Why is premarital sex a sin?

The sexual use of our bodies must honor and glorify God, and this cannot happen outside marriage.  Read on to learn why.

Readership: Men; Women; Parents of adolescents; Singles; Christians;
Length: 4,000 words;
Reading Time: 30 minutes;

Introduction for Parents

It is well understood within Christendom that premarital (and extramarital) sex is a sin.  But most people don’t understand exactly why that is.

For example, if we were to ask a typical young person whether it would be OK for two people to have sex if they are in love, or are engaged to be married, then they could readily come up with several culturally inspired reasons why that would be acceptable.

On the other hand, if we were to ask the same young person why he/she should wait until marriage to have sex, the answers would make reference to the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy or contracting an STD.  If the youngster is a church-goer, the answer might be “cause Mom said so”.  An older adolescent might assume greater personal agency and hunt for a better response.  “Umm… because the Bible says it’s wrong?

Moreover, there would be no sense of morality, certainty, or conviction behind these responses.  If we were to follow up with the question, “Why is it morally wrong?” or “Why does the Bible say so?”, they will draw a blank.

This post is an attempt to fill in this blank.  Use this knowledge to explain to your children the reasons why sexual purity is important, and to back up your admonitions for your children to refrain from sexual promiscuity.

Introduction for Adult Christian Men

The top fact is that marriage is an incredibly bad deal for men these days.  The rational conclusion for a man is just to spin plates or go MGTOW, but many Christian men have a damningly strong libido and/or a redemptive purpose to form a family that just won’t let them quit.  Hence, many men still cling to the ideal of marriage with a “do it or die” attitude.  And many end up dying (figurative of the soul and finances).  There is really no good choice here.

Through several posts this year, one inconvenient truth that has come to the surface of our understanding is that a man is incentivized, or more or less required in many cases, to engage in some degree of premarital sex in order to arrive in a marriage.  This is presumably no less true among Christians, due to the general convergence of the church with the visages of modern feminism and traditional chivalry.

Although this method of engaging in premarital sex really “works” (in the sense that it duly leads to marriage), nevertheless, it is still indeed a very bad approach to marriage.  This is because the woman does not have the mindset necessary to build a marriage that glorifies God.

Low libido

Background Fundamentals

To explain exactly why premarital sex undermines the formation of God’s archetype, a Christ centered marriage leading to sanctification, I’ll refer to a familiar Red Pill paradigm as an ontological model: the Alpha Fux/Beta Bux (AF/BB) female mating strategy.  According to this paradigm, a woman’s choice to have sex is motivated by two outcomes.

  1. She has sex in order to gratuitously submit her body to a highly qualified male, and to seize the opportunity to collect top-quality seed. (AF)
  2. She has sex to claim dominion and assert power, largely motivated by her desire to secure various forms of his investment in her. (BB)

In both cases, the relationship is based on carnal mating strategies, and does not necessarily embody an organic symbiosis of complementary personalities and shared values — a union which would glorify God. 

  • If she has sex for the first reason above (AF), then she has foolishly forfeited her purity, and his favor for her as a potential wife.
  • If she has sex for the second reason (BB), then she has selfishly abandoned her favor for her husband and will neglect to respect him properly. At an opportune moment, she will display her hypergamous inclinations to trade up and monkey branch, and is thus unlikely to remain faithful. 

In both cases, the reasons for pairing are based on foolish or selfish motivations which will be explained in the next two sections respectively.

As long as a man conforms to the woman’s mating strategy, the focus is on Game techniques (or the catastrophic lack thereof) and playing her game, and this is unlikely to yield a Christ-centered marriage.

man woman arm wrestling-744x491

Going deeper, the beginning of this breakdown occurs when the woman fails to act as a gatekeeper of sex.  To explain how this happens, Derek left this gem under 8 Examples of IOI Word Semantics (2020 August 8).

The evolutionary method: Man sexually desires woman and pressures her for sex.  Woman rebuffs his advances (for a while).  Man has unlimited sperm for multiple sexual partners, but woman can only be pregnant by one man.  She selects her mate.

Feminism flips the script: Women throw themselves at men.  For (evolutionary) normal men, coupling soon follows.  But commitment is poor, since woman gave up control of sexual access.  This is her power.  By shedding it, men use her.  Cohabitation, MGTOW, divorce, single parenting, marital sexual starvation… all the logical result.

Men have an unsatisfying choice: (1) Give in to base desires to score easily, or (2) take on the woman’s role of sexual gatekeeper.  The former means lots of sex, but is sin.  The latter is righteous, but lowers your chance of getting lots of sex due to weeding out the sexually voracious in favor of the stable and godly.  The third choice is perhaps even worse: (3) settling for used goods.

As you can see, when women fail to be sexual gatekeepers, men are left with no good choices and God’s archetype of a sanctified marriage is debased.  As a result, we see strange pairings and fewer happy marriages.

Olivier Sarkozy Mary Kate Olsen

Such mismatched pairings abound.  Men want women who like sex, but are not promiscuous.  Thus in light of the above,

““Hunting for a unicorn is an individual solution not a societal solution.””

Women need become chaste pre-marital sexual gatekeepers again.  The sexual voracious need to use control of sex to acquire the best mates, not just the best looking and sexually willing.  This would dramatically increase the odds of ‘unicorn parings.’ But we no longer have the social systems required to mandate this.

