Research on how Life Scripts are the new normal

We’ve been talking about lift scripts for years now, but there’s now actual research about how American parents are pushing it and the ordering of it in young adults.

American parents are prioritizing university and having a job over getting married and having children.

All images from IFStudies links provided.

This is fairly obvious if you ask men and women about what they were taught when they were growing up. Almost everything is about doing good at school so you can get a good job and do stuff. Not much is taught about relationships and marriage or even important things in them

Putting Things in Order: Relationship Sequencing Preferences of American Women

All images from IFStudies links provided.

In the preferred sequencing order, having sex and cohabitation are before marriage whereas they were traditionally and for Christians after. Can’t tell much about the house as that’s probably some part of the American Dream.

Now figure 2 is very interesting.

• 30% of women are whoring it up – sex as the first relationship stage
• The majority of women ~60-70% want cohabitation and 60% want sex before marriage. Clearly shows there are not much Christian values anymore.
• 60% saying they want family before sex doesn’t show much except that a slight majority of women still have some extremely basic standards

images from IFStudies links provided.

I assume this chart mainly shows women who call themselves Christians. The only thing of note in this chart is the Church attendance. Weekly attenders are the most important and like the other studies I’ve talked about there are more likely to be women that are virgins in Church.

Of course, ideal is not always what happens, so you can assume that many women have delusions of ideals but rarely do they happen.

images from IFStudies links provided.

Finally, all fertile women have bought the cultural life scripts. The cultural penetration into the Church is pretty much standard. Pun intended.

The only good thing is that looking for a true Christian has never been easier. You just bring up the hard topics in the Bible and see if they agree and actually do what it says in their daily life. It’s just that there are few of them.

The unhaaaapy divorces affect kids the worst

Aaron Renn covered this article in his newsletter, but I wanted to look at it more in-depth. This is actually a very old study (2000) and article (2001).

After examining 300 marriages that ended in divorce, the researchers found that there were two types headed for divorce: high-and low-conflict. The prevailing wisdom is that most marriages that end in divorce are fraught with conflict, but the sociologists found the reverse: 60% of low-conflict marriages ended in divorce, compared with 40% of high-conflict ones. “I didn’t trust these findings, because they were counterintuitive,” Amato said.

The researchers checked the statistics against an independent sample of 5,000 married individuals who, before divorcing, were also interviewed every few years by researchers from the University of Wisconsin at Madison. The results were the same: 60% of low-conflict marriages ended as compared with 40% of high-conflict unions.

This confirms what we know. Most divorces out there are not for cheating, partner violence, or any other “exceptions” that feminists and churchians hang their hats on.

I suspect these stats have gotten worse this study was published in 2000 and was recording married couples during the 1990s for 3-5+ years. It’s likely that most of the marriages divorcing for high conflict are likely under 40% and perhaps as low as 20-30%. The rest then would be low conflict divorces which would make up 70-80%+.

The reasons for this are obvious. Feminism, sex and the city, and all manner of divorce if you’re unhaaaaapy has become more normalized. Wives will jettison a “good man” over pretty much nothing. Include the college educated divorce rates that are now oft-quoted of 90% of divorces and you have likely much higher increased stats.

“Being stuck in a household where there is a lot of discord puts children at greater risk for depression, problems in their own marriage when they do marry, problems in friendships and a tendency not to go on to college,” Amato said. “Divorce benefits these children because it removes them from an aversive, conflict-ridden, hostile home.” Perhaps most important, Amato said, divorce excises a negative role model of love from the home.

“If you ask what is wrong with the marriage, these couples just go on and on,” Amato said. “These are what you would call terrible marriages–marriages that fit our preconception of divorcing couples.”

But children whose divorced parents had low-conflict marriages (that is, they rarely fought and reported being pretty happy during the marriage, then continued to socialize and said they still loved each other after divorce), fared worse in adult romantic relationships. “When kids grow up in families with parents who had these ‘good enough’ marriages that end in divorce, they do badly,” Amato said. “They are more likely to see their own marriages end in divorce and have problems in general forming intimate relationships.”

