Women Rely on a Man’s Frame for Redemptive Introspection

A woman needs a man like the church needs Christ.

Readership: All
Reader’s Note: This is part 7 of a series on masculinity.
Length: 2,700 words
Reading Time: 9 minutes

Introduction

A previous post, The Greatest Archetype (2021 May 21) described a comparison of Christ and the church with a man and his wife, using the story of St. Peter.  The main driving points of this post are summarized as follows.

  • The church/Peter/woman is in a natural state of rebellion against God/man.
  • Only when broken and inevitably failing in human weakness, does the church/woman submit to the authority of Christ/husband as head.
  • The “born again” experience described in John 3 is not a conscious act of the will. Instead, it has more to do with the breaking of the will (similar to breaking a horse). This “breaking” aspect of the “born again” experience is not something that can be entered into willingly. For most people, it is unexpected, uncontrollable, and it is strongly resisted. (However, it does help if one willingly avoids indulging in idolatry (i.e. spiritual/carnal adultery), which postpones or subverts the “breaking” process.)
  • As such, the wife, much like Peter in the example, needs to come to her end as the strong, independent woman that tries to usurp the husband’s headship before she will take her role as the helpmate.
  • When the church/Peter/woman does get to the point of submission to Christ’s/her husband’s headship, they/she will start to see the real blessing of peace in their lives/her life.
  • When the church/Peter/woman submits to Christ’s/husband’s headship, it leads to a life of peace for the soul, the blessings associated with a life of peace (not merely or necessarily material blessings) and ultimately the saving grace of Christ.
  • God did not make the church/women to be able to bear the responsibility of headship, He made the church/women to fall in line and support Christ’s/a man’s headship.
  • Marital headship is God’s model for the family that mirrors that of Christ and the church, albeit without the perfect headship of Christ.
  • The marital relationship, with the fullness of intimately knowing another person emotionally, intellectually and physically, is richer and experiences the blessings of peace when it aligns with God’s design.

Cornerstone posted a summary of Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development (2021 June 12). He states that Kohlberg concluded that women did not advance beyond the third stage of conventional morality, in which good intentions are determined by social consensus, and the morality of an action is judged by evaluating its consequences in terms of a person’s relationships: “It is OK if everyone else is doing it.”  Cornerstone further notes that Stages 4-7 of Kohlberg’s model are specifically Masculine Stages, and that they are based on Systems Thinking*. Cornerstone correctly identifies this Systems Thinking to be equivalent to Frame, and I will add that this Frame is both individual and societal-wide. It is the building of civilization, the organization of systems, law, and order. Women, apparently, cannot do it. Moreover, this line of reasoning supports the argument that women lack moral agency.

This post will take a look at how a woman is dependent on a man’s Frame to rearrange or “break her will”, bring structure and meaning to her emotionally disheveled life, and increase her overall value and status as well.  Here, I’ve collected several snippets of quotes from around the Manosphere that highlight a man’s artistry in drawing a woman closer to the heart of God.

Under the post, Parental divorce ruins daughters’ future marital commitment and confidence (2021 February 24), Kentucky Headhunter wrote,

“Studying the impact of women’s commitment to marriage is like studying the impact of unicorn farts on global warming.

Women don’t have confidence in “the marriage”. They have (or don’t have) confidence in the man.”

This is an interesting perspective which assumes women lack agency and are malleable.

Mike Davis responded with a story that backs this up.

“[Mike’s wife’s] parents divorced when she was five, the youngest of four kids. The divorce and the years until she was 18 were contentious. Nothing evil, just a lot of hate and resentment on both sides. Because of this, she saw divorce as an easy option to a marriage not working. She did say I changed her views on this fairly quickly by way of my actions and displaying what a man should be. She had not been exposed to a masculine male role model and did not know what it was supposed to look like. She said I showed her how a marriage could and should be.”

Marriage, Sex and More: Is marriage supposed to be forever? Maybe… (2021 February 24)

This implies that the connection between parental divorce and a daughter’s loss of confidence in marriage is more nuanced than Whitton, et al. had considered in the paper cited in the post about the effects of parental divorce.

My revised theory is that parental divorce causes daughters to lose confidence or faith in “something” that is intrinsic to her relationships to men (i.e. her father and husband) and this is outwardly observed in (i.e. “represented by” in the study) her confidence and commitment in marriage. I am guessing that this “something” is her hope or her faith in God.

I can also see how this would cause her to be more attracted to a different type of man, probably men who are less marriage minded and more caddish, and choose such a man for marriage, which would also contribute to marital dissolution.

