The Red Pill and Blue Pill as Paradigms of Sanctification and Defilement (with a mathematical analogy)

Noyce goys are defiled by the BP mindset, but they carry the notion that they’re ‘sanctified’!

Readership: Christians
Length: 2,250 words
Reading Time: 8 minutes
Note: Scare quotes indicate a false impression of sanctification, defilement, etc.


If one is in a relatively comfortable and secure place in life, then to pose a mathematical analogy, this is like being situated on a local extrema, either a maximum or a minimum.  One’s perception and experience of this state can be construed (or misconstrued) as a form of sanctification.  Whether it is a true sanctification depends on whether one is situated at a global maximum, as opposed to a local maximum.

The task of navigating through life can be confusing, because in order to move from a local maximum to a global maximum, one needs to first go through a local minimum.  Many individuals cannot envision the glories of the distant global maximum which lie beyond the hardships and horrors of the nearby local minimum. As a result, they remain stuck in a less than ideal comfort zone.

To illustrate how a false sense of sanctification can be deceiving – and blinding, I’ll cover three case studies of how people can get stuck in a local extrema – a comfort zone — thinking that they’ve finished the race of faith to the global maximum in this life.

Case Study 1 – Overcoming the Blue Pill mindset

Men largely operate on principles of honor and respect, while women function in terms of perceived love and connection. The typical, chumpy, good natured man, who is so despised in the eyes of women, unconsciously sticks to those principles of honor and respect in all his dealings with humanity – including women. Whenever he is attracted to a woman, he emphasizes being nice, considerate, forbearing, and graceful, which he correctly believes is the honorable thing to do. However, he is mistaken in thinking that women value being respected in that way, and that they will respond in like manner – offering him respect (and püssy) in return.

According to Vox’s Socio-Sexual Hierarchy, this type of man is labeled a gamma male.  The gamma male is living in a local maximum. He has everything sorted out in his mind, and although he may not be satisfied with his lot, he is indeed comfortable with it. He has the notion that what he believes is truly the way things should be, and it is other people’s fault for screwing up the world. He is the king of his mental microcosm, and thus he perceives that he is ‘sanctified’.

From this perspective, it is easy to see why cucks are always in the mood to pedestalize every poon in their path. It’s because they have achieved a false ‘sanctification’ in their wimminz worship, thinking themselves to be righteous, virgin, “nice guys”. But in reality, they are continuously dwelling in a spiritually unclean state, which is manifested in their lustful fantasies and jerking off.

To escape from this local maximum and move toward a better state in life, he would have to let go of being the king of his mental microcosm, and all the perceived philosophical luxuries pertaining to the vanity of his mind. The unsanctimonious tasks of realizing his solipsism, admitting his weaknesses, and renewing his mind strikes him as being a nauseatingly opprobrious and inconvenient undertaking. He does not see the blessings of trust, humility, and charisma that he might obtain by embarking on a personal journey of introspection and confession, leading to greater authenticity along the lines of his deeper convictions.

When he happens to meet other men who exemplify the charismatic blessings of trust, humility, and courage in their lives, an envious inferiority complex kicks in.  Thus, he is quick to condemn those men as ‘defiled’ — emotionally manipulative, proud@ss chads – the hated sexual bullies that invariably sully the poon that he worships in his dreams.

In sum, the gamma perceives that he is ‘sanctified’, and that more dynamic men are ‘defiled’.  Thus, it is extremely difficult for him to budge from his mole hill.

Moles are solitary creatures, coming together only to mate. Territories may overlap, but moles avoid each other and males may fight fiercely if they meet.

Case Study 2 – Oneitis stymies the epiphany of Red Pill truth

It is not uncommon for men have a deep longing for an idealistic love, reminiscent of what he experienced from his mother as a boy. In this case, mommy has used her ‘love’, care, and feminine graces to ‘sanctify’ her dearest sunny boy (with no intervening father figure) into the BP mindset, according to her solipsistic view of how boys should behave, all in order to support and serve her own feminine imperatives, and often to the detriment of her progeny.

