A group of feminists protesting people they disagree with

Thoughts about my conversations with two Christian feminists

I was reading some work by a Christian feminist this week. She was arguing that if only men were to help out their wives with housework, then marriages would be more stable. So often, society works very hard to give women what they say will make them happy. Then when women get what they asked for, it doesn’t make them happy. Is equal housework once of these cases?

Consider this New York Daily story about a Norwegian study that affirms traditional roles within the marriage.

Excerpt:

Couples who share housework duties run a higher risk of divorce than couples where the woman does most of the chores, a Norwegian study sure to get tongues wagging has shown.

The divorce rate among couples who shared housework equally was around 50 per cent higher than among those where the woman did most of the work.

“The more a man does in the home, the higher the divorce rate,” Thomas Hansen, co-author of the study entitled Equality in the Home, said.

So here is a case where women say what they think they want. Then they get it. And then they don’t like the result.

Emotional intimacy

Another point made by the Christian feminist was that women only initiate 80% of divorces because men are terrible at emotional intimacy. The Christian feminist says that we just need to have churches teach men how to be more emotionally available. Men need to take the initiative to make marriages work for women.

Here’s conservative Andrew Klavan explaining that many women today are attracted to emotionally unavailable men, and that men adapt to this in order to get the girl:

I wanted to take a serious look at this situation and get at the reasons men such as Weiner behave in this grotesque way.

I blame women.  No, really.  Women — by which I mean each and every single member of the female gender — you know who you are — need look no further than themselves to explain why [Anthony] Weiner-types behave toward them in this fashion.   We men are always hearing complaints from women about how badly we treat them, what pigs we are, how pushy and abrasive…  on and on.  But what these same women conveniently fail to mention is that this stuff really works on them!

There are tons of studies about how women are attracted to the so-called “dark triad” character traits. Many women are attracted to emotionally unavailable men before marriage, but after marriage, most of them realize how terrible that is for marriage. They asked for something, got it, but then they don’t like what they got. Although they’ve vowed to love this (terrible) man through thick and thin, they just can’t do it, and they use no-fault divorce to eject him from the home.

So, I guess I would just ask this Christian feminist: do women have any responsibility to test men for intimacy ability before marriage? Do they have any responsibility to suppress their feelings in the moment, and choose what will work in the long run?

It seems to me that women need to take the initiative to evaluate men for the most important things that they want out of marriage. I agree that women want emotional intimacy. So they need to choose men who provide them with that. Men do not change. The man you marry will not change for you after you marry him. It seems to me that instead of telling bad men that they need to turn good after marriage, we should tell women to choose better.

Many women today spend an awful lot of their time looking into mystical nonsense: astrology, the law of attraction, manifesting, Disney princesses, happily ever after, Hallmark movies, etc. They have a deep intuition that the whole universe is set up for their benefit, and that the path they must choose in order to be happy is shown to them through their feelings. Maybe we should work on fixing that, rather than destroy the society (and children’s lives) with rampant no-fault divorce. Maybe the problem is that women need to be taught that when it comes to marriage, they need to treat it like a job interview. They need to evaluate men, and choose one with demonstrated ability for the job’s actual requirements.

Elsewhere in the Christian feminists writings, she says that men have 100% of the responsibility for marriage success. But none of the authority to lead. I just want men to understand that this is often how women see men. Women want to choose men based on how a man makes her feel. She will make a snap judgment about whether he is “The One”. She feels good when she makes decisions based on intuitions and first impressions. She has enormous confidence in the judgment of her intuitions. This is the man that The Universe has chosen to make her happy, and She doesn’t make mistakes. And if that man doesn’t make her happy, then she can divorce him. And all the Christian feminists will celebrate her decision. Does that sound like a good deal for men? In particular, does entering a situation like that free you up to focus on serving God? (2 Tim 2:4) Sounds to me like you would be skating on thin ice for the rest of your life. And for what? To please God? No, to make her happy.

Last month, another Christian feminist told me that “masculinity is when men use their physical strength to benefit women as protector and provider”. Again, this view that it is men’s job to make women happy is everywhere, and if men fail to make women happy, then that’s what divorce is for. There is no idea among Christian feminists that men are supposed to serve God first, and women are supposed to help them to serve God. One divorced Christian woman once told me “marriage is for women”. So just understand what you’re getting into, if you decide to get married.

