A certain Commenter has two parallel comments about the current evangelical churchs and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs being similar blankslatists:
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
3 September, 2025 at 4:20 pm
Oh, I have had soooo many conversations with Mrs.Pseudonymous Commenter about this. I have told her more or less what’s in this post about the current evangelical churchs and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs being similar blankslatists. She did not want to believe me,”BUT BUT !A#$ said”Ultimately, this comes down to the question of authority. What authority should be used to aid one’s personal discernment in judging the authenticity, the meaning, and/or the faithful application of any revelation, such as since the wimminz has the gina,she be the goddess and MENZ be the simp frame goddess worshipper yes?”
This from a woman who has been one of the “cool kids” and “popular people” from high school and who should have been able to see these social dynamics from a mile away. Women in church like the current failing evangelical churches and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that are failing even more with The Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump are just another social club with female girly girl social enforcement codes of speech and typical
”good guy feminists may take umbrage at what you’re saying, SIR! BUT I’m preaching what GOD said so if Suzanne disparages & discredits the entire manosphere cuz of it I’m good!” tone -policing by fedpilling ”you must vote!” Blue Pill supposedly ”redpill” authority” ”Patriarchal” Soccer Dad trolls.
And not just any social club, but one where virtue and general girliness is meant to be paramount. Furthermore, this virtue is expected to be actually practiced and not to be worn as a badge.
Disagree. Women claim to practice virtue; but even if they don’t, they all (attempt to) wear their “virtue” as badges. Constantly talking about how their “prayer lives” and how “my Holy Spirit” “talks to me”. (“My” Holy Spirit. Heh.) They can pull out a Bible verse (of course, taken out of context) for any situation. Everything they say and do is calculated to project how “holy” they are, and how they’re more holy than you are.And whose wiener & whining is bigger at the ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that are failing even more with The Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump.
gossip (sometimes fabricated and malicious) is spread. I have heard of such stories(as I turn a blind eye to it while smiling at the ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that are failing even more with The Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump., and I can’t normally figure out the motivations as to why it happened, but I am a guy with a modest weiner & whine lads.😉
Of course, you know why. Because they’re women, and spreading gossip is female nature, which is also a characteristic of ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blog I dare say too. Because these women don’t have anything better to do than meet ostensibly to study the Word but which always devolve into talking sh!t about women who aren’t there. Paul talks about this many times, most notably in his Letter to Titus, and warns women against it and warns church leaders about it.
Anyway, the same people often pose as very holy or very gracious (or both) while engaging in such behavior. Maybe it all part of the in-group/out-group thing that the chicks do, or maybe it is just random silliness.
There is nothing random about this. It’s a calculated power play. Everything women do is about power – mostly through manipulation, deception, fraud, and misinformation. Church women wield soft power this way. Of course this is ingroup/outgroup. There are always ingroup/outgroup dynamics where women are involved; and church is no exception. I have had to convince Mrs. deti of all this – it’s a group of women; and if you aren’t conforming to what they want or do, then you’re in the “outgroup”.”
“But Pseudonymous Commenter, it’s church and massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs . We are supposed to be above that. That’s not supposed to happen at church or massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that fail the Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump .”
“But Mrs. Pseudonymous Commenter, they’re humans. And they’re human women. This is what human women do wherever they are.”
I have recently encountered two women who seem to fit the above description. What they say and how they present are two different things. Seemingly everybody loves them, but do they? I have to be careful around them, as I am a fella who gives off an aura of “I can expose your phoniness rather easily”, even when I work very hard not to radiate this.
I’ve had to do this once with a “bible study” “leader” Mrs. Pseudonymous Commenter used to attend. She was disrespectful to me, so I had to call her out directly(unlike DAL’ with MRS.DAL’ as he thought game=redpill who fix it) and tell her to stop it. That was all it took. Just confront her, and her rude, impolite, discourteous behavior. Just refuse to tolerate it.
Hypocrites. Broods of vipers.Failures to Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump and gamebot moms and poor poor natural defilers like Mary Kay Letourneau.”
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
3 September, 2025 at 6:11 pm
”I am not so familiar with the evangelicals or the massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs . How does that come into play?
Currently, church and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church ,bluepill, yet ”redpill” simp frame goddess worshipping blogs in North America in the “evangelical” tradition is more “seeker friendly”, more “progressive”, less formal, with a modern worship tradition. People wear shorts, t-shirts, and jeans; there’s a worship band and a “praise team” (no organist. No hymns, no hymnal.). Less emphasis on bible study, scripture readings and teaching/preaching; more emphasis on fellowship, love, and community ,strife and whining while doing but the barest amount of day game, LAWD have MERCY!.Emphasis on getting people to come to services and read ”woe is me! MENZ NOT marrying,just when I need them to MENZ UP & worshipmfor my goddess daughter!” posts. Hence the evangelical title: Evangelism, winning converts, but no one’s sure what you’re converting them from or to. No tithing or offering, you “give as you’re led”.
This also includes the pentecostal/charismatic/DALrockian/Voxian traditions.
These worship traditions cater to women’s gina and butt tinglelzlzlz. Heavy emphasis not on what you think, but about how the goddess worship makes you feel(down there while tinglelzlzlzingzz all day and night game)😉 while supposedly ”respecting the cox and taming the c@nt.”
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
3 September, 2025 at 6:18 pm
Evangelical = “low worship, low aesthetic, low culture”. Pentecostals, charismatics, nondenominational Christian, contemporary Christian. Traditionally black denominations (for example, Church of God in Christ, or COGIC). Megachurches – Joel Osteen, Saddleback (Rick Warren), Willow Creek, any church led by a “celebrity” pastor since around 1995.
