Category Archives: Moral Agency

Lowest Common Denominator

In today’s post I want to examine the subject of who “keeps” a nation’s morality. Given the state of moral decay in the West at the moment, and the overall mess that is the marriage market, I think it a topic worth exploring. Since it is a fairly broad subject, I will give considerable latitude to my readers in their responses. But at the same time I would ask that folks use common sense, and not abuse this privilege.

A number of figures have argued, and argue still, that women are the one’s who set the “moral tone” of a civilization. One such figure was Fulton Sheen, who said in Life is Worth Living:

“To a great extent the level of any civilization is the level of its womanhood.  When a man loves a woman, he has to become worthy of her. The higher her virtue, the more noble her character, the more devoted she is to truth, justice, goodness, the more a man has to aspire to be worthy of her. The history of civilization could actually be written in terms of the level of its women.”

Others, including I think some around the ‘sphere, have argued the opposite. I do not have any quotes to provide at the moment, as I think this position is argued more by the commentariat than by most bloggers. But I know I’ve seen it.

Before I go on, I should clarify something. I am not examining the subject of which sex, male or female, is more “naturally virtuous.” Or which is more naturally civilized, or a greater fit for civilization, or some such. Rather, I am examining which sex sets the bar of morality in a civilization. In math terms, which is the lowest common denominator?

I do not think that Rev. Fulton Sheen was expressing above a belief that women are more naturally virtuous than men. Rather, he was stating that when women in a society are moral, it is likely that the men will be too. Conversely, the implication is that when men in a society are moral, women do not necessarily follow suite. [The argument that the men in a society can only be moral when the women are, and so the reverse stated before isn’t true, is a different argument altogether.]

As I see it, there are four mutually exclusive alternatives here: women set the bar, men set the bar, neither sets the bar (they are both independent of each other) or both set the bar (there is a casual link between the two in terms of moral level). I invite my readers to offer their thoughts on which they think is true.

Also, I think there can be a number of different possible factors which might be responsible for any bar setting that might occur. They are, in no particular order:

  • Inspiration- The moral character of one sex inspires the other to live a more virtuous life (perhaps in order to be “worthy” of them).
  • Reactivity- One sex might be more inclined by nature to mirror the moral character of the other sex (this is more instinctive than a deliberate choice)
  • Responsiveness to Leadership- One sex might be more inclined by nature to respond to moral leaders and their directions on the moral life. [If one sex is less responsive  than the other it is all the more essential that it be trained/raised properly when young.]

I am sure there are more, but those are the ones that I could think of in short order.

While I am one who loves intellectual discovery for no other purpose than curiosity, something else is driving me here. If one sex is naturally more influential when it comes to the moral character of a people, than it stands to reason that more care needs to be exerted raising that sex while young. After all, a misallocation of time (that most precious of resources) could have lasting effects on the virtue of a civilization. And even if time is spent, it if is spent poorly it will still have deleterious effects. Perhaps even leading to collapse, in the end.

And with those dark thoughts I invite my readers to step forward and voice their own.

 

 

Advertisements

62 Comments

Filed under Blue Pill, Marriage Market Place, Men, Moral Agency, Red Pill, Sexual Market Place, Sin, Temptation, Women

Avoiding Sacrifice

Deep Strength has a new post up wherein he argues that Women hate suffering:

I was trying to think of ways to make the this post into something elaborate, but the title really just explains itself. Women hate suffering, and by extension women don’t handle suffering well.

Examples:

  • Divorce rate is 70% women initiated. Because women are unhappy.

  • Husbands persist through contentious and shrewish wives in marriage taking on more responsibilities (e.g. choreplay, childcare), while women can’t handle being unhappy.

  • Pastors and wives with unbelieving husbands will go out of their way to make up stuff like “intelligent submission” so they don’t have to submit. Then the sad part is when “intelligent submission” is defended instead of admitting it is being used to rebel against husbands and against the Scriptures.

