Christian MGTOWs: What Do You Want?

I’ve been contemplating this a bit. If possible, I am looking for some serious discussion about this and feedback as I am very, very interested in people’s thoughtful answers.

If necessary, allow me to explain where I’m coming from with the question. Obviously, I identify a great deal with the MGTOW movement and school of thought as well as MRAs and the issues they confront. Like many Christian MGTOWs, I’m sick and tired of what we have and don’t have in churches. We get “Men Step Up” or other accountability groups that are willfully ignorant of men’s realities, lack any sort of restorative and protective spirit towards men, and consequently, just don’t come across like they even care about the men to whom they “minister.” It’s the boot camp school of thought at best, and at worst, it’s a loveless demonization, condemnation, and an atmosphere that reduces men to performance objects (in great part, of course, for women).

I complain and protest it with no intention of quitting doing so. The other thing I do is this: produce something like what I want to see. Sometimes a man or woman needs a rebuke or boot camp, as it were. I often say–though it’s FAR too simple of a way to illustrate this overall, but may convey the imagery–it looks like men get almost nothing but “boot camp,” with women getting nothing but the “nurse’s office” (and major softball when it comes to their sins by comparison).

Yes, I’m sick and tired of real attention and real ministries and real responses to problems with an understanding, responsive, gentle, protective, supportive spirit seeming to go almost exclusively to women. If I’m talking to MRA/MGTOW crowds, this needs no introduction.

But once again, then: what do you want? Now that you have left churches and mainstream society for very understandable reasons, what do you want to proceed to build? My answer is found all over this blog as a starter–what’s yours?

I can see that MGTOWs want to be heard. Briefly, I would plug that it tests the faith to remember that God hears when no one else does, cares when no one else cares, and the world is no match for His power. Keeping all that in mind, I pray that Christian MGTOWs will continue to turn to the Lord.

How illustrative could you get as far as what you would like churches to look like as opposed to what they are now?

I don’t have a one-track mind with men’s rights in Christianity, so my primary interest is the church and ALL of Scripture’s principles materializing in it. As far as the church, then:

*If you were to be heard, what would you tell your local church, EXACTLY, what you would like to see them do?

*In the spirit of the saying “if you want something done, you’ve got to do it yourself,” if you’ve given up on churches, what would you like to do yourself while existing churches prove incurable?

*What would you like to see become of Christian MGTOWs in terms of building what you want to have? How will you influence it to go in that direction?

It’s no question that nature abhors a vacuum. Identifying a problem is the unavoidable first step toward making a solution. With MGTOWs being exhaustively descriptive about what they don’t want, where I see most of the discussion leaving things is with a vacuum. Yes, I understand that that’s kind of the point of “Going their own way” to leave it open-ended for the individual. For those of us who believe in Scripture’s teachings, and of course the overall implications of the problems of things today, I am greatly interested in both ideological and vivid descriptions of action that illustrate what Christian MGTOWs desire and a place where they could feel at home.

One thing I want to see is some more horsepower coming from women in the way so much tends to be consumed by women. For example, I want to see women say “Eek! Abused men don’t have any DV resources! Let’s act and organize to change that!” And the reason is because women do so to such great extent for themselves and men’s donated energies and resources have so much to do with the culture’s responsiveness to them. Suffice it to say, it’s important for the energy flow to be a two-way street more than it is, if only for men to have more left over for their own gender. But I believe in spiritual family being alive and active between genders.

In any case, please, your thoughts!

Why the Manosphere Does Not Need to be Angry or Bitter

There’s no doubt about it: reading about men’s real-world issues can easily cause extreme personal frustration and upset. Of course, we’re reading about “bad news,” which in itself is no fun to dwell on, but on the other hand, truth is truth; is the Bible itself devoid of discussion about injustices and the unpleasantness of sin? No one who has the slightest knowledge of Scripture would ever claim so. The important thing is to have an answer for every thought that we get–not to end up with a thought that begets destruction to ourselves.

2 Corinthians 10:5

We are destroying sophisticated arguments and every exalted and proud thing that sets itself up against the [true] knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought and purpose captive to the obedience of Christ,

What is it that’s infuriating when reading about men’s issues and facing our realities? Now of course, bad news is bad news, and the world is full of it; injustices left and right. However, to quote the comedian Bill Burr (like most comedians, he uses a crassness that I don’t condone) in a stand-up I came across: “I envy women. I’m not saying all your problems get solved, but at least they’re taken seriously!”

