Friday, April 12, 2013

Female privilege, imperative, or reality

My daughter and I were on our way home from running errands in RLB's truck when the tread from the rear passenger tire blew off. My first tire blowing experience. It was pretty scary, especially since we were only feet away from a pretty deep ditch.

I got out of the truck and walked around to look at the tire. The tread ripped the wheel well molding right off. The inner tube was still intact. I wondered if I could drive on this being about four miles from home.

I got back in the cab and started calling my road side assistance when I saw a police officer pull up behind me. I didn't complete the call and instead got my driver's license ready and insurance information out of the glove compartment. That's what you're supposed to do, right? 

The cop came up to my window but wouldn't take the documents. Instead he said, "let me take a look at the tire." I got out of the truck again and walked around the backside with him.

Cop: "Do you have a spare?"
Me: "Yes"
Cop: "Well, I could change it for you but..."
Me: "No, no, it's too hot out here (it was over 100 degrees), I can just call the service."
Cop: "No, you don't want to wait here for the hour it will take for them to get here, but with the slope of the road, I don't think I'll be able to get the jack to work right. Tell you what, you drive real slow, I'll follow behind you, there is a tire shop right up the road."
Me: "Okay, thank you so much."

I was home 30 minutes later (even with me stopping back where we blew the tire to pick up the tread and the wheel well molding).

Just a really nice cop? Would he offer the same service to a man? There's no way we can know for sure.

However...

Can anyone blame me for appreciating this kind of treatment?

When I told RLB all about it, he joked that I got the helpless blond lady treatment.

Perhaps.

One of the things I hate most about the prevalence of feminist women is the natural response from disgusted men. I really like the idea of kindness in a society. If you, as a woman, have ever barked at a man for opening your door, you are an abysmal beast. If you, as a woman, have ever mocked the kindness of a man because of your empowerment and independence, I hate you. Really, I do. 

Kindness is good. Bitchiness, entitlement, snobbery and haughtiness is bad. Can we agree?

My children tease me, though I know they've learned great lessons of kindness and responsibility. We were in the grocery store parking lot. I opened my truck door and the wind took hold of it. Bam, right into the car next to us. It left a one inch gouge in their door. I felt terrible. I wrote a note apologizing for what I did, left them my name and phone number and promised to take care of the damage. They never called. And though my truck has at least a dozen dings in its doors from other car doors, I can't not do the right thing in that situation.

I don't desire chivalry without reciprocation. I truly desire mutual kindness.

I have read a lot about the female imperative. Yet still I quest for an alternative response to it. I write endlessly about biblical submission and the responsibilities of a wife in marriage. However, my words are merely a peep amongst the bull horn of entitled female doctrine.

I support, emphatically, the need for men and women to reject feminism. In responding to a comment regarding the purpose of the manosphere I wrote the following:
...what I see the manosphere as is the pursuit of truth. It is the analysis of the general nature of women and how they respond (not what they say, what they do) to stimuli. It is the analysis of the nature of men depending on their socio/sexual proclivities. It is the high scrutiny and replication of what successful men do. It is a response to feminism and an assertion that feminists/cultural Marxists will not control the thoughts and behaviors of free men.
Here's where I take issue:

I have daughters. They are being raised in a Christian household with exceptional morals. They value purity and chastity. They see biblical submission role modeled and have an exceptional respect for their father as head of the household.

However, there is no man entitled to them. And that's what I hear a lot of men expressing. These men are looking for the chaste virgin who will naturally submit and fulfill their role as a Christian wife. These men seem to question the ability of the dominant frame the very manosphere they read proclaims they can own. They will go without until the perfect package is presented into their hands. I gotta tell you guys, should you lack an understanding of grace, I can not support my daughters marrying the likes of you. She's fallen. She's a sinner. She's in need of her Savior every last bit as much as you are. She will obey God's commands in marriage but for goodness sake, don't believe for a minute that she will be able to cast off all of her female or sinful nature. And, she very much wants to be attracted to her husband. She will, I promise, overlook the man who rejects a masculine frame, and will choose a man who is exciting to her. It's her nature.

There's nothing wrong with that.

Of course I submit to RLB no matter the circumstance. But he lives with me in an understanding way. He gives me grace. And, he does what is necessary to keep me attracted to him.

I'm interested to know if this is my expression of the female imperative, if it is the tradcon perspective, or if it is an expression of reality. 

