The UK chapter of the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (“UCKG”), a controversial Christian sect based on Prosperity Theology, is using its house organ, Universal, to encourage women to shun players only interested in one night stands in favour of provider betas who are willing to postpone sex until marriage.
The advice page warns women to the “behaviour and tricks” of “Casanovas” who use them for sex, before encouraging them to choose ”men of integrity” willing to commit to marriage. UCKG is a worldwide evangelical church based in Brazil, and is known for sharp financial practices. In the UK it is known for its aggressive promotion in impoverished black areas and its connection to the Victoria Climbie child abuse case.
Who is the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God?
Bishop Renato Cardoso and his wife Cristiane, daughter of CKG’s billionaire founder Edir Macedo, at a Love School event.
The Universal Church of the Kingdom of God is an international Pentecostal church with headquarters in São Paulo, Brazil. The “Church” has been accused of money laundering, charlatanism, and witchcraft. It is banned in several African countries.
The church applies Prosperity Theology, a doctrine which states that financial success is the will of God, and that donations will increase one’s material wealth. The founder of UCKG, Edir Macedo, is worth an estimated $950 million. The UCKG considers that the first 10% of congregants’ income “belongs to God” as a tithe payable to the Church as soon as possible in order to guarantee salvation.
In London the UCKG are active in areas like Brixton, Stratford and Kilburn. Congregants are drawn from black communities in deprived areas. In 2000, Marie Therese Kouao and her boyfriend Carl Manning were sentenced to life for the murder of Kouao’s great niece Victoria Climbie, who was burnt with cigarettes, tied up, and beaten with bike chains and hammers.
The case precipitated an overhaul of UK Social Services. At the inquest it was revealed that Climbie had been taken to the Finsbury Park branch of the UCKG in the days before her death. The UCKG pastor who saw her allegedly said that he suspected she was being abused, but he thought Victoria was possessed by the devil, and she could be “healed” with prayers so he didn’t call social services or the police.
Precautionary measures for born-again sluts
So what is this dodgy corporate church telling its women congregants on the subject of dating strategy? The piece starts by warning them to the well known player archetype—the game-conversant cad:
Casanova-A smooth-talking charmer who has mastered the art of finding, meeting, attracting and seducing beautiful women into the bedroom. Once he accomplishes his goal, he leaves the woman in fear of having a relationship and proceeds to find his next conquest.
An archetype we all recognise, then. The author continues:
There are many men all over the world who have made a point in life of targeting women who are insecure, disappointed in love, or that are just easily swayed by comments of flattery, These men prey on women to boost their own egos and to just add to their tally of female conquests.
Men who seek no strings attached sex are simply notch count hyenas in search of validation and women who accept their advances are insecure. Only sex had within the institution of marriage is legitimate.
But just like these men with no integrity have learnt to take advantage of certain women, it’s important for women also to spot these kind of men and their behaviour and tricks.
Because only “certain women” are susceptible to game.
A man of no integrity, yesterday
Here are a few pointers: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is: If he is saying a world of nice things to hear, and he doesn’t even know you yet, then something is up.
In other words, if it appears he is running good game, it’s likely he is not the pliant beta schlub you are waiting for. He might even be a Recovering Average Frustrated Chump getting ideas above his station and gunning for that R-selected quick lay.
If he is really serious, he will tread carefully so as not to get involved too quickly before he finds out who you are. It is better that the guy is taking his time, than him wanting to speed things along at the speed of sound.
Women are encouraged to bottleneck men into a Blue Pill dating strategy—k-selected attraction and endless coffee dates “getting to know each other,” presumably all paid for by a beta who is “playing by the rules” of traditional courtship.
Closed for business until marriage: if he says he wants to “share his love with you physically” so that he can commit to you through marriage, then something is wrong. That part of the relationship is so special that it should wait until marriage. Actually, if he realty wants to prove his love for you, he can marry you, What better way to prove his love than to marry you?
Thought this advice might be good if applied on a society-wide scale form an early age, there is conveniently no mention of whether the bride to be is a 21-year-old virgin or a born-again slut who has ridden the cock carousel into oblivion and is now looking for a two-legged life insurance policy willing to foot her pedicure bills into old age.
The “Casanovas” are degenerates who should be treated with contempt for trying to sleep with women without marrying them, but born-again sluts making prospective husbands wait for months (if not years) before they have what alphas got on the first night are, of course, perfectly honourable. The advice continues:
Beware of physiological games : Some of these men are great at making women feel guilty if they do not give in to their advances. Remember that you are not obligated to do anything that you don’t want to do. Those who love respect other people’s boundaries. If he makes you feel uncomfortable or pressured, end things immediately.
Women love a good con
My first reaction was to think that since UCKG is a business concern dedicated to extracting cash from worshippers, banging the marriage drum is a way of widening the contributor base. How better to do this than by brainwashing women into the need to tie up a beta schlub for the long term?
On a closer reading, and notwithstanding that marriage is a central plank of the Church’s programme at its sell-out Love School events, this is simply classic empowerment snake oil for women, and has precedent.
In his illuminating “The Road To Whoredom Is Paved With Abstinence,” Emmanuel Goldstein reviews a similar ruse, The 30-Day Love Detox by Dr. Wendy Walsh, a television quack from Canada. The good doctor (of psychology) advises women to hold out, because “you’ve got a 90 percent chance of being broken up within one year.”
Goldstein points out that the advice is based on a fallacy, since Walsh conflates correlation with causation (women who are able to hold out for 30 days are more likely to have longer relationships anyway). The mere act of waiting is not a guarantee means of ensuring a long lasting relationship, but sounds convincing as a cure-all, quick fix because it is conceptually simple.
