Hello everyone. I’m still alive. And I’m still on my hiatus.
I have a final difficult push to get my “financial freedom” business off the ground. So I need total focus. This is probably the closest thing a man can experience to giving birth to a baby (thankfully.)
Anyhow, I’m taking a break this evening and I’ve had some thoughts that have been percolating through the murky recesses of my subconscious that I wanted to make note of here.
Namely, there was a problem I had been thinking about but never quite reached a conclusion:
What is the real problem with pornography?
(You can find my earlier posts on this topic somewhere in the archives. I’m too lazy to link to them right now.)
On the one hand, I think it’s clear that the church misdiagnosis the problem and uses it as a tool to guilt-manipulate sex-starved men. I’ve written about this earlier so I won’t go into details here.
But, I’m not going to come out and say “pornography is just fine and dandy. Go hog-wild boys!” Intuitively, I know there’s something wrong with it.
An idea was triggered when I read an email today from A.J.A. Cortes (who I highly recommend following… even if you don’t normally subscribe to email lists).
The title of the email was “We covet what we see, and what you covet is not Real.” It was a lengthy email, but here are a few excerpts [emphasis mine]:
I grew up in the 1990s, before social media took over. When I was growing up, the hottest girl you knew was whoever was the hottest girl in your class/grade/school was.
Maybe you lusted after a female celebrity, but your beauty norms were shaped by who you saw in person.
Obviously that has changed. We all posses the means now to view an infinite number of hot bodies on our smart phones. The commodification of beauty and the body has spawned a massive, massive industry.
Beauty has always been prized, beauty and glamor are persuasive, that is beyond question.
That said, when you are so inundated with beauty, glamor, appearance, you lose your perceptual underpinnings of what is REAL, and what is artificial.
He then addresses the incel/beta problem:
[The incel movement is] representative of a world in which a generation of damaged men have been raised indoctrinated by femininity, pushed into false vulnerability, made subservient to their feelings, and as a result they are truly beta, and helpless with women. Add in being skinny fat, being made to feel guilty for being a man, and raised to put women on a pedestal, and you’ll end up with some truly deranged individuals (its not accident that around 90% of school shooters are all raised by single mothers)
Modern femininity has cruelly and ironically created the very thing it set out to destroy; men that hate women, and don’t understand them (A woman can never raise a Man to be a Man)
I WOULD call that toxic masculinity.
And its made worse by young men scrolling through 10,000 IG skanqs. It traps their maturity into being perpetual betas looking at fake bodies, and probably pornography as well
The problem is not that men like to look at nude women. People have been depicting and looking at artful depictions naked women for a looooong time. (Yet the Scriptures are mysteriously silent on this “sin.”)
The problem is overexposure to glamour.
I define art as taking something ordinary and making it extraordinary. Art highlights the beauty or emotional power of an object or experience by re-framing it in a way that makes it seem new again.
Or, to bring it closer to home:
The first glamorous image of a naked woman you saw was thrilling. The 1,000th image you saw was “normal.”
The first time you watched sex from a third person perspective was intriguing. The 1,000th time you’re just trying to find a video with enough novelty to get excited enough to cum.
The problem with pornography is that it doesn’t offer any new perspectives on the beauty of sex or women. It only normalizes what was once (perhaps) an intriguing frame. Glamour becomes the expectation rather than the rare delight.
Even “Perfect 10s” don’t look as glamorous moment-to-moment as they do in their one-in-a-thousand perfect photographs.
As Cortes has pointed out, glamour has become a commodity. It’s no longer special.
So what’s the solution?
Well, here’s how NOT to solve the problem.
Don’t go around vilifying men for looking at porn. Let’s not be naive about this: porn exists in such abundance because it’s fulfilling an unmet need.
Men (and women) are hardwired to seek out the mystery that is sex.
I don’t think it takes a genius to figure out that if appreciation for truly artistic expressions of sex, such as the Song of Solomon, are not cultivated, then people will settle for the next best thing.
People will continue to consume tasteless porn for the same reason people continue to consume junk food: they are unaware of how sick they are; they just know they need to continue eating something. And they’re probably just too damn lazy to do anything about it on their own.
