For Singles: Finding the Girl You Can't Keep Yourself From Banging

Someone recently PMed me about the single life. I know OZ has more of his incredible wisdom on the way for single men, but given that I just made this write-up anyway, I might as well share it more openly, with tweaks and adjustments to generalize and refine the content a bit.

MARRIAGE ORIENTATION

Are your life aspirations right now oriented toward marriage or away from marriage? There are all kinds of secular reasons for why you'll find an orientation away from marriage is ideal, which you can read about from TRP/MRP and the many comments by u/Whitified (not to say he doesn't have biblical reasons as well). Marriage laws, emotional complexities, risk factors, and all kinds of other things tell us that modern day marriage is a bad idea. But let's set that aside for now and just consider a biblical aspect.

I am an extremely firm believer in Matthew 6:33 - "Seek first His Kingdom and His righteousness and all these things will be added to you as well." In other words, if God wants it for you, then he'll give it to you ... if you seek His purposes first in your life. The implication is, of course, that if you're not seeking God, he's under no obligation to provide "all these things" to you. Jesus didn't end that verse with, "Or don't seek him, it doesn't really matter ... he'll still give you all that anyway."

1 Cor. 7 can in relevant part be summed up this way: Don't look for a spouse because she'll distract you from your mission to God. If you're pursuing God first and find yourself about to engage in sexual sin with someone, then go ahead and get married. But even when you're married, you should live like you're single, fully devoted to God.

For singles, take Paul's words to heart: don't pursue marriage at all. "Monk mode" should not be an X month thing for you. It should be with the mindset: "This will last until I'm in a context with someone where I know I won't be able to stop myself from sleeping with her for much longer." You're not pursuing a relationship (or even necessarily in one); you're pursuing God and finding yourself with women swarming you anyway - BECAUSE of your faithfulness to God.

This sounds counter-intuitive to many because you might secretly maintain your blue pill ideologies. It's hard to kick the idea that marriage is an ideal that should be sought after, as it was in the Old Testament times. But physical marriage was replaced by spiritual marriage to Christ. It and sex are no longer, in a post-Gospel world, the epitome of human existence. In fact, under current marriage laws, modern marriage doesn't even resemble Old Testament marriage anymore anyway, so even that is no longer a realistic ideal.

5 STEPS TO FINDING A WIFE (by not trying to find one)

Here's my general guide for single guys:

ONE: Find a mission in life. I personally believe this mission must involve the calling to make disciples as Jesus did (as opposed to the modern dictionary/church definition of "discipleship"). For further reading: Master Plan of Evangelism, by Robert Coleman, and Lost Art of Disciple Making, by LeRoy Eims. Master Plan casts the vision, Lost Art gives you practical tools for getting it done. You can also ask me for a copy of my book on discipleship and I'm happy to share it free of charge. Also listen to the sermon Born to Reproduce, by Dawson Trotman, which can be found here (top link). It's old, but still probably the best sermon I've ever heard. I listen to it at least 2-3 times per year.

TWO: Start living your mission. Start making disciples in the context of your particular skill set, interests, hobbies, spiritual gifts, etc. For me, that involves a lot of TV watching. I kid you not ... I'm a writer and love different plot structures, so I utilize TV as an opportunity to hone my craft, but also to connect with friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc. Watching shows together is an easy way to build a connection with someone and to start a conversation with new people.

This, of course, doesn't distract me from lifting, reading, studying/memorizing Scripture, working full-time, spending time with my kids, etc. It just means that I focus my hobby time into things that help advance my calling to make disciples, creating relational bridges that can be leveraged for the Gospel and raising new believers into spiritual maturity. About 95% of America is addicted to TV and I'm not aware of a more universal hobby, so it makes sense to fish with the widest net.

THREE: Develop orbiters. As you live out your vision I guarantee people will take notice. I have never known an active disciple-maker (especially in a college setting, as the original question-asker was in) whose efforts didn't get noticed. Join a campus ministry (Navigators is my preferred, if you have one locally) or local church and utilize their meetings as an opportunity to find believers to disciple. Let the leadership know what you're doing. That leader will likely partner with you, which will drastically increase your social network alongside his (which is usually large if he's good at his job), and place you in front of plenty of women (possibly even the object of your ONEitis - NOT THAT YOU SHOULD CARE) who will take notice of your spiritual maturity and lifestyle for Christ.