25 comments:

  1. Lefout of your list of options are three other possibilities:

    1. None of the above. This could be something you just came up with out of nowhere.

    2. Two of the above. It could be the tradcons align with the feminine imperative on this. Or they don't, but reality does. Or they don't, and reality is with them this time.

    3. All of the above. Sufficiently summed in 2.

    What I mean to say by this is simply that labels are not, as you seem to present them, alternatives to truth. Rather, they are descriptors that may or may not be true.

    It is conceivable that tradcons, innate female drives, and reality might be in accord on a thing or two. The need women have for oxygen springs to mind as a trivial first example.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SD's point is about the failure of the labels. It was more a sarcastic question than genuine. It appears that anytime traditional Christian values are espoused, they are labeled in a derogatory manner. The ankle biters are going to ankle bite.

      If you claim Christianity as your morality today in Western society, you are labeled something derogatory by the evil doers. I really don't know what else to call them. If you have a better term, please recommend one.

      Delete
  2. There are plenty of opinions in the manosphere that are not very nuanced. If your daughters have strong moral and ethical values and can resist the feral selfish attitudes that the uncontrolled female imperative seems to encourage they will be a great catch for a solid attractive man. I agree keep her away from total control freaks.
    There are plenty of bigots who think they are intellectually superior who harbor derogatory attitudes toward Christians, and there are plenty of phonies who consider themselves Christian with an almost childish belief in heaven and hell but no solid ethics or integrity if it is inconvenient for their selfishness. A lot of static to tune out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They may be breeding themselves out of existence:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EDtp0mLej0

      Delete
  3. "However, there is no man entitled to them. And that's what I hear a lot of men expressing. These men are looking for the chaste virgin who will naturally submit and fulfill their role as a Christian wife. These men seem to question the ability of the dominant frame the very manosphere they read proclaims they can own. They will go without until the perfect package is presented into their hands. I gotta tell you guys, should you lack an understanding of grace, I can not support my daughters marrying the likes of you. She's fallen. She's a sinner. She's in need of her Savior every last bit as much as you are. She will obey God's commands in marriage but for goodness sake, don't believe for a minute that she will be able to cast off all of her female or sinful nature. And, she very much wants to be attracted to her husband. She will, I promise, overlook the man who rejects a masculine frame, and will choose a man who is exciting to her. It's her nature. "

    I admit that I found this somewhat confusing SD. Are you saying that some men in the manosphere seem to be holding out for a perfect woman... and define such perfection as to mean that she would not act female? I'm not sure that I have seen anyone take this line before, but perhaps I just missed it. Either way, its an absurd view for a man to hold. A righteous, God-fearing woman will always still be a woman at heart, just as a righteous, God-fearing man will always be a man at heart. There is no escaping our sinful nature.

    Or am I getting this completely wrong?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SD's reference is to the all too typical Gamma-type man that occupies the churchianity pews. Beta provider is not going to cut it. The whiners in the manosphere have no ambition. They complain about the way things are but do nothing to fix themselves. We agree it is an absurd view for men to hold. It's a defeatist view. Unfortunately, it is exactly the MGTOW mentality. They are many. They will change nothing and get nothing. They are weak and deserve to die out.

      Delete
    2. "They are weak and deserve to die out."

      Whether or not they deserve to die out, they will die out. Such is the fate of any movement which doesn't self-procreate.

      However, I do sympathize with some of the ones who have given up. The math of the situation is such that many men who are holding out for a good woman (not a perfect one, just a good one) will have to do without in this country. The ratio of good men to good women is just too lopsided.

      I hold not sympathy, however, for those MGTOW who hate or despise women. They are so focused on the mote in the eyes of women they can't see the beam in their own.

      Delete
    3. I'm a strong believer in the man making the woman good. It's the leadership women crave. If you give them that, you give them the chance to change. Not all of them will, but things worth having are never easy to acquire. It's either a vicious cycle of feminism creating weenies of men and crass women or a productive cycle of biblical leadership creating good women and men.

      Delete
    4. They are weak and deserve to die out.

      I don't agree.

      These men you speak of are not people waiting around for a women to marry them so they can stay home and sit on the couch.

      They want a wife, they will do their male duty, they will go to work and provide. They just are not allowed to because women have been freed by society to follow their hypergamy. They don't get the time of day from a quality woman, they only have women that have been cum dumpsters and are looking for a sucker to raise someone else's kid.