To me, that’s the mixed blessing about reading men’s rights stories. On the one hand, I feel like I’m in the company of people calling a spade a spade: it is unbelievable how many issues men have that are unique to us that get so little attention, so little serious energy directed at attempting to solve, and in fact, it’s a bold thing even to speak about men’s issues. While women’s problems are declared from rooftops, men’s are in parentheses in a gracious moment. The mere mention of, say, men’s well-founded concerns about the likelihood of getting divorced and destroyed in family court or the lack of domestic violence resources for men–and just so many more I could easily list–we have to worry about coming across as offensive, let alone that barely anyone puts the level of energy that goes to women’s problems. As of this writing, there is not even a single federal level department dedicated specifically to any need of men and boys with a multitude of programs and an abundance of taxpayer resources dedicated to women.

Christian culture isn’t any better and often exposes gross hypocrisies when speaking of masculine responsibilities (accurately or not) without even a word of protective or restorative sentiment to men in a culture of unprecedented and intentional attacks on masculinity from feminism. If we can’t protect men, as a culture, then we can’t protect women, because it’s men who are simply expected to do the “provide and protect” small-scale and large-scale. And if it’s confusing what I mean by “protective” and “restorative,” just check out virtually any women’s ministry!

Angry yet? 😉

I’ve burned up and cried out to God a number of times over this. Clearly there’s such a thing as righteous indignation over injustice and it’s common to see women afforded that by the boatloads (i.e. “a man shouldn’t treat you like that” messages). Men are usually utterly deprived of the same caliber of loving ministry.

God’s answer to me was to the effect of: “You think YOU’RE mad?” In my cry out to God, He made very, very real to me the sheer wrath and punishment being stored up against those responsible for this scene, including “Christians”; multitudes–of women, especially–will have to answer for why they had one level of passion, one level of indignation, one level of energy unto action (be it time, money, resources, etc.) for the needs of women and a fraction at best for the needs of men. Many would claim that their love for men is evidenced in the treatment of their husbands and sons, and yet, while that is questionable, what of the world–law, culture, and society–that their male relatives, whom they “love,” have to live in?

Matthew 25:45-46

Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

So why does this thought set me free from anger? Because suddenly any notion of anger feels like going to war with a squirt gun against people who are about to be victims of a nuclear strike! It feels downright ridiculous! I know that my anger cannot generate a single degree of heat compared to what God has in store for this sin against men for whom Christ died.

Romans 12:19-20

Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but leave room for God’s wrath. For it is written: “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.”

Note the phrase “leave room for God’s wrath.” When I realize what comes to the unrepentant sinner, I’m quite genuinely moved to sympathy. What God can do to someone who harms me is so far beyond anything that any human could possibly do! (Matthew 10:28) Suddenly I’m moved to be on God’s good side more than anything, firstly, and then minister toward the good of the person after I “leave room for God’s wrath.” My own anger washes away–what’s the point? God’s wrath is comparable to millions of degrees of heat; my anger is pathetic by comparison!

Therein lies the message of God’s love: it matters when we are hurt.

1 Corinthians 3:17

If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.

That would be gender-neutral “him” folks. God will not tolerate harm women do to men any more than vice-versa, nor will He put on the kid gloves with women the way the modern West (particularly) comparatively takes women’s sin against men so much more lightly than the reverse. I’ve heard a lot of references to Jezebel over the years, and rightly so, since Revelations refers to Jezebel as something of a recurring character (Revelations 2:20). And there’s one thing notable about the story of Jezebel which I haven’t heard mentioned in all the discussion, and that’s the way that she died: killed by her eunuchs, the men she emasculated (2 Kings 9:32-33).

God cares about men, even if today’s world values men so much less. And there’s more to be said about God’s justice and the powers of our prayer, and God WILL hear those of men who cry out.

Luke 18:1-18

18 Now Jesus was telling the disciples a parable to make the point that at all times they ought to pray and not give up and lose heart, saying, “In a certain city there was a judge who did not fear God and had no respect for man. There was a [desperate] widow in that city and she kept coming to him and saying, ‘Give me justice and legal protection from my adversary.’ For a time he would not; but later he said to himself, ‘Even though I do not fear God nor respect man, yet because this widow continues to bother me, I will give her justice and legal protection; otherwise [a]by continually coming she [will be an intolerable annoyance and she] will wear me out.’” Then the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says! And will not [our just] God defend and avenge His elect [His chosen ones]who cry out to Him day and night? Will He delay [in providing justice] on their behalf? I tell you that He will defend and avenge them quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will He find [this kind of persistent] faith on the earth?”

