Answers to the Exit Questions for the Series on Masculinity

Explicit answers to the questions that were brought up earlier posts.

Readership: All
Length: 2,200 words
Reading Time: 7.5 minutes
Reader’s Note: This is the 9th and last post of a series on masculinity. Here is the full list of posts in this series.

  1. Σ Frame: Redefining Manhood as Boyish Immaturity (2021 June 14)
  2. Σ Frame: Do men need talk therapy? (2021 June 16)
  3. Σ Frame: Entering Manhood (Rite of Passage) (2021 June 18)
  4. Σ Frame: A Man’s Ability to Read IOIs Depends on Having a Firm Grasp on His Personal Archetypal Mythos (2021 June 21)
  5. Σ Frame: Men’s Fantasy of Emotional Intimacy (2021 June 23)
  6. Σ Frame: 8 Things that Increase Discernment (2021 June 25)
  7. Σ Frame: Women rely on a man’s Frame for Redemptive Introspection (2021 June 28)
  8. Σ Frame: When walking on eggshells, step boldly! (2021 June 30)
  9. Σ Frame: Answers to the Exit Questions for the Series on Masculinity (2021 July 2)

Of note, this series received a few responses from around the Manosphere.

Based on the insights and arguments tendered in the discussions, I’ll answer the questions that were posed in this series of posts.

Questions and Answers

Q1. Is it possible for a man to experience a deep, emotionally humbling love for a woman without taking the risk of “opening up” to her in the manner described here?

A1. NO – A man can love a woman in other ways, including Agape love, tough love, washing her clean, and so on, but without honesty and humility, his joyful enthusiasm will always be lacking. If sexual intimacy doesn’t take up the slack, I think there would be little else that could hold his heart in the relationship, outside of willful commitment (e.g., for the children’s sake, or to maintaining economic integrity, etc.). Unfortunately, too many marriages are solely fueled by male willpower.


Q2. Is men’s desire for honesty and openness with their wives just a quirky conceited fantasy, or is this how God intends for men to “love their wives”?

A2. It is God’s will for men to be authentic, honest, and open with their wives, and for men to experience intimacy, humility, and joy in doing so. Most men who have successful marriages (Ed, Scott, and I) will readily agree with this. However, this only works out well for men who have the following traits.

  • Have very few weaknesses that are intolerable to women.
  • Can generate the venerable Tingles in their wives (which blinds the woman to the man’s weaknesses).
  • Have a wife who has a generous will, and is faithful enough to overlook or forgive anything she perceives as a weakness.
  • Have a wife who is emotionally stable and spiritually mature enough to know how to micromanage her own emotions and deal with problems and setbacks.

As can be seen by the items on this list, whether or not a man can be honest with his wife depends largely on the character of his wife.

When these traits are lacking, she will interpret his honesty as him dumping his worries and grief onto her. This will make her insecure and vexed, and she will attempt to dump this anxiety back onto the man. Thus, it is extremely unwise for a man to be gut wrenchingly honest and emotionally vulnerable in front of his wife, because this will be perceived as a weakness. The weakness plays on her insecurities and fears, and gives her mind (1) some evidence that she should listen to Satan and (2) a justifiable reason to lose faith and defect.

Deep Strength says it is a fallacy to teach men to be emotionally honest, and in essence, he is saying that men’s desire for deep authentic honesty with a woman is merely a fantasy. But I say it is not a fallacy at all. It only appears to be a fallacy for men who don’t have the traits listed above, and who don’t have a woman who is sufficiently mature. (Granted, this is most men.) If the wife is wholly untrustworthy, intractable, and intransigent, then yes, it is a fantasy to those men.


Q3. Should a woman ever be expected to be a faithful, loyal listener when a man needs to talk things through?

A3. As a theoretical ideal, yes. In reality, no.

Eric Francis Silk answered this question well.

“They say that the relationship between husband and wife is like the relationship between God and us.

Well… We know considerably less about God’s mind/heart than God knows about our minds/hearts.”

Deti said,

“Right. When a man has problems, fears, anxieties, despair, depression, etc., he’s to go to God with it. He’s to go to other men with it (iron sharpening iron). Men are iron; women are cheesecloth, or in some cases Brillo pads. Cheesecloth does not sharpen iron. Brillo pads do not sharpen iron; they’re just abrasive irritants.

Children go to parents, usually Mom, with problems.

Wife goes to husband with problems.

Husband goes to God with problems.

Children respect/submit to parents; wife respects/submits to husband; husband respects/submits to God.

God loves husband; husband loves wife, wife loves children.”

Q4. Do women know that men fall for women with whom they can be humble and honest, and use this to control and manipulate men?

A4. YES – This is the primary reason why women are accepting of a man’s honesty before marriage, and very harsh and discriminatory afterwards. In a future post, I will discuss What changes after marriage? &


Q5. If a woman/wife insists on being the talk therapist to a man, is this her will manifesting as pride, as DS described?

A5. YES – A man should feel comfortable in opening up spontaneously with her. She should not try to force it into the open, or coerce him to talk about his feelings. Furthermore, if a woman does, this, it is taken by a man as disrespect.

Scott offered an alternative explanation when he said,

“The most likely scenario is she is repeating what she has been conditioned to repeat. Than men need to talk about their feelings more. But she doesn’t actually believe it. The analog of this is men who say they love kick ass girls with guns. They only think they are supposed to say this.”


Q6. If a man cannot face, deal with, or talk about his feelings, does this mean that he is weak or immature in some way?

A6. NO – Scott said,

“Cannot” is a loaded term here. But if we take it face value, it is more likely that he feels there is no he can talk to about it.”

I’ll add that he might have some issues that he is not able to put into words. It might also mean he cannot trust others enough to open up. Whether this truly indicates a weakness depends on the man on a case-by-case basis, but it should be noted that while an inability to “get honest” might be an indicator that a weakness is lurking, a man’s inability to talk about his feelings openly and on demand does not constitute a weakness by itself.

The issue of maturity, as was discussed in the first post in this series, is a little more nuanced, but the answer is still NO. This is because women have a false concept of “maturity”. (See Post 8 in the series.) Dalrock wrote about this compounding effect of societal decay in his post, Connecting the pathological fear of husbands having power with the peter pan manboy syndrome. (2012 October 4)

Q7. Is it worth trying to educate women that their husbands will love them more deeply and more genuinely if they would allow him to “open up” his Heart Trust and humility, and honestly communicate his thoughts and feelings without any backlash?

A7. YES — In theory, it is definitely worth it. But in practice, education alone may not be effective because of women’s inherent weaknesses in dealing with perceived weaknesses in men.

I find it ironically hilarious that not one, but two examples of this futility came up in the comments. I’ll convey these two examples as case studies.

Case Study 1 – Shame is as shame does, not what we say about it.

Under the 5th post in this series, there was a conversation between Cameron, Deti, Elspeth, Liz, et al. It all began when Liz mentioned an old Chateau Heartiste post, Petraeus and the Infidelity Risk Curve (2012 November 15). There was a disagreement about how Petraeus’ wife was shamed in various ways. Liz took the position that (1) she was a good wife. (2) Heartiste’s post shamed her, and (3) she doesn’t deserve that. The sentiment from the men was that, (1) Heartiste’s post, rude though it may be, was simply common sense. (2) She shamed both herself and Petraeus by “letting herself go” way too far (as the wife of such a powerful man). (3) She inadvertently subjected Petraeus to temptation as a byproduct. (4) Petraeus shamed both himself and his wife by having an affair. (5) Heartiste is a nihilistic prick, but even so, (6) there’s no shame in talking about it. To make a long tiff short, I believe all of the chatter can be summed up in one statement from Deti,

“No one disagrees with the Red Pill. They just hate it when you talk about Red Pill.”

Yes, because when you do, you’re serving up slices of humble pie, and if the shoe fits, well, you’ve just helped someone understand their own problem, and shamed the ħә11 out of them in the process…

Case Study 2 – Love Overlooks a Fault

There was another discussion focused on whether mens’ weaknesses (by various definitions) affects a woman’s view of him. The women, who happen to be very happily married, could not be convinced that their husbands had any significant weaknesses.

