Posts Tagged ‘Husband’

The Moralists

August 27, 2014

Dalrock has a post that in the last few days has been gaining traction to becoming quite epic.  The original post discussed a young Christian woman who retained her virginity until marriage and then afterwards discovered she has some serious sexual dysfunctions.  It is obvious reading her story that she has some serious emotional issues as well.  From reading her story it is plain that she was taught that sex was shameful and dirty before she even reached puberty and understood what sex even was.  This is a common teaching that young people receive in almost every church to one degree or another.  These attitudes are not easily changed once a woman finally marries and sex becomes ok literally overnight.  The church’s repression of healthy attitudes about human sexuality and our natural sexual desires is just as ominous as the promotion of female promiscuity which the church also accepts and legitimizes.

It is not difficult to see that the origins of this young woman’s harmful attitudes about sex originated from with her church’s indoctrination and its foundational belief system.  Although she is a stout feminist, her attitudes about sex were likely fully ingrained into her belief system before she accepted the feminist ideology wholeheartedly.  It is important to point out that mixing modern church doctrine with feminist beliefs will almost always cause sexual dysfunction and unhealthy repression in not only women but men as well.

THE DISCUSSION

I submitted several questions and gave some hypothetical’s of issues pertaining to the main topic that I hoped would be discussed in a rational manner.  I also made a few statements to help guide things along.  These were legitimate concerns that many men do have when reevaluating their personal beliefs after taking the red pill.

What resulted was some men decided to mischaracterize what I said and then decided to engage in thinly guised character attacks.  I did not enter into these discussions really caring about what these other men and women think about me personally, nor do I currently care.  What is important is that the message gets through.  The level of debate, emotion, and rationalization from the church men this discussion caused tells me I struck some very raw nerves, which I will explain below.  That is good.  That was the point.  However many of the men who held themselves out as morally superior (moralists) avoided and ignored the most important points and questions I asked.  They engaged in a type of anti-intellectualism that for some of us well read individuals greatly annoys us.  However, not everyone did this, and not everyone held themselves out as a moralists.  These individuals greatly added value to the discussion.  This is pretty long but the problem is big and the solutions must be hashed out.

I will admit that some of my points were not as clear as they should have been.  My mind works extremely fast and as it happens at times, many of these ideas came to me in one fell swoop while I was writing my comments.  I believe this caused some confusion and if so I hope to clarify that here.  Also, because of the personal nature of some of the criticisms against what I wrote and the length of this essay I decided to post here on my blog and link back to Dalrock’s post instead of posting a simple comment.  I am going to break this up into a few different posts so bear with me.

One thing you may notice is that I no longer refer to myself as following any sect or religion.  The thing I find most disagreeable is hypocrisy.  For me to not be a hypocrite myself, for the many reasons below, I am no longer willing to identify as a Christian or promote the church in any way.  I feel by doing so could be harmful to good men by possibly encouraging him to join an organization where he is almost guaranteed to be hoodwinked by the feminine imperative.

ALPHA AND BETA

I am not going to get into a big what is Alpha and what is Beta discussion.  There are enough good resources out there if you want to know more.  However, what those two terms, and other like it such as Omega and Gamma, they are merely adjectives that encompass different sets of behavior patterns, attitudes and personality traits.  All three of these things can be changed in a man to a greater or lesser degree if necessary to achieve certain goals and objectives.  Many men often have a mix of these qualities.  The terms therefore are used loosely in my essays when I use these descriptive attributes.

THE QUESTIONS I PRESENTED

Is sex in a loving committed monogamous relationship just as moral as sex in the current Marriage 2.0 scheme where men are likely to lose?

Is sex between an unmarried man and women in a loving, committed, monogamous relationship inherently sinful?

Is it absurd and unrealistic to expect all unmarried Christian men to remain celibate when there is no other viable and rational option for sexual gratification other than entering into Marriage 2.0?

THE POINTS AND STATEMENTS I MADE

Church doctrine about human sexuality cases more problems and dysfunctions due to the inherent shame that surrounds most churches beliefs concerning sex in general.  This shame manifests itself in men and women even after they marry creating sexual issues in the marriage.

There is no consistency in church doctrine from one denomination to another concerning human sexuality, sex in marriage, marriage and divorce.  Most churches do not uniformly enforce its own edicts and local customs, even ones that are vigorously promoted within that church organization.  Many denominations refuse to teach the entire counsel of God.  The inconsistency on such issues such as divorce have ramification that could affect the salvation of the parties involved.  So how does a man know what teaching is truthful and which ones are in error causing him to sin?

Biblical marriage no longer exists because the state has usurped the bibles’ authority over family, marriage and sexual matter by legislative fiat.  Marriage 2.0 is a government promoted institution to ensure that the state has jurisdiction over a man, his assets and his children for later disbursements to his ex-wife should she choose to divorce him.  For biblical marriage to exist there needs to be social controls in order to discipline transgressors of biblical law.  Civil law would need to match biblical law.

Because biblical marriage no longer exists, a man may engage in sexual relations with a woman who he has a loving committed and monogamous relationship with without incurring the wrath of God or everlasting damnation.  God knows a man’s heart and will judge him according to that.  God will not judge a man for not following and unjust law or religious edict.  Godly suffering comes from God.  God would not place an impossible burden on a man and then call it a sinful should the man choose to opt out of trying to meet that impossible burden.

Additional points and questions relevant to the overall theme of this series and the previous points that were discussed will follow in subsequent essay in this series.

Next essay: Celibacy

Advertisements

images

It’s sad that so many men and women both have such a messed up view of what sex is, what it means and the importance of it in a monogamous relationship.  Take the case of Samantha Pugsley who through an unhealthy mix of her apparent hardcore Christian upbringing and her belief in radical feminism maintained her virginity until she married and now has a very unhealthy attitude about sex and especially sex in marriage.

Since pictures can tell a story by themselves this is her a few years ago and her now after her full indoctrination into feminism, colored short boy haircut included.  Her transformation validates that wedding cake is very fattening indeed.

She was able to convince an obviously very beta or omega boyfriend to remain celibate and wait for her throughout 6 years of dating.  What happens in these cases is that she turned her virginity into not only a big part of her identity but an idol.  The end result for these young women who have this attitude is that they often remain unmarried and become old spinsters who are still virgins, which is bad for men and women both.  The 463 point checklists these women create are also a big roadblock for them in their quest for the perfect feminist Christ like husband.  The whole virginity game that religious women and beta men play is harmful and can have lasting negative repercussions throughout their lives.  We see this game played out in celebrating virginity for virginity’s sake with purity balls, rings, and other such unbiblical nonsense.  These women’s virginity ends up being narcissistically all about them and not about the gift of their body to their future husband, as is apparent what happened in Pugsley’s case.

Although this seems far more common in virgin women than men, many of these people end of with unhealthy attitudes about their sexuality which creates sexual dysfunctions as seen in Pugsley’s article and throughout the comment section with women who adopted virgin game ended up disappointed because they failed to realize their unrealistic expectations about sex.  I follow a fellow blogger who also saved herself for her husband, but she was taught by her mother the proper attitude about virginity and about the importance of sex in her marriage and now her and her husband experience the wonders of sex as God truly meant for it to be.  A lot of poor teachings come from the parents of these young men and women.  The fathers of these girls essentially go super white knight and pedestalize their daughter which in turn just gives her unrealistic expectations because no man would live up to the fantasy that she created in her mind with her parents encouragement.  The boys on the other hand are also taught harmful attitudes.  One such thing is even remaining a virgin to begin with.  Unless a young man quickly courts and marries and has sex (which is biblical) he should be experiencing other women.  He should not become promiscuous per se, but a man does benefit from having experiences, sexual and otherwise, with other women.  A young man should never remain celibate just for the sake of waiting but only a short time in order to marry particular woman.  It’s also important to note for those men with moral hang-ups regarding sex, that nowhere in the bible does it instruct men to remain virgins prior to marriage.  I am of course challenged to raise up my 2 daughters with the proper attitude about sex so they will make their future husbands happy and have lifelong happy marriages.

