Market Failure- Part 2

This is Part 2 of my Market Failure Series. Part 1 can be found here (I suggest reading it first).

Undercutting the Market

Something that has become a real problem for chaste women who are looking to get married is the effect that unchaste women have on the MMP. Marriage is costly, for both men and women, but right now the cost to men is greater. It is natural for humans to not want to have to pay for something if they can help it, so if they are given a chance to get products for free they will do so. Unfortunately for women, the product they are trying to sell is primarily sex (in the form of access, fidelity and the fruits of sex-children). And when other women offer it at discount prices (as in outside of marriage), then of course many men will leap at the opportunity. Mind you, those of us who understand how the current SMP works know that many of the men who fall for the lie of sexual liberation won’t really benefit from it. They may get some sex along the way, but in the grand scheme of things not as much as they would if the market was healthy and they “bought” the product. The net effect of these men leaving the market is to make matters much worse for the women who stay inside, because they are left with a far smaller pool of potential buyers. Were all women required to behave in a chaste manner or be forced out of civilized society, then men (driven by their omnipresent and powerful sex drive) would be forced to participate in the marriage market in order to satiate their desires.

Also, even those men who are still in the market for marriage might still expect to have sex with their prospective wives before getting married. When faced with a woman who wishes to maintain her virtue, they will probably simply move on. Their acclimatization at the hands of unchaste women and a licentious culture has left them unable to appreciate the value of a virtuous, chaste woman as a marriage partner.

Network Error

One of the more significant problems for a chaste man or woman trying to find a spouse is the complete breakdown of the old social networks. By social network I don’t mean Facebook, I mean the vast interconnected links of friendships and family ties that used to exist when our society was healthier. A century ago you could trust your family and friends to help you find a marriage partner. And if they couldn’t find you someone, then someone they knew would find you someone, and so on. Church was a place you went to be encouraged to marry, and you could find a good spouse there. In short, the whole community was effectively on your side if you wanted to get married. Of course, that assumes that you had a reputation in your community that was positive. Someone with a negative reputation would find themselves locked out of this system, and discouraged from participating. While this could be abused, more often than not it served to keep away men and women who were up to no good.

This is all gone now. The old networks are gone, and aren’t likely to be rebuilt anytime soon. People are more spread out and disconnected than ever, and the odds that family or friends will be able to find you a suitable mate are dismally low. It does still happen, but is the exception rather than the rule now. In market terms, think of this networking as a form of buyer recommendations. They helped to direct buyers and sellers towards interested parties that were thought to be a good match. Is it possible to find a mate without this? Yes… but it is that more difficult. Think of what Amazon would be like if it didn’t have features to recommend products bought by those with similar tastes or purchasing patterns. You could still get what you want, but it takes a lot more time and effort to get it. The same applies to the MMP.

So Close and Yet so Far…

Not too long ago I met a Christian woman who was quite a bit younger than me (although still an adult). Although we met in a professional setting, it was somewhat relaxed, and so we got to know more about one another. Both as a measure of respect and to preserve anonymity, I will simply describe her as an attractive young lady who was thin but in a healthy way. Not a bombshell, but clearly on the right side of the distribution curve of female attractiveness. After talking with her for a while I discovered that she was a very devout Christian. And I mean Christian, not a Churchian. She took scripture very seriously, and believed in following that teaching in everyday life. I never asked, and she never mentioned, if she was chaste, but for her I considered the question unnecessary. Her actions and demeanor spoke for her on that accord. Also, when the subject of sexual sins came up in one of our theology discussions, she was quite vehement in her agreement that sexual sins were especially damaging.

When it came to matters outside of faith, we had a lot in common. We enjoyed many of the same TV shows and movies, and many of the same subjects fascinated us. Our personalities seemed to mesh well, and it quickly became clear to me that she enjoyed my presence a lot. Enough that I soon surmised that she was attracted to me, even as I was attracted to her. Now most of you are probably asking why the hell I am writing this and not actively pursuing her. The reason: She was a Protestant and held views which were often the polar opposite of Catholic teaching and doctrine. And she was very sincere and serious about her beliefs; I wasn’t going to be able to simply get her to change her mind. Sadly, it just wasn’t going to work out between us.

This story highlights one of the major difficulties that Christians face in the current MMP. We are called to not be unequally yoked, and at the same time we find ourselves hopelessly divided against one another. Two Christians can find one another only to discover they are from different faith traditions. I have written before how Church Shopping encourages bad teaching. Church shopping is possible only because the Church is divided; were we still one body in Christ that wouldn’t be possible. Unfortunately, that disunity also has the effect of impairing the ability of young Christians marrying by throwing yet another obstacle in their way by effectively lowering the pool of potential mates that much more.

Angels versus Sluts

No, that isn’t the title of the newest Made For SyFy movie (if it was, the word shark would be in there somewhere). Rather, this is to discuss another signal of sexual dysfunction which is occurring in parts of the West. Specifically, the situation where married men will only sleep with their wives for the purpose of having children, and turn towards prostitutes and porn to satisfy their lusts/passions. This is not common in the United States, but in some European countries which were until recently more traditional it is not unheard of. In such cases, married women (especially Christian married women) are seen as angels who are “pure” and shouldn’t be corrupted by carnal desires. This notion of not sleeping with your wife (even if she is attractive) seems crazy to us here in the US and in other Western countries, but it does exist. Similar practices occurred in the past in the UK and US during Victorian times, when married men in some circles would often visit prostitutes for sex, because sex with your wife was something done for procreation only. Now, that practice has died out here, but it did exist and still does exist elsewhere.

So how did it come about, and what does it mean? Well, it is my belief that it is an alternate response to the old saw that women are pure, good and sugar and spice and all things nice. When exposed to this falsehood, men develop unhealthy ideas about women. They adopt a binary pattern, where they assign women to two different categories:

Angels- pure and innocent women who shouldn’t be the subject of carnal desire. If you have sex with them, it should only be for procreation. They are pedestalized and treated well (most of the time).

Sluts- sinful and broken women who have rejected their purity and innocence, in essence, their “true” feminine nature. With such women sex for pleasure is not only alright, it is all that they are good for. These women are not respected and are treated badly.

