Rethinking Rites of Passage From a Biblical Perspective

Jesus’ Temptation seen as a Rite of Passage

Readership: Christians
Author’s Note: I am making my wife read the Bible this summer as part of a continuing effort to establish headship, and I was reading to stay a little ahead of her. I had this epiphany, for lack of a better word, while I was reading the passage in Matthew 4 for probably the 100th time. Also, I would not have thought about Christ’s temptation in Matthew 4 without Jack’s earlier write up on rites of passage.
Length: 2,100 words
Reading Time: 7 minutes


Back in June, Jack wrote a post about Entering Manhood (2021 June 18). This post described the ancient rite of male passage, and highlighted that it is an important part of a man’s personal development.

One commenter asked whether a rite of passage is necessary for Christian men, and if there was a Biblical basis for rites of passage. Here is the comment from Titus2Homemaker on Jack’s 2021/6/18 post.

“Far be it from me to dismiss the potential VALUE in such rites of passage. But as this is a post for Christian men, I have to ask why the standard here is primarily the pagan world, and not Scripture. How does this concept fit in with Scriptural instruction, and with historical Jewish application of it? We know that there are Bar and Bat Mitzvahs (for boys and girls, respectively), but were there such life-or-death rituals involved? And if not, although we can say such rituals have VALUE, can we point to them as ESSENTIAL?

I ask that not to evade the issue of such forms of entering manhood, but because if rites of passage of that nature are not essential, then we might need to dig deeper to determine what the factors ARE that ensure our boys grown into men and not just overgrown boys.”

This is an important question that deserves consideration: Is there any Biblical foundation for the male rite of passage?

Ten days after I read Jack’s post, I was reading Matthew 4 which is the temptation of Jesus and then the start of his ministry. It is interesting to me that Christ went through what was essentially a rite of passage and after that He started his ministry.

Jesus is the Final Archetype

Jesus was a man’s man.  He worked with His hands to build things.  Being fully God, He understood authority and saw fit to submit to the will of the Father on our behalf.  He saw through tests of the most educated and powerful religious authorities and had perfect answers for them all.  He endured social and political pressure that only few will ever know and stayed on mission.  He never lost frame regardless of what was thrown at him.  He wept when there was loss and His heart felt pain.  He was patient with those that did not have understanding.  He was compassionate on those who did not deserve it.  He was the perfect man with all the knowledge, wisdom, and discernment to complete His mission on earth … and yet, when the Holy Spirit took Him to the desert, we have no account of Him protesting.

Jesus’ Temptation as a Rite of Passage

The story of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness bears a striking resemblance to what we would call a rite of passage.

He was God, with perfect knowledge and in perfect relationship with the Father and Holy Spirit so He knew what the end of His earthly mission entailed. 

I can imagine He spent the time in communion with the Father, meditating on scripture, and getting prepared for the temptation that He knew was coming.

In it, we see not only a struggle to survive the elements, but also the pushing of body, mind, and spirit in overcoming evil.

Another aspect is the physical endurance. We do have an account that, even though He could have made sand into filet mignon, He did not eat for 40 days.* It stands to reason that he intentionally chose to fast.

Fasting (or starving?) is known to put one in a physically weakened state, but it can also impart clarity of mind and increased willpower.

I have, at times, had to go on a juice fast for a week.  Calories were still coming in, just very few and in liquid form.  After 7 days the hunger is ever present and substantial weight loss occurs. After 40 days Jesus would have been emaciated and weak.  He was physically starving and, at least for me, thinking is affected by the discomfort and the desire for it to end.  This is most likely the state of the human part of Jesus when He resisted the temptation from Satan.

Satan approaches the temptation with the frame that Jesus is human and subject to human desires and weakness. We see this in the 3 things he chooses to use to temp Jesus, physical comfort, a logic trap with spiritual implications, and then finally with wealth and power. In addition, Satan knows scripture, and he uses this to try to create further confusion. He probably knew who Jesus was and what Jesus on earth meant for him and so he threw his best at Jesus to derail the process. Much like with Eve, he targets the suspected weak spots and, as he often does, contorts what would otherwise be good things to make them evil, such as he does in making sex, possessions, pride, etc. into idols.

Other Rites of Passage in the Bible

While the temptation of Christ is a very distinct event that could be considered a rite of passage in the bible, there appear to be many others, once you consider that the purpose of a rite is to be a sanctifying and/or refining experience designed to prepare one for what life will bring.

  • Job lost his estate and family, that is, his dominion over what God had given him. He was tempted by his wife and friends, yet remained strong in his faith through emotional and physical misery.
  • Noah endured mockery and ridicule, but showed perseverance and faith.
  • The patriarch Joseph lost his God given freedom when his brothers sold him into slavery. He was tempted sexually with Potiphar’s wife, and had his faith tested by being unjustly imprisoned, and his faith and trust in God was ultimately used to save an entire nation as a public administrator under Pharaoh during a famine.
  • David seems to have had a more clearly defined rite.  I would imagine that all his older brothers at one point or another had to care for their father’s herd in some capacity.  During David’s watch he faced the lion and bear with stone age weapons.  His tests involved the physical, bravery, duty, and faith.  Those attributes were on full display against Goliath.
  • Peter’s trial came in denying Jesus 3 times. The failure, the dejection he must have felt when he returned to his old life of fishing and subsequent forgiveness are part of the boldness of faith that the church is built on.
  • It is obvious that Paul endured many trials in his lifetime, after living what was most likely a cushy life afforded a Pharisee, including beatings, stonings, being shipwrecked, being criminally charged, facing judicial action, and being socially rejected in general.
  • All the disciples endured the testing of their faith in the decades after Christ’s ascension, most unto death.

