The Original Entryists

The distinguishing characteristic of an entryist isn’t that it wants to be in somewhere, but that it doesn’t belong.

When I stopped allowing comments from women I probably spent too much time explaining why. That might have given the impression that I thought women were simply more wrong; more stupid, or something similar. The reality is that it’s as simple as They don’t belong in the Men’s Sphere. If the Men’s Sphere/Manosphere?Androsphere means anything then it means a Sphere of Men. By definition that means any woman in the Men’s Sphere is out of place.

Sometimes a woman gets lost. That happens. Once a woman is found, however, she ought to go home. Otherwise she is a pollutant; an entryist. Tolerating them is a mistake that injures the community. Not because said woman is “bad”, but because no woman is man enough to be a man.

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made.

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Eve, who was made without sin by Him who is without sin, couldn’t resist this offer even though she was already made in the image of the same sinless God. She was already like Him. Just so: Beware the woman who “gets it” and tells everyone else to “get it”. Women who actually “get it” are old; as in not young. Not a little older. Not smarter. They are old.

Quick: Who sweeps houses?

24 “When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ 25 And when it comes, it finds the house swept and put in order. 26 Then it goes and brings seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there. And the last state of that person is worse than the first.”


27 As he said these things, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed!” 28 But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

Be blessed, rather, and guard yourself and your spaces against entryists lest they bring in seven more like themselves. Keep what you have been given!

5 thoughts on “The Original Entryists

  1. Pingback: Further Thoughts on the Original Entrusts | Things that We have Heard and Known

  2. I also have noticed is no women, no white knights. I don’t mean a man seeking truth and understanding and just needs the talking points negated, but one acting to defend the “equal” but “too weak” woman. – Lewis has some wisdom on this.

    If there is one older and more subtle evil than the gluttony, anger, and lust represented by feminism, it is pride. In this case “the inner ring” represents some social status high ground (anything male is patriarchal privilege), at least to them whether it is or is not in reality. And their pride can’t stand to be excluded from anywhere.

    They can’t seem to understand that due to the topics, they can contribute only chaos or noise, as much as were I to try to join a discussion forum for nursing mothers. Even male OB/GYNs would not be welcome though they have lots of technical knowledge, or even a woman doctor who never nursed.

    We see Adam sinned twice – not stopping Eve, and then following her. Is that not what the “enlightened, non patriarchal” liberal fathers do? Not protect their daughters, and then pay for abortions or whatever else? And a forum dedicated to correcting Adam’s bad tendencies in fallen men is not something women can help with. Worse, they will try to subvert the discussion.

    In Catholic circles, St. Joseph is protector and provider for the Holy Family, Mary bears and nurtures. This is the model, the template. The wrong question is: “Can we make a different model work?” Maybe, like riding a limping horse, but the risk is damnation and shattered lives, and we know the original model works.

    Even if women desire the happiness and accept the traditional family, they need to find or create their own fora for women. And there may be spaces for both men and women, but the topics will be different.

  3. Originally, when I saw your announcement either here, or over at Dalrock, about discontinuing the ability for women to comment, it struck me as a bit “scorched earth”. Later, I remember wondering if it was perhaps a just a reactionary result of that exchange with Dragonfly on Dalrock’s blog (but I don’t recall if the exchange occurred before or after your announcement). However, as time has gone by, I appreciate more the wisdom of your decision and sense that it wasn’t knee-jerk. It was thoughtful and deliberate. Frankly, I wish more men’s blogs adopted such an approach.

    I somewhere read another commenter or blogger (a farmer, as I recall) confess that he did not divulge everything in his heart to his wife, because she often could not handle it, and although she might insist otherwise, he had found that they were both happier when he left certain things for sharing only with other men. I can attest to this. Partly because women’s shoulders cannot carry the mantle that men carry because it is not their role to do so, any more than I am responsible to carry my boss’s mantle or be privvy to every conversation or decision his station requires. There are things my wife simply does not comprehend because she is a female and her frame of reference is not that of a man. But it is deeper than her just not understanding them – it is more related to the female tendency to say that she wants “God to be #1 with her man,” but to possess a certainly jealousy when she is forced to realize that the star around which you orbit is not her. To realize that she may well be addressed on occassion as Mary was by Christ: “Woman, what am I to do with you?” instead of the coddling of which our females think is our due. It is an interesting exercise to Google the phrase Jeses spoke to His mother and read the contortions to which it is subjected in order to comport with our modern sensibilities. It is truly amazing to see the lengths that are taken to turn His mild rebuke into a non-rebuke.

    The problem I have with many of the female commenters is that they fall into one of two categories: the nannies – tone deaf to the degree of their own feminist leanings; and the cheerleaders – trying too hard to outdo one another in showing their agreement with the blogger, and holding themselves up as NAWALT Exhibit A. Neither group really moves the conversation forward in most cases. The cheerleaders are probably the least useful because they may well inspire a certain dissatisfaction by many of the men with their own wives – who are apt to be more like the nannies than the cheerleaders. The nannies at least inspire some united and thoughtful chastisement. The cheerleaders are – well – cheerleaders. Just as in high school, often more concerned with their appearance and their chances with the quarterback than with the actual outcome of the game at hand.

    I personally find the atmosphere of at least a few men’s-only spaces to be a refreshing and inspiring respite than to constantly accommodate a female’s input where none is sought.

  4. @ mrteebs says:
    August 10, 2015 at 3:33 am

    “I somewhere read another commenter or blogger (a farmer, as I recall) confess that he did not divulge everything in his heart to his wife, because she often could not handle it, and although she might insist otherwise, he had found that they were both happier when he left certain things for sharing only with other men.”

    I’ve never shared my war stories with my wife, and I think I’ll keep it that way.

  5. @mrteebs

    Thanks. All those things pushed me towards the ban. One thing you didn’t mention was what decided it for me: What if I win? What if I win over a wife and bring her out of agreement with her husband? Is that a good thing even if I’m right? It’s one thing if she reads my posts and changes her mind, but if I win her over in back-n-forth comments, then isn’t it likely that her perception of her husband will be diminished? I sometimes discuss important topics here, but there’s nothing very important in what I say about them that I should risk disunity in another man’s family.

    Suppose the cheerleader type: Is my argument with her, or her husband? If it’s important enough for him to feel it should be argued about, why is he having her do the arguing? Ever notice that the husbands of the cheerleader types aren’t in the comments? When the cheerleader says, “My husband approved everything I said”, is it actually the case that he really doesn’t care what she says? On what grounds do I even decide whether he exists or not?

    Ultimately, unmarried feminists didn’t drive my decision. They are easy to swat away; if they ever buzz around at all. But it would be unjust to ban the half-right cheerleaders and admit the fully wrong tone-deafs. So I cut them all loose.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.