I would urge considering the notion of the word “quickly” in this passage, as I have claimed it in prayer myself to great effect; it is not referring to the day of final judgment. How could it? There’s simply no way a human judge could be SLOWER than that, and Jesus is clearly comparing the speed of God’s vengeance here to the slowness of a human who doesn’t care.

Therefore, to men who are on this wavelength, pray with persistence for justice on your own behalf, while praying for souls. God loves you enough to protect you, pull-no-punches. These two notions are not in conflict.

2 Timothy 4:14

Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds.

This is a matter of confidence of God’s love for us and how much it matters to Him when we are hurt by others–in fact, that is the first step toward forgiveness, in which we release the debt that we are due for the sin committed against us.

 Ephesians 3:16-19

May He grant you out of the riches of His glory, to be strengthened and spiritually energized with power through His Spirit in your inner self, [indwelling your innermost being and personality], 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through your faith. And may you, having been [deeply] rooted and [securely] grounded in love, 18 be fully capable of comprehending with all the saints (God’s people) the width and length and height and depth of His love [fully experiencing that amazing, endless love];19 and [that you may come] to know [practically, through personal experience] the love of Christ which far surpasses [mere] knowledge [without experience], that you may be filled up [throughout your being] to all the fullness of God [so that you may have the richest experience of God’s presence in your lives, completely filled and flooded with God Himself].

Amen! God give us strength!

My Story, “Finding My Own Way” (an appeal to MGTOWs)

MGTOW is often called the “red pill.” The red pill–A reference to “The Matrix” of course–jolts us away from an addictive illusion, to a shocking truth, but ultimately to a real freedom.

The addictive illusion? That we need women’s approval like we need our kidneys, and we are just means to women’s end without equal innate value, that it is of lesser importance when women hurt men in various ways than vice-versa (an attitude well-reinforced by real data about women receiving FAR lighter sentences for crimes than men, the lack of DV shelters for men, etc.). Since we cannot possibly live without women, the price of a woman is ratcheted up infinitely and crosses far over the line into costing parts of a man’s very soul. I’m going to make the occasional comment about this, as I think is USUALLY understood about MGTOWs (and if not, for the most part, you’re horribly mistaken): MGTOWs are NOT against relationships with women or even marriage. What they DO understand is an embedded psychological slavery inflicted upon men that men are fulfilled by paying any painful price, compromising their very being clear to self-emasculation, dehumanization, and soul-selling, to get married and/or have a relationship. (I see a relationship with a woman as a potential life partner, and someone who accompanies a man boldly and shares all of his risks and adventures as he goes his own way, and such women do indeed exist)

And the culture is not protecting us. It’s actually promoting the system because it appears to make men move productively. Men are subject to objectification for their productivity (again, the reason why the “red pill” allusion is so apt) and a large part of it says that only women have innate value, but to us their happiness from us is a prize to us indicative of our worthiness as human beings–motivation to perform. Of course, feminism inverted what it perceives the dreaded “patriarchy” of being in that regard, and in all practicality, they succeeded, especially since traditionalists (who are not so different) don’t fight back on men’s behalf, but prove mainly to be part of the machine that convinces men that their value has to be redeemed by their performance.

The MRM, of course, confronts a multitude of practical issues reflecting a cultural disinterest in protecting men–blatantly–to the point that the exploitation of men is self-defeating, because men can only be so productive in the face of such spectacular apathy and neglect.

So what’s the individual man to do? Leave the hopeless system. It’s only the practical thing to do, because it’s a system that casts blame and shame–not real, actual help–when men underperform in their sight, and it cannot be satisfied. It’s a chicken and egg problem, because men are like any humans who need provision before they can be expected to perform. Men can thrive and perform in a system in which their interests are looked after and men are allowed their freedoms and independence.

Taking a few HUGE steps back, I look at this as a Christian. The anti-male culture was something that snuck up on me frequently that I didn’t want to believe existed, but far too many times it took me by surprise (with so few others acknowledging its existence) until I decided to face it, daily, on my own terms. To some, it would seem like a “fixation” to men in the manosphere, MGTOWs, and the MRM, which is indeed unfortunate, because I’d just as soon live out the childhood fairy tales of rescuing a princess, taking down a foe, raising a family–alternatively, today’s women could be encouraged to join the fight and reboot the system, but rare is the woman who wants to confront the need to face the culture. But when so few are looking after a problem that is a threat to you, unfortunately, that forces the need for you to be somewhat “fixated” on the potential threat.