In all these cases the hardships refine the areas of dominion necessary for men to build/cultivate the earth, kingdoms, families, and faith.

One could argue that some of these trials and tests were not Rites of Passage, given how we think about them today, because it came at the hand of God (or “fate” if you prefer), and was not organized as such by elder men in the community. However, these examples do emphasize the value of such an experience, and suggest that it is necessary for a man to endure and overcome hardship if he is to be successful in life and in spirit. When a community imposes the requirement that all men should endure a Rite of Passage, as has been done for eons, then it prevents any men from “falling through the cracks”, and tends to improve the overall quality of men in the group. I would assert that the enduring successes of prior generations of men made the community-created trials offered by a rite of passage necessary.

In our day, manually taxing labor is no longer common in order to be able to eat or clothe ourselves, and hard times typically means cutting back on our excess instead of real suffering.  Overcoming trials builds strong men, who then build and enforce a stable society that makes life easier to the point that the hardships that created the strong men are largely gone. For the continual perpetuation of a strong, stable society, the continuance of a community organized rite of passage may be necessary.

Are there Rites of Passage for Women?!?

Going further with the idea of a Rite of Passage being any sanctifying or refining experience, we find that women have Rites of Passage too, except tailored to the God given differences of men and women. I believe there is a very good case to be made that those differing refining events in life are gender specific, reflecting those purposes for which God designed men and women.

For men, the challenges tend to be in the areas God called us to master; to be the spiritual head of the household, leader, protector, provider, teacher, and so on. These are the characteristics of Headship, and it is obvious that men’s trials tend to be around events that force growth in these areas.

The challenges for women tend to be events in the areas of the home, family, and bearing/rearing children because that is where they are called. For generations, girls learned those skills needed to care for children and a home working alongside their mothers and grandmothers.  This was a prevalent part of growing up just two generations ago and if you consider how God often works through families, you can see the Titus 2 familial relationships being used in the perpetuation of the church.  Paul indicates that women are saved by childbearing which would indicate that for women it is marriage, motherhood, and raising children that are sanctifying processes for her.  Later in life, she becomes one of the elder women of the church who are to teach younger women how to be good wives, manage their households, and love their husbands.

In our modern culture, the three big temptations that women face are in (1) resisting the Feminist lies and demonic influences of our age, (2) overcoming the Curse of Eve in her fallen nature by submitting to male authority, and (3) preserving her sexual purity (i.e. virginity). A fourth challenge that is more about excellence than temptation, is in preparing herself for marriage, raising children, and becoming a Proverbs 31 woman in general. At the very least, a wise man should consider a woman’s ability to pass through these challenges as a rite of passage into marriage and then carefully consider how a prospective wife has approached the fourth in her life.


One of the interesting side effects of being opened to RP truth is that certain parts of scripture that did not make sense now do (i.e. women saved by child bearing).  Some scripture passages that seem confusing or insignificant become quite important when seen through a Red Pill lens. (Examples include Numbers 30 describing the headship role of fathers and husbands, and their duty to protect women, and Genesis 3:20 when Adam gives his woman a name.) The debate Dalrock started by looking at marriage statistics and tying them to country club church teaching goes much further than that.  Understanding God’s hierarchy of authority makes everything from the creation to the fall to God’s kingdom in Revelation fit together better.

Jesus did not kick off His official ministry in what we would consider a strong state of being.  But for some reason, a 40-day physical endurance test that would have weakened His body and state of mind, was what God chose for the perfect man who in theory should not have needed testing. Jesus persevered through the trial and then completed his ministry which he knew would end with his excruciating death.  At the end of time, who He really is will be revealed and we’ll all see the conquering king.

* Note: The number 40 is significant in the Bible. The Israelites spent 40 years in the wilderness as a punishment for unfaithfulness. There were 40 days of rain to flood the earth as a punishment for people’s sin. I would think the parallel of 40 days of fasting immediately followed by Satan’s temptation was intentional considering Jesus as the sacrifice for human sin.


This entry was posted in Child Development, Collective Strength, Conserving Power, Discernment, Wisdom, Discipline, Education, Enduring Suffering, Faith Community, Fasting, Headship and Patriarchy, Holding Frame, Leadership, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Moral Agency, Organization and Structure, Perseverance, Purpose, Rites of Passage, Self-Concept, Sphere of Influence, Strategy, The Power of God, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Rethinking Rites of Passage From a Biblical Perspective

  1. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    On topic & knowledgeable as usual! What is needed is trial by combat for so-called elites! No more of this “I come from a wealthy family” & “I went to so & so college-university” stuff! Was Frank Hart wrong here?

    “Those in power write the history, while those who suffer write the songs.”

    It’s time that foolish bluepillers hear somebody was born rich & has a few certifications, and they think it’s a sign from god that these inferior-born elites who were never tested has anything to do with being a genetic superior elite that has natural god-given ability!

    This isn’t how evil organized feminism (That most good ”stay in the lines” Red Pillers also love!) It rose over the last 200 years with lots of help from supposedly enlightened foolish fathers & men looking for easy sex?

    Then we get Rachels demanding Biblical rites of passages for men!

    Let in-bred born elites who give themselves important titles first prove themselves worthy of power!

    Then we might could get back to a functioning system!

    Conclusion: MAKE ELITES GREAT AGAIN through rites of passages of combat that women can’t easily do! See how easy it is to fix now? Rachel would most likely approve too I bet!