  • Christian men and husbands would rather cave to women when they are unhappy rather than to tell them it is a normal part of the Christian walk. “All who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” 2:Timothy 3:12. Suffering is normal for Christians. We do a lot of things in this life that we don’t want to because they should be done.

  • Women are coddled by society, praised and pushed for college and credentialism. Men are put down and no on cares about them. When women fail they are helped as much as possible, especially by white knights. When men fail no one really cares that they are suffering except perhaps their parents.

I agree with a lot of what Deep Strength has to say in his post. Women are indeed coddled- more than men, anyways. There are plenty of women who aren’t coddled out there, of course. Men cave all-the-time (hence “mancaves”). And so on and so forth.

At the same time, I think he is a bit off when he says that women hate suffering. In fact I have written a post on this subject before. A few snippets from that post:

You see, healthy women “like” suffering.

I put quotations around like because it is not a conscious desire, but an unconscious one. Something deep down inside them recognizes that a certain amount of suffering is to be expected, is natural even. As Ace alludes to, this draws from Genesis[.]

Women expect suffering in their life- it is the natural thing. [Think about the vast majority of human history- filled with suffering for pretty much everyone.] When women are too comfortable, when suffering is absent from their life, then it sends a message to their unconscious mind that something is wrong, that what they are living is an unnatural life. That message of unnaturalness will only be repeated over the years as they grow up. They will know, somewhere deep down inside, that something is wrong. Unfortunately, because this is unconscious, they won’t know what it is, exactly, that is wrong.

This will, naturally enough, lead them to feel miserable. The misery is only made worse because they won’t understand it. It will gnaw on their mind incessantly, like an itch you can’t quite reach.

I suspect that part of the reason that women act so crazy in the west today is because of this. Using that itch analogy I just mentioned- women act crazy because they are trying to scratch that itch. Only they don’t quite know how- so they do so in extreme ways. Again, deep down inside they know they should be suffering, so they go out and make themselves suffer (without every truly understanding that is what they are doing).

I think a better word, one that fits what Deep Strength is driving towards, is sacrifice. Women hate sacrifice. They don’t want to have to sacrifice anything to get what they want. A few examples:

  • They say they want a family, but they don’t want to sacrifice their youth, and an education and/or career, to get one.
  • They don’t want to sacrifice their comfort and easy lifestyle for the pain and burden of children, so they opt for birth control and abortion.
  • They don’t want to have to sacrifice their happiness (and time, etc.) for a man whom they find unattractive, and so they opt for divorce.

And so on and so forth.

Later in his post Deep Strength says this:

Christian wives hate suffering and putting their own will aside to display Christ-like behavior. They would rather manipulate the situation around them to be better by their own volition than try it God’s way.

Again, putting aside their own will is a sacrifice. And one they don’t want to have to make. Further, it is one they all too often refuse to make.

Of course, that isn’t really any different from men. Men don’t want to have to sacrifice either. That is just general human nature. The thing is, this is where Deep Strength’s statements about coddling are important.

Women are, on average, far more coddled than men in today’s society. It is far more common for men to be taught and told that they will have to sacrifice to achieve what they want in life, than it is for women. And even then, for women, the scale of the sacrifice they are told to expect is likely to be less.

What does this means? It means that women are less inclined to sacrifice in general. When they must sacrifice, they are inclined to sacrifice less. And of course, they try and shift as much of that burden of sacrifice onto men as they can get away with.

The solution requires confronting this problem head on. Women, of all ages, need to be reminded that we all must sacrifice. Especially as Christians. Our faith is one of self-sacrifice. Without a willingness to sacrifice, well, our Lord and Savior explained what would happen:

18 “Hear then the parable of the sower. 19 When any one hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in his heart; this is what was sown along the path. 20 As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. 22 As for what was sown among thorns, this is he who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the delight in riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. 23 As for what was sown on good soil, this is he who hears the word and understands it; he indeed bears fruit, and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty.”

