What does it mean to be Defiled? – Part I

A Biblically based understanding of Defilement, covering descriptions and implications on relationships and spiritual vitality.

Readership: All

This essay is comprised of the following sections.

1. Introduction
2. Concepts and Definitions
3. Is Defilement a State or a Process?
4. What is the difference between being Unclean and being Defiled?
5. Old Testament Scriptures Covering Defilement
6. The Lamentable Defilement of Children
7. Conclusions

Introduction

In the commentary under one of J.T.’s posts, Saving Eve: A strong disagreement (October 15, 2018), the word “defile” came up out of a scripture reference, and it occurred to me during the discussion that this is one of those theological terms that Christians frequently hear and use in discussions, but don’t really know what it is.

Since this conversation, I’ve been more cognizant of how this word is used.

In a more recent post, Divorce Part 7 – Final (November 24, 2018), Deep Strength offered an exegetical study of the scriptures on the topic of marriage and divorce. Both of the words, sanctification and defilement were used in the text of this post, as well as many of the comments. Again, I felt like the general understanding of these concepts needed clarification.

After I started this study, it quickly grew to more than 20 pages in MS Word. So because of the length, I parsed it into smaller bites and made several posts of it. This post will only begin to cover the topic of defilement, as it only covers a couple passages within the Old Testament. There is a lot more to be had from the OT, as well as the NT.

Other posts stemming from this study include the following.

• Sigma Frame: What does it mean to be Unclean? (December 2, 2018)

In addition to this, there are two parables circulating the RP sphere which may offer more succinct insights. Some of my readers will be familiar with these stories.

• The Parable of the Pie is an anecdotal comparison between sanctification and defilement.
• the Parable of the Sticky-Tape is another analogy that describes the Alpha Widow syndrome as a trope of defilement.

For quick reference, I’ll post these links to online resources covering the related word studies.

• Bible Hub: Topic: “Unclean”.
• Bible Hub: Topic: “Defile”.
• Bible Hub: Topic: “Consecrate”.
• Bible Hub: Topic: “Sanctify”.

Concepts and Definitions

The words, defilement (n.) and defiled (adj.) describe a major concept in Christian doctrine. These words not only strike the mind as impressive, but they are also confusing at the same time.

The word defile is defined as, “to make foul, dirty, or unclean; pollute; taint; debase;” or “to violate the chastity of”.

Synonyms which might enlarge our understanding of the concept of defilement include debasement, corruption, and contamination.

As per the dictionary definition, defile carries the connotation of being “dirty”. But the full Biblical concept includes the spiritual aspect of dirtiness. The full flavor would involve the concepts of eventual damnation, and eternal perdition.

Running parallel to many teachings about defilement are references to things that are unclean. This topic has been reviewed in a previous post, entitled, What does it mean to be Unclean? (December 2, 2018).

Moreover, these definitions are as nebulous as could be, and may not yield any further insight to the layperson. They don’t really help anyone understand the spiritual or practical significance at all.

It may help our understanding of the matter if we draw an entertaining analogy to some concepts ubiquitous in thermodynamics, industrial engineering, and manufacturing science. So (partly in jest), I will be making intermittent comments to this end.

Concerning these distinctions, the reader may like to review some basic definitions of the related concepts, such as states, processes, and qualities, which may help us differentiate between the concepts discussed herein.

The remainder of this essay will further examine the concept of defilement from a Thermodynamic Red Pill (TRP) perspective. Future posts will discuss how culturally pertinent sexual dynamics are related.

The process of moving from A to B requires a catalyst. The process of moving from B to C is spontaneous. The process of moving from C to either A or B can never occur.

Is Defilement a State or a Process?

I had to think about this question for a long time, and I am sure that most people, even believers, are unaware that there is a difference. Right now, I am about 80% convinced that defilement is a state, and not a process. The adjective, defiled, is used to describe that state.

For example, the statement, “The person is defiled” is similar to the statement, “The water is contaminated”. Both adjectives, defiled and contaminated, describe a state characterized by the presence of intrinsic impurities. Likewise, the states of uncleanness and defilement are characterized by properties which describe and determine the respective states.

But too often, these words are used in convention to refer to an amalgamation of the processes involved, which thereby introduces the confusion as to whether it is a state or process. I suppose we could invent the word, defilation, to generally refer to any process leading to defilement.

Another source of confusion may arise from the fact that it’s human nature to be adamantly focused on the “works (of the flesh)” aspect, or the processes necessary to induce a state of defilement, but I am convinced that God is most concerned about the state.

Further compounding this confusion is the fact that the Bible contains many descriptions of things that lead to defilement and uncleanness, which seems to fit the viewpoint of man, and thereby provide apparent credence to the false assumption that defilement is a process.

In sum, many of the references given in scripture concerning defilement fall into one of three categories.

1. Delineations of processes that cause a state of defilement.
2. Descriptions of the properties used to identify a state of being unclean or defiled.
3. Proscriptions of processes for dealing with said states.

Interestingly, it seems that most scriptures cover the first two categories. Some verses give remedies for being unclean, but (so far) I have not found any directions about how to reverse defilement. If we appropriate the afore invented word, defilation, to mean a process of becoming undefiled, then capital punishment appears to be the only scripturally mentioned form of “undefilation”. The absence of such a term in scripture, and the severe consequences and irreparability of defilement both stand as evidence leading to certain conclusions in the next section.

What is the difference between being Unclean and being Defiled?

The Bible lists many things that cause uncleanness, as well as defilement. The writers of scripture used two different words, unclean and defiled, to make a distinction between them, because being unclean is not the same as being defiled. So you might be asking this question, as I did – what is the difference between the two concepts?

Largely based on the conclusions of the previous section, my best understanding of this, is that uncleanness is a temporary state, but defilement is permanently etched into the body, mind, soul and spirit, not to mention the salaciously indelible memories of licking that delicious fig pie.

Similar to being unclean, defilement also includes the spiritual aspect – that is, certain experiences affect one’s state of mind, and emotional disposition, such that one becomes unfit or unable to have certain other experiences in life, including personal and spiritual maturation.

In other words, a person who is defiled cannot think objectively, and they have developed subjective biases. They possess certain emotional predilections and peculiar affections. The end effect is being more psychotic and less real, more emotional and less rational, more given over to sentiments and less so to education. Essentially, more feeelz, less faith.

Now we add to this understanding, the fact that defilement is rather permanent. It becomes a part of one’s constitutional identity of the soul. I have personally heard true stories amounting to the fact that certain sexual experiences can transform one’s value system, beliefs, and even one’s personality!

So another way to describe the difference is that uncleanness is defined by certain extrinsic properties, while defilement is determined by certain intrinsic properties.

According to Figure 1, it is the movement of the system towards C, never to return to either A nor B.

[Eds. note: This is a very sobering realization. A true comprehension of the eternal gravity of defilement should put the fear of God into a person.]

The distinction between these two states should become more evident to the reader in the next section.

Would you drink out of these cups, even if they were washed first?

Old Testament Scriptures Covering Defilement

In scripture, Leviticus 18 pumps up the volume by describing a number of things or activities causing defilement, including adultery, incest, homosexuality, and bestiality.

We may not be surprised to learn that sexual immorality most certainly introduces defilement. But interestingly, a sexual union is not always necessary for a defilement to occur. (Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament bring this out more clearly, but this will remain to be discussed in a future post.)

The first half of this chapter states that it is “wickedness” to “uncover the nakedness of” any one of a large number of close family members. (Scholars believe that “uncover the nakedness of” someone might also be a euphemism for sexual relations, so this remains up for debate.) Verses 6-18 iterate each relation that is forbidden to disrobe in your presence.

Here’s a true story that will make this relatable to the reader. I remember once when I was a child, I accidentally walked in on my grandmother while she was undressing. After seeing the sight of her aged body, I was not able to imagine that any woman, young or old, was aesthetically beautiful underneath her clothes. It was not until I was much older, after I had seen prime SMV women in the nude, that I was able to think of (some) women as beautiful. So I can understand how the sight of naked family members can warp one’s impression of people in general.

The second half of this chapter lists a number of activities, most of them sexual, which cause one to become defiled. So here we are talking about processes which should be avoided.

“¹⁹ ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity. ²⁰ Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife, to defile yourself with her. ²¹ And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the Lord. ²² You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. ²³ Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.

²⁴ ‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. ²⁵ For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants. ²⁶ You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you ²⁷ (for all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled), ²⁸ lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you. ²⁹ For whoever commits any of these abominations, the persons who commit them shall be cut off from among their people.

³⁰ ‘Therefore you shall keep My ordinance, so that you do not commit any of these abominable customs which were committed before you, and that you do not defile yourselves by them: I am the Lord your God.’”

So to put this all together, a bullet list of defiling experiences looks like this.