    Post-script: Endurance test: WE who have been tested by combat have been here for a long time & have fought so-called elites & Rachels since before this sphere existed!

    Everybody could learn from those tested by actual theological combat instead of Monday morning quarterbacking at home!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Ame says:

    Excellent post, RPA.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    This post needs this too! Here’s an endurance test for theological combat-hungry people! A GREAT MAN once said this, years ago!

    ”Jesus came to Fulfill the Law of Moses”

    and Genesis: 3:

    “And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 14: And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

    Our forefathers lived by this simple precept which Moses and Jesus agreed upon: “and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

    And so you see that the feminist movement was a massive transfer of property. Women naturally vote for all “Alpha fux beta bux” platforms, and thus they naturally vote for the welfare state. The problem with this, Great Men, noted is that women oft lust after men incapable of exalting civilization. And thus a woman’s liberated sex drive, coupled with the right to vote, will lead us all to living in huts, as Europe is demonstrating. The central planner parasites never care about this, as they are all about short-term profits, cashing out on the decline, and then moving on to the next exalted civilization, until there are none left.

    Thousands of years ago, our forefathers noted that a man had to actively keep a woman from going off with the serpent (Lots of chilvary & lust!), so that the patriarchal family structure–the only family structure–might be exalted. And our forefathers gave each-other, and us, these Natural Rights. As the Great Books and Church took care of Civilization and the Family, men were then free to create things such as science, philosophy, symphonies, and countless other inventions & innovations!”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Jack says:

    This post makes me wonder, what kinds of rites of passage do we have now, or have had over the past few decades? All I can think of is military basic training, the Boy Scouts, and the Baptist church I grew up in had a group for boys called Royal Ambassadors that was very similar to the Boy Scouts. There are not many, and they’re not very rigorous with the exception of military training.

    The next thought I had is, why did these groups not function as a sanctifying/refining experience for men? I suppose these groups did impose some degree of refinement, but only for those men who did it and stuck with it. But it wasn’t enough to serve as a counter-influence to the growth of feminism.

    The third thought I had is that perhaps these groups were unable to have this effect because joining any of these groups is entirely elective, not required. I’m sure the reason is more complex than this. Any thoughts?

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Lastmod says:

    Well….I personally believe the Boy Scouts could serve as a “compliment” to a rite so to speak. As could Royal Rangers, Varsity sports in high school, or a boy who is more academically inclined to get into Harvard, Dartmouth, Renssealaer Poly….

    The real walk comes from “the dad” and if a boy doesn’t have a father, then its the pastor, uncle, grandfather to help guide this boy to that state from childhood to being a young man.

    A rite doesn’t have to be some amazing feat or some adventure that costs money. It doesn’t mean travel to a foreign country. There are many things that can help this…..and these once fine civic organiztions once “helped” here. No longer. Trail Life is basically a bible study, Scouts are moot, as are a lot of organizations. Varsity sports I suppose could still work, but not every boy is gonna be able to throw like Eli Manning, field like Mike Schmidt, and bench like everyone in this sphere can.

    Not every boy is sport inclined. He should know HOW to play them, the rules but to PLAY them on a proficient level isn’t a sign of “manhood”

    We don’t need to “invent” something new and stamp jesus on it, and then make it out as if this has been done forever. In the Jewish tradition it was the “Mitzah” for boys and girls…..and with Jewish boys required circumcision? How many of your “christian dads” are gonna make your teenage son go under the knife to “become a man”? It’s in the Bible….

    Anyway…. every boy is different, but every boy needs a walk that culminates in a challenge of sorts that makes him realize he is no longer a boy but becoming a man.

    I don’t have the answer…..but I do know its very lacking today

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Ame says:

    i don’t know anything about this group, but just saw this article:

    Trail Life USA, a Christian outdoor adventure program for boys, hosted its first national backyard campout in April 2020 when many families were isolated due to the pandemic. More than 20,000 families participated, prompting the Christian scouting group to plan two more backyard events that summer. Many troops continued to meet in church parking lots or parks and held outdoor adventures such as canoeing and backpacking trips.

    Despite nationwide lockdowns, Trail Life experienced its largest increase in new membership, growing to more than 33,000 members and 900 troops in 50 states. In the past four months, the group has had more than 300 inquiries of individuals wanting to start a troop and 3,500 new members.

    On Wednesday, the Christian Service Brigade, a discipleship program for boys founded in 1937, announced it would begin steering its outdoor divisions and boys to join Trail Life.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Lastmod says:

      “Trail Life” is a bible study and its loosely connected under a national office which allows the charter group in question to do what it please but has to follow some basic guidelines and of course pay money to the organization proper to be allowed to use the materials, logo and the like….

      Trail Life is a weekly bible study for the churches that charter it and many of the troops are co-ed.

      Liked by 2 people

      • elspeth says:

        Trail Life does not allow co-ed troops. At all. Period. Are you sure you have the right organization?

        Liked by 1 person

      • elspeth says:

        And they also spend a LOT of time doing the “outdoor adventure” thing advertised in their promotional material. Yeah, there is some Bible study and prayer, but it’s not the thrust of things from what I understand.

        I was a little disappointed with the glib way Scott declared them a failure. In the absence of family and community cohesiveness, and with the collapse of the Boy Scouts, I am of the mind that we should encourage Christians forming their own types of these organizations.

        If it is true, however, that there are places with co-ed troops, I will reluctantly admit he may be right. But that really is not the way Trail Life looks in FL. Not at all, the state leader if really adamant about the mission and the trajectory of the troops here.

