Exposing the Truth to Others

This post examines the pros and cons of presenting unpleasant, factual truth to others who may very well be in a state of contented denial. A real world example is explored as a case study.

The D.C. Slut Hunt

Dalrock’s latest post, Someday we’ll laugh! (December 29, 2017) brought a sad story to our attention. There’s this woman who had a long history of what appears to be amateur sex tourism. According to Dalrock, she kept a detailed account of her sexcapades on her blog for a few years. Then her blog dried up, and after a time, she reappeared, announcing her engagement. Not so surprisingly, her older, savage posts were deleted. An archive of her blog can be found here. (See Dalrock’s post for more information.)

You might think her engagement is happy news at first glance – the ‘start of a new beginning’, and all that. But the guys on the ‘sphere know better. Gaza offered one scintillating account of how he didn’t want to be Red Pilled at first, but after a while, the evidence became too overwhelming. Likewise, a lot of them have slogged through the trenches of involuntary celibacy, frivorce, legal theft, sanctioned kidnapping, cuckoldry, and rejection. They’ve seen stuff like this before, and they know it doesn’t go well for the guy.

The comments below Dalrock’s post offer a psychoanalysis and details of the harrowing predictions. I’ll paraphrase the gist of the most noteworthy ones here.

Some women, especially younger ones, really are confused and ignorant enough to not know what they’re doing when they ‘suddenly’ find themselves in bed with a man. With feigned shock and gleeful surprise, they say, “But it just haaappened!” In other words, they know the theory of procreation, but they are ignorant of the social dynamics leading up to the funk, or the mechanics of how to ‘insert cad A into slut B’, and they use this ignorance as an indicator for innocent virtue. Manospherians know that this justification is only an indicator for the loss of innocent virtue. Such women are devoid of any volition of willpower that would be necessary to say ‘NO!’

But most other women are fully aware of what they’re doing, although they still might not be fully informed, or willing to face the consequences. These women do have the willpower to say “YES!’ But because of their casual attitudes towards sexual relations, these women decisively choose to spread their legs wings and f*ck fly. They hamsterize their choices post hoc, and then try to pass it off ‘respectably’, or at least, ‘justifiably’, as a glorified process of ‘finding ones self’. As Gaza pointed out, the overworn euphemism used to ‘justify’ women’s behavior in this regard, is ‘low self-esteem’.

Common consensus at Dalrock’s place was that the woman in this story is most likely the latter. Wise RP guys know, that manner of prolific denial poured on the banality of careless carouseling cannot detract from the inherent, mindless contradiction that is evident. As David put it,

“If riding the carousel, even with losers, is seen as a sacred path to marriage and a badge of honor, and plenty of women are working to support that narrative, then why did she feel the need to delete her blog posts?”

Perhaps she is ‘repenting’ from a ‘low self-esteem’? Definitely (if you have XXX-ray RP vision to see through the opaque euphemisms), but that’s hardly scratching the surface. Let’s see if we can do any better.

Boxer buddy, pass me another beer. We’re going into this a little deeper.

Feminine Introspection

Buckyinky and the guys brought up the discussion concerning women’s abilities and habits of introspection, Dave II’s comment summed it up well, and included the correct approach in boldface [emphasis mine].

“…women suck at introspection. And I mean really suck. They can introspect for years and never get to a correct answer. For example, if traveling was needed to ‘find yourself’ then either all the people who never traveled in the past were chronically miserable, or [else] ‘finding yourself’ is not at all necessary for a person to have a satisfying life. I concluded the latter because human beings have choices and those choices we act on cause our experiences which then shape who we are. So you make yourself, rather than finding yourself. Simple. That took about 10 minutes to figure out, and it explains why I never have an urge to travel, as do most men that I know. Meanwhile, women are still ‘looking for themselves’…”

“…they really just wanted to spend more time on the carousel and the choice of language is just a red herring, which was quite effective in the pre-Red Pill days when betas ‘were more abundant and none the wiser’ (as they are still). Maybe that’s the problem. They introspect not to discover the truth, but to justify what they want the truth to be. And when they can’t, they simply find a way to make it seem ok, or pretend that it’s not what they’re up to, or not their fault for doing it.”