(Matthew 13:18-23)

10 Comments

Filed under Blue Pill, Christianity, Churchianity, Civilization, Men, Moral Agency, Parenting, Red Pill, Sin, Temptation, Women

Starting With The Right Question

I want to begin this post with a little bit of scripture:

25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read?” 27 And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.”

29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

(Luke 10:25-37)

Here we have the classic parable of the good Samaritan. I’m sure most of my readers are quite familiar with it. My purpose in mentioning this parable is to examine the lawyer.

You see, the lawyer asks two questions. The first one is good, and I think, honest. The second question is an entirely different matter, however.

When the lawyer asked Jesus “who is my neighbor?”, what do we think his purpose was?

Was the lawyer trying to ensure that he lived out God’s law to the fullest? Did he ask the question ensure he didn’t miss anyone?

Of course not. Scripture tells us that he was looking to justify himself. The lawyer wasn’t asking Jesus that question in order to get what I suppose you could call an “expansive” answer. Rather, the lawyer was trying to use whatever criteria that Jesus mentioned in order to limit those whom he would treat as a neighbor. He didn’t want lots of neighbors, he wanted as few of them as possible. Hence the question.

His goal was to restrict the amount of love he had to show his fellow man. In other words, the lawyer wanted to be miserly with love. And he was counting on Jesus to help him out with this (boy was he in for a surprise).

In short, the lawyer’s heart wasn’t in the right place from the very beginning. And so his question was wrong from the very beginning. A better question, rather than “And who is my neighbor?”, would have been “How can I live out the law to the fullest?” Such a question comes from a heart that is aligned to God.

Whenever we ask a question which concerns living out our faith, we always need to ask it when our heart is in the right place. If God is not first and foremost there- if serving and loving him totally is not our aim and purpose- then our endeavor is corrupt from the start. Whatever comes of it will invariably be twisted in some way.

I mention all of this because Deep Strength has a couple of recent posts concerning submission in marriage: The problems with intelligent submission being the first, and Wifely submission is easy being the second. Both of these posts draw as their origin a simple enough question: “When should I obey my husband?”

It is my belief that this particular question, just like the question of the lawyer, comes from the wrong place in the heart (perhaps intentionally, perhaps unintentionally) . Its purpose is not “How can I live out the law to the fullest?” Rather, the purpose is to limit obedience, to limit that which must be rendered to another. Much in the same way that the lawyer wanted to limit how much love he had to render to his fellow man.

A better question, one arising from a heart aligned with God, would be more along these lines: “Which action now available to me would be most pleasing to God?” Otherwise stated, “What action would be most loving?”

 

9 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Churchianity, God, Marriage, Moral Agency, Sin, Temptation, Women

Groundless Fears Of Men About Their Daughters

[DG Note: Today’s post is a guest post by reader/commenter Tigersault (formerly A Visitor)]

 

Men today, regarding their daughters, act and think like women.  Sure, being foolish is a surefire way to end up with your genetic lineage being annihilated but I’m not talking about that here.  What I’m talking about is how men when confronted with the painfully obvious fact that most women (I’m talking a majority well over 50%) do not and, more importantly, SHOULD NOT attend a university/college, they immediately start thinking and acting like women regarding a range of possible scenarios that more often than not DO NOT COME TO PASS.

 

This post will examine three points: 1) the obvious dangers of sending your daughter(s) to a university/college 2) the various scenarios that men come up with to rationalize sending their daughters to university/college and 3) what happens in the rare scenario that something does happen.  All three of these will be backed up with personal anecdotes when possible.  Yes, exceptions do not break the rule but bear with me here.

 

Before delving into these three points, an aside about myself:  I come from a very well-to-do upper class background and, in the current occupation I am in, I deal with death on a semi-regular basis as part of my job duties.  Beyond that, I am prepared to say nothing more due to wishing to keep my anonymity.