        Must be something in the water down here (besides mosquitoes, I mean).

        Liked by 3 people

  7. thedeti says:

    Whatever the rite of passage is for a boy to become a man, it must involve two things:

    1) the boy submitting to, and going through, some rigorous training, with other boys. He develops camaraderie and friendships, forged in dirt, fire, blood, sweat, and tears. He learns authority, hierarchy, his place in the hierarchy, cooperation with peers, and leading subordinates.

    2) The boy successfully surmounting one or more challenges. The men of the society – usually comprised of older male family members – decide whether he has surmounted them successfully. He must do it by himself, with no help.

    This models Christ’s rite of passage – Years of being raised in the temple and learning trades with his father (training). Fasting in the desert (facing the challenge) and defeating his adversary (surmounting the challenge). Whereby Christ could say “I have overcome the world”. And He had. and did, and has.

    Every boy must undergo training, and surmount challenges. They go through the training with other boys. They surmount their challenges alone. Boys need to learn independence, self sufficiency, self reliance, perseverance, resolve, clear-headedness, and a burning desire to conquer and win. The “eye of the tiger”.

    Rites of passage for girls involve their bodies changing, and their learning how to help and cooperate.

    1) Menarche and puberty; which is the source of their interpersonal power.

    2) Learning a complement of domestic skills that involve helping their parents and siblings; and eventually, helping their husbands and rearing their children.

    When girls bodies change into women’s bodies, they receive enormous sexual/fleshly power. Their mothers and other girls have to help them harness that power. This teaches them submission and humility (hopefully).

    Girls don’t need to learn to surmount challenges. They need to learn humility, submission, friendliness, and cooperation. The girls need to learn how to get along with others and to help others. The girls need to be together and with the older men in their families (father, uncles, older brothers) so they can learn how to be helpmates, how to follow orders, and to do what is asked of them.

    In contrast to the boys, who have to be left alone sometimes; the girls should NEVER be left alone to their own devices. The girls require close supervision all the time. They require that training because girls are easily distracted and easily deceived, which leads to them not learning everything they need to learn and to their inability to submit and cooperate.

    A girl becomes a woman when 1) Her body completes the transformation from girl to woman; and (2) her father decides she has learned the domestic skills required of her and has learned submission and cooperation.

    What we have now is a complete inversion of male and female roles.

    What we have now is boys not getting trained, and never being challenged. If they never get challenged, they don’t know if they can rise to a challenge and successfully overcome and master it. We have too many boys who aren’t capable of anything, and who don’t know what they’re capable of. Girls are now going through those “challenges”, and demand that the challenges be made easier and adapted so they can “pass” them. Or they demand “exceptions”. What this shows is that girls are not built for these challenges – if they were, they wouldn’t demand that they challenges be adapted or eliminated.

    What we have now is boys being told to learn humility, submission, cooperation, and friendliness. Instead of doing that, they don’t learn anything. They don’t train, they don’t face challenges, and they don’t learn cooperation. They just…. go away, off by themselves, playing video games, watching and using p0rn, using alcohol and drugs, and earning just enough money to pay rent, and buy basic needs and an internet connection. What this shows us is that boys aren’t built for humility, submission or “cooperation” with girls – if they were, they wouldn’t just disappear and anesthetize themselves with screens and substances.

    Boys aren’t built to cooperate. Boys are built to overcome, master, and rule and reign.

    Girls aren’t built to surmount challenges. Girls are built to help their men overcome, master, and rule and reign.

    Liked by 4 people

    • thedeti says:

      When a boy wants to be considered a man, he is put before the men of the community for consideration, and they decide if he is a man. They decide if he is ready to do for himself.

      When a girl wants to be considered a woman, she is put before her father, and he decides if she is a woman. He decides if she is ready to be given- and to give herself – to a man.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Lastmod says:

      “Boys aren’t built to cooperate”

      That is a basis of Scouting, a basis of any team sport, a basis of problem solving in the workplace…be in construction, code, rescue, and military

      I don’t know where you get that from

      Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        Boys are t built to cooperate with girls.


      • thedeti says:

        Also- “cooperation” for boys means “work together in a structured hierarchy to accomplish a task or objective “.

        “Cooperation “ for girls means “get along with each other to achieve consensus and harmony so everyone feels good”.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ame says:

        “cooperation” for girls means using any and all methods to achieve whatever you want regardless as to whether or not it’s good or wise, and that changes daily.

        Oh, oops, you mean the way God created us?!

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:


        I guess if you want to go Roissy, woman is your sexual enemy in that your “natural” sexual strategy conflicts with hers and vice versa. Other men are your sexual enemy as well. Civilization attempts to foster the cooperate-cooperate equilibrium that makes good things possible.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:


        cooperation” for girls means using any and all methods to achieve whatever you want regardless as to whether or not it’s good or wise, and that changes daily.

        No, that’s what an individual girl does, left to her own devices. That’s not cooperation. That’s raw female nature in action: I want what I want, now, and it’s your duty to give it to me. I will extract it from you by any means necessary, including fraud, deceit, subterfuge, sabotage, duplicity, mendacity, gaslighting, and manipulation. If you call me out on any of that, I will call you a misogynist and an incel, and people will believe me because I’m a woman and I’m untouchable.

        When I write things like this, people say I’m a misogynist and an incel. Because, well, I suppose, “misogynist” now means “person who tells the truth about women”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        @ Cam

        I guess if you want to go Roissy, woman is your sexual enemy in that your “natural” sexual strategy conflicts with hers and vice versa. Other men are your sexual enemy as well.

