In Chapter 20 of Every Man’s Marriage, Stephen Arterburn explains that when he was dating his wife Sandy she found the idea of holding his hand revolting:
When Sandy and I were dating, I attempted to hold her hand one night. She jerked back and said that the thought of holding my hand kind of made her sick. She said it in the nicest way possible, but for whatever reason, I simply wasn’t appealing to her.
Arterburn claims in the introduction that when he first married her he was a backwards thinking he-man traditionalist, and only learned to be a Sensitive New Age Guy (SNAG*) after she threatened divorce, thus “reviving” the marriage. But in Chapter 20 we learn that he was a sniveling SNAG from day one. His reaction to finding out that she found him revolting was to LJBF himself. Arterburn continues:
My temptation was to lick my wounds and walk away. Instead, I told her that I wasn’t in this relationship to hold hands or do anything else but be with her. Well, that obviously had an impact on her because we eventually did hold hands. Furthermore, we eventually got married.
Arterburn tells this story as an example that proves the SNAG model the book is selling really works, as well as an example of God’s providence. Because he was obedient to God during their courtship by LJBFing himself, he was prepared by God for his unexpectedly sexless marriage. This helped him double down on stupidity:
It is amazing how God lays things out in our lives that make sense only years later. This was one of those weird things…
When we finally married, I was shocked to find that sex was a painful experience for her. She wanted no part of it. I was humiliated, felt like a failure, and had no idea what to do. Then I remembered the hand holding incident. I went back to that place and realized that I had to be of the same mind now that I was then.
After years of applying the methods Arterburn and Stoeker teach in the book, it has all been worth the wait:
It would take years to work out the problems, but the end of the story is that we’ve had some wonderful sexual experiences in recent years that we never had in our earlier years. It was worth the wait and worth my learning some new things about her–that sex could be something she would actually want versus dread.
This is just one more example of the danger of the heretical model Arterburn and Stoeker are teaching in the book. Instead of helping other men avoid making the mistakes the culture was teaching, they doubled down on the mistakes and presented them as coming from God. Simply put, the new religion they invented is not only not from God, it doesn’t work. Women aren’t turned on by men who submit to them. A woman’s sexual desire isn’t stimulated by a man complying with her soul essence as it sets the terms of oneness. It is all nonsense.
At some level at least Arterburn had to know what he was writing wasn’t true. The book the quotes above are from was published in October of 2001. In the introduction to Every Single Man’s Battle Arterburn explains that some time in 2002 he learned that Sandy was cheating on him, and when he confronted her on it she filed for divorce.
…I had arranged [a trip to Australia] to celebrate our twentieth anniversary together, trying to mend what had been so very broken for twenty difficult years. I had thought we were making progress, and as I walked that beach with my wife, I presumed she felt as close to me as I did her. Alas, that simply was not the case. The betrayal had already occurred, and she was making plans for divorce…
Many readers of Every Man’s Battle will be stunned to discover that my marriage ended in 2002…
*My words, not Arterburn’s.
“Many readers of Every Man’s Battle will be stunned to discover that my marriage ended in 2002…”
Many non-readers aren’t.
Many readers of Every Man’s Battle will be stunned to discover that my marriage ended in 2002…
Not a reader, but also not stunned…..not in the least.
Apparently, sex really was something Sandy wanted, and didn’t dread, so long as it wasn’t with her husband. Kind of like submission.
It’s almost as though the two go together, or something.
Pingback: The thought of holding hands with him made her sick, but fortunately he convinced her to marry him. | @the_arv
They are aware women have free will, right?
Apparently, sex really was something Sandy wanted, and didn’t dread,so long as it wasn’t with her husband. Kind of like submission.
Yep. Guarantee that Sandy’s fornicator was NOT submissive to her…but the other way around. Gee, I wonder why that is?
Men ought to learn how to listen to what women are saying especially before considering marrying the woman…instead of trying to think you can somehow change her free will when it comes to this. If she’s not wanting to submit to you and help you…or even something as simple as it revolts her to hold your hand, go ahead and follow that ‘temptation’ and leave.
Fred was ignorant, then he became deceived, and then he began deceiving others. Now he’s divorced but still paying her expenses (lest he end up in jail with a criminal record for not doing so) while she screws other guys. Good job Fred [sarcasm intended]. If anything’s left, I have a bridge in New York City I want to sell you retard.
@ PokeSalad
It’s a mystery. Clearly, good old Steve needs to explore that mystery by writing another book: “Every Man’s Adultress”.
He could collaborate with Sandy’s side stud. That way, everyone can get both perspectives, that of the cuckolded and the cuckolder.
One of the best (and that’s to say the worst) endings for a naive blue pill gobbler (bpg) I’ve seen involved the wife cheating with the son’s baseball coach. She divorced bpg and moved in coach. Bpg ended up in a cheap room for rent slaving long hours for a aerospace company to pay the ex-wife’s mortgage, car payment, child support, etc… while she did coach in the same bed, under the same roof, that bpg had been recently permanently ejected from. He saw the kids every other weekend but mom and coach had all the authority by then.
Poor bpg stoically carried on for a couple years until he saw coach riding carefree around town in the car he was making the payments on blasting the radio on and drinking a beer. Something finally snapped. Next thing I know bpg has stopped going to church and is on the Internet in the personal section and he picked up a blond psychologist who did family counseling. They started dating and fornicating until she dumped him. Poor bgp. He lost his family, his home, his car, his wealth, and finally his morality. At least he still had his job.
Which is good because if he doesn’t pay the devil her due, then he goes to jail and becomes a criminal with a record too.
American raises an important point: do his post-divorce writings show that Fred has learned anything?
If not, give Fred high odds of screwing up in the same way again. The most valuable asset for a conman is his sucker list. He can sell it, because suckers are marks — easily fooled, again and again.
“When we finally married, I was shocked to find that sex was a painful experience for her.”
This is confusing because somewhere else I read that Arteburn had sex before marriage with his first and second wife. I think it was in a summary of his lawsuit against Dr. Minirth.
Yeah I remember reading and pointing out that site where he admitted that.
Do other readers have my simple reaction to this? Namely, that this guy is continually saying ‘How can I be the man my wife wants me to be?’ – BUT does SHE ever worry about ‘being the woman my husband wants me to be’???
The question is never asked, which indicates the guy is a complete doofus.
Arterburn has been divorced twice, BUT Fred has not been divorced. He and dominating Brenda have been married 30 years.