Under Cane Caldo’s post, There’s No Way Around No (December 14, 2017), Caspar Reyes wrote this gem,

“While the daughter of Eve is capable of logic and reason, especially in the service of her own illogical and unreasonable ends, she is nonetheless not a man that she will be ruled by logic and reason or rule herself by them. The daughter of Eve was made to be ruled by a man, and this is the crux of the matter. She both desires this and resents it, and will deny it even whilst knowing deep down that it’s true.”


Quoted from Chateau Heartiste’s The Great Men on Loosed Women (2017 September 26) [emphasis mine].

“…in the Chateau Heartiste definition of modern feminism:

The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

Corollary: Radical female equalists seek the destruction of the feminine in women and of the masculine in men.

Constraints on female sexuality enable the full flowering of femininity. Absolute license corrupts femininity. It’s a more complicated relationship between sexual restriction and license for men. Constraints on male sexuality channel machismo to beneficial ends in a patriarchal culture, but demoralize men and corrupt their masculinity in a gynarchy such as we live in today in the West.”

Also,

“Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall”

Proverbs 16:18

Under the post, Exposing the Truth to Others (January 1, 2018), Cill said,

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

Here, Cill says that a woman uses the man’s frame, which would include his estimations of her, as a proxy for introspection. That’s deep, and I believe that’s right. That would emphasize the feminine need for a spiritual shepherd. It also reveals why the relationship is more solid when the man is the dominant figure in the conflict structure.

earlthomas786 was on to something interesting when he responded to Cill with this gem.

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

In regard to women, however, if it wasn’t for men’s responses to [their idiosyncrasies], most of their introspection would be comprised of cat videos, traveling on expensive trips, and whatever is on TV, especially if they are childless. I think once they become mothers their children become their biggest source of introspection… and that’s a good thing.”

“Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.”

1st Timothy 2:15 (NKJV)

Of course, a woman first needs a man before she can have children.

J. T. Anderson wrote a guest post a while back, The Satanic Persuasion Formula (2018 January 20), in which he presented a model of how women fall into temptation and sin. The serpent’s original persuasion sequence (via. Genesis 3) was outlined in the following steps:

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

The inverse:

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

J. T. used the following example as an illustration of what a man could say using the inverse approach.

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

J. T. adds,

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

J.T.’s idea is worthy of experimental investigation.

Chateau Heartiste’s post, Technology And Female Hypergamy, And The Inegalitarian Consequences (2018 January 4), mentions the necessity of men enforcing a degree of discipline over the feminine imperative (which Feminists prefer to label as “oppressive patriarchy”).

“…there was a gut instinct understanding that it was a bad arrangement to alienate 80% of men in an asexual purgatory and break the bonds of nuclear family formation by permitting women to waste years chasing the 20% of men they desire most. These traditional barricades against free-wheeling hypergamy loosened the link between raw female desire and domesticated female behavior. Women may not have liked it (though there is evidence in happiness surveys over time suggesting otherwise — aka the “tyranny of choice” paradox), but tamping down on their unfiltered and unobstructed hypergamous drive certainly was good for society as a whole.”

Further on, Roissy describes how the indulgence of the feminine imperative leads to a stronghold of societal suicide.

“It’s kind of a victorious vagina queefback loop: the greater hypergamous freedom women enjoy, the more that institutions have to bend to cater to women’s prerogatives, and the more those institutions feminize (by essentially locking out beta males from economic and sexual opportunity) the more hypergamous women become in response.”

“Female preference cascades in openly hypergamous societies are accelerating the lockout of beta males from the primest cuts of poon, while also locking out women from motherhood and happiness.”


Under Chateau Heartiste’s post, Is Male Hypergamy Real? NO (2018 January 5), a commenter going by the pseudonym, Abraham Lincoln, offered a cringeworthy metaphor for female behaviors from the male perspective.

“Women cannot be held to account because women are unaccountable. Like, if your dog shits in your house, yes, some discipline and probably some anger are in order, but stop and take a breath… who really is at fault here?”

In his post, When The Red Pill Meets the Crimson Pill, Heartiste offers this insight.

“Women trust the jerk because they know the jerk won’t tell them whatever he thinks will win their approval. And THAT’S how the jerk, ironically, wins their approval. By not trying for it.”

“A big reason women are attracted to jerkboys is the aversion jerkboys have for acquiescing to anyone’s demands, let alone women’s demands. That delightfully novel and romantically exhilarating jerkboy self-regard leaves a potent impression on women, who see refracted in the trait a forthrightness and strength of character and purpose that is lacking in niceguys.”

From a general reading of the Manosphere, we know that the proverbial ‘jerkboy’ is different from the supplicating betaboy in that he ‘doesn’t care’ about the outcome of the interaction. I make the assertion here, that the reason that the jerkboy doesn’t (seem to) care, could result from two states of mind.