The church is extremely schizophrenic when it comes to sex in general, and especially sex in marriage.  Deti’s comment stood out to me and nailed the point quite well:

From Pugsley’s article:

“When he did, I obliged. I wanted nothing more than to make him happy because I loved him so much and because I’d been taught it was my duty to fulfill his needs. But I hated sex.

“My feminist husband was horrified that I’d let him touch me when I didn’t want him to. He made me promise I’d never do anything I didn’t want to do ever again. We stopped having sex. He encouraged me to see a therapist and I did. It was the first step on a long journey to healing.

“When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.

There is always a horribly distorted view of sex and a woman’s sexual role in marriage whenever these discussions are had. A wife is supposed to be sexually available to her husband at all times. She is supposed to give her husband sex when he wants it. Look at it this way: Would a wife put up with a husband who said “well, I’ll work when I feel like it. I’ll give you money to take care of the family when I feel like it, or I think it’s a good idea, or when I decide you need it”. Would a wife put up with that? Didn’t think so. So it is with sex and a husband’s view of it.** But women don’t want this. They don’t want to be totally sexually available to their husbands, for many reasons, chief among them are that most wives just do not desire their husbands sexually. This is a problem because most women are having sex with men who are more sexually desirable than they can get for marriage.

The other prime reason that women don’t want to be sexually available to their husbands is if they are, then they cede a lot of control in the marriage to the husband. A woman before marriage is able to control men by using sex and sexual access. Sex, sex appeal and sexual access are the greatest measures of a woman’s power, and if she gives them completely and totally to one man, she has given up most of her power. She doesn’t want to do this, of course, because that would require her to submit and trust, and what if he screws it up?

** NOTE TO liberals, feminists and other dipshits: I AM NOT SAYING THAT A WIFE IS CONSENTING TO RAPE. I am not saying a wife must have sex when sick or injured or recovering from childbirth. No loving husband would demand sex under those circumstances. I AM, however, saying that a lot of wives unreasonably withhold and limit sexual access. No wife is too busy that she can’t take 20 minutes out of her schedule to take care of her husband’s need. And if she is, then her priorities are screwed up. I am also saying that if a woman doesn’t consent to having sex with a particular man when HE wants to and NOT just when SHE wants to, then she should not marry that man and should not marry at all, because she has a distorted and improper view of marriage.

It is likely she was only a technical virgin and not one in fact.  She states in her bio she is bisexual and so one may deduce that not only do other women join her and her husband in bed, but she likely engaged in certain woman on woman activities prior to marriage.  That said, she was not a virgin and whatever waiting she forced upon her husband was not done in any biblical or moral sense, but as a way to satisfy her own warped view of controlling her own sexuality and sexual morality.  This is evident in her disgusting attitude of “my body my choice”.  All you have to do is read how she hates her husband so much she cannot stand the thought of being impregnated by him and goes ahead and terminates her pregnancy.  I just wonder what the story is behind her husband who waited 6 years in order to have sex with this average looking obviously mentally unstable woman who’s motivations are fueled by radical feminism.  Regardless of one’s religious convictions this man was nuts to remain celibate for 6 years while he waited for this woman.

I wrote most of this as a companion to The Women in Church essay, but a comment on J4M prompted me to include his comment in this essay and thus my response to it as an example of the typical man you would meet in church.

Church Man writes:

I stopped reading alt-right and christian game (an oxymoron) sites last year. The hypocrisy and lunacy was too much to digest. I call myself a church man on purpose, since that crowd is so anti-churcianity as they call it. Supposedly they are the “real Christians” and the rest of us who go to church and actually enjoy it are fakers and dupes or chumps.

I took a gander at Grey’s blog and its the same ol’ crap. A fornicator deigns to lecture men about “church sluts”. And those men lap it up like the dogs they are.

The only people with a right to critique the church are those who are IN IT and trying to make a difference. Not those who have left it to lead wanton lives and yet deign to lecture those of us who have stayed and are living straight.

I am glad Church Man stopped by.  However it seems he read the title of ONE post, got his panties in a knot and stormed off to randomly criticize me on a article that was talking about something else entirely instead of leaving his remarks at the end of my essay.  I think he should have read more of my essays.  He did this in an effort to discredit me personally instead of addressing the issues in the j4G article or my particular comments. This is the classic behavior of the white knights and mangina’s I speak about below.  Many of these men are probably married to the older church women I wrote about in my previous essay on the Types of Women in Church.  When you point out how these mens’s behavior is perpetuating some of these problems they take it as a personal attack and act out emotionally, just like women really.  He ambiguously uses shaming language against me and the entire sphere because he is somehow more moral than any of us, or he thinks of himself as so.  Maybe this is because he chooses to attend church were some of do not.  I personally think that Dalrock and Rollo are quite moral and probably more moral than most of the men who actually go to church including my criticizer.  I will also speculate their marriages are happier and more fulfilling for both spouses than most church men.  I will admit I am a bit more amoral than what I used to be in regards to having sex out of wedlock.  I am also pragmatic, but I digress.

He goes on to state that no one is allowed to criticize the church if they no longer attend.  This smacks of someone who is so entrenched into the feminine-primary mindset that they cannot see past their own misandry.  He must go to the non-typical church were the virgin women are marrying the good virgin and non virgins men regardless of their beta mindsets and none of the church girls have 463 point lists of qualities their perfect man must possess.  His church also takes divorce and female promiscuity so seriously that women are excommunicated for frivolously divorcing their husbands.  The sluts in his church (yes they are there) have forsworn their promiscuous ways and thus many have relegated themselves to a life of celibacy and singleness because they know that they are far to damaged to be a good wife who is able to bond to the beta men who she would meet in church.  These men like Church Man, when (not if) they find themselves victims of hypergamy and the feminine imperative will either resign themselves to a lifetime of loneliness and bitterness or they will be the first ones lurking on Roosh or Heartiste in order to learn the skills and mindset necessary on order to meet and keep his new love interests.

Continuing the original essay, we see from the example above that these men do exist in large numbers and the comments just lends credibility to what follows.   As for the older or married men in church, I have NEVER met a red pill alpha, or any alpha for that matter.  Even the combat vets, who I consider brothers, are still white knights mangina’s when it comes to women and the feminine imperativeEverything they say about marriage and relationships is usually dead wrong.  Many of these men are led by their wives and their children, although they will be the first to tell you how much of a leader they are in their families.  If you criticize or call out the bad advice they commonly give about intergender relations you are thoroughly chastised and shamed.  They will never debate or talk about these issues in an adult and intellectual manner.  Normally they tell you that their interpretations are the only ones that matter, call you immoral and rush off in a huff.  I really cannot totally respect a man for behaving like that.  These same men continuously tell the unmarried and younger men they must marry.  All you have to do is attend any modern church and you will hear the cry from the pulpit and the other male attendees for younger or unmarried men to Man Up (and marry those sluts) and woe unto the man who has sex with one of the precious single princesses who attend church.