Traditional = “high worship, high aesthetic, high culture”. Roman Catholic. Orthodox Church in America. LCMS. Episcopal. To a lesser extent, Southern Baptist.
Failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs= they can barely get 5 or 10 comments per post(what year is it 2018/’19?) after getting dozens with 100-200+ comments during a certain year{with supposed ”strife-maker”(only called such after he left their blogs) professorGBFMtm & supposed ”rabble rouser” lastmod}, and their ”geniuses”?Let !A#$ keep believing that joining sectarian Radix Fidem, notice once he became a ”official” Radix Fidem sectarian, I stopped commenting so much there? As ED said ”Pseudonymous Commenter is a bit of a downer and MRS. ED HURST says her Radix Fidem ladies Auxery complain of massively decreased amounts of gina and butttinglelzlzlzingzz ”so !A#$ told I ladz”Pseudonymous Commenter, please stop being so reddish blackpill and causing massive drops in the gina and butttinglelzlzlzingzz of the Radix Fidem ladies Auxiliary,ED says that’s why he wasn’t allowed to keep reading Voxian game in 2012”So I looked !A#$ in his Deppian(by way of Disneyian Pirates films) face and said ”NO you will NOT control me, NO you will NOT take my soul, NO you will NOT win this game =redpill and oh its a game=redpill like back in high school with big buxom Mary Jane and respect the cox and tame the c@nt!I’am the one in charge!I’m the one that says YES, NO, NOW!HERE!It’s universal, DUDE!IT’S BIOLOGICAL!, IT’S ANTHROBIOLOGICAL!WE ARE MEN!” like I did to MRS.Pseudonymous Commenter in spring 2011 after discovering Messrs. ROISSY & GBFM!
P.S. To !A#$, ED HURST, MRS. ED HURST & the Radix Fidem ladies Auxiliary, NO, NO, NO, I don’t work at Costco, and unless you’re married to me, related or banging me, you lose, you get nothing!!! Good day!!!https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8rVY26lZItM
professorGBFMtmP.S.Derek, See why sometimes it’s good to start off with an old friendly comment from an old friend of 13 and a half years!? Even by turning the reddish blackpillness of it all whitepilled by keeping hope alive and well!?
Derek L. Ramsey
Did you hear that Jen Hatmaker has left the church?
I’m out of the church right now. I don’t know that I will ever go back, and I don’t know that I will never go back. I grew up under the steeples. My dad was a pastor. I married one at the ripe age of 19, and I have always been a part of the machine. I was a leader. I was an organizer. I was a pastor. I don’t even know what church could or would be for me just as a person.
My lifelong exposure has left me in a place where I know too much. I have been a part of the problem. So I need a break from the machine. I don’t feel like I am forfeiting or want to forfeit my faith. I’m relearning what faith can look like outside of the structures. And I’m finding it very healing, very gentle…
professorGBFMtm
Even more stunning than Jen Hatmaker leaving the church?
This sh@cking update on marriage statistics from DAL’ in October ’14https://theredarchive.com/blog/Dalrock/fewer-men-are-working-and-marriage-isdying.7775
Conventional Wisdom of Gina and butt tingleslzlzlz
Conventional wisdom is that the decline in men’s labor force participation and the weakening of marriage as an institution are linked, but only in one direction. The standard narrative is that as men have (for whatever reason) worked less, marriage has been weakened because men are no longer filling the role of breadwinner. There is certainly some logic here, and this must be a least part of the explanation. However, in asserting that the connection works in only one direction the standard narrative requires a series of incredible assumptions.
The first assumption conventional wisdom requires is that a marriage based culture doesn’t create powerful incentives for married men to work hard and maximize their earnings. Denying the incentive marriage provides to men to work harder has left a cottage industry of sociologists and economists scratching their heads trying to figure out why marriage makes men more productive and doesn’t do the same for women. This incentive is denied despite the fact that we implicitly recognize that it is a powerful motivating force in other contexts. Every family court judge in the land knows that marriage creates strong incentives for men to work harder, which is why courts feel the need to assign income quotas (imputed income) to divorced men in order to keep them working as hard after the divorce as they did while married.
The second assumption is that the desire to marry in a marriage based culture doesn’t create an incentive for young men to work hard to signal breadwinner capability or at least breadwinner potential. To believe this, one would have to assume that young men aren’t aware that women place a high value on a man’s employment and earnings status when selecting a prospective husband. This is absurd. The reality is that sex is a powerful motivator for men (young and old); just ask any marketer.
The third assumption is that feminism and the sexual revolution never happened, or at least that they didn’t fundamentally change marriage patterns. Under this assumption, the only reason women are delaying or forgoing marriage is because women simply can’t find men with jobs. Yet we know this isn’t true. Feminists have completed a long and wildly successful march through all of our institutions, and young women are quite open about their plans to maximize their period of casual sex and only marry once they start to see their window of fertility close. The reality is that women are delaying marriage not because marriagable men are scarce, but because they perceive them as so abundant they don’t feel the need to hurry and lock one down.
Conclusion
In a marriage based society, getting sexual access to the most attractive women requires men to work hard to signal provider status. After the wedding, men feel the responsibility which comes with the position of head of the household. Both of these are extremely powerful incentives for men to work hard and maximize their earnings. However, we have moved from a marriage based/incentive structure for men to a quota/coercion based society. As a result, we are seeing a shift in men’s attitudes about work.
