The Eternal Fate of Carousel Riders

The Androsphere covers a lot of information about the sociosexual dynamics of younger women in postmodern western culture.

But have you ever wondered what happens to those hard reveling wimminz afterwards?

After abandoning the faith of their childhood home…

After wasting their prime childbearing years in dissipation…

After riding the carousel…

After tripping as a drug-addled groupie…

After preparing for a professional career in communications…

After hitting the wall…

After earning full ‘cat lady’ tenure…

After winding down their precious careers…

After entering into a quiet, lonely retirement…

After spending and sacrificing all…

What lies ahead for them at the end of the line?

Here is one woman’s gripping testimony.

Liberty’s Son commented,

Bon Scott would be 72 if he were alive today, so she might have known the original AC/DC back in the day.”

I am sure he means ‘known‘ in the Biblical sense of meaning.

Here’s Angus Young at 63. They DO kinda resemble each other! You know what I mean?


“There is a way that seems right to a man,
But its end is the way of death.” ~ Proverbs 14:12 (NKJV)

Alright, I hope you guys snortled at this ribald lampoon! The ‘slippery slope’ fallacy should be evident, but doubtless, that’s how many of ’em go. In fact, Bon Scott met an untimely death only a few months after he released “Highway to Hell“!

H/T: Britain’s Got Talent (YouTube Channel)


Posted in Music, Satire | 3 Comments

How to Dismantle the Idol of Fandom: Breaking the Fifth Wall

This post examines elements of fandom as a form of idolatry, and considers how ethical systems may be bypassed, and false beliefs exposed, by ‘breaking the fifth wall’.

Readership: All

This article is outlined as follows.

  1. The Fragility of Man
  2. The Nature of Idols
  3. My Repentance from Fanhood
  4. The Falsehood of Fandom
  5. The Illusion of Fandom
  6. Deconstructing the Pseudo-Ethical Stance
  7. How Can Idols Be Dismantled?
  8. Conclusions

The earlier part of this post (1-5) describes how fandom lies somewhere between having a healthy respect for an influential figure, and pedestalizing them above their true spiritual position (i.e. idolatry). I feel it is important to make a clear distinction between them, so that we know exactly where the line is between having a ‘healthy’ regard, or an ‘unhealthy’ regard, for the person or ideology in question.

The latter part of this post (6-8) describes some applications of this distinction, and points out how an added degree of awareness will strengthen one’s Frame when interacting with someone who holds certain values or beliefs that are foreign to one’s own.

1. The Fragility of Man

In the comments under a previous post, The Objectivity of Offense Constitutes Respect (May 6, 2018), J.T. posed an interesting dilemma concerning how we should regard men who are held in high esteem, men who have become idols in the eyes of others.

“As Christians, we are supposed to show love to all, including our enemies. But a false teacher can do a great deal of harm to those he teaches. Hence it seems logical that exposing false teachers is showing love to the church. Furthermore, we cannot judge false teachers merely by the words they speak. Christ says it is by their fruits that we will know them. So I think there are some important questions worth pondering:”

  1. “Is it ethical to predict bad fruits of a teacher by extrapolating from an assessment of the man’s mind (i.e. his writing)… as Vox Day and others seem to believe they have the insight to do? Or is this disparaging a man’s character without cause?”
  2. “If one is confident he has identified a false teacher, is it necessary to show courtesy to that teacher? And if so, how does one show courtesy while warning his followers that he’s an enemy?”

“How do we distinguish between calling out false teachers for the good of the church and unfairly attacking a public figure for entertainment/publicity, etc.?”

The answer is simple, yet profound. If one thinks of the man in question as mortal flesh and bone, while yet at the same time, made in the image of God, then he cannot esteem him to be a projection of one’s own psychological attributes.

This is the paradigm busting magic of believing in Christ Jesus, because Jesus was perfect. All other beings have ‘areas to be improved’. So in dealing with any particular man, we must recognize the work that Christ is doing in him, to bring him towards completion. In not doing so, we would fail to recognize his spiritual disposition. Those who believe that a man is wholly complete, and therefore qualified to take the form of an idol (or Christ himself, which is a blasphemy), are discounting the grace of God through Christ’s sacrifice.


2. The Nature of Idols

When a man is spiritually broken, that brokenness propels him to fill that void in any way he can, and then he is faced with a choice: (1) to continue suffering in a broken state, (2) to turn to idols for a temporary anesthesia, or (3) turn to Jesus for healing and wholeness.

As commonly regarded by the average person, idols appear to come in various forms, be it superstars, prized possessions, an intense self-centered desire, an ego fixation, or the classic carved image of antiquity. But in the spiritual sense, idols are none of these. Instead, idols are figments of the mind and heart – figments which are believed to fulfill some missing aspect of one’s existence, and perhaps do, in some diminished fashion.

The superstar, author, actor, philosopher, hero, HB10 woman, or carved image, is merely an object which gives expression to the true nature within, and thereby improvises a temporary ‘fix’ to the brokenness.

self idol

But this expression is not full, nor true, and that is what makes idolatry debasingly evil. It only becomes full and true when the Holy Spirit fulfills and heals that broken part of the man. When one is made complete in Christ, the better nature of the regenerated man, that whom God made him to be, and intended him to become, emanates from within the man himself, and is no longer vicariously experienced through the adoration of the idolatrous object.

“But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.” ~ 1st Corinthians 13:10 (NKJV)

But just as a husband is ready to dismiss an adulterous wife, as long as a man clings to his idols, the hand of God will not move towards his re-creation. Thus, it is imperative that idols be addressed and dealt with.

3. My Repentance from Fanhood

I have a confession to make, too. When I was younger, U2 was my favorite band. I bought all their albums, and I listened to their music every day. Most of my friends did too. One of the things that solidified my fanhood was their outspoken profession of Christianity. But then, in the early 90’s, this rock band were arrested for possession of cannabis, which was still illegal at that time. When I heard this news, my esteem for the group plummeted, but I still bought one more album after that, entitled, Pop. This album was so bad, that I have never purchased another album since then. I recognized that they had changed. They no longer inspired me.

At that time, these developments prompted me to recognize that the men in U2 were not as I had imagined. Looking back, I have come to understand that they had not changed, and I had not changed either. I was merely confronted with the fact that my imagination and inspiration were separate from the reality that produced it. In other words, I did not share the same beliefs and values as the men I once idolized, and this discovery ‘depedestalized’ them in my eyes.

Lately, their support for gay marriage (2015), and their endorsement of abortion (2018), has further engrained in my mind the dangers and disappointments that come with putting one’s hopes in man. Now, I see Paul, David, Adam and Larry just as the flesh and bone that they are – mere men who are talented musicians and stage performers, but who are below average in most other respects. I still have an affection for them as individuals who have added joy and good memories to my youthful life, but the wonder and fascination of their larger-than-life glory has since faded away. Looking past the humanity of these men who are made in the image of God, the spiritual reality is that their profession of Christianity is probably a falsehood, much like cultural Churchians imagine themselves to be true believers. Furthermore, I speculate that they are most likely converged at the highest level. They sold out the Holy Spirit, in exchange for a renewable pass to stardom. This is all very clear to me now, but it was not discernible to my teenage self in 1987.


4. The Falsehood of Fandom

Simply gathering a fan base does not make one a very influential leader. A true leader needs to be intricately ‘connected’ to his following. Some kind of feedback loop needs to be present. For example, Prof. Jordan B. Peterson would need some way to ‘correct’ his fans whenever they fail to get the right point. But if this should happen, then many of his fans would wake up to face the incongruences of their own beliefs. This would be a good thing, but it would also reduce his following. There is also the logistical barrier – there is a limited number of followers that one person can mentor.

In his post, Fandom is Idolatry (May 7, 2018), Dark Brightness (via Bruce Charlton), illustrated how fandom does not constitute a base under real leadership, but it is merely a projection of the idols one worships onto an object or a persona. Key quotations follow.

“[Fandom’s] appetite for novelty, and its mass nature, always corrupts; and always corrupts in the direction of prevalent mainstream ideology.”

“Other fandoms are closely analogous – revealing that this is a property of fandom rather than being related to specific authors or their work.”