In closure of this discussion, Deti wrote,

“I am convinced that I am dealing with extreme, extreme outliers in the Manosphere Ladies’ Auxiliary (MLA). Women in the MLA are not anything like women in the real, actual, functioning everyday world. Not at all.”

Yes, the MLA are extreme outliers — unicorns that never fart! And these are women who already agree with the larger points being made on this blog (based on their stated interactions with their husbands, if not cognitively). Yet even with them, it proved to be very difficult to get the point across that all men have intrinsic weaknesses. We can’t know how open their husbands have actually been with them, so I will presume their stubbornness is because they can’t cognitively admit the fact without doubting their faith. We might be annoyed by their disagreeableness, but in this particular matter, this is to be commended of them.

Comprehensively, this conversation sums up the overriding message of this series – that a major piece of intersexual communication is transmitted by faith alone, and that love overlooks a fault. Without this faith and love, marriage is stormy.

Q8. What is your guiding star? Is it a deeply inspired personal mythos combined with a divine purpose for living, or are your psychological assessments guided by something else?

A8. This question is deeply personal, and each man must find the answer for himself. I will only say that it is unwise to place your trust in a wife, if both your confidence in yourself, and your trust in God are not significantly greater. Therefore, your mythos must transcend that of merely having a harmonious marriage. Instead, it must rest on something larger and greater.

Conclusions

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Make sure you know your ball and chain well before you anchor your soul to her by pouring your heart out in honesty and humility. Of course, it’s God’s will that you should do so, but good luck pulling that off!

Related

  1. Σ Frame: Confidence and Authenticity in Speech (2009 December 28)
  2. Illimitable Men: The Game of Power (2014 April 22)
  3. Illimitable Men: Understanding Female Psychology (2016 March 16)
  4. Σ Frame: Conflict Structure and Marital Satisfaction (2017 November 15)
  5. Σ Frame: Disciplined, Submissive, Happy Wives (2018 February 15)
  6. Σ Frame: How To Get A Better Response From Your Girl (2018 February 27)
  7. Σ Frame (J.T. Anderson): Moulding an Excellent Wife (2018 March 5)
  8. Σ Frame: Apprehending True Humility (2019 April 7)
  9. Σ Frame: The Trust Factor (2019 April 18)
  10. Σ Frame: 2 Frames of Reference for Identifying the Trust Factor (2019 April 23)
  11. Σ Frame: Creating and Maintaining Heart Trust (2019 April 28)
  12. Σ Frame: Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing. (2020 January 27)




About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Authenticity, Boundaries, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Communications, Conflict Management, Conserving Power, Courtship and Marriage, Discerning Lies and Deception, Discernment, Wisdom, Discipline, Education, Enduring Suffering, Female Power, Fundamental Frame, Game Theory, Headship and Patriarchy, Holding Frame, Influence, Introspection, Leadership, Love, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Failure, Models of Success, Moral Agency, Organization and Structure, Personal Presentation, Power, Purpose, Relationships, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Stewardship, The Power of God, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

116 Responses to Answers to the Exit Questions for the Series on Masculinity

  1. Adam says:

    Jack, this has been an excellent series. Well done to all for the discussions that contributed.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. elspeth says:

    Yes, the MLA are extreme outliers — unicorns that never fart! And these are women who already agree with the larger points being made on this blog (based on their stated interactions with their husbands, if not cognitively). Yet even with them, it proved to be very difficult to get the point across that all men have intrinsic weaknesses.

    I can assure you that I am no unicorn, Jack. Not even close! My husband probably can’t count the number of times he has said to me, “Yes, [Els]. Because it’s all about you”, LOL. I actually appreciate that because I need to be confronted in that way, but it puts to death any self-assessment I might harbor of being a unicorn.

    We understand that all men have weaknesses. Humans are all broken by the curse of sin and death, my husband is no different, and I assure you that I have borne witness to that over the course of 27+ years. I’m not married to Superman, and I know that. I am married to my hero, though, and we all know that people tend to view their heroes through idealistic lenses.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      “I actually appreciate that because I need to be confronted in that way, but it puts to death any self-assessment I might harbor of being a unicorn.”

      Followed by

      “I am married to my hero, though, and we all know that people tend to view their heroes through idealistic lenses.”

      equals UNICORN.

      No one expects a perfect wife. It is your attitude towards SAM when he does confront you that makes you such an outlier and your last sentence is exactly what Deti is talking about.

      I’ll give you a contrast so you can see the difference. The last time I confronted Mrs. A she got mad at me when she was not getting her way, she threatened withholding sex even though she knows this is how she hurt me in the past. I told her that this was sinful so she amended her sentiment so now she would not withhold but she would just lie there like a limp fish. When this got her nowhere, she stormed out of the room and slammed the door hard on the way out. Being unable to gain control herself she stormed back in and declared I was treating her like a child. This is the type of heart attitude and behavior that is the norm in modern wives.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Scott says:

    Love Overlooks a Fault

    Just in case the obvious needs to pointed out here–this is actually a commandment. It is one that each individual Christian is supposed to do, and married couples should be practicing daily towards each other–if they want Christ to be shown in that union.

    In the conversations here, it is usually presented as one that only happens (from woman to man anyway) when she is gaga crazy over her husband. But I say this–

    It is a type of love that everyone, even women can learn.

    If we wait for certain conditions to be met before we pour this love on (to our friends, our neighbors, our spouses, whatever) we will be waiting a VERY LONG time. Did Christ wait for us to love him correctly before he climbed up on the cross?

    Wait for your husband/wife to do their part first, then love them back. See how that works out.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Scott says:

      This creates what one might call a “Mexican love standoff”

      Both parties staring each other down, waiting for the other to go first.

      It’s why contractual/transactional marriage doesn’t work (and why I am in favor of sacramental marriage).

      There may be very long periods if time where one person doing all the loving while the other sinfully withholds theirs.

      I wish I could do my own version of pre-marital counseling for Christian couples and I would explain this format. I would pound into BOTH parties a list of their OBLIGATIONS and explain that those are things the other person is entitled to no matter how you feel right now.

      I don’t think it would help many but the very few devoted Christians there are left on earth. But for those, it would be worth it.

      Liked by 4 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Scott, I know this is the “correct” position but trying to reconcile this with your axioms.

      Agape can overlook faults but eros cannot.

      Like

      • Scott says:

        It seems more to me that in the modern era, Eros is the path to a deeper more “agape” love (at least in marriage.)

        I don’t feel Eros toward my best friend but I love him right past his worst character flaws.

        I have my doubts that many of the women who are currently whacked out crazy about their husbands would still be like that on the face of a truly broken man, unless somehow they made the switch over time to a deeper form.

        Like if I became sick and invalid, would Mychael take the hit to our finances, take care of me while I lie there in bed, needing to be fed, changed, etc until I pass?

        That kind of total sacrifice and devotion is almost never seen today, save for very old couples. We marvel when we see it.

        I really don’t know.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        My guess is Mychael would and the only reason you doubt this is trauma from your past experience. I actually think my wife would too and we have plenty of trauma in OUR relationship (which is coming up this morning between us).

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I think that once a relationship experiences a certain level of trauma your relationship goose is cooked. Everything current will be mapped into that trauma consciously or subconsciously. Even the stay together for the kids seems questionable. How much of those stats just capture the characteristics of the parents not the presence or absence of the dad. Just learned the kids are afraid of me – well hell how beneficial is my presence. Most people have only 2 kids – my older two I have a solid relationship with. The others would just be a bonus. The youngest daughter i guess i haven’t f-d up the relationship yet but its inevitable 46 year old guys dont change much. You think things are fine but they’re not.

        I’m saying this because if you dont have trauma with her and she’s into you, you dont have much to worry about – you’re good bud.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        @Scott:

        Like if I became sick and invalid, would Mychael take the hit to our finances, take care of me while I lie there in bed, needing to be fed, changed, etc until I pass?