Let’s just say a straw broke the camel’s back for me a few years ago regarding the injustices against men–a very big straw, but not one suffered by me directly. After a lifetime of being infused with notions of the sheer preciousness of women and how terrible it is for them to be done harm, I saw continuously–and in one final jolting, enormous fashion–that men are considered acceptable to hate and not considered worth protecting, defending, or giving justice in the face of harm. This was around the year 2004 when some bombshell news knocked me right down and I realized the cultural misandry was an inescapable reality that I could not ignore, as much as I might want to think that it’s “all in my head,” yet this was before the MRM, MGTOW, and the manosphere grew into what it is today, and for all the people in my life who had their sense of righteousness, this issue didn’t come up–thank God for the MRM today, which makes things so much easier. I had nowhere–nowhere and no one–to go, but to Christ.

The world isn’t fair. The MRM details a long list of injustices and clearly they are far from the only ones that exist. Women suffer injustices too. All people of all eras suffer injustices. The world’s collective sense of justice is fickle, unreliable, undependable. The one who pins his heart on the fickle world will be betrayed and brokenhearted very quickly, and ultimately, that goes for anyone. And every era has its wars and challenges, and today’s unique battle becomes tomorrow’s cliche, or storytelling trope–the legends of battles fought yesterday were once new and surprising situations for the people who actually faced them. Today’s battle is that which is detailed in the MRM, without a strong precedent, and without popularity. That’s what makes it a struggle, although struggles are nothing new.

That’s what following Christ is all about, in any era–standing up against and being conquerors of the world, a journey found in the heart; a willingness to follow a cause that may not be so visibly seen but is steadfast and true. It’s about a “narrow path,” not being swayed by the fickle and unjust world. It’s about becoming a greater “you” who lives in a harmony with that greater standard that is steadfast and exists apart from the flow of culture. That is the meaning of the word “holy,” or “set apart.”

What is a true Christian man, in essence, if not a true “MGTOW”? But one thing I harp on a lot in my writing is that there is a big inner hurdle in traditionalist culture that led to this mess, keeps the mess going, and opens the door to feminist exploitation (still ending up on men’s doorsteps to fix women’s problems after calling men “oppressors”)–a machismo in men that stubbornly and proudly refuses to admit its vulnerabilities and neediness. That’s ultimately what MGTOW is about, yet doesn’t state such in such an honest and humble fashion: we as men have frailties and unmet needs. We can’t take the hatred. This is a lack of love. And it’s a lack of love on behalf of the world that lacks the love to give; the world needs a supplier of love too. We are goaded into this pride by a world that will (often) further say “man up,” don’t complain, don’t whine, be a man. MGTOW is about escaping this futile system completely.

But escaping to where?

The bitterness of MGTOWs and the manosphere is obvious. It’s there for good reason, with untreated wounds and unmet needs. But if we fail to abandon machismo, we will struggle to treat the festering wounds that lead to bitterness, and make the problems we ourselves complain about much worse–since, if we have no unmet needs and vulnerabilities, what’s to complain about?

Men are to be strong and providers. Very well, but we need a provider too. None of us are Superman. So where do we go?

I turn to God. I grew closer and closer to the Lord in my vulnerabilities. The Bible is full of stories of people brought low–humbled–to be confronted with their need and dependency on God. And this was definitely the case for me. It’s not a need that “only people in trouble” have, but people who “feel” in trouble are merely exposed to the fact that they are not invincible, and neither is anything in the world–it’s not only those who actually see the need to take the red pill who actually need it, but everyone does. And yet we cry out for justice. We have needs beyond food and shelter. We can seek out those needs, but we cannot produce the cure.

I want to boldly suggest to MGTOWs to seriously consider the path of Christ. You are already bold to defy the better part of the world; you are already sold that the better part of the world is an unreliable and unjust place; you are already bold to fight it and escape for your lives, body, mind, and soul; you are already bold enough to say that there is a better way than what the world offers, with all of the heartbreak that it imparts, and seek it out with hopefulness and not hopelessness; many of us may be hurt, but we are not giving up as if waiting to decay.

We are “going our own way,” but what is the point if we are “going” without a destination? Clearly there is something we want that many of us do not yet have. We are “going,” because we are searching for something outside of us, led by something WITHIN us, rather than pushed around by the direction of the culture. Cleaning out the noise of the culture is the first step, such that we can confront ourselves honestly for our own needs to “go our own way” to get met, but where is the destination?