“What Peterson does — ironically, making a new fandom — is disassemble the pseudo ethics of the TruFan, who divides the world into those whom agree with them, and those who do not. Often on trivia. Often on what they project onto the author.”

“[Newman et al. feminists] use emotion, lies and projection as rhetorical weapons. Their fandom is a lie. It is no cruelty to point this out, but a mercy.”

“Fandom, in its current iteration, is toxic. This toxicity is encouraged by those who would make money out of those who are unhappy, not by directing them towards those activities which will make them happy and fulfilled, but by encouraging them to dig a basement in the hell of their making.”

We are easily convinced that this is true for the fans of feminism and other ideologies, such as Marxism, but DB implies that the nature of fandom relegates Peterson into a similar category. No matter if what he professes is true or false, even if he encourages young men to pursue virtues such as love and respect, fans will interpret the message through the blue-pill lens of their own non-shared environment, which inevitably will contain sundry idols.

For instance, Peterson’s example could actually be enabling some of his fans to develop viewpoints and debate tactics that would allow them to lazily demand love and respect from others, while still failing to integrate this habit into their character, and they would thereby become further complacent about their own preconceived notions of things.

This dynamic might appear within any kind of fandom that is lacking leadership feedback.

5. The Illusion of Fandom

Putting Peterson on the proverbial pedestal is an expression of fandom. As such, opinions of Peterson (or any other public figure like him) are a reflection of a person’s own values and beliefs, and not necessarily an accurate representation of the man himself. Only the man in question can speak for himself, and the contents of one’s heart spill out of the mouth. This is true for the star, the fan, and the critic.


Ass such, putting Peterson on a pedestal so that one can knock him off of it, is also a pseudo-expression of fandom, since it is also a projection of one’s own belief system. To offer a lighthearted and somewhat spurious example, if SF/Vox/DB made a public effort through argumentation to knock U2/Peterson/Tolkien off a pedestal that they had created in their own minds, then the power of their respective arguments are determined by whether they can convince themselves and/or others that the underlying philosophical pillars of the entities in question are either true or false. But the ‘truthiness’ appearance of the argument is determined by the belief systems of the particular people involved in the construction of the argument.

The strength and value of their arguments depend largely on whether their readers identify with the same values (or idols) as they do. This is largely what DB terms ‘TruFandom’. In essence, TruFandom forms when stars create an argument or other expression that is useful to those who think like they do. But these arguments and expressions have no value in destroying the culture of idols, and in fact rather, they support the same. The real challenge is in convincing others to adopt the same values and beliefs that we do (which are presumed to be truth), and do so in the faith that what we believe is universally true, everlasting, and useful in building God’s Kingdom.

6. Deconstructing the Pseudo-Ethical Stance

Peterson’s claim to fame can be found in his ability to take the stance of an outside observer, who is able to see the difference between those who think like he does, according to the Righteousness vs. Guilt (RvG) system of law and reason, and those who subscribe to the ethical system of Honor vs. Shame (HvS), which has been adopted by the feminist left, presumably for the purpose of dismantling the traditional western RvG system. This was one of the main points discussed in a previous post.

Peterson nimbly dances around the ethical structure imposed by society, thereby deconstructing the very essence of the previously untouched argument surrounding ethical values. Essentially, he asks the question, “Which ethical system are we going to use for our argument?” In doing so, he exposes the respective belief systems for what they are, and thereby dismantles the pseudo-ethical structure of the argument. For this reason, and also because this approach is effective when dealing with the left, is why many conservatives have identified with Peterson, in addition to the reasons outlined in the previous post.

Peterson Selling Meaning

When Peterson questioned the legitimacy of using ‘offense’ in the argument, he ‘broke the third wall’ (borrowing from film and literary terminology), in which a character acknowledges directly or indirectly that they are in a play, or a public debate in this case. But in doing so, Peterson also broke what we might call ‘the fifth wall’, which I here define as the boundary between those who believe the premises of, and agree with the argument presented, and those who don’t. Instead, he questions the larger picture, the overall meaning and mechanics of the debate itself. This has since become the new paradigm of modern argumentation, and this added level of awareness is desperately needed in a quickly globalizing world.

Number 13 on the list of 16 Specific Qualities of Frame addresses this fact.

“The ability to consider and navigate multiple viewpoints at once is essential part of having a strong Frame. The person who has the wider angle view than anyone else involved will typically have the dominant Frame.”

Since Peterson has introduced this new, additional element of ethical awareness, any critic will seem ignorantly ‘unaware’ of this reality, and will not be able to analyze Peterson’s philosophical worth very effectively, unless he addresses this contribution. Furthermore, no philosopher or critic will be worth his salt these days, if he cannot adapt to the new paradigm of breaking the fifth wall of ethical venues.

7. How Can Idols Be Dismantled?

In any challenge between opposing frames of mind, if an account from one person fails to contain the fundamental truths recognizable to others concerning the state of one’s systems of belief, then it is reduced to a mere philosophical argument. As we well know, the old system of cognitive and rational argumentation has never been known to successfully proselytize souls, and this is because it fails to address the issues of the heart. Vain arguments cannot bridge the gap to the heart. Adopting an expanded Frame of reference within the new system of argumentation, which observes the deeper belief structure of another person, may be more effective in communicating deeper truths to one’s heart.

Vox Peterson

The positive aspect of publicly debasing popular idols is that it conveys the perceived truth of one’s own values, beliefs, and experiences to others. But this only has impact if it contains truth, which may appear in the following forms.

  1. The objective truth of a respected authority which transcends our personal beliefs and experiences, such as the Bible, or another such shared value on which we agree is truth. Examples of bloggers who seek to apply Biblical truth include Christianity and Masculinity, Dalrock, Donal Graeme, and Wintery Knight.
  2. The subjective truth of a personal testimony – a true narrative of one’s own life experience which cannot be denied. Examples of bloggers who confess and profess include Airstrip One, SFC Ton, and Snapper TRX.
  3. A third avenue of apprehending truth is prophecy, which imparts a conscientious awareness of things that would otherwise not be regarded, and this additional knowledge shifts our perspectives of what is right and true. We might consider Vox Day and Prof. Peterson both to be social prophets, under this loose definition. The author(s) of Chateau Heartiste, and Rollo Tomassi might also fall under this description, but it seems difficult to call them prophets, doesn’t it? (Our concept of prophecy needs to be updated and made relevant.)
  4. The presentation must acknowledge any personal and culturally influenced presumptions that are present. From what we have gathered in this essay, one way this can be done is by breaking the fifth wall.

In any philosophically-styled argument for or against a particular stance, the above truths must be implemented as a common ground of understanding for all interested. Breaking the fifth wall – making the person in question (as well as any observers present) aware of the unstated and subtexted presumptions, or ‘idols’ – is an essential step in bridging the gap between the mind and the heart, and presenting a clear choice of what to accept as truth.

Obtaining a deeper awareness of one’s assumed values, ethical stances, and belief systems, and how they might stand at odds with other systems, and especially with God’s truth, is when the light shines in through the wall!

Berlin Wall Down

8. Conclusions

The following points briefly reiterate the arguments concerning the nature of idols and fandom.

  • Human nature easily resorts to cheap substitutions for joy and fulfillment.
  • Idols (e.g. fandom) displace the broken aspects within a man, offering a temporary reprieve from the associated suffering,
  • Idols (e.g. fandom) are a projection of the deeper character of a man, which vicariously fulfills the broken aspects thereof.
  • Idols are attractive because they are relatively easier and more ‘comforting’.
  • Idols offer a substitute for God’s grace, and thereby prolong brokenness and suffering.
  • Any obsessive preponderance upon any person or subject, such as fandom (or anti-fandom), can easily become a form of idolatry.
  • Real leadership requires a feedback loop with followers. Without a method to monitor the learning process of the followers, leadership is reduced to mere inspiration (in the positive sense), and fandom (in the negative sense).
  • ‘Breaking the fifth wall’ is here introduced as a new concept in awareness, which means to expose the respective belief systems of those involved, and adapt them to the argument at hand.
  • Breaking the fifth wall can be effectively used to dismantle the pseudo-ethical structure of the argument (including pseudo-virtue signaling), and reveal the deeper motives and dispositions of the debate opponents.