This 4th wave feminism seems to be just a return to Goddess worship.
Ya know, Ashtoroth, Ishtar, Aphrodite, Libertas.
It’s a good way for men to avoid growing up, just do what Goddess tells you to do. No need to lead!
But like all idols, paybacks are a bitch.
“The betrayal had already occurred, and she was making plans for divorce…
Many readers of Every Man’s Battle will be stunned to discover that my marriage ended in 2002…”
Dalrock, does he ever state more explicitly than this that it was his second wife who cheated on him? Notice the very impersonal phrasing: “The betrayal had already occurred.” Doesn’t say who betrayed whom.
If you Google his second wife’s name, the first image that comes up (at least for me) is of the two of them kissing on a bed with a dog in the background. I mean no offense to the second Mrs. Arterburn, but a man who gets cucked and divorced by a woman her age does not just happen to end up dating an attractive blonde twenty years younger than him a year later. Even if he is a super sexy New Age submissive dude and all.
Hmmm . . .
Virginia,
remember that he has wealth on his side, and that creates some powerful attraction in women, even younger ones.
From the lawsuit link provided earlier, we discover that, at the time of the lawsuit, Arterburn was pulling in $500,000 from book sales alone. That’s not counting what he makes from speaking engagements, or from his New Life Treatment Centers. And I seem to remember our host or one of the commenters saying that Arterburn is now on-staff in some capacity at a SoCal megachurch. So as a wealthy “Christian” speaker, author, quasi-pastor, he can probably pull in any number of hypergamous young hotties.
“remember that he has wealth on his side, and that creates some powerful attraction in women, even younger ones.”
I don’t doubt it. Clearly he had no trouble reeling in Wife #3, regardless of whether he cast his lure before or after the divorce was final. But having a $500,000+ annual income is also effective in persuading hypergamous middle-aged wives not to cuckold and divorce their gravy-train husbands. My recollection from earlier posts is that his only child with his second wife was a daughter adopted at least ten years before the divorce. That doesn’t leave a lot of years to receive child support, which would only be at a one-child level anyway. And in many states, a woman who cheats on her husband is viewed less favorably when calculating alimony.
And with $500k per year in book sales income, Steve has a strong motivation to continue churning out more books. If one were cynical, you might suspect that Steve-o doesn’t even believe what he writes, but writes what he knows will sell. Now I suspect he actually believes the crap he writes, but it’s not a foregone conclusion.
Another thing, have you noticed that Arterburn always writes with a co-author? I don’t know of any books he claims sole authorship of. Perhaps there are some, but the ones being discussed in this thread, and the two in my library (on completely different topics) are all co-authored, but with Steve-o always getting top billing. Makes me wonder what the arrangement is between the two authors. Is Steve putting his name-recognition and clout behind books largely written by others (with him I’m sure adding some content or personal anecdotes) in exchange for a cut of the revenue? Or are his books mostly his own thoughts, but he writes poorly so get someone else to flesh out the sentences and paragraphs?
I DO know this. Steve Arterburn has a genius for self-promotion. He is very good at it. Back in the early 90’s, I worked for an organization which had a business relationship with his New Life Treatment Center. While I never actually met the man, the general feeling from those who did interact with him was that he was a bit of an egotistical a**hole. But again, he is VERY good at self-promotion. Whatever criticism you direct his way (very justified, I might add), you at least have to give him that.
“While I never actually met the man, the general feeling from those who did interact with him was that he was a bit of an egotistical a**hole. But again, he is VERY good at self-promotion. Whatever criticism you direct his way (very justified, I might add), you at least have to give him that.”
Dark Triad alpha, successfully masquerading as a beta to sell books?
“And with $500k per year in book sales income, Steve has a strong motivation to continue churning out more books. If one were cynical, you might suspect that Steve-o doesn’t even believe what he writes, but writes what he knows will sell.”
As an added bonus, the more Christian husbands who buy his books and take his advice to heart, the more sexually frustrated Christian wives there will be at his conferences . . .
Stephen Arterburn suffered the consequences for a stupid decision. I won’t go so far to say that he deserves what he got, but if she won’t hold hands with him, he should have been out of there quickly after. Kind of like investing in a Ponzi scheme and whining when it all comes crashing down.
When Sandy and I were dating, I attempted to hold her hand one night. She jerked back and said that the thought of holding my hand kind of made her sick. She said it in the nicest way possible, but for whatever reason, I simply wasn’t appealing to her.
Man, I was very much a nice-guy-mentality slow starter in high school, but even then I knew the right response to this was to hit the bright red eject button and move on with some dignity. There’s more fish in the sea, and frankly even if there weren’t who in the world would want to be with someone who found you revolting?
Why did he marry her? Why did she marry him? If she won’t even hold hands with him, if sex is dreaded and painful, then he should be quick to drop her at the first opportunity. I would even go so far as to say this is an ”irreconcilable difference” and HE should detonate the marriage, before children are born.
If the act was painful, why was it not painful when she cheated on him?
And people wonder why I don’t want to marry a “good Christian woman”…
Sandy divorced Arterburn after, as he put it, “20 difficult years” of marriage.
After reading this post, I’m beginning to understand why the marriage was difficult and why it ended in divorce.
@Virginia
Yes. Google a sentence from the last quote in the post. You should be able to find the same introduction in Google books. He says someone called him and told him about the betrayal, and that when he confronted her he hoped she would repent. But instead she filed for divorce. It sounds pretty brutal.
Pingback: The thought of holding hands with him made her sick, but fortunately he convinced her to marry him. | Reaction Times
why can’t christians raise men to be strong?
modern Christian men would attack this man as evidence of how atheist men are bullies…
As an added bonus, the more Christian husbands who buy his books and take his advice to heart, the more sexually frustrated Christian wives there will be at his conferences.
Hah! Yes, and also the fact that even once these husbands realize that they’ve been sold a bill of goods, they’ll be too ashamed and beaten to admit it and will thus be obligated to continue drinking the toxic koolaid.
Thanks Dalrock. These gents just keep proving everything the Bible says about marriage to be true. Not through their words or deeds but through the failures of their marriages. God knows best.
This book came out in 2001? That was well before Red Pill truths became known. I wonder how his books are selling these days.
virginia says:
March 6, 2018 at 8:02 pm
“remember that he has wealth on his side, and that creates some powerful attraction in women, even younger ones.”
