Red Pill Grifters

Do we need to vet the leaders of men’s communities?

Readership: Men in general; Christian men;
Author’s Note: I’ll preface this article by saying it was drafted over a year ago, and has no relation to the recent article related to Roosh. I believe it is safe to say that both authors are consumers of his content, both pre and post conversion. As Adam pointed out, those who commented on the last post tend to be very skeptical. Whether or not that skepticism towards Roosh is warranted, that skepticism is necessary when dealing with personalities in the sphere, especially when it comes to monetized youtubers.

Grift: Money made dishonestly, as in a swindle.

Introduction

If you are unfamiliar with the term “Grifter”, just think of a swindler.  They come out of nowhere, pretending to be your “friend”, and making the familiar impression that they are “one of you”.  Many ask for your money, or sell you some product, promising you the world.  They tend to sell themselves as a brand first, and then find their product.  What sets the grifter apart from the traditional swindler is betrayal of their audience. The grifter peaks in fame amongst their audience, and then seeks to gain a larger audience by betraying those who made them big. Specifically, they moderate.

If you have been around the Manosphere long enough, then you have seen the grifters who come in every now and then to use the Red Pill™ as a marketing brand for their own purposes (fame and monetary gain).  We have seen this with certain speakers, groups, and conventions over the last few years. I am sure those who were online back in the golden-age of the “Manosphere” know of many more examples.

For those who are younger, and who are familiar with YouTube culture, you are most likely familiar with grifters in many areas other than the Manosphere.  A more mainstream example would be Glenn Beck.  Glenn is a guy who went from HLN to Fox News, then to the Blaze, and is now running the second iteration of the Blaze. Every time he moved on, there was a shift in his political views, a shift in how he dressed, etc.  He went from moderate/skeptic to edgy boy/”christian activist”, to Mr. Never Trump, to Trump apologist, and then to whatever he is now. (I must confess I don’t care to keep myself updated on his more recent personality changes.)

Coinciding with these changes, Beck seemed to have a major “health crisis” that takes place every 3-4 years.  In 2010 he was telling his audience he would go blind because of macular dystrophy. His schtick back in 2014 was his super rare neurological disorders that could only be cured by a special chiropractor in Texas. It was purely coincidental that conservative talk radio programs began to advertise special, and incredibly dangerous, chiropractic treatments of the upper spine (NUCCA adjustments). Right on time with his pattern, and when he was trying to regain subscribers who fled after his anti-Trump rants, in 2017 his wife came down with a super rare nerve disorder.

FRAUDS IN THE RED PILL

There are several dangers when it comes to grifters in the Red Pill market. First, the target audience is young men who pretty much were not raised. The second is the credibility or authority of the speaker, which is often suspect, and mostly goes unnoticed by todays naïve youth. Third, online personalities build up loyal audiences only to betray them.

“Some men believe in the red pill until they are uncomfortable with it.” ~ Rollo Tomassi

I believe Rollo’s insight has merit when it comes to regular people.  But when it comes to personalities online, their discomfort over the Red Pill is a calculated decision that precedes a new conjob.  When Red Pill types abandon the legitimacy of the Red Pill on forums such as YouTube, their motivation is always: (1) to gain a larger audience; or (2) to replace a dying audience with a new and growing audience.  If personalities just shifted their focus back to something else, it would be one thing.  What we see, however, are personalities who don’t stand behind anything other than promoting themselves as some form of brand.

Many people who label themselves “conservative” or “traditional” do this as well.  A few primary examples would be Baked Alaska’s life, Laura Southern, Milo, Charlie Kirk, etc.  Even Tim Pool went from being moderate-liberal and quasi-objective to being the guy who could be writing Sean Hannity’s talking points.

It’s classic branding and marketing, with roots in narcissism.  The personality will do and say whatever they have to in order to stay relevant, grow their audience, and make money.  I’m hesitant to believe many in the political arena and the Manosphere are truly Red Pilled.