This sort of s’mothering instinct serves to instill an idolatrous view of women in the son. He never learns how to tell women “no”, for fear of losing the ‘love’ and affection that he has grown to be so codependent on.

A problem arises when he gets the notion that a woman/wife can, and even should, offer him the same kind of unconditional ‘love’. It’s the male version of the hamster. In the unfortunate event that he gets a little taste of ‘love’ from a supple, perky, peer-aged girl, he’s swamped in swoon land.

Oneitis is a local maximum.  It feeelz gooed.  But it’s a long way from a sanctified headship marriage.  Wally Oneitis needs to get over the hump and go through a local minimum of despair before he can make any progress towards the global maximum.

Buena Vista conveyed a story over at Spawny’s Space about a Wally who was stuck in a deplorable Blue Pill existence characterized by Oneitis, and who just couldn’t “get it”, no matter how hard his friend tried to tell him the Red Pill truth. (Click on the link to read.)

At first exposure, I had the impression that the Blue Pill mindset is human nature, but others argued that it was an acculturation. But after reconsidering this phenomenon in the light of these concepts of sanctification and defilement, it yields further insight to think of the young man’s BP situation as him already having been (falsely) ‘sanctified’ (or defiled from the RP perspective) into this codependent lifestyle. Thus, the RP truth would only show itself to be a form of ‘defilement’ from his perspective, although it would be sanctification to his older, wiser RP’ed friend. Therefore, he would need to lose that false sense of ‘sanctity’ somehow, before he would be able to enter another psychological form of sanctification.

And… it would be necessary for him to experience a relative offence and a perceived ‘defilement’ in the transition.

In sum, the püssy pedestalizing oneitisizer perceives that he is ‘sanctified’, and that any life removed from his idol is ‘defiled’.  Thus, because of this deception of perception, it is extremely difficult for him to budge from his gopher hill.

Gophers aggressively maintain their territories and are solitary outside of the breeding season.

Case Study 3 – The blinders of Boomer Theology, AKA Complementarianism

It gets worse when one is in a local maximum and they are deceived into thinking that they are at a global maximum. Such a person will never even consider venturing into uncharted territory, even to blaspheme the mere suggestion thereof as a ‘heresy’.

As a case study of this phenomenon, let’s consider Deep Strength’s review of a series of articles at Theopolis that addressed the Manosphere’s response to modern societal ills.

  1. Aaron Renn on The Manosphere and the ChurchDS’s post.
  2. Alastair Robert on The Virtues of DominionDS’s post.
  3. Peter Leithart on Side effectsDS’s post.
  4. Bill Smith on Attraction: The Biblical Theology of Pickup ArtistryDS’s post.
  5. Paul Maxwell on The Measure of a manDS’s post.
  6. Mike Bull on What is Biblical FeminismDS’s post.
  7. Aaron Renn’s final response.

The main thing we learned from DS’s reviews is that these authors, most (if not all) of whom are of the Boomer Generation, are channeling a peculiar, feminist-lite, hermeneutical interpretation of male-female relations, which was humorously termed Boomer Theology.  We also learned that Boomer Theology is apparently the source of the structural archetype we know as Complementarianism.

Although the authors at Theopolis clearly recognize the deeper truths stemming from the Red Pill frame, nevertheless, they could not break out of the neo-trad Blue Pill Frame.  They used words like twisted and perverse to describe the RP mindset, indicating that the RP was ‘defiled’ in their eyes.  In other words, they could not see past the local minima obstacles between Complementarianism and Headship.

DS called out their errors as follows.

  1. They assert that women are spiritually superior to men. (Wife ≈ Holy Spirit)
  2. They try to read social and sexual equality into their eisegeses of the Bible.
  3. They omit references to wifely submission towards her husband.
  4. They ignore womens’ agency to sin and rebel at their own peril.
  5. They refuse to reject feminism or call out female rebellion.
  6. They emphasize male responsibility over divine purpose.

In sum, leading Christians of the Boomer generation have superposed feminist philosophies onto Biblical concepts to form Complementarianism.  I suppose this was a practical response to the sexual revolution of the 60s, the women’s liberation movement of the 70s, and the divorce debacle of the 80s. So I’m giving them some credit in assuming that they have achieved a local maximum, given the challenges of their generation.