I was a MGTOW LONG before I ever heard of such a movement. I went my own way, detached from fickle world, in order to find something I desperately needed that the world would not offer. But I went out needing to find something. I found Christ. I was raised in the church, which I do not count a total waste by any means, but it was not enough. I had to connect with Christ as my very own purpose and make Him a part of me. Cultural misandry (such that the mainstream still ignores it for what it really is) made me painfully aware of my need to go my own way and find the destination that was Christ, who showed me the truth. Keeping with the “red pill” allusion, it’s not only the people who actually take the red pill who need it–everyone does. But some of us confronted our need for it.

I hope I have shown that I resonate with MGTOWs profoundly and that feels like an understatement, since, once again, I believe I was truly a MGTOW before I ever got wind of such a movement or phenomenon. That’s why I’m asking the rest of you to hear me out on this: when I “took the red pill” and sought out, I found Christ who met those previously unmet needs and gave me my real unshaking foundation. I’ve had harsh trials since then, but the sheer impact of that “red pill” shocker and the antidote that came with it have made my genuine connection to God unwavering.

What happens after that? After I am provided by God with what I could not otherwise receive, I have more to give. The “red pill” is the realization that the world can’t provide what we need, and the real alternative is Christ. After that, I learn to look back mercifully on that same world (albeit with difficulty). Think of The Matrix again, recalling the scene where Morpheus leads Neo in the program with the woman in the red dress; the people of the Matrix are “the very minds of the people we are trying to save.” They have the same problem we did, but do not realize it; they’re dependent on the system, even while taxed and tormented by it, just like we were. They “fight to protect it.” Once I find Christ, I know they have the same need: take the red pill, face the shocker, awaken from the phony reality, and grasp something real and unshaking.

If you take me for a fool that my conclusion to MGTOW is finding Christ, then I hope you can at least bear with me, because I think my story ought to be recognizable.

Thank you for reading. I pray that when you find your own ways, you get to the destination that has what the rest of the world did not–could not–offer you.

“MGTOW” and Common Sense

For a Christian man, seeking Godly masculinity in a post-feminist world is a complicated affair.

Well, it is and it isn’t. The simplistic and liberating way to look at all things in this life is to obey God and keep His commandments, and imitate a solid number of Godly examples of men all throughout Scripture. I’ve written a lot about this already.

But then comes the matter of interacting with today’s society, law, and culture. With some glimpses of the conflicting schools of thought regarding some desperate attempts to reach for traditional masculinity and femininity versus feminism’s efforts to destroy them both, I fear a feedback loop, because flaws in the former led to the latter. Some of what I am about to illustrate, I hope, will clarify this statement. But the short of it is, the fact that men are perceived as stronger is, effectively, what makes them weaker.

How so? Well, a man is strong, and therefore he doesn’t need protecting. And when people are many times over more interested in protecting women from men than vice-versa, then that’s the irony at work: I am effectively dwarfed and defenseless before the sheer power of women, because of the fact that I’m expected to be stronger.

I don’t make promises in this regard, but you could say I’m a “MGTOW” because I err on the side of singlehood for this reason. Am I saying “all” women are dangerous to men? No. Not at all. I think many women today probably make wonderful wives while they pursue Christ wholeheartedly, albeit with their fair share of human error just like a man.

The following is a story about a man who was caught on camera defending himself from a woman who started attacking him with a stiletto: link

On the one hand, I was happy to see that his plea of self-defense was accepted and he was acquitted of charges of assault against the woman who attacked him. On the other hand, many people recognize the man by his jacket and he is subject to antagonizing. He was a very tall man who struck a woman who first attacked him. And many people simply won’t have it; a man is just not to hit a woman for any reason.

Why not? Well, because men are too strong to be allowed to hit women. And effectively, then, women become the most staggeringly dangerous adversary a man can possibly face, not DESPITE the fact that she’s seen as weaker, but BECAUSE of it. Feminists will scream “girl power” at the spectacle of a strong and (to them) imposing man being defeated in any and all capacities by the allegedly underdog and oppressed sex, and that is a beautiful thing to them. And then, traditionalists likewise don’t really offer an alternative, because likewise they see the man as stronger, and not needing protecting–since who needs to protect a big, strong man?–nor allowing him to protect himself.

As MGTOWs are very smart to figure out, traditionalists and feminists have a lot more in common than they like to admit. In both cases, the stronger men are, the weaker men are, effectively.

I repeat something to women, whom I love dearly, to hear me out, please: please see the difference between accusing ALL women of being monsters to men, and the accusation that men are truly in far too much danger simply to say, “ah forget the modern world, I’ll just be an old-school man’s man and settle down with a family.” We have a fight on our hands we didn’t ask for, and many of you (women) did not ask for the modern world either. We cannot pretend that it doesn’t exist. The other side of the coin of traditional masculinity/femininity is that women seeking traditional femininity don’t see protecting men as a “feminine” thing to do.