All the hamsters in one wheel. Brilliantly put!

See, being able to achieve an honest, accurate and effective introspection is uniquely a Christian phenomena. Only the Holy Spirit of God can make a person fully aware of the horrors of one’s sin. Most people can’t stomach it, so they choose to continue on in the comforts of their ignorance. Knowing the dregs of our corruption enables us to know the depths of the grace of God that are made available to us through Christ’s atonement. If we do not agree with God’s assessment that we are inherently depraved, then God will be faithful to keep shoving our noses in our own sh*t. Oswald Chambers describes this well in his entry for December 28.

“If we trust to our wits instead of to God, we produce consequences for which God will hold us responsible.”

“God holds us responsible every time we refuse to convert ourselves, our reason for refusing is willful obstinacy. Our natural life must not rule, God must rule in us.”

“The hindrance in our spiritual life is that we will not be continually converted, there are [wallowing wedges] of obstinacy where our pride spits at the throne of God and says — “I won’t.” We deify independence and willfulness and call them by the wrong name. What God looks on as obstinate weakness, we call strength. There are whole tracts of our lives which have not yet been brought into subjection, and it can only be done by this continuous conversion.”

Chambers wrote these words exactly a hundred years ago! Yet, they still apply, and are even more relevant, today.

[Eds. note: If God does NOT give us the goad, then we do not belong to Him.]

So when men ask for a woman to do some serious introspection and ‘grow up’, what they are really asking, is for her to accept Christ and sort through her own sin – not an easy request, but one that is absolutely necessary if a woman is to have a solid marriage.

The Square Root of X3(Sin I)

At the root of the problem, is the widespread, default choice of people to DEFY Biblical truth and wisdom in the selfish interests of convenience and pleasure, and formulate a new body of guiding principles (e.g. most _____ism’s), which become the de facto god, ‘Self’. This is succinctly captured in the following formula. Note that the “I” is central to the new godhead.

“Defy” + centralized “I” = “Deify”

[Eds. note: The word, ‘deify’, is from the viewpoint of the idolater.]

Another weighty issue lies in the counter influences, posed by _____ist society, that support the deification of the feral god, Self, and are diametrically opposed to the possibility of the redeeming suicide of self introspection. The nature of this influence has been sufficient enough to garner much talk around the Manosphere, which has been growing for some time, that Feminism is a cult religion. As Dalrock and Donal Graeme have elucidated in great detail, even organized religion (i.e Churchianity) is quietly acquiescing to the comfortable slide into depravity.

In this view, another recent post on Dalrock, If she has enough self-esteem she won’t tingle for Harley McBadboy (December 7, 2017), received a comment from Earl which hints to an idea that is worthy of exploration.

“I seriously wonder if the false religion of Revelation 18 is feminism.”

“Or some feminism-Islam hybrid. In any case [I am] reading a book about the people who worshiped Baal and had Jezebel running amok (which you can also find in the Bible with Elijah) …it seems things like child sacrifice (abortion), sexual immorality (same), and worshiping the rain (creation instead of the Creator) were the big things. Along with killing the prophets.”

Seeing how feminist mantras and doctrines offer their own set of ‘virtues’, which displace the knowledge of Christ and prevent women (and men) from performing an effective introspection, then if we were to hone this to a fine point, we could say that Feminists are Satanists!

The Problem

Now back to the subject. What is the woman’s main problem in this case study?

Obviously, this woman is not a Christian, so she can’t get any clues from God. She doesn’t have any conscientious, caring males, such as a father or brother, to watch out for her, and if she does, she has foolishly neglected their shepherding advice. Instead, she has chosen to listen to those smooth, sweet, lying voices that make her Feeelz into the moral good, instead of those voices of wisdom that push her to face the truth and take responsibility for her soul.

