Boundless reader Steve Bierfeldt tried. He wrote an article for Boundless entitled “Being a Man is Worth Losing a Friend,” with the subheader on the main page “Real men go after the things they want, period.” In the article he describes how he and a good female friend with whom there was mutual attraction lost their friendship because he told her he found her attractive and liked her more than other girls. As a result, she never spoke to him again. Bierfeldt then says that he doesn’t regret his actions, because real men are willing to take risks, and urges young men not to listen to our culture of passivity but to God’s Word and to be bold.
Apparently this was too much masculinity for Boundless readers, because the very first comment blasts Bierfeldt for believing that the Bible calls men to make their intentions known and for women to respond, because, apparently, male initiation is merely a cultural aspect. A few commenters stepped in and thanked Bierfeldt, but the comments then quickly devolved into stuff along the lines of “girls who wait for men to make moves waste a lot of time” and “the Bible isn’t a rule book” and the ultimate bitch comment by a girl who I will assume ought to remain single for the rest of her life because good men don’t deserve this kind of attitude, “Women are not things, period.” Then some super-sperg shows up demanding Scripture references for where the Bible says that men should initiate.
It really seems like Christian singles want every marriage to be an actual miracle that defies the laws of nature.
Haley's Halo 
With as much garbage that exists in the “Christian” world that is peddled by these groups, it’s amazing any “Christians” get married at all.
Boundless used to be great, circa 2000 or so. It went through a lot of changes editorially. It used to be much more substantive and intellectually thoughtful, but seems to have increasingly embraced marketing the Evangelical Mainstream view. I think that everything in its archives by J. Budziszewski is worth reading, as are most articles pre-2005 or so.
The dude goofed because he stated his desires, rather than acting on them, but in general it’s much better than sabotaging dreck out there. I was half-expecting to read that he was required to stay in the “friend zone” forever, apologize profusely and suck up to her, and letting things go is cowardly.
I agree with the author 100%. I’m surprised Boundless actually published this article. Christian circles are starting to get a little too weird for me now. I am relatively new to the Christian Red Pill world but it’s where I have finally rediscovered who I am and what I want out of life, including a spouse. Unfortunately Christian women are becoming less and less appealing. The whole “women are not things” debate would have turned me off of any of those ladies, assuming I ever would have felt attracted to them in the first place. A wife, a woman, a man, a house are all nouns, and by definition, “things”. These people seem so caught up on being politically correct they missed the whole point of the article. The author weighed the risks and rewards a pursuing this woman and acted on his God given desire. These “women” complaining about his actions are the same ones who can’t find a “real man”. Enjoy your cats ladies.
“Then some super-sperg shows up demanding Scripture references for where the Bible says that men should initiate.”
I agree with your overall point, but I don’t see how trivializing people with developmental disorders brings glory to God.
Good point about unkindness, Kurt.
But thinking deeper, perhaps the problem that many of us are having with these Churchian writings is that they do sound like manifestations of some sort of disorder, for example, a hairsplitting legalism divorced from a nuanced understanding of humans as having bodies and emotions characteristic of autistic spectrum disorder*, or a self-obsessed hyper-emotionalism characteristic of narcissism.
And while Christ calls us to love the mentally ill and developmentally disabled, it is legitimate to point out when thought processes characteristic of illness or disability are being used to provide instruction for the Church.
*Haley’s post about physical attraction being an either/or proposition is an example. Off-topic, but I wonder if the people who believe that dichotomy are have either extremely low self-control / intelligence or extremely low sex drive. The former have personally experienced passion without regard for the compatibility / morality / legality of a particular attraction; the latter only imagine that if they were attracted to someone, it would involve a departure from their usual hyper-analytical approach and therefore BOOP! BEEP! INVALID OPERATION!
While I agree that harmful thought processes should be examined, “sperg” is still a mean-spirited slur akin to “retard”. Why would a self-professed Christian find it acceptable to use such denigrating language?
“But thinking deeper, perhaps the problem that many of us are having with these Churchian writings is that they do sound like manifestations of some sort of disorder, for example, a hairsplitting legalism divorced from a nuanced understanding of humans as having bodies and emotions characteristic of autistic spectrum disorder*, or a self-obsessed hyper-emotionalism characteristic of narcissism.”
This is an interesting point. I don’t know that it’s just “Churchians” though. The ability to understand people in a nuanced way, as well as the ability to take pain and disappointment and move on with life, is something that I wonder is perhaps in short supply in some manosphere circles. Adaptation and resiliency are general life skills that help people navigate the vicissitudes of life without giving themselves over to bitterness, discouragement, cynicism, and the like. Also, the ability to process complex emotions and their various causes, rather than just pounding one note is pretty important for being able to deal. Black and white thinking (all people are x or y, things are only this or that) in general is not held in monopoly by the mainstream.
It’s almost like they want everything to fail, so that they can continuously complain about it.
The problem with that worthless chick and her “women are not things” statement is just further proof that she is just some idiot parroting something she heard someone else say, because it is out of context.
This arrogant little fool probably felt that she “told them”, and went on her merry way.
Ultimately, the Church will be fixed by reaching the men and getting them to stop engaging with any woman who has one of these competitive, defiant attitudes.
To a somewhat greater degree than men, women have problems seeing cause and effect relationships. If women keep up with these petty attitudes and childish responses, the day is coming when men will simply have had enough.
When a critical mass of men begin to realize that promoting “girl power” is a losing game, they will stop. I expect feminism to crumble within my lifetime.
By the way “girl power” is nothing more than whatever expression of power men collectively allow, since as the stronger sex, we could, if we were united, reinstate a patriarchy in a week. The girls would be powerless to stop it.
And that really chaps their hide.
If they keep taunting the good men, sooner or later the good men will start being bad men, and then the women will have nowhere to turn, and will be living in a mess of their own making,
There is no reason for men and women to be friends. The mistake was in assuming it was possible.
The girls at Boundless are weird, no doubt, but Bierfeldt’s method is not likely to work. Very few romantic relationships start as long-time friendships. Romantic relationships normally go from zero to sixty very quickly, or they don’t happen at all. If you want romance, you have to be constantly meeting new people, to see if something catches fire, not looking at the crowd you already know well. Hence the y81 advice about joining an urban megachurch, assuming it’s a Christian flame that you want.
Of course, there is a class of men (well-represented among the commentators here, alas) who resent this fact, and believe that is somehow immoral that women commonly go for someone they just met over the reliable guy they have known for a long time. Hey, that’s the way girls are. If you don’t like it, you’ll have to marry another guy.
No friends. Observer is correct.
What are the Blue Pill myths that Churches have inshrined that we are fighting?
#1 Women rationally atracted to the “good men” with the right resume`.
#2 Chritian women are DIFFERENT, they want Godliness as well as the resume`
#3 If the Christian man would just be NICE enough and godly enough he couse get a “good woman”.
#4 If you wait LONG ENOUGH, you will get the perfect ONE for you.
“And if you dont believe this you aint a christian , it says so in the Bible………….”
Anyone else see this as a failing policy?
OFFTHECUFF said: “The dude goofed because he stated his desires, rather than acting on them…”
Yep. While I agree with with Bierfeldt’s overall premise, he seemed to ruin his chances by constructing an awkward moment:
“The young lady I referred to earlier was a friend whom I’d known for years. In fact, we’d been exceptionally good friends and had developed an attraction we both acknowledged. So one evening over dinner, I acted upon it.
“She agreed it was my role to act and her role to decide. She said she wanted some time to think. While not the response I’d hoped for, it was not the response I’d hoped against.” — from the article
Just what the hell did he do? Did he actually ASK HER OUT? Dinner and dancing, maybe? Even to invite her to a tractor pull would be preferable to what he probably did, which was, “Tiffany, I think you deserve honesty; and I’d like to let you know that I’m very attracted to you and would like to state my intention of taking our relationship to the next step.”
Blech! And, to make matters worse, he then attempted several unresponsive contacts with this young woman.
According to statistics, marriage and birthrate is way down in America. If the overall mentality of Boundless is pervasive among single, church-going men, I believe it.