        Men and women are at direct cross purposes sexually. Each is trying to extract from the other what it wants while giving back nothing, or as little as possible. It’s also a zero sum game, it really is. For men’s sexual strategy to prevail (marriage 1.0), women have to “lose”. For women’s sexual strategy to prevail (the current Western SMP/MMP), men have to lose. Right now – women “win”, and men lose. And our society is crumbling because of it.

        Civilization attempts to foster the cooperate-cooperate equilibrium that makes good things possible.

        Yes – a civilization of families run by men, where men are cooperating with each other. When you throw women into the mix and they demand “equal voices”, it becomes all about “how does everyone feel” and “that’s not fair” and “everything has to be fair” and “everyone has to get something” and “everyone has to feel good about this” and “you hurt my feelings” and “you’re just being mean to me” and on and on and on while nothing gets done and everyone’s pointing fingers at each other and Rome burns.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        1919 – year of the worst decision ever.

        Liked by 1 person

    • info says:

      The Trial of women is the trial of the temptations of being born with a silver spoon in their mouths.

      And of Satan drawing them away into worldly things.

      And the Temptations of the World as a result. How will they be humble and righteous in spite of their inborn privilege at least in so far as Sexual Market value is concerned.

      Because soon that privilege will go away.


  8. Scott says:

    The reason none of the groups mentioned will be able to pull off what once was, is they no longer lead to membership into a fraternal order.

    Now that the Boys Scout is now just “Scouts” the entire purpose of it is lost. If an Eagle runs into another, older Eagle, they have a connection that spans generations. And the most salient ingredient in that connection is manhood.

    Now, with girls entering the Boy Scouts, that connection has no fraternal value.

    Anything fraternal is public enemy number one now. So TLUSA will fall. All of it will fall. It is necessary to understand this now, and wait for the macro issue of what will become of masculinity to work itself out, which will take generations.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      If you are a father of sons, you can not depend on any organization to even reinforce manhood. We live a very right leaning area of the South and even here I am consistently correcting feminine behavioral lessons that the boys get put through in school. We are at least a full generation into an almost completely feminized society (there were still scraps of masculinity when I was a child) and we are seeing the results play out in politics, institutions and the general risk averse nature of the population in general.

      Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      You have the option of getting your sons to kill a grizzly bear because of where you live. How about “kill a grizzly with a revolver” as a rite of passage?

      I could get my sons to kill one of our Florida deer which are about the size of a dog. That’s about it.


  9. Lastmod says:

    I am hardly some rock-solid specimen of biblical manhood, but the best education about being a man came from: leaving the house after grad school and never moving back home and (drum roll), my father.

    There was “no test” or review by the local “tribe” (my uncles and Polish relatives) to see if I was one yet. Rudyard Kipling wrote that classic poem called “If” way back in the late Victorian era….and even then there didn’t see to be levels or metered tests…….the question posed was indeed “If”
    Hiking and camping was my thing…..but expecting me to join Varsity baseball and throw a 110 mph pitch and be scouted for the majors…..most ball players can’t even pitch like that.

    Do you guys want a “fight club” type of thing? Peyote in the desert? Pushed from a helicopter into the wilderness with only two toothpicks and a Swiss army tool? “Survive three weeks, and we’ll see if you’re a man! McGuyver did it, so can you!” Do you take him to a prostitute, and then he becomes a man?

    Really. Do you want this codified for “other men” to determine if the boy is a man or not by their standards? I mean, I’m all for the fact boys need something to grow up into….but taking a 13 year old boy with few skills and expecting him to become a man by some sort of “field test” is a bit off.

    Liked by 1 person

    • elspeth says:

      I’m kinda overdoing here, but I wanted to say that I really love that poem by Rudyard Kipling, If. It is a wonderful synopsis of proper character assessment. Brilliant.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        When I was a freshman in college, after our parents dropped us off….and they left. The freshman had a welcome dinner. We had a week before all the upperclassmen would return. It was time to build class spirit and learn the ropes of campus life… was August 1988……our class was the long off year of 1992 (well it seemed a long way off back then)

        The college president gave a speech….well…..he just read the poem “If” and that was it. It was powerful and delivered in a very dramatic fashion (I went to a Liberal Arts college). He did it from memory without a stammer. I remember that clearly.

        All of us young, still had wide eyed teenage innocence about us. Reagan was still president. Bernie Sanders was still the mayor of Burlington (I went to college in Vermont). Girls still had big hair, and people still drove K-cars.

        That poem is a great testament……and looking at Kiplings life, he himself needed this poem. Where was his test of manhood? Shy, sickly……..and deemed a failure on so many levels as a younger boy and man. What amazing piece of writing.

        Liked by 4 people

  10. Joe2 says:

    2) The boy successfully surmounting one or more challenges. The men of the society – usually comprised of older male family members – decide whether he has surmounted them successfully. He must do it by himself, with no help.

    I have no idea of what these “challenges” look like nor how the men of the society determine which challenges are appropriate for each boy. Can you give some examples and provide the criteria for surmounting them successfully?


  11. Jack says:

    More examples…
    Getting laid has been seen as a rite of passage among peers. For most men, this was truly a challenge. This existed up until about 10 years ago.
    Fraternities have hazing, which can be a very grueling challenge in some cases.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      In Sea Scouts (used to be big here in Florida) they did the old “hot machete, cold machete. They tell you you’re going to be seared with a machete that’s being heated in the campfire. Right before they do it, they pull one out of a cooler full of ice. When they “sear” you the guy usually screams out and everyone has a good laugh. I never saw this so maybe it was a local folktale. Or maybe a one time thing since guys would get wind of it.