        That kind of total sacrifice and devotion is almost never seen today, save for very old couples. We marvel when we see it.

        I really don’t know.

        Maybe you don’t know, but I do, based on your descriptions of your marriage.

        Mychael absolutely would stay with you and do all those things, and more. Mychael will never ever leave you no matter what happens to you. You could lose all four limbs, brain damaged, and drooling into a solo cup, and she would be happy to wake up every day and take care of you. She would be whistling cheerily while emptying your bedpans. She would consider it one of the highest privileges of her life to wipe your ass multiple times every day.

        Because the two of you have that love/sex foundation from the very beginning of your relationship. Because she was smitten with you from the very first time she saw you.

        Elspeth would do that for SAM. Liz would do that for Mike.

        Would Mrs. deti do that for me? I really doubt it.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        @Scott

        Mychael would do absolutely ANYTHING for you. ANYTHING. She will stay with you until one of you is cold in the ground. If you predecease her, she will never remarry. In her mind and heart, no man she’s ever known has ever come anywhere close to as attractive, good, or high character, as you.

        You’re the best man she’s ever known or met. You’re the best man she’s ever had, or will ever have. And she knows it. She will never be able to replace you, even if you die before she does. You’ve already alpha widowed her. Any man after you would be a complete fool and be wasting his time to even try to get to know her.

        Mychael is DONE with other men, forever, even if you die today. I’m right about this. I know I am.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Mychael does the cute little hand clappy thing when she greets him. The way she looks at him in pics – love AND desire.

        They have 40 good years left even if he’s sh!tt!n’ the bed for some of them.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Of course a woman that is head over heels attracted to you will be harder to fall for satans whispers or as DAL’called them ”the whispers”!Until then,just ride your harley while being shot at!!!

    Riding out of the grave on a harley gets alot of IOIS everytime too!!😎😉

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Deep Strength says it is a fallacy to teach men to be emotionally honest, and in essence, he is saying that men’s desire for deep authentic honesty with a woman is merely a fantasy. But I say it is not a fallacy at all. It only appears to be a fallacy for men who don’t have the traits listed above, and who don’t have a woman who is sufficiently mature. (Granted, this is most men.)

    Teaching men that being emotionally honest with women will be nothing but a horrible mistake on their part 99 out of 100 times (999/1000 times?) is the correct thing to do.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Jack says:

      “Teaching men that being emotionally honest with women will be nothing but a horrible mistake on their part 99 out of 100 times (999/1000 times?) is the correct thing to do.”

      If 100 men run a race, and only one wins, does that mean we should be teaching all the men that they’ll probably be one of the 99 losers???

      If only 1 man wins a race, and 99 men lose, does that mean that the finish line is a lie, or a fantasy, or that it doesn’t exist, or that it doesn’t matter???

      Or should we tell men that there is no reward worth working for? No joy in trusting? No blessing in intimacy? No reason to make any effort? It’s all a scam! After all, hope is a terrible thing!

      No! We need to make the goals and rewards very clear, so that men know where they stand, what they have to do to get ahead, and how to know if they have won.

      The lie is that there’s nothing to gain, and everything to lose by making any effort to pursue God’s best.

      24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. 25 And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. 26 Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. 27 But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified. ~ 1 Corinthians 9:24-27 (NKJV)

      Or maybe you’re thinking that if we tell all the men that the goal is a hopeless fantasy, then 50% or more will give up, and then that will make the race easier for the rest of us, right?

      Or maybe you’re thinking like a Woke kindergarten teacher who gives out consolation prizes to every student.

      I need to dredge up Chateau Heartiste’s byline, “Where pretty lies perish”.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Here is a revolver with a hundred chambers, 99 have a bullet in them. Have fun.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        Without God, everything in life is Russian roulette.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Jack says:

        Without God, everything happens according to chance and fate (or so it seems). But when you believe that God is your father, and that He will support you every step of the way, then our hope is not in vain. Even when everything collapses all around us, God will see that we have a way out.

        Liked by 1 person

      • caterpillar345 says:

        Thank you for this comment, Jack. Even if the revolver only has one empty chamber, at least I better understand both the risks and the rewards and can decide if I’m willing to hold out for and/or push myself towards the rewards (despite the risks).

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        I would say the probability of a happy marriage isn’t 1/100, but it’s considerably less than 50/50. If there’s a point to RP (for unmarried men) it’s to help them estimate probability of success in general for yourself and with a particular woman that you meet.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        If you estimate 1/100 then MGTOW is appropriate and wise and in line with Christian belief. Celibate MGTOW.

        Like

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        One of the good aspects of knowing that 99 of the 100 chambers are loaded is that the risk and rules of the game are known and a man can adjust. My issue was that I started out not even knowing there was a revolver involved.

        The comment about not being emotionally honest with a woman makes sense in the context of the blue pill churchianity world we live in. This is the mean culture. If a man does not take steps, or even know to take steps, to deviate from the mean, emotional honestly is going to get him obliterated in marriage 99/100 times.

        The good news is that God made women malleable and RP truth can give unmarried men who have the opportunity to marry a much better chance at a fulfilling marriage. As hard as being married to Mrs. A has been over the years, and as much as being emotionally honest has come back to bite me, the honesty and connection we had while dating is what I am steering us towards. RP knowledge is playing a big part in how I am doing this, even if I am doing things out of order. I should have done during our dating/engagement those things I am doing now.

        Like

  6. AlexeiKaramazov says:

    Hey SigmaFrame, long time lurker here (like, since the ~2018 Dalrock days). With the conclusion of this series I just wanted to express my gratitude for everything you and the other commenters here have done and contributed. I feel like these posts and conversations are made exactly for someone like me (for reference, 26M, single, engineer, asian-american-christian context). After understanding the true nature of churchianity, I dealt with loneliness, like I was the only one who understood what the devil was doing in our culture and churches. I also dealt with disillusionment, particularly of those who I thought were my fellow brothers and sister in Christ. Knowing that all of you guys here are fighting for the truth brings me great comfort and peace. Even when you guys argue and disagree–in fact, it’s even more helpful for me when you guys do so. I pay close attention to everything that is said and try to learn and implement whatever I can. I’m sure there are others out there like me.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. thedeti says:

    I can fully understand why the womenfolk just don’t get it.

    Liz and Elspeth are so incredibly hard sexually attracted to their husbands they can’t see straight. That distorts and skews everything about the way they see the world, sex, marriage, and relationships. They are with their husbands long term.

    But the difference between their marriages and other long term marriages is hard visceral sexual attraction.

    Most marriages don’t have this. Most marriages that go the distance have wives who really do love their husbands. They do care about their husbands. They are good women. Conscientious. Hard working. Dedicated. Devoted. Kind. Caring. Nurturing. Steadfast. Stalwart.

    They have good, functional, working relationships with their husbands. They even have sex with their husbands. They even like that sex sometimes. They even get into that sex sometimes. They even orgasm sometimes.

    The difference is that those women just don’t want to have sex with their husbands, and never really did. The difference is that those women don’t have super hard visceral sexual attraction for their husbands.

    The prime reason for this is that those women settled for their husbands and before they married, those women had better sex, more fun sex, and more exciting sex with more attractive men than the men they married. Their prior men tingled them. Their husbands, the men they picked/had to settle for, don’t.

    These couples “have sex”. But they don’t have sex.

    This is why it looks to the Lizes and the Elspeths of the world like all these marriages that stay together are “good” marriages where the couples look “happy”, look “good”, and “have sex”. Outwardly, it all looks good. But the one missing ingredient is her hard, visceral sexual attraction, and if you aren’t looking extremely closely, you won’t see that that ingredient isn’t there. To the Lizes and Elspeths of the world, because their marriages have that ingredient, they presume, horribly wrongly, that every long lasting marriage also contains that ingredient.

