Grasping at the Truth I: The Weight of the Scepter

My son’s belief in my greatness knows few bounds. Sometimes I will give him a new food, and I’ll say, “Here, try this. I like it.” On occasion he likes it, and will ask for more. Many times he does THE BEST THING: As he chews the food, he gets this grimace, but he chokes it down. I’ll ask him, “Was it good?” and my beautiful boy smiles wide and says, “Uh-huh!”–like that yuck-face never happened. “Do you want some more?”, I ask. “No thanks, Dad.”

Regardless of his own tastes, it is more important to my son to proclaim as good what I have said is good. The world will tell him he’s a liar to say something which tastes bad to him is actually good. The world is not reckoning with the fact that my son has decided that what is good to me is what is good to my son, and not even his taste-buds are going to tell him different. You can’t force this worldview on people. It’s an upward-oriented love that grows out of a deep respect for what the authority has done for the subordinate.

I’ve spent a few posts talking generically about dicks, and a little more specifically about the fact that women like them, and that it’s good that they like them. I don’t think I’ve ever actually told my son his dick is great, but I might have. He just assumes that his is because I have one and I’m not ashamed of mine; so insofar as he is like me, his is great, too. We usually shower together because I’ve always hated giving kids a bath, or baby-sitting them while they bathe. When my daughters were babies I was more likely to take them into the shower with me than to kneel beside the tub, leaning over and all that hassle. When they got to be toddlers I just delegated it solely to Mrs. Caldo. After all: daughters are not sons.

My son being a son, there’s been no reason to stop. He’s old enough to wash himself (and does), but we still shower together. We both look forward to it. It’s just us, together. His sister’s can’t come in. We race each other undressed, laugh loud, sing songs, cheer the Bronx, and laugh some more. Sometimes Mrs. Caldo gets jealous wants to share and comes into the bathroom (but not the shower!) to listen to us horse around. He learned from me how to wash himself properly without a spectacle being made of it, or a bunch of nonsense words. He just copies me. We talk about sports, LEGO’s, our bodies, today’s events, and move smoothly among them all. Nobody hushes him, or gives him those disapproving looks. On occasions when I’m out of town, my wife supervises his showers, and he waggles around just the same.

This loving respect of a devoted follower is what husbands want from their wives, and this is what wives want to give to their husbands. A woman’s love is ALWAYS oriented-upward; out of respect for his authority; for what he produces and provides; for his abilities. She will never feel intimacy with him for who he is except as she recognizes him on the basis for what he has done, what he currently does, and what she expects him to do in the future. This isn’t a bug in women, but a feature: It’s another way of saying, “women like dick, and that is good.” Within this relationship, there is no room for judgment, or recrimination; just enjoyment and intimacy.

There is, of course, a difference in methods of sharing from husband to wife, as compared to, from father to son. Wives need to be given dick on a regular basis, and so must come together with their husbands. At birth sons are given their own permanent and separate installations; with which to woo their own wives. Wives must grab their kings’ scepters to act in the king’s stead, with the full weight and pleasure of his authority, and both will be fulfilled. (King and queen shower time has a much different feel. Hey now!) Sons must wield their own scepters, and will be kings in their own rights.

There’s been some feedback that my language is too salty, and a general undertone in some of the comments that what’s really important is the spiritual truths underlying these sexual truths. Quite so, but the simple fact is that the physical signs of the truth are what are given to every man to point us to the real Truth. In fact, you can’t understand the Bible until you start to grasp some of these truths, but understanding the Bible will deepen respect for the sign of sex. There’s an interplay in the mating of the two views.

Neutered Piety II: Read the Sign, Numbnuts

More plain sex talk ahead, and as always remember that this is a map of an escape route used by a fellow convict.

————————————–

I’ve talked pretty extensively about a really simple subject (women like dick) because that is where sexual love and marriage start; the lifelong pursuit of which is presumably why you’re reading this. From an earlier post:

Some of the liars will say they know that cocks and muffs are good things from God, but I can tell from their comments that they don’t really because they are angry about the pure desire for dick. They want something “more”. If you’ve ever thought to yourself, “Why doesn’t she appreciate me for who I am?”, check your pants, because the whereabouts of your cock are unsure. She has nothing “more” to give you if she doesn’t love you for your dick. It starts there.

Peregrine John highlights this in the comments:

It starts there.
Yes. I’ve been trying to get this basic fact through many dense skulls for a very long time: Sex is the beginning of intimacy, not the end. So many insist on arguing over paint colors before even laying a foundation, and wonder why things never come together.

Foundation, indeed. There is much more intimacy other than sex in marriage, but it is foundational. Foundations aren’t supposed to go away, either. It’s also true that if you spend all your time laying (hey-o!) foundation, you’ll never have time to erect (bah-dum-ch!) the building upon it. Another commenter would rather I write more about how important prayer is to marriage. He is concerned that the spiritual aspect of life, marriage, and sex are getting short shrift in my new posts.