Children in low-conflict households grew up thinking everything was OK, Amato said, and then the marriage suddenly ended. To them, the divorce was inexplicable. “These children,” Amato said, “have trouble making a commitment, question how much one can trust love and commitment, and in marriage, they have a lower threshold for problems which trigger thoughts of divorce.”

Wallerstein found similar effects upon children whose parents’ divorces were not precipitated by conflict. “What I found from the children was that as adults they suffer from the fear of the second shoe dropping,” Wallerstein said. “I associate this with the fact that their parents’ divorce came out of the blue. They were horrified when their parents met them at the door after school and said, ‘We have decided to divorce.’ Some came home to find a parent gone.”

The moral of the story is that parents who don’t have a combative relationship but are bored might want to ditch divorce plans to work much harder at their relationship. Or they may want to pause before filing those divorce papers in hopes that their marital happiness quotient will spike.

On the surface this does not make sense, but when you think about it does. Marriages that seem good and happy and then a parent just leaves will really shock a kid making them basically trend in a very negative direction on the Big 5 personality traits that increase risk of divorce:

• Less trusting/agreeable
• Less openness
• More neuroticism

It also teaches them by poor role model instead of a removing a poor role model. The high-conflict you’re removing the poor role models, but in the low-conflict or frivolous divorce you’re teaching them that a parent can leave at any time for even dumb reasons. This is probably why both men and women start to be either paranoid or fear avoidant. They’ll leave before the other person can leave them, or they will be walking on egg shells all the time because they fear someone will leave them.

Frivorces affect kids the worst.

Linda Waite, a University of Chicago researcher, discovered that 80% of people who rated their marriages “unhappy” in a national survey, when asked five years later, ranked it “happier.” Of the couples who rated their marriages “miserable” (2%), about 77% rated them as “very happy” five years later.

And of course if you work through it then most are happier later. Surprise surprise.

Authority in marriage is a must

Now that the incendiary title is out of the way, I’ve been thinking about this for the past few weeks.

Essentially, how the world works is that everyone is under some sort of authority.

• When you’re a child you’re under the authority of your parents, teachers, and whoever else there is teaching or discipling you.
• When you’re older as a student in university or a job you’re under the authority of the school, teachers, or your boss
• Whatever opinions you hold such as if you’re a democrat, republican, liberal or conservative, you’re under the authority of whatever indoctrination they are trying to pile into your head.
• Jesus claimed to be under the authority of God, and the Bible makes clear that the Church is under the authority of Christ just as the disciples followed Christ.
• So the main thing under fire, especially in the Church, is the authority of husbands over wives.

Authority in all of these examples in essence is influence. It’s not being able to force someone to do what you want, although you could probably do that. However, they would likely do it unwillingly.

Therefore, it’s stupid for any man to enter a marriage where a woman is not under his authority and willingly following his lead. It’s been said before that submission is not submission until there’s disagreement. Many a wife will willingly follow her husband until she disagrees with something he said or does. It’s not submission if you agree but when you disagree.

We can see the example of this with God and Jesus and Jesus and his disciples. Jesus sweat blood but submitted to the father’s will in the garden. The disciples had many opinions about Jesus being the Messiah, but Jesus had to continually rebuke their notions of what they though the Messiah should be and to show them that His purpose was not a military kingdom but a spiritual kingdom that would reign forever.

The problem then is that if a wife is not under a husband’s authority that means she’s under someone else’s or something’s authority.

• Whether that is at the whims of the cultural tides
• Her friends or family whispering in her ear
• Her boss at work dictating her schedule
• Even her own feelings or prioritization of children over her husband
• Materialism or keeping up with the Jones’

As I’ve said before, this is the big temptation for wives as deti referenced in the recent post:

It’s ironic. A large delusion that has come over the eyes of the Church. Women have no trouble submitting to their boss at work or their teacher in school or other human authorities because it is normal. But God forbid they submit to the husband to whom they committed their life to, who loves them the most, and the one they vowed to be with before God.

You can see how this can get messy real fast. If you don’t have authority or influence over her then someone or something does. She does what she wants, and what she wants is going to be deleterious in the majority of circumstances to the family unit.

