Re: Secret Thoughts of a Desperate Housewife

The other week I wrote a post summarizing some of the common sex questions Christian wives are privately asking online.

Most of the questions centered around issues of guilt. I thought it’d be fun/useful/provocative to give my answers to each of the questions.

Q: Is using birth control and condoms inside of marriage a sin?

A: No. Do not add to the word of God. “Be fruitful and multiply” does not mean have as many children as you can as fast as humanly possible.

Exception: some forms of birth control destroy life after conception. Sometimes it is difficult to assess the effects of a birth control. Condoms are probably the safest bet in terms of conscience.

Q: Is masturbation a sin?

A: No. Do not add to the word of God.

Q: Is it a sin to have an erotic dream involving another man?

A: No. Do not add to the word of God.

Q: I can’t enjoy sex…

A: Ask her what she is thinking about while she is having sex. Get specifics.

Q: Is it a sin to have sexual thoughts about someone other than my husband?

A: No. Do not add to the word of God.

Exception: It is a sin to covet a man other than your husband. But this is different than fleeting sexual thoughts.

Q: Is it a sin to enjoy reading erotica?

A: No. Otherwise you couldn’t enjoy the Song of Songs.

Q: How can I deal with lusting after hot guys?

A: The modern concept of lust is different from the biblical concept of lust. She is probably just noticing physical features that women instinctively find attractive. But if it truly is sinful lust, the solution is simple: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9)

Q: I feel guilty because I privately fantasize about being raped…

A: “Rape” is modern term used to shame both men and women for natural sexual instincts. It is not wrong to have sexual fantasies about being roughly taken by a man. Do not add to the word of God.

Q: Need prayer to heal from the past…

A: Pray. But don’t allow her to continue to identify as a victim. There is (probably) nothing wrong with her physically. It’s all in her head. Help her to focus on positive aspects of sex (like the Song of Songs) rather than negative (like being a sexual abuse victim.)

Q: I have issues with attraction and fantasies towards women…

A: The Bible never condemns women for finding other women sexually attractive. The Song of Songs even encourages it (Song 6:13).

 

No Mercy for Weak Men

It’s harsh realities like this that make the Christian virtue of mercy shine all the brighter:

Neither women nor society care about male weakness. As alluded to in section 6, low tier men are invisible to women as a function of hypergamy.

If you are weak, depressed, small, poor, uneducated, unconfident, or anything else that prevents you from being powerful, nobody will care about whether you live or die.

People only care about you when you’re powerful, or a woman. You have to pull yourself up by the bootstraps and become self-reliant because nobody else gives a fuck. You’re given a dichotomy, sink or swim; you sink, and you end up drowning yourself in failure and self-pity. If you swim and only if you swim, people will start taking notice.

Society will always have a safety net for women, for weakness is a function of femininity rather than a bug. White knights will come to the rescue, the state will provide welfare and other women are more than happy to side with her – all of this in spite of any success or remarkable accolades! A man of equal unworth is condemned, and rightly so. Whilst women can cruise without social ostracisation, men cannot. Fair it is not, but true it is all the same.

-Illimitable Men’s Red Pill Constitution – Section 14

I know that, as a man, I will never forget those precious few times somebody took pity on my wretched state and lent a helping hand instead of passing judgment. It makes a difference.

This Little Chart Tells You How Likely You’ll Get Laid

A man would do well to ponder this chart if he wishes to have success in the bedroom:

(From the book, The ONE Thing by Gary Keller.)

Here’s a red pill interpretation:

Scenario: your wife isn’t having sex with you.