I think there should be more talk about prayer in marriage or whatever state of life you are in over sex. The best bonds in marriage are the spiritual ones.

A little background before I continue: I take it as given that I’m somewhat infamous for ruining a perfectly good and cathartic comment thread by smashing around the place with Bible verses, variations on a man-up theme, and an overblown sense of importance. Sometimes I comment on a thread that’s been added to every five minutes for the past two hours. Then I make some bombastic statement about the importance of the spiritual aspect of the topic and that thread just loses its pulse. Not always, but it’s not infrequent either. So, why did I not start this conversation with the importance of fundamentally spiritual things?

I did.

C.S. Lewis rightly said:

“You do not have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.”

Sex is a fundamentally spiritual experience. Just as there are no amoral tools, there is no non-spiritual sex. Sex always has an effect on the spirit: That’s why it’s important.  Whatever a soul does with his body, his spirit is involved in. Sex is sex, but it’s also a sign pointing us towards other things: love, life, the mystery of the Trinity…and prayer.

The reason my last post was titled “Neutered Piety” was precisely to point out the uselessness of a spirituality that shunned sex, and the blasphemy inherent in the general lack of appreciation for child-rearing itself, and the blessings those burdens provide. Most of the comments, however, were a defense of NFP; to which I only devoted one paragraph! The post wasn’t even focused on NFP.

NFP itself is not an inhibitor to children because it has very few practitioners. Most people simply use artificial birth control, or deny each other. It’s what NFP stands for (and what it was developed for) that aborts life. It’s one thing to accept that we are fallen creatures who are given to fear where we should hope. It’s another to practice fear and hopelessness. There are extenuating circumstances for which I think NFP-like practices can be a grace. These are rare. They probably don’t apply to you. Can people use the knowledge cobbled up in NFP for procreation? Sure, but that was not the RCC’s intent when they set about codifying it, and it’s not the intent under which it is practiced. Their intent was to release the members of the church body of the burden of taking care of one another; the very thing we are supposed to do as members of a church body.

I assumed the NFP paragraph was going to cause a ruckus, but I also knew that I’d precede it with a statement that nobody cares most Protestants are going to Hell, and no one would remark upon that. “Who cares about Protestants? Defend NFP!” Whoever wants to complain about my (perceived) lack of spirituality should read that post and comments.

And no one said anything about vasectomies; which are very common, and self-evidently gruesome.

Birth control is a classic case (If not THE classic case) of insanely wicked desires foisted by women onto men; who in turn perpetrate it onto the whole world. Women complain about the burden of child-making; which was given to them by God for women’s sake. Men scramble around trying to find ways to circumvent the very thing that God specifically gave women for their instruction and redemption.

• Men pull out.
• Men invent condoms.
• Men invent NFP.
• Men invent BC pills.
• Men invent BC shots.
• Men invent divorce.
• Men invent no-fault divorce. (Level up!)
• Men invent alimony.
• Men invent compulsory daycare and call it public education.
• Men perfect and distribute porn.[1]
• Men keep their daughters from marriage.
• Men cut off each others’ balls.

Women then utterly lose their respect for men. Why? Because women perceive correctly that it is madness to trust those who just cannot be stopped from cutting off perfectly functioning balls. They cry and wail and provoke because they want proof their men have balls, and there’s precious little proof. They’re crazy for validation of their desire for dick. In their delirium, many spread their legs to any swinging cock; just groping around in a blind panic to get their hands on one that functions the way dicks are supposed to.

A good number of men in this corner of the Internet respond that one more round of birth control will bless where the other methods have cursed: “When the male birth control pill comes out, it’s gonna be a GAME-CHANGER!” Such men won’t be happy until everybody is as sackless and dickless as they already are. No thanks: I like mine, and women do, too. Even when women don’t get to experience them first hand, they’re glad just to know functioning gonads are out there.

This is why I am pointing folks back to the basics of “women like dick and that’s awesome because we have them.” Read the sign, numbnuts. Has the sign of sex been covered with graffiti, porn, marketing, and all manner of misinformation? Unquestionably, but the church’s response has been to blindfold men and then beat their heads downward. Christians are trying to walk them past the sign of sex for fear of the graffiti. The sign is still good, though. It’s the graffiti that is the problem; much of which was requested by women in their insanity. Time for another C.S. Lewis interlude:

“A man can no more diminish God’s glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.”

The task in front of us is not to “not see graffiti”, but to scrub it away from the sign of sex and our women. For that we’ll have to take the blindfolds off men, stand them up straight, and teach them to open their eyes and to think rightly. Then they and others can follow the signs; not further down the rabbithole, but out into the sunshine where men belong.

For some non-graffiti examples from some respected women: Check out the comments, likes, and links from women to these posts. They are exuberant about my proclamation that women like dick. The men who followed those women here ought to think about what that communicates about all of us; when women ought to be following men into the open air.