Many people, most pointedly her fiancée, desperately want to carry the faithful presumption that she is, or at least wants to be, an introspective and growing Christian, but the story of her life so far does not support this hope. In fact, she could be actively working fraud – doing and saying what is necessary in order to allow others to continue to believe this superficial falsehood, all the while hiding and cherishing the snarkness within, merely for her own benefits and conveniences. I proffer that this is closer to the trough, in answering the question of why she deleted her essentially female porn blog.

Lord Dalrock profusely labels this behavior as ‘Denial’. Illimitable Men and Rollo call this ‘Machiavellianism’. I call it ‘Spiritual Fraud’ – it’s a charlatan, ‘Self-god-idol deceptive fraud’. Unfortunately, this is the common denominator in our post modern society, no matter what you want to call it.

A Proposed Solution

I know not many Manospherians might think of it this way, but it would actually be an act of faith and agape love to make some effort to correct those in error, with kindness and patience. Red Pilled men need to take action in this respect. If we care about our society, then something has got to be done to demonstrate to women (who genuinely desire to marry) that they should be waiting and preparing themselves for a prince, and that it’s a really bad strategy to simply kiss all the frogs in the hope that one of them will magically transform into a prince. [Thanks to Red Pill Latecomer for this analogy.] If we care about young couples like the one in question, perhaps it might be beneficial to speak a Word of the Red Pill Truth to them. Since I’ve been on WordPress, I’ve seen a lot of solid wisdom come out of Earl.

“Is it bad to provide a man with information that might lead to him withdrawing from the engagement?”

“The preacher doesn’t state ‘If anyone has any reason why these two should not marry, speak now or forever hold your peace’ for nothing.”

Of course, there is always the chance that, by speaking up, we might just be ‘throwing pearls of wisdom to swine’, and thereby provoking them to ‘turn and attack’, according to the Biblical adage.

Matthew 7:6 (NKJV)

“Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.”

But as the talk went on, these gracious, Christ-loving guys quickly reached a consensus to inform the future hubby of what kind of woman he is marrying. Boxer volunteered to be the bearer of bad news. [Eds. note: There’s a man of faith and courage.]

Schadenfreudians, mind your manners!

The Game Plan

If we’re really going to start digging up dirt, then we should not be ignorant of what we’re doing. So let’s talk about this with an informed, intelligent approach, and be confident of what we’re doing. Those who mock an honest assessment of the wisdom of an endeavor are riding the Ship of Fools [music video courtesy of World Party].

I will speculate that there are seven possible outcomes to this situation. Outcomes 1, 2 and 3 (in blue font) happen if we hold our peace. Outcomes 4 to 7 (in red font) happen if we don’t. These Outcomes are loosely described as follows. Of course, there may be variations of these themes, but the gist is essentially the same.

Outcome 1

No one says anything. They get married. He mans up, learns some Red Pill Game, and puts the goad on her to grow in faithfulness. His Dread Game ‘love’ touches her heart, and after a nightmarish first two years of marriage, she slowly accepts an introspective approach, and learns to be the ideal lover, wife and mother.

Roissy, Vox, stop laughing!

Outcome 2

No one says anything. They get married. He meets a burlesque stripper at his bachelors party and is converted to BDSM*. He conveys these emotions to his new wife. She likes the idea of being the one in control, and he voluntarily submits to domestic slavery. They join a BDSM community. They enjoy threesomes and group sex with their new BDSM friends. All goes relatively well, until she gets pregnant. A few fights ensue. A unilateral abortion comes in handy, and the party goes on. He gets a vasectomy, but she continues to get pregnant…