  1. He has no vested interest in the outcome (i.e. the pagan jerkboy).
  2. He trusts God with the outcome (i.e. the man of faith).

In the first case, the lack of vested interest could arise from a number of reasons. One reason is because he feels no visceral attraction to the woman in question. Another reason could be that he is spinning a few other plates, and isn’t putting all his sperm in one basket. A third possibility is that he might be a Dark Triad sort of personality, who is incapable of any real empathy. All these reasons allow him an added degree of emotional freedom, which in practice, gives him the ability to remain psychologically independent, and thus retain his Frame quite easily

In the second case, the man may or may not have any vested interest in the outcome, as described above, but regardless of this, he believes in the power of his honesty, displays faith in allowing God to work the magic of redemption in the woman’s heart, and gives her the freedom to choose accordingly.

In both of these cases, we see that it is crucial for the man to retain Frame.

Commenter King adds the following gem, which explains the spiritual reason why unregenerated women are attracted to unrefined men.

“Both men and women are drawn to the truth. The truth is painful, especially to the deluded who have only ever known the intoxication of “pretty lies.” Virtuous men are not deterred by pain because it is the sign of proximity to truth.”

“Women trust the jerk because, especially today, truth telling itself is defined as “jerkiness.” How dare you upset our fraudulent tranquility! But once she submits to the truth, the utility of being a ‘jerk’ vanishes.”

Yes, women are attracted to the ‘jerkboy’, but only during the early stages of programming.

Conclusions

The state of being unregenerated, viz. feral, is the factory default setting for humans, and especially for females of the species. I am sure there are a few regenerated women out there, but good luck finding them.

As evidenced in these quotations and comments, a woman needs a man to set her straight so that she does not destroy herself, the family, and society at large. Within Christian doctrine, this form of shelter and security for the woman is called a “spiritual covering”. A man needs to be disciplined and do a considerable amount of work in order to provide a proper spiritual covering to a woman.

A righteous man will have to start from scratch, choose an undefiled woman wisely, and mold her into a regenerated state. Believing in Christ introduces a parallel universe in which it is possible to escape the feral nature of the self, and the traps and machinations of others.

Men need regeneration as well. Unfortunately, it is rather common for women to be unable to discern the underlying state of mind within a man who remains emotionally and psychologically independent from her, which leads many (initially) innocent women down the ravaging path of revilement, heartbreak, and eventually the exhilarating but d@mning carousel.

Women need strong, faithful male influences, as well as other, wiser women, to help them tell the difference, choose wisely, and resist temptation.

Related

* Systems Thinking is an overall dynamic evaluation that simplifies complex dynamic systems into a collection of positive and negative causal feedback loops covering a time delay. It considers the causality of events as a whole, so it can integrate seemingly independent events and divergent data to understand the overall interaction. Thus, when faced with complex interrelated events, a Systems Thinking approach can analyze problems in general through the exploration of causal relationships and information feedback, and can overcome the erroneous cognitions caused by intuitive thinking and subjective judgments, and thus, can solve the problem thoroughly. A scientific coverage of Systems Thinking was introduced by P.M. Senge in his book, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday, 2006.

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 Attraction, Authenticity, Charisma, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Collective Strength, Confidence, Courtship and Marriage, Determination, Discernment, Wisdom, Discipline, Fundamental Frame, Game Theory, Headship and Patriarchy, Holding Frame, Influence, Leadership, Love, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Moral Agency, Organization and Structure, Personal Presentation, Purpose, Relationships, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Sexual Authority, Stewardship, Strategy, The Power of God, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to Women Rely on a Man’s Frame for Redemptive Introspection

  1. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    True redpill preaching returns again!!
    So no woman is to be trusted, if women lack moral agency, right? So all women are is grown foolish children too, then wherefore comes this “wise women” I hear about!? No wonder white&nerdy/blackpill said the manosphere makes excuses for womens’ bad behavior, iniquity &sin! But does god? That is the real question, right?
    If Roissy was such a expert on women, how does one explain traditional goddess lady raine then?
    We should be “open&honest” in relationships like she said, right, Roissy “trusted” her, we too, right!?
    So Rachel lacked moral agency too, but we can trust her with children. Does that make sense?
    I still am the only one who preaches the full Red Pill gospel to all the lost blue&purple pill sheep!
    After all these years, nothing has changed!!!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Elspeth says:

      But does god? That is the real question, right?

      That is the real question. But if the answer is “God holds a woman, married or not, accountable for her own sin and/or righteousness before him regardless of how spiritual her husband is”, then that opens a whole other can of worms.Doesn’t it?

