Generating and handling attraction from the opposite sex

Generally speaking, 9 times out of 10 if a single man or woman is hanging around another single of the opposite sex they’re definitely attracted and interested in a relationship. Some are more obvious than others (“get a room” comments ensue), but this is generally true even if they are afraid to say it or acknowledge it. It doesn’t matter if they’re pre-teens, teens, 20s. 30s, and older. It’s all the same.

Lest we get caught up in the apex fallacy, one has to be attractive in either looks and/or personality to generate such interest in the first place. For men it’s almost always only looks though feminine personality sometimes plays a role. For women, it’s a combination of looks and personality.

To summarize:

• Men’s attraction is primarily based in a woman’s looks (symmetrical face, long hair, low blemishes, clean and youthful looking skin, hourglass figure, etc.) and feminine dress (dresses, skirts, etc.). Personality is primarily a disqualifier (masculine, in your face, brash, ball-busting, etc.) though in rare cases can be an attracter (very feminine personalities like very encouraging, pure hearted, and such men will start to gravitate to, especially if they don’t have any in their life).
• Women’s attraction is based in a man’s looks (tall, muscular, strong jaw line, etc. facial hair can be polarizing in a good way) and his personality. Personality can be an attracter (confidence, charisma, humor, etc.) or a disqualifer (weak, feminine, no backbone, unmasculine, wishy-washy, etc.).

I was watching a show with my wife the other day, and there were 2 men on the screen. One was very confident in his personality and posture and the other was sitting like he was nervous and when he spoke he also came off as nervous as well. My wife noticed the confident one as attractive, but when they came up again did a double take because the nervous one was actually more physically handsome to her.

Unlike men, this is one of the things where for women personality can make a man more attractive to her.

To dig a little deeper, I think we need to get into the minutiae from a couple comments on Sigma’s post. First, mine:

“women always have sex on the brain” – this is a variation of the apex fallacy.

Men always have sex on the brain.. for women that are attractive to them.

Women always have sex on the brain… for men that are attractive to them.

The vast majority of men don’t have sex on the brain with obese women. Same for women with the unattractive man: they’ll call him a creep and avoid him.

If a woman is hanging around a man and giving him any type of one-on-one or intimate attention she’s definitely interested. But that also assumes a man can get such attention in the first place.

Second, Scott’s:

Yep. If you have never heard something like this:

“The first time I met you I couldn’t stop thinking about what those hands were going to feel like all over me” then I am really, truly sorry.

This is the crux of the direction I am trying to take my stuff, for what its worth. I have like 159 twitter followers. About 50 some odd you tube watchers. I’m a nobody.

I WILL NOT sell Charles Atlas style “how to pick up chicks” crap. I just can’t bring myself to do it.

My interest is in men who have given up their natural masculine traits and been smothered by a lifetime of blue pill conditioning. Rollo’s advice is right about SO MANY important things. Including “you cannot negotiate desire.” And then goes on to try to teach men to attract women using a monkey dance. Which in my opinion, is a form of negotiating desire.

I think this is key. This is where things went wrong. All the stuff about the MMP is correct in that is artificially skewed buy factors in the environment. (Dating apps, messaging from the culture, etc). Wrenching back to rationality is going to take as long as it took to get here, with a ton of collateral damage.

I both agree and disagree to some extent.

There are some things that just naturally generate more attraction that comes with being excellent.

I’ve noticed in myself once I started to ingrain the Biblical marriage roles and responsibilities into my head even before I was married, I obviously came off as a more strong, masculine personality because I was doing what God commanded and not backing off on it unlike many of the Church husband who says with a nervous chuckle “gotta ask the boss” while his wife is starting or already a harpy.

Once I started taking working out and becoming much more muscular seriously, I started generating a lot more interest from women just because. Once I started taking my dress and style more seriously I generated more interest from women as well. No man who has worked out and gained 20-30 lbs of muscle and/or lost a similar amount of fat has not seen a difference in interest from women. This is just something that obvious.

Likewise, I think the goal has to be removing the femininzed and chivalric lens from our world view. Learning pick up lines and how to jump through hoops is obviously going to fail in the long run. A woman will start to pick up that your personality is not congruent with how you normally act.

However, a man that has removed the feminized and chivalric world view will not bend toward trying to be a people pleaser or try to jump through hoops to try to garner a woman’s interest. Ironically, this ability to not care (e.g. be outcome independent) is what helps to drive at least some natural attraction.

In other words, be the best man you can be to serve God and see how much interest you get from women. This is a fluid process as one can almost always gain more muscles or be a stronger leader. For the majority of men they will be able to at least generate some interest, though how much at first sight is debatable.

---

Putting it together

Ideally, the hierarchy for men on going out with women would be something along the lines of:

1. See who is attracted to you
2. Apply godly selection criteria (e.g. true Christian, humble, teachable, etc.)
3. See who is the most attracted to you both physically and personality-wise after those criteria
4. If there are only women that are somewhat interested and not potentially all-in for marriage, then you have a hard choice to decide whether you want to stay single or go with it.

The interest you generate from women can change over time you change. As was said before, you can become a stronger, more confident, masculine (and godly man) and gain more muscle.