Other men you will meet are the young men who were brought up in church and are hoping to find that “one special snowflake” to marry.  They saved themselves, in most cases from lack of opportunity mind you, and are hoping to find the vestal virgin of their dreams.  The problem though is that these men dry up the vajayjay’s of the pretty little church girls who with their lists, only get hot and tingly for the alpha bad boys they would only meet outside of church.  Some do get lucky and their personalities and potential win out, AFBB.   For these men they might end up with a good woman with a healthy (but previously restrained) sex drive that can now be released in all of its naughty fury.  Woe to the man who ends up marrying the 30 year old virgin spinster who had very few choices to begin with or the fake Christian woman who has already worked up a notch count in the double digits.  I hope most of these men at least have enough sense to ask his love interests some very basic questions. It’s unfortunate that for many of these young men who ascribe to contemporary Christian dating advice (bullshit really) the only women who will actually settle for them are themselves settling.  They wouldn’t have to settle so much if they learned game and upped their alpha quotient some.  But these men can rest assured that although she probably wasn’t your first choice, neither were you her first choice.

It’s important to remember that most Christian women have thoroughly adopted the Fireproof world view of how marriage should work and of course if you are not a weeping slub like the (supposed) hero of Courageous, well your just less of a man.  Of course the men who act like this are the ones who end up being cuckolded and possibly forced to raise another man’s child.  Most Christian women also have no problem blowing up their marriages for whatever frivolous reasons, such as her husband looking at porn or he no longer makes her haaapy.  When Christian leaders exalt praise on single motherhood, then you know for sure the church has big big problems.  The older men in church encourage the women to act like this because they refuse to hold women accountable to that higher standard.  They also refuse to teach the unpopular masculine messages in the Bible.  Lastly they deify their wives which of course contradict every teaching of the bible and ends up leading the man to idolatry.  When there is a problem in a couple’s marriage, the following excerpt gives a perfect example of the men=bad, women=good meme.

“When my wife left me for frivolous reasons I approached the head pastor of her church in order to get some help reigning in her rebellion.  All he told me was that it is a woman’s right to divorce and that I am abusive because I told her (my wife) we were going to go to a different church because I did not like the teachings of the one she was attending, which was the church this guy led.  He actually had the gall to tell me that I should be listening to her and coming to his church.  Suffice it to say that we never did reconcile our marriage and are now divorced”.

Too many Christian men and believe that marrying Christian woman will shield them from the reality of divorce.  Unfortunately that is simply not true.  Christian men would be much better of marrying a secular non believer.  If anything the sex will probably be better.  By marrying a secular woman  you can feel confident that at least she will not be having the trad-con version of feminism pumped into her brain twice a week.  It is a sad state of affairs when a non believing woman is preferred to a professing Christian none.

I blame the men in church for not biblically leading their women.  I feel sorry for the young men who grew up in church and have never been exposed to proper thinking about what works with women.

Sexless Marriage Series #2

The Spreadsheet Couple who received so much notoriety as of late as shown some very disturbing trends in how a large portion of American men and women think about sex, especially sex in marriage.

One issue as Dalrock recently brought up is the vagina’s power that women often then misuse with most men.  I agree that the nets reactions was based on the sudden loss of the wife’s V-power and all women’s sudden worry that their men would wake up and realize how tenuous their own power plays really were.  Go read Dalrock’s article and come back.

I will however disagree with Dalrock’s observations that women were only half hearted in their support of the wife.  The articles were essentially all the same, essentially telling us that this guy creates a spreadsheet because his wife didn’t want to have sex and that although she should have used better excuses, no man, and especially this lame ass, should ever expect sex from his wife or any women.  What I read was pretty much all female and most male writers supported the wife directly.

Another issue is the very disturbing trend that I have seen reading the comments on the various articles.   This trend is one of male entitlement to sex, specifically as it relates to the sexual dynamics within a marriage.  Feminist have been telling women that their body is theirs to do with as they please regardless of consequences or context.  At first this was directed towards abortion and the feminist’s belief that only women have a right to decide whether to kill their babies or not.  Of course the fathers feeling in the matter are irrelevant.  However, this same attitude spilled over into the sexual arena.  Now we read stories such as this where a wife consistently denies sex to her husband and he is then compelled to document her refusals and reasons in a spreadsheet.  Instead of working on her marriage WITH her husband, she runs off and posts the spreadsheet and her brief story in the net hoping to garner the support of her sisters.  We then see women and their male supporters come out of the woodwork in droves supporting this woman using the same logic that a woman has an absolute right and even an obligation to refuse sex to her husband anytime she does not feel like it.  The modern woman and mangina really do believe that a woman should NEVER put out if she did not immediate desire sex and that sex should ONLY occur if she wants it.  Of course a lot of blame was laid at the husband’s feet because he approached his wife everyday for sex.  Apparently men are not supposed to do that either.

Now we all know, or should know, that you don’t “ask” a woman for sex, you initiate sex with her.  Oh, I can hear those feminists yelling rape already. Speaking of which, the feminists and manginas often state that anytime any man, husbands included, cajoles, pesters or negotiates for sex it is rape when the woman finally gives it up so her man will shut up about it.  Although I find having to pester any woman for sex unacceptable and I would never do that, I do not think such a thing is rape.  I need to write about what rape is and what it is not.  I know that essay will piss a lot of people off.

So what are a woman’s rights and obligations in regards to her husbands or boyfriends sexual desires and needs?  As I stated before, MEN NEED SEX.  I am not talking about duty sex which is lame and is usually less satisfying than looking at porn and jerking off, I am talking about good mutually enthusiastic and satisfying sex.  Without regular quality sex men will normally drift away from his spouse emotionally.  In time he may want nothing to do with her.  This happened to me. My now ex wife always maintained the belief that men are not owed sex and we ended up drifting far apart, so much so that I had zero desire to even try to reconcile with her after she left.  Needless to say our sex life was lame, I looked at porn, she pulled a Jenny Erickson and left.  On the other hand an ex girlfriend of mine not only told me she believed her job was to keep me utterly satisfied, our sex life was such that I had no thoughts of looking at porn and we even adopted the practice that every orgasm we each had would be with the other person.  No more going solo.  She didn’t care if I looked at porn, but we both wanted to share ourselves with each other all of the time.  Simply put, she derived satisfaction by tending to my needs and I derived satisfaction tending to her.  Yes there were times I didn’t want to have sex but because I cared for her I did it willingly and enthusiastically and I’m sure there were times she didn’t want to have sex also.  Ok maybe not, but she still would have had sex anyways.  Another thing to mention is that by cuming inside her pretty much every time I think the bond between us was greatly increased.  Also, regular sex keeps our man parts in good working order and we do feel discomfort and even pain if we have to go too long.  Either way men’s bodies are designed to have sex and ejaculate very regularly.

As Dalrock puts it:

A wife who almost never wants to have sex with her husband is a terrible wife.  As with a slut, only a foolish man would (knowingly) fall in love with a frigid woman.  However, unlike the slut she isn’t even desirable.  A frigid wife is powerless, undesirable, and (romantically) unlovable.  This recognition is what so horrified women around the world when the spreadsheet went viral.