      I recognize the complicated nature of the entire discussion. Unlike most, I have long since learned to be at ease with unanswered questions. I accept that if all the aspects of spiritual life and eternal truths could be untangled by the intellectual capacities of man, no matter how smart, then God is immediately rendered obsolete.

      Here’s the thing. SAM absolutely sets the tone around here. I do rely on his “frame” to help me unravel my thoughts and reach conclusions about all kinds of things. We each have sin areas in our life with which we struggle, and they are often opposite things. Areas where I am weak, he is strong, and vice versa. Objectively moral or immoral outward behaviors are not really something we wrestle with as long time believers. But internal stuff that manifests often in the words we use? We hold one another accountable in those areas. I am vain, and just yesterday he reminded me to confront that spirit. He has a temper, for instance, and I have to pull his sleeve and help him rein that in.

      But there are times when we discuss topics and our very opposite ways of processing and looking at things often means we agree to disagree. The beautiful thing is that we can do that, and still be connected. He doesn’t demand that I surrender my opinions to his as an act of submission.

      All that to say…women have some very real weaknesses and many of them are unique to us. We don’t do well when things feel uncertain or insecure. Those of us who have lived life -even through childhood- dealing with successive upheavals and changes and the reality of that do better with it than others, but it is a thing women struggle with.

      So yeah. It makes a big difference to have a man of strong frame helping us along. I’ve been giving a lot of thought to Deti’s questions to me last week. And my answers revolved heavily around frame.

      You have never ever seen SAM fail? He’s never ever made a mistake in his life? Never committed error? Never ever once had a setback? Never ever once seen him afraid?

      Fail? Nope. Major mistake? Of course, I assume he didn’t mean like cutting a piece of wood 4 ft. instead of 3 ft, 😉 . Nope. Error? Again, major stuff? Nope. Setback? He doesn’t wear things like that. Stuff happens, that’s life. Forge ahead. Afraid? Absolutely. Usually in life and death scenarios involving people he loves. I have a reason for revisiting this.

      When we had been married 2 years or so, he lost his job. He got a nice bonus + vacation accrued and 6 months severance, so we would be able to pay bills for another 6 months. My thought was that he should find another job right away and we’d have two incomes for those 6 months. His thought was , ‘Nope. Go to school and get the latest certs for my field.”

      I hated that plan, but I shut my trap and went along with it; as if I had a choice. Before he finished that 6 month certification, he got a job offer from the company through which the certification courses were being offered, for a nice bit more than he’d been making before. So he had the severance, the pay from the new job, and they reimbursed him for the classes.

      We had a couple of events like that. They may have been coincidental, but I figured that God was sending me a personal message: “Shut up, and let him make the decisions about which way to go because I am guiding him for the sake of both of you.”

      That was a long time ago, but those moments, along with his innately dominant frame, left me thinking that he’s got this. And when doesn’t, or is inclined to ask me what I think we need to do, I see that as divine guidance, which still means “God is leading him to get my wisdom (such as it is) on a matter”. Either way, he’s in the driver’s seat listening to divine GPS.

      It’s a much more peaceful way to live, even it does have some Biblical holes in it, 🙂

      Liked by 3 people

  2. cameron232 says:

    “It’s kind of a victorious vagina queefback loop”

    Roissy/CH certainly has a way with words.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    My above sermon is on the grounds of Luke 16:10.

    “Whoever is faithful with very little will also be faithful with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.”!

    If you can’t trust someone with a little you sure can’t trust them with a lot, right? Peter&the apostles were faithful with a little, so they received much greater later!!

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Red Pill Apostle says:

    Year’s ago my father-in-law, in a comment about my wife, said, “She can justify anything”, which was his way of saying the hamster is strong in that one. I can attest that his assessment was spot on. What I can say with certainty in my own marriage is that Mrs. A would not think twice about doing things that are morally questionable if she has a reason. Not a good reason, just a reason. The 2 most common I have heard are the group affirmation, “All the ladies I’m friends with…” (one of my personal favorites because it makes jumping off the proverbial bridge with the rest of the group a real option), and the allusion of justice, “The other person did this to me, so now I can do that”.

    The biggest mistakes I made as a husband were (1) expecting that Mrs. A would think and introspect like a man, and (2) not understanding that I needed to be the earthly guiderails in her life of God’s rules for living. Had I understood these from the start, I believe I could have had more realistic expectations of our interactions.

    Liked by 6 people

  5. redpillboomer says:

    “…there was a gut instinct understanding that it was a bad arrangement to alienate 80% of men in an asexual purgatory and break the bonds of nuclear family formation by permitting women to waste years chasing the 20% of men they desire most. These traditional barricades against free-wheeling hypergamy loosened the link between raw female desire and domesticated female behavior. Women may not have liked it (though there is evidence in happiness surveys over time suggesting otherwise — aka the “tyranny of choice” paradox), but tamping down on their unfiltered and unobstructed hypergamous drive certainly was good for society as a whole.”

