Here is the series so far:
Part 1 — Hypergamy is a Myth
Part 2 — Hypergamy Note
Part 3 — Luck
Part 4 — Reasons for Divorce
Part 5 — A Case Study on Marriage (Intermission)
Part 6 — What is Hypergamy? (Part 1)
Part 7 — What is Hypergamy? (Part 2)
Part 8 — Wants and Choices
Today we will discuss:
Part 9 — Hypergamy or Adultery
The Problem With Hypergamy
Throughout this series, I’ve alluded to a particular problem with hypergamy: it lacks explanatory power. Simply put, it doesn’t explain enough. As our study of divorce has shown, there are many problems with marriage that do not explicitly or implicitly involve hypergamy. Hypergamy is supposed impact all women to such a degree that a woman with good character is a rarity. But, hypergamy cannot explain all the phenomena that the Dalrockian Manosphere ascribes to it.
For example, hypergamy doesn’t explain the young women who blow up their marriages in order to pursue their career as a single woman. Nor does it explain why so many women married to elite, highly masculine men end up divorcing them for lesser men (or no man at all). Nor does looks-based hypergamy explain why women often lose interest in physical intimacy with men, whether high- or low-tier. Nor does universal female hypergamy explain why an average of 60% of first time marriages succeed and why that number is significantly higher for low-risk populations (and lower for high-risk populations).
Even if we granted, for sake of argument, that hypergamy was not a myth, it would only be reflected in a minority of a minority of women. It’s just not good enough as an explanation.
As we first mentioned in Part 8, there is a phenomenon that explains the same thing that hypergamy explains, but it doesn’t stop there. It explains much more.
That phenomenon is adultery. But first, let’s talk about marriage. Biblical marriage.
The Act of Marriage
There is a simple biblical precept found in the earliest pages of scripture:
This is why a man will leave his father and his mother and will join with his wife, and they will become one flesh.
This is the act of marriage. It is the physical joining of a man and a woman. The one-flesh bond that is created by that joining cannot be broken, except by death. No man can separate them. So did Jesus attest:
And they said, “Moses allowed us to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”
But Jesus said to them, “Due to the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation God made them male and female.
So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together no human is to separate.
Marriage is not a ceremony. It does not involve a church, priest, government official, or captain of a sailing vessel. Marriage is a physical act between a man and a woman.
All sex creates the marital bond. It doesn’t matter if it is a girlfriend, wife, mistress, or prostitute. The “one flesh bond” is a non-negotiable reality established by God himself at creation. It is the very reason for there being male and female. We call this the “act of marriage” both because it belongs only in marriage and because it produces, establishes, or confirms a marriage. It is not possible for the act of marriage to take place outside the marital bond, because it is what produces the marital bond.
Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as fornication, there are just licit or illicit marital acts, all of which invariably produce the marital bond:
Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? So should I take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Absolutely not! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute is one body?
Like Jesus, Paul establishes this principle by quoting from the the original words of Genesis 2:24.
Widespread Marriage
Recently, in the comment section under “Hypergamy is a Myth,” I had a lengthy discussion with Cameron. There I made this comment where I discussed a high school of about 800 students. Over the course of 18 months, most of those students engaged in one form of intimacy or another, without hundreds of instances of the act of marriage. A sizable majority of the students temporarily gave their bodies to each other in the permanent one flesh-bond of marriage. Around three-quarters of the student population left high school married in the eyes of God, but almost none of them were married in the eyes of themselves, their parents, the Church, or the State.
It has been estimated that ~5% of new brides and up to ~20% (but probably less) of new husbands are virgins. The number of weddings where both partners are virgins represents a tiny fraction of total weddings. Even after we adjust for couples who lost their virginity to each other—and thus married each other—prior to the wedding, the combined number of such couples still represents a minority fraction of all marriages.
Marriage, as established by God, is permanent. It can only be broken by the death of a spouse. Thus, generally speaking, almost every marriage in America is between couples where one of them is already married to another. There is a term for a married person having sex with someone who isn’t their spouse: adultery.