<<<slow clapping from the Left audience>>>

*Outcome 2 in the real case, may not involve BDSM, but may very well be characterized by the ungodly inversion of male-female roles, viz. she is the harridan, cat loving babushka, he is the wimpy, compromising, sex beggar.

babushka cat

Outcome 3

No one says anything. They get married. He relaxes into the comfortable routine of married life. She becomes bored and ‘unhaaapy’. Starfish ensues. He works harder, putting in overtime and doing housework. She nebulously demands ‘more’. He becomes ‘nicer’ in order to satisfy her demands. Starfish dries up. She meets alpha number 116, and catches the feeelz and the clam. She listens to her ‘mother hen friends’ about the unbeatable benefits of a frivorce. The common Manospherian trope of western marriage ensues.

<<<crickets chirping>>>

[Eds. note: Tight lips sink ‘ships.]

Outcome 4

The messenger informs. She lies, denies and justifies. He sees the evidence, hurls and backs out. No marriage. She goes on the indignified AMALT rant, commiserates with ‘mother hen friends’, and becomes an avowed card carrying feminist . She crowdfunds a lawyer to sue the Manosphere, but to no avail, due to the evidence. She then turns to the liberal newspapers, finds sympathy and affirmation, but no satisfaction. He takes the Red Pill and suffers Purple Haze.

Dalrock gets promoted from lord to godfather.

Outcome 5

The messenger informs. She lies, denies and justifies, and so does he, with Blue Pill style ‘forgiveness’. They get married. All goes well, except he can’t stop thinking about her past. He has a creeping suspicion that slowly grows more deafening every day, and eventually becomes disgust. Her feeelz are frustrated. They drift apart. An affair by either party, or both, comes into view. She realizes that a divorce is the ‘best solution for both’ of them. The trope picks up here.

Roissy writes a scathing post about it, and quotes science.

Outcome 6

The messenger informs. She is angry at the messenger and fesses up with arrogance. He is shocked, blows chinks and backs out. He’s forced to swallow a very bitter Red Pill. No marriage, ever.

It’s anyone’s guess from here on. She probably becomes a Churchian. He might go MGTOW, or move to Thailand and pimp it up – with benefits… Who knows?

Roosh produces another video eschewing sluteye.

<<<open arms from the Manosphere>>>

Outcome 7

The messenger informs. She fesses up with tears. He forgives her, and follows through with the marriage. He dabbles in Red Pill and uses his moral high ground to enforce his Married Game. Things go reasonably well.

Manospherians bow their heads and congratulate themselves for saving two souls. Feminists and Churchians chalk one up and gloat.

Life goes on.

Game Analysis

Now, let’s explore a little game theory with the following points. The outcomes are listed in order of preference, with whether the couples agree (either to marry or not to marry) in parentheses.

  1. Outcomes 1 (they agree) and 7 (they agree) [marriage in both cases], are the best possible scenarios.
  2. Outcomes 4 (they agree) and 6 (they disagree) [NO marriage in both cases], are bad, but it could be worse.
  3. Outcomes 3 (they agree) and 5 (they agree) [marriage in both cases] are horrifically bad.
  4. Outcome 2 (they agree to marry) is a 50 Shades loving feminist’s wet dream.
  5. If the messenger cannot present some rock hard evidence, then the Manosphere will risk embarrassment and possibly harassment. Not to be a fearmonger, but wisdom requires its consideration.

As can be seen here, the red options dominate the top of the list, except for the case of Outcome 1. Outcome 1 is highly improbable, but it is at the top of the list, so it should be investigated. To this purpose, he should be contacted for a discussion, and then the answer to the decision whether to inform him would be made clear. There is the possibility that he already knows about her past, and he believes he has sufficient Red Pill awareness to know what he’s dealing with. In this case, she may have scrubbed her blog clean for the obvious reasons of propriety, and not necessarily to hide her past from him. [I know you might be snickering at that possibility, but bear with me.] If so, then that’s his choice, and his choice should be respected. Or, in other words,

“Don’t betray a Red Pill brother by talking sh*t about his woman (even if it’s true).”