Concerning the dismantling of pseudo-ethics and idols in public discourse, I offer the following points.

  • Proponents, critics, and observers alike must consider the impact of breaking the fifth wall, and address this impact in their assessments. If a critic fails to regard this effect, he has missed one of the most important aspects of an argument.
  • Concerning the valuation of any person’s worth as a philosopher or teacher (i.e. Peterson), we must look for (1) the truth of his words, and (2) the fruits of his impact.
  • The new style of debate, which involves breaking the fifth wall, may prove to be very useful, not only in disarming and dealing with emotional, irrational opponents, but also in helping others evaluate and come to terms with their own values, ethics, and belief systems.
  • If applied accordingly, there is a chance that more people may be stirred from the delusions of their idols, and that more unity of mind may be achieved. On the other hand, making clear distinctions of the nuanced issues of the heart will inevitably prove to be deeply divisive.


Posted in Authenticity, Conflict Management, Culture Wars, Discerning Lies and Deception, Holding Frame, Influence, Leadership, Persuasion, Strategy, The Power of God | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Man as the Hiring Manager

This post discusses the responsibilities of men as the ‘hiring managers’ of women, and the woman’s role as a subordinate helper and facilitator. Several important takeaways are delivered for single and married men alike.

Readership: Men

This is the third installment in a series of posts about life management. Other posts in this series include the following.

The first post identified a passage in Genesis which describes God’s proscribed relational structure between man and woman.

“Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.” Genesis 2:15 (NKJV)

“And the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.’” Genesis 2:18 (NKJV)

The previous two posts discussed how the man plays the role of a manager, and how his management is necessary for the growth of the relationship.

Managers Need to Hire Worthy Helpmates

Genesis 2:18 indicates that God intended the woman to be a man’s ‘helper’ and companion in life. By analogy, being an excellent manager is ineffective if the boss doesn’t have diligent, loyal, hardworking employees who understand what needs to be done and then work at it diligently. This is why the hiring process requires credentials, and is made into a stressful, multifaceted test of ability and responsibility.

Likewise, it’s very important for a man to choose a woman who will cooperate with his prerogatives. Men should give potential female partners a bit of stress and take her to task for the purpose of proving her ability to be a good helper and companion, before giving her a ‘promotion’ to the position of a girlfriend or wife. Contrary to what Blue Pilled men believe about women wanting to be pampered and coddled (which is an expression of chivalry), most (real) women would be delighted when a man presents her with a challenging task.


The implementation of this proposed structure has different applications, depending on if you’re single or married. If you’re married, it’s a hefty (and perhaps hopeless) task to try to transform your wife into being a cooperative and respectful helper. But some men might stand a good chance to push towards this goal in their relationship. I am in this situation, and I’ve compiled a directory of several posts that cover how this might be accomplished. I am definitely experiencing progress in this endeavor, however, the process is difficult, slow, and often painful.

If you’re single, then you don’t (yet) have the burden of teaching a woman, but only to select the woman who is better for you. Here, the ‘helper’ concept offers a great frame of mind in which a man can vet any particular woman in question. In the application of vetting, men can ask themselves questions like these.

  • How much help does she actually offer to you?
  • Is she helping you, or does she expect you to help her?
  • Does she have the ability to offer help?
  • Does her skill level match yours?
  • Are her values and interests compatible with yours?
  • Does she even have the mindset to offer help?
  • Does she enthusiastically agree with, appreciate, and support what you’re doing with your life?
  • Does she encourage you to do more, and to make the most of yourself (and not just out of her selfish motivations for her own gain)?

A more specific question to ask is, does she follow you? This is important because following you is an expression of submission. Concordant questions follow here.

  • Does she seek your attention? Or do you seek hers?
  • Does she follow your directive? Or does she prefer to ‘live and let live’?
  • Does she follow your thoughts, and intentions? Or does she argue about things?
  • When you are walking around in public, does she follow your lead to go where you want to go, see what you want to see, and do what you want to do? Or does it happen that you often follow her around, or else, you tend to get separated when pursuing your respective interests?
  • Does she accept, and actively try to enhance the things you do? Or is she ambivalent about your preferences of how things should be? Or worse, does she always tell you to do things differently, or to do things her way?


I will offer an example which might seem rather trivial on the surface, but in fact, it conveys very important information about your real status in the hierarchy. Suppose you want the sugar bowl to remain on the table where it can be easily accessed when you’re eating your Wheaties for breakfast every morning. She wants the sugar bowl in the cupboard, so she can take pride in having a ‘clean’ (i.e. empty) table. So where will the sugar bowl be kept?

Small signs such as these are an indicator of the real dynamics of your relationship. A wise man will not ignore the signs!


Concerning single guys, while it is definitely true that men want to screw women with hot, young, hard, healthy bodies, the fact is that men love women who allow them to lead, who consistently offer them practical assistance in life, and who do so with a respectful attitude. Contrary to cultural propaganda, this is the true meaning of the Biblical concept of ‘submission’. Furthermore, men want to marry women who offer both aspects – hot sex and helpful, respectful companionship.

The problem that a lot of men get into, is when they get hooked on the sex (or the hope of sex), and give the lady a promotion to a position above her ability. Choose wisely!

For married men, a greater awareness of their role as a manager will do much to align their marriages with God’s archetype, leading to an enhancement of their marriages in the long run.

A previous post, Why Do Men Need Visions and Dreams? (May 15, 2018), inspired men to have a vision for their lives. What is your vision? Can you envision yourself as being the ‘King’ of your household? Can you envision your girlfriend or wife as someone who supports your life plans with enthusiasm?

Or do you think life is hopeless, that the 4th Wave fracas will drown us all?

“But Jesus looked at them and said to them, ‘With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.’” ~ Matthew 19:26 (NKJV)

Whatever state you are now in, I challenge you to dream a little bit, and let that dream sink into your attitudes and belief systems over time. Don’t be afraid to mourn, to be angry, and to then take the appropriate actions to make your life into what you want it to be.

Prayer helps.


Posted in Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Collective Strength, Holding Frame, Leadership, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Purpose, Relationships | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Man as the Middle Manager

This post discusses the responsibilities of men as managers of life, and the woman’s role as a facilitator. Several important takeaways are delivered for single and married men alike.

Readership: Men

This is the second installment in a series of posts about life (and woman) management. Other posts in this series include the following.

The first post discussed how management is necessary for the growth of a relationship, and that God intended for the man to fulfill this role, and for the woman to be his helper.

woman watching man work

Men Compartmentalize Management

Women are known to view life comprehensively, viz. ‘everything affects everything’, while men are known to compartmentalize different areas of their lives. This habit of men naturally fits that of a manager.

I propose that a man’s general areas of executive management should include the following, in the order of priority given. Each area has several sub-categories which are unique for each man, and each one has its own set of tasks and responsibilities.

  1. Managing his purpose in life – work
  2. Managing his self – identity and personal growth
  3. Managing finances – cash flow and savings
  4. Managing plans – schedules and time management
  5. Managing his female helper
  6. Managing his social life and interactions
  7. Managing SJW’s at the office (heh)

[Eds. note: Priorities (3) and (4) are about equal in importance, but ‘finances’ are listed as a higher priority because it is a more urgent matter. Also, Jesus talked about money more than he talked about planning.]

The interesting thing here is that our lovely, submissive, female helper plays a role in the execution of all of these priorities. (Just smile and believe it on faith.) So next, we’ll discuss the first four priorities of management – points which pose the most difficulty for men in the way of managing the female.

Priority (1): Managing His Purpose

My wife has often stated that she is most attracted to me when I am busy working on something. She even makes it a game to try and distract me by giving me more physical attention at those times. Once in a while, she’ll even take her clothes off and do a gyrating dance in front of me. (I usually laugh at her, and tell her to come do her ‘job’.)