They are fickle, and have no foundation.

How Fraudulent RP Forums/Channels Are Born

The step-by-step formula for using the Red Pill to monetize a blog or a YouTube channel goes like this:

  1. Start off with a typical channel that focuses on 1 or 2 things.  You know, men’s fashion, beard trimming, and coffee. 
  2. Gain an audience with that niche market.
  3. Once you reach your peak audience, start interacting more with your audience to establish rapport.
  4. Slowly pivot the focus of your blog and commentary to Red Pill topics upon discovering this “amazing online community of young men”.
  5. Act as if all of these people are only asking you your opinion on Red Pill matters.

Presto!  Now you are a “Red Pill” channel, and you may sell garbage to your viewers for high prices.

10 Signs Of A Charlatan Your Should Be Aware Of Before You ...
“If you don’t buy my beard oil, the feminists win.”  …he says.

The Life Cycle of a Fraudulent Red Pill Forum

  1. Start a forum to focus on a generic subject. Lets say you are a pastor and you and some elder buddies start a blog that focuses on gender roles.
  2. Gain a following until your forums stops growing.
  3. Open your forum up for interaction, Q&A.  This should be done around the 1-2 year mark.
  4. Slowly pivot onto RP topics.
  5. Solely focus on RP topics.
  6. Affiliate with others for economic opportunity and more growth.
  7. Slowly pivot your focus away from “hard core” RP issues so you can get an even broader audience.  Again, at the 1-2 year mark.
  8. Reject the RP audience who refuses to follow you into the purple abyss.
  9. Backtrack a little and align your “christian” ministry with a convention of pick up artists whose organizers brag about having over 1,000 conquests.

So who is real? Well, for most people, time will tell. Pay attention to whether people are selling a product, or are monetized in some way. Long term anonymous figures who aren’t monetized would have to be a dedicated larper to be a con. Figures who are independently wealthy and are openly controversial are low risk, as the threat of being silenced doesn’t matter to them. They tend to be ideological.

Some Red Flags to Look For

Sometimes it takes time to discern who is real, and who isn’t.  Time will obviously tell, but monitoring for red flags will surely help.  Red flags, you ask?  That’s right.  Watching for red flags is something you should do in every aspect of your life – it’s not just for sifting through choices of women.

Here are a few red flags to watch out for.

  • Are these guys repeating something someone else said?  If they are, are they adding new commentary, or are they trying to pass this wisdom off as their own?
  • How did their channels/forums grow?  Did they start off providing good content on some other random hobby or way of life, only to switch to the RP to gain more followers?
  • Do their alliances force them to compromise their core beliefs?
  • Do they exhibit the same narcissistic traits as the women they tell you not to date?  (Research narcissistic personality disorder.)
  • Do they have a high-drama social media presence?
  • What are they selling to you?  Subscriptions, patreons, merchandise, Conferences that cost thousands?
  • Do they complain about a marrying a prostitute while bragging about sleeping with hundreds of women?
  • Are “holy men” associating and cooperating with behavior and a message that would be denounced in church?

Related

This entry was posted in Building Wealth, Churchianity, Convergence, Discerning Lies and Deception, Discernment, Wisdom, Health, Identity, Leadership, Manosphere, Models of Failure, Persuasion, Stewardship. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Red Pill Grifters

  1. Novaseeker says:

    One of the big red flags here, for me, is whether the individual in question is either making his living, or a significant part thereof, or is angling towards that, with respect to his activities in these areas. That “professionalization” of the red pill is where the red flag starts getting magnified and starts to glow and blink for me.

    Money is corrupting, plain and simple. Obviously we all have to make our own livelihoods, but when that part of our lives gets entangled with this kind of advocacy, there are very high risks that come about of corruption of what is being said and done in the effort to “grow the business”.