    What they fail to see is that most of the time, that ingredient IS NOT there and never was, or there was so little of it that it wasn’t sufficient to last. Most of the time, that ingredient is missing. Most of the time, that ingredient is missing because she gave away her entire storehouse of that ingredient to other men before she ever met her husband. Or she just didn’t have much of that ingredient to begin with. Or her parents failed to give it to her or failed to tell her where to find it within her. And once it’s gone, it’s GONE.

    This is why Liz and Elspeth don’t get it. It’s because most longstanding marriages don’t have that one essential ingredient. It’s why they eat three layer cakes; and why most men and women have to settle for collapsed souffles. Just because these couples have sex, doesn’t mean they have sex. Just because these couples get together, doesn’t mean she is attracted to him. Just because they stay together, doesn’t mean they are having sex. Their sex lives in truth more resemble masturbating into a vagina and her using an old trusty BOB that just happens to be attached to a man she’s married to.

    That’s the difference.

    Liked by 3 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Some will say, “Marriage is more than sex.” Sure, but sex is the primary thing in marriage – sex and the children that result. The most fundamental feature.

      And yeah desire can’t be negotiated. Her desire.

      Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        Marriage is a sexual relationship. Marriage means that there is one thing I can do only in the marriage and am not allowed to do outside it, and that’s sex. That’s why sex is so important to it. That’s why a wife MUST MUST MUST deliver sex.

        No sex, no marriage. Period. End of discussion.

        Liked by 6 people

    • I think I heard it first from TFM, “You’re not having sex, you’re just masturbating inside her.”, and no, he wasn’t talking about sex dolls.

      Knocked me off my donkey, it did.

      Liked by 4 people

  8. Lastomod says:

    I disagree with much of this……in theory

    It just (to me) makes it out as if there is zero love, zero understanding, zero anything except “raw viscereal attraction” by her, and the man cannot even open up. Sex is the only thing that matters and should matter to him, and if she is hot, and if she is following God 1000% or its “going to fail” and then added that the man has to make every freaking decision in the marriage including how she is cleaning the house and raising the kids…..this nonsense should have been “vetted” before you got married…….and it again makes the woman STILL have all the control in the marriage. She has that visceral look, she chooses the guy and he has to play defense on emotions…..ANY of them, or she is going to “rebel” and she will anyway even if you don’t do this……

    and any man that has a trust with his wife is some beta, is weak, is frail….anbd isn’t “maintaining frame”

    Just cold, lifeless marriages that are no better than the dead bedroom ones, frivorced, or just a bad marriage.

    My parents never had this, and dad wasn’t some “natural alpha” and my mother wasn’t some perfect ten (like you all have had many times over before marrying you nine wife)

    Just lost, and maybe its for the better….maybe I dodged a bullet…sure missed out on three seconds of bliss that is given begrudgingly evidently…..

    Or just be like DS.

    Most men will never be able to find the hot, fit, young, perfect mindset christian gal who nods her head on any decision, and just obeys…..and I wouldn’t even want a woman like that for anything and everything. THAT would be exhausting….especially after coming home from an eight hour day that was more stressful than usual.

    My parents actually enjoyed each others company. It seems to be some business transaction here. She will do this or that, or you’re doomed. It’s over.

    And it is still assumed if a woman is hot and / or giving you that visceral look is WORTH marrying.

    Liked by 5 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      Jason this is basicaly how I have seen western civ most of my life!

      Most women,most men&soceity cries for heroes,but will dump them in a split second!
      Hence how all of us men have been hated by the outside world to varying degrees!
      DETI is the most extreme example in marriage,just as you are the most extreme example as a single man,but you know most men like most women will happily stab a man in the back! I&DETI have been saying this for a decade+ he just does it more often than myself!!
      JESUS is realy the best example of how MEN who only want to help are hated,right?
      I have never said marry the woman giving you IOIS!
      I could have married any of afew dozen+nurses afew years ago if I beleived that!!

      This is THE GENX wedding song too!

      Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      “My parents never had this, and dad wasn’t some “natural alpha” and my mother wasn’t some perfect ten…”

      Your parents married over 50 years ago in an environment that encouraged marriage. My parents had a decent marriage. I know them intimately, and trust me – if they had not married each other, very few others would have married them or stayed with them. Very few others would have put up with them.

      LastM and deti’s parents:

      –Marriage 1.0
      –both raised with characters geared toward long term marriage, boundaries, compromise, industriousness, cooperation, getting things done, and basic love and living in harmony
      –both directed toward marriage
      –he had a few sex partners before marriage; she had AT MOST one before marriage, if that
      –marriage premised on forming a unit for each other and kids
      –no internet, no smartphones, no social media
      –both had to learn social skills using bodies, voices, and actual spoken words. Both had to learn to relate to each other in person in real time
      –hard familial and societal checks and balances on male and female behavior
      –limited sexual market place, even more limited relationship market place
      –both on more or less equal footing relationally, economically, and legally
      –clearly defined roles within marriage
      –the culture encourages, supports, and defends marriage – you work it out

      Current generations:

      –Marriage 2.0
      –both raised with characters geared toward maximum individual license, firm brick walled boundaries, absolutely no compromise, cooperation only when it serves one’s own interests, who cares if things get done, no love, constant conflict and drama
      –both directed toward gaining sexual experience
      –he had sex partners and is drenched in online porn; she had anywhere from 3 to (infinity) sex partners resulting in her settling deeply for him
      –marriage premised on hedonistic fulfillment and “enrichment” of participants
      –internet, smartphones, social media, all used to form the marriage and to attack it from within and without
      –stunted, developmentally delayed social skills – social skills are nonexistent to limited at best
      –Hard, sandbagging limitations on male behavior; absolutely no limitations or checks on female behavior
      –RMP is subsumed into SMP; the SMP is a total free for all, thrown wide open. The SMP/RMP are literally worldwide in scope; woman have tens of thousands of men available to them
      –women elevated above men relationally, economically and legally; men are intentionally hindered and disadvantaged
      –no clearly defined roles or codes of conduct for men or women
      –the culture discourages, denigrates, and attacks marriage. Existing intersexual relationships and marriages are constantly under relentless assault from within and without

      That, my friend, is why things were as they were; and things are as they are now.

      Liked by 3 people

      • redpillboomer says:

        What an eye-opening comparison and contrast deti! I can remember Marriage 1.0 albeit I was just a kid and only observing it as I grew up in it and around it, but wow! And yes, 1.0 was a lot like you described, not perfect by any stretch of the imagination; however we as a culture sure threw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater in the headlong rush to get to 2.0. Maybe a 3.0 is in the making? That would make for an interesting post and commentary by this blog’s participants: What might Marriage 3.0 look like? All I can think of is…Jeez, I can’t even really think of it…I just shudder at the thought of what 3.0 might look like, considering what an utter sh*t show 2.0 is right now.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. “I would say the probability of a happy marriage isn’t 1/100, but it’s considerably less than 50/50.”

    The question isn’t about “happy marriages”, it’s about whether you should be “emotionally open and honest” with a woman. The answer is obviously, “No.”

    I sometimes buy a lottery ticket that might win me a 100 million bucks even though the odds of me winning are infinitesimal. If I don’t win I’m out $2, but I can really enjoy thinking what I would do with the money if I did win.

    I could also be “emotionally open and honest” with a woman, and while the odds of me “winning” may not be as bad as the one-in-a-billion that the lottery ticket is, they are still overwhelmingly against me, and if I lose, I lose a hell of a lot more than $2.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. A1. NO – A man can love a woman in other ways, including Agape love, tough love, washing her clean, and so on, but without honesty and humility, his joyful enthusiasm will always be lacking. If sexual intimacy doesn’t take up the slack, I think there would be little else that could hold his heart in the relationship, outside of willful commitment (e.g., for the children’s sake, or to maintaining economic integrity, etc.). Unfortunately, too many marriages are solely fueled by male willpower.

