Headship tomorrow and headship yesterday, but never headship today.

Dalrock

“The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday—but never jam to-day.”
“It must come sometimes to ‘jam to-day,’” Alice objected.
“No, it ca’n’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass and What Alice Found There

Last week I covered the complementarian argument that Adam’s sin was failing to prevent Eve from being tempted into sinning.  This specific bogus claim is part of a larger pattern where headship alternates between being denied (or minimized to irrelevance) and headship being used as a handy club to bludgeon husbands (usually to blame men for women’s sins).

The speed with which the transformation occurs often makes this particular method of complementarian rationalization quite comical.  I once attended a sermon where the pastor started by explaining that his wife is in authority over him, and discussed the proper ways she punishes…

View original post 917 more words

Advertisements

 

Now get out there and reject passivity!

Amusingly, one also finds that neo-cons accuse Trump of a different kind of ‘passivity’ and encourage him to reject it; see here…

Dalrock

Complementarians have the problem of wanting to seem biblically traditional, while avoiding actually being so.  The goal is to create something separate from formal feminism/egalitarianism, while avoiding offending feminist sensibilities.  This has led complementarians to invent a host of weasel words that sound like something traditional but mean something else.  This starts with the very term complementarian, a term meant to seem traditional while rejecting tradition.  This allows complementarian women to seem traditional while they discuss Women in ministry kissing traditionalism good-bye.

Other complementarian weasel terms are servant leader, a term that means not headship, and step up, a word that means whatever you want it to mean so long as it doesn’t mean take charge.

But today’s complementarian weasel word is reject passivity.  This is the other term you say to men when you want to seem like you are telling them…

View original post 258 more words

 

Riding the security carousel.

Figures…

Dalrock

Pastor Douglas Wilson explains in Reforming Marriage why women’s sexual sin is different than men’s sexual sin.  When dirty men sin it is because they want sex.  But when misguided and unfortunate women sin it is because they are looking for love in all the wrong places:

If we interviewed a thousand men who were immoral and sexually promiscuous, we would find we had a thousand men with a lack of self-control with regard to sexual temptation. If we were to do the same with a thousand promiscuous women, we would not find a thousand women with a sexual problem, but rather with a security problem. They are generally not looking for great sexual satisfaction, but rather for emotional security.

Luckily normal women aren’t tempted to become promiscuous.  Only women damaged by failing fathers are tempted in this way (emphasis mine):

The girl has a big vacuum in her life—a…

View original post 212 more words

 

The Enemy Of England

PA

Not enemy:

***

Enemy:

View original post

 

Comment Of The Week: Inverted Sexual Polarity

Chateau Heartiste

From Ryu, a worthy COTW entry,

Women are becoming the men that they need. And men are becoming like the women they want.

How telling, that the women are cashing in, making the big bucks, getting tattoos, a bad attitude….

…while the men are hitting the gym, watching what they eat, being nice and agreeable.

White women will not re-feminize until white men dominate them again. Either white men do it, or the minos and muzz will do it. The void will be filled in any case.

That coda is critical. Women will never lose their desire for dominant men. Their pussy-shaped void will be filled, the only question remaining…by which men? Their own, or the men of an invading tribe?

View original post

 

World’s brightest atheist has just learned God is real

As those of us lesser mortals who believe already knew…

R.I.P., or so they say, Stephen Hawking…

 

The truth

Yep.

Hence blogging pseudonyms or partial names…

Philosophies of a Disenchanted Scholar

View original post