Random Musings and Links- #6

It is another one of those posts filled with links and random (and not-so-random) thoughts on my part. Given time restraints, I won’t be able to respond much to comments for the next day or so, but feel free to chime in despite that. I will try and keep things orderly at least.

I’m going to begin by address something that Deti said in my post Meager Options:

In the past, around 60 or so years ago, [what earlier comments said0 describes how it went down. Typically it was the man requesting (P in V) sex after a few months of dating or courtship, and the woman saying “Ok, but marriage first.” And typically he was giving up more and more resources (time, money, etc.) in exchange for more and more “sex” (kissing, making out, petting, oral, but reserving P in V for marriage). (Let’s not kid ourselves – lots of women were doing “everything but” P in V before marriage, for men they were “seriously dating”.)

What Deti is describing is an attitude held by most everyone in the MMP (yes, that’s right, the Marriage Market Place), including most “Christians.” That attitude is one of bending the rules as much as possible to favor one’s interests. The rules are simple: a woman exchanges lifetime sexual access and exclusivity with a man who in turn gives her resources, protection and status (which we might call “commitment”) for life. And the exchange is supposed to be at the same time. But neither men nor women really want that. Men want sexual access (and even better, exclusivity) without having to provide commitment, while women want to receive commitment without having to provide sexual access or in some instance, sexual exclusivity.

This ties in the whole concept of boyfriend/girlfriend. As Dalrock has explained, the terms were invented in order facilitate this bending of the rules. The whole notion of the celibate boyfriend is a means for Christian women who don’t want to provide sexual access to receives the commitment they want from Christian men. Likewise, many Christian men will use their status as boyfriend as a means for sexual gain for themselves. All of which goes to show why devout Christians should reject those ideas and the mindset behind them.

For those of you who haven’t been paying attention, Deep Strength and Ballista have been involved in a spirited debate about headship and authority in marriage. It starts with this post by Ballista and was followed by this post, which Deep Strength responds to here. I don’t exactly agree with either, but I think many of my readers will find them interesting. Here are both sets of posts:

Ballista- Anarchy in the Marriage; Negating Authority in Marriage; Headship in Marriage Implies Authority; Confusing Status with Action- Creating Supplicating Betas

Deep Strength- Headship is not authority in marriage; Headship is not authority in marriage Part 2; Headship is not authority in marriage Part 3

Dalrock explains why women are compelled to take over the Gaming world.

NSR brings the humor. And the beat.

Rollo explains how Yes Means Fear.

As always, Maeve has your baking needs covered. This time, Blueberry Muffins.

Chad discusses Falling on Your Sword.

Dropit delves into the nature of Ambiguity.

Free Northerner hosts a guest post about how men can avoid sex starvation in marriage. He also exposes some of the hypocrisy and ignorance of those decrying the “campus rape epidemic.”

Martel, who is busy writing his book, asks for some help increasing his knowledge of children’s literature and other media directed at them by the popular culture.

Allamagoosa looks at The Time and Place for Hierarchy.

I also want to address this comment left at her blog by someone named Ashley:

I’m in this situation with my significant other. Both of us are in professional school and in our twenties and the way our lives are scheduled, we couldn’t even get married until one of us graduates or after one of us takes our board exams for medical/dental school. But that’s like another 2-8 yrs and we would both be ~30 yrs old. And I want to have children so we’d have very limited time to enjoy each other sexually as a married couple. What is our solution? We don’t really have one. Either we push to get married early on or “foreplay” to relieve sexually tension. I know we aren’t suppose to “foreplay” but its very very unlikely going to lead to sex because besides the whole Christian ideal, an unwanted pregnancy is 100X feared with our schooling.