Derek’s analysis makes it clear that the woman is relinquishing her power when she allows the man to assume the role of sexual gatekeeper.  Of note, this is a role which men are not wired to adopt, and thus will seldom do so.  The result is a reduced interest in investment (i.e. commitment), widespread promiscuity, and a disintegration of the MMP, culminating in a plethora of very dissatisfied men and women, and very unhappy marriages.

But this begs the question, why would so many women, who are insecure by nature, willingly pursue whoredom when there are so many risks and negative consequences attached?  Are women really that horny and that dumb?

Maybe some are, but there is more to it.  While Derek’s viewpoint is accurate, there is a parallel paradigm from the female perspective in which, that by abandoning her responsibility to remain chaste, the woman usurps the spiritual authority of the man, thereby flipping the hierarchy of control.  This results in her holding the reigns of power in the relationship.

Women’s choices are outlined in a previous post, The Feminine Dilemma (2018 October 27), which can be summarized as basically either AF or BB, or both through engaging in serial monogamy.

Now, let’s consider what happens when a woman relinquishes her moral agency of being a sexual gatekeeper in order to engage in premarital sex – first by riding the carousel (AF), then by seducing a Steady Eddie into marriage (BB).

woman-on-her-bed-looking-anxious-worrying-about-endometriosis-and-sex

1. The gatekeeper of sex abandons her post in order to seize AF opportunities

A woman’s natural desire to be ruled over is commonly expressed as a hypergamous desire for a top quality man, because she intuitively perceives that such a man has the visceral power of authority over her.  Rightfully, an unmarried woman should be ruled by her father,* and Christ, if she is a believer.  However, there are many women these days who are lacking a cover of authority over her head.  The lack of authority and moral guidance, combined with the passion and ignorance of youth, yields a libertine agency that is prone to error.  This could happen through one of the following ways.

  1. Her father fails to act as a functional figurehead of authority over her.
  2. She willingly departs from under her father’s protective covering.
  3. A combination of the above is especially catastrophic.

In the first case, she may desire to marry a suitable man who can rule over her properly, but since he has the power seat, she has no control over his willingness to commit to a marriage.  She must prove to him that she would be a worthy wife (e.g. through feminine attractiveness, kindness, submissiveness, etc.) in order to attract his commitment.  If she gives it up to an alpha before marriage, she has shown herself to be “easy”, which signals that she is unstable and unfit for marriage, and by doing so, she has basically forfeited the opportunity to marry him.  Why?  It’s because Men won’t commit to a relationship unless it’s an obvious win for them.  If he’s already getting all the sex he needs, then what motivation does he have to accept a much larger responsibility for it?  As the saying goes, why should he buy the cow when the milk is free?

In the rare event that he is an uncommonly righteous man, or if there is a pregnancy, he may be willing to marry her, but this is unlikely since he has already shown himself to be of questionable moral standing by engaging in premarital sex, and since he is presumed to be uber quality, she is not likely to be the only contender for his investment and affections.

Throughout history, women have long noted the apparent inequity of male-female courtship roles, making God out to be unjust for this arrangement, and have indignantly expressed their disapproval through Feminism and sexual rebellion.  But this response to God’s design only makes it all that much harder for all women (and most men) to obtain a joyful, sanctified marriage. 

In the second case, she must have a motivation to stray.  Below is an abridged list of possible reasons, all of which are included in the Feminist Life Script.

  • Seeking higher education or employment opportunities away from home and out from under her father’s authority.
  • “Discovering herself.”
  • Riding the carousel.
  • A desire to assert power and autonomy.
  • Outright rebellion.

rewards and dopamine

Of note, the desire to assert power and autonomy is intensely alluring.  Dalrock described this phenomenon in his essay, Women’s morphing need for male investment. (2013 August 24).

When women are young and have the power position in the SMP, promiscuity is intoxicating to them.  Since they have the power, the short term nature of most of their relationships isn’t seen as them being rejected by men, but as them rejecting men.  Young women today don’t feel the need that previous generations did to secure commitment in their late teens and early 20s because:

  1. Only small numbers of other women their age are going after the more public and durable forms of male investment.
  2. Their hopping from man to man is seen as occurring on their own terms.

However, as women progress into their late twenties all of this starts to change.  Their SMP power relative to men starts to decline and at the same time their peers start to marry in much greater numbers.  In other words, their need to secure male investment occurs fairly suddenly, and at the very time their SMP power is starting to dive.**  This is surprising to many young women because of our cultural denial of the SMP realities Rollo describes.

If her particular pretension of the feminine imperative is ruled by her own desire for power, then any relationship she enters into will start off on the wrong foot with her presuming to be in control.  If she spends a considerable number of years exercising her p*ssy power over men, then it will be extremely difficult if not impossible for her to abscond from the habit.  Even after she has tired of the carousel and is ready to settle down, she will probably choose a husband according to the same standard.

couple in bed woman on phone

In all of the above cases, she has missed the chance to marry a preferred man and eventually has no other choice but to marry a lesser man (by her standards).  In effect, she is forced to resort to hypogamy (marrying a man below the tier of her expectations), which reprehensively violates her natural desire for hypergamy.  In reality, the man offering commitment may indeed be an equitable match for her, or even higher, but because of the Alpha Widow syndrome, deep in her soul she regards him as being sub-par.  Thus, after marriage, she’s stuck with a man whom was selected by his inability to take the lead, nor generate the Tingles.  This unfavorable situation inevitably leads to severe discontentment, contempt, and rivalry, culminating in the woman’s morphing need for male investment (i.e. frivorce).