    This little gem articulates well what’s transpired in the western societies over the course of the last 70 years. It also seems to be, for those left in Western society who even still care, our ‘Humpty Dumpty’ problem. ‘Humpty Dumpty’ because “All the king’s horses and all the king’s men, couldn’t put (THE ABOVE) Humpty back together again,” aka move society back in the direction we’ve move away from.

    I mentioned in an earlier post, short of a ‘Great Awakening’ type of revival/s, or a complete an utter economic breakdown, we aren’t going to go back to the earlier model that held sway for most of our history in the west, certainly in the United States. I did here one curious thing put out the other day on some ‘Sphere Youtube post about technology possibly beginning to drive this back in this direction. The idea that I got was that technological ‘replacements’ for females (increasingly lifle-like sex dolls) and female reproductory functions, e.g. artificial wombs etc (don’t know much about this stuff, just hear about it) might give the beta males access to sex again, sans the flesh and blood woman. In other words the 80% might again be able to get sexual pleasure and also children via the new technology.

    Any of you heard this line of thought? Seems a bit far-fetched to me, but I’m working on keeping an open mind to any possibilities that might turn this sh*t show we’ve got going on around. A couple of the Manosphere content creators seem to think there is an outside chance of this occurring in the next decade or so.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      That whole sex dolls and artificial wombs thing you heard in the manosphere always struck me as a way to give the finger to women and/or a tactic designed to scare them into behaving. I don’t think you’ll see that sort of thing. I don’t want to have sex with a friggin’ doll no matter how “realistic” it is. That’s just deviant.

      I don’t want children without a mother for my children.

      This line of argument from the manosphere always came off as b_llsh!tt!ng to me.

      Liked by 3 people

      • info says:

        @cameron232
        The proported solutions isn’t that great. And is Satanically inspired. Otherwise why would it bear so much resemblance to the Dystopian “Brave New World”?

        Liked by 1 person

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      redpillboomer
      Tfh/anon use to talk about artificial wombs(Like in the brave new world novel that was developed during the ’20’s flapper girl sex culture!) at dalrock all the time back in the day!But that was mainly for men with alot of money not most of the ”lower” 80%of men!
      https://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html
      That was the starting point of most of this futurist talk inthe sphere!

      Like

  6. lastholdout says:

    “Believing in Christ introduces a parallel universe in which it is possible to escape the feral nature of the self, and the traps and machinations of others.”

    An awesome statement. I may hang that one on my wall.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Ed Hurst says:

    It’s not that better women don’t exist, but they are increasingly rare. The source of the flaws that make women as Jack describes is social and cultural. That culture will have to die before there is any large scale restoration of better things. I walk in the conviction that God is currently working on the destruction of that culture, by way of pouring out His wrath on a lot of other problems at the same time. This is why I keep saying that this is a very bad time to seek a genuine biblical marriage. It’s not impossible, but it requires a divine miracle.

    Liked by 5 people

  8. lastmod says:

    Been hearing about artificial wombs for over fifteen years “just right around the corner” talk. Sex dolls I guess have come a long way…but then men like this who get them become a character in a short Charles Bukowski story that takes place in LA of all places (so fitting). Or you become like TFM who gives it a personality of sorts and just other creepy-spooky stuff that no one wants to know about.

    The options for most men still stands of the following: find the unicorn (that is SO easy to do according to DS) she’s hot, submissive, would be a good mother after two dates and she loved Jesus and accepted him as Lord” when she was three months old…she remembers it clearly. Settle and be a dad to here already several kids which is option MOST men today have to take. I won’t say it again…okay I will……will you fathers of daughters here allow a 40, 43, 47 year old man to marry your nineteen year old daughter? Wait…he’s devout, holy, has a decent job…just was never married…….his actions show this in church and in the flock. No? Then shut your mouths about older men dating younger women and “its natural and normal” talk. Yeah, for other women…..not your (cough) virginal daughter.

    Go to Vegas and get a legal hooker. Porn I suppose. It’s very good today evidently.
    SImmer and burn for a year / several years and just decide that the over glorification of the sex-act really isn’t worth it and it was predetermined by god or whatever that it wasn’t for you….its for the “good looking” people he mad in his image.

    Early to mid thirties. You’re done as a man in this situation (never dated / v-card / never married / no kids). You will burn and you will have to love it (the self righteous here will tell you this…yet they never had to burn) or you can just finally let high school go and just do what you want.