The caveat to that which I agree with Scott to the extent that the man you are when you meet a woman is likely the interest that she will perceive in you almost perpetually. In other words, having good pick up lines or jumping through hoops won’t work. She’s either attracted or not, and it’s very difficult to change a first impression unless you drastically change over the course of knowing her (e.g. gain 20 lbs more muscle and she notices it).

Thus, if a woman is not interested or only marginally interested it’s not worth your time to talk to her much at all. Keep focusing on being a better man so when the next woman comes around you are potentially more attractive and can generate a stronger initial interest.

Jumping back to meet cute scenarios

Previously on meet cutes, we looked at the commonness of having women be initially attracted to you. In general, I think that it’s not that common for the majority of men, though there are always some percentage of the population that would be attracted.

---

Scott posted his stance on Sigma’s blog and I think some of it is true and some of it isn’t (my responses in regular, then some analysis).

I recently tweeted my final position on this, which I suppose might lose me some support. I have been beating around the bush on the topic for a while, trying to be gracious, trying to sugar coat it.

I believe that the red-pill content creators (the big ones, Christian or not) are full of crap if they believe that true, visceral attraction can be created in a woman who never had it for you in the first place. Like within the first meeting.

Some of them have a conflict of interest in trying to create this fiction, because they sell books and have monetized youtube accounts. It is in their best interest to make this seem possible.

But I have never seen a woman go from being luke warm about a guy and then become [truly] hot for him. She may settle and convince herself that she is attracted to a man who is the best she can get, but hot crazy in love–no.

If you are not getting really obvious IOIs right from the start, move on. If that makes me “black pill” so be it. I want men to find women who cannot keep their hands of them, otherwise they risk terrible destruction later on.

This is generally more true for men who are primarily attracted based on physical appearance. Getting to know them better will not increase any visceral attraction toward them for the most part, except if they are capable of very seductive behavior.

I think the real question is how many women for that matter are marrying men that they don’t have any attraction at all for?

There are certainly both men and women who are marrying with varying levels of attraction, but very few have absolutely no attraction. These are probably the ones where you have the wives cringing away from physical contact with their husbands in wedding photos. There are a few, but they’re definitely not even a big minority.

If we’re using a 0-10 scale where no attraction is a 0 and crazy love at first sight is a 10, there’s a big range. The real question isn’t if we can take a 0 to a 10… it’s if we can take a 3-4 to a 7-8 in most cases. The “sort of maybe attractive when I’m ovulating” or “relatively dead bedroom but once were attracted to each other” to “I want to do him at least several nights a week.” You don’t have to be the 10 of “I want to bang like bunny rabbits all the time.”

In reply, Scott says:

At first glance, the idea of a spectrum of attraction (woman—>man) strikes me as wishfully ascribing male thinking processes to women. This is understandable, and tempting. I am guilty of it from time to time. I just don’t think if you (a guy) are placed in the “meh” file you can ever get out. So I have never actually tried.

I’m not sure I agree with that.

There are definitely some reciprocal indications in terms of attraction itself. For instance, women can pick out attractive features on men just like men can pick out various attractive features on women. If they have particular unattractive features that knocks them down. Most people are not models so they have a relative mix of attractive or unattractive features.

In general, male sexuality operates on some lines of physical attractiveness: “would bang but wouldn’t date” to “would bang and date” to “would bang and marry.”

As we know though, female sexual strategy is relatively dualistic: AF/BB. Ideally, a man has both AF (dominant, handsome, charismatic, masculine, high status, successful leader,) and BB (money). Women’s hierarchy is AF+BB > AF > BB > None. Or if they are their own BB with a good job then it’s AF+BB > AF > None > BB.

It’s a spectrum and not a yes or no. Women who can’t marry an AF+BB or AF will try to get a man who has some AF with a lot of BB.. and so on down to only BB. But they will be less and less happy about it.

Admittedly, one problem I have is looking through the lens of my own lifetime of experience, an N of one. In that myopic view, I have never seen this happen. In any relationship I ever developed, be it a ONS, a FB, or an LTR that lasted years, her attraction was always obvious and unmistakable, from the first few seconds save for my obtuse lack of sensing it. I have been told “dude, she is REALLY into you” on more than one occasion before I noticed these signs.

An example from real life would be something like, I went to a party one time at a friends house and there was a girl there. I immediately found her really cute and started talking to her. There was ZERO indication from her that she was interested, so I moved on within a nanosecond. At that same exact party, I met another girl who would become my longest relationship to date at the time (it lasted about 2 years) and she made it really obvious that I had a green light. So, what I see from women is attraction that actually leads to something more is a dichotomous variable. “On” or “off.” Nothing in between. And you cannot slide along that scale like on a slide rule with them.

On the other hand, men I think can do the spectrum thing. I have had several LTRs that developed over time with women for whom I had almost no regard for in the first place. Its usually a coworker, or someone you see on a regular basis for whatever reason. She could be flashing giant orange flags that read “here I am come and approach. I will say YES” and I just move along with my life as if nothing is happening. Then, one day the thought flashes across your mind “I never noticed how cute her smile is.” And then you are toast. All of the sudden she is all you think about from the time you get up to the time you go to bed. You now have a crush on a girl who up until this point was just somebody you see as part of the scenery at work.

This is not strictly true. From what I’ve seen it depends on fairly specific circumstances to set men up to be successful when there is not a lot of initial attraction. We discussed some way back when here: understanding the friend zone and escaping it.