• Viewing adult, close family members in the nude (other than one’s husband or wife)
• Thinking of sex too lightly, or taking sex casually (profaning God)
• Having casual sex with short term partners (fornication, profaning God)
• Having sex with a woman during her menstruation.
• Swinging (trading husbands or wives for sexual purposes, which is adultery)
• Cuckolding or being cuckolded (adultery)
• Sexual experiences with same sex partners (homosexuality)
• Sexual experiences with family members (incest)
• Sexual experiences with animals (bestiality)
• Sacrificing children’s well-being (e.g. destroying their lives, spiritual vitality, faith, and confidence) for the sake of personal goals or interests

The Lamentable Defilement of Children

In the spiritual sense, one’s first encounter with either God’s grace, or Satan’s thug life, often occurs in childhood or adolescence. Thus, a state of sanctification or defilement (respectively) can set in early, often times long before a person is cognizant of the nature of the transition. This trajectory tends to develop and expand over a person’s life span, resulting in their eternal condition of union with (in the case of sanctification), or alienation from (in the case of defilement) God Himself.

The last point on the list above is an especially complex topic, since it involves the defiling formation (or the de-formation) of young minds and souls. So it includes this sublist.

• Divorce and fatherlessness are both known to have a profoundly negative effect on any children involved.
• Pursuing sexual promiscuity while married, which invariably results in the defilement of the perpetrators through adultery, is both a cause of, and a prevalent motive for a frivorce which harms children. So this is a double defilement.
• Sexual experiences with children (pedophilia)
• Killing children (abortion, infanticide, homicide)

“But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.” ~ Mark 9:42 (NKJV)

Related

• All Things Bright And Beautiful: Spiritual Darkness and Sacrificing Children – Part I (August 28, 2018)
• All Things Bright And Beautiful: Spiritual Darkness and Sacrificing Children – Part II (December 6, 2018)

Conclusions

It might be tempting for some readers to cling to the belief that defilement is not much different from being unclean. But the difference is noteworthy. A state of uncleanness is (presumed to be) temporary – body fluids and sheets which can be washed up in an hour, or rancorous or inebriated dispositions which undulate over time. But defilement is associated with taking a step into the abyss – etched permanently into the body (self-evident), mind (i.e. cognitive beliefs, memory), soul (affections and inclinations), and spirit (perdition).

Upon reflection, it may be apparent to the reader by now, that when a society loosens its sexual norms, the associated “liberation” not only brings depravity, but it is also the destruction of Sanctity. It would be more fitting and accurate, from a Christian perspective, to rename “the Sexual Revolution” as “the Defilement Rebellion”.

Related

• Christian Crier (feat. Jack Wellman): What Does Defile Mean? A Biblical Definition of Defile or Defiled (August 13, 2015)
• All Things Bright And Beautiful: Email Questions… Virginity is a pile of horse manure? (November 9, 2018)

Advertisements

A True Prophet of Western Politics

A favorable op-ed on Ed Hurst’s unique political views.

Readership: Those who are fully disconnected from the Matrix

To most Christians, it may appear as though the political spectrum of the Right conforms more closely to Christian principles as a nation. Indeed, for all my life, most Christians have believed that the political Right is the moral Right, and have voted accordingly.

Likewise, most Christian leaders and organizations throw their political hat in with the Republican Right. However, the religious leaders of our day are increasingly embracing the corrupted values and lifestyles of the Left.

On the other side of the aisle, I’ve found that many Leftist principles envelop a Christ-like attitude towards one’s fellow man, although their values and purposes have descended into outright paganism. Another no-go.

So in sum, I’ve never been content with the comprehensive narratives offered by either the Right or the Left. Many of those in my generation (X-er’s) have felt the same way, although for different reasons, which has led to the growth of the third parties over the last 30 years, such as the Libertarian and the Green. But none of these parties have gained significant traction. Moreover, it is becoming apparent to everyone that no clear political lines can be drawn along Biblical or other ideological grounds. It seems that “the system” just won’t allow it.

This phenomenology begs the deeper question of, WHY is it all so stymied?

The Flimsy Nutshell answer: It’s all puppet politics to appease and control the masses. We don’t know what’s really going on behind the scenes. But occasionally, we get a harrowing glimpse of the truth, which no one is ready to believe, much less accept responsibility for.

To make the social landscape even more confusing, false teachers, and false leaders abound these days. It’s nearly impossible to find a voice that speaks the values and viewpoints of God concerning modern politics.

So I want to devote this blog post to promote a fellow blogger, Ed Hurst, at “Do What’s Right“. He’s been blogging for many years, and he has more than 900 followers. He’s also written a number of books on various subjects, including A Christian Guide to the Sexual Marketplace (2013), and Redemption and Sexual Identity (2014). They’re available online for free.

Concerning his approach to scripture, he states his unique approach in his page, Philosophy.

“…holding to the Western epistemology guarantees you cannot understand the Bible. Your subconscious mind will be imbued with an arrogant assumption you do understand it, and better than those who wrote it. That’s wrong. Further, the Hebraic approach is what God designed as the proper viewpoint for humans in this world, so if you don’t embrace it, you fight God.”

Elsewhere, he says,

“You do not measure the Bible against Post-modern Western social expectations. Instead, you measure the West and every other society and culture against the standards God set forth in His Word. It’s not that God expects us to clone the Hebrew society in our own day and time; it won’t fit. Rather, in “rightly dividing the Word,” we discern the underlying facts of human nature manifested in Hebrew customs by reading about them from within the ancient Hebrew moral standards.”

This is a view from outside the crucible of the Western Aristotelian epistemology, and all of its offshoots. He defines mysticism as simply holding a non-Aristotelian epistemology. I feel this is a philosophical tool likely to yield some astute insights that are commonly ignored by today’s thinkers, and indeed has, as can be seen in many of his posts.

To the point, Ed has been able to put into words my deeper beliefs, or should I say, suspicions about western politics. As he writes in his post, The Current Path of the US (November 30, 2018),

“The “left” and “right” in our current political context is just a front to whip up the crowds. It never ceases to amaze me just how deeply the troops on the ground truly believe the crap they are sold. There is a wealth of mythology on both sides that really has nothing to do with actual government policy.”

Read more in his latest post, The US Is Terminal (December 5, 2018), and other works under the tags, Politics and Globalism.

Now you will see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Related

• The American Thinker (feat. Peter Skurkiss): Is Globalism the New Feudalism?(December 4, 2018)
• The American Thinker (feat. Selwyn Duke): For the West to Live, ‘Equality’ Must Die (December 4, 2018)

What does it mean to be Unclean?

Reaching a deeper understanding of the concepts behind the state of being Unclean, including Biblical citations, descriptions, and visual illustrations.

Readership: All

I’ve decided that several theological terms, such as unclean, defile, consecrate, and sanctify, deserve a closer study. So this post takes a look at the first term, and some upcoming posts will tackle the others.

A simple interpretation of unclean is just what the word means – dirty. An object, such as the coffee mug in the picture above, or a person, in the spiritual context, has been busy with the common tasks and functions of life, and carries physical or spiritual indications of his/her contact with the functional world. These indicators become feculent if efforts are not made to wash and clean them in a timely manner.

In the spiritual context, the Bible mentions several experiences which cause one to be unclean.

“⁴ Whatever man of the descendants of Aaron, who is a leper or has a discharge, shall not eat the holy offerings until he is clean. And whoever touches anything made unclean by a corpse, or a man who has had an emission of semen, ⁵ or whoever touches any creeping thing by which he would be made unclean, or any person by whom he would become unclean, whatever his uncleanness may be— ⁶ the person who has touched any such thing shall be unclean until evening, and shall not eat the holy offerings unless he washes his body with water. ⁷ And when the sun goes down he shall be clean; and afterward he may eat the holy offerings, because it is his food. ⁸ Whatever dies naturally or is torn by beasts he shall not eat, to defile himself with it: I am the Lord.” ~ Leviticus 22:4-8 (NKJV)

To reframe this in my own words,

“If you’ve been ill and puking, you shouldn’t plan to go on a date. If you’ve just attended a funeral, or if you’ve been jerking off on X-vids, or if you’ve been cleaning up your kid’s excrement, or cleaning dead cockroaches out of the drain, or if you’re all grossed out from working at a medical clinic or from watching horror movies, (etc.), then until the day is over and you’ve had a hot shower, you’re not going to be in the right mood to enjoy a romantic candlelit dinner with your spouse. And if the dinner includes roadkill, then that will ruin the mood of the evening, on top of the fact that you’ll be facing some serious gastroenteritis over the next few days.”

From my reading of this, it is apparent that practically any repugnancy or offense that causes one to develop a rancorous disposition, is part and parcel of the experience of becoming unclean.

Of note, an offense is a process by which one becomes unclean.

Does this mean that certain Feeelz are unclean?