Read the sign of sex, there from the beginning–the final development of men that God said made mankind good, in coincidence with the gift of subordinate mate women–and the revelation of the good and joyful and necessary use of the dicks God gave man. Then reflect that it is by the work of our dicks that women will be not only be satisfied, but disciplined. Then, yes, go pray about it.

[1] Newsflash: Your computer is a sexbot. You can stop waiting for the Grand Sexbot Reformation because it’s here. How do you like it so far?

Neutered Piety: The Socially Conservative Abortifacient

More truthful sex talk ahead. Today I am speaking specifically to those who style themselves as socially conservative or traditional Christians. As always, I write this as someone who has thought about, been subjected to, participated in, and subjected others to these evil acts, and worse. I’m telling you that you can leave that old pagan self behind, as I did, if you will accept the power of the Truth; which is Christ. If you do, you will find there is good food everywhere. It’s God’s world; world without end.

————————————–

The socially conservative position on the words (re: “women like dick”) that I have written in my last two posts is not just indicative of the problem of the lack of manliness, but in many ways it is a source. GKChesterton’s comment on “A Refresher on the Basics: There is no Ugly Truth” is a fitting example of a man caught between two worlds.

While I agree with the theme this curmudgeon isn’t happy about the style. It limits who I can point here.

I put him (and many others) between two worlds, and I used signs of the Truth to do it. That’s what the Truth does. It’s a two-edged sword that cleaves spirit and divides flesh. Rather: the light of truth divides the curtain of darkness over the fact that many Christians are living between two worlds. I know, because I came from out between those worlds. In a time of gross prosperity and medical wonder: I have merely four children, when I ought to be trading secrets with the Duggars.

God made sex and dicks and pussies. If my heart is True, then I can no more desecrate those things with my words any more than I can sanctify them by using technical jargon like coitus, penis, and vagina. God has already made them holy! If you find Christian agreement with the theme, then let the be your guide as to the content of my heart. If my  heart is good, then I have to ask: What is your problem?

You. You’re the problem.

At the beginning of my first post of my “new blog” (reborn with a new intention), I posted a warning:

“To some of you: some of the terms in this post will be as food that has been sacrificed to idols. Consider yourself warned, and partake according to the strength of your faith.”

I meant what I said there, but it was a bit of a test. The Scripture I’m referencing there is where St. Paul instructs the church on Corinth on how to handle each other concerning inexpensive food that was the by-product of sacrifices at various temples in Corinth.

Here’s a summary: There is only one God, and God made everything, and everything God made is good. Whatever food we find is therefore good food from God. You may eat it in a clean conscience, and remain clean. However; some weak Christians who lack faith and knowledge will not be able to fully let go of their pagan past, and so for their sakes, whenever they are around,  it would be better not to eat at all, than to lead them back towards their pagan past by accidentally invoking pagan wants in them.

As with all Scripture: I cannot but agree. Christians, though, in their weakness of faith and sheer stupidity, have taken this so far that St. Paul could not have written those words today. It is anathema to such “Christians” to even speak of sex except as food sacrificed to idols. This creates a real conundrum: This level of “sensitivity” that forbids us from talking clearly and in plain language about sex leads inexorably to the conclusion that St. Paul should not have written the very Scripture that we base our “sensitive” posture upon! The belief in Christ that should bear good fruit then gets perverted, and it’s growth aborted in fear of bad fruit; so that no fruit is allowed, ever. We don’t want marriage. We don’t want children.

We don’t want sex.

Spit-up is not nice. Crapped diapers are not nice. Colicky babies driving you to thoughts of infanticide are not nice. Premature babies infested with tubes and monitoring wires are not nice. Deformed babies are not nice. In a best-case scenario: Draining your time, energy, and bank account for the no-good, self-centered, unproductive, bad-mannered, lay-about assholes that children are…is not nice.

They are wonderfully good, and beautiful, and beautifying, though.[1]

Fornication and adultery and divorce are not the result of the birth control, or abortion. They are the logical results of Christians–Christ’s temple(s), the Church–abandoning sex and love and children in favor of niceness and convenience. Those Christian sisters of Catholicism and Protestantism have found what they sought, and having laid down with modernism,”science”, and all manner of Babylonian fineness and strength, now find it despicable in their sight.

Abortion is nice. Yes, it looks pretty gruesome seeing all those baby body parts sliced up and sucked out, but how bad is that compared to a lifetime of caring for a downs syndrome child until you die? Those parents may never get a vacation! It is much nicer to get an abortion and go to Tahiti. There we can get misty at a horizon, and then puke up: “Look at that sunset! Isn’t God good?”

Birth control is convenient. How else shall we finish college? We all accept that a good percentage of Protestants are on the fast-track to Hell; especially as regards sex. Catholics[2] will sniff their noses at their Prole-estant brothers, and say, “We’ve always said artificial birth control is bad.”