I think this attraction is no coincidence. Women are naturally drawn to a man who is busy with a purpose. This sense of purpose piques the woman’s curiosity and draws her into the man’s Frame. It is therefore very important for the man to establish himself in the woman’s eyes as a man with important (and fun) things to do.

woman helping man

From a management perspective, it seems intuitive that a supervisor (husband) should take the lead, and should then make demands on the subordinate (wife), and not the other way around. A woman reading this might object with the argument that the wife’s needs and preferences are being ignored within such an arrangement. But in fact, past studies have shown that it is advantageous for the husband to direct and make requests of the wife, and initiate conflict if necessary, in order to establish a relational structure that has longitudinal improvements in satisfaction for both partners. Previous studies which describe this structure are outlined and discussed in the following posts.

The gist of it is that the wife needs to be presented with the choice of either assisting the husband in meeting various life goals and personal needs, or not. If she happens to be the type of woman who derides his values and ridicules his personal preferences, then he needs to make it clear that their relationship has little hope of a future unless she can accept who he is, and support him as he embarks on his particular path to growth and fulfillment. That sounds reminiscent of a soft dread game. If the reader is a single man, let it suffice to say that such women fail to see the positive in you, and are thus best avoided.

On the other hand, if the husband presents the wife with clear goals, an outline of a plan, and then specifically points out what he needs from her, then she is faced with a clear choice of whether to support him or not. Given the lack of a better and more convenient choice, it is very likely that she will agree to support the endeavor. After all, it is human nature to desire to be part of an enterprise that is larger than one’s own personal interests. Furthermore, as she invests more of her time and emotional energy into the work, she should grow to appreciate it (and him) much more as time goes on.

woman changing tire

Priority (2): Managing His Self

With respect to priority (2), we know women have this innate tendency to want to ‘mother’ the man, or else, ‘change’ him in some way more to their comfort and liking. (Red Pilled men know that accommodating her requests for ‘change’ have no positive lasting benefit.) I recommend that single men should get their own life together first (i.e. priority (1) above), before settling in with a woman. For dating and married couples, the man needs to draw boundaries which protect his own peace and joy, which satisfy his unique personal needs, and which put his heart and mind to rest.

Here, it’s important for the man to know who he is as an individual, develop his Frame, and make his spiritual needs evident to the woman. (Women seem to be well aware of men’s physical needs, so I will omit this facet from the discussion.) Typical spiritual needs husbands have of wives include simple gestures of kindness, gratitude, and respect, enthusiastic receptivity to sexual intercourse, having uninterrupted quiet time to spend on a personal interest, or enjoying regular occasions to hang out with friends. To this end, please read my previous post, Pushing the Line, to learn how a man can demand, and receive, better responses from his woman.

Priority (3): Managing Finances

With reference to priority (3), the woman should be taught and challenged to become more responsible with finances. It should be made evident that if she is responsible with small things, then she will be trusted with more, and if not, then what she has will be taken away. (See the Parable of the Talents, in Matthew 13:12, Matthew 25:29, Mark 4:25, and Luke 19:26.) This is not about ‘male domination’ or control, as purported by wimminz. It’s about maintaining responsible stewardship.


Thus, men need to regulate the income and expenses, and women need to be put on a budget. If the woman cannot abide by the budget put forth by the man, then she needs to have her financial privileges (i.e. credit cards) revoked. If she has her own source of income, then the man can restrict his contributions and let the woman learn these lessons at her own expense.

I’ll add here, that when you lay down some rules, you’ll get a lot of static in the beginning, but if you stick to it, then (hopefully) she will come around to see things the way you do. At the very least, you’ll show her that you’re a man of principle and that you follow through on your decisions. This may also elicit some respect from her.

Rest assured, if the typical woman is given responsibility for the family finances, the expenses will be skewed towards creature comforts and personal indulgences, not to mention her own private bank account, which will become her nest egg if and when she decides to hire a lawyer, file for a divorce, and elope with her (other, more favored) boss. So don’t be that sucker husband who trusted his wife with all the money, and then got reamed out of house and home. (I keep US$3,000 in cash hidden away with a trusted friend, just in case my wife pulls a stunt, or blows up the budget somehow.)

In other words, The Parable of the Talents applies to the man as well as the woman. If a man grossly mismanages his money by letting his woman handle all the finances, then what little he has will be taken away. So saith the Lord of Hosts, and you know it’s true.

Priority (4): Managing Plans

Concerning priority (4), plans, schedules and time management, the man needs to draw an outline of what needs to be done, and orchestrate the execution of a plan. The plan should be a vehicle to achieve the man’s larger purposes in life, according to priority (1). The plan needs to be made clear to everyone involved, and should be followed as closely as possible.


If presented with a clear plan with mutually beneficial goals, a woman is more likely to jump on board without too much resistance. But if there is no plan, the woman will devise her own plans, and then expect the man to follow along. If in fact, a man really doesn’t have a concrete plan in place, then he can always make up a tentative plan, and then change it later on. Women (and subordinates) are more confused and upset by a man (supervisor) with no plan, than a man (supervisor) who is constantly changing the plan.

So, a man should always be talking about big plans, even if he’s not confident about achieving them. In fact, women love to hear men talk about opportunities, goals, hopes and dreams, because this is a projection of perceived power. If a man fails to achieve these goals, women are likely to blame external factors, rather than the man’s ineptitude. This is because women naturally grab on to the faith and hope that are expressed, and have (hopefully) invested themselves in the labor, so as a result, they can be very forgiving in this respect.

If you do all these things, and your woman still wants to chide you about never achieving the plans you set forth, then I’m sorry to say, you’ve got a rotten, selfish woman. I suggest you just do your own thing, and put her words out of your mind. Pray that there will come a day when she realizes the sinfulness of her attitude.


The temptation that men have faced historically, is to give the responsibility of certain priorities to the female helper in their lives. This frequently happens when the woman is being a feral b!tch-@ss by plying a multitude of shit tests on a regular basis, and then the man naturally grows bitter and resentful. After a while of this, the strength of will in the man becomes fatigued, and he just wants to escape, or give in. The bottom line is that he stops caring about, and making efforts in management.

Think about it…

  • A man would never ask a woman to move furniture and renovate the house, while he swept up the dust and splinters.
  • A man would never ask a woman to change the oil in the car, while he cleaned the tools.
  • A man would never ask a woman to manage his business appointments, while he scheduled them and prepared the reports.


  • Many men presume that their wives know what’s better for his personal well-being, and then go along with her priorities.
  • Many men think it’s OK for a woman to manage his finances, while he earns the money.
  • Many men allow their wives to tell them how to spend their time, while the wife is busy making more activities for him to spend time on.

Something is not quite right here.

To counteract this default human ontology, married men need to focus on developing devices to keep this aspect of feral femininity at bay, while single men should focus on vetting women who won’t toe the line in this regard. From this point of view, we may gain a renewed appreciation for Game, because it is, at the very least, an effort towards management, and a refusal to resign to either fatigue or fate, even though the motives, moral agency, and level of responsibility remain debatable on a case-by-case basis. [Vetting is further explored in the following post, Man as the Hiring Manager (May 24, 2018).]

I am not discounting the myriad ways that a woman adds life and value to the relationship, and introduces ideas and activities that give it gusto. But a man needs to have a plan and a purpose, and he needs to spearhead the execution of that plan. The woman should follow along and contribute to the enterprise. Sure, there are many instances in which a woman is well qualified for the task, and is quite responsible in the execution, but the man should not remain ignorant of what is going on, under the assumption that it’s her area of expertise. (How many times have you heard a man say, “My wife handles the finances.”?)

Taking hold of the reigns may be very difficult in the beginning, but after some boundaries and structure have been established, and she gets used to the new momentum, it may be easier and more enjoyable (for both) than most men imagine. I know this from experience.


Posted in Collective Strength, Discipline, Holding Frame, Influence, Leadership, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Organization and Structure, Purpose, Relationships, Respect, Stewardship, Strategy | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Man as the Manager, Woman as the Helper

This post kicks off a short series discussing an ontology involving the male responsibility as a manager, and the female role as a helper.

Readership: All

Other posts in this series include the following.

The Word ‘Management’ Should Not Have A Bad Connotation

In the neck of the internet where I most frequently read, whenever I’ve come across the words, ‘wife/woman management’, it’s always in a negative context, as in ‘managing gender differences’, ‘managing shit tests’, ‘managing hormonal behaviors’, ‘managing jealousy games’, and so on. In fact, the whole purpose of Game is understood to be motivated towards ‘managing’ a woman’s hypergamic, rebellious, and solipsistic nature.