Well, sort of. A better way to describe this would be in terms of the appropriateness of one’s disposition within specific contexts. I believe this is because being unclean also includes the spiritual (or ceremonial) aspect – that is to say, certain experiences, like having orgasms, PMS, and touching bugs and dead things, affect one’s Frame of mind and emotional disposition, such that one becomes unable to enjoy, or unfit to attend formal white tie events.

The emotion of disgust is the near opposite of joy, and several passages in scripture associate joy with a vibrant life in the presence of God.

“Do not sorrow, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.” ~ Nehemiah 8:10 (NKJV)

“Let us come before His presence with thanksgiving;
Let us shout joyfully to Him with psalms.” ~ Psalm 95:2 (NKJV)

Put simply, the mundanities of life are just not fitting nor dignified, and thereby spoil the joys of a formal experience.

From a simple TRP perspective, the two states are incompatible.

For a visual experience of the difference, please overlook my amateur photoshop skills and “feel the difference” between the images below. [Viewer warning: the third and fourth images may be disturbing.]

Image of a joyful beauty in paradise – soul inspiring!

Image of a down-to-earth man fighting against nature for survival – also very inspiring.

Image of a down-to-earth man doing a very disgusting, but well-paying job. It’s still honorable and respectable, in spite of the stench.

Image of a joyful beauty at a meat rendering plant… Ugh! Pass me the barf bag, NOW!

I think everyone can agree that the juxtaposition of joy and beauty with death and decay is far worse than merely the sight of rotting carcasses at the glue factory. There’s no inherent value, meaning, or inspiration in it, and it destroys any value, meaning, and inspiration that might have been recognized of its constituent elements. In fact, once you’ve seen that last image, if you go back to view any of the previous three images again, you’ll find that they have lost all their power to inspire. That’s precisely the sentiment carried by the Biblical descriptions of being unclean.

I believe this is (at least partly) the idea that Jesus was referring to in the parables of the patches and wineskins.

“No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and the tear is made worse. Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.” ~ Matthew 9:16-17 (NKJV)

Leviticus 15 talks further about ceremonial uncleanliness. It says that women are unclean during their menstrual cycle, and that men are unclean after a seminal emission.

“¹⁶ ‘If any man has an emission of semen, then he shall wash all his body in water, and be unclean until evening. ¹⁷ And any garment and any leather on which there is semen, it shall be washed with water, and be unclean until evening. ¹⁸ Also, when a woman lies with a man, and there is an emission of semen, they shall bathe in water, and be unclean until evening.
¹⁹ ‘If a woman has a discharge, and the discharge from her body is blood, she shall be set apart seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening. ²⁰ Everything that she lies on during her impurity shall be unclean; also everything that she sits on shall be unclean. ²¹ Whoever touches her bed shall wash his clothes and bathe in water, and be unclean until evening. ²² And whoever touches anything that she sat on shall wash his clothes and bathe in water, and be unclean until evening. ²³ If anything is on her bed or on anything on which she sits, when he touches it, he shall be unclean until evening. ²⁴ And if any man lies with her at all, so that her impurity is on him, he shall be unclean seven days; and every bed on which he lies shall be unclean.” ~ Leviticus 15:16-24 (NKJV)

For menstruation and ejaculation, the jism, blood, stains, and odors are obviously properties that determine an unclean state. And we know how women are often in a foul mood too, during their menstrual cycle.

But in addition to the malodorous menses and meandrous moods, we might also presume (from a spiritual view) that a psychological state of post orgasmic delirium is also concomitant with becoming unclean.

By comparing the faces of pleasure and pain, we get a glimpse of how an orgasm might be considered unclean, while suffering is not. The faces expressing pain are disturbing, but still remain respectable and relatable. But the schmoozy O faces appear psychotic and creepy within the context of polite company. This phenomenon is apparently true across sex, race and culture.

Image source: Motherboard (feat. Samantha Cole): Researchers Studied How Facial Expressions for Orgasms and Pain Differ Across Cultures (October 16, 2018).

To further explore this effect, let’s consider how people’s moods will change after having sex (as in Leviticus 15:18). For a visual comparison of the pre, in vitro, and post dopamine/oxytocin states, take a look at these photo illustrations from Brazilian photographer, Marcos Alberti, who teamed up with sex toy brand Smile Makers to capture the cum laud faces of women within shuddering throes and curled toes, in a collection he calls, “The O Project” [Viewer warning: link NSFW].

My comments follow the visual teaser.

In the pre-oxytocin state, the subjects appear (relatively) dignified and rational. But after grunting through an O, each person takes on a different aura. Some women get silly and giggly, some become bumbling buffoons, some get proud and disdainful, some get catty and mean, some just get zoned out and sh!t faced, and a few actually become more soft, warm and loving. Their change in spirit cannot be denied. In fact, the Bible says that this is when you really “know” a person in the carnal sense.

Different strokes for different blokes. Different post O’s for different host hoes. But the bottom line is that something in their spiritual constitution has changed. It’s not a permanent change, but it’s definitely not appropriate nor suitable within certain contexts. Hence, the person would be considered unclean in this state.

Now the women in these photos were only lancing their loins with a sex toy product, and there was no “emission of semen” as stated in Leviticus. But if an actual man were introduced into her orgasmic thrall, and the specified genetic condiments were tossed onto the salad, then that’s when the real permanence of defilement sets in.

The next post will cover the topic of Defilement.

Conclusions

Some rather unsurprising conclusions about ceremonial uncleanness are as follows.

• The gut-turning blend of the beautiful and the unseemly, is a characteristic quality of a state of being unclean.
• Activities or experiences which elicit rancorous disgust detract from one’s sense of confidence and joy in a formal dignified setting.
• Similarly, activities or experiences which cast one into an inebriated or unsober state of being defer one from being in a rational and reasonable state of mind, which may have a direct impact on the decisions and/or events in one’s life.

Related

Sigma Frame:

States, Processes, and Qualities

Some brief definitions of engineering and thermodynamic concepts to be used as an analogy to explain spiritual phenomena.

Readership: Reference

I feel there is a general haze of confusion surrounding many spiritual concepts, such as defilement, uncleanness, consecration, sanctification, and redemption. I will be studying these concepts in some future posts, and in order to help our understanding of these matters, I will be discussing them in terms of an analogy to the comparable concepts ubiquitous in thermodynamics, industrial engineering, and manufacturing science, namely states, processes, and qualities, among others. So this post is meant to serve as a reference to some general definitions. I may add to this post in the future.

A State is defined as the equilibrium condition of a system, and is described in terms of several state variables or state quantities that depend only on the current equilibrium condition of the system. State functions do not depend on the path by which the system arrived at its present state. For example, internal energy, enthalpy, and entropy are state quantities.

• Uncleanness is a state defined by certain extrinsic properties.
• Defilement is a state determined by certain intrinsic properties.

A Process is how a system passes from one state to another. Process functions depend on the path taken to reach one state from another. As an example, mechanical work and heat are process functions because they describe quantitatively the transition between equilibrium states of a thermodynamic system.

Process Quality is having the highest efficiency and best utilization of all resources in production.

Product Quality means to incorporate features that have a capacity to meet consumer needs (wants) and gives customer satisfaction by improving products (goods) and making them free from any deficiencies or defects.

Six Sigma (6σ) is a set of techniques and tools for process improvement. Six Sigma strategies seek to improve the quality of the output of a process by identifying and removing the causes of defects and minimizing variability in manufacturing and business processes. It uses a set of quality management methods, mainly empirical, and statistical methods, and creates a special infrastructure of people within the organization who are experts in these methods. Each Six Sigma project carried out within an organization follows a defined sequence of steps and has specific value targets, for example: reduce process cycle time, reduce pollution, reduce costs, increase customer satisfaction, and increase profits. A six sigma process is one in which 99.99966% of all opportunities to produce some feature of a part are statistically expected to be free of defects.

Related

 

Is there any honor or benefit to slut shaming an adulterous wife?

An examination of the dynamics of slut shaming a wayward wife.

Readership: Red Pilled Men

Based on one of my previous posts, there was a discussion at Boxer’s concerning how a man could possibly deal with an adulterous or Alpha-widowed wife, who is spiritually impoverished as a result of her present inclinations, or her previous sexual profligacies, respectively. These posts included,

1. Sigma Frame: Can You Trust A Dancing Skeleton? (September 21, 2018)
2. Boxer: How Dare You (November 7, 2018)
3. Boxer: Patriarchal Thinking (November 13, 2018)

Just to be clear, my previous post (1) was intended to warn readers of the inevitable risks of today’s MMP, and to encourage readers to be both honest and extremely diligent when vetting a potential spouse. I’d like to believe that the overdramatized description might even induce more conscientiousness about the social, marital, and spiritual consequences of sexual promiscuity.

The term “marital fraud” was intended to describe how the spiritual desolation in the wife, which results from dissipating herself (AKA “discovering herself”), invariably remains as a perpetual act of cruelty and disrespect towards her future spouse. It was not meant as a justification for divorce in the de jure sense, although I do understand how it could be interpreted that way, based on certain Biblical passages.