Ha.

Catholics not only partake of the convenience of birth control: They brought that filth in-house, and re-branded it. You just can’t stop a Christian committed to niceness! Forbid the pill, and they’ll invent Natural Family Planning. They turn themselves into the husbands of white-washed and barren tombs as surely as their pill-popping Protestant sisters. They’ll tell you with eunuch-like solemnity that NFP is about counting the cost before building the tower, as Scripture requires. That is a wicked logic. Marriage was the commitment. Sex is the foundational act. If you are married: Keep mixing that mortar as much as you can! It is ours to merely receive the bricks with which God blesses us, and build up His house. In my opinion, NFP is the most truly infernal of the birth controls. It is the “serial monogamy” of marital sex lives.

Vasectomies are convenient, and nice. It’s monstrously grotesque to me that I have to explain to anyone what the hell is wrong with idea of conveniently cutting off your balls. So, for now I won’t, but consider this: THE SELLING POINT OF VASECTOMIES IS THAT YOU DON’T NEED YOUR BALLS ANYMORE, AND THIS WAY YOU’LL BARELY NOTICE THEY ARE GONE! Also: women want dicks; particularly because they are linked to balls.

Divorce…well, their are plenty of testimonies to go around about how nice divorce is. You don’t  need me to tell you. Chances are: you can just call your mom, or sister.

It was Christendom that screwed sex up so badly that there may not be a Christendom in the future. Yes, pagans practice birth control, and abortion, and castration, but it took Christians Hell-bent on niceness and convenience to anesthetize everyone to the sexual and societal pains that would have led others to Christ, instead of away from Him.

It is Christians sacrificing sex and marriage to the idols of niceness, convenience, and education, and then forbid it to others on the basis of the fact it was sacrificed! We sell pleasures in our houses of faith, and then decry speech that might, maybe, smack of whoring.

Sex is not the end-all-be-all. Sex is a sign towards the way of Christ. The point of the sign of sex is to get on Christ’s path; to follow him. It’s not about screwing your way to Heaven. Collecting sexual experiences for sex’s sake no more makes you Christ-like (or pagan god-like) than collecting travel brochures will wing you to Tahiti. Like all signs, we want to follow them, and then pass them in pursuit of that thing in which the signs point. There are a lot of signs, and I will talk more about them in other posts.

[1]It’s also what we asked for when we decided that we wanted to know right and wrong for ourselves. The Fall can be summed up as: “You want to see what’s not good with yourself and the world? There you go: Get out, and go nuts. Let me know how it goes.”

[2] Not all Catholics (just like not all Protestants are going to Hell), but the vast host of them and their leadership. Catholics spend way more time yapping about chemical birth control and abortion–while selling NFP as a gospel–than they do actually raising children. Talk about your post-modern solutions for post-modern problems.

I Make You Look Good

More plain sex speech ahead.

———————————————

My last post should probably have been titled “Women Want Dick”, but as I weighed the merit of various titles I decided that the message “There are no Ugly Truths” was more important. Also, it might draw in those very people who would immediately be turned off by the word “dick”.

When I was a teenager, I had to have a couple surgeries near my dick (but not concerning it) and as I was talking about some trouble with stitches I kept mumbling the word “penis”. The doctor interrupted me and said, “I call it a dick. It’s okay if you do, too.” The word “penis” just sounds diminutive in my ears. Besides: This is how men talk at work. It’s how we talk to our friends around the campfire. It’s how we speak to our dads.

Women, largely, don’t talk this way. I’m fine with that. Discretion and talking around things is often good for women to do. It’s often good for men to do when speaking to women, or near them. Though, more and more I think the straight talk is what is needed. Most of that doesn’t have much to do with sex, or dicks though.

I am not fine with Christian men not speaking plainly. “Bad words” is code for “how men talk”. We’ll know when men have started taking back their churches when they say “dick” to their fellow church men; appropriate circumstances provided. If any of those sort of men read my post yesterday, the safe assumption is that they said to themselves something along the lines of, “Why does he use vulgar terms?” Worse: “This is nothing new. Of course women like sex.”

That’s not what I said. That’s what the culture says. Whenever others do, you should immediately start looking for the underlying message, because they’re trying to reframe the perspective. The most common reframe is towards the idea that women want to be pleasured, just like men do. That’s a a lie, and it’s designed to keep both men and women from liking sex with their spouses. It’s effect is to normalize all sexual behavior as equal; including and especially deviant sexual behavior. The focus on seeking out pleasure rather than accepting it does to sex what the focus of seeking happiness did to marriage: Made it a gay thing.

We can we deduce this is a lie by going back to our principles that different things cannot be equal, and that since men and women’s sex drives and tastes are different, then women are not pleasured the way men; they’re not even primarily interested in their own pleasure.

Yesterday I wrote:

[F]rom the consummation of sex all sorts of things can grow: love, children, civilizations, pleasure…the things that make human life worth living.