An underlying motive of efficiency is assumed to be present in all of this – men want the most of what we can get out of life, including women, with the least possible investment of time, energy, and other resources. Of course, this emphasis on the investment-to-payoff ratio is even more true for women, with applied hypergamy being the paragon example. So it’s not just men – we are talking about an element of human nature. But the thing is, both men and women generally perceive a partner’s emphasis on this kind of efficiency as selfish and unloving, and therein lies the rub.

I admit, after having many bad experiences with women, including going through the divorce mill, and then taking the Red Pill, I’ve also carried this reflexive attitude of efficiency, largely out of self-preservation, and I have come to view women generally as a load of sugar-coated trouble. But it’s not just me. In general, male-female relationships in the 21st century have been reduced to a series of transactions and validations which must be continually serviced without fail. For women, marriage has become a disposable, self-serving tool of manipulation. For men, marriage has been downgraded to a defacto state of genteel prostitution with an unpredictable expiry date. The rise of both divorce and cohabitation to that 40% marker is proof that people cannot trust each other with a marriage ‘contract’.


But in the back of my head, there is a nagging voice saying it shouldn’t be this way. Maybe you feel this way too. A man/husband and woman/wife should be ‘like-minded’ and should be working together towards certain goals that they agree on, and building a joyful life together, in general. The ongoing questions are, “What’s missing?” and “How can we recover that missing piece of life?

One quote from a sermon I covered in a previous post brought a bit of truth to my attention.

“God stops growth where there is no management, or bad management.”

We men have taken the attitude that ‘woman management = trouble’, which consumes our precious time, emotional energy, and which has little return on the investment. This is truly understandable, because in this day and age, the risks far outweigh the returns. Obviously, the source of this problem is that 40+ years of feminism have castigated masculinity as ‘toxic’, and have removed the honor, dignity, power, and authority assigned to the male in his rightful role as the primary manager of family and society. But this is not how God meant it to be.

There are many facets of male-female relationships covered in scripture, but in this series, I just want to focus on these two. [Emphasis mine.]

“Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.” ~ Genesis 2:15 (NKJV)

“And the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.’” ~ Genesis 2:18 (NKJV)

These two verses make it clear that God intended man to be a manager, and the woman to be a helper. I believe this is a significant piece of what we are missing, so the remainder of this series discusses these two ideas.

Man’s Rightful Place As A Manager

Because time and human energy is limited, the man’s responsibilities need to be arranged in a schedule so that everything can be finished in a satisfactory and timely manner. The man needs to make it clear to the woman that he has a number of responsibilities which demand his time, and that his time is not hers to spend as she decides.

If the woman expects the man to be the primary bread winner and beast of burden, and if she is not willing to help reach their shared goals, and if she spends her time in other pursuits, then it does not profit the larger enterprise of their union. In fact, it may hinder it. In any analysis, as long as the man and the woman are not cooperating, their total efficiency is not maximized. But if the woman is willing to help the man meet some of those responsibilities, then their workload becomes easier, and their goals can be met more quickly and efficiently.

The verse in Genesis 2:18 reveals that God institutes a vehicle for enacting his plan for humanity, by establishing a hierarchy, in which man manages, and woman helps. The fact follows that women do need to be managed by the man in her life. It’s part of God’s design. We can argue about it and say that it’s too much responsibility (for the man), or ‘unfair’ (for the woman), and so on, but in the end, there’s no way around it. We can either gripe and be bitter about how God has arranged this ontology, and fight against this fact of life, or we can accept it as a basic responsibility of being a man or a woman, and work it to our advantage.

successful Obama surprised Michelle


It’s ideal for women to ‘help’ men in their shared enterprises, but the expectations of their respective roles and duties need to be made clear. Men are responsible for regulating the action. Women should recognize their valued role as a cherished helper.

Feminists like to soapbox the narrative that men are ‘overbearing’ and that ‘submission’ (on their part) is a mark of shame on par with slavery. But the opposite is closer to the truth for the majority of men. It’s time for men to reframe that narrative by declaring men to be responsible managers of family and society, and take back their dignity and authority in the process.


Posted in Collective Strength, Leadership, Models of Success, Organization and Structure, Purpose, Relationships, Self-Concept, Stewardship | Tagged | 9 Comments

Why Do Men Need Visions and Dreams?

Dr. Myles Munroe delivers a powerful ‘man up’ message with a tidal wave of OMG realizations about the purpose of men and the nature of women.

Readership: All

Today, we’ll look at a powerful sermon delivered by Dr. Myles Munroe, who was a Bahamian evangelist and ordained minister, author, speaker, and public leadership consultant, and who founded and led the Bahamas Faith Ministries International.

His talk is directed specifically at men, directing them on to the vision inspired path of discovering their God-ordained purpose for living. Munroe gives men a powerful ‘man-up’ message that is as strong as it is comforting. I would go so far as to say that his stance sets the stage for a unique form of ‘Christian Game’. Men would do well to take his viewpoints on male-female relationships into serious consideration.

You can mock and criticize his loose interpretations of scripture all you like. But Munroe’s Frame is ‘fundamentally’ true to both the Holy Spirit and the Red Pill perspective, and impeccably stolid at that. Furthermore, the words out of his mouth have put the fear of the Lord into millions around the world, including yours truly.

Munroe died in a freak plane crash in 2014, just two months after he spoke out publicly against g@y rights, saying that “people have ‘hijacked’ and ‘raped’ the civil rights movement with efforts to fight for the rights of those in the LGBT community”. He also said that the support of QTBGL persons in the Bahamas “does not represent the majority of the convictions of the Bahamian people”. Was his death just an unfortunate accident, or was he martyred by the ‘powers-that-be’?

Independent: Myles Munroe: Preacher who outraged many with his views on women and gays (November 11, 2014)

This sermon is rather long at 80 minutes, but I guarantee that if you take the time to watch it, you’ll have quite a few mind-blowing epiphanies of the ‘A-Ha!’, and ‘OMG!’ quality, concerning the nature of men and women, and their interaction.

Power Quotes

“Man was not created to dominate other men, but to dominate the earth.”

“Democracies do not colonize. Only Kingdoms colonize!”

“God intended for the earth to be a colony of His Kingdom. God intended the male man to be the colonizers.”

“Men are not on top. They are not the ‘heads’. Men are on the bottom! They are the foundation!

“Men were created before women. Men are first. Men have knowledge that women don’t have. But it’s no fun being first. Being first means you are responsible for everything that comes after!”

“The discovery of your purpose is about your dominion.”

“Vision is a preview of your purpose.”

“God stops growth where there is no management, or bad management.”

“I feel like preaching… almost!

“God gave man work, before he gave man woman. Work comes first. If you put woman first, you will have trouble!”

“There were six commandments that God gave to Adam in the garden of Eden.” (Genesis 1-2)

  1. Eden – to live in communion with God
  2. Work – to become what God made you to be.
  3. Care – to cultivate, and bring forth fruit.
  4. Guard – to protect, and to create a safe Kingdom for others to enjoy.
  5. Command – to teach, mold, and guide others in the ways of holy living.
  6. Observe – to recognize God’s sovereignty, keep His commandments, and walk in His ways.

“Your job is what you do for your employer, but your work is what God made you to do. You may lose your job, but you can never lose your work. Your employer might say, ‘You’re fired from your job!’ But what employer can say, ‘You’re fired from being you’?”

“A man’s work is the expression of his purpose. A man with no woman has hope. But a man with no work will lose his mind.”

“When a man is doing His work, then the woman will follow after the man. That’s how it’s got to be. Amen? When the man is not about his work, the woman feels lost and insecure.”

“Woman is an incubator. Whatever you give her, she takes it, adds life and value, and gives it back to you. If you give her sperm, she gives you a baby. If you give her groceries, she gives you a meal. If you give her a word, she gives you a sentence. If you give her frustration, she gives you hell!”

“There is no entrance on a male man. <turns his back to the audience> This is an exit, not an entrance!”