We have two situations covered in Boxer’s two posts, and their related discussions.

1. A wife who was slutty in the past, and who continues to coit Mr. Danger, even though married.
2. A wife who was slutty in the past, but who has since settled down and honors her marital vows.

In the last post (3), Boxer covers these two cases respectively as follows.

“If his partner is breaking the [marital] contract, then there are remedies available, which don’t include impotent whining and bitching in public. If his partner is not breaking the contract, then he needs to shut the fuck up and quit whining and bitching in public. Public bitching and whining is unmanly. The time for reading the prospectus is before one invests [in a woman by marrying her].”

But as Honeycomb and Ofelas pointed out in the comments of Boxer’s previous post (2), sexual promiscuities are acts of sin that people rarely come to regret. A guy is blessed if the girl actually regrets her past libidinal indiscretions and confesses it.

There was also some discussion about whether commiserating over marital fraud is “manly”, or honorable, or what not. I agree that these considerations are important, however they are also corrigible, depending on the context of the situation.

If the wife is merely fraudulent, in that she did not confess her true sexual history with her fiancée before marriage, but she conscientiously observes her marital vows and seeks to invest in the relationship, then I believe there is not much a husband can do to remediate the spiritual poverty that she has brought into the marriage. The best he can do is to improve the bonding as much as he can, and guide her towards spiritual growth.

But if the wife continues to revel in her “freedom of choice”, and indulge in glorifying branch swinging, then slut shaming might have a beneficial purpose. So I will outline a few possible outcomes here as follows.

Possible Benefits to Slutty Wife Shaming

I can see a small number of possibly beneficial purposes in publicly shaming an adulterous wife or LTR companion (the first case mentioned above).

1. In the case where the wife continued to be proud of her carouseling, and at risk of continuing in it, then exposing her sin and shame might serve to goad her towards repentance and reinforce her remorse.
2. In the case where the wife was nymphotically desperate for cyclical sexual afirmaction, such that it took the form of an adicktion which she couldn’t live without, then publicly shaming her would probably break any remaining trust in hubby. This move would essentially end the relationship, and would push her out to drift in the SMP. However, getting rid of such a woman would probably be a good thing, and she would probably be (relatively) “happier” too, for whatever that is worth. Furthermore (if I am interpreting scripture correctly), this form of discipline is endorsed by St. Paul.

“…deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” ~ 1^st Corinthians 5:5 (NKJV)

3. It would demonstrate to other, i.e. younger, women that they can’t avoid a public scorning for sexual profligacy, even though married. This would be taking one small step back to a Patriarchal social structure, much to the dismay of liberated Feminists. (That in itself may prove to be rather satisfying!)

Risks Inherent in Slutty Wife Shaming

There are also many risks in this, which should not be overlooked.

1. A man risks violating the sacred trust of his wife, which may lower her temptation threshold. This is a complicated and nuanced matter, which may warrant some further discussion and review.
2. He opens himself up to gossip and ridicule within his community.
3. This may have a negative effect on his reputation and social standing, which in turn, may affect the trajectory and stability of his career.
4. Once other Chads find out that she’s easy, she may face a landslide of sexually tinged male attention. In this case, the man would basically be advertising her services to the community.

Of course, the effectiveness and end results of these purposes would depend on the character of the individual, the social context, and the nature of their peer group as well.

If the peer group / public rejoined the husband’s shaming of the wife by reinforcing the social ostracization, then this may do wonders in bouncing the wayward wife back onto the straight and narrow. We know how women always follow the herd.

On the other hand, if the peer group scorned the husband for exposing his wife’s indiscretions, and labeled him as “cowardly whiner”, then this may serve to empower the wife’s ambitions to up her N count even higher.

In a perfect world, she might also respond by feeling compassion for her husband’s having to endure suffering for her wrongdoing, but this (I believe) is unlikely, and even if she does, it is unclear whether she would turn her behavior around or not.

The bottom line is that if a man has a cockamaniacal wife who is rocking the boat by flirting and F-ing around with other men, then this puts the cucked husband in a very strenuous, defensive, and dishonored position. This continues to be true, although less severe, even if the wife has since forsaken her promiscuous past.

Also, other males would be wiser to offer moral support to a husband who feels he has been defrauded or cucked, rather than to deride him for being an “unmanly” cuckold.

I hope the information offered in this post may help men think through their choices and actions more clearly.

Somewhat inspired by the discussion at Boxer’s, I’m still trying to figure out who gets cucked worse (in theory) – the Tingle-inspiring Alpha who has the quick, soul gratifying F*ck that is so envied by all other men, but then has his progeny condom-bagged or aborted, and thereby loses his reproductive opportunities to the Beta she has children with later on, OR the Beta who fathers children with her, but has to tolerate her guilt-ridden soul emptiness and sexual frigidity stemming from her youthful, widow inducing rendezvous with the Alpha.

It’s a tough call.

But it does seem like wherever Derek goes, he draws criticism… 😉

Related

• Atlas Obscura (feat. Sarah Laskow): The Racist, Slut-Shaming History of Adultery Laws (August 21, 2015)

On the Authenticity of Appearance and Avatar

Being your true self often requires you to conform to a role, similar to that of a play, and then take great effort to thespianize the REAL you… and it is exhausting!

Readership: All

Introduction

As you may have already noticed, I’ve decided to experiment with a new site appearance, using the Jack of diamonds and the Jack Sparrow character as the new avatar.

The reasons include the following, among others.

• I feel this image fits my persona a little better.
• I wanted an image that is more piercing, bold, energetic, and clean cut.
• I believe this image might appeal to a wider audience of men, especially the younger men.
• But really, it’s all about being authentic.

Some might scoff at a claim of authenticity from a blogger who won’t disclose his real name. However, this same boundary can increase authenticity, because it destroys socially constructed limitations of expression.

I know readers won’t necessarily believe my words because they are true, but because they are authentic. So then, the strength of authenticity comes down to what is being said, and its value to the reader.

But authenticity is not what you might think it is. Let me explain by describing how authenticity develops.

The Development of Authenticity

In our experience of coming of age, and in the beginning stages of coming to God, our mind is filled with Machiavellian images of an omnipotent God, the eternal glory of heaven, the austere horror of hell, the power of angels, the terror of demons, and a multitude of mysteries surrounding these metaphysical transcendent realities.

In parallel, we faced various truths apart from God, and we were greeted with confusion and frustration.

But then,

We are knowing God through His Word.
We realize how Jesus serves us.
We change our concept of what love is, among many other false mindsets.
We are facing various truths from God’s perspective.
We are knowing God’s mind through prayer.
We are knowing how to serve God and improve our station in life by doing His will.
We are knowing God’s heart through suffering.

Then, when the costs of opportunity, and the pains of suffering come, we know we are being real.

But when does God become authentic to us?

Is it in the beginning, when we observed an impressively fearsome and enigmatic God from a distance? Or later, when He is as familiar to us as our father, and we become a part of His legacy on earth?

As we come closer to God, we resemble Him more closely, in form and character, including our appearance to those who do not know Him. Those who think God is all smoke and mirrors, may very well see us in the same manner. Unless, that is, we take the effort to extol Christ in our daily living. This very post is going over how to do this.

Thus, getting closer to God not only involves being authentic before God, but also before our fellow man. But because we originate from an earthly substance, the way in which we are authentic doesn’t always seem natural. Being your true self often requires you to conform to a role, similar to that of a play, and then take great effort to thespianize the real you. It often requires a transformation of thoughts, words, and image, into what would allow you to connect with others and inspire them – and not what would emanate from your relaxed, casual effort. It also fatigues the h@ll out of your Flesh (literally). It is exhausting, yet simultaneously invigorating.

“And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” ~ Galatians 5:24 (NKJV)

The Display of Authenticity

Exactly one year ago, I had a conversation under American Dad’s post, Out of your shell (November 21, 2017), which was delightfully insightful to readers at the time. This discussion is definitely worth reviewing, so I’ve coopted the substance of the topic as follows.

---

SF: I enjoy being a very solitary person, and being alone with my research projects, academic writings and philosophical thoughts. People can be so annoying and distracting. But at the same time, I work in a teaching profession, so it’s important for me to be upbeat, energetic, friendly, patient and inspiring. So, I have learned to fold up my inner world whenever I step into the classroom, and live a larger life as an actor while in front of my students. At these times, my inner being, which I normally keep to myself, shines through in my performance. It is thoroughly exhausting for me, but apparently quite effective, as gauged by my class performance reviews.

I don’t know if this advice is transferrable to others, but I believe introverted people would benefit immensely (as I have) from seeing social interaction as a forum for the exaggerated display of attitudes and sentiments, and to consider the emotional work involved to be play-acting in an authentic way, doing whatever is necessary for others to recognize one’s true heart.