This is similar to the way in which NoFap is presented to gamma incels as a shortcut to alpha status and a bottomless pool of pum-pum. The message is “avoid masturbation, and all else will follow.” Substitute gamma incels for fickle women looking for a fast track to the stable relationship they crave after a prime spent on the Carousel, and you have a good, profitable Abstinence con similar to the Secret. Yet as Goldstein points out, refusing men sex (if women can manage it) is not enough:
When a woman isn’t rewarding the man with sex, she must find other ways to keep a high value man waiting. First and foremost, she must show that she won’t change her mind halfway through the ‘waiting period,’ lest she bail and waste the man’s time. Secondly, she should make the wait as pleasant as possible for him, to ensure he will stick around. That means looking superb, being a great conversationalist and offering him tasty, home-made meals. … Don’t expect Walsh to tell any of that to her audience – that would mean doing something for a man.
Similarly, the UCKG’s inevitably female advice columnist gives no advice to her readers as to what exactly is going to keep men waiting around for a lot longer than the 30 days advocated by Walsh. The scenario envisaged is one of the potential suitor subjecting himself self denial and financial expenditure in return for a chance to marry a woman who is supposedly so worthy that she is required to make no sacrifice in return.
The irony of UCKG telling women congregants that “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is” is that the very same applies to the advice it’s giving them. It’s a “money for nothing” scheme which asks nothing of women other than that they hold off the fanny for an instant, free SMV boost.
Betafied men who are foolish enough to have been bamboozled by UCKG’s glossy corporate identity and been lassoed into a blue-ball waiting game by one of its women followers would be well advised to remind himself to Iron Rule of Tomassi #3:
Any woman who makes you wait for sex, or by her actions implies she is making you wait for sex; the sex is NEVER worth the wait.
And if the sex is not worth the wait, then neither is the marriage. Sexuality, says Rollo, is a spontaneous chemical reaction between two parties, not a process of negotiation. You grievously are wasting time and opportunities to meet better prospective women in waiting for marriage to shag any woman, let alone one that belongs to a dodgy, cultish church led by a billionaire.
Let those women die alone then I say. Unfortunately some thirsty sap will probably be willing to wait.
Regardless of whether she puts out, would you really want to date a believer in the prosperity doctrine?
yeh, she’ll become prosperous after finding a nice (read: naive) Christian man to dispossess of his wealth.
When Steve Harvey was pushing his 90 day shit, several women came forward and said that they missed out on guys because they held out and were really regretting the advice. This will be no different.
He is the worst. I know he got old, and the road is brutal on comics, but did he have to do a show like this? non stop ass kissing of women, which is hilarious, bc most of his viewers are non working single moms- the LAST segment of society in need of an ego boost…
I can’t stand his (Steve Harvey) bullshit! My ex used to talk about his books all the time. Well, look where that left her, missing out on this prize!
LOL!
Tell her to call Steve and ask for her money back (it didn’t work).
I warned her.
After our break up i started reading The Rational Male. She then picked up a copy for herself to see what I was reading (she saw my IG post). when i found out she was also reading the book i told her that she was finally reading something valuable; write down some notes i told her.
Young girls are infamously terrible in their decision-making, so they probably dodged more bullets than they did high quality men
Yes, but again, Steve didn’t hit the message straight on (for fear of offending, plus he was selling something).
You don’t “hold off” anything….these women should stop (or not start) being sluts and whores. That’s the real message.
It doesn’t sell anything so it’s why they all use the “hold off” message…so they don’t offend. If you don’t offend, then the message doesn’t really take hold (but then they don’t make any money).
That’s the really sad part. These con jobs really pray at the church of ATM, first. They could give a fuck if these women stop (or not)…as long as they get paid.
Haha.
B-but anon, it’s not slutty when I do it. I’m not like other girls. I do it for Jesus.
http://i.imgbox.com/rePYlcu8.jpg
Shouldn’t it be “born-again Virgins”?
The problem with the theories that women should abstain to snag a good man is that these women love sex more than man. If you are dating a girl for more than 4 weeks and are not banging here someone else is, simple as that.
It’s not only man who want sex women need it too and these people are telling them not to satisfy their natural desire. What for? A beta male who only rides in the missionary position? I don’t think so. In my experience the church going girls are the worst.
Exactly right. In fact if I’m not fucking her in four weeks I’m fucking someone else too
I disagree, women LIKE sex. Sex helps women stay even keeled, but NEED it… not so sure. Unlike a man, who has a built in unending hunger for sexual satisfaction most women have no problem abstaining from sex for sex sake.
That’s exactly why this type of abstinence snake oil and the natural instinct to dodge sexual advances of males is primarily a “female” thing.
Women NEED attention, affection, to be desired, and wanted. But sex? Not so much. It’s merely a tool to manipulate the males around them for their purposes; more often than not.
In fact we all know that 3 weeks out of the month, most women are barely aware they have a vagina, let alone it would be nice to have it stuffed full of some hard dick.
When it comes to sex, most women are more akin to camels than rabbits. They will wait for ages just for “decent” sex, never mind great sex.
We men on the other hand can’t go a day or two without even bad sex or just rubbing one out.
Like all women the real problem with “oops I did it again” behavior – or just being a constant slut – is emotional, mental, and depending on the time of the month; hormonal. They either can’t resist good game, are overwhelmed by ovulation or they have been conditioned to evaluate their self worth via how many guys they can get to plow them.
Heck most times it’s all of the above all at once.
