/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>741754

its a sin to seek spiritual knowledge/wisdom from a non christian source

Women are great and do things men can't. They are soft and nurturing. They are warm and loving. They create life and love to please. With these gifts comes the responsibility of using them justly. It's not a fair blanket statement to say women are more predisposed to evil than men are, only that the tools they have cause far more damage when evil is done.

>>741755

I guess Aquinas was a sinner then.

>>741760

yes

>>741752

Indeed, Women have gone mad since they are not properly submitted as all the Church father say. It's hard to find a pure women, even in religious circles since the Church has become feminist.

If you can become a monk, become one (Matthew 19:12).

>>741757

The only feminine metaphor applying to God in the bible is maternity :

>"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling!" Matthew 23:37

It can be putted in relation to saint Paul :

>"But women will be saved through childbearing if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." 1 Timothy 2:15

This softness, nurturing, compassion is the way of the interior. The way of the psyche, affection and passivity. That must be putted in under the control of the masculine pole. Or else you have our society : (((soft, nurturing, warm and loving))).

Women don't create life, they just bear it. Only God create, and men, to the extent they represent Him. The Virgin Mary is the model.

The psyche being inferior, it's more prone to attachment to this world and so, to go mad. So there is equality with men as they can obtain the same sanctification, but inequality in the extent this sanctification necessitate harder means in detachment (physical mean to preserve virginity).

>>741760

Aquinas used religious sources. There is a significant nuance.

>>741792

I heard of this saint when I was a child. Thanks for the remembrance, I'm french too. Are you the orthodox french anon ?

>>741786

>>741787

Precisely, the feminist liberation in some regards was necessary, to free from the dread of complete abuse, but on the other hand, it teaches them to reach for independence and grow their ever more masculine side.

So they get to be more and more masculine, needing less of men, feeling less the need to submit, and at the same time growing in loneliness, and with them so do men, that without the feminine healing energy of women, tend to be more and more feminine themselves, again, with loneliness.

One good quote of the book I mentioned

>The laws evolved to protect women of the painful physical abuse of men, but still haven't evolved to protect men against the cruel psychological abuse of women.

>>741757

But here is the thing, I never stated them as explicitly evil, but that they among the most emotionally brutal, in fact I think they aren't even aware of the damage they cause, they are the weaker sex, but only in physical form, when in their emotional side is capable of leaving men in shambles.

From psychology:

>women evolved to be much more strong emotionally than men, where they didn't have the strength to protect themselves, they use advantage to have male protect instead, this can be seen in the way how boys and girls develop in their teenage years, while boys are still fighting and be emotionally clueless, girls fight with each other through feelings

Another great quote from the book that I posted in the relationship thread:

> Men love women, for their ability to care, to nurture, to heal, and to bear children

> Women on the other hand, only really love their offspring, and give in to what men want, in exchange for his seed, protection and ability to provide

This is again, something that work completely in their subconscious, many are completely unaware, specially inexperienced ones.

As I've explained in the other thread as well, they tend to seek men that are unavailable and give in to their wills, this for females that don't quite understand it, don't really know how to submit, and don't give themselves to commitment and god, can lead to an extremely unpleasant intimate life.

Where either seek bad boys, that in reality never really love them, will be abusive and never really care. Or when meeting really proper guys, who could actually be meant for them and commit, they drop him like a sack of shit, because they know how to submit.

>>741751

Kek, a weird coincidence tbh.

Although I believe it's because we see them as some kind of spiritual mothers.

Like Our Lady, we venerate her because she's our adoptive mother.

>>741804

>> Women on the other hand, only really love their offspring, and give in to what men want, in exchange for his seed, protection and ability to provide

why get married if your wife will never love you? for sex? that seems like a very raw deal to me.

>>741804

>>741817

It sounds like the book was written by someone who holds a grudge against some girl.

I can say so because I used to think like that.

>>741817

>that seems like a very raw deal to me.

It is, but it isn't all raw like that, given that women can have higher income than men, they could literally just artificially impregnate and live life on their own, but there are those women who just want a decent marriage and a good family.

So that isn't really the whole deal, men want a partner not only for sex, but feminine caring and the charms that go with it, I think women also want to connect and have a strong men that they can feel safe submitting to.

It just makes all the more harder with the current state of things, with a working wife making more than the husband for example, it brews more fights and they less likely to submit and commit.

The author of the book also makes from time to time a distinction between "sincere girls" from "dishonest ones", but I haven't been to see where to draw this thin line, but one can guess what those extremes are.

>>741799

>women evolved

>evolved

Stopped reading right there

>>741751

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/remembering-joan-arc-original-nasty-woman-180961709/

I wouldn't look at a feminist icon as something praiseworthy.

>>741754

Go back to >>>/pol/ with your heresy and PUA-tier garbage.

>>741906

>Heresy

But the point is exactly that all women have this nature, even if somewhat unconsciously, men need to be aware not to fall their prey, women need to be aware to not sway away from devotion.

>>741799

>it teaches them to reach for independence and grow their ever more masculine side.

Ironically, all the jobs these strong independent wymin are still about financial management, taking care of kids, the elderly, the sick, etc.

>accounting and financial stuff;

>doctoring and nursing;

>teaching;

etc.

Except most of these career women(because let's be honest, there are some real ones that are good at running a big business) just put the same skills they would have done for their family and themselves, for some distant CEO's profits.

If it werent so tragic, it'd be bloody hilarious.

>>741751

>Because it's a miracle to see a woman capable to hold ideals, stay virtuous and resist until the end no matter the difficulties.

tigga, there are tons of female saints.

It's a miracle there are female saints, period.

>>741904

Taking the bait made to stain the image of St. Joan.

>>741751

>they're just overall passive, mediocre, in intelligence and spirit… They're herd creatures who go with the flow

That describes most men perfectly too.

>>741799

You should read more christian literature instead of your pseudo-spiritual literature.

You would have known feminism is and always have been shit. Women don't need power to be loved justly. No, women nowadays don't become masculine. They are the epitome of mad feminity : Hysteric, passionate (in the bad sense).

They are not strong emotionally. They are more shallow, which mean they are less affected by deep/spiritual matters. So, yes, they are stronger in the sense they are blind to what matters, but they are more affected by surface problems.

>>741904

Unfortunatly her memory as been stained. And the memory of saint Hildegarde too since she was made doctor of the church and this move (adding female doctor) is a feminist move of the modern church started by Paul VI. In total contradiction with the Pauline teaching "women should not teach". But for Joan of Arc, know she killed no one, one led as inspired by God, and wore dress. She is not feminist I think.

>>742036

Sorry but you are a modernist. If there is one thing right in Islam, it's their view on women.

>Thomas Aquinas "But man is yet further ordered to a still nobler vital action, and that is intellectual operation." Summa theologiae, I, Qu 92, Art 1, responsa

>"Woman is slow in understanding and her unstable and naive mind renders her by way of natural weakness to the necessity of a strong hand in her husband. Her ‘use’ is two fold; animal sex and motherhood."

Gregory the Great, in P.G. 59, 268.

>Clement of Alexandria "[Women’s] very consciousness of their own nature must evoke feelings of shame." Pedagogues II, 33, 2

Gave you only some examples.

>>742077

Because are feminine nowadays. Only the saint is masculine. There will always be someone holier/more masculine than you. And men are more masculine than women. saint clement of Alexandria clearly say virtues are masculines.

>>742130

Mary is the Mother of God.

How can men even recover lol

Women 1 Men 0

>>742101

>Because are feminine nowadays.

Most people are dumbass sheep, no matter the gender or age.

>>742101

>Because are feminine nowadays. Only the saint is masculine. There will always be someone holier/more masculine than you

Bollocks. The world needs femininity. Christ himself was master of both the masculine and feminine. Without it, we die.

>>742152

This is probably the best post in this thread. Thank you for writing this. The whole masculine/feminine deal refers to something that goes beyond the material gender.

Screencaped for future uses.

PS : En Français c'est vraiment avec un "A" mais je suppose qu'il faut traduire puisque je m'exprime en anglais.

Par rapport à ce que tu as dit sur la virilité/féminité, cette critique apparemment innocente d'un film pourrait t'intéresser : https://www.senscritique.com/film/Excalibur/critique/59538207

>>742136

This. Even in my edgy "winnie the pooh woman" times I always expressed my love for the Mother of God.

She is a woman always worth to fight for.

>>742156

Ahah merci.

On écrit ça de la même manière en anglais : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_of_Clairvaux

Moi aussi je dois souvent vérifier pour les noms de saints.

Depuis ton lien :

>Avec cette grille de lecture on peut comprendre combien, la femme, de nos jours, et ce depuis, bien avant l'avènement du Christ, a été et est toujours diabolisé par de soit-disant "religieux" qui s'abrutissent et abrutissent de façon dogmatique et hyper-limité au pied de la lettre morte, les sublimes enseignements des mystères…

L'exoterisme est vrai et a sa raison d'être. L'auteur semble parler comme un (une?) progressiste qui voudrais que déja le règne de Dieu soit réalisé sur terre, qu'il y ai pleine transparence. Malheureusement pour cette critique il semblerait qu'on soit face à quelqun qui ne comprenne pas assez bien le principe des mystères. Les mystères doivent être cachés. Les gens comme ça sont louches qui s'attaquent à l'Eglise ou a la tradition sous prétexte de spiritualité. ça ne m'étonnerais pas que ce soit une femme new-age. D'ailleurs, toi qui habites à Lyon tu dois savoir que Lyon a eu, et a encore affaire à des spiritualités foireuses.

>>742165

Je ne viens pas de Lyon, je connais juste Blandine. : )

Mais c'est vrai qu'il y a des affaires louches là-bas.

J'avais oublié cette phrase de la critique, cela dit, bien qu'il faille respecter l'exotérisme, dans notre époque qui s'approche de la fin et avec le matérialisme qui détruit de plus en plus les vérités symboliques de l'Eglise ; dévoiler certaines doctrines secrètes peut s'avérer salvateurs pour certains. C'est ce qui m'a sauvé d'ailleurs, moi qui trouvait le christianisme "niais" et "enfantin".

En tout cas, je suis content de voir qu'il y ait des gens instruit à propos de l'ésotérisme ici. Je fais en général profil bas car les gens ont ici une foi simple et c'est tout à leur honneur.

Que Dieu te bénisse!

>>742159

Amen brother!

>>742174

Je sais pas. Le problème est le fait que l'ésotérisme soit devenu hétérodoxe et ne soit plus encadré par l'Eglise. D'ou les conflits fréquents entre éxotérisme et ésotérisme. Un dévoilement pour certains, oui, mais pour la masse ça donne la théosophie et le new age. (juste sur ce board par exemple, les discussion a propos de l'ésoterisme sont bannies car vues comme par nature hétérodoxe donc mieux vaudrait qu'on arrête là avant de se faire ban.)

>>742193

what happened?

Good thread OP. I was hoping someone from the Relationships thread would make one.

>>741787

>Indeed, Women have gone mad since they are not properly submitted as all the Church father say

Yep. There a ton of young single women in my church who always ask "Where have all the good men gone?", but cannot fathom the idea of submitting to their (future) husbands, as the Bible demands.