Of course, to make this analogy fitting for the present-day religious climate, you’d have to say it’s like telling people that eating is bad by pointing out the poor nutritional content of their diet. Then you ban all production of nutritious food and tell people if they don’t get over their “hunger problem” that they’ll be justly burned in hell forever. Then, as a solution, you offer a path of grace that says you’ll be forgiven for being hungry and eating such terrible food. But you really should stop eating… as evidence that you’re truly forgiven.
Peace out for now.
I’m taking a brief hiatus from my blog.
I’m going into “monk mode” for a while to knock out a mission critical project that is unrelated to this blog. Philosophizing about sex would be a distraction.
I intend to return though. Probably in 2-3 weeks or so.
My blog theme is going to expire soon. I suspect my blog will revert to some kind of generic design when it does. Or something wonky will happen, who knows? I’ll fix it when I return.
If you want to be sure you get alerted when I post again, follow me on WordPress or add my blog to your RSS reader.
Peace out (for now.)
At the end of the week, the premium WordPress theme I’ve been using is scheduled to expire and I don’t intend on renewing it.
I like the design fine, but I don’t like the back end. It was pitched as a drag-and-drop editor but the code is so bloated I have a hard time figuring out how to customize anything. Even after spending several months learning basic web development, I still haven’t figured out how to change the font sizes on the mobile layout.
Anyhow, I’ll be switching to a new theme soon.
If there’s any bloggers reading who are interested, the theme I am using now is from Elegant Themes. The theme I’ll be switching to is GeneratePress.
So expect to see some wonkiness going down if you visit my site this week.
If all goes well, I’ll remember to set up the new theme before my current one expires.
If not, expect all hell to break loose… visually at least.
Lately, my 3-year old daughter has been testing me.
It’s the classic won’t-stay-in-bed test.
First, she kept coming out of her room with various “needs” or would try to talk to my wife and me while we were trying to relax.
Like a good conservative parent, I tried the approach I was most familiar with: stern warnings and spankings.
But that approach did not work at all. All it did was work her up into a hysteria. Plus, she has OCD tendencies (like I did as a child) so when she gets fixated on something she feels she “needs” she can scream about it for an almost an hour straight.
So the spankings weren’t helping.
Then I tried the “nice” approach.
I’d lie in bed with her. Pray with her. Try to help her relax.
But that didn’t work either.
She only saw my kindness as an opportunity to increase her requests. And the result was the same as before: not falling asleep until 2 in the morning.
As you might have guessed the effective approach was the third option: neither indulgence nor coercion.
Instead, I just calmly laid down a clear boundary.
Every time she’d leave her room, I’d just pick her up and put her back to bed.
The first night she repeatedly ran out of her room for about an hour and half straight. Then lied in bed and cried for an hour. Then went to sleep.
Next night was half-hour of resistance, then an hour or so of crying.
Third night she didn’t try to get out of her room at all. Instead she just screamed, cried, and whined for a couple hours.
Recently, she’s been testing the boundaries again. She’s not getting out of bed, but she’ll stay awake in her room until 2 or 3 in the morning and then wake up at 8 in the morning. A sleep-deprived little woman makes for a miserable day.
So I decided it was time to set another boundary: lights out after half-an-hour and no getting out of bed.
Similar situation as before: tried to get out of bed for over an hour. Cried for an hour. Went to sleep.
I expect tonight will be a shorter period of resistance.
So what’s the point of all this?
Well, I’ve noticed that principles in human relationships are transferable. What works with adults works with children and vice versa. We’re all human. Some are just more mature than others.
I’ve noticed that we tend to apply one of two ineffective strategies when dealing with people: coercion or indulgence. And it all centers around the dynamic of demands.
When dealing with his wife, a man tends to follow one of two approaches:
- Appease his wife’s requests (The Nice Guy Approach)
- Request that his wife change her behavior, usually backed by a “threat” (The Wife Discipline / Classic Red Pill Approach)
In my experience, Option 1 leads to a dead bedroom. Option 2 leads to resistance (though admittedly more sexual attraction.)
But I think I’ve found a third option that works better:
I enforce my personal boundaries. She can do what she wants so long as she doesn’t infringe on my happiness. I improve myself and stay busy with my mission. I invite her to grow with me. And she follows.
Let’s talk about “man crushes” today… in a completely heterosexual way.