We know that some women will refuse sex often, even when she wants it in order to leverage the power of her pussy.  However this is not the way God or nature intended things to work.  Reading Dalrock’s statement above we see that a frigid wife is a bad wife, a woman not even deserving of our love.  He is right.  Even the ones who “claim” they do cook, clean, etc. unless they are tending to her husband’s sexual needs she is still a bad wife.  You can hire out most of a wife’s other duties, but sex should not be one of them.  Sex is the only bio-chemical bonding a couple will experience.  I have yet to meet or hear about a sexless couple that is happy with two normal adults.  Although no woman seems to understand her own body as well as she should, that is fine because the amateur gynecologist is here.  Reading the comments from Scarymommy’s article it is easy to deduce that sex reinforces the bond between a loving monogamous couple such as a husband and wife.  You will read many of the wives report that they feel so much closer to their husbands with the more sex they have with them.  Without getting into the science, let me say that the science backs this up.  I just made a Walsism, oops.  Anyways, I will save the scientific details for another essay I am working on because it’s that important and it’s interesting.

A wife owes her husband sex.  Even in other committed and monogamous relationship sex is owed to the other partner.  We explored the health benefits and the benefits to the relationship.  Let’s now look at another issue the feminist will certainly scream about.  Us men we work hard for ourselves and our families.  Oftentimes we sacrifice our happiness by not doing things we would rather do or work a job we would enjoy more but the pay would be much less.  Also when we get married we EXPECT that there will be regular and enthusiastic sex with our wives as much as reasonably possible.  For the promise of our commitment, which men honor way more than the modern women does, we want sex, which is also part of the promise and commitment on the part of the woman.  What we do not want is to be the second man eating off of the same plate, which all too often happens.  Married women and women in committed monogamous relations have a responsibility to have a genuine desire, and to actually have sex with their men.  She owes it to him for his commitment to her and in exchange for his work.  If she no longer is sexually attracted to him then she should end the marriage and refuse to take any of his assets when she leaves.  In other words a woman might have to fake it, yes I know, but if she truly loves him her negotiated desire will likely change to the genuine desire which is so important in any couples relationship.  When a woman marries or otherwise commits to a man she loses her right to continually say no.  If she has a medical condition that makes sex difficult she needs to address it immediately.

One thing about control and feminism as it pertains to this instant issue.  Feminism and by extension pretty much all American women desire to control men’s sexuality.  They will use their frigidity, or refusals to have sex, their anti-porn stance, and of course the all too common tactic of using sex as currency.  All of this boils down to not just women attempting to control men’s sexuality but women controlling the whole man.  If you have a woman like this it’s simply better to leave.  It will suck at first but in the end a man will be better off.  I have noticed that many frigid women and women who use sex as power have deep emotional issues and unresolved baggage in their lives.  All you have to do is talk to a feminist pansexual woman for only a few moments to smell the psychosis.  One study pegged over 20% of American women fall into this category.  Unfortunately these same women can behave themselves long enough to snare an unwitting man into a relationship with them.  As I said before the man should just leave her.  If for whatever personal or financial reasons a man decides to stay, he will have to game the shit out of her hard and be at the peak of his own emotional strength.

Sexless Marriage Series #1

I was first going to write this essay about the Spreadsheet couple that has recently gone viral over the internet and the sphere here and here just to mention a couple of good articles, but I wanted to address this one thing first.  Men who look at porn.  Much has been written about this subject and I think most of it is wrong.  I am not going to take a moral stance against it because doing so will not only dilute the topic because I believe the common moral stance against itself immoral.

Men NEED sex.  Be it from their wives, a girlfriend, a mistress, hooker, Fuck Buddy, or good old jerking off it does not matter, we need to have that release often and when it comes to actual sex it needs to be good.  If we are in a loving monogamous relationship, regular quality sex causes us men to love and bond to our women more.  Likewise they bond to us more.  It’s funny how biology works.

However, the attitude of the modern American woman is that we, as men, are not entitled to sex and therefore should never expect it, even in the confines of a monogamous relationship or even marriage. Yet, these same women will state that they are entitled to an earth-shaking orgasm every time they bless the man with access to their golden magic super awesome vaginas.  Of course any man who might want sex from a woman, or dare I say expect it as part of their relationship is a creep.  This even applies to the husbands of frigid wives.  These women will of course get quite angry if a man ever rejects her sexual advances and will even post his rejection of her online with her hamsterlation on why she is so wonderful and how he was an asshole.  The other side of this coin is that men do not owe women commitment, fidelity or our resources.  If we are married and have scrotial fortitude we may very well leave them or fool around on these women.  Sorry babe, but that’s the price you will pay for your rejection of us.  Also it’s worth mentioning that a woman who only offers duty sex or who is otherwise frigid or unenthusiastic is quite unattractive, at least to me.

For the hapless beta or man who is otherwise chained to an unhappy marriage because of his religious beliefs there is porn.  Yea porn!  It’s maybe not the best thing for reasons I won’t get into right now but for many men it’s a valid alternative to getting a mistress, going to hookers or divorcing his wife.  Just remember that for most of you moral shackled men, your wife has done things too.

If a woman wants to keep her man around she needs to give it up enthusiastically and often, she needs to stay fit and be an overall pleasant person to be around.  The only happy relationships I have seen all had an exciting and full sex life in common.  Most western women simply refuse to be exciting in bed with their men.  They use sex as a commodity to be traded for men’s resources, favors and oftentimes commitment.  I don’t think many women even do this conscientiously but as a result of their upbringing in our feminist and female entitlement driven society and the unshackling of women’s behaviors due to feminism.  Then they take this destructive attitude about sex into their marriages essentially putting their own pussy on a pedestal all the while forgetting that sex is one of the main (and most important) components to bonding with your spouse.

I have to mention that when many of these women were young, and considering the modern view regarding female promiscuity, these women, now wives, likely had sex with quite a number of partners prior to marriage which would have lessened their overall value as potential mates and have increased the chances any marriage they entered into would ultimately fail.  Some became alpha widows and in all likely hood irreparably damaged their ability to pair bond to any man they might meet in the future.  When these women finally did catch their beta husband after a solid ride on the carousel, they will all too often deny him the wonders of her past sexual experiences and only give her now husband infrequent and vanilla sex.

One issue that came up several months ago was with Matt Walsh’s article telling married men that when they look at porn they are committing adultery thus lending moral justification to millions of women to justify divorcing their husbands.  I was heavily involved in the comment section which seems to have been erased for some reason.  It was good that I made notes at the time.   There were over 3000 comments on that article back in February.  Now there are only a little over 300.

In the comment section of that article there was a vigorous back and forth between commentators stating essentially the following three positions:

  1. Almost 95% of the female commentators stated, and many times with much vitriol, that a married man looking at porn is in fact equal to and in some cases worse than the act of committing adultery with another woman. Most of these women were self professing Christians. Several women stated that when they caught their husbands looking at porn they were mortified and so disgusted they never wanted to haves sex with their husbands again. In many cases They also stated that previously they were more than willing to have sex with their husbands but were rejected because their husbands would rather look at porn than have sex with them. I would say that a majority of these same women ended up divorcing their husbands for this reason alone, or for the ones who have not done so yet are seriously considering divorce. Most of these women plainly state that no man, including their husbands, are not entitled to, nor shall he expect sex on a regular basis with his wife.  Of course these same women get upset when their husbands would rather look at porn then have duty sex with them. These women then lavishly praised Walsh on his courage in writing the article condemning all men who dare to look at porn as adulterers, perverts and rapist in waiting.  This group of women and their supporting men always blames the man.  They say things like any man who “needs” sex lacks impulse control. They shame anyone who has a different view than theirs, oftentimes telling these individuals that they are sorry for their partners because the commenter in support of porn is such a wicked vile individual.  Most will shame any man or woman who even mentioned that looking at porn may be caused by a spouse not getting sex from their wives.  Most of the vitriol is directed to male commenter’s and the female pro porn commenter’s are responded to with a little les hate.  The people in this group never mention women looking at porn, divorce porn, or women and their romance novels.  The men in this group seem to me like they are soft and catering to their wives opinions.

