Solid New Site for Christian Men

by W.F. Price on April 15, 2012

At long last, some Christians are finally starting to take scripture seriously and put the errant churches and preachers in their place. I’ve mentioned Dalrock before, and how I think his emphasis on Christians is probably one of the most effective vehicles for addressing men’s issues, but now there’s another excellent site called “Christian Men’s Defense Network.” The writer running the blog is bright, articulate, and has a good deal of personal experience with the problems we face. It was only a matter of time before the Christian men who have been victimized by the new family law regime began to raise their voice, and it appears that the time is at hand.

I certainly don’t expect everyone involved in men’s issues to be Christian, or even religious at all. About half of my friends (at least) are straight-up atheists, as I live in a very secular part of the country. I consider myself religious, but I like to keep my distance from organized religion, because as a man I have a deep distrust for much of what passes for Christianity in the US today. I suspect, but cannot say for certain, that non-Christian faiths here are similarly poisoned or are headed in that direction.

However, institutions are important, and the shift of Christianity from a benign patriarchal to a feminist type institution has been catastrophic for millions of American men. Some of what comes out of the mouths of so-called “Christian” leaders on the subject of women and marriage is breathtaking heresy from an orthodox point of view, and although that can be very frustrating, it provides an excellent opportunity to call them out on it. For those who are worried that women will entirely take over the church, I think they should just take it easy and see what happened to the Episcopalian Church in the US since Katherine Jefferts Schori took over. People have been abandoning it in droves, and now all that’s left is a shell of an institution that provides little more than a pulpit for radical left-wing activists.

So what about the bigoted white knight patriarchs out there who are dumping on young men and catering to female congregants? Well, it’s simple, really: put the old bulls out to pasture. The time always comes when a new generation of leaders begins to step up and demand a few changes, and that time is now.

{ 75 comments… read them below or add one }

Raj April 15, 2012 at 11:25

Religion won’t help if people just go to religion to pick and choose the ideas that support their agenda and discard what is inconvenient.

Even when times become hard and Church goes back to being patriarchal it will only be because matriarchy isn’t plausible anymore at that time, not because society has somehow learned a lesson.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader April 15, 2012 at 11:57

A big issue for church going people is the amount of feminist cant that has already been absorbed by churches. Way too many church people seem to believe that “feminism = abortion”, and therefore if they oppose abortion, they are anti feminist. So you get churches where men are constantly harried to serve women better, while women are pretty much constantly praised for their awesomely awesome selves. The result is a divorce rate among evangelicals of 38% (vs. 40% for the larger culture), a divorce rate among Roman Catholics of 30%, and so forth.

So it’s long past time for church going men to push back. This site, the CMDN, is doing just that, starting with a series “So you Christian wife divorced you” that like Spearhead makes the point to men in those straits: “You are not the only one, you are not alone”. CMDN would be tough reading for any church ladies. If they read it…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 0
Aaron April 15, 2012 at 12:35

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 47
American April 15, 2012 at 12:51

Reaching out to Christian men will be a way to get our message out, as some would suggest it may not be the perfect way to get the message out, but it will get the message out. I would not be so concerned about who’s gonna “Brand us” this or “label us that”, as we will not reach the masses of the ignorant anyway, our reach is more focused on the few that are ready to hear it, no matter what the barbarian whordes of the ignorant think.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4
Traveller April 15, 2012 at 12:56

““Christians” may have allies in favor of many MR principals, but please be wary as this “group” is not much in favor of rights and liberties.”

Totally agree, while I understand this article.

What you wrote about Chridtians could be referred to Muslims too, they are not friendly with feminists. Or White Nationalists.

There is overlap of goals, but Men’s Rights is putting the rights of men above all, not under the Bible, or under the “White Race diktats” or anything else.

My opinion, for me MGTOW is the soul of MRA.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 9
doclove April 15, 2012 at 13:06

@ Aaron
We need to reach out to all men and boys(as well as women and girls) whatever their religious beliefs or lack thereoff. Benign temperate and light patriarchy works for building and maintaining (benign) civilization. Benign civilization benefits the greatest number of people and causes the greatest amount of happiness. The matrirchy we’ve been slowly instituting at first for over 150 years with the rapid instituting of the matriarchy over the past 50 years does not work.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
W.F. Price April 15, 2012 at 13:20

You’ll do a great disservice to the movement by linking up with Christians and the religious right! Being such a big spokesman for the MR movement you may already have provided ammo for opponents to brand the movement along with those types. Not to mention alienating myself any every other like minded person who favors MR and cannot stand the politically religious.

-Aaron

While I don’t want to alienate the non-religious, I think it’s imperative to keep in mind that Christianity continues to have enormous influence over social policy in the US. The de-facto Christian-feminist alliance has been a disaster for the American family and marriage, and if we are to isolate and eradicate feminism like the social disease it is it will be necessary to purge it from mainstream religious movements with tens of millions of adherents.

Aaron April 15, 2012 at 13:44

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 32
W.F. Price April 15, 2012 at 14:08

I advise a shift in focus to ally building. Instead of emphasizing differences, I see opportunities with other movements clamoring for their rights–with the largest one being the LGBT movement. Society is changing and the dominoes are falling towards equal rights for LGBT (marriage, etc.). Whether you agree with this or not (I do), there is no doubt that their position is mainstreaming and has cred and momentum. Issues of divorce, asset distribution, custody, etc. are starting to be flushed out in policy, court rulings and public opinion. Those are open doors to link up MR egalitarian goals with their progress. Instead of these policies be treated as new for the LGBT folks, wouldn’t it be better to get true gender equal language put into policy?

