Masculine Monday- To Command And Obey

It has been a long while since I wrote one of these post, and thus long overdue. Today I want to examine the subject of authority and leadership as it relates to masculinity.

Before I continue, I would direct my reader’s attention to this post by Cane Caldo. It helped stimulate the present post.

I believe that one of the essential qualities that makes a man a man is his ability to function effectively within a hierarchical structure. It is his ability to lead others below him in authority, in subjection, and his ability to follow orders of those in authority above him. In my opinion a man is not a man unless he is firmly capable of both task.

To Command and Obey go hand in hand.

From my experience, most men who come across as unmanly fail in at least one, if not both, of those areas. When it comes to authority, they come across either as weak or overbearing. And when it comes to obedience, they are either rebellious or spineless drones without initiative.

Creating proper men, that is, instilling in them the essence of command and obedience, must start at an early age. Deviations from acceptable behavior must be spotted and corrected. Creating a man is not an instant process, nor an automatic one. It can, I think, be likened to the forging of a sword- a process which takes time, patience and hard work. Yet the end result is a sharp tool, waiting to be used.

Unfortunately we don’t have the structures in place anymore for this transformation to take place on a mass scale. Point in fact, we have been actively working to dismantle them for generations. And that process yet continues.

So it is up to individuals and small groups to continue this essential work. Men who are fathers of boys are especially demanded upon. Most of the work is up to them- and in a hostile work environment, no less.

I would like my readers, especially fathers, to give their thoughts on the subject. Both in terms of general views on whether I am right or not, and also as to specifics on how to achieve this.

Masculine Monday- A Positive Approach

Rollo Tomassi has kindly reminded me that his newest book- Positive Masculinity, is now available. I would encourage my readers to give it a look. I haven’t had the time to grab or read it myself, but I intend to when time permits. A review will hopefully follow shortly after. While Rollo and I don’t agree on a fair number of things, I find that his work is always worth reading- if only to provoke one to reexamine his own beliefs.

Works like his are all the more necessary in this age, when masculinity is openly derided and masculine role models are all but extinct. Rediscovering the ways of the past will be the work of generations, and an endeavor that must be started right away.

It is especially necessary for Christian men to stand up and establish examples of Christian masculinity. For the most part most of the role-models out there, the purported Christian ones, that is, are basically just secular examples with a dash of Christianese painted on. That needs to change. I hope to explore how in future posts in this long dormant series.

 

Market Analysis: Collective Bargaining

This post is a continuation of my Market Analysis series, which began in my post Market Watch. In today’s post I want to examine and discuss in greater detail this observation that I made:

Too many people are doing too little to make marriage happen these days. Marriage needs to be a matter for the whole community.

I have two general areas I want to examine here. The first to look at is the community angle. The second is about making marriage happen.

Starting with community, there is a saying about how “it takes a village” which I think is appropriate here.

Marriage is a communal effort. Everyone in the community is involved in ensuring that it works. When the community isn’t supportive of marriage in general, and marriages in particular, then you get what we have today: tons of divorces and a crashing marriage rate.

Looking back at my quote, I had it wrong. I shouldn’t have said “Marriage needs to be a matter for the whole community,” but instead should have said “Marriage is a matter for the whole community.” Whatever we say or think about it, that simple fact cannot be changed any more than human nature can be changed. We are social beings, and our social environment impacts all of our relationships.

The marriage market cannot be healthy unless the community is supportive of it. When that support is withdrawn, then our baser natures will assert themselves. Thus we end up with the sexual marketplace instead. I suppose, to continue with market metaphors, that the marriage market can be described as a fairly regulated market which, absent those regulations, will quickly turn into a real mess.

Let’s expand that first sentence somewhat. What does “make marriage happen” actually mean? I can think of a number of things:

• Encourage young people to marry verbally- that is, talk to them and spur them towards marriage if that is their calling.
• Publicly talk about the benefits of marriage and how wonderful it is or can be, especially around young people.
• Stop badmouthing marriage- eliminate the griping and negative attitude that is so often expressed. [At the same time efforts need to be made to address the source of these woes. But keep it below the radar]
• Provide financial support and incentives to young people to marry.
• Discourage and admonish against individualist attitudes which lead young people away from marriage (careerism, travelism, etc.)
• Rebuke and punish those who break up marriages or treat them flippantly.
• Reassure young people that the community will have their back during rough spots in the marriage.
• Promote life and the unique blessing that is children.