When you think about it, this makes a certain sense. It is an attempt to rationalize and explain the true nature of women while still maintaining an overall mode of thought that leaves women as innately good. Think of it as an attempt to fit observable facts about how women behave with blue pill thinking. There are the “true” women, the Angels, and then there are the “false” women, the Sluts.

This is an awful mode of thought for men and women, because it prevents the development of a truly healthy marriage. Men who would otherwise want their wives are taught that they shouldn’t direct such thoughts to women, and instead are directed towards porn and prostitution. Women, on the other hand, who in many cases would desire to be desired, are denied the full measure of their husbands masculine power. The end result is massive amounts of sin and unhealthy marriages. Yet another sign of a Market Failure.

Substitute Goods

Lastly, this brings us to the topic of pornography. This subject seemed to generate the most discussion last time around, and I have no doubt that it will do so again. Before I delve into this more deeply, I wish to make the point that I am not exploring the moral, ethical or religious implications of porn. That will be for another post in a few days. Instead, I am examining how pornography impacts the MMP.

As I begin, I think it important to distinguish pornography from its rough female equivalent: the romance novel (specifically, the bodice-ripper or sub/dom type). Both of them serve as a sort of release, although they do it in different ways and satisfy different needs. For women, the romance novel satisfies the emotional high which comes from experiencing the true measure of a dominantly masculine man. For women, the physical need and release of sex seems to be (based on observation and testimony) less important or meaningful than the emotional high which accompanies the act when it is with an attractive man. Meanwhile, pornography (and the subsequent accompanying act) accomplishes the goal of satisfying or sating the male sex drive. For men the physical Need of sex is more important (or at least more pressing) than the emotional connectivity of the sex act. Something they both have in common is that they can be addictive, and can cause lasting damage. For men the damage is physical for certain, and possibly emotional, while for women the damage seems to be purely emotional, in that it can impair their ability to experience an emotional high from sex.

So how does this impact the MMP? As I explained earlier, the primary product that women sell in the MMP is sex, while the primary product of men is commitment. The romance novel might provide women with an emotional high, but it cannot satisfy the female need for male commitment (and yes, it is a need). Therefore the participation of women in the MMP will not be greatly affected, except indirectly. That indirect effect is that they are more likely to divorce their husbands, because they are less likely to experience an emotional thrill as a result of having sex with their husband. The situation is quite different for men though. Pornography can sate (however poorly) the male sex drive, which is the primary commodity that women bring to the MMP. In a way, it acts as a substitute product, allowing men look outside of women to meet their market needs. I would say that it is an inferior product, but there are men in this day and age who would disagree. They would point out the various flaws in women, and explain that “the real thing” isn’t much or any better in most cases. While for some women this would seem to be the case, I think most men would agree that on the whole this isn’t true. What might be true, on the other hand, is that on a cost/benefit analysis porn might be better than many women (at least when it comes to satisfying the Need, the Void is another matter) in the current MMP.

Another reason for porn’s prevalence these days has to do with the delaying of marriage. In the United States the median age of marriage for men was 28.2 in 2010. It is almost certainly higher than that now. Women have jumped up to 26.1 as of 2010. Remember that the primary male reason for joining the MMP is sex, a drive nearly as powerful as that of hunger and thirst. Most men do not have the discipline to suppress their sex drive until they are 28, and in truth most men probably could never achieve that level of discipline. They will look for a release to meet the Need. With marriage delayed for so long, and with prostitution expensive and risky, porn is the cheaper and safer alternative. While it is not the only force in play here, the fact that women are delaying marriage (at least in the US) is a major reason for the uptick in porn use. [And yes, if you are wondering if I am saying what you think I am saying, I am. Women are the cause of a lot (not all) of porn use by men.]

In the long run, the effects of porn will be to persuade many men to drop out of the MMP. Given the currency that they have to offer, and what they can buy with it, pornography seems like a better deal. For the women in the MMP, this has a similar effect to unchaste women, it dilutes their effective value. Unfortunately for women, they cannot do nearly as much to improve their MMV as men can.

In Conclusion

Whether they are symptoms of the greater problem or they are causes of that problem, all of the subjects that I have covered detail the overall Market Failure that we are experiencing now. Marriage is a broken mess in the West and there are no signs of it getting better any time soon. As much as many of us would like to fix the institution, it is unlikely we will be able to do so. Why? First off, there are many who refuse to acknowledge that the institution is broken to begin with. Even then, among those who do recognize there is a problem, few are able to perceive what the cause of this dysfunction is. Lastly, and most importantly, even if the cause was universally acknowledged, it is doubtful that the will exists to do what must be done to solve the problem.

 

Update: I have decided to write a relatively brief Part 3 to include a few other ideas which I haven’t explored yet. Hopefully it should be out later today.

Dodged a Bullet There

Boy am I glad that I stayed away from Sunshine Mary’s blog today. I haven’t seen this much friendly fire since I took a class of kindergarteners to a paintball park…

P.S. I am going to try and crank out Part 2 of the Market Failure series today.

Market Failure- Interlude

My latest post, Market Failure, has already generated far more comments than any other post that I have written to date. While I always hope that my posts will generate some discussion, I never anticipated that level of response. So before I address any substantive issues, I want to thank everyone for their comments. Despite the nature of the subject matter and some of the personal nature of what was discussed, the overall level of debate and discussion was relatively civil and respectful. I appreciate this, both because it is easier for me as an administrator (who doesn’t want to have to wade into the comment section to set things aright) and because it maintain my blog’s reputation as one that is respectable.