 

  1. Another camp defended anyone looking at porn. This group postulated that in many cases porn use seems to be the symptom of them not getting enough actual and “quality” sex in their marriages and from their wives. This camp stated that INSTEAD of committing REAL adultery by having sexual relations outside of the marriage covenant they will look at porn and take care of their own needs instead.  These men along with a few women who supported these men’s actions, would rather have good fun and enthusiastic sex with their wives but either their wives are lame in bed (read duty sex) or their wives are just not interested in sex with them.  As stated above, this group was shouted down and shamed by the anti-porn people for their opinions.

 

  1. The third and smallest group consists of both men and women who both look at porn with and without their spouses or partners, but each allowing the other to look at it and even encouraging the other spouse to explore their own desires and fantasies online and later discussing what each other likes and even using porn as foreplay. From what I gleaned from the limited information in the comments, these men and women seem to enjoy the most stable and yet exciting marriages.  They also seem the happiest with their spouses. One thing I did notice is that in these marriages and relationships neither person overtly identified as being a Christian.

 

It should be obvious by now that feminist and trad-cons share many harmful ideologies in regards to male sexuality, male shaming, porn and divorce.

It seems to me that women who stridently identify as being Christian are the ones who seem to not only feel they are entitled to withhold and deny quality and regular sex from their husbands but that they will almost certainly be willing to divorce their husbands for the singular reason of him looking at porn, thereby stealing his money, resources and children from him using the Church™ and its femcentric teachings along with articles like those from Matt Walsh and Jenny Erickson as a justification for their decisions.

As for the article I think its pure rubbish.  All it was is pandering to women, especially Christian wives, giving them moral cover for frivorcing their husbands.  It was pointed out by a small minority of aware men that this article and others like it highlight that not only do men need regular and enthusiastic sex with their wives, these men when deprived will take the path of less damage and look at dirty pictures and videos instead of carrying out an actual affair with another woman, which in reality if done, may have a far greater negative consequences for the marriage than a man simply looking at porn, or would it?

Jenny Erickson left her husband over his alleged porn use.  It seems that in her case and with the many men who have to resort to porn and masturbation to relive themselves in their sexless marriages, porn is just a symptom to the far greater problem of having a wife who continually denies sex to her husband and when he finally does get it on his birthday and anniversary, if that, it is worse than lame.  In these marriages porn is more fun than having to throw a fuck into and likely overweight, definitely overbearing unpleasant woman.

There are many real world consequences for women’s prior and current bad behaviors.  Sex and female promiscuity prior to marriage and women’s entitlement attitudes are two issues that have negatively affected more marriages than any other issue, including men looking at porn.

To me there is a profound difference in meaningless sex, or sex just for the act of ejaculation and passionate sex with a woman who I really love, care about, and trust.

My married sex life lacked the passionate sex I so craved all of the time.  I can count on my appendages the times that the sex was actually very good during my marriage.  It was not like my wife was not hot, she was.  She even tried to do things from time to time.  However we just never had that chemistry, or if we did, something else was screwed up between us.  I do blame a lot of our marriage problems of her feminist beliefs and her neo-Christianity.  I still think that had she not joined a gyno-centric church we would have made it and had had a good marriage.  Also she was very repressed about her own sexuality in general.  I once believed, albeit incorrectly, that this was a problem I needed to correct.

After many years of lame duty sex I thought I sucked at being a lover.  The lame sex in my marriage affected me deeply.  I began to doubt myself.  I felt inadequate.  I was dying inside, slowly over many years. After she left I doubted myself even more.  I felt worse.

I even spoke to a couple of my female clients about it while I was still married and they offered to “grade” me.  I declined their offers, which I regret doing so now.  After she left I noticed that with the variety of women I started banging that I was in fact a very good lover.  They not only told me so, they showed me with their sexual responses and their bodies.  I enjoyed the passion of the entire act from seduction and foreplay to post coitus cuddling.  My lovers enjoyed how I loved the entire act.  One particular woman I met after my wife left me brought out all of those many years of my sexual repression and my wife’s denial of my own sexual pleasure.  She allowed me to explore my sexuality in a safe environment and with her.  The one thing her and I had was a connection.  I always looked forward to our lovemaking.  For days after we made love I felt complete, I felt like a man.  These feelings compelled me to be a better man overall.  These feelings she aroused in me also compelled me to want to please her in every way.  I wanted to spend time with her when I could.  It was with her I no longer doubted my sexual abilities.  It was after her that all of my lovers showed me that I was ranked among their very best.  For that I will always be grateful to her.  Unfortunately, the relationship had to end for other reasons, but our time together will be counted as a fond memory of mine.

After that woman and some others I have had, I no longer desire meaningless sex with just any woman.  It is more than knowing I am the prize and my natural aloofness.  It is that in a loving relationship where we both love and trust each other a connection happens that leaves me feeling full.  It is that connection that I am seeking.  I know there will be meaningless sex along the way, but I will always seek out the “connection” that makes me a better man.

I know couples that have that connection.  I have spoken to both men and women about their sex lives.  The best relationships are those where they both can feel open and honest with each other to not only express their fantasies but explore them with each other.  I think this woman gets it from the female point of view.  Another thing I noticed is that when a woman embraces her own and her man’s sexuality he will normally stop desiring other women and desire to commit to only her.  I think that women who have a problem with their men looking at porn should take heed to this.  If he can equate that full feeling and connection that (he craves with you) to having sex with you, then I don’t see porn being a problem in your relationship.

A good video from a friend of mine about the monies that are transferred from producers (men) to parasites (many women).  Watch the video and check out Terrence Popp’s other videos on You Tube.

 

I will mention that I do respect the privacy of the people I talk about.  However if their story has something to offer in the way of an example I am going to use their story while omitting certain identifiable information about them.  Many of my real world friends do read my essays and some of them can figure out who I am talking about, or maybe it’s them.  One friend I mentioned in an essay got a little mad at me because I wrote about him generally.  I think he felt shame for his behaviors more so than anything that I may have alluded to in writing.  However that same friend’s behaviors and attitude were such that they could have been attributed to any beta who consistently fails with women.  It’s not out of disrespect that I use their stories or my own personal observations about people I know.  It is in the spirit of helping others that I do what I do.

So yes if you want my advice about something and there is a bigger lesson to be talked about I am probably going to talk about you, but not you, just your story.

That is my disclaimer.

By: MonkeyWerks

I was directly criticized by Jesse Powell in this article on Secular Patriarchy concerning an essay I wrote explaining how women never fully appreciate the sacrifices we make for them as men and how a man living a simpler life free from the obligations and insistent demands of a woman might be something worth working towards.  Because of the issues he raised, I think a response was warranted if for no other reason but to point out he is an uber white knight beta and to expose the movement as one that promotes beliefs that are really quite harmful.  Plus I wanted to stretch my legs, ok my fingers, a bit before I wrote about more important topics.