    It can happen even when someone does not start out as a grifter. Someone can start out by writing blog posts or, these days more likely doing YT videos, and they notice that as they begin to pick up steam in terms of viewers that they can monetize this. And so it begins. For some this is fine and is just a sidelight that helps cover a few side costs or what have you, but for many growing that monetization stream becomes a focus, and they begin to look into how that is done, what others have done to achieve it, and so on. The information is out there, the internet provides it. And so the message, the approach, moves to where the money is going to flow more readily — and, again, this is for people who didn’t start out intending to be grifters, but people who backed into that by means of being exposed to the potentialities of monetization of their content.

    You can see this with many of the girls on Instagram, as well — it starts by posting their own pics because that’s what young people do today. And then it gets bigger and bigger, and they can monetize and some cross that bridge, and then it’s on and on from there as the money pile allures. Money corrupts. Especially money that is as “easy” as internet money (no boss, no schedule, no deadlines other than your own, etc.).

    It has also happened a LOT in the red pill area. Roosh is one example of that. Rollo seems to have avoided the worst of the monetization influences due to his own money being stockpiled, but even he shifted to different forms of media in order to continue to cultivate a bigger audience for his books. There were places that were originally a part of the proto-sphere like “Hooking Up Smart”, which morphed over time into a more branded, tailored, focused experience that could be monetized better before dating apps made it irrelevant. The “Male Action Plan” guru, Athol Kay, didn’t start out as a grifter, but he did end up as one, and along the way the entire message became first purple and then as blue as the sky for monetization and breadth-of-audience reasons. Indeed, good old Roissy (Heartiste), as repulsive as his political junk was, managed (likely because of said junk) to remain aloof from monetizing his content, which is kind of miraculous given that he basically was the entire lynchpin for the old manosphere, before it morphed and splintered and grifted itself into oblivion.

    Of course there are also others who start out intending to grift, but they are generally easier to spot if you are coming at them from certain angles (ie, from the textual one). If you are approaching these things from the more “Wild West” atmosphere of YT, however, and are young and uninformed about the history of the sphere from, say, 2005 to 2020, you can and probably will get taken in by at least one of these latter day hucksters who are relatively easily discerned once you know your way around.

    In all, stick to the amateurs, and eschew the professionals in this specific space. More honesty that way.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      I’d say an exception exists for those who are older and independently wealthy.

      I’ve recently discovered Kevin samuels, who is a 50 year old in the line of image consulting who regularly challenges feminists live on YouTube. If it turns out he is a grifter, he would be the most amazing one because he is willing to become public enemy # 1 to the feminist regime.

      Liked by 3 people

  2. Jack says:

    Just for the record, I have never made a cent off of this blog. Scott might earn a few peanuts from his YouTube videos that are featured here from time to time. But aside from that, none of the authors here have received any kind of compensation.

    I don’t think Dalrock made any money off of blogging either.

    Roosh monetized Return of Kings, but he paid contributing authors $5 in bitcoin for each article between 800-1,800 words in length. I don’t think he made very much on that.

    Liked by 10 people

    • cameron232 says:

      There’s also the natural tendency of men to compete with one another. So some will try to create unique content, positions on issues, etc. Some will try to compete to have the reddest (or blackest) pill. You see this with political writing/blogging as well. “I’m the furthest to the right.”

      Liked by 3 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      I have no problem with monetizing pages or throwing up a Patreon for passive income. My issue is when people make it their job and primary source of income. That’s when people get into the business of ear tickling.

      Installing ads on a site sets you up for censorship though. Ironically, the way around this is to self host, which requires $$.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. cameron232 says:

    Utterly off topic but fascinating. Much higher rates of pregnancy for “lesbians” suggesting female sexual fluidity as I think Nova has mentioned.

    https://neurotoxinweb.wordpress.com/2021/03/19/red-pill-in-reality-pregnant-lesbians-edition/

    Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      Probably what I would refer to as “reactive lesbianism” — meaning women who are not “only ever sexually attracted to girls” lesbian, but women who “opt” for lesbian relationships after being “burned” with experiences with men. Same holds for “lesbian until graduation”. Same holds for “political lesbianism” (see: https://infogalactic.com/info/Political_lesbianism ). There are some women who choose to have relationships with other women (almost always temporarily, but sometimes on an ongoing basis, especially if it’s done later in life) due to being “sick of men”, having had bad experiences with men (including the kinds that lead to pregnancy with a man who is disinterested), or wanting to escape “toxic dating culture” or “toxic teenaged boy/girl culture” or “toxic college dating/hookup culture” or what have you. You can think of it as “The Lesbian Option”, or Lez-Op, which is obviously available to a certain percentage of women due to an inherent fluidity in those individuals, but which only becomes “activated” in a reactive way, when there are things about men or dating men, or sex with men, or related matters that she wants to avoid.

      There is no equivalent of this on the male side — men who are sick of the dating market don’t “go gay” for a while and have sex with other men. Not even a small percentage does that. Pornography and prostitution get patronized but not other guys. Big difference between the sexes. Men do engage in “situational homosexuality”, as we see in prisons, or hundreds of years ago on naval vessels, and so on, but no “gay until graduation” or “political gay” men.

      Labels for women are tricky. Generally speaking, I think that a woman who uses the label “bisexual” is looking for a beneficial social marker (a cool/hip marker), because it doesn’t require her to change any outward behavior to conform to the label. “Lesbian” does, but very few women use the term, including women who are actively involved with women. Many women who are involved with women don’t use either term. As with most things, look at what they are doing, and not the label they are using because in the world of women, with its peer group influences, which now run electronically and so on, the issue of labels is multifaceted and may, in many cases, be only tangentially linked, if at all, to behavior.

      It also needs to be remembered that not all women are sexually fluid. I have noticed that there is greater fluidity as one decreases in age and generation — that is, the younger generations are more sexualized in general via porn and social media, and the LGBT influence is very strong, so there is a lot of encouragement and exploration going on among the girls — again, a different effect than the same has to the guys. But among older women, there are still flexible women like Cynthia Nixon or Glennon Doyle, but there are also quite a few women at these ages who have never experienced much sexual fluidity — it’s still much more present than it is in men, even at these ages, but it nevertheless differs quite a bit between different generations of women. Women are getting more fluid, more sexual, and more homosexual, on the margins, over time.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Lexet Blog says:

        They are the most violent group when it comes to domestic abuse. Also the group that is the least stable when it comes to relationship length and divorce.

        Lots of women get pregnant to save relationships because #logicfail

        Liked by 3 people

    • SFC Ton says:

      I’ve had two lesbians come on to me.

      Both were former pro athletes…. well, as close to pro as chicks get…… Both said they became lesabins while playing college sports, and both said wanting to have sex with me was about frame, i.e. someone they could submit to.

      I think, but can’t really prove, sex is more about who women can submit to then any other factor.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Lexet Blog says:

        Let me guess. Softball players?

        Liked by 2 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        One of the two

        Liked by 1 person

      • redpillboomer says:

        @SFC Ton

        “I think, but cant really prove, sex is more about who women can submit to then any other factor.”

        This is an interesting line of thought. Even though the word submission is one of the most politically incorrect words out there, maybe the female brain is hardwired to ‘submit’ to a male, i.e. sees him as dominate in one way or another? In other words, the reason any woman gets together with any man, from ONS to LTRs, may be because they can ‘submit’ to that man, at least for one night in the case of a ONS. What do you guys think, subconsciously at least, in the brain ware, it’s all a form of submission?

        Liked by 3 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        That’s mostly how I see it RPB.

        It explains a fair amount. Think about a sh!t test. Pass and she’s down. Fail, as in fail to dominate that situation, and she dries up.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Rock Kitaro says:

    Very timely topic. Recently, I’ve been reminding people about that in the comments section. Not sure if you guys heard of a guy named Derrick Jaxn. But he came out as having cheated on his wife, after ripping on Black Men for years for doing the same thing and mistreating Black Queens.