To that I would say, look at the Proverbs 31 woman: She opens her arms to the poor

    and extends her hands to the needy. (Proverbs 31:20)

Yes, women can rescue men. In fact, that is crucial for breaking today’s vicious feedback loop of traditionalism and feminism causing men to become weaker and weaker. How would women feel if:

*No Domestic Violence shelters existed for women?
*Women were deprived (effectively) from a basic human right to self-defense against men?
*You could scarcely find any writing advising you what sorts of men to seek and what sorts of men to avoid for marriage?
*You saw that men initiated 70% of divorces and women were subsequently destroyed by family court left and right?
*If you felt demands on you to be women of good character and to treat men well without any regard for the injuries you face emotionally and culturally as women?
*No spirit of gentleness and compassion, and respect for your situations, but only demands for your roles as women?
*A man could accuse you of a crime and he would be automatically believed unless blatant evidence (like a video recording) proved him wrong? And then, you were twice as likely to get convicted, and then destined for a sentence two to three times as harsh?

Would this cause you to think an extra ten times before going anywhere near any man? I’d think it would. If our culture were that resistant to protecting you, but only liked to put demands on you, that is an abusive lack of love. Would that be the same as accusing every last man of being a direct danger to women? Of course not. But I don’t see anyone pulling any punches when it comes to protecting women. And men need to learn to do the same, with women’s support. And this needs not to be mistaken–by anyone–of hating women as a gender.

On men’s side, we must abandon machismo. The manosphere is an explosion of anger to the blatant, untreated injuries of men in an otherwise total absence of a discussion regarding so many of those real situations.

Rather than gather in rage and anger over the hurts, why can’t men gather in the trenches with a mutually protective spirit all over again, with gentleness and compassion toward one another? Why not–rather than anger–we provide a safe place for one another to be honest about our pain and seek healing? I don’t mean to be misleading, because those avenues DO occur in the manosphere, but the remaining anger is a matter of machismo; we still fear the loss of our masculinity, like the realities of our vulnerabilities makes us unmanly. We don’t want to admit our hurting and disadvantaged state, which tends to be met with more contempt still in the mainstream culture of feminism/traditionalism which continuously demands that men be strong, productive, and less needy. However, if we fail to abandon machismo and embrace the realities of our vulnerabilities, we contribute the same poison into the world that caused our problems in the first place.

I want to focus on the positives in that regard: MANY good things are happening in the wake of men’s rights issues being exposed. Many women are demonstrating a genuine, unselfish sense of justice for men’s sake and supporting them in circles that are protective of men. More admirable still, many women are turning the other cheek to men who (inexcusably, in my opinion) demonstrate a retaliatory anger toward women in general when men’s indignation ought to be steadfastly aimed at an oppressive culture, not an oppressive gender; many women are showing understanding and patience for some of the awful, misguided bitterness of many men. Such women are absolutely crucial for the healing of the culture. A page called “Women Against Feminism” on Facebook caught the attention of Time magazine with a mere twenty-five thousand likes–many of those being men–as women who (in many cases) spoke out against feminism as a man-hating entity. The effect of women toward restoring the culture is huge and vital.

As I seek masculinity, personally, my reference is the Bible. Again, take King David, who was a King, a musician, and a ferocious warrior all at the same time, and did not have a single problem pouring out his deepest vulnerabilities to God. THAT is how we break the feedback loop that has caused men to be seen as too strong to need protection, too strong to admit to the reality that a woman can indeed harm a man. We need to reconcile what our current culture has had a total impasse at reconciling to break the cycle: acknowledging that vulnerability does not conflict with masculine strength. Quite the contrary, a lack of ability to acknowledge vulnerabilities is the worst enemy of our strength.

Modern traditionalists who oppose the ideals of post-feminist mainstream–if they really want to reach their destination–must understand the true nature of the dimensions of masculinity and femininity; it is just as important, on each side, to realize the ways men and women are alike as they are different. Read Proverbs 31: women must be strong too and be rescuers of others; read the story of Ruth and Boaz: yes, women can be pro-active pursuers (in a sense) too. On the other side of the coin, men can express vulnerabilities like any Godly man portrayed in Scripture, as such is crucial for their (or anyone’s) strength.

In the midst of the confusion of the world, speaking for myself, I find Scripture as my guide and standard through the tosses and turns of the culture.

What Does Scripture Say about the “Oppression of Women”?

“Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” –Gen 3:16

One popular modern theology interprets this as a prophecy of the “gender wars”: essentially, Eve will “desire” to control her husband, while Adam would rule over her, which is to say that Adam would be the (most often) successful one.

This modern-crowd-pleasing proposition refers later to Ephesians 5:22-23 to assert (essentially) that a husband who loves his wife as Christ loved the church does not “rule” over his wife according to the curse (which, according to the claim, is really more of a prophesying of a sinful interaction). For anyone who fears scriptures as a whole, this is profoundly insane.

First and foremost, if someone who “loves” us couldn’t possibly be the same one who “rules over us,” how is it that Christ loves us?

Luke 19:27
“But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.”

These words were spoken by Christ, who does indeed rule over us–and will have slaughtered anyone who opposes his rule–and also loved us enough to sacrifice his flesh for us. To claim that one who loves someone else enough to die for them will not possibly rule over us because “to rule over” is an “unloving” thing to do is calling Christ unloving. Eager acceptance of the newly-popular Genesis 3:16 theology might indicate modern attitudes toward Christ as well.

What is the primary confession of our faith? Is it not “Jesus is Lord“? And the word “Lord,” by definition, being he who rules over us? To claim that to rule is by nature in conflict with loving, then one must claim that either Jesus is not actually our Lord and Master–our ruler–or that Jesus is unloving.

Secondly, the agenda in the theology is clear enough: to justify the feminist claims regarding the “oppression of women” that allegedly occurred throughout human history along with some acknowledgement of feminism fundamentally opposing virtually everything said about women in scripture–and all principles associated with them, of course. If God prophesied this (allegedly) profoundly “sinful” phenomenon, He offered absolutely no follow-up as to its solution nor did He hint at the more ideal alternative. And this is the same God who rebuked Israel for a multitude of various offenses to Him, even issues as trivial as tithing (Malachi 3) which Christ calls a “gnat” of an issue relative to others which are “camels” (Matt 23:24). Furthermore, it is quite notable that 1 Peter 5:3 advises elders not to “lord it over” the flock without calling attention to a gender issue, as the potential of elders “lording it over” younger is acknowledged but even still, nothing in scripture to acknowledge any danger of husbands sinfully “lording it over” their wives. The Bible also directly confronts the issue of racism (Exodus 23:9). Personally, I would grant that this could arguably be implied to a certain extent (not to “lord it over” anyone, including wives), but absolutely not to the extent that we could possibly infer that women were particularly oppressed throughout history in such a way that offended God, without Him ever raising even an implied objection to it, let alone a direct one. Then again, Sarah, wife of Abraham, was commended for calling Abraham “Lord” in the New Testament.

Thirdly, therefore, in what context does someone call someone else “Lord” or “Master”? Aren’t these the titles of a ruler by one who is ruled? 1 Peter 3:5 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. Genesis 3:16 reads, once again: “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” The same God who commends Sarah (in the New Testament, as worth noting to some who would erroneously claim that this might make a difference) for calling her husband “lord” and obeying him also does not desire for her husband to “rule over her”?

Fourthly, there is 1 Timothy 2:12-14, in which Paul states that a woman ought not usurp authority over a man in part because Eve was deceived (and “in the transgression”), not Adam. Did Paul reach this conclusion completely on his own, or is his conclusion remarkably in alignment with God’s reaction to Eve’s sin (Gen 3:16) which declared the gender who would be the one carrying authority?
Fifthly, as somewhat aforementioned, oftentimes “that was in the Old Testament” is a general-purpose answer for unwanted aspects of culture. Aside from the previously stated points involving New Testament references to the Old, the proposition that God’s “curse” to Eve regarding being ruled by Adam ought to be considered revoked would also make it the only one of God’s curses to cease its application; since we’re under the New Covenant, does that also mean that women no longer experience labor pains as severely, and no one has to work from the ground, and no one returns to dust any longer in addition to God’s (alleged) prophecy to Eve being revoked? Why should only one particular aspect of God’s curse to Adam and Eve be rescinded by the New Covenant while the others remain firmly in place?

In short, this is another blatantly intellectually-dishonest but crowd-pleasing theology that carries implications of attitudes not only about marriage, but also about Christ Himself as the loving ruler that he is. Do we not know how to reconcile God’s dictatorship with one who also loves us? What could cause anyone who fears God’s word to accept such an interpretation?