Lemme give you another example. I’m maybe average attractiveness (not unattractive but not attractive). A couple of my friends have called me a 6. I don’t normally get women to look at me twice. However, I’ve TAed a few classes where there are multiple TAs working together with a large group of students. What usually ends up happening is that a lot of the students (including the women) start to gravitate toward the more attractive men first. However, I know my stuff down pat, and I usually challenge the students and tease the girls. My professor later told me that a large majority of the students told me that I was their favorite TA. I was getting IOIs from the women whereas I had none before and even asked some out later and said yes.

This is the power of being in a position of relative authority and being charismatic with the students. I think it’s also true that first impressions are the most important, and it’s relatively rare(r) that a woman will like you sans not being attracted at first impression, but it’s been my experience that there are chances to subvert that notion but it has to be in specific circumstances.

YMMV. But I’ve had that happen several times throughout my life like I described in the meetcute article on my site (don’t know if you read that one, but this is not an isolated incident). Some other commenters chimed in saying it was the case for them too.

---

I think part of the issue is that Scott is very naturally attractive while many of the other men may not necessarily be that attractive. His experience is that he can just move onto women who are naturally attracted to him without understanding the various scenarios where women may not be attracted at first but may be more attracted over time under various scenarios.

Like I said in the other meetcute post, I could count on one hand the amount of women who were attracted to be naturally. However, I do generate some interest from women based on my relative position or status (TAing, when I was leading Bible studies, teaching others, etc), occasionally based on my personality (humor or charisma in certain areas), maybe some based on my physique (decently muscular but not overly so… it does increase as you become more and more muscular), and other common attraction factors like this.

Possible conclusion: Might be more common for your average joe to have more interest generated post-first meeting than someone who is naturally physically handsome. Most of my attraction from women seems to have been generated after the initial meetings. That said, overall interest is much more for someone who is naturally physically handsome so they have way more options.

In general though, I think the talk about extremes isn’t too useful. For the most part, if you’re single you want to work on the various areas (especially becoming muscular, style, etc.) to make good first attraction impressions and the rest builds from there. From here it’s selecting the women who are interested and not wasting your time on the ones who aren’t or somewhat interested. You shouldn’t really deal with the ones who aren’t anyway because it’s too much investment for little results.

Most marriages there was at least some semblance of attraction (2-4 at minimum) and probably higher in the 5-8+ range at maximum (if a husband has gotten fat and lazy for example and dipped down into the 2-4 range then). Building that back up is a much easier task than someone who was never attracted. But again, it seems to be extremely rare that women would marry a man to whom they were never attracted.

Revisiting dread in the Bible with an anti-chivalry lens

In the previous (long) post on dread, I outlined several concepts surrounding dread in marriages.

To define dread, it’s generally a disconcerting feeling that results in a woman/wife when her husband becomes more sexually attractive (often interpreted in a bad manner). Thus, when a husband becomes more sexually attractive (to his wife that was previously depriving him) she often has bad or disconcerting feelings because she was denying him and also often seeing other women having sexual attraction for him which can make her jealous.

In many cases, there are times when there are rational fears and irrational fears.

Rational fear — fearing the consequences of when you do evil — is a healthy fear. This is the fear of God that we all have in our hearts. We should fear and tremble when we commit sin because God is Righteous/Just and abhors sin. Rational fear is an encouragement to do what is right, and to avoid doing what is wrong.

Irrational fear — is unhealthy and to be eliminated. This is when you fear/worry about necessities as Jesus talked about with clothes and food or have an irrational fear about what “may” happen to you in marriage. Irrational fear is a discouragement. It is often to avoid doing what is right and to do what is wrong (such as [being afraid to speak] out for your faith [when in a crowd of people]).

In the case of a husband who understands he has shirked his leadership role knowingly or unknowingly, he begins to act as the head and taking responsibility for his own well being in accordance with God’s mission for us.

• Spiritual (getting deeper into the Word, understanding and applying God’s Biblical marital roles and responsibilities, prayer, meditation, fasting, making disciples, evangelizing, using gifts of the Spirit, etc.),
• Physical (working out to build muscle, losing fat, style, grooming, etc.), and
• Emotional/mental (having your mental and emotional state under control and not blurting things out, focused on exuding fruit of the Spirit in any interaction, not DEERing when leading (defend, excuse, explain, rationalize), etc.).

Aside from the most important aspect of obeying God, as a husband focuses on these things one of the biggest side effects we see is that this husband will often become more attractive to women, both his wife and other women. Single men and men in relationships become more attractive to women too.

When this happens, women or wives start to exhibit several rational fears that crop up. For instance,

• There is a rational fear of authority that is rooted in his position as the head. The rational fear of leadership from her husband results in increased sexual desire for him.
• There is another rational fear of breaking trust of the dysfunctional trust relationship. While breaking trust is normally a bad thing, breaking trust in a dysfunctional relationship pattern is a good thing. This naturally results in additional fear as she “feels like she doesn’t know who her husband is anymore.” However, this broken trust must also be rebuild if you want unity in your relationship.

There is also rational fear that often manifests in the form of jealousy as other women tend to find a husband has his stuff together attractive (unlike their own in many cases).

One clear example of this is in the Scriptures where God’s salvation to the Gentiles is to make Israel righteously jealous for Him.

Romans 11:7 What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; 8 just as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, Eyes to see not and ears to hear not, Down to this very day.” 9 And David says, “Let their table become a snare and a trap, And a stumbling block and a retribution to them. 10 “Let their eyes be darkened to see not, And bend their backs forever.”

11 I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous. 12 Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be! 13 But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 14 if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them. 15 For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? 16 If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too.

Indeed, if other women are attracted to a wife’s husband that is a good thing. If she is taking him for granted, being disrespectful or rebellious, she should be uncomfortable with that because she is doing wrong. These rational fears should be heeded and she should repent and change her behavior.

To be clear, I still personally do not advocate for going out and flirting with other women. But if you’re attractive other women will start to gravitate to you, sometimes even if your wife is there. Whatever is not born of faith is sin (Romans 14), and it’s almost always the case that intentionally flirting with other women when married is not born out of faith but revenge.

I made the connection the other day with the post on Why We Are Here that the reason why I think that even the Christians who know about intersexual dynamics still have a lingering sense of discomfort with dread is that they’re so in-grained with chivalry that it feels bad or evil to make a woman “feel bad.” Per the RPC founder:

“We don’t put on an “RP Lens” to Scriptural interpretation. We take off the “Feminized Lens” that everyone else is wearing, then interpret Scripture without that bias.”

By taking off this feminized/chivalrous lens, we now see that dread / feeling bad is one of the necessary steps to repentance of sinful behavior. We have to recognize that we have done wrong and with that comes feeling bad and guilt. Then we have to give this wrong to Christ to repent and not do it again.

This also scares me because the feminist/chivalrous lens easily flies under the radar to even men who know about intersexual dynamics. It’s also why Dalrock’s observations about chivalry and game’s anti-chivalry effect flew under the radar for so long.

To summarize: If you are focused on God’s mission and obedience to God in all you do, any type of dread or feeling bad that a wife experiences is normal and good because it pushes her away from the comfortable feeling of doing wrong: denying her husband sex. It is the type that is necessary to hopefully help her to repent and change her behavior.

Why we are here

I initially wrote this as a comment for reddit, but it’s worth a post since many men don’t understand the various interactions with lots of the different men’s blogs.

1. Over the past 100+ years (or perhaps 1000+ years as Aaron Renn’s Masculinist newsletter investigates), much of western Christianity has incorporated a lot of secular beliefs into their sex/gender perspectives. Christianity has been increasingly feminized while male masculinity has become more demonized. Fake perspectives like Christian egalitarianism and complementarism have arisen.
2. Many in the Church espouse typical cultural phrases like “happy wife, happy life” or “gotta listen to the boss” which is direct contradiction to the Bible (e.g. Ephesians 5). Likewise, as divorce and brokenness in homes has increased by liberal policies, men and women are not fathered and mentored as much as they used to which has resulted in much dysfunction. Not that conservatives are any better because they’re not. Like Christ, Christians should not be concerned about changing politics but about changing hearts with the gospel.
3. Most dating advice follows an untruthful bent, especially in Christian communities. “Just be yourself” is one of the common ones that doesn’t help, and in the Christian community “focus on being godly” or “just pray and God will have it all in His time” are some of the common ones. This is unhelpful to Christian men who are unsuccessful with women.
4. During the late 90s, 00s, and early ’10s, the pick up artist (PUA) community was all about discovering what worked to get laid. This slowly morphed into discussion boards on the internet. During the late 00s and early ’10s, this group started to pick up steam on the Internet and started fracturing into various groups: PUAs, secular red pill, red pill women, men’s rights, incels, etc. Probably the most prolific Christian blog (Dalrock) on exposing the false beliefs of the culture and how they have been incorporated into the Church started around 2010 or 2011.
5. Many Christians who were bad with women ultimately saw that some of these concepts worked, which had been contrary to the typical advice they had been preached to when they were teens or young adults in the Church. Many of these Christians get sucked into the secular RP and lose their faith.
6. Since God created man and woman, the Truth in the Scriptures about male and female relationships is clearly true. Much of this lines up with what the secular RP has come to conclude through trial and error (man should be the head of the family, have a mission bigger than himself, wife is helper and shouldn’t be put on a pedestal, etc.). Some high profile secular RP leaders like Roosh and Victor ultimately see that hedonism and sex is all worthless in the end without God.
7. As far as the reddit RPChristians goes, the founder started it with the intent to understand and apply what the Bible actually teaches about marriage and relationships and to minister/outreach to the secular RP (much like organizations like XXX Christians which minister to porn stars). Since there are not a lot of spaces where Christian men and women can discuss sexuality without fear of reprisal, this is one of those spaces.
8. We don’t incorporate RP philosophy into what we do because the Bible is the ultimate Truth, but we may use RP terms to communicate concepts that the Bible teaches.

Some Q&A on why we may use RP terms. Personally, I try not to use RP terms anymore since they’ve become loaded words. They don’t effectively communicate what you’re trying to say much like hash tags or liberal/conservative catch phrases.

How would you categorize your philosophies/theology to someone unfamiliar with RP?

We teach what the Bible says, but we may use RP concepts to explain it as many men from secular RP understand the terms in that way.

Many men even here may think it’s about incorporating RP beliefs into Christianity, but that’s false. You can’t incorporate other beliefs into Christianity and have it still be Christianity. It’s just your own pet version of Christianity.

Would you simply say you’re an RP Christian? Or is there another overarching name for this type of theology. Personally, I had never heard of RP and it’s hard to find online resources or commentaries on your interpretations of scripture.

No, I’m just a Christian who believes what the Bible says about men and women and doesn’t get caught up in what the culture teaches which is mostly false. Men and women are not the same. They have different traits they look for in the spouses. Each have a sin nature that they need to resist.

Most Christians who are not familiar with the sub think that we are trying to incorporate RP philosophy on top of the Bible but that is furthest from the case. Because we use the term RP in the name and thus are “associated” with the secular RP, we’re often biased against for stating the truth in other subs for just posting here.

Is this isolated to reddit? Do you meet up with groups or attend churches with those who adhere to these same beliefs?

There’s associated Christian blogs.

As far as I know, there are no groups or Churches specifically, but individual men may go back to their churches and start teaching actual Biblical truth in their small groups and ministries and even pastors. In some churches, some men have gotten kicked out or asked to stop.

And one good answer from the reddit founder about why it’s not putting on an RP lens but taking off the cultural feminized lens.

That’s because very few believers have delved into the Bible’s views on sexuality enough to produce content exclusively focused on it that aren’t tainted by serious cultural baggage. This, of course, makes a lot of sense when you consider how it was culturally inappropriate to speak openly about explicit sexual matters for all but the last 75-ish years of the world’s history. It is the feminization of the world that brought on the sexual revolution, so it’s not surprising that the content that’s been generated on the topic is feminized as well.

To go from a different angle, if I were to write a “red pill commentary” on the Bible, it would look extremely close to a blend of many other commentaries already in existence. I’m not going to read the book of Nahum or Daniel and try to force some “RP lens” into how the book should be interpreted. But there are some passages where a proper interpretation has been lost on those who have been conditioned by culture to have a butterflies-and-rainbows view of who Jesus was and feminized notions of marriage and sexuality. That is:

• We don’t put on an “RP Lens” to Scriptural interpretation. We take off the “Feminized Lens” that everyone else is wearing, then interpret Scripture without that bias. This leads to many similar conclusions, but a few extremely significant different ones too.

To be abundantly clear: there are MANY commentaries that will preach the same things we do. But again, one of our principles is relevant here: Watch what people do, not what they say. This is a twist on the “Do as I say, not as I do” motto that’s become a popular joke about churches – because many pastors will not live out what they preach. In this sense, you may READ many commentaries that preach proper principles of marriage, sexuality, headship, etc. – but good luck finding a body that actually practices them. Congregations will pay lip service to Scripture, but conform their behaviors to culture.

The author deleted his post eventually, but our comments are still up. Also, some of the mods and regulars have started some roundtable video series on YouTube. Subscribe if you can, as YouTube only allows livestreams if you have 1k subscriptions or more, and I think a lot of Christian men and women would like being able to interact in real time.

Overall, I think it should be abundantly clear that the reason why we are all here is that the Church is conforming too much to the culture. That’s why the majority of the New Testament was written to tell the Church to stop doing that. We are in this same boat.

My goal as a Christian is to lead by example to show single and married Christian men that doing what God says (in the Bible on the topic of marriage) is the right thing to do, and that it will produce good fruit. Real effective change is made through godly discipleship.

For instance, if you have any shame or discomfort talking publicly to Christians or non-Christians about the gospel then that may be an area to work on. But sadly, maybe a harder thing to do is to tell those same people that you’re the head of your marriage and that your wife submits to you and why that is good.

Double standards around sex: the purest example of the feminization of Christianity

From Reddit’s sub “Christian Marriage.”

Women, please don’t deny your husbands — 0 upvotes, 50% upvoted

Here’s the post:

Sex for a husband is so essential. Please don’t undermine how important that is to a husband who desires his wife, but doesn’t get any romance. Keep your marriage alive!

And of course, the top few answers:

• My husband is compassionate about my medical problems. Sex is not all we have and it’s not the most essential. Our love and relationship are much deeper.
• Sorry but this is not great advice. I was told by a female Christian counselor that “under no circumstances should a Christian wife ever say no to her husband for sex”. So as much as I thought that was some bogus, 18th Century, misogynist advice, I tried it. I did it whenever he wanted with a good attitude. My husband still cheated on me multiple times and watched porn despite having sex with me multiple times a week. Don’t make women feel it’s THEIR DUTY to keep the husband happy. Are you kidding me? This is actually some “wisdom” people are giving out on a Christian sub? Maybe instead the advice should be that both the husband and wife need to focus on other aspects of intimacy so the wife wants to have sex. Some women experience pain, have trauma, don’t feel valued and loved. Why should a woman do this out of OBLIGATION? It should be done out of desire to bring her and her husband closer and same with the husband. Please check your heart and the Bible before spewing this rhetoric.
• This is definitely true! But also, men, do not forget that you hold part of the key yourselves. Make sure that you act as a man worthy of respect and desire, that you take care of yourself and that you treat her with love and care. No woman wants to have sex with Homer Simpson.
• One of the hallmarks of being a good husband (or wife, for that matter) is not treating sex as something you are entitled to. Just saying.

Literally a list of excuses why women shouldn’t have sex with their husbands. You know, the one they agreed to “have and to hold.”

Then someone was smart enough to post the opposite one.