“I don’t doubt it. Clearly he had no trouble reeling in Wife #3, regardless of whether he cast his lure before or after the divorce was final. But having a $500,000+ annual income is also effective in persuading hypergamous middle-aged wives not to cuckold and divorce their gravy-train husbands. My recollection from earlier posts is that his only child with his second wife was a daughter adopted at least ten years before the divorce. That doesn’t leave a lot of years to receive child support, which would only be at a one-child level anyway. And in many states, a woman who cheats on her husband is viewed less favorably when calculating alimony.”
WRT your last sentence, officially, at least, only in the state of NC.
Anyway, never forget that a dollar tomorrow means more than 5 dollars next year to most women. Loads of Ameriskanks, if married to a wealthy man, are likely to calculate that they can just frivorce rape him, get what he already possesses, probably get oodles of money from him in the future (while giving him nothing but court dates and insults), and not have to have anything to do with him outside the legal and banking industries. You HAVE heard of Paul McCartney and John Cleese, have you not?
“Many readers of Every Man’s Battle will be stunned to discover that my marriage ended in 2002 …”
Maybe; for some values or “many”. But the rest saw it coming from 100 miles away.
On top of everything else young Christian men have to deal with, born again virgins throw the purity shit test in their ephiphany phase. Maybe these girls are different, but it reeks of a dead bedroom if your post-ho won’t do you before marriage. Obviously, if it’s a 20 yr old unicorn, then that’s a different situation. It’s the 25-30 bracket that fills the pews looking for a husband in bad faith.
He’s queer and the women are beards.
Keeps pastoring,writes books for women,needs cover.
@thedeti : And people wonder why I don’t want to marry a “good Christian woman”…
Albert Mohler rightly called divorce the biggest scandal of the (evangelical) church.
In all these stories, through all these years, we NEVER EVER hear about ANY reaction from churches to condemn at least no-fault divorces. It is appalling.
Those actions have nothing to do with Christianity. It makes more sense to say ‘that’s why I don’t want to marry a non-submissive, rebellious woman who is revolted by my touch.’
I think most guys on here would agree that being single for the rest of your life because all women are revolted by your touch is a much better route than marrying any particular woman who has admitted your touch revolts her.
Related, I think this is why it is important for congregations, parishes, etc. to pray for their pastor/priest. We tend to forget about those guys.
@Mountain Man, there are many things to be cynical about here, but his co-authoring his books is not one of them.
It is standard for celebrities and business executives, etc., to use a ghostwriter. They don’t have the time, talent, or inclination to spend years learning the art and craft of writing, so they hire a writer (like me).
As a former Blue Pill, emasculated husband in this kind of abusive marriage (now divorced – by MY hand, not hers, as I came to be awakened to the Red Pill – as bitter as it was at the time), I can testify to say that being alone will always be my preference rather than ever suffer through this – or even the HINT of this – ever, ever, ever again. I have already begun teaching my young son about the red pill so he doesn’t grow into this NASG suffering.
Dalrock, you are the “Paul Revere” of men everywhere. I have no idea where you find so many books written by cucks like this false-Christian author, but the fact that you expose them and their anti-Christian ideas for the world to see, is doing God’s work.
What stuns me is that not only these numbskull non-Christian authors like this write to deceive naive Christians, they can actually ruin someone’s life. Think about “Eat Pray Love”, where the author lied about finding Fabio to marry her in Italy, she forgot to mention he “Italian hunk” was fat, bald, ugly, and GAY! Her book ruined many many marriages before she got caught and “confessed” on Oprah her “Italian dreamboat” 🙄 is and always was gay. The whole thing was a fraud. It helped ruin m any marriages and families (I know of one case personally, mother of 4 wanted to “Eat Pray Love” and now she lives alone in a 1/1 apt, her 4 boys hate her with a passion. Great job! *roll eyes*.
The frightening part is that authors like this can blind and deceive good young Christian men wanting to do the “right thing” and get married. The danger of male submission, to failing to see the dangers and corruption of this new degenerate system of Marriage 2.0, and that being Beta = marital failure for sure.
When will people understand that this Marriage 2.0 system is a corruption of traditional God-given marriage and abstain completely from it??? This current system was designed to destroy men’s souls, crush their spirits, and make them into Indentured Servants of the Family Law courts and his cheating ex-wives. It is a system created to benefit the trial lawyers and the Feminists that created it. I has to reset or it is better off it ends…. and it might, given 70% of American males 20-34 are “never married”. Maybe it is best Marriage 2.0 ends rather then continue to ruin men’s lives.
Please keep exposing these fraudsters authors. I am just stunned to see how people like this actually manage to get a book published. Such authors are doing the Devil’s handiwork.
Ps. I am thinking of writing a post discussing Prenups, because so many men are failing into that false sense of security and getting married and getting hurt when divorce comes knocking. I am upcoming 1st year law student and 6 years as Paralegal have taught me a lot, even if I cannot give specific legal advice…. Let me know if you would like to publish it. 🙂
There are lots of details of these stories which make no sense. The guy is a hustler and has built his books and business. He keeps attracting women without too much trouble. His actions say he is a catch and attracts women.
His sniveling words are something else entirely. In order for marriage to be successful we need to sometimes makes changes for our spouses, to learn and grow. But this embarrassing self abasement where he places his wives whims and goals as the manifestation of the divine and his way to growth is wrong. Its sick and ultimately not likely to be successful.
Stunned – not. Surprised it took wife #2 so long to divorce the idiot.
Darlock – how is his third marriage doing in 2018?
On topic…
bdash:
Right. You see, when a man stands up to a woman, he’s a bully, he’s violent, and probably a rapist. When a man tells a woman she’s out of line, he’s doing something he just shouldn’t be allowed to do.
@ Paul:
@thedeti : And people wonder why I don’t want to marry a “good Christian woman”…
Hmm. I didn’t say this, at least not in this thread. Perhaps someone else did.
I really want to read that book just to see how bad it is, and if there is a some truth mixed… just enough to fool people. But I don’t want to give that guy any of my money.
I’m in the Dallas Fort Worth area as well. I wish Dalrock would come up with a marriage seminar. Me and my wife would be first in line. And I’d encourage my adult (and quite alpha) son to go. And my adult daughter as well.
You can never really know what is in someone else’s heart and soul unless they are willing to truly reveal it. She simply did not know what she wanted from her life, and no matter how much he tried he could never have given this awareness to her. Thank goodness she filled for divorce. This was her first step to honest self discovery. Her affair was dishonest self discovery which was very harmful to all involved.