Feminism and weak/absent father figures are largely to blame. The increased percentage of emasculated men today doesn't help either.

>It's hard to find a pure women, even in religious circles since the Church has become feminist

A sad truth. I can tell many Christian men, both on here and ones I've met in person, are working to improve themselves. I wish more women had the same attitude.

>If you can become a monk, become one

I've been contemplating that very idea lately… that or some other clergy position.

I've been discontent with STEM in college, and I've felt a calling to the Orthodox Church over the months, but I want to be certain this is the right choice before "church hopping".

>>742193

Think of it this way.

If you were a girl, should some bad experiences with them(and, let's be honest, there are plenty of shitty, predatory men) make you turn into a hateful radfem that think men are scum?

Maybe colder, maybe circumspect, but NEVER become that which is hateful.

>>742038

>Ironically, all the jobs these strong independent wymin are still about financial management, taking care of kids, the elderly, the sick, etc.

Not really, those that take feminine careers are actually pretty they manage to maintain their feminine aspect and a worthy living at the same.

But there are many, and I say many more entering some that used to be restrict male jobs, like leadership, management, engineering, even programing, driving, sole manual labor and security.

>>742101

>You would have known feminism is and always have been shit. Women don't need power to be loved justly. No, women nowadays don't become masculine.

You misunderstand, feminism =!= femininity, in fact they oppose it each other.

>>742152

You seem to grasp that better in this post, both sexes have masculine and feminine energy, women are becoming more masculine and men more feminine, and both end in deep unhappiness by reaching this state and trying for balanced relationship.

Its even the worse of both worlds now, since feminine women still have that strong charming side that attracts the males, but they also have a more developed masculine side and independence, and that's where it all falls apart because never learn how to really submit and commit to a corresponding male.

And as I've said before, they do have a stronger emotional side than men, not a moral or objective one, this is why women can leave men in shambles without giving two f*cks, this how they compete with each other and its how that can badly hurt a physically stronger male.

>thinly veiled french thread…

>>742201

>>742193

This too, and its another women behave the way they do, as mentioned before they look for a quality male to protect and provide, and if you can't handle their moods swings and shit test, how the hell could you handle to protect and provider for them in this shitty world?

Them having standards to find a suitable male isn't really the problem, the bad side of this equation comes with the feminist wave of the world, where women instead can provide and be protected on their own, with laws and everything. But there aren't still laws in place to protect men from their nasty emotional side, this leads to the possibility of men having the literal lives ruined.

And the other downside to this, is that since they can't settle with a strong confident man, their feminine side still feels attraction to those unavailable men, eg, the bad boys who will never really care for them, leading to unfortunate cycle of self destruction.

But not all hope is lost, I'm seeing for one the fall of the wave of feminism, current generation probably is still pretty f*cked up, but there are tendencies of women identifying more with their feminine side, preferring to submission and whatnot. If anything is to set an example, the generation most affect by feminism, millennials alike, you can see the tendency of having a very small ratio of happily married couples, tons and tons of 30+ yo with no prospect of ever finding a suitable partner. (just remembered embed)

>>742200

>but cannot fathom the idea of submitting to their (future) husbands, as the Bible demands.

My priest once told a bride to read that passage from Paul. She got all triggered saying she didn't had to obey her husband lol.

Then the priest had to explain why she should and it was not slavery, it was the obedience of love etc. He also said that for example woman must ask permission form their husbands to go out at night, which I imagine triggered a lot of young women.

But who cares. Next day they probably forgot about it and will get divorced and remarried in less than an year.

>>742215

that video really pissed me off. what a fricking boomer cuck

>>742226

yeah, i'm thinking women are just a meme now. the only question is do you give up and become a monk, or hold on to whatever delusions you still hae left and wait for a unicorn

>>742561

>A heart broken is the converse side to deep, intense love. It represents the loss side of the coin.

>You cannot have one without the other.

Words of truth, I was aware of that in the past, but thanks for reminding me again, it did really touch me. I'll check out this book.

But the point of the thread was to bring more understanding to the subject, both for men and women, and most importantly learning from it.

My worry is specifically in the tendencies of the modern world, where women are seeking to strength their ever more masculine side and independence, leaving even the strongest of men behind.

>>742481

>that video really pissed me off. what a fricking boomer cuck

He is not wrong though.

Its actually funny to see this recent video of him after viewing the old ones many years back, and you can even feel his frustration on the subject of how bad things got.

And I think it even shows the frustration on the female side, she sought to become strong and independent, but now she's sad and alone.

I just hope its an indication of a change in tendency.

>>742204

Feminism don't oppose femininity.

Feminism oppose traditional women role.

But feminism don't oppose the madness of women (which makes them feminine). So feminism just oppose the submission of this madness.

>>742215

Well, your video clearly gives the key to everything you say : You are a feminist who listen to a feminist non religious guy. inb4 "I'm not feminist, I believe women should be submitted", but you are if you think they are better, stronger,… than men.

>>742561

>Turning to hating them, to analysing them isn't the path to restoring your stability.

>Don't hate the sinner hate the sin

>>742481

Becoming a monk is giving up the world, and giving up the world is the real fight. Become a monk if you can.

>>742659

tldr?

>>741747

Lol, literal jew face.

>>742697

>The ego must be denied to achieve salvation, Pride is the greatest sin. The greatest saints see themself as the greatest sinners.

Obviously. That's like the most cliche thing you can write… but that was not the point of what I wrote. This just tells you misunderstood what I wrote there. It is not pride to have a healthy self esteem. I did not talk about men being prideful.

>No, everything he does is for God.

Clearly this was meant in a way that he does everything for a family - which is in this case his way of going to God. Of course God is the main driving force behind it, well no shit - read the first paragraph I wrote.

>>742695

>That is disputable, women is responsible for feminism/the fall. Men is responsible for hearing it.

It is. I dispute what I wrote. Like it or not.

You do not have to agree with what I wrote. Honestly I do not care. I laid my point of view that was similarly grounded before I read Evola and I used quotes to make it easily flowing. Just because you dislike the guy that does not make some of his points invalid.

>>742669

>Feminism don't oppose femininity.

lol mate. It clearly does. You seem to have a twisted view of what feminity and feminism is. But again….we disagree on few points when women are concerned so that's it..

Also I do not want to be the "you made a typo" guy but seriously the grammar is terrible in most posts.

>>742659

Thanks anon, I'm sorry I didn't read it through yet.

Felt another heartbreak just by looking at her FB and seeing how she's trying to erase all our memories.

I've guess this is just another way (and reason) to destroy my ego, and not fall or become attached to these falsehoods.

I'm not in a good mood so better stop talking. Hope for the best, hope I can grief and recover, hope there's bound to be something better at the end of this tunnel.

>>743008

There is an end to it. You should focus on your spiritual life now and try to drop your ex. If you check her fb/ig you will always find something to worry about. Better drop it.

>>743268

Thanks brother, the more I think about the hard it is to not see her as a cruel mistress and feel resentment.

I want to let go, I want to accept it, pray to give me strength to get over this.

I'll read stuff soon enough, I've guess there is an upside to this, if I'm able to overcome this (and I've had my fair share of heartbreaks in this life), I should be able to overcome anything else.

Time to destroy my ego and attachment once again.

>>743295

sometimes swallowing our own pride is the worst part of breaking up with somebody. There are many women in the world. You will find better one for sure. It'salways dark before the dawn.

The more I think about it, the more I hate women. How can you not? I mean that as a genuine question, how can anyone apart from oxytocin tolerate a woman's presence as anything but the highest offense?

This is especially true in the Churches I have visited. Enter into any parish or body or whatever, denomination matters not, and any woman who dwells within under the age of 40 is only present because of one reason, her sexual marketplace value has caught up to her or is soon to catch up so she acts with wise self interest to find herself a husband. It is disgusting to gleam and hear what these women are capable of as they come in and seek to poach young men of their youth and vigor after having taken every degenerate twist and turn in the godless world outside.

I have not met one woman who is not worthy of vicious scorn as she lives her unrepentant lifestyle up until the point of it being inconvenient to her long term economic status. Young men come to an understanding of God through various circumstances, but ultimately many fear their Maker and understand their sins as an affront to Him and find personal salvation in Christ. I have not seen one woman seek Christ for any reason beyond her expiring value. She goes into the church to find shelter from her sins as we all do, but there is no love of God in her heart, none that I have seen anyways. No woman I have seen has decided to bear the sacrifice of not having a marriage, as so many, even in this very thread consider for themselves, it is not even a thought in their head, they will receive a husband and will be secure under him so long as she dances the dance up until she is able to take from him everything!

So I ask again, who would, given the choice, willfully take in these accursed vipers when even the most gracious thing offered to them is taken with manipulative, plotting hands?

>>743716

i hate women, so i avoid them. then i start to feel bad for hating them, and open myself up to interacting with them. then, they just end up giving me more reason to hate them. i try to not hate them, but they just force me to do it, which makes me hate them even more for filling me with hate. its a vicious cycle.

women should have zero rights and arranged marriages should become the norm for the express purpose of breeding. women should essentially be breeding slaves. if given the slightest freedoms, they wind up getting dicked down by every other dude within a 30 mile radius. sane men realize this and don't bother with them, then you have a situation where only retarded cuck men are breeding (as far as whites go, we all know the shitskins just breed indiscriminately, like wild animals). its a disaster

>>743716

https://youtu.be/eCiFO7qV54E

>>743809

Nothing he said was wrong

>>742652

Okay managed to read, excellent information brother, really vital for anyone who wishes to better himself and is failing to understand women.

>>742654

Another great dissertation there, I couldn't help but remind of a quote from the book I was reading:

>Men love women, their ability to care and heal, to make a home and create and care for their offspring

>Women on the other hand, love only their offspring, but they rely on men to provide them with stability, purpose, and their seed

Of course this isn't noted in your text, but it draws an unfortunate parallel. Maybe its true for the women who are dishonest about submitting.

>>742655

Again agree with the great text here, it is a factual true that men themselves pushed for the feminist agenda, because of the times where they were put to work and required to become more independent due to war.

I remember actually seeing this, that it was only small minority of women fighting for feminism and that there were even "pro femininity" movements from women themselves.

And as I said before its true that "feminism" in itself has pushed to develop their more masculine and independent side, in turn making men more feminine, messing up their roles in relationships and leading to a lot of confusion.

Looking into the real world I can barely ever see a real stable couple that doesn't have its roles reversed.

>>742658

And yet a great conclusion.

Taking from this I am fearful, for what it means for a men to give himself in love and commit, when in it is at that point that women may fail to see a strong man in himself and lose interest. Again with the ever more scarcity of women who are willing to submit with their feminine side.

>>743546

Now looking back at my relationship I can't help but feel resentment.

She was indeed very feminine, I my masculine helped to bring out more of that side of hers. But I can't help but feel tricked, that she would push and insist for me to commit and open my self to her, only to dump me like that afterwards. Because it seems deep down that this wasn't her real motive, but instead she was one of these venomous girls while pretending to be devote. eg, seeking approval and love, but not really willing to submit.

Also, part of me can't help but blame myself, I was complacent and maybe she failed to see me as a long term provider (her main complaint). And this was mostly because I wavered in intent this last semester, even though I was pursuing my focus but I didn't push enough.