One of the limitations I’ve noticed of red pill blogs is that the prescriptions rarely take a man’s personality into account. Sure, we can all agree that Donald Trump is a super-alpha, but is it really practical for every reader to try to imitate him?
Donald Trump is who he is… partly because of his work ethic… but also partly because of his natural personality. I could never be like Trump no matter how hard I worked.
This is why I think it’s useful to learn frame and game by studying men that are suitable for one’s own personality.
***WARNING: Nerdy Talk Begins Here***
The most useful personality system I’ve found is the Myers-Briggs typology. I’ve studied this system on-and-off over the years and my opinion of it has varied from thinking it was fascinating to thinking it was deeply flawed. Now I realize the problem isn’t the system itself, but rather how it’s typically used.
First off, the letters you’re probably familiar with, such as the ESFJ or the INTP, are misleading. They are just the shorthand and are rather misleading to those uninitiated to the underlying functions.
One of the biggest errors people make is they assume someone is either extroverted or introverted. But the reality is that everyone has both extroverted and introverted functions. An extrovert is simply someone who uses their extroverted functions more frequently than their introverted functions, and vice versa for introverts. This is why you can have an introvert being outgoing in a social setting or an extrovert who is perfectly content doing solitary activities.
It’s also worth noting that “extroversion” refers to how you interact with any part of the external world, not just people.
Another error people make, that is encouraged by the shorthand version, is they assume that people are either “judgers” (i.e. making decisions and getting things done) or “perceivers” (i.e. exploring new ideas and possibilities). Just as with the extrovert-introvert dynamic, this is also a misunderstanding. Every person has cognitive functions for both making decisions and exploring new ideas.
The other limitation of the shorthand typing system is that it only describes people’s as they are not who they are becoming. Every person has dominant functions that he uses naturally, and weaker functions which he wishes to develop. When people are young and not fully mature, they tend to be attracted to a mate who is the mirror image of themselves (i.e. their dominant functions are your weak functions, and vice versa.) (Interesting read on that by Pat Stedman here.)
Anyhow, none of these nuances are reflected in the 4-letter typing system. The more accurate system works like this:
Each person has 4 modes of cognitive functioning, two “judging” and two “perceiving” modes. And each of these modes is paired with an extroverted or introverted function. So there are 4 possible perceptive functions:
- Extroverted-Intuition (Ne) – The Brainstormer. Generates new possibilities, synthesizes abstract ideas and picks up on cues in the external environment.
- Introverted-Intuition (Ni) – The Theorist. Uses mental models to understand and analyze the world and anticipate future events. Perceptive of inconsistencies and always adapting their models.
- Extroverted-Sensing (Se) – The Life of the Party. Takes in the world as it exists in the moment. Highly in tune with the sights, smells, sounds, and other physical stimulus around them.
- Introverted-Sensing (Si) – The Observer. Takes notes of facts and events exactly as they happen and categorizes them. Like an internal filing system.
Each person has two of the above. One extroverted and one introverted.
Likewise, there are 4 possible decision-making functions. Each person has one extroverted and one introverted decision-making function function:
- Introverted-Feeling (Fi) – The Creative. Reflects deeply on how one feels and what is right or wrong. Searches for the deeper meaning behind everything. Artistic and creative endeavors are a natural outlet.
- Extroverted-Feeling (Fe) – The Peacekeeper. Concerned with maintaining social norms and keeping the peace. Strives to do what is best for the group.
- Extroverted-Thinking (Te) – The Manager. Seeks to impose order on the external environment as efficiently and logically as possible. Values productivity and results.
- Introverted-Thinking (Ti) – The Scientist. Seeks to form a framework on how the world works on a concrete, tangible level. Naturally notices inconsistencies and loves to take things apart to see how they work.
Once you identify your strongest function from each group and then your weaker (i.e. your second choice) from each group, then you can accurately identify your personality type with the four-letter system:
If you’d like to learn more about this, there’s as an excellent article written by Heidi Priebe over at Thought Catalog.
***SIGH OF RELIEF: Nerdy Talk Ends Here***
The great thing about the Myers-Briggs system is that there are helpful nerds all around the internet who have spent hours arguing about and classifying famous people by their personality types.
