How to date "evenly" as a Christian

OsmiumZulu · 2018-11-01T15:29:18+00:00

What does “long term” mean to you?

Are you looking for a spouse or a girlfriend?

What do YOU want out of an LTR?

Red-Curious · 2018-11-01T21:29:47+00:00

I'm somewhat disappointed with the answers in this thread so far. /u/YayLove came close when saying that relationships aren't an exchange - but then she (he?) blew it by saying to focus on giving.

Exchanges certainly happen in relationships and marriage, but that exchange is not the point. It is incidental. The fairness of these exchanges stops mattering when you contemplate the larger things at work.

This faulty "exchange" concept, I believe, comes from the "love tank" model of relational counseling. This view says that each party has a "tank" and that if someone's tank drops too low, they will be unhappy and want out of the relationship. It teaches that each party must fill the other's tank for the relationship to work, or else the other person won't be happy and will want to leave. In this model, each person is responsible for the other person's love tank. Given that each person's experience of the relationship is based exclusively on his/her own tank, it also fosters a highly competitive nature. Rather than ensuring the other person's tank is full all the time, it incentivizes each person to keep the other person's tank at a mediocre level - just enough that the negative consequences don't kick in - and then do whatever else they want with the rest of their time.

In another model, people view relationships as having a joint tank. Each party fills it with a different color - one red, another white. It is a joint effort to keep the tank full, but the color inside the tank is a good indicator of who's doing more to keep the tank full. This isn't an accurate picture of reality, though, because there is no collective emotion - each party has their own emotions, though they do influence one another.

A better way to look at it is the biblical way, doing away with tanks altogether. God gives the man a mission. The man's mission should be big enough that he recognizes the value of having help. He invites others to help him. At some point he starts wanting to have sex with some of the people helping him. One of them it gets so intense that he decides to marry her to legitimize their sexual relationships.

Here's the deal: if you're off actively looking for a relationship, you're already in a state of subservience. In today's deregulated sexual marketplace, women by default view themselves as the selectors. They sit back, let men come to them, and they decide if the man has enough to offer her to be worth the effort of locking down his commitment. If you're actively looking, you're just another man in their queue - unless you're going after unattractive women who don't have anyone in their queue.

Now, if you enter that woman's queue, she thinks (reasonably, in light of the sexual marketplace) that her very existence is the exchange you get for all your effort. The value of her time and attention is the "equal exchange." If you don't buy her dinner, so be it. She won't give you her time that day. If you don't pay for her movie ticket, she'll find another guy who will. If you don't give compliments or massage her feet or whatever, she doesn't need you. Women operate on a tank-filling relational mentality and assume that your tank is always full just by virtue of her being around you, but that you must actively make effort to fill her tank.

This is where hypergamy is actually a beneficial thing to men. If women were not hypergamous, then there would be no recourse for a man. He would simply be compelled to keep playing this game, vying for her attention, filling her tank only to be left in the cold when his runs empty.

But because women are hypergamous, they always want what is better. If a man is pursuing her, he is, by default, viewed as being lesser. If a man is present in her life, but shows no clear signs of interest, it indicates that he greater. That's how the hamster rationalizes his disinterest. After all, there are a million guys who would be interested in her, but not this one, so he must be capable of achieving a higher standard than all those other guys; and if he has that capacity, he must be a better guy than all those other guys, and therefore she wants him more than the other guys.

So, when you intentionally pursue a relationship with a woman, you are telling her: "You are in demand, at least to me, therefore I am willing to pay a price to get you." At no point in this transaction is there a communication: "You must pay a price to get me" or "You must pay a price equal to the price that I'm paying you." See how the transactional "equalizing" view of relationships makes no sense in this model?

If you don't pursue her, though, she is left thinking: "I am not in demand to him, but he is now in demand to me. Therefore, I must be willing to pay a price to get him." That price is her submissiveness, following his leadership in the relationship. At no point should she be thinking, "Now that I have paid him my submissiveness, he must pay me back something so that we're paying equal amounts to each other." Instead, the man is rightly in the biblical position of being the head of the relationship.

