RED PILLS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

   Blogger Insanity Bytes has an interesting article, which can be read here.  The article critiques one of the Game Cultists, who's taken issue with an article written by Mary Kassian on the subject of women tolerating domestic abuse.

     To set up the premise of this controversy, Miss Kassian received an inquiry from a reader who evidently was married to a domineering bully, but was confused as to whether she, as a Christian woman should assert her rights. Miss Kassian writes in response:

    "I believe that the Bible teaches that a husband's position as head of the home does not give him a right to rule, but rather the responsibility to provide loving oversight. A husband is not imparted with privilege, he is entrusted with obligation---the obligation to love, cherish, and shepherd in emulation of Christ."

   Which statement echoes what the New Testament and subsequent Church authorities have written. And she states the crux of the matter succinctly: "The questions pertain to whether a husband has a right to force his wife to do something against her will... It is not the husband's right to force or coerce his wife to submit. Submission is voluntary on a wife's part and her choice entirely."

    One of the Manosphere Game Gurus---whose readership attracts thousands of men---wrote a rather rage-filled and disingenuous rebuttal to Miss Kassian. It would be unnecessary to go through it point-by-point, since it is filled with typically cultish non sequiturs and Game-Theory neologisms. He states emphatically, for example that "the post follows the Duluth Model framing headship as abuse" although she never mentions the Duluth Model.

      The original question posed to Miss Kassian was whether a husband had a right to do things like taking away a wife's phone, her keys, preventing her from leaving the home, forcing her to accompany him outside, locking the wife out of the house, concealing financial documents, and taking her personal property without her consent."

      One can only conclude from this is that the Gamers' ideal of a Christian husband is to treat wives in this kind of fashion. He gives his intentions away by writing the following:

      "Kassian is inviting wives to teach their own husbands on the proper way to exercise headship." he thunders, "No matter how you look at Kassian's article, she has no business writing such a thing, even under the most libertine complimentarian interpretations of Scripture. Only an egalitarian would argue that is appropriate for Kassian to teach what she is teaching."

       What he therefore derisively sneers at as libertine, complimentary, and egalitarian, is the notion that women are somehow equal in the Eyes of God and that the Christian ideal of gender polarity does not put positive reciprocal obligations on either party.

        Why is something as brutish as the Game Cult so popular? It is because it appeals to three of the worst elements in Postmodernist culture: narcissism, the belief that ends justify the means, and the evasion of personal responsibility.

         Game is narcissistic in that it teaches the superiority of certain initiated Alpha Males who ostensibly bend others to serve their will. It teaches then that force and fraud are justifiable means of achieving one's ends, and that Might makes Right. Then it covers its crimes with pseudo-religious authority so that responsibility for their actions fall upon God rather than upon themselves.

         Needless to say, we will not solve Domestic Violence by condoning it. Domestic Violence happens because we are taught that the gender differences are part of a class-war and that interpersonal relationships are premised on power. This is also how the Game Cult so easily can masquerade as a religion; its practitioners operate under the assumption that they are warriors in a holy crusade fighting a cultural war.  In this respect, they are no different from the Feminists whom they condemn.