A woman is not taught to be uppity; she is born wanting more and better. That’s the role women will naturally play in civilization. When they are at their best they provoke and beseech; at their worst they usurp, tempt, and nag. Either way, women are the living expression of the idea of upward mobility (more and better) and it’s (part) of what God intended women to be.
Now, let’s address some common lies that surround this need in women; this hypergamy. One of them I’ve already covered above: Hypergamy is a good thing, and it’s intended. If a man doesn’t feel like dealing with any hypergamous impulses then he doesn’t want anything to do with women. More for me and mine, then.
Another common lie is one that we see most often coming out of churches and other peoples who might describe themselves as “socially conservative”. It’s a perversion of women’s role of provocation and beseeching, and it goes something like this: “Women are a civilizing force on men.” This is wrong. Women are an impetus for men to express civilizing force. The force comes from men. Even when it comes from women, civilization is an inherently male expression of force; so children better do what Mama said and stop actin’-the-fool because one way or another she has access to Daddy’s belt.
We understand this when we examine why the presence of women provokes men to civilize things, or why mothers civilize their children’s behavior: We’re trying to make it–homes, streets, grocery stores, anywhere–safe, orderly, and pleasant, if not beautiful. Does Mama swat her kids because they made her? Only if she’s dysfunctional and abusive. They certainly provoked her, but they don’t make her. She’s doing it because somebody needs to make sure those kids know how to behave, succeed, and be useful to someone besides themselves. What does that tell us about women?
The big daddy lie of them all is that women must be encouraged to “be themselves”; to “reach for the stars”, and “live their dreams”. [1] It is repeated because it must be maintained in the face of all evidence to the contrary–which is ubiquitous–and that maintenance is necessary because it is a cover for the more fundamental lie that women aren’t like that. Oh yes, they are. We see it every day on every street, in nearly every song, and certainly in every advertisement.
It’s precisely the mechanism upon which the serpent in the Garden of Eden operated, and he attacks it in the same way. It insinuates that Eve is held back from something good, and that’s bad. She wants good, doesn’t she? And God makes good things; so whatever she wants must be good, and if she wants it to be good, then it is good for her, and in fact will make her better, won’t it? Keep in mind: At this point, the Fall has not happened, and we see hypergamy already in play; a hypergamy that God created and said was Good.
Notice what happens there: The serpent slips in the insinuation that it’s bad that she’s being kept back. If we were to make a list of “good” or “bad” word associations corresponding to the content of the conversation between Eve and the serpent it would look something like this:
GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD bad GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD
But one fly ruins the ointment; especially when that one fly says it’s ok to ignore what your Daddy told you if you feel like it’s holding you back and you really want it.
This is an expansion of a comment I made in my last post.
[1]I doubt whether there has ever been born any woman who did not lean this way from the cradle.
Things that We have Heard and Known 
You have to help me, as I haven’t found my voice for these ideas yet. “What does that tell you about women?” I don’t know enough to extrapolate your logic.
“…the more fundamental lie that women aren’t like that.” Like what? I love your stuff, but you’re assuming a lot that I can’t fill in. The same with the Empathological guy. I love reading it, but sometimes I need it spelled out when there’s often only tantalizing hints. Please help.
@Caspar
Thanks for asking for clarification.
My objective there is for the reader to ruminate on the relationship between children and parents; specifically as it relates to times where discipline is required…which is nearly always.
Hmmm… This would probably be easier if I answered your second question first. For this whole post, when I say “women are like that”, I’m referring to the statement in my opening paragraph, wherein I claim women are “uppity”, and always searching for “more and better” everything, from everyone, everywhere they go. It’s also an allusion to the manosphere acronym NAWALT (Not All Women Are Like That).
NAWALT is an expression that is used to soothe the egos of overly-sensitive women. These creatures judge the truth of any statement about women on the basis of whether they’d like the statement to be applied to themselves, rather than on whether it accurately reflects truth.
Now lets go back to disciplining children and women. Women–like all humans, animals, and plants–need discipline.[1] The overall lie is that women DON’T need discipline, but rather need to be encouraged to let their ambition run wild. Nothing in civilization can be allowed to run wild. Given enough time, plains grass will crumble highways, and woodland vines will tear down buildings, but women grow in the home and left undisciplined–undiscipled–they will eat their children. We’re seeing that today.
[1] (discipl-ine; as in: “to make a disciple”)
Caspar, help me help you. I don’t catch your gist.
Signed
Empathological guy
I guess my time has come to put myself out here a little bit, as much as one can under the anonymity of a nom de guerre. MMSL was my gateway drug into the genre about a year ago, and I have found that being a university-educated evangelical in my late 40’s I identify most heavily with Dalrock and Empath. Every line of Dalrock’s series Reframing Christian Marriage was about me, and I devoured every post on both blogs and on many others. I had quite a backlog to work through. My catalyst to the action of dropping a red pill into my own marriage was Empath’s post about Noah. From memory: “Leadership looks like Noah, he doesn’t hang his head in shame over the exposure of his nakedness, he asserts his authority.”
The former was me exactly; I was under a regime of punishment from the Mrs. and her hired serpents over a dalliance. I will say about that that though a lengthy affair, there were lines not crossed; had it continued rather than being discovered, I suspect the lines would have been crossed eventually. At any rate, in her fury she and they subjugated me to a limitless regime of shameful and shameless tactics, counseling, humiliation, sex-addiction groups, evaluations, etc., to force me to “get it” and “man up” by realizing what a treasure I had in her, at which point I suppose, all the right words being said and buttons being pushed, she, like one of those age-old mechanisms encountered by Indiana Jones, which though having sat idle for centuries yet under the right influence clicks right into place a well oiled machine, would slip directly into sweet submission and follow my approved leadership into the bliss of eternal crepuscular quiet times together.