Once the orbiters start to take notice of what you're doing and the fruit your life is bearing for the Kingdom, they're going to want to do three things: (1) Follow in your footsteps, modeling discipleship in their own lives; (2) Learn from you on how to accomplish that; and (3) "Leech" off of/help in your successes in your own ministry for God's Kingdom. Note that this process will typically also naturally weed out most of the women who don't take their faith very seriously, which means the types of orbiters you'll be amassing (as I did over a decade ago when I did this in college before I lost my alpha post-marriage) are the types of quality women you'll be looking for with low or 0 n-counts and who are likely to take their faith seriously. Admittedly, post-college the attractive draw of this becomes more difficult (a lot of the people you'll be attracting will be married), but it's not entirely negated in value. The real goal here is to be sorting out which women can actually be on board with your mission and not.

FOUR: Cultivate your orbiters. Your mission and lifestyle will be an inspiration to others, including those women, who will want to latch onto your life. In a TRP sense, it could be argued they want to "leech off of your spiritual credit." For example, I recently asked my wife why she's with me as opposed to some other guy (there was appropriate context for the question). Her answer: "Because I know on judgment day you're going to be the one God's impressed with and I want to be able to tell him I helped you do it." I'm not trying to toot my own horn, but to give you an idea of the female mentality - and this is how spiritual marriage SHOULD be. A great external reference (I'm a musical junkie) is the song A Part of That from the musical The Last Five Years (Anna Kendrick sings the song in the movie, which is on Netflix).

Long story short, you're going to find plenty of women who want to "leech" off of your spiritual credit ... or more theologically accurate: "be your helper" alongside the mission you're on. For the record: the reason my marriage sucked for 7 years is because when I got married I made my mission secondary to my marriage. HUGE mistake. Again, 1 Cor. 7 says, "Let those with wives live as if they had none." That means putting your mission first. Read 108 on the sidebar (I think that's the "life-cycle of a relationship" post), as that goes into more detail on the point and why the mission cannot be something internal to the home, like making enough money or buying a big enough house. Your real goal in all of this part of the process is to be finding an orbiter (or many) who is on the same mission you are (which likely will be caused by your influence in the first place) and to work together in tandem toward the fulfillment of that mission.

Let me be abundantly clear here. This coop mission is what creates the context for your being together. This is what will put you in proximity enough to start having those sexual desires for one another - not because you're chasing tail, as if you needed a relationship to keep you happy and fulfilled.

FIVE: Start the relationship. Once you've got your flock of orbiters/plates/whatever you want to call them, eventually you're going to start feeling strong sexual urges toward one of them that surpasses the rest. When you feel that, do your best to avoid it. If she keeps pursuing you and you're getting tempted into a lustful relationship, then start orienting yourself toward marrying her.

ORIENTATION OF THE PURSUIT

Bear in mind that this is different from the blue pill ideologies put out by the church, which suggests that the man must pursue the woman. Note that the verses that imply God chasing after people are usually with his bride in a post-marriage context - and it's not in an "I was wrong! I neeeeeeed you! Please come back!!!" kind of way, but a "Hey, get back here. Stop wandering off!" way. It's usually a pattern of, "So and so was in the fold, then they left, then God pursued them and they returned." even to that end, there are still several examples where God lets people walk away and doesn't necessarily pursue them relentlessly to force them back.

But before marriage we see things more like Psalm 14:2, "The Lord looked down from heaven ... to see if there are any who ... seek after God." Jeremiah 20:12-13, "You will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart." Deuteronomy 4:29, "But from there you will seek the Lord your God and you will find him." 1 Chronicles 28:9, "If you seek him, he will be found by you, but if you forsake him, he will cast you off forever." 2 Chronicles 7:14, "If my people ... pray and seek my face ... I will hear from heaven" (really, every few chapters of 1/2 Chronicles has passages about this). Doing a word search is producing virtually all examples of us seeking God, almost never in the reverse.

