Sexual relations and women’s suffrage

There are many aspects to the pattern of godly living which God has set forth for us. One of those is healthy sexual dynamics between men and women. God has made it adundantly clear that men and women have different roles in this life.

Regarding commands specific to women:
– women are not to speak in church (1 Cor 14:34-35);
– women are to be submissive to husbands in all things (1 Cor 11:3, Eph 5:22-24, Col 3:18, 1 Peter 3:1) (subject to Acts 5:29);
– women are to respect/revere (lit. ‘fear’) their husband: Eph 5:33
– women may not exercise authority over men (1 Tim 2:11-14);
– women must be keepers of the home and bear children (Proverbs 31:10-31; 1 Tim 5:14, Titus 2:4-5);
– women are to concern themselves with pleasing their husbands (1 Cor 7:34);
– women are to avoid gossip (1 Tim 3:11, Titus 2:3); and
– women were created as a helper to man (Gen 2:18).

Regarding men:
– husbands are to love and care for their wives even unto giving up their lives for them (Eph 5:25, 28, 33, Col 3:19, 1 Peter 3:7);
– fathers bear ultimate responsibility for the correct raising and discipline of children (Eph 6:4, Col 3:21, Heb 12:9);
– fathers bears accountability for the actions of his family (Gen 3:9-11);
– men bear grave responsibility for correct teaching and not leading the church away from the truth (Gal 1:8-9, James 3:1);
– man is to cultivate and subdue the land (Gen 2:15)

Generally I mistrust simplistic pictures which try to convey Scriptural teachings, as they often misrepresent it. But this one seems OK.

I want to consider all the way back to the fundamentals of sexual dynamics, and this is only lighty touched by Scriptures, though the implications are there for those who seek. What makes men and women tick? What makes them attracted to one another? There is an old sterotype that men don’t like smart women. And more recently, the counter-stereotype is that such men are intimated by smart women and can’t ‘handle’ them.

But there is truth to both these stereotypes. It goes back to why God has instructed women to revere their husbands. It’s because men need their wives to revere them; at least, in order to have a happy, prosperous relationship. God doesn’t just make arbitrary laws because He thinks it’s fun: he does it for our benefit. And so just as much as women desperately want to submit to a man; a man requires a woman who desires to submit to him. After all, it’s right there in the sexual act, fetishes notwithstanding. As God is to man; so man is to woman. A man craves that his woman worships the very ground he walks on. His natural response to such a woman will be one of utmost love and care – to the point where he would give his life for her. And a woman craves a man who will be her immovable rock and protect her and provide for her in a dangerous world.

This is why there is the stereotype that men are attracted to dumb women. Or that they prefer younger women. We don’t need to rationalise (we cannot, perhaps) these stereotypes in order to understand that they represent a deep truth. Men go for young, fertile women; women go for strong, powerful men. Sure, evolutionists say that men are attracted to younger women beause they are more fertile. I’m sure this is party true. But I think it’s more important that a young, dumb woman is more likely to revere him. To worship him. She will submit to him, gladly, without sourness or reluctance. What is worse than a nagging wife? Would you not rather hide out on the corner of your roof than deal with a quarrelsome wife? A woman’s submission is so much more important to a man than anything else a woman can offer. Money? No. Mothering skills? No. Housewife skills? No. Excel spreadsheet skills? Heck, no. These things have value (except possibly the last), but they are not pre-eminent.

Not a natural environment for a woman, and not a catch for a man who wants a satisfying relationship (and children).

This is why men are prone to cheating on their wives: a younger woman is so much more likely to rever him precisely because of her naivete. And when a woman has lived with her husband for a long enough period of time, she will come to see all his faults and flaws, and it will become that much harder for her to revere him. As they say, ‘familiarity breeds contempt’. She may turn sour, or at least sceptical (truly, she will beome realistic) of the amazing god on earth that she once adored. So it does not matter that the older woman may be more skilled at serving her husband: she may cook and clean the house like a pro, she may be more experienced in the sack. But a man will prefer a woman who is a terrible cook yet who happily and eagerly cooks him terrible meals day after day, for he desires a woman who, even if unskilled, unquestioningly reveres him, to a woman who serves him skillfully, yet perhaps somewhat reluctantly, and in the full knowledge that he is a flawed being.

So this is why men have a tendency to avoid educated, powerful women. An educated woman will be far more likely to see the flaws in her man. And a powerful woman – possibly holding more status than her husband – will find it much harder to revere her man. These women, in being powerful and educated, offer to men in the sexual marketplace the very thing which men least desire. There may be a smattering of such women with the inclination and self-control to properly revere their husbands, but I suspect they are vanishingly rare. And even a particlarly sharp yet uneducated, woman may, in some respects, be a sub-optimal catch for men, for her innate intelligence will inevitably pre-dispose her to pride and scepticism. That is, unless she kept such attitudes tightly controlled, in which case she would be a truly rare and worthy woman.

The Call of the Wild. Anti-feminism poster from the early 1900’s.

Now, to get on to the topic of women’s suffrage. Call this conspiracy or whatever you want, but women’s suffrage was never about equality. It was a gigantic shit test, which men failed. Women were testing their men to see if they could keep it together and keep women’s hands off something which they never created or had any involvement in previously: statecraft. In failing the shit test, men showed to their women that they were not a rock of stability. Thus, men lost the respect of women, and women were only too happy to usurp the power that men had fumbled and lost. The failure of men led to women adopting the masculine trappings of political education and power. The failure of men led to women turning into that which they find least desirable in a woman.

About the Author:

  • Charliedelto

    Oh wow, this is red pill as all hell. Women’s suffrage was a shit test, I never thought of that.