I know I shouldn't be meddling so deep in this, but its a question that I thought had figured out. And at the very least I want to understand so to become stronger.

>>742652

>>742653

>>742654

>>742655

>>742656

>>742658

>>742659

Sensible information succinctly presented. Well done and thank you.

Is it Christ-like to be filled with that much hatred towards the opposite sex? I'd think God would consider it a sin.

>>743888

Checked, and I don't think its christ-like to be filled with hate towards anything.

They have their flaws and puzzles use, but its their nature and we have to accept it.

>>743716

>Enter into any parish or body or whatever, denomination matters not, and any woman who dwells within under the age of 40 is only present because of one reason, her sexual marketplace value has caught up to her or is soon to catch up so she acts with wise self interest to find herself a husband. It is disgusting to gleam and hear what these women are capable of as they come in and seek to poach young men of their youth and vigor after having taken every degenerate twist and turn in the godless world outside.

I think I can see this, just a small glimpse at (((christian dating apps))) and I could see the majority to be over 30, pure normalfags whose appearance didn't treat them well.

I can imagine most of them are like that in actual active churches as well, with the exception of protestants that tend to be more feverous with their families. Catholic churches are basically seniority meetings.

>>743888

jesus rebuked the thots

>>742654

Did you unironically quote Evola ?

>>742036

hahahahahahaha

>>743957

inaccurate strawman, i haven't jerked of to anime porn in a very long time

>>744069

Don't take me wrong bro, but why fapping to cartons and not to real women?

>>744086

because sometimes a man just wants to nut to some big titty anime pokemon girls and the cosplays are just terrible 9 times out of 10

>>744093

The sexually impure shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, repent.

>>744093

>the cosplays are just terrible 9 times out of 10

It more or less depends on who you like and personal taste.

>>744096

i have. like i said before, i haven't jacked it to anime tiddies in probably over a year. last time i jerked off at all in general was like 3 weeks ago and it was probably to something pretty vanilla compared to hentai. i have fapped to incest porn recently tho, probably within a couple months ago. bestiality hasn't happened in a long time either.

>>744101

most of the cosplay stuff is too vanilla for me, or for how i used to be at least. lewd cosplay is usually shit, but yeah, there are some hidden gems if you look hard enough

man, i wish porn was illegal

>>744106

you cannot "tone down" mortal sin, you have to stop completely. Beg God for Grace.

>>743839

Again, having knowledge of women's flaws is not thinking badly of them. You sound like a white knight.

>>742666

>>743850

>>743854

Thanks guys. Good to see my effort was not in vain.

>>743944

Yes, quite unironically. Got any talking point against the quote or you're just one of those "muh evolafags" guys?

>>743957

lol this quote. Always makes me laugh. I do not know any basement evolafags irl but I doubt people who take time to read him jerk off to anime. It's a good one though.

I am almost one year nofap going strong. Nice try anyway.

>>743850

Yes. Women sometimes women love their offspring while omitting the love for man. I think that scripture demands that man loves his wife but not the other way around - not really sure here but I think it is so. Well judging from my family this doesnot have to be a case. However every time there is an offspring the man will be quite shadowed by it because the woman now pours her love to care for kids. I think it's natural state of things to some extent. Unless the woman despises the man and cares only for kids of course.

>Feminism

I really like the quote that feminism turns women into inferior men. Not sure who said it. Basically it has nothing to do with feminity it is just women swallowing the equality pill and then larping as men - while men allow it by silence.

I do non think the woman will take the commitment as a sign of weakness - quite the contrary. She will see it as a sign of stability. Well it depends - if the man is "I am about to settle because I want to and i can manage it" or fi the man is "I want to settle because I do not know what to do with myself, perhaps this will save me from misery". The latter approach would probably be a sign of weakness.

>instead she was one of these venomous girls while pretending to be devote. eg, seeking approval and love, but not really willing to submit.

lol that's like the last relationship I have been in, that I have described on /relationship general/ Some girls are like that. The experience will make you stronger, with time you will sort out what was your fault and what was hers. Your analysis of the situation may shift with time and new experiences.

These vids should be seen by everyone on this thread.

>>744283

> I really like the quote that feminism turns women into inferior men. Not sure who said it. Basically it has nothing to do with feminity it is just women swallowing the equality pill and then larping as men - while men allow it by silence.

Great quote. It makes sense since they develop their masculine side but are still driven by emotions.

> I do non think the woman will take the commitment as a sign of weakness - quite the contrary. She will see it as a sign of stability. Well it depends - if the man is "I am about to settle because I want to and i can manage it" or fi the man is "I want to settle because I do not know what to do with myself, perhaps this will save me from misery". The latter approach would probably be a sign of weakness.

Also agree with you once again. Its not that take it as weakness, but that the men strength was able to bring out their feminine side and fell in love with, but then its time to commit they aren't able to, either simple because they don't know how or aren't ready to, because they want to be strong womyn, or God knows what.

But then if the man takes that step and she isn't ready to, she will just start seeing him as needy and forget about that mysterious strong man she was so passionate about.

> lol that's like the last relationship I have been in, that I have described on /relationship general/ Some girls are like that. The experience will make you stronger, with time you will sort out what was your fault and what was hers. Your analysis of the situation may shift with time and new experiences.

Yeah I know the feeling, feels like if I can survive this I can get through anything.

Thanks for helping me through this brother, we're gonna make it.

>>743796

>inb4 maester eckart gymnastics

Why ? What were you thinking about ?

>>744475

I'd like to point out the image with women using horns on him is because he unzipped his pants in public and that's something you can't support.

That's all.

>>744486

Yes, anyway it change nothing to my point or to the fact feminist are hysterics.

>>744534

Bhakti yoga (devotion) is justified still lower than Jnana Yoga (way of the knowledge). Indeed, there will be no love or knowledge in God since all will be surpassed. Saint Paul talk about this state as epignosis, so even the gnosis is surpassed.

Yes, indeed, but still Guénon had it's reservations about catholic saints because of them (even though legit mystic) being too much spectacular or sentimental.

Are you french ?

>>744585

Ahahah ok.

Maybe, I'm not sure but it seems it refers to pure love toward God. But then it seems more appropriate to link it to gnosis which is Knowledge of God in this world (being theophore). But epignosis refers to the knowledge of God in the other life, which will be even better than the one in this world, still in progress as saint Gregory of Nyssa describe it.

Yes, the devotional way is totally legitimate, especially for europeans Guénon will say.

My discord is Urbain_II#4643

>>744475

>No pride, the man must be as humble as he can

Well no shit sherlock. Never heard this before. You seem to take great care in misrepresenting what i wrote don't you. Or you misunderstood the paragraph completely and you think this is an argument. I did not write about pride. The point was a man needs a healthy self-esteem. That is not the same thing as him beind a pridefull ass. And all you do is cry about how pride is a sin and you cannot become a saint if you embrace it. Well no shit sherlock again. Read the paragraph again if you need to.

>If you have nothing to answer, ok.

I already stated what my perspective is and nothing needs to be added. I did not claim "solely men were responsible" That is all I'll say

>While the women only have the family, it's not the same for men.

No shit. What do you think I wrote about all the time? Did I not mention that men reach towards God in various ways, including ascesis? Why do you pick a sentence out of context then twist it and afterwards write basically what I wrote in my initial statement? (the man is the head of the family, they together reach towards God as a ONE WAY of man reaching the transcendence) Seems you do not debate in good faith.

>he was plain wrong in fundamental things.

I never stated I agree with Evola upon everything. I agree with the quotes I used in posts. I do not agree with his utilitarian view of Christianity in particular but that is another story. I am perplexed by you using merlin pic that reads "Evola is a faggot" while the pics you use are totally faggy and reddit-tier.

English is not my native language too but using plural/singular and "We do/he does", that is pretty much just very basics most non-english speaking anons handle, especially if they discuss politics and philosophy on imageboards in english. I do not claim to be a master english writer nor I claim to be an intellectual of any sort, I am a regular guy.

Again. I do not have much issue with you having an opinion different from mine. I knew there would be people who disagree with the worldview I presented and I am fine with it. What I dislike is somebody missing/misrepresenting the point and catching upon a strawman (muh ego) trying to "enlighten me" about how pride is a sin(no shit!) while posting in broken english grammar with faggy merlin pics while larping as an intellectual. You're encouraged to make an effort yourself by posting coherent series of posts presenting your opinion on sexes, and if you feel like it even on Evola/Guenon philosophy instead of wasting my time with strawman.

I feel no need to debate mostly strawman arguments and write long reactions when my initial posts speak for themselves well enough. If you're somehow not okay with them being there, please take time and do your part in a similar way so you're satisfied with the various content presented here.

Have a nice day.

>>744821

There is no self if not of God. So there is no self-esteem to have.

>Galatians 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me."

You need to totally let Christ live in you, so you need to totally surrender your self.

But I talk to you about the peak of spirituality. So, the only thing you need to understand is that it is absurd to say men run on ego. And, indeed, when you say things like this, I tend to think you totally not understand spirituality, maybe it comes from Evola.

You put too much responsibility on men. They are not more responsible than women for the fall, that is what the holy tradition say. Men and women are responsible, as for feminism.

>Did I not mention that men reach towards God in various ways, including ascesis?

I didn't speak about that but about the fact that in the family the father is also turned toward the public life while the wife is turned inward. You just forgot to say so by saying "he does everything for a family". Maybe you only forget to say the men don't do everything for the family.

Ahah yes I agree with you on the Merlin pics and about my languages inabilities, I just like this cartoon. Anyway Evola must be read with caution (since he is a faggot), that's all I said. And against this none-traditional thinker I gave you fathers and doctors of the church. Forgive me if I appeared arrogant or anything, I'm not really handy.

>pride is a sin(no shit!)

Running on ego is a sin. You should know this. (hence the word egotism,…)

>>744821

Don't worry brother.

>>744475

>Anyway, give up if you don't understand.

That's my feeling towards you too, like the above said, it plainly feels like you blatantly ignore we wrote only to take a few bits out of context and throw in half truths.

If you still believe feminism is part of femininity I don't have anything else to tell you.

>>744894

>maybe the quote from Bishop Williamson comes from Evola somehow.

The quote demonstrates that men need to have some confidence to attract a woman. Having a healthy confidence is not a sin and the point of "men run on ego" when taken in this context is quite obvious.

Enjoy your strawman.

>people talk shit about women

>70% of most denominations are female

Thats not because women are converting, thats just because men leave the church in droves. Probably something to do with "what do you mean I cant do that with my penis?"

Deep down you know it's true

>>745095

>people talk shit about women

>70% of most denominations are female

Who even said that? Nice try traveler.

>>745087

If you talk from the start of only the confidence, then it would have been good. Unfortunetly your formulation was problematic.

>Men need confidence, they need a certain amount of self esteem to be masculine.

>Well we do need some ego to be who we are.

>When a woman dominates a man - that is she breaks his ego for good,he will never truly love her. He may not leave her, but he will always feel some resentment because she did not let him be the man.