I have never had one of my essays ripped apart by a pseudo feminism writer before.  Maybe I’m finally getting to the big time.  I actually had to read some of his articles to see what this person or movement was all about because I do try to be intellectually honest.  I was bit shocked at what I read, although I probably shouldn’t have been.  When I first started reading I thought a woman wrote it.  I now know the article criticizing me came from a man although the writing sounded very female-eqe at first.  The shaming language was as such that I normally expect from a female writer who have nothing more substantial to say than for me to “man up” and give everything that I own now and in the future to my ex wife or to any other woman who blesses me access to their warm and moist nether regions.

Apparently the ideology Secular Patriarchy promotes is nothing more than feminism in sexy panties where the woman benefits from the sweat, labors and protection of the man while having to give very little in return.  Actually this is what mainstream feminism and most American say women really want, however they usually only respond sexually to the skittles man.  The only differences between regular feminism and SP are that the woman stays at home and does not contribute to the household finances and the man must somehow “protect” the woman even up to needlessly putting his own life in danger.  As one commentator pointed out that Powell made a grand pretense that no (male) expense should be spared for women’s (supposed) protections.  This assertion goes along with a really disturbing statement I found that Powell made in that he promotes the idea that men SHOULD be so against rape that even in the case of a false rape accusations he believes that men should still be willing to be imprisoned, to serve the greater good, which is serving women at ANY cost (to men).  Powell believes that men should simply put all women on pedestals, worship them, and for men to serve all women, and as the woman sees fit mind you.  He goes on to explain that men should work their tails off to provide for woman’s lifestyles and all of the woman’s wants, desires and comforts without requiring them to contribute or even reciprocate.  He calls this unconditional chivalry.  He actually states that women are superior to men in many ways.  His value of men is so low that his beliefs do not even spare men from being falsely accused of crimes.  Personally, I would rather 1000 alleged rapist go free instead of even 1 man be falsely accused or imprisoned.

Sunshine Mary invited him to debate his beliefs on her site in April of 2013.  The comments there were lively and tended to destroy the assertions he was attempting to make.  Powell claims to be an atheist and states that he loves women and serves God, but it’s obvious that his god is really women the feminine imperative, and the ideology he promotes.  He further elaborates this point, but it becomes clear that his beliefs that what he states is unbiblical and goes against the natural order of things.   It’s interesting that even atheists try to distance themselves from him.  He does seem very schizophrenic in his theology.  Seeing as he is a ardent supporter of Mark Driscoll’s incessant “man up” and white knightery sermons its no surprise that many of his beliefs promote the feminine imperative in such a grotesque fashion.

Although it became pretty painful to read because he had genuine problems common with nice guys and beta males but he just took the wrong road in trying to fix the problems. I was able to learn a good bit about him by reading several of his articles.

He admits to being a feminist since a very young age and being raised by a domineering feminist mother who likely subjected his father to never ending belittlement.  I am sure the example his father set for him growing up was that of a passive and submissive man.  He states that he was a feminist until his mid 20’s when he started believing in Secular Patriarchy.

He apparently had a rough time in high school where he did not have many friends, and that he also had difficulty meeting girls and getting them to go out with him.  He also stated that he was afraid of the girls in school reacting adversely to him expressing his “strong” feeling the girls “inspired” in him.  He goes on to explain he never had a girlfriend until he was 17 years old and failed with women until he became involved in the patriarchy movement in his mid 20’s.  I think it should be noted that his experiences with women in 11th and 12th grade influences his belief system today so much so he dedicates an entire essay to it.  Below are a few excerpts that illuminate why Powell thinks the way that he does:

Of course it is not enough to just admire and think good thoughts about women from afar. At some point I have to “get close” to women and try to actually get a woman to like me and form an actual real relationship with a woman. This is where things got a bit more difficult. I had partial success I would say in high school but not real success. There was always a barrier I couldn’t overcome or get through. I was not “good enough.” I did not have enough to offer. I could not compete with my competition.

My rejection by women in high school was the beginning of me wanting to “improve myself” and to try to figure out a way I could actually be of value in a woman’s life. I loved women plenty, I could definitely give my love to a woman and be nice to her and be concerned about her and care about her and stuff like that but that wasn’t enough. I had to have something “more” that I could offer, what this “more” was exactly was not so easy for me to figure out and was even harder for me to actually develop and possess. Still I had to be more and possess more and give more somehow.

Being rejected by the woman I was primarily interested in in high school gave me a greater respect for women and for her needs and her legitimate interests as a woman in particular. Being rejected by her instilled in me a greater sense of duty and commitment to her and towards women overall. I failed her, I didn’t have enough to offer her, I didn’t love her enough in the concrete ways I should have loved her. I was too focused on myself and not enough focused on her well being as a woman.

More from his essay:

In high school I never viewed myself as being “dominant,” the thought would have turned my stomach I am sure. I would have thought of such an “assertion of power” as being cruel and a betrayal of the woman I loved and wanted to be in a relationship with and I would have assumed such a power assertion would have been a great threat and a great turn off to the woman likely leading me to be promptly dumped which would have been a big disaster for me….

Nobody in my life; neither my family nor anyone at school nor any messages from the wider culture; ever taught me how to be a man. Nobody gave me the slightest clue how to treat women or what my role in relation to women was or that I had any kind of duties towards women whatsoever. On the contrary I received negative messages about masculinity meant to undermine me and weaken me and attack any positive protective or assertive impulses I had within myself towards women.

(Emphasis mine)

He explains how until his “conversion” he would “do anything to get whatever woman he liked to like him and be his girlfriend” and admits that there was a “shield” that prohibited him in getting too close to his love interests.  He speaks about how he thinks he could not compete with the other boys because “he was not good enough” or did not have enough to offer women.  He goes on explaining that after high school any relationships he did find himself in “fizzled” very quickly and his ability to meet women was even weaker than when he was in high school.

His conversion to this belief system is based on his inner conversations of what he THOUGHT he had to offer a woman (and what he incorrectly thought women wanted) in any relationship with him.  He ended up having “strong desires” to take care of and provide for a few particular women he had strong feelings for, which he ends up admitting was idealistic.  He then decided that he wanted his future wife to stay home, raise children and take care of the home while he worked.  In his words he wanted to “take care of” and “give a good life” to the woman he loved.

He explained that he “kept an eye on“and “noticed” the girls he was interested in.  The way he explained it gave me the stalker creepy feeling.  I can just imagine how he makes the women who are the target of his attentions feel.  The biggest thing I noticed in his essay about how high school girls shaped his current belief system concerning women in general is that it is an internal dialogue he has had with himself over the years and yet he still remains perplexed that reality does not follow his internal thoughts and desires on how women SHOULD act towards him.  Instead of having a different and more positive dialogue with himself he essentially states that he has determined that if he just serves women enough, is a nice enough guy they might just like him…someday.

What happened is Powell was an Incel and instead of learning game and the other related skills to improve his success with women he modified his lifelong indoctrination of the feminist belief system he was exposed too to include “taking care of” and overtly worshiping at the altar of the feminine goddess, thinking that maybe that will get him what he wants, a woman to love him.  He became an uber white knight and now promotes an ideology he called “unconditional chivalry”. I just cannot see him actually engaging with real women and testing his theories out.  It seems that instead of going out in the world, learning new skills and adapting one’s own personality in such a way as to get some success with women he turned his belief system into his own personal religion.