    Not sure if I agree with you here. Generally, “reframing” fixes most of these issues. If you’re going to emote and cry over a fear or worry you have that’s generally something that a woman would do. Some men do this. Their women are repulsed. Sharing it the “masculine” way per se by indicating that this could be an issue and sharing it with a wife and asking her suggestions without getting overly emotional and problem solving the issue is good potential leadership.

    It seems to me that some of the issue might be the way in which someone does something rather than what they are actually doing. The way in which a confident man would ask out a woman rather than a timid man is pretty stark even setting aside physical appearance.

    As can be seen by the items on this list, whether or not a man can be honest with his wife depends largely on the character of his wife.

    When these traits are lacking, she will interpret his honesty as him dumping his worries and grief onto her. This will make her insecure and vexed, and she will attempt to dump this anxiety back onto the man. Thus, it is extremely unwise for a man to be gut wrenchingly honest and emotionally vulnerable in front of his wife, because this will be perceived as a weakness. The weakness plays on her insecurities and fears, and gives her mind (1) some evidence that she should listen to Satan and (2) a justifiable reason to lose faith and defect.

    Deep Strength says it is a fallacy to teach men to be emotionally honest, and in essence, he is saying that men’s desire for deep authentic honesty with a woman is merely a fantasy. But I say it is not a fallacy at all. It only appears to be a fallacy for men who don’t have the traits listed above, and who don’t have a woman who is sufficiently mature. (Granted, this is most men.) If the wife is wholly untrustworthy, intractable, and intransigent, then yes, it is a fantasy to those men.

    Given what I already said in the previous section, why challenge the character of your wife?

    I can choose to be fat or muscular and one is obviously better for attracting my wife versus challenging and negatively influencing her in submission and respect.

    I can be “open and honest” with my wife if I do it in a masculine way but not in a feminine way, and it shouldn’t have much negative blowback whether I was attractive to her or not. However, the exception is if the way you to do it (or the way she perceives it) perpetuates an inverted roles relationship in which that would be bad all around.

    The rest of the questions are conditioning to the point I mentioned. The way in which someone does things (even the same thing) absolutely can change the way anyone — man or woman and also including wives — will view them. If you’re emoting or bring up stuff in a feminine way then that’s typically going to be a negative even if a wife has good character; the wife of good character will choose to do the right thing regardless. However, why would you do things in a feminine manner when you can do it in a masculine manner when you know the influence will be negative versus positive in most cases.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Elspeth says:

      “I can be “open and honest” with my wife if I do it in a masculine way but not in a feminine way, and it shouldn’t have much negative blowback whether I was attractive to her or not. However, the exception is if the way you to do it (or the way she perceives it) perpetuates an inverted roles relationship in which that would be bad all around.”

      This resonates. Honest, open, masculine vulnerability > honesty wrapped in feminine style emoting, emotions.

      Liked by 1 person

      • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

        I’m always open&honest as my bro CT fletcher!
        We usualy cause epic scenes at iron addict gyms like in miami with our moments of tough- but highly sensitive male vulnerability too!!

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “Honest, open, masculine vulnerability…”

        (Affects best Sesame Street chorus singer voice) “One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn’t belong…..”

        This is an oxymoron if ever there was one. It should be honest, open masculinity. That’s it.

        Be honest. Be open. Do them in a masculine way. Vulnerability is ALWAYS feminine. A man must never be vulnerable with a woman.

        Vulnerable comes from the Latin vulnerare; “to wound”. If you’re vulnerable, you’re WOUNDED. You’re INJURED. You’re HURT, you’re crippled, you’re debilitated, you’re not at 100%. If you’re wounded, injured, and hurt, you’ll be killed. Your woman sees that, your relationship to her is also wounded, injured, and hurt, and will soon be DEAD.

        Liked by 4 people

      • elspeth says:

        https://pushingrubberdownhill.com/2021/07/06/husbands-must-not-unburden-themselves/#comment-16905

        I was married for 26 years before my wife passed. In the early years without question this post applies, but as the years go by and the whole “become one flesh” thing actually becomes real you can talk to your wife and there is an understanding because you are in fact one. The happiness or closeness of that state of understanding is beyond my ability to describe, how to find a woman you can have a relationship like that with is also beyond me.

        This is what I was trying to convey at the beginning of the conversation, albeit clumsily and apparently inarticulately. There is a shift that happens, in a good marriage where hearts have been knot together and seem to beat together, when this becomes as natural as breathing.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I wouldn’t deny that something happens but I also think the marriages that make it that long are often the ones that were destined to work from the beginning because of the characteristics of the participants.

        I can see how the longer you make it the less likely this stuff is to bite you in the butt – this sort of problem would tend to manifest early in marriages. I am seeing a lot of marriages break up suddenly among my high school classmates – and I mean original, twenty year or more marriages – not recent 2nd marriages. I don’t know all the reasons.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Scott says:

        I was married for 26 years before my wife passed. In the early years without question this post applies, but as the years go by and the whole “become one flesh” thing actually becomes real you can talk to your wife and there is an understanding because you are in fact one. The happiness or closeness of that state of understanding is beyond my ability to describe, how to find a woman you can have a relationship like that with is also beyond me.

        In my current way of thinking, I conceptualize this mindset as a form of indulgence (because I can’t think of a better word) combined with really good luck.

        It’s an indulgence in the sense that you must allow yourself to feel this way about another person. You must commit yourself daily to wake up, look over at her and go all starry eyed and infatuated with her. This requires a willingness to look pretty stupid if it falls apart, or she doesn’t reciprocate. Included in that mental state is the ultimate in betaness–banishing from your mind the idea of it ending. Also known as “oneitis.” Forsaking all others and all that. You cannot have an “abundance mentality” if you want to reach the level of connectedness this person is referring to.

        Luck in the sense that it works if you both feel the same way about each other, or to put another way–she indulges in the same fantasy that you were somehow fated or meant for each other in some cosmic way.

        If you get that, the rest of the world pretty much melts away every time you are together.

        Liked by 3 people

      • elspeth says:

        It’s an indulgence in the sense that you must allow yourself to feel this way about another person. You must commit yourself daily to wake up, look over at her and go all starry eyed and infatuated with her.

        Yes, Scott! There’s a lot of truth in this. I have often thought to myself, “There is no way on earth that I look like anything near what he seems to think I look like. Not possible. Now, he’s all kinds of beautiful, but me… Nope.”

        It’s a choice we both make, and it spills over into how we interact with each other, and with each passing year, there was a growing trust on both our parts. I see more of him, warts and all, hurts and all, etc. Just never occurs to me that they are a sign of weakness. On the contrary. It takes courage for my husband to trust me that way.

        He sees more of my warts, hurts, weaknesses, etc. It’s a big deal because I’m not given to bursts of emotion or long windy diatribes about how I feel. I was raised to deal, so for most of my life, I dealt. That may sound awful to a screechy, emotionally uninhibited postmodern but I think taking my time to bare my innermost stuff has served our marriage as much as his reticence served it.

        We lay it all out there now, but it wasn’t always this way. Thinking before you speak (about your words, your spouse, the effect your words may have) is not bad, not is it dishonest. Only in our overly emotive culture could it ever be viewed that way.

        So when I hear the words, “Yes. Because it is always about you”, I hear a call to be better because he knows I’m capable of it. And when he hears, “Yeah, babe. But remember, I am not you”, he knows I need to think through a thing in my own way. I usually come around to his way of thinking, but he can’t just put the “right” thoughts into my head.

        That probably tells a little bit about the parts of our personalities that invite conflict, but you get the point.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        There’s a lot of truth in this. I have often thought to myself, “There is no way on earth that I look like anything near what he seems to think I look like. Not possible. Now, he’s all kinds of beautiful, but me… Nope.”

        It’s a choice we both make, and it spills over into how we interact with each other, and with each passing year, there was a growing trust on both our parts. I see more of him, warts and all, hurts and all, etc. Just never occurs to me that they are a sign of weakness. On the contrary. It takes courage for my husband to trust me that way.