Confidence is not the same as ego and self-esteem. Saying men run on control (objective side of confidence), which can directly be linked to knowledge would be better. I talked about it in one of my answers . It's easier to see the hierarchy between control (knowledge, participation) and love.

>>745095

>people talk shit about women

The purpose of this thread is to better understand women so we can better serve their needs as husbands and fathers. Is a critical examination of their mannerisms really "talking shit"?

>70% of most denominations are female

Yeah, it's gone in that direction over the last few decades… I believe there's some factors to consider.

For the older folks:

<old ladies often go in groups to church together, while men don't

<men tend to die of old age before their wives do, leaving widows in the church

<sermons delivered by most pastors today are pozzed, which is unappealing to the older, more conservative men

For younger people:

<the internet, porn, gaming, atheism, etc., has driven many young men away from God

<women usually see churches as social clubs, support groups, and a place to find dates rather than an actual holy place of worship (men do this to a lesser extent)

<many young men long to be the most faithful Christians they can be, which is perhaps why the orthodox church has 12% more men than women, and very few female converts

<an overwhelming majority of young Christian women ignore or reject certain parts of the Bible they aren't comfortable with (e.g. obeying their husbands), therefore being less devout (even if greater in number)

If churches went back to taking a hard stance against degenerate behavior, I can assure you that gap would go away. Again, not talking shit, just stating my observations…

>>745127

I may be talking shit, and if so, someone is else is welcome to make clearer, but from what I understand:

Ego doesn't directly correlate to self esteem, since the latter is more about knowing your value and capacity, knowing you're strong to persevere and knows how to handle yourself if need be.

Ego correlates more with attachment, to status, to material wealth, to past accomplishments.

So in turn ego is fragile while self esteem is steady.

A woman will use and will twist a man's ego to break him, when true confidence and self-esteem in yourself as a man is immalleable.

So the path of the superior man is to let go of you ego and attachment and women's tricks will not reach you. When they realize that they will either give up or submit.

>>745127

>>745225

From Mirriam dictionary:

ego noun

\ˈē-(ˌ)gō also ˈe- \

plural egos

Definition of ego

1 : the self especially as contrasted with another self or the world

2a : egotism sense 2

b : self-esteem sense 1

3 : the one of the three divisions of the psyche in psychoanalytic theory that serves as the organized conscious mediator between the person and reality especially by functioning both in the perception of and adaptation to reality — compare id, superego

Synonyms

pride, pridefulness, self-esteem, self-regard, self-respect

Ego is the Latin word for "I." So if a person seems to begin every sentence with "I", it's sometimes a sign of a big ego. It was the psychologist Sigmund Freud (well, actually his original translator) who put ego into the popular vocabulary, but what he meant by the word is complex, so only other psychologists really use it in the Freudian sense. The rest of us generally use ego simply to mean one's sense of self-worth, whether exaggerated or not. When used in the "exaggerated" sense, ego is almost the same thing as conceit. Meeting a superstar athlete without a trace of this kind of ego would be a most refreshing experience. But having a reasonable sense of your own worth is no sin. Life's little everyday victories are good—in fact, necessary—for a healthy ego.

Examples of ego in a Sentence

I have enough ego not to want to give up easily in any contest or competition. a star athlete with a refreshing lack of ego

>Bishop williamson points out: " Men run on ego, women run on love". This is true. Men need confidence, they need a certain amount of self esteem to be masculine. We all know we have insecurities, we all know the trouble asking a gorgeous girl out, we all seek female approval to some extent. Well we do need some ego to be who we are. Some men are more hard,some less…but all of us are fragile. When we reach our fracture point, we break. When a woman dominates a man - that is she breaks his ego for good,he will never truly love her. He may not leave her, but he will always feel some resentment because she did not let him be the man. What this means practically: We should seek feminine women. They tend to be submissive - not always, not in everything but a good woman knows when not to contradict her man even if she thinks otherwise. She instinctively knows that if she broke him, she would not be able to rely on him the way she does. It's the same as you not wanting to destroy your car.

If you take the meaning "pride" not "self esteem" into account in all those lines then you get what you imply. However that is not what was meant -and definitely not what Williamson talked about. Again I did not mean "ego" as pride. I used it as "self esteem", as I have repeatedly said here.

I thought it would be obvious that I do not talk about men "needing to be prideful". That would make no sense.

I stand with what I wrote, that a man without an ego(a self esteem in this case) is ultimately a broken man.

>A woman will use and will twist a man's ego to break him, when true confidence and self-esteem in yourself as a man is immalleable. So the path of the superior man is to let go of you ego and attachment and women's tricks will not reach you. When they realize that they will either give up or submit.

Well yeah she will test his insecurities as well as his pride. A man must be able to know when he's wrong and admit it otherwise he is a laughing stock for being prideful. He must however when he' s in the right be strong and withstand others doubting him.

There are however women who do this to an unnecessary extent. My friend has a submissive father obviously, she also swallowed a lot of feminist propaganda and she thinks she will be attractive when she always tries to act as above the man. That includes sh*t talking men whenever she gets the chance, always doubting everything you say/your abilities. It is not even irritating since I was never interested but I feel bad for her because her approach limits the scope of partners for her - she needs to find someone very similar to her father.

Feminism is that women abandon their role and larp as men. They abandon feminity and try to be "masculine". I see no way in which feminism is "feminine" since it is an antithesis to feminity

>>745282

Great text again.

Yeah I've guess I was taking "ego" in the Freudian sense, that is of pride instead of self. The key here is not identify yourself with your pride, because its bound to be broken, everywhere has ups and downs, and every situation can change.

>There are however women who do this to an unnecessary extent. My friend has a submissive father obviously, she also swallowed a lot of feminist propaganda and she thinks she will be attractive when she always tries to act as above the man. That includes sh*t talking men whenever she gets the chance, always doubting everything you say/your abilities. It is not even irritating since I was never interested but I feel bad for her because her approach limits the scope of partners for her - she needs to find someone very similar to her father.

Yeah, this is the point where feminism goes wrong, they feel the need to be strong and independent, without realizing they're giving up on what would make them truly happy (for the girls that are really feminine).

Let me share this video from another post, on a somewhat related note, it showcases how bad role reversal has come >>744951

>>745368

>>745127

>>745282

Sorry to have used a word that has several meanings, including prideful conduct and to create a confusion. That was not meant here. I would probably not use the word myself but again…I was using quotes of a sermon where the meaning was quite clear and the phrase is quite catchy, which makes it easy to remember and then apply in life..

If I was not clear here in my text I apologize for the confusion. This was no "ubermensch" chad bullsh*t. What was meant was self esteem sense.

>>745368

I would say the "chad culture" we see nowadays is a reaction against the mainstream telling you "if you act weak and feminine women will like you". Chad culture is kind of a return towards masculinity………. in a way. With downsides however. I have been around the channels on yt for some time and there are currents that claim masculinity is being degenerate.

>Overcome yourself so you can screw as many women as you're able.

The sad state of things we live in, really. I suppose this is not the case with /christian/ but it is a thing unfortunately.

Anyway..Good thread OP.

Tbh I did not expect it to turn out so well. Good work.

>>745382

Yeah, but if you saw that video, its basically only solid advice:

>stay away from e-thots

>stay away from tinder

>stay away from porn

>don't settle for less

>work on yourself

And in overall I rarely see chad culture as something toxic, working on masculinity is very different than being outright chauvinist/sexist.

And these trends (such as PUA subcultures) are just overcompensating because my generation (millennials) had nearly no real role models and were explicitly taught to be anti-masculine.

>>745422

The video is quite solid. Not to say I like pjw. I used to watch his vids though.

Chad culture is fine if one stays out of the "gaming crowd" that is really just into hook up culture.

So I've been wondering about the more real references to feminine in the interpretation of the bible, and I hope guys can help me figure it out.

It seems to me pretty clear that both Mary show the better side of the feminine:

< Mary mother of god

> purity, maternity, caring

< Mary of Magdalene

> devotion, love

And even Eve, being a seductress for Adam to take on the forbidden fruit of knowledge. Does this seems right?

And I think some other clear references like some examples posted in the thread already. Is there any more?

So I just find this recommended to me on youtube, I know its not that important but I think its really important on tides turning with feminism. There seems to be a general consensus that they went too far and a tendency to set it back straight, we can at least be hopeful.

>>745888

Thanks, good references there.

So I've been reading much more on my book and it delved into some very interesting subjects, what I like to write here today is about the differentiation of love.

Mainly, between conscious love and unconscious love, as described, the first is about true love, love to god, love to family, universal love and etc, the latter refers to passionate love, romantic love, lust and obsession.

Romantic love, or simply passion, is evil, is where the downfall of men lies, is where man starts to idolizing a woman for something more than she really is (or wants to be).

The worst thing seems to be, is that the smartass seductress women will always keep trying to make the man fall to her charms, the good news is that maybe a sincere will eventually succumb and accept being devote to the man, but these seem to be far rarer and harder to find.

It is for this reason that a superior man always has his purpose higher and focus on life, must always be willing to let her go, for the moment he falls in passionate love and becomes attached to her, is the moment where she gains power over him, turning him into just a provider, playing cruel emotional games with him, and even worse to just completely leave him in shambles.

To add a bit more, out of coincidence I've find this article referred by someone else around this board today: https://therationalmale.com/2011/12/27/women-in-love/

>I found this particularly thought provoking – Men are the romantics forced to be the realists, while women are the realists using romanticisms to effect their imperatives (hypergamy). This is a heaping mouthful of cruel reality to swallow, and dovetails nicely into the sixth Iron Rule of Tomassi

<Men are romantics forced to realists, while women are the realists pretending to be romantics

I mean, doesn't this phrase infers a world of redpills in a single sentence?

And I've guess it says it all, it says about men's hopes for unconditional romantic love, of a woman who would love and support him despite his vulnerabilities, either because of our inefficiencies while growing up (lack of motherly love), or because of influences in our feminist society.

The most cruel and paradoxical thing for us to understand, that women will give their passionate love precisely to those ones who won't fall passionately for their charms.

The key here is never fall for woman, but to instead lover her consciously and be aware of her charms. Try to identify her nature, if she's honest in love or a cruel seductress, and avoid the latter like the plague.

The book also mentioned some great references on the bible, about men who fell passionately and met with ruin:

> Adam https://biblia.com/bible/Genesis3.1-24

> Samson https://biblia.com/bible/Judges16.1-31

> David https://biblia.com/bible/2Samuel11 (and following)

> Solomon https://biblia.com/bible/esv/1%20Kings%2011.1-43

>>748122

You make very good points here, this is a thought i've never considered. May have just saved my "love life" with this one. God bless man.

>>745382

>"if you act weak and feminine women will like you"

It's actually painful when I think about how false this is. A weak and sappy man is probably something out of my nightmares. Tbh I feel the only women who advocate for this are feminists who seem to have a messed up idea about how relationships should work.

>>751915

I'll have to start off by saying I'm the minority of which you speak so I can't comment on the seemingly 'devilish charms' that 'most' women display and/or use. I will ask about the type of women you pursue because to me those types of girls (who I've unfortunately been friends with) have an attitude problem rather than them just belonging to the female sex.

Also, if you think a woman is being dishonest in her interactions with you, why not take you're attentions elsewhere? With the women you describe nothing good ever comes of forcing the issue. Not judging but it's a genuine question.