    Black Men, in turn, have a guy named Kevin Samuels who are holding women accountable. They like Samuels so much so that they keep saying things like, “We have to protect this brother”, and “He’s speaking the Gospel”. They take it much further than that in their rhetoric.

    And I’m like… I get that they’re grateful. But it begs the question, “If the Messenger turns out to be a hypocrite, does it render the message useless?” and “After seeing how the idol these women propped up was so swiftly chopped down… shouldn’t we as men be on guard too?” Because personally, what all these examples, Ravi Zacharias included, have taught me, is that this is why you shouldn’t put too much stock and faith in humans. Look up to them and be inspired by them, but up to a point… If we’re Christian, ultimately we should have God and his Word the Bible as our true compass. Even as I’m starting to learn about the Prophet Muhammad now, I usually pray that God strengthen my faith to handle such knowledge.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Adam says:

      Yeah, the hero worship side to it has always left me cold. I’m after the message, not the messager. Guys who go into the hero worship stuff are just substituting for what they’re lacking themselves, they’re after their own personal guru. Problem with gurus is that they’re all human and all too falliable. When they start believing their own schtick you just know that the fail train is coming choo-choo right around the bend.

      Liked by 8 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      Very true. I recently discovered Kevin samuels, and he is absolutely hilarious, especially in his response to Jaxn. There have been some cringeworthy portions of his show where he drives certain points a little too hard. However, that is also done intentionally to reinforce his points.

      A problem I have with Samuels is he states he is a Christian, but appears to openly date around and presumably fornicates with women.

      As per the content of his show, it is great because he is able to get women to reveal that their standards are out of touch with reality.

      His contributions to the sphere are as follows:

      his show is a red pilling experience for men
      he advocates that women marry young
      he advocates that women ought to become wives (as a matter of character) pre marriage
      he advocates headship and the idea that a woman has to have a covering, whether it be her father, husband, or church (no white Christians are out there saying this openly)

      -His mnemonics SIGN and PRAISE are pretty good.

      What separates him from every other public figure out there is that he is on a mission (saving the black community). There is a lot the white church community can learn from him.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Rock Kitaro says:

        DUDE! Thank you!!! I agree with his contributions, for sure. It’s not my place to say whether someone isn’t a Christian or “they’re not Christian enough,” but it’s deeply tragic when one wears that badge, has a multitude of listeners and preaches activities and lifestyles that clearly go against the teachings of Christ and his Apostles. Even if he is speaking to the point of “if you want to succeed in Satan’s world, this is what you should do,” he has an opportunity to spend more time encouraging them to choose to do what’s good in God’s eyes instead.

        And with the Black Community, specifically, I strongly opine that its our sexual immorality leading to adultery, and children out of wedlock that’s hurt us the most.

        Liked by 4 people

      • redpillboomer says:

        “A problem I have with Samuels is he states he is a Christian, but appears to openly date around and presumably fornicates with women.”

        This is an area where I pulled back from, but not totally out of, secular manospherian teachings. I prefer the Cristian Red Pill because it aligns with my values better. I think in general the secular RP men do a fairly good job of describing how ‘Eve thinks and behaves’ in her fallenness, aka Red Pill awareness. I began my RP journey listening to these guys and it helped me work through my ‘RP rage’ at the time. My Blue Pill lens of looking at intersexual dynamics began to turn red. Quite frankly, I was astonished just how Blue the lens had been, and I was more upset at MYSELF for not having seen it or known it, and that I’d just had swallowed the BP worldview the proverbial hook, line and sinker. I finally learned to give myself some grace when I realized no one — not my Dad, no male relative, no man anywhere that I can ever remember — had shown/taught me these things. I’d been subtly, culturally conditioned to view gender relations through a Blue Pill lens only, and it was purely the Grace of God that had prevented me in my past from getting ‘taken out’ by my gender relations naivety.