        This still doesn’t tell me anything about what SAM thinks, because it’s a report of what you think he thinks, filtered through you.

        I’d love to know what SAM thinks but I will never know since he’ll never come here. But I am not going to know it unless he tells me directly, which he will never do since he doesn’t know me from anyone.

        I know that the girls here want us to bare our souls to women. We can’t. We just can’t. It doesn’t work at all. It destroys us, destroys our women, destroys our relationships. Because mostly, you women can’t handle it.

        E, most men and women cannot have the marriage you do. Most men and women can never have the marriage you do. It’s just an impossibility.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        True. My info is 2nd hand. He is peripherally aware of these conversations though he’s “got too many flesh and blood people to juggle as it is”. So you’re right.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        @Elspeth:

        This requires a willingness to look pretty stupid if it falls apart, or she doesn’t reciprocate. Included in that mental state is the ultimate in betaness–banishing from your mind the idea of it ending. Also known as “oneitis.” Forsaking all others and all that. You cannot have an “abundance mentality” if you want to reach the level of connectedness this person is referring to.

        You omitted this part of Scott’s discourse and in a lot of ways, this is the most important part. Because this is the down side. This is the side that allows you to destroy us if you don’t like it, if you get afraid, if you can’t handle it, or if you lose attraction (and most of the time, women do, because we are mere mortals, unlike SAM).

        You don’t get it. I have tried this. I have tried being this vulnerable. I have tried allowing myself to feel this. IT DOES NOT WORK. It destroys relationships. It destroys marriages. It makes women feel insecure, afraid, and frankly terrified that their husbands are going to get them, themselves, and their children killed or tossed into the street, cold and hungry.

        Men cannot do this. We can’t. We simply cannot.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        Oh, yeah.

        However much Scott loves his wife, and as deeply as mine loves me, there is no way on earth two men who look like SAM or Scott don’t know that they won’t have to be alone if “it all falls apart”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        However much Scott loves his wife, and as deeply as mine loves me, there is no way on earth two men who look like SAM or Scott don’t know that they won’t have to be alone if “it all falls apart”.

        I don’t know how this responds to what I wrote, but, yes, SAM and Scott can replace their women without missing a beat. That’s the ideal place for men to be.

        Liked by 1 person

  11. redpillboomer says:

    “As can be seen by the items on this list, whether or not a man can be honest with his wife depends largely on the character of his wife.”

    This got me to thinking about my wife and her character. Whether it’s the ability to be honest around her or really anything else we do as a couple, a lot of what makes our relationship work is her character. Yes, there is/was visceral attraction, and as important as that was back in the day when we met, the character issue was as important, and probably more important to making the marriage last in the long run.

    I mean, I’ve got certain things going for me in our relationship, and have had them working in my favor since we met 32 years ago. These were mentioned in the post above:
    “Have very few weaknesses that are intolerable to her.”
    “Can generate the venerable Tingles in her (which blinds the woman to the man’s weaknesses).”

    What I’m seeing right now is that would NOT have been enough for us to last 32 years if she didn’t have the good character qualities mentioned above:
    “Have a wife who has a generous will, and is faithful enough to overlook or forgive anything she perceives as a weakness.”
    “Have a wife who is emotionally stable and spiritually mature enough to know how to micromanage her own emotions and deal with problems and setbacks.”

    So, it’s not just about ‘maintaining frame’ and all the other stuff we guys are supposed to do that makes it work. Her character is/was the difference maker. In other words, I could have done all that stuff and it still would not have worked out in the long run if she didn’t have the character.

    In my case, I was fortunate because God did the vetting for ‘blue pill stupid me’ back in the day. I mentioned in an earlier post, that when I met my future wife, I had two other ‘Christian’ females I was dating and very attracted to, in both cases attracted to them with my ‘little head’ as much as, if not more, than my ‘big head.’ I believe marrying either one of them would have led to a failed marriage BECAUSE of the character issue. Looking back on it now, they both were nominal in their faith, one I believe was a current CC rider at the time, and the other one was jumping off the carousel looking to ‘switch lanes.’ I do NOT believe either one of them had the character to last 32 years, however you couldn’t have told ‘blue pill stupid me’ back then because I was vetting for looks, curves and personality more than character. Fortunately God interrupted my stupidity before I got myself into one hell of a mess with either one of those women.

    Liked by 4 people

  12. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Range of motion?Get your ass in motion!!!Musclebound mothereffers!!Be a iron addict like me&other sensitive dudes&you will get all dagirls&bernikified fiat dollars!
    That how I&this dude rolls

    Heres what I did to the bluepill chains that churchians tried to put on me back in daold days!!

    Now see why I don’t go down to the grave easily!?
    Musclebound&slightly heavily masculine!!!

    Liked by 2 people

  13. lastholdout says:

    “So, it’s not just about ‘maintaining frame’ and all the other stuff we guys are supposed to do that makes it work. Her character is/was the difference maker. In other words, I could have done all that stuff and it still would not have worked out in the long run if she didn’t have the character.”

    RPB: Thank you.

    Liked by 6 people

  14. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Heres more good rules for relationships&dating from womens!!!Its still complicated!!!

    Heres delicate women talking about the patriarchy!These girls know whats up!

    Heres about being a protector for all your MANUP pleasure!!!

    I wonder why mens don’t care about damarriages&dasoceity!?
    Reputation matters dudes to these delicate wimminz!!
    Healthy relationships are demanded here ,also,so step it up mens!!!!

    Like

    • lastmod says:

      Personally this was my favorite track from “Max Max Beyond Thunderdome”. I saw this in the summer of 1985 (8th grade). Thought it was kinda dumb at the time….. but it has aged very well. Watched it about two years ago for the first time since 1985. Tina Turner was the biggest comeback of the 1980’s. This song won a grammy also. Was more of a Schwartzenegger fan back then (Commando) for action flicks.

      Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        “Master blaster rules barter town!”

        I actually liked the main title song to that movie by Tina.

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        I remember my dad dropping me off at the mall in Plattsburgh (the “big city” for my area of New York State) so I could go see this movie in the summer of 1985. I get out of the car. He looks at me as I am going into the mall (entrance near the movie theaters / pay phones). He yells as he’s lighting a cigarette. “Scout…. I’ll be here by 10 PM. If the movie ends before then call.” I nod, and roll my eyes. Someone was honking the horn behind him. He puts the car in drive, flips the guy off without even looking at him, and speeds off in that K-Car. Dad never used his truck for stuff like this (dropping me off at the mall, or someone’s house). “The truck is for work”, he would always say.

        Memories

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Plattsburg – you are from upstate New York – way upstate.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Southern California 2021 must seem like a different planet.

        The hardest thing ever to me is when your dad goes. Mom is still alive though – only 67 y.o.

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        My mom died in 2008. She was only 61. My dad in 2019. There was a almost a twelve year age difference between them when they married. If my father was born at the time I was…..he probably would’ve been a life-long single as well. It surreal now being the only one left. Older brother passed in 2019 as well.

        Yeah Cameron, for a “big city” visit it was closer to cross the Canadian border and go to Montreal than drive to NYC or Boston. Plattsburgh was the “local” Adirondack big city, and it not big at all really. Back then you just needed an iD, that all changed afetr Sept 11th. The real “heart and soul” of teh Adirondacks in teh village of Lake Placid where the 1932, and 1980 winter games were held. I grew up a ten minute drive from there.

        It was more of shock when I moved to CA in 1994 after grad school. Nothing really surprises me anymore.

        I am more upset for the fact that all the advice I ever got was “either / or” advice that forgets basic human fickleness and personality. If the marble doesn’t fall one way…..well it must be the other way.

        Also done in extremes. DS for example make sit out if you are not jacked, you MUST be fat or out of shape. If a man dare shows any shred of human dignity….he’s weak and deserves the lake of fire.

        Again, 99% of men of my dad’s era and NOW didn’t follow any of this advice or extremes when it cam to their own married lives. They’ll tell you they did….but I just don’t buy it. I’ve witnessed too many pretty decent marriages and these men are not dead and cold in everything (like this textbook christian sphere).