Husbands can say they want an egalitarian marriage — and that is acceptable if a husband is willing to choose that by God’s authority vested in him as the leader in marriage — but this scenario only works in the specific instance of a woman submitting herself to God, being trustworthy, and having near if not full maturity in her own moral agency. This combination of 3 aspects is unlikely for many women to have in today’s culture and even the Church.

Therefore, any man that wants to be married should take the proper precautions and leadership reigns of any relationship he is in and ensure that such a prospective wife is willing to follow his lead even if she disagrees before marriage. There are many ways to test this that have been covered on this blog before, but it is imperative that he does this.

There are too many things out there that vie and fight for the authority and influence over a wife that can erode it slowly or quickly from a husband. Many many examples in the Church and even the sphere.

Don’t make the mistake of going into a marriage without knowing your wife will submit to you especially when she disagrees with your words or actions.

Hypergamy galore: college vs HS or less education preferences

Ironically, IFStudies article on The College Dating Divide shows hypergamy in action.

For single women, education appears to have a profound influence on dating expectations, according to a new report from the Survey Center on American Life. Close to half (45%) of college-educated single women say their relationship status is largely due to an inability to find someone who meets their expectations. For single women without a college degree, only 28% report that this is a major reason for their lack of a partner or spouse. Of six different reasons single women give for why they are not dating or in a relationship, the inability to find partners who measure up was cited most often.

Women appear much more discerning than men when it comes to dating. However, there is a massive educational divide among women in their dating priorities. College-educated women are far more likely than those without a degree to say a partner’s political views, personal habits, and current financial situation are important considerations.

Of 10 different attributes measured in the figure below, a majority of college-educated women would consider nine of them to be liabilities in a potential partner. For the majority of women without a degree, only three—being unemployed, living with parents, and smoking—are dating liabilities.

We already knew this, but now we have a quantified chart!

Photo from IFStudies article.

There’s a few things of note on this chart.

• Women are more picky in a good way on health aspects – smoking
• Women are more picky with height, lives with parents, and monetarily/job wise when they make more. Something we already knew to be true for women – 6 foot, needs to be independent, and “his money is our money, and my money is my money”
• Most of the rest are due to leftist indoctrination – Trump, vaccines, religious, did not go to college, has children, is republican.
• Then the last one is similar leftest indoctrination but reversed which is interesting – More college educated want to date a feminist, but much HS or less people do.

Of course, even though the college educated women SAY this, that’s not what they actually want. Their hypergamy wants the masculine man, and they don’t actually like the liberal male feminist as has been proven time and time again.

The biggest gap is in did not go to college. This is profound because the gap in college education is now like 60:40 women:men in university. This means about 33% of those women (40:40 pair off, 20 left over out of 60 total women 20/60 = 33% of all women) are left over and if 50% of them are hypergamous enough to not want to date a man if he did not go to college, that means about 16-17% of women that are college educated women may not marry.

This is not including the fact that marriage being eliminated and cohabitation is mostly on the rise in lower incomes and non-college educated, so that’s why the estimates are closer to something like 30%+ of women may not marry. Many of them likely due to being priced out hypergamously because they won’t get a reign on it.

Woman don’t understand the male experience or what men want

A commenter called “anti-deti” tries to push back against deti’s comments on the terrible state of men and marriage by asserting how his marriage was different. Yet, it is precisely the comment that gives away that this “man” is almost certainly a woman. Let’s take a look.

Deti initial comment:

We all know men marry for sexual attraction and love. A man will not, absolutely will not, marry a woman he does not feel love for.

A man will not, absolutely will not, marry a woman he does not want to bang.

Women know this.

This is why men have to go into a marriage knowing their own value and what they bring. He has to be prepared to walk away at all times. He has to be prepared to say, in effect, “I get what I want and need from this relationship, or I’m leaving. You do what you promised, you give me what you promised, or I’m leaving.”

More to the point, though, he has to know in his own mind and heart that he’ll be OK and that he can eventually replace her if he wants to. Most men are so beaten down that they don’t know this. They don’t even know that “no involvement with women” is an option. They don’t even understand “no woman is better than a bad woman”.

It never occurs to them, “Hey, you know, I don’t have to take this sh!t. I don’t have to put up with your BS, your temper tantrums, your sexual deprivation, and your all around bad treatment. Being alone would be better than this.” And then go do it. It doesn’t occur to them because of the blue pill / churchian complex keeping these men in mental and emotional prisons.