A few comments Aunt Haley:
1: I’ve been in this awkward situation many times. The great majority of the time (about 75%), the female in friend in question does not end the friendship when unreciprocated romantic feelings are revealed, provided I don’t keep pushing her on it. It sounds like this guy overestimated the depth of his friendship with this woman, on her end OR like there were other issues in the “friendship”,
2: The woman in question who not only rejected her “friend”, but disowned him, is going to be one of these “woe is me where are all the good Christian men at???” when she is alone and childless at 35 (if she hasn’t decided to lower her standards by getting with an unsaved guy).
3: Both the manosphere (red pill) and establishment (blue pill) are full of crap. There is no secret code or system going on. Attractive people get all the girls (or guys), both in the church or the secular world.This isn’t rocket science. There is no need to create a delusional alternate reality in which all men or all women are the enemy, constantly scheming to screw all of the opposite sex over. That being said, female sexism (misandry) is more overtly obvious than male sexism (misogyny) in the contemporary culture.
4: The writer of the article needs to get up, dust the dirt off his duff, and keep on “campaigning” regardless of what the naysayers tell him–unless he wants to stay single.
There is no need to create a delusional alternate reality in which all men or all women are the enemy, constantly scheming to screw all of the opposite sex over.
There’s a pretty vocal contingent of the manosphere who love to frame things so that women can’t win. Not attracted to a boring beta provider? ENTITLED! GOING TO END UP WITH CATS!! Trying to give “good guys” a chance? NO WOMAN SHOULD DATE ANYONE SHE’S NOT ATTRACTED TO! THAT’S UNFAIR TO THE MAN! Goes out with an alpha (i.e., a man more attractive than the commenter in question)? HYPERGAMY! PUMP AND DUMP!! FUTURE FULL OF CATS!!!
The way these guys talk, unless a woman marries at age 20 with no education and no job that actually makes any money, she’s doomed to end up with a sad and lonely future full of cats.
” Why would a self-professed Christian find it acceptable to use such denigrating language?”
Yeah… it’s not like our Lord and Savior would ever call someone a “son of a viper”.
If you act like a duck…
Aunt Haley, the solution is to first, the churches need to recognize and admit to the realities of sex selection and the marriage market.( prety much the same inside churches as outside) Level with people, instead of cheerleading. Then stop raising unatracktive kids, or at least stop encouraging “godly” unatractiveness.
Christian men and women desire hotness in the opposite sex every bit as much as the unsaved. It is a fact of life–deal with it and end the politically correct BS (or manospherian conspiracism) and find some way to overcome it.
If you are having zero luck with the opposite sex, you need to work on that. You can’t make your face more attractive (unless you can afford plastic surgery), but you can work out, get in better shape, get a better hairdo, etc. Naturally you can also become better-read and educated so you are more interesting a person. Get some real hobbies you are passionate about, for crying out loud.
The best possible outcome to this story would be this Boundless guest writer attempting to figure out what’s unattractive about him that led to his nuclear rejection. If he has normal social skills, he likely has at least a couple of genuine friends that would be willing to give him some painful feedback that could help him, and hopefully at least one is a female. He should seek their honest advice.
Haley, 2/19, 8:44 pm:
You know very well that that vocalization from the manosphere is a direct response to the rest of society, which has framed things so that men can’t win.
Guy wants to date a pretty, slim, Christian woman? YOU’RE A SEXIST, SIZE-IST, SHALLOW PIG!!!
Guy isn’t interested in marriage because most women aren’t marriageable? YOU’RE A PETER PAN MAN-BOY WHO WON’T GROW UP! STOP PLAYING THOSE VIDEO GAMES, AND MAN UP AND MARRY THE SLUTS!!
Guy wants sex from his wife, who promised to give it to him when she said “I do”? YOU’RE NOT ENTITLED TO SEX, YOU SELF-CENTERED PIG!! SHE HAS TO SUBMIT ONLY WHEN SHE FEELS LIKE IT AND ONLY WHEN YOU’RE PROPERLY SUBMITTED TO GOD!!
Guy points out obvious unfairnesses and inequities in marriage and society in general? YOU’RE A WHINER AND A COMPLAINER!! MAN UP AND STOP CRYING!! GET BACK TO WORK, YOU PIG!!
The issue of men being more interested in sex than their wives and this causing eternal conflict in marriage is one that goes back to the Fall itself, and is just as big of an issue in the secular world as the Christian bubble. I don’t believe there is a really effective long-term fix for it–aside from making it a point to select a spouse that is well-matched to you in libido (but very few women truly have a man-like sex drive). Even the majority of sluts are not truly libidinous–most of them are desperate for attention, validation, status, are trying to find “the one” but are going about it in an idiotic way, etc.
In my experience in this matter (which is pretty extensive, considering the effort I’ve gone through to try to find such a woman), upwards of 9/10 women with very high natural sex drives are hefty or chunky by mainstream society’s standards. This is not an accident–increased fat content means more hormones flowing through one’s body, including testosterone. Since most guys do not want an overweight woman, this becomes a catch-22. Thinner women have lower hormonal levels than heavier ones (for proof of this, look at the extreme example of near-anorexic gymnasts that don’t even menstruate until they stop competitively performing and are stunted at 4’11” for life) and are not going to be in the mood very often, relative to men.
It’s a fact that Christian guys want a slim woman just as much as secular ones. So, does this mean that both are reflecting biological design? Not necessarily. I do believe some of this is cultural programming. There is a difference between someone barrel-shaped and someone who is simply big all over and looks like a woman–big boobs, big hips, big butt, big thighs, etc. The former person is unappealing to anyone and is probably really unhealthy, whereas the latter may well be as fit as can be and extremely fertile (and is often very attractive). A good example of this is plus-size model London Andrews (warning, some of her pics are NSFW and are not particularly edifying to look at if you get my drift). Do I believe that many of the latter women are getting passed up foolishly or wrongfully conflated with the Gabourey Sidibes of the world? Yes, I do.
I think Athol Kay has it right when he urges men to make themselves more attractive/sexually desirable to their spouse and up their “LTR game”. This isn’t an overnight magic bullet, but allows your spouse to maximize the libido that God gave them. Athol has stated that his wife has a lower desire level than he does, but since he has made himself very hot and desirable to her, her lower desire is functioning at its optimum level and they are both very satisfied in bed.
In a way, this is true. There’s a phenomenon of what we might call “evangelical exceptionalism,” the feeling that since God performs miracles, is not bound by earthly rules, gives us better than we deserve, etc., it’s overly cynical and worldly to actually think of and take into account things like general rules of everyday life, human nature, and averages and statistics. I’ve heard liberal Christians accuse conservative Christians of being “Paulians,” and while I hate to lend credence to a liberal, there’s some truth to that. Evangelicals lend particular weight to passages from the epistles of Paul where he calls the things of this world “dung,” talks about how our bodies and the earth are passing away, basically making it sound (if you take it out of context of the rest of the Bible) like everything in this world and this life is completely 100% worthless and we should be 100% focused only on the Kingdom of Heaven 24/7/365.
As an example, there’s a girl I’ve been going on dates with since early December. Last month, I tried to have a DTR, and it fell flat. She basically said (in not so many words, of course) that she’s not ready to move forward with the relationship because she’s not sure that I’m enough of an Earl of Piety. The next day I sent her the link to your Earl of Piety blog entry. After reading it, she, predictably, told me that she didn’t like it, that it was too cynical, and that the author was giving bad advice because women should hold out for a guy who’s passionately pursuing the Lord with all his heart, mind, soul, and strength, etc., etc.
Martin L:
The issue of men being more interested in sex than their wives and this causing eternal conflict in marriage is one that goes back to the Fall itself, and is just as big of an issue in the secular world as the Christian bubble. I don’t believe there is a really effective long-term fix for it–aside from making it a point to select a spouse that is well-matched to you in libido (but very few women truly have a man-like sex drive).
A woman who can only have sex when she wants to or is paid for it is not a wife.