Even in the case where he is up to RP snuff, but does NOT know all the facts about her past, it might still be better NOT to inform him, because doing so opens the possibility of only one equal outcome, and three lesser outcomes. Knowing their personal characteristics would help make this call.

However, if he proves to be true Blue hue, no clue, through and through, then informing him is the next best option. Going back to the list of preferred outcomes, we see that if the two contenders are to be informed, they will be caught in a Prisoners Game dilemma. [Note that the point values in the present problem are skewed from what is shown in the link.]

This entails that, by being informed, the couple has a 50% chance of NOT sticking to the landing, and only a 25% of having an acceptable marriage. [That is, according to the strict analysis. Their individual temperaments may shift this estimate.]

Looks grim for marriage peddlers.


The analysis confirms most of what we already knew to begin with, but it also adds several details.

In all of these instances, the Trump card is whether she will be honest with him about her past. Her honesty leads to positive Outcomes 6 and 7. Her dishonesty ruins the show. She is calling the shots. He is basically on the receiving end, giving her either a thumbs up, or thumbs down. So, whether they stay together (all Outcomes except 4 and 6) depends on his agreement with her, regardless of the Truth.

Whether they both actually come to know the Truth depends mostly on HER reaction to the Truth. If she is willing to fess up (Outcomes 6 and 7), then there is a chance for a new beginning for both. If she does so with authentic humility and sincere repentance, then she might even have the chance to be married, in spite of her sins (Outcome 7).

If they remain ignorant (Outcomes 2 and 3), then nothing good will result from it. [Eds. note: Anyone who believes Outcome 2 is inherently satisfying is a schadenfreudian, and that’s a generously kind assessment.]

In the case where her heart is dead set against waking up (Outcomes 4 and 5), then it is impossible that a concerted effort to bring awareness of her past to her fiancée is going to bring any positive developments towards marriage. However, it would destroy whatever false notions she has about marriage, which might not be a bad thing.

Some Outcomes (3, 4, 5 and 6) will throw him into a crisis of belief tailspin, which might be a good thing for him, depending on his faith and temperament.

Any positive outcome (1 or 7) is going to require the grace of God (as described in the previous section on Introspection), as well as the good willed effort of everyone involved, in order to grant this couple a deeper revelation of their problems, and motivate them to improve themselves. What are the odds of that happening?

At the very least, a spotlight would allow them both to reassess their decision to marry in the light of the Red Pill Truth. Even if they continue wearing blinders (i.e. he remains in denial and she continues with her fraud), they will still have a compass to point them in the Right direction. Whether they use it in the future is their decision.

To spill the Pill, or not to spill the Pill… that is the sequestion!

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Collective Strength, Communications, Purpose, Relationships, Respect, Satire, Sphere of Influence and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Exposing the Truth to Others

  1. earlthomas786 says:

    According to her she’s a ‘born again atheist’ and her parents are born again Christians. I’ve noticed she’s dabbled in yoga and Buddhism (and it seems whether she knows it or not, feminism)…so she’s trying to fill that void.

    Getting back to introspection and sin:

    “Defy” + centralized “I” = “Deify”

    Reading 33 Days to Morning Glory, St. Maximillian Kolbe who before he became a priest was said to have been a great mind in the STEM fields…put that knowledge of formulas to use namely to show how to become a saint:

    W+w=S W is God’s will, w is our will, S is sanctity.

    Then one day pondering this the opposite formula makes sense too….

    W-w = s. Where the small is sin. However most people would consider this path…’strong and independent’.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Sigma Frame says:

    “W+w=S W is God’s will, w is our will, S is sanctity.”

    Word equations~!
    I should point out that the ‘deify’ is from the viewpoint of the idolater.


  3. Cill says:

    “why did she feel the need to delete her blog posts?”