One of the things a man needs to do to choose a wife wisely is to know his own value, and withdraw all of it promptly from any woman who can’t or won’t give him what he wants and needs.

Although I slightly disagree with some of the points on how a man must deal with things, it’s for the most part an accurate on the male experience.

Anti-deti response: I disagree. I neither loved my wife nor was sexually enamored with her when I got married. I married her because she was a smart, hardworking girl that I thought would make for a good partner in life. She loves me, I’m more or less ambivalent. She cooks, cleans, works, and f_cks, while staying out of my way for the most part.

As we will analyze, a woman 100% of the time wrote this comment.

I disagree. I neither loved my wife nor was sexually enamored with her when I got married.

A. Very few men, aside from maybe players, won’t marry a woman for love.

B. Women don’t know how strong a man’s sex drive is. Virtually 100% of men will marry a woman because he is sexually enamored with her.

The first sentence alone almost assures that a woman wrote it because this woman does not understand the male experience.

I married her because she was a smart, hardworking girl that I thought would make for a good partner in life.

C. Notice the attributes that this woman describes that she likes in a “woman.” It’s the exact attributes that women like in a man.

They want a smart, hardworking man that is a good partner in life.

Very common saying that women say they want. Pure projection.

She loves me, I’m more or less ambivalent.

D. The woman again projects her own feelings on this imaginary wife. This is why the Bible says men are to love their wives and wives are to respect their husbands. Different needs.

Men want respect from women not love. If a wife respected and adored her husband, he would love her and not be ambivalent about it.

She cooks, cleans, works, and f_cks, while staying out of my way for the most part.

E. Finally, the woman attempts again to think like what a man would want, but stumbles in the middle. Yes, men generally want good cooking, cleaning, and sex.

However, most men absolutely do not care if a woman works and if she’s sweet he definitely doesn’t want her to stay out the way but be around him a lot.

TL;DR: The troll accounts always give themselves away because they don’t understand the male experience and what men are looking for in the opposite sex. The reason for that is because the literally don’t care, otherwise they would put some effort into learning about what men want and actually try to do it. Women like this are few and far between today.

God’s way is still the best – Myth of sexual experience, cohabitation, and pornography

All images from the links.

Myth of sexual experience

Higher relationship satisfaction, relationship satisfaction, and sexual satisfaction. This doesn’t even take into account the divorce rates for increasing partner counts for women either which are drastically higher as well.

Also note that sexual experience seems to negatively affect women more than men, although just slightly in these analyses. Would be interesting to see if that’s statistically significant too.

Cohabitation doesn’t help your odds of marital success

The decreased seriousness of cohabitation as a “trial” means that people will break up at more frequent rates if they experiencing things they don’t like. This is compared to marriage where it’s a commitment / covenant first which people are more willing to take seriously and work things out.

How prevalent is pornography

This chart is interesting because the 30-49 range likely has a lot of men that are being frozen out of sex in their “marriages,” or men that have failed to launch and think that porn is the only experience they are going to get. That would be my speculation for why that rate is the highest.

This chart also makes sense from a Christian perspective.

Christian men who are mission from God have a sense of purpose. Hopefully, they are working to be excellent in all they do physically, emotionally, mentally, spiritually, and also from a discipleship perspective. Purpose and working toward that purpose changes a man.

Porn is only a symptom of the problem in that respect. If a man isn’t attractive enough to get dates he’s more likely to be lonely or isolated, unhappy about how they look, and/or self conscious or insecure and satisfy sexual urges on porn.

The alternative is porn or the gym. One is the long term answer that can raise attractiveness to date and marry. Porn is the symptom of a short term medication much like alcohol to mend the wound.

No, godliness is still not attractive

Jack covered some DP Monahan’s Godliness is not attractive? post in his Comparing Carnal Chads and Churchian Cucks, but I want to dig deeper on the main misconceptions.