How important is a woman’s sexual pleasure to those things? Almost none.

Try contemplating sex without an erection, and then consider that a man has almost no volition over whether he gets an erection or not. What control he does have is probably a mnemonic trick women would not find sexy at all: Thinking about another time or woman. There’s also pills, and mechanical devices; none of which are sexy, and certainly not as sexy as throbbing boner conjured by the touch and smell and sounds of an attractive flesh and blood woman in front of him. The woman’s reaction to sexual desire is secretion that facilitates the man’s entry into the woman. It’s inconspicuous, where the man’s erection is unavoidable. Without that secretion, then sex becomes a painful experience for both, but it’s a secondary concern. Without an erection there just is no sex, period.

A woman’s orgasm is of no importance to conception, but the man’s is invaluable.

A man can rape a woman and receive pleasure, and cause conception, but try to consider how a woman can rape a man with normal sex. It’s almost impossible. Remember: She has to incite a hard-on. If she does: How bad could it have been; except upon reflection? Yes, she might have been an embarrassment if his friends knew he’d slept with a fat girl…later. No, it’s not good for teachers to seduce high school boys, but we have to drum up our sense of indignation for that; you know–really think about it why it’s bad. Why? Because ultimately we know that for sex have to occurred at all, he had to be giving it to her.

Women who describe themselves as “in love” (another topic for another day) hardly care about their own specific stimuli. They generate this “in love” feeling almost totally by pleasing the man, and his response to it. It is from his excitement that the woman gains. Consider that many women admit to routinely faking pleasure. Why? One: Because she can, and it doesn’t matter. Conversely: There’s no faking a boner. Two, because somewhere in her mind is the idea that what’s important is that the man is pleased; even if that means she has to construct moans and writhing because she is aware that he puts emphasis on his ability to please her.

Does a woman want to be sexually pleasured? Absolutely, and a man wants to be that source of pleasure. It seems counter-intuitive, until you lay it out. (rimshot) If such a man just realized that what is most important is giving her dick; they’d both be more pleased. The more he seeks solely or specifically her pleasure, the more likely that both will be dissatisfied. Saying “women like sex” explains very little about what it is about sex that women like–which is dick. They perceive emotional bonding by the amount and frequency that a man wants to provide it. Church-folk don’t say these things for the reasons I enumerated in yesterday’s post. What a shame.

What can we deduce from all this? Men are the gatekeepers to commitment AND sex. Sex originates from the man. Men have so much sex-iness, that we get regularly get erections for women who aren’t even concerned with us; who aren’t doing anything particularly sexy; who are not around. They don’t even have to be real. We can circumvent natural procreation simply by masturbating into a cup; the contents of which can be scooped directly into a vagina, and “VOILA!”: A baby. Fifteen minutes later we can do it again. Women have to go through a difficult and invasive procedure to harvest their eggs. Men have so much sexiness that we can afford to literally give it away and feel no loss.

Pick-up artists know this. They talk about women being the gatekeepers of sex, but their actual prescriptions are to assume that women want what men have. Their assumptions are right. So they should stop saying women are the gatekeepers. That they do has always baffled me, and it causes a lot of other assumptions to just be wrong.

Said another way: Men sexualize everything about women. This is said often, but exclusively in a derogatory way. The beautiful truth is that women literally cannot be sexy without men to declare them sexy by our very thoughts and impulses. Eve wasn’t sexy until Adam popped wood at her debut. Eve liked being sexy–as all women do–and it was the dick that declared it so. Any woman who declares herself sexy is prematurely judging herself. It’s phony. It’s narcissism if she believes it. The woman who wants to know if she is truly sexy has to consult the cock.

You can say this to your wife, too, but you may want to slightly change the tenor because women are skittish, and like guessing games, but do not remove the physicality of the act from your speech: “You want what I got, don’t you?”* Sure, she might laugh. I laugh saying it. That doesn’t make it untrue, and laughing is a pretty good way to fall into bed. If she bristles, that’s good, too. Pretty much any arousal or challenge on her part works in the man’s favor–and therefore hers.

The exception to this is outright contempt, or ridicule. That is unacceptable, and should be returned with disdain, followed closely by shunning. Not for her directly, but for the attitude. “What an ugly thing to come out of your pretty mouth.” Withdraw your attentions and provision immediately. A woman who rejects her husband is sick, and you must starve that evil out. When she screams: “Will you just tell me what you want for dinner?” your reply is: “We have to finish the other conversation first: Tell me that you want me in you.”

You’re not looking for an apology, but repentance, and fealty. It doesn’t even matter if she means it. The internal betrayal a rebellious woman feels uttering those words will blow a hole clean through the ranks of that rebellion, and what she thinks she wants. That’s a good thing, and you can occupy that cleared space.