Here’s the path of accountability:

  1. Why doesn’t she want to have sex with me? (Seeks Reality)
  2. This is the way women are. (Acknowledges Reality)
  3. If I’m going to get laid, it’s up to me. (Owns It)
  4. What can I do? (Finds Solution)
  5. O.K. I’m going to try it and see how she responds. (Gets On With It)

Here’s the path of victimhood:

  1. Suffers in silence or complains without asking questions. (Avoids Reality)
  2. Rejects red pill truths or claims his case is different. (Fights Reality)
  3. “The Bible says a wife is supposed to submit to her husband! If she would quit being rebellious…” (Blames)
  4. “I can’t make her submit to me. That’s on her.” (Personal Excuses)
  5. “I’m turning it over to God. If He wants to change her heart, it’ll happen.” (Waits & Hopes)

Remember: a victim is sexually repulsive to women. But a man who takes charge of his life gets what he wants.

Sex, Scholars and Conspiracy

In case you’re wondering why the Song of Songs is so difficult to understand, this might explain why:

…but as [the theological revisers] were unable to suppress the book, they endeavored to darken its real meaning, for dogmatic purposes, saying as Georg Hoffmann put it in his translation of the Book of Job, Let us save the attractive book for the Congregation, but we will pour some water into the author’s strong wine. Not satisfied with the obscuration of the original book, the theological revisers tried to cut up and dislocate the text as much as possible, destroying the original order and logical sequence, so that in the present form of the book there is no proper arrangement, no logical connection between the individual verses

The above quote is from an research article titled “Difficult Passages in the Song of Songs.” It was published by Professor Paul Haupt, Ph.D. in a 1902 volume of the Journal of Biblical Literature.

There was a flourishing of scholarship during the late 1800s and early 1900s that attempted to decode the Song of Songs. But, tragically, those insights never reached the church. Then a couple of world wars and political upheavals seems to have diverted the attention of intellectuals to other matters.

Apparently, Dr. Haupt wasn’t the only one to recognize that something was screwy with the way the Song of Songs was arranged. A scholar named Professor Bickell, of Vienna, tried to show, in 1884, that the confusion was due to a bookbinder who misplaced the sheets of the manuscript. But Haupt claims the distortion was intentional.

In another article, Dr. Haupt attempts to put the Song of Songs together in what he judged to be the proper arrangement.

Normally, I would be instinctively opposed to any attempt to rearrange the received text. But I find at least two reasons Dr. Haupt’s thesis is plausible.

First, we have the Apostle Paul’s prophesy to consider:

But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. (1 Tim 4:1-3)

The joys of marriage are primarily sexual. In order to convincingly forbid marriage, one must make sex seem undesirable for piety. But the Song of Songs, with it’s graphic and exuberant praise of the joys of sex, would stand directly in the way of that agenda. Thus it would be necessary to render the text indecipherable and offer an allegorical interpretation in its place.

Finally, Dr. Haupt’s rearrangement and translation simply makes more sense than the received text. For example, here’s a section he titles “The Bride Addressing the Bridegroom on the Morrow After Marriage”:

Behold thou art fair, my own darling,
aye, sweet; our bed will be green.
Of our home all the rafters are cedarn,
and (its walls) are all paneled with cypress.

As the apple amid trees of the forest,
so amid youths is my sweeting.
I delight to dwell under its shadow,
and sweet to my taste is its fruitage.

To the tavern where wine flows he brought me,
‘Love’ was the sign hanging out there.
He refreshed me with cates made of raisins
and with apples appeased all my cravings.

On his left arm my head was reclining,
while around me his right arm was clinging.
As long as the King stayed there feasting,
my spikenard its scent was exhaling:

My sachet of myrrh was my darling,
scenting my breasts with its perfume.
My darling was a cluster of henna
(blooming) in En-gedi’s gardens.

With kisses of thy mouth do thou kiss me,
for thy love than wine is far sweeter.
Thy name is thrice-clarified perfume;
and therefore all maidens do love thee.

Take me with thee! Come, let us hasten!
to thy chamber, O King, do thou lead me!
There let us rejoice and make merry,
and be drunken, not with wine, but with loving.

My darling is mine, and his am I,
who feeds on the dark purple lilies
Till the breeze (of the morning) arises,
and the shadows are taking their flight.