      Getting laid was seen as a rite of passage – I don’t know if that’s a latter-half of the twentieth century thing. Of course, this rite of passage would involve the creation of harlots.


    • thedeti says:

      I had forgotten about fraternities and hazing.

      Now that I think about it, things like getting laid, getting your education, your first job, and moving up through the ranks, should be considered developmental milestones and not “challenges”, I suppose.

      Boy Scout ranks, especially Eagle Scout, could be considered challenges. At least, it used to, back when that meant something. Everyone knows what an Eagle Scout is. It used to be that you put that achievement on your resume/CV. It counted for extra pay/rank in the military. In, say, 1990, if you were an Eagle Scout, that opened otherwise closed doors.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. feeriker says:

    I know that it’s superfluous to say it, but the Western World will never see meaningful rights of passage for young boys restored as long as 1) fathers continue to be marginalized, 2) rampant, institutionalized disrespect for men in general and fathers in particular remains the societal norm; 3) women hold permanent threat point over men, 4) related to number 3, women get a veto power over how fathers interact with and raise their sons; 5) churchianity, with all of its heretical and feminist poison, continues to replace true Christianity; 6) Westerners look to the State as their primary source of moral and legal authority and protection (a time-and-space-rendingly stupid move), 7) Western parents in general, and Western fathers in particular, remain indifferent to their sons’ moral and physical maturity and futures (and the majority are), or are too terrified of feminism to advocate for them; and 8) the common ties of shared community and shared moral values remain weak or non-existent.

    Honestly, I don’t see any of these eight obstacles to the revival of rites of passage to manhood being removed, and the old rituals restored or new ones created, as long as our society continues on its current path. Only total socioeconomic collapse/hard civilizational reset stands any chance of creating the fertile soil needed for them to arise.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Scott says:

      Yes. When I have, in mixed company, described my list of masculine qualities like calculated risk taking, courage, sacrifice for a greater cause–the list is pretty long) the usual response is some form of “Why can’t women be taught those?”

      Even “conservatives” do that now. It really is no use.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Scott says:

        Or, “Those are good qualities for everyone to have, not just men.”

        Or, “I know a few women who are better at those than most men.”

        You get the idea. They completely miss the point.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        Mrs. A did this conversational Jiu Jitsu to me yesterday. Once you know to expect that the main point will be brushed aside and the supporting examples of the point will be personalized, the tactic becomes a fascinating display of discussion slight of hand. I don’t believe that Mrs. A does this consciously. Rather, it is that she feels the conversation more than she thinks it, which makes personalizing various topics and points an easy snare to fall into.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        I still see most “conservatives’ ” views on these subjects as similar to those held by those in Protestant “family ministries”. James Dobson, Dennis Rainey, Bob LaPine, thrice married twice divorced Steve Arterburn. They go something like this:

        Men are supposed to be the head of the family. Men are supposed to give themselves up for their wives as Christ gave himself for the Church. This means men are to be servant leaders. And that, in turn, means men need women’s input on how they are to be servant leaders.

        And “head of the family” doesn’t really mean “leader”. It means “source” – source of love, provisioning, blessing. Because that’s what God is. He’s the Source of those things for us; so that’s what husbands are supposed to be – a source. That’s what “head” means in this context.

        Women are supposed to submit. That’s what it says in the bible. They’re supposed to submit to their husbands, But husbands and wives are supposed to submit to each other, because it says that too. You can’t read “wives submit to your husbands” without also including “Christians are to submit to each other”. Plus, wives need to submit only when their husbands are being absolutely perfect and doing everything right, and only as long as they approve of what their husbands are doing and how they’re being the “head” (source). So, “submit in all things” really just means “submit when I want to, when it feels right, when he’s going to church, and when he’s doing what I think he should be doing.”

        Women are slow cookers; men are microwaves. It takes lots of time for a woman to get ready to have sex with a man. Men need to do all these things to help her get ready. If she will not have sex with her husband, it is because he is doing something wrong or has not sufficiently earned sex from his wife. It is because he’s not going to church, he’s not reading the bible, or he’s just not being nice.

        If a man’s wife is unhappy, it’s her husband’s fault. It is because he’s not creating an environment conducive to her happiness. It is because he is working too hard. Or not working enough and not earning enough. Or he’s not praying enough. He’s not going to church. He’s not reading the bible. He’s not spending enough time with the kids. He’s not rubbing her feet. He’s not doing enough chores. He’s spending too much time on his hobbies and those take him away from home. If she’s not happy, it is because of something her husband did or did not do.

        If a man’s wife cheats on him, it is her husband’s fault. It is because he drove her to it. It is because he did not love her enough, do sufficient foreplay, did not perform oral sex on her, expected her to perform oral sex on him, doesn’t have intercourse long enough, takes too long with intercourse, or because she doesn’t “feel” loved. It’s because he did not “date” her enough. It’s because she feels he doesn’t “care” about her.

        Everything good in a marriage is to the wife’s credit. Everything bad in a marriage is the husband’s fault.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @deti, all those words – they could save themselves the time and ink. Just say “women defacto run the marriage” because that’s what they’re teaching. Can’t have a democracy with 2 people.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        The reason conservatives and Prot family ministries look at it like this is that the actual truth of how marriage, leadership, submission, sex, and infidelity really work and happen, is unsavory to women, makes women look bad, forces them to account for their choices and decisions, and forces them to bear the consequences for those choices and decisions.

