The Denigration of Men (Part 1)

(this will be a hard post for some to read as it is almost pure red-pill. I pray those who read it will take constraint and think on what is written.)

In the course of writing “The Deification of Wives”, I mentioned that the general trend in society at large for a very long time is to exalt women and denigrate men. The tendency in Churchianity is to always find fault with the men and leave women alone, to the point of treating them as inherently good or sinless. As a result of this recognition, long-time readers will notice that I don’t spend post after post railing into men and affirming women in their pride as people in Churchianity such as Boundless and other places does.

This post will examine the cause and effects of these things. In the end result, the only conclusion that you can take is:

Men are at fault for these things, too.

Commandment I: Thou shalt have no other gods before me. (Exodus 20:3)

Commandment II: Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:… (Exodus 20:4-5a)

As I wrote here, its not so much using women to bring down men, it’s men consenting to it by allowing their women to rebel against God. Of course, it’s the Devil perverting certain God-given features of men for his own use, but the root sin problem that needs addressed is on the men to repent of (worship and idolatry of women, along with vagina addiction). As Vilar writes (1):

The majority of men prefer to subjugate themselves to an exclusive deity, woman (they call this subjection love). This sort of personal deity has excellent qualifications for the satisfaction of religious needs. Woman is ever-present, and, given her own lack of religious need [aka the personal Jesus], she is divine. As she continually makes demands, man never feels forsaken. She frees him from collective gods, for whose favors he would have to compete with others. He trusts in her because she resembles his mother, the deity of his childhood. His empty life is given an artificial meaning, for his every action is dedicated to her comfort and, later, to the comfort of her children. As a goddess, she can not only punish (by taking away his sense of belonging) but she can reward as well (through the bestowal of sexual pleasure).

For those that are unfamiliar, Vilar is describing “the blue pill” as spoken of in the manosphere (and the exact dynamic of Marriage 2.0 fully followed). The “the red pill” is the acceptance of this truth and awareness of all the attendant machinations of forcing this to happen, and repenting of it. The causes and sources of this problem of idolatry will be detailed.

1. Men are brought up from a very young age to see women as creatures to be unconditionally served.

The second commandment mentions the idea of service. Men and women both are created by God with the tendency and desire to serve and worship Him. But men are brought up from a very young age to be pleasing to women, and this tendency is used to point men towards women instead of towards God with this desire.

Their mothers begin this in infancy as a function of convenience in service to the Feminine Imperative, and then it leads out from there into greater society. Young boys are presented with a creature that is different from them, who desires certain things from them and dispenses praise and punishment along with life provision. His mother becomes a god, in essence, and he ultimately requires separation from her to become fully actualized before God as a man.

Sunshinemary’s posts (#1, #2) about the AHG girls and the Boy Scout troop are a great example of such things that young men encounter. Then it goes into dating and into adulthood as the example I lifted out of The Manipulated Man on that post (2) illustrates. The training is done throughout and into adulthood to set men into an orientation of worship and servanthood to women and to train women to have this expectation of men. Ultimately, masculinity (or what it is to be a “good man”) becomes defined in terms of his usefulness to the women around him (3), being a slave to women is considered virtuous (4), and men go on to find happiness in their own subjugation (5).

2. Men lift up women beyond their true qualities by assigning qualities to them that aren’t true or neglecting to assign qualities to them that are true.

When young boys begin to grow self-aware enough to realize what they are doing, and that it is defined as “good” by their parents and greater society, then another behavior kicks in. To do these things, and maintain their self-respect, women must be defined in ever-glowing terms that aren’t reflective of their true nature in order to justify their subjection. (6) This illustrates that what we serve is a great reflection of what we worship.

This can easily be seen in all the descriptive terms used to describe women, such as a woman having “women’s intuition”, being “beautiful”, or being “the fair sex” (7), or even being “innately good”. It can also be seen in silence in not mentioning bad qualities of women, or even forbearing sin that occurs in them. It can also be seen in all the objectively dull things that men have done in literature and in music that are nothing but praises and odes given to the feminine god in the flesh that strikes their current desire of worship. This even crosses into current Churchianity with the worship of the personal Jesus as boyfriend, which is sung about in romantic and erotic terms.

(This got too long, so I split it up. Part 2 will complete the text tomorrow.)

(As I did here, I recommend The Manipulated Man if you are looking for a decent treatment of red-pill manosphere issues. While the book is secular in many ways and you probably won’t agree with the author entirely, she offers much to think about in the way of gender issues.)

(1) The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar page 50. (2) ibid page 15-17. (3) ibid page 20.
(4) ibid page 44. (5) ibid page 47. (6) ibid page 35. (7) ibid page 36.