DS concluded,

“…there is still a lot of heretical feminist and boomer complementarian lenses still clouding the eyes of these men where they interpret the Scriptures incorrectly and give poor prescriptive advice.

This article in particular clearly summed it up for us: if you go along with their advice you’ll just get more of the same just under a different name. Servant-leadership and boomer complementarian figureheadship are still two sides of the same coin as is men stepping up into responsibilities without authority and calling out female rebellion.

It’s pretty sad because these men seemed like they really started to understand some of the concepts of the manosphere, but just found another way to twist the concepts to fit their own boomer complementarianism again. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.”

Yes, these men, like other Complementarians, are wholly convinced that they are ‘sanctified’, and that it is the Christian Manosphere and RP lore which are ‘unclean’.  Meanwhile, DS, myself, and other Manospherians maintain that Complementarianists have adulterated the scriptures with worldly philosophies, and that we are in the right.

But the thing is, both views can be intrinsically and independently coherent (representing local maxima), but both views can’t be right (representing two global maxima).  One of us must have a false notion of what sanctification entails, while the other is closer to the truth.

For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22 (NKJV)

It’s too easy to deceive people these days!  All Satan needs to do is point out all the messes in the surrounding local minima, and present a convincing case that it’s better for one to stay put.  Then, leave it up to the solipsistic mind to invent the hermeneutics necessary to justify it.

In sum, Complementarians perceive that they are ‘sanctified’, and that any life outside of their femcentric, Blue Pill, Boomer theology is ‘defiled’.  Thus, it is extremely difficult for them to budge from this dung hill.

Dung beetles meticulously polish their turd balls to make them easier to cart home.


As you can see, one’s self-assessment of his relative position in life is largely determined by myopic perception. The desire to attain/maintain a local extrema (security, comfort, etc.) tends to blind one to the possibility of achieving another, better alternative in life.

To refine my initial comment at Spawny’s, it is human nature to desire a continuation of the perceived ease and comfort which are hallmarks of a sanctified lifestyle (or a defiled one, depending on your perspective).

The third case study exemplifies how modern Christianity has become relativistic, just like the wider culture.  The demonstrative reason for this is the natural human motive to enhance the perceived experience of ‘sanctification’ (viz. to hedge the local maximum).

Thus, we can understand how the path of defilement (or ‘defilement’, relatively speaking) is how most men enter into the RP world. (1) Their BP ways of life, no matter how filled with BP lies they might be, are perceived as ‘sanctified’. (2) Their comfy zone state then becomes perceptibly ‘defiled’ through grave disappointments, adultery, or divorce (which are true defilements prevalent in today’s culture). (3) It is only then that they realize that those BP notions are, in fact, the lies which proved to be their undoing.

Farm Boy, Kentucky Headhunter, and Buena Vista are also correct in believing that the various manifestations of the Blue Pill mindset is acquired through culture, because culture has a significant influence on what one chooses to accept (or pursue) as an ostensibly ‘sanctified’ lifestyle.

In addition to culture, one’s family of origin also has a major impact on forming one’s perceptions of what a valued ‘sanctified’ lifestyle should look like.

Thus, sanctity (or defilement) sets in early, often times long before a young person is cognizant of the nature of the transition. Particularly in the spiritual sense, one’s first encounter with either God’s grace, or Satan’s life of preponderant frustration, often occurs in late childhood or adolescence, which is a time when one’s family, peer group, and popular culture has a larger-than-life influence. This trajectory tends to develop and expand over a person’s life span, resulting in their eternal condition of union with G-d (in the case of sanctification), or alienation from (in the case of defilement) God.