…which unfortunately is the cause of rape hysteria. http://i.imgbox.com/1kMclM0s.jpg
What you must realise is that women play with themselves to no end too. I know this for a fact. Dildo’s etc outsell any male sex toys. Ok, maybe they don’t need it. No one needs sex, even men don’t need it as they can survive perfectly without it. Actually you are more likely to find more male Virgins in their twenties upwards than women. The point I am making is unless she is a virgin she is fucking. She might not be doing you but when Mr Alpha Male comes along she will find it hard to resist no matter what Pastor Anti-Cassanova said. In the meantime while she waits her rampant rabbit keeps her occupied.
I just avoid this drama whenever I can, to the point I outright block them.
I see your point but your frame of reference is backward. MEN will do whatever to satisfy themselves sexually ie masturbation and etc. Women on the other hand will do whatever to get love, attention admiration etc. For instance guys don’t “friendzone” chics. If a girl is attractive and down to give up poosy…we take it – and then play friends. As we all know, a woman will sideline you to “friendzone” with out a second thought and NEVER reconsider. That’s not a trait of a sexually driven creature. That’s the trait of a socially driven creature.
I have sisters and at one time associated almost exclusively with females, and when u get into the inner circle you realize that just as women do a lot of sexual and moral projection onto us, we do the same to them.
They are no where near as sexual as we dream and wish they were…not even close. In fact except for the biological drive during ovulation, most females equate sex and relationships with things that have next to nothing to do with physical sex.
Like falling for a guy because how popular he is, or how he takes charge, or can sing, or listens, or has pretty eyes…*roll eyes* it’s almost embarrassing how sappy most females are and how far removed from their vagina is from their conscious sexual perception.
Most women barely know how to get off with a guy or how their plumbing actually works; never mind actually reaching down there and handling business for themselves. SMH
I think alot of us in the PUA/Neomasculinity community forget that just like with the “alpha fux/beta bucks” scenario, at any given time only a few chics are actually slutting up, or succumbing to their base desires. And the ones who consistently do are really getting around. Don’t get me wrong, AWALT when it comes to being whorish, just not all the time or for every guy.
3 date rule.
Isn’t it slutty for a woman to have sex after only seeing a man three times?
No. Why would any guy want to waste his time with a girl who doesn’t find him attractive?
If a girl does find him attractive and abstains from sex, then it means she views sex as transactional or as a manipulation tool or bargaining chip.
Sex isn’t something men “get” from women.
Abstaining from immediate sex shows that the woman values and respects herself. It has nothing to do with manipulating men. If I slept with every dude that I found attractive or went out on a date with, I would be a used up whore. That’s gross.
Couldn’t I just as easily argue that she *doesn’t* respect herself if she puts so much stock in the opinion of others that she would avoid having sex she wanted to have? If it’s the opinion of the guy she’s worried about, rather than society’s or that of her friends, refraining from having sex just indicates she uses sex as a bargaining chip and plays weird games.
Guys don’t care if a girl sleeps with them on the first date. Believe me, they’d prefer it. All they’re worried about is if she’s going to cheat on him after he commits. They’re just worried about if she sleeps with everybody or if she is sleeping with him because she’s that into him. It’s not always possible to tell, but it’s not like reverting to 19th century courtship and making a guy wait means anything and could possibly be a sign of something just as bad. Every long term relationship I ever had, I slept with the girl on the first date. The longest of those was seven years.
I don’t know what kind of men you associate with, but all of the men I have known do not respect women who jump into bed easily. My opinion also comes from growing up with only male siblings.
It’s great that you have had long term relationships with women who slept with your right away, but I am very confident that the way you think is not typical. Of course, that doesn’t mean your beliefs is wrong. I know that my husband married me partly because I wasn’t easy. Every other women he dated was having sex with my husband within two or three dates. I am telling you this story to illustrate that the majority of men do not respect women who sleep with them right away. Most men do not respect anything that they don’t have to put much effort into.
It is normal for women to care about the opinion of a man she is dating and wants to have a relationship with. It is also normal for an intelligent women with morals to be selective about who she sleeps with and when. There’s nothing “weird” about it. You may not agree with my opinion but I would ask that you respect it, as I have respected your choice to have relationships with loose women. I am not “manipulative” just because I am not easy.
Do you agree with what Roosh has to say about women and sex? If so, what makes you want to be in a relationship with a woman who has sex right away?
or ‘born-again vaginas’ – as in a Damascene conversion on the cock carousel
✔►►►✔Make over 13k/M0NTH@af19:
Going Here you
Can Find Out,
►►►► https://WorkOnlinePress.com/get96/position96…
“Any woman who makes you wait for sex, or by her actions implies she is making you wait for sex; the sex is NEVER worth the wait.”
So true, women are con artists to the core.
I had a woman make me wait until the third date. The sex was great.
Third times a charm. Was it tough having to see her three days in a row?
Ha ha ha! She actually has an agreeable personality.
Did she not speak?
When she spoke it was like listening to a babbling brook. No words just sounds that fade easily into the background.
Delightful. Wasn’t worth hanging onto that one?
For a little while but even a babbler does your head in after a while.
Iron Rule of Tomassi…..yes.
So we lament that women are whores, but condemn any messenger that encourages them not to be?
Personally, I have no problem with people telling women not to be such whores. Hell, this is the exact same advice I will give to my daughter when she is old enough to hear it. If your point is that women who withhold sex have to be pleasant in other ways – no argument from me, and you should be up front about that with them.
For me, this article is a miss from an otherwise solid author.
haha if this pastor thinks he can better feminism then good luck to him. however chances are his advice falls on deaf ears and might only help women with the thirstiest of betas.