Adultery
And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Although he wouldn’t have had to say it explicitly—Genesis 2:24 establishes that the act of marriage makes an unbreakable one-flesh bond—Jesus nevertheless explicitly states that if a wife divorces her husband marries another man—whether he is a virgin or not—she commits adultery because she is still married to her first husband. Rather obviously, you can’t commit adultery if you are not married.
Adultery is adultery because it is marital theft: claiming another man’s wife as your own wife. It doesn’t matter if this is the intention or not, forming a one-flesh bond with a non-virgin whose mate is alive is adultery in all cases. Adultery is illicit marriage.
Let’s stress this point: adultery is both illicit and marriage. Infidelity—like prostitution—results in a person becoming “married”—one-flesh bonded; without a wedding—to multiple people. There exists no way, outside the grace of God, to resolve such an illicit conflict.
No man can truly divorce his wife. Only God can do so and he has declared that only death can free a husband and wife. If a husband or wife divorce legally, they are still “married” (one-flesh bonded). Any subsequent joining with another person is adultery (so long as their spouse still lives).
Almost everyone is already married. Everyone who has had premarital sex is already married. The vast majority of those marriages should not have happened because they were formed in an adulterous union. When a man or woman fornicates, she should be forbidden from remarriage for life (or at least till her de facto husband dies).
No Christian may knowingly marry a non-virgin non-widow, and if they are such a person they may not marry anyone else. Otherwise it would be adultery. A “single” non-virgin, non-widow Christian has two options: reconcile with their actual spouse (if possible), or else remain celibate until each one of their spouses is dead.
What About Hypergamy?
We don’t live in system where de facto adultery is punishable by death (e.g. stoning). If anything, we live in a society that celebrates adultery! How many times have you heard someone talking about the importance of determining “sexual compatibility?” That’s a celebration of adultery.
But what about hypergamy?
If you consider what is behind the definitions of hypergamy in the Dalrockian Manosphere, you’ll find a pop psychology and sociology masquerading as Christianity. These definitions—which are altered from the original meaning of the word—are attempts to explain what are actually the negative affects of widespread fornication and adultery. Ultimately, what’s really breaking good matches—assortative pairing—is not hypergamy (e.g. through the process of alpha widowing), it is adultery. The consequences of widespread adultery—not hypergamy—largely explains everything attributed to hypergamy.
The consequences of this are reflected in this quote:
It only takes one partner to permanently “damage” a man or woman, and it doesn’t have to be a hypergamous union with an alpha. Whether or not you believe it is a myth, hypergamy wouldn’t be a problem if men and women would stop committing adultery. Adultery accounts for almost all of the problems behind frivolous divorce, not just the ones supposedly driven by unrestrained hypergamy.
The young and old alike are trying to temporarily form and then discard what are, in actuality, permanent bonds. In his teaching against prostitution, Paul taught that the bond of marriage is as sure as the bond of Christ to his church. The alpha widow effect is just one instantiation of what happens when someone pair bonds for life with someone and then discards them (or is discarded).
A ‘temporary’ hypogamous union is just as damaging to the soul as a ‘temporary’ hypergamous union.
Men—who themselves may already be married—are marrying already married women and this leads to a much higher chance of divorce because it is founded in adultery and violates God’s plan. God, through grace and forgiveness, can and does redeem this, but you can’t be surprised that divorce is so likely.
Why attribute to the Dalrockian Manosphere’s hypergamy…
Dalrock always described marriage as largely lateral in terms of both sexual capital and social status. Assortive pairing. The Dalrockian narrative is that (some unspecified fraction of) women have sexual-capital (which isn’t just “looks”) hypergamous STRs before their lateral LTR. And that there is a sexual capital AND social status hypergamy-of-desire in women not just in the sense of wanting better (just like men) but of having an aversion to lateral or lower “deals.” Low romantic sexual attraction to their assortively-paired equals.