Skipping to the NT ... Matthew 6:33, 7:7, 28:5; Mark 3:32, 16:6; Luke 5:18, 11:9, 12:31, 19:3 (interestingly, when Jesus says "the Son of Man came to seek and save the lost" - a counter example in verse 10 - it's given in the context of Zacchaeus first seeking Jesus); John 6:24, 7:34, 8:21, 13:33, 20:15; Acts 15:17, 17:27; Romans 10:20; Colossians 3:1 ... and in all of this I found only one use of the word "seek" related to Jesus seeking us: John 4:23. But as with Luke 19:3 (Zacchaeus), this is the woman at the well and Jesus prefaces his conversation with asking for a drink from her, then saying, "If you knew who I was, you would have been the one asking me, not the other way around." Long story short: this feminized notion that God is just always seeking after us is only referenced in a few places, whereas there's an overwhelmingly greater amount of passages referencing the idea that Jesus' bride and those he wants to draw into relationship with himself are expected to seek Him. Now, the Spirit does have to draw us to God (John 6:44) - we can't seek him on our own. But that "draw" from God's Spirit is the same as a godly man having a spirit about him that is alluring women, drawing them to seek after him.

If you pursue something, it means you value it more than what you presently have or who you currently are - you're beneath it. If you are content in what you have, you'd have no reason to pursue anything else. As Christians, we are called to be discontented with a yearning in our soul for the size of God's Kingdom until all nations have been reached. But in relationships, we ARE called to be content in Christ. If you're pursuing relationships with women as a high priority in your life, that tells me you're (1) not content in your relationship with Christ, and (2) that you're "lesser" than (or status-wise: "beneath") the woman you're pursuing.

CONCLUSION

I guess what I'm saying in all of this is that you shouldn't be worrying about finding a wife. You should be the kind of man who makes women worry about whether or not they can find a guy like you. Be that man and women will come. But "that guy" isn't chasing tail all the time. He's on an independent mission for Christ. James Bond never said, "Hold on, MI-6 ... let me go find my girl first, then I'll go do my mission for you." He found her as part of his pursuit of that mission (not a perfect example, but you get the point).

[–]nascent_masculinity 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Once you've got your flock of orbiters/plates/whatever you want to call them, eventually you're going to start feeling strong sexual urges toward one of them that surpasses the rest. When you feel that, do your best to avoid it.

How does this fit into the framework espoused in the sidebar, "God created us to be relational, sexual beings. It's okay to embrace that."? Obviously you are to avoid entering into lust or porneia, but if we are also operating on the RP assumption that any romantic relationship is based at LEAST partially on sexual attraction, how does repressing that desire make us any different from the Nice Guys who divorce their sexuality from their interactions with women outside the bedroom?

Apologies if I seem argumentative - I'm not, and I'm actually pretty new at the whole RP thing - just want to lay out my confusion accurately.

[–]Red-CuriousMod | 37M | Married 14 yrs[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

This is actually a really good question - and one I probably should have fleshed out better.

First off, I have also written a post with an official stance for this sub that premarital sex is and will be considered sin (although definitions of marriage may vary). As such, sexuality is meant to be embraced in the context of marriage, not before marriage.

More to your point, that doesn't mean singles should shut their sexuality down either. Rather, they should prioritize it. Embracing sexuality for a single person doesn't mean making it one's highest priority, as secular RP suggests. It means accepting the fact that we are sexual beings and therefore should not feel guilty for having sexual urges, which the church often attempts to do to us.

The question on the table, then, is what the single person should do with those urges. Should he fervently seek a wife? My post above makes it clear that I think the answer is no - and I am as confident in this as Paul seemed to be when he wrote the same things in that chapter (1 Cor. 7), "I have no word from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy."

To that end, a single person should avoid marriage at all costs, but in doing so not feel guilty for having sexual urges. But when those urges become overwhelming with another person to the point of inevitable sin, then it should be embraced fully with Paul's blessing that such a person does well to marry - although he notes that the one who stays single "does even better."

To summarize: embracing sexuality first means not feeling guilty about having sexual urges, and then means embracing marriage and sex when one's urges would otherwise lead into sin, and then after marriage to embrace it fully and completely within the bounds of that marriage.

As a point of clarity:

if we are also operating on the RP assumption that any romantic relationship is based at LEAST partially on sexual attraction, how does repressing that desire make us any different from the Nice Guys who divorce their sexuality from their interactions with women outside the bedroom?

Scripture is the premise, RP is a praxeology that fills in the gap where Scripture doesn't otherwise speak ... and most of RP is first found in Scripture anyway. My point in saying that is simply that we don't try to force RP and Scripture to coincide as if they are both infallible truths. Scripture is primary truth, RP is secondary when there are no conflicts with Scripture.