One caveat to the withdrawal of affections and provisions: Do not leave. Ever. First of all, it’s legally troublesome. More importantly: The doghouse is for the offender; not the offended. If you leave you will communicate that you’ve done something wrong, or shameful.

If you approach the problem of having sex with your wife from the point of view that you have to extract sex from behind her gates, then you’ve already lost. There is no latent boner hidden in her, so stop trying to get it up. You have the sex, and she has to come to you to get it. You will lead. She will follow.

*“…what I got hanging…”, if you’re slightly bolder.

A Refresher on the Basics: There Are No Ugly Truths

To some of you: some of the terms in this post will be as food that has been sacrificed to idols. Consider yourself warned, and partake according to the strength of your faith.

——————————————————-

Women want dick, and that is AWESOME, because we have them. Not only is it awesome, but it’s good–physically, spiritually, emotionally, and mentally. To whatever extent a woman does not want dick, she is weak and infirm in one of those categories. If you think, “Mothers/sisters/daughters/grandma don’t.”: You’re lying to yourself. Women’s desire for dick is so good that God doesn’t say the creation of man is good until God makes someone who wants Adam’s dick–a woman. When Adam was presented with Eve, he didn’t ask God:

“Oh, hey there, hold up a second…what is this for? She seems…incomplete…and slightly perforated.”

No. Adam said:

“This at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man.”

Let me translate that:

“Finally! This one is for me, and I’m going back in there to get what’s mine!”

If you believe that women are inherently inert in their feelings towards wang, it’s because nearly everyone around you believes this same untruth. Others spend an incredible amount of time convincing you that sex is at best a necessary evil. The reasons for this are various, and I will write about those later. Here are the basics: God invented sex. God made dicks, and pussies, and called them good. They were made to be, and are, holy.

The key aspect of sex that the liars trade on to convince us that sex is merely a necessary evil is that it’s tremendously intimate and private. Understand: Intimacy and privacy are the signs of holiness; not evil. We do it in privacy (in darkness to others) because sex is God’s country. It’s an original holy place. We don’t keep our sexual unions hidden from others because we’re trying not to infect them with our wickedness, but because only we are sanctified to partake in our goodness. A sexual union is a very exclusive club; filled with riches and delights for its members. Marriage is the membership card.

The sexual landscape isn’t pick-up artist territory, and it isn’t a weapon used to control civilizations, or push women off the pedestal–though those things can certainly happen, and sometimes even need to happen. Sex, and dicks and pussies aren’t neutral tools to be repurposed for this use, or that use. Their uses are self-explanatory. They only do two things. One is sex, and from the consummation of sex all sorts of things can grow: love, children, civilizations, pleasure…the things that make human life worth living.

Some of you recognize that women were made for dick, but don’t actually think it’s women’s business to want it. The beautiful truth is: She was made for that, and much more…it does start there, though. You don’t even have to get her to desire dick: She was made that way. Nuns do not lack a desire for dick: They offer up their unfulfilled desire as a sacrifice, and for the instruction of their faith. Without that good desire for dick, their spiritual growth would be harder to spur.

Some of you think that a woman’s desire for dick shouldn’t start until she’s married–when that is the very impetus for her to GET married. The truth is that it’s not yet her business to realize how good cock is until she’s married, but that’s a very different thing. Like marriage, we say prayers before we eat (or you should, slacker) because we realize that sustenance is a blessing from God, but we eat because we’re hungry.

Others think women’s desire for dick makes them dirty, just like you. If you know the truth that dick is good, and a woman’s desire for dick is good, then you should know that a woman’s longing for your loins means she is compelled (often ignorantly) to be your holy dick’s holy sanctuary; as God made her to be. Now, if you bring filth into your sanctuary that’s your problem; not sex’s, not marriage’s, and definitely not God’s. That’s a different post.

Some of the liars will say they know that cocks and muffs are good things from God, but I can tell from their comments that they don’t really because they are angry about the pure desire for dick. They want something “more”. If you’ve ever thought to yourself, “Why doesn’t she appreciate me for who I am?”, check your pants, because the whereabouts of your cock are unsure. She has nothing “more” to give you if she doesn’t love you for your dick. It starts there.

Many of you don’t want to say dicks and pussies are fundamentally good because you don’t want to believe the the truth because it’s inconvenient to your worldview. If we say they are neutral, then we can use them for whatever we’d like and no one can judge. It’s better to such folks to look at their past actions and present plans and not consider how exactly they are fucking up the fucking program. Look: If you can’t admit that you’re full of lies, then at least have the balls to call them what they are: Ugly lies. Because we know the truth is beautiful. There are no ugly truths.

Finally, I said above that dicks and pussies do two things, but I only expounded upon one. The other thing dicks and pussies do is expel waste. This is anything you do with dicks and pussies that is not sex within the confines of marriage; sex that is not holy.