        But there are no good women anyway…..and none want to submit so most of this advice is pretty useless……..well….should be taken with that proverbial “grain of salt”

        Liked by 3 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      Jack,heres trainer mike page’s stuff on heart trust from ’10!https://pickingupmarriedwomen.blogspot.com/2010/05/key-to-womans-heart-trust-me.html
      Also heres DAL’ on true romance in marriage!!
      https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/11/20/does-romantic-love-sanctify-married-sex/
      This is about pastor tim bayly manning up for his lord mary lee bayly, the ‘ole ball&chain wife of his!!
      Bayly agrees with milton marriage must have passion or it is not clean!?
      Anybody here agree with that veiwpoint?

      Liked by 1 person

  15. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    All those who beleive only men must follow rules&be celibate do you agree with this too?
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/soloish/wp/2018/09/14/why-these-single-women-are-choosing-celibacy/
    Always mens must do&be!!Never womens must do&be!!WHY?
    Churchians are the enemy christians huh?They just blame men like it seems most
    Enlightened RPs of the secular or christian variety also do,with nary a word to womens soul care!
    So its unloving to tell womens truth too?

    Like

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      Why did’nt the manosphere stand up with those kenyan catholic bishops in’14,who said girls&women were being sterilized by WHO vaccines like the U.N. seems to be pulling now on the west!?
      It seems everytime theres MEN who speak the truth,the manosphere,dos’nt want to be seen with them!!I’m imagining this,right?This should be tomorrows main discussion topic!

      Like

  16. Lastmod says:

    And I still remember the whole theater erupting into laughter and applause when this scene ended (Commando, 1985).

    Liked by 2 people

  17. cameron232 says:

    Didn’t even have to watch it.

    “I like you that’s why I kill you last.”

    Like

  18. Lastmod says:

    Over the top here…. but at the 1:32 mark fits my father perfectly. This guy nails his accent perfectly. Though my dad was never this loud…. but he always threw in stuff about Russians / Germans attacking “humble Poland”.

    By the 1970’s, Poles in the USA had two claims to fame. The Pope (first non Italian pope in 500 years, and Bobby Vinton… ughhhhhhh)

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      There was Polish girl at work (as in from there) who they hired to do international business development with Poland – a pretty brunette girl.

      Like

    • cameron232 says:

      Poland is in an unfortunate geographical location.

      They make nice guns at the Radom factory, pretty Christmas ornaments and they have the 5 time world’s strongest man.

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        Years ago at my uncles home (dad’s brother). The Miss Universe Pagaent was on TV, and I was in the kitchen watching my tea steep…..my cousin yells from the living room “Jay, hurry up….Miss Poland is coming up!”

        I yelled from the kitchen “Well…..I hope she remembered to wax!”

        Which caused EVERYONE, Aunt (and she was Thailand and even understood that), uncle, cousins, other relatives to LAUGH

        cause they all know its true 😉

        Give me a British accent on a pretty gal any day…..could be sold quickly

        Liked by 3 people

  19. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    This weeks MANUP sermon with the lovable pastor&certified professorGBFM!!!”Sisters doing it for themselves”as MEN have failed such dellicate&masculine feminity for way too long again!!!

    This is based on numbers 27:1-11!!Watch&see how men have failed wimminz again!!!
    This is from early june,this year!!!
    Only 25 minutes for your drive-by churchanity needs too!!!

    Like

  20. feeriker says:

    Vulnerable comes from the Latin vulnerare; “to wound”. If you’re vulnerable, you’re WOUNDED. You’re INJURED. You’re HURT, you’re crippled, you’re debilitated, you’re not at 100%. If you’re wounded, injured, and hurt, you’ll be killed. Your woman sees that, your relationship to her is also wounded, injured, and hurt, and will soon be DEAD.

    Yet another piece of evidence that we humans are not as far removed from feral animals as we like to believe.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. RichardP says:

    Jason – if you are in Pasadena and looking for a home church, you might check out this place. Lake Ave Congregational Church. It is at the intersection of the the 210 Foothill Freeway and N. Lake Ave there in Pasadena. The links below broke up when I pasted them here so I don’t know if they are going to be intact when I publish this. If they are not, just Google the name of the church.

    It has been around for a while. Charles Fuller was pastor at one time. If the Google Maps link works, you can see Fuller Theological Seminary across the Foothill Freeway and a bit to the left of where the church is.

    They have many groups across many ages and a lot of activities. At least they did before C19 hit. This is the home church for the kids at Azusa Pacific University, and Azusa’s choir and orchestra (plus other players from the church) put on some good music program at Christmas, Easter, and other special occasions. As is the case elsewhere, I imagine it will take them a while to get back up to speed after having been shut down for C19.

    Google Map

    Lake Ave. Congregational Church

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lastmod says:

      Thank you will check it out in a few weeks, Not really looking for a home church or faith anymore. I have been asked to play in the Salvation Army band at the Pasadena Tabernacle (Salavtion Army Corps here). They do have an award winning brass band here that marches in the Rose Bowl parade every year to high acclaim. I play b-flat cornet, and I can play trumpet…..would love to join a ska / rudeboy band. Alas….

      Its a beautiful area and did make the right choice by moving here rather than parts of LA proper. Are you here in town? We should meet for lunch

      Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Yeah it’s the nature of the internet that people who interact over these things are scattered wide – would be cool to meet up with a bunch of you guys (and gals) hard to tell what people are like in real life.

        Liked by 1 person

  22. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Heres why MGTOW!!!Does this woman look familiar much to most married men&even dating single-type men?

    To men like I,scott&rollo most women look&act like this woman you might have seen on geico commercials recently!

    Always missing us&asking us to stay&missing us,while they eat, love&pray!!Stop being clingy women&put on you Big girl panties like the aging neo con wimminz&act your age for once!!!

    Liked by 2 people

  23. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Here I was in more purplepill days of beleiving in stuff&soceity!!

    Its indepence day everybody!!Does it realy matter much now!?

    Liked by 1 person

  24. lastmod says:

    Preferred the innocense of my childhood in the 1970’s……though I don’t remember the Bicenntennial clearly……I DO remmeber this on TV…SAturday morning cartoons……late 1970’s. Happy 4th of Juy everyone!!!

    Liked by 4 people

  25. cameron232 says:

    “Conjunction junction what’s your function?”

    “Electricity…eeeeee-lectricity!!”

    Happy 4th Jason.

    Liked by 3 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      Late ’70’s as in ’78?

      This classic film made by hanna -barbera made a lasting impression on me before I became a ladies man soon after!!!
      Speaking of which this is for all dabeautiful girls who love the true redpill in tokyo&elsewhere from ’88!!!!

      That was also in the dapast!!!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        I was thinking THIS Hannah-Barbera live action production from 1965. “Swinging Summer” which introduced the world to a Ms. Raquel Welch. Filmed at Arrowhead Lake in CA.

        Liked by 1 person

  26. cameron232 says:

    And Elspeth’s birthday I believe happy birthday Elspeth if I got it right.

    Liked by 3 people

  27. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Elspeth you know were all one big happy eccentric DAL’ fam&heres a beautiful song for you too!!
    Milly here could’nt beleive how lovely&romantic this song is!!

    ”Love of my life” does that sound familiar elspeth!?
    Like my first comment to you at your site back in feb?😎😉🎂
    Hopefuly at age 100 you will out bench ernestine here!

    With our cheering you on elspeth you will win the world weightlifting championship belt!!

    Like

  28. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    Centered masculinity&femininity is discussed&explained here!!!

    Even for delicate distorted perverted sexes that should be comforted into the lake of fire,right!?
    Careful shes very feminine here with lovely sailor talk for bluepillers&purplepillers!!!