In terms of substance, a lot was addressed in the comments, most of it not dealing directly with what I discussed initially. However, most of it did concern the general subject of my post, which was the overall failures of the Marriage Market. The rampant use of Pornography, men suffering from a Madonna/Whore complex and refusing to have sex with their wives, romance novels and some of the other topics discussed are ALL signs of a dysfunctional culture. At heart there is something fundamentally broken about the way that men and women relate to one another these days. It is my belief that the core, the foundation of any society lies in a dual mechanism of how power/resources are distributed between men and women and of what is expected by and from each of the respective sexes. If this core is corrupted, then everything else will become corrupted too. And I contend that this is what has occurred. There is a deep rot within the West, and that rot manifests itself in different ways in different parts of the West. In the US it might mean that men turn to pornography after being sexually frustrated by their wives, while in a nation like Cyprus it might mean that men view sex with their wives as something done for children only, and turn to prostitution to meet carnal desires. In either case, both behaviors are symptoms of a greater dysfunction between the sexes.

I am going to address some of the topics discussed in Part 2, as well as a few others which didn’t make it in part 1. Some subjects I will cover include pornography and its consequences, networking problems, the effects of Christian disunity, how promiscuity undercuts chaste women’s MMV and the female equivalent of porn, romance novels. Hopefully I will be done by Friday and will post it that evening, or Saturday morning. Until then, feel free to continue discussing the subjects in Part 1. Or, if you have suggestions for topics of consideration, mention them here.

Update: Bryce over at Anarcho Papist is also covering the subject of market failures from the perspective of institutional dissolution.

Market Failure

There has always been a Marriage Marketplace (“MMP”). In days past it looked a lot different from what it is today. But it has always existed in some form or fashion. Why is this so? Perhaps it is because humans tend to be transactional and economic in their behaviors. After all, marriage is a contract of sorts (for a Christian that contract takes the form of a covenant), with an exchange of promises between the man and woman in what they will and won’t do during the marriage. Given the base transactional nature of marriage, it is hardly surprising that a marketplace would form around it. Whether it was families or the individuals themselves, bargaining of some sort went on and clearly some individuals were higher value than others. In the past titles, dowries and inheritance were the primary currency, while today things like youth, beauty, fertility, earning power and status can make someone high or low value.

However the Marriage Marketplace worked in the past, one thing is abundantly clear about how it works today: it doesn’t. The current Marriage Marketplace is broken, and is almost completely subsumed into the greater Sexual Marketplace (“SMP”) which has largely taken its place. This process has been a complete and utter disaster, whose consequences will be felt for generations. It manifests itself in many different ways, some of which I will explore in this post.

False Advertising

Free Northerner has recently taken upon himself the task of examining how well Churchians are marketing marriage these days. As you might guess, it is not a pretty sight. His post is in response to one of Dalrock’s latest, Brilliant Advertising. Here is how Free Northerner expressed his initial thoughts on seeing the video that Dalrock brought to our attention:

Instead of making marriage look like something men would want to pursue and would be willing to sacrifice for, they make it look horrible.

In the little skit in the middle, the man is the thoroughly henpecked, seemingly unhappy husband of a fat, dumpy, controlling wife. He’s so thoroughly beaten down that he’s afraid to have a little masculine bonding time with his son and the video implies that there’s something wrong with him wanting to do so.

Watching this, my main thought was ”is this really how they want to advertise marriage to men?”

My personal philosophy is that if you aren’t sure if someone is acting the way they are out of malice or stupidity, stupidity is the safer bet. More than a few in the manosphere have argued that Churchian leaders like Driscoll are actively malicious in their efforts to get men to “Man-Up and Marry those Sluts!” Others insist that they are just misguided fools, so blinded to feminist indoctrination that they don’t realize what they are doing. Myself, looking at this video, I have to agree with those who label Driscoll and his ilk fools. If their goal is to sell marriage, that video isn’t the way to do it. In fact, it is one of the best testimonies against marriage that I have seen lately.

So what is an effective marriage marketing ad? Here is how Free Northerner would go about selling marriage:

It starts with an average-looking man in a suit, someone most guys could identify with, coming home from a day at the office. He looks kind of worn-out and stressed. He parks his car, sighs a bit, then walks up to his house. He opens the door.

The first thing seen when the door opens is his non-offensively pretty wife dressed femininely. She looks up from working in the kitchen and sees he’s stressed, so she comes up to him with a smile on her face and gives him a hug and quick kiss on the lips. She takes his bag and says, “Dinner is almost ready, why don’t you sit down?” He gets into his recliner and leans back, his stress visibly fading away. She joyfully brings him a small plate of freshly made cookies and some milk. He thanks her with an expression of mingled gratitude and relief and takes the cookie. While he snacks she says, “How about later…” and bends over and whispers something in his ear while brushing her hand up his leg. The man responds with a large, expectant smile.

Cut to her calling out that dinner is ready. The man goes to the table to find a delicious home-cooked meal of steak and potatoes, his cute, happy children run up to the table. His wife wipes the dirt smudges off of one of the rascals as they sit down. The man looks on proudly as he sits at the head of the table. His wife sits to his right. She looks at him with an expectant smile, her hand on his arm, and he proudly says grace for the family.

During the prayer fade to black and end with the tagline: Worth being a man for.

The picture that Free Northerner presents is a far cry from the marriage conveyed in Driscoll’s video. As Free Northerner points out, a lot of men, Christian men especially, would sign up for this. So why don’t we see an ad like this? Martel explains it succinctly:

However, they’ll never accept it because it shows the woman being submissive, feminine, and supportive. This defeats the entire point of marriage as they see it.

That just about covers it. Driscoll’s ad showcases Marriage 2.0, which any man worth his salt can see is completely unappealing. It offers nothing to the man, and demands more than ever.  What Free Northerner is selling is Marriage 1.0. A marriage where the man is the head of the household. Where he has a lot of responsibility, but the authority to back it up. And where he is respected and admired for his efforts. Driscoll and his ilk could never make an ad in the manner of what Free Northerner suggests. From them it would be false advertising. Because what they believe in is Mutual Submission, Female Spiritual Superiority and a non-covenantal marriage.

Predatory Practices

Of course, just like any marketplace, there are predators to be found. Those who prey on the naive and the vulnerable, hoping to fleece them of their worth and leave them penniless. In our current MMP, they can take on several forms. Two that I wish to briefly cover are the Former Carousel Rider (“FCR”) and the False Christian Player (“FCP”).