I had a man in my life who was very much like this woman. Never did I force him into marriage…yet he was never truly present in the marriage. After 7 years of dating you think you know the one you love, but that deeper commitment of marriage can prove out some serious soul issues. He would lie his way through much of our 14 years of marriage even though therapy was involved. He didn’t know how to love himself therefore how could he really love another the way God intends us to love. I had to file for the divorce because I knew in my heart he would continue to lie and break the holy contract anyway which is an affront to God.
This is from 2013 and is the sixth (5 minutes each) post for something g called the “Seven Minute Marriage Solution”. He must be bad at math because we’re at 30 minutes already and he starts this video with stating that “we will get to those seven minutes later”
The rest is a nauseating ramble where he tells of how to stop enabling addictions in your marriage. He offers two examples where men had sexy addictions and their wives needed to stop it. Even to the point of building up a woman who “made a plan, for her graduate degree, then divorced her husband.”
This guy IS destroying marriages.
@theshrew
Thank goodness she filled for divorce. This was her first step to honest self discovery.
Seriously? A biblical reference to esteem “self discovery”, be it honest or dishonest, please?
She simply did not know what she wanted from her life
Again, seriously?? Biblical reference on how this affects anything?
Fascinating that in the book intro, he describes his 20 year marriage to Sandy as brutal and difficult, and yet, a couple short years before was praising that period in his life and telling other men how to have a marriage like he and Sandy. I doubt he connected the dots (for his readers anyway) and admitted to his faults there.
The Shrew,
You are correct that we can never know what is in someone’s heart. However, I think you paint an overly rosy picture of her motivations. You have psychologized her dysfunction as a lack of self-awareness and self-discovery, but there is a simpler possibility. Perhaps it is as simple as selfishness and fraud. Women commonly marry men they don’t love, with full knowledge of what they are doing. Why? Because of all the benefits. She gets increased social status; access to his wealth, labor, and income; a socially approved setting for procreation; and someone to complain about to her girlfriends. And what does she have to give in return for all that? Nothing at all, except for a little bit of reluctant, infrequent, joyless sex — until she decides to turn off the sex spigot entirely. It’s marital fraud on a massive scale. And how does the church respond to this fraud? Not by calling it out, but by covering it up.
We need to make sure young men are taught to screen for attraction in the women they date. I was never taught that. Like many men (most?), I assumed that if a woman said “yes” to a date invitation, or agreed to be my girlfriend, then that meant she was attracted to me. I had two 3-year relationships in my 20’s and 30’s, both of which were ostensibly heading towards marriage. But as I look back on them now, I can see that neither of those women loved me. I was simply a tool used to meet her own needs and desires.
The church is NEVER going to call out this fraud, because doing so requires them to admit that women can sin. The only way to stop it is to teach men to screen for attraction. Teach your sons, grandsons, and nephews. Teach your neighbors boys and the young men at your church if you can. If the authors of this book had been taught this, they could have avoided marrying miserable, exploitative harpies.
Fucking Parody Gold! Well done! Five stars!
Finally – Doug Wilson takes down “servant leadership”:
https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/masculinity-without-permission.html
Pretty much red pill all the way.
At times I get the “blues” hard about being single….never being endeared………always that fifth wheel…….always single……….not “good” enough. Trying too hard. Not trying hard enough……..too self-centered. Not good looking enough. Good looking but single…..I must have mental problems.
Fortunately Christ like a father, comforts. Not speaks. Comforts. Helps. Understands.
I am going hiking way up in Alpine County (California) in four weeks (Carson Iceberg Wilderness Area) for a week. I have an upcoming trip to the UK to see where my mother grew up, and then onwards up to North Wales (Betws Y Coed) where many of my ancestors came from…..clean off drugs and drink pushging into a second decade……second chances through Christ. A turning a away. A change.
I dodged a bullet. I have no idea how any man today would even consider marrying a “nice Christian girl” I know many do….and some do have a good marriage………..but the men I know DON’T behave like this man, and their wives are NOTHING like this.
Who are these people????????????????????????/
He’s doing even more than that. He’s twisting the words of all your prophets for his own profit. The marriages he destroys are collateral damage.
He’s scum, and anyone here who claims to have faith in God and Jesus has a duty to expose him. He’s actively destroying your community, like a parasite, that sickens its host, and feeds off the decaying organism.
I am surprised that no one on this blog has mentioned the passing of Billy Graham. He is perhaps the most famous of the Christian Gurus, all of whom are American, and who all seem to sin in inverse proportion to their admonition not to do so. I was therefore hoping that a man who marries a woman who feels sick when her hand is held albeit nicely was the sort of man who needed a beard but that does not seem to be the case and indeed the new Mrs Arterburn (Misty – is that real name?) is not exactly someone whom I would throw out of bed. He has an eye for the ladies. Get me into Christian Pastoring!
The best counterattack against guys like Arterburn is to defund them. Twenty years ago I would have argued for boycotting any Christian bookstore that sold his books. But now with Amazon, he bypasses any kind of local effect we could have. So, guerrilla attacks on Amazon 5-star comments? Lay out the hypocrisy of a twice-divorced man giving marriage advice?
Ideas? How do we push back on those still promoting and selling his books?
Opus – as far as I know, Graham was above reproach in his moral life. After all, the “Pence rule” used to be the “Graham rule”. As far as I know the only scandals in Billy Graham’s life related to politics (specifically Richard Nixon) and some theological wobbliness late in life.
@Hmmm
Indeed, Graham does appear to have been an exception to the rule. I too operate the Pence rule.
The sales rank of “Every Man’s Battle” is 6,209 on Amazon now, which is a pretty good rank for a book that’s almost 10 years old. Arterburn and his ilk have way too much influence on Christian men, whether it’s men who buy the books themselves or men who are getting the book via their harpie wives. Many thanks to Dalrock for this in-depth look at the fool’s gold Arterburn is peddling.
@Dalrock
A new post from Pastor Wilson. Curious to see your take on it. https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/masculinity-without-permission.html
How could he ever think the physical part of their marriage would be good if she couldn’t even handle holding his hand?
I credit much of the modern Christian junk to idiocy, but I have to wonder about maliciousness here. How could someone in his field be dumb enough to not see the risks ahead of time?
The Shrew: Thank goodness she filled for divorce. This was her first step to honest self discovery. Her affair was dishonest self discovery which was very harmful to all involved.
God demands fidelity in marriage. You marry, you stay married. For better, for worse. For richer, for poorer. In sickness and in health.