Man, skimming through this thread, one can only conclude that when it comes to women the only important thing is how skillfully you can manipulate them. What a freaking bother. If you can't just relax and be yourself and kid around with them, what's even the point of being with them?

>>753008

Tbh I feel the only women who advocate for this are feminists who seem to have a messed up idea about how relationships should work.

Well its exactly just them, but society and media in general. Even then most women would never admit they can fall so easily for the dominating chad, its not like someone can freely admit out loud that in fact they wouldn't like for someone showing love and care for them.

Its kinda hard to put into words this kind of behavior, but one example of the media that's been thrown around a lot lately by the females is the Fifty Shades of Grey phenomena, and how it really is the ultimate female wet fantasy.

>meet a dominating young handsome man

>who treats you coldly and happens to be filthy rich

>be seduced and fall in love with him

>then in turn, seduce him and make him fall in love with you

>and end up being the strong womyn with the upper hand in the relationship

Little do most women know, that's when they start to lose attraction to him. But that's the ultimate female fantasy, because its a form of validation, to conquer and dominate over that special male that previously seemed so unreachable to her.

This is also what I call the pseudo-feminist, which is a girl who is feminine in essence but is fooled around to be a independent strong women, without realizing that in some way these are contradictory things to wish for.

>Also, if you think a woman is being dishonest in her interactions with you, why not take you're attentions elsewhere? With the women you describe nothing good ever comes of forcing the issue. Not judging but it's a genuine question.

Here is the thing right, for the longest time I was away religion, I was very timid and lost when young, but I always wanted to successful with women, so I set out on path to improve myself socially by putting myself out there (and through means of game), sometimes falling into degeneracy, but mostly being with all sort of normies girls, I've been in a really long term relationship, and lastly I was with a girl who presented her self as wife material but in the end up broke my heart into pieces (more on her later if you want).

So I've been with all sorts of girls, from really young just seeking to have a good time, to older wishing to settle, and in my experience the vast majority of normie girls who aren't admitted sluts, but at the same time haven't save themselves for marriage either, they still want a male companionship and sexual satisfaction, but to justify to society (and to themselves) they get into these short not really deep relationships, this is the kind of girl that goes jumping from one relationship to another, because after all if they're properly dating she isn't a slut.

But here is the thing, the vast majority of girls are still feminine in that regard as well, but not letting that part of theirs out very much, and when a masculine man comes around and she can feel safe, that part of her comes flushing out almost overcompensating for being repressed so much, with all the craziness that it entails. And trust me, its almost something innate to most women, it may be underdeveloped or repressed, but is there.

I would not say dishonesty in the strict sense either, I think I've some pretty honest girls here and there, but even they play that seduction game of hiding their feelings and leaving uncertainty. Even more when a girl completely break some promise or thing that she said herself, its not really dishonesty, because she thinks with feelings and when she said/promised something good before, she had a good passionate/happy feeling, and she didn't have that anymore when she broke it.

Sorry for the really long and rumbling texts, I'm somehow like that today.

>>753034

>Even then most women would never admit they can fall so easily for the dominating chad, its not like someone can freely admit out loud that in fact they wouldn't like for someone showing love and care for them.

Its kinda hard to put into words this kind of behavior, but one example of the media that's been thrown around a lot lately by the females is the Fifty Shades of Grey phenomena, and how it really is the ultimate female wet fantasy.

It's annoying that Fifty Shades of Grey became so popular. From what little I know about it, the main guy just strikes me as straight up abusive - not the type of man I'd like to be in a relationship with.

>and end up being the strong womyn with the upper hand in the relationship

Little do most women know, that's when they start to lose attraction to him.

Oh you're so right! I can't speak for all women (obviously) but to me the types who want to engage in such power play have issues - the Tumblr "Daddy" phenomenon is equally disturbing.

>Here is the thing right, for the longest time I was away religion, I was very timid and lost when young, but I always wanted to successful with women, so I set out on path to improve myself socially by putting myself out there (and through means of game)

Self improvement is always great but I'm sorry it led you to engage in degeneracy Anon.

>I've been in a really long term relationship, and lastly I was with a girl who presented her self as wife material but in the end up broke my heart into pieces (more on her later if you want).

I'd like to hear more if you're comfortable with sharing!

>So I've been with all sorts of girls, from really young just seeking to have a good time, to older wishing to settle, and in my experience the vast majority of normie girls who aren't admitted sluts, but at the same time haven't save themselves for marriage either, they still want a male companionship and sexual satisfaction, but to justify to society (and to themselves) they get into these short not really deep relationships, this is the kind of girl that goes jumping from one relationship to another, because after all if they're properly dating she isn't a slut.

I'd like to say not all women are the same but considering you seem to have vast amounts of experience, I can't really blame you for the conclusion you've reached. Like I said in another thread, myself and the females I know are not the psychopaths that seemed to be described here so I can only say this must be country specific?

>But here is the thing, the vast majority of girls are still feminine in that regard as well, but not letting that part of theirs out very much, and when a masculine man comes around and she can feel safe, that part of her comes flushing out almost overcompensating for being repressed so much, with all the craziness that it entails. And trust me, its almost something innate to most women, it may be underdeveloped or repressed, but is there

If that's the case for you, why not look for women who seem to be in touch with their feminine side from the get go? I'm sure not every single woman where you live is a crazy feminist (unless I'm being naive)

>I think I've some pretty honest girls here and there, but even they play that seduction game of hiding their feelings and leaving uncertainty.

From my point of view hiding your feelings and perhaps sending mixed signals sounds isn't necessarily a seduction game. For example, I'm very shy when I like a guy so I downplay how I feel so I don't come across as some clingy stalker. I know it can seem that women are all calculating but it's not what you think (at least some of the time)

>Even more when a girl completely break some promise or thing that she said herself, its not really dishonesty, because she thinks with feelings and when she said/promised something good before, she had a good passionate/happy feeling, and she didn't have that anymore when she broke it.

I'm going to say that a girl like that is immature and doesn't understand the weight of her words rather than her just being a 'typical' female.

>Sorry for the really long and rumbling texts, I'm somehow like that today.

No worries, it's interesting to read the perspective on the other side of the fence

>>753027

Make kids.

It is a pity though.

However we can also see this as a test of our manhood, it's akin to training a dog.

>>753040

There is a common saying :

"Don't listen to a woman's word, listen to her actions".

So far, in the present age, it's been proven to be true again and again. It's also true for feminized males mind you/

More on this here :

https://therationalmale.com/2011/09/06/the-medium-is-the-message/

However, there are some female saints worthy of respect so in doubt: kudos to you. Stay with God and may you find whatever you seek.

>>753054

To me, there are a plenty of other things in life which test your manhood more profoundly than learning to psychologically manipulate women. I can't get over the fact that they don't love you for your personality and virtues, but for your ability for petty manipulation. Now, how can someone who values something like that be a test of manhood?

>>753054

>There is a common saying :

"Don't listen to a woman's word, listen to her actions". So far, in the present age, it's been proven to be true again and again. It's also true for feminized males mind you/

Well there's also a saying that says: "actions speak louder than words". To me a hypocrite is a hypocrite and a woman who presents herself contrary to what she says is not sending mixed signals, she's being downright immature.

>More on this here :

https://therationalmale.com/2011/09/06/the-medium-is-the-message/

I've read the article and while I feel like he makes a good point on the different styles of communication that are used by males and females, he lost me when he referred to women as being generally childish in their way of communicating and being 'calculatingly crazy'.

I'm young/inexperienced so I won't dispute the evidence presented too strongly (especially if you're from some ultra liberal country) but I will vouch for the fact that not every woman is going to put you through hoops every single step of the way (it's silly tbh).

>However, there are some female saints worthy of respect so in doubt: kudos to you. Stay with God and may you find whatever you seek.

To be a saint at all is worthy of respect and thank you!

>>753061

I don't know man, I can't respect anyone who finds petty manipulation attractive. You love them, yet you can't show affection. You're human and you have weaknesses, but you can't show it. To me, the whole dynamic looks like pure torture for a man.

I also see 0 purpose in a spouse whose only role in the marriage is to be dragged on a leash you're holding with 0 input and support from her part. And although you have her on a leash, you're still going through the life alone because you have no shoulder to lean on, because that's what 'weak' men do. I don't want to go through life playing a macho charade just so I can satisfy their twisted mindsets. Or spending your life being constantly dragged into petty shit tests.

Again, I stand by my statement that winning favour from such creatures is by no means a test of manhood.

>>753068

Yeah, a test is not pleasant, but this particular 'test' is not only unpleasant, but not representative of anything. Thank God, I do have a couple of close friends whom I deeply love and they deeply love me. And yes, men give each other unconditional love that women simply can't give us.

>>753040

>From what little I know about it, the main guy just strikes me as straight up abusive - not the type of man I'd like to be in a relationship with.

He really is, and that says something about the real state of current day media and society, of how much it became popular among females.

>Like I said in another thread, myself and the females I know are not the psychopaths that seemed to be described here so I can only say this must be country specific?

I'm from brazil, and while its a particularly degenerate culture, I can safely say its like nearly everywhere for the majority of girls. Its like they're psychopaths either, you have a strong purpose and reason for being celibate, most girls have not, were not raised that way and no encouragement from society to do that. They, like other human being, have desires and the need for affection, so people go from one relationship to the other while hoping to find "the one", without realizing that they're just going further it. Women will do that just so they're not branded slut (someone who admittedly goes for casual sex), and have a little more security in the relationship, get more intimacy and etc, that's casual dating in nutshell. And I mean, its not the worst thing, just see spring break in the US, and that's where people are literally living degeneracy.

>If that's the case for you, why not look for women who seem to be in touch with their feminine side from the get go? I'm sure not every single woman where you live is a crazy feminist (unless I'm being naive)

That's the thing though I always go for the more feminine ones, that crazy side of girls is part of the feminine essence, and for that they an equally strong masculine guy. For example, for the girls I dated, a lot of times they would be in much better position professionally (and saying as I was a neet, much better financially), I mean it must be saying something if these girls were going for me regardless of my complete inability to provide.

Another thing, try to see it this way, to good side of the masculine: purpose, focus, reasoning; the bad side is: aggression, violence, pure anger. The same way, the good side of the feminine: love, caring, nurturing; the bad side: crazy emotions, seduction, drama, deceit. So its not necessarily bad, but part of it, and one must know its there but not let it take over control. Not related to feminism either, but example, when feminism goes bad in this scenario, like what I've about most girls making more money than myself, its not bad but the girl must be aware of that and let the guy take lead at least in the relationship. Another it can go wrong is how the women lose the meaning of commitment and submission, since they were thought to be strong, independent and that women don't need men, it makes it specially easy for them to just jump out at the faintest sign of weakness, considering even how marital laws are nowadays.