    Indeed. She wouldn’t want the poor sucker she’s engaged to to come across it either (no pun intended).

    Re introspection:
    I know women who are in long-lasting relationships. They will give their man shit tests, and if he holds his frame, she will use his responses as a substitute for introspection. I suspect that if he stopped holding his frame, the relationship would not last.


    • Sigma Frame says:

      Cill, I hear you saying that a woman uses the man’s frame, which would include his estimations of her, as a proxy for introspection. That’s deep, and I believe that’s right. That would emphasize the feminine need for a spiritual shepherd. It also reveals why the relationship is more solid when the man is the dominant figure in the conflict structure. (See this post for more on conflict structure: https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2017/11/15/conflict-structure-and-marital-satisfaction/ )

      Liked by 1 person

    • earlthomas786 says:

      ‘ They will give their man shit tests, and if he holds his frame, she will use his responses as a substitute for introspection. ‘

      Interesting and I think you are on to something there.

      While men sometimes have women’s response as a part of their introspection…it’s often not the biggest or most important. I’ve probably learned more about myself first from spending more time in Eucharistic adoration and prayer and then also from failure…taking on challenges, and learning new skills.

      Women however if it wasn’t for men’s responses to them most of their introspection is cat videos, traveling on expensive trips and what’s on tv. Especially if they are childless. I think once they become mothers their children are their biggest introspection…and that’s a good thing.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Boxer says:

    Boxer buddy, pass me another beer. We’re going into this a little deeper.

    Reasoned like Gilbert Strang. Boxer approves (though he doesn’t drink – it’s the one part of his Mormon upbringing that managed to take).

    Liked by 1 person

  5. JT Anderson says:

    I have a hypothesis that women are generally be susceptible to new ideas if the information is presented in the right sequence. Specifically, the inverse of what I call the “Satanic Persuasion Formula”:

    The serpent’s original persuasion sequence (via Genesis 3):

    1. Exaggerate the restriction of righteousness
    2. Suggest that he’s not giving her what she deserves
    3. Highlight short-term pleasure, discount long-term pain

    The inverse:

    1. Dramatize or satirize the burden of folly
    2. Discredit the source (suggest a conspiracy)
    3. Acknowledge the ego
    4. Discount short-term pain against long-term gain


    “I think it’s a shame that so many young women are slaving away the best years of their lives to line the pockets of greedy corporation owners. Who do you think the “women’s lib” movement is really helping? We all want our talents to be acknowledged, and those who are greedy like to feed a dream to those who feel unappreciated in exchange for years of what amounts to slave labor. Sure you can have a career. But at what cost? In the end, you find out you were just another cog in someone else’s machine. Replaced as quickly as you were let in. Perhaps the initial pains of motherhood aren’t nearly as bad as the price of decades of fruitless toil. At least with children, you’re investing your effort into something that lasts.”

    Granted, if a woman has hardened her heart, she will never be receptive. But if she is merely deceived and pumped up on rhetoric, I believe it can be countered.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sigma Frame says:

      Your idea is worthy of experimental investigation. Have you written any posts that describe your hypothesis in greater depth?
      I regret that your blog does not accept comments.


  6. Pingback: Review of vetting, virgins and new info on virginity pledges, from Christianity and Masculinity | Σ Frame

  7. Pingback: How to Dismantle the Idol of Fandom: Breaking the Fifth Wall | Σ Frame

  8. Pingback: The Three Step Path to God | Σ Frame

  9. Pingback: The Blue Pill, Feminism, and Sin | Σ Frame

  10. Pingback: How to ward off Self-Deception | Σ Frame

  11. Pingback: The Shepherd and the Crook | Σ Frame

  12. Pingback: Women Rely on a Man’s Frame for Redemptive Introspection | Σ Frame

  13. Pingback: The Status Signaling Narrative | Σ Frame

  14. Pingback: The intermediate goal is to get past the blinding obsession | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s