Men please don’t deny your wives — 123 upvotes, 100% upvoted

The same exact post but substituted husbands for wives.

Let’s look at the comments.

• Is this because of the recent post for wives to not deny their husbands? Lol. Both statements are true and need to be heard. I understand that some partners have lower libidos, but the rejection is very painful for the partner being denied. This does a lot of damage in a marriage. Unfortunately, I have found that talking about sex is a little taboo in the Christian community. My husband is still uncomfortable talking about sex, and we’ve been married for 8 years, together for 11.
• First step, men – stop looking at porn.
• Amen!
• Thank you; I needed this. We’ve got a Cold War in our home right now. I’m trying to remain strong, but temptation is ever-present.
• If you insist
• This is very important. I went through a depression period. I stopped paying attention to my wife and now I’m paying for it. It’s not her fault, but mine. She did everything – even dyed her hair blonde (although I never asked) so I would notice her. I was too preoccupied with myself to even notice she was looking for attention. We are still together and working on things, but it’s hard. I appreciate any prayers my way. But men – take note of this!

Men being told to stop looking at porn, and men owning up to denying their wives.

Can’t make this stuff up. Literally the same command to both the husbands and the wives to have sex with each other but two drastically different responses from “Christians.”

Unshameable

One of the things most Christians seem to have trouble separating, not just in wider Christian culture but also in various manosphere circles, is that vetting and preferences for marriage are different than how you should treat someone as a fellow Christian.

Marriage is a covenant and supposed to be permanent in God’s eyes. You should be selective on someone who you are making a lifelong covenant with. You want a true Christian (not in name only; who walks the walk), hopefully whose mission is aligned with yours, who is grounded with good character and morals, wants to follow God’s biblical roles and responsibilities, and ideally the least baggage as possible. More on past posts on vetting.

This does not mean those who don’t meet your criteria (whatever they are) are not good Christians or evil in some way. Everyone has sins in their past that they can repent to God and be forgiven. As Christians, we do not need to shame them or make them feel unwelcome once they are in God’s family. We should celebrate and be joyful.

But that does not necessarily mean you need to eliminate different past sins as criteria for who you want to be married. I don’t have anything against non-virgins or single mothers who have repented and are in Christ. In fact, I rejoice with them, but I also wouldn’t marry one. Same with alcoholics, other various addictions, and even murderers (heck, Saul/Paul was one before he was converted).

If you want to marry a single mother that’s great too. I know some men who have and they have godly marriages. However, it is true that it is riskier. It is one that I personally refused having reviewed all of the relevant data. Each man should pray, get wise counsel, and evaluate the risk for himself. If he is satisfied that she is truly repentant and has godly character then who am I to judge? I’ll encourage him and try to help him in his marriage.

Whatever preferences or criteria you have for marriage are fine. One can say some may be unrealistic (as in the case of evangelical american princesses). One could say some are unwise or unfeasible. One should evaluate whether different preferences and criteria are worth having or if they weed out too many otherwise good candidates. However, I don’t think anyone should have any shame for their criteria or preferences for marriage. If you’re a Christian it’s a lifelong thing and you want to make a good choice if you’re not going to stay celibate for life.

Each to his own with no shame, but it is good to be in the Scriptures, praying, and wise about your own preferences and about who you potentially choose to marry including their past.

Jesus says follow Me — the correct view of relationships and marriage contrary to the culture

I remember writing this up, but I think I forgot to post it here.

Jesus and the Church are a guide to male and female relationships and marriage. The analogy of husband and wife as Jesus and the Church in Ephesians 5 provides a strong background for how we are to walk in male-female relationships that lead to marriage and in marriage. Christ:Church::husband:wives. This goes against many things in our popular culture and even in the current Church today.

There is the notion in popular culture that men romantically pursue women. This thought has also pervaded the Church in the form of “Jesus is my lover” or “husbands should romance their wives” because “Jesus and God continually pursue you.” This is false. The Father and Jesus both call us or rather present the opportunity, but it is up to us to acknowledge the call and choose to follow.

Matthew 4:18 (NASB) Now as Jesus was walking by the Sea of Galilee, He saw two brothers, Simon who was called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea; for they were fishermen. 19 And He said to them, Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.” 20 Immediately they left their nets and followed Him. 21 Going on from there He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and He called them. 22 Immediately they left the boat and their father and followed Him.

Jesus had just traveled out of the wilderness where He was tempted and had started to preach the gospel in the surrounding areas. In other words, Jesus started His God-given mission. The disciples saw Jesus on His mission, He invited them to come join Him in the journey, and they wanted to follow Him.

In the context of male-female relationships, remember from the beginning that God created woman to be a helpmeet of man. Jesus demonstrates His mission and presents a clear vision of how He was going to task His disciples when they follow Him: to be fishers of men. In the same way, a man who asks a woman out on a date should already be working toward His God-given mission—evangelize, make disciples, use your Spiritual gifts to build up the body of Christ, and lead ministry. He should also have a clear vision of where she fits in his life as his helpmeet as she is going to help him on his mission. She is also going to fulfill her Biblical roles and responsibilities just as you would to her.

Jesus does not chase after us, nor should men chase after women. This flies in the face of all “romance” that is popular in the culture and Church. Consider when Jesus claims that He is the “Bread of Life” in John 6.