 

First, the obvious dangers of sending your daughter(s) to university/college.  They bear repeating.  One of two things (or possibly both) will happen:  1)  your daughter will come out a flaming liberal and/or feminist and/or 2) she will lose her virginity, potentially becoming an alpha widow, and/or have so many sexual partners that she will become unmarriable except to the most beta schlub.

 

In my family’s case, one sibling came out a raging feminist.  Even in a certain situation where she disliked someone who was a woman, when hearing that a certain requirement had to be met of all individuals, regardless of gender, she was quick to ascertain the woman was not being asked to fulfill said requirement only due to gender.  Furthermore, she buys the campus rape myth.  My girlfriend asked the following question, “Was [your sibling] like this before she went to college?”  My response, “Not that I recall.”  My sibling’s feminism is complimented by acceptance of homosexuality and transsexualism.  In another sibling’s case, she wears the pants in the relationship with my in-law.  She may not admit it but she’d be happier submitting to his headship.  And yes, this sibling views anti-homosexuality as being bigoted.

 

Finally, on the obvious dangers point, although a woman’s promiscuity may precede her time at a college/university, being in that environment certainly will not do wonders in terms of maintaining her chastity.  Whether it be the greeters of a southern university or two (Google it if you don’t believe me) being recruited as de-facto geishas to entice high school senior football players to attend their university for obvious benefits or just your run of the mill attractive girl, the environment in college/universities is generally not conducive to maintaining one of her most prized assets, namely being chaste.  In one instance, I was at a tailgate with an individual that I had met the previous night.  We were talking when suddenly he recognized one of my classmates and decided to leave.  The reason?  He had had a one night stand with her.

 

Second, when you bring up to men that their daughters would be better off not going to college/university a stream of woman rationalizations comes forth.

 

1) “What if she can’t find a man to marry?”

 

2) “What if her husband turns out to be horrid and she has to separate due to physical security concerns?”

 

3) “What if she needs to hold herself over with work for a bit before she marries?”

 

4) “What if her husband dies and she has to go back to work?”

 

“What if….”

 

The above questions can be perceived as legitimate concerns but upon further examination are debunked easily.  However, as one can see, this line of questioning can go on indefinitely.  Before moving on to point 3 of the post (the rare case the worst comes to pass), ask yourself this question: is it really, assuming she’ll be attending a four year in state public university, worth shelling out roughly $80,000 for a piece of paper that in many cases is worth as much as a high school degree due to market over saturation or, in the case of worthless majors like ethnic studies or women’s studies, worth less than a normal degree AND a huge red flag to future employers?  Keep in mind too that beyond all the time and effort they spend on said degree, they will have a lot of down time around alcohol and late teens/early 20’s men with the same amount of raging hormones they do.

 

So, what if the worst comes to pass?  We’ll hit this in the order of the questions numbered in the paragraph on point two of this post.  1) What if she can’t find a man to marry?  Well, it may certainly not be too late.  However, ask yourself this?  What can a man bring to the table nowadays if women are told, from an extremely young age, that they can be anything they want AND do anything as well, if not better, than a man?  If she can’t find a man, don’t despair.  If she’s young enough, keep an eye on quality boys that she interacts with regularly.  If she is post college, put her in situations where she is around eligible men, especially parish life.  Make a point to strike up conversations with parents of men who are looking to marry.  Make sure she dresses modestly and that she acts like a woman.  These two things alone separate from the vast majority of bottom feeders in women’s bodies nowadays.  If she cannot in fact, despite your and her best efforts, find a man to marry, through no fault of her own, see to it that she’s well taken care of: have her work for a family member or friend in a secure line of work.  Support her as needed, emotionally, spiritually, monetarily.

 

2)  “What if her husband turns out to be horrid and she has to separate due to physical security concerns?”  Those vows she took in the Sacrament of Marriage are binding until death due them part.  So, what now?  Do what is needed to make sure he won’t harm her: i.e. restraining order, firearms training for her, followed by making sure she is in a safe place to live, whether it be your house, a trusted family friend, etc.

