Noyce goys are defiled by the BP mindset, but they carry the notion that they’re ‘sanctified’!
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.
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.
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.
- Aaron Renn on The Manosphere and the Church. DS’s post.
- Alastair Robert on The Virtues of Dominion. DS’s post.
- Peter Leithart on Side effects. DS’s post.
- Bill Smith on Attraction: The Biblical Theology of Pickup Artistry. DS’s post.
- Paul Maxwell on The Measure of a man. DS’s post.
- Mike Bull on What is Biblical Feminism. DS’s post.
- 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.
- They assert that women are spiritually superior to men. (Wife ≈ Holy Spirit)
- They try to read social and sexual equality into their eisegeses of the Bible.
- They omit references to wifely submission towards her husband.
- They ignore womens’ agency to sin and rebel at their own peril.
- They refuse to reject feminism or call out female rebellion.
- 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.
“…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.
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.
- Preston Highlands Baptist Church (John Sypert): Mark 11:12-25 | “Tearing Down to Build Up” (2019 November 3)