People are so sexually starved everywhere that they work sex up to this incredibly wonderful thing. It isn’t. And it also doesn’t take very long if the woman’s only goal is to get the guy off cause he is her husband. Nor is it particularly hard(but this isn’t even remotely necessary) to make it relatively nice for the woman to, even if she isn’t in the mood. It doesn’t take long, it isn’t hard, and if the b*tch can’t do it because “she doesn’t want to” then the husband should stop doing things for her that “he doesn’t want to”. This will get real awesome, real fast.
Refusing to have sex with your husband is petty, mean, and selfish. It is simply nastiness.
No whores, you don’t get a pass. Men go to jobs that they HATE HATE HATE for eight.. nine… ten…. hours a day. You can ride their c*** for twenty minutes a day. That’s all there is to it. And no, they aren’t comparable. One is very easy and the other is very hard.
The girls at Boundless are weird, no doubt, but Bierfeldt’s method is not likely to work. Very few romantic relationships start as long-time friendships. Romantic relationships normally go from zero to sixty very quickly, or they don’t happen at all. If you want romance, you have to be constantly meeting new people, to see if something catches fire, not looking at the crowd you already know well. Hence the y81 advice about joining an urban megachurch, assuming it’s a Christian flame that you want.
Of course, there is a class of men (well-represented among the commentators here, alas) who resent this fact, and believe that is somehow immoral that women commonly go for someone they just met over the reliable guy they have known for a long time. Hey, that’s the way girls are. If you don’t like it, you’ll have to marry another guy.
Unless they knew each other as children. Plenty of little girls look at how a particular boy is acting, either in an instant, or over a period of time, or both, and think “I want him to be my husband.” In the really real world.
Hermes–
Thanks for bringing up “evangelical exceptionalism.” I think a lot of Christian young people have been burned in the pursuit of relationships and their own spiritual walks because the concept is often taken to an extreme – like, if God ISN’T doing something extraordinary in your life, then you have a defective faith. It’s not usually stated that bluntly, but the implication is there. It’s probably why we then see a lot of Christians rationalizing that EVERYTHING is extraordinary, like “Someone showed me kindness today. God is EXTRAORDINARY in His grace!!” It’s like everything has to be to the extreme – are you ON FIRE for God, are you TOTALLY SOLD OUT to Him, are you a WARRIOR FOR THE KINGDOM, etc. But some days we wake up and stub our toes and have to pay bills and the toilet gets clogged. No wonder a lot of evangelicals are constantly berating themselves for not being good enough Christians: their lives just aren’t transcendent enough.
BTW, I feel like I’ve arrived if my readers are sharing my articles with the people they’re dating. Sorry to hear you have not yet achieved Earliest Earl of Most Pious Piety with this girl yet. She probably found out you like beer and is concerned that you will lead your future children down a dissolute road of chronic intoxication. Is she under 30? She may not have reached that age yet where you need to get really real about the reality of what is available to you in the dating market.
she’s doomed to end up with a sad and lonely future full of cats.
I’m only commenteing to say that I like how many times you used the word “cats”. My unmarried sister-in-law literally has six cats, and although I like her very much, and wish that she would get married, I still laugh every time I read the “single old cat lady” meme.
Waiting around for a partner Way Above Your Own Market Value, (WAYOMV ) as a devine gift does seem to work as often as church culture implies it does. Why not instead learn to raise your own market value?
To the almost-ealr: Dump her now. Ignore her. Do nothing to aid, assist, or otherwise acknowledge her.
Men need to start making these stupid, creepy women PAY for their arrogance.
Like I have said elsewhere, my “guy door” has a sign that says Girlfriends Only.
Unless a woman is a very good friend, the rest of them can flake off and look after themselves.
whatever–
I don’t think that the problem all comes down to pompous, spoiled, feminist wives (some of it is, but by no means all). I think it goes back to the Fall itself–men and women are wired differently and want different things out of marriage. There are women that genuinely try to get into sex as often as their husband wants and do it because they love their men–but still, it’s a chore to them. They don’t enjoy it and this is often the case no matter how hard the man tries to make it pleasurable for her. Stress and fatigue are proven libido-killers for the majority of normal women, whereas they often produce the exact opposite effect in healthy men of normal T levels–hence the man coming home ragingly horny after a 16-hour day in the coal mines whose grocery-clerk wife has no desire at all after her nine hours + childcare. Or, look at that time of the month–I don’t know too many guys who feel like monks when they have bad gas or stomach cramps.
Short of self-improvement programs like Athol Kay’s “Mindful Attraction Plan”, I don’t think there’s very much that can be done about it, at least until we move past the “wives are all selfish entitled jerks” or “men only care about getting off” polemic.
I look at this problem like all of the rest of life’s problems–as a conservative, politically-incorrect, biblical-literalist Christian. Ultimately all disappointment, grief, and strife goes back to one incident: the Fall. That doesn’t mean that there is nothing that can be done to mitigate or compensate for it, but I think this difficulty is one of the more challenging ones to deal with because it deals directly with human biology. It would be like expecting huge numbers of humans to arbitrarily want to eat more, or less, based on willpower alone. The body does not work that way.
The long-term fix to this problem comes down to individual human biology. Parents and churches need to learn how to meaningfully educate teens and young adults on how to prudently select mates based on shared life and physical attributes–and this includes libido. Or, we could have more older man/younger woman marriages: as men’s health and testosterone decline with age, the sex drive usually follows. An average 50 year-old man would probably be a fine sexual match for most healthy women, and he is much more likely to be financially and emotionally stable and faithful at that age as well. For younger or very healthy men with raging, out-of-control libidos that cannot be satisfactorily married to a woman that doesn’t at least come close, the solution will include explaining to them that the rare women that can gladly keep up with them may not be a traditional physical perfect 10 (likely to be overweight, have some masculinized features reflecting their higher-than-average T, etc.).
Aunt Haley, I’d love to hear your take on this very real problem (as evidenced by the amount of porn usage, affairs, etc. among pastors) in society in general and the Christian world in particular, perhaps in the form of its very own post.
Haley,
Actually, she drinks in moderation herself, so it’s not that, or any other lifestyle issue, as far as I know. She basically told me she has doubts because I’m not constantly quoting chapter and verse, gushing about the latest devotional book I’m reading and how my Quiet Time was this morning, peppering my speech with biblical phrases and theological concepts, talking about the latest coworker I’m witnessing to and inviting to church, etc. The problem is, I feel like some of that just comes down to your basic personality. Just as you said of your father in your Earl of Piety post, that just wasn’t in his personality. It doesn’t seem to be in mine, either–making me wonder if I’m ever going to be “Christian enough” for a Christian girl.
She is under 30, but what frustrates me about that is that I thought she already had gotten realistic. This is a girl who gave me the IKDG treatment a year ago, after which I dropped all contact and didn’t think much about her, but then she texted me a Happy Birthday in September, and spontaneously wrote a greeting on my Facebook wall in November. This spurred me to Facebook-and-Twitter-stalk her, revealing that her three closest female friends had all recently gotten engaged. A-ha, I thought, she’s had reason to become realistic, and I have an in. So I asked her out, and since then I’ve even asked her about the Joshua Harris thing, and she replied that she’s changed her thinking on that, that it’s not fair to guys, that she gave up having “checklists” (she actually used the word) for dating, etc. I guess there are multiple stages of getting realistic, and while she may have gotten realistic, she hasn’t gotten “really real about the reality” as you put it.
Jack,
I’ve thought about it, but I have to admit–not that this bodes well for the relationship–this girl’s partially right. I was neither raised in an Evangelical Christian immediate family nor had the typical Evangelical born-again experience–i.e., one distinct moment when I went forward at an altar call and prayed “the sinner’s prayer” or whatever, followed by getting “discipled” by a more mature believer–so I never got the memo about all these little practices like having devotional time every morning. And the fact that I can’t really quote chapter and verse or discuss certain matters of theology knowledgably gives me pause about my ability to raise children in a Christian environment. This girl’s saying this has made me realize that I actually do need to deepen my Christian faith.