 First off, “foreplay” is probably not acceptable Christian behavior based on what she is hinting at. The way I look at it, if you aren’t comfortable explaining in graphic detail everything involved to all your friends and family… God probably doesn’t approve (at least, until marriage). This approach is a surefire way to come to sin, and in fact the mindset hints at a sinful attitude already (finding ways to “cheat the system”).
Second, delaying children is not a wise plan. It really isn’t. Mrs. ktc explains why you should Have Children.
Also, she has responded to my post Proposing A Question with her own post, Proposals. This brings me to the topic of marriage proposals on bended knee. I have yet to hear a good reason why men should do them. Mere expectations or custom at this point are not enough. This alone is reason enough for a man not to do it. But even more than that, bending the knee is a sign of supplication and (as those familiar with Game of Thrones will recognize) surrender. For all the talk about how essential it is for a man to start off strong by proposing to a woman, this runs entirely counter to that. Who the woman in question is doesn’t matter- as a custom it just has no merit. I invite my readers who disagree to explain otherwise, of course. But at this point proposing on bent knee is not something I’m ever going to do. And I will tell any woman I court as much. If she cannot accept that, then in my view it demonstrates she wasn’t a good candidate to begin with.
Be Feminine Not Feminist tells women: Don’t rob your children of their Daddy.
At Peaceful Single Girl this post demonstrates the damage caused to children by divorce.
Apparently Sigyn is having some real trouble with depression and could use your prayers.
Stingray explains yet another reason to homeschool.
At the same time, homeschooling isn’t easy, as Elspeth will tell you. Much of the problem is that we aren’t aligned as a community towards supporting homsechooling and mothers who stay at the household. The old support networks are gone, and were an essential part of the process.
Elspeth also discusses the difference between being unmarried and being single. I describe myself as unmarried, not single, and my reasons match up with those expressed at her blog.
Eviscerating the faith through decrying “Paulinity.” I’ve seen some of that applied here in the ‘sphere before. Mostly by men who want to engage in fornication. But I’ve seen a few women argue it as well, often to escape any requirements or duties placed upon them (especially in marriage).
I’ve argued before about the risk associated with women with tattoos, and here is yet more support for my concern.
Update: Red Pill Set Me Free talks about how a woman, any woman, however high-value, can become Ruined.
Advertisements

29 Comments

Filed under Alpha, Blue Pill, Christianity, Churchianity, Civilization, Courtship, Desire, Femininity, Feminism, God, LAMPS, Marriage, Masculinity, Men, Pair Bonding, Red Pill, Sex, Sexual Market Place, Sin, The Church, Women

29 responses to “Random Musings and Links- #6

  1. theshadowedknight

    Why not flip the script on proposals?

    “Give me your hand.”
    She either does so, or does not.
    “Kneel for me.”
    She either does so, or does not. She is kneeling before her suitor, her hand in his, and he shows her the ring.
    “Will you marry me?”
    If she says yes, he can pull her to her feet, and the entire time, he is in command; in the dominant position. She has to submit to him to even hear the proposal, and if she will not, then the proposal would not be advisable.

    The Shadowed Knight

  2. DJ

    DG in all seriousness if you find the right girl she won’t care how you propose.She will want you more then she cares about gestures. Its everyone else that will get on your or her case cause it wasnt (insert comment). And those people dont matter. Just do it in a way that is sincere and right for you and Mrs. Future DG. With all due respect your making it a bigger deal then it deserves.

  3. theshadowedknight

    Before I forget, the reason I made that comment about marriage was to point out that women know just how to get men to propose. They are just waiting to do so until later. Watch what they do, which is get the husband they want on their schedule, not what they say about men not proposing.

    Women know how to get married. They do not want to, and so discussions on how they should seek a proposal are pointless.

    The Shadowed Knight

  4. Why, exactly, should men propose? Who has the most to gain from a marriage these days?
    http://redpillpushers.wordpress.com/2014/09/12/why-should-men-propose/

  5. The problem I have with “bended knee” proposals (especially in a public place) is that they are usually portrayed as being (expected to be?) a surprise to the woman.

    Anyone who does a “Grand gesture” proposal had better be damn sure that the answer will be “yes”.

  6. Thanks for the link!

    My opinion on proposals is that if the woman loves the man, it won’t matter to her how he proposes or if there’s even a ring. I certainly didn’t.

    The real problem is all her girlfriends who might comment that he’s a bum for not buying her a ring. I avoided this by buying a cheap ring for myself.

    I didn’t want to get arrested for assault when I would inevitably slap/punch anyone who made such a disrespectful comment about him.

  7. Feather Blade – The problem I have with “bended knee” proposals (especially in a public place) is that they are usually portrayed as being (expected to be?) a surprise to the woman.

    Anyone who does a “Grand gesture” proposal had better be damn sure that the answer will be “yes”.

    YouTube is loaded with proof of this.

  8. Much thanks for the link. But the beat ain’t over yet, Rocktober is still going. \m/ \m/

  9. Taylor

    “Also, she has responded to my post Proposing A Question with her own post, Proposals. This brings me to the topic of marriage proposals on bended knee. I have yet to hear a good reason why men should do them. Mere expectations or custom at this point are not enough. This alone is reason enough for a man not to do it. But even more than that, bending the knee is a sign of supplication and (as those familiar with Game of Thrones will recognize) surrender. For all the talk about how essential it is for a man to start off strong by proposing to a woman, this runs entirely counter to that. Who the woman in question is doesn’t matter- as a custom it just has no merit. I invite my readers who disagree to explain otherwise, of course. But at this point proposing on bent knee is not something I’m ever going to do. And I will tell any woman I court as much. If she cannot accept that, then in my view it demonstrates she wasn’t a good candidate to begin with.”

    I wanted to respond to this with my own thoughts. As many red pill readers know, simple knee-jerk direct ideas don’t always work. Betas might think showering a girl with attention and gifts will secure her affection etc etc, but are constantly defeated. Project value, signal attraction in other means, and engage in the ebb and flow of negs and subtext to draw desire. The naively direct method of reciprocation gains none of it, you logically can’t argue someone into attraction.

    To switch to another topic, who’s the strongest man in the room: One that will speak boldly his views and argue them with hot passion, or another that states passionately his views and demures gracefully when tempers rise. To paraphrase Hartley, what character is there in presuming to demonstrate how a country might be governed well, when he himself cannot govern his own temper? In this case, it’s self-control that is the show of strength, not hot-headedness with any measure of vigor.

    Proposals fall in line with the overt action and the meaning seemingly at odds with each other. Why would the man lower himself before the weaker sex? Well, he is in no fear of his position being supplanted with the gesture, he still has the job of putting forward the PLAN. I will take care of you financially and promote your security, I will raise and support children with you, let us be united as one in purpose and meld our goals. He’s not interested in the PLAN if she isn’t on board. If accepted, her duties are care, respect, and support, child-rearing, and devotion for the rest of her life. It’s not something to be taken lightly, so he’s asking her to weigh it as she sees. I’m much persuaded that this is really the position of strength coming up with the PLAN and putting it to her.

    You’ve probably gathered from my previous paragraph I’m speaking of the traditional marriage roles, assumption of God-fearing biblically taught man and woman, who would never bring up or consider frivorce in a fight. From that standpoint, let’s talk proposals as echoing Christ’s humility. He has always been head of the church, he bought the whole field having seen the treasure in it: union with his bride that has hitherto been in a pitiable state. Christ had the power, but set it aside to ask his bride to join him in great purpose. He subjected himself to human temptation, really a debasement, to show humble leadership–getting his hands dirty not being above it.

    I’m droning on here to try to serve the point that *this* time it’s Christ-like humble strength showcased. *Other* times people talk about fallacies like “mutual submission” when really the husband’s headship is being debased, or “manning up” when manhood is in reality toppled. If you have the time, Kierkegaard put it better than I have now in Philosophical Fragments, the second chapter. The king and the maiden shows the one knowing and choosing humility as the good move in forming the union. The picture here is we emulate that Christ-church relationship as husband-wife.

    http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=2512&C=2380 <– King and maiden

  10. Elspeth

    I was not treated to a grand proposal on one knee, or even a diamond engagement ring. The “proposal” was memorable, passionate even, but not the stuff of princess movies or little girls’ fantasies.

    You can avoid a lot of angst with a focus on the more important things, a proper vetting during courtship and how to build a successful marriage and family. The expectation of a perfect proposal, is for many women, more about having an envy inducing story to share with other women than about the bigger picture.

    In their defense, if what I experienced is any indication, it takes a woman of resolute mind to be uninfluenced by the noise.

  11. @ TSK

    I thought about writing something where I flipped the script, but time and interest were lacking.

    @ DJ

    DG in all seriousness if you find the right girl she won’t care how you propose.She will want you more then she cares about gestures.

    Oh, I understand. That’s why I mentioned it being a filter.

    With all due respect your making it a bigger deal then it deserves.

    I guess I made it seem like it was a big deal to me, but its not. I was just responding to some comments by a few others. In fact, I didn’t bring up the topic in the first place, it was someone else who did so.

    @ RPSMF

    I have another post in mind of yours to add to this one in an update.

    @ Feather Blade

    NSR is right, there are plenty of examples of that ritual gone horribly wrong. I try not to find too much amusement in them, because I know that could have been me years ago.

    @ NSR

    It was going, but is over now. But there’s always next year.

    @ Taylor

    I’m afraid your comment was more confusing than elucidating. Your link provided some ideas, some of which might be worth exploring in the future. But overall I’m not sure you got your point across.

    @ Elspeth

    Thanks for sharing your story and perspective.

  12. I’m curious. Are there any specific points that you disagree with on the headship/authority interaction or is it more of a differences of opinion on what you’re looking for in a spouse?

  13. @ Deep Strength

    A bit of the latter, for sure. But that is only to be expected- everyone is looking for something slightly different.

    My disagreement with the former is somewhat linked to a purely textual approach. I don’t support Sola Scriptura, and would look to the Patristic writings for understanding as much as I would look to the text itself, if not more.

  14. theshadowedknight

    Donal, I am not talking about a reversal just for the purpose of examination. I think that as women are to submit to their husbands, it is fitting that the proposal asks for her to show her willingness. If she will not submit to such a simple request, then it would be a most unwise man that would marry her.

    The Shadowed Knight

  15. Mrs. C

    @tsk ” I think that as women are to submit to their husbands, it is fitting that the proposal asks for her to show her willingness. If she will not submit to such a simple request, then it would be a most unwise man that would marry her. ”

    Seriously? It’s one thing to choose to kneel when making a request of another person, but to tell someone to kneel to test their willingness to be submissive is just goofy. A wife’s willing submission in marriage is not one that would require the posture of kneeling before a superior. A wife’s willing submission is that of a loving companion and cooperative help in all life’s burdens. For the Christian, we are to take an attitude of humility towards others. Not seek to be in the dominate position.

    If a woman, upon receiving a proposal, chooses to kneel when she says “Yes, I will marry you”, then that would be a lovely gesture the groom would cherish in his memory of the event.

    On the whole subject of kneeling. It is a noble gesture if one chooses to do it as a sign of honoring something good, true and beautiful they see in the other person, especially if it is a recognition of those attributes in light of being a follower of Christ. For it to be a requirement by either party, strips the act of it’s value and makes it quite mediocre.

  16. Feminine But Not Feminist

    Thank you for the linkage Donal! 🙂 I’m surprised you linked to that post though… it never did get many views so I figured it wasn’t liked by many people.

    And thank you for linking to the blueberry muffin recipe too… those look absolutely AMAZING and I’m definitely gonna try them out in the near future.

    My opinion on proposals is that if the woman loves the man, it won’t matter to her how he proposes or if there’s even a ring.

    Yes, this! Any woman that insists on a grand gesture type of proposal and a diamond ring before she will marry him is more concerned about the status it will give her among other women than she is about marrying that particular man. If a woman truly wants the man because of who he is, rather than the status of getting married, then she will be thrilled that he wants her too, no matter how he does it or what others think or say about it. I mean, I enjoy hearing engagement stories and think diamond rings are pretty just like every woman does. But they aren’t necessary. I would rather have the man I want without all the fufu than to have a man I don’t necessarily want with it.

  17. @ Donal

    Gotcha.

    I personally hold tradition in high regard, and I’m actually going through a lot of Chrysostom’s homilies right now aside from reading the Scripture. It’s good stuff because he has deep insight on the vast majority of it.

  18. @ Everyone

    I am done for the moment with discussing kneeling and such in marriage proposals, but feel free to continue discussing it her if you like.

  19. @ FBNF

    You are welcome. I thought about linking to your posts on attraction, but I am planning on saving those for a post later this week.

    And yes, those muffins look incredible. And I’m not normally a muffin person, either.

    I would rather have the man I want without all the fufu than to have a man I don’t necessarily want with it.

    I think that most women are like this, actually. Its just that most cannot get the man they want, so they take the other option- they get the man they don’t want but insist on the “fufu.”

  20. @ DS

    Got it.

    While a textual approach has value, there are a few problems with it. One is later editing of the book/letter by scribes (which is evidenced through minor differences in documents depending on age/location). The second is that it relies on word usage being exact and perfect, and which simply isn’t the case for human beings.

    Hence relying on Tradition- it helps us understand what Christians of the time or those who followed closely by understood about Scripture.

  21. trugingstar

    From the statistics I’ve heard, there were few to no changes from original scripture to scripture as we read it today. There are probably more errors in translation between modern versions like “The Message” and the “NIV” than there are with original text.

    I also think the tradition is important, insofar that it is Biblical. I currently attend a Messianic congregation. It’s been helpful for me to understand the context of current events, the holidays and their representation of Biblical prophecy, etc., and the frame of scripture. I’m one of those people who needs to see the big picture before I understand “why” I’m doing something.

    To me, it makes the most sense to learn the Bible from a Jewish perspective. It’s a Jewish book, and the original, universal church was led by Jews. That being said, I still weigh everything I hear where ever I go. I don’t believe that Kosher still applies to Jews, for example, but I do think that there’s a need for Jews, and possibly Christians, to keep celebrating the Holidays. I’m still weighing everything out.

  22. trugingstar

    You need the Bible, God’s Word, to fact-check. If it wasn’t reliable, you’d either have a God who’s weak, a God who doesn’t care, or a God whose purpose is to confuse people.

  23. mdavid

    trugingstar, You need the Bible, God’s Word, to fact-check. If it wasn’t reliable, you’d either have a God who’s weak, a God who doesn’t care, or a God whose purpose is to confuse people.

    Clearly, the bible is not reliable when divorced from a single, unified Church to interpret it. Because everyone is disagreeing about it. 70,000 different psudo-churches are all floating around who all claim the bible backs “their” view. So one needs a Church to “fact-check”. That is, to:

    1) Define what “God’s Word” is. There is no TOC on any bible, and everyone uses different books.
    2) Define what manuscripts to use. We have no original copies of biblical books.
    3) Decide what God’s word actually means. God’s word, as defined by most Christians, clearly states that men are to be obedient to the leaders of the Church when in disagreement over doctrine. So even if one want’s go incorrectly claim the bible is a fact-checking device, they are forced to acknowledge the Church.
    4) The Church is One. Christ only has one Bride. Again, the bible, as defined, by most Christians clearly states this.

  24. @Donal – TYVM – more muffins to follow….

  25. theshadowedknight

    There is much good that the feminist movement has done to help create laws to provide help for women in marriages where the husband and father is an abusive tyrant rather than a loving provider.

    Fair pay and women allowed entrance to all areas of the work force where they have something of value to contribute is a good thing.

    These laws are also good when you have women who are passionate about their field of study and rather than serving and having a family, they wanted to spend their lives serving the common good through their work.

    Cryptofeminist. Your own words condemn you more than any case I could make. You twist the Word to serve your own ends, and not those of the Lord. In that light, I will have nothing more to do with you until you recant and repent.

    The Shadowed Knight

  26. Mrs. C

    @tsk You cherry pick sentences out of my post without the thoughts that follow to try to prove I’m some kind of enemy. You call me a Cryptofeminist (whatever that is), I could just as easily call you a misogynist by cherry picking things you said. .

    What solutions do you have for women who are indeed in these situations? Where did I twist the Word? In what way do my words condemn me? You may condemn me but I don’t see where my words do? What kind of man are you who would forget these few in favor of the majority? I’d really like to know why you think this way. Not every woman feels called to marriage. There are a select few who happen to have a passion in their field of study who would rather spend their lives in work. There are men who choose not to marry. Why is this ok?

    1 Cor 7:7-9 – However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that. 8But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. 9But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.…

    Who are you to decide who should marry and who should choose to remain unmarried?

    The fact is that there are always going to be a small number of men and women who remain single all their lives. They should be able to pursue work that is meaningful to them and that serves the common good.

    There were also women in the past whose husbands could no longer be the breadwinner but weren’t able to make ends meet. What are they to do? Denying that these real problems existed in our anger at the feminist movement that went too far and too wrong in it’s aims is not logical. If we’re ever going dig ourselves out of this mess, we have to have some common sense.

    As a Catholic, I believe that government should play a limited role in our lives. Following is a quote about government’s role that I adhere to…

    “The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”

    “The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.” (CCC, Article 1, #1878 – 1885)

    Catholics should affirm that governing is meant to be something “good”. God governs and invites us all into this effort. We were made to give ourselves in love and service to the other; to form societies and communities of interest and to build mediating associations. Through their proper role, governing is empowered to serve the common good while still respecting the role of the individual, human freedom, and the primacy of the family.”

    In pandering to the over-reaching feminist aims, the government has failed to remember that it’s only to be used as said above to “support a community of a lower order, in case of need and to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society..” It has also failed to remember that it shouldn’t deprive a community of a lower order of it’s functions. The feminist movement should have stopped at limited laws to provide solutions to very real problems without becoming a free- for- all that ended up taking away functions and rights of others in order to “help” those who greedily demanded more aid and more protection than needed.

    You said “I will have nothing more to do with you until you recant and repent.”

    Well, last time I checked, I don’t follow the church of The Shadowed Knight nor do I remember you ever having anything to do with me in the first place.

  27. @ TSK

    If you have a problem with Mrs. C’s post, voice your grievances on her blog. Not on mine. Especially on a post covering an entirely different subject, or set of subjects.

  28. theshadowedknight

    Donal, I do not care about her post. What I do care about is another feminist running around unchallenged. Her critique of my alternative is another abuse of Ephesians to justify her feminism. That is my problem.

    I used her own words to show what she was. My interest in her blog ends there.

    The Shadowed Knight

  29. Mrs. C

    @tsk If you had a problem with my critique of one or the other person being required to kneel for a proposal rather than it being a voluntary gesture, you should have stated your case why you see it differently. I do admit I may have worded it poorly by using the word goofy instead of “in bad taste”, but I fail to see how my point of it being voluntary for either party so as to make the gesture more genuine and valuable, makes me a feminist.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s