-Aaron

Well, I personally think gays are crazy for wanting to have anything to do with marriage as it currently exists. My solution to the marriage problem would be to abolish civil marriage and replace it with contract based partnerships, which would be open to any kind of couple. This is one area in which Christians are problematic, as they still see state-based civil marriage as somehow akin to the Christian notion of marriage (in fact the two share little in common). But here’s an example of something that both Christians and those opposed to them could both benefit from. Ultimately, if I had my way I’d get back to the fundamentally American attitude that what people do in their private lives isn’t the state’s business.

However, as for a partnership with lesbians, I just don’t see it happening until feminism is totally discredited. Lesbians have too much at stake in affirmative action for women, they are deeply involved in family law and its associated industries, and they tend to view themselves as women’s champions against men in general. They are far more politically involved in gender issues than gay men, who don’t generally care (for obvious reasons) about things like child support, divorce, etc. They are also far more “fluid” in their sexuality; they tend to have a lot of sexual interaction with bisexual women and married women, so they are more prone to see men as their sexual rivals, which adds an extra element of hatred to their attitude toward men in general.

greyghost April 15, 2012 at 14:16

Welmer
The tendancy for men to distrust “the christian right” is real and valid as the definition stands today. I think we can make huge progress by changing the definition to the truth. What better mens club can there be but a church. Look what you have done with the Spearhead and how men are drawn to it. A masculan place for men to speak the truth to one another without reguard to what some cunt thinks. I think we can build churhes like that. Zero tolerance to femminism and speak the truth at all times. We can’t wait for someone to do it for us.
Dalrock started it as a rebutle to the a christian woman would make a good wife arguement on his blog. He is one of those guys that believes in the power of good marriage and families. He fully aware of the issues men face and understands game,family law misandry etc. I tease him at times as he actually does research and data collection and shows the result that as a promarriage guy he seems to have a knack for finding reasons for MGTOW.
Well someone gave him the NAWALT shit and brought up christians. Low and behold he made the conection we have here of the consevative feminist shit and post the data. He then started actually challenging these christian types on line and even had a few things to say about focus on the family. The bottom line is the church as we know today is full of shit and they know it. But it is a ready made organizatuion that MRM can change into a very powerful masculine institution by not carrying the lie and feed itself as a haven for men in need of the real truth. Run it straight and hard like this place here. Show no mercy to a slut.
I’m sure with the fellas you have here some great ideas can come about to get it going.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 5
Aaron April 15, 2012 at 14:28

@greyghost

Don’t stick your dick in crazy is good advice for interacting with woman AND churches. If you thing they are plyable to our aims you may be right. There is a whole lot of crazy and intolorance to go with that.

My opinion as an ex catholic and a vast consumer of news listening to religious voices leads me to associate churches and religion with hate. Not my hate…theirs.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 14
American April 15, 2012 at 15:05

Aahron says
I advise a shift in focus to ally building. Instead of emphasizing differences, I see opportunities with other movements clamoring for their rights–with the largest one being the LGBT movement.
American say, The LGBT movement empowers itself by villifying the hetero-fammily Unit, and the hetero-male, I doubt they are going to be allies of mens rights anytime soon.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 5
greyghost April 15, 2012 at 16:09

Aahron
You are dead on right about how you feel about the church as you have seen it and know it. The fuckin church as adapted femminism so it is just a bunch of bullshitters calling themselves christian to give themselves some moral credibility. A church with out feminism will run off the manginas and the cunts. Now you hav e place for men to gather without breaking the law. No need to anouce no bitches allowed as soon as character standards and biblical judgement is made on female behaviors they will up and leave on their own. The maginas will be their right behind them sniffing at their butts like good feminized christian men. One place ,one websight ,one preacher That is all it takes. Best thing about it the s.o.b. will never have to lie but he damn sure needs to be on the red pill. The MRA’s of the MRM will define the definition of christian church. We don’t have to lie. The only people interested in lies are women and maginas. That group of people don’t respond well to logic.That has been shown over the last 50 years.
Join the current churh? Hell no, fuck them, members of the current church full of lied to victims will join us. The church will be another front in the MRM. (tactical) MRM big picture as a whole (strategic)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4
greyghost April 15, 2012 at 16:44

doclove
We do need to reach all men. Reaching women is unneccesary to do directly. Speak about and infront of women while talking to a man. Don’t waste time in debate or arguement with a women unless it is being done to demonstrate the futility of expecting logic or empathy or even basic common sense and logic from a women for a male audience. (that being the purpose of the debate)
The red pill awakening of men is what is needed.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Attila April 15, 2012 at 17:02

Sola scriptura Protestantism or anything associated with it is a dead-end spiritually and a dead-end politically – as it dovetails into the current power structure.

What is needed is something that the Powers That Be cannot co-opt or neutralize.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Aaron April 15, 2012 at 18:36

Well, based on the Dislikes and comments it’s clear that I’m the odd man out.

I am curious to know how you guys think there will be progress. The movement seems to lack a tactical focus and is too heavily focused on airing out frustrations. Change takes time, effort and the process is messy.

Addressing the inequalities you know you’re right, but are you truly being effective?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8
TFH April 15, 2012 at 18:42

Aaron,

As a non-Christian, but a right-wing free-market person, I can tell you that if blogs like the new one mentioned simply get men to stop going to Church, and thus avoid the ‘man up’ scam that churches inflict onto men, then they have done their job.

But the most effective way to destroy feminism, in theory, is to shrink the size of government, since feminism exists only in proportion to the size of government. Hence, small-government types are the most potent people against feminism. A Christian who happens to big big-government, will not be.