>From my point of view hiding your feelings and perhaps sending mixed signals sounds isn't necessarily a seduction game. For example, I'm very shy when I like a guy so I downplay how I feel so I don't come across as some clingy stalker. I know it can seem that women are all calculating but it's not what you think (at least some of the time)

It is though, and I don't blame you, its something nearly unconscious its part of your nature and you should do it. For one, this will be how you gauge a strong male, realize women have crazy emotions, and you're gonna need a man who knows how to be steady to navigated through all of that. Its gonna be hard, but once you do find him, do not go crazy power grab like the above I wrote about, be willing to submit, help him become more masculine instead pushing him down, tell him what you want best and thrust for him to give you that while leading. That's what it means to be a good couple, ultimately helping each other grow together. Also realize like every human he will have ups and downs, that he may have his weak moments, and again, just him through with it instead of judging.

Whew, that was another long one, sorry but I was to mass. I'll make sure to talk about my ex later.

>>753027

>conclude that when it comes to women the only important thing is how skillfully you can manipulate them

>If you can't just relax and be yourself and kid around with them, what's even the point of being with them?

You completely got the wrong idea (and even subsequent replies), because your idea is "why can't they just accept little weak old me, and love me the way I am", when instead you should striving to become the superior man, that in turn they will just naturally love regardless.

Because I understand you, myself like many boy in pain, have grown up without lead, me for example, grew up with a (single) motherly love (because she was full time working), so I am specifically susceptible to women's caring, I crave it like a baby. Also grew up without any strong fatherly figure (because they separated when I was so young as well), and to top on that, add ADD, porn addiction developed in my teenage years together with the age of internet, and all sort of degeneracy in my young adult years. Result is a weak men with no compass and strong purpose in life, so tell me now, wouldn't she be the crazy one if she was love me like that, just the way I was.

No! I needed to become a better man and so should you.

>>753061

You get the right idea man, with the exception of your first phrase, its false, but women do want a strong man, otherwise how would we be able to protect them, if cannot even protect ourselves from their crazy moods?

Also, check the goddamn first post on this thread, there are two verses, they speak the truth.

The thing is, what we were taught about romantic love is false, its lust and passion, its idolizing a human being that should otherwise be a equal partner or wife.

That's why women hate the whiny boys the most, because craving for their care, love and sexual attributes will only make us weaker.

>>753082

>being celibate, most girls have not, were not raised that way and no encouragement from society to do that.

True. Hookup culture as a consequence is a tragedy.

>They, like other human being, have desires and the need for affection, so people go from one relationship to the other while hoping to find "the one", without realizing that they're just going further it. Women will do that just so they're not branded slut (someone who admittedly goes for casual sex), and have a little more security in the relationship, get more intimacy and etc, that's casual dating in nutshell.

Again you're right but at the same time the same can be said for playboys/PUA's who go through woman after woman as some sort of status symbol. I think the point here is that looking at it both ways, it's obvious that this is not what God intended.

>that crazy side of girls is part of the feminine essence

Are we talking about jealousy? Personally, I think if it's exercised in the right way it's fine but if the girl you're dating is actually acting like some crazed person, that's not a good sign.

>For example, for the girls I dated, a lot of times they would be in much better position professionally (and saying as I was a neet, much better financially), I mean it must be saying something if these girls were going for me regardless of my complete inability to provide.

If they're attracted to you despite your financial position, that's more than many men can say. Good on you Anon!

> like what I've about most girls making more money than myself, its not bad but the girl must be aware of that and let the guy take lead at least in the relationship. Another it can go wrong is how the women lose the meaning of commitment and submission, since they were thought to be strong, independent and that women don't need men, it makes it specially easy for them to just jump out at the faintest sign of weakness, considering even how marital laws are nowadays.

I think a relationship where a woman earns more than her bf/husband already makes for an uncomfortable relationship i.e she's aware she has more power than he does and uses that. The feminists who tout that they don't need a man are the ones who reach the age of 40 and become bitter because they never married. I think men and women are supposed to complement each other (in an ideal situation). Marital laws no matter the country is completely messed up ad the fact that they're heavily biased /toward/ women regardless of the situation is heartbreaking.

> For one, this will be how you gauge a strong male, realize women have crazy emotions, and you're gonna need a man who knows how to be steady to navigated through all of that. Its gonna be hard, but once you do find him, do not go crazy power grab like the above I wrote about, be willing to submit, help him become more masculine instead pushing him down, tell him what you want best and thrust for him to give you that while leading.

No arguments here. I really have no desire/time or energy to play mind games with men and ruin them because it's fun/whatever the case may be. Good advice though!

>Whew, that was another long one, sorry but I was to mass. I'll make sure to talk about my ex later.

Hope you enjoyed mass! I look forward to reading it.

>>753324

Adoption?

It could save a soul.

>>753329

Don't want to butt heads here but… I don't see how it would get me anywhere, being a full time employee at an Orphanage (something that I wouldn't mind, hating on people who adopt is not the angle I'm going for here) isn't a replacement for raising a child of your own.

It's merely taking care of someone else's, other than the potential emotional bond one might have with said someone else's kid (which may break down at any point) there won't be a whole lot binding them together.

Is there any women out there worth it?

I can relate to every anon here.

The only good women are either dead (saints) or nuns.

Celibacy is the only way.

Thing is I'd even like to have kids.

The problem is that I can't trust them 100% like I trust my male friends.

>this MGTOW/incel flood

I'll just ignore that, should we report it?

>>753313

Hey there, sorry for taking too long.

>Again you're right but at the same time the same can be said for playboys/PUA's who go through woman after woman as some sort of status symbol. I think the point here is that looking at it both ways, it's obvious that this is not what God intended.

You have a point, but for a men, to be roughened up, will only make him stronger, scarred, dominant and strong in his purpose and more masculine (if he learns it right), for a women though it will make her jaded, bitter, harder to get affection, more masculine as well, hence the opposite of what a girl looking for love should be. Just see women approaching their 30s and later, they at some point just want to settle with a provider, far less than a ideal man, even when they probably had that ideal guy much earlier in life but passed on it because of stupidity (and a lot of times not understanding what commitment means).

Also I suppose that when a guy has a real fatherly figure in his life is properly taught, then he can be a better man from the get go without need to go through so much suffering. The very PUA movement is a reflection of how lost men got in current society, some pozz/feminist tendency that has been affecting us since the 60s somewhat.

>Are we talking about jealousy? Personally, I think if it's exercised in the right way it's fine but if the girl you're dating is actually acting like some crazed person, that's not a good sign.

Jealousy is a part indeed, but not exactly only that, these are all part of emotional tides of the feminine. I think its bad when these go overboard, like going crazy with obsession or something.

Like one example I could give you of crazy feminine girl behavior, like the obsession to seduce and charm everyone around, because giving her the lovely eyes gives her validation, but when in turn she doesn't want them at all, she just to feel desired by random men. Another really bad example of this would also be those obsessed with betraying their loved ones, simply because its forbidden and creates drama, they feel addicted to rush almost like a drug, its a very bad place to be and to be associated with.

>I think a relationship where a woman earns more than her bf/husband already makes for an uncomfortable relationship i.e she's aware she has more power than he does and uses that.

Right again, but its an unfortunate reality we must learn to live with, a lot of times I'll just encounter women making more money than me, the answer to that is to know how to separate both, the relationship and money.

Money is by far something that most causes distresses in relationships, probably because most people don't have other things to rely on emotionally, so it ends up breaking, just check all the major economic crisis in history and how it affects divorces and breakups rates.

>Hope you enjoyed mass! I look forward to reading it.

This might sound weird, but would mind moving over to a chat like discord, irc or something?

I'm asking this because its gonna be a really long story, and not really related to thread, and even more would prefer to more private. Also wouldn't mind more feedback while at it.

>>753542

>Also I suppose that when a guy has a real fatherly figure in his life is properly taught, then he can be a better man from the get go without need to go through so much suffering. The very PUA movement is a reflection of how lost men got in current society, some pozz/feminist tendency that has been affecting us

So true. You could even argue PUAs do what what they do from a place of insecurity.

> 60s somewhat.

Unarguably the /worst/ decade. It's been a downhill since then.

>Like one example I could give you of crazy feminine girl behavior, like the obsession to seduce and charm everyone around, because giving her the lovely eyes gives her validation, but when in turn she doesn't want them at all, she just to feel desired by random men.

I'll have to say this isn't feminine behaviour at all - crazy, yes but not womanly. Those women are just vain and seek validation but not every woman you meet is going to want the attention of every man in the room.

>Another really bad example of this would also be those obsessed with betraying their loved ones, simply because its forbidden and creates drama, they feel addicted to rush almost like a drug, its a very bad place to be and to be associated with.

I'll agree, drama queens are everywhere. Sad thing about them is you don't know what they're like until the crazy switch is turned on.

>the answer to that is to know how to separate both, the relationship and money.

Money is by far something that most causes distresses in relationships, probably because most people don't have other things to rely on emotionally, so it ends up breaking, just check all the major economic crisis in history and how it affects divorces and breakups rates.

True but learning to separate money and relationships become more difficult as time goes on - i.e when marriage happens. Partly why those divorces happen when there's financial issues is that there's other factors to it like the house, children etc. Also, it could just be that the relationship was built on money, and that never lasts.

>This might sound weird, but would mind moving over to a chat like discord, irc or something?

Sure! I just made a discord since I've never had a reason to use it. What's your username?

>>753830

I just send a request, I think it worked?

>>753345

>>753344

The sexual selection pic is retarded.

Don't have the twitter account from the christian statistician that explains it, but to put it shortly, "jocks" and sluts tend to sleep around a lot with each other, which is what skews the results, for the most part.

Also, going bald aint got to do with testosterone.

https://www.healthline.com/health/hair-loss-and-testosterone

>>753539

>The only good women are either dead (saints) or nuns.

Yeah, no.

Get your head out of ass, and look around for them.

>>753881

>Get your head out of ass, and look around for them.

Then tell me where anon.

I've got only two choices.

The girls from college which I know they get winnie the poohed at Wednesdays party every week or 80 year old ladies in the Church.

Can I get some blackpill material?

I perform quite badly in life. There are so many women I know with much higher achievements than me. My female friends are studying abroad and getting jobs at really good companies. Not me, I even failed at joining my internship program. I'm neither attractive, intelligent, hardworking, religious and charitable, or even a nice and honest guy in real life. There's no way I can consider women to be an inferior being like what he's doing >>753337

Even though I probably fail at life, I thank God for teaching me the way of humbleness, and I don't blame anyone but myself for my shortcomings. I'm not going to judge you at all, maybe you really are better than women, but I'm not one of you.

>>757325

>>757325

Kek, I still think you are. I'm sure you don't receive, divorce, and cheat your way to comfort even if you do I'm sure you'll admit it unlike a woman.

>>757325

Such is life in the zone my friend, read the thread and get some perspective.

But basically, because of societal changes:

>girls are being to develop their masculine side more, become independent strong womyn and muh feminism

>meanwhile boys are being told to let go of their masculinity, plus being baited by rampant pornography and degeneracy, and no basis for role models on how to behave

This causes women to be superior than most men, the end effect of this large change in balance is yet to be seen.

But for one I can say something is coming up, that is uber masculinity, for those who survive the forsaken battlefield of dating. Another is female tendency hypergamy, but only with those few uber males. And yet another even unpredictable outcome, may be from the women losing touch even more with their feminine side not knowing exactly what to do.

Gonna take this opportunity to bump and remind of something I saw a while ago.