You also seem to assume that a man is pursuing romantic relationships in the first place. If you remove the romantic relationship from the picture as a goal in itself (as my original post suggests), then that "at LEAST partially on sexual attraction" part doesn't come into play either. All relationships are platonic until sexual tension increases to the point where it can't be platonic anymore. The goal here is not to foster an increase in sexual attraction (which I believe is one of the main reasons for how screwed up relationships are today); rather, it's to let the mission drive each person's life context and to allow sexual attraction to build on its own. This is how to avoid dead bedrooms, whereas people who cultivated sexual attraction as singles realize after marriage that they can't keep it up indefinitely, as body chemistry changes, women pass the wall, menopause enters the fray, children get in the way, etc.

The traditional secular/worldly method inherently implies a bulge of sexuality early in a relationship that will fade. Secular RP sexual strategy attempts to mitigate this by making the man as attractive as possible and to encourage him to give the woman many opportunities to respond to his sexuality ... but there will still always be a fade/decline after the early parts of the relationship as the honeymoon phase/new relationship ecstasy wears off. My proposal cuts out any up-front sexual tension and allows it to develop naturally in a way that increases sexuality after marriage rather than inherently lends itself to a gradual fade over time.

[–]nascent_masculinity 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for the detailed response. Your writings and this subreddit are definitely expanding my understanding of gender dynamics and relationships - I have not yet found any other viewpoints on the subject that have been both effective and scriptural. TRP as espoused on the big sub has bothered me for the same reasons you mentioned in the post on the sidebar about which TRP concepts are scriptural. However, my parents' advice and popular Christian teaching on sex and relationships have proven insufficient in my experience.

There is a lot to unpack in your response but one thing that sticks out is:

All relationships are platonic until sexual tension increases to the point where it can't be platonic anymore. ... My proposal cuts out any up-front sexual tension and allows it to develop naturally in a way that increases sexuality after marriage rather than inherently lends itself to a gradual fade over time.

For lack of a better way to say it, how does this work? It seems to me that this proposal jumps directly from an acquaintanceship / friendship directly to consideration of marriage. I'm trying to reckon with how this can happen if you skip the phase in which sexual attraction is built, i.e. dating or courtship (whatever your preferred term). Perhaps my understanding of the ideal timeline of a relationship is flawed.

I certainly do not esteem myself as knowledgeable in this area so your thoughts are certainly appreciated. If there is another post that addresses my questions, feel free to direct me there. I'm in the process of reading the sidebar material but I definitely won't get through all of it tonight, you know?

[–]Red-CuriousMod | 37M | Married 14 yrs[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

For lack of a better way to say it, how does this work?

You pursue your mission. People are going to flock to you as you do so. One of those people will be a woman you'll desperately want to have sex with, and she with you. You decide to get married to legitimize the sexuality.

It seems to me that this proposal jumps directly from an acquaintanceship / friendship directly to consideration of marriage.

It certainly seems that way on paper, but as sexual tension naturally increases between you and other women you'll find yourself in that phase where people say, "They're not official, but they're pretty much together." This is exactly where you want to be - because you have no obligation to her, only to God. It's a lot easier to make your mission first. It's a lot easier to avoid oneitis and new relationship ecstasy, etc. This is also what even secular RP preaches: don't make relationship commitments of exclusivity, per the sniper method. Always keep things open.

how this can happen if you skip the phase in which sexual attraction is built, i.e. dating or courtship

You have to remember that dating/courtship is a relatively new phenomenon, compared to the rest of human history. So I wouldn't immediately jump into the assumption that this is a biblical ideal that everyone should strive to go through before marrying someone. Modern dating/courtship is a highly feminized social construct that really does very little to advance the man's interests, but still provides (albeit to a lesser degree) relational security for women.

In order to get that relational security, the secular world has allowed women to utilize sexuality as leverage to get that relational security, saying that they will only have sex with a man who they have an exclusive relationship with (which mostly stems from anti-slut defense over anything else). In a Christian worldview where sex before marriage is off the table already, then there is really no leverage women have to pull the man into that type of temporal relational security, so I'm not sure why a man would do it. Specifically, it communicates three things to a woman: (1) acquiescence to relational social constructs, (2) an intentional pursuit of the relationship as an ideal, and (3) that the man's commitment to his mission can be tempered and balanced with other agendas. That said, I accept that most men will enter into exclusive relationships to pursue marriage anyway simply because they still see marriage as an independent goal worth pursuing, which runs contrary to my (and most of even secular RP's) view of things.