Do thou spring to the feast, O my darling, —
like a gazelle or a young hart be thou! —
(To the feast) on the mountains of myrrh,
(to the feast) on the hillocks of incense.

O maidens, lo, I beseech you,
by the gazelles and the hinds of the fields,
That ye not stir nor startle our loving
before our fill we have drunken.

 

Even if one is unfamiliar with the erotic euphemisms, the logical sequence makes it quite clear that something quite exciting is going on between a man and a woman.

If you’d like to delve into the topic deeper, check out Dr. Haupt’s article as well as his metrical translation.*

* It appears that Dr. Haupt has abbreviated the Song for the sake of rhythm. Hebrew is more concise than English and thus difficult to translate poetically. The complete text is clarified in the footnotes. There’s no introductory note about this so it took me a few takes to figure out.

 

They Just Don’t Make Comedy Like They Used To

My wife and I have been rewatching one of our favorite comedy TV shows, 3rd Rock from the Sun.

The premise is that a group of outer space aliens assumes human bodies in order research life on planet Earth.  The “politically incorrect” jokes that were allowed to air back in the late ’90s is a testament to how much our culture has changed in such a short time.

Here are a few of the classic zingers on gender:

Dick: Sally, I want you to observe her, find out what women on this planet do.
Sally: Why can’t Harry do it?
Dick: Because you’re the woman.
Sally: That brings up a very good question: why am I the woman?
Dick: Because you lost.

Sally: Dick, women are trouble. I should know! I’ve been one for two weeks!
Dick: I know, which brings up another point. I command you to shave under your arms.
Sally: Doable. I’m sorry you find me so offensive (tears up)
Dick: Dammit! Pull yourself together, man! We’re going out.
Sally: Ok, give me an hour.
Dick: An hour?
Sally: I got to rotate these (indicating breasts). It’s a party!

Harry: Women. You can’t live with ’em, and yet they’re everywhere.

Tommy: Sally, you’re amazing. As sick as you are, you keep taking care of us.
Sally: Yeah, I know. I don’t understand. All I want to do is curl up into a ball, and yet somehow I feel compelled to nurture you. God, what a cruel disease!

Sally: You just can’t imagine what it feels like, Dick. It’s like he reached in… and pulled all the bones out of my body… [starts crying]
Dick: My God, what are you doing?
Sally: [wipes her tears] Apparently I’m leaking!
Dick: Well, stop!

Nina: I knew you had a thing for her.
Dick: Yes, but I understand I’m not allowed to show it to her without her permission.

Gender comedy has changed. It used to be about poking fun at the difficulties of being (and living with) a woman. Nowadays, it’s about the difficulty women face dealing with their idiot husbands.

 

 

The “Dark Triad” for Kingdom Men

It’s an accepted truth in the manosphere that there is a trifecta of personality traits that result in immense personal power.

This “dark triad” gives a man access to high social status, power over men, and is the key to unlocking the legs of women. Basically, a Dark Triad man can get whatever he wants.

In case you’re not familiar with the traits, here’s a quick summary:

Narcissism  – self-love and ridiculously high self-confidence. Low-self esteem people live their lives vicariously through high-self esteem people.

Machiavellianism  – seeing life as a game of strategy that must be manuevered. People are seen as objects to be manipulated and used for their utilitarian value. Women love this (subconciously) because they have a craving to be the object of a man’s lust. And men without purpose want to feel useful and thus respond to a Machiavellian man.

Psychopathy – no sense of guilt or discomfort with making immoral choices. Psychopathic people do not feel guilt or fear about making ruthless decisions. This is advantageous to their quest for power, whereas more conscientious people have great difficulty doing anything manipulative.

(You can read a more in-depth summary at the Illimitable Men blog.)

At first glance, it would appear that Christian men are at a disadvantage. None of those attributes sound like appropriate behavior for a follower of Christ.

But it recently occurred to me that there is an equivalent to the Dark Triad for Christian men. Not only equivalant, but, I would content, superior to the Dark Triad.