Note that a lot of so-called small-government people quickly cave in once some women complain about how they will be inconvenienced by a reduction in some government program. This is precisely why the Tea Party failed – they could not stand up to shaming language from women, and a takeover by women who did not want to shrink government at all.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
J. Durden April 15, 2012 at 18:48

I’ll just drop these here:

http://www.30ce.com
http://www.yhwh.com

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Aaron April 15, 2012 at 19:06

@TFH

While we’re on opposite political spectrums, I can understand the desire to shrink the size of government. However, I don’t see the connection between shrinking government and changing policies or opinions. Starving the government will not cut into institutions like family courts or filter out into non-government spaces like mid/large corporations, churches, etc. An environment of every person for themselves will only polarize things further.

Didn’t feminism start as a maligned, laughed at group of bitter women who had legitimate grievances? Isn’t that essentially where the MR movement is? It took feminists years of pushing issues and arguments before succeeding (to a very tragic level!). Cutting government doesn’t get any MR argument into view and doesn’t change or open any minds.

I think we need to have increasing numbers of voices seeding the message. Americans love underdogs and have an innate sense of fairness. More awareness of the shit that goes on will be what’s needed to give political cover to change policies. More voices and stories will also undercut the easy dismissive feminist voices that blather on about patriarchy, etc. Also, linking up with other groups as I suggested previously will make it much more difficult to malign our aims as misogamy, etc.

I guess in the end that I think the solution is to build small and then go large.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6
greyghost April 15, 2012 at 20:16

Aahron
I wouldn’t consider you the odd man out. I think your fealings on the church is healthy and valid.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Eric April 15, 2012 at 20:58

Price;

This is a very fine-line type issue. I don’t think the MRM should alienate people of any religion, but remember that—in America especially—religious and political beliefs are often closely connected. Social conservatism is treated largely like religious doctrine.

Dalrock’s blog, which you alluded to, for example, is socially conservative to the core, even though Dalrock has seemingly added Roissyism to Christianity—most of what’s written there is mostly Socons and Roissyites debating on the finer points of their respective doctrines.

That’s what I’m concerned that the MRM could become, it could spin off into a Socon variant, just like it already has a Roissyite variant. We don’t endless internal disputes over ‘who really represents the MRM?’ There needs to be some clear-cut fundamentals spelled out first. Maybe there should be some sort of manifesto, drafted by MRM leaders, that could hold some of these variant movements in line—then there would be no question when tries to speak on behalf of the MRM.

For example, the effectiveness of the ‘Catalogue of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics’ helped codify for men an effective system to recognize feminist bigotry and resist it. A similiar ‘Position Paper’ of some kind could give men a reference point that would go beyond political and religious ideologies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Dalrock April 15, 2012 at 21:35

Modern Christians are providing moral cover for women to divorce frivolously while busily filling the pipeline with unsuspecting men. Man up and marry those sluts! is followed by it’s your fault she divorced/cheated/stole your kids because you didn’t make her haaaapy. None of this is Christian, as the excellent blogger you link to is deftly pointing out. Modern Christianity is corrupt and thoroughly feminized, but this isn’t biblical. CMD-N is speaking the truth while reaching out to help other Christian men. I am delighted to see his voice enter our sphere.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 1
Glenn April 15, 2012 at 21:38

By naming a group “Christian Men’s Defense Network”, you cordially invite every Maxist-feminist, vengeful homosexual, gender-Bolshevik, and garden variety troll to flood in and trow every possible monkey wrench possible.

Men function better as solitary guerrilla agitators, or maybe smaller cells of semi-autonomous groups (like The Spearhead) that meet only to exchange information, then disperse and continue spreading the truth.

All formal organizations will be infiltrated and destroyed. Conversely, you can not fight ideas with bullets.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8
keyster April 15, 2012 at 21:55

The majority of Christians see Feminism in the context of abortion and abortion rights only. They have no idea about any other aspects of it – – until someone explains it to them.

And what I’ve found is that when you do explain it to them they listen. The White-knight shaming Christian man is much easier to shoot down than the compliant secular-progressive lefty….and Christian women are concerned about men, because they still like men and many are the mothers of sons.

Christians care about men and women and children and families. They understand that men and women need each other, and if one falters so does the other. It’s true that feminism (sans the abortion aspect) has infiltrated and damaged the Christian church.

Trust me, get them to pull their noses out of their Bibles long enough and they’ll listen to what’s really going on with men. Ironically Christian orthodoxy is much more open to the plight of men, fathers and sons then Secular-Progressive orthodoxy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2
keyster April 15, 2012 at 22:03

“Men function better as solitary guerrilla agitators, or maybe smaller cells of semi-autonomous groups (like The Spearhead) that meet only to exchange information, then disperse and continue spreading the truth.”

The quintessential MRA “destroyer”.
Something positive takes place, a group tries organize, someone expends a little effort and all he can say is –”They’re doing it wrong!”.

Thanks for “exchanging information” here.
You’ve been a big help.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4
Aaron April 15, 2012 at 22:54

@keyster

I am a man of the “Secular-Progressive orthodoxy” but am also a MR activist. I am unfamiliar with the christian view of things and have many political opinions that make me believe I’m much more open in many facets than those on the christian right side. Realistically, my opinion is due to unfamiliarity…as is yours I think. However, we have the MR movement in common.

This discrepancy is exactly why I’ve made such an unpopular showing today trying to separate MRM from politics. We have things in common but once we start talking in the narrative that you’re on the right and I’m a progressive it’s all over. Stereotypes take over and no discussion takes place.