To be clear, in biblical times, virtually all men had more value to offer women than women had to offer men. They were very sexist times, by modern standards - and I'm only commenting on the actuality of it, neither in a condoning of all their practices, nor condemning them. It is what it is. So, the man was always the prize because men had more rights. They were capable of earning an independent wage. They were capable of owning land apart from inheritance. They were given positions of decision-making in tribes and councils. Women were excluded from these things, and thus the sexual marketplace always presumed that the man had more to offer the woman than the woman did the man.

Deregulating the sexual marketplace through countless feminist political victories has shifted this balance away from what we see in the Bible on a pragmatic level, though the theological fact of God's intentions - which Paul reasons from creation and not from culture - remains unchanged. This is where most confusion now lies because as Christians we have a proper theological framework we must follow (which is the red pill praxeological understanding of how a sexual marketplace best functions) compared against the pragmatic reality that women can easily create their own value apart from a man, and therefore have no societal incentive to follow the theological framework the Bible lays out for intergender relational dynamics (i.e. essentially, the leader/helper dynamic).

Nevertheless, the red pill view is still to make women chase you rather than you chasing them. This is the biblical view, as we are to chase Christ rather than waiting for him to chase us down every time we stop our feet and slam the door in his face. It is also evident in the order of creation, as Paul explains.

To that end, the pragmatic solution for you is simply to make yourself as attractive as possible, make yourself available to women who you want to notice your attraction (preferably through inviting them to join you on your mission, apart from actual dates, as the opportunity to get to know each other and foster attraction), then let them start sending IOIs your way as you flirt back.

I've heard story after story of guys who employ this type of methodology and find that their girlfriends are actually the ones who are paying for their meals, buying them clothes, new TVs, stereos, etc. That's not to say you should be attracting women just to get these things from them; but the point is that you don't have to be stuck in the "equal exchange" model or the "I must give, give, give" model - you can make the sexual marketplace work for you by being in high enough demand that a woman, now being able to self-generate value, would spend that value on you just for the right to say she's your girlfriend. Again, what you should do or actually do is up to you - but be the guy who can do that if he wants.

Tag: u/deep_strength u/redpillwonder - as this is a theory-heavy comment and I wrote it in a rush, so feel free to correct any mistakes.

Deep_Strength · 2018-11-01T20:47:57+00:00

The world: guy buys dates, expects sex back to maintain "even" relationship.

Christian: guy buys dates, what does he expect back?

My ideas: Expect her to cook, make out, what else?

You, like many others, have missed the point if you're thinking about it like this. Remember, most of the "advice" of the secular RP is for men who are bad with women. These "what to do" vs "what not to do" lists can help some, but that doesn't really teach you much.

Key point: Do what you want and understand the pros and cons.

You are a man. You can decide what you want to do on your own. You shouldn't be doing anything because someone told you to do something, but because of your own principles and how you personally want to do things. This is how to be self-actualized, confident and decisive.

I wanted to pay for my dates so I did. End of story.

Pros and cons: You must also recognize that if you date a traditional/conservative Christian woman and you don't pay for dates, you may not get that many dates. In fact, the majority of Christian women who are willing to pay for half of dates are going to be more liberal Christians, which will probably mean they have more liberal values which is usually bad for relationship/marital stability and ability to teach them.

I'm good at short term dating but have never gotten into the longterm, and I may be heading there with one girl. In general, I'd love if there was a longterm dating/courtship guide from a red pilled Christian perspective. Any links?

The ability to get dates but not keep them is usually an issue with a poor ability to lead rather than attractiveness. Although more attractiveness is usually useful too. So work on leading relationships better.

Other key point: DO NOT think of relationships as an exchange. This will lead to bad stuff in the long run.

Read these on why:

Each of you should be in the relationship because you desire to be there and desire to do things for the other. Once you get to marriage, these desires turn into Biblical roles and responsibilities to God. They are not an "exchange."

edit: spelling

hidemyface1234 · 2018-11-01T15:00:45+00:00

The whole notion of men paying for dates was that women used to not work. So of your girl has a job she can pay her half, most of the time. Don't let her cherry pick the parts of equality that benefits her alone, you want a partner in life, not a leech.

