I came across the following post warning about the “sexist” history of many aspects of contemporary wedding ceremonies: https://www.mic.com/articles/139845/7-surprisingly-sexist-wedding-traditions-we-should-change-immediately
I found the authors alarm to be amusing. Who knew history was so politically incorrect?
If only the white dress was the lone part of the bride’s wardrobe steeped in the patriarchy. Unfortunately, the veil is just as guilty.
The patristic era of the church is considered to have run from AD 150 – 500.
All surviving evidence shows that the early church unanimously believed that only men are in the image of God. Tertullian, Ambrosiaster, Augustine, and others all wrote of men alone being the image of God. The women of the early church knew they were not in the great and glorious image of God like their husbands, and consequently they would have no reasonable basis to claim equality with men. Furthermore women were not only looked upon as lesser and weaker vessels, but they were in fact viewed as a source of uncleanness and defilement, the original source of transgression against God, and prone to giving in to their passions and their ever emerging lustful desires.
Women are worse than animals because they are continuously full of lust. ~ Origen AD 184 – 253
Woman is the root of all evil. ~ Saint Jerome AD 347 – 420
…it is still Eve the temptress that we must beware of in any woman. ~ Saint Augustine AD 354 – 430
Some of the early church fathers were swayed by the great influence in their culture of the stoics and ascetics to adopt a very anti-sex position, that has carried over into today’s Catholic churches demand for celibacy amongst their clergy. Instead of viewing married sex as sanctified, always due at your spouses request, and a protection against temptation, as the apostle Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 7:2-5, some instead viewed all sex as a weak failing of resolve to restrain the flesh, and thought that only God’s command of procreation could render it permissible. Thus they erroneously rationalized all forms of sexual contact to be evil, if conception wasn’t the primary goal. The goals of not defrauding your spouse of their due, and keeping temptation at bay, were apparently overlooked. Along with verses like:
Proverbs 5:18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. 19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.
Based upon the rest of proverbs 5 the “fountain” is fairly clearly being used as a euphemism for the man’s sexual organ.
I think the churches historical anti-sex drift has led to many teachings in the Bible concerning sex to remain obscured. Bowdlerized! For example just prior to the husband being told to let his fountain be blessed, and all that, we are told:
Proverbs 5:15 Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well.
What if Solomon, who was given wisdom from God, wasn’t instructing us to refuse to drink any literal water when away from our own well? Nobody I know even practices that literally. Lapping waters from thine own well makes far more sense and is on topic as another pretty graphic euphemism. I’ll let you figure out what he just described. Hint: men have a fountain, women have a well. LOL I believe Solomon is instructing us to fully enjoy our exclusive marital sexuality, (leave every other man’s well alone) and that is in keeping with the apostle Paul’s teaching that frequent marital sex helps to prevent temptation including thirst for adulterous liaisons.
The “Problem That Has No Name” was described by Betty Friedan in the beginning of ‘ The Feminine Mystique’. The problem lay buried, unspoken, for many years in the minds of American women. It was a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction, a yearning [that is, a longing] that women suffered in the middle of the 20th century in the United States. Each suburban [house]wife struggled with it alone. As she made the beds, shopped for groceries … she was afraid to ask even of herself the silent question — “Is this all?”
Why the dissatisfaction? Because Betty doesn’t think her husband is a god. That’s why. As a Feminist, Betty’s husband is at best seen as an “equal”, not someone she can look up to, but most likely seen as an undeserving and inferior person that she is enslaved to. She doesn’t reverence her man, and so she doesn’t reverence her mission, which is to serve her husband. Having lost respect for her man, she also naturally loses interest in keeping him, keeping his home, and keeping his children that she had together with him. She is dissatisfied with her lot, serving her “equal”. Needless to say this explains why she is also going to ‘dead-bedroom’ him, and only begrudgingly condescend to allow him some lackluster sex when, if ever, she feels like it. Her natural sexual instinct is craving a man that she can reverence, but she has deluded herself into believing that her own husband is not such a man. Perhaps she thinks, somewhere out there is a man who is more. And so she is attracted to confident men who project that they are something more than other men. She keeps hoping to find a “god” to serve.
So why was the Patristic prevailing wisdom that women were insatiable sexually?
My theory is that when women see themselves as beneath men, because they are taught from childhood that all men exclusively are gods, images of God most high. Then every married woman has a man whom she always has great reason to look up to and reverence. And serving him and bearing him children, becomes a divine privilege and a very worthy purpose. No other purpose is needed if women are taught the truth correctly, from God’s word. Marrying a god is likely a great source of “insatiable” female sexual desire. Men alone being images of God is the satisfaction to most of a woman’s hypergamy. Every woman can marry a man who is hopelessly above her by nature of his very creation as a god. During the Patristic age Christian women were taught that, and those who recorded church history found the wives then to be sexual aggressors, desiring their husbands “insatiably”. We would all reap benefit from ending this God emasculating heresy of imagining women into the image of God our Father.