Maybe so, but this does not change my opinion that women should be told to stop acting like whores.
Agree…and that should be the message versus this “holding out for love” bullshit. The church doesn’t want to offend them because they love that cash so much.
Women are going to fuck whoever gives them the tingles…bottom line. The true church has always reinforced “it’s a shame to be a whore” and it kept women in line.
You can’t make a whore a housewife. You can’t fix a broken woman (never try).
I don’t think he gives a rats ass either way, so long as he’s got them walking thru the door and putting cash in the till. Gotta tell them what they want to hear and if it’s that they can still play the hard to get game after whoring around, well so be bit – sell it to them!
Agreed
Perfect. We have time and time again advocated for women to hold it until marriage, and when some institution actually tells them to do that (corrupt church practices aside), it gets booed? No, just no…
I only think they forgot to mention that 1) the chick MUST be a virgin in orther to have the right to do that to a man (I guess that’s implied, but you never know). 2) She must find other ways to show her value and take care of her appearance to keep the man around (as the other article pointed out), instead of, you now, just make him wait there while she sits on a pedestal. 3) She must make sure she will give him quality sex after all the wait, instead of acting like a corpse in bed.
The problem is that the idea of withholding only works for virgins and young ladies who have high SMV and good reproductive capabilities.
Dried up cock carousel riders who are already getting fat and old don’t have any right to play this game. The article states that.
A woman looking for marriage when her ass starts to sag is like a death row inmate “finding Jesus”.
THIS
Yes, yes.. That was my item #1! The author mentions that, but the church magazine doesn’t, I guess..
Right. The woman must have something of value…otherwise, who wants to pay full price for a used car?
The fact that we’re seeing this “natural selection” more and more (thanks to feminism) has many women ‘up in arms’. They’re trying to find a way to blame men (yet again) but it’s really the FI that has fucked them.
Who cares about their right to play this game? Let them try. And let the men that are dumb enough to play it with them play it. You Doktor Jeep as well as ZeI9 will never fall for it. At least I hope.
In principle no, but the advice as presented seems imbalanced.
The problem is that the message is full of hypocrisy. It talks about women being “tricked” by smooth players, because she somehow believes that he will marry her. If I meet a random girl in a bar and hook up with her for a one night stand, I have certainly not tricked her. Certainly she cannot expect me to wife her up. She has to take responsibility for her actions. However, this is not what the message says. It gives the women the slut pass, telling them that men are somehow responsible for any whorish activity she has indulged in, even if it was certain all the time that the guy only wanted to bang her, even if she herself knew it deep down. This institution, like the rest of the world, knows that it can’t criticize women, because women instantly get defensive, so they have undertaken the widely practiced task of scapegoating men, and heaping unto them, the blame for women’s slutty behavior, and not holding women accountable for anything.
Right…good points. It’s using “holding out for love” versus telling women “stop being whores”..like it used to do in the past.
The corporate church is raking in the cash (don’t forget)…it’s what they do. Corporate churches are the best cons going, today. They operate under a veil of “religion”…it’s all about the money, people.
I’ll have to chime in here because I can see it from two sides.
First, anyone who hasn’t read the Iron Rules of Tomassi then you need to go do it here: http://therationalmale.com/the-best-of-rational-male-year-one/
I can see your points here, Nem…but I think the author is shooting at the reasons why this church is having to tell women to go this route. We all know that women will pick certain men at certain times in their lives (men will understand certain concepts better after reading Tomassi on The Rational Male).
The church is saying to avoid the “player” while they promote (or sell) their own brand (fix) for profit. Women (via feminism) have been told to ignore the old “rules”; get out there and do whatever comes “naturally” so they’ll feel “empowered”. They’re doing it and in the wake we’re seeing the results of it. The church should be shaming them for being whores (but they’re not…see the fine line they are walking?). They’re saying to hold out for “love”. It’s the same bullshit that movies promote “love conquers all”….and the church is selling this fix for a low, low fee.
The latest con by this church is….hold out for “love” and it will come along (no it won’t). The woman will hold out, she’ll hook up with a good provider (beta) and then her natural selection – she’ll jump on a passing Alpha cock (best of both worlds). The corporate church con isn’t going to tell them that…because they are selling something – love – and it’s a joke.
I don’t trust these “mega” churches because they don’t give a fuck about
religion….they’re all about corporate sales. They disguise it (with
religion) but that’s about as close as they “believe” in it. It’s all a
mask to get more money.
So don’t buy into the other con (the player) – buy into our church con (hold out for love). Either way, the female’s natural selection (and progression) will have her sleeping with an Alpha, at certain times, and a Beta (especially when approaching the wall and needing security).
If she has her own money (needs no security), then she’ll more than likely end up bitter (a feminist), joining the ranks of the other old, bitter women (with cats). You see this face all of the time – fuck you men. I just laugh.
Didn’t mean to leave such a long reply….but the bottom line is:
Corporate church con versus the player con.
Women are going to do whatever (when the tingles come or when she needs the security) – doesn’t matter when…it will just happen. It’s an ugly truth and women don’t want men to know about it.
When people pay their 10% tithes to “God” do they not notice the big house & flashy cars that the pastor has? Does it not seem strange to just give your hard earned money to a guy driving a Rolls Royce while your driving a Honda?
the poor have always thrown away what little they had. no religious organisation in the world doesn’t prey on that principle to some extent.the only problem now is that they are competing with government and this church likely knows that if it can draw in more men who can provide for their women it too will intern get more in the way of charitable donors. most men would forgo the tax belt they get from the government and knuckle down with a born again.