Posted in Choosing A Profession, Confidence, Discipline, Freedom, Personal Liberty, Holding Frame, Influence, International, Leadership, Male Power, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Organization and Structure, Purpose, Relationships, Satire, Self-Concept, The Power of God | Tagged , , , | 9 Comments

Patriarchy vs. Matriarchy: Divorce and Government Spending

A review of the divorce rates and government spending as a percent of GDP, suggests that patriarchy doesn’t deserve the bad rap that it has been given by feminists over the last few decades.

Readership: All

The data for the crude divorce rate (number of divorces per 1,000 people), and the government spending as a percentage of the GDP, are shown in the table below. Patriarchal societies are listed in blue font, and matriarchal societies are in red. Societies in black font are not strongly aligned either way.

Unless otherwise noted, the data is from 2005, which are lower figures than what we find currently. In recent years, the divorce rates have grown much higher, all around the world, largely due to the creeping influence of western feminism. The older data is a better indicator of the effects of the hierarchical structure on society, because the recent immigration and refugee rush has introduced too much confusion over the matter, which scrambles the obvious effects.

Country Crude Divorce Rate

(Divorces per 1,000 people)

National Budget as a Percent of GDP
Sri Lanka 0.15 6.7%
Brazil 0.26 13.9%
Italy 0.27 40.4%
Ireland [1] 0.27


34.0% (2005)

26.1 (2017)[2]

Mexico 0.33 7.2%
Chile 0.38 11.5%
El Salvador 0.41 6.3%
Ecuador 0.42 4.5%
Mauritius 0.47 7.0%
Thailand 0.58 6.9%
Syria 0.65 11.6%
Panama 0.68 16.4%
Greece 0.76 48%
China 0.79 16.8%
Tunisia 0.82 16.0%
South Korea 0.88


12.9% (2005)

32.3% (2015)

Spain 0.88 41% (2017)
Portugal 0.88 45.9% (2017)
Austria 0.97 49.1% (2017)
Trinidad 0.97 15.4%
Barbados 1.21 28.2%
Luxembourg 1.42 42.9% (2017)
Japan [3] 2.08


15.2% (2005)

39.4% (2015)

Belgium 1.83 52.2% (2017)
Finland 1.85 49.6%
Germany 1.91 43.9% (2017)
Canada 2.46 19.9%
Australia 2.52 27.1%
New Zealand 2.63 28.7%
Denmark 2.81 58.3%
United Kingdom 3.08 40.9%
Russia 3.36 44.4%
Puerto Rico 4.47 41.0%
United States 4.95 41.0%


Ireland and Japan stand out as exceptions to the rule. Ireland experienced a huge spike in government expenses (65% of GDP) before they cracked down on spending in 2010. In Japan, the marriage rate has dried up to a crawl. They also have one of the lowest fertility rates in the world.

Granted, there may be no direct correlation between social structure, and divorce or government spending, but the numbers are hard to ignore.

While feminists blame the ‘evil patriarchy’ for most of their perceived social ills, with rare exceptions, those countries with patriarchal values have low divorce rates, low government spending, and growing, healthy economies and societies. Every country which has experimented with “equality” has experienced a rapid implosion of both its economy and its social stability.

Remember, in western societies, between 60 to 80% of divorces are initiated by women.

Let us not be fooled by the superficial ‘virtue posturing’ and the demands for ‘equality’. The government dole machine, and the high divorce rate, are the crowning achievements of feminism, all at the cost to men.

If feminists were honest, they would say that “the right to commit subsidized and legally sanctioned adultery”, is their end goal for social reform, not to mention the abortion mill.

The western social policy needs a radical correction, and that is putting it mildly!

H/T: Jesus is Savior: Divorce Rates (2005)


  1. Mahon, “Ireland: A Private Patriarchy?” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 26:8 (1994) 1277-1296.
  3. Population Statistics of Japan


Posted in Culture Wars, International, Society, Statistics Reports | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Amerika Disappears!

A radical political website that I’ve been following for some time has recently disappeared off the internet.

The last post I saw from them was…

Amerika (feat. Brett Stevens): Why White People Do Not Act For White Interests (May 7, 2018)

It was quite a good (i.e. provocative) post, and I imagine this may have been the last straw for the powers that be.

Does anyone know what became of this site?

***UPDATE***(May 10, 2018)***

Amerika came back with a new post. My suspicions were apparently true.

Amerika (feat. Brett Stevens): Under DOS Attack by Scared Leftists (May 9, 2018)

“This DOS attack consisted of two prongs: a TCP/IP-based attack against the machine that hosts several of our sites, and an HTTP-based attack against our PHP-based scripts. Our host, Dreamhost, managed to block the former attack, and with some crufty old 1990s know-how, we have lessened the latter.”

What an honor — to be targeted by paganized haters!

The cultural war is heating up.

Free thinkers, back up your blogs!


Posted in Culture Wars | 1 Comment

The Objectivity of Offense Constitutes Respect

This post examines the contributions of Prof. Jordan Peterson, and finds that he has pioneered a robust response to a new style of dishonest debate that has developed in recent years.

Readership: All

The following article is organized as follows.

  1. Introduction
  2. Addressing Men’s Preeminent Need for Respect
  3. Maintaining Integrity and Garnering Respect Within the NeoModern Debate Style of Presumptively Valid Strawmen
  4. The Defense For Our Traditional Ethical Structure
  5. Conclusions

1. Introduction

Recently, Jordan Peterson’s honor and credibility has been targeted by a few Manospherians, most notably, Vox Day’s posts (tagged, Jordanetics).  Adam Piggott also wrote a scathing article entitled, Not only is Jordan Peterson not an alpha male, he’s a member of the left intelligentsia. (April 28, 2018).

I don’t follow Peterson that religiously, so I could be mistaken here, but I don’t believe he ever claimed to be the Savior of the Alt-Right.  So if he fails to fulfill that expectation, then who’s going to be disappointed?

So he’s not an Alpha Male…  So what?  Most men aren’t.

Did he ever claim to be an alpha male?  Har de har har…  It’s just a lame joke.  Most guys enjoy some wishful thinking now and then.  Big deal.

He is a liberal!?!  What a surprise!  Over 90% of academicians are liberal.

He doesn’t practice what he preaches?  Ho hum.  I don’t know.  I get the impression that he’s well qualified within his profession.  Maybe he’s pointing towards a larger ideal which he strives for, but others don’t understand – something like respect, for instance.

Whenever a man embarks on some enterprise, if he fails in some respect, there’s nothing noteworthy about that.  We see this every day.  But if a man gets up afterward, dusts himself off, and tries again, then he’s definitely a qualified man. If he can stand his ground and make his stance well known to others, he’s a cut above the rest.

Anymore, I am nexting every post I see about Peterson, simply because it’s old news.  Reading these posts doesn’t contribute anything to my pursuit of excellence.

I am curious to know why these bloggers have decided to put so much time, and mental energy, into tearing down this particular man, out of millions of others.  Is this somehow part of a larger strategy in our fight to be free from Feminism’s choking death grip?  Does it somehow educate men about how to deal with various sorts of women in an effective manner?  If so, then how does Peterson have relevance?

These bloggers may have been successful in ridiculing Peterson and giving us a laugh, all for the sake of offering an interesting few minutes of blog reading and getting a few more clicks <slow clapping from the back>, but they have not made their case against Peterson applicable to the larger scheme of resisting the creeping black shadow of Satan’s schemes.

Before Peterson’s persona gets completely prostrated by apathetic and possibly envious criticism, let’s take a moment to recall what he has contributed to the scenes. Regardless of your religious beliefs or political affiliation, I believe it is significant.