God figuratively uses the sun and moon as images of man and wife, or male and female.
In the passage below Joseph relates a prophetic vision to his father, Jacob. The patriarchal order in which Joseph mentions the symbols, and the exact same order in Jacob’s reply, shows that Joseph’s father (AKA Israel) immediately knows that he is the sun, his wife is the moon, and the eleven other brothers are the eleven stars.
Genesis 37:9 Then he dreamed another dream and told it to his brothers and said, “Behold, I have dreamed another dream. Behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” 10 But when he told it to his father and to his brothers, his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the ground before you?” 11 And his brothers were jealous of him, but his father kept the saying in mind.
Most cultures treat the sun as male and the moon as female and have sun gods and moon goddesses. The moon is the lesser or weaker light that “rules the darkness” and has a 28 day cycle exactly like a woman. In fact our words “menses” and “month” both come from the the latin mensis (month), which derives from the Greek Aeolic form mens (μηνς) of mene (μήνη; moon).
Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
Ezekiel 32:7 And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.
Psalm 84:11 For the LORD God is a sun and shield: the LORD will give grace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.
In the following passage our earthly bodies are directly likened to celestial bodies:
1 Corinthians 15: 39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42a So also is the resurrection of the dead. …
45 And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1 Corinthians 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
Some of the ancient moon goddesses were given names like the “Queen of Heaven” or the “Mother of gods”. Do those names sound strangely familiar?
an idol of the ancient polytheists’ goddess Luna
Read Mike’s post. I suspect he is only just picking up steam in his fight for truth. He seems to be one of many new folks that the lord is calling to cry out God’s message, because the apostate churches won’t.
Men, you were all created; fearfully and wonderfully made. God our Father, the Ancient of days, has seen fit to share his glory with us all by making us each as a lesser likeness of Himself, God most high and fearful. We are all sons of the man Adam, a son of God, we are born after his divine image, and so we too are lesser gods, like he. We have inherited the rightful dominion over this earth that was given to our father Adam by God, Adam’s Maker and Father, who made all things through His only begotten Son Jesus Christ. The disciple, whom Jesus loved, John, had a vision of Jesus Christ our now exalted head: Revelation 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
Christ, our redeemer and resurrection, is the head of every man, just as man is the head of woman. Women are to reverence their husbands, after marriage through humble obedience to them, and before marriage by keeping themselves pure and unspoiled for them. Ha ha.
I’d like to give my highest salute to my wise MGTOW brothers who have kept themselves unspoiled by women, who are natural defilers. You have a magnificence bestowed by God that women can’t touch. If not for my own weakness and fallibility of mind, I would be one of you and as stalwart as you are.
Revelation 14:3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5 And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.
Keep your walk straight, your head high, and your pure heart committed to God. Be guided by your reason, by your faith, and by sound principles. You noble sons of Adam have my enduring respect and admiration as you bear the burdens and responsibilities placed upon you by an ungrateful society that depends upon your good virtue. While silly harpies and religious charlatans smear all men as “toxic” or “unloving”, I will not so slander the image of God. From the bottom of my heart, my brothers, with all the honor due to you, I salute you.
The man pictured above, is United States ~ Union general William Tecumseh Sherman, known as “Uncle Billy” to his troops, and famous for his quote “War is hell”, and his harsh “total war” strategy. He seems to have been a bit red-pilled. Below are some of his quotes.
When people believe a delusion they believe it harder than a real fact.
To those who would submit to the rightful law and authority, all gentleness and forbearance; but to the petulant and persistent secessionists, why, death is mercy, and the quicker he or she is disposed of the better. Satan and the rebellious saints of Heaven were allowed a continuous existence in hell merely to swell their just punishment. To such as would rebel against a Government so mild and just as ours was in peace, a punishment equal would not be unjust.
You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war. They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Atlanta can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war, which can only be done by admitting that it began in error and is perpetuated in pride.
I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine; even success the most brilliant is over dead and mangled bodies, with the anguish and lamentations of distant families, appealing to me for sons, husbands, and fathers … it is only those who have never heard a shot, never heard the shriek and groans of the wounded and lacerated … who cry aloud for more blood, for more vengeance, for more desolation. War is hell.
War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.
I intend to make Georgia howl.
If the people raise a great howl against my barbarity and cruelty, I will answer that war is war, and not popularity seeking. If they want peace, they and their relatives must stop the war.
My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom.
Wars are not all evil, they are part of the grand machinery by which this world is governed.
War’s legitimate object is more perfect peace.
But, my dear sirs, when peace does come, you may call on me for any thing. Then will I share with you the last cracker, and watch with you to shield your homes and families against danger from every quarter.
An Army is a collection of armed men obliged to obey one man. Every change in the rules which impairs that principle weakens the army.
An army to be useful must be a unit, and out of this has grown the saying, attributed to Napoleon, but doubtless spoken before the days of Alexander, that an army with an inefficient commander was better than one with two able heads.
So I’m exploring WordPress Reader, and it recommends an oddball post about the “science” behind cuckoldry. And it piqued my curiosity because that is something that I sure as hell don’t understand. Well, Sharkly bit the bullet, and read through it for you. It was written by a slut who cuckolds her husband and claims to be a sex therapist who helps other couples enter into this same kind of cuckolding. Firstly there really wasn’t any “science” cited, although she does repeatedly allude to “primate studies” as she profusely illustrates her post with pictures of Black men. The pictures and article were such that even I won’t link to it. LOL But it gets worse. I tried to read some of this authors other articles on the subject, but my porn filter blocked all but one of them, so I’ll just address the two posts I was able to read. This deluded slut uses speculation based upon her very non-standard view of evolution theory to arrive at the conclusion that wives should have a sex deprived Beta husband, who provides for and protects them, while the wives should also enjoy emotionally meaningless sex with a number of well hung studs. The kicker is that the wife has to get the Beta husband onboard in order to keep a “good” marriage going with him. While all of it was debauched, evil, and destructive to the family, there were some things that jumped out at me.
She firmly believes that women have higher sex drives than men.(likely the personal anecdotal evidence of a female sex addict, her insistence on the emotional meaninglessness of the outside sex is also a hallmark of sex addiction) She believes that Patriarchy has perverted and inverted our sex roles, by keeping women monogamous.
Although she doesn’t give away her whole professional method for converting couples to cuckoldry, she does state that women dominate their husbands via sexual denial, and the first step to cuckoldry is getting the husband to willingly accept his wife’s denial of sex. Wow! It hit me like a ton of bricks. I’ve heard that shit preached in church! I’ve had that turd flung at me in “Christian marriage counselling”.
She says: Fortunately my husband does not see me as a “fallen woman”. On the contrary, he puts me on a pedestal. My husband considers me to be a white, blonde, Greek Goddess, and the more extramarital interracial sex I have, the more he adores and admires me.
In the comments she says: It would be a big step in the right way if we could have a matriarchal society structure again so that a woman would be free to be intimate with other men if she wants to.
regarding her cuckolded husband:
No, he believes that he is mortal – and that I am a Goddess.
And there you have it! The church forces men to let their wives deny them sex with lame excuses. The ‘great whore’ stole from men the exclusive image of God, and instead deifies women as men’s superiors. Converting churchmen into ready cuckolds to slutty wives. Our churches are a polluted fat whore, not the bride of Christ!
I have been blogging for just a month, and yet in that very short time, I have come across an interesting phenomenon on a few different occasions already. Married women have been secretly contacting me for spiritual consultation.
1 Corinthians 14: 33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36 Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord.
So to prevent confusion in Christ’s church, and to promote peace within our families, I need to acknowledge that the above commandment is of the Lord.
So why do woman seek me out for spiritual answers? I’m not sure if they feel that I’ll know them and their situation better than their husbands, or care about their situation and their children’s situation more dearly, or that recently established anonymous strangers on the internet are to be trusted for guidance more than their husbands? But I suspect that they’re looking for a second opinion, or third, or fourth, or fifth.
My own (separated/mid-divorce)wife, who has Intimacy Anorexia, is addicted to withholding intimacy from me. That includes spiritual, emotional, and physical intimacy. She will not pray with me or do a devotional with me. So I really enjoyed feeling the spiritual intimacy of having a woman come to me for spiritual consultation. However I also knew I was not where they should be getting their spiritual guidance, if there is any way in which their own husbands can be made to give them guidance on the matter. I realized the exchange is one of intimacy, and that belongs to their husbands. So I needed to try to nip this in the bud.
All husbands are their wife’s heads, and are to be asked for guidance. Even unsaved husbands are to be asked for guidance, and then submitted to. Husbands want to be followed, it is very intimate and endearing to have a woman who is willing to follow you.
I don’t even know whether a wife should ask for her husband’s guidance, if she isn’t already committed to following it, so long as it isn’t clearly a great sin. In my mind it would be insulting and create distance to ask a husband for guidance, and then do something else, after he gave his plan. And going to other men for spiritual headship, is just two-timing a woman’s own head. I wouldn’t advise it, unless her husband has clearly and repeatedly refused to give her any guidance on the matter after she has asked him for it clearly and she has conveyed to him sincerely that she intends to follow his advice, so long as he does not guide her into a greater sin than her failure to submit. Some husbands may have become hesitant to give their wives spiritual direction, knowing she’ll just openly defy them, thereby putting them to shame, or worse, submit herself to some other man’s spiritual direction.
1 Peter 3:1 Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, 2 when they see your respectful and pure conduct.
I think that kindly asking an unsaved husband to give you spiritual guidance, and being committed to following it, provided it wasn’t a great sin, could be a great tool to turn a husband’s mind to his spiritual responsibilities. Especially if you asked him for help following certain passages in the Bible that involved your submission to him. I can imagine an unsaved man getting quite interested in the Bible based upon just that topic alone. And there are many great tools online that a man can use to find things in the Bible, even if he has little or no knowledge of it. One site I like to use is: https://www.biblegateway.com/ Even an unsaved husband could find some relevant Bible passages there and try to apply them for his wife.
I just see that women are squandering a chance to have more unity in their homes, by finding out what their husbands’ spiritual desires are, and then indulging them, a chance to motivate their husbands to exercise more spiritual leadership, and a chance to build closer spiritual intimacy with their husbands.
Rasputin ~ Sexual Mystic “holy man” File source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rasputin_1907.jpg
Mystical definition: having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence.
Once again, Jack, over at Σ Frame, has stirred me to think new thoughts. In his recent post “How is illicit sex related to one’s spiritual state?” Jack relates; having the experience of falling in love, bonding, and feeling accepted and blessed as a result of humbly opening his heart while engaging in illicit sexual encounters. Seemingly, Jack is wondering at the mystical aspects of sexual union.
Jack isn’t the only one who thinks sexuality is spiritually charged. In the unintentionally funny video below, Ms. Tylor shares some NSFW explanation of her sexual mysticism and also basically describes becoming an “Alpha Widow”, without using the term.
The Bible warns extensively about sexual immorality, not just forbidding it, but also saying that in spite of the fleeting pleasure, it changes us negatively and irreversibly. There is a significant lasting spiritual component to the acts of disobedience against God’s commands. The illicit sex mystically impacts both our spirit and body, and so God warns us of the imperceptible damage being done.
1 Corinthians 6:15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! 16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.” 17 But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. 18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
Recently reformed Pick Up Artist Roosh V. speaks of the fruitlessness of illicit sex:
“ I’ve spent a lot of time trying to fornicate, fornicating, traveling to more effectively fornicate, and writing over a million words about fornication. What did I learn from all that? It’s an experience that gets more dull with repetition, like any other experience. However, it also leaves you with a massive hangover where you find yourself at a loss. What was the point of all that? Is there anything I’ve truly gained? What lasting glory have I achieved? If I wasn’t a writer, I would have nothing to “show” for my efforts besides memories that are as likely to make me cringe as give me happiness.”
Roosh’s eventual conclusion is now reminiscent of King Solomon’s similar statements of the vanity of such consuming pursuit of fleshly pleasure.
However, when reserved completely for marriage, sex between virgins has the divine ability to bond just them together into one flesh and to be a source of exclusive intimacy between them, unspoiled and incomparable, in reward of their obedience. Statistical evidence shows the greater holding power of this unspoiled mystical bond against the marriage wrecking forces of our current culture. Our children need every possible advantage in their marriages. As parents we should make sure they know about, and get, this divinely revealed dividend of sexual immaculacy.
Jack, at Σ Frame linked to my How to bring back Patriarchy post.
In his description Jack hinted about the Overton window. While I’m not certain what Jack was implying, I do have a response.
First I had to look up what the Overton window was. While I was unfamiliar with the term, It was a familiar concept that I believe is quite true. It refers to the range of ideas permitted in public discourse. Often people, especially on the far left, will use the Door-in-the-face technique to modify the window of ideas which are acceptable, by publicly promoting leftist ideas that are currently far out of bounds to destigmatize less extreme leftist ideas that then seem to be an acceptable compromise by comparison.
So am I saying men are in the image of God while women are not, as a strategic ploy to move the center point of discussion to the right by yanking the extreme edge over further to the right?
No. I actually believe every word I wrote, and I even held back a bit.
Now if all I accomplish is to move the Overton window to the right through the Door-in-the-face technique, that in itself will increase righteousness and be helpful to society, and will have been a good deed. But I intend to do far more. I’d actually love to see my plan followed and patriarchy restored.
Now if I were to bet on my success, I’d bet against Sharkly. I’d bet that society continues to ignore God’s word, even when I proclaim it, and instead will try to censor me, mock me, and persecute me. But the results are not mine to control. So, I’ll just try to be a faithful servant of God, and serve him as best I can, in my own unique way that He has been preparing and equipping me to do.
separately, a commenter seems to wonder:
No, I don’t believe so.
If I really hated women I’d tell them to study for years in college preparing so they can waste their most fertile years and expel their freshest eggs while working in a factory or office, and then have to settle for whatever leftover men are still available, or else cats. I’d tell them to be sexually liberated and get pumped and dumped by a string of immoral men who will later laugh about all the stupid whores they porked. If I really hated women I’d flatter them that they’re equal or better than men, they’re “daughters of the King” made in the image of God, have a goddess inside them, and that they just need to “find themselves”.
No, I love women. A lot! I’ve even spent time carefully admiring pictures of women whom I don’t personally know, on the internet. ???? And my love and appreciation for women is why I’m not hesitant to tell them what is truly best for them. And it is best for women to truly know their place. Woman was created last of all, for the man, God gave her to the man, to have. The man was created in the image of God and as such comes before God, who’s image he bears, uncovered. But the woman is just the glory of man, and must cover her head when coming into the presence of God, because she is not allowed this exaltation that is reserved for men who are all in God’s image and glory.
I also feel that women get too much flattery and aggrandizement in our Feminist society, and especially in our churches, having become veritable temples of cunt-worship. So, out of love I generally try not to overinflate their already inflated sense of self. I try not to apologize in advance before I say something putting women back in their place, nor do I want to sandwich it with a piece of praise. Just, Whack! Know your place woman! That way the message doesn’t get lost. I’m willing to be a rock of offense for God.
Let me have it below! Your comments may help me or others.
The perfect man who lives just over the fence, where the grass is always greener.
A recent comment made me wonder, if it is possible that women like to shift the blame for their lack of compliance & submission onto their husbands?
And, personally, being a woman, there’s nothing I love more than a dominant, masculine man who isn’t afraid to stand up and take charge. It’s pretty near impossible to be submissive to a limp dishrag who refuses to lead.
I think I have also heard women say the opposite: “if only my husband wasn’t so overbearing and demanding, then I would find it easy to submit to him.”
Many women seemingly say to themselves; I’d be submittin’ like a kitten, if only my husband was perfectly everything I wanted him to be, changing in harmony with my moods, and was a fit helper to fulfill my every desire.
The downside of the soul mate / fairy tale view of relationships
Apparently some women have difficulty submitting because their husbands are not assertive enough, while others have difficulty submitting because their husbands are too assertive. And no doubt some have difficulty even though their husband is the perfect balance of assertiveness, because everything he is asserting is somehow just wrong.
Did she choose her own man? The answer is: Yes! Women are the gatekeepers of sex. Unless she was forced to marry a man who raped her,(like in some Islamic countries) then she truly did have the option to say “no, I do not”, instead of saying “I do”. She may have even arranged to be given away to this man by her own father. So, how did her husband become so unworthy, that he can no longer be submitted to, as unto the Lord? And how did the mythical “Chad Thundercock” become so perfect for so many different types of women, while their own husbands constantly miss the mark so badly? Is “Chad” really that well-endowed? Girlfriend! I’ve heard his manhood is almost as big as “the fish that got away”, and yet guaranteed to always feel just right. He’s such a good lover! He does stuff to you that you’ll love before you ever knew you’d like it. Somehow Chad just knows. But if your own husband did the same stuff, it would just be all wrong, and you’d feel used and violated, not like when Chad did it perfectly in your mind.
Maybe for the good of all marriages, we need to hunt Chad down and expose him as being a fabricated figmentary fantasy. Or better yet, make him marry one of these hos he’s supposedly bedding, and then let her tell the world what a dirty rat disappointing husband Chad turned out to be, and how abusive he is, and how she was forced to divorce him and flee with the kids and all Chad’s stuff.(although she is still living in Chad’s former home) And how she had to go to court to force Chad to fully pay for her life on easy street, while she is having to screw a growing list of men, on Chad’s dollar, to console herself about the breakup over Chad’s failure to be who she thought he should have been.
The problem for us is Chad is perpetually single, always available to even the ugliest and orneriest women, he refuses to ever marry, and he can be such a homewrecker, always one-upping husbands. That Bastard!