Anyway, you can’t take almost 50 years of blue pill, including twenty-plus years of a blue-pill marriage where you were spoonfed blue pill medicine from the pulpit every Sunday and in every marriage book and seminar etc., and then nuke it away with a single red pill bomb. The hamster is strong, I tended and cared for and fed it myself. In some ways giving a hamster a red pill is like giving antibiotics to certain bacterial strains — what should kill it only makes it more resistant. My hamster is not only resistant, but clever and logical and furious. It knows no emotion but anger, and when it comes down to it, she will do absolutely anything to get her way, to the extent of destroying my house and children, and the serpents would help her every step of the way. In many ways, to be a man is to be alone. She is outwardly submissive as a martyr might be, but even so it is in such a way as to exercise control over me. Red pill truth is received as abuse or mistreatment. After a year of waking up, I can see these things, but I have not learned to wield the weapons against this Satanic rebellion. I have written many words to get my thoughts down, but they all amount to trying to get to conclusions logically, so they never get sent or said. The few attempts I have made at confrontation are met with emotional violence. She is not getting what she wants, but attempts to get her to see that to win she has to lose are so far a losing battle for me.
Reading some of the posts from established writers is sometimes like reading dialogue where you are supposed to understand the thought processes that the author was attributing to the characters. A statement like, “John said, ‘Ah Fred, I see where you are going with this!’” is sure to generate twenty minutes of rereading the same paragraph to try to figure out where Fred was going with it, but I never figure it out. I understood “women are like that” to mean something to do with NAWALT, but I couldn’t quite make the connection exactly what. I am like the child in Galatians 4 who needs a schoolmaster to help him recite the principles until he is a man who can roll with them in understanding. Wax on, wax off. To learn, the student need not understand; he must hear and do. I am a man with a man’s task but childlike understanding and ability.
Thanks for listening; I respect all of you, and I am one of you.
@Caspar
What is the common thread running through your decisions and actions at each of these three stages?
My own rebellion is my failure to deal with hers.
I should say, the common thread is my own rebellion. I would say that my desire to till another’s garden was because of the weeds in mine, which I permitted to grow unrestrained.
You don’t commit yourself to your endeavors; good or bad.
1. Why didn’t you bang that broad with whom you were chatting up and making out?
2. Why are you trying to carefully dose, or work in, red pill truths? The Bible says we are to be transformed by the daily renewing of our minds; that we are to crucify ourselves every day of our lives. Does that sound safe?
3. Why do you ask for child-friendly instructions when you are going to treat it with adult-style sophistication? I mean sophistication in a negative sense, here; the convolution of a simple thing.
1. It’s my greatest regret about that relationship the way it turned out, especially considering she was seriously DTF, but it was a heavily blue-pill relationship and a desperate case of oneitis. Not a very Christian retrospective, but that’s what it is. We dreamed together of marriage one day to one another, finally consummating our love on our wedding night, although that was probably more my fantasy than hers, as she practically begged me on more than one occasion to just take her. I always took for granted that there would be more time, then poof.
2. No. Right.
3. My struggle is not so much needing instructions as wanting to understand others’ writings. But you are right; on the home front, I have made my task into something like taking the stand in my own defense with the goal of convicting the prosecutor, like convincing her that she needs to follow me before she will follow me.
Sigh — ouch, but right. Half-ass is the story of my life. Thank you for the mirror; your words are at once heavy but light.
CR
Caspar:
In many ways, to be a man is to be alone.
This is a key insight. Half-assedness could be related to a failure to fully embrace this fact. The thread of whininess throughout much of the manosphere also reflects denial on this very point: failure is always something perpetrated by others, not ourselves. The ultimate transcendent offense is failure to coddle “betas” into manhood with sufficient empathy, sufficient reassurances that their problems are not their own fault.
Hopefully the paradox is obvious.
(No reference to empathologism intended in my previous comment).
A lot of men don’t seem to want a wife. What they want is to return to being taken care of by mommy, but with sex.
Women want male wives; men are often content with female husbands.
Your comment threads are often as thought provoking (sometimes more) than your posts, Mr. Caldo. Reading Caspar’s comments reminded me of an incident where my BIL walked into this little tiny church, right up the center aisle down front and told his wife it was time to come home. He’d warned her before she left -it was a weeknight- “Don’t forget where you live.” (Agent men tend to say that to their wives).
The women and pastor at the church were horrified that her husband would do such a thing. Was she being abused, etc? Next day a few women from the church, accompanied by his MIL who was in leadership there, showed up at the house to check on her and reason with him. He let them see that his wife was just fine. His MIL wanted to talk the thing out, got out of line and found him gently pushing out the front door; “I love you mother-in-law, but it’s time for you to leave my house.”
The marriage has not only survived but thrived, and my SIL and I still occasionally laugh about that to this day. I marvel that church people find it appropriate to get all up in a man’s house when they have no justifiable reason for doing so. It’s almost like they want to undermine the marriage.
Zippy, merely mentioning empathy doesn’t ping my radar, but thanks for the follow on.
Pingback: Lightning Round – 2013/10/09 | Free Northerner