Christian Red Pill bloggers like Aaron Renn insist (against the claims of Evangelical preachers) that godliness does not attract women. Women, instead, are attracted to power, what we call “alpha” attributes, i.e. size, strength, status, confidence, money. In fact, godliness is unattractive. Godliness is “beta”. Women will settle for “betas” because they are good providers, but will secretly despise them. Women pick alphas for sex and then settle for betas to take care of the alpha’s bastard kids. Therefore men have to be taught not only how to be godly but also how to be alphas.

I understand what they are getting at – we do observe these kinds of behavior and the examples he gives of what passes for Evangelical marriage advise are ridiculous – but I think the model for understanding the behavior is flawed. From a theological perspective it can’t be the way God intended human nature to work; since status is purely relative, by definition not all men can be high-status. There will always be inequality of alpha traits. But since God wills that the great majority of men marry, it cannot be the case that God makes a condition for being married the display of these traits.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding that he would understand if he had read my post on A Christian understanding of attraction and the role it plays in marriage Part 3.

Essentially, attractive traits — PSALMs (power, status, athleticism, looks, money) and masculinity — or however you classify them are a subset of the main aspect which God created to be attractive to women: Dominion. This is directly related to the commands God gives to man from Genesis 1 and 2. Analysis of these verses are handled in the attraction link above.

To use the example of status, Monahan is correct that not every man can have high status. However, status is only one indicator of relative dominion within a group or from group to other group. Not every man needs to have mainly status either. He can have relative dominion over other areas of PSALMs + masculinity.

For example, not every girl is interested in the high school or college quarterback or sports athletes (though most of them are). Even within “nerdy” video game or D&D or anime collectives, there are women who are groupies toward men there. These latter groups have virtually no status within a school or university hierarchy, but they have their own sub-group hierarchies and the people within those groups have their own non-status attractive traits.

While display of many of these traits are not needed, there usually is at least one or couple of aspects of dominion that men need to display to be in relationship or married. Pretty women sometimes go for the ugly rich man or fat celebrity. However, let us also not forget the quintessential example of the 40 year old obese man-child living in his parents’ basement playing video games. When you display virtually no dominion subtraits — sexual attraction — like the video-game-basement-obese-man, no woman is going to want to marry you.

A man who is generally excellent in all he does (e.g. “do everything you do for the glory of God”) naturally develops PSALMs and masculinity by being excellent at his job, learning to be discipled and discipling others (good socially, learning how to follow and lead, etc.), cultivates physical fitness, etc.

The alpha / beta dichotomy is basically a Nietzschean one in which the ubermench takes what he wants while the ordinary people huddle in fear of social scorn. It is not a vision of an orderly society but of a fundamentally disordered one. It is also based on evolutionary psychology which tends towards just-so stories: an evolutionary explanation of how the alpha got his game is analogous to a wives’ tale of how the cat got his tale, tending towards tautology and generally free of evidence. (To be fair, Renn himself makes these same criticisms.)

Most Christian Red Pill types are Protestants which means they labor under a distorted view of human nature: in classical Protestant doctrine human nature is totally corrupted by original sin, so a Protestant can imagine a world in which the natural order is a Nietzschean one while the divine law is something completely different.

Catholics don’t always have a consistent view of nature and grace, but in general they do not see human nature as totally corrupted by sin, but as weakened while retaining its inherent goodness. Catholics don’t typically speak of godliness but of virtue, which is the development of the good capacities inherent in human nature. There is no set of good Christian “beta” virtues on one side, and human “alpha” virtues on the other. Rather both are sets of human virtues which work together, and which are perfected and elevated by the infusion of the supernatural virtues of faith, hope, and charity.

This too is another common misunderstanding, and to be fair, there is probably a large component of the ‘sphere which also misunderstands this.

Consider the “ideal man” so to speak for a Christian woman. This is the Brad Pitt / Chris Adams / Chris Hemworth type that ticks all of attractive dominion related traits of PSALM and masculinity, but also has all of the virtues as well. Christian, faithful, kind, good with kids, humble, etc.

In other words, these traits are not mutually exclusive to each other.

The reason why it’s a common misunderstanding is that many men have observed the “bad boys” getting the girls where they display the PSALM traits and then assume that women are only attracted to the combination of PSALM and masculinity with evil. Likewise, they see the Church producing Christian nice guys who are not attractive but supposedly exuding all of the virtues. Hence, they believe that these things are mutually exclusive to each other. However, they are not.