If your “self discovery” leads you to believe that you don’t like the man you married … tough. That’s the “for worse” part of marriage. You’re obligated to stick to your vows, whether it makes you happy or not.
God doesn’t care about your “self discovery,” honest or otherwise. Your “self discovery” — your self, your happiness — is not the center and purpose of all creation.
Dalrock, please right a review on Amazon for this book.
However, I think you paint an overly rosy picture of her motivations.
Please don’t feed the trolls.
@thequestion
Re Wilson article….
Honestly not bad. He makes some very good points…… yet he still can’t resist taking a swipe at the men
By so emphasizing servant leadership, the church has not succeeded in establishing more of it, but they have succeeding in giving men a noble-sounding name as a fig leaf for their cowardice.
People like ‘The Shrew’ will line up for the mark of the beast like it’s a free iphone.
LOL…you just had to do break the holy contract because you thought he would.
Guess what…he didn’t, you did, and you will never know if he would of pulled the trigger or not.
@Mountain Man, Virginia & Kevin
Most men can manage to be an egotistical jerk towards men but a lapdog with women. We don’t have sexual attraction towards men. Mark Driscoll was the same. Hell: Most Christian celebrities are the same. I doubt Tim Keller would interpret a male congregant demolishing Tim’s china as a”godly tantrum” and a sign of Tim’s needed repentance. [1]
On the Doug Wilson post: Good to see. I would like to know what brought him around.
[1] Kathy Keller’s decisions to demolish dishes makes *much* more sense to me now that I know Tim Keller puts on gay interpretive dance at his church. When I initially read Dalrock’s post on it I thought it was strange the wife would smash the china, but the sort of guy who likes homoerotic ballet is the sort of guy who cares deeply about the china.
It just occurred to me that the basic narrative Arterburn has written of his courtship (not dating! Kiss that goodbye!) and subsequent marriage to Sandy reads like a romantic comedy script for a movie. The whole “at first she didn’t like him but then she saw his good side and fell in Twu Wuv” rom-com bit. Once again we see that Rollo Tomassi is correct; men are the true romantics. Yeah, a man shouldn’t base life decisions on an emotional wave, but many do.
Arterburn was clearly very blue-pill before marriage, probably from childhood. Combine that naive view of women and marriage with his obvious belief in The One / Soulmate myth and you have a walking Androsphere cliche.
I had to file for the divorce because I knew in my heart he would continue to lie and break the holy contract anyway which is an affront to God.
Had he broken the “holy contract,” the sin would have been on him.
But she broke the “holy contract.” So the sin is on her.
And I imagine that she’s so stupid, so self-delusional, that she thinks she’s free of sin because her “heart” told her that it was okay to sin before her husband could.
The serpent still talks to women through their “hearts,” and women still listen. Don’t pay attention to that patriarchal, outdated Bible text. Listen to Your Heart.
“Arterburn was clearly very blue-pill before marriage, probably from childhood. Combine that naive view of women and marriage with his obvious belief in The One / Soulmate myth and you have a walking Androsphere cliche.”
Makes me laugh that Arterburn has believed in The One three separate times now…
When a man does it…it’s a sin.
When a woman does it…it’s ‘self discovery’.
This has been your daily education in how things work in feminist la la land.
@Hmm, @Question
That article by Doug Wilson is not too bad. For an aging TradCon it’s very good. He’s not lavender anymore, but medium purple. There are problems:
On the one hand, Wilson actually admits that there are women who chase away men. That’s a huge leap of progress. On the other hand, what’s missing from that paragraph? The “babymomma who births a series of children each by a different man, with never any intention of marrying at all”. I’ve seen such women with my own eyes, and they come in all colors. TradCons fall for their sad story of abandoment every time. Every single time. Wilson likely is no exception.
Poisoning the well is not prudent nor is it useful to an actual debate. When a man of alleged wisdom does this, it casts doubt upon his honesty.
This is remarkably good and clear. It is free from the usual Wilsonian perambulatory obfuscation and more importantly it matches reality that can be observed by any man with The Glasses.
But, of course, he can’t just leave it there.
When men are doing what they were told to do, following the instructions of their leadership, to call them cowards because the leadership gave them stupid instruction is in fact cowardice. Take the leaders to task, Doug Wilson, not the men who were misled. If this means spending some time yelling at a mirror, do it.
Blah blah “toxic masculinity” blah
Excuse me for asking, but exactly who was it that engaged in “accomodations with feminism”, Doug Wilson? Was it the average man who is just trying to do right and get along with women? Or was it the leadership? As a culture it is long, long past time for the TradCons to get around to admitting their own mistakes. Anyone who is too proud to admit error has forfeited authority to tell other men to correct their errors. Back to the mirror, Doug Wilson.
There’s a few more details, such as the usual old man TradCon desire for young men to run risks that the old men never had to take and refuse to take now, but let me cut to the bottom line:
IMO this is what motivated WIlson: Jordan Peterson’s YouTube lectures. Wilson’s not the only one, I’ve seen little bits and pieces in other places where churchgoing writers are a bit alarmed at Peterson’s growing popularity – he’s not a Christian! He quotes Jung a lot! Why are these young men paying attention to him instead of sitting still for yet another of our ManUP rants?
It’s an obvious fact that Jordan Peterson has a large and growing following among the 20-something men. He does this without talking down to them or berating them (much), he also gives them real philosphical meat that is vastly different from the stale, dried-out tapioca most churches hand to men under the guise of “life advice”. While I have not viewed many of his vids, I have not seen any contempt from Peterson – contrast that with the usual looking-down-my-nose-at-you-worthless-cowards attitude that is typical of preachers – including Doug Wilson in this very essay. By the way.
Peterson is talking to young men as men, not as boys, not as problems, not as puppets in a personal psychodrama, not as enemies, not as morons. Maybe preachers, especially the TradCon types, could try learning from him?
tl;dr
Wilson is progressing quite rapidly for a man of his age and background, but he still has work to do. He’s moved from “lavender” to “purple. This essay gets a B-, up from his previous C’s.
One more thing about Doug Wilson’s latest piece: looks like he’s given up on comments. There’s now a box that can be used to email him directly, and that’s it. I find this interesting. Did he get tired of policing the commenter flamefests, or did he get too much reasoned disagreement, or something else? One thing I’ve learned about these celebrity preachers: they don’t like being shown their errors. Not at all.
@Anon Reader
Good insight on the Wilson piece. There is much to like, but there are some flaws as you note.