…what is better explained by widespread marriage and adultery (and the accompanying negative spiritual effects)? Why even discuss such fallen relationships at all, let alone exhaustively with a fine-toothed comb? To the virgin Christian man looking for a wife, what relevance are single moms, alpha widows, or any N-count other than 0? And to the man in a union formed through adultery, should he expect to be able to escape the consequence of that decision, as if adultery was of no import at all?
This is the heart of the issue:
Fast forward to today. I have been studying Biblical Sexual Morality for years and when I told the truth about what the Bible actually says on Dalrock’s blog, I was attacked, ridiculed, mocked and accused of starting my own religion. Why? Because if they admit that (as the Bible says) marriage begins when the eligible virgin has sex, then over 80% of the “Christian” in the church (including the men on Dalrock’s blog) are living in adultery because they purported to marry another man’s wife. They were not the man to get her virginity and they were OK with that because the church told them “sex doesn’t make you married.”
That is a tough pill to swallow and they reacted with outrage.
What I know to be true is that virtually any “single” woman a guy meets that isn’t a virgin is already married and banging her is adultery. And… can you trust her if she tells you she is a virgin?
This entire series should be understood in this light.
Read more here.
NOTE: I don’t believe that there is such a thing as an “adulterous marriage.” Adultery is an act, not a state of being. It’s not possible to commit adultery with someone you are married to, but it is possible to be stuck in a de facto polygamous relationship. It may be impossible to produce a satisfactory solution to marriages that were unintentionally produced through adultery, but it can’t be fixed by divorce, which is forbidden.
We don’t live in system where de facto adultery is punishable by death (e.g. stoning). If anything, we live in a society that celebrates adultery! How many times have you heard someone talking about the importance of determining “sexual compatibility?” That’s a celebration of adultery.
But what about hypergamy?
If you consider what is behind the definitions of hypergamy in the Dalrockian Manosphere, you’ll find a pop psychology and sociology masquerading as Christianity. These definitions—which are altered from the original meaning of the word—are attempts to explain what are actually the negative affects of widespread fornication and adultery. Ultimately, what’s really breaking good matches—assortative pairing—is not hypergamy (e.g. through the process of alpha widowing), it is adultery. The consequences of widespread adultery—not hypergamy—largely explains everything attributed to hypergamy.
The consequences of this are reflected in this quote:
Rollo
Now before I get run up the flagpole here, I’m completely aware of the studies indicating a woman’s capacity to bond monogamously is inversely proportionate to the number of sexual partners she’s experienced prior to monogamy.
It only takes one partner to permanently damage a man or woman, and it doesn’t have to be a hypergamous union with an alpha. Whether or not you believe it is a myth, hypergamy wouldn’t be a problem if men and women would stop committing adultery. Adultery accounts for almost all of the problems behind frivolous divorce, not just the ones supposedly driven by unrestrained hypergamy.
The young and old alike are trying to temporarily form and then discard what are, in actuality, permanent bonds. In his teaching against prostitution, Paul taught that the bond of marriage is as sure as the bond of Christ to his church. The alpha widow effect is just one instantiation of what happens when someone pair bonds for life with someone and then discards them (or is discarded).
A ‘temporary’ hypogamous union is just as damaging to the soul as a ‘temporary’ hypergamous union.
Its like ArtisinialToad told you at https://grassrootsapologetics.org/2016/09/17/creation-vs-evolution/#comment-57
I read your comments on Dalrock’s blog and enjoyed them. However, I can tell you that while your comments are quite cogent, you’re wasting your time with the majority of the regular commenters there. I know, I’ve been a thorn in their flesh for years.
GBFM has been” a thorn in their flesh for years” longer than anybody as has all THE GREAT MEN & KNOWLEDGE through the thousands of years of recorded and unrecorded history.
IOW?
THIS is most definitely TRUE”I read your comments on Dalrock’s blog and enjoyed them. However, I can tell you that while your comments are quite cogent, you’re wasting your time with the majority of the regular commenters there.”