This kind of psychological doubling-down, and emotionally played-up approach is also key to meeting women, and it’s a core aspect of improving one’s Game. Furthermore, I have learned that this is actually an expression of humility.

“Humble thyself in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up.” ~ James 4:10 (NKJV)

I know it’s true!

Scott: You have described almost exactly the process I use when teaching. I do the same thing when I am seeing a patient, or at a social event.

I just never put it to words like that. And yes, it takes all the fear out of meeting/interacting with women away.

It’s almost like the way some people drink alcohol to lower their inhibitions and be more social. I can just flip a switch to a different “mode” minus the drinking and the hangover.

Further. Yes it is humbling. It’s hard to explain but it’s like saying “it would be a shame for me to hide my ability to lead, to teach, to bring people together because I would rather just stay home and read. So, I won’t.”

Earl: I used to work in the media sector and I still do public speaking. Normally I’m introverted but once I’m into performance mode it’s like a light switch flipping on. If I compared what takes more out of me… a hard physical workout or doing a long ‘performance’ mode, it’s always been doing the performance.

“Humble thyself in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up.” I know it’s true!

Perhaps that’s the ‘light switch’.

SF: Bingo! Finding the ‘switch’ takes a while of trial and error, and it’s always emotionally taxing to ‘flip it on’. But it’s well worth it – a key to life itself!

Lost Patrol: I have seen that kind of thing before. I posit this has proven effective for you precisely because you are not an actor. You probably could not take on a different ‘role’ and be successful. Your act is to show the genuine you, which you normally safeguard, and you get good reviews because people like what they are hearing and seeing. They respond to the honesty. In your case the acting is not to put on the mask but to drop it.

When I was younger I would often develop an admiration for certain professional actors based on their performance in movies or shows. If I was later exposed, via a talk show or news article, to the actual personality of that individual, it usually resulted in a colossal let down; and I could never look at them the same way again. They were faking it.

SF: LP,

“Your act is to show the genuine you, which you normally safeguard… the acting is not to put on the mask but to drop it.”

Your distinction is exactly right.

“They respond to the honesty.”

Yes, and I would add two more descriptors – acceptance and sincerity.

Acceptance is what allows me to open my heart to begin with. I accept them first, as an act of faith, and then they are given the real choice to either accept me or reject me in return, depending on how the interaction plays out.

Honesty is saying things precisely as they are, and as it relates to people’s lives.

Sincerity is the attachment of emotion to honesty. It is what connects one person’s heart to another, and makes the moment indelibly memorable. Sincerity is what makes you either an iconic superstar, a revered sage, or an arrogant ass, depending on what you say and how it’s taken. Sincerity is the key.

Scott: LP agreed. When I am “on” in front of the class, I am simply unguarded. I always have a lot of fun with my students.

YS: I related to some of what you said. I also like being alone, and would often prefer it, truth be told. My profession demands that I not be, and my wife and kids have helped in that area too. It can be work, but I have appreciated many of the times I have forced myself to be social.

MacDonald the Old: A former pastor of mine was big on the idea that personality traits shouldn’t be assumed to be “good” just because they’re “who I am.” It’s a bit of a “red pill” moment in itself to realize that the “be true to your heart” mantra has conditioned us to never look at our own personal tendencies with a critical eye.

The additional lie it perpetuates is that our personalities, desires, and preferences can’t – or shouldn’t – change.

SF: The “be true to your heart” mantra is a “true” lie, which all depends on how it is interpreted and applied. If I interpret it to mean that I should do what is most to my liking, what is easiest and most enjoyable, then it is a lie (a self-serving platitude). If I interpret it to mean that I should be authentic in the act I put on for my students, then it is profoundly true.

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: Who can know it?” ~ Jeremiah 17:9 (NKJV)

…and so are the deceitful ears. People hear whatever they are inclined to hear, and they don’t always hear the truth contained in truths.

---

Conclusions

• Authenticity = Acceptance + Honesty + Sincerity
• Getting closer to God not only involves being authentic before God, but also before our fellow man.
• The subjective experience of being authentic doesn’t always come easily. It usually requires a lot of emotional work.
• When you can get into the habit of being authentic, people will notice and respond.

Related

• Sigma Frame: Personal Wealth and Service (12 September 2009)
• Sigma Frame: Onlookers, or Overcomers? (6 November 2009)
• Sigma Frame: Confidence and Authenticity in Speech (28 December 2009)

The Parable of the Pie

An explanation of Sanctification and Defilement using the Parable of the Pie, and the implications on relationships, including sexual purity, and spirituality.

Readership: All

Thanksgiving is right around the corner, so this is an appropriate time to retell the Parable of the (Poon) Pie. So here it goes.

I once heard a pastor explain sanctification like this.

“There were two boys, Jim and John, who were fighting over a piece of pie because they both wanted to eat it. Then Jim got the smart idea to lick the pie, at which time the fight ended immediately. John reacted with a look of disgust, while a smile broke out on Jim’s face as he continued to eat the pie. Jim kept the treat for himself, while John walked away silently. John was angry about losing the pie, but after Jim had licked it, he had no desire whatsoever to eat that particular piece of pie. He had lost all interest in having it for himself.”

Now let’s explain this parable using the two words in question.

At the beginning of the fight, the pie was fresh, tasty, and steaming hot out of the oven. No boy had ever put his fork into it. But when Jim licked the pie, he sanctified it to himself. On the other hand, since Jim had licked the pie, John considered it as defiled. That one lick made the pie both sanctified (to Jim) and defiled (to John).

In spiritual symbolism, both of these parables could also be extended to describe our relationship to Christ. Sanctification is described by Jesus like this.

“He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.” ~ John 7:38 (NKJV)

That’s what happens when a person gets “licked” by the Holy Spirit! And also, the closer we are to God, the less popular we will be in this world.

Likewise, the defilement context rings true as well. The closer we get to darkness, the less we are able to relate to God.

“He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.” ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

In case the reader hasn’t yet picked up on the meaning of the parable, the appropriate word substitutions are listed in the table below, according to the sexual and spiritual interpretations.

Symbolic Logos	Sexual Analogy	Spiritual Analogy
pie	a young hot virgin	A human being
lick	sexual intercourse	A conversion experience
spittle	semen	The Holy Spirit / Unclean Spirit

[Eds. note: Reversing the sexes or the deifications of the archetypes within the parable doesn’t reflect reality (i.e. “two girls fighting over a lollipop”, meaning, “two women fighting over a man”, or “two men fighting over the Holy Spirit”, respectively). Because in this case, continued “licking” correlates with increased wanting, often on the part of both girls, men, etc.]

So far, I think we can catch on to the analogy. But here is where the analogy breaks down.

The pie has no emotions, no soul, no reproductive potential, and offers no possible relationship to Jim. But a living, breathing girl is much more complex than a pie. A girl, on the other hand, has a fresh passion, and is eager to be ravished.

In addition to this, the girl also has a soul, and a highly impressionable spiritual constitution. Jim opens up her body, causing her shuddering pain and tears. He spills her blood, and thereby institutes a covenantal soul tie which she will never forget, or be free from, for the rest of her life. After this experience, she is forever bound to Jim, and the cost of opportunity is that she can never bond with John in quite the same way.

The difference between sanctification and defilement is not only spiritual, but also visceral. After a few good hard romps with Jim, not only will John not want the girl, but the girl will not want John either. Instead, she will grow to want Jim more, and she might even grow to despise John.

But it’s hard not to like piping hot, homemade pumpkin pie!

Pumpkin pie is my favorite! Happy Holidays, from Sigma Frame!

Related

 

The Feminine Typecasts of Men

A mansplained feminine view of male archetypes, complete with suggested nicknames.

Readership: Red Pilled readers, and the curiously imaginative sort.

In a previous post on Sigma Frame: Finding Mr. Right (June 15, 2017), we perused several types of men available to women on the S/MMP: Mr. Right, Mr. Right Fit, Mr. Right Now, Mr. Right On, and Mr. Good Enough! The outstanding question was whether a woman can identify them and make the best choice for her life.

Since then, I’ve expanded our understanding of The Feminine Dilemma (October 27, 2018), and found that these different types of men fall right in line with the different archetypes identified in this post. You may like to cover these two posts before reading on, if you haven’t already done so.

Here, I’ll cite the different types of men from the first mentioned post, and add some comments based on insights gleaned from the second. Each type of man/relationship is categorized by the chart given in the Feminine Dilemma – the Lifepath pursued by the female, and the male’s defacto role in the relationship.

Dependent Female + Dominant Male = The Tingly Respect Model

“Mr. Right is the man who is in her own SMV band, who has a complementary personality (i.e. is her “type”), and who shares many spiritual values and attitudes towards life. He is the guy who loves and honors her, and she desires and respects him.”

This fits the ideal Tingly Respect model, complete with Tingles.