    Liked by 1 person

    • redpillboomer says:

      “I won’t say it again… Okay I will…… Will you fathers of daughters here allow a 40, 43, 47 year old man to marry your nineteen year old daughter? Wait… he’s devout, holy, has a decent job… just was never married……. His actions show this in church and in the flock. No? Then shut your mouths about older men dating younger women and “its natural and normal” talk. Yeah, for other women…..not your (cough) virginal daughter.”

      I have to agree with you on this one. This idea that men 35-45 and older, that have their ‘act together,’ can just drop down into the early twenties for women/wives I think is men kidding themselves and engaging in some egotistical thinking. RP content creators that push this idea that men’s SMP/MMP peaks at 38 or so and that’s when they are most attractive to the twenty somethings, I’ve always seen it as a bit of a stretch. First of all, most women under 25 are (1) not looking to get married, and (2) pretty darn immature this day and age, many already have a significant N-count. The older twenties maybe, early thirties women, now he’s got a good chance of landing one of those CC riders looking to ‘switch lanes’ from the SMP to the MMP.

      And I think you’re also right, these content creators with daughters under 25 are NOT looking for them to find some great 38 year old guy to settle down with because he’s done ‘spinning plates’ and ready to settle down. There’s quite a bit of hypocrisy in the ‘Sphere, IMO, when it comes to men’s OWN daughters (I’m thinking primarily of the secular content creators); other guy’s daughters it’s okay for them to marry a guy 15 years older, but not for their daughter(s).

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jack says:

        “This idea that men 35-45 and older, that have their ‘act together,’ can just drop down into the early twenties for women/wives I think is men kidding themselves and engaging in some egotistical thinking.”

        Good points. I want to add that (3) it is women themselves who make this into wishful thinking on the part of men. Women, even older women, all prefer younger F* boys, and are loathe to consider marrying a man even as little as 7-10 years their senior, especially after they’ve ridden a few younger F* boys.

        This is all because sexual fulfillment and female primacy are the main priorities in the west. As a comparison, in Asia, other things have priority in decisions surrounding marriage. So it is not so uncommon for older men to marry younger women (I’ve seen up to 30 years age difference), and also, older women marrying younger men (I’ve seen up to 10 years age difference). The average situation in Asia is a man in his mid to late 20s picking up a girlfriend who is in high school or college, courting for about 3 to 5 years, and then getting married. It all starts when the girl is in high school, around 16-18, she gets a lot of suitors and settles in with one. Their families are also fully aware of everything and are involved in the decision making process. But this kind of set up is unthinkable in the west.

        Personally, I am teaching my daughters to have a serious mindset about sex and marriage. But they are still pretty young. I have yet to see what kinds of men they will consider for marriage, and what kinds of men will appear as potential suitors.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        The women I have spoken to who are around 40 say they want a man who is 40 to 50 years old. They seem to want a man who is their age up to 10 years older. I’m sure it happens but I haven’t seen any of them say they want a significantly younger man.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jack says:

        Cameron, They will never say they want a younger F* boy. Everything they say is socially acceptable. But when given the choice between pursuing marriage with a man 10 years older or having a fling with a younger F* boy, they will choose the latter, even at the cost of the former. This is the basic reason why marriage gets pushed out so late.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @Jack, Are we talking about 20 something carousel riders (“This is the basic reason why marriage gets pushed out so late”) or 40 year olds who have “hit the wall?”

        I can’t imagine 20-something carousel riders are typically f-ing even younger men – it’s not like they can’t find attractive men in their 20s and early 30s.

        So you’re talking about 40 year olds? I’m sure there’s some boy-toy seeking 40 year old women. The ones I talk to want a permanent relationship (not an f-buddy) and they want it with a man who’s at least close to their age. They don’t want old men or young men. Women as a group are much more open to a positive age difference (older man) than men are – if that age difference isn’t too great. This is one of the largest demonstrated psychological differences in men and women. Men go the opposite way, preferring same age or younger.

        Is this just an observed experience thing where you’ve seen this? I don’t see a lot of 40 year olds f-ing young men (Hollywood movies excluded)– I guess they could be doing it on the downlow.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jack says:

        Cameron, I would say women between the ages of 25 to 45 have this tendency. Of course, alpha-ness trumps age.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        The f-buddy thing certainly exists. I don’t know what percent of women in that age range are looking for an f-buddy vs. a permanent relationship. My perception is the f-buddy/friends with benefits thing is more common among young girls but I can’t say since I haven’t been in the market since 1993!!

        Liked by 1 person

      • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

        Women for some odd reason will tell you they are the GREATEST thing ever usualy,especialy in person!
        Thats another reason I never liked puagamers most of them could get any woman supposedly especialy max tucker,neil ross,david deangelo,roissy&roosh!
        Does anyone realy beleive them!?
        I always appreciate how women in their 20s&30s have their act all together,yet don’t get married with a license for daparents,why?
        I don’t know its usualy women who enroll other women into threesomes?
        People think I of all people, beleive the censored news?
        I beleive the reality out here not parents,churchians&MSM!!!