 

3) “What if she needs to hold herself over with work for a bit before she marries?” Pretty much see point 1.  Introduce her to God-fearing righteous men, looking to marry.  Let her live in your house until marriage.  So far it’s worked out fine for my parents.  From personal experience, one sibling is married and the other is in the house until she marries.  It is working fine thus far.

 

4) “What if her husband dies and she has to go back to work?”

 

I have two experiences with this.  First, a friend of mine who is advanced in years had a daughter he supports due to her husband no longer being in the picture.  My friend is not very well off and yet manages to do it.  I cannot recall for certain if her husband is deceased but I believe he is.

 

Second, in my course of work, someone I knew professionally was murdered along with several others in a random killing several months back.  Besides my professional obligations in aiding his widow, others in the state, as well as her parish have banded together to help the family of the deceased.  This is not a one time thing either, regarding the parishioners.  This is a continued process of supporting her as she works to support her family.

 

As horrible and tragic as the situation is for her and her children, we are committed to continuing to help her.  Everyone, regardless of how desolate their situation seems, knows at least one other person that would help them in their time of need.  And yes, to my knowledge, his widow did not attend college.  I say that due to knowing them enough professionally that it is obvious and will say nothing further on it.

 

To conclude, men today, especially regarding their daughters, will delve into irrational thinking and acting like women when it comes to the subject of their daughters not attending college/university.  Is it worth them a) turning their backs on what you’ve taught them re: the Faith, b) becoming flaming liberals c) losing their virginity/being so unchaste as to be unmarriable due to N count, STD(s), being an alpha widow and/or d) spending a great deal of your money on an investment that most likely will not be worth it?  There are several “what ifs” addressed above with personal experiences where appropriate and likely scenarios when no personal anecdote was available.

 

In closing, as my girlfriend and I have discussed before if we get married, we are looking to marry off our daughters as soon as possible.  Raising chaste, Catholic, feminine princesses to be queens, imbued with truly traditional values, who have God first, their husbands and families close behind, rather than a career, is worth dividends in the end, as well as a way to continue our way of life.

24 Comments

Filed under Alpha Widow, Churchianity, Civilization, Marriage, Marriage Market Place, Moral Agency, Parenting, Red Pill, Sexual Market Place, Sin, Temptation, Women

Never Enough

I was in a conversation recently at church in which the discussion turned towards Christians who held (what those present) considered to be pretty obviously heretical beliefs. Several of the men present (it was an all male conversation) expressed a belief that ignorance was the biggest problem. They felt that if people were better educated it would got a long way towards solving the problem.

I disagreed. In my opinion it isn’t a lack of received truth on most people’s part. The problem is found in the heart, not the mind. No amount of proof will work for them. Case in point:

19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich man’s table; even the dogs would come and lick his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side. 24 He called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony. 26 Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there to us.’ 27 He said, ‘Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father’s house— 28 for I have five brothers—that he may warn them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.’ 29 Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.’ 30 He said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

(Luke 16:19-31)

You can tell people the truth, you can show them the truth, but if they don’t want to accept it, and its implications, they will simply reject it, and choose a more preferable interpretation. That is not to say that ignorance is good- it isn’t. We are called to tell the Truth, even if we know people will reject it. Sometimes error really is a product of ignorance- that was my case for much of my life.

The key is not to be disheartened when people do reject the Truth (in whatever form and case it may be).

Naturally enough, this also applies to the “Red Pill.” Of course, the Red Pill isn’t really “truth” per se. Rather, it is merely an exposure to the fact that one has been living a lie. (NSR has a good write-up on that here.) But all the same- plenty of folks will choose the lie, even after they have been told (and shown) it to be a lie. For them, there is never enough evidence to support your argument (whatever it may be). All you can do is carry on.

14 The mind of a fool is like a broken jar;
    it can hold no knowledge.

(Sirach 21:14)

10 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Churchianity, God, Moral Agency, The Church

Marital Competency

{Bit of a stream of consciousness post tonight.]