Born-again since 1998. I send my 10% to an organization that helps needy Jews in the former Soviet Union – in other words, people who actually need help, not like the apostate phoney who heads this apostate, phoney church.
Jews needing money in the Soviet Union??? lol
Communism = Judaism
From this day forward….step up an IRA (traditional or roth), your choice with your 10%. Look out for your well being into your later days.
I guarantee you….Jesus will be ok with it.
Reminds me of the Suicidal Tendencies song, “Send Me Your Money”.
Headquarters of the Trinity Broadcasting Network, run by Paul (dead) and Jan Crouch. These people are really famous in OC.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/12/02/televangelist-swindler-paul-crouch-leaves-a-dirty-legacy-evangelical-christians-look-the-other-way/
This is in Costa Mesa, Orange County, California. This is some extremely expensive real estate.
http://images.onset.freedom.com/ocregister/blogs/taxdollars.ocregister.com/trinnity-complex.jpg
http://assets.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/138246/IMG-2952.jpg
http://assets.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/138220/IMG-2811.jpg
wow, looks like an unfinished white house minus the capitol dome.
I used to live about 10 minutes down the freeway from that place. When you drive past and see it up close, you can see that it looks really cheaply made, as if the people who built it overcharged by 200% for cheap plaster.
Every Christmas they set up Christmas lights that spell out “Happy Birthday Jesus” in huge letters. The place is an eyesore.
Here’s another Orange County Jesus Mansion, Saddleback Church:
http://www.greenheck.com/images/profiles/saddleback.jpg
http://www.sprung.com/sites/default/files/styles/medium/public/galleries/1.3.1-saddleback-1.jpg
Right. I don’t remember the part where Jesus was living in a palace and driving a Rolls.
Maybe I missed a few Sundays?
Like preaching about sins of the flesh while fornicating with under age girls because its what God wants. The light just never seems to go on.
All that in exchange for happiness AFTER you die…
Ha ha ha…You have spoken correctly. I would add that any man or woman with common sense is going to want a marriage partner with sexual experience and confidence. If the sex is not good there will be cheating throughout the marriage. Then what?
I have given some money to my local Catholic church recently, but they are not rich by any means. The aging church needs a lot of money to maintain. I think from now on I’ll give them a small amount every year.
Honestly, you know what you can give a church (better than money)? Time. Donate a little time (at least you know where it’s going).
Save your money.
Good point. I’ve always pointed out this fact. I understand “people of faith” (the pastors, etc..) need to earn a living…but come on. People are such sheep.
These corporate churches are about “corporate”…nothing about religion (but people buy into them). Stupid.
Nine hundred and fifty million! Just shy of a Billion!?
Okay, normally I leave religion out but I’m a Christian, God fearing..etc.
What fucking morons…950mm!!! The ideal is to live like Jesus and he didn’t ask anyone for money and certainly wasn’t worth close to a billion. Heck someone gave him a coin and he said to give it back to the guy printed on it.
This is what happens when women are given “a voice” in society.
have you seen how the poor invest their money. better that schtick than back to government.
better back to the Govt. where a good percentage of them got their income from!!
Preaching religion for a profit just doesn’t seem right to me. I feel if someone truly loved Allah, God, Jesus, etc and wanted to spread the message they would do it for free.
A healthy sex life is an integral part of a good marriage. Other things matter, without question, but healthy and frequent sex is one of the pillars. A healthy sex life in a marriage almost has a “trickle down” effect. Other things tend to fall into place much easier if both people are getting what they need between the sheets. What if you wait and she’s awful? Or what if you wait and both of you just don’t have the chemistry in the sack that you thought you would? I believe that some people might be compatible outside the bedroom but completely opposite inside. I’ve had a few “dead frogs” myself, and the consensus will show that I wasn’t the problem. Can you imagine waiting for that? All this build up and finally the big night comes, and you’ve got a dead frog on your hands. I can’t think of anything that would put most guys on the road to infidelity, whether intentional or unintentional, faster than something like that. The car analogy stands firm here: Try before you buy. Marriage is a huge commitment. Don’t waste time getting all the other pieces in place but leave out one of the most crucial.
I agree with what you’re saying, but the answer is no fault divorce laws. They often get slammed on this site – and rightfully so when women use them unfairly. But they also protect men in the exact situations you’re talking about – you find out you are incompatible in the bedroom, you have an easy out. This is admittedly not a perfect protection from alimony awards and the various other stupidity that happens in family court, but those rights are far narrower if you act quickly. It should be pretty apparent within the first six months at least if there is compatibility. If not, act fast.
Of course, understand that we live in a society where most women are whores, not women saving themselves for marriage. With those women, who cares….
Agreed, but that’s why they get slammed: women abuse them. Time is certainly of the essence in a situation like that, but I recommend that if a man is considering marriage, a prenuptial agreement is part of the deal. This is serious business. I’m talking about both of you lawyering up prior to signing. Now, it’s not the get out of jail free card that some would have you believe, but it will go a hell of a long way in protecting yourself. If your would-be bride hands you some bullshit line like, “What, are you planning to get divorced,” or, “We don’t need that because we really love each other,” kick her butt to the curb POSTHASTE. Yeah, I know you just wasted several years in an LTR, but your future self will be immensely grateful should things go south and your once feminine, Red Pill wife decides to throw it in reverse. If they’re pissed off enough at you, they’ll take you to the cleaners. If there’s a child involved, that’s even worse since courts almost always award primary custody to the mother by default no matter how good of a father you are. If that happens, kiss your house goodbye, because she “needs it” to raise your child or children. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING is more important than protecting yourself from this kind of barbarism, especially in today’s society.
“What, are you planning to get divorced?”
“No. Are you? If not I don’t see why this is a big deal.”
“We don’t need that because we really love each other.”
“It’s because we love each other that we need this, I don;t want material considerations to cloud our judgment about our relationship.”
There are my responses.
Agreed. A pre-nup doesn’t assure you’ll get divorced, it assures you’ll play fair if you do. That said, it’s dangerous to rely on this, trust me. I don’t know how the laws work in the States, but in Canada, almost everything stops at the marital home. So, irrespective of contracts, all money poured into the marital home will be split. Outside of the marital home, many assets can be protected, including inheritance, and a pre-nup issn’t necessary. So, as a general rule, my advice to people where one person already owns a house, is to sell (or rent it out) and purchase a new home together. If the house is a rental property, it will stay in the owner’s assets. If you choose to sell, take the equity from the sale and park it, and buy the new house 50/50. There are both tax and market considerations in either of these options, but both provide a degree of protection in the event of a divorce. That way, all equity growth in the marital home will start from the date of cohabitation. None of this is a guarantee, but it helps. Some people think my ideas are damaging to marriage, but I think they benefit the relationship, because an imbalance of material considerations has a trickle down effect into other areas of the relationship.
“A healthy sex life in a marriage almost has a “trickle down” effect. Other things tend to fall into place much easier if both people are getting what they need between the sheets.”
This is absolutely correct.
But that’s why courtships so were so long. So people could really feel each other out and build tension with it. Plus the woman has to work harder for one loyal man than a long line of guys basically queuing up to screw her.
Ever had a whore who was terrible in bed? I have. To them it’s no different than watching MTV. Almost a chore. They’re devalued and they know it. And they also know 47 blokes are waiting around the corner to jump on
Holy shit, Clown from Fighter’s History Dynamite!
You’re maybe the second person in over 10 years to recognize my avatar. Right on. That game was a worthy Street Fighter II clone.
“PICK A CARD!” I always liked Ray and Mizoguchi. I paid some bucks for a Japanese Saturn import of it.
Rolling over in bed after the big night and realizing what a bad idea it was to not take a ride around the block and kick the tires.
For virtuous girls who are unspoiled this is a good idea. A very, very good idea. Pretty much the only idea that can rescue the west.
No redemption for party hoes though. Marrying damaged goods is suicide
Because you know they’d just lie on “the big day”. “I’ve only been with one other guy and I didn’t even like it.” Yeah…
If someone’s the kind of guy who can’t spot a lying hoe then he deserves it.
99% of hoes have it telegraphed. There are dozens of articles here and elsewhere detailing the signs, and most are obvious.
Like we say, trust your gut.
Virtuous, unspoiled girls are already doing this. By definition. They don’t need to be told to start doing it.
It’s not as simple as that as anyone can see.
Peer pressure is even screwing girls over who in other environments would be unspoiled.
This message needs to get out to reinforce unspoiled girls before sluts drag them to their level. And rest assured, they will drag down and drag down hard
They may need to be reinforced – being a virgin or not may be a binary state, but their attitudes towards their own virginity / sex life are fluid
Any man that marries a hoe like that brought it on himself – and to a lesser extent his father failed him – as did the anti-male institutions that rule the West. Truly imbibing the red pill is a painful experience – like cauterizing a wound. The wound left in your psyche by the weak-ass politically correct cravens who raised you. But the power and freedom one feels after truly breaking their chains cannot be described.
I hate how leftists have hijacked the church. They are spitting into the face of the idea that chaste women are more valuable. There is nothing worse than a whore that fucks like a prude. I hope that this insanity with soon be banished so that we may restore the church to its patriarchal origins.
Once again the church arrives with the correct message but the wrong focus and delivery. The basic premise of their message appears to be Casanova’s and other seducer types are bad and take advantage of poor, helpless women and avoid marriage. Now quite frankly I freely admit we aren’t good marriage material but not because we are bad but because we know the gig is up, our eye’s are open and that marriage is the sucker’s play in today’s world. They know where their money comes from and it comes from telling women what they want to hear, which is exactly what we do as well, we are just more honest because we approach the world as it is, not as they want us to believe it is.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “Marriage is the long con that women and society want us to play, and game is the short con we play in return.”
“Marriage is the long con that women and society want us to
play, and game is the short con we play in return.”
Well said!
Marriage doesn’t exist anymore.
It doesn’t even arrive with the correct message; should be: women need to stop acting like whores.
This “hold out for love” bullshit is just that…bullshit. It’s a con artist saying “watch out for the player con” while pulling it’s own con on the woman (at the same time).
Here’s the thing: I wouldn’t mind this teaching if they were strongly encouraging women to remain virgins in the process and making women more feminine and presentable as good wife material.
But they aren’t. They are instead focusing on men while treating women as innocent victims like any SJW outfit or Gamma male.
The way I see it, if a church wants any credibility in sexual matters, they should be encouraging women who lack any STEM potential to avoid college, get married young, and remain a virgin until marriage. But good luck finding a major church that does that.
Agreed.
They will just encourage them to get an “education”, and pursue a “career”, in the most fertile period of her life.
None of these corporate churches give a flying fuck about the religion at all. They are in it for the profit (the money)…that’s it. Most churches, period, are going to go the PC route because they always need ‘new customers’. Most are giving women a “free pass” because it’s the thing to do (during this time in our history).
The new churches (or new-old model) will be churches who tell it like it is (i.e. women need to stop acting like whores).
More charlatans masquerading as pastors scamming people out of money.