The Kingdom Man’s “Dark Triad” consists of three attributes:

  1. Diligence
  2. Shrewdness
  3. Fear of the Lord

I will address each in turn below…

Trait #1: Diligence

The plans of the diligent lead surely to advantage, But everyone who is hasty comes surely to poverty. (Proverbs 21:5)

Diligence, when properly understood, has the same effect of irrational ego-based confidence.

Many Christians mistakenly believe that diligence is synonymous with hard work. While people often avoid diligence due to laziness, hard work is typically the result of a lack of diligence.

If you look up charuwts (diligence) in a Hebrew lexicon, you’ll see that it does not mean “hard work” or “effort.” It means “decision” with the image of making a deep and permanent cut. In other words, it’s a decision made after a careful analysis of the situation. It also involves taking self-initiated action on that decision (Prov 6:7-8).

The Bible teaches that being hurried is the opposite of diligence. Or, as Tim Ferriss puts it:

“Being busy is a form of laziness – lazy thinking and indiscriminate action.”

Probably the closest modern concept we have to diligence is the 80/20 principle. Approximately 20% of your inputs generate 80% of the output. 20% of your actions will result in 80% of your success. 20% of your habits are generating 80% of your problems. etc. etc.

The key is, don’t focus on working harder. Only two types of people believe working harder is the best solution: people who are insecure and people who are stupid.

Focus on making better decisions and then do those few things that will get you the best results.

Or focus on enduring the trials that will force the majority of your competition to drop out.

My wife sometimes accuses me of being arrogant. But I have a sincere belief that I am (or can be) better than the vast majority of men in whatever I choose to focus on.

But my confidence doesn’t come from a sense of being special. I simply understand that, at every level of competition, 80% of men are losers (relatively speaking.)

For example, if you accept the red pill and decide you want to have sex with a real woman rather than settle for porn and masturbation, that puts you in the top 20% of men.

If you actually manage to establish the (few essential) daily habits that will help you reach your red pill goals, that puts you in the top 4% of men.

If you study and practice advanced seduction techniques, that puts you in the top 1% of men.

And so on and so forth.

At every level of competition, you can count on these truths:

  1. 80% of your competitors will be too lazy (i.e. busy) to make a better decision
  2. 80% of your competitors will give up at the next roadblock
  3. 80% of your roadblocks are coming from 20% of the inputs

Once you truly grasp the power of diligence and the 80/20 Principle, you’ll have the same level of confidence of a narcissist.

Trait #2: Shrewdness

And his master praised the unrighteous manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the sons of this age are more shrewd in relation to their own kind than the sons of light. (Luke 16:8)

Christians are notoriously dim-witted when it comes to dealing with worldly affairs. This was the case even during Christ’s ministry.

A prime example of Christian naivity was during the advent of the movie as a new entertainment medium. Rather than seizing the opportunity and sending bright young men to film school, ministers wasted their efforts derailing against the evils of the medium and warning people to stay away. So instead, we’ve opted to allow God-hating secularists to seize the medium and use it to indoctrinate our children with feminism, socialism, and all kinds of other hellish ideologies.

And we still haven’t learned. Even to this day, pastors still haven’t figured out that what people read/watch/listen to on their phones informs their worldview more than what they hear from the pulpit. Preachers are boring. Social media is exciting. Attention is influence.

But it’s not just about seizing new communication mediums. It’s about building the kingdom and letting your light shine with the same level of shrewdness as one who is pursuing ungodly power.

Do you want to be great in the kingdom of God? Jesus says to build your house on the rock and shine your light for the world to see (Matthew 5:14-16.)

It’s always a battle. Either the world will overcome and subsume your house. Or your house will shine a light so bright that the world will be drawn to it.

It’s a shameful thing for a man to lose his dynasty. If a man is not vigilant, worldly people who are more shrewd than him will snatch away his children and spoil his work.