There is obviously a time and a place for gifting so that's why you buy her dinner on her birthday or an anniversary (that's once a year, not on some 6 month mark like these girls be trying).

Read proverbs 31 and ask yourself often, "is she doing the modern equivalent?" .

squizzo_rad · 2018-11-01T20:15:01+00:00

I don’t give women permission to pay on dates.

If the relationship advances I will be the one working and she will be a home maker. I simply set that precedent from date one.

john_of_peaches · 2018-11-04T20:04:50+00:00

As Red Curious mentioned in his long post - the Red Pill way is for women to chase you. The Jesus way is for you to chase God and to be like him.

If you are thinking of an exchange, you are not being like Christ. Can you tell me what you did in exchange for Christ death on the cross?

Let's enter into a hypothetical world where Jesus is using Reddit before he started his ministry - here's Jesus post:

Hello Everyone,

I'm building a relationship with the world and want to maintain an "even" relationshipj.

I'm planning on sacrificing my life, loving them with all my heart, teaching them about God and basically pooring out my life for them. What should I expect back in return?

I'm good at living by the Spirit but need some advice on living the rest of this human life.

Thanks,

Jesus

In general, I'd love if there was a longterm dating/courtship guide from a red pilled Christian perspective. Any links?

Sure. Try Matthew, Mark, Luke or John: https://my.bible.com/

john_of_peaches · 2018-11-01T13:50:33+00:00

What do you do to maintain an even relationship over many dates without sex before marriage?

You might benefit from asking the married Christians over at /r/ChristianMarriage as well, especially if your goal is marriage.

I'm married and didn't have sex until marriage. It's reasonable to expect whatever border of physical affection you have established to be upheld (provided it doesn't engage lust, etc.). My girlfriend (now wife) wouldn't kiss me if I treated her poorly in dating.

velocigasstor · 2018-11-01T16:20:50+00:00

Dude, it's not a scoring system. Just find a chick who's interested in the same things you are, heck she'll probably foot the bill herself half the time if she's cool. Not all women expect to be catered to and give sex back as collateral like some kind of exchange- finding a balance that you're happy with shouldn't be forced if you're with the right person. Also, the only place you'll find a 27 year old virgin with no job is if you raid an amish farm and find one that's not married off yet. Wanting to "train" a woman is assuming she has been overly sheltered, and will emotionally and financially rely on you in sort of a Stockholm-syndrome kind of way... and to me that screams unhealthy marriage. Wanting a meek, conservative stay at home mom is different than wanting a sex doll that can recite bible verses.

YayLove · 2018-11-01T17:12:41+00:00

The problem is you are looking at a relationship as an exchange instead of just giving.

hidemyface1234 · 2018-11-01T15:00:59+00:00

The whole notion of men paying for dates was that women used to not work. So of your girl has a job she can pay her half, most of the time. Don't let her cherry pick the parts of equality that benefits her alone, you want a partner in life, not a leech.

There is obviously a time and a place for gifting so that's why you buy her dinner on her birthday or an anniversary (that's once a year, not on some 6 month mark like these girls be trying).

Read proverbs 31 and ask yourself often, "is she doing the modern equivalent?" .

john_of_peaches · 2018-11-12T18:34:19+00:00

Just let her pay as easily as you do. There's no norm that determines you should pay everything.

Also for long term, you should make date plans, where to go what to do. Majorly you, starting on conversation topics. Have your vision for the future clear. (Don't tell all of it just glimpses at certain times)

The beautiful thing about being a man is, you're the one determining what's normal, not your woman. So whatever you please, whatever you want. You know what you want. Do it. And take her along.

Title	How to date "evenly" as a Christian
Author	john_of_peaches
Upvotes	13
Comments	44
Date	November 1, 2018 1:28 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RPChristians
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RPChristians/comments/9t9er8/how_to_date_evenly_as_a_christian/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RPChristians/how-to-date-evenly-as-a-christian.301648 https://theredarchive.com/post/301648