On the progressive side, there are the same crossover issues men face (divorce, DV, alimony, etc.). In fact, I find that feminists are uniformly willing and feel justified to hit a spouse. Yes, there are loads of feminists and white knights but men on the left face the same MR related issues!

Since I think one of the reasons I am so unpopular here today is because I spoke of LGBT and connecting with them on crossover issues I’ll go ahead and give an example. A friend of mine is gay (surprise…Bay Area, CA). His close friends have been together longer than most straight marriages and wanted to adopt. They got an adoption contract with a woman in MI and very proudly received the baby after providing all medical, financial, etc. care. Anyways, they got the baby but MI has a provision where the adoptive mother can take her rights as a mother up to a certain time point. Bottom line is that she had a second thought and took the child back after almost two months and is now suing the father for child support. Regardless of your thoughts on gay adoption, she took the child from caring, wealthy parents and instead forced a bait and switch on the child’s father who as I heard is just as poor as her. Long winded to get the story out in writing but this is an example of areas where men of all backgrounds have issues with feminist related policies.

Like you, I agree with Glenn’s statement:
“Men function better as solitary guerrilla agitators, or maybe smaller cells of semi-autonomous groups (like The Spearhead) that meet only to exchange information, then disperse and continue spreading the truth.”

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 17
Yevaud April 16, 2012 at 00:52

Piping in on the issue of gay men and MR: I don’t speak for all gay men, but I would argue that if gay men knew what was good for us, we would side with MR and not with feminists. One reason is given by Aaron’s example above. Another is that the more strident forms of feminism are ultimately toxic to the gay male psyche, which highly values masculinity from both a subject and object point of view (I don’t think I need to link to gay porn sites to convince you that conventional masculinity is attractive to gay men, but I would also argue that a healthy gay male psyche is one that is in touch with its own core masculinity).

I don’t agree that gay men seek to destroy hetero masculinity or conventional families – that does not jibe with my experience where gay men are very deeply involved with their families as sons, brothers, uncles, and sometimes fathers. However, I do think there is a fair bit of commonality with the MGTOW movement in primarily finding emotional validation through solidarity with other men (often – and it needs to be said here – nonsexually) rather than necessarily relying on unions that mimic heterosexual marriage.

I understand that many readers of The Spearhead are distrusting of gay men, and that Christians in particular are not welcoming, but it needs to be said that there are gay men who support MR, and I think if the movement reached out to gay men, many more would be supportive.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Phil April 16, 2012 at 00:57

I call bullsheet that Aahron is an ex-catholic. But he sure is anti-christian. What Dalrock and this new website CMDN are doing is excellent.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
Eric April 16, 2012 at 01:31

Glenn:

‘Men function better as solitary guerrilla agitators &c’

Even guerrillas and partisans can’t function without an external central command or a fixed set of ideals. Solitary fighters are only fighting for their own purposes, or sometimes in groups for their own ends. That type of fighting has never won a war—it usually ends up with factions fighting each other.

That’s why I stated earlier that what the MRM needs badly is some objective standard, like a Statement of Goals. Otherwise, solitary fighters will do God-knows-what under the MRM banner; or else it will be co-opted by other groups seeking to cash in on its success. If we had something like that, men could measure a group’s words by it— then it wouldn’t matter what political or religious leanings that group had. We’d know whether or not they were genuine because we could measure their statements against a tangible set of goals and ideals.

Consider that every successful nation is guided by a Constitution and every successful religion by a Creed. This is true of any successful movement or organization. Movements without a set of standards are either chaotic semi-anarchies (e.g. the French Revolution) or cults of personality (e.g. the Third Reich). The MRM is still a new movement, and vulnerable to either type of take-over. There are plenty of men willing to be leaders, but these leaders need a binding principle if they hope to take the movement anywhere.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
greyghost April 16, 2012 at 03:18

Eric
I use myself a kind of Strategic and Tactical frame of mind. An over all mens ideal. Big picture goal, what victory looks like and what to realisticly expect,how we get there. Getting all men on the red pill is what I would think is Strategic.
Also a guerilla war always ends with a conventional war to final victory. (see chairman Moa) What better convential army than a church run by preachers with game. (They don’t have to lie)it is not an either or we do both MGTOW,and the church of MRA. Build the church and let the guerillas run wild.
The heavens have shined a light on the MRM.
Welmer Price you have redirected history with this article. Dalrock you mutha fucka.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Father Marker April 16, 2012 at 03:30

@Glenn

“By naming a group “Christian Men’s Defense Network”, you cordially invite every Maxist-feminist, vengeful homosexual, gender-Bolshevik, and garden variety troll to flood in and trow every possible monkey wrench possible.”

And that is what we want. (To some degree). We want them to descend like flies and then we can beat them into submission.

In Australia at one time we had this fly paper which was simply sticky strips that were pinned to the ceiling and hung down. Any fly silly enough to land on it was there forever.

Let them come and land on our flypaper site and we will infect them with our ideas and also show the young un’s how to deal with them harlots.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
meistergedanken April 16, 2012 at 05:10

“This discrepancy is exactly why I’ve made such an unpopular showing today trying to separate MRM from politics. ”

Nah, rather it is because you have a penchant for telling Price what to do with his website (“don’t let THOSE types of people comment”, “Don’t write about THAT”). Start your own damn site.