“Mr. Right Fit is the man who appears to be a Mr. Right because he meets her list of qualifications, but there is something missing in their interaction that spells “no happy future” to the relationship.”

This guy is a good match, possibly fitting the Complementary model, or possibly the Tingly Respect model. However, the “something missing” is presumably the Tingles.

“Mr. Right On is the man who can fill her life with the dizzying, distracting effects of romance, fun and good times, but he is not cut out for marriage. This guy is likely an Alpha male who is just using her for his own good times.”

This is definitely the Tingly Respect model, however she has foolishly chosen a man who far outranks her on the SMV scale.

“There is also a Mr. Bad Ass, who is a very confident, self-assured man who games her hard and treats her like an immature little girl, and teaches her some very hard lessons about life. She should watch her personal boundaries and beware that she does not “fall in love” with his dominance and charisma, and give Mr. Bad Ass a permanent place in her heart.”

Masculine power rules here, so it’s another instance of the Tingly Respect model. But in this case, his perceived relational value is sufficiently low enough that she doesn’t consider him for a serious LTR. However, even though she might perceive him to be rancorously disturbed, she may be more than curious about exploring the Tingles. Her level of personal agency would determine her choice.

Dependent Female + Submissive Male = The Courtly Love model

“When she gets impatient with herself, and starts to selfishly justify all her lack of qualities that she can offer to a man (i.e. dissociative rationalization, AKA “hamstering”), she will find a Mr. Right Now to fulfill all her urgent, immediate needs for attention and affirmation. But deep inside, she knows Mr. Right Now is just for now, not for marriage.”

Here begins the unholy slide into the Courtly Love model with a Beta orbiter having a sufficient SMV to rise above the Friend Zone™.

“The idea of “settling” connotes a failure to achieve a goal, and “Mr. Good Enough” only serves to reinforce that notion. She is getting too impatient about finding a man, and just grabs one whom she feels she can control and can take what she needs from him. It’s not a good idea to marry this guy, because neither of you will be happy.”

This is another instance of the Courtly Love model with a Beta orbiter. But here, she is more desperate, and marriage minded.

Independent Female + Submissive Male = Feminism

Since I wrote the OP more than a year ago, it has come to my attention that my initial estimation was rather generous towards the motivations of women. I had assumed that the majority of women pined after the Tingly Respect ontology. Indeed, there are other types of men useful for those feminine imperatives which are less honorable.

Mr. Right Cuck – The clueless White Knight™ who is easily manipulated and disposed of by various feminine tactics of the handbag variety.

Mr. Friend Zone – the cool Beta Orbiter who is Oneitis™ loyal to her beck and call, but who cannot be allowed into her secret inner chamber – because telling him the truth about her Feeelz and her sexcapades would ruin the (so called) “Friendship” – and she knows it.

Mr. Husband Material – According to the self-professed unicorn, Ritz and Triscuit, the ideal husband has a SMV between 3 to 6, and is less than 5 on the “Stupid Scale”. What she won’t tell you, is that if a man is too smart, or too hot, then it’s too difficult for her to retain control on a daily basis. In other words, some women intentionally destroy their ability to pair bond, and wait until their MMV hits the wall before getting married, knowing full well that they need to “adjust” their MMV to coincide with that of Mr. Husband Material when approaching the altar. The Hamster can be stupidly brilliant at times.

Mr. Ted-e-bear – A friend with benefits. Here, the trust is high, but the Tingles (and respect) are virtually non-existent.

Independent Female + Dominant Male = Allyship

An allyship* is when a male offers his masculine talents to support the woman’s prerogative. The nature of this interaction is that the woman gains affirmation when male strength is used to pump her ego, which Feeelz gooed to her!

From the second OP mentioned in the introduction,

“Women who can attract a dominant man, but who wish to remain independent, basically have a choice between having Open Relationships with plate spinners, or being a rich man’s sugar baby.”

So we have the following.

Mr. Guy-ration – Plate spinning men who are regular F-buddies and sex party partners.

Mr. Sugar Daddy – An older, richer, and possibly married man who supplies the magic carpet, complete with wine, and who covers all her unforeseen expenses, not all of which are less than luxuries.

Mr. Pawn – A man complicit in a STR contrived for a specific, immediate purpose, such as sexual exploration, rebellious mudsharking, inducing jealousy, attention wh@ring, or to attain social dominance in a peer group, such as the one described here*. It’s difficult to categorize Mr. Pawn, because the Tingles may (or may not) be there, but she will also be wanting to control the interaction. As a further breakdown, each type of interaction might deserve its own nickname.

I’ve decided that prostitution should be in a category of its own, because it’s more of a business transaction than a relationship, and the power of the male is therefore irrelevant.

Mr. John – Men who offer opportunities to liquidate her SMV to generate income.

Conclusions

It may be incredibly difficult for some women to give up their natural desire for relational control and self-determined autonomy, and as a result, they may continue to founder and flail in many ungodly positions.

It may come as a surprise to some men, but many women choose husbands according to the Feminism model, in which she willingly sacrifices her marital bonding capability on the altars of the Carousel and the Wall, in exchange for independence, power, and control. Tingles be d@mned!

Because of the multitude of potential relationship structures that would fit the molds of Feminism and Allyship described here, I suspect that this breakdown may only begin to scratch the surface.

Furthermore, a woman’s subjective, in situ definition of Mr. Right may very well be subject to a woman’s particular circumstances, character, motives, and level of maturity. In other words, the “Mr. Right” that a particular woman speaks of, may not be the same Mr. Right described above.

It is clear, however, that a mature relationship that fits the mold of God’s ideal structure is a highly select set of conditions, characterized by maturity, humility, grace, and self-control.

* H/T Dalrock for bringing the word “allyship” to my attention in his post, Do what she asks, but know in advance that she will take great care to protect herself from feeling gratitude. (October 16, 2018). The post on the Feminine Dilemma has been updated accordingly.

Related

For the converse male view of female archetypes, I recommend Black Label Logic’s Gendernomics: Female sexual strategies (July 18, 2016).

 

Why is Citizenship Unquestionable?

America’s immigration policies are quickly becoming self-destructive liabilities. Long lived cultures have a noose-tight admission. Why shouldn’t My America do the same?

Readership: All American, Good Old Boys

This will probably be my only political rant this year. I despise politics, but sometimes you’ve got to speak up on issues. This is one of those instances.

NPR (feat. Hansi Lo Wang): Jeff Sessions Told DOJ Not To Discuss Citizenship Question Alternatives (October 27, 2018)

NPR unwittingly reports how the Deep State is attempting to resist the addition of a question about citizenship to the census, which was dropped after 1950.

“But days after the Census Bureau received the Justice Department’s request, its staff concluded that collecting people’s self-reported information through the census would not be the best way to generate better citizenship data. Instead, compiling existing government records about people’s citizenship status, the bureau found, would not only produce more accurate information but also cost less money.”

Their argument sounds so good, that it’s hard not to agree. But are they really concerned about “accurate information”? Are they really going to implement the proposed alternative, or is it only a red herring to stall the confirmation of the new census amendment?

It’s pretty clear that this is about money, votes, and power.

It might help our analysis of this situation, to consider and compare a few other countries citizenship policies.

Israel’s government insists that it is purely a Jewish state, and no other residents are genuine citizens. Jews worldwide may claim Israeli citizenship. That’s quite a grip on power.

In China, people aren’t even allowed to apply for citizenship unless they are a Chinese National. (There are very few, and very rare exceptions.) If they are Chinese National, then citizenship is bestowed automatically upon application, and the person does not need to give up their citizenship elsewhere. In other words, citizenship is based directly on race, i.e. paternal ancestry. No one in China wants to adopt orphans of other nationalities or races, because that would not be a benefit to the community, or to the country. But if they allow their orphans to be adopted abroad, they are planting seeds of cultural and economic sources worldwide.

In Taiwan, it is a little more lenient, but not much. The race-based admission still applies, but other than that, you need to have a squeaky clean criminal record, a bachelor’s degree, a small business, and US$650,000 worth of non-liquid assets in Taiwan. Oh, and you need to live in Taiwan and pay income taxes for at least 5 years straight. You can get a permanent residence if you marry a Taiwanese citizen, but not full citizenship status. However, your children will qualify, since they would have certified, direct, Chinese ancestry.

Feminist America would call all these policies “racial discrimination”, and label these countries as “backwards”, but Roissy would call this the preservation of culture. China and Israel should know about the preservation of culture, because they are among the oldest, still-active cultures in history.

Think about it. What would happen in the United States if we instituted a landed/educated grandfather clause for citizenship eligibility?

Mega MAGA overnight!?!

The Philippines has an open immigration policy, where anybody can come and go as they please. The problem is, nobody wants to live there, not even Filipino’s. The economy is lifeless, so there’s no economic opportunity. The government, police and military, are all corrupted to the core. Everyone is pursuing work overseas, and trying to get out of there.

The trend is that immigration policies around the world seem to follow a “supply and demand” type of structure. Countries which are so poor and unstable that no one wants to live there, are more than happy to accept anyone who comes along. Whereas, countries which have anything of value, a sanctum of decorum, economic freedom, political liberties, what have you, are all controlling their borders tightly, and the path to citizenship only allows the most elite types through.

But there have been a few European countries that have not followed this “supply and demand” trend for their admission price. We know them well: Britain, France, Germany, Sweden… and just as macro-economic theory predicts, the value of their citizenship has fallen through the floor overnight.

Following the dictates of supply and demand, I fear that if the U.S. sells its citizenship status too cheaply, then the value of being a citizen will soon fall afterward as well.

The writing is on the wall. It’s time for Democrats to put aside their partisan platitudes and do what’s good for the country.

Related

• Larry’s Musings: Is the biggest threat to world peace the United States? (November 7, 2018)
• Do What’s Right (feat. Ed Hurst): A little more clarity on politics (November 7, 2018)
• Throne and Altar: Capitalism is the void (November 8, 2018)
• The Orthosphere: The Acid Eating at Tradition is Not Capitalism, But Cheap Information (November 8, 2018)

 

The Feminine Dilemma

Women must choose between two different life paths, and two different kinds of men.

Readership: All

Introduction

Rollo’s socio-sexual inventory ratings of SMV and MMV are based on a person’s desirability in the SMP. This post will take a step away from this commonly used analysis, and embrace Visceral Power and Choice of Lifestyle as fundamental stances which affect the interplay and outcome of a relationship. These two variables may be ascertained through objective tests (to be developed), or projective measures.

The following relationship ontologies are ridiculously broad, and certainly have many exceptions. However, the characterization is readily apparent, and therefore sufficient to develop the descriptive, prototype model discussed in an earlier post, Models of Courtship and Marital Structure (October 3, 2018). References to the Courtly Love and the Tingly Respect models will be made throughout this essay, so if the reader is unfamiliar with these courtship models, he/she should first review this post.

The Dyadic Feminine Dilemma

The following illustration depicts the female’s Life Path on the abscissa, and the Power Structure exercised by the male on the ordinate. Please refer to this figure as an aide to help visualize the descriptions that follow.

Her Life Path

Concerning their path in life, there are generally two types of women.

• She is either pining for love and hoping for a husband and children, or she is seeking to advance her own interests, pursue her dreams, and/or develop a career.
• She is either attempting to make herself more feminine, family oriented, industrious, and desirable, or she is looking to travel, meet many people, see the world, and get “experience”.
• She is either seeking to serve others, or else seeking to serve herself.
• She is either hoping and/or learning to be a happy help-mate, or else she is working herself towards a position of autonomy and independence.

As a woman advances down either path, it becomes more difficult to change to the other path as life goes on. However, it is considerably easier for a woman to make no effort at all, and for the vast majority of women not abundantly blessed with good breeding, this choice defaults to the independent lifestyle. Thus, a woman must prepare herself to build a satisfying LTR with a man.

What Determines Her Life Path?

Women may or may not be aware of it, but they choose the path they take in life. Early in life, I would guess during or shortly after puberty, females are faced with a dilemma of choice. Their choice is largely determined by a myriad of factors.

• Agreeableness: Less agreeable → more independent
• A pattern of being either pursued or rejected by males: more rejection → more independent
• Education: In general, more education → more independent
• Emotional Constitution: stronger constitution → more independent
• Life Experiences: Complicated and nuanced
• Personality: More extroverted, more rational → more independent
• SMV/MMV: (Relation is complicated, but in general, a higher SMV/MMV → more opportunities to form relationships are available)
• Strength of Libido: A weaker libido is thought to be associated with more independence.
• Temperament: more distemper → more independent
• Testosterone level: more T → more independent
• The presence of an authoritative and loving father: less father figure involvement → more independent

I suspect that there are many other qualities that could affect one’s propensity towards independence, such as one’s level of intelligence, neuroticism, personality disorders, socialization habits, cultural norms, and identification within a peer group. So these personal characteristics will remain as an ongoing investigation

This is quite a comprehensive gestalt of many divergent characteristics, but here we’re talking about a person’s natural inclination or general preference.

If a woman decides against independence in favor of having a male partner in any capacity, she must then choose which power structure she wishes to have in her relationship. So here we come to the second choice that women must consider.

Her Choice of a Man

Concerning the type of male partner that a woman could choose from, a typical woman will find that she has a choice between two basic types of men.

1. Men who possess an equitable or lower SMV/MMV compared to hers, and who are generally more willing to go through a formal courtship and offer long term commitment. These men are typically labeled “Betas”. The vast majority of regular church-going men would also fall into this category.
2. Men who possess a higher SMV than hers, and/or who can induce Tingles. These men are presumed to be Alphas, or “worldly men”, and they would probably be much more reluctant to marry her.

A woman will be able to attract a larger number of men who have an equitable MMV or lower (the first group), and likewise, she will also receive a significantly larger number of marriage proposals from these men, compared to higher SMV men.

Correspondingly, she will not find access to commitment from very many men in the second group, men who have the ability to exert visceral power over her. So in summary, she will have a much greater selection of choice within the first group, however these choices may not strongly appeal to her liking.

Lexet disagreed with me on this point, arguing that the relatively lower propinquity of such men, and women’s general disinterest in such types, invariably leads to an attrition of volume. So perhaps another way to approach this decision is in asking what type of man will she choose? (This is the fundamental dilemma explored in this post.) In the most simplistic form (within the visceral power based ontology here entertained), a woman is faced with two options:

1. If a woman seeks to consolidate power and control over a relationship with a passive, agreeable man of lower SMV (Beta), or if she simply ‘settles’ for this type of man, she is adhering to the Courtly Love model.
2. If a woman chooses to submit to a man’s authority, or if she just happens to set her thighs on an assertive, higher SMV, Tingle-inducing man (Alpha) and becomes enslaved to her passion for him, she is opting for the Tingly Respect model.

As you might see, this dichotomy boils down to the simple choice, “To Tingle, or not to Tingle”. It might be argued that there is a third choice, “To Tingle intensely during peak SMV years (while riding the carousel), and then not at all (during marriage)”. This is actually a very popular choice these days. Certainly, women may or may not choose to date and sexually entertain men of either or both types before marriage, but her longitudinal relational pattern will determine what types of men will be available to her at the time she decides to marry. In other words, a woman will fall either one way or the other. The vast majority of women will find that the third choice is nothing more than a convoluted and dissipating path to the first choice. This view will be further explored later in this essay.

We might anticipate some objections from women at this point. Women will invariably argue against the concept of female submission when the Tingles are absent, and so women will magnify this caveat as a fault of the Tingly Respect model. But on the other hand, women will hardly ever chafe at the task of submitting to a high-SMV, Tingle-inducing stud. So it can be assumed that a woman’s choice to submit is highly tentative on the visceral power of the male. In other words, a female’s submission is inherently conflated with, and wholly dependent on masculine power within the Tingly Respect model. If and when the Tingle is absent, the relationship may very well default to the Courtly Love model, unless the woman can place her faith in God during the dry spells, and submit to the man out of obedience to God.

But whether there be Tingles or not, those women who resist submitting to a man’s authority are left to wallow at the bottom of the graph. Here there are basically two genres of relational structures. Women who desire companionship must continually grapple for power in the relationship, while those women who can accept or prefer more independence fall into the Feminist category.

Combinations of Power Structure vs. Life Path

This section will examine each of the four extremes of the original chart, encompassing the Tingly Respect model, the Courtly Love model, Feminism, and a fourth, uncharted type of relationship (if one exists at all).

This assertion that either the male, or the female, but not both, hold a place of power in the relationship agrees with Rollo’s Cardinal Rule of sexual strategies:

“For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed, the other gender must compromise or abandon their own.”

It will be shown that a woman’s willingness to submit, and to be a help meet, is a reflexive critical Factor in determining her life path.

Dependent Female + Dominant Male = The Tingly Respect model

Since a woman forfeits the position of power upon entering into the Tingly Respect model, pulling off a successful venture in snagging a Tingle-inducing, high SMV man for marriage can be a challenging feat for most women. She needs to have/do the following.