    Like

  29. Lastmod says:

    Happy Fourth All! Quiet weekend for me. Pot of tea……fresh shave, gorgeous afternoon, and “The Style Council” playing loudly on my turntable with Top Mod from the late 1970’s / 1980’s………Paul Weller.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. locustsplease says:

    The fallacy of men being emotionally honest with women. Is probably the most descriptive of where I’m stuck at. I’ve known this for years. Women have always gotten mad when I showed any weakness and used it against me. I understand they don’t want to listen to me cry or hear problems that are mine to solve I get it and have no problem living like this. However.

    I’m almost 40. I was basically sold into slavery when i got divorced she took everything past present and future. It has been the largest burden of my life by far and affects me daily. I just don’t see myself being in a relationship with someone who doesn’t side with me on this. The reality is I look like a beta just talking about it. I’m making monthly escalade payment size deposits to my ex while driving a truck with 300,000 miles on the odometer.

    I know women don’t want to hear these things. It’s easy when you’re a winner — just keep winning and playing the game. But when you’re a loser, you would have to bluff or lie about being a loser, effectively forever. And I’m not a liar.

    Liked by 3 people

    • cameron232 says:

      They tend to take your past by taking your friends. By taking your money they take your future — you can’t form a relationship with another woman if you’re broke. “I don’t want you but no other woman can have you.” Basically it’s as much the finger to other women as it is to you.

      Liked by 1 person

  31. Pingback: Husbands must not unburden themselves – Adam Piggott

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

  33. cameron232 says:

    Scott: “The analog of this is men who say they love kick ass girls with guns. They only think they are supposed to say this.”

    This is a duplicate comment from Spawny’s but I feel compelled to leave it here too.

    “Strong” women aren’t attractive (they can be physically, I mean the characteristic of “strength” isn’t femininely attractive in and of itself).

    Men’s existence from the time we’re little boys until we’re too old to care is competing with each other for who is “stronger” in one way or another – physique, strength, fighting ability, insulting each other in person or over the internet, social dominance, climbing the career ladder, …… etc. A great deal of this competitive nature is innate – it’s basically competing over women. So why should men celebrate also having to compete with the other half of the human race in displays of “strength” just to get access to “strong” women who aren’t really femininely attractive in the first place? Double the competition to fight for access to an inferior product – no sale.

    Like

    • Scott says:

      Yes. The whole strong/sassy woman thing is like a weird live action meme that everybody plays along with like the Emperors New Clothes.

      I want my wife to the anti-world for me. Soft. Sweet. A place to land and feel like the days competition is over.

      Liked by 3 people

  34. thedeti says:

    Adam’s post today at Pushing Rubber Downhill makes clear that men can’t unburden themselves to their wives, ever.

    This should also put the lie to the idea of men and women being “equals”. This should also put to bed any notion of “egalitarian” marriage being an ideal.

    Husbands are positioned above wives. God puts us there. We have the position not because we earned it or even are qualified for it, but because God ordained it and decided that’s how it should be. It’s on us to rise to that. It’s on us to bear up under it and get it done. It’s on wives to leave the rest of it be, to do what their husbands tell them to do, and to stop demanding that husbands do what they cannot do.

    This is a big part of why our women don’t respect us. Our wives demand that we “get in touch with our feelings” and then we do it and they hate us for it. We men have to be better. The wives have to stop demanding this of us.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Elspeth says:

      I actually agree with this, Deti. 100%.

      Like

    • Elspeth says:

      I don’t want my husband to bare his soul to me. When did I say that?

      What I said is that over time in a good marriage you reach a point where your husband opens up more and more.

      Either, to borrow from Adam’s commenter, one flesh is real. Scripture teaches us to accept that as real and true.

      Like

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        Elspeth – Being one flesh is 100% true, because God made it so for married couples. I believe, from taking a quick perusal through a Google search on the topic, that we as Christians overwhelmingly are biased towards associating one flesh with positive attributes of marriage. This, I believe, is an oversight.

        One flesh exists regardless of the couple’s closeness or fondness for each other simply because God united them in the covenant of marriage. That you see one flesh as a blessing in your marriage should be a source of great joy for you. Many others view those inextricable bonds that come from building a life together and absolutely recognize being one flesh as you do, but without the overall fondness for it.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        RPA – I guess this is true – doesn’t St. Paul speak of being one flesh with a prostitute?

        It is hard not to admire Elspeth’s optimism in everything – it’s a very lovely attribute – guess I’m more skeptical about things. Harmless as a dove but wise as a serpent.

        Liked by 1 person

      • elspeth says:

        @ RPA and Cameron:

        I’m rarely described as overly optimistic, so thanks. You’re right about the one flesh thing. I stand corrected, while at the same time I still believe that people committed to God’s ways and who are open to Holy Spirit transformation can have an excellent and joyful marriage even in the absence of the intital “meet cute”. I believe that God’s power is more important than our weaknesses.

        Jack, Thank you for your openness to allowing my rambly here on your blog. I suspect your gracious latitude is for the purpose of observation and critique, but still. My optimism, fueled mostly by my own marriage experience, seems to be triggering to my old friend, which is not my intent. His input is far more valuable and relevant here than anything I have to say so less commentary from me going forward. I’ll still be around from time to time as life permits.

        Hey Cameron, you guys stay safe today, okay? We tuned on the news in our house this mosrning for what I believe is the first time since last year’s hurricane season. Felt strange! Thankfully we’re not getting much more than rain and moderate wind.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Hi Elspeth, I’m in the City Beautiful right now – just raining some here. We’re on the east coast so I don’t think it’s gonna affect us much – kids will just be inside driving my beautiful bride crazy.

        I like your comments and value them and think they add something here. And Liz and Ame.

        I think your old friend was hurt pretty bad – I personally know a man in a very similar situation – I mean it sounds really similar – it’s pretty bad what the women do to them. Yeah there’s male monsters in marriages too – but I guess society has a lot of sympathy for women married to those men.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        Jack,

        Forgive me for using your combo like the bar from Cheers, but this is where I chat with Cameron. Interesting story.

        For my bday, my kids brought all my “worlds” together. Couple of blogosphere friends traveled in, my more UMC Christian education circle, old friends, family of origin, inlaws. Quite a mix.

        They recently asked me what that was like for me. It was okay. Old friends and family thought the Internet friends was kind of strange. Current social circle didn’t find it strange at all.

        Made me wonder how many people ever actually experience that collision of all their worlds in one place.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I’ve never actually met anyone I “know” on the internet in real life.

        It felt strange when my work friends met my family. Two different worlds that I usually keep seperate.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        My life is pretty co.partmentalized as well. The one exception is that my family is pretty up to speed with my Internet wanderings. That’s why my kids were able to track down and notify a couple of the ladies without me knowing. SAM even occasionally asks me how Scott or a couple other folks are doing.

        But none of the various circles really knew about each other. The “so how do you know Els?” question was asked a lot.

        At least if I die all of a sudden y’all will probably find out because Hearth will know and pass it on.

        I can be rather morbid, I know. 🤣

        Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        I’m up for a trip to Florida. I even have relatives in Miami*.

        I’m a Central American immigrant. *Of course I have relatives in Miami.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Elspeth says:

        Look me up, Oscar!

        Like

    • Lastmod says:

      Adam needs to stick to the stuff he knows…..and by his own experiences, he may have had many but he knows little or nothing about them

      Liked by 1 person

  35. Pingback: Husbands must not unburden themselves | New Life Narrabri

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

  37. cameron232 says:

    An opportunity to summarize my view on this sharing of emotions, vulnerability…. etc. with wives/girlfriends.

    Women want strength in a man. In a normal woman, that means what compliments her weakness, lack of constancy, etc. She wants her man to be a rock she can anchor to.

    At the same time, women tend to be discontent with the men actually available for them to marry. Whether it’s because of looks, height, lack of sufficient status, career success, whatever.

    If you fail to be a rock and you’re already marginally attractive to her, you risk falling below her floor. This is bad whether or not it results in immediate divorce.

    If you can share in a way that allows you to still be a rock – more power to you. If not, unless you’re very attractive you’re taking a big risk.

    Like

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