        The truth about sex, sexual attraction, and women’s behavior in attraction, makes them look irresponsible, short sighted, and unintelligent. The truth is that women behave badly too. This is why we used to restrain women and sex, and got them married off so they can be irresponsible, short sighted, and unintelligent with their husbands behind closed doors and so their husbands can shield them from the consequences.

        The truth about submission means women don’t get control, and they have to be responsible for who they pick to submit to.

        The truth about how infidelity happens is that women are sexual selectors and they decide who gets sex, when, where and how. So if a man is getting sex from a woman, it’s because she’s allowing it and she picked him for it.

        The truth is that God held Eve responsible for her sins at the Tree. He gave her her very own curses: Pain in childbirth, Adam rules over her, and she will resist his rule. Women don’t like responsibility and accountability; but God requires these things of women.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        The main reasons we are at this point now is

        1) Women have been brought on par with men in every significant way – politically, legally, culturally, socially, educationally, professionally. Because of this, almost no one thinks women should submit to men, and everyone thinks women are precise equals to men in every way. Submission is a thing of the past, a throwback. (It’s funny though – when you let women lead it all, they don’t like it, they f**k it up, and then they yell for the men to get in here and fix it.)

        2) Women don’t like being faced with the truth of their sexual depravity, irresponsibility, and insolence. So they do what they do best – throw tantrums, stamp their feet, and threaten. Any pastor, church leader, or man who actually reads the bible on these subjects and holds women to it is called out, viral videos made about him, made the subject of social media campaigns, canceled, and threatened with loss of credentials and livelihood.

        Do it our way, or we are leaving the church and taking volunteers and tithe money with us. Do it our way, or we will destroy this place and your career. If you say those things again, we will destroy you, your career, your family, and your children. We will harass you to the ends of the earth so badly that you won’t be able to make a living cleaning toilets, much less leading a church. And, oh yeah, we won’t have sex with you, and no other women will either.

        Like it or not, those tactics work. those tactics have worked beautifully to advance women’s “cause”. Men are absolutely petrified of women today – and with good reason. Society has made them all powerful. To insulate themselves, men have created an entire set of false theology and false doctrines to placate women.

        3) Point 2) operates in marriages very simply. “Do it my way, or no sex for you.” And it works on most men. It is losing its effectiveness, but it’s still one of women’s main tactics, and it’s still very effective.

        Liked by 1 person

      • feeriker says:

        As a mental exercise I just tried to imagine a woman in Jesus’s place in the desert during His 40 days of fasting and running a gauntlet of Satan’s temptations. Ain’t. No. Way. that any woman would have successfully weathered that trial. No way whatsoever. Most MEN wouldn’t be able to do it. Women, as the weaker vessels? An absolute non-starter.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        the tactic becomes a fascinating display of discussion slight of hand.

        The progression of any disagreement or argument involving a woman is

        1) Explain your position to me.

        2) That doesn’t sound fair.

        3) If men can do/be/say that, women should be able to do/be/say that.

        4) I can do that. I know women who can do/be/say that. My female friends can do/be/say that.

        5) I never said that. I never did that. Women don’t say/do/believe that. You’re lying. You don’t remember it correctly.

        6) (Crying, waterworks, yelling) You just hate women! Misogynist/incel/bitter/angry/small d * ck/can’t get laid!


      • thedeti says:

        Oh yeah, forgot

        5a) That hurts my feelings. What you said hurt my feelings.

        (At this point all logic, reasoning, and problem solving must stop to address her hurt feelings, because “we are not moving on or discussing anything else or solving any other problems until you acknowledge that you hurt me, you apologize for it, and you promise to never ever ever do/say that ever again” (and until I can write down what you said and mentally file it away for later deployment against you when I think I can use it as ammunition.”))

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        The “hurt feelings” tactic is deployed when she is losing the factual/logical argument. She uses “hurt feelings” in an attempt to gain control over the narrative. Her feelings aren’t hurt – she’s trying to control the process. She’s shifting the focus from the facts/needs of the family to her need for control. The best way for a woman to do that is to say “STOP. My feelings are hurt. Everything stops until that gets addressed to my satisfaction.”

        Moving it to feelings is the province of women, and ensures that she “wins” – women ALWAYS “win” when the playing field moves to the emotional.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      Feeriker – Your points 1-5 have the common theme that women are the recognized moral authority in society and in the family.
      1. Of course men are marginalized because they are seen as inferior.
      2. Why respect men when #1 is true?
      3. The position of moral superiority means that the threat point is to be wielded like a weapon for the good of society.
      4. Women’s veto comes from the assumed moral superiority … all hail the wisdom of having a female genitalia!
      5. Churchianity merely gives religious figure authority to women being morally superior, so we get endless sermons about how men should do better and how women are great for tolerating the men who aren’t doing better

      Societal collapse will not cause new rites to be created. What it will do is strip all the societal niceties that make feminism possible, and in doing so create an environment where masculine qualities are valued more by a larger percentage of society.

      Liked by 3 people

  13. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    How many ”conservatives” agree with this piece of wisdom from January 1st ’14?

    ”Yes, ’tis a sad state of affairs with modern American/Western women.

    We would all like to change it, so we must ask,

    “How did this come to be?”

    “Why did women come to disregard Genesis, the Law of Moses, and the Divine Wisdom of Jesus Christ?”

    Follow the money, and one soon sees that the less time a woman devotes to her family, the more time she can devote to the corporation. The less time a woman spends cooking meals, the more time she can spend cooking the books in a sub-prime loan office.