Hermes,
She is trying to become your personal Holy Spirit, controlling, and policing every single thought and action of your life and your walk with God, as if God actually needs her help to make you “Christian Enough.” Her “faith” is based (misplaced) on her idolatry of you meeting her “needs” and expectations of certain self-defined (not in the bible) “Spiritual” requirements, so that she can “bestow” upon you (as if she is closer to God than you) the label of “Spiritual Leader,” and thus calm her own nerves about being happy, safe, and “Spiritual enough.” Her “faith” is not based on Christ, but her own ability to make things (including you) turn-out “right” (as she decides/what is most convenient for her desires). Basically, she’ll make you jump through endless hoops until you are “leading” her by doing all the super special Churchy things that Pastors teach as “Christian,” but aren’t written specifically in the bible. If you do all those extra miscellaneous things to please her, then Congratulations, she is leading you, and manipulating/interfering with your relationship with Christ to make you turn-out “right” (according to her will instead of God’s), but she will tell you how happy she is that you are “such a good Spiritual Leader,” because you are submitting to her will, giving her what she wants from you, and “leading” her where she desires to go. How is that for irony?
If her “faith” dependency were on Christ instead of you or herself, then she would not be so upset (self-righteous/judgmental/likely willing to end her entire relationship with you, because she is blind to her own sin), that you aren’t meeting all these unbiblical expectations of hers, because her focus would be on Christ and her own sin, not trying to micro-manage your walk with Christ (and your “sin”) to make herself feel happy or safe.
All of her actions just show that she is passively placing all of the responsibility of her own walk with Christ on you, expecting you to manage all of her “spirituality” for her, and the next moment she begins to feel “unhappy” or “unsafe,” she will begin to blame and shame you for her own sin problems, her own misplaced “faith,” (idolatry), and her own passive, weak, idolatrous “walk with Christ.”
Women, where in the bible does it say that husbands must lead their wives in personal and family bible studies every day? Where does it say that men must pray out loud with their wives every day? Or attend seminars when their wives want them to? Read several “Christian” self-help books? Attend the specific Church that the wife wants to go to? And more.
Stop placing your own personal preferences on your boyfriends/husbands as requirements/expectations to change them into your own personal idea of a “Spiritual Leader.” If your “spiritual” idea is not written explicitly in the bible, then you have no right expecting men to meet those unbiblical requirements.
If your “faith” were really on Christ, then you would believe that Christ is big enough, powerful enough, Holy enough, and good enough to lead you through an imperfect man. Your faith would not hinge on your opinion of the quality of his walk with Christ. That is just idolatry, expecting men to become your own personal Jesus – the one whom you desire to depend on and trust more than Christ himself. Stop trying to manipulate men to match your unbiblical picture of a “perfect” man. Stop passively placing the responsibility of your own walk with Christ on your men.
Let men be men, and stop trying to control how men choose to relate to Christ. We are not women, and we are not going to relate to Christ the same way that women will, because we do not think and act like women. All of these miscellaneous things you expect men to do are your own ideas of how women want to think and act in relation to Christ, and they aren’t fair expectations for men. We will meet with and grow in Christ in our own ways. That is for us to decide. God does not want you to form men after your own image. You are not the Holy Spirit.
It’s none of your business how many minutes a day we pray to God, whether or not we pray out loud, and whether or not we decide to have “family bible studies” according to your own preferences. If you want a real Spiritual Leader, then you need to let go of your expectations and allow men to lead however we decide to lead. You are not the leader! You are to trust both Christ and us and begin to cooperate and follow. God will lead your man if he is listening to Christ, but as long as he is not forcing you to sin, then HOW he leads you is none of your responsibility or concern. That is between him and God. But you should still encourage and pray for him no matter what.
Hermes, I would see the 3 friends getting engaged as a red flag. Now she wants The Wedding and needs a stage prop called a groom.
I think the girl is just not that interested in you, Hermes (sorry!) That is the problem, not her spiritual checklist. I remember when I read about the original ‘Earl of Piety’ girl, thinking that her checklist was a long-winded way of saying that she just wasn’t very interested in the guy pursuing her. Sure enough, she ended up with a different boyfriend a few weeks later.
As far as getting ‘really real’, sometimes that depends on how much someone wants to be married or not.
galloper6 is 100% correct!
She likely could just want the praise of other women that comes with increased social (status) legitimacy (to match her friends and tout her new increased social status to other women at church) via a wedding ceremony (that guarantees you will be required to give everything good in your life to her, but that she will only consider doing so for you when she thinks it will help her get something she wants from you), and she would likely marry any random man that could provide “enough” social status praise. She likely is just loving herself (idolatry), and you are just the prop piece “accessory” to her plans. She would be happy for a short while, and then turn around and ruin your life, expecting you to become her own personal Jesus / financial labor slave (dedicated to her worldly “happiness” more than her holiness or maturing faith), while never taking any responsibility for her own sins and her own life. She will want you to go through the religious pharisaic rituals of a “Spiritual Leader,” as long as you never point out any sin in her life. She doesn’t want to be convicted of any sin, because her self-righteous, arrogant, pride tells her that she is already “holy,” and all those religious practices are really just meant for you to change to become her special version of “Jesus,” that always “loves” and “forgives,” and requires no holiness or personal sacrifice from her in return.
It’s a one-sided, “Christian,” business arrangement, and you could be the one agreeing to a bad deal for you.
Most likely, her “I love you!,” DOES NOT equates to “I want to marry YOU!” It just means, “I FEEL “happy” right now!, (and that could change tomorrow).”
Go on a camping trip by yourself for a few days, and really fast and pray about this relationship and listen for God’s wisdom. Be prepared to breakup with her if you need to, but don’t agree to marry her unless you know with 1000% certainty (by observing her actions, not asking her) that she wants to marry YOU (not any random guy), and that she WILL ABSOLUTELY honor God’s commands to her to RESPECT YOU UNCONDITIONALLY, AND COOPERATE WITH AND SUBMIT TO YOUR PLANS AND LEADERSHIP. IF SHE CANT DO THOSE NOW, THEN BE WILLING TO WALK AWAY. DON’T BECOME ENGAGED TO OR MARRY ANY WOMAN WHO WON’T RESPECT YOU AND SUBMIT TO YOUR LEADERSHIP FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME.
Most “good Christian women” can’t even come close to doing this, and aren’t worthy marriage material, so be prepared for the fact that that your woman might not either. It’s just the poor odds we are forced to deal with now.
Good luck, man!
Hermes my friend, if I were you, I would drop her as a lost cause and move on to someone better. If she was really in to you she would by with you instead of a few facebook posts. If you love someone you want to be around them . She is probably has several potental stage props in her friend zone. This sounds like a frivorce with her cash prizes in the making. She may try the opps pregnancy trick. Too bad there is no true love test. It is easier to get a new girlfriend than get a new life.
Wow. You guys are serious mind-readers. Now I know what Haley means about being exasperated by the manosphere, not to mention about “aspies.” Let me clarify that I would never agree to marry a girl unless I were completely convinced she understood and believed all the politically incorrect, anti-feminist things the Bible teaches about marriage, such as that, contrary to the popular Evangelical belief that the wife’s submission to the husband is contingent on his loving her as Christ loves the Church, a wife is actually commanded to submit her husband even if he is not obeying the Word. (1 Peter 3) Beyond that, I can only say that you guys have read waaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too much into the small amount of information I gave.
Hermes.
Pass on this one, there are more girls. Ones who will not try to run the show.
I’ve seen too many of my brothers fall into the girl trap. Stay free, brother.
Hermes,
Even if we are reading way too much into your personal story, the few details you have provided are still blatant warning signs that we’ve each become familiar with on the road towards engangement/marriage. I don’t need to know your specific story to recognize many of the same warning signs along that same road. At least become very cautious.
You can dismiss our warnings if you like, but as a brother-in-Christ, I have a desire to help my brothers avoid trouble, and that is my intent. I want you to choose wisely, brother, because the Church, in general, won’t be helpful or even there for you if your wife were to ruin your life, and some of them might even become your enemies. This is your only chance to choose wisely!
Pray about the concerns we have mentioned.
Jack and an observer are correct.
Men and women can not be friends. Period. I’ve tried that and it doesn’t work. That is learned behavior.
Headstillspinning, trying to defend yourself about something you know to be wrong, like referring to others as “super-spergs” because they have the horrible gall to have a different opinion than you, isn’t Godly, period. Yes, Jesus referred to people as vipers. But guess what? The description fit. Yours doesn’t. If you really want to be a man, you should admit when you’ve done wrong. Manliness is accepting responsibility for one’s actions and not running away like a little boy. It’s amazing how much foolishness there is in this blog. If somebody doesn’t suit your needs, throw them aside. That isn’t biblical, at all. That shows a total lack of concern for humanity, and for God Himself. I wonder how many of you who’ve had issues with women, have been rejected by them because they see a nasty spirit in you. Perhaps your problems are your own, and it may well be a good idea to look inward. Do you really know the Lord, and have a real faith, or is it all just knowledge? Will you be one of the ones saying “Lord, Lord” when you die, and hear back “go away from me, I never knew you?” I hope not. But if you refuse to change your attitudes, I think it may well happen to many of you. Grow up, be real men, not pretend, worldly “men.”
Also, women aren’t there just to suit your desires. Seriously, grow up. Even claiming to be a faithful follower of Jesus is almost absurd on the very face of it with the attitudes some of you are showing. You may remember that wives are not just commanded to submit to their husbands, but husbands also to their wives. A “marriage of convenience,” or one that only exists to procreate and ensure your physical pleasure, isn’t loving, at all. It goes against the concept of love AS DEFINED IN THE BIBLE. Love is the ultimate SACRIFICE. Grow up, and quit looking out for yourselves.
Jonathan,
Thanks for your reply, but Haley (our hostess) was the one who used the term “super-sperg” and mmaier2112 quoted Jesus’ words “generation of vipers”. I also suspect that you have misunderstood the little bit that I actually did write.
Today I attended a “Single’s Conference” at a big mega church in NYC. With 900 people there, 83% of the attendees were women. During the Q&A, someone submitted a question asking “Why aren’t the Christian men pursuing the Christian women? Since the men aren’t pursuing, is it acceptable for women to initiate?”
The lead pastor started to explain that men face a lot of pressure and influence from today’s culture/media/society, shaping the definition of what makes a woman attractive. He started to say that men are looking around at the church full of women and the are not necessarily seeing a lot of what matches up to society’s definition (which becomes our own definition) of an attractive woman that we would like to be with and like to be seen with.
But before he could finish fully expressing and commenting on this, his wife cut him off and interrupted him. She explained that the biggest reason men aren’t pursuing women is that men are occupying their time with porn and video games, which satisfy their needs for intimacy and conquest.
Now I think that the pastor was really onto something interesting before his wife cut him off. I spent the day at the conference where there were literally hundreds of single, Christian women. I saw exactly two women who I though were attractive (admittedly, I’m sure there were some others that I missed. It was a big event).
It is possible that my standards for physical beauty/attractiveness are way too high? Has today’s culture played a big role in narrowing the scope of women that us guys find attractive?
Kracken, consider that the event does not sound like one that would appeal to attractive women. They dont need to go to special events to find dates. Once an event has a reputation of a beta fest, the beauties dont show. Also remember in churches frumpiness is encouraged if not demanded.
Kracken,
It’s conceivable that our lascivious culture could have partially warped our view of what would have been considered an average standard of beauty. All things being equal, that might have been our primary consideration. But that isn’t the case. The dramatic increase in obesity in the last half century, coupled with church induced frumpiness and a willful purge of feminine behavior I think has more to do with it. Why bother to account for the havoc caused by the embrace of feminism, when you can just blame porn and Xbox.
And just in time for Jonathan.
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/the-wake-up-call/
Galloper and WestoftheHudson,
Thanks, for the replies. It sounds like you guys are on the same page and I agree with you. I’ve recently discovered the manosphere. It is great to see other people writing about things that I’ve always sensed, but was never able to fully organize and aggregate on my own.
Galloper, Kracken –
Attractive Christian women go to events that display or showcase Christian Alphas; concerts, sports-themed events that feature at least the possibility of the participation of unmarried athletes from a local sports team. I remember back in the 80s there was a group of muscleguys who “testified” for the Lord by performing strongman stunts in the sanctuary.
They know it’s a one-in a thousand shot, but they prefer that .1% chance to having a lesser man locked down tight. Remember that the quality of man that they attract is a strong indicator of their own position in the female hierarchy, and they are all of them in a virtual Roller Derby the ruthlessness and savagery of which most men cannot understand until they have a daughter.
@Jonathan
You may remember that wives are not just commanded to submit to their husbands, but husbands also to their wives.
Please tell me chapter and verse where men are commanded to SUBMIT to their wives. There is no such thing in the whole Bible. So please, shut up and stop preaching the gospel of Oprah.
Read carefully what I wrote and open your mind to wisdom, fool.
Read all of Ephesians 5. It doesn’t end and verse 22, you know. Trying to get people on using the wrong word instead of listening to what they’re saying is REAL mature, open-minded and manly, right. Repent of your foolishness and selfishness and get right before God. You aren’t men, you’re dogs.
“ You may remember that wives are not just commanded to submit to their husbands, but husbands also to their wives.”
No. That is wrong. Husbands are not to submit to their wives, ever. Husbands are commanded to love their wives. That’s not submission to the wife; but rather submission to God.
What do you think love actually means? Here’s a hint: it’s in Romans.
Apparently Jonathan is referring to Eph 5:21 which says “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ”. This immediately precedes verse 22 which commands wives to respect/submit to their husbands.
Churchians argue verse 21 was meant to temper verse 22, and actually means “mutual submission” between wives and husbands. No. This is wrong. If Paul intended that, he would have said it. The “submit to one another” command in verse 21 has nothing to do with how husbands relate to wives; nor with the marital relationship. If it were intended to apply to the marital relationship, Paul would have said that. And if it were intended to apply to the marital relationship, there would have been no need for Paul to have written verses 22 through 25; nor for the Holy Spirit to have inspired Paul to write them.
Oh, right. Ignore what makes you uncomfortable. Got it. You know the truth, you just refuse to obey it. Maybe it’s time you take it to heart instead of just reading it, and then taking the parts you like and twisting them to suit your worldly values…
Jonathan:
In your suggestion about “what love means”, you must be referring to Romans 12:9-21. Nothing in there about submission or respect. Nothing in there about husbands being commanded to submit to wives.
Whenever Paul discusses the relationship between husbands and wives, it is always one of love (NOT respect and NOT submission) from husband to wife; and respect/submission from wife to husband. (See also I Peter 3:1-7.) Men are commanded to submit to God and lawfully constituted governmental authorities.
So, Jonathan, you’re simply wrong about your suggestion that husbands are to submit to their wives.
You’re still missing the point, fool. Get off the word, and to what it represents. How are you showing love to the women in your life? (Or anybody for that matter)
“Get off the word, and to what it represents.”
Ha. So to implement the Word, we’re to ignore it and “get off” it. That’s nonsense.
“How are you showing love to the women in your life? (Or anybody for that matter)”
Not by showing submission where it’s not called for or commanded. Showing submission where love is called for is not only unbiblical, it’s thoughtless and cruel.
Again, I ask: how ARE you showing love to the people around you?
Jonathan:
I reject your frame. Your question is irrelevant, because the pertinent matters is how husbands relate to wives and vice versa. We’re not here talking about how people show “love” to each other; nor even about how a man shows “love” to the women in his life. Stop moving the goalposts, and stop mucking up the discussion with inanities and irrelevant matter.
So let me ask you a relevant question.
Are love and submission synonymous when applied to husbands and wives?
How us that mucking up the conversation? Husbands are commanded to live their wives, no? Well, I see no love in the attitudes if anybody here so I’m calling it out. Defend yourself, for real. Quit trying to discard what you aren’t comfortable with…
Jonathan:
I don’t have to defend myself to you or anyone else. Neither I nor anyone else commenting here owe you any explanations for anything. You obviously don’t want to discuss anything; you simply came here spoiling for a fight.