I personally think that Christian men ought to focus on serving God, and stay far away from marriage. Even the most conservative Christian women have this view that men are there to serve them, and meet their needs, and make them happy. They call it “servant leadership”: men get all the responsibility with none of the authority. It’s a reversal of male headship, where the new God is the woman’s feelings. That sort of arrangement certainly isn’t going to allow a man to focus on serving God.

10 thoughts on “Thoughts about my conversations with two Christian feminists”

  1. As usual, the feminists are incoherent. They insist that women can do everything men can but that all their problems are caused by men and they need men to change to fix things for them.

    As the red pill crowd figured out over the last 20 years, watch what women do, not what they say. They say they want more “emotionally available” men, but when they get them they lose respect. And the more beta the guys get in an effort to give women what they ask for, the less the women respect them. It is like drinking saltwater.

    Marriage in the U.S. is already a peculiar and dicey thing, as it is the only contract where the party violating the agreement can severely punish the one upholding the agreement. It is even more dangerous if men don’t vet women before marriage to see if they are willing to submit to the man’s leadership. Sure, the women can change for the worse later on, but if they already balk at the biblical marriage model beforehand, guys should run away. In other words, find out right away if a woman is a feminist. If she is, move on quickly. It won’t end well.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. So let me get this straight: after half a century of bashing men for anything and everything, now that we have ended up in a total Freak Show, where unborn children are mass murdered (by women) and children are now being abused through transgendering (by women), and taken to Drag Queen Story Hour (by women), where they are groomed for pedophilia by men dressed as WOMEN, it is somehow the fault of men NOT women who have behaved like Jezebels, and worse, for half a century – did I get that right???

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I think the point these Christian feminists were trying to make was that men exist only to please them. We are their pet cats and their ATMs and their handbags.

      I just thought it would be good to remind men that they are made to serve God and that is their number one job. Women can only come along if they want to help with that number one job.

      Liked by 2 people

    1. I don’t know if you are in the dating world at all, but if you are or are hearing anything about it, women have become EXTREMELY passive. They don’t ask questions, or prepare themselves for marriage roles. They are not reading any non-fiction. So what ends up happening on dates is that the man carries the conversation and asks questions to evaluate her for marriage, and she just sits there passively and decides how she feels about him.

      This view that men exist only as ATMs and clowns for women is everywhere. And God help you if you fail to keep her entertained.

      Like I said, this week has been an eye-opening week for me. I found out that a conservative evangelical woman who I used to hold in high regard has this view that men have NO AUTHORITY in the marriage to confront evil or lead the home. She completely denies male headship. So what are men for? Men exist only to provide women with emotional intimacy, to provide financially for them, and to keep them happy. This woman LITERALLY said that all of the 80% of divorces initiated by women are caused by men’s failure to entertain their wives properly.

      So, look. If that is the view that women have of men and marriage, “It’s a man’s job to make me happy”, then I think that’s a clear message to men about what they can expect. Women see no-fault divorce for “unhappiness” as completely legitimate. And I mean the conservative evangelical social conservative women. That’s how strongly they have this view that marriage is all about them and their happiness. This is not the place for men to make a difference for God. You will be her slave. And her feelings will become your new Bible. Her happiness will be your new God. Or else she will no-fault divorce you and clean out your bank accounts and cut you off from your kids.

      Like

      1. She’s a product of the feel good, watered-down, lukewarm, apathetic, non judgmental entertainment centers called “churches.”

        Her “pastor” has likely never asked anything difficult of his congregation, nor preached on the cost of discipleship, denying oneself, picking up a cross, and following Christ especially when it’s uncomfortable.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. I actually saw a a description of God’s order to the family and how it was inverted that is quite good. God created the order of.

    God

    Husband

    Wife

    Children

    But in many cases it has become

    A claim of men and women being equal and the kids telling parents what to do

    So we functionally end up with ones that look more like

    Children

    Wife

    Husband

    And well God gets left to the side as he doesn’t allow himself to be subservient. But when you break the order and it becomes chaotic

    In some cases you can move the children on their line but it often looks like that in many families because people reject proper spiritual leadership. They reject that a proper husband can lead a family towards God

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes! Look at my post today where children are running the home. A threat to commit suicide from a child is now more important than a man collecting evidence and making decisions from evidence.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s