I don’t agree with this article at all. My wife made me wait 2 months before we had sex, but she cooked, cleaned, paid for things and at most gave me oral in the meantime. She was a virgin (fucking score) so I didn’t hold it against her at all. It really did make me respect her more. Now, if she didn’t do those things to fill the sexless void, I would have dropped her.
I am not saying if a girl slept with me out of the gate I wouldn’t respect her at all, but I know I am nothing special and chances are if she slept with me quickly, she has done it before. It would make me more cautious.
You’re right
I sub-consciously wrote-off any girl who dropped her panties in the first few weeks.
I didn’t have that problem as so much as I didn’t tolerate any of her bullshit after I fucked her. After I got the pussy, I’d judge whether or not the girl’s personality was good enough to keep around.
I am the same. A bad personality makes for bad sex and a bad fucking evening.
I never did – they always had to drop them pants on the second date. Never have been fond of women with no experience. I detest caution, hesitation, fumbling.
The next time you say something weak like this I will be there to slap the words right out of your mouth.
Never speak badly about yourself.
Hahahaha rightfully so. I didn’t mean it in a negative way. I mean I am human like everyone else. I didn’t do anything out of the ordinary to make her drop her panties any faster.
LOL! Yeah I knew what you meant although I do say to my friends to never speak bad or criticize yourself because there is no shortage of people to do this for you.
Ain’t that the fucking truth…
We are all special flowers in God’s garden.
“She was a virgin….” but also “she gave you oral”….
How does that work?
Is this a Bill Clinton sort of rationalisation thingy?
You see, when a penis enters a vagina….
I see….
So IT IS a Bill Clinton’s rationalisation thingy!
So a woman can have had hundreds of guys up her poop hole…..and have swallowed gallons and gallons of various dudes come…..and STILL be a virgin.
Interesting.
Or, bear with me now, she could have not done anything with a guy until she met me! *gasps*
You are “the prize”…never forget it.
Your situation was a unique one (a good one). It’s one that many are looking to duplicate, today.
The author sounds almost like he thinks men are entitled to have sex with the women they’re dating, which is precisely one of the criticisms feminists like to level at red pill / manosphere guys.
If you want to have a good time with a woman who will put out, who will lower her SMV by taking your dick and maybe even wasting part of her youth as your girlfriend, fine. That’s what whores are for. But don’t pretend like it’s somehow in a woman’s best interest to turn herself into a slut to please the kind of guy who says “the sex is NEVER worth the wait.” That kind of guy is usually not looking for marriage, and if he does start looking for marriage, he’s not gonna marry a banged-out whore anyway.
Whores are for a 30 minute quickie.
You would have to read The Rational Male and the Iron Rules of Tomassi to understand that particular line in the author’s article.
http://therationalmale.com/the-best-of-rational-male-year-one/
It’s not about the “NEVER worth the wait” part…..it’s deeper. Women use sex (and they know it) as leverage (to get something from a beta chump). When women are attracted to a man, then the physical attraction (spark) is there and she doesn’t use it to leverage sex for something (anything – money, house, car, etc…). Alpha fucks/Beta bucks is the term.
She won’t “hold out” for the Alpha like she would a Beta. That was the point of that line (don’t let a woman put you in a holding pattern). Her natural attraction is a spark…it’s not a low fire that needs “tending” to ignite the passion (your wasting your time at that point).
This is a helpful distinction. I was thinking of it in terms of a young woman saving her virginity for her husband.
I agree that using sex as a tool (withholding it for punishment, promising it for leverage, giving it as a reward), is absolutely poisonous to a relationship.
The church is supporting abstinence and virginity until marriage, it is encouraging girls not to be hos, and it is encouraging the formation of strong families. Essentially, it is fulfilling the third plank of the ROK community beliefs.
Of course it is ridiculous if some washed up aging slut tries to cover up her past and take advantage of this, but the church is advocating abstinence until marriage, which is the opposite of that.
It is ironic that the article refers to this church as preying on black families, when in reality promoting the formation of black families is one of the best things that an institution can do to help the black community.
I also don’t get the slam against NoFap. Sure there are some antimasturbation zealots on there who believe in accumulating chi energy and whatnot, but the main focus is to help guys get over porn addiction and interact with real women. Sure most are in gamma or omega state right now but that’s the whole point; a guy can’t ever hope to get close to becoming an alpha if he can only get it up for pixels on a screen.
Yeah but the only audience that this advice is helpful to is young adolescent girls before they enter the world of sex. Its disrespectful to fuck around for a decade and then tell a guy “we’re going to wait until marriage”. Even she will feel like she is taking advantage if him.
Show me a church that I can walk into as a proven and worthy man and mingle with (and subtly but politely shit-test) its consent age members who are well kept fine fair virgins and meet their fathers to openly discuss things like DOWRIES, then by golly I’d beat my chest to join and give them my 10%. If I wanted some ‘washed carouseller’, I’d find one at a bar and take her to the self serve car wash and, while doing my car, I’d accidentally hit her with the power sprayer a few times. Underarms, butt and a DOUBLE SHOT to the twat.
But are they also advocating a return to Marriage 1.0?
They should be advocating women to stick up with their marriages, and not just divorce rape a guy on the slightest whim. Women need it more, coz three 75% of the divorces are pursued by women. However they go the other way around, telling men to be good husbands so that they do not force their wives to divorce them, since they know they can’t criticize women and hold them responsible their actions. Women are never wrong after all. It’s always somehow the guy’s fault.
My question was rhetorical. It makes no sense for a guy to marry for the pussy when 1) she can take it away by divorce, no questions asked and 2) with hold it on a whim if he doesn’t do the fucking dishes.