To get back to the heart of the matter, as you live on your mission to God you're inevitably going to find lots of women who you're sexually attracted to. You should do your best to avoid it, but it's going to be inevitable eventually, which is why I say that even under my model 99+% of men will still end up married. When that sexual attraction starts to build naturally, you won't be able to help yourself from being around this girl - but you shouldn't create some dating commitment of exclusivity to her either. You just continue your mission, but spend time wherever it happens. When the sexual tension is at its apparent peak, you "get married" - but by then she'll well understand the context of your mission and the prioritization that happens with it, as well as your expectations for her role in that mission. It wouldn't be a traditional marriage by any means, but traditional marriage is mostly a product of feminization and product marketing anyway. Ideally, your marriage should look exactly like what you had before you were married, except you're allowed to have sex and you live together to save on expenses.

Notice that most dead bedrooms and manifestations of blue pill curses happen because people start changing how they view each other and the world after marriage. It jumps from "him and her" to "we and us." It's no longer "his house" ... it's "our house, and we must allocate responsibilities." Even most people in the secular RP world screw this up. At a theory level a scant few of them seem to understand this, but I still see lots of talk even among endorsed contributors about allocation of responsibilities in the home, as if it's a joint effort. They're still assuming that marriage changes things - but that change is precisely what ruins most relationships. You marry someone because you liked who they were and how they lived before you married them, so why just start up and changing things immediately after marriage? If it isn't broke, don't fix it. This, of course, is much more difficult when you're marrying young.

Back to the point: by utilizing dating/courtship, you're communicating to the woman that you are willing to work within widespread social constructs. This will then, of course, communicate that you're also willing to work within the modern social understanding of marriage. Even if you try to explain otherwise, she will not be able to understand or receive it because she sees the pattern: meet a man, start dating, relationship builds, get engaged, get married ... and the continuation of that pattern will be implicit in the subtext of all of her thoughts. She cannot escape it no matter how many times you explain to her otherwise. The only real way to break her expectation of a traditional marriage is to break the expectation of traditional pre-marriage social constructs as well, which means not entering into exclusive dating relationships and demonstrating the pattern and prioritization of your life to her before marriage, after which the proposal will make much more sense in the framework you have already established. This is also a far more honest approach to relationships. She knows exactly what she's getting into before she says "I do." And if you have abundance, you'll be fine even if she says, "I don't." But as a practical matter, the sexual tension wouldn't have built to the point that you'd even be contemplating marriage if she was in an "I don't" mentality, so even that risk is very low.

I'd also stray away from a big, fancy wedding ceremony. Practical considerations aside, this would undermine everything else a man is striving to achieve. A post-wedding celebration would be fine, and I've known several people to do this. Sexual tension built, they got married at the courthouse on their own, then they told everyone about their marriage and decided to have a party with cake, dancing, etc. to let their families meet the new spouse. Of course, you don't have to have the celebration part, as that's totally up to you and how much respect you want to give the family members who would expect it and want to meet your bride. I'm simply saying there's room for it, but not as the wedding ceremony itself, which can be dangerous.

I'm not sure if this is what you were looking for, but I hope it helps.

Tag: /u/OsmiumZulu and /u/rocknrollchuck for feedback/a second opinion, as I know most of this is pretty "out there" for most people.

[–]rocknrollchuckMod | 53M | Married 14 yrs 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

To get back to the heart of the matter, as you live on your mission to God you're inevitably going to find lots of women who you're sexually attracted to. You should do your best to avoid it, but it's going to be inevitable eventually, which is why I say that even under my model 99+% of men will still end up married. When that sexual attraction starts to build naturally, you won't be able to help yourself from being around this girl - but you shouldn't create some dating commitment of exclusivity to her either. You just continue your mission, but spend time wherever it happens. When the sexual tension is at its apparent peak, you "get married" - but by then she'll well understand the context of your mission and the prioritization that happens with it, as well as your expectations for her role in that mission.