1. Self Development: A woman needs to have a firm command of several qualities of excellence just to get her foot in the door. This is important, because the type of man she can attract in marriage is directly dependent on the current level of her character development.
2. Self-Estimation: She needs to have a real-time feedback mechanism built into her self-consciousness, so that she can exercise personal boundaries, which can be used to accurately assess the quality of man that she can reasonably assume to receive a marriage proposal from, and adjust her own self-perception accordingly.
3. Socio-Sexual Awareness: She needs to clearly know the difference between her SMV and her MMV, and use this knowledge to achieve her lifelong relationship goal.
4. Social Estimation: She should be acutely aware of the interest level, and the type of interest, she gets from men, and use this information to identify her true MMV, and learn to regulate her expectations and/or her character accordingly.
5. Recognize Authority: She needs to accept the fact that the man will expect to be the head, and that she will need to submissively fill the role of his helper and life companion.
6. Dignity: She needs to learn how to offer honor, respect, and genuine friendship to a man in a way that he will appreciate.
7. Sexual Purity: She needs to preserve her sexual purity, so that she can avoid being Alpha Widowed, and will thus be able to bond with, and feel genuinely aroused by a man who is on par with her own SMV.

Now, what happens to many women these days, is that at first, they pursue the Tingly Respect model. However, somewhere along the way, they run into some problems (corresponding to the list above) and drop the ball. See this list from Deti for more.

1. They do not develop emotional or spiritual maturity.
2. They do not exercise sufficient self-control to regulate their boundaries and make the most of their opportunities.
3. They idolize the Tingles too much, and chase men who are inappropriate matches for them, out of their league and/or are only interested in sex.
4. They fail to adjust their expectations to reality, and do not take responsibility for regulating a healthy social life. At worst, they indulge in fruitless or even self-destructive endeavors, and expect others to pay for their ‘life experiences’.
5. They do not feel the compunction to see themselves as a ‘helper’, and learn how to get along with a man accordingly. At worst, they denigrate hierarchy as ‘the oppressive patriarchy’.
6. They have an arrogant Feminist mindset that belittles and demonizes masculinity.
7. They do not feel any conviction to pursue sexual purity, thinking it to be archaic.

As a result, they take a few rounds on the carousel until they come to a point where they see that they will never just “fall into a marriage” with an Alpha by accidental fate, and they subsequently give up on pursuing this model. By this time, their MMV has depreciated so much, that they are forced to assume the Courtly Love model, in which they are able to exercise enough power over their relationships to make them come out the way they want (which is never exactly what they want). Unfortunately, they must sacrifice their holy Tingles in doing so, which transforms them into bitter, disrespectful shrews. Remember, Tingles = Respect.

Dependent Female + Submissive Male = The Courtly Love model

Modern women with real world sensibilities will say that there is no such thing as courtly love in today’s MMP. Contrary to their assertions, the courtship model endorsed by many churchian societies is basically a churched-up Courtly Love model. (This has been parodied by Dalrock for years.) In addition to the informally instituted Courtly Love model within the church, there are many men who willingly pursue and engage in the Courtly Love model, but these men tend to be those who are sexually invisible to these women, men who have no visceral power to induce the Tingle, and so these men don’t come up on their radar. This is partly because the MMP is presently converged with the SMP, and conservative, marriage minded men cannot compete with ravaging cads in this arena. Also, masculinity is persecuted, so there are very few men willing or able to step up their game. To reverse this sordid State of Affairs, parents (especially fathers) and social communities need to invest in and reward young men’s development of masculine traits.

It may also be possible that some women who chafe at the idea of submitting to a man, or who are determined to create a life of their own choosing, willingly embrace the Courtly Love model from the outset. Their reasons for doing so might be because of cultural norms, peer pressure, education, insecurity, a poor relational history characterized by a distrust of men, or merely due to the rebellious female sinful nature to usurp power from men.

Independent Female + Submissive Male = Feminism

Women who insist on Independence, and who want or expect their men to be compliant and accommodating, are basically feminists, or else, they’re into BDSM. The Feminist idea that men and women are “equal” is categorically rejected here as unrealistic.

If an independent woman can accept (or is forced to accept, due to her lower SMV) a more submissive man, she’ll have to shoulder the majority of responsibility for the relationship. This is not likely to sit well with most normal women. More liberated types might find the opportunity to be swinging with cuckolds.

Worst case scenario for men! Feminazi’s might try their d@mnest to destroy any visceral “weakness” – any emotional vulnerability which a presumably “evil man” might use to exert power over her. Women like this know they must necessarily dissipate their natural ability to Tingulate (= Respect a man) in order to solidify their grip on power. So they carelessly (or willingly) embrace the carousel (if her SMV is sufficient to allow the possibility) as an enjoyable way to destroy their innocence and vulnerability, gain social and sexual “experience”, and become a Strong Independent Woman™ (SIW). This is a wide and well-traveled road which prepares her to manage a weak, submissive, human ATM after her peak SMV years have passed, and she can no longer depend on suitors for material resources. Government welfare programs may provide a feline ridden alternative to this fate.

Independent Female + Dominant Male = Allyship*

Women who can attract a dominant man, but who wish to remain independent, basically have a choice between having Open Relationships with plate spinners, or being a rich man’s sugar baby. Prostitution may also be an option for those women with a high libido.

A formal marriage proposal is very unlikely to be offered here.

* Update (November 11, 2018): At the time of writing this post, I had not found a suitable label for this type of relationship. H/T to Dalrock for bringing the word “allyship” to my attention in his post, Do what she asks, but know in advance that she will take great care to protect herself from feeling gratitude. (October 16, 2018). In this post, a woman explains the behaviors of two different types of men, one a “mansplainer”, and the other an “ally”. This is an excellent example of an independent woman’s subjective assessments of men, based on their interaction. Remember, the interaction defines the relationship.

In the comments section, Spike argues,

“Allyship” is the legitimate word for the derogatory term, “White Knight “, or “mangina”.

I disagree with his claim that allyship = mangina, because the allied male in the cited story expresses dominance over the other mansplaining male in the interaction. This is actually the application of masculinity to support the woman’s prerogative, and although women seldom display gratitude for this, as Dalrock pointed out, women always find a rush of affirmation when male strength is used to pump her ego. White Knights, OTOH, demonstrate Chivalry, but not necessarily dominance. If you think about it, gratitude abuts humility, whereas ego stroking reinforces pride. So it’s implicitly incongruent or even contradictory to express gratitude for having the ego fluffed.

Conclusions

Women must work out a very complicated decision of whether to join with a man in a long term relationship, or else pursue an independent lifestyle. If a woman decides to have a male partner in any capacity, she must then choose which power structure she wishes to have in her relationship. According to this ontological model, the following conclusions have been obtained from this study.

• Women may or may not be aware of it, but they choose the path they take in life, henceforth female agency is a primary factor in determining which life path she will embark.
• There are many life factors that determine whether a woman chooses to accept a male partner in a LTR, or else to pursue independence.
• A woman’s willingness to submit to a husband, and to be his companion, friend, and helper in life, is a critical factor in determining her life path. So if a woman desires to ever be in a committed, LTR with a man, then she must prepare herself accordingly. Earlier preparation in life is better, so as to take advantage of her peak SMV years to attract the best mate possible.
• The Feminine Dilemma boils down to the simple choice, “To Tingle, or not to Tingle”, however this choice is confusing and difficult to execute. Women must also fight against their own rebellious sinful nature to usurp power from men. As a result, very few women can achieve a robust marriage characterized by Tingles and respect.
• Women are expected to naturally prefer a Tingle-filled relationship in which they have little control. But since they are lacking overt control in this case, it is difficult for them to move towards a committed relationship. Female control must thereby be sublimated into a larger array of personal characteristics, and this generally takes the form of soft power. Females stand the best chance to achieve an ideal relationship if they develop their kinder, gentler forms of soft power.
• Women tend to be blind to all relationship options that do not inspire the Tingles, and are strongly resistant to enter into those same relationships. If Tingles cannot be produced within a marriage, it spells a very difficult and unhappy union for both partners.
• Because the Tingles are a central element for inducing women to effortlessly conform to God’s archetypical relational structure (i.e. respecting and submitting to their husbands), parents (especially fathers) and social communities (including churches) need to invest in the cultivation of young men’s development of masculine traits, such that they can harness the visceral power of invoking the Tingle tantrum in women. Young men also need to be informed of the powerlessness of women in the (preferred) Tingulated state, and should be held responsible for their actions.
• Likewise, young women need to be educated and instructed how to develop qualities that are beneficial towards attracting a serious commitment from a man, including the development of soft power, and the preservation of their sexual purity. They also need to develop sufficient faith in God to be able to resist the temptation to usurp authority or rebel, and trust their husband’s (or father’s) headship, even when Tingles are not forthcoming.
• Those women who desire companionship but who are adverse to the idea of submitting to a man, must continually grapple for power in the relationship. In the case where the man is willingly submissive to her, she will come to bear all responsibility for the relationship.
• Those women who prefer more independence will fall into the Feminist category, which has little chance of yielding a quality Christian marriage.
• Those women who choose to pursue an independent lifestyle, have no honorable options in the way of relationships, unless they remain chaste.

Related

• Dalrock: Empowered to Avoid Responsibility (September 12, 2018)
• Sigma Frame: Meretricious Power and the Tingle (October 9, 2018)