So… think about that.
Nowadays, no one can become famous unless they know how to present themselves well. They have to dress and groom well. They have to speak confidently. They’re looked up to as leaders.
In other words, celebrities have everything women want.
And there are celebrities that are the same personality type as you. This means you can model yourself (how you speak, how you dress, how you control the frame etc.) after someone who probably already share some of the mannerisms with.
It doesn’t matter if you personally like the celebrity or agree with what they stand for. We’re just looking for men with high sex appeal whom we can model ourselves after. It’s easy to admire high-SMV men. But we want to model ourselves after high-SMV men that we have a realistic shot at authentically emulating.
So, courtesy of 16Personalities.com, here are some ideas to get you started.
- Christopher Nolan
- Colon Powell
- Elon Musk
- Arnold Schwarzenegger
- Vladimir Putin
- Bill Gates
- Stanley Crouch
- Steve Jobs
- Gordon Ramsay
- Harrison Ford
- Jim Carry
- David Petraeus
- “Weird Al” Yankovich
- Adam Savage
- Tom Hanks
- Sacha Baron Cohen
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
- Nelson Mandela
- Jimmy Carter
- Morgan Freeman
- Johnny Depp
- Tom Hiddleston
- Barack Obama
- John Cusack
- Ben Affleck
- Sean Connery
- Robert Downey, Jr.
- Will Smith
- Robin Williams
- Russell Brand
- Quentin Tarantino
- Denzel Washington
- Anthony Hopkins
- George H.W. Bush
- Frank Sinatra
- Lyndon B. Johnson
- Bill Clinton
- Steve Harvey
- Danny Glover
- Clint Eastwood
- Bear Grylls
- Tom Cruise
- Michael Jordan
- Daniel Craig
- Kevin Costner
- Michael Jackson
- Jack Nicholson
- Eddie Murphy
- Bruce Willis
- Michael J. Fox
- Nicolas Sarkozy
- Samuel L. Jackson
- Jamie Oliver
- Jamie Foxx
- Adam Levine
- Steve Irwin
I’m guessing that none of the men listed above have (had) any trouble getting laid. Find your personality type and then start studying interviews of those celebrities on YouTube. Pay attention to how they speak, how they control the frame, how they dress, how they present themselves. They became famous for a reason.
Imitate what you like. It will probably work for you.
Not a popular topic among Bible study groups, but well-worth noting.
Paul’s final exhortation to the remaining faithful few in the Body of Christ was to suffer hardship like a good soldier (2 Tim 2:3).
Paul didn’t tell us to be like a soldier in all ways. He didn’t say go about waging physical warfare or capturing kingdoms from neighboring nations. He instructed us to have the mindset of a soldier.
Like a soldier prepares himself to suffer in battle. So must Christians (particularly men) prepare themselves to suffer for the sake of the truth.
Because those who stand for truth in this age will suffer. This doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll be burned at the stake, imprisoned, or tortured. But it does at least mean the present establishment… the churches, the schools, the mainstream media, and maybe even your employer… will not like what you are doing and will attempt to silence and shame you.
This age calls for a certain kind of man. This age calls for a man who embraces suffering… or, to paraphrase Ryan Holiday, this age calls for men who embrace the obstacle as the way.
This age calls for men who choose not to feel harmed by this persecution, because they were expecting it.
We need men who can steady their nerves in the face of adversity.
We need men who can control their emotions rather than react with passion to provocations.
We need men who can stay standing after being attacked, because they realize it’s not as bad as it felt on the first blow.
We need men who can embrace persecution as a meaningful part of their story rather than seeing it as pointless suffering.
We need men who can let go of the things they cannot change, and get to work on the things they can.
We need men who can look at the work in front of them instead of worrying about some future conspiracy.
We need men who can recognize, from the Scriptures, what needs to be done and put it into effect.
We need men who can turn persecution to their advantage by finding the upside of every attack.
Unfortunately, this kind of man is a rarity today. Men today are not trained to endure hardship. Instead they are trained to grow up to be Nice Guys who do everything can to avoid hardship.
But you can train yourself for battle. It all starts in the mind. I recommend starting here.
(As an aside, a man who can endure hardship is sexually attractive to a woman. So it is possible to both obey God and get laid at the same time! Score.)
Since this blog is about sex, and sex is a physical activity, I feel I owe it to my readers to at least briefly touch upon nutrition.
The best book I’ve ever read on nutrition is Deep Nutrition by Catherine Shanahan. It’s got a lot of fascinating stuff on epigenetics (i.e. modifying the expression of your genes). Sadly, most of us our not reaching our genetic potential due to the poor nutrition of the modern diet.
Or, to put it more bluntly, we’re all a lot dumber and uglier than we should be.
The problem I’ve always had with health advice is that there’s always some new thing to be worried about or some new fad to try. What I liked about Shanahan’s book is it teaches you the simple fundamentals of health so you are equipped to judge for yourself.
If you just want the “bottom line” of eating healthy, it’s this:
- AVOID vegetable oils
- MINIMIZE sugar
- Meat on the bone (gently cooked) or bone broth
- Fresh animal or plant products
- Sprouted or fermented foods
- Organ meats
That’s all you have to worry about. If you have a healthy gut you don’t need to freak out about all the toxins and food sensitivities all the hipsters are freaking out about.
Also, eating healthy doesn’t mean eating food that doesn’t taste good. Here’s the breakfast I’ve been making for myself every morning that conforms to the standards of a nutritious diet:
- 2 pieces of sprouted grain bread, lightly toasted, topped with a generous helping of grass-fed butter and
- 2 farm fresh eggs, sunny side up, topped with fresh herbs
- 3 fresh strawberries
Prep time is minimal. The longest part of the process is waiting for the stove to heat up.
And, if you need help remembering not to eat vegetable oil or sugar, just think of this:
When vegetable oil enters your body, it oxidizes and acts like an explosive inside your body, damaging your brain and other organs and (for many) winds up resulting in heart attacks or strokes.
Vegetable oil also causes a man to produce low quality sperm.
And when (excessive) sugar enters your bloodstream, it crystallizes and gets “stuck” in your veins. The resulting blockage makes it difficult for men to “get it up.”
DISCLAIMER: I’m not a doctor. I’m just an ordinary guy who read a book by a doctor. So don’t take this as medical advice. Do your own research, talk to your doctor, yadda yadda yadda
One of my favorite bloggers to follow is Vox Day.
I follow him not necessarily because I care what he is talking about. I follow him to learn how to analyze anything.
In my reckoning, the most valuable video/post Vox ever produced is called “7 Signs of an Intellectual Charlatan.” The video is well worth watching in its entirety.
Identifying charlatans is a skill that is woefully lacking among the Body of Christ today. And I am indebted to Vox for pointing out the core patterns of charlatanry. In retrospect, it seems obvious. But until it was pointed out to me, I didn’t quite know how to tell whether I was being duped or not.
So with the aim of equipping fellow believers to avoid the craftiness of false teachers, I’d like to share some observations on how Vox’s Charlatan framework applies specifically to deception in the church.
The 7 Signs of a Religious Charlatan
1. Uses imprecise biblical terms – Under the teaching of a charlatan, the Scripture loses it’s precision. For example, “sexual immorality” is made out to be anything from seeing a nude woman, touching yourself, or “pressuring” your wife to have sex. This gives religious authorities great leverage for guilt manipulation over men. But a quick check in a Greek lexicon shows that the word was simply used to describe prostitution and other forms of promiscuous sex.
2. Does not accurately quote the Scriptures – There’s a reason that Satan deceived Eve through the spoken word. It was easier to misquote God while still sounding correct. Always check what the Scripture in question actually says before believing a teacher. You’d be surprised how often it’s blatantly misquoted.
3. Uses theological jargon to answer simple questions – there are many things in the Bible that appear to contradict church doctrine. For example, the Bible teaches that God desires all men to be saved (1 Tim 2:4), yet church doctrine teaches that, at least so far, most people have gone to hell. So a simple question is, does this mean God is not able to bring about what he desires? An honest person will admit he doesn’t know yet or will have a straight answer. A charlatan will provide a long-winded theological explanation that leaves you scratching your head.
4. Uses systematic theology and catechisms to justify his answers – Religious Charlatans utilize the coherence theory of truth (do the ideas logically fit together?) rather than the correspondence theory of truth (does the idea accurately describe what I can observe?). Systematic theologies and catechisms are the most effective way to make blatant errors acceptable. The Apostle Paul warns us that immature believers are “being carried about by every wind of teaching, by human caprice, by craftiness with a view to the systematizing of the deception.” (Eph 4:14, Concordant Literal Version)
5. Quotes Bible teachers and theologians rather than the Scriptures – There’s nothing wrong with quoting other teachers to reinforce a biblical truth. But it should be an immediate red flag if the opinion of a famous teacher or theologian is used as the basis for an argument. Powerful rhetoric does not equal biblical truth.
6. Ignores the context – There is a world of difference between quoting what the Bible says and understanding what it means in context. Just because the Bible says something that can support an argument doesn’t mean that’s what the author meant or that what was said is even relevant to us. As Paul instructed Timothy: “Endeavor to present yourself to God qualified, an unashamed worker, correctly cutting the word of truth.” It’s the correct “cutting” of the word that matters. God does not give bonus points for creative uses of His Word.
7. Talks about the value of “theological training” instead of knowing the Scriptures – “Theological training” is code word for indoctrination. The more a mind can be trained to follow the pleasant grooves of a perfectly coherent system, the less he will question the underlying assumptions of the system. And the longer he is trained, the more he believes he is correct and the more passionately he will defend his inherited doctrines when they are criticized. Thus is error propagated into the church.
When I was a toddler, all I wanted my mother to read me was dictionaries and encyclopedias.
My poor mother tried in vain to get me to listen to stories, but I had no interest. (It wasn’t until she read me Winnie-the-Pooh that I developed any interest in fiction.)
While I can say today that I’ve since expanded my horizons and read other forms of literature, I’ve never lost interest in dictionaries.
Words have meanings and those meanings are determined by usage. Dictionaries simply tell you how a word is commonly used.
So why would this matter?
It’s because we live in an evil world. And people who want to harm you are rarely going to do so through brute force. They’re going to do it through propaganda… through words.
It really surprises me how few people understand how deceptive propaganda works. I would guess most people are cynical enough to believe that institutions are lying to them, but they don’t even realize all the lies they believe. Knowing that people are liars doesn’t make you any less susceptible for falling for a specific lie.
A skilled liar will not give you blatantly false information. Instead, he’s going to change the meaning of key word without telling you and then make a solid argument on top of the dubious meaning.
A great example is one that Vox Day talks about:
Atheists will argue that there is no “evidence” for God. But this is bullshit. There is tons of evidence for God. If you look up “evidence” in a dictionary, it simply means “an outward sign” or something like that. There was a Babylon Bee headline a while back that read “Local Atheist Demands Evidence for God, Besides Entire Universe.” That about sums it up.
What atheists won’t tell you is that they are using the term “evidence” in an uncommon way. They are referring specifically to scientific evidence. But it’s a stupid argument argument because one can’t use the scientific method on metaphysical realities.
Anyhow, this is just one example how Christians who don’t pay attention to key terms get bullied and duped by intellectual frauds. It happens all the time and the church is the worst place where it happens.
Some think it’s petty to bring up dictionary definitions in an argument. But the dictionary is very often the most powerful tool for exposing the root of the deception.
It’s perfectly fine to use words in uncommon ways, so long as one is upfront about it or the audience understands the jargon.
But charlatans are never upfront about their terms. They love to take advantage of ambiguity. They love to say one thing and let the listener think something different.
This is why I intend to continue in my dictionary obsession.
If you wish to build your own religious empire, the formula for success can be found right in the Bible:
For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. (2 Tim 3:6-7)
The key to religious power is guilt manipulation. The formula is simple:
Perpetual Guilt + Long Education Program = Captive Convert
If you run out of actual sins, you can invent your own! There’s no limit to the amount of guilt that can be manufactured if you only apply your imagination.
Women are particularly susceptible to guilt manipulation and will enthusiastically join any program with a vague promise to help them find relief.
Now, as for the men, they are a bit more difficult…
You see, men have this obnoxious thing called “testosterone” and it makes them quite difficult to control.
Men, in their natural state, do not want to stay still. They will not submit easily to authority. Rather than accepting their external circumstances, they will bend reality to their will. There is virtually no limit to what a man can accomplish through sheer willpower. To make matters worse, men have an innate ability to set aside their differences and join forces when they are threatened or wish to accomplish a task.
The male naturally judges others in terms of their utility to his mission. The male has no problem severing connections with anything or anyone that hinders his pursuit. He is not susceptible to guilt manipulation like the woman. He evaluates everything in terms of his mission. He will even shun loved ones if necessary.
Hopefully you can see how this is problematic.
But, in recent times, our Social Experimentation team has discovered a way to control men. It was found that if young boys are educated in the same manner as girls, they will grow up to be, as far as our purpose is concerned, functionally like women. Namely, you can condition a young boy to think of his “maleness” as “toxic” by punishing early expressions of his male instincts.
The fruit of this operant conditioning will be in full effect by time the boy reaches young adulthood. You now have a relatively docile male who is burdened with guilt over his male instincts. The doctrine of “lust” is particularly effective towards controlling the male as he has already been trained to feel guilty over “objectifying women.”
It’s best that the male does not learn to study the Scriptures on his own, for then he would discover our sleight-of-hand maneuvers that were necessary to formulate our doctrines. Best to lead him to believe that he is “unqualified” to handle the Scriptures and that it is “dangerous” to reach conclusions on his own without the aid of an “expert.”. This is relatively easy to do as the young man’s self-confidence is all but non-existent as a result of his earlier education. He has been trained to study, memorize, and restate answers that have been taught to him rather than to think for himself.
Nevertheless the man still retains some remnants of his instincts. He does not wish to be blatantly controlled so it is best to loosen his leash a little. Let him feel like he is being a “spiritual leader” to his family. We provide a wide range of programs for that, including:
- Sunday morning sermons
- Wednesday night Bible studies
- New member classes
- Radio programs
- Bible colleges
- Daily Bible reading plans
- Bible seminaries
- Sunday night sermons
- Daily devotions
- Bible conferences
- Training programs
- Bible Institutes
It is ideal that the male join or follow these programs at the request of his wife. By this time, he is already persuaded he is guilty of objectifying women, so appeasing his wife’s requests by stepping up to be a “spiritual leader” is an excellent way to help him feel a brief sense of relief from his guilt.
Furthermore, men also have an instinct to provide for and protect their offspring. So we offer a variety of programs to satisfy that need as well:
- Sunday School
- Children’s churches
- Summer Bible camps
- Christian schools
- Vacation Bible School
Don’t get too hung up on the format of the learning. That’s not what matters. The program will be effective so long as it meets two criteria:
- Provides the illusion of progress while remaining ambiguous enough to leave the student confused
- Engages enough of the student’s time and energy so he is sufficiently distracted from examining the Scriptures
With a group of guilt-ridden men and women, you’d be pleasantly surprised at how easy they are to control. So long as you never fully relieve the student of his or her guilt, they will always assume the problem is with themselves rather than the system.
It’s elegant self-reinforcing system: the guilt prompts them to join a program and the resulting confusion from the teaching causes them to feel more inadequate, prompting them to seek out more programs to remedy the problem.
Isn’t religion great? There’s no other industry like it.
On a serious note, if you find that you’ve been learning about the Bible for years and still get confused when you read it, you are NOT the problem. You’re operating in the wrong system.
Here’s one clue that has shed a lot of light on the Scriptures for me recently:
Start with 2 Timothy. This is the most logical place to start.
Think of it like visiting a blog.
When you visit a blog, you skim some of the articles to get an idea what it’s about. Then you check the “About” page.
On this particular “About page” you learn that the author is Paul, a messenger of good news to the Gentiles.
“Perfect!” you think to yourself. “I’m a Gentile. And I could use some good news right now.”
So you’re ready to start reading. Where do you start?
The most recent post, of course! The one on the top. That’s the one with the most relative and up-to-date information.
This most recent post is titled, “All of Asia Has Abandoned Me…”
Uh-oh. Something just went wrong. What’s going on?
Let’s start reading and find out…
(If you want a good commentary on 2 Timothy to aid your study, I recommend “The Church in Ruins” by Clyde L. Pilkington, Jr. I think he occasionally reads too much into the text, but he provides a lot of solid observations. Plus, it’s a short read.)