      So why would they improve themselves? There is no reward for doing so. The top tier men will screw all the women they want and then find a quality women to settle down with. This leaves the low tier men with very used women, very ugly women, or nothing. I'm not surprised a lot of them choose nothing.

      It is like you expect every man to be a Rich Successful Alpha. That is simply impossible, and has never been the case, but most managed to find a wife and raise a family.

      Delete
    5. "I'm a strong believer in the man making the woman good. It's the leadership women crave."

      Yes, but that only works if you can marry a good woman in the first place. Or at least, one who hasn't been ruined by the world. Honestly, with what I know now about the Red Pill, and my own innate abilities, I'm not worried about holding onto a good woman. Its finding her and wooing her in the first place that is more of a concern.

      Delete
  4. If it's unacceptable for a wife to let her physical appearance go because this will reduce her husband's attraction to her (and I believe that this is true), then it is equally a moral failure for a man to behave in a fashion that causes his wife's attraction to him to die out. It's two sides of the same coin, but they're so different that it makes a lot of sense for people giving advice to "specialize" on one side or the other - that doesn't mean that the other side of the coin doesn't exist. Women who focus on the man's side of the coin and neglect their own are likely to make themselves just as miserable as the men focusing on women's failures instead of taking responsibility for their own side of the coin. (I seem to recall something about specks, and eyes, and planks...)

    And, well, if a loser's going to frame his loserness in terms of "waiting for the right one," I wish him well in his celibacy. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  5. SD,

    A few thoughts. I think that men get genuine pleasure from helping a damsel in distress. It makes them feel strong and important. I had a situation similar to yours recently and a cop responded the exact same way. I think it's fine to accept such help as long as you are gracious (you should never have an entitled attitude) and you should also be willing to pay such acts of kindess forward.

    I would tend to agree that some men in the manosphere can be unreasonable at times, especially when it comes to demanding a virgin. My husband was entitled to a virgin when we married b/c he was also a virgin. Most grown men are not.

    But, I do think that the main reason they are so cautious of women in general is that many of them have been terribly mistreated, even in marriage. Stories like Deti's are heartbreaking. It makes me so sad to think of married men having to beg for sex only to get rejected. Think of the emotional scars that must cause.

    I agree with you 100% about mutual kindness. I don't have any ministry-related gifts that I'm aware of at this point, but I am a kind person and my husband reciprocates as do most people I encounter, whether socially or in my workplace.

    I don't find it difficult to submit to my husband for the most part because I respect him and it's obvious that he loves me. Respect and love --- though required by God regardless of one's circumstances ---is much more difficult to demonstrate if one or both spouses are rude, disrespectful, or downright cruel to each other.

    LisainVermont

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure you're right to state that only virgin men deserve virgin women. It would be awfully nice, but this equivalence implies the very equality professed by feminists and contested by the manosphere. Not only women who are already rich and successful deserve rich and successful men, we already know that what makes each sex tick is very different. I agree though there is a measure of balance and justice, and that a woman who is good, chaste and submissive deserves a man who is honorable, protective and hardworking. I'm sure there are some guys in the sphere who expect a lot without doing much to improve themselves, but the vast majority understand what needs to be done and are trying very hard.

      Delete
    2. What I meant was that it's unfair for a man to insist his future wife be a virgin if he hasn't saved himself for her.
      Lisa in Vermont

      Delete
  6. @donalgraeme
    Are you saying that some men in the manosphere seem to be holding out for a perfect woman... and define such perfection as to mean that she would not act female?

    Yes. And I am saying that because of comments like this of yours:

    Yes, but that only works if you can marry a good woman in the first place. Or at least, one who hasn't been ruined by the world.

    All are broken. Most are not being raised right. Most have been lied to just as men have.

    The men I desire for my daughters to marry will need to be like their father. One who is not afraid of what a woman might do, regardless of her past and how she may have been ruined by the world. One capable of forgiveness and who is confident in his mission. Though these men may never need to forgive what RLB forgave of me, the qualities in a man who lives with a woman in an understanding way is what will be essential.

    I guarantee my daughters will be unable to maintain their "good woman" qualities every day for the rest of their lives. Just as all men go through periods of doubt in their lives, my daughters will, because they are women, go through times of irrational emotion, hypergamous thoughts, the need to shit test, etc. It is very important their husbands do not either a) place them on a pedestal or b) have unrealistic expectations of perfection.