As I have stated before, the reciprocal rule is another reason why this misunderstanding persists. If the populations you look at for understanding women are only promiscuous women then you are going to get the wrong impression that all women act like prosmiscuous women. The majority of women who desire relationships will also value the virtues that we have mentioned above.

Monahan’s unification falls a bit short which we’ll explore in the next part.

God does not expect all men to be powerful in the hierarchies of the world, but he does expect all men to be virtuous. He also expects men to exercise authority according to their state in life. For most men, that means exercising authority over their families and property. So the virtues of manhood should be those virtues ordered to the exercise of authority: prudence, courage and creativity in the face of opposition, obedience to higher authorities, integrity, accountability, and the ability to take counsel. (I am sure there are others, these are the ones that occur to me).

Virtue understood as the perfection of a good potential is attractive because there is nothing else a person can possibly be attracted to except for virtue. Problems arise when a person is attracted to lesser virtues instead of higher, or is so enamored of one virtue that they ignore vices in other areas, something that happens all the time. This is probably not a simple matter of nature but also of social conditions: our society encourages young people to start fornicating in the second half of their teens and marry ten to fifteen years later, which means we are habituating them to judge members of the opposite sex and themselves in terms of what makes for a good fornicator and not a good spouse, hurting their marriage prospects later in life.

I suppose someone like Renn would accuse me of imposing a theological framework on reality, when reality is completely different. Just like the Evangelical pastors I want virtue to be attractive because of my theoretical commitments. Fair enough.

Monahan is close here but makes a classic blunder confusing cause and effect.

Again, if the virtue itself is attractive, let me know when the Christian women are flocking to marry the virtuous Church janitor.

• Let me know when the gorgeous Christian women want to marry the church janitor
• Women are attracted to the pastor, worship leader, bible study leader and not the Church janitor, parking lot coordinator or door greeter redux

A pastor and janitor can be equally as virtuous. Heck, some janitors can be more virtuous as we see with tons of pastors and priests with massive sex or money scandals. Yet, women still want to marry the leaders and not the janitors.

No one who reads these two posts can tell me with a straight face that virtue itself is attractive. Virtue is good and definitely something that both Christian men and women want in a mate (again, they are not exclusive), but virtue is not attractive except in the context of dominion in the form of PSALMs + masculinity or other categorizations.

• Women are attracted to dominion and the relative sub-classification of that (PSALMs + masculinity) as that’s how God created them to be in Genesis 1 and 2.
• God wants us to be virtuous because He is good. Virtuous behavior over time leads to life and positive reinforcement cycles (e.g. Proverbs on wisdom and doing good). Not because virtue is attractive.

The main reason people can get confused is that:

• Virtuous actions can sometimes be attractive (e.g. running into a burning building to save someone, pastor giving a sermon, worship leader leading worship),
• But not all attraction is virtuous (e.g. bad boys using their attractiveness for promiscuity), and
• Not all virtuousness is attractive (e.g. virtuous janitor vs pastor).

As I stated before men that seek to be “excellent in all things” God has for them generally develop both attractive traits and virtues. But this does not mean that attractive traits cause virtue or virtue makes things attractive. They are two separate things because they were created differently by God.

Additionally, to hammer home the point on general leadership being attractive. Not every man can be a Bible study leader for the Church, but every man can be a Bible study leader for his girlfriend or wife. Not only does this fulfill God’s role for men in Ephesians 5 on helping sanctify his wife, but he is also leading which is attractive and being virtuous doing it.

What the Church and The Chosen should be teaching

The Chosen was peddling the Happy wife Happy life mantra and Jack did a layman dive on Headship = Authority after I brought up Wayne Grudem’s research on headship again. So what should the Church be teaching?

They should be teaching:

• Headship is authority, and submission to authority is good. Even if the husband is not a Christian. 1 Cor 11, Eph 5, 1 Pet 3, etc.
• Authority is not bad. Rather, God created authority as Good for those under it. 1 Peter 2, Romans 13, etc.
• Jesus shows us how to use authority to love and serve others. Matthew 20, Luke 22.

Matthew 20:25 Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Authority is not canceled or removed, but it is to be used responsibly as Jesus used it.