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 Authenticity, Building Wealth, Charisma, Child Development, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Churchianity, Complementarianism, Confidence, Convergence, Discerning Lies and Deception, Discernment, Wisdom, Divorce, Education, Enduring Suffering, Feminism, Game Theory, Introspection, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Failure, Perseverance, Psychological Disorders, Psychology, Purpose, Respect, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Solipsism, Strategy, The Hamster, The Power of God. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to The Red Pill and Blue Pill as Paradigms of Sanctification and Defilement (with a mathematical analogy)

  1. Scott says:

    (2) Their comfy zone state then becomes perceptibly ‘defiled’ through grave disappointments, adultery, or divorce (which are true defilements prevalent in today’s culture). (3) It is only then that they realize that those BP notions are, in fact, the lies which proved to be their undoing.

    I’m not a boomer, but the elder board at my church, my professors at seminary, and pretty much every other male I looked up and listened to at the time were. and they led me to the slaughter of my divorce on this path. They taught me, through a painful, life-ruining trial how NOT to do marriage.

    Liked by 5 people

  2. Scott says:

    Whoops, forgot to close the quote there.
    [Jack: Fixed!]


  3. Scavos says:

    “They try to read social and sexual equality into their eisegeses of the Bible.”

    Would chivalry fall under this assertion?

    “They omit references to wifely submission towards her husband.”

    Nickel for every time this gets glossed over/ignored…

    “They ignore womens’ agency to sin and rebel at their own peril.”

    i.e. If your wife sins/rebels, it is most likely/completely your fault, you evil creature of a husband.

    The first two case studies hit home to me. CS #1 in regards to self-reflection and honest self-examination(which tends to get misconstrued as “low self-esteem”). It is painful, but it has to be done. Thankfully, there is some guidance I can get here and other sites(the potential for sudden shutdown of these sites is a big reason why I’m archiving all that I can find). The more I dig into these articles, the more I feel like Roddy Piper putting on the glasses in “They Live.”

    As for CS #2, it reminded me of what my mother had taught me about finding a woman(be chivalrous, always putting her first, etc.). I’m sure most here have a good guess as to how that worked out.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jack says:

      @ Scavos,

      “They try to read social and sexual equality into their eisegeses of the Bible.”

      Would chivalry fall under this assertion?

      If you mean chivalry as an archetypical relationship structure, yes, definitely.

      If you mean chivalry as the traditional social etiquette that pedestalizes women, DS didn’t mention that in his Theopolis series, and I don’t remember seeing it there either. But it is a common characteristic of western culture in general, Complementarianism and Courtly Love included. However, it’s not flaunted very heavily by too many men anymore, for fear of being taken as chauvinism. It varies from person to person though.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Ed Hurst says:

    After working alongside a great many professional ministers in several different denominations, I can tell you that most Christian leaders won’t leave their BP position because their wives won’t let them. And divorce will disqualify them from future pastoral positions. Some have, in a round about way, admitted that was how it worked. It’s part of why I gave up on the mainstream pastoral profession.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Scott says:

      Yes. Just imagine if one of those guys got up in front of the congregation and preached.

      “From this day forward I will hold all the congregants accountable to their sins. Men and women. Women, as well as men will be required to introspect on their relative curses received in genesis and humble themselves before God, just as men are required to do. Both will be required to help ease each other’s burdens in marriage and make life easier not harder for each other. Meeting the others needs, emotionally, sexually and otherwise. I will not preach a gospel of women being holier, more spiritual, more in tune, better people than men. I will require my own family to obey my final word even when they don’t agree. I will lift men up and give them hope and the strength and most importantly the backing they need from authority to lead their families to salvation. I will do this regardless of the personal cost to me. “

      The elder board and the church at large in that locality would quickly conclude that he had been overcome within “misogyny” and “he just doesn’t get it” and nag nag nag until he blew his brains out.

      Liked by 7 people

      • Scott says:

        And next someone will come on here and say “my preacher says that”

        No they don’t. I don’t believe you. Video and audio please.

        Liked by 3 people

      • JPF says:

        Video and audio please

        Similar to Dalrock’s challenge to list one church where they publicly post a sign with, “X days since the last divorce in this congregation”.
        I don’t think he ever got an answer either.

        Along the same lines, we could have, “X days since a daughter from our congregation chose to become a harlot”.