“Do what I want or I’ll feel ‘alienated’!” Does this argument often work for you in real life?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
doclove April 16, 2012 at 05:36

@greyghost
Concentrate on males because that is a more fruitful market, but don’t ignore females. Coercion works but not as well as incentives. Explain that coercion in the long run never works as well as incentives. Coercion doesn’t work on women very well, and it works just as badly or less well on men. Feminism costs too much money and too much freedom as well as destroys incentives by growing the government and reducing the private sector as TFH said. Government typically screws everyone in the end because there is no competitor and it is the final arbiter. Eventually, it will screw women just as it has men. If you as a woman care more about your advantages and protections given to you as well as strange women you don’t even know over you’re own male relatives then you are no good; and as Keyster said, some women understand that to some degree being religious and in particular being Christian. Some secular women will understand too. Most women won’t see past their own noses. Some men won’t see past their own noses. Right now women have less reason to look past their own noses than men, but that will change. Globalman or Peter Andrew Nolan has told many that when men decide they aren’t going to protect women beyond their own female relatives, neighbors and friends or worse not going to protect any woman, that women are in trouble and this is what our ruling elite and governments either explicitly want or erroneously believe in a fantasy world which will never be and will eventually create a worse a real dystopia for women which will be worse than any real dystopia for men that we have now or even a worse dystopia for men which they will accidently get. The best laid plan go awry, or here’s a Jewish Rabbai joke: Man plans, and God laughs. Point out that the percntage of men and women aged 40-44 who never married in 1970 were 4% and 5% respectively and as of 2010 is 17% and 12% respectively.

Point out that American Blacks were hardly any more likely to be in jail than Whites and even had higher marriage and legitimacy rates than Whites with fathers who raised their sons and men who got married and stayed married to their wives. Lookat the american Blacks now. Marriage rates have fallen and are falling further and so have child legitimacy rates. American Whites are following and are where Blacks were at in circa 1965 with American Hispanics in between and Asians now being as bad off as Whites in 1980 when theywere much better off too. Blacks are the canaries in the coal mine so to speak.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Jay April 16, 2012 at 07:02

Religion by its very nature is proto-masculine anyway. Libraries could be filled with historical documentation of the hostility religion has for women.

Christian men ‘demanding’ more masculine-centered attention would be a laudable effort if not for the painful irony of men whining that their feelings are now hurt after two millenia of passively or actively participating in a church that wouldn’t know what to do with a clitoris if given a manual.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 15
keyster April 16, 2012 at 08:27

@Aaron
“This discrepancy is exactly why I’ve made such an unpopular showing today trying to separate MRM from politics. We have things in common but once we start talking in the narrative that you’re on the right and I’m a progressive it’s all over.”

OK, why don’t you keep trying to appeal to the “Humanist/Tolerant/Multi-Culti Egalitarian” types about MRM (or anti-feminist governance issues), and I’ll keep working the “Right Wing/Evangelical/SoCon” types. Let’s see who gets the furthest.

If you don’t think Social Movements should be about politics, then you’re VERY misguided. Why is it that it’s always the secular-progressive guys that end up saying the MRM shouldn’t be political?

Any solutions to the plight of men and boys will have to come through political means — and it’s highly unlikely this will be coming from the left. Stop trying to fit a round peg in a square hole.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4
keyster April 16, 2012 at 08:41

“The MRM is still a new movement, and vulnerable to either type of take-over. There are plenty of men willing to be leaders, but these leaders need a binding principle if they hope to take the movement anywhere.”

How many times must this be said?
Men NEVER have and NEVER will organize against women.
The only logical route to Men’s Rights breaking into the mainstream and staying there is through women, probably conservative women.

Why?
Because they’ll be listened to and they’re better at organizing social movements. A man and/or men won’t be listened and won’t be supported by other men when it comes to anti-feminism. Women must be our allies, like it or not that’s a fact. Women are the key to getting the MRM off the ground and into the mainstream. Sad, but true.

Have you ever tried to organize a bunch of MRA’s to actually do anything? Herding cats on LSD is easier.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7
Migu April 16, 2012 at 08:44

Christian men ‘demanding’ more masculine-centered attention would be a laudable effort if not for the painful irony of men whining that their feelings are now hurt after two millenia of passively or actively participating in a church that wouldn’t know what to do with a clitoris if given a manual.

Really? And the Kama Sutra comes from where?

And a man in a lifelong partnership with a woman is not going to know what to do with a clitoris?

Men are whining that their feelings are hurt? Whining denotes unjustified anger or pity. As in the child is whining because his father will not let him play with the gun?

I believe that you are the one whining Jay. Whining about the fact that you fell into trap. Godspeed my good friend.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Migu April 16, 2012 at 08:46

Have you ever tried to organize a bunch of MRA’s to actually do anything? Herding cats on LSD is easier.

Ever heard of an army? Ever heard of a militia?

The men must believe, and they obviously don’t believe the MRA plank? Ever wonder why? Because it isolates the means from the purposes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Anonymous April 16, 2012 at 08:54

Ketster wrote (concerning Aaron’s latest whinefest) “Why is it that it’s always the secular-progressive guys that end up saying the MRM shouldn’t be political?”

It probably has something to do with their obsession with the separation of Church and State.

They don’t want a system that provides its adherents with an ethical and moral framework to influence the interaction those same adherents have with a system that continually must wrestle with the issues of instituting and codifying ethics and morals. I know, it doesn’t make sense, but we have to remember that people like this tend to believe neither in objective truths nor Cause-and-Effect (i.e., actions have consequences).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
meistergedanken April 16, 2012 at 09:01

Keyster wrote (concerning Aaron’s latest whine fest):
“Why is it that it’s always the secular-progressive guys that end up saying the MRM shouldn’t be political?”

It probably has something to do with their obsession regarding the separation of Church and State.