I had an interesting discussion with a friend recently about the difficulty of living a Christian marriage. Our faith, our God, demands a lot from us. I don’t think I am alone in thinking this either…

His disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.”

(Matthew 19:10)

After discussing the difficulty of living up to marriage, we briefly talked about how few are up to that these days. Which leads me to this post.After giving it thought, it occurs to me that what is going on is as simple as most people these days not being competent enough to marry.

Marriage, successful marriage, that is, requires a lot of life-skills and disciplines. Traits such as patience, strong self-control, charity and kindness all go a long way towards making a marriage succeed. An absence of those traits, and more, makes it more and more likely a marriage will fail (divorce), or will end up miserable for one or both spouses.

It seems to me that, assuming they were quantifiable, one could make a score of each of these core traits. Then you could create an Index of them, to get a rough value for how well someone scores overall. This would lead to a Marital Competency Index, or MCI score, that you could use to measure someone’s marriageability.

Of course, I recognize that a really precise way of measuring the MCI is impossible- quantifying different traits is either impossible or arbitrary. All the same, as an abstract concept I think that it has some worth.

For example, one could use a theoretical MCI score to explain whether or not someone was “marriageable.” By marriageable I mean a score which was high enough to represent that they possessed enough of those essential traits for them to be likely to live a successful marriage. Certain traits, being so essential, would be so heavily weighted that they naturally fall in line with the overall score. Others would have much lesser values, and so might not be “make or break” in terms of meeting the threshold.

Another advantage to this concept is that it helps to understand the role of culture and the surrounding society. This is because the MCI score which represents the threshold for “marriageable” would not be fixed. Rather, it would fluctuate with the culture. A healthy culture that respects and promotes marriage would have a lower threshold. People would be able to marry with less traits and yet still have successful marriages. On the other hand, in a sick culture that actively works to undermine marriage/marriages, such as ours today, the threshold increases. People need to bring more to the table in order to make marriage work these days.

Also, the MCI concept would help explain why someone “turning to Jesus” doesn’t simply make them marriageable. After all, these traits take time to build and develop. Many require years of development. A sudden conversion would not instantaneously cause someone to grow skills that have been stunted for years or decades. To provide a metaphor- a fruit tree that has been sick for a while will not instantly produce good fruit the moment a cure is applied.

[In addition, this highlights how important it is to raise daughters right. They have far less time to correct deficiencies than men, given that their fertility window is far more limited.]

I could probably continue, but at this point I think I’ve covered enough for a single post. Now, I know that I’ve covered this topic in different ways before. But having thought on it, I don’t think I have had a post which is as (hopefully) clear and specific as this one.

20 Comments

Filed under Blue Pill, Civilization, Marriage, Marriage Market Place, Moral Agency, Parenting, Red Pill, Uncategorized

Masculine Monday- #8

*Men Only*

Short and simple post today, with a short and simple message to men:

Learn how to say “No” to women.

Seriously, if you have trouble with it now, learn to do it. Your life will become so much better for it.

And, dare I say, so will the lives of most of the women who are part of it.

I might be a bit presumptuous here, but I think most men spend a lot of time trying to get women to say “Yes” to various things. But learning to say “No” to when when necessary can get you just as much. In fact, I would warrant a guess that you saying “No” just might be a factor in her saying “Yes.”

This is easier said than done, of course. We men have an instinctive desire to please women. We don’t like it when when are upset. And of course, we are fearful of being tagged a misogynist or the like.  Couple that with a Western upbringing indoctrination, and most men in the West end up as the ones saying “Yes.”

So perhaps some of my male readers would be kind enough to offer their advice on how they learned to overcome all of that.  Guys, what happened you learn to say “No” to women?

[This post was inspired by Dalrock’s recent examination of how many Christian leaders are fearful of telling the women in their congregation “No” in any way, especially the important ones.]

7 Comments

Filed under Alpha, Beta, Blue Pill, Men, Moral Agency, Red Pill, Women