This completely the opposite of how most people pursue relationships and marriage today. If the man does not lead in this area by making his intent clear towards marriage (IF that is his intent), then isn't he deferring leadership in this area to the woman, in a sense? In other words, isn't he leaving her to pursue him, thus abdicating his leadership role in the situation?

[–]Red-CuriousMod | 37M | Married 14 yrs[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Three things:

Who is the one who sets the path and decides where to go: the pursuer or the pursued? And, therefore, if the woman pursues the man, who is really the one leading?
You're treating the relationship as a thing in itself, like it's a substantive yet intangible entity. In reality a "relationship" is merely a word that arbitrarily categorizes how two people interact. The notion that it is anything more than that prior to marriage is at the core of all blue pill thinking. There is no such thing as "the relationship" - it's just him and her and each of their own sets of goals and desires until a covenant (marriage) enters the picture.
Your comment assumes there is a relationship before marriage, and therefore someone must lead it. My model assumes there is no "the relationship" and therefore there's nothing to lead. If the woman asks for the DTR talk the man can simply say, "There is no relationship. My focus is God and the mission he gave me. If your focus is me and helping me fulfill that mission, that's wonderful and I want to be around people like you. And if in being around you I find we can't keep our hands off each other, I may even propose to you one day. But my goal isn't to get married; it's to make a difference for eternity. If I do get married someday it'll be because that woman meets two requirements: (1) I find her helpful toward my mission and (2) I'm sexually enticed by her."

This notion that a man must "lead the relationship" assumes that the relationship itself is his goal because it's the direction he is going. But I don't believe this is biblical, as a man cannot serve two masters ... and I don't buy into the "first priority, second priority" philosophy. I've never seen a person capable of living it out - even myself.

[–]rocknrollchuckMod | 53M | Married 14 yrs 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Who is the one who sets the path and decides where to go: the pursuer or the pursued? And, therefore, if the woman pursues the man, who is really the one leading?

Good point, never thought about it that way.

There is no such thing as "the relationship" - it's just him and her and each of their own sets of goals and desires until a covenant (marriage) enters the picture.

Your comment assumes there is a relationship before marriage, and therefore someone must lead it. My model assumes there is no "the relationship" and therefore there's nothing to lead.

So then it's the difference between "the relationship" and "a relationship" such as a friendship, for instance. That makes sense.

"There is no relationship. My focus is God and the mission he gave me. If your focus is me and helping me fulfill that mission, that's wonderful and I want to be around people like you. And if in being around you I find we can't keep our hands off each other, I may even propose to you one day. But my goal isn't to get married; it's to make a difference for eternity. If I do get married someday it'll be because that woman meets two requirements: (1) I find her helpful toward my mission and (2) I'm sexually enticed by her."

Oh what a load of trouble many people would save themselves if they would heed this. I'm blessed to have had this work out by God's doing - I didn't go into it with this frame exactly.

and I don't buy into the "first priority, second priority" philosophy.

Agreed. Priority is singular, only pluralized in the last 100 years or so. IMO there can only be one true priority. It's similar to the definition I use for multitasking: doing many things poorly at the same time.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Excellent points. Speaking of my own experience, it's much easier to maintain a healthy level of sexual activity in a long term relationship when the man and the woman are well-suited to each other in terms of compatible personalities than if the relationship is based purely on sexual attraction, which I think backs up what Red-Curious is saying here about developing a friendship with a woman first and then letting sexual desire grow from THAT, not the other way around. This is a type of sexual desire that's going to be maintained and sustained throughout a long term relationship like a marriage. I will caveat this by admitting that I've never been married, and so, I'm drawing from my pre-believing days when I was engaged in a number of both short term and long term sexual relationships. I noticed that the women whom I was able to maintain consistent sexual attraction for weren't always the ones who I blindly pursued for simple sexual gratification. The women I desired for more extended periods of time weren't always the "hottest," but they were always the most feminine and the most submissive and the easiest to get along with. Again, this is evidence drawn from when I was living in a lifestyle of sin, but in terms of the psychology and biology behind it all, I would suspect (and my married peers can agree or disagree) that sexual attraction within a healthy marriage would progress along the same route, and that sexual desire is more easily maintained with a woman who is submissive, feminine, and a delight to be around, rather than with a woman who is MERELY physically attractive.