In other words,

• Men should be exhorted to lead their relationships and marriages and use their authority to love and serve others.
• Women should only follow men who demonstrate faithful use of authority to love and serve.
• Arguing for or against authority and submission is the type of foolish controversy that the Biblical authors wanted us to avoid. 2 Tim 2, Tit 3, etc.

Unfortunately, we got the complementarianism nonsense which is basically all but egalitarian in practice and muddies the waters. This gets blended with failed teachings such as agreement as godliness (two)  and intelligent submission (two, three).

Clear and accurate teachings from the Scripture are best — even if they are hard.

At least if they are hard serious Christians will rise to the occasion as opposed to being duped and deceived leading to failed marriages where both the husband and wife are confused as to what happened. They followed what they thought were “Christian” teachings but they were actually following culture under the guise of the Church’s deception.

More interesting studies on women’s perception of attraction and orgasms

Another OKCupid chart of independent ratings of look and personality.

Something we already generally knew, but improving PSALM and masculinity traits helps.

Regarding the photos, it’s going to be improve your own looks such as muscular build, skin care, style, hair style, grooming, and such. Then professional photos are usually the most helpful.

Other studies have shown that putting that 6 figure income next to a man’s dating profile raises their “looks” or “attractiveness” score.

This chart is for both men and women, so attractiveness is a bias filter that makes us look more favorably on others. This is why the Bible warns about favoritism especially in regard to status or position as well.

---

Do Orgasms Give Women Feedback about Mate Choice?

Since this was college age study it’s not as super generalized to the population, but it does give us several things to look at.

Frequency of orgasm:

• Partner’s family income – I assume this is family income since most college aged men don’t have a job. Once they have a job it will be related to that. For example, Chinese women orgasm frequency depicted by their partner’s wealth.
• His self-confidence – obvious
• How attractive he was – obvious

My comments – ALM of PSALM (power, status athleticism, looks, money) and masculinity traits.

Orgasm intensity:

• How attracted they were to their partners – obvious
• How many times they had sex per week – more practice = better
• Ratings of sexual satisfaction – next topic
• Friends rated as more attractive also tended to have more intense orgasms – pre-selection
• Orgasm frequency was highly correlated (r = .82) with orgasm intensity – more practice = better
• Orgasm intensity was a marginally better predictor of sexual satisfaction than orgasm frequency.

My comments – S and L of PSALM and masculinity traits.

Sexual satisfaction:

• How physically attracted women were to their partner – Looks and muscles
• Breadth of his shoulders – basically, a good V-taper

My comments – Hit the gym to build muscle

Initiated sex more based on their partner’s:

• Motivation
• Intelligence
• Focus
• Determination
• Sense of humor

My comments – First 4 are masculinity traits that can be summed up by AMBITION, and the last is close to the command presence of amused mastery.

Sense of humor predicted:

• Self confidence
• Family income
• propensity of woman to initiate sex
• frequency of sex
• enhanced orgasm

My comments – Amused mastery I believe is also built on a foundation of knowing you’re successful.

Last tidbit: “Women who began having sexual intercourse at earlier ages had more sex partners, experienced more orgasms, and were more sexually satisfied with their partners.” – Unsurprising. Promiscuous women are good at hedonism.

In conclusion, orgasm frequency, intensity, sexual satisfaction, and initiation of sex all pretty much go back to the PSALM and masculinity traits for attractiveness. Not really a surprise, but supports the Bible’s model of sexual attraction.

If you want to date and marry, work on God’s mission and excellence in all the areas of physical, spiritual, emotional, and mental generally lend toward improvement in PSALM traits and masculinity.

---

The Chosen sabotaging Christian husbands

For as much as the Chosen has been fairly good at portraying the intent and message of the gospel, they are doing their best to sabotage husbands as well.

Not only is has the “happy wife, happy life” become ubiquitous in the Church, the Chosen has termed it “he’s speaking gospel truth.”

When I first saw it in the episode I thought maybe they’ll spin it as something that Peter tried and failed, so when he went back he could say it was bad advice. But I guess that was me thinking too optimistically. The irony is it was bad advice and failed during the show, just like it fails in real life. Yet they still called it gospel truth.

Makes me sick.