        I was thankful for it and still am; however, what caused me to pull back to some degree was what they were outright telling, or in most cases certainly implying, that we do with this newfound awareness/knowledge. It seemed to me like the underlying message was to shift the sexual playing field back in men’s favor to take advantage of ‘fallen Eve’; i.e. to ‘turn the tables on her’, so to speak, to our advantage. This seemed to be the implicit thrust of the message instead of using it simply to protect oneself from her ‘fallen feminine wiles’ and focus on becoming the best version of man you can be…,AND that includes relating to women properly, Biblically through a Red Pill lens, and doubly certainly from some ludicrous Churchian lens. That’s why we need the Christian Red Pill in my opinion, to get this gender relations thing working right in God’s eyes, according to His design, and not the damnable ways of our gynocentric cultural system, nor the fallen RP men’s ways of seduction and leaving them after being through with using them, aka ‘pumping and dumping’.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        Different people appear to have different struggles with extracting valuable information from larger pieces (books or articles or sites) that contain other information which is, for various reasons, not usable (moral or other). Some people are more or less fine with this, and others are not. It’s interesting to see how people differ on this. I think it also has something to do with faith orientation — some kinds of believers are more inclined to stay away completely from things that are not of their faith, whereas others are more inclined to take useful information from non-faith sources in a discerning way. Comfort levels differ greatly, and this has caused no small degree of tension among Christian guys in this corner of the internet.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Jack says:

        “Different people appear to have different struggles with extracting valuable information from larger pieces (books or articles or sites) that contain other information which is, for various reasons, not usable (moral or other). Some people are more or less fine with this, and others are not.”

        For me, whenever I am interacting with media, certain concepts stand out or impress me as fundamentally true, regardless of the context or the labels that are attached to the presentation. I also relate to ideas that reflect my own experiences. I can integrate these concepts into my own hypotheses and implement them in different contexts. With some diligent thought, I can also revise the labels such that it makes sense to me.

        Using this approach (which is based on a kind of discernment), I have discovered truth in the most unlikely places, such as art, music, PUAs, porn, and other religions. I’ve also noticed that certain sources which should be dispensing truth regularly, fail to do so. I dislike the news and certain movies because I can never get this impression of truthfulness from them. This caused me a lot of confusion when I was younger, I mean like, parents and church should be true, and porn and Buddhism should be false, right? But it is not so cut and dried in following a dualistic, deductive logic. It’s more inductive, like some aspects are true and other aspects are hubristic, and there are patterns across the board, and it’s like this of all things. (One exception is the nature of creation. Nature is always inherently true, and it is frequently incomprehensible.) Actually, God shines his light on both the righteous and the ungodly. Basic human nature is the same for both saints and sinners. In fact, it’s more evident for the latter.

        One thing I learned on “Resurrection Sunday” this year is that, not only is Jesus the Lord of heaven and earth, He is also the Lord of hell. He has to be, or else how could he have conquered the cross and the grave, and then come back to life?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sharkly says:

        When men use Red-Pill truth to chase after women and beguile them with their performance(monkey dance) and have illicit sex with women, their false-god is still womankind,(the creature) imaging a feminine sex/fertility goddess, and not our Father God (our Creator) who forbid sexual immorality, and commanded us to put no other such thing before Him.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Lexet Blog says:

      Per your comment on Ravi, I have several posts on my own blog about qualifications of elders and deacons in the church. They are tangentially related to this topic.

      I can’t think of a single pastor who is a public figure that actually meets the scriptural minimum for them to be an elder.

      Unfortunately, most churchians do not care for the scriptures, and refuse to apply them when they do.

      That’s not to say there aren’t good pastors or ministries out there. I am saying that those who seek public glory and mega ministries that make mega bucks aren’t good people.