2. Addressing Men’s Preeminent Need for Respect

One point which Peterson has hit on, again and again, is that men are in a continual process of self-betterment; that men should step up to face the challenges that confront them in life; and that men need respect from other men, for whatever they contribute, big or small.  This is a fundamental truth of life, and Peterson should be lauded for reminding us of this basic tenet of humanity, and encouraging us to be cognizant of the need for respect, especially among men.  If you don’t agree with his specific points, then let’s see if you (or someone else) can do better.  Don’t just tell us how his points compare to another flawed line of reasoning.  Point out how the arguments are flawed and give us a better mode of thought.  We’re waiting…

Dalrock pointed out the importance of respect in his recent post, The wages of miserliness. (April 3, 2018).  He writes [emphasis mine],

It is this miserliness of respect for other men that has created the void that Peterson is filling.  Note that Peterson isn’t telling young men they are great as they are, just let it all hang out.  Peterson is telling young men they need to man up.  But Peterson’s man up message is fundamentally different than the modern Christian man up message.  Peterson’s message doesn’t celebrate the feminist triumph that is afflicting young men.  Peterson offers both love and the possibility of respect for men who work to improve themselves.

Practicing Love and Respect offers a win-win end game.  Let’s not forget that.  Scoff if you will, but the continuation of the civilized nature of our society depends on it.

3. Maintaining Integrity and Garnering Respect Within the NeoModern Debate Style of Presumptively Valid Strawmen

Perhaps Peterson’s most obvious achievement is in maintaining his position, in spite of holding an opinion that was seen to be flawed from the outset by the larger feminist dominated culture, and proving that his true position was not superficially misogynistic, overtly callous, nor carelessly spiteful. Whether or not you happen to agree with his position, you have to admit that the presentation of his argument was superbly executed.

Just in case you missed it, or want to watch it again, here’s the famous debate Peterson had with Cathy Newman.

A poignant aspect of this debate is that it exemplifies the type of dishonest debate tactics (on the part of Newman) that have grown to be acceptable to society at large.

“The video is instructive for modern dialogue. Typically, positions are entrenched, assumed, and then discussed, according to predetermined views about what the opponent is presumed to be saying, despite what they actually say they think. Christians would do well to take note. This is the new form of discussion and debate. We have to accept that on key social issues – particularly issues of sexuality and human flourishing – we will be dealt with according to what our interlocuters presume we think, despite what we actually say we believe. We can expect this to be multiplied to any number of other issues.” [1]

Newman lost face, not because her argument was less convincing (although many believe they were), but because (1) her presumptions of his thoughts and motives were shown to be incorrect, and (2) she was unsuccessful in trying to shame Peterson.  All her attacks, which appeared in the form of presuming avarice on his part, rolled off his back.  This dynamic revealed her to be misinformed at best, an ignorant troublemaker of mediocre merit, or a false accuser at worst.

4. The Defense For Our Traditional Ethical Structure

Peterson explicitly states that offence is acceptable in the pursuit of truth.  That statement presumes there is a truth to be known and grasped.  He nowhere affirms the idea that identity is whatever you subjectively perceive it to be.” [2]

In saying that the quest for truth is often necessarily offensive, Peterson is clearly identifying his ethical structure as being Righteousness vs. Guilt (RvG).  Furthermore, one’s personal choice to adhere to any particular ethical system is an absolute truth which cannot be refuted in any ethical system.  So to engage with him any further in a meaningful discussion, Newman would have to recognize this truth, and adopt the appropriate RvG reasoning, which she evidently could not do.

I will speculate that the reason why Newman resisted entering into an honest debate within the RvG ethical structure, was because she knew the logical nature of men would give Peterson, a man, an advantage over Newman, a woman.  (You can call me sexist for saying so, but I believe she was conscious of this.)  Furthermore, (I believe) it was not her purpose to engage honestly within a debate for truth, but only to shame Peterson, as she did previously to Tim Farron and John Smyth.  Regardless of whether Farron’s or Smyth’s beliefs were applicable and theologically sound, she targeted them for merely having Christian beliefs, and thus, she attempted to bring shame to the name of Christ.

 “…Peterson didn’t challenge Newman directly about the objectivity of offence (potentially that’s because he holds my view that offence is subjective and that is why basing legislation on subjective measures is so problematic – we cannot know the line between right and wrong because it is in the eye, ear or sensitive disposition of the beholder).” [2]

Although guilt may or may not be accurately ascertained through law, the accusations of either offending, or being offended, appeal to either honor or shame in the court of public opinion.  Petersons arguments have impact, not only because they are logically sound, which appeals to the RvG sense of ‘being right’, but also his calm demeanor and occasional sense of humor portrays him as dignified and gracious, which brings honorability in the Honor vs. Shame (HvS) system, which Newman (and the media) had cunningly adopted in her strategy.

The key takeaway is that our traditional RvG ethical structure, which has been predominant in the west since medieval times, is now giving way to the HvS system under the odd-ass bedfellows of Feminism and Islamophilia.  Here, Peterson is making a wise and concerted effort to preserve our time honored ethical structure.  (For more information on ethical structures, please see my earlier post, Foundations of Cultural Ethics and Chivalry (February 18, 2018), which is the first of a series on this subject.)

5. Conclusions

Peterson’s greatest contribution is that he artfully constructed a collection of viewpoints and arguments which (1) remained solid in a logical debate, (2) attracted respect, and deflected dishonest debate tactics and shame, and (3) successfully defended the main tenets of logic and truth in the RvG ethical system.  Furthermore, and he did so in a public debate against Feminists in a way that they had to respect.  It is his ability to command the respect of his adversary that attracts a following.  This is why so many young men admire Peterson, and it is a habit that all of us should be developing within ourselves.

Be aware of the real battle! The battle is not against one aging educator (Peterson).  It’s against those principalities and powers that seek to subject us to a foreign ethical structure (such as HvS), wipe away truth, and solid reason, and replace it with self-destructive infighting, persnickety feuds over perceived honor, and all the associated (and ridiculous) ‘virtue posturing’ that is now becoming so prevalent.

And their motives contain no better justifications than to hate us, insult the name and glory of Christ, and to degrade our Christian civilization. All the more reason for us to stay focused on the goal!


  1. Stephen Kneale: Cathy Newman’s Channel 4 Interview With Jordan Peterson Is Instructive For Christians In Public Debate (January 19, 2018)
  2. Stephen Kneale: We Don’t Need To Be Friends: A Rejoinder To Dave Williams On Jordan Peterson (January 20, 2018)


Posted in Authenticity, Holding Frame, Influence, Leadership, Models of Success, Personal Presentation, Persuasion, Politics, Respect | Tagged | 9 Comments

Stepping up to the Challenge

The journey of a thousand miles, begins with a single step.

Readership: All men, and women in LTR’s

boy grows to manhood 1

Growth is a Process

It’s easy for men to read about the Socio-Sexual Hierarchy of men, which is frequently cited on the Manosphere, and then come to see a man’s inherent value and social efficacy as a static quality. But this notion does not reflect the truth.

The truth is that men go through different stages of development as they mature throughout their lives. Here are some examples that may ring true with the reader.

  • The chiseled guy who was the star quarterback in high school, and was admired by all the ladies, becomes a beer guzzling, couch potato, working a dead-end job, all burned out by midlife.
  • The high school geek who was mercilessly parodied and ridiculed, and who couldn’t get a date to save his life, suddenly ‘fills out’ in college, and eventually becomes the co-owner of a software firm, making six-figures a year. He marries a nice girl, and enjoys a comfortable life.
  • The seasoned PUA with a notch count in the hundreds, finally gets bored and weary in dealing with fickle females. He settles down with one good woman with the mind to raise a family and live a quiet life.
  • The loyal, hardworking, Blue Pilled Beta hubby gets cheated on and frivorced by his ‘sweetheart’ wife of seven years. Heartbroken, he swallows the Red Pill and eventually comes to preside over a soft harem of attractive divorcees.

Most every man comes into a mature life-game mentality at some point in his life. The alpha males are the guys who ‘get it’ early and easily. Other guys need time, experience, and mentoring before they can pick it up.

Fortunately for men, we tend to get better over time. Men don’t ‘hit the wall’, and afterwards go rapidly downhill. Like the SF adage says,

“Men age like wine and cheese; Women age like milk and disease.”

With effort and experience, men can, and do, get better throughout their lives. So we would do well to look at the accumulation of personal investments in one’s self.

From this perspective, the whole concept of ‘potential’ is annoyingly understated, downplayed, and ignored.

When we assess a man, do we consider what he could be, or do we only look at his present state?

male muscle growth

The Missing Link

What’s missing in today’s western society is the one-on-one teaching, older men mentoring younger men, and examples of authentic masculinity are getting rare. If this trend is not reversed soon, Feminist inspired society will nail the lid on the coffin.

