Thursday, October 6, 2016


        The Manosphere's Red Pill/Game Cult rarely has anything positive to say about marriage. In fact, they generally have a lot more to say about divorce. That subject spawned not one, but two articles from prominent Game leaders today. Both again try to demonstrate that their doctrines on divorce are Biblically justified.

        The Game philosophy towards divorce has a double-standard, like everything else about which they write. They don't believe in complimentary gender polarity nor do they believe in female spiritual equality. Divorce is never justified under any circumstances, according to them, if the woman seeks it. On the other hand, they encourage husbands to employ Dread Game, a type of psychological abuse by which wives stay committed through fear of their husbands. Fear of loss factors into this: with the Gamer husband free to divorce under nearly any circumstances. Female expendability and culpability are central to Game thinking on any subject.

        Dalrock, one of the bloggers of the Game Cult, penned an article attacking the ministry of Joel and Kathy Davisson. According to the Davisson website, Joel Davisson is pastor of a non-denominational Protestant Church, and the couple experienced serious marital difficulties a few years ago. Their ministry today is focused on Christian marriage counseling.

       True to form, Dalrock begins by asserting that every denomination other than Game is under the control of feminist women. "I've written previously about the modern Christian cross-dressing view of marriage where wives are in absolute headship and regularly need to give husbands wake-up calls to establish their authority. While wives punishing disobedient husbands is a modern Christian fetish, there is a divergence of opinion on how wives should make their husbands submit...Modern Christians love this method {divorce, or the threat of it} as well; if you've seen the cherished movie 'Fireproof' you will recall that the husband to heel (and to God) by filing for divorce and taking up with a new man."

      As far as modern Christians go, Pope Francis spoke against these things  less than a week ago. But the Gamers will ignore the Pope and attack Reverend Davisson instead. Dalrock finds especially troubling Davisson's alleged 'reworking' of Malachi ii:16, in which the prophet denounces Hebrew men for frivolous divorce. He says:

     "What is so diabolically brilliant about this new Feminist meaning of Malachi ii:16 is that they have twisted the passage from a condemnation of male divorce theft to a blessing of female divorce theft...It is this new form of divorce theft/treachery that modern Christians want to condone, and this is why Malachi ii:16 must be twisted to condone divorce as long as the wife is the one committing it."

    Dalrock accuses the Davissons of promoting this viewpoint, based on what they said here:
"We have wrongly lifted three words out of context and as a result, the entire emphasis of the passage has been changed. As we have already pointed out, the pressure often falls on suffering women to 'buck up' instead of being placed upon men to treat their wives right as God intended...The message of Malachi ii is this: 'Men, obey the Word. Quit dealing treacherously with your wives. Why? Because if you don't you're going to end up divorced and God hates divorce."

    In other words, Dalrock's real issue here is that women should willingly submit to suffering at the hands of their husbands and being treated unjustly and treacherously. Dalrock admits as much when he complains: "Joel and Kathy explain that the real point of Malachi ii:16 is misapplied when it is used to tell unhappy wives that they should honor their marriage vows." So suffering from injustice and treachery is no justification for a wife to react? Once again, this article is just another Gamer justification for Domestic Violence and an unjust criticism of a ministry which claims to have saved several marriages.

     The second post was authored by Roosh Valizadeh, on the blog Return of Kings. Valizdeh is another long-standing Game Cult icon who's advocated such Christian positions as legalizing rape.

    Valizdeh---who has also claimed that promiscuous male sexuality is a spiritually elevating practice---published today an exegesis on a parable of the prophet Ezekiel's found in Ezekiel xxiii. Now Christian theologians for centuries have understood this passage to be a parable explaining how Jewish spiritual infidelity brought God's punishment upon them. But Valizdeh has the striking revelation that the passage is somehow central to understanding feminine desires for divorce.

      "This was made most vividly clear" he pontificates, "with the story of the Oholah and Oholibah sisters in Ezekiel xxiii, which uses a metaphor to describe the Jews whoring themselves out to other gods. Besides the changing of a few details, it's a tale that rings eerily familiar to the behavior of modern women."