I think it is worse even than this. Wilson is waxing nostalgic for the days when he could still afford to accommodate feminists when he writes:
Wilson is nostalgic for the sweet spot where feminist hecklers had to constantly be treated as if they were legitimate, but not so powerful that accommodating them was an unmitigated disaster.
I didn’t think of it in exactly this way, but this mirrors my own initial reaction. Wilson is right in his remarks about what individual men have to do. But he overlooks the fact that this will only ever apply to an elite group of men. If we want men in general to desire the responsibility of husband and father, we must do the unthinkable and have respect for respectability.
nebbish
[neb-ish]
noun Slang.
a pitifully ineffectual, luckless, and timid person
@thedeti : sorry, my bad, it was Jason who said that
The first thing I noticed, as well, was that douggie got rid of comments. I disregard any article completely without comments. It’s basic skin in the game in the internet age.
But I had to respond to this:
“the plague of fatherlessness has a three-fold impact—on the miserable women who see their children abandoned by the one who fathered them, on the wretched women who chase away the one who fathered her children, and on the children themselves, who struggle with a standing hunger and with no pattern or model to follow.”
He talks about the three people effected by fatherlessness, and doesn’t even mention FATHERS. It’s great he for once mentions the women kicking father’s out, although he writes it very nicely as as “chasing away,” instead of “marrying under false pretenses,and then using the full arm of the state to steal their offspring and their past present and future resources while getting moral cover from the church.
It’s an odd article that shows he’s at the limit of his paradigm, but is doing all he can to stretch it over to show that his paradigm still fits the facts. Oh and event though this whole article is about the current lack of masculinity he still has to write about the dangers of toxic masculinity twice.
@theshrew
” I had to file for the divorce because I knew in my heart he would continue to lie and break the holy contract anyway which is an affront to God.”
Classic ‘womenz-feelz-think’. Attaway you go girl!- God hates divorce but thankfully for you your heart trumps Gods word. 🙂 You are your own God.
Look at the bright side, if he ever gets behind on his court ordered alimony, I’ll bet he’ll be able to find at least a few guys in jail who won’t be repulsed at the prospect of holding his hand. #everycloudhasasilverlining
Wilson answers selected comments every Tuesday. He closed off immediate comments because they tended to be hijacked by a couple of folks with nothing to do but answer and argue with every other commenter, without actually violating any board rule. One of these was MeMe (regulars may remember her as InsanityBytes).
The Tuesday answer session does have open comments.
Honestly not bad. He makes some very good points…… yet he still can’t resist taking a swipe at the men
Actually, it is bad. It’s terrible prose. Wilson is a plodding, yet clumsy writer. But you’re right, he makes some good points, but can’t help but take swipes at men.
Cane Caldo: “On the Doug Wilson post: Good to see. I would like to know what brought him around.”
Nothing “brought him around” … you silly little men in your foolish echo-chamber have been so busy calling everyone else “cucks” and “betas” that you haven’t been paying attention to what he has actually been saying for years.
@Ilion
You have me confused with someone else, sunshine.
No I don’t sweet child.
@Sunshine
Find a post or comment where I called someone a “cuck” who was not an actual cuckold. I don’t even use beta very often, and when I do it’s usually not derogatory. The fact is you don’t know to what I’ve been paying attention.
What Doug Wilson has been saying for years is littered with garbage. Even when he tries to avoid blaming men–for one post!–he has to caveat that he would really rather talk about the bad men…but he won’t do it here…even though he thinks he should.
But it is fine with me if Doug, you, and whoever else get your jollies on the Dunning-Kruger express.
Was invited last night by a casual friend to hos chuch…..yes, another “bold n biblical” one (aren’t they all today? every church is 100% standing on the Word of God….)
Got there. Praise began. Smoke machines, light show. disco ball………remote mics, dancing on the stage………
Announcements. Well, this church added its first female member to its “Board” and the pastor says to the congregation……(about 1000) “now some of you men are gonna be upset…..but we need input from women on how to steer our ministries, and they are natural nuturers…..we want to reach out and grow…….and all the studies show, a church that has moms, baby strollers, and an active childrens ministry are the ones who are going to survive…..also its Biblical…….Paul made a woman an apostle……….so its okay of women serve on the board….” All the women cheered, yelled and applauded. Most of the men here too. She also was a single mom
I got up at that point, shook my friends’ hand and said “gotta go”
Caught the bus back home. It’s not biblical. It’s not okay and its not allowed.
I would bet he is speaking of Junia. I have been listening to Romans the past few days.
– First, Paul didn’t make anyone anything in that case, he was just sending greetings.
– Second, this doesn’t say Junia was an apostle, just that the specific individual was “of note among the apostles”. Someone can be of note within a group, but not hold the same position of that group.
– How do we know “Junia” was female?
– A single greeting reference is not sufficient to build a doctrine of “women can be apostles” and the evidence would be insufficient to overcome other Scriptures that support the opposite idea.
That pastor did not need a woman on his board to find out the things he claimed as well. His comments indicate he already knew that, so having a woman on the board was not necessary to find out such things.
Pingback: Some Christian conservatives bow down for feminists
I appreciate the feedback. It is clear to me that the men on this blog have no control of their own anger and spite. This is not a scripture based issue, no matter how hard you try to find passages to substantiate how women have wronged a man’s life. Humanity’s indifference to humanity is very apparent among all of you. The Bible is not God’s word so much as it is man’s attempt to translate how we try to make sense of our earthly life.
Dan Horton re Doug Wilson
He talks about the three people effected by fatherlessness, and doesn’t even mention FATHERS.
Very significant point. I admit that I just read right through the paragraph twice and didn’t see that. We’re all just conditioned to dismiss fathers as irrelevent, even when writing about them, and the omission by Wilson and my own self demonstrates that blind spot.
Good catch.
@The Shrew
It is clear to me that the men on this blog have no control of their own anger and spite.
The words “some” and “all” are not synonyms. It would benefit your to make a note of that fact.
@theshrew
Typical drive-by troll. See ya!
How do we know “Junia” was female?
The consensus of scholarship. ‘ία’ is the ancient Greek suffix for feminine abstract nouns. Whatever your take on the rest of verse, it’s a stretch to say it is male.
“A single greeting reference is not sufficient to build a doctrine of “women can be apostles”
Many people over the centuries have taken pains to say it is male even though the evidence does not really support this contention. There are two questions that need answering: (1) Is Junia female? and (2) Were Andronicus and Junia apostles? If you’ll only accept any combination of answers that means a woman is not an apostle, then that’s intellectual dishonesty. The insistence that Junia is male bears the heavy implication that the text does say that Junia is an apostle. Whether this is enough to build a doctrine is a separate question.