To buck this trend, here are three case studies of men and situations which describe the hard and painful journey of going from a boyish idiot (e.g. beta male) to being a man that is a master of the game (e.g. alpha male).

Case Study 1: The Recovering Late Bloomer

OmegaMan left this insightful comment on Adam Piggott’s post, He Gets It (March 22, 2018).

“When I first started to seriously think about girls I was the inexperienced idiot who knew absolutely nothing about how to relate to the opposite sex. When you’re a pudgy inexperienced young man making his first ever approach to what seems like a nice young girl, and you get humiliated in front of everybody for your audacity, then that is enough to shut down most guys for a while. When everybody inadvertently lies to you about what girls want, and you believe it and you then get repeatedly shot down in FLAMES, you just give up. That was me! I gave up and never approached another lady for all of my 20’s. With my confidence destroyed, I concentrated on school first and then career.”

“As I was approaching the third decade of my life, a friend got me into weight lifting, and while I was not fat, I couldn’t be called fit either. Anyway, through weight lifting, a transformation came over me. As women started to look at me, my confidence levels rose to the point where I once again started asking women to go out. Add a Corvette, and women started throwing themselves at me.”

“Through a sometimes still painful process, I learned how to treat women the way they like and want to be treated. The ‘piece de resistance’ came when one young lady told me that she loved watching my muscles as we fucked.”

young couple

“I eventually met a young lady who tried so very hard to show me what a good wife she would make, and of course I took her up on the offer. After many, many years we’re still happily married, and it looks like it will last to the end of our days. You know that you still have it, when your woman rips your clothes off, and drags you into bed.”

“I think I’m at the point where I ‘get it’, but it was not always like that. The journey was hard, very hard, and I nearly gave up for good. I have my one friend to thank for starting me on my journey, and to him I will be forever grateful.”

“We need to realize that we are born as boys, not men, and that the journey to manhood is hard. The question then is, how do we, in this matriarchal society, help young boys to cast off their childish ways, and become the men that not only build the society in which we live, but that women will lust over as well.”

I believe OmegaMan’s experience of snail-paced growth is more common than anyone suspects. Men don’t talk about these things much. The important thing is that he eventually ‘got it’, and he’s also enjoying a successful and mutually fulfilling marriage.

Case Study 2: The Faith to Leave a Bad Situation

Fellow blogger, Snapper, had the guts to leave his church because the church was teaching an inverted hierarchy of marital headship, his wife was learning those things, and it was ruining his marriage. Snapper tells his story in this series of posts.

As you can see by the posting dates, this transition of leaving a bad church situation probably took nearly 10 months. That’s not easy. Snapper also explains the difficulties he faced in dealing with his wife and mother-in-law in this post.

Snapper’s done the right thing in getting away from the Wolf that’s chasing his wife, but now he needs to find another flock of sheep. We’re still waiting to read Snapper’s follow-up stories of a new beginning with another fellowship of believers.

Some commenters suggested that, until he found another church to attend, he should start meeting with other men. To this, Snapper replied,

“I’ve considered [starting my own men’s Bible study group], but I’m afraid I might be considered the de facto ‘leader’ of a group if I put out the call and I, at the moment, am not qualified to be a leader in such things, as my home is not really in order [referring to the problems surrounding male headship in marriage]. The continued issues with my wife and daughter put me in a bad position. I don’t really know if putting out the call and assembling some guys for study would necessarily be a ‘church’, but by default someone has to lead said group, and I don’t think I am biblically qualified. I’m still mulling it over, as I don’t see anyone else standing up in answer to the call for some good old fashion Bible study, and it is much needed. Thanks for the prayers.”

Often times, the pressing ‘need’ for a leader to step up to bat in a challenging circumstance, and the willingness of someone to do so, is more important than a man’s ability or readiness. The next case study will examine this phenomena.

men's group

Case Study 3: Transitioning to be the Leader of a Small Group Bible Study

Recently, my men’s group had a similar discussion about leadership. The current leader, Tyson*, had been leading for over three years, and he was burned out and couldn’t lead anymore. He wanted to step down so that he could focus on his new career and some other things. The pastor thought it was a good idea, because it would give other men the chance to gain leadership experience.

When Tyson announced his decision to the Men’s Group, he asked if there was anyone else who wanted to take the lead. Only one guy in the group, Glenn*, volunteered to continue leading. After some discussion, and no objections, Tyson announced that Glenn would be the new leader. The pastor was also informed of the planned change of leadership, and he blessed Glenn as the new leader, while also encouraging the others to take turns leading. A couple months later, Tyson stepped down as planned, and passed the mantle to Glenn.

Now, none of the other guys objected to Glenn’s leadership during those two interim months, but a couple weeks after Glenn started leading, some of the guys in the group came to Tyson privately, and said they didn’t want Glenn to lead. They offered reasons why they thought Glenn was unfit to lead, which included him being divorced, and that his Red Pilled views caused them to question his theology, and whether or not he believed in sound doctrine.

In response, Tyson defended Glenn’s new position as leader, saying in effect, that no one except Christ himself has perfect doctrine, and that Glenn’s doctrine was just as sound as any of theirs. Tyson’s and the Pastor’s stance on this issue was that the experience of leading under the church authority is what builds leadership ability and refines sound doctrine in a man. [This is the main point of this post.] Even so, the other guys didn’t want to accept Glenn as the new leader, while at the same time, none of them wanted to lead either. So, if Glenn didn’t step up, there would be no one to lead Men’s group.

As a result, the Men’s Bible study group split into two factions. Four guys, including Tyson, continued to meet with Glenn as the new leader, while the other nine guys decided to form their own Bible Study group. However, only two of those nine guys attended Men’s group regularly, and since neither of them wanted to lead that group, their group essentially dissolved into an online chat group. Meanwhile, Glenn’s group experienced an incredible revival of the Holy Spirit. Their prayers were answered in dramatic ways, and they saw their numbers grow as well. Within a few months, two more men (who were not previously members of the church) joined Glenn’s Bible Study.

Glenn later told Tyson that he felt guilty after the group split up, as if he were the cause of the fracture. Tyson said there was nothing to be guilty about. Tyson also said that actually, he was glad the group split, because it was God’s way of clearing out those guys with poor commitment and low motivation, which was necessary for the faithful remnant to experience a renewal in their lives.

* Names have been changed for the usual reasons.

journey of 1000 miles begins with a step


If a layman has the opportunity, desire, and willingness to lead, then he should give it a shot, whether it be a promotion, a small Bible study group, a community group, a relationship with a woman, or being a father. He should not excuse himself, saying that he lacks experience and proper training, etc., because he will develop these things in the process of engaging new challenges in his new role. If he does excuse himself, for whatever reason, he is only denying himself the chance to earn experience.

It also helps to not be so myopic. Leadership is not just about the leader. Concerning the leadership ability required in each case study…

  1. OmegaMan just needed some time, some encouraging mentorship, and meeting a decent woman by God’s happenstance, in order to come into his potential.
  2. Snapper left his church, not because he was a qualified leader, but because he saw that attending this particular church was bearing bad fruit in his wife’s faith. He merely responded in a responsible manner.
  3. In the case of Glenn’s Bible Study, all he did was volunteer to lead, and this opened the door for God to dispose of the soggy cornflakes, and it also allowed those guys who were serious in their faith to experience a regenesis. Small moves, big waves! That’s real leadership! Glenn’s actual leadership skill was totally irrelevant. All he had to do was take that step of faith.

Have faith, my friend. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and all commanding Generals were once enlisted men in basic training. Give yourself some time to build skill and confidence, to learn new ways of thinking, and to experience God’s grace in making you a part of his purposes.

But when that opportunity presents itself, don’t hesitate to jump on that chance. Don’t ever think that it doesn’t matter. Every decision you make matters, even in ways that you are not aware of.

Cheers to the man who reaches for, and eventually achieves his full potential, whenever, and whatever that may be!


Posted in Collective Strength, Determination, Leadership, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Success, Organization and Structure, Stewardship, The Power of God | Tagged , | 5 Comments