     We should suppose that it would sound familiar to a man whom by his own admission has spent most of his adult life in the company of prostitutes, sluts, and adulteresses. And equally predictably, Valizdeh---a loud partisan of the Alt-Right---demands government action to solve things:

      "Considering that Western governments have removed all ramifications for a woman's actions, it's no surprise that we have nations full of Oholahs and Oholibahs. Unlike the American government, God exacted His furious vengeance on them...In modern times, they would get free welfare, while a dozen Beta males form a line in front of their door bearing gifts, love, and commitment."

      Yes---perish the thought that a man should ever heal a broken woman with love and commitment; or the Church offer humanitarian aid. That might be a Christian approach; but Valizdeh of course finds fault with the Church and salvation in Game:

     "You sure don't see this being taught in Christian churches and Christian countries have the highest divorce rates in the world...It's clear that the churches have been subverted by Feminist thinking. The priests of today are no longer teaching from the Bible but making it up as they go along to appease the promiscuous women who fill their pews and want to be graced with God's goodness even though they don't follow His Word. The teachings I've found in the Bible very closely match my own experiences from sleeping with the most promiscuous of them. Unless there are restraints on their behavior, they will rush into becoming like Oholah and Oholibah, and society will suffer as a result."

     Again, there is absolutely no sense of male responsibility here. Valizdeh, like Dalrock, is a male supremacist and a malignant narcissist who is just as bad as the Feminists whom he criticizes.

      While it is true that divorce laws are in serious need of reform and familial breakdown is a social crisis, attacking Christian organizations who are fighting the problem is no solution. What the Game Cultists really desire is Radical Feminism and Identity Politics to be applied to men. They fear female sexual power. In the natural order of things, female sexual power is accepting and submitting to a dominant with whom she bonds. It's the 'acceptance' part of the equation that the Gamers want to eliminate: either through government force or cultish fraud.



  1. "The priests of today are no longer teaching from the Bible but making it up as they go along to appease the promiscuous women who fill their pews and want to be graced with God's goodness even though they don't follow His Word. The teachings I've found in the Bible very closely match my own experiences from sleeping with the most promiscuous of them."

    Gah! That is just maddening, because Roosh is so close, he almost has the whole message of grace right there, and than whoosh, he loses it.

    We the "promiscuous women," and I'll include Roosh in that, really do fill those pews to be graced with God's goodness even though there are none worthy. It we were worthy it wouldn't be called "grace." So the red pills, that's what they are crying out for grace,they just think it's to be found in a woman and not in Christ. They want wives as their personal martyrs and people like Roosh are trying to sleep their way to salvation. Than they take that bit of perverse and twisted psychology, weave it around scripture, and try to sell it as "truth."

    I would never have believed it if I hadn't read it so many times. Arrggg.

    1. Yes, and Dalrock is a piece of work too. I don't know how many times in that one article he condemned 'modern churches' for encouraging divorce. Just a few days earlier, Pope Francis spoke out against 'the culture of divorce.'

      I don't know much more about the Davissons, other than what they claim on their homepage. But it sounds like they've prevented a lot of divorces from happening, a yet Dalrock is angry because they insist that husbands should treat their wives well instead of using Dread Game!

  2. Thank you Night Wind. Much appreciate. Only God knows how many couples have not reached out for help because of that Article by Dalrock, whoever he is appearing on the 1st page of our Google results for the last few years. We have indeed helped hundreds of couples to get happy in their marriage... and yes, as a second tier "win , we have empowered a number of women to leave abusive husbands. We get a lot if flack from a small group of loud, self proclaimed critics. You would not bother us at all except for the fact that we are quite certain that there have been many couples whose marriages could have been saved but were discouraged by articles like his. Thank you for being a voice out there that offers a common sense rebuttal.

    1. Thank you for the positive feedback. Yes, Dalrock and these others are trying to drive people who need help into their cult. I've read about some of the good work you've done---keep it up! Domestic violence is an issue, whether these characters want to admit it or not.

  3. Ah shucks. I do not see an edit button. That was "of flack" instead of if. And our other typo was not supposed to say ""You would not bother us.." It was supposed to read: They would not bother us at all..."