They don’t want a system that provides its adherents with a framework for ethics and morality to influence the interaction those same adherents have with another system that must continually wrestle with the issue of instituting and codifying ethics and morality. I know, it doesn’t make sense, but these are the same people that neither believe in objective truths (see: moral relativism) nor cause-and-effect (i.e., actions have consequences).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Migu April 16, 2012 at 09:24

How many times must this be said?
Men NEVER have and NEVER will organize against women.
The only logical route to Men’s Rights breaking into the mainstream and staying there is through women, probably conservative women.

This is 100% correct. Briffualts law cannot be denied. However; we can withdraw our support, and only take those who follow.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
keyster April 16, 2012 at 09:39

“I know, it doesn’t make sense, but these are the same people that neither believe in objective truths (see: moral relativism) nor cause-and-effect (i.e., actions have consequences).”

Yes, that and regardless of our innate tendencies, Social Engineering is the answer to all of our ills.

“Ever heard of an army? Ever heard of a militia?”

Ever heard of an army or militia in the history of civilization that was organized to do battle against Matriarchy? Didn’t think so. That’s the big difference. And the very few disparate REAL MRA’s are simply to suspicious, cynical, misanthropic and often poor to affect much change, other than some online activity…which is better than nothin’.

It’s gonna be a woman or women that brings down feminism.
And when she appears, we should have her back.
Men simply can’t and won’t do it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7
Migu April 16, 2012 at 10:10

Ever heard of an army or militia in the history of civilization that was organized to do battle against Matriarchy? Didn’t think so. That’s the big difference. And the very few disparate REAL MRA’s are simply to suspicious, cynical, misanthropic and often poor to affect much change, other than some online activity…which is better than nothin’.

The army of Isreal under king david.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Migu April 16, 2012 at 10:14

David destroyed the Matriarchy in his time, and people followed him. Then he fell to Bathsheba. The story repeats with Sampson. Only Solomon managed to keep the matriarchy in check. Explains the prophets and Jesus if you know what I mean.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Georice81 April 16, 2012 at 10:32

One thing to worry about is the so-called Christian counselling. First of all they put psycho-babble ahead of the Word of God which is feminist and anti-family to the core. Also the mere fact that a husband and wife go to a counsellor is by itself destroying the lines of authority from a man to a wife. In effect what the woman is doing is saying to her husband, “I want another person to be the head of our household”. So when a man acquiesces to this, he is in effect putting his marriage into a slow-death mode. Even if the marriage survives, it does so in a very crippling way where neither is happy and where the woman now view her husband as a spiritual eunech.

A Blog in the CMDN does mention not to bother with counselling which is what most churches say to do but is intrisically wrong. Usually at this point, the wife is either cheating on her husband or is planning to leave him anyways and she just wants someone to help her justify her decision/lifestyle. Counsellors don’t have the guts anymore to stand up to righteousness and instead will try to shift the blame to the husband which is what the wife wants anyways.

Other than finding your wife in bed with another man, the worst thing that can happen is for one to hear the words, “We need to see a counsellor”!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
freebird April 16, 2012 at 10:44

@J.Durden
The first link you dropped lead to some speculative (invented) reversionist anti-biblical drivel fronted by an anti-gunner.

Now however anti-churchianity you may be, I know full well you’re not an anti-gunner.

Why let someone disarm you intellectually either?

You could full well make your point in your own words, I’m sure it would be clearer and more concise.You are very intelligent as well as a good writer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
freebird April 16, 2012 at 11:11

@J.Durden
Having looked at your second link I find it very good theology,with some small exception as to the interpretation of God’s real name,but this is quibbling as to whether there was a “w’ in the original Hebrew alphabet.
Thanks for posting it, it led me to very well written page on the second coming that I believe most Christians could benefit by reading:

http://www.yhwh.com/Thoughts/SecondComing.htm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
freebird April 16, 2012 at 11:28

Well that is interesting:
The author of the above mentioned site is well aware that the Hebrew “w’ is pronounced “vah” as in “V” but yet uses the incorrect pronunciation for his purposes.
He should know better!

I apologize to all the atheists out there for my last few posts,but for Christian scholars this is important business.After all you would not call
one of your friends by the wrong name!!

I’m against using these variations as a foundation to deliver “the one truth” as a condition,but we must be aware of what we have in front of us, and error is error.
http://www.yhwh.com/YHWH/Yhwh.htm

Pardon me:not YAHWEH
Closer would be -Yah-ha-Vey
In keep also with the King James YHVH.

Semantics, I know,but some folks make a religion out of a pronunciation as if they have a total lock on the truth,as it’s a pain when they are wrong in the first premise as well as the second.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Migu April 16, 2012 at 11:31

I want another person to be the head of our household”.

Correct. This is the problem, and the rest of your comment is spot on. If a woman does not want you to be the authority, do not choose her for a wife.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Migu April 16, 2012 at 11:35

The first link you dropped lead to some speculative (invented) reversionist anti-biblical drivel fronted by an anti-gunner.

Tar babies are best disnengaged from. The best way to combat them is to construct one of your own, and let it be.

To everyone out there. You must read the entire bible for yourself, for if you do not, you trust another man’s interpretation, and that means you worship mammon, or to put it int he vernacular you worship yourself.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Aaron April 16, 2012 at 12:20

Whining my way out the door. Don’t worry about the door…it’s already closed. You got rid of me for good.

Hooray to my only post that will be liked!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 13:27

I apologize to all the atheists out there for my last few posts

Can’t speak for anyone else, but there’s no need for this. As a godless heathen, I think it’s great that the Christian bros have some resources to use in such trying times.