John 6:60 (NASB) Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? 62 What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68 Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.

Jesus challenges all of those that were following Him about His role and place in the Kingdom of God. His invitation is the same: Follow Me and continue to Follow Me. Yet those who were not interested He let walk away. The same is true of God in Romans 1, where He allows humanity to be given over to their sinful passions and lusts if they don’t want to seek Him.

Consider the father’s actions in the Prodigal Son (Luke 15). The son decides he wants his inheritance to go party. The father allows him to go off on his own. The father does not chase after him to persuade him otherwise. Only when the son makes the choice to come back to the father does the father see him in the distance, come out of his house, and run toward him with arms open wide.

The pervasive romantic attitude that men are supposed to pursue women runs contrary to the Father and Jesus’ actions. Both culture and some in the Church would have us believe that Jesus continues to chase after us at all costs. This is only true in the example of the parable of the lost sheep where the shepherd goes to apprehend a sheep that wandered away, yet in that case that sheep was already under the Shepherd’s care (Luke 15). Only after we are committed in marriage are we responsible to seek after that which is ours that is lost. This mirrors the roles and responsibilities of marriage.

The Biblical model for relationships is that men demonstrate and invite, and women choose to respond to that invitation and follow.

If a man asks a woman out on a date and she turns him down, should that man continue to try to be “romantic” and chase after her? Of course not! There’s nothing a man can say or do to convince a woman to like him more. Even if by some measure he wears down her resistance and she capitulates, such a relationship will not work out in the long run because it was not based on her genuine desire to be in the relationship with him. Whether or not she actually acts on it, she will internally desire to leave as soon as the next best thing comes along.

No matter how much you, as a man, may want to be in a relationship with a woman, she also needs to want to be in that relationship. She has to want to follow you, out of genuine desire to be with you.

• Jesus leads, the Church follows. Men lead, women follow.
• Jesus doesn’t chase after us. Men should not chase after women.

The goal of a single Christian man should be to carry out his God-given mission wholeheartedly and invite a woman on a date (or to be courted) to see if she wants to follow him. If she isn’t a good follower or isn’t teachable to be a good follower, he should be selective and eliminate her from contention.

The point at which a man starts to pursue after a woman, he slips into a dangerous frame of mind that can easily lead him to start pedestaling her and sin. Adam not saying no to Eve and the serpent in the garden is but one example of putting your wife over the commands of God. He was not deceived but willfully chose her more than obeying God.

Everything always goes back to the family

When we get into the topic of marriage education, one huge problem is that the Church or even a school curriculum are being considered primary teachers.

Deuteronomy 6 shows us that the father (and mother by extension) are to teach all of the things in the Law to their children both day and night. The modeling of the father and mother show the kids the importance of marriage and how it should work. The Church/gatherings/assemblies are to reinforce this to show that the whole community accepts God’s standards and practices them.

The Church itself is to be a supplement. It’s not an answer. This is why families without strong and good role models (and those especially without a father) have large statistically bad influences on children even if they go to Church. There’s no primary good modeling.

The Church and ideally education should help families to have good marriages, so that they can model those to their kids. But this is limited as it requires husbands and wives to want to do that. This is a big problem in western Christianity because most husbands and wives think it is the Church’s or education system’s responsibility to educate their kids. We can all see how that works out — young people leaving the Church in droves as they go to college.

The state of the Church is only a symptom of the decay of the family. There’s a reason why the leftists/Marxists wanted to destroy the nuclear family.

How to evaluate sexual compatibility as a Christian with no pre-marital sex and only chaste behavior

This question has been asked a bunch of times before, but it never has had it’s own post.

Let me first say I’m not an expert on this topic, but here’s a bit about how I approached it with my wife. The good fruit that this has born is that I am happy to say that my wife has never once denied me when I really wanted to have it nor have I her. We have had grace for each other if sick or tired a few times, but overall we go out of our way to please the other.

I’m going to go over a bunch of different points here (not everything in the post above), but if you want to read the full timeline of when/how I discussed things you can click the link.

—————————

• Vet for background (e.g. how she grew up, what her parents taught her about sex, if there is any abuse, etc.) to ensure there aren’t any yellow or red flags there which may interfere with intimacy

This gives you some clues into how she was raised and her attitudes toward sex. As one of the many Christian growing up during the “purity” movement, it did warp many Christian men and women’s ideas about what was good and what was bad. It’s was often the case that it was drilled into young adults heads that sex before marriage = bad and sex after marriage = good. While most men can flip a switch to go from no sex to lots of sex, sometimes women have hangups about this because they’ve been doing what is “right” and now even though it’s good to have sex with their husband it still feels “wrong.” You want to see if they can process through any yellow or red flags in their attitudes toward sex.

• Look not just at virginity but overall chastity. It helps to differentiate if she may hold virginity as an idol, or if she’s being obedient to God

No man or woman should be shamed for preferring a virgin spouse. However, virginity is not a be-all end-all. A “technical virgin” who continues to do everything with men while dating is questionable at best. A woman who had formerly slept with some men but has been chaste for many years since she has been saved is showing that she understands how to obey God.

• Look at her attitudes toward physical intimacy and acceptance of it For example, you should both want to have sex and have trouble keeping your hands off each other, but you stop yourselves because you want to avoid temptation and honor God.