* The present discussion suggests why it is extremely important for a marriage-minded man to vet a potential wife by examining the relationship she has with her father.

** The event of change described in Dalrock’s last paragraph is commonly called “hitting the wall” within the Manosphere.

cat lady

2. The gatekeeper of sex abandons her post in order to seize power

Women use premarital sex to qualify men.  In this scenario, you might imagine that a woman thinks of a man as a kid’s wind-up toy.  The first part of the game is to determine his winding style and strength.  This exercise allows her to become familiar with and own her p*ssy power.  If she shows a little bit of cleavage, or a lot of leg, will that get him wound up? Maybe a bare-breasted titty show might get him to see things her way.  Not enough? Some popsicle popping will surely get him to soften up and conform to her wishes.  The challenge is an integral part of the game.  If he gets too excited from a gesture too small, then a gaming woman might throw that small fish back into the pond and go fishing for a bigger challenge.  She’s hunting for the high SMV man that can hold out for the grand finale.  As a preselection characteristic, high SMV men can get a lot of action from many women, are under less compulsion to toss their load, and are more likely to hold up to her sexpectations.  Instead of his low pressure cooker type of self-control serving as evidence that he is an unreliable, promiscuous player, it’s taken as a confirmation that he’s a big fish.  Thus, by its very nature, using premarital sex to qualify men tends to screen for promiscuous men, and filter out chaste marriage minded men.

Women use premarital sex to ensnare men.  Basically, the man’s natural prerogative is to conquer, dominate, and inseminate.  But when this goal has been reached through engaging in premarital sex, the man’s mindset changes.  His aggressiveness in pursuing a relationship becomes more relaxed as he resorts to the follow-up role of preserving and maintaining the new status quo.  This role focuses on consolidating his position as a defacto “husband” (and possible father), and in peacefully maintaining the “territory” he perceives to have “conquered”.  In effect, she has “disarmed” the man, and has put him into a defensive position.  For many men, this translates into greater investment (e.g. commitment, time, housing, food, resources).  In effect, she has bartered off her sexuality for his greater interest and investment.  By its nature, this is a type of soft whoredom.

couple in bed man on phone

Women use premarital sex to control men.  After the man is sufficiently ensnared, it is at this time that the woman shows her claws and fangs.  Men are caught unawares, and are already hooked on the oxytocin and endorphins.  She is now able to pour on the heat, and she threatens to disrupt the status quo of him having a satisfying relationship and regular sex.  Meanwhile, men become confused and find it extremely difficult to reverse gears and return to the aggressive mode of being a conqueror.  In the hope of maintaining the peace and continuing on with the sexual relations which he has already tasted, most men will not only tolerate her demands, but will bend over backwards to satisfy her particular conditions.  Because of this motivation for continued sex and sanctification, men become placated and comply easily to the whore’s demands.  This also explains how premarital sex quickly turns into the habit of her withholding sex after marriage.  It’s all about control – her control over him.***

In short, a woman uses premarital sex to select high quality, but weak willed men who are then duped through his natural desires.  First, his fleshly desire for sex, and then after sex, his desire for peace and satisfaction.  It is through this manner that the God ordained hierarchy has been flipped on its head.

*** PUA’s commonly encourage the exploitation of soft whoredom merely for the sake of getting laid, teaching men to abandon the relationship when the fangs come out.  Similar to prostitution, such an approach may indeed deliver sexual gratification to a man without him being controlled.  However, this behavior is condemned in scripture as whore-mongering.  (See Ephesians 5:5, 1 Timothy 1:10, Hebrews 13:4, Revelation 21:8, Revelation 22:15.)

Post-titles-in-comments

Why premarital sex leads to a dysfunctional marriage

It is the nature of women to desire a man, but a woman’s desire to control a man is part of her fallen nature.  Since sexual desire is perhaps the only area in which women genuinely have visceral power over men, especially younger men, it is a no brainer solution for her to combine her desire for a man with her desire to control a man simply by applying her thighs to the stud.  She can knock out Two Birds with one stone, and enjoy the ego rush of power in the process.  As long as women perceive their sexuality as a form of power, they will carry a mistaken sense of control, and will be continually tempted to abuse this power.

As mentioned earlier, single young women tend to revel in their sexual power, and they learn to use this power to leverage male desire in order to extract attention, affirmation, and various forms of provision, as well as evade responsibility (AKA the p*ssy pass).  But within marriage, she becomes acutely aware of the consequences of her actions (i.e. sex reveals her vulnerability while it empowers the man) and the relevant responsibilities.  With this information added into the equation, she must now resort to a new strategy in order to continue exerting power and evading responsibility.  This invariably results in her using sex (i.e. the denial thereof) as a weapon.

Before marriage, she had no sense of responsible agency, only the thrill of passion, affirmation, and the illusions of liberty and control.  After marriage, familiarity and selfishness kill the passion, the affirmation is a once and done deal, and her perceptions of liberty are transformed into adultery and become a liability.  In short, all her previously dearly held idolatries are eliminated in one fell swoop.  The true nature of her depraved spiritual state is revealed in all its gory, leaving her floundering for some other idol to latch onto.

primal sex play

Since women are intuitively familiar with this method of control, one might think that they would continue to flex their perineal muscles even after marriage, which might actually be helpful in terms of closeness and bonding.  But in fact, the nature of marriage requires both partners to form a relationship that is structured according to God’s archetype, or else it becomes miserable.  Men and women who enter into marriage with any relationship structure contrary to this are forced to evolve according to God’s prototype, or else fail.