Tying this back to the chart on men’s employment, what this means is one of two things is going on:
1) The entire reduction in men’s earnings and labor force participation is due to the loss of incentives which were in place when we were a marriage based society.
or
2) Structural forces have reduced men’s participation in the workforce (a shifting economy, global trade, an increase in welfare/disability payments, etc), while at the same time men’s incentive to push past these obstacles has been greatly reduced. Put another way, we have reduced men’s incentive to work hard at exactly the time we need them working their hardest. Even worse, each of these two problems feeds the other in a vicious circle. Weaker incentives for men to excel results in a weaker economy, which weakens marriage, which then further weakens the incentives for men to excel.
No matter how you view it, we are paying a huge price for our decision to move from a marriage based family structure to a child support family model. Moreover, this price is going to continue to increase as the inertia left over from the former model fades away.
Some comments from that post?: Joey brings up ”bad luck” as opposed to the ”lucky” 50% or so who stay married.While Donal knows just a little more day and night game-knowledge will get white MEN remarrying at 100% again, like in 1960(when most divorced white MEN were day and night game geniuses with vast amounts of swagger, furry hats like Mystery=Eric Von Markovik who long ago disavowed the massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church,bluepill, yet ”redpill” simp frame goddess worshipping blogs in North America as stated herehttps://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/scaachikoul/pickup-artists-manosphere-incels-the-game-mras theres even mention of their being ”sectarianism” in the sphere- ”While pickup artists obviously didn’t create misogyny, they certainly helped perpetuate it and taught another generation how to act out sexist behavior in their romantic lives. PUAs are now part of a larger constellation of groups relating to men and masculinity, often as a counterpoint to feminism, called “the manosphere.” These groups include Men’s Rights Activists, or MRAs, who advocate for men’s rights, to varying degrees of legitimacy; Men Going Their Own Way, (MGTOWs), who don’t want women around at all; Proud Boys, a far-right group that discourages members from masturbating in order to maintain their interest in sex with women; red pillers, men who believe that women are actually the privileged group between the two sexes; and the involuntarily celibate, or incels. The groups at once complement one another while also being in vehement disagreement”-(BUT, BUT, BUT, i thought every MAN wanted to be under the thumb of ”RPGenius” ”leaders””uniters NOT dividers” (like W. Bush) who can’t even vet and lead one poor poor natural defiler through her fitness=sh!t tests of baby murder & adultery while such ”RPGenius” ”leaders” have acute envy for MEN who can get a woman that obeys the law of MOSES that JESUS came to fulfill NOT destroy as DAL’ & VOX said the law of gina and butt tingleslzlzlz superseds and destroys the law of MOSES, right?)& testosterone.
Joey says:
October 3, 2014 at 1:43 pm
I think the economic decline, wailing and gnashing of teeth from semi-marriage-minded women is what Heinlein referred to as “bad luck.” Whocouldaknowed?
donalgraeme says:
October 3, 2014 at 1:44 pm
Nothing like some graphs to drive your point home Dalrock. A couple of things worth pointing out:
1) The drop in white male remarriage rates is truly startling. It was nearly 100% in 1960, and now its just above 1/3. That is a huge drop, one that has to be making a significant impact.
2) The difference in median ages of first marriage between men and women are surprisingly even. It never varies much at all, but stays level at about a 2 year difference. Given what we know about female preferences for the age of potential spouses, that is proof that women are the ones driving age of marriage these days.
Joey says:
October 3, 2014 at 1:52 pm
The irony here is that the utopia that the feminists are going to create is ultimately self-destructive. The closer the feminists get to their (stated) ideal of the burdens being split 50/50 in society, and of driving men out of power and traditional roles and occupations, the closer we will get to the whole thing crashing down.
A friend of mine – less of a friend lately because he’s increasingly a low beta drip – quit his lucrative $120k/year job so that his $150k/year wife could provide for the family while he stays home to raise the kids. He’s a *great* house dad, though he’s not exactly setting an awesome example for how his two boys should grow up. On the one hand, it’s working out okay for them financially, on the other, there’s an insecurity about him and I presume they will be slackers like their dad is. He doesn’t know how he’s contributing to the crash of the system, and I’ve lately taken to calling him John Galt, much to his befuddlement. I will put him in contrast with another friend who is a house dad – sort of – he works independently from home in a consulting gig, makes a solid living, and also has the flexibility of being a full time home parent. His wife is an engineer who has to travel a bit for work so he has to do more of the parenting than she does sometimes, and man does he get shitty looks from local stay-at-home-wives, who assume he’s a slacker and gold digger. He’s Alpha as hell, and is being a good provider and setting a good example for his son. Not all work has to be in a factory or a downtown building.
The difference between the two guys is that one of the guys is working and setting a good example for his son, the other is acting as a free rider and setting the example that if you can get it for free, you should take it.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Joey:
Your friend who quit his $120 k per year job should probably plan on becoming a frivorced man. She will probably lose attraction for him and seek other… companionship. Your friend became a kitchen bitch; no woman likes to be married to a kitchen bitch. If and when that happens, encourage him to give equality to his wife HARD — tell him to seek half the assets AND child custody AND child support AND liberal alimony.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:12 pm
donal:
actually the male remarriage figure/graph isn’t a percentage; it’s a number per 1000. So in 1960, for every 1000 divorced men, 97 remarried; in 2010 that same number was down to 36.
It’s not a percentage drop, but it is a steep drop nonetheless. Men aren’t remarrying because they can’t in turn because they don’t believe they have the assets or wherewithal to do so.
Or, they aren’t remarrying simply because they don’t want to; in turn because men 45-64 have more SMV than women at the comparable ages do; and they can attract somewhat younger women probably from 35-45, and they don’t have to remarry to get sex, which is what they want.