I recommend starting by reading and frequently pondering Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of PowerApply that level of thinking towards leading your wife and building your house to be a beacon of light in the world.

Trait #3: Fear of the Lord

Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28)

A man who fears rejection from God is immune to the social pressures of his day.

Imagine yourself standing before God’s throne on the judgment day…

“But… but… but God. I was following the traditional faith. I believed everything the catechism said. Everyone else was going that way. Surely, you’d understand…”

“Liar. You have twisted my plain words and willingly followed false teachers. This man is a worthless coward. Take him away and burn him. He is unfit for the kingdom.”

Remember that God is a fair judge. He doesn’t judge on a curve. You either bear good fruit or you don’t. And God says there is no room for cowards in the kingdom of Heaven. (Revelation 21:8)

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to test the limits of how much cowardice God’s mercy overlooks on the final judgment.

Don’t put your trust in religious slogans like “grace alone” or “my intentions are good.” Rather, you should be scared shitless about violating or adding to what God has plainly communicated in His word.

If you don’t understand a passage, beg God for wisdom and read the passage (in context) over and over until it makes sense.

When you find something in the Scripture that is contrary to what you believe or do, immediately change your mind about the matter.

And above all, show mercy to others so that God will be merciful to you (James 2:13)

Don’t rely on pastors.

Don’t rely on theologians.

Don’t rely on tradition.

You have the Holy Spirit who teaches you all things. (John 14:26)

When you truly understand the fear of the Lord, you will have no qualms about blatantly denying the unbiblical B.S. that passes off as church tradition. You won’t allow your conscience to be bound to extra-biblical teachings.

In other words, you will have the power of a psychopath.

Keep in mind that the majority of men have none of these traits. So if you can tap into the synergy of having all three traits, you can accomplish anything you set your mind to. Your house will be immune to storms and your light will shine forth before the world. And you will be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.

These are the kind of men that are needed to build a kingdom.

 

This is Why the Church is Dead

Rollo Tomassi wrote a scathing assessment of modern church culture a couple years ago. It’s held up tragically well.

Church culture is now openly hostile towards any expression of conventional masculinity that doesn’t directly benefit women and actively conditions men to be serviceable, gender-loathing Betas. The feminist narrative of “toxic masculinity” has entirely replaced any semblance of what traditional masculinity or manhood once was to the church. Any hint of a masculinity not entirely beholden to a now feminine-primary purpose is not only feared, but shamed with feminine-interpreted aspersions of faith.

This problem is further compounded by the sexual expectations placed on the Christian man:

For the agnostic or areligious man, discarding a Blue Pill social conditioning for a Red Pill awareness is a difficult task, but for men raised to believe that their only doctrinally approved path to sex with a woman is abstinence until marriage, that man’s only hope is to accept his fate and stay the Beta a feminized church has conditioned him to be.

And once he gets to marriage and his approved expression of his sexuality, the “Christian” man finds that the feminized church, even the male elders, expect endless qualifications to women and his wife’s unceasing appeasement in exchange for that approved sex. It’s a tail-chasing that holds men to the old books social order expectations while absolving women of all accountability and expecting him to also make concessions for a new (feminized) social order that’s ensaturated the church.

The institutional church can offer a man no hope. But Christ called us to build and expand a kingdom. And a kingdom requires men.

Ideally, the church and the kingdom of God would be the same. But we cannot serve the institutional church at the expense of doing what God called us to do.

I’m not a revolutionist. I believe it’s good for a man to belong to a church as long as he is able. But I suspect we will see an increasing divide in the coming years between the “church” and true men of God… if for no other reason than that masculine men will be completely ousted from the church.

In tomorrow’s post, I’m going to cover the essential mindset of a kingdom-centered man.