This should be quite obvious seeing the context of 1 Corinthians 7. Paul describes that “because of fornications” that men and women should marry because they were burning with passion for each other. Beware of women (or men for women) who want to be in a relationships or marriage but don’t have a hard time keeping their hands off you. They may be in it for other reasons, but less likely want to fulfill their own duty toward you. Which leads into…

• Go over the Bible passages on marriage with her and ask for her opinions (you must ask her to give her opinions before giving yours, so you don’t unnecessarily influence her toward your perspective).

1 Corinthians on denial of sex is a big one. If she is a true Christian and unselfish she will want to have sex even if she doesn’t feel like it and same with you as a husband. It is must to go over this passage with a prospective spouse and see their attitude toward it.

• Ask about her libido.

Many men never ask, but it’s important. Does she want to have sex? How is her sex drive? What is a reasonable amount of sex in marriage to her? What if your numbers are so drastically different such as you want to do it everyday while she wants to do it once every couple weeks?

• Look at how she treats others and you. The more unselfishness and respect for others you see, the more likely it is that she won’t deny sex.

The Christian walk is often filled with loving and serving others *even when we don’t want to*. You want a Christian who walks the walk. Also, read the Christian Brad Pitt thought experiment as it explains how a woman generally will act if she’s attracted. She’ll want to go out of her way to follow you and be with you. This includes sex.

• Examine attitudes and actions toward birth control (and if she is taking any), exercise, sleep, and other factors as that can influence a woman’s sex drive

These are often overlooked. Aside from the potential side effects of things like birth control (cancer, blood clots, etc.) there are other things like changing a woman’s preferences and sex drive that get glossed over. There’s a few examples in the OYS threads about men realizing their wives libido was killed by birth control. You don’t want to get married to someone who is taking birth control who is attracted to you and then when she goes off she thinks you’re not attractive and doesn’t want to have sex with you. Likewise, lifestyle stuff is important because things like high stress and lack of health all can contribute to lower sex drive.

While sex is not everything, it’s easy for it to become an issue in a marriage especially when you’re the one getting denied. These difference points can allow you to investigate a woman or man’s potential attitudes and actions toward sex which will give you a good idea if they want to have sex with you and if they’ll deny you or not.

Headship in Genesis

I’ve already gone over why there was headship before the fall. Even as CBMW has gotten a lot of stuff wrong, they did get this right in 1987 Danver’s statement.

Adam’s headship in marriage was established by God before the Fall, and was not a result of sin (Gen 2:16-18, 21-24, 3:1-13; 1 Cor 11:7-9).

It’s pretty interesting how there is a strong alignment of God’s perfect Creation and the New Creation.

Genesis 2:18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” 19 Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. 21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.”

24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

• v18 – Man is alone and needs a helper.
• v19-20 – God shows one way how man is tasked with authority and dominion over the animals by naming them (from prior Genesis 1 “dominion over all the earth”).
• v21-22 – God creates woman from man.
• v23 – Adam’s statement parallels naming Eve (headship authority) and covenant vows.
• v24 – Marriage is a man leaving his parents (independence), forming a new family unit with his wife (cleave), and becoming one flesh (covenant).

Paul in Ephesians 5 references the Creation in Genesis several times, much like he does in other passages in the Scriptures (e.g. 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Timothy 2, etc.).

Ephesians 5:22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Husbands and wives are to emulate Christ and the Church, which also emulates Adam and Eve’s Creation. Adam:Eve::Christ:Church::husbands:wives.

• Gen 2:19-20 – God sends Jesus to take back dominion over all the earth as the Messiah. Jesus passes His mission on to Christians (Matthew 28) to be co-workers with God (1 Corinthians 3).
• Genesis 2:21-22 – Eve was formed from Adam, so too the Church is formed from Christ. Christians are partakers in the New Covenant through Christ’s sacrifice for us. His blood washes away our sins to those who repent and follow Him, and we remember this through His body and blood (communion).
• Genesis 2:23-24 – Jesus departs from God and is to be joined to His bride, the Church. He is the head, the Savior of the body, just as Eve was formed from the body of Adam and Adam is the head.

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, 26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless.

Genesis 2:16 The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

Genesis 3:17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’;

Christ loves the Church for the purpose of sanctification. Where Adam stumbled, Christ reigned. Husbands are to emulate Christ as the head over their wives by teaching and helping them to be sanctified unlike Adam did with his wife.

Ephesians 5:28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, 30 because we are members of His body.

Like in Genesis 2:21-22, husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies — like Eve who was fashioned from Adam, and Christians who are saved by Christ’s sacrifice through His body and blood. They are one flesh with their wives through covenant, and must treat them as themselves.

Ephesians 5:31 For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. 32 This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.

Finally, like in Genesis 2:23-24, the covenant of marriage is reaffirmed both in reference to Adam and Eve in Genesis and Christ and the Church. A husband is to treat his wife as part of his body (Adam and Eve, Christ and the Church) and a wife must respect/reverence/fear her husband as he is her head (as Adam was Eve’s head and Christ it the Church’s head).

Headship was originally created for Adam and Eve by God in order that they fulfill their mandate on the earth to take dominion, be fruitful and multiply, tend to the garden and obey God by not eating of the forbidden fruit. Similarly, headship functions in the similar way with Christ and the Church and husbands and wives in the New Creation in Christ.