On another note, in regards to embracing your sexuality as a man without actually lapsing into sexual sin, I think getting down to the biological mechanisms that govern sexual desire is helpful: when you consider sexual urges as dopamine spikes that are directing you to pursue "rewards," and realize that this same neurochemical (dopamine) is also responsible for directing you to engage in other activities that promise some kind of "reward," you can begin to foster the habit of redirecting those dopamine spikes to other productive endeavors--hobbies, exercise, building a business, socializing with friends, taking risks in life that, if successful, promise great rewards, etc.--masculine endeavors that deliver that same dopamine, but in ways that don't lead to sin. I've heard that many men who are trying to kick an addiction to porn, for instance, utilize this technique of recognizing that the urge to watch porn is your body telling you that it wants those massive dopamine spikes that porn offers, and that you can begin to recognize this and redirect that need for dopamine towards other activities that are rewarding. And so in an odd but scientifically sound way, pursuing hobbies, getting outdoors, adventuring through life, building a business, etc. can be an expression of the same biological urges that drive you to have sex. I hope that makes sense.

[–]rocknrollchuckMod | 53M | Married 14 yrs 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-CuriousMod | 37M | Married 14 yrs[S] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Haha ... I hear you. Just be cautious, though. The aspects of your mission that should allure women to you are things that should naturally expand your social network and that women would understand to be fruitful for God's kingdom.

So, if your mission is to "take the ... Church head on" as your adversary, that will fulfill neither of these purposes. In many ways I felt like that's what I was doing too, but tact means everything. Phrase it that your mission is not against the church, but to redirect the church.

Imagine a hockey puck gliding along the wall, behind the goal, and back toward the half of the court where it came from. Now imagine smacking it straight against the wall "head on." Which one seems more graceful? Which will maintain the most momentum once the puck is moving the right direction again?

Keep that imagery in mind when deciding how to pursue your mission. Pastors can get on board a lot easier if you come alongside them in a redirective fashion, which will work to increase your social network and maintain the apparent integrity of your mission to outsiders. Smacking head on just made me look like a defiant idiot when I used to employ that method.

As u/Whitified once noted, women often associate tact with charm and charisma. Good tact is attractive. Bad tact is not.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ElectricalAutumn[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-CuriousMod | 37M | Married 14 yrs[S] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Personally, I recommend guys wait until 30 also. That said, I have less objection than other manosphere bloggers to marrying much younger, as long as the criteria are met: you're on a mission for Christ, she's helpful in the fulfillment of that mission, and you can't keep from banging each other for long.

Personally, I married at 23. It was always a goal of mine to have kids at a younger-ish age so that all of my kids would be 18+ by the time I hit 50, when I intend to retire from secular work into full-time ministry. Given that my 4th and last kid was born when I was 32, I came pretty darn close to meeting that goal.

That said, I was also significantly less informed about the ways of the world before I married. I had many inherently red-pilled traits at the time, but did not intellectually understand it in full to the degree of being able to make informed decisions on how long I should have waited. I'm not sure if I would have done things differently or not, given my other life goals.

Thanks for this post. Very enlightening. I always pursued women in the past and am still transitioning into a RP mindset rooted in Christ.

So it seems we should be seeking after Christ and The Kingdom Of God and let women pursue us as we pursue our vision/mission. As of now, I’m on a combo of steps 1 and 2 (as it seems they can sort of overlap).

How would you define “making deciples as Jesus did” differently than “discipleship in the modern dictionary/church definition”? I’m about to listen to/watch that sermon, so maybe it explains it in there.

Being 22, it’s hard for me to develop orbiters as I’m in the Orthodox Church and a lot of the people around me are older than me, haha. Also, I’m going to be graduating and going to grad school in 6 months, so I’m worried (not that I should be) about finding groups where I can lead after I graduate from undergrad soon. Any advice there for steps 3 and 4 considering this?

I agree with this entire post, thanks again for the thoughts.

Title	For Singles: Finding the Girl You Can't Keep Yourself From Banging
Author	Red-Curious
Upvotes	22
Comments	15
Date	March 14, 2018 7:46 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RPChristians
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RPChristians/comments/84gbdv/for_singles_finding_the_girl_you_cant_keep/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RPChristians/for-singles-finding-the-girl-you-cant-keep.301993 https://theredarchive.com/post/301993