The only way to reinstate the proper hierarchy of authority is for the man to stop having sex with the woman, and to start demanding her submission, wherein her obedient compliance is rewarded with love, attention, and other favors, possibly sex if they decided to marry during the interim.  The thing is, this remedial approach is extremely difficult for both the man and the woman.  It is even more difficult than it would have been to resist having premarital sex in the first place.  It is difficult for the man for the reasons discussed above, and it is difficult for the woman because it requires her to assume a posture of humility and respect after having succeeded in dominating the man.  Most women will patently refuse.  For others, the sudden invalidation of her power breaks the continuity of her once reliable ego fixation, and suppresses the satiety of her addiction.  Her depraved grasping for love, security, and control is exacerbated, even amplified to hellish proportions, which will guarantee he does not succeed if it does not drive him away altogether.

Furthermore, if men try to implement a remedial strategy, it is very likely that the now frustrated woman will be tempted to monkey branch and try her hand on dominating another man, rather than to do the hard work of being obedient to God and her husband in a relationship that has already lost its spark and has become filled with the grievances of sin.

All this clearly explains why so many marriages have a rocky start for the first 2-5 years, and 50% of them end in the divorce courts.  In other words, 50% of them prefer to return to the idolatries of their youth, and there’s probably a good proportion of those who stay married who are merely tolerating it, while empowering themselves to “stay faithful” by dreaming of the Asherah poles of the past whenever they’re rutting.

couple in bed both on phone

Concluding Statements

Because of the tomes of discussion about the AF/BB female mating strategy in the Manosphere over the past decade, we have come to regard this strategy as the natural default.  However, while I was composing this essay, I realized that if a woman obeyed God by postponing sex until marriage, and she married sufficiently early in life (early 20s), then the AF/BB strategy (and all its transgressions) may never ensue.

Thus, the AF/BB strategy is only the default strategy for those women who have abandoned the God proscribed prerogative to avoid sex until marriage and instead have pursued the feminist life Script, relishing their own p*ssy power and indulging the idolatry thereof.

In other words, the AF/BB strategy is a peculiar manifestation of feminism, a result of worshipping the idol of female rebellion.  It only seems like the dominant prototype because feminist ideology prevails as a conventional benchmark for women.  Another way to say this is that we are witnessing the once rare catastrophic consequences of promiscuity now played out as a societal norm.

Men want to interpret a woman’s willingness to have premarital sex as meaning that she loves him so much that she just can’t control herself.  But this notion is just a projection of male lust and a denial of God’s archetypical relationship structure.  Remember, women are the gatekeepers of sex, and the only time she should be opening her legs that gate is in obedience to God’s will for her life.  That means celibacy before marriage, and afterwards, submission to her husband’s advances, and only her husband’s advances.

wedding 12

It is my opinion that women who are unwilling to follow this course should not get married, because as long as a woman obeys the fleshly nature (following evolutionary psychology) she will maintain a utilitarian approach to sex (i.e. informal whoredom along the AF/BB trajectory) and will fail to fulfill her role as sexual gatekeeper according to God’s designations.  A woman is not fit for marriage unless/until she grows past her barbaric nature and can willingly submit her body to the worthier purposes of marriage and procreation.

The bottom line is in whether she (and he) will choose to be obedient to God’s will prior to the wedding day.  If she cannot resist illicit sex before marriage, then it is unlikely that she will resist illicit liaisons afterwards.  If she will not prove to be obedient before marriage, then it is highly unlikely that she will suddenly become obedient afterwards.  For a man to think otherwise is unreasonable, and foolish.  To briefly reiterate, foolishness is when you can’t (or won’t) see what will come next, based on the nature of things and the track record of past behavior/events.

Any way you look at this, premarital sex is a sin.  Of course, we already knew this, but now we know why.

Related

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 Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Courtship and Marriage, Discernment, Wisdom, Education, Female Power, Feminism, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Failure, Relationships, Sanctification & Defilement, Strategy, The Power of God, Vetting Women and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Why is premarital sex a sin?

  1. lastmod says:

    all the pics you use in posts like this. 99% of couples don’t look like this on their best day

    Like

    • Jack says:

      @ Jason, I try to select higher quality images that fit into the theme of the post, or tell a story on their own, or are thought provoking or inspiring. It’s actually quite difficult to find high resolution photos that don’t have a feminist bias.

      Like

  2. ramman3000 says:

    You know you are doing something right when you write up a huge post like this and all you get are crickets. Not even lastmod can be bothered to come up with serious criticism! Well done, sir.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jack says:

      Thanks Derek. I believe a high number of views, shares and pingbacks, and a low number of comments indicates a pertinent, well written post. Time will tell how many views it receives.

      Like

    • lastmod says:

      Premaritial sex is a sin in the christian world only when it depends on “who” is sinning.
      Popular guy with the ladies? He just can’t help it. Most other men? It is a sin, and they need to “grow masculine traits”

      This post has been done a billion times over, hence why I mentioned the photos.

      Like

      • Jack says:

        “Premaritial sex is a sin in the Christian world…”

        Premarital sex is a sin for everyone, but only some people recognize this. A person doesn’t need to be a Christian to appreciate the wisdom of chastity. But in spite of (or maybe because of) the inadequate teachings on this subject, many Christians fail to recognize this truth.

        “This post has been done a billion times over…”

        Really? Where else have you read the detailed explanations I offered above?

        Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        Jack. Your post doesn’t even say why it’s a sin. It goes into the usual “evil female nature” and relationship models, her using sex to upsur male authority…..it goes on, and this has been discussed frequently on all red-pill, christian, rollo-esque blogs for almost a decade. In the same breath, and same frame of mind on other posts from the same blogs….tons of information on how to generate this attraction from women, and how to “get them” and to have them get tingles for you as a man but at the same time claiming God’s word above all and then going into complex sexual-cultural-sociobiology….while forgetting the birth control pill opened all of this up. Women found their new power, and most men just gobbled up what was offered.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        Jason. What is your concept of sin?

        I see a need for younger Christians to understand the concrete links between the acts of sin and the consequences of sin. There just isn’t enough analysis on this.

        Other than an occasional passing mention, Rollo intentionally avoids discussing sin. Christian Red Pill writers commonly state that premarital sex is a sin, but they don’t go into very much detail about how or why. Deep Strength and Biblical Gender Roles have done a few exposees of Game over the past couple years, showing it to be sinful, but that’s about it.

        If you know of any other Christian Red Pill blog posts that answer the question of how/why premarital sex is a sin, please post links for the benefit of our readers. If you can find anything at all, I’ll guess it’s at least five years old – if it’s still up online.

        Like

      • Sharkly says:

        So, if the churchians are a messed up hypocritical social club that reminds you of Jr. High, then don’t live for their validation, live for God alone, and ignore their biased judgments.

        Liked by 2 people

      • lastmod says:

        I would still be doing it “wrong” friend Sharkly, hence the validation of god really means nothing. In my christian walk, I was corrected and rebuked even after ten years of serious Bible study…..retreats, service, attendance…..study, study. Many in the ‘sphere are some hot-roll to heaven I would not be invited too, nor welcome even if I did make the cut. The depression and seething anger was actually hurting me. Throwing that off and actually living life (and not a debaucherous sense) but hiking, traveling, honing my skills into work, a work-life balance, and thinking of MYSELF instead of what I was supposed to be doing…I actually HAD growth. Living for god stunted me for ten years…..and I did notice something…….when I was striving for living for god….I noticed 99% of my fellow men who were professing, didn’t and had the audacity to lecture me about it. This is a big reason why men leave. Soy boy pastors, mean church ladies, and weak praise music are not a big a factor…..my fellow men are the problem. I will spend the rest of my life calling this out.

        Like

      • ramman3000 says:

        @lastmod

        “Your post doesn’t even say why it’s a sin”

        Here is what I have written on the topic:

        “Regardless of whether or not there is a marriage, sex creates a one-flesh joining. This may be licit or illicit. The only time it is licit is in the context of a new or existing marriage. Thus, all sex outside the bounds of marriage is unconditionally wrong.”

        As per Genesis 2 (and others), sex is the ‘act of marriage’, so all sex outside this is wrong. The entire biblical sexual ethic relies on this fact.

        Like

  3. Pingback: Are you a man or a mushroom? | Σ Frame

  4. Novaseeker says:

    However, while I was composing this essay, I realized that if a woman obeyed God by postponing sex until marriage, and she married sufficiently early in life (early 20s), then the AF/BB strategy (and all its transgressions) may never ensue.

    Thus, the AF/BB strategy is only the default strategy for those women who have abandoned the God proscribed prerogative to avoid sex until marriage and instead have pursued the feminist life Script, relishing their own p*ssy power and indulging the idolatry thereof.

    This is very true, which is why Dalrock used to harp on age at first marriage skyrocketing, and what this implies for sexual behavior and all of the issues you discuss here.

    The reality is this: most parents push their daughters into the life script, including almost all Christian parents, and especially almost all Christian fathers. This is just a fact. They want the daughter to delay marriage until the later 20s so that she can get her full education (bachelors and increasingly a masters or other advanced degree) and get her career/job pathway started and with some experience before she begins to think about being tied down in any way geographically or otherwise — in other words, the parents want their daughters to be financially independent, to have all the pieces in place to live successfully and independently of any particular man before they look for a husband. And this is the case for almost all Christian families and almost all Christian fathers. The fathers who do not do this, and encourage young marriage in their daughters (defined culturally today as any marriage younger than age 25) are generally viewed as abusive, and so there are few of them.

    The dark underbelly of this is that everyone knows — everyone from the parents to the extended family, to the minister/priest and so on — that these young people are fornicating prior to marriage. Although everyone pays lip service to chastity, and would say publicly that they believe the young unmarried are being chaste, they, in fact, know that this is not the case and simply collectively choose to look the other way and not ignore that they are doing so, and that they know everyone else is also doing the same vis-a-vis their own kids. Why this mass shared delusion? Because the alternative is to challenge the life script of securing financially and professionally independent daughters, and that is a price almost no Christian parents are willing to pay.

    They will openly admit that this is a priority for them, of course (while at the same time insisting that Jenny is very godly and of course would never sin like that), and in doing so point the finger at men who divorce their wives for younger women, leaving them financially hard off (an illusion of many layers, starting with the reality that only a small number of divorces reflect that in 2020, and ending with the fact that women are not left financially in the lurch after a divorce … this isn’t 1920, it’s 2020, but everyone acts as if it isn’t, and therefore that women desperately need to hedge their bets due to all the unrealiable scumbag men who are leaving their wives for younger women all the time). And so while they publicly insist on their children’s godliness, in private they simply choose to “not pry into things” very much so that they can retain the illusion, and most know, in their deeper minds, that their kids are fornicating … and the bottom line is that they prefer this to the idea of the daughters marrying earlier and fornicating less.

    The churches themselves remain almost entirely silent on this issue — if they do say anything, it involves chiding young men for being irresponsible. I have never even once heard a sermon chiding young women for avoiding marriage until the 30s for financial reasons, and thereby essentially making fornication a foregone conclusion de facto. Not a word, and we all know full well why that is.

    The bottom line is this: as long as Christian fathers encourage their daughters to pursue the secular/feminist/independence life script, young women will prioritize their own empowerment, and will be engaging in fornication with “fun boys” until they are in the husband hunting age of the later 20s. And all of that is very, very unlikely to change, because most Christians are more loyal — much more loyal — to the values of their socio-economic class than they are to Christ and His will. Young men need to realize this, and plan accordingly.

    Liked by 2 people

    • thedeti says:

      “women desperately need to hedge their bets due to all the unrealiable scumbag men who are leaving their wives for younger women all the time)”

      That right there is the main reason why the Script gets and keeps such traction. “Dear Daughter, you cannot count on a man. What if he leaves and divorces you? What if he dies? What if he gets disabled? What if he can’t work? What will you do then?

      Yes, it is true there is some small chance that she could marry a man who dies prematurely or gets disabled, and those are tragedies when they occur, and communities and churches rally around them. But most of the time when a woman in her 30s or 40s finds herself single, it’s because of a divorce she initiated and instigated.

      The divorce problem is not men leaving their wives high and dry. Men are not en masse boffing their secretaries. People who think this have been watching too many Mad Men episodes. Don Draper and Roger Sterling were the exception, not the rule.

      It has NEVER been the case that most married men were sleeping with their secretaries or cheating all over the place on their wives, even during the “evil patriarchy”. It has NEVER been the case that most married men were frequenting prostitutes. It has NEVER been the case that most men wanted out of their marriages. Even if they did want out, they couldn’t get out because the social opprobrium and perpetual alimony was such that they could not or would not do it. The few men who did cheat on their wives usually did it on the downlow.

      The so -called bad old days of no good very bad shiftless dishonest cheating men leaving their wives for younger models never were and are massively, massively overblown.

      [Jack: Dalrock proved that the common belief that divorce rates are driven by men discarding older wives for a younger model simply doesn’t fit with the data. See his post, Why a woman’s age at time of marriage matters, and what this tells us about the apex fallacy (2011-8-26).]

      Liked by 1 person

      • cobaltsheath says:

        “It has NEVER been the case that most married men were sleeping with their secretaries or cheating all over the place on their wives, even during the “evil patriarchy”.”

        You bring up a good point, too, here. People forget that patriarchies have plenty of social norms for men to follow as well.

        Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        I was at IBM in the 1990’s in an office setting. It happened ALL the time.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        I am sure it happened sometimes. Were these men at IBM leaving their wives and marrying their chippy secretaries? I bet they weren’t. I bet they were having their dalliances and keeping them on the downlow, and eventually moving on when he got tired of it or she started dating someone seriously or got married or otherwise just stopped.

        I will also bet it was a minority of men at IBM cheating on their wives. I will also bet it was not anywhere close to a majority of men. Because, as you all have seen me write, most men don’t cheat on their wives because they can’t. They’re not attractive enough. A lot of men can’t get even their own wives to have sex with them, much less get someone they’re not married to to have sex with them. It was that way in the 1970s, and it’s orders of magnitude worse now.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        Oh? I thought looks had nothing to do with bedding women???? Now men are not attractive enough.

        It was the best looking men. There was a scandal of sorts in my technology group SSD / Shark / ESS that did indeed divorce his wife and marry the admin. One dude was banging my secretery….he was married…..but we know “that never happened” right?

        If you were average or ugly in 1990’s silicon valley as a man. You pretty much were incel. An ugly woman was scoring above average guys. Why? Because they were even FORCED to date down.

        In my twelve years at IBM. I saw only one woman fired (asked to step down) because of her sexual misconduct at work.

        Men??? If the man was deemed hot. Never fired. An ugly dude makes a clumsy flirt with a woman???? “He’s a creep and a danger / inappropriate to women and is the reason why women feel unsafe to walk the campus!!!”

        The good looking in the corporate world can NEVER do wrong.

        But looks dont matter. Women just want raw male authority, confidence, and for the guy to “make them laugh”

        Like

  5. lastmod says:

    “Jason. What is your concept of sin?”

    My take would be wrong no matter what “my concept” of sin is.

    “I see a need for younger Christians to understand the concrete links between the acts of sin and the consequences of sin. There just isn’t enough analysis on this.”

    Before I was forty, I set foot in a church maybe 50 times. Weddings after my college years of friends from college. Before that it was usually Christmas and Easter. I was raised culturally Church of England (COE / preppy-Catholic) and even I with low IQ, low status, and low expectations got the concepts of what was right and wrong from church. Understood that “sin” in god’s eyes was a separation from him. Jesus, and his whole point of his life, death and resurrection was to give us redemption from this, to overcome, and to have “life”

    This is what I understood at at 40 when I arrived “in” church at The Salvation Army. If I can grasp these basics by being raised a cultural chirstian as a boy and a teen………and younger Christians today don’t understand this……the problem lies not in the church. It lies within themselves. As much as I admire your scholarly approach to this in this post……..its WAY over my head for the most part at age fifty, and unless every young Christian reading this is a “whiz” it will be over their head as well.

    I got the concepts of sin, and the story of Jesus from very sporadic attendance, and if young men today who have been christian their whole young life are not “getting” this………..well, that;’s on them.

    I personally think they really just don’t believe and are just there because their parents are making them go. Parents relying on the church for a sense of values, and guidance.

    Christ evidently made this very simple……..and now, since we know it isn’;t simple, it’s easier to break this down into evolution, psychology, inborn evil female nature…..alas no hope!

    Like

  6. bee123456 says:

    A Christian book that encourages what Novaseeker is exposing is, 10 Dates Before I Do.

    In 10 Dates Before I I Do, Stephen Arterburn talks about his concern that his daughter was getting serious with her boyfriend. Arterburn talks postively about discussing and convincing his daughter to not marry young but at least wait until later to marry. He was pleased she changed her plan and now wanted to wait until age 26 to begin to consider marriage.

    The 10 dates, is not 10 dates with the same guy, it is dates with 10 different guys!

    “They agreed, reluctantly, but they agreed. Over dinner a few weeks ago my daughter casually told me of a new plan she had devised for her life. Here was her plan: school, travel, job, car, and then no sooner than 26, perhaps think about marriage. The ten dates process helped her think through her long-term plans, which clarified short term decisions — like getting married at 20. If couples would go through this process, partnering decisions will be more wisely considered, marriages will be stronger, and consequent commitments will more likely be kept. Now, that will push down the rate of divorce. This concept can impact marriages as no other book has. It is practical, and it provides a plan to work, rather than a concept to understand.”
    See more at: http://search.overdrive.com/ti/751009f3-2b7d-4f31-995f-0a907dd64617-425-1-1-1-1/10-dates-before-steve-arterburn-audiobook#sthash.NH58R2ky.dpuf

    Like

  7. Novaseeker says:

    Good find, Bee!

    It may push down divorce rates, and it may not. I am guessing that the claim that it reduces the divorce rates is due to later age at first marriage. Dalrock did a deep dive into that at one point and it turned out that the statistics appeared to say that the “younger age at first marriage results in higher divorce rates” meme is generated mostly by couples with a higher education level — that is, couples which married younger but where both parties eventually earned college degrees had a higher divorce rate than such couples that married later, whereas the divorce rate for couples where at least 1 never obtained a college degree was similar regardless of age at first marriage. It was an odd conclusion — I suppose it could be explained by the fact that the couples where both eventually earned a degree would feature more resentment by the wife about “wasting her degree” and this could generate a divorce incentive that wasn’t present in the other couples.

    But … in any case, even if you concede that increasing age in first marriage reduces divorce rates, it’s really a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul here, because it’s 100% clear that increasing age at first marriage moves fornication rates to close to 100%, and also substantially increases the rates of cohabitation, serial fornication, and abortion, simply by increasing the number of boyfriends/girlfriends prior to marriage in a culture where virtually all of those couplings, except for a small number of fanatically religious chaste people, are going to be sexually active. Basically Arterburn is prioritizing avoiding divorce by promoting fornication which, as you say, underscores my point that Christians basically don’t care very much about pre-marital fornication any longer, in terms of priorities of sins to avoid and to design life plans around increasing the likelihood of avoidance. They’ve thrown in the towel on fornication pretty much at this point.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. thedeti says:

    I am not surprised the 10 Dates Before I Do book comes from Steve Arterburn.

    –got a girl pregnant in college, pressured her to have an abortion

    –first marriage ended in divorce

    –He and second wife adopted one child – she divorced him after 20 years

    –Married a third time

    Sorry/not sorry – how is a man who’s been divorced twice and married thrice holding forth from a Christian perspective on marriage and family? How does this man have a ministry? Why does anyone listen to anything twice divorced, thrice married Steve Arterburn has to say on marriage and family?

    Liked by 4 people

    • lastmod says:

      Just maybe…..a big maybe…….people relate to someone who is like them. Not perfect. Made some mistakes. Wants to right them. Clueless men like myself who stumbled into this realm ten years ago…..well, just about ten years ago quickly learned that there is zero hope if they are on / around forty. Can’t have premarital sex, all women are evil. You have to vett, nope…none left. How to date…..but if you can’t…..you’re not a real man……pray, but remember god owes you nothing………have a bad past, you have consequnces, unless you are deemed good looking on a cultural standard……..jesus loves you so much, but he loves some people more for worse sins than your own………

      who knows Deti. People tend to relate to people who are like them and have “changed”.
      I did find help I needed in overcoming my cocaine addiction from people who indeed lived it.

      No, maybe his advice isn’t correct. It probably isn’t on many levels. No one has cornered the market on truth in any of these forums that’s for sure

      Like

      • thedeti says:

        “Just maybe…..a big maybe…….people relate to someone who is like them.”

        “I did find help I needed in overcoming my cocaine addiction from people who indeed lived it.”

        OK, but the recovering addicts who helped you were in recovery and weren’t using anymore. They might have been like you, but they had overcome their addictions and stopped using.

        Someone who’s thrice married has a history of having some trouble not getting it right.

        It’s fine that someone like Steve Arterburn wants to get it right. What’s not fine is him having a ministry. It’s pretty well established that men whose lives have this kind of disarray shouldn’t have Christian ministries.