The FCR is a woman who rode the carousel while she was younger (aka a slut) and then upon hitting “The Wall” (or getting close to it) decides to “settle” and marry. So she seeks out a hapless “Beta” and gets him to marry her, despite the fact that she feels no attraction or respect for him. She plays upon his desperation and likely inexperience, and uses it to her advantage. Then, after several years and probably several kids, she divorces him and tries her hand at the SMP once again.

The FCP is a cad, a player who specializes in “robbing” young Christian women of their virtue. He hangs around in Churches and among Christian circles and preys on the pure and innocent. His goal is simple: to deflower Christian women (and probably make them Alpha Widows in the process). He knows the right catchwords and phrases to put them at ease and to convince them that they can trust him. The FCP relies on their innocence and inexperience to trick them into giving up their most valuable asset, after which he fades away to play the field elsewhere.

To understand why they are marketplace predators, it is important to understand what gives men and women value in the MMP. For men, besides their attractiveness or SMV value (as determined by their LAMPS attributes), they also bring something very important to the table: commitment. For women, they bring their attractiveness/SMV value as determined by their youth and beauty, but also their character and virtue is a component as well. Both women and men are looking for as much attractiveness from a spouse as possible, but they are also looking for something completely different from the opposite sex. Women look for commitment from men, both in how much a man has to offer now and how much he will be able to offer in the future. Men look for sexual access and sexual fidelity from women; these are both heavily impacted by the N count of the individual woman. In many respects a woman’s virginity is the most valuable asset she can possess, because nothing else adds as much to her Marriage Market Value (“MMV”).

With this understanding, we can see why the FCR and the FCP are both predators: they both seek to steal what is most valuable from men and women in the MMP. The FCR, in marrying and then divorcing a “Beta” male, destroys his financial standing and thereby reduces his ability to offer commitment in the future. Essentially this cripples the man’s MMV. The FCP, on the other hand, by sleeping with a Christian woman takes her virginity and with it a huge and irreplaceable part of her MMV.

In the past these kinds of predatory practices were not accepted in respectable society. Divorce theft was nigh-well impossible, and cads were not only kept far away from most good women, but faced the prospect of a “shotgun wedding” for their actions. Sadly, neither is punished anymore. Men and women both can get away with behavior that would have been considered reprehensible a century ago. Yet another sign of a market failure.

Supply and Demand

For a while, after I had taken the Red Pill and into the first few months of this blog, I was convinced that the current MMP heavily favored chaste women. I based this opinion on what I believed to be a simple supply and demand situation. They were a limited supply, and the demand for them was much greater than the supply. Surely chaste women would have no trouble finding a husband. But now I appreciate the difficulties that such women, especially chaste Christian women, face in the current MMP.

Predators

For one they have to contend with the dangers of market predators like the FCP. There are Pick-Up Artists (“PUAs”) who specialize in going after virgins, and some of them are very, very good at it. So chaste women have to take steps to protect themselves. And those steps often restrict when and where they go, which reduces their chances of meeting a good, marriage-minded man.

Bad Programming

There is also the fact that most women these days aren’t taught how to find a good man. Like men, they are given awful advice, usually along the lines of how men want strongandindependentgirrrrrrlpower women. All of which will send a good man running far away in the opposite direction. The fine ladies at Girls Being Girls have been trying to offer advice on how to go about finding a young marriage-minded man, and I salute them for their efforts. Of course, my admiration is not entirely selfless, as I could potentially be the beneficiary of their advice to a marriage-minded young woman out there.

Abandoning the Market

But one problem that has become more apparent to me of late, and that represents a significant obstacle to chaste young women, is that many formerly marriage minded men are checking out. The cumulative effect of the divorce culture, unjust laws against men, the inequitable nature of the SMP, Nuclear Rejections and the generally unfeminine nature of most women these days has convinced a lot of men that marriage is not worth pursuing. They are disappearing from the dating/courtship scene, and probably won’t ever return. Twenty years ago my assumption about the supply/demand situation was probably correct. Men back then hadn’t quite wised up to what was going on. But things have changed; thanks to both the internet as well as everyday experiences, more and more men are giving up on marriage. Unfortunately for my Christian sisters out there, many of those men are Christians. Some have become players and PUAs themselves, while others simply go their own way in an effort to avoid as much female contact as possible.

Ultimately their motivations don’t matter. What matters is that the MMP is massively distorted when a large chunk of the remaining male population there just up and leaves. And worryingly enough, this distortion seems to be getting worse and worse. This is yet another example of a massive market failure.

End of Part 1

This post was getting long, so I decided to break it up. I should post part 2 in the next day or so.

Updates to the Blogroll

I have just finished a reorganization of my blogroll. A few blogs are gone because of inactivity or inapplicability, but I’ve added a few and moved others, especially because there are two new categories: Neo-Reaction and Feminine Blogs.

New blogs include:

Loving in the Ruins (Elspeth’s new blog)

Girls Being Girls (A collaborative effort to create a blog for all things feminine)

Anarcho-Papist (A blog exploring Neo-Reactionary theory)

80-Proof Oinomancy (Ace of Spades blog)

Staged Reality (Leap of Beta’s blog)

That’s all for now. I hope to have another post up sometime later tonight or early tomorrow concerning difficult to accept scripture.

At What Price Knowledge?

I think it can be universally agreed upon, or at least the closest thing to it, that what we know as the Manosphere today would not exist without the Pickup Artist community.  The combined hours of effort spent by those in the PUA community to make empirical observations of women, experiment with different techniques and then record the results must be mind-boggling. Whether it was profit which drove them, or a desire to show off,  doesn’t really matter. Were it not for the dissemination of that knowledge by PUAs (what is commonly referred to as “Game”) the “Red Pill” would yet remain the realm of The Matrix alone. Those of us who are devoted to the task of piecing together the inner nature of women owe them a debt of gratitude for the collective knowledge that they have made available to us.

Yet it is all too easy to forget the source of that data. Information on female behaviors like fitness testing, serial monogamy and “bitch shields” was acquired only as a result of sexual immorality on a truly staggering scale. For those of us in the “Christian Manosphere”, we need to be frank with ourselves that there is a moral cost associated with this knowledge. Having been in these parts of a while, I’ve noticed that most members of the Christian Manosphere rarely stop and consider the moral ramifications of using this knowledge, which was procured by conduct which is anything but Christ-like.

That isn’t to say that there aren’t those who object to “Game,” of course. But what I find interesting is that many of those who oppose “Game” do so based less on moral principles and more based on the idea that the whole thing is snake oil medicine. I happen to believe there is some truth to the charges; more than a few of the PUA “Game” techniques do smack of this. And honestly, I think a lot of what “Game” teaches is really about building up your Confidence, which is absolutely essential for you to have a strong Power value. But based on my personal experiences I can vouch for at least a few of the “tricks” that are out there. And others have echoed the same as well. My suspicion is that that much of the resistance over the efficacy of “Game” is really about the source, not the product.

Setting aside the practical value of “Game”, there are serious ethical questions raised by the use of this knowledge:

Is it right for a Christian to learn from the sinful behavior of others as part of his plan to get married?

Should Christians pass on this information to other Christians, knowing that some believers may ultimately use it to sin?

Would it be wrong for a Christian to purchase products and/or services from the PUA community, or recommend them to others, knowing that this might encourage yet further sinful behavior?

—————————————————————————————————————————

The first question I find easy enough to answer, once I re-write it to this: Is it right for a Christian to learn from the past sinful behavior of others in order to find, attract and keep a wife? Understanding that you can’t do anything about the past behavior of others relieves much of the moral burden. Also, placing everything in light of the objective of marrying, and staying married to, a good  woman makes it clear that you aren’t using this knowledge for evil ends. Whatever evil was responsible for the development of the knowledge you use has already been done, and you cannot change this fact. But what you can do is use it for a greater end.

The second question isn’t difficult either. If someone, upon learning about the Red Pill and picking up some skill and knowledge with Game, were to go out and use it to sin, then he was never a believer to begin with. He called himself a Christian but was really a Churchian. In his heart and his mind he had already sinned or planned on sinning, which means that any fault or blame lies with him, and not with whomever introduces him to the Red Pill (unless of course the teacher knew his true nature beforehand).

The last question is a lot trickier than the others. I am inclined to think that any contribution financially would be relatively insignificant, and not enough by itself to encourage further sin. But it is a possibility that can’t be ignored. Which is why I think it really comes down to a balancing test: is the good that comes about from the use of these services greater than whatever evil might result? I would think that in most cases the good would outweighs the bad, but this is never something which we can be certain of.

I got to thinking about this subject after reading Martel’s latest post, wherein he mentions some of his past misdeeds. What struck me about his post was his frank discussion of those failings and how he hoped to find ways to use them for good. Martel’s post, and others like it, reminds us that the use of Red Pill knowledge always carries with it a great burden. It was purchased at terrible price, and for those of us who belong to the Moralist school we must use it responsibly.  Of course, let us not forget that the PUA’s didn’t create our immoral culture; they merely developed the tools to best benefit from it. In the end, should we learn how to use those same tools to make better tools with which to redeem our culture, then I for one will sleep soundly at night, my conscience secure and untroubled.

What Men Look for in Women

This post is a sequel of sorts to Attraction versus Desire, wherein I discussed the difference between the traits that men and women are attracted to in the opposite sex, and those traits which men and women find desirable in the members of the opposite sex they are attracted to. This post is going to include a brief explanation of what I look for in women, in terms of both attraction and desirability, although the latter will receive most of my focus. Then I am going to invite some of my male readers to leave their thoughts on what they look for in women as well. My female readers are free to ask questions about anything, of course.

Attraction

Here is what I briefly wrote in my previous post about what I find attractive in women:

1) A feminine, symmetrical face

2) Healthy, unblemished skin

3) Long, lean legs

4) A waist-to-hip ratio somewhere above .6 and under .8. [The thinner the woman, the more she can get away with a higher ratio.]

That was an abridged version of the things which attract me. Some other things which attract my attention:

A) Long, healthy hair (I prefer shoulder length or longer, although longer than the waist is probably too much)

B) An ample bosom (and I should mention that yes, there is such as thing as too big here)

C) A shapely posterior (squats are your friends ladies)

D) A good, healthy body fat percentage. For women I find that to be in the 20-30% range, with a preference closer to 20% but a more well endowed woman is able to get away with closer to 30%. (A good article on the subject for both men and women can be found here. The pictures for the women are especially illustrative while still tasteful)

Before anyone tries to point out the obvious, I acknowledge that few women can really meet all of these criteria. That doesn’t mean I’m not attracted to these features, however. Attraction from men to women is ultimately about beauty, and beauty is about perfection, something human beings inherently lack. Most of these features are outside of a woman’s control, save perhaps through surgery. But given the obesity problem in America now, and the general lack of attention much women pay to themselves, simple measures to control your weight can make a huge difference for women.

At this point I suppose I should mention that there are certain combinations of features which appeal to me more than others. The word “archetype” is perhaps appropriate here. For example, one archetype (among many) that appeals to me is a woman with a slender figure, creamy white skin and long dark tresses. Other men have their preferences in this regard, likely a combination of genetics and environment (culture, for example).

Desirability

A short list which I provided before about those traits I found desirable in a woman:

1) Dresses in a modest and feminine manner

2) Chaste

3) Sweet and gentle

4) Respectful

5) Devout

I am going to reprise this list, clarify and expand on it now.

A) Devout- This doesn’t mean a fanatic, but it does mean someone who doesn’t go to church out of habit. Someone with doubts is ok, we all have doubts, it is part of out nature. But I am looking for a believer who is serious about her faith. As a Catholic, this means a woman who is a Catholic or  will convert to Catholicism. I aim to avoid being unequally yoked or mismatched with my wife.

B) Chaste- I am looking for a woman who has been chaste her whole life. Sorry to the prodigal daughters out there, but this is non-negotiable (barring a divine command as was given to Hosea). There are a number of reasons for this, which I have expounded elsewhere and will address in the future. But they include protecting myself from divorce, assortive mating (my N=0) and incentivizing proper behavior, to name a few. See also Matthew 9:16-17.

C) Modest- This means modesty of dress and behavior. From my experience female flash usually indicates a lack of substance. When I see a good looking woman who is also dressed modestly, I usually take it as a sign that she is of a higher quality than most of her peers. See also 1 Peter 3:1-6.

D) Respectful- I can’t stand a woman who acts like she is better than me. In other words, a bitch. Such a woman I want to have nothing to do with. On the other hand, a respectful and considerate woman is someone whose presence I can actually enjoy.

E) Feminine- A woman who doesn’t shy away from feminine behaviors is very desirable to me. This encompasses a lot of traits, including a quiet gentle spirit mentioned above. All of them are thoroughly desirable, and help make a woman a “keeper.”

F) Industrious- The woman in Proverbs 31 is a perfect example of an industrious and diligent wife. What I am looking for in a wife is a woman who will be a net asset, someone who adds value to my household. Whether that means rearing and teaching the children, maintaining the home or working at whatever job I believe it proper and prudent for her to engage in, I desire a woman who can accomplish those tasks as needed.

G) Cheerful- I almost forgot this trait, but it is an important one. A cheerful woman, one who brightens my day… now that is something of worth. Even something as simple as a genuine smile and a warm greeting when I return home from work everyday would be valuable in a woman. Naturally no one can be cheerful all the time, but a woman who does her best to maintain a good attitude as much as possible is one I would want in my life.

H) Can Cook- [Ed: Somehow I managed to forget this the first time around] I’m not a bad cook, all things considered, and when I have time I don’t mind cooking for myself. But there will often be instances where I don’t have that kind of time. A woman who knows her way around the kitchen brings value to the table. And a woman who is a good cook and knows how to prepare a delicious meal for when I get home from a long day at work? Now that is desirable.

I) Intelligent and Curious- I enjoy having intelligent conversations, and if a woman can engage in one with me it is a definite plus. But curiosity is just as important, a woman who likes to learn and is eager to learn gives off a kind of “vibe” that I find quite endearing. Also, I tend to find that women with these traits tend to be more receptive of flirtatious innuendo.  [Ed: Thanks to Ringmistress for reminding me of this]

Conclusion

This is far from an exhaustive list, so if any of my readers have suggestions on how to expand it, please leave them in the comments below.

It’s Not The Fall That Kills You…

…but the sudden Stop at the bottom.

Playing Dominoes

Ace of Spades over at 80-Proof Oinomancy has written a couple of posts concerning “the Decline.” In the first post, titled The day has come, the day has come,” Ace explains how he views the subject of the Decline:

All this talk of “the decline” is laughable.

It has already collapsed.

Who goes to church NOW?

Who has an intact family NOW?

Who has a well-paying, secure job NOW?

Precious few.

Our institutions have ALREADY failed and fallen.

Everything you are witnessing now is merely pocket-groups trying to make sense of the chaos.

In his next post, “When all the while, a pontiff smiles” Ace provides a metaphor for the situation:

Empires and civilizations do not fall like stones.

They fall like dominoes, neatly arrayed.

It’s called “the cascade effect”.

And you’re simply in the center of cascade.

You, as they say, “can’t see the forest through the trees”.

Which is the entire point of my work here.

When I read this I realized that Ace and I have been on parallel tracks when it comes to our mental approach to the current “crisis.” Many people seem to expect that there will be some kind of “collapse”, or catastrophic event which marks “the Decline,” or perhaps its culmination. This is proceeded usually by a period of free-fall which may be what most think of in terms of “the Decline.”

Instead Ace provides us with an analogy which highlights that the Decline is a series of discrete events, each of which when triggered will fall and potentially trigger another event. The sheer complexity of the situation is too much for a single line of dominoes, instead we are talking about lines and lines of dominoes, linking around and intermixing with one another, all connected by a myriad of pathways. So even a few dominoes being toppled will quickly lead to line after line being set into motion; before long matters will quickly spiral out of control. Everything will topple. Here is an apt visualization of the process:

Understand that dominoes are falling around us all the time , and each moment we are only able to observe a few of them. Hence Ace’s statement about how we “can’t see the forest through the trees.” Many people, when they see a domino fall, think its a big deal. But they fail to realize that other dominoes fell at the same time which we didn’t see. Most fail to realize that other dominoes had to fall in order for this latest domino to topple. And they fail to realize that yet more dominoes will be toppled as a result of this latest domino falling.  Only when we examine the totality of the circumstances do we begin to understand the scale of the game.

Now, some people are trying to pick the dominoes up and place them upright again and to line them up as before. Whether this is even possible or not at this point is a major issue of contention in certain segments of the manosphere. That debate is outside the scope of this post, although I hope to address it later.

The analogy of the “Collapse” or “Fall”

I think a more common visualization that people use when trying to understand our current predicament is to imagine our civilization as a car hurtling towards a cliff. The “Decline” is considered the point where the car has hurtled off the cliff, and is spiraling towards the ground, and the “Collapse” represents the final crash or Stop at the bottom. While this has merit as an analogy, most folks are probably using a picture which is too simplistic to accurately capture the nature of the situation. I’ve created a few crude pictures of some different takes on this analogy to try and help people visualize what I am talking about. Here is what most people are likely imagining the situation is like:

To provide something of a legend for this, A represents the “path” leading towards the cliff, B. C represents the “Fall” between the Cliff, B, and the bottom, D (which I will refer to in the future as “The Stop”).

As I said earlier, I imagine that most people will be using a mental model much like this. The principal debate this model engenders is whether  we (we being the West generally, and the USA specifically) are still at A, have reached B, or are somewhere in the process of C. I think it safe to assume that most everyone realizes we have yet to reach the Stop at the bottom yet. The principal relevance of our current position is that it determines if anything can be done; after all, once we hit the cliff at B we are no longer in control.

However, this model leaves much to be desired. A slightly more advanced version might look something like this:

The legend for this model is slightly different. A represents the “safe” path, or a road which can be traveled safely without fear of necessarily going downhill. Of course, one can be heading towards the downhill section, B, without having reached it yet. C represents the Cliff, and D is the long Fall towards the Stop at the bottom, E. This model incorporates, somewhat, the domino effect which Ace mentions. Section B, “downhill”, is illustrative of a situation where once you find yourself there, matters will invariably get worse and worse, even without active effort to do so. This would be like the dominoes falling in a line, moving the “car” ever closer towards the cliff. However, because the “car” is still on solid ground, it is possible to reverse the situation, that is, “re-stack” the dominoes and place them upright once again. Once you hit the cliff at C this is no longer possible, everything is in free fall.

But even that model has serious problems when it comes to conveying the situation we face. This third and final model attempts to explain the true complexity and difficulty of our situation: The legend on this last model is even more complicated, naturally. A represents the pinnacle point of civilization, the point where everything is optimal and working as it should. B represents the downhill slope. Note that it is no longer a straight line but a curve; the further along you go, the greater the incline down. C represents the point where the slope is so great that the tires on the “car” can no longer maintain enough friction for you to control the car; the momentum of the “car” will carry it forward despite all efforts otherwise. D represents the gulf between that “point of no return” and E, which is the first stop. I say first Stop because as F indicates, there are other “cliffs” which the car of civilization faces further onward.

Why do I like this visualization better? A couple of reasons:

1) By imagining the optimal point of civilization, A, as a pinnacle it helps us understand that civilization is always in a precarious position, even when everything is optimal. In fact, the balance point is so narrow it is essentially impossible to perfectly balance everything, which means that civilization is effectively always moving downhill on B. In that sense, A represents a theoretical or ideal point, rather than an actual, real state.

2) The inclined curve of B accurately demonstrates the always unsteady nature of civilization. B’s ever increasing curve showcases how as more dominoes start to fall, they will trigger even more dominoes. 1 domino triggers 2, those 2trigger 4, and so on. The further along you go, the harder it is to stop.

3) What this model shows, and most people fail to understand, is that dominoes are always falling. ALWAYS. The theoretical pinnacle of A is meant to demonstrate that civilization is never safe. Why? Because civilization is nothing more than an ordered attempt to restrain the worst of human behavior, and to try and channel some of it towards positive ends. But human behavior is one of the few universal constants. Just like a gas will always expand outward to fill its container, humans will always push against social constraints in order to have their way. These pushes are the equivalent of dominoes falling. Commit a crime? You just toppled a domino. Ignored a long-standing social convention? That’s another domino knocked over. Civilization is maintained by picking up the toppled dominoes and setting them upright again. Punishing a criminal and ostracizing someone over their egregious social behavior are all examples of replacing dominoes. This process is one of a Sisyphean nature, it never ends, so long as civilization lasts.

It is vital that we understand this, because unless we all actively work towards setting the dominoes upright again, and putting new ones into place, civilization will fall. It will fall and fall, until it hits a Stop. At which point there is a massive social/civilizational upheaval. Assuming some measure of Order is restored, then the slow and steady climb back up the mountain can begin. Otherwise, the slide downward continues.

4) The Stop, that massive crash or collapse which we all [should] fear is the culmination of a long slide downhill. Some people, however, seem to look forward to it, a few even eagerly await this coming catastrophe. They fail to appreciate several things. The first is that the “Decline” is a cakewalk compared to what is ahead. As the title of this post mentioned, the Fall doesn’t kill you, the Stop at the bottom does. Those who have actually lived in societies which have collapsed will tell you that there is nothing to look forward to in that kind of environment. The second is that it is terribly difficult to pick up the pieces after a Stop. Before you can set up new dominoes, you have to clear the old ones from the board, and that is easier said than done. Wiping clean the detritus of a fallen civilization is the work of generations, not a few years or even a lifetime. So if you are cheering for a collapse, go ahead and Enjoy the Decline. Odds are, its the last fun that you will have in this world.

Conclusion

There are plenty of analogies and metaphors out there which can serve to describe our situation. But one thing is clear: the dominoes are falling, and they are falling faster than we can replace them. It may well be that we are past the point of no return. Yet I caution those who cheer this news, do not be so eager for what lies ahead. Those who yearn for the collapse are alike to those who yearn for the Day of Judgment, which shall be a day of Darkness:

¹⁸ Alas for you who desire the day of the Lord!
Why do you want the day of the Lord?
It is darkness, not light;
¹⁹     as if someone fled from a lion,
and was met by a bear;
or went into the house and rested a hand against the wall,
and was bitten by a snake.
²⁰ Is not the day of the Lord darkness, not light,
and gloom with no brightness in it?

Update: Leap of Beta has a post up about this topic as well.

Warning Phrases

One of the many lessons that the Red Pill has taught me is to be wary of certain phrases when I see them. At least, in the context of considering a member of the opposite sex as a potential mate. Yesterday I was scanning through some the blogrolls of a few of the various blogs that I read and came across a blog, written by a female, which contained one such phrase in the “About” section. The phrase? “I live life to the fullest.” My response?

Whenever I see this phrase said by a young woman, I immediately form several conclusions in my mind. The first is that the woman is most likely promiscuous, and not simply sexually active. The second is that she is highly materialistic. The third is that she is probably not religious at all.

In short, someone who is not potential wife material.

Of course, it would be foolhardy to judge a person just off a single phrase. Which is why I dug a little deeper into the blog where I found that quote. While I didn’t spend a whole lot of time there, it did become clear that the young woman in question wasn’t the least bit religious, and did have a strong materialistic streak. I didn’t catch anything which suggested promiscuity in my cursory examination, but on the other hand I saw nothing which hinted at chastity either. So all in all, my initial judgment was mostly correct. While it may seem shallow, shortcuts do serve a valuable purpose.

So I started to think of other phrases which trigger that same kind of mental alarm whenever I see them. Here are a few that I thought of off the top of my head:

“I’m a new person now”

“I’ve always been the type who knew how to have a good time”

“I want to do things differently this time”

“I’ve made a few mistakes”

To my readers, what are the phrases which make you mentally scream “DANGER!” whenever you hear them? They don’t have to be just about women, female readers are invited to submit their own warning phrases when uttered by men. Feel free to list them in the comments and I will add those I find especially fitting to this post.

Update: Here are some of the suggested phrases from women:

“I just want a nice guy who will treat me right.”

“I don’t regret those experiences. They made me who I am today.”

“Turnoff: Judgmental guys.”

[Anything that involves Daughter of the King and princess together]

“I prayed, and the Lord laid it on my heart to say/do/be/go there and ________________.”

[Anything which involves “Girl Power” in any way]

“If you can’t handle me at my worst, you don’t deserve me at my best.”

“To tell you the truth…”

“It really expanded my horizons.”

“I learned a lot about myself.”

“I’m just trying to find myself”

“It’s all covered by Grace”

“I’d do it all over again”

Here are the phrases/things said from men:

“I hate it when people just judge each other all the time. I’m not like that.”

“I just try to take life as it comes, you know?”

[Blanket descriptions of women using profanity]

The Married Prostitute

No, I am not talking about the wife of Hosea here:

² When the Lord first spoke through Hosea, the Lord said to Hosea, “Go, take for yourself a wife of whoredom and have children of whoredom, for the land commits great whoredom by forsaking the Lord.” ³ So he went and took Gomer daughter of Diblaim, and she conceived and bore him a son.

Instead, I am talking about something else: married women who use sex as a source of power over their husbands. The problem of wives denying their husbands sex is a rather common topic in the manosphere. Some prominent bloggers have asked why Christian women won’t have sex with their husbands. Others have addressed this situation as well recently. I suspect there are several reasons why this topic keeps coming up:

1) Many of the members of the manosphere experience or have experienced it.

2)  Many members of the manosphere have heard of other men being cut off by their wives.

3) Many members of the manosphere are worried that if they marry they too would be the subject of a wife’s sexual denial.

4) This topic is one that is largely ignored by most of society, and when it is addressed the results are not helpful.

Bad advice and commentary is especially prevalent in Christian circles, where husbands are usually advised to love their wives more, as if that will fix the problem. Unfortunately, most Christians in the West have adopted a whole lot of foolish narratives and beliefs about sex and women which get in the way of the truth. This is especially troubling in light of the fact that the New Testament has pretty specific guidelines about sexual denial:

 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is well for a man not to touch a woman.” ² But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. ³ The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. ⁴ For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. ⁵ Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Of course, this set of guidelines is usually ignored or disregarded in Churchian circles, and even more sound congregations and denominations will often skip over it. However, every now and then you will find those who are willing to call out this sexual denial for what it is: sin. Somewhere in my travels across the internet landscape I came across the websites Acts 17:11. Therein I found a particularly powerful and direct attack on this particular sin. It was so potent that I couldn’t help but blog about it. Bolded parts are mine:

As to frequency, I suppose people differ. But it is not for an outsider to say in any case. If one partner wants sex, then God’s command for marriage is clear enough: “no refusal” is permitted unless mutually agreed to for a time of prayer. That is the command of scripture. Your body belongs to her, and vice versa.

First, search your own heart and see if you have not “destroyed your own household” (Pv 14:1) in terms of normal sexual response and desire. We deal with this in another posting, but for our purposes here you must honestly ask yourself the question if you have contributed to her frigidity. Have you brought pornography into your marriage bed, for example, or thoughts of another woman? Have you been a lover or just a user of your wife’s body? In other words, if you have been sinning and are just reaping the harvest of your ways, then there is no time like the present to repent, ask for forgiveness, and seek God for healing. But if your conscience is clear, and she is sinning by “holding out”, this is also a grievous sin that directly disobeys the word of God, and she must be confronted about it.

Practically, this needs to be worked out some other way than by the letter of the law; but the law has its “ministry” (of condemnation). The law won’t change her, in other words, but will serve to bring proper conviction into her life. Confront her with the word, in private, as commanded by Jesus Himself. If this does not work, bring two or three to confront her of her sin. Hopefully, she will see her sin and repent. Perhaps the shame of having her secret sin exposed will goad her to take seriously her covenantal responsibilities. God has told you what to do if you find your brother (or sister, in this case) in sin (Mt 18:15-17). Go to her, just the two of you, and confront her. If she does not repent, then go with two or three. This is the command of your Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

More than a few women have a problem in this area. Not to be overly dramatic, but these women are prostituting themselves within marriage. For one reason or another, such women like to have their husbands sex starved so they can blackmail them, control them, humiliate them, dole out the favors on their terms, get what they want, etc. They are prostitutes, in other words, who happened to be married. Husbands can do the same thing, and have, as a form of control; but it is more often women who fall into this pathology of sin. Of course, there is always the excuses and contingencies, as with any sin. But God looks to the heart of the matter, to what is really going on. Whenever sex is bartered, it is prostitution; and no money need change hands. Married people belong to each other. A wife in disobedience has become a married prostitute with a single customer. God is not mocked. Such is a great offense and thus the warnings of the scriptures above.

While at first this article seems to possibly go the Churchian route, the impression doesn’t last for long. For one, the author clearly establishes that it is “your” conscience which matters, not hers. This is good, because submitting yourself to your wife’s judgment about your conduct is a sure fire way to always fail to measure up to her standards. Rather than loving your wife, you end up trying to find ways to make her feel loved. This is guaranteed to fail. Thankfully this article avoids that folly. Now, I am not sure about the rest of the site; it could be Churchian everywhere else. But it doesn’t even buy into the servant leadership nonsense.  Instead, it doesn’t pull any punches. Really, there isn’t much to say that it doesn’t already say.

A singular exception might be the unusual awareness of the mercenary nature of women which this article displays. That attitude is something which I suspect comes as a bit of a shock to most men when they first take the Red Pill. The truth depth of it can be both highly disturbing and highly difficult to accept.  Which is why it is rare to see this kind of admission, or something like it, from a Christian perspective. Far more common is the idea that women are all sugar and spice and all things nice. While I hope that this kind of message will become more prevalent as time passes, part of me knows this is unlikely, as the cancer of feminism continues to spread its tentacles throughout Western Christianity.

[I thinking about working on a companion post that addresses this issue from the perspective of the husband, not sure when it will be completed though]