There needs to be more of these sorts of resources, not less. I don’t agree with lots of sites in the manosphere in regards to peripheral issues, but I support all those who take a stand for men. Christian, Jew, Muslim, Agnostic, etc. If we let ourselves get divided over trivialities, then our enemies win before the fight begins. Onward, Christian soldiers….

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Migu April 16, 2012 at 13:43

Whining my way out the door.

That’s right. Take your ball and go home. That fixes everything.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Migu April 16, 2012 at 13:55

Boxer,

Pick something and stick to it. Seriously, who cares if you don’t fit with all, or try and include all. If you aren’t christian and vehemontly disagree with them, state it as so, and f**k anyone else who undermines you. Just don’t fall to pride and sycophantry as a means to an end.

Concede when you know it is right to concede, and you are smart enough to know when it is right. You don’t need popularity points here, you only need hold to your convictions, You don’t do that. You are eloquent, but you never make a decision. Understand?

F**k it dude, you know when somebody trumped you. Admit it and move forward,.

Go for it, you will be amazed at the forces that coalesce around you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Anonymous April 16, 2012 at 14:41

“Look what you have done with the Spearhead and how men are drawn to it. A masculan place for men to speak the truth to one another without reguard to what some cunt thinks. ”

Example A as to why the MRM fails to appeal to the majority of men, particularly the Christian faction.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
greyghost April 16, 2012 at 15:02

Keyster
” It’s gonna be a woman or women that brings down feminism.
And when she appears, we should have her back.
Men simply can’t and won’t do it.”
What’s your plan? What do you tell a man here freshly traumatised with the red pill. Why would any woman bring down femminism?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
wobbegong April 16, 2012 at 16:16

Keyster
‘How many times must this be said?
Men NEVER have and NEVER will organize against women.
The only logical route to Men’s Rights breaking into the mainstream and staying there is through women, probably conservative women.’

If we were fully organised the movement would be co opted by pyschopaths and brought down quickly or it would devolve into hatred like feminism has. Better to remain loose and leaderless, keep informed and spread the word. Stay single, don’t have kids, do the bare minimum for society without being a leech. Enjoy yourself.

Take Care

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
freebird April 16, 2012 at 16:42

Thanks for the support boxer,I don’t listen to those who say you’re all bad.
Big smile.

More on topic, it’s a great idea to have men’s rights in the church, it’s all about the truth as written,and that’s not a bad thing at all.

Big tent and all, men are invited.
Or at least, and I’ve considered it, is to send some MRA materiel to these pastors.Let them know exactly why the membership is fading to nothing.

Those Dalrock posts on Christian wives cheating is pure gold.They cannot be refuted by any serious theologian.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Attila April 16, 2012 at 17:41

The hardest-core people I personally know who don’t drink The Powers That Be-Koolaid are Spanish Roman Catholics. Russian Orthodox, Turkish Sunni/Iranian Shi’a Muslims. Something in their religion or culture seems to have given them immunity from the Media Mind-Meme Factory. I’ve also met some atheists, pagans and skeptics who seem pretty immune- but unfortunately – they seem to buy into a lot of the cultural strategies of the “progressives”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Eric April 16, 2012 at 20:03

“Ever heard of an army or militia that was organized to bring down Matriarchy?”

According the earlier views of non-feminist anthropologists like Bachofen, that is precisely what DID happen at the advent of the Neolithic period.

Also, what do you think all these earlier ancient mythologies and legends about the ‘sky gods’ defeating ‘children of the earth mother’ actually refer to?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Eric April 16, 2012 at 20:15

“Its going to be a woman or women that brings down feminism.”

Logically impossible. Feminism is anti-male and fanatically devoted to bringing down so-called ‘patriarchy’ (i.e., civilization). Women who go against the feminist mainstream are shamed just like men are and considered either traitors or fools by the Sisterhood.

The only possible way women can bring down feminism is through the agency of men: marry foreign/traditional wives and breed it out of the system. It will never happen though ‘tradcon’ women alone. Look at a case like Dr. Laura Schlessinger. She’s a socon and hated by the feminists even though she fully advocates the idea of women being more socially powerful and more valuable than men. She thinks that men should be ‘gamed’ (i.e., manipulated, like a female Roissyite): but even her condescending attitude towards men is too much for radical feminism.

That’s the problem: even if socon women took over, their anti-male attitudes would still prevail. The radical feminists consider all men as dogs, who need to be leashed, caged, or euthenized; the socons think all men are dogs too, but dogs can be trained, made to work, and be loyally devoted to their mistresses. No difference whatsoever, as far as the welfare of men is concerned.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Glenn April 16, 2012 at 21:18

At times I wonder if men are aware of the profound impact we are having on society as a whole. Speaking for myself, I am not a victim. The only way they can walk all over you is if you lie down first.

Let’s be honest, the Marriage Strike is causing full-blown panic among women. Steady increases in the amount of foreign brides, and the lower probability of divorce that comes with them, is icing on the cake. As Fred Reed said, it may not be a good time to be a married man, but it is a great time to be a single man.

Over the last decade, we men have started forming a very real dictatorship of the proletariat…of sorts. It is much like the old joke; what if they held a war and nobody showed up? Over the last 40 years, the feminists have erected a system of enforced male servitude. But the fatal flaw of this system is men volunteering for slavery.

Does anyone here deny that there is a mass awakening amongst men in regards to avoiding marriage? Hardly. And do we know who we can thank for this turn of events? Why, ourselves, of course! We really should stop to smell the roses every once in a while, that is all I am trying to say.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 21:32

Dear Eric:

According the earlier views of non-feminist anthropologists like Bachofen, that is precisely what DID happen at the advent of the Neolithic period.