        The two above would be seen as rude… but why? These are destructive events. Why should we not focus on ensuring they do not occur, which is exactly the attitude presented with, “X days since the last accident that cost a work day”.

        Liked by 2 people

    • redpillboomer says:

      Interesting insight. As a lay person, I didn’t catch on to this because I was so BP throughout my years sitting out there in the pews; however, I did notice over the years the phenomenon of Pastors falling for the church secretary (yes I know, a classic trope, but seemingly a reality nonetheless), or having an affair with some woman in the congregation, usually a married one, going through a separation or divorce. Typically this woman was being counselled by the Pastor and/or the Pastor’s wife. My question is this, was it a case of just good old lust from the Pastors; or was there a relationship to what you described above as their Blue Pill ministerial entrapment mindset fueling any of this? Just curious on your view Ed based on your experiences from being on the inside of these ministerial staffs.


      • Ed Hurst says:

        Honestly, I doubt the pastors went looking for it. Most of the time stuff like that is initiated by the woman. They tried it with me often enough. When you are in the pulpit, you look just enough Alpha to be attractive to women who go to church. That’s a part of the Blue Pill thing where women control the bedroom, as well. Nor would I suggest that those women were looking to destroy the pastor’s career. It’s what happens when a pastor manages to be some portion of pseudo-Alpha Male in a gynocentric atmosphere.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        @Ed —

        Right. I think it’s more like the woman thinking: “why can’t my loser husband be more like Pastor Bob? He’s both godly and attractive!” kind of thinking.


  5. Elspeth says:

    @ Scott:

    My preacher doesn’t say that, so I won’t pretend otherwise despite the fact that they also don’t pretend women are sinless. We don’t get the “women are holy and wonderful” sermons at our church. Black men are misogynists, if you haven’t heard.

    Still, some husbands are able to clearly articulate (without domineering belligerence) these truths and expectations to their wives and families. As hard of a pill as this is to swallow, walking this out in a marriage depends far more on a wife’s heart of obedience than on any pastor’s ability to communicate it.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Sharkly says:

      “Black men are misogynists, if you haven’t heard.”
      Elspeth, what exactly do you mean by that?

      And assuming it were true, why do you suppose Black men are more likely to hate women, than men of other colors? Is that genetic, or have women done something to Black men to create the dynamic you claim exists. Am I right in saying that today most Black men in the U.S. were raised by single mothers? What exactly did they do to their sons to make them misogynistic? I’m not fool enough to believe that it comes from rap music. I believe rap music is an expression an artist uses to connect with their audience hoping to get them to buy the album. If their is a market for “misogynistic” music, I believe It is because these young men are soothing the pain of their degradation by lashing out at their abusers, who raised them as bastards, and in many cases denied them their real father. I think pointing at Black men, is missing the mark.

      I work in a huge factory with men and women of all races, and part of my job is to correct them. While there are many individual exceptions, stereotypically the Black women are the most resistant to taking correction. Meaning generally they’re far more likely to feel entitled to be rebellious unteachable fools. I’m sure I’d be inclined to be misogynistic if I had to deal with them more. I really try to steer clear of some of them. The Black men on the other hand are generally respectful of my role and often fun-loving and comedic during our interaction. They are quite easy to deal with by comparison.


      • Elspeth says:

        Hey Sharkly.

        I said that partially tongue in cheek, but partially seriously.

        Black men are not all misogynists. I’m married to one and I am well loved.

        However, black men have been -often undeservedly- pedestalized in the black community. Yes, most have been raised solely by their mothers, and many have not been raised in a way that would endear them to women or to confer any protective instinct towards the women in their lives. They’ve mostly seen one if three templates.

        The first is the strong independent woman who doesn’t need a man. She is actually rarer than you might think.

        The second is the woman who suffers any and every kind of indignity to hold on to her man. Online she’s referred to as “Pickmesha”, sticking with some guy in the hope that when he tires of the plate spinning she’ll finally earn the part she spent 5, 10 years auditioning for.

        The last is the woman who has a man and rules the roost because he can’t or doesn’t want to pay the cost to be the boss. He gets the bed partner and the flexibility to work part time if at all because she’s got it covered.

        Black women are actually NOT the most resistant to correction. It’s just the opposite, in my experience, when she has a man who has earned her respect. But then maybe the women in my family and my husband’s family are a special breed?

        My point was that you’d be very hard pressed to find a black man, even a henpecked, emasculated one, who will verbalize any pedestalization of women.


      • cameron232 says:


        I used to ride to work with a black woman who, in my mind, is very typical of an American black woman of her generation (50 something years old). A loud, opinionated Christian democrat. She becomes loud and angry when discussing politics, thinks a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body wrt abortion e.g “pro-choice”, is positive that the Republican congress explcitly told Obama they wouldn’t cooperate with him because he’s black.

        When her white male supervisor asked her to make up missed time at work she said “no!!”and of course wasn’t even reprimanded.

        On the other hand, she constantly objects to other (usually young) women dressing inappropriately at work, with their T&A hanging out (funny, that’s such an un-liberal attitude). When she sees these women she says “their husband shouldn’t have let them go out of the house dressed like that.” !!!!

        Just an ancedote of an unusual blend of conservative and liberal attitudes that I suspect is typical in black women.

        My guess is most black women require a VERY dominant male to submit to.

        Growing up in a mixed race community, almost all the problems I had with black children were with the girls not the boys. I got along great with black boys. A significant minority of black girls seemed to really hate white boys.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sharkly says:

        However, black men have been -often undeservedly- pedestalized in the black community.
        LOL Elspeth has figured it out. Black men are apparently suffering from too much respect. SMH

        Black women are actually NOT the most resistant to correction. It’s just the opposite, in my experience, when she has a man who has earned her respect.
        LOL So, apparently I have bad experiences correcting some Black women because I’m a disrespect-magnet. I guess the small percentage of Black women who are easily teachable then are the defective ones, for not being mouthy and poor listeners like the ones who apparently are having difficulty respecting my position over them because of some failure to be respectable on my part. /S

        I know this might be a painful truth bomb, Elspeth, but Black women statistically do quite poorly relating to their coworkers in the workforce, even with lots of affirmative action. Do you really expect me to believe that 100% of their poor performance is due to people mad about dark skin?

        Here is a bit of research findings:
        For black women in more interdependent jobs, that is, jobs that require more interactions with others to get their work done, inclusive climates led to lower levels of emotional vulnerability. This indicates that, though having an inclusive climate was overall a good thing for all women, the more that black women’s job execution depended on others, the less emotionally vulnerable black women were willing to be. This suggests that an inclusive climate alone may be insufficient to foster black women’s high-quality connections with coworkers.
        In other words: Black women don’t normally work well with others, even when others go out of their way to be “inclusive”!

        Most Black men can respect their coworkers just fine, even though they might occasionally feel disrespected themselves. But if a Black woman feels disrespected, the whole company is usually going to hear her wrath.

        Feminism is further advanced in the Black community, which is more matriarchal, and should be a warning to everyone of where we are now headed as a nation. White women will rapidly become more like their generally intractable Black sisters.


  6. Scott says:

    The fact that Elspeth has her kids in a homeschool co-op and she reads, analyzes, critically but not reactively contemporary original north American texts regarding the foundations of American liberty makes her the most extreme type of outlier among black women I have ever been made aware of. Maybe save Condolezza Rice, the double PhD, accomplished pianist and former Secretary of State.

    Further, she talks about her husband in public forums with great respect, as if he is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and in private (I know this because we email) she is able to discuss the dynamic of that relationship with more candor, but still manages to hold him in the highest regard.

    The carpool lady you describe is the template for every black woman I have ever met and also have had the stressful headache of being the boss of several time. Stressful because the dreaded, life and career ruining threat of a “racism” charge lurks around every corner if you try to actually use your authority to mentor or mold such a person at even the most kid gloves level. This is true no matter how kind and truly caring you are of the people in your charge. Every time I was reassigned and moved on to a new duty station, my staff would throw a going away party, with crying, and scrap books ad gifts and all the rest of it. So I know I was a good boss. But there was always that one black lady who didn’t come to the party and everyone knew why.

    If I could live with my beautiful wife and children in a neighborhood full of Elspeths and her family surrounding us, it wouldn’t matter to me one bit what friggin color they are. This puts her, I realize, in a difficult position of having to look around and feel like a three headed alien in her own subculture and having to make sense of it all. It would be easier to just go full on terminatrix 1000 (See TJ Sotomayor) and be done with it. But her conscience would not let her.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Elspeth says:

    Good morning, Sharkly.

    I haven’t punched a clock in 25 years, so I’m woefully out of touch with workplace dynamics apart from what my husband shares. In general, his experience is that women, in general, don’t play well with others in the workplace.

    The experiences I have relayed have been largely my observation of black women in social and intimate relationships. Women mostly in my family of origin or family by marriage, and the women I have knowledge of through the grapevine.

    When I say that black men are pedestalized, I actually mean that. It’s not always in the best ways, and your perception of lots of respect is an oversimplification of what I am referring to. The pedestalization is often demonstrated by the coddling of sons (not allowing them to grow into men), while pushing the daughters a lot harder to succeed. It is expressed by allowing the men to behave horribly, including having extremely low standards for sexual access. In effect, in every way except for the ability to reproduce, there is low male accountability in the black community. It doesn’t create men who love or protect or respect their women.Just the opposite, in fact. Black women often lament the ways that all of their sacrifice do NOT pay off, not recognizing that they have created this lack of respect by demanding nothing more than sexual prowess from black men. It has created a circular sexual firing squad between men and women in the black community.

    It’s a level of dysfunction I can hardly do justice in a combox. You kind of have to see it to mentally process it. But no worries, if you really want to see what it looks like, the dominant culture is catching on and these traits are becoming more and more visible across the ethnic spectrum.

    This puts her, I realize, in a difficult position of having to look around and feel like a three headed alien in her own subculture and having to make sense of it all. It would be easier to just go full on terminatrix 1000 (See TJ Sotomayor) and be done with it. But her conscience would not let her.

    Well, for all intents and purposes, we have divested from the black community and have raised our daughters to do likewise. We don’t filter our decisions through the lens of the collective because our values clash, and we have accepted what that means.

    That said, we are still members of our families of origin, with all of the duties that this entails. Fortunately, we both come from families where our life choices and conservatism are respected if not fully agreed with.


  8. Sharkly says:

    I might say that the treatment of Black males that you are describing by Black women, is “the soft bigotry of low expectations”. I’d call that permissiveness not pedestalizing. And permissive parenting is growing these days, leading to bratty kids and selfish adults. Nobody is approved to discipline anybody, they just disrespect or shame each other instead. Refraining from discipline, and shaming instead, is stereotypical feminine behavior.(and foolish)

    Yes you’re right about women in general being an issue in the workforce. Without saying too much, my biggest issue at work yesterday was two Feminist banshees having a catfight. And their manager sent me in to settle it. LOL I got them calmed down, but I’m sure they’ll be back at each other again soon. Neither one likes to submit, they both like to escalate and force others to submit.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Pingback: More on Relational Archetypes | Σ Frame

  10. Pingback: Is the Christian Red Pill a Black Pill? | Σ Frame

  11. Pingback: Why is the online amateur sex industry attractive to men? | Σ Frame

  12. Pingback: Lessons from the Train Wreckage | Σ Frame

  13. Pingback: The Relinquished Life | Σ Frame

  14. Pingback: Dealing with Discernment | Σ Frame

  15. Pingback: Towards a more complete appreciation of Sanctification | Σ Frame

  16. Pingback: What does it mean to be Defiled? – Part I | Σ Frame

  17. Pingback: A blinding obsession | Σ Frame

  18. Pingback: On Curating a Christian Culture of Attraction | Σ Frame

  19. Pingback: The Ever Looming Black Pill | Σ Frame

  20. Pingback: The Black Pill is the Natural Outcome of the Secular Mating Paradigm | Σ Frame

  21. Pingback: Scott is not Black Pilled | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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