Those are just a few ideas I have come up with while thinking about it. I invite my readers to offer their thoughts on the subject. This post is less developed because I am hoping many of you can propel the discussion forward, hopefully towards directions I haven’t thought of.

Market Watch

In my previous post, A Poor Example,  I mentioned a post that Scott and Elspeth wrote about how June Cleaver might be unmarriageable right now. What I want to do with this post is make a series of observations based on what they mentioned in their post, as well as in the comments. I will likely expand on it over time, as I have a chance to re-read the comments. This won’t be an in-depth post, but rather more of a list with perhaps a comment or two of my own.

So here are some of my observations:

• The Market for devout Christians, men and women alike, is awful. I wrote previously on this topic in my Market Failure series of posts. You can read Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 via the links. As for who has it worse, I think that is mostly an academic exercise. My gut says men more than women, but not by a huge amount.
•  Geography play a huge role in the difficulties of the marriage market right now. Different geographic locations are more or less favorable to men or women. My suspicion is that where I live the ratio between marriageable men and women heavily tilts to men, and that of course makes the market tougher for men.
• Demographics also plays a significant role. As various Christian groups have splintered, and there is even more separation in belief within groups, the overall pool of eligible mates has dropped precipitously. So while absolute numbers might be up, the actual pool is perhaps smaller than it has been for perhaps even centuries.
• Most Christian parents are not raising devout Christian children. Much less marriageable ones.
• Young men are much less interested in marriage than they were in the past. Having a few more years under my belt since I started blogging, I have seen this more and more. Younger men are just less interested in marriage. The why of this is worthy of a whole post of its own.
• Too many people are doing too little to make marriage happen these days. Marriage needs to be a matter for the whole community.

 

Also, the answer to this:

Is it possible that parents of the last several generations, responding to the cultural cues from blue-pill pastors and other sources have raised both sex children to be pretty useless at “traditional” marriage, and therefore a different approach to finding matches for them may be required?

…is yes and yes.

More to come as I think on it.

Update: A few more observations-

• The market is seriously hampered by the amount of deception going on. The worst lies, from what I have seen, tend to be those that people tell themselves. Self-deception makes hit harder to diagnose problems, among other ills.
• Introverts and shy people are especially vulnerable in the market right now. Given how few effective venues there are for meeting eligible mates, each one has to count that much more. For introverts, that is much more difficult.
• I am among the most the most “pro-marriage” of guys in the Christian manosphere. At least as it applies to my own life. Only a couple might be at the same level as me, such as Deep Strength. I don’t know if that was the case originally, but it seems to be the case now. And even despite my subjective “gun-ho” approach I am still very cautious.

You Reap What You Don’t Sow

[Alternate title: Shaking Yourself Apart]

So I caught this in the news recently: One of the Shakers’ last three members died Monday. The storied sect is verging on extinction. An excerpt:

One of the last three remaining members of the dwindling Shaker sect died Monday.

Sister Frances Carr died at the Shaker community at Sabbathday Lake in New Gloucester, Maine, “after a brief battle with cancer,” according to a statement on the community’s website.

It continued, “The end came swiftly and with dignity surrounded by the community and her nieces.” Carr was 89.

Carr was a member of the United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearance, a Christian group formed in 1747 in Manchester, England. They earned the name the Shakers when critics began calling them “Shaking Quakers” because of “their ecstatic and violent bodily agitation in worship,” according to Sabbathday Lake’s website. The Shakers eventually abandoned this particular dancing-style worship, but the congregation adopted the term, according to the Associated Press.

I remember reading about this particular sect years ago. I am not at all surprised the group is nearly extinct. Here are some of their core beliefs:

The Shakers practice celibacy, in addition to pacifism, equality of the sexes and communal ownership of property.

Their extinction is sort of a given considering their beliefs. Of course, the surviving members think otherwise, but hey, why wouldn’t they? Another point from the article:

Although it may sound like an old-fashioned religious sect by today’s standards, at one time the Shakers were considered progressive. As PBS noted, “Seventy-five years before the emancipation of the slaves and 150 years before women began voting in America, the Shakers were practicing social, sexual, economic, and spiritual equality for all members.”

We can see in the Shakers the end result of “Progressive Christianity” – extinction. This group just happened to (almost) get there a lot faster given their embrace of total celibacy. Other sects will come to the same fate as well, as sooner or later their deviancy will catch up with them.

 

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)

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.

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.

Tuesday Tips #2

Today is the second in the series of guest posts by reader/commenter Michael K. The subject is food:

Tuesday Tip #2: Stop Being A Food Addict

…his disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck ears of grain and to eat…

We live for only a short while. Therefore it’s hard for us to grasp how dramatically food has changed from even recent times. The invention of fertilizer, diesel transport, air travel, and genetic engineering has transformed our food in both substance and quantity.

Food has become ubiquitous for all first-world nations, and our bodies have not had the time to evolve for this bounty. Liquor is a good example here: many Native American tribes lacked exposure to liquor long enough to genetically adjust and many thus banned ‘firewater’ from their communities to save them.

Modern food is unbelievably cheap by historical standards. It is also carefully bred, processed, refined, and even genetically engineered for concentrated succulence. So, of course, we get fatter and fatter every decade. In essence, modern processed food coupled with unrestrained consumption is a dangerous game that we clearly have not yet evolved to handle. If you doubt this, compare the weight of people today to photos from the 1940’s. It’s disturbing.

Years ago my family and I saw these warning signs. We organized food-related activities and stuck with it. It was trying at first (with some social tension). Yet it proved to be one of the best decisions of our lives. What seemed radical then appears blasé now. We will never go back.

We eat two large meals each day (kids eat a noon snack). Meals are reliably on time without exception. Only whole, unprocessed foods are used. Shopping is done every two weeks, with an inflexible shopping list. Recipes are step-by-step, timed, and practiced so anyone can prepare it as needed.

The only “processed” foods in the house are cheese (milk, salt, enzymes), grain cereal (flour, barley, salt, yeast), and peanut butter (peanuts, salt). Zero coffee, tea, cane sugar*, or alcohol (except holidays). This may sound austere but it is actually no privation at all; the fact is that quality home cooking using real foods simply blows away anything else out there. We eat like kings.

Recipes and portion sizes are carefully planned to guarantee heaps of nutrients, fully satisfied eaters, and dietary consistency. Leftover food has been phased out through portion adjustments before each shopping cycle: we literally waste zero food and have zero leftovers.

Summary:

1) Shop only twice a month.

2) Table, kitchen, dishes cleaned every meal (before anyone leaves).

3) Meal quality is incredible; real, home cooked food is tasty!

4) Recipes, cooking, and meal times are firmly consistent.

5) Everyone is trim and healthy (visible by skin, hair, teeth, weight).

6) Strangely, less time is spent on food due to organization/routine.

7) Saves money (processed food is mostly brand profit).

8) We hunt, fish, and garden aggressively for better food.

9) Far less garbage (and no garish packaging).

10) Little to no cavities.

11) Less illness; many prior medical issues have vanished.

12) Fewer behavioral issues, mood swings, and much better sleep.

13) No leftovers due to well-planned meals; zero food waste.

14) Nobody complains about food anymore.

15) Nobody leaves meals hungry, bloated, or stuffed anymore.

Practical tips to actually DO something, not just talk, about food addiction:

A) Vitamix vegetables or fruits each meal. (toss in a multivitamin).

B) Make meal prep/cleaning a routine, organized family activity.

C) If single, make food for several days (planned leftovers only).

D) Use Living Cookbook to track recipe/meal cost, nutrition, and calories.

E) Plan every single meal two weeks out (shop biweekly) and stick to it.

F) Ignore food and diet fads. Processed food is 99% of the battle.

G) Eat mainly vegetables, meat, fish, eggs, fruit.

H) Be very restrained with grains, nuts, dairy, and tea.

I) Seldom (even never) eat coffee, alcohol, processed sugar.

J) Use lots of spices, experiment with recipes, and learn to cook.

K) Hunt, fish, berry pick, mushroom hunt, and garden.