Sometimes things grow from waste. Regardless: If you piss where you’re supposed to eat–where you consum-mate–just because you can, then at best you’re an idiot. More likely you’re purposefully evil. This is where a lot of people are, and where everyone has been. They think they are fooling people when they say their non-marital sex is meant in love, or respect, or “just fun” because there’s some emotional component to the act. The truth is  that such people just like to shit on each other, or are willing to put up with excreting upon, and being excreted upon, so that they can get some feeling, or some other resource.

I would have started my blog there–at Women Like Dick–before, but I didn’t connect that many of you don’t really believe that women like dick, and that this is GOOD.

This is, I think, the source of the quandary of the “natural alpha”, and his inability to see the problem, but I’ll let you decide what names you want to give me. Regardless, you’ll just have to give me a break. because, look: When was the last time you really pondered if men and women both like to eat? Our taste-buds (hypergamy/koreogamy) tell us what we’re eating, but a starving person eats what is before her. The concerns of her particular palate can be learned, and satisfied, and surprised later; once you’ve got one.

On Second Thought

In my family’s future there is a large, insulated, plumbed, and air conditioned garage that we’ve built. We will build it because we need a place to live while we spend a year or two building the actual house. When we move into the actual house, the garage will still be there, it will still serve an important purpose, and it will be a better garage than most others have.

Today, for some reason, after I posted my post “New Blog”, I had a series of hits from unusual areas. There were some from pingbacks on others’ old posts, and a couple from outside the normal sites that I’m aware of, or with which I have little contact, i.e., non-Manosphere sites. And if I ever do need to smack down a particular straw man, it would be a shame to have to drive traffic away from the new site to reference the old because I had already tackled that subject.

I have to count some costs on this tower, but there is no question this blog needs to grow in a totally new direction: more Tacomaster, less Thankful Husband. Perhaps I got a bit jumpy today.

Suggestions from the crowd are welcome. “Wisdom in the counsel of many”, and all that…

New Blog

I started this blog under the wrong pretenses. That happened because this blog is a direct result of my guest post “Cypher’s Problem”; a (not good) rebuttal post to Dalrock’s “Why Christian’s Need Game”.

See that? I allowed someone else to frame the conversation, and I’ve been just responding ever since. This is very easy to do because Game–the system of thought–is so wrong that it provides endless supply of straw men to knock down; which is fun…

…And stupid, and a waste of time, and lacks any utility for anyone.

I thought if I could knock down enough straw men, that the real men–Man–would become visible; that you’d see them peeking between then chaff. But there are simply more Game guys setting up more straw men than I can keep up with. Pity this idiot. I had the answer all along, but got so caught up in the exercise of mowing that I failed to keep to what I knew, and raise up the men–Man–above the others, and in that way He and they would be seen.

Understand, that when I say system of thought: I mean systems of thought that pretend at being different. Traditionalism, and conservatism, and reaction, and all this bullshit that I don’t even believe in; spinning my wheels trying to expose those/it for the various Games they are. No one here wrote the book. It’s not in the past, and it isn’t hidden.

The new blog will still be focused on marriage, attraction, sex, etc., I don’t know if I will keep this blog up. Even if I do: everythings dies, so eventually it will not. Some of my posts will move over to the other blog, and some of them will be smelted down and then hammered out into the posts that they should have been. This will necessarily expose some of my faulty statements; to which I can only say,  “Oh well.”, and, “Have at them.” Good on you if you can find them, and make something useful of them.

It’s also my intent to host many of the links to those to which I already link; not limited to, but most definitely will include Dalrock and Keoni Galt, and others who espouse Game.

These sort of transitions are malleable, so I make no promises, but this is my intention at this point. I don’t expect to post here at this link again after I announce the new blog.

When it’s up, I will link to it here.

We Love the Impossible and Ruinous Lie

I saw several links coming from SunshineMary’s blog, and so I went to see what had been said about me. All good, it turns out.

While I was there, I read her latest post. It’s about her husband not replacing the broken dishwasher because she repeatedly used it to abuse the kitchen knives after he’d pointed it out to her several times. One of the comments drew the ire of everyone there, and it baffled the commenter. He thought he was saying the plain truth that everyone knows.

Thankful Husband said:

I’m probably missing some of the things that make this very important message possible (thank you SSM), but here is the backstory that makes this possible:
1) she has to know you truly do love her and are there to protect her, care for her, and have her best interest at heart. That regardless she is truly more important than yourself and you are willing to die daily and quite literally for her.

This is the prevailing wisdom all across the landscape of America; whether among Christians, or otherwise. Here’s why it’s nonsense.

-A person cannot literally know another person’s mind. This rules out the ability for her to know how he feels about her. She has to judge his actions; which are not a outgrowth of his feelings, but of his decisions.

-He’s talking about obedience to feelings; both to her own and to his. Aside from the impossibility of knowing his feelings (since she can’t truly know his mind), it should be obvious that obedience to feelings is ruinous.

-Love is not a thing felt, but a thing done. So, in addition to it being an impossible and ruinous act for her to know his true feelings, it’s also a total waste because whatever those feelings are, they aren’t love.