        Like

      • whiteguy1 says:

        RPB, I’m guessing I’m outside the norm but, I’m getting ‘hit’s’ from girls as young as 22 and as old at 55, (I’m 46). Girls are girls and the age difference, especially when they are thinking in the MMP 10-15 yrs isn’t that big a stretch. We’ve got to remember not to inject our own biases as men/fathers into the mix. I’ve got 2 daughters and my prayer for them is that they marry a God fearing man, that is the number one criteria for me. I don’t care about his age.

        And as Jack says, Alpha trumps all.
        One of my Dad’s friends in NM is 61 (never been married I heard), who is part owner of one of the largest/most famous restaurants in the state is in a LTR with a junior from the local university…I believe there is a 40 yr age difference there!

        Funny since I’ve ‘red-pilled’ my dad he didn’t even offer any blue-pill commentary when he related this story, he just kind of smiled. (He’s 72 and been married 48yrs)

        Liked by 2 people

      • Liz says:

        I want to add that (3) it is women themselves who make this into wishful thinking on the part of men. Women, even older women, all prefer younger F* boys, and are loathe to consider marrying a man even as little as 7-10 years their senior, especially after they’ve ridden a few younger F* boys.

        I know so few women who are married to much younger men I could count them with one hand. Actually two. I don’t know anyone who dates men far younger than themselves. One couple went on a blind date and didn’t know until they’d fallen for each other. She looked very young at the time, and thought he was older. She’s eight years older. The other couple…well, she looks like his grandmother and everyone thought it odd.
        Not the case the other way. My dad was twenty years older than mom. There are a lot of couples like that. From personal experience though, Dad did make mom older. South America has even more obvious age spreads than Asia. The woman with boy toy social media ploy might make celebrity news but in the real world it’s not much of a thing in my experience.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jack says:

        I need to clarify that F* boys don’t marry cougars because that would instantly transform them into “Bennies” (foolish simps). But occasionally a cougar will want to marry her F* boy and turn him into her Bennie.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liz says:

        I do think more young men are interested in dating older women than before. That didn’t use to be a thing. I remember taking my first son to orientation at college and I thought the university was overrun with queers because we were being stared at so much. Until we went into a store and I realized they were looking at me. Maybe they needed some lunch money, or something.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @Liz, I’ve heard some anecdotes on this and attempts at explanations. Plausible explanation: there’s less competition for attractive older women than there is attractive younger women. Also sometimes easier to get the attractive older women to have sex with you. I say “attractive” older women because the young men wouldn’t want to get with the woman if she isn’t attractive like Holly P.

        One of my HS friends moms paraded around in front of us with a little thin see-thru nightie and g-string underwear. Would we, as teenage boys, have hit it? Yeah, probably. We would have preferred our 17 year old classmate in the g-string but because the mom was thin and shapely – yeah there was some attraction.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liz says:

        One of my HS friends moms paraded around in front of us with a little thin see-thru nightie and g-string underwear.

        We had one of those in our high school too. I felt very sorry for the daughter, it was humiliating I’m sure. Wonder where she is today.
        Thinking further, there was a pilot who dated a judge when he was around 23 and she was late 40s. That was probably 40 years ago now. It would be weird now, I’m sure it was weirder then. He said the only thing he could remember about her was that she smelled old. He mentioned that because he was around the same age by this conversation and wondered if he smelled old too. His wife was younger.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        One of the mansophere sites years ago showed an advertisement for a dating site trying to get men to date older women. They emphasized the sexuality of the older women suggesting that they were easy (they didn’t phrase it that way if course). E.g. you could get her to s_ck it by the 2nd date. Sorry to be crude. This is from memory but I think they showed actual proof of the website in the form of screencaptures so it wasn’t just manosphere anecdotes.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    The RP guys are just telling foolish parents what they want to hear,how their daughter is going to marry a noble idealistic successful man!Show me all these 20,25,30 year old millionaires with their own homes,parents demanded grandier things&are now reaping the whirlwind while blaming their greed&lust on most men as usual!!
    But the next post should realy guilt trip men into being blamed for womens depravity!That will work on the one true MGTOW&all the incels too!!!
    Mark driscol,john piper&doug wilson could’nt get the job done!But the weakened modern manosphere will!?The manosphere like the church drove most men away with its demands of man-up with nothing of WOMANUP to delicate SLUT wimminz out here,so again they have reaped what they sowed!!If young women don’t care about marriage then why tell men to MANUP?