They like the rest of the world & Yale know the TRUTH & ignore it, but as someone said here before so eloquently GBFM, MOSES, JESUS, Derek, MOD, LIZ, and CAM are sent only to like a man who is a dealer in search of fine and [a]precious pearls, Who, on finding a single pearl of great price, went and sold all he had and bought it.-Matthew 13:45-46
Amplified Bible, Classic Edition
See this link here for evidence of how the whole world knows its guilty as stated here in the NT :
9 Well then, are we [Jews] superior and better off than they? No, not at all. We have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks (Gentiles), are under sin [held down by and subject to its power and control].
10 As it is written, None is righteous, just and truthful and upright and conscientious, no, not one.
11 No one understands [no one intelligently discerns or comprehends]; no one seeks out God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have gone wrong and have become unprofitable and worthless; no one does right, not even one!
13 Their throat is a yawning grave; they use their tongues to deceive (to mislead and to deal treacherously). The venom of asps is beneath their lips.
14 Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood.
16 Destruction [as it dashes them to pieces] and misery mark their ways.
17 And they have no experience of the way of peace [they know nothing about peace, for a peaceful way they do not even recognize].
18 There is no [reverential] fear of God before their eyes.
19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that [the murmurs and excuses of] every mouth may be hushed and all the world may be held accountable to God.
20 For no person will be justified (made righteous, acquitted, and judged acceptable) in His sight by observing the works prescribed by the Law. For [the real function of] the Law is to make men recognize and be conscious of sin [[a]not mere perception, but an acquaintance with sin which works toward repentance, faith, and holy character].
21 But now the righteousness of God has been revealed independently and altogether apart from the Law, although actually it is attested by the Law and the Prophets,
22 Namely, the righteousness of God which comes by believing with personal trust and confident reliance on Jesus Christ (the Messiah). [And it is meant] for all who believe. For there is no distinction,
23 Since all have sinned and are falling short of the honor and glory [b]which God bestows and receives.
24 [All] are justified and made upright and in right standing with God, freely and gratuitously by His grace (His unmerited favor and mercy), through the redemption which is [provided] in Christ Jesus,
25 Whom God put forward [[c]before the eyes of all] as a mercy seat and propitiation by His blood [the cleansing and life-giving sacrifice of atonement and reconciliation, to be received] through faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in His divine forbearance He had passed over and ignored former sins without punishment.
26 It was to demonstrate and prove at the present time ([d]in the now season) that He Himself is righteous and that He justifies and accepts as righteous him who has [true] faith in Jesus.
— Romans 3:9-26-Amplified Bible, Classic Edition
https://archive-yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/world-agrees-adultery-while-prevalent-wrong
Surveys find solid disapproval of adultery in every country, yet technology and social media, modern lifestyles and flexible gender roles, films and news reports about the affairs of politicians and celebrities make the activity more visible worldwide. “Historically, most cultures consider the behavior immoral, and religions impose stiff penalties,” explains Joseph Chamie, demographer and former director of the UN Population Division, referring to a global survey across 40 countries reporting that more than 75 percent of respondents regard adultery as morally unacceptable. “While religious doctrines concerning adultery are essentially unchanged, social norms and laws have changed.” Ostracism and consequences vary from country to country. Severe punishments have largely vanished while most industrialized nations, with the exception of 21 US states, no longer consider the activity a crime. Chamie concludes that “marriage is no longer the permanent or sacred institution it was a century ago.” Such violations of personal commitments contribute to eroding trust in society.
– YaleGlobal
World Agrees: Adultery, While Prevalent, Is Wrong
Media reports highlight adultery among political leaders and celebrities, and such visibility could erode moral objections
Joseph Chamie
Thursday, April 12, 2018
Chinese leader Bo Xilai, with wife Gu Kailai, and Pakistani commoner being flogged
Adultery on trial: From Chinese leader Bo Xilai, with wife Gu Kailai, to a Pakistani commoner, adulterers in some nations face punishment and shame
NEW YORK: Adultery, despite near universal disapproval, has become more visible and prevalent worldwide, challenging established morals of acceptable behavior. Daily news headlines list extramarital affairs of heads of state, government officials, celebrities and other elites. In many instances, extramarital affairs among high-level officials are open secrets, tolerated until other corruption or crimes are uncovered. In addition, social media, technology, and modern lifestyles facilitate adultery.
Adultery, defined as voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not a spouse, occurs in every society. Historically, most cultures consider the behavior immoral, and religions imposed stiff penalties including death: In the Bible, the seventh of 10 Commandments states, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and the Koran prohibits adultery, describing the behavior as “a shameful deed and evil.” In Hinduism, marriage is a sacred and sanctified relationship, with adultery considered a serious breach of dharma, punished here and in the hereafter. Buddhism regards adultery as a serious transgression, furthering suffering and viewed as harmful to oneself and others. Confucianism, considering marriage of prime social value, holds faithfulness and sincerity as first principles and includes infidelity among grounds for divorce.
While religious doctrines still condemn adultery, social norms and laws have changed. Adultery continues to be strictly prohibited in some countries like Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia and Somalia, yet is decriminalized in nearly all industrial societies. A notable exception to decriminalization of adultery among developed countries is the United States, where it remains a criminal offense in 21 states: Various forms of adultery are a misdemeanor in Florida, New York and Utah and a felony in Massachusetts, Michigan and Wisconsin. Prosecutions are rare.
While severe punishments for adultery have by and large disappeared, the majorities of the general public in virtually every country still view adultery as immoral. A global survey across 40 countries, covering three-fourths of the world’s population, found 78 percent suggesting that married people having an affair was morally unacceptable. The study’s notable exception was France, where 47 percent said an extramarital affair was morally suspect.
See just like the Dalrockian manosphere/redpillosphere knows their wicked deeds and words against goodness, brotherly love, and the Spirit of Christmas have left them all but dead in terms of pagehits , comments/ amount of commenters, and in Spiritual health, so has the ”bluepilled, cucked,simped” world too? as
” We have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks (Gentiles), are under sin [held down by and subject to its power and control].”
and
”20 For no person will be justified (made righteous, acquitted, and judged acceptable) in His sight by observing the works prescribed by the Law. For [the real function of] the Law is to make men recognize and be conscious of sin [[a]not mere perception, but an acquaintance with sin which works toward repentance, faith, and holy character].
21 But now the righteousness of God has been revealed independently and altogether apart from the Law, although actually it is attested by the Law and the Prophets,
22 Namely, the righteousness of God which comes by believing with personal trust and confident reliance on Jesus Christ (the Messiah). [And it is meant] for all who believe. For there is no distinction,
23 Since all have sinned and are falling short of the honor and glory [b]which God bestows and receives.
24 [All] are justified and made upright and in right standing with God, freely and gratuitously by His grace (His unmerited favor and mercy), through the redemption which is [provided] in Christ Jesus,”
Conclsion
All that needed to be said as well as
”Men—who themselves may already be married—are marrying already married women and this leads to a much higher chance of divorce because it is founded in adultery and violates God’s plan.”
Most of the MEN inside the Dalrockian manosphere as well as outside it care nary a bit about that especially now as the days of officially recognized marriage among people are almost over anyway and most of the MEN in the sphere think they can just jury-rig/game the system any3way to their liking as if life was like Burger King’s slogan ” HAVE IT YOUR WAY®” which is most likely why they are ”consumers” of Christianity and your blog instead of believers in it.
Professor,
Its like ArtisinialToad told you…
It’s funny how the other day Pseudonymous Commenter Kansas said this:
Derek is the kind of stubborn fool who seemingly can’t admit that folks like Artisanal Toad have schooled him, until after they’re dead.
But Toad and I got along just fine. We had mutual respect for each other. We went back and forth quite a few times. The only problem we had was that he wouldn’t always respond to my arguments and so I did the same, even though neither of us were ones to easily back down from a debate. Our debates effectively ended in draws. Things would have been different if he were still here…
It’s a shame that most of “The Argument Room” was never archived, because Toad used to do formal rebuttals of people he disagreed with on this very topic. He never did so with me and was always polite in our interactions.
Frankly, Toad was easily the most cogent writer in the entire Manosphere, and I don’t think it was close. His arguments were among the most difficult to argue against, which is probably why he got censored so much by the people he outclassed.
Toad would agree with me that, in his own words, “sex with an eligible virgin is to marry her.” In modern times, pretty much every loss of virginity is with an eligible virgin. Here is what he said:
The idea that a virgin does not know that giving her virginity to some hawt boy will result in her being married is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter whether she knows or not, whether she consents or not, because her consent is not required.
They are married, whether she likes it or not.
For years, all Dalrock has done is keep up a steady drumbeat of posts that essentially boil down to one thing: men are losing the cultural war against feminism. For years, Dalrock has offered no solutions to help men and churches deal with the problem of feminism. The Dalrock message is clear: Men are losing and there is no hope.
The truth is that the early church threw out the Bible’s teaching on sexual morality and replaced it with a combination of Pagan belief, Stoic philosophy and Roman law.
The misguided focus on hypergamy is not irrelevant, but an actively harmful distraction.
Men and women are held to the same standard of sexual morality (pagan belief)
As Toad notes, this assumption is behind the entire Dalrockian Manosphere, and is not merely “contra-Deti” as Cameron suggested yesterday. Toad continues:
This rejection of the Bible has resulted in two major problems. The first is the epidemic of adultery within the church.
The problem with all this adultery is that it has utterly destroyed the church. Adultery not only explains all that hypergamy is supposed to explain, but it also explains why the church is completely ineffective at doing anything about it.
Men must accept the responsibility of the role they were given, by God and women must accept the role they were given, by God.
Yesterday I wrote about agency and how a man must lead by claiming responsibility regardless of who is to blame. Here Toad is, 8 years ago, saying more-or-less the same thing.
Toad and I disagreed on a number of foundational issues, but this largely did not impact our shared understanding on these issues.
Bear in mind that Toad and I use terminology slightly differently:
The Bible does not teach that sex always creates a marriage. What the Bible does teach is that the man gives his commitment to marry every time he has intercourse with a woman.
This is expressing the same thing I said in the OP:
We call this the “act of marriage” both because it belongs only in marriage and because it produces, establishes, or confirms a marriage. It is not possible for the act of marriage to take place outside the marital bond, because it is what produces the marital bond.
It’s two different ways to express what is confusing only because the modern conception is so alien to it. You can read more in Toad’s own words here. Above I called it the “act of marriage” (a verb) not “marriage” (a noun). Toad concurs:
Sexual intercourse is the definitive act by the man that marries a woman. Note that the word “marries” is a verb. This is why I have stated before that a man gives his commitment to marriage every time he has sex. Within marriage he reaffirms his commitment to the marriage with every act. It is the man’s action but the outcome of that act depends on the status of the woman.
Becoming one flesh is not the act of sexual intercourse, it is the result of sexual intercourse. The man has sex with the woman, God makes them one flesh (c.f. Matthew 19:5-6).
The outcome, of course, is whether or not they are entitled to live together as husband and wife after the act of marriage. It’s why you can’t take a prostitute home to live with you. But, this is a completely separate issue, and largely not relevant to this discussion of adultery.
Oh, and the issue is not just one of whether or not a man should remarry:
The right of a husband (under the Law) to divorce his Christian wife for adultery does not exist for Christian men and unlike the Law, there is no exception for adultery. Interestingly, we see Paul being very clear that the instruction is not from him in his Apostolic authority, but from Christ.
Peace,
DR
It’s hard to know what to say because my axioms and what follows from them lead me to a different conclusion about what creates marriage. I do, however, think that sex damages people’s ability to pair bond with others and I REALLY endorse this statement you make:
“To the virgin Christian man looking for a wife, what relevance are single moms, alpha widows, or any N-count other than 0?”
I have said more than once in the sphere that there is too much talk of “high notch counts” and that the one that matters is n=0. The data (published at the Social Pathologist blog) suggests that the big jump in divorce is for n=1.
I guess the answer is that a demand for n=0 means almost no one can get married.
Hey CAM you see my comment in response to your last one on the last post, here about GBFMS Brotherly Love for Deti and other related things such as hyperbole?https://derekramsey.com/2025/03/06/tell-me-what-i-want-what-i-really/#comment-21256
i’d have Brotherly Love like that for guys like Jack if he hadn’t claimed it was Derek’s and my fault his site pagehits and amount of comments and commenters have gone downhill drastically ever since his porn post https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2021/09/20/lessons-on-life-and-marriage-from-matthew-10/ came out.i also didn’t like where acts like RedPill Apostle was the publisher /Author when it was him and on his site. On that post where he blamed i & Derek for his slipping so much in popularity,pagehits, and commenters that he ”forgot ” to mention that after the porn post, FB at Spawnys only did less than a handful (total)of ad plugs for SF posts, Yet supposedly i and Derek were the enemy of his success.
Jack and especially Sparkles claim to be RP( & in general)Geniuses yet blame others for their lack of success.
So as a peace offering, i offer this video of ”secrets” to them.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFKpf7RuGTI
How to Rewire Your Mind for Success: The Missing Secret from Think and Grow Rich
Chaz Wolfe
1.95K subscribers
Subscribe
3
90 views Mar 3, 2025 Driven to Win
In this episode of Driven to Win, Chaz Wolfe sits down with John Mitchell, entrepreneur, success mentor, and author of The Missing Secret of Think and Grow Rich. John reveals the hidden formula inside Napoleon Hill’s classic book and explains how his 12-minute-a-day method can rewire your subconscious mind for success. If you’re tired of working harder and not seeing results, this conversation will show you how to work smarter, increase your income, and take full control of your life.
What You’ll Learn:
✅ The real secret inside Think and Grow Rich that most people miss
✅ How to train your subconscious mind to work for you instead of against you
✅ The 2% mindset—why some people succeed while others stay stuck
Guest:
John Mitchell – Author of The Missing Secret of Think and Grow Rich, Entrepreneur, and Success Mentor
Host:
Chaz Wolfe – Founder of Gathering The Kings
Key Topics:
🧠 The 2% Mindset – Why success is a necessity for some and just a preference for others
📖 The Missing Secret of Think and Grow Rich – How John decoded and applied Napoleon Hill’s principles
🔄 Rewiring Your Subconscious for Success – How a 12-minute-a-day practice can reshape your thoughts, actions, and results
Yeah Driven to Win just like Derek, MOSES, JESUS, AND GBFM, and maybe just maybe one day Jack and Sparkles too bro😉
Your “PornPillApostle” comment is still one of the all time funniest sphere comments, Prof.
@Derek – While there are important *psychological* insights here; this rings ultimately false to me (i.e. from the perspective of my fundamental assumptions).
I regard it as imperative that marriage is understood as (ideally) a conscious and voluntary commitment to make a permanent mutually-loving relationship – with all that entails.
Here, you are reducing this spiritual ideal to the psychology (or legalism) of a material and mundane physical act.
The material is indeed always and necessarily spiritual – but the spiritual is always greater than (more than) the material.
Bruce,
I am actually rather astounded to hear you say this. I admit confusion as to precisely what you are objecting to.
I consider the act of marriage to be a deeply spiritual act, perhaps the most spiritual act that humans can enter in outside of a union with Christ. I don’t view it as a mundane act at all.
The whole reason adultery is so terrible is because it is creating a deeply spiritual bond between two people for whom the bond is illicit. What do you think happens when people casually cast aside those lifelong bonds as if they were nothing of consequence? Adultery breaks souls. It is typically a violation of multiple of the ten commandments, but it goes beyond that to the fabric of being and relationship. Few are the acts of man that can either be so aggressively god-honoring or god-hating depending on the details.
I believe you are are identifying the wrong problem. The reality of the act of marriage is not minimized because people fail to recognize its importance, nor does it become legalism due to ignorance of its significance.
Society treating the act of marriage—a deeply spiritual act—as a mundane act is precisely why adultery explains the degradation of society much better than most (but not all) competing explanations.
Peace,
DR