Step off.
I didn’t come here for a fight. I came here for information on an interesting Boundless article. I found a bunch of self-proclaimed “Christians” acting like the world. And I’m calling it out. Here’s a few passages you should read:
1 Corinthians 13
13 If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
Matthew 7:21
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
I apologize for my attitude, but what I see here, really angers me. It isn’t right, and it isn’t being “like Christ.”
We can shout chapter/verse at each other all day and settle nothing. Or we can observe the contemporary church scene and note DYSTOPIAN levels of disfunction. Too many diviorces, baby mamas, and involuntary singles. These problems need to be solved across denominational lines. So let us figure out what we are doing wrong.
I agree with that. There’s definitely something missing in the church. I’m inclined to think the missing thing is the church acting like the church. We get together and worship, but that’s all we do. We listen to the Word, and to the pastors before us, but then never apply what we learn. Never gonna be different from the world, while still acting like the world. It’s not just certain people, it’s the majority of the church system. Even within it, authentic, Christ-followers, are the minority. Unfortunately, I guess that’s inevitable…
Jonathan, this pattern of failure crosses all denominational lines, even Jews are reporting similar results. That indicates it is a problem of practice not doctrine.
I believe the problems stems from letting women set the agenda as well as failure to understand the true nature of (most say 95%) women.
From a practical standpoint Shepherds and parents should understand how wolves operate. After decades of uselessly dispising these wolves (pick up artists), I decided to “read Rommel’s book”. After noting their real world observations of how women really behave, it soon beccame obvious how they were beating us . Why are our virgin daughters so easily impregnated by scum, while most our young church boys cant get a date much less married? Why are too many Christian men loosing their wives to heathen seducers?
No one here is plotting to become a pick up artist. But face it; to stop the wolves you need to understand them.
That actually does make some sense. I don’t know. I’m probably being a little too heavy-handed with my criticism, but it’s hard not to be sometimes. When I made my initial post, that was after having done some reading on other blogs that were much worse than this one, and i kind of put them all into the same category. That may have been a mistake. At any rate, I’m done yelling and acting like a nut, and will go on my way. Good day.
Jonathan, stick around you can help. The agenda here is find solutions not argue over rank or doctrine, or who has a better church.
I’m not really sure what I can contribute. I share some values with this group of people (I’m libertarian, and there are apparently a lot of libertarians here; I’m anti-feminist and strongly believe in manhood, like apparently a lot of others here) but I’m not really a member of the “manosphere” and don’t really even know what to think of it. I have big problems with feminism, like I said, but I also have big problems with chauvinism, and sometimes I even see it when it isn’t there. I have a tendency to think I know others’ thought patterns better than I actually do…
J are you a pastor? If so you are on the front lines dealing with the wrecked lives the
wolves leave behind.
And It is critical for churches that new families be formed. Meaning the sons of the church need to find wives. Far too many cant.
These problems are being driven by out of control female hypergamy, which these wolves (PUA= pick up artists) have learned to play like a fiddle.
Jonathan.
As an Orthodox Christian I don’t much of a dog in this fight. We have lots of men in our churches, and they stick around. We also don’t change. Ever. For anybody. We don’t have women clergy and we never will. Ever. Period.
What you were probably referring to when you said that husbands were to submit themselves to their wives was the reference to Ephesians 5:21 “Submit yourselves to one another in the fear of God.” This passage is more of a general exhortation to Christians in general to take each other seriously and to consider his brother or sister better than himself.
This passage comes immediately before Paul’s exhortations to pay heed to the natural hierarchies already in place in human society; husbands over wives, parents over children, masters (employers) over slaves (servants, employees). There is a sense in which Paul’s exhortation in Eph. 5.22 is prior to the exhortations to submit to the natural hierarchies. Authority was never supposed to be arbitrary or tyrannical.
But in the same way, I’m sorry, except for Ephesians 5:22 there is no indication in the New Testament that husbands are supposed to submit to their wives. If you had quoted Eph. 5:22 you could have had a civilized conversation about Paul’s intentions in this Epistle, but your attempt to extract husbandly submission to a wife from the command of Paul for a husband to be “loving his wife” struck the Protestants here as sloppy interpretation, bordering on sophistry. From there it declined into ad hominems and name calling.
In the Orthodox Church we have bishops, presbyters, and deacons. We also have startsi or gerontes. These are people, men or women, who are filled with the Holy Spirt and who have dedicated themselves to prayer and communion with Christ. Some of them are sought after as counselors or spiritual guides, although they may be only laymen. It would be a foolish bishop who lightly lay aside the counsel of a starets, but no one would ever say that a bishop has to submit himself to the starets.
I hope that made sense to you.
Nope. Not a pastor. I’m just a regular churchgoer. I’m fully willing to admit that I may have some things wrong, but I think there’s an overemphasis here on certain aspects of manhood, at the expense of everything else. A man is strong, yes. But a man is also gentle, and kind. (Real women are too, but those things don’t need to be in conflict. They manifest differently between male and female) A man may not be in “submission” to his wife, but that’s not really what I’m saying. I’m saying that love is not self-serving. If a man is truly loving his wife, he won’t be beating her down because she wants to see a movie instead of go play golf with him. I know that’s an extreme example, but I’m trying to make a point. Husbands are to lay down their lives for their wives. I don’t see much of that in some of the attitudes here. I realize, many women aren’t doing their part and submitting or respecting their husbands, but that’s no valid excuse. It seems to me like I’ve said pretty much all I can say on the matter. I can’t change minds, only God can do that. And I especially can’t do it if I’m wrong, which I don’t think I am, but you never know.
@Jonathan: strongly recommend you check out Deep Strength’s blog. Lots of very good stuff there; this guy really drills down into the original Greek for passages in the New Testament that relate to masculinity. I think you’ll find much food for thought there as I have.
http://deepstrength.wordpress.com
second that about Deep Strength.
Christianity in the Anglosphere has been taking a real beat down for the past 2 generations. We need a confident street wise Chrisianity. To get that, we need to raise confident streetwise sons.
I appreciate the recommendation. I’ll check it out. Also, agree about a streetwise Christianity. People don’t live the faith enough, but try to “present” it too much, if that makes sense.
“I think there’s an overemphasis here on certain aspects of manhood, at the expense of everything else. A man is strong, yes. But a man is also gentle, and kind. *** If a man is truly loving his wife, he won’t be beating her down because she wants to see a movie instead of go play golf with him. I know that’s an extreme example, but I’m trying to make a point. Husbands are to lay down their lives for their wives. I don’t see much of that in some of the attitudes here. I realize, many women aren’t doing their part and submitting or respecting their husbands, but that’s no valid excuse.”
Jonathan, all that’s a nonstarter with me. The idea that we have a widespread epidemic in the manosphere of men not pulling their weight in relationships and not loving their wives gets no truck with me whatsoever. I’ve been around these parts and seen and read horrific stories of men being shat upon in the most egregious manners by wives, the women who promised to love them. I’ve read stories of men who HAVE laid down their lives by working their fingers to the bone at jobs they hate so wifey-poo can be a SAHM.
So I’m not too interested in hearing from more people saying that men aren’t doing enough, that men aren’t laying down their lives, that men aren’t showing enough love. That’s horse$hit, and I for one will stand against it.
Well, you can do what you want. But I don’t think it’s right. You don’t change people by getting further and further entrenched in bad attitudes. You change them by encouraging them to change.
Jonathan:
It’s clear to me you don’t understand what’s being said.
These are men who HAVE laid down their lives. These are men who HAVE loved their wives in every humanly possible way – through self-sacrifice. Through working themselves almost to death. Through tolerating the absolute worst female behavior. Through sexual deprivation.
If all that is not “laying down one’s life” for a wife, then I don’t know what is.
There is no epidemic of “bad attitudes” in the manosphere.
No, I don’t think that kind of “toleration” is love. But neither is treating women as second-class, worse than dirt. When you have people saying things like this::
“Like I have said elsewhere, my “guy door” has a sign that says Girlfriends Only.