    ‘Tis a short-term and destructive strategy–to encourage women to abort and pursue the material over the spiritual. But some do profit off of feminism–those who grow the State.

    I hope that Good Men realize that the higher form of game is returning Genesis, the Law of Moses, and the wisdom of Jesus not just to the choir, but to our courts, schools, universities, and churches, and then, perhaps, we may again begin to see it in our homes.”

    That was 7&a half years ago! It only gets worser out here, not better! There must be a traditional brutal rebirth for civilization to live again!

    Is this formatting going to convince people of truth? It didn’t back then! How much less likely now?

    The world is all chaos now! But we think we’ll get anything but chaos from it? Is that realistic?

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Lastmod says:


    Funny stuff. In college when the upper classmen returned…I remember the door getting forced open aroun 2AM….me and my roommate were grabbed, given a beer and a letter “G” was painted on our chest…it was like a shellac paint, it had to wear couldn’t wash it off….then we were dragged shirtless to the back cornfield behind the lacrosse pitch. There was a fire…we were belittled a bit about where we were each from. If you were from Vermont (usually native Vermonters did not come to this college, it was 99% out of staters) the abuse was heaped upon you a bit worse.

    We had to roll in the dirt, which caused the letter G to become like sandpaper because of the shellac. We were given another beer. We then walked back to the campus, the freshmen were instructed to strip down to their boxers, we were already shirtless and had to sing “Respect” by Aretha Franklin to the all girls dorm…the girls jeered and laughed at us from their windows. This was done because my college was a womens’ college until 1979. It was a womens college from 1824 til 1979, this was the “nod” to the colleges past, and had been a tradition since being coed. The female freshman usually had their initiation a week later……which involed a food fight or pillow fight in the Student Union. One year, it rained so the frosh girls had to have a pillow fight in the mud near the tennis courts. Hilarious.

    Fun times. Such was college in New England

    Liked by 1 person

  15. feeriker says:

    (It’s funny though – when you let women lead it all, they don’t like it, they f**k it up, and then they yell for the men to get in here and fix it.)

    This is what I put up with intermittently during the last half of my military career and for the past 20 years of my post-military career in the commercial sector. It has led me to vow to never, EVER again work for any woman.

    If my current boss were to quit or retire tomorrow and was to be replaced by a woman, I’d give my two weeks notice immediately. I’m not kidding.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Lastmod says:

    My “manager” is a woman. she is two steps down from the CEO which is a man. She has been decent, competent and has a very “needs of the consumer, and business” mindset which I appreciate. She is younger than me by fifteen years. I don’t mind working under a woman in a career. What I do dislike is incompetence. Still early to tell / figure her out yet. Can give a better picture in a few more months. Will she come to bat for me when I need her to do so? Will she step up and lead when it is required? Will she otherwise stay out of my way and let me handle my 15 properties? Hopefully.

    Liked by 1 person

    • feeriker says:

      Will she otherwise stay out of my way and let me handle my 15 properties?

      Yes, until she reaches a point where she needs you to do her job for her (while expecting you to still continue doing your own as well) . This happens, IME, with 50 to 65 percent of male bosses at some point and with 90 to 95 percent of female ones.


      • cameron232 says:

        I have never worked for a woman – never – and if they ever try to place me under one I will quit that day. I will first give them an ultimatum – “find someone else for me to report to or I quit.” They probably won’t accommodate me so I’ll have to quit. Would rather be a construction worker or welfare leech or whatever than work under a woman.

        The reason is I’m sexist/egotistical and believe in male authority and find the idea of being under the authority a woman to be degrading.

        I’ve also never been pulled over by a female police officer. Not much I can do if that happens – the instinct/desire would be to tell her to f_ck off but obviously that would escalate it and you’d go to jail or be shot.


  17. feeriker says:

    “I’ve also never been pulled over by a female police officer. Not much I can do if that happens – the instinct/desire would be to tell her to f_ck off but obviously that would escalate it and you’d go to jail or be shot.”

    Odds are overwhelming that you would be able to kick her ass into a coma. The key is to separate her from her “equalizers” (i.e., gun and taser).

    Liked by 2 people

    • Lastmod says:

      can’t outrun a body cam, a radio and every other type of safety thing they have now as evidence.

      Never pulled over by a female cop either. Was pulled over by the CHP back in October, joyriding with my new car in the Sierra-Nevada foothills (Bootjack). Clocked at 75. He wrote the ticket for 65. The fine was $466.00. The speed limit was 45. When the CHP in Cali pulls you over, you’re getting a ticket.

      Flew past him…… I immediately yelled, “Aww sh*t!” and yep, he spun right around, lights up, and I was pulled over. He smiled when I rolled down the window. “Where’s the fire, hep cat?”

      I nodded, gave my license, registration and insurance. He came back, gave me the ticket. I signed, thanked him and was on my way. I don’t argue with police anymore.


    • cameron232 says:

      I guess the point is the male ego doesn’t take well to being dominated by a woman – generates anger. Not going to beat the sh!t out of a woman cop (all the ones I see around here are short, fat blondes for some reason) because among other things I can’t help my family from prison.


  18. Scott says:

    “hep cat”


    Liked by 1 person

  19. Pingback: The Recipe for a Meet Cute | Σ Frame

  20. Pingback: Disclosing the Taboo of Masculine Sexuality | Σ Frame

  21. Pingback: Entering Manhood (Rite of Passage) | Σ Frame

  22. Pingback: Determination and Detachment | Σ Frame

  23. Pingback: The intermediate goal is to get past the blinding obsession | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s