I think that thread was deleted, but it posed a good question:

How do you still keep attracted to your wife

This is indeed a interesting and challenging question, because it will get harder as she develops to be your life partner, best friend, household administrator, mother and eventually more.

First I would like to hear what you guys have to say, virgin and husbands alike.

The more I dive into relationships/attempts to make women interested the more I see how naive I was all my growing up.

Everything feminists/modern culture tells you women want/appreciate is a lie. They want you to lead, to be the man even if they claim the exact opposite.

>>768313

Tough one. One of my vices is that I lose interest in the woman with time because I am autistic and do not value what I already have. This has destroyed my relationship once.

>>744475

you're wrong. Masculine pride is male dignity - it is natural, good, and you have a duty as a man to preserve it. It is in part why masturbation is wrong, because it is shameful against this innate dignity you are made for.

You are mistaking natural male dignity for pride.

Sorry if this is a bit off-topic, but the relationship general is too retarded so I'd rather post here.

I wonder what God wants me to do. I feel like if I'm not ready to be a husband yet, but I think my lack of experience with women will be a disadvantage in the long term. Does that mean I should still date even though I'm not ready? I'm willing to remain chaste before marriage of course, but even like this, I feel like I wouldn't be honest, trying to get a women while knowing I'm not ready to be a husband. On the other hand, should you really start dating only when you're ready to move in your own place, have enough money to raise kids etc?

I'm so far from this, even in the best scenario I won't have a full time job before I'm 26 because of my damn studies.

I'm also burning with desire for a girl I know, and I don't really intend on doing anything about it, though I don't know if that's because of the reasons I just mentioned, or just because I have no balls… My friends are all telling me "YO JUST GO FOR IT SHE'S HOT LMAO", but that hasn't been very helpful in the past.

>>773426

the other day the barista at a coffee shop called me "my love" and I've never felt more emotionally manipulated.

"A man is already halfway in love with any woman who listens to him."

There's nothing wrong with that feel, in fact it's superior to certain other base impulses we might be inclined towards.

It's hard brother. Submit it all, every thought, to Christ.

Don't feel cheated by what you see and cannot have.

At the end of the day know that God desires your salvation more than anything for you, and say with confidence Glory to God for all things.

>>773426

By realizing that just because a woman is nice to you doesn't mean she wants to get with you. Do you assume that every man being nice to you is gay?

>>773464

It's funny you say that; I was called "love" twice by some waitress yesterday, which was a first (usually it's hon, darling or, more rarely, handsome). Figured she was flirting for tips and didn't think much of it, but the women who say

>she's just being nice

don't seem to realize that a (homely) waiter saying the same would be fired for sexual harassment. Just another fine example of the nature of women.

>>773422

>I'm also burning with desire for a girl I know, and I don't really intend on doing anything about it, though I don't know if that's because of the reasons I just mentioned, or just because I have no balls…

Same. I let her go because it would be easier for me.

I'm not made for that, so why bother her at all.

>>773426

First of all stop masturbating. If you take active steps towards conquering your confidence after that things should fall into place.

>>773465

Nah, I don't assume anything, it's more like >>773464 said, I can't help "feeling halfway in love" when a moderately attractive girl is nice to me. I have read all the redpills about women, but I feel I am to easy to manipulate.

Also, "gay" is a perversion, so that's a terrible analogy.

>>773476

It's not an easy battle, but I'm doing remarkable progress in that since I returned to the Church. The Sacrament of Reconciliation helps a lot.

>>773770

Look mom I posted on the Internet.

>>773770

>>773781

Both of you are true and wrong. Christ was celibate and chaste. The 12 disciples spent the rest of their lives in celibacy. Paul advocated celibacy. God punished Eve by making her feel extreme pain during labor.

I'm not saying that celibacy is necessary, but marriage, sex, and procreation are seen as something vain by God. I wish our society wasn't so obsessed by marriage, sex, and nativity.

>>773770

>LE

>!!!1

Why do we always get the normalfags?

>>774069

>more people that get to join God's family

That's not a guarantee. Children can be rebellious. Wives or husbands can leave you. He came not with peace but with a sword, so it's better not to become too attached to single individuals.

>they never told people that starting families were bad

Never said so, but chastity is better. The biggest love there is, is to love others as God have loved you, and therefore it's better to devote your love completely for strangers and even your enemies rather than your own family. Families can even be a hindrance. There's a reason why missionaries and priests should leave their family.

>>774064

Begone faggot.

Marriage was raised to the status of Holy Sacrament by God.

>>774089

>being chaste is no guarantee that others will find salvation either

I don't think salvation has any guarantee but God's own love and forgiveness and your willingness to accept them, but it's a guarantee that you can devote more of your life to fulfill your duty.

>>774110

Whats your point?

>>772943

>The more I dive into relationships/attempts to make women interested the more I see how naive I was all my growing up.

Indeed brother, we all are, here I was thinking more into feminism and reach another level of ideas.

There were two steps to feminism, pre 60s, was the good feminism, that told women have the right to vote and be protected against violence by law (you can't simply rape or murder a woman and just get away with it), it also tended to protect women from abusive marriages having laws that favored them, with financial and physical security.

The next step, was 60~2000s, this was when sought out to seek their independence, compete in the job market, drop the old lady stuff and get modern, this is effectively when the movement gain strength in adopting male qualities and dropping the feminine ones. Women were encourage to seek independence from men, girls encouraged to developed more rational and logical traits, seek more male oriented studies and whatnot. This also happened to be when sexual liberation begun, correlated or not, when sexual revolution started, when love and commitment started to lose its meaning, when divorce rate skyrocketed, when porn was born.

Now post 2000s, we have the dreaded consequences, I can see a fork in what people call feminism, a new wave of sexual liberation and pornography powered up geometrically. One half of this feminist movement, is the women that literally hate men and the power of our dicks, they want to begone with us, to replace us, to become man themselves, and this is further supported by spineless men, the so called soyboys, that seem to hate being men themselves. Funny thing is that a lot of people in this new zoomer generation seem to grow into being homosexuals (both boys and girls), purely out of social convention, and because of how misaligned the other sex seems to be.

The other half of this modern feminism, are the ones that more dreaded to us, current age active seeking heterosexual males, these are the females that value their femininity, and would have no other way, but they also want to benefit from their newfound independence and protection under the law, the result being be spoiled entitled brats and never held accountable by the emotional hurricane they leave behind in their trails. eg: they can be polygamous, real bitches and sluts, and never suffer the consequence until later, and even then its very likely they will easily find a chode to settle with.

>>768313

>>772943

>Tough one. One of my vices is that I lose interest in the woman with time because I am autistic and do not value what I already have. This has destroyed my relationship once.

So I've finally came to reply my own question above.

Indeed its a though one to answer, keeping attraction is not easy, both for you and for her. One thing to note and understand, you will be partners, but never equal. A sexual relation is different than a friendship, but as you develop your relationship, you go from being a lover, to a best friend, and even business partner when you married.

So to answer this, you gotta sort of keep these relationships separate, be the lover when its really lovey time, be the friend most of the time, daily talks and that shit, and when you need to have some serious talks, about future and financial planning, be the business partner.

This is some advice I've heard repeatedly, although I haven't experienced it extensively, I can attest to some parts, don't let thing get mingled, we are lazy and as such we have the tendency to chose the lesser effort path, like chilling out with a girlfriend on friday night and then just having a quicky after the movie, then just after sex wanting to talk financial thing really quickly before finally sleeping. This isn't good, believe me, and specially if its someone you happen to get really passionate about, we a tendency to crave her presence and be romantic all the time, that can potentially real spoil things up.

Furthermore, the advice I repeatedly gave above still works wonders here, never fall passionately in love, it makes a much whole easier not mingling these parts.

I read another passage on my very valuable book, and it mentioned over another way females can mess with our minds, that is by playing with duality, they make us fall in love by all good, love doey and perfect, and then start to mess with us by doing exactly what we would expect, behaving badly and inducing suspicion.

This causes a duality of feeling in us, of love and hate, or more specifically of deep passion and hate, since these are different sides of the same coin, that prevents us from acting rationally, having certain answers, and being extremely confused fluctuating between these two extremes. Its literally what drive us crazy, and I guess gives them the most sadist pleasure, suffering from their love and being unable to act upon it (because we're confused we don't know how to act).

The only way to get over this, is by not playing this game at all, one cannot win in the field if he hasn't already won it internally, you be wasting tremendous energy trying to win this battle, so instead, just don't fall over passionately. Its much easier it said than done, but there goes my advice, do not let be fooled by the ones that seem perfect.

>>774165

>that told women have the right to vote

Things that shouldn't have happened

neither men should vote tbh

>>774171

> never fall passionately in love

>just don't fall over passionately

I get what you're saying and why, but I'm not sure it's realistic and/or a proper way of going about it.

I also get that romance is a modern invention and, although seemingly less so these days (with everything being more focused on sex itself and carnal pleasure) on the whole for generations now society (particularly in the most recent century hollywood and the pop music industries) has completely pushed 'falling in love,' romance, feels, etc. as the ultimate high, everyone's salvation, way of finding meaning and purpose in life etc, etc, and as an idol and the thing that's going to make life worth living, when obviously for Christians there's only one thing to which we give the all the glory and make the centre of our lives, and it sure isn't romance or falling in love with a romantic partner.

Having said that, I cannot possibly comprehend how or why you would think that it would be appropriate to not let yourself fall in love, passionately, with a partner. I understand there are times in which is will be beneficial to switch off that side of things, if possible, and I'm not condoning allowing yourself the opportunity to 'fall in love' willy nilly with whatever girl you happen to be involved with just for the feels buzz when you have no intention of wifing her (I'm aware that people in arranged marriages report that they fall in love only a good while after the marriage and only grow more in love as the years go on, because of the nature of their relationship and their understanding of love within marriage). However, we are humans, with human emotions. Such feels are part of our humanity, part of the human experience and as people with God-given dignity and created in the image of God, such emotions and feels have their time and their place and proper conduit and can be enormous force for good, both love (in terms of storge, eros and philia say, leaving agape out of the question given we're talking about 'feels') and hate. Both have their time and their place. There is certainly nothing wrong with sexual desire, passionate love and longing, eros, in the right context.

>>774171

Additionally, you will never find a partner by being up front during the dating/courting process and saying 'I don't want to fall in love, marry me.' Like I said 'falling in love' is, rightly or wrongly, considered to be the height of earthly human experience, so even if you some how did find a women who on the surface for some reason agreed with you and that falling in love was a bad idea and didn't want it either, but you still otherwise hit it off and got married as you thought it was a good idea, given society's embedded pedestalisation of the human sexual experience culminating in the sacred 'falling in love' holy grail, I think she would end up resenting you and the fact that you never wanted this passion which every husband would, in an ideal world and under the right circumstances, have for his wife, and vice versa the wife for the husband.

But anyway, I got sidetracked, I meant to say that realistically I don't think you would ever find a partner if you were to go around being up front advertising yourself as a bachelor looking for a wife that you 'do not expect to be and are not prepared to and will be actively avoiding 'falling in love' in any forthcoming relationship/marriage.' As I said, 'falling in love' is part of the expected package, let alone the moral consideration, pragmatically speaking, you deny a woman passion, you will be denying yourself a woman.