      Liked by 4 people

      • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

        LEX
        Thats what I’m talking about how is it, these intelligent ”blessed by god” people can’t study finacials&law” like us attorney-types who love god on the manosphere?P.S.This is a very short comment for myself,right?You also know I don’t trust any self-made republican-democrat oligarchy types that accept donations or salary,right?Let them experiance reality for once in their priviledged lives of public welfare!I’m not a bad person for saying such things ,right?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Rock Kitaro says:

        Indeed. I was just reading 2 Peter Chapter 2 a couple of nights ago that specifically talks about false teachers. That coupled with what I’m learning about Islam and how strongly so many Muslims worship, go to Mecca and revere Muhammad, sadly its understandable why so many agnostics and atheists would lack respect for Christianity. So many who claim to be Christians don’t appear to respect Christianity themselves by refusing to submit to Christ’s teachings. Of course, I want to emphasize “appear” because you never know what’s stirring in a person’s heart. We all fall short and all that.

        Liked by 5 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        I think false teachings have the stronger pull with most people.

        False teachings etc. are sin and the urge to sin seems pretty dang strong in most of us.

        Liked by 5 people

    • thedeti says:

      Jaxn did get raked over the coals for hypocrisy.

      Interestingly, Samuels has endorsed male cheating, saying “men don’t cheat, they exercise options”. Paraphrasing Samuels, he says when men do it, they’re just being men, but when women do it they’re cheating (because it’s so incredibly easy for them to do it).

      Liked by 3 people

      • Rock Kitaro says:

        I know. I hate that he endorses that message while claiming to be Christian. It’s very destructive to those who also claim to be Christian, and yet rely on other humans to teach them, instead of going straight to the source.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Dalrock used (I think) make a rhetorical point (is that the right phrase?) that if women take advantage of their power in the sexual marketplace when they’re young and have the advantage, why shouldn’t men do the same when they’re in their 30s or 40s and the power has shifted?

        He wasn’t endorsing this view, just pointing out the logic. But I could see how some would take this further – I’m not endorsing it.

        Then you get odd interpretations of scripture by Christians like A. Toad who claim the bible says Christian men can sleep with harlots.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Lexet Blog says:

        Incentives drive the market.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lexet Blog says:

        To be honest, I’m not sure if he endorses it, or states it as a reality of dealing with very wealthy and powerful men.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        Either way, it’s a creative argument. He is telling women high value (super rich) men cheat, while encouraging them to be more reasonable. Ie, scaring them to the middle of the bell curve. lol

        Liked by 1 person

  5. feeriker says:

    “I know. I hate that he endorses that message while claiming to be Christian. It’s very destructive to those who also claim to be Christian, and yet rely on other humans to teach them, instead of going straight to the source.”

    Like most churchians, he’s a soldier in Satan’s army, whether serving as a conscript or a volunteer.

    Liked by 3 people

  6. Scott says:

    If I could figure out how to make money off of you guys I totally would.

    Liked by 5 people

  7. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Everbody
    Hear about how now,the 16th/17th century written islam-approved gospel of barnabas is now going to be pushed as some rediscovered ”gospel”,when like the judas one is no gospel at all!Does that sound familiar?P.S.You know more female ”pastors” are going the nikole mitchell route,right?All this makes artinsal toads lesbian wives&harlot-sex is approved sex, look bibical!
    P.S.In ther words?Its only going to get much,much worser,of course!I&stonecold steve austin always give AUSTIN3:16, to all these modern people of the west,thumping their gospels of judas&barnabas in our kind (baby) face’s,that will get them nowhere they want to go!

    Liked by 1 person

  8. locustsplease says:

    These grifters are unfortunate because they draw so much internet attention that people think they are the movement. The most famous christian grifter is kanye west. He is literally married to the whore of Babylon and is a classic attention whore himself yet people think hes leading the movement. When i tell Christians he is going to turn on you in the future they tell me i dont believe in christs redemption.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      You aren’t allowed to say that. Everyone in the cook kid neocalvinist camp (MacArthurites, Babylon bee, John piper) was ecstatic over west since his “pastor” was a TMS grad.

      They all went silent when ye built his compound. I’m sure now they are jealous he turned it into a plot for 30 million

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

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