    They won't be attracted to men who feel the world has been ruined for them. There is nothing about defeatism that is attractive.

    What RLB is expressing is slightly more indelicate way of saying what Vox had to say at the end of his post:

    It's understandable why so many men are afraid. Fear has been instilled in them by 16 years or more of relentless feminist propaganda in the educational system, in the ruthless reinforcing of the female imperative by their parents, their teachers, their pastors

    But it's all a lie. Bad things are not going to happen if you refuse to avoid offending and upsetting women. You are not committing to living a monk-like existence devoid of female companionship if you fail to regularly kowtow to the female imperative, in fact, in case you haven't noticed, those of us whose default position is open contempt for that imperative tend to do considerably better with them than you do. And if you have reached the point where you are so fearful that you can't even admit that you find a long mane of wavy hair or a tight, well-formed female posterior to be attractive, you can't reasonably call yourself a man. You're nothing more than a sad, pathetic drone.

    So stop being afraid. It isn't masculine. It isn't attractive. It isn't even Christian, for that matter. Conquer your fear, and that is the first step in developing Game and moving up the socio-sexual hierarchy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "All are broken. Most are not being raised right. Most have been lied to just as men have."

    I think we are both assigning different meanings to various words here. For example, when I say broken or ruined, I don't mean sinful, or fallen, or prone to sin. Nothing of the sort. When I say broken, I mean this:

    http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/04/meet-the-swugs-of-yale-women-washed-up-at-21.html

    and this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2304789/How-unrequited-love-torture-soul-Liz-Hodgkinson-reveals-doomed-obsession-man-took-virginity-hurts-50-years.html

    That is what I mean by broken.

    "I guarantee my daughters will be unable to maintain their "good woman" qualities every day for the rest of their lives. Just as all men go through periods of doubt in their lives, my daughters will, because they are women, go through times of irrational emotion, hypergamous thoughts, the need to shit test, etc. "

    See, that is not what I include in my definition of a "good woman." What you have described in inherent in the female condition. What I mean is this: chaste, takes care of her health, is polite, acts feminine, tries to maintain a sweet disposition... That is what I mean by good.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I read both of those stories. But here's something to ponder.

    Regardless of how disgusting the SWUG is, is there a man who could wake her out of her stupor? I'm not suggesting one would want to. What I'm implying is the man that could is the man my daughters will be attracted to.

    The Alpha widow...

    This is actually new to me, meaning; it's not something I have ever experienced. I married someone who puts every man I had known prior, to shame. And...and, I know his natural propensity is Delta.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Regardless of how disgusting the SWUG is, is there a man who could wake her out of her stupor? I'm not suggesting one would want to. What I'm implying is the man that could is the man my daughters will be attracted to."

    Perhaps. But I'm not sure. A long time ago the concept of a ruined woman was not a novelty. There was an understanding that some women simply weren't marriageable. I think that it is possible for a woman to be permanently damaged in how she relates to other people, especially a man. Her soul might be saved if she comes back to the faith, but the temporal damage of her sins cannot be cannot undone. Thinking on it, I suspect the SWUG is more likely to be permanently damaged that the other woman. Perhaps the husband of the other woman was not very Alpha, and couldn't break the first man's hold. But the dilemma is this: how do you know just how damaged a woman is? (Conversely, for a woman looking for a husband, the same question applies).

    I think you are letting your own situation cloud your judgment here SD. I know somewhat of your past, and how you overcame it. But you are extraordinary and exceptional in that regard. I don't think most women could recover as you have. Personally, I find it something of a miracle. A man cannot count on being as lucky or blessed as RLB has been in finding a woman who can overcome her past.

    I guess what I am getting at is this:

    I don't expect perfection in a wife. I'm not perfect.

    I don't expect that I won't have to act like a masculine man around my wife. I owe that to myself as much as I owe it to her.

    I just have a few basic standards, a few basic criteria, that I won't concede. Every woman should be the same way when looking for a husband.

    ReplyDelete
  10. donalgraeme,
    What if we just believed what the Bible has to say? "More than conquerors" and all that. What if we are actually submitted to the simplicity of it all? Though it wasn't easy, we had faith. What if it was that faith that brought us to the overcoming?

    Blessed...absolutely. Lucky? No. To write it off as luck is to undermine all the work that went into it. There is no luck involved in battling with the devil and coming out victorious.

    We were willing to go there. RLB was willing to to fight. No miracle. No luck.

    Truth.

    The Word.

    RLB does not live the life of Riley. It may sound as such. But I get to see the truth of it. I get to see the battle. I get to see the obedience and submission to the Word. I get to see the rejection of the path of least resistance.

    I adamantly reject this notion that he was lucky. Acts 10:34

    I am in no way extraordinary or exceptional. I am a hopeless sinner. BUT...I believe.

    Please don't discredit the Hope that is in Jesus Christ. It is obtainable for all of His creation.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Two things:

    "Blessed...absolutely. Lucky? No. To write it off as luck is to undermine all the work that went into it. There is no luck involved in battling with the devil and coming out victorious."

    I will give you that. You are both blessed.



    "I am in no way extraordinary or exceptional. I am a hopeless sinner. BUT...I believe."

    You give yourself less credit than you deserve.

    "Please don't discredit the Hope that is in Jesus Christ. It is obtainable for all of His creation."

    The Hope that Jesus promises us is a hope based not on this world, but the next. A hope for Salvation that lets us join Jesus and His Heavenly Father in Heaven. That Hope does not mean, however, that we can expect to escape the consequences of our actions here on Earth. The Prodigal Son was welcomed back by his father, but his inheritance was lost forever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The exceptionalism and credit are the belief in God's Word. That is available to all. Yes, you pay for the crap you did here. You also reap the rewards of following God's guidance here. The MGTOWs fail to listen to God's guidance. That's it. They are quitters.

      I have been told my entire life how lucky I am when I accomplish different things. I'm told this by the same people who would never do what I do to acquire said rewards. I have taught SD how to do the difficult in order to acquire the reward. That is a habit one must develop.

      I have a jacket with Prodigal Son embroidered where my name should go. I own that spiritually. I will take the Prodigal Son's life every time over the pissed-off-at-home son. That is how you accomplish things in life. You fail a lot. I fail more than other people do. That is the secret to being blessed. It's right there in the Bible. MGTOWs are afraid. The parable of the talents is the same lesson. Failing miserably is my specialty. MGTOWs specialize in avoiding challenge. They suck and should just grow a pair...boobs or balls. Their choice.

      Delete
  12. Donalgraeme,

    Who is to say he could not have earned a new inheritance?

    The answer to that is, I think, beyond the scope of the parable. But I would argue that your inference also goes beyond what the parable is intended to address - which sums up to "The indignation of the righteous has absolutely no bearing on God's joy over saving the sinful."

    Churchianicus occidentus is largely the result of the churches bowing to the feminists and honoring woman as the stronger vessel, rather than the weaker. We lost sight of the fact that Eve was decieved. We avoided acknowledging she even could be.

    The truth is that all women are fundamentally depraved.

    And all men.

    Always have been. Always will be. Til the end of this earth.

    The Christain answer of utter grace is the only way to swallow the red pill and not be poisoned by it. And sometimes that means withholding earthly consequences. God did not destroy Ninevah when they repented. But he did punish David's adultery and murder even after David repented.

    The difference between the cases is not known to me. Perhaps there is a standard that can be applied across the board. Point is it's not so cut and dried.

    SD is right. She's not so exceptional as you might think. The strongest difference between her and most women is that, like the Church, she has a husband devoted to purifying her. Will this always work? No.

    But in the grand scheme of things, the moral differences between two humans is a lot smaller than we think. We are made of the same rotten materials. The question of how much of the rotteness has been allowed to show has much less bearing than the question of how much rebuilding has been done.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Of course I submit to RLB no matter the circumstance. But he lives with me in an understanding way.

    This is an expression of tradcon churchian feminism. Sorry to be blunt...but it just is. This is not an expression that conveys an iota of submissive nature, quite the opposite. Note....I am only writing about the words on the page, I do not know you at all, so take my comment exactly as its intended, this summation of yours is a massive red flag and the type of thing a churchian feminist will pump her fist and yell amen about.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 1 Peter 3:7
    Not churchian, it's biblical.

    He knows I'm a wretched sinner who will fail. He does not hold me to a standard of perfection. When I fail, he encourages me back to the Word. That can include tough love. Most of the time he can just give me a look and I'll know I'm out of line. Then he forgives me.

    You either completely misread what I wrote or I haven't a clue what isn't tradcon.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Is 1 Peter 3:7 something you deny, Empath?

    Please explain how it is tradcon churchian feminism.

    I don't know you either and am very curious what way it is you live with your wife.

    ReplyDelete