Wow weee! Your parody gets better and better. Keep it up! I would stick a gold star on your forehead if I could. You’re getting good, in a few months you should be at the level of a feminist Vox writer! Well done!
textbook. disagree with a woman…..now all men here have uncontrolled anger and spite. Happens in church too. I was once asked to get something for another person, a woman. I told her “no” and off she goes….tattles to the CSM (Corps Srgt Major) that I have unctrollable rage and anger. As if.
The accurately handled ‘The Shrew’: “It is clear to me that the men on this blog have no control of their own anger and spite.”
And yet, for all their faults, they have you accurately pegged.
“How do we know “Junia” was female?”
“The consensus of scholarship. ‘ία’ is the ancient Greek suffix for feminine abstract nouns.”
Moreover, ‘Junia” is a Latin female name; it’s the feminine of the clan-name ‘Junius‘
The NT was written in Greek, not Latin.
I definitely lol-ed here, a great line.
I credit “modern Christianity” to Satan. Odd while Christ spoke of Satan more than Heaven the modern church avoids talking about him. He’s one ghost writer that doesn’t want credit. His goal was always to destroy Christianity and use whatever means necessary to do it.
The Shrew says:
March 8, 2018 at 9:51 am
“I appreciate the feedback. It is clear to me that the men on this blog have no control of their own anger and spite. This is not a scripture based issue, no matter how hard you try to find passages to substantiate how women have wronged a man’s life. Humanity’s indifference to humanity is very apparent among all of you. The Bible is not God’s word so much as it is man’s attempt to translate how we try to make sense of our earthly life.”
She missed perhaps the most fundamental point on Christian theology. That is that teaching goes from God to men to women. Women don’t teach men theologically in Christianity! When a woman starts to do that, she’s wrong from the first syllable, and she never improves.
Luke, show me the scripture that points out only men teach women theology. I would very much like this information.
If this is a men only blog I can deal with that. I’ve been following Dalrock for many months now and find the posts quite interesting. I also enjoy the flurry of comments after his posts. He has definitely hit a cord.
I posted a comment simply to point out that the man who has been getting his marriages wrong should look deeply within himself to straighten out his path forward. Picking a spouse by hoping that they can “fix” this person is a set up for failure. He is clearly doing it wrong.
The Shrew
If this is a men only blog I can deal with that.
Dalrock has welcomed women’s comments in the past, so it’s not men-only. However since it tends to be majority-men the dialog can be heated, and blunt. It’s not as hot a kitchen as some other places, but it can get warm. Some people find that tiresome, others like it.
Red Pill Latecomer says:
March 7, 2018 at 11:47 am
Well said.
@The Shrew
Note that when its older women mentoring younger women its in the context of loving their husbands, loving their children and being subject to him.
Whilst 1 Timothy 2:12
”But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
KJV
Assuming of course the non-feminist slanted translation:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/cbmw.niv2011.2.pdf
Which cuts out most of the Patriarchal themes that is present in the original scriptures.
You make absurd statements…you get proper feedback. Nothing to do with emotions, honey.
“The NT was written in Greek, not Latin.”
The NT was written in a Latin-ruled empire, in which Latin speakers were the upper crust, and in which Latin names had more status than non-Latin names. It was similar to how almost no native English personal names survived the several centuries of rule by French-speakers following the Disaster of 1066.
… ‘Junia’ is a Latin female name, the feminine of ‘Junius’; ‘Paul’ is (the eroded form of) a Latin-based male name; ‘Agrippa’ is a Latin male name; ‘Agrippina’ is a Latin female name; ‘Aquilla/Aquila’ is a Latin name name; ‘Priscilla’ is a Latin female name.
So, despite that the NT was written in Greek, it is loaded with Latin-derived personal names.
@Derek Ramsey
Could there be any more apostles than the 12 Jesus sent?
@Derek Ramsey
Junia if feminine is certainly not one who teaches scripture(maybe the basic Gospel though) or has Authority over men:
https://carm.org/junia-apostle
Else that would contradict other scripture that prohibits that.
Ilion,
That still doesn’t prove Junia was female, nor that he/she was an apostle.
I knew a man named Kim years ago. It did not appear to have been that abnormal when he was named (not a case of a Boy Named Sue that Johnny Cash sings of).
Ironic source of a good discussion of the issue:
https://cbmw.org/uncategorized/a-female-apostle/
The sex is irrelevant however. I am sure Priscillia was well known among the apostles as well. We know she helped and had a good relationship with Paul. She and her husband also helped Apollos. It wouldn’t be surprised if others knew her as well. Being known and appreciated by a group is not the same as being a member of that group.
Weak evidence for claiming women can hold the office of Apostle.
@infowarrior1 – Could there be any more apostles than the 12 Jesus sent?
Yes. Jesus was an apostle (Hebrews 3:1). Others, subject to debate, include Timothy, Silas, Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, Andronicus/Junia, the women that followed Jesus, the 70 disciples, Bartholomew/Nathanael, Lebbaeus/Thaddaeus/Jude/Judas, the authors of the gospels, various parties mentioned in the “Acts of the Apostles”, and the papacy. It depends on doctrinal presuppositions.
…is certainly not one who teaches scripture…or has Authority over men…Else that would contradict other scripture that prohibits that.
Yes, it would be a contradiction and one (or both) of the explanations must then be wrong. You’ve presumed which one of the three it is.
The CARM and CBMW links are illustrative of a hedging-your-bets approach: absence of a definitive stance makes it easy to move goalposts. Skepticism is fine if it is applied evenly, otherwise it is cherry-picking.
Cringe-worthy.
A woman who doesn’t want to hold a man’s hand isn’t attracted to him. It’s that simple. Same for a wife who doesn’t want to sleep with her husband.
Women hate weak men. Even uber-feminists. Show me a feminist whose husband has lower socio-economic status than her and I’ll show you a woman who can’t stand her husband, and probably is cheating.
Women crave the masculine no matter what they say. Never listen to what women say. Watch their behavior — behavior never lies.
The Bible is full of great wisdom about women, if only people would actually read the source code.
Here you go, Shrew.
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 ESV
“The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.”
———————————————————————————————————————–
1 Timothy 2:11-12 ESV
“Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.”
———————————————————————————————————————
Titus 2:3-5 ESV /
“Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.”
———————————————————————————————————————–
Ephesians 5:22-33 ESV
“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word”
——————————————————————————————————————
1 Peter 3:1 ESV
“Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives,”
——————————————————————————————————————
1 Corinthians 11:1-34 ESV
“Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.”
Jay Karknee says:
March 7, 2018 at 6:28 pm
“Look at the bright side, if he ever gets behind on his court ordered alimony, I’ll bet he’ll be able to find at least a few guys in jail who won’t be repulsed at the prospect of holding his hand. “
More likely his ears and hips, but we know what you meant. (Never forget that MEN very probably are subjected to forced rape in this country at rates that exceed those women suffer, when rapes in prison are included, and much to most of the forcible rape those imprisoned men suffer is interracial, by attackers belonging to groups with above-average infection rates of various STDs such as HIV…)
More for Shrew: http://biblereasons.com/women-pastors/
@Derek Ramsey
”The CARM and CBMW links are illustrative of a hedging-your-bets approach: absence of a definitive stance makes it easy to move goalposts. Skepticism is fine if it is applied evenly, otherwise it is cherry-picking.”
You are right. Junia the apostle wouldn’t be in the position of Authority or teaching scripture as the Holy Spirit says through Paul.
@Luke
” when rapes in prison are included, and much to most of the forcible rape those imprisoned men suffer is interracial, by attackers belonging to groups with above-average infection rates of various STDs such as HIV”
This disgusting sodomitic evil ought to rightfully be punished by the firing squad. Everyone doing the raping in prison needs to be shot if Justice is to be done.
I believe others can be apostles, though they are different from the original 12, as even Paul was, by his own confession. (I know that some think he should have been the replacement for Judas, but they are wrong and need to read his writings more.)
Apostle just means “sent one” and many can easily be in that role, especially when going to form a new work for Christ someplace at His leading. All the offices notes in Ephesians continue, contrary to the claims of some.
This does not mean they are all open to women however, nothing in the Scriptures says that and turning an obscure reference of thanks to overturn other Scripture is quite dishonest and/or foolish, at best.
The Bible is not God’s word so much as it is man’s attempt to translate how we try to make sense of our earthly life.
That statement just cost you any remaining shred of serious attention that you might otherwise have have merited, even if only grudgingly.
Now get lost.
She just keeps proving why women shouldn’t teach men in these matters.
‘All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;’
2 Timothy 3:16
Shrew is a Unitarian/Universalist based on her gravitar description. Thus, don’t expect her to treat any aspect of the Bible as authoritative or infallible, including passages dealing with submission and authority. Even if you could show her chapter and verse, it would likely be explained away as inapplicable to the here and now, given our superior modern enlightenment. I don’t think she is here for serious discussion.
Everyone doing the raping in prison needs to be shot if Justice is to be done.
Those who condone and encourage it deserve first to be raped themselves, then shot.
I don’t think so either. If she thinks it’s because men are ‘angry’ because they rebuke her absurd statements…it’s all about emotions.
I don’t think so either. If she thinks it’s because men are ‘angry’ because they rebuke her absurd statements…it’s all about emotions.
And yet, you never learn. You take the bait each time.
A woman like that only shows up here because she gets sexually aroused from arguing with men (and losing these arguments to an authoritative men). Yet you are more than happy to jump through hoops to entertain her.
On the contrary. I am serious especially as it relates to the spirit. Luke gave me some good passages to work from. Currently I am on vacation but plan to develop some thoughts for Christian men concerning the women they wish to understand more deeply. This to me is a very important topic. I work with brides on a daily basis, seeing about 150 each year during bridal season. They are from all religions, but mainly Christian. I will be posting on my blog The Shrew.
Blessings to all of you!
The Shrew says:
March 12, 2018 at 12:29 am
“Luke gave me some good passages to work from. Currently I am on vacation but plan to develop some thoughts for Christian men concerning the women they wish to understand more deeply.”
If you are going to tell these thoughts to men, you will clearly have failed to understand the crystal-clear words of 1 Timothy. You literally have nothing you can tell men theologically, not and be faithful to a key foundation of Christianity. If you have theological questions, you should (AT HOME) ask your husband, get his answer, and accept it. If a woman has no husband, then her father. Only IMO if your mother is clearly faithful as a Christian (includes accepting the commandments of the above verses I cited) should she probably be going to her mother for such questions. it’s clear that the vast, vast majority of American women are NOT faithful Christians, and have less than nothing in the way of good counsel to offer a woman who is genuinely seeking to learn God’s will for her life. Like a church that accepts female clergy or admitted sexually-active homosexuals as clergy, a woman who fails to accept the above verses can be instantly rejected as any kind of Christian guide to a younger woman. Women, unlike men, rarely if ever seem to have any good theological teaching in them if apostate on something key. There are vanishingly few female counterparts in the Bible to Saul, Sampson, Moses, and David, after all, demonstrating this.
Luke,
The Shrew likely has the same challenges most women today face, but saying she should abandon her job because it might lead her to teach false doctrine is foolish. She should certainly not seek a pulpit ministry, but teaching the proper balance in marriage, for example, is perfectly consistent with what older women are called to teach.
I would that more woman would do that, so few do today.
Dear Fellas:
YHBT, boys.
The Shrew sez:
You are hilarious! When I was much younger, I used to do this sort of thing on usenet. I would like to think I got as good at it as you, but I don’t think I ever did.
Best,
Boxer
I commented in January:
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/01/14/stantons-dilemma/#comment-257118
shrewview dot wordpress dot com
Pingback: The Lone Wanderers’ solutions to feminism
As a 50 year old woman, I can only feel embarrassed for the woman in this article. My guess is she enjoyed many liberal courses in gender studies and was most likely on the pill, which does “wonders” to a woman’s psyche. (Listen to “Contraception, cracking the myth. By Prof Janet E. Smith-Lighthouse Talks by Augustine Institute)
Ick, ick, ick. Poor guy, what a disappointment to find out she doesn’t want intamacy with him. It is a lie from the pits of hell that married women don’t want sex. “Fifty shades of grey” did not become the highest grossing paperback book since Harry Potter for nothing. And guess who the majority of readers were and are? Hint: not men.
Pingback: How to creep out your wife. | Dalrock
Latest Red Pill News: Florida school shooter gets loads of fan mail from hot young groupies. The sad sad irony is, if he had the attention of these girls a few years ago, odds are he would not be a shooter. It is so dam sad all around.