 

My Response to Him

I figured I would respond to him because the beliefs he espouses are potentially harmful as to how they sound pretty good on the surface with the woman staying at home, raising children, doing yoga to stay hot and sexy and supposedly making sammiches, but the underlying theme of his beliefs are quite sinister indeed as they are nothing but pretty lies covering up how feminism and all of its different denominations have perverted what should be the natural order to how men and women interact and relate in successful and happy relationships and in a successful society.  Another reason I was compelled to respond is that far too many men believe in this nonsense to one degree or another.  It should be clear by now, at least to readers of the sphere’ that in order for men to attract women they need to adopt a certain set of behaviors.  We call this Game.  Powell’s romanticized view of chivalry and men’s servitude towards women will do nothing for men (and in fact women) but lead them to heart break.

Women in general have an attitude of what’s yours is mine and what’s mine is mine.  I have noticed this in not only my relationships, but in the relationships of other couples I know as well.  Sometimes it is overt and sometimes this attitude is quite subtle but it is always there.

As one of my oft repeated saying from an ex states “you are just not doing what I want you to be doing”, women demand from us our resources and will often use every trick and deception to acquire them.  The woman in question wanted me to make a six figure income again even though at the time it would have had adverse health consequences for me and of course taken up all of my time.  The issue with her was not that she was lazy and wouldn’t help.  She was a very motivated and ambitious woman, which I happen to like.  The issue was the amount of income I would need to generate to pay for discretionary expenses such as her 2 horses.  Also she was adamant about have a large amount of money in saving right away (within 24 months).  It’s good to have a large savings but if you read my other essays where I described parts of our relationship you will see that there was already assets and cash set aside, it was just disproportionally hers.  She didn’t want to invest HER assets in our future plans as much as she wanted me to invest mine.  In this day and age I have no problem letting a woman do half the work, nor am I concerned if a woman makes more money than me.  I brought more than enough to the table in many other ways to more than make up for my lesser income.  In the end she wanted me to provide her a lifestyle that would have enslaved me.  It takes more than big tits and a nice ass.  Thanks but no thanks.

The woman that Powell speaks of is the proverbial Proverbs 31 woman who, by and large, do not exist in any discernibly large numbers in today’s society.  To give proper credit where due, I would say my ex wife tried hard to be that woman but her feminized church and feminist beliefs prohibited her from realizing her potential greatness.  The modern woman will always desire more and more stuff, which necessitates her husband producing more and more resources so she can have more stuff.  She will also demand through her action that her husband Game her hard at all times. It sounds like a bad deal for any man in any marital or cohabitation environment.

Powell was unable to grasp the basic understanding of my essay in that women as a gender do not understand the sacrifices we make for them and our children, nor do they appreciate the amount of work required to generate the substantial resources required to keep them fed, clothed and reasonably happy.  That’s ok though, we have, as men, been under appreciated for a few generations now.  However, we as men do have the choice to either give of ourselves to worthy women or not give anything to unworthy women.  We have no duty in either case.  I realized some time ago I am no longer obligated to give my resources to any particular woman.  Once a woman decided she no longer wanted to part of a man’s life (read have sex with the man) she no longer gets to enjoy the fruits of his labor.  I think it’s best for the majority of men to just be single and have sex with various women, or even in a committed monogamous relationship while not having to pay for women’s shit, or taking it for that matter.  If the man desires children than its best to raise the child(ren) in an intact family structure and live with the children’s mother, but still remain unmarried and protect his assets and freedom.

The main crux of my original essay was, as I will now explain Barney Style, is that instead of men working so hard they cannot enjoy their lives and have the time to pursue their other interests while still relatively young, why not consider living such a lifestyle where a man needs to only work part of the time (or as little as reasonably necessary) to provide adequate resources for himself and in my case my children only.  As in my experiences I have found a man can be quite happy doing this.

It may take some actual work at home if so inclined, such as growing your own food in a large garden, raising some livestock, learning to can and preserve food, learn another skilled trade that you always wanted to learn, etc, it is work that a man CHOOSES to do that benefits him and him alone and work that he really enjoys.  If a man has a wife or SO and she assists him in HIS mission, goals and endeavors, great!  Make it a family affair I say, so much the better, four hands are better than 2.  However in many circumstances the woman desires material goods that are unnecessary and from my observations these women have zero desire to assist the man in creating the resources.  In many cases it takes a man working so much more than necessary in order to acquire the resources to purchase the material goods, which were as originally stated, unnecessary in order to satisfy the woman.

Seeing as I do not rely on any particular woman to assist me, nor would I ever do so, I do these things myself and with my children.  I have friends that often assist and they share in production and the bounty of our activities.

The important thing is that my essay was primarily about how women today do not appreciate men’s sacrifices.  They demand the men in their lives to produce in ever increasing increments so that they may live a life of ease and comfort, all the while sacrificing the man, his health in many cases and the mans time.  Why would a man give his agency, his production, resources and his leisure time to a woman who will in the end not fully appreciate it?  Some men do choose to do this to their detriment; however I choose to live for me instead.  My children obviously benefit from my works by learning valuable skills they can use in the future if they so choose to emulate their fathers quest for personal independence.  They also have the coolest pets and eat natural foods. Powell criticizes me for “squandering” my time instead of directing all of my time to activities that would always benefit a woman.  He states that it is somehow a theft of the woman’s provisioning and it is immoral.  In response, it is the highest form of morality for a man to live foremost for himself and his mission.  In this case selfishness is the higher form of nobility.

I do have to point out that the basis of his morality is unclear and spurious seeing as he is an atheist and the moral teaching he propagates conflicts with traditional Christian beliefs.

Entropy is my God said it best in his comment on SSM’s site:

@MR JESSE POWELL

I hear a lot of blather about chivalry from a man who is too cowardly to find and dedicate himself to pure atheism, and too sure of himself and his ideas to subsume himself in a belief system with concrete tenets. Both paths take fortitude. It takes zero fortitude to stand up for what you feel (You are a special snowflake) is right. Proof is evident in all women; they worship their feelings as a god unto themselves. And for the mathematically vigilant when I say all, I say all in the statistically relevant all. By this I mean at least 95% of all women, two standard deviations from mean, all worship their feelings as divine. Begin Screeching NAWALT now.
I hereby call you a coward and would if possible, challenge you to a duel. Our pedantic and homosexualized country does not allow that though so I will curtail my response to your blatant hatred of men, and by proxy me, to this post.
Allow me to destroy your milquetoast ode to romance novels via two ways.
1. If you were man enough to embrace Christianity, first by believing that the bible isn’t the inherent and unflawed word of the ONLY God, then you would have a solid foundation upon which to base some claims on men toward women. They would not be “Chivalry” though as it is a recent addition to the lexicon and was never mentioned in any version of the bible. So if you were a Christian your thesis fails, falls flat on disbelief, and is mired in Phariseeism.
2. This is far more exciting, you fail as an atheist. You have no god, you have no moral code of absolutes. Everything is relative, nothing is wrong, nothing is right. Many so called intellectuals claim to be atheists and wonder around in a dazed myopic trance of legalism while surfing a sea of moral ambiguity. Some claim to be hedonists and do whatever it takes to feel good. All of these are abominations to the true atheist, to the one who doesn’t worship anything, to the one who literally worships nothing. Your panacea of good will and chivalry will crumble like a house of dried feces in the winds of changes that prepare to sweep this nation.