I don’t know enough about this to argue it pro or con, but Joseph Campbell wrote along similar lines in Occidental Mythology.

http://ipublica.net/joseph-campbell/reviews/occidental-mythology/index.htm

There is about no other holy book in the world, of any other religion, that abounds of such a flagrant contradiction between right and rape, or, to use a lighter pair of opposites, between pope and porn. And yet, that perversion was not born with man, but with patriarchal man, and patriarchy was not the first egg…

This is the only book I’ve read on the subject, so I’m glad you mentioned Bachofen.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Eric April 16, 2012 at 23:06

Boxer:
It’s interesting you mentioned Joseph Campbell. I haven’t read Campbell much, but I know he was a student of Jung; who was a student of Freud; who was a student of Bachofen.

Bachofen’s thesis was that stone-age cultures were matriarchial and civilization couldn’t become possible until men overthrew the matriarchy. According to him, that was the end of the Paleolithic Era and the beginning of the Neolithic; when men went from hunter-gatherers and tribalism to building cities, developing agriculture, domesticating animals, inventing the wheel, the sail, &c. Needless to say, most anthropologists don’t hold this theory any more (at least not publicly). However, it IS interesting that most feminist utopians do envision a future society not unlike the Paleolithic cultures that Bachofen depicted.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Eric April 16, 2012 at 23:20

Glenn:
Good points, all of them! I’ve noticed, compared to ten years ago or so is the number of men who are dating/marrying foreign-born women. I remember a holiday recently, in our city’s Chinatown District, looking at the married couples with their kids. I’m not exaggerating—at least 1/3 of those families had an American father. You never would have seen this a few years ago.

I’ve also noticed too the trend towards for foreign women is also appealling to younger and younger men. You’d be surprised how many teen and twenty-something guys I’ve met who’ve told me that they’ve dropped out of the US dating scene altogether and were planning trips abroad when they money or vacations.

It’s hard to figure a number for the impact of MGTOW, since they aren’t quite as observable. But I’m certain the number of men staying single by choice is climbing too.

“The fatal flaw is men volunteering for slavery”
LOL that’s another example of feminist illogic. They claim men are too aggressive to build a culture; and then they start a ‘gender war’ against whom they claim are natural warriors! Their Amazonian thirst to compete with and defeat men at all costs is going to be their own downfall.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Rob April 16, 2012 at 23:22

Boxer should finish his arguments before running off, only to start the same argument again tomorrow, as if he didn’t argue the same thing the day before.

Be a man, boxer.

Finish what you start.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Rob April 16, 2012 at 23:30

Is Trotsky a Marxist?

Yes

or

No

Why won’t you answer, Boxer?

You claim a decade of studying him, so you should friggin’ well know by now.

Answer the question.

Be a man.

Speak the Truth, for goodness sake!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
American April 17, 2012 at 04:43

One of The White Gender-feminist Establishments greatest feat was to convince Americans that minorities and white trailer trash are the dominant patriarchs, while they (the white gender-feminist establishment) are the oppressed matriarchy.
You see folks, the white gender-feminist establishment have re-defined matriarchy and patriarchy to better fit their “construction”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
American April 17, 2012 at 04:47

Rarelly does one see anyone from the matriarchal underclass complain about ???Patriarchy???.
Only the White Gender-feminist establishment (who are the patriarchy that come from an educated / orderly society) are the ones who “Break the patriarchies” of the underclass. This is simmilar to when the Nazi’s claimed they were the Oppressed by the jews.
The White Gender-feminist Establishment who break others patriarchies, should get their own Patriarchy broke!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Jay April 17, 2012 at 06:41

Christianity is now female-friendly? Liberal?

It’s “Brokeback Mountain” of the holy land – guys hanging out with alpha-male after leaving their wives and mothers only to return and (centuries later) telling them that they can’t make their own decisions about their uteri.

The irony is astounding. It’s almost funny.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5
Bskillet81 April 18, 2012 at 07:12

@TFH

Hence, small-government types are the most potent people against feminism. A Christian who happens to big big-government, will not be.

While the purpose of CMD-N is not primarily political, I can assure you I’m no “big-government” Christian. I personally believe the welfare state needs to be abolished or at a minimum very, very severely gutted, and the federal regulatory apparatus needs to be entirely removed and replaced with the Constitutional system where laws are actually enacted by Congress, not regulatory commissions.

@Glenn

By naming a group “Christian Men’s Defense Network”, you cordially invite every Maxist-feminist, vengeful homosexual, gender-Bolshevik, and garden variety troll to flood in and trow every possible monkey wrench possible.

I say, “Bring it on!” While Burke said the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing, it is similarly true that the best means for the defeat of evil is exposing it to the light of day. If they want an open argument, I’m happy to oblige them.

@Spearhead

Thanks for the blurb!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
woggy April 19, 2012 at 16:03

@Jay
” telling them that they can’t make their own decisions about their uteri.”
What are you planning to do with your uterus, huh Jay?

It’s not as if men are free to do with their reproductive organs as they please either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Hosehead April 29, 2012 at 04:06

Christianity is so fragmented that, speaking generically about ‘Christianity’ is like speaking about everything and hence about nothing. There is very little in common between, on the one extreme the Russian Orthodox Christians and, on the other the Christian Zionists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous April 29, 2012 at 10:38

@keyster

Thanks for “exchanging information” here.
You’ve been a big help.

….. AND get off my lawn! lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Poester99 April 29, 2012 at 10:40

@keyster

Thanks for “exchanging information” here.
You’ve been a big help.

…. AND get off my lawn!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: