Post: #1

I've had some hardships in my life recently, that have really turned into new, exciting opportunities, but still: I went through a period of depression. I've become more drawn to the church I was baptized in 7 years ago: the Russian Orthodox Church.

I didn't even know anything about the religion, besides the depressing choral singing and beautifully profligate interiors and uniforms of the church.

And of all the current major Christian denominations, it's the most patriarchal: something I like. Very much.

But still, I'm a committed long-long bachelor: I think marriage is an outdated institution, even if it wasn't for our anti-male divorce and child custody/support laws.

And no kids either. Not in my rotten country. Not worth the financial and psychological toll which has about a 30% chance of happening to every American male who gets married.

I don't know. I feel like I've developed a duality. A little Machivalean, in a way. I treat girls like children. Except when I fuck them, of course. Then I make sure to remind them that they're women.

Duality like this any good, heh?

Post: #2

(11-02-2012 12:18 AM)megatron Wrote:  I've had some hardships in my life recently, that have really turned into new, exciting opportunities, but still: I went through a period of depression. I've become more drawn to the church I was baptized in 7 years ago: the Russian Orthodox Church.

I didn't even know anything about the religion, besides the depressing choral singing and beautifully profligate interiors and uniforms of the church.

And of all the current major Christian denominations, it's the most patriarchal: something I like. Very much.

But still, I'm a committed long-long bachelor: I think marriage is an outdated institution, even if it wasn't for our anti-male divorce and child custody/support laws.

And no kids either. Not in my rotten country. Not worth the financial and psychological toll which has about a 30% chance of happening to every American male who gets married.

I don't know. I feel like I've developed a duality. A little Machivalean, in a way. I treat girls like children. Except when I fuck them, of course. Then I make sure to remind them that they're women.

Duality like this any good, heh?

Hmmm, interesting question.

I'd say, do whatever floats your boat. I personally am not very religious and don't really see the appeal of it, but I have met people for whom religion privides definite benefits. Do what makes you feel good.

As to your other point, I too treat women like children. I think that if you deal with enough of them, you come to almost laugh off their shit tests, drama, and other assorted craziness the same way you do a child's BS.

Post: #3

(11-02-2012 12:30 AM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

(11-02-2012 12:18 AM)megatron Wrote:  I've had some hardships in my life recently, that have really turned into new, exciting opportunities, but still: I went through a period of depression. I've become more drawn to the church I was baptized in 7 years ago: the Russian Orthodox Church.

I didn't even know anything about the religion, besides the depressing choral singing and beautifully profligate interiors and uniforms of the church.

And of all the current major Christian denominations, it's the most patriarchal: something I like. Very much.

But still, I'm a committed long-long bachelor: I think marriage is an outdated institution, even if it wasn't for our anti-male divorce and child custody/support laws.

And no kids either. Not in my rotten country. Not worth the financial and psychological toll which has about a 30% chance of happening to every American male who gets married.

I don't know. I feel like I've developed a duality. A little Machivalean, in a way. I treat girls like children. Except when I fuck them, of course. Then I make sure to remind them that they're women.

Duality like this any good, heh?

Hmmm, interesting question.

I'd say, do whatever floats your boat. I personally am not very religious and don't really see the appeal of it, but I have met people for whom religion privides definite benefits. Do what makes you feel good.

As to your other point, I too treat women like children. I think that if you deal with enough of them, you come to almost laugh off their shit tests, drama, and other assorted craziness the same way you do a child's BS.

Post: #4

You like the religion but don't actually believe it. Or you're not willing to compromise on being a pussy hound. You're remaking the religion in your own image, appointing yourself God and worshiping your own reflection. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but standard fare among people who want the trappings of religion but none of the obligations and restraints.

Take an art history course, read some philosophy, maybe you'll get over it.

Post: #5

(11-02-2012 01:59 AM)basilransom Wrote:  You like the religion but don't actually believe it. Or you're not willing to compromise on being a pussy hound. You're remaking the religion in your own image, appointing yourself God and worshiping your own reflection. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but standard fare among people who want the trappings of religion but none of the obligations and restraints.

Take an art history course, read some philosophy, maybe you'll get over it.

I see where you're coming from, but that's not the case. I see it this way God > Me > Women. I do feel superior to women, they're impulsive little brats, but I believe in God and that I have to submit to him sometimes. And that I feel a need to do it more and more increasingly.

Post: #6

(11-02-2012 02:10 AM)megatron Wrote:  

(11-02-2012 01:59 AM)basilransom Wrote:  You like the religion but don't actually believe it. Or you're not willing to compromise on being a pussy hound. You're remaking the religion in your own image, appointing yourself God and worshiping your own reflection. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but standard fare among people who want the trappings of religion but none of the obligations and restraints.

Take an art history course, read some philosophy, maybe you'll get over it.

I see where you're coming from, but that's not the case. I see it this way God > Me > Women. I do feel superior to women, they're impulsive little brats, but I believe in God and that I have to submit to him sometimes. And that I feel a need to do it more and more increasingly.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying whether religion is true or not - you already presumably accept God's authority as understood by Christian Orthodoxy. Meaning the Bible and Christianity are God's word in your eyes. And that the wisdom of His commandments transcends time and place. So who are you to disagree? At best you're a unrepentant sinner, at worst a heretic.

Don't be one of those people who want to retain the trappings and name of religion, and then completely gut it of its historical, authentic character. Eg, pseudo-Catholics who support abortion, *in the name of Catholicism.* They're just heretics in denial.

Post: #7

I enjoy ponderings like this thread.

Supposedly, we live in a society dominated by secular and humanist values. Those values are leading to the demographic collapse of society, through lack of reproduction. They are in my humble opinion false values. Right now I am reading "America Alone" by Mark Steyn - which illustrates the post Christian collapse of secular Europe through birth rate. In any case, as far as I understand there was never a culture who did not recognize man as a spiritual being upon Earth in entire human history until the birth of "modern" psychology. Now we are to suppose you are just a rat. And this is progressive? In fact it is regressive, but the seeds of the demise are sowed therein. People reproduce children who are fellow spiritual beings, and care for their development. Rats, it seems, fail to reproduce their fellow rats in modern socialist democracies - especially when such rats are nothing more than carbon footprints. A blight upon "Gaia." A philosophy of self destruction.

Proverbs 5:18
"Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth."

Genesis 1:28
"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

Ancient wisdom. The future belongs to your progeny, not those without. Especially those of no philosophy other than nihilistic hedonism and "modern" environmentalism which holds man in contempt. What will your contribution be to the world in 200 years? Likely very little without children.

In any case, I think it is better to act not as a reaction to society and forego marriage and children, but to look for women or jurisdictions (preferably both) that are conducive - if that is what you want.

As for women, consider possibly Timothy 2:12-13
12)But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
13)For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

Post: #8

Christianity and the PUA lifestyle are fundamentally opposed. The goal of the PUA lifestyle is to sleep with tons of hot chicks. Lust and sex outside of marriage are explicitly forbidden in the Bible. You can't claim to be a Christian and live a lifestyle completely divorced from the tenets of the religion. Got to choose one or the other.

Post: #9

I don't think that you have to choose at all. What you have to do is find a set of beliefs that are internally consistent to you and that will make you happy.

Every religion has a founder, who was essentially a heratic. Before monotheism, people all worshipped different idols. The Abraham came along and said that Yahweh was the one true god as all the idols were just clay. Jesus came along and said, "I've got a new covenant." Eight hundred years after that Mohammed popped up and said that he was the last prophet. The world's three major religions all worship the same god, but can still be at each other's necks. Why? Because religion is barely about god at all.

Some people feel more comfortable assimilating into an already existing set of beliefs. If that's you, cool. If not, though, I say follow you own path, using what you want from what's already there and creating the rest yourself.

Post: #10

Yeah, it's hard to be a PUA and NOT be an existentialist. Read some Camus (like L'Etranger).

However, just because you're a worshipper doesn't mean you can't be knowledgable. That is, after all, what Genesis is all about. And Christianity acknowledges your sinful nature, but the difference is your willingness to repent (admitting you did wrong to yourself) and making an effort to do better. At least in Catholic doctrine (and I think, Orthodox doctrine - repenting there sucks, at least Catholics get to hide in a dark box, you guys have to look the priest in the eye).

So if you can live with telling yourself what you do in your love-life is basically wrong, and you will make at least a cursory effort to do better, then I think you can have Christianity in your life. There are also other advantages to a faith-based lifestyle. And it gives you the additional excuse of telling every girl who wants you to settle down with her that you have insanely high standards - ie. she must give up her career and devote her life to serving you and raising your children, which includes keeping herself in shape and hot until your dick doesn't work anymore. Shit, you can even cheat as long as you do your best not to... lol!

Finally... you should read up on the beginnings of the Church and Byzantium. It's a crazy exciting history how the schism came about, and it tells you a lot about human nature. I strongly recommend the Cambridge Medieval History (http://histories.cambridge.org/collectio..._history).

I was raised a Catholic. One of main objections which I'm sure a lot of guys share is the reactive nature of accepting you have a sinful nature.

Game is about self-empowerment, and Catholicism often runs contary to that, what with Original Sin and whatnot, and also the idea that you can't do what you want to as a man, because a set of apparently arbitrary rules defined by other men over a thousand years ago in a day and age and entirely different circumstances.

I decided not to get into that discussion too much and instead I just wanted to focus on not being a prisoner of circumstance. I didn't want religion to be an excuse for me to not get pussy. If I was going to have to be religious and deny myself pussy, it would only make sense if I had pussy thrown at me, otherwise it would be a meaningless exercise of necessity, like it was for a guy I know with assburgers... he's quite religious, but it's kind of pathetic because he never really had a choice - he didn't have the option to say, I'm not going to religious and instead I'm going to fuck around like a rock-star.

So I'm postponing all those discussions until my circumstances no longer dictate my choices for me, but rather I dictate my circumstances. In other words, when I can autonomously fuck girls like this on a regular basis. Will that ever happen? I doubt it. Just look at how advanced Roosh's game is, and he still has to struggle for pussy sometimes.

Post: #11

Look at the Greeks. They're all Orthodox and have been the biggest poon hounds in the world since the beginning of time. No worries.

Post: #12

(11-02-2012 03:48 AM)durangotang Wrote:  As for women, consider possibly Timothy 2:12-13
12)But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
13)For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

If Adam was created first, then why do people always say women first?

I ask as Christianity and Chivalry seem entwined to me at times (and Christians seem to believe in Chivalry more than others).

Post: #13

There are a lot of Game/Anti-Feminist passages in the bible. Durangotang mentioned some of them. Women's childish and fickle nature was written about many times in the Bible. And how they need to be led by men in times of strife, because they're easily led to the dark side, without even being self-aware of the harm they're causing to themselves and others (rationalization hamster).

Paul, who's called a "misogynist" (whatever the fuck that means these days), said that a man must love his wife like Christ loved the church: basically cherish it, and devote your life to her and the kids. Modern Churchianity never forgets to remind men of this sacred duty. They just fail to emphasize the other half of it: the sacred duties of the wife. It's written several times in the Bible, that the wife must submit to her husband. Trust him and support him in the big life decisions that he will inevitably have to make. It even states that if a husband is a good leader, a good provider for his wife and his children, if he treats her right, their sex live will be rich and fruitful. There's a passage that even implies that any kind of sex a loving married couple wants to do, it's their right: nothing is sexually sinful between a man and a woman if they sign the marital covenant before God.

There's another passage that states that it's a sin for a wife to refuse her husband's sexual advances.

Durangotang, can you please site the specific passages I'm referring to?

Clear gender roles that are the pillars of modern civilization and human advancement.

I'm just realizing that I have a strong moralist streak, grounded in my anti-feminism, game theory beliefs and now, my burgeoning faith: I'm realizing more everyday just how important traditional values are. I think most of us here can agree with that.

I'm never going to believe in myths like Creationism, and a bunch of other strange laws in the Bible. But they may sound ridiculous either because the King James is a product of many many, watered down and doctored translations and plus the fact that many old Hebrew and Aramaic idioms, metaphors, figures of speech and even specific words cannot be adequately translated into our English Bible.

As far as abortion? When I was once staunchly pro-choice, I'm now very conflicted on the issue. I consider it murder now, but if I get my g/f pregnant in the near future, you bet I'm gonna do everything I can to convince her to abort. Does that make me a hypocrite? Sure. Morally duplicitous? Yep. I'll live with that. We're made out of contradictions.

Overall, I'm just sick of what I'm seeing right now in my life and American society. Right now, I'm a great, respectful, and thankful guy to my friends and parents. And they mostly reciprocate and show me respect for these traits. With women, I do much better when I unleash my asshole, aloof, Machivaleon side: I have to treat them like the brats they are to earn their respect. This problem is less pronounced with more traditional, Russian-raised girls whom I've dated, but the rule still holds: in American society, a man must know game and treat most women as disposable to be successful with them and to fulfill their male biological imperative: reproduction, or rather it's modern proxy: fucking lots of bitches.

Post: #14

(11-02-2012 09:01 AM)Walderschmidt Wrote:  

(11-02-2012 03:48 AM)durangotang Wrote:  As for women, consider possibly Timothy 2:12-13
12)But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
13)For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

If Adam was created first, then why do people always say women first?

I ask as Christianity and Chivalry seem entwined to me at times (and Christians seem to believe in Chivalry more than others).

I agree. It's like the chicken and the egg argument: are women fickle little children because we men have always protected them and coddle them or did we coddle them because they're fickle little children?

It's both, to a degree. But it seems that mostly Anglican Christinianity, which beget modern chivalry and white knighting, that created this extreme system of female privilge and misandry (women are mysterious, beautiful chaste creatures who must be taken care of; men are sexually vile beasts who must be controlled) during the Victorian era especially. This, of course, eventually led to modern female privilege: Feminism.

This is evidenced by just how similar American Evangelical Christians and many Radical Feminists are in their beliefs: women are special creatures, morally superior to the licentious, beastly males. They share staunch anti-pornograpy and anti-prostitution views. They seek to control male sexuality and freedom. They both support a system where women are coddled and punished much less harshly than men for the same infractions. And at heart, both groups are dogmatic totalitarians who want the government to force their beliefs on everyone.

Post: #15

No, Christianity frowns on pre-marital/extra-marital sex.
There's no sex for sport when Jesus is involved.

You're not in the game unless you're fucking, period.

WIA

Post: #16

womens child like mind, behaviour and looks were traits who secured a successful mating strategy. they have to nurture babys and children, understand their feelings etc, so they are more like them. "youthful" looks are one of the most desired traits in women. its all natural selection

Post: #17

Post: #18

(11-02-2012 02:41 PM)void Wrote:  womens child like mind, behaviour and looks were traits who secured a successful mating strategy. they have to nurture babys and children, understand their feelings etc, so they are more like them. "youthful" looks are one of the most desired traits in women. its all natural selection

hmm, great point. Did you read this in an evo psych article? I'm open to reading some good academic evo psych papers, if you have any recomendations.

Edit: although, honestly, I should go back to reading the entire Rollo Tomassi (Rational Male) archive.

Post: #19

My problem with the Church and Christianity is that it really offers nothing to help satiate a man's natural desires. I presented the following premises to my orthodox priest:

1. God created man to desire women.
2. God wanted man to be loyal to one woman.
3. Women today aren't interested in loyal men, and in fact love the men most who show the least signs of commitment.


My priest did not disagree with any of my premises. He agreed that America is completely fucked for the most part. He believed there were good women out there, however. I told him I couldn't be sure because I've seen so many women lie about this issue. I told him about astronomical divorce rates and how likely it is that a relationship will dissolve today.

He agreed with all of this and told me what he thought was the only way to safely navigate the world as a man today, and please God: Celibacy.

His logic was that given how shitty things are today for the American man, celibacy is the only guarantee to stay out of hell. Playing the dating game leads to sin and addiction to that sin, so avoiding it all together is pretty much the only way to stay safe. Additionally, being celibate has greater value than being married in the eyes of God, according to some of the Saints in the Bible.


I have always wanted to have a good wife, with a satisfying sex life, and raise a strong family with her. As I grew older I realized how fucked up the average girl is, and realized my dreams of a good family were basically impossible. Then after talking to my priest about these issues with his recommendation of celibacy, I became bitter and angry that I could have none of it: no wife, no family, and not even a basic sex life.

Why did God create me with these desires just so I needed to fight them all the time? Sexuality became one big cruel joke.

But rather than stay angry with God or myself, I have accepted that if indeed God wishes us to restrain from sexual promiscuity then I am almost guaranteed to die a sinner. As much as I would love to please God and earn his love, I am unable to give up as great a pleasure as sex and the possibilities of a woman's love.

I am not strong enough to do that.

Post: #20

(11-02-2012 07:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  My problem with the Church and Christianity is that it really offers nothing to help satiate a man's natural desires. I presented the following premises to my orthodox priest:

1. God created man to desire women.
2. God wanted man to be loyal to one woman.
3. Women today aren't interested in loyal men, and in fact love the men most who show the least signs of commitment.


My priest did not disagree with any of my premises. He agreed that America is completely fucked for the most part. He believed there were good women out there, however. I told him I couldn't be sure because I've seen so many women lie about this issue. I told him about astronomical divorce rates and how likely it is that a relationship will dissolve today.

He agreed with all of this and told me what he thought was the only way to safely navigate the world as a man today, and please God: Celibacy.

His logic was that given how shitty things are today for the American man, celibacy is the only guarantee to stay out of hell. Playing the dating game leads to sin and addiction to that sin, so avoiding it all together is pretty much the only way to stay safe. Additionally, being celibate has greater value than being married in the eyes of God, according to some of the Saints in the Bible.


I have always wanted to have a good wife, with a satisfying sex life, and raise a strong family with her. As I grew older I realized how fucked up the average girl is, and realized my dreams of a good family were basically impossible. Then after talking to my priest about these issues with his recommendation of celibacy, I became bitter and angry that I could have none of it: no wife, no family, and not even a basic sex life.

Why did God create me with these desires just so I needed to fight them all the time? Sexuality became one big cruel joke.

But rather than stay angry with God or myself, I have accepted that if indeed God wishes us to restrain from sexual promiscuity then I am almost guaranteed to die a sinner. As much as I would love to please God and earn his love, I am unable to give up as great a pleasure as sex and the possibilities of a woman's love.

I am not strong enough to do that.

This is a beautiful post, man.

I feel the same way in regards for having a desire to create a family: it's just literally impossible to have a good one in our society. And another important thing is that we must think of the kids lives before we procreate. There's very little chance that they won't be fucked up when they grow up. Society and government have ruined the nuclear family. Only the rich elite can afford to dabble in marriage nowadays.

And celibacy? heh. Fuck that noise.

Like I said, I'm going to focus on being a good, respectful person to my family and friends: people who appreciate it and reciprocate. With today's modern American woman? I'll treat them exactly how they like to be treated: poorly.

Post: #21

(11-02-2012 01:59 AM)basilransom Wrote:  You like the religion but don't actually believe it. Or you're not willing to compromise on being a pussy hound. You're remaking the religion in your own image, appointing yourself God and worshiping your own reflection. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but standard fare among people who want the trappings of religion but none of the obligations and restraints.

Take an art history course, read some philosophy, maybe you'll get over it.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly.

Why's he asking us for advice rather than his minister, rabbi, or spiritual adviser?

He's looking for us to come up with clever rationalizations that will allow him to live a godless life while "putting God first."

That's some women bullshit and we gotta call each other out on that stuff.

If the guy is a man, he needs to own his decisions. If he believes in God and takes his religion serious, talk to his spiritual advisers and do as they advise.

Otherwise we may as well just insert a rationalization hamster wheel.

Post: #22

(11-02-2012 07:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  He agreed with all of this and told me what he thought was the only way to safely navigate the world as a man today, and please God: Celibacy.

Yeah, Judeo-Christian texts aren't too hard to understand.

You marry one woman or you don't fuck.

Guys don't like to hear that...So we get all sorts of rationalization hamsters going.

Post: #23

(11-02-2012 07:54 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  He's looking for us to come up with clever rationalizations that will allow him to live a godless life while "putting God first."

That's some women bullshit and we gotta call each other out on that stuff.

Otherwise we may as well just insert a rationalization hamster wheel.

This is the default state of religion in the West now.

I got familiar with a traditional sect. I increasingly saw it as a bunch of falsehoods and myths. But I could respect the traditionalists for being consistent, and living a more or less devout life, according to the rules set by ancestors from thousands of years ago. I have no desire to convince them they are wrong either. The more liberal denominations, on the other hand, were far worse.

The progressives would dilute and adulterate the religion so that it fit their TRUE faith. For instance, the traditional rites don't give much of a leadership role to women? Oh, God obviously didn't mean that, now we know better, let's rewrite the rites. Either you accept the religion as divine, as the work of God, and consequently its authority as real and eternal, or you're a heretic. Anything in the middle is just rationalizing to make yourself feel good. If God didn't write it, as the liberal sects believe, what authority does it have? The whole thing unravels.

People have sentimental attachments, and they want to keep them. I get that. But in wanting to keep two mutually exclusive beliefs, eg sexual liberation and Catholicism, you've got to bend on one or the other or both. 'Compromise' makes a whore out of you. Better to just be honest with yourself. Either choose one, or both and acknowledge that you're a sinner in the hands of an angry God...

I see four kinds of people:

1. Heretics: People who don't believe in any faith.

2. Traditionalists: People who have faith, and consistently observe it in its more orthodox forms.

3. Sinners: People who profess to believe, but routinely sin. The Mediterranean Mode.

4. Progressives: The people who rewrite their religion every generation to suit the latest wave of intellectual fads.

And, like WestIndianArchie said, if you ain't fucking, you ain't playing. You could do things to make yourself more appealing, even learn game. But without the option of having sex with different women at a moment's notice, you can't be a pickup artist.

Post: #24

It's possible.
The pickup artist, he only picks up, no?
That doesn't necessarily imply sex.

Post: #25

Yes. I grant the inconsistency, but we are all super-inconsistent. So, yeah, if you're interested pursue your Orthodoxy but don't give up the Game. Screw the inconsistency, just live with it!