I suspect it’s a bit of both.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:13 pm
“Having been through the family courts, it’s far less likely I’d ever get married again.”
I haven’t been through a divorce, but I’d have to agree. If I’m ever single again, I won’t remarry.
Artisanal Toad says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:33 pm
@Anchorman
Having been through the family courts, it’s far less likely I’d ever get married again. If I did, there would be serious vetting, starting at her relationship with Christ and her views on marriage.
NO. A thousand times, NO. You start with her eligibility to marry. Matthew 5:31-33. If she is a Christian “legally divorced” from her Christian husband, the divorce is illegitimate. According to 1st Corinthians 7:10 she has merely separated from her husband (c.f. Romans 7:2 and 1st Cor. 7:39) The so-called “pauline privilege” allowed both believing men and women to be free from their unbelieving spouses if their spouse refused to live with them. Other than that, no divorced Christian woman is eligible to re-marry.
Look at what The Lord said- if you marry the woman who is illegitimately divorced (she’s still married) you commit ADULTERY. There is a reason why 2nd and 3rd marriages have such a dismal rate of success. God is not mocked.
Other than that, I think your comment is spot-on.
@Pseudonymous Commenter
they can attract somewhat younger women probably from 35-45, and they don’t have to remarry to get sex, which is what they want.
When looking at the cohort of 35-45, the issue of children is most unlikely to be on the table. Therefore, sex and companionship are the only real reasons the man would marry. Those who desire to be obedient to God must remarry if they want licit sex.
That was the first year i noticed Artisanal Toad’s comments.
donalgraeme says:
October 3, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Thanks for catching that error folks. I was looking at the graph with percentages of those married right before, and missed the switch to # per 1,000. Still, the relative drop stays the same proportionally. Only 1/3 re-marry as much as did before.
See how Donal longed for 1960 American white MEN when most divorced white MEN were day and night game geniuses with vast amounts of swagger, furry hats & testosterone.Like Wally Coxhttps://i.redd.it/7ysy0i3cvmm81.png, most MEN of every race back then were 6’5” studs who could lift a house😉That’s why in just 48 years,when he died he had been married three times” Cox married three times—to Marilyn Gennaro, Milagros Tirado, and Patricia Tiernan. He was survived by his third wife and his two children.[2]”
Lyn87 says:
October 3, 2014 at 3:20 pm
Interesting charts as usual, Dalrock.
I noticed that the difference in marriage rates between blacks and whites increased by 250% between 1960 and now. Prior to the “Great Society” programs the black and white rates were within a few percentage points of each other. Now the white rate is lower than the black rate was in 1960, and the black rate fell off a cliff. It’s almost like you get more of what you subsidize… who knew?
[D: Indeed.]
I thought the “Percent of US population 15 and older who are married” would be significantly skewed by the fact that people frequently used to get married right after high school in 1960, but such unions are rare now, but once I cross-referenced the population by age distribution, I realized that using “median age of marriage” rather than “15 and older” would only move the lines by an insignificant amount – a percent or two at most.
The Remarriage chart was the most surprising to me. Part of it surely has to do with the fact that women typically outlive men, and the life expectancy has risen by about a decade since 1960, but any way you look at it the drop in the remarriage rate among 45-64 year old men is HUGE. In 1960 a woman in that age cohort had about a fairly good shot at finding another husband (then again, she was probably a widow rather than a divorcee), and now it’s down to less than half of what it used to be. The “EPL – Trade Up – Plan B” strategy is a sucker’s bet for women. Also, I suspect the average middle-age guy looking to remarry in 1960 was probably a widower whose wife died young, whereas now he’s a frivorce victim paying his ex-wife’s bills by order of some judge. Frankly, I would have guessed that the remarriage rate among the older set would have increased rather than decreased simply because people are living longer. The fact that it is close to zero is surprising to me, especially since the men in that cohort grew up under the old social compact. I would have been wrong to guess that.
Consider the declining marriage rate, the rising median age for first marriages, and the plummeting remarriage rate… then toss in the employment implications mentioned in the last post, and it looks like feminists are only now starting to reap what they have sown. The inertia of the old societal order on the behaviors of Boomer and Gen-X men is artificially propping up the numbers and masking the extent of the damage. The implications of these charts are ominous indeed.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 3:27 pm
“When looking at the cohort of 35-45, the issue of children is most unlikely to be on the table. Therefore, sex and companionship are the only real reasons the man would marry. Those who desire to be obedient to God must remarry if they want licit sex.”
True. But when we get to the issue of remarriage for men in the 45-64 age cohort, one of the least religious in history, I think that one of the last things on the minds of most men at that age is obedient to God’s requirements for licit sex. The fact is that a 50 year old man has more SMV left than a woman of similar age and station. Said another way, it’s why a 50 year old man often won’t date or have sex with a woman of the same age. He’s looking for sex and companionship, and most likely he won’t have to marry to get it from a woman in the 35-45 age cohort. If he had to marry to get it, he probably would, But since he doesn’t have to, he doesn’t.
It’s different for women in the same age group. These women don’t remarry as easily, simply because they can’t. They have a lot less SMV to work with, though they desire remarriage probably more than similarly aged men. The imperatives of remarriage are different for women at this age — it’s not about resources for kids; it’s about resources for self-care. She doesn’t want to marry because she needs a guy to take care of her kids; she wants marriage so she can lock in a man and his money to care for HER.
Remember the three female imperatives. The first is alpha sperm for kids; the second is beta provisioning to care for the kids. The third kicks in if she fails in the first and second. The “tertiary” imperative is for the woman to secure provisioning for herself by any means necessary.