Our country for certain, but perhaps the entire world, is about to face the consequnces of our actions. We have bankrupted the entire planet. As system dynamics teaches, the more complex a system the greater the change to the system outputs when any one input is removed. We may be about to lose several. When moral codes run into the unbreakable wall of real hunger, of thirst, of sickness, and real cruelty, we will see how long your “Chivalry”, brought about only due to an unprecedented surplus of wealth, can survive. We have all been living like hogs in a vat of moral detritus. I long for the punishment to arrive, if nothing else so that the iron bar of reality comes crashing down on the paper mache you and those like you have built.

I despise your sanctimony when you have no backing for any of it. If you are an atheist then there is nothing upon which to assert any beliefs at all, ever. You prefer what you prefer and I prefer what I prefer. You prefer that men owe a never ending debt to women for all time. What you fail to take into account is the fact that no one who shares your belief system (no moral absolutes) has any, repeat, any reason to abide by this. Your silent and heartfelt prayer, to the spongy pink god of your own feminized soul, is that you can leverage the power of the state to enforce your baseless beliefs. Let me say that again, your only hope, and greatest joy, just like all other cowardly statists, is to enforce your putrid will through the leviathan of the state. You are Stalin, you are Mao, you are Hitler. You pray for an ever powerful, never-ending government body that will continue to enforce your petulant feminized whims.

(Emphasis mine)

Continuing, he goes on to point out that a woman would not have to trade her sexual intimacy or as I also put it “her cleverly disguised feigned interest in the man’s mission” in order to secure a man’s resources if I just accepted his shaming criticisms and gave freely to the woman without any expectations of positive reciprocal actions on her part.  He believes it is ALL men’s duty to do this even in light of today’s social constructs with promote frivolous divorces, divorce theft of men’s wealth and his children and the far too numerous social programs that only benefit women and harm men.  He turns the whole issue on its head when he states that a woman’s immoral behaviors in a relationship are in fact the fault of the man because he does not give freely of his time and resources to the woman and because he does not act in what Powell would define as chivalrous.  He then goes on and on about men serving women and that by serving women he hopes that they will be romantically interested in him.  As for his mission in life he believes that a woman should be a significant part of the man’s mission and that men succeed through and only because the help of a woman.  However, he then changes his mind and criticizes me because I expected my wife to assist in our family business.  He seemed to miss the part in the bible that states very clearly that a woman is a man’s helpmeet.  She was created to assist the man in his mission, not become it.

Apparently he believes that somehow by working and assisting men a woman harms herself.  He misconstrues the reality of the situation.  Both my ex wife (T) and ex girlfriend (C) worked very hard.  In fact I set up (T) in her own business once it became clear that she was unwilling to assist me in my business.  As for (C), this is a woman who reroofed her own house.  Her biggest complaint and attraction to me is that most men are incapable of doing what is historically men’s work and she fell in love with me because not only can I do all of these things I have awesome tools to do it with.  I think she loved my tools more than me, and me with my tool belt.  I do believe she would find Powell’s remarks particularly offensive.  Both woman agreed with me that woman are generally ill suited to do some types of work such as firefighting, combat roles in the military and law enforcement for example, but that does not preclude woman from swing a hammer or turning a wrench.  I suppose he would also object to a woman being a secretary or receptionist jobs well suited to women especially if she is attractive.

 

One thing to consider is that in my line of work I do not need to work 40 + hours per week to generate the necessary income that would support a simpler lifestyle.  This is a choice that Powell takes issue with because it challenges the feminine imperative necessitating that a man work at his maximum rate until he keels over from exhaustion in order to provide a life of relative ease and comfort for his wife and children without any help from her.

The woman being frugal in Powell’s example is indicative of a woman being responsible with resources she was entrusted with.  Furthermore her responsible handling of her husband’s resources benefits the family unit as a whole and is a good show of proper submission and discipline.  The family as a whole benefits from the wife’s responsible actions. In general this woman would be part of a small minority of women in today’s society.

Powell strongly believes that a woman has no obligation to assist a man in his mission and insists that a man makes the woman his mission.  He tells us that a woman should EXPECT a man to work for her and if he refuses to do so or asks for her assistance he is shameful and somehow less than a man.  He ambiguously states that men should support a woman’s “heroic mission”, whatever that may entail.  Maybe he doesn’t know either.

So in closing, yes women are generally selfish, although a minority may not be overtly and will try to control their worst impulses.  However a woman basic hypergamy will always compel her to seek out the best deal at all times.  The games rigged so men can choose not to play, or they can play it on their own terms.  What Powell does not like is that men have the right to choose what they do with their time and resources.  Although happening slowly, men are becoming aware that most women simply do not deserve, regardless of however entitled women may feel that they do, all that a man used to be willing to do for them.

It is abundantly clear that Powell has no understanding of how a woman’s mind (or her gina tingle generator)really works.  He seems smart enough and its obvious he has least been exposed to the written works of Dalrock, The Rational Male and Heartiste, but he is blinded by his ideology and upbringing to the truth.  It is not surprising he had, and I am only speculating here, still has problems relating to most women.  It is an unassailable fact that bowing down to women will not get you laid or married for life. The best thing for him to do would be for him to honestly convert to Christianity and find a good marriage believing church to attend in a small town.  He will probable still suck his wife’s ass in the end.  Alternatively, he can shuck off his ideological Blue Pill upbringing as so many of us have done and learn Game. Normally I will not promote or prescribe such things such as marriage and cohabitation in this modern anti-marriage and anti-family climate but in his case I do not think he would be able to fully expunge his feminist beliefs and romanticized views of woman from his mind. Because of this, it is unlikely that he could handle the Red Pill truths we oft discuss here.  Not all men are meant to be alphas and not all men can handle the truth and reality.

Related Articles:

On Man’s Role and Man’s Duty: a counterpoint guest post by Mr. Jesse Powell. – Sunshine Mary
The Cart Before the Chevalier – Alpha is Assumed
Tradcon Arch-Mangina Jesse Powell Gets Rejected By The TWRAs
Hail to the V
What we need is more chivalry!
Chivalry: Falling In Love With Shame
Can Nazbol Misandrists Really Be This Stupid
The gift transformed into a debt.Rejecting outmoded responsibility
Men, You Are A Husband To All Women
WHAT A REAL GENTLEMAN DOES
Chivalry only comes from a position of strength.

 

Ayn Rand Good woman

 

I found this excerpt from Ayn Rand that I think has some very good wisdom.  I experienced this in a woman I met about a year ago.  One of the things I found most attractive in her was that she reflected me in many ways.  I did not understand that at first.

Another thing that I noticed after we were together for some time and after I began writing was that through our relationship I did have a sense of increased self esteem, in particular how she totally surrendered her body to me.

Perhaps this was because my experience with my ex-wife was completely opposite.  My ex-wife used sex as a weapon and didn’t know that a woman’s submission and surrender to her husband would make her happier than she could have ever imagined.

The statement by Rand also speaks a lot about male hypergamy and the male imperative.  When I met my wife she was the hardest in the group of women I was dating to win over, but I did win her over.  Out of the 3 other men who were chasing her I am the one who conquered her heart and her body.  I think that maybe I saw her for more than what she was.  It does take a strong women to keep up with me and love me because she still had to earn my love, which she did in many ways.

I referenced two different women I have been involved with recently in this essay, both having unique strengths and flaws.  I think the key when considering a woman to love is to find one that encompasses the traits that make you feel masculine in all ways.  Something to ponder.