Good post. Most of the religious stuff (and I'm Orthodox) that gets spread around here (regarding relationships) is way too ideal. You can tell that it comes from guys that think like us because in order to prove our points, we often exaggerate for effect. Throw the idea of "new convert" on top, and 2D stuff such as writing vs. real conversation with someone addressing the particular needs of each, and it can get a bit out of hand. If you read some of the idealistic articles and aren't immediately struck by this, you need to take a few steps back, regroup and just start asking questions and interacting far more to get the proper balance.I think there's this idea within religious communities, of which this forum is also becoming - that the 'perfect' one will come from God and she will have none of the innate biological drivers that cause all of the problems we see in relationships. She will be submissive, funny and want sex as much (or as little) as you want and life will go great with your 'one' that was gifted by God himself.
What this does, is foster an unhealthy community whereby men cannot talk about relational problems (usually a lack of sex) because he has to uphold the image of his wife being the 'one' that everyone covets, and if he is to mention his dissatisfaction, he will often be met with scold from the community as a true man of god (TM) would never complain about wanting sex, he must be deep in sin and lust.
Dead bedrooms are incredibly common and it's rarely because of 'differing sex drives'.
What a lot of Blue Pill religious men come to find is that whilst their perfect wife isn't cheating or anything of the kind - they also aren't having sex with him and it's because to her he has become the safe cuddly teddybear that she can rely on to do as he's told, will never leave and will put up with undesired intimacy once a year.
The religious community today offers little to help with this situation and the idealized relationship can become one of 'platonic room mates'.
The Rational male however offers you an actual life line, but to take that life line would depend on if you believe the person you are with is 'the one' or if there are many 'good ones'. If your woman is the chosen one from God, but after one year doesn't want sex ever again and begins nagging you and disrespecting you - is this a worldly problem that can be fixed with worldly solutions, or do we say that actually perhaps this one wasn't from God but the next one will be?
From my perspective we have to live in the real world even if we are not of the world and the Rational Male is one of the best books to have ever existed in understanding how to maintain desire in a relationship, keeping both partners at their optimal happiness and stress free.
Whilst I'm not a fan of Rollo's marketing nor his comments towards Roosh finding God - it would be naive to assume he hasn't helped save many marriages that would otherwise not have survived and this has to have some credit.
I'm sure my opinion won't be popular here and that's OK - I'm just calling it how I see it currently.
I think most of this "redpill" philosophy is incompatible with Catholicism because it tends to generalize about women and "women nature".
in Catholicism we had plenty of women saints who completely defy what the redpillers say about "women nature".
if you read Catholic authors from the past, you will learn everything about the genders and other issues.
So it's clear that Catholicism can make women great in every way, if God wills it and through his grace. Many redpillers would have you believe that those women would have been sluts or some feminists if they lived in our "emancipation" era
Could you elaborate and name a few ? (Not that I disagree, but I'm curious to know which examples you're thinking of. I am a traditional Catholic and I love reading Catholic authors of all sorts, but "gender issues" is not the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of all that I have read. I'd have thought there are no such things as gender issues in a Catholic world).
History shows otherwise. During the French revolution, at a period when mostly everyone believed the anti-monastic propaganda and thought it was a good thing for the government to close all monastic establishments, you still had many nuns begging to be just left alone.
That is more due to the current dating age than anything else. In more puritanical times, the theory of spinning plates would still be utilized, it would just not have a sexual component, and you would move on a lot faster from a falling plate.I don't think so. From what I can recall, Rollo tirelessly promotes fornication through the guise of "spinning plates."
The question to ask yourself is, "would you give your son The Rational Male?" My answer is a hard no.
I followed his work closely in my early and mid twenties and was curious to see how he reconciled that information with religion when his new book came out. I found it unreadably bad and put it on the shelf after about half an hour.
You should probably go read the Bible before you go off like that. Also 4/10 on the trolling attempt.The problem with Roosh removing the Travel and PUA posts, is the “bridge” of manosphere to religion will simply erode over time in regards to this forum. More and more rote platitudes and pious advice, but hardly any cause and effect, who, what, how, and why, etc. Eventually you are just back to modern Christianity, where everybody stopped participating because nobody understood the point anymore, and viewed it as a bunch of stuffy no-fun nannies telling you to keep your hands out of your pants.