A certain Commenter has two parallel comments about the current evangelical churchs and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs being similar blankslatists:
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
3 September, 2025 at 4:20 pm
Oh, I have had soooo many conversations with Mrs.Pseudonymous Commenter about this. I have told her more or less what’s in this post about the current evangelical churchs and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs being similar blankslatists. She did not want to believe me,”BUT BUT !A#$ said”Ultimately, this comes down to the question of authority. What authority should be used to aid one’s personal discernment in judging the authenticity, the meaning, and/or the faithful application of any revelation, such as since the wimminz has the gina,she be the goddess and MENZ be the simp frame goddess worshipper yes?”
This from a woman who has been one of the “cool kids” and “popular people” from high school and who should have been able to see these social dynamics from a mile away. Women in church like the current failing evangelical churches and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that are failing even more with The Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump are just another social club with female girly girl social enforcement codes of speech and typical
”good guy feminists may take umbrage at what you’re saying, SIR! BUT I’m preaching what GOD said so if Suzanne disparages & discredits the entire manosphere cuz of it I’m good!” tone -policing by fedpilling ”you must vote!” Blue Pill supposedly ”redpill” authority” ”Patriarchal” Soccer Dad trolls.
And not just any social club, but one where virtue and general girliness is meant to be paramount. Furthermore, this virtue is expected to be actually practiced and not to be worn as a badge.
Disagree. Women claim to practice virtue; but even if they don’t, they all (attempt to) wear their “virtue” as badges. Constantly talking about how their “prayer lives” and how “my Holy Spirit” “talks to me”. (“My” Holy Spirit. Heh.) They can pull out a Bible verse (of course, taken out of context) for any situation. Everything they say and do is calculated to project how “holy” they are, and how they’re more holy than you are.And whose wiener & whining is bigger at the ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that are failing even more with The Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump.
gossip (sometimes fabricated and malicious) is spread. I have heard of such stories(as I turn a blind eye to it while smiling at the ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that are failing even more with The Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump., and I can’t normally figure out the motivations as to why it happened, but I am a guy with a modest weiner & whine lads.😉
Of course, you know why. Because they’re women, and spreading gossip is female nature, which is also a characteristic of ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blog I dare say too. Because these women don’t have anything better to do than meet ostensibly to study the Word but which always devolve into talking sh!t about women who aren’t there. Paul talks about this many times, most notably in his Letter to Titus, and warns women against it and warns church leaders about it.
Anyway, the same people often pose as very holy or very gracious (or both) while engaging in such behavior. Maybe it all part of the in-group/out-group thing that the chicks do, or maybe it is just random silliness.
There is nothing random about this. It’s a calculated power play. Everything women do is about power – mostly through manipulation, deception, fraud, and misinformation. Church women wield soft power this way. Of course this is ingroup/outgroup. There are always ingroup/outgroup dynamics where women are involved; and church is no exception. I have had to convince Mrs. deti of all this – it’s a group of women; and if you aren’t conforming to what they want or do, then you’re in the “outgroup”.”
“But Pseudonymous Commenter, it’s church and massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs . We are supposed to be above that. That’s not supposed to happen at church or massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs that fail the Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump .”
“But Mrs. Pseudonymous Commenter, they’re humans. And they’re human women. This is what human women do wherever they are.”
I have recently encountered two women who seem to fit the above description. What they say and how they present are two different things. Seemingly everybody loves them, but do they? I have to be careful around them, as I am a fella who gives off an aura of “I can expose your phoniness rather easily”, even when I work very hard not to radiate this.
I’ve had to do this once with a “bible study” “leader” Mrs. Pseudonymous Commenter used to attend. She was disrespectful to me, so I had to call her out directly(unlike DAL’ with MRS.DAL’ as he thought game=redpill who fix it) and tell her to stop it. That was all it took. Just confront her, and her rude, impolite, discourteous behavior. Just refuse to tolerate it.
Hypocrites. Broods of vipers.Failures to Manosphere men, young demonized men, and secular folks like Trump and gamebot moms and poor poor natural defilers like Mary Kay Letourneau.”
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
3 September, 2025 at 6:11 pm
”I am not so familiar with the evangelicals or the massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs . How does that come into play?
Currently, church and ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church ,bluepill, yet ”redpill” simp frame goddess worshipping blogs in North America in the “evangelical” tradition is more “seeker friendly”, more “progressive”, less formal, with a modern worship tradition. People wear shorts, t-shirts, and jeans; there’s a worship band and a “praise team” (no organist. No hymns, no hymnal.). Less emphasis on bible study, scripture readings and teaching/preaching; more emphasis on fellowship, love, and community ,strife and whining while doing but the barest amount of day game, LAWD have MERCY!.Emphasis on getting people to come to services and read ”woe is me! MENZ NOT marrying,just when I need them to MENZ UP & worshipmfor my goddess daughter!” posts. Hence the evangelical title: Evangelism, winning converts, but no one’s sure what you’re converting them from or to. No tithing or offering, you “give as you’re led”.
This also includes the pentecostal/charismatic/DALrockian/Voxian traditions.
These worship traditions cater to women’s gina and butt tinglelzlzlz. Heavy emphasis not on what you think, but about how the goddess worship makes you feel(down there while tinglelzlzlzingzz all day and night game)😉 while supposedly ”respecting the cox and taming the c@nt.”
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
3 September, 2025 at 6:18 pm
Evangelical = “low worship, low aesthetic, low culture”. Pentecostals, charismatics, nondenominational Christian, contemporary Christian. Traditionally black denominations (for example, Church of God in Christ, or COGIC). Megachurches – Joel Osteen, Saddleback (Rick Warren), Willow Creek, any church led by a “celebrity” pastor since around 1995.
Traditional = “high worship, high aesthetic, high culture”. Roman Catholic. Orthodox Church in America. LCMS. Episcopal. To a lesser extent, Southern Baptist.
Failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church blogs= they can barely get 5 or 10 comments per post(what year is it 2018/’19?) after getting dozens with 100-200+ comments during a certain year{with supposed ”strife-maker”(only called such after he left their blogs) professorGBFMtm & supposed ”rabble rouser” lastmod}, and their ”geniuses”?Let !A#$ keep believing that joining sectarian Radix Fidem, notice once he became a ”official” Radix Fidem sectarian, I stopped commenting so much there? As ED said ”Pseudonymous Commenter is a bit of a downer and MRS. ED HURST says her Radix Fidem ladies Auxery complain of massively decreased amounts of gina and butttinglelzlzlzingzz ”so !A#$ told I ladz”Pseudonymous Commenter, please stop being so reddish blackpill and causing massive drops in the gina and butttinglelzlzlzingzz of the Radix Fidem ladies Auxiliary,ED says that’s why he wasn’t allowed to keep reading Voxian game in 2012”So I looked !A#$ in his Deppian(by way of Disneyian Pirates films) face and said ”NO you will NOT control me, NO you will NOT take my soul, NO you will NOT win this game =redpill and oh its a game=redpill like back in high school with big buxom Mary Jane and respect the cox and tame the c@nt!I’am the one in charge!I’m the one that says YES, NO, NOW!HERE!It’s universal, DUDE!IT’S BIOLOGICAL!, IT’S ANTHROBIOLOGICAL!WE ARE MEN!” like I did to MRS.Pseudonymous Commenter in spring 2011 after discovering Messrs. ROISSY & GBFM!
P.S. To !A#$, ED HURST, MRS. ED HURST & the Radix Fidem ladies Auxiliary, NO, NO, NO, I don’t work at Costco, and unless you’re married to me, related or banging me, you lose, you get nothing!!! Good day!!!https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8rVY26lZItM
professorGBFMtmP.S.Derek, See why sometimes it’s good to start off with an old friendly comment from an old friend of 13 and a half years!? Even by turning the reddish blackpillness of it all whitepilled by keeping hope alive and well!?
Did you hear that Jen Hatmaker has left the church?
My lifelong exposure has left me in a place where I know too much. I have been a part of the problem. So I need a break from the machine. I don’t feel like I am forfeiting or want to forfeit my faith. I’m relearning what faith can look like outside of the structures. And I’m finding it very healing, very gentle…
Even more stunning than Jen Hatmaker leaving the church?
This sh@cking update on marriage statistics from DAL’ in October ’14https://theredarchive.com/blog/Dalrock/fewer-men-are-working-and-marriage-isdying.7775
Conventional Wisdom of Gina and butt tingleslzlzlz
Conventional wisdom is that the decline in men’s labor force participation and the weakening of marriage as an institution are linked, but only in one direction. The standard narrative is that as men have (for whatever reason) worked less, marriage has been weakened because men are no longer filling the role of breadwinner. There is certainly some logic here, and this must be a least part of the explanation. However, in asserting that the connection works in only one direction the standard narrative requires a series of incredible assumptions.
The first assumption conventional wisdom requires is that a marriage based culture doesn’t create powerful incentives for married men to work hard and maximize their earnings. Denying the incentive marriage provides to men to work harder has left a cottage industry of sociologists and economists scratching their heads trying to figure out why marriage makes men more productive and doesn’t do the same for women. This incentive is denied despite the fact that we implicitly recognize that it is a powerful motivating force in other contexts. Every family court judge in the land knows that marriage creates strong incentives for men to work harder, which is why courts feel the need to assign income quotas (imputed income) to divorced men in order to keep them working as hard after the divorce as they did while married.
The second assumption is that the desire to marry in a marriage based culture doesn’t create an incentive for young men to work hard to signal breadwinner capability or at least breadwinner potential. To believe this, one would have to assume that young men aren’t aware that women place a high value on a man’s employment and earnings status when selecting a prospective husband. This is absurd. The reality is that sex is a powerful motivator for men (young and old); just ask any marketer.
The third assumption is that feminism and the sexual revolution never happened, or at least that they didn’t fundamentally change marriage patterns. Under this assumption, the only reason women are delaying or forgoing marriage is because women simply can’t find men with jobs. Yet we know this isn’t true. Feminists have completed a long and wildly successful march through all of our institutions, and young women are quite open about their plans to maximize their period of casual sex and only marry once they start to see their window of fertility close. The reality is that women are delaying marriage not because marriagable men are scarce, but because they perceive them as so abundant they don’t feel the need to hurry and lock one down.
Conclusion
In a marriage based society, getting sexual access to the most attractive women requires men to work hard to signal provider status. After the wedding, men feel the responsibility which comes with the position of head of the household. Both of these are extremely powerful incentives for men to work hard and maximize their earnings. However, we have moved from a marriage based/incentive structure for men to a quota/coercion based society. As a result, we are seeing a shift in men’s attitudes about work.
Tying this back to the chart on men’s employment, what this means is one of two things is going on:
1) The entire reduction in men’s earnings and labor force participation is due to the loss of incentives which were in place when we were a marriage based society.
or
2) Structural forces have reduced men’s participation in the workforce (a shifting economy, global trade, an increase in welfare/disability payments, etc), while at the same time men’s incentive to push past these obstacles has been greatly reduced. Put another way, we have reduced men’s incentive to work hard at exactly the time we need them working their hardest. Even worse, each of these two problems feeds the other in a vicious circle. Weaker incentives for men to excel results in a weaker economy, which weakens marriage, which then further weakens the incentives for men to excel.
No matter how you view it, we are paying a huge price for our decision to move from a marriage based family structure to a child support family model. Moreover, this price is going to continue to increase as the inertia left over from the former model fades away.
Some comments from that post?: Joey brings up ”bad luck” as opposed to the ”lucky” 50% or so who stay married.While Donal knows just a little more day and night game-knowledge will get white MEN remarrying at 100% again, like in 1960(when most divorced white MEN were day and night game geniuses with vast amounts of swagger, furry hats like Mystery=Eric Von Markovik who long ago disavowed the massively failing ”RPGenius” ”leaders” ”Jewish Christianity” Authority church,bluepill, yet ”redpill” simp frame goddess worshipping blogs in North America as stated herehttps://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/scaachikoul/pickup-artists-manosphere-incels-the-game-mras theres even mention of their being ”sectarianism” in the sphere- ”While pickup artists obviously didn’t create misogyny, they certainly helped perpetuate it and taught another generation how to act out sexist behavior in their romantic lives. PUAs are now part of a larger constellation of groups relating to men and masculinity, often as a counterpoint to feminism, called “the manosphere.” These groups include Men’s Rights Activists, or MRAs, who advocate for men’s rights, to varying degrees of legitimacy; Men Going Their Own Way, (MGTOWs), who don’t want women around at all; Proud Boys, a far-right group that discourages members from masturbating in order to maintain their interest in sex with women; red pillers, men who believe that women are actually the privileged group between the two sexes; and the involuntarily celibate, or incels. The groups at once complement one another while also being in vehement disagreement”-(BUT, BUT, BUT, i thought every MAN wanted to be under the thumb of ”RPGenius” ”leaders””uniters NOT dividers” (like W. Bush) who can’t even vet and lead one poor poor natural defiler through her fitness=sh!t tests of baby murder & adultery while such ”RPGenius” ”leaders” have acute envy for MEN who can get a woman that obeys the law of MOSES that JESUS came to fulfill NOT destroy as DAL’ & VOX said the law of gina and butt tingleslzlzlz superseds and destroys the law of MOSES, right?)& testosterone.
Joey says:
October 3, 2014 at 1:43 pm
I think the economic decline, wailing and gnashing of teeth from semi-marriage-minded women is what Heinlein referred to as “bad luck.” Whocouldaknowed?
donalgraeme says:
October 3, 2014 at 1:44 pm
Nothing like some graphs to drive your point home Dalrock. A couple of things worth pointing out:
1) The drop in white male remarriage rates is truly startling. It was nearly 100% in 1960, and now its just above 1/3. That is a huge drop, one that has to be making a significant impact.
2) The difference in median ages of first marriage between men and women are surprisingly even. It never varies much at all, but stays level at about a 2 year difference. Given what we know about female preferences for the age of potential spouses, that is proof that women are the ones driving age of marriage these days.
Joey says:
October 3, 2014 at 1:52 pm
The irony here is that the utopia that the feminists are going to create is ultimately self-destructive. The closer the feminists get to their (stated) ideal of the burdens being split 50/50 in society, and of driving men out of power and traditional roles and occupations, the closer we will get to the whole thing crashing down.
A friend of mine – less of a friend lately because he’s increasingly a low beta drip – quit his lucrative $120k/year job so that his $150k/year wife could provide for the family while he stays home to raise the kids. He’s a *great* house dad, though he’s not exactly setting an awesome example for how his two boys should grow up. On the one hand, it’s working out okay for them financially, on the other, there’s an insecurity about him and I presume they will be slackers like their dad is. He doesn’t know how he’s contributing to the crash of the system, and I’ve lately taken to calling him John Galt, much to his befuddlement. I will put him in contrast with another friend who is a house dad – sort of – he works independently from home in a consulting gig, makes a solid living, and also has the flexibility of being a full time home parent. His wife is an engineer who has to travel a bit for work so he has to do more of the parenting than she does sometimes, and man does he get shitty looks from local stay-at-home-wives, who assume he’s a slacker and gold digger. He’s Alpha as hell, and is being a good provider and setting a good example for his son. Not all work has to be in a factory or a downtown building.
The difference between the two guys is that one of the guys is working and setting a good example for his son, the other is acting as a free rider and setting the example that if you can get it for free, you should take it.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Joey:
Your friend who quit his $120 k per year job should probably plan on becoming a frivorced man. She will probably lose attraction for him and seek other… companionship. Your friend became a kitchen bitch; no woman likes to be married to a kitchen bitch. If and when that happens, encourage him to give equality to his wife HARD — tell him to seek half the assets AND child custody AND child support AND liberal alimony.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:12 pm
donal:
actually the male remarriage figure/graph isn’t a percentage; it’s a number per 1000. So in 1960, for every 1000 divorced men, 97 remarried; in 2010 that same number was down to 36.
It’s not a percentage drop, but it is a steep drop nonetheless. Men aren’t remarrying because they can’t in turn because they don’t believe they have the assets or wherewithal to do so.
Or, they aren’t remarrying simply because they don’t want to; in turn because men 45-64 have more SMV than women at the comparable ages do; and they can attract somewhat younger women probably from 35-45, and they don’t have to remarry to get sex, which is what they want.
I suspect it’s a bit of both.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:13 pm
“Having been through the family courts, it’s far less likely I’d ever get married again.”
I haven’t been through a divorce, but I’d have to agree. If I’m ever single again, I won’t remarry.
Artisanal Toad says:
October 3, 2014 at 2:33 pm
@Anchorman
Having been through the family courts, it’s far less likely I’d ever get married again. If I did, there would be serious vetting, starting at her relationship with Christ and her views on marriage.
NO. A thousand times, NO. You start with her eligibility to marry. Matthew 5:31-33. If she is a Christian “legally divorced” from her Christian husband, the divorce is illegitimate. According to 1st Corinthians 7:10 she has merely separated from her husband (c.f. Romans 7:2 and 1st Cor. 7:39) The so-called “pauline privilege” allowed both believing men and women to be free from their unbelieving spouses if their spouse refused to live with them. Other than that, no divorced Christian woman is eligible to re-marry.
Look at what The Lord said- if you marry the woman who is illegitimately divorced (she’s still married) you commit ADULTERY. There is a reason why 2nd and 3rd marriages have such a dismal rate of success. God is not mocked.
Other than that, I think your comment is spot-on.
@Pseudonymous Commenter
they can attract somewhat younger women probably from 35-45, and they don’t have to remarry to get sex, which is what they want.
When looking at the cohort of 35-45, the issue of children is most unlikely to be on the table. Therefore, sex and companionship are the only real reasons the man would marry. Those who desire to be obedient to God must remarry if they want licit sex.
That was the first year i noticed Artisanal Toad’s comments.
donalgraeme says:
October 3, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Thanks for catching that error folks. I was looking at the graph with percentages of those married right before, and missed the switch to # per 1,000. Still, the relative drop stays the same proportionally. Only 1/3 re-marry as much as did before.
See how Donal longed for 1960 American white MEN when most divorced white MEN were day and night game geniuses with vast amounts of swagger, furry hats & testosterone.Like Wally Coxhttps://i.redd.it/7ysy0i3cvmm81.png, most MEN of every race back then were 6’5” studs who could lift a house😉That’s why in just 48 years,when he died he had been married three times” Cox married three times—to Marilyn Gennaro, Milagros Tirado, and Patricia Tiernan. He was survived by his third wife and his two children.[2]”
Lyn87 says:
October 3, 2014 at 3:20 pm
Interesting charts as usual, Dalrock.
I noticed that the difference in marriage rates between blacks and whites increased by 250% between 1960 and now. Prior to the “Great Society” programs the black and white rates were within a few percentage points of each other. Now the white rate is lower than the black rate was in 1960, and the black rate fell off a cliff. It’s almost like you get more of what you subsidize… who knew?
[D: Indeed.]
I thought the “Percent of US population 15 and older who are married” would be significantly skewed by the fact that people frequently used to get married right after high school in 1960, but such unions are rare now, but once I cross-referenced the population by age distribution, I realized that using “median age of marriage” rather than “15 and older” would only move the lines by an insignificant amount – a percent or two at most.
The Remarriage chart was the most surprising to me. Part of it surely has to do with the fact that women typically outlive men, and the life expectancy has risen by about a decade since 1960, but any way you look at it the drop in the remarriage rate among 45-64 year old men is HUGE. In 1960 a woman in that age cohort had about a fairly good shot at finding another husband (then again, she was probably a widow rather than a divorcee), and now it’s down to less than half of what it used to be. The “EPL – Trade Up – Plan B” strategy is a sucker’s bet for women. Also, I suspect the average middle-age guy looking to remarry in 1960 was probably a widower whose wife died young, whereas now he’s a frivorce victim paying his ex-wife’s bills by order of some judge. Frankly, I would have guessed that the remarriage rate among the older set would have increased rather than decreased simply because people are living longer. The fact that it is close to zero is surprising to me, especially since the men in that cohort grew up under the old social compact. I would have been wrong to guess that.
Consider the declining marriage rate, the rising median age for first marriages, and the plummeting remarriage rate… then toss in the employment implications mentioned in the last post, and it looks like feminists are only now starting to reap what they have sown. The inertia of the old societal order on the behaviors of Boomer and Gen-X men is artificially propping up the numbers and masking the extent of the damage. The implications of these charts are ominous indeed.
Pseudonymous Commenter says:
October 3, 2014 at 3:27 pm
“When looking at the cohort of 35-45, the issue of children is most unlikely to be on the table. Therefore, sex and companionship are the only real reasons the man would marry. Those who desire to be obedient to God must remarry if they want licit sex.”
True. But when we get to the issue of remarriage for men in the 45-64 age cohort, one of the least religious in history, I think that one of the last things on the minds of most men at that age is obedient to God’s requirements for licit sex. The fact is that a 50 year old man has more SMV left than a woman of similar age and station. Said another way, it’s why a 50 year old man often won’t date or have sex with a woman of the same age. He’s looking for sex and companionship, and most likely he won’t have to marry to get it from a woman in the 35-45 age cohort. If he had to marry to get it, he probably would, But since he doesn’t have to, he doesn’t.
It’s different for women in the same age group. These women don’t remarry as easily, simply because they can’t. They have a lot less SMV to work with, though they desire remarriage probably more than similarly aged men. The imperatives of remarriage are different for women at this age — it’s not about resources for kids; it’s about resources for self-care. She doesn’t want to marry because she needs a guy to take care of her kids; she wants marriage so she can lock in a man and his money to care for HER.
Remember the three female imperatives. The first is alpha sperm for kids; the second is beta provisioning to care for the kids. The third kicks in if she fails in the first and second. The “tertiary” imperative is for the woman to secure provisioning for herself by any means necessary.