That leaves only one option then: deceit: You will have to go into the relationship/marriage with her working on the assumption that you'll fall in love with her, that you'll be able to provide her with the passion, the desire, the longing, the eroticism that is expected, in the right places and context, as part of the dynamic between husband and wife. Why would she assume it would be otherwise? As before, this has been part of the package for aeons. You will however be leading her on, deceiving her, because you never intend to or will let yourself 'fall in love' with her, and actively avoid it, depriving her of a key aspect of intimacy that is supposed to comprise a unique and healthy part of a relationship between husband and wife.

Just because your wife is a Christian and we put Jesus first does not mean that we should deprive our wifes and be deprived ourselves of erotic passion. We know it's not the be all and end all, if we loose it, or there are barriers to experiencing it, as Christian's we've got bigger fish to fry so ultimately no it's not the end of the world, but still, as above I think it has it's time and it's place.

Have I just completely misunderstood you? Or are you really saying 'do not allow yourself to have passion for your wife, or allow yourself to fall in love?' To me this just seems absolute bonkers and denying yourself a key part of the very healthy, God-given human experience. Yes, obviously I am aware there will be times where you will need to be very cautious that you're not thinking either with your romantic feels heart and wide pupils or with your benis, but that is not to say you're required to wholly denounce passion, eros, desire, longing, intimacy completely.

>>774171

>I read another passage on my very valuable book

Is this >>741754 presumably? By all means do some reading around the subject and feel like the only thing you're able or supposed to read is the bible exclusively, but take what's in your books with a pinch of salt mate. Don't get me wrong, when you posted it I put it on the long, long reading list to look up later as it sounded interesting. If this (or the other book you're referring to if it isn't this one) isn't from a Christian author I think you need to keep in mind that a sincere Christian woman, who you know is serious about her relationship with Christ, will have Christ as her priority, just like you should, and a lot of what will be set out in these books will not be applicable for such woman. I'm not saying it will always be the case and the book won't have anything useful to say, but such books can really infiltrate your mind and get you into a very negative way of thinking about a particular thing or group of people and can give the impression that the generalisations made within them are to be taken as 'gospel' (if you're familiar with this phrase, I hope it doens't confuse matters if you're not a native english speaker).

The femanon who provided responses and conversation in this thread was testament to how well screwed on some women can have their head and are not all nurotic, controlling, shit testing man eaters some of these manosphere books and blogs would have you believe. I'm not saying there aren't differences between us, and I'm not saying generalisations about our distinctions cannot be made, but at the end of the day remember that each and everyone of us has a God-given dignity as an individual, and we should be treated as such. We're all people, at the end of the day. sorry for rant/ramble

>>775311

I don't get it.

>>775283

Hey man i just wanted to say that's a really good post.

>>741754

>>Nehassan Alita

Meh, I don't think it's worth the hassle. His book at many times reads like a cringy PUA pamphlet. Also, his views on sexuality are purely materialistic, he shows a clear contempt for marriage and he constantly appeals to quasi-gnostic Jungian pseudoscientific garbage.

Granted, his text has some useful practical advice for dealing with women, but nothing you can't find in English-language sources.

>>775542

Thanks bud, appreciated. Look forward to seeing if anyone has any contrasting views and if they want to challenge any of the points I was considering posting in the 'regular anons' thread as saying 'that one anon who take hours to form really long, wordy, thought out posts that raise and/or respond to a number of points and issues but never gets any replies presumably because his posts are too long or ireverant' and then spoilering 'me' as it feels like it's always the way, alas, but your kind words are appreciated lol

>>775594

>I don't think it's worth the hassle.

Noted, thanks for the advice

>>775598

I'd say the only valuable lesson in that book is to not turn women into idols. If you willingly put yourself below them, they won't have mercy on you. I say it's not worth it because of all the heresy in it.

Frankly, it's unwise to seek spiritual or relationship advice out of non-Christian sources.

>>775719

>I'd say the only valuable lesson in that book is to not turn women into idols

Simple common sense. Thanks for further info, though I just realised you're talking about the Brazillian chap, who I had no intention of reading anyway (given it's in Portuguese). Are you aware if the other writer, David Deida, is trash? That's the one I put on my list out of curiosity

>>775285

>The femanon who provided responses and conversation in this thread was testament to how well screwed on some women can have their head and are not all nurotic, controlling, shit testing man eaters some of these manosphere books and blogs would have you believe. I'm not saying there aren't differences between us, and I'm not saying generalisations about our distinctions cannot be made, but at the end of the day remember that each and everyone of us has a God-given dignity as an individual, and we should be treated as such. We're all people, at the end of the day.

Thank you for the kind compliment Anon. That's exactly what I'd hoped to accomplish by posting. As for the rest of your post, it was a good read! Pretty much all or rather secular dating 'coaches' and media aren't very helpful when it comes to pursuing a Christian husband/wife. Tbh I feel that you're just as likely to pick up someone rather unsuitable.

>>774165

>There were two steps to feminism, pre 60s, was the good feminism

>was the good feminism

>good feminism

>feminism

>good

>ever

Also what is this "you can't simply rape or murder a woman and just get away with it" crap? What exactly do you think was happening back then?

>the right to vote

Democracy is chaotic mob rule and universal suffrage made it worse.

>having laws that favored them, with financial and physical security

Yeah, we can see the fruits of that, where a man can simply be accused of abuse with next to no evidence and have his life ruined.

>>787987

Cheers, I actually have a lot of new stuff to share with, but I'm on a really rough and demotivated period right now, not even feeling like browsing too much. But soon I'll get back.

>>789363

Get out of my thread /pol/

>>789430

>anything i dont like is /pol/

>>789430

You cannot be a feminist and a Christian.

Anon is right, even Victorian era feminists used terrorist tactics to achieve their ends.

>>789528

>>789720

>>789742

Oh wow, my point is proven, I'm not even agreeing with feminism or anything of the kind, just read the goddamn post he replied to originally. I would just love to beat the heck off and rape any woman that disagrees with me, just as the next guy, but is that really christian in any way, shape or form?

So yeah, don't come with that MGTOW bullshit on me. This just reeks of /pol/ shitposting, where as he just completely ignores the rest of the post and the context in which it was put.

>>789794

You misread >>789363 by saying that his position is that women should be raped. His actual position seems to be that prior to feminism women were not raped en masse as you are implying. I agree, the early feminist movement wasn't about stopping women being raped en masse, as that didn't happen, it was more about demanding suffrage.

The marriage of man and woman is like the marriage of Christ and his Church. I think that's from Paul. They are not equal partners, that's heretical.

Society had many protections for women prior to first wave feminism.

Bump I guess

>>801204

The Most Important Person

on earth is a mother. She

cannot claim the honor of

having built Notre Dame

Cathedral. She need not. She

has built something more

magnificent than any

cathedral—a dwelling for an

immortal soul, the tiny

perfection of her baby's

body…The angels have not

been blessed with such a

grace. They cannot share in

God's creative miracle to bring

new saints to Heaven. Only a

human mother can. Mothers

are closer to God the Creator

than any other creature; God

joins forces with mothers in

performing this act of

creation… What on God's

good earth is more glorious

than this: to be a mother?

—Joseph Cardinal Mindszenty

>This is what femenism should be. When women honor their children they honor God

>>801311

Good to hear that.

Try to read through the series of posts. There is some food for thought.

>>742652

>>742653

>>742654

>>742655

>>742656

>>742658

>>742659

>>801305

>The Most Important Person on earth is a mother.

And Christ ?

>Mothers are closer to God the Creator than any other creature

You should say that to nuns and all Christianity, that virginity is behind motherhood.

>What on God's good earth is more glorious than this: to be a mother?

To be monk ? For example.

I despise this emotional (and thus feminine) spirituality typical of modern Catholicism.

>>801599

Christ is not on Earth. That is not Biblical.

>>801599

Yes I saw this in my university’s catholic organisation. A lot of “pro-life feminism” and whatnot.

Shortly after seeing that I begome Orthodox (for many other reasons, but that was one). XD

>>801967

And I will for this reason too (and many others too).

>>801948

>Christ is not on Earth

And the virgin Mary ?

>>789542

>Celibacy and the freedom that comes with it seems to be way to go for me.

If you're able to remain celibate, you should.

>>801376

Hey brother, just posted on the self improvement thread. Funny how we recognize each others in a anonymous forum.

Guess I'm doing alright, but hadn't developed any relationship so far, unfortunately. I am on quite a bend however, with this pretty girl that appears occasionally on my local church, I'm thinking of asking her out but I have no clue about what would she think. I know I have to put myself up to it and ask her out (either good if she accepts or be done it with otherwise), but at the same time there never seems to a good opportunity, while the church isn't also that great a place for that.

I've guess since lent I almost haven't focused so much on this, but instead started working on other areas of my life. But I starting to feel the draw to being back dating again, before it was more out of loneliness, but now more about enjoying and sharing someone's company, not to mention the intimacy I miss so dearly. Yesterday I begun reading again a book on the subject, so I've guess better to prepare.

Eerie, just hearing some woman crying out loud somewhere in the neighboring buildings. Make me wonder (and remember).

>>809115

Yeah it is quite funny. The church is not the best place, but in front of it, why not…on the way back home. At the very least she will be pleased that a man shows interest in talking to her. Even if she rejected..it would be an experience and hence good points for you.

I avoided /christian/ like plague the last month or so…it was doing me no good to argue with people online on the top of seeking a job so I just switched off internet amount of stress. Right now my life is coming back to normal so I will probably try to post more.

>>741747

I know mother's day has passed but I find my mother so inspiring. She got my family from passive Christianity to active, getting us to go to church and stuff. She's stayed with my father through his severe mental anguish and him not being able to bring in money anymore. Growing up, I thought all women were like my mother but this has been horribly untrue.

>>809183

Bad news, so yesterday after mass there is this prayer group she usually goes to, all I could do was say hello to her, when to my surprise she was doing the singing (I don't really like these groups, as they tend to mimic prots too much). She was absolutely incredible, even prettier than before, letting her hair grow and with a shine in her eyes, all throughout she gave what seemed like pretty solid looks my way, I was absolutely stunned. Just for when it came to the end she started flirting heavily with a bearded hipster guy which seemed to know her. I just stood there for a minute while she didn't even notice me, next week there will be a traditional party (where couples dance together), and it seems like she hinted him to go.

I've guess that's my answer, I knew I didn't have much to hold on but now better to let this go. This just shows how it really is, a coincidence that just this week I started reading again on one of those books portraying the profane side of females, and again it said how bad it is for a man to find himself in a passionate state.

>>810548

Well yeah bad news…but there is a small chance you misread the signs she gave off to him/to you.

Either way the party sounds a good way to meet some girl or this girl not? if you're not supposed to come with the girl there.

Me personally I like dancing a lot because dance is my second nature and also one can meet women this way easily.

If I were you and I had some way to set it up I would go there (even if I would not seek the particular girl in question anymore), great way to meet people

>>810700

So there has been some development, but a very messed up one.

I'm not even sure this is the proper place to talk since it escapes on the subject of the thread.