    Like

  10. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    MANUP w/DAL’&GBFM!!!Thats why DAL’ had to stop blogging in jan’20 to be the main ”nice”& sensitive repersenitive of the GBFM&DAL’ MANUP redpill church&club!
    Heres a top-secret meeting of one of our chapter member manup clubs,shhh,don’t let feminists&churchians know about our legion of members who are going to be at the dallas 2021 no-promise keepers conference at at&t stadium!

    Can anybody imagine the MSMS reaction to our call to redpill arms speech that I&DAL’ are preparing as I write this!?This is the film that inspired I&DAL’!!!

    &hers our official theme song&rallying call!!!DAL’ wanted this song!He said it reminded him of his gangsta rap days in dahood in colorado!!!
    I wanted this song for all da beautiful girls!

    Like

  11. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    heres a aging neo-con woman telling men to MANUP!

    Heres that gangsta rap song that DAL’loves!!

    Like

  12. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Heres more help for the smp/mmp!

    She knows GBFM!!!Is the real mac daddy of all-time!!!

    This tells much on how complicated yoiur datings&relationships are nowadays&stuff!!!
    This help mens&womens very much!!!

    Here I’am on a typical day out keeping it relz with all daladies&churchians!!

    Like

    • Lastmod says:

      Mind Games was a very underrated album by John Lennon (1973). It had only the minor hit “mind games” and he was still crossing over from the “by the minute” protest / social commentary phase of his solo career to a standard solo artist. Loved all his solo work, though McCartney did become in his own right….a superstar in the 1970’s.

      Great song professor

      Liked by 1 person

  13. rontomlinson2 says:

    Hello, can anybody remember and link to the video (from 2-4 years ago I’d guess) of the mother crying in her car as she realises she can’t simply pretend to be good around her child/children, she actually has to be good?

    Liked by 1 person

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      Are you talking about this video from’19?

      Liked by 1 person

      • rontomlinson2 says:

        Hi Professor,

        No that’s not the one (thanks anyway & nasty woman in car is very close!) I’ll have another look later.

        In the video as I recall it the young woman was complaining that she had to be a good mother around her kids otherwise they’d learn the wrong lessons. She couldn’t just fake it or otherwise get out of the game. It might be an example of a potential redemptive introspection (via children) along the lines of the writers Jack quotes (‘earlthomas786’ and St Paul).

        Christian red pill is already at the cutting edge but this topic takes it further I think.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        GBFM – This is a great video as a case study for Jack’s post …

        Pining for her ex that she does not want in her life because he’s bad for her, well at least not right now, but she really misses who he is so at some point she’s open to it and he’s moved on to another woman (alpha widow)
        Rudderless in life from social, professional, self control (alcohol and who knows what the meds she picked up were) and relational standpoints

        Here is a woman who would undoubtedly rebel against headship, but would benefit immensely from having a man who cared about her set boundaries and have her think about what she is doing in relation to those boundaries.

        Liked by 2 people

      • lastholdout says:

        Huh?

        Like

  14. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Heres another video of a non-wise woman destroying her own home with her own hands! (Does that sound biblical?)

    Women, don’t be that wife, right!?
    This is why dating&marriage rates are at a all-time low more than other factors combined!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Jack says:

    Psycho Killer Alpha Widow

    The history starts around 4:40.
    TL/DR: Guy f*cked her nutty with casual sex for 3 years and then he married another woman. He still had sex with her even after he was engaged. An investigative report said she had a battle to the death with the guy’s wife that lasted for hours.

    Here’s an interesting mental exercise. If he had put in the time and effort to nurture her spiritual growth and had married her, instead of pumping and dumping her, then maybe she would have been a loyal, submissive wife. On the other hand, maybe her nuttiness was terminal, and even if he put in the work and married her, the insanity would come out in some other way down the road. It’s hard to say.

    Like

    • feeriker says:

      Multiple behavioral psychologists have gone on record as saying that women who suffer Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and other, similar mental health/behavioral issues are very prone to being hypersexual, which is what draws men to them (and what draws them to Chads/bad boys). This probably describes Stephanie Lazarus to a tee, and although the sex with her was probably mindblowing for Chad, he was under no illusions that she was anything other than a bat shit-crazy trainwreck in the making. No amount of nurturing would have made her wife material.

      Liked by 1 person

  16. Pingback: When walking on eggshells, step boldly! | Σ Frame

  17. Pingback: Answers to the Exit Questions for the Series on Masculinity | Σ Frame

  18. Pingback: Why challenge the character of your wife? | Σ Frame

  19. Pingback: Secrets | Σ Frame

  20. Pingback: Exhuming the Masculine Frame | Σ Frame

  21. Pingback: Knowing how things are supposed to be | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

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