We were all raised to think exactly what Thankful Husband said above, and that is a massive roadblock to peace in marriage. It sets up a no-win situation for the man, and permanent dissatisfaction for the woman. She’ll keep wondering why this ideal–an ideal that is so ubiquitous that no one needs to explain it–is always just out of reach. She wonders why she just can’t quite get to that impossible and ruinous lie, and it’s driving her mad. Let me rephrase that into Manosphere language:

The Impossible and Ruinous Lie is The Hamster, and The Hamster is born of the English word love.

One of the serious oversights of the discussions of sexual relations in the Manosphere is that men are just as affected by The Hamster as women. It does get discussed, but I don’t think it’s ever been tied together the way I’m doing here. What Thankful Husband is trying to talk about when he says love in the quoted comment is actually compassion and sexual desire for one person, and at the same time. Resolve yourself to never use the word love except as an action done for the benefit of its object, and to instead choose a more specific term:

• compassion
• desire
• fraternity
• benevolence
• pity
• honor
• passion
• charity
• devotion
• fidelity
• sex
• affection

Etc. Then, pay attention as your thinking changes. Things that were confusing will be clear. Decision-paths that once seemed fraught with unseen peril can now be charted. Our language and culture have debased all these words by smelting them all together, and we have been debased by that process.

Mixed up in all of this is the justification process, which is what is normally referred with the idiom “Hamster”. What is justification? It’s making the undesirable desirable; whether it’s convincing yourself about a decision you’re really not sure of, or it’s engaging in a behavior that is counter-intuitive to normal behavior. When it’s bad it can be lies that you tell yourself. When it’s good it can be unimpeachable compassion and unwarranted affection. Because of the way the English word love has been counterfeited, the lies will seems just as plausible as the truth.

I am convinced that this counterfeiting of the term was not an accident, but a deliberate plot of Satan. It’s remarkable how well it tracks with the corruption of Eve and then Adam in Genesis. Compare: “Don’t you want to be like God?”, to, “Don’t you want love?”

But why? Corrupt the word love, corrupt the thinking about love. Corrupt the thinking about love, corrupt the act of love. Corrupt love, sex falls. Corrupt sex, marriage falls. Corrupt marriage…generations fall.

When you are in the habit of defining love only as an action done for the benefit of its object, and your feelings and impulses are given more clearly defined terms, dealing with a rebellious or hypergamous[1] woman can be done from a position of understanding and options, instead of blindly groping for the loving thing to do.

-He can express compassion by ignoring her bad behavior when she deserves to be rebuked. She won’t see this as compassion on her own because she can only judge actions, remember? He’ll have to prove it to her by bringing this to her attention when she won’t stop running her mouth. Sow forbearance, tear up the weeds, and reap meekness. This will also grow sexual desire in both of them. First she’ll blaze, “You’ve got some balls to talk to me like that…” that will smolder into “…show me.” Hypergamy harnessed.

-He can express sexual desire by making a strong push towards the bedroom. This is tough for women on first blush, because everyone, everywhere, has been telling them that men are bad. They only want one thing (you know: S. E. X.) and that men are bad because they want the S-word. Women don’t unless they’re sluts, and even if you’re married if you give it up while you want something you might, kinda, maybe be whorish because in the end we’re all just consumers, right? The truth is that she wants a man to take her; to ravish her and rejoice in her body. They are married, and that makes him that man. It is also compassionate to sooth her aching needs.

-He can express benevolence by giving her what she wants. This is a very appealing option to women when they hear it. The man too, is inclined to do this as he gets to fulfill his role as provider. It’s also extraordinarily dangerous for either the man or wife who still believes the in Impossible and Ruinous Lie. In that case he will confirm in her that she can behave badly to get what she wants.

“Pssh! Oh, well, Cane: You just described Game.”

No it’s not, and here’s why.

All of this can only be understood if a man actually loves his wife; if he is resolved to put her needs before his regardless of her behavior. And a man can only sustain that love–that action–if he is himself sustained by God, who is love. A man doesn’t always want to ignore his wife’s behavior, and they usually don’t want to fight about it. He does these things for her sake (including fight), that she might genuinely benefit. This cannot be faked. We are spiritual beings, and the spirits will out.

If he instead approaches these  from the spirit of self-serving–of narcissism and the rest of the Dark Triad traits–that will be discovered, either covertly or overtly. In the short term, it will probably get you laid. That’s not the Christian man’s goal; not even the married Christian man. His goal is to fulfill his scriptural responsibility to lead and love his wife. What’s more: You are the leader, and she is the follower. You will set the pattern. What does she learn from you, if you lead by self-righteousness and pride? How will she lead your children?

How will she not be led astray? If you are successful, she will worship you. If you are unsuccessful, then she will worship herself.

[1] Short refresher: Hypergamy is a good thing.