        What’s also questionable is his having a ministry on marriage, family, sex, and intersexual relationships. Mr. Arterburn’s track record doesn’t really establish him as being the best person to advise others on those matters. Not with two failed marriages and two divorces under your belt.

        It’s fine that Mr. Arterburn is a work in progress. But you can’t be a marital work in progress and minister to others credibly on marriage. You can’t have two divorces under your belt and represent God and His Word on marriage, sex, and relationships.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        Another thing: Men in the manosphere talking about marriage and relationships, coming from failed relationships:

        They’re not ministering. They don’t have professional ministries. They don’t have broadcast ministries, pulpit ministries, or any kind of ministry. They don’t claim to represent God or His Word. They don’t claim to pass judgment, and they’re not even really giving advice.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. lastmod says:

    Deti, okay. Then why can a priest (Catholic or otherwise) give “marriage counseling”? He has had no experience on being married, on sex and the like. He has has had zero experience on “love and war” in a household. He doesn’t have children……..yet, the priest is still held as a “solid” advice giver in these matters for the most part in the christian catholic tradition.

    Your advice or stance then could preclude to: the only person allowed to give ministry on something in a christian sense would be someone who has lived or is living it. Jesus wasn’t married. Neither was Paul. So why is Paul revered about his letters concerning these matters (Corinthians 7 in particular). How many married men are getting it wrong…….and by what standard? How many men got it wrong the first time, by their own actions or their x-wife butare getting it right now?

    Some of the greatest men in the faith we have never heard of because they were busy living it, and striving instead of hem and hawing about who has the right credentials on what matters and when, or how they got them. Perhaps their life was indeed a sacrament to the word. I am sure some are around…but they are too busy working, in prayer, doing the best they can BUT they would not be listened to by anyone in the sphere even if they had some advice because they did follow the impossible standards that “mere men” in this sphere have setup in order to have a successful sex life and married life.

    The takeaway for me, and countless others is: looks only matter. muscles. A STEM degree, and if your wife suggests anything she needs to be rebuked, and if she ever had sex, she is excluded from the kingdom because she will want to subvert, rule and use this as a weapon to control her husband…….and plenty of debt-free virgin, hot women are out there….but they are not, but they are….but they are not…..and soyboy pastors are to blame for the state of the church.

    For men who have all the answers…..the vast waste of men out in the world are not banging on the doors here looking for solutions here.

    What does that say? All talk, and zero action

    Like

  10. AngloSaxon says:

    Why does LastMod continue to comment? LOL!!!

    Like

  11. lastmod says:

    AngloSaxon:

    Because “I was” one of you. A believer. A “sinner redeemed” supposedly. Christianity could still turn the world upside down…..revival probably could arrive very quickly………….it takes action. In my over twelve years in the faith, I saw zero action. Oh sure, lots of comments on the web…..but boots on the ground? Actually living the word????

    No. Almost zero. Sure, Dalrock could go on and on about “who said what about him in said interview” (who is behaving like a woman here???) and spend the last three years of his postings on “courtly love” (something that he and a few others were immune to….but everyone else is living under). Every pastor publishes a “book” today. Everyone has a podcast. Sermons everywhere….cucked ot not. Churches everywhere…full or empty. Info all over the web……..of why, of apologetics, of confusing terms, of hailing NON Christians (liek Rollo and Roosh before his virtue-signalling conversion) as geniuses, and that we christians have “so much” to learn from them.

    Yeah, Jesus went to the pharaisees and then told the twelve and masses “We have so much to learn from these men” (the pharasiees). I can assure you, he didn’t. He brought the ones who wanted to learn to his level, and to what the father expected. Not the other way a round.

    I was lied to about brotherhood, fellowship, manhood, and it seemed to be a total contradiction to what I read in the bible (which is useless anyway unless you have a 150 IQ, speak greek, went to seminary, have the gift of prophecy, and the ego to back it up)

    I learned from the sphere to hate, be jealous, have people laugh at your pain, give paltry advice “just move to a foreign country, get a stem degree, learn the language and culture, vett / date tons of women there…and you’ll be fine. Happens all the time, people do it everyday”

    A underlying “good enough for thee, but not for ME” attitude and a subtle hatred of women……well, excpet their own wives (they married the exception!)

    I learned that looks only matter, despite saying otherwise………..and I learned that some sins are okay and others are not…depending on the man (alpah_ who comits them. I learned that one has to be a Trump supporter or conservative (small or large letter “c” conservative to be a christian).

    I learned that the only good gifts were: IQ level, genetics (but god made us all in his image, and loves us….but made some people just freaking ugly…to teach them a ‘lesson’ to live him more…..and the people purporting this of course were not made ‘ugly’). Gifts like arrogance, pride, and Ego only mattered…………….the word “leader” thrown around like the word “love” (what happens when everyone in a forum like this is some amazing “leader”????? well, the answer is really no one)

    I could go. Maybe I should. But I won’t.

    I need to call this out. You all can wring your hands about “helping men” and the impossible standrds you set for most men to adhere to or follow in order to have an IOI before they are 25 hurt, cause despiar, and isolate men. Help drive them out.

    Christianity was my last chance to have fellowship with men. I was rejected from it by my looks, my status, and my financial ability….and my intellect.

    Men need to be warned, that is why I post, and you being an “Anglo Saxon” should be smart enough to sniff that out on your own

    Like

  12. Pingback: Seeking Input on Marriage Licenses | Σ Frame

  13. Pingback: Patheological Weddingsday – When wanton treachery brings shame, not honor. | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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