The reality of God’s command, for reasons previously stated, is indeed the bane of feminists’ existence: it is indeed a command to Eve to align her desires for Adam’s rule as a punishment for being more easily deceived. This is why Sarah was commended for obeying her husband and calling him “lord” (1 Peter 3:5), and one of the two reasons why Paul would not permit a woman to usurp authority over a man (1 Timothy 2:12-14). This takes nothing away from Adam’s ability to love Eve any more than Jesus’ rule over mankind takes away from how much he loves us, though the fact frustrates (fundamentally feminist) efforts to put an accusation in God’s mouth against men as a group and embellish Ephesians 5:22-23 to encompass any human definitions of “loving” or “unloving.”

Test yourself to see if Scripture is truly your final authority of the truth: there is no biblical account of the “oppression of women” inasmuch as society committed an evil all throughout the course of human history in God’s sight. Clearly, men sin against women, just as women sin against men, men sin against men, and women sin against women.

White-Knight Syndrome

Every man needs to be aware of the dangers of white-knight syndrome. Quite simply, ironically enough, it’s the true source of feminism’s horsepower–ironic, because it’s a warped remnant of old-school chivalry that has resulted in men victimizing other men in the interest of feeling like the hero in a storybook rescuing a damsel in distress, when in reality what they do is deprive other men of justice. Feminism’s true power lies in their reliance on this traditional paradigm–traditionalism, which they appear to oppose, but are only exploiting.

A white knight is Jezebel’s wet dream, hence feminism, which manages to endure the “empowerment” by victimhood paradox, because of white knights who victimize men out a desire to be “one of the good guys” against villainous men who overpower the more helpless and (allegedly) harmless gender. As much as many women might like, men cannot be altogether disposed and many man-haters know this full-well that men are still required to take on tough duties in the society that women can enjoy, and the “white knight” is exactly the “useful idiot” she needs.

I mentioned in my last post that if white knights’ true desire is the well-being of women, then ultimately they are their own worst enemy to that end too, because in their zeal to take out “bad bad men” who victimize women, to the point where innocent men become collateral damage, we’ll run out of men who are able to help women. Of course, that’s a secondary issue, because their original crime is depriving other men of justice which they have no right to do.

But, as for that secondary issue, this needs to be a wake-up call for women: wondering why so many men don’t want to marry? In large part, because they know what happens to men in family courts upon divorce, and not too seldom at that. The wake up call for women ought to be that they need to be just as interested in the well-being and justice of men as for themselves and other women regardless, but there are consequences affecting what men can do for women in the event of such a spectacular apathy.

I will digress momentarily from the main drag of this article. This issue of women’s apathy bothers me more than white-knight syndrome, because the “do unto others” is not happening and I cannot fathom the excuse for women so accomplished at voicing their needs and grievances and making themselves their own top priority–an area which men need to get better at doing if, once again, they expect to keep their strength to help themselves, other men, and women, hence my efforts with this blog. Society’s demonstrable deficiency in protecting men from female adversaries (on every level) is causing disaster for absolutely everyone.

Here is an example of a young man who knows exactly what he is doing with an understanding of reality–a woman assaults him (NOT in self-defense) but he doesn’t dare attack back. At one point she gets a finger inside his mouth and pulls at his cheek (fishhook) and, in that position, only a few pounds of force of a pull could rip through anyone’s cheek. But again, it’s a risk–as he demonstrably fully understands that he must take, to allow himself to be assaulted, with his camera being his only line of defense when she would later accuse him of assaulting her; she, a modern woman, is fully aware of white-knight syndrome culture and attempted to exploit it.

This video is the only way he survived the double-victimhood of being assaulted and a false accusation, as her accusation against him was automatically believed and only this video changed others’ minds. There is no way of knowing how many men were not so savvy and fortunate so as to be spared such a fate.

Link to source:

Who can even say how many men, currently locked up and/or misrepresented within violence statistics,  didn’t suffer such a double-victimhood if a woman is automatically believed? White-Knights, you have a problem, and you need to fix it.

Men, let’s be a service to women.

Men, let’s be a service to other men and ourselves, for our own sakes, and so we can keep it up.

Women, you might consider carefully how you’ve likely been the recipient of chivalry and consider that men aren’t a bottomless pit of strength that they may seem, and think about putting something into the men’s side of the economy please. I’ve seen enough of these anecdotes of women attempting to falsely accuse a man (proved wrong only by blatant evidence like a recording) to tell me that it’s not just a few conniving women who are aware of their abilities to do this to a man–to cry victim and summon white-knight culture against a man. No, I believe story after story like this indicates that the average woman knows full-well that she possesses this unjust amount of power over a man, and the apathy of women toward the well-being of men is reprehensible. Thank you very much to those of you (women) who do get involved in men’s issues. I know it takes courage. Let’s be on the same team.