Recommending Reading:

Nutrition and Physical Degeneration (Price)

*If modern fruit (genetically engineered for sweetness) such as pineapple, oranges, blueberries, strawberries, apples, and bananas isn’t sweet enough, you’re desensitized to sucrose. Desserts sweetened with fruit juice (and topped with real cream!) are deliciously sweet to a normal palate. Yum.

Selected Sunday Scriptures- #104: Rise Up!… And, Er… Ignore The Elephant In The Room

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

(Genesis 1:27)

While this blog is focused first and foremost on masculine matters, I devote plenty of time to discussing women as well. There are a number of reasons for this, but the most important is the simple fact that the fates of men and women are intertwined. One can only change men so much before further developments are impossible without affecting women as well.

Sometimes this can be forgotten, both by men outside of this neck of the woods, and by those within. Here is an example of the former. A quote:

In our culture today fathers are becoming less and less a part of our children’s lives and the absence of fathers has led directly to the downfall of Christian culture in America. Currently, 40 percent of American children do not grow up with their biological father.

That number is on the rise as more and more couples choose the lifestyle of cohabitation and decide not to get married at all. Since the men in those relationships are not bound by any marriage vows, they feel less responsibility to stick around, especially if the marriage or childrearing starts to get tough. What are the results of fatherless homes? Let’s take a look at the statistics:

The author goes on from there to talk about the perils of fatherless families. He is absolutely right in this, of course. But at the same time, he missed the huge elephant in the room: divorce. Now Dalrock has covered this blind spot plenty, and I don’t feel it necessary to repeat his many, many posts on the subject. However, this blind spot is not unique. There are others.

To get an idea of one, lets look at what this author talks about next:

Now this absences of fathers in everyday does not only apply to the demise of domestic life. In fact, what we are also experiencing in our culture is the absence of fathers in the spiritual life of the home, even when the father is present in the family. As pointed out by Doug Barry in his “Battle Ready Rally,” we typically praise our grandmas for passing on the faith in our family. We almost never hear about fathers or grandfathers passing on the faith to their children. Typically, “church” or “religion” is viewed as something reserved for women.

…

These Polish men failed to see that their primary responsibility as head of the household was to fight the spiritual battle for the lives of their family. As Saint Paul says in Ephesians 6:12, “For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens.” It is our duty as fathers to fight that battle and to be a firm foundation for our family. If we don’t do it, our society will continue to crumble around us.

All well and good. I don’t disagree with his general argument- Christian men do need to lead the spiritual life of their families. But as I indicated earlier, the author here is missing something important, something essential. What is missing?

Well, leadership, of course. He mourns the loss of spiritual leadership. But if a man is not a leader in other ways in his family, how can he flourish as (much less be encouraged to be) a spiritual leader. And where does this take us? Why, authority in the family, naturally.

²² Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. ²³ For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. ²⁴ As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. ²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, ²⁶ that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, ²⁷ that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. ²⁸ Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹ For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, ³⁰ because we are members of his body. ³¹ “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” ³² This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the church; ³³ however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

(Ephesians 5:22)

Men cannot fulfill their role as spiritual leaders in their family if the rest of their leadership is cut off at the knees. How effective will a man be if the children see his wife, their mother, constantly rebel against his leadership? I think we all know the answer to that.

Ultimately, the real blind spot here is to the way that the Church treats men, husbands/fathers in particular. The lack of respect, the lack of support for a husband’s authority, all of these undermine any desire or efforts for men to be the spiritual leaders of their families.

As Deep Strength and others have pointed out, men (like women) respond to Incentives. this applies to actions within marriage, as well as before or without. Now, does that excuse men who don’t try to carry out their duties? Of course not. But the blame is not only theirs to share.

⁵ “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me; ⁶ but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

⁷ “Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the man by whom the temptation comes!

(Matthew 18:5-7)

If we want more men to act as spiritual leaders in their families, the Church needs to stop treating men like trash. It needs to encourage and admonish, yes, but also respect and acknowledge. Further, women need to be taught to encourage and aide their husbands in being leaders, rather than be taught to belittle them and usurp their authority.

Male and female He created us. The behaviors of both need to be addressed if we want to see positive change. Ignore one sex entirely, and you will never get very far at all.