Conservative Virtue Signaling

Until Christians acknowledge that this is what’s driving the abortion industry, being “pro-life” is merely virtue signaling:

Photo text:

Rules

  1. Get FUCKED
  2. Thou shall not suck the dick if he does not lick thy CLIT
  3. absolutely NO condoms
  4. If someone tells you to drink water tell them to FUCK OFF
  5. Swallow the kids Bitch
  6. Shackers must leave by 10am
  7. When in doubt drink another
  8. The less clothing the better
  9. NO [cock] Blocks
  10. Chuck + rally

How to Argue with a Woman (or Gamma Male)

The other day I got in a Twitter “fight” with some random girl named Sherry.

I’ve reproduced the argument below for instructive purposes. Comments are in brackets.

Tony Reinke: Al Mohler (June 2014): “If you get any report of any kind of sexual abuse, certainly involving a minor, you be committed before that ever happens, that before you leave that room you are going to dial 9-1-1 and you’re going to call for help.” [Virtue signaling]

JT: Translation: Always assume the man is guilty and turn the matter over to the secular courts. Hmm…

Sherry: He only said pastors aren’t qualified to investigate. Let the authorities do that. The ‘secular courts’ have presumption of innocence with burden of proof that has to be met. Not like the kangaroo courts we’ve seen in colleges where students can be railroaded with no defense.

JT: Perhaps you don’t know that it is shameful for Christians to go to court? (1 Cor 6)

Sherry: You can’t be serious to think there is a correlation between neighborhood litigation and sexual assault. Perhaps you don’t know that Christians are also sinners and commit crimes. Is this a parody account? [Both women and gamma males argue the same way: address an imaginary argument (“so you’re saying…”) rather than what was said. Then they attempt to change the topic with pseudo-logic and discredit the messenger.] 

JT: Taking a sexual assault accusation to court is litigation by definition. Christians are called to use wisdom to judge each case fairly.

JT: Again, have you read 1 Corinthians 6?

Sherry: Yes I have and you’re definitely a joke.

Sherry: Christians are also called to follow the law.

JT: So turning a brother over to the court is following the law?

Sherry: I’m probably foolish to answer, but in this case Yes. @AlbertMohler is referring to sexual abuse. I stand by my first comment. 1 Cor 6 doesn’t apply. This isn’t a trivial or small matter to be handled between believers. Especially if a child is involved. [This is where she has given up. People who argue on an emotional level are quickly exhausted by logic. Also note the callout to @AlbertMohler. She is hoping a higher authority can affirm the opinion she cannot defend.]

JT: Sherry, you are allowing emotion to cloud your judgment. Just because a child is involved doesn’t automatically mean the man is guilty.

JT: 1 Cor 6 is a universal principle for all disputes between Christians. Each case must be examined with wisdom… without knee-jerk reactions

From what I can gather, there are three Christian goals to arguing:

  1. To shame opponents of truth into silence (Tit 2:8)
  2. To instruct a watching audience (Prov 19:25)
  3. To give the opponent opportunity to repent (2 Tim 2:25)*

My recent Twitter exchange inspired me to come up with a simple argument formula that Christians could use that I think meets all the above criteria:

  1. Decode the jargon – most opening statements from angry women and false teachers are nothing more than virtue signaling disguised with righteous sounding jargon. Decode the B.S. so that everyone can see the plain meaning.
  2. Have you not read? – call attention to the Scripture passage that corrects the false assumption. Phrasing it as a question makes it irresistible to the ego. No one wants to be ignorant. The intensity of the rhetoric here depends on the type of person you’re dealing with (e.g. man vs. woman, teacher vs. layman, educated vs. naive, etc.)
  3. Correct and dismiss the false argument – most of the time, you’ll be arguing with a gamma male or a woman. They won’t address your point and will almost without fail counter with a “so you’re saying…” line or something similar. Quickly correct and dismiss the false argument and immediately move to the next step.
  4. Restate the question. Go back to Step 2. Repeat Steps 3 & 4 if necessary.

* Note that the biblical concept of “gentleness” implies using strength. It’s an expression of power, but with reserve. In other words, only use as much strength as necessary for the situation.