Unless a woman is a very good friend, the rest of them can flake off and look after themselves.”
It makes it kind of hard to take the argument seriously. Women and men are different, and I’m not sure they can really always work as friends, but this comes across as practically hatred. You don’t stop man-hating feminism by becoming a woman-hating misogynist. You stop it by promoting male and female purpose through biblical values. I don’t know how else to put it.
“No, I don’t think that kind of “toleration” is love.”
Really. So you don’t think a man tolerating hateful behavior from a wife for the sake of a marriage and for his children is love?
“But neither is treating women as second-class, worse than dirt. When you have people saying things like this:”
“Like I have said elsewhere, my “guy door” has a sign that says Girlfriends Only.
Unless a woman is a very good friend, the rest of them can flake off and look after themselves.”
It makes it kind of hard to take the argument seriously.”
Neither of these statements are in any way indicative of treating a woman like dirt or as a second class citizen. If anything, they are a recognition that a woman has what she’s demanded – absolute equality to be treated as a strong, independent person; and that unless she wants to be a wife in every sense of the word, she can’t claim any benefits of such.
You seem to think that men owe duties to women simply because they’re women. No. We don’t live in such a world, not anymore.
The men making these statements are not talking about wives. It’s a recognition they have no duties to women at large. It’s a direct result of the current situation we live in. This is the way women wanted it, and it is the way it will have to be. Women don’t get to claim strong independent status when it suits them; and then claim all the benefits of male strength from any nearby male when it suits them. Women don’t get to have it both ways.
We have “duties” to the entire world; wives, other women, other men, children, etc. Jesus said to love even our enemies…
Uh, then what are you doing here? Shouldn’t you be out carrying water for someone in Mali, then?
My duties to the whole world flow out in concentric circles. My family, my wife’s family, my church, my coworkers, my community. Later maybe my state or my country
The widow down the street who wants her sofa moved? Maybe not so much.
Really, Jonathan. You come off as someone in his very early 20s. Are we to be at he beck and call of everyone just because we love them?
Jonathan:
Yes. We have duties to our Christian brothers and sisters to show and teach them the gospel.
We have general duties to persons other than our wives and children; but those duties extend only to not causing them harm.
We have no affirmative duties to help them, especially when those persons have made it clear that attempts to help them will likely result in a sex harassment complaint or a “let’s you and him fight” situation.
I have no affirmative duties to pick up a heavy box for a woman just because she demands that I do so. I have no affirmative duties to assist a stranded female motorist. I have no affirmative duties to help anyone with his/her job. I have no affirmative duties to pay money to a baby mama. I have no affirmative duties to come to the aid of a woman who’s in a public altercation with another man.
That’s not what I said. I’m not creating things out of thin air, but stating what’s in the Bible. To contradict in directly all the while referring to oneself as a Christian seems like a bit of cognitive dissonance…
Love isn’t just what you do. It’s your attitudes even more importantly; it’s your entire being. You can’t always help everybody with everything, but just saying “I don’t want to” is downright selfish, and has no place in the body of Christ.
Jonathan:
“ Love isn’t just what you do. It’s your attitudes even more importantly; it’s your entire being. You can’t always help everybody with everything, but just saying “I don’t want to” is downright selfish, and has no place in the body of Christ.”
What do you expect these men to do?
What do you want them to do in response to which they’re saying “I don’t want to”?
It isn’t selfish for a man to say “I don’t want to help you lift that heavy box” when she has selfishly said “I am a strong independent woman and I don’t need a man”.
It isn’t selfish for a man to say “I don’t want to help you change that flat” when she has selfishly said “I don’t need any help because I’m a strong independent woman”.
It isn’t selfish for a man to say “I don’t want to help you with your job” when she has selfishly said “all men just want sex and will sexually harass me”.
It seems to me that many women are being selfish in putting off marriage to the very last minute; in claiming that they are strong and independent one minute; then playing the damsel-in-distress role the next minute depending on the situation.
I’m better at helping men anyway.
I relate to other women through my wife, and that is as it should be. Any woman who wants a favor from me has to be vetted by my own woman. The first question she will ask is usually “Why don’t you have your own man or a male relative do that for you? Why do you need my man?”
Hierarchy, remember?
I agree, that isn’t being selfish. But there are a good deal of women who are not “strong, independent” feminists. It’s all a matter of character. You’ve been associating with the wrong women. There are certain signs of their character, that will stand out before even getting to know them, if you look out for it. The feminists tend to be very “prissy,” in a way more humble women are not, for example.
Oh yeah. It would be good if you take your stand on the Bible to actually quote the Bible to make your point. I Corinthians is a good chapter, but it isn’t necessarily a blank check given to the world to be cashed on demand.
Or do you believe it is?
J what do you tell Brother Tom? He is a regular Wenesday nighter who did everything the church told him to do but after years of working 2 jobs to support her and 3 kids,wife leaves him for excon biker? Tell him he “was not Godly enough”? Or the good family who follows the all rules and then the local serial impregnator knocks up their teenager they “were not Godly enough”?
Real compation there bud.
Sorry Jonathan but the enemy dont play by the rules.
When you are in a war you need to read Rommels book.
I’m pretty sure I’m not putting things in the right terms. We’re having a communication breakdown here, and I know it’s probably mostly my fault. I’m not saying any men aren’t doing enough. I’m speaking more strictly about an attitude that I observed in some earlier commenters on this board.
Jonathan:
You seem to be saying that a man has duties to any and all women, at all times, everywhere, to do whatever that woman wants him to do. I don’t subscribe to that at all, not one bit.
Now a man might give of himself to assist a woman he knows, maybe from church. But he doesn’t have a DUTY to do any of that.
He also doesn’t have some amorphous duty to assess a woman’s character to determine if he thinks she’s not a feminist. Her nonfeminist status doesn’t give rise to any duties to help her. Sorry, that’s just a nonstarter. Not gonna fly in today’s world. I’m not going to help a woman just because I think she’s a nonfeminist. Not unless she’s my wife.
Yes, there’s clearly been a communication breakdown. I’m not talking about “duties.” Do you only love your wife because it’s your duty, or because you love her? Do you read the Bible and go to church because it’s your duty, or out of love for God? Duty and love can go together, but they are not the same thing. Duty is the old covenant. Love is the new covenant. Duty doesn’t save, and it doesn’t change the world. It has a purpose, but that purpose is in the service of love, not for it’s own sake.
“I’m speaking more strictly about an attitude that I observed in some earlier commenters on this board.”
I know exactly what you’re talking about. You’re talking about the absence of a loving, Christlike attitude that is willing to sacrifice for anyone and everyone around them; who loves all human beings for their humanity. You’re talking about the altruistic knight in shining armour, bearing chivalry and good deeds. Dudley Do Right. Goody Two Shoes.
The men you’re referring to used to embody those attitudes. They would lay their coats on puddles for women; leap to the assistance of any woman anywhere; come to the defense of any woman who so much as broke a nail.
Then they were royally screwed over by a woman or women. Had their hearts broken and crushed, lost everything in a nasty divorce they didn’t see coming. Sued for or accused of harassment by some insane feminist. Rejected 20, 30, 50 times by women for no reason other than they aren’t hawwwt enough, rich enough, or connected enough.
Those men learned that their good atittudes got them exactly NOTHING in life, NOTHING in society, and NOTHING but scorn and ridicule even at their churches.
Even these men’s CHURCHES threw them to the dogs.
So again – your claims are a nonstarter with me.
@Jonathan: you are a classic example of the Christian “nice guy”. Deep Strength has written posts specifically for men like you:
You can find other Christian men bloggers on Deep Strength’s blogroll. They’re worth checking out.
I didn’t realize strength of mind and spirit qualified as being a “nice guy.” Normally they’re seen as fake, lying and self-serving. That’s why women don’t like them. All I see is self-serving attitudes here and, unsurprisingly, from single individuals desperately seeking a wife or girlfriend yet unable to find any, at least any that last. I guess if I’m the “nice guy” I should probably be happy about that.
@Jonathan.
We’re having a communication breakdown here, and I know it’s probably mostly my fault.
Why? Saying:
Repent of your foolishness and selfishness and get right before God. You aren’t men, you’re dogs.
seems to me a great way to make communication easier. Lol.
“Read carefully what I wrote and open your mind to wisdom, fool.”
I have seen your wisdom in qualifying other human beings as dogs, only because they disagree with you. Such a Christian move. I can’t wait to receive more wisdom from you. The next step? Women are bitches? Jesus speaks with your mouth, brother.
Again, I ask: how ARE you showing love to the people around you?
Telling that they are fools and dogs, no doubt about it. Following the Gospel according to Jonathan.
“Read all of Ephesians 5. It doesn’t end and verse 22, you know. ”
Nice bait and switch. Chapter and verse, please. By the way 1 Corinthians 13
Matthew 7:21 don’t say that. Ephesians 5 don’t say that either
You have written a lot, but you haven’t be able to prove that husbands must submit to their wives, because this thing is not there. You have talked about a lot of other things (for example, love) but not submission. You have insulted, adopted a holier-than-thou attitude (which is as unChristian as it gets). But you haven’t able to prove that husbands have to submit to their wives, which was your original claim.
T
The problem seems to be the agenda in churches apparently is set by mothers of ugly daughters. MOUDs They insist that the marriage market does not exist because it is unfair and SHOULD not exist. All the wishing, good intentions , pretending and lies will not change the mechanics or arithmatic of attraction. Meanwhile as too many church men try to order their lives around bogus information the PUAs are having a field day frolic.
He prolly pulled the move, “Hey, so do you like me? Because it seems like you do, and I think I like you too.”
Drat I was hoping this post would be longer with more details…
Geez it’s like that with my mom who I know, KNOW wants me to get married and give her grandbabies (and I don’t object to that either) and yet… well let’s just say that I had one shot which she & dad contributed to being ruined. Then other attempts to… well build attraction (esp “be more alpha”) will end up getting sabotaged (though I don’t think she means to).
Oh well, miracles don’t happen for everyone.
I am WAY late to this conversation. However, just in case he is still around to read it, I’d like to leave a message for Jonathan.
Four times you have called Deti a fool. Four times. Might you have forgotten this verse, o master of the bible? Read the last 13 words carefully now, oh supremely holy one.
Matthew 5:22
but I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Sir Chancelot, your picture…
Wow, that’s a lot of comments. I came across this post about my original Boundless post. Looks like there’s definitely some good back and forth here. If it would be helpful to someone for me to answer a specific question they had instead of a conjecture they might have thought, I’d certainly be willing to. Thanks again for the discussion all.
Steve, welcome to the ghetto.
Three things:
1. I think Haley makes it clear that this is not your fault. It’s the derpy Boundless community, no offense.
2. We’re not allowed to play devil’s advocate on Boundless. Again, not your fault.
3. How are we even supposed to contact you?
I mean, and I think you were headed in the right direction, just you took it a little too seriously. It’s like you immediately demanded an answer, but then, feelings aren’t initially set in stone. You have to kind of weigh-out the feels gradually, hence why people date.
There’s no offense taken at all. I’m enjoying the positive or negative critiques. My email is stevebierfeldt at gmail dot com
testing
Most “Christian” churches are so far from ineffective and flawed in doctrine and methods and socialization, that finding someone there IS impossible. It’s as bad or worse as Isaac having to travel to another land to find a woman who believed what he did. God is probably about to clean out all the dross, keeping the real few believers for Himself…
“God is probably about to clean out all the dross, keeping the real few believers for Himself…”
Yeah, the Church of Philidelphia will be raptuted soon, and since there’s no marriage in Heaven, we won’t have to worry about dating anymore.
Jesus, come soon!
This is an interesting site and read. I’ve read Dalrock and other sites in the manospehre. I’m a 40 something Christian male who has never married. I’ve had ladies interested in me and several were quite nice and attractive but I don’t know I have my own issues. I’m a good man and I want to serve God, but I deal with SSA- Same sex attraction- I don’t call myself gay because I ‘ve never had a “gay” relationship. When I was young I “experimented” or had sexual encounters with men to see what i thought about it or if I was going to get into the lifestyle. As i matured I realized that as a Christian and especially from all the Bible study I have done I can’t justify being gay and a Christian. It is no sin to be attracted to people of the same sex, but it is a sin to have sex with other men. So basically I am celibate.
I have really tried to date women and even those that I consider “attractive” sorry but I still have no interest or desire to be with a woman at all. I even went to sex therapy years ago with the Exodus groups that supposedly turn “gay people straight” that was nonsense! You can’t change anyone’s sexual identity or attraction. I used to talk to pastors about it and most don’t have a clue. I had this one guy tell me I had to have demons removed- what a bunch of horse manure! I see it like this I have 3 choices as a Christian man- 1. Ignore church and go my own way and have sex with men or anyone I want to. 2. Try to be straight and marry a female. 3. Stay celibate. I have chosen 3. I prayed for 25 years for God to make me “straight’ so far nothing came from that. There is no “gay” demon that turns men and women gay! I remember one time when i first started studying and reading about SSA that i was really depressed and God spoke to me by the voice of an angel. The voice spoke to my heart and said, “Let God love you.” He was not condemning me for having SSA he was just telling me to open my heart to God . We have the Bible tell us what is right and wrong- God needed to let me know that He loved me and that he would be with me on my journey of life. So you ask why am I on any site that talks about relationships between men and women? Because I am a Christian who wishes to please the Lord and live a godly lifestyle and I don’t go around telling people I am “gay’ so people assume I am straight.
This is a big issue today. More and more people in the church are going to have to deal with and talk about gay people in church. How do we talk to them and respond to them and their problems. Do we say live a gay lifestyle it’s o.k. or do we tell them to stay celibate? We really need to talk about this intelligently and with love. I joined the gay Christian network and chatted for a while, but I wasn’t happy with the info and people there. There are two main groups and way of thinking. Group one says that you can have a same sex relationship if it is monogamous and caring. Group two says no just stay single and celibate. I have chosen group two, but I don’t continue to chat because they are just like the other people in our culture. Everything revolves around sex and I’m sorry but there is more to me than my sexual attraction. I am a human being made in Christ’s image. I’m an artist, son, etc. I don’t need to talk about my SSA all day long. I want friends not a bunch of counselors worrying over me. That is the kind of thing I dealt with and got tired of. I also get very angry when people have called me gay in the past. why? since i am gay? It’s a term of derision- it is meant to demean a man- to emasculate him. I am just as much a man as any other guy. I almost got into a fight with this guy at a church one time because he called me gay cause I wasn’t interested in dating some girl- I think he liked the girl but she liked me instead, but I wasn’t interested in her. So called “Christian” people can be as nasty and ungodly as any worldly person could ever be so basically I never ever tell anyone that I have SSA. So yeah I deal with the why are you still single at your age thing all the time. I just tell them I never found that right person for me- which is true- but not the whole story.
So this whole issue of dating and marriage is still very much part of my life as well as long as I am in church whether or not I am in a single group or not. At present I don’t belong to a church that has a single group, but I used too- the social pressure to date was very strong and quite irritating to me. People act like you must be weird or there must be something wrong with you if you’re not pursuing some female. I did tell one guy about my SSA- he was a nice guy and good to me, but he still didn’t really understand me nor my issues. After that I didn’t bother ever mentioning anything about it anymore. After a while I stopped going to single groups because of all the social pressure. I miss having friends but I don’t want to have to deal with all the condescending attitudes that I know I’m going to get from “church people.” I think that is why gay people stay away from “evangelical” churches. They either go their own way and never go to church again or go to a gay friendly church. Personally since I have a seminary degree I would like to start my own church where everyone is welcome whether you are gay or straight and demand people are treated with respect! I would like to hear you guys feelings on the subject and how you deal with gay people in your church and single groups. Do you even have or know you have gay or SSA people in your church? You probably do but don’t even know it.
Is this “Haley” person dead?