The problem is the blatantly obvious con job of this church and it’s billionaire founders in conning the lower classes to give them their money in the name of God.
These false teachers will be the first to be cast into the far reaches of hell to be ass fucked and poked with burning objects for eternity. They are the most evil people in the world to lie to people using God’s name. Like the article states they are only using the no sex before marriage line to increase their money.
Their entire prosperity theology is a false doctrine and might as well be authored by satan himself. Jesus said that the meek shall inherit the earth. Now the meek are those who live in material poverty. He also said that it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. These are the same type of people Jesus was condemning in His earthly ministry. The same type of people who had Him nailed to a cross.
Don’t be an idiot and give them a pass just because a small part of their message happens to be partially truthful. Please do not be that fucking stupid.
Nope, I disagree. This corporate church (unlike traditional churches) is promoting “hold out for love”….a very different message. The traditional church would shame women “don’t be a whore”.
The corporate church only cares about one thing…..money. They are bending a message to fit their business model. That’s part of the problem with society today, – too much PC bullshit instead of shooting straight with people. It reminds me of the “everybody gets a trophy”, mentality.
You want a trophy – get better at the skill.
You want a decent husband, family life, etc….stop being a whore.
This corporate church dances around the real issue because it wants to rake in the cash. This place is not a church.
Hey guys whatever you do, dont say anything bad about the church or organized religion. you’ll soon realize that this comment board is crawling with indoctrinated religio bots with all the zeal of an ISIS recruit defending their faith.
Show me a religious wacko zealot and I’ll show you a hypocrite with more skeletons in their closet than a concentration camp in Auschwitz.
Everyone is a hypocrite at some point in their lives, even people who claim no religious affiliation but who still have their own moral standards of conduct.
Like order comes from chaos, salvation comes from debauchery. Church washed sluts are the biggest ‘DICK-pocrites’. (pronounced ‘dippo-crits’ and rhyming cousin of the common American gastropod carousellerina or HIPPO-crite.
A true church-washed slut would have to accept that there are physical consequences to that particular sin, that is, STDs, unplanned children out of wedlock, a lack of any interest in marriage from guys, etc. as part of what she chose when she did the deeds.
In terms of divine forgiveness, yes she’d get it, but the physical consequences remain.
lol I didn’t know people were still stupid enough to fall for indulgences
Is Millionaire Matchmaker’s Patty the Pope of this church? Because this advice is the same.
It’s good advice for any ‘former’ slut who wishes to lock down a sub-beta man for a relationship, even rich below-beta men. But women usually don’t want these men. Any high value man is going to see right through this and NEXT the girl once he figures out that the girl is trying to charge him for something she gives to other guys for free.
Abstinance and not being a slut in the first place is good advice. But once girls go slut, they can’t go back, slutinness leaves signs that can’t be erased.
The best advice for sluts is to either lockdown those not demanded men, or to be the most feminine slut possible. This means be giving, don’t let things bother you, and be super open about who and what you are. This will result in you getting treated like a slut and him refusing to commit to you exclusively, but maybe he’ll pick you when he settles down. Maybe.
Seriously, don’t get started in the slut game. No kind of high value man will want you for anything other than a conquest.
“Abstinance and not being a slut in the first place is good advice.”
That’s such a damn great line lol
I’ve known sluts that postponed sex with beta providers to make them think they are good girls. But eventually they’ll get bored with these guys and go fuck the alpha
“But once girls go slut, they can’t go back”. There is no way a church that teaches about Jesus, no matter how much of a sect they are, will tell anyone that there is no hope of reedemption. Jesus forgave an adulterous woman and told her: “go and sin no more”. He did not say: “go, but you are such a slut, I know you will end up going back to your old habits by next week, anyway”.
Even Rocky IV, one of the manliest movies ever filmed, had a message that everyone can change.
Once a bear has had a taste of human flesh, it has to be put down.
In other words, God forgives, but actions have consequences.
Jesus was referring to that woman’s standing with God, not pressing “Undo” with regards to her past actions. He was also indirectly addressing that the same religious leaders that were to stone her to death were not applying the same judgement to the man involved, as that is what Torah dictates.
Consider the thief on the cross who was crucified next to Jesus. He begged Jesus to forgive his sins and remember him in Paradise, which is what Jesus did. But the same thief also pointed out that he and the other thief were being rightfully punished for their earthly crimes. He didn’t ask Jesus to take him off the cross and restore him to full health. He knew that he had to pay the legal punishment for his crimes.
‘Without sin there is no repentance’ – Rasputin.
I always wonder why feminists and SJWs aren’t screeching about Patty The Jew and her selling women like cattle program.
For the 21 year old virgin who wishes to have a traditional marriage in which she subordinates to the husband, it is excellent advice. Projecting a non-interest in one-night stands, behaving conservatively and dressing modestly will reduce unwanted attention from men who are not interested in marriage. It is a win-win for everyone involved, as such men can easily go find other women with whom to have fun, and such women can hold out for a potential husband who will appreciate them.
For the sluts though, no, they had their chance, and any guy who wifes them up is pretty much guaranteeing a life of “married” misery.
On the spiritual plane, her gates are ONE WAY. The USED WOMAN has every dick that has passed through her gates TRAPPED IN HER HEAD and heart. Every object and every night of being slobbered upon and crapped upon remains with her. THE WHOLE line up is there.
Her pussy could have been Ellis Island with boatload after boatload having traversed through. The beta can live in denial of this or he can live dissatisfied. He can parade her around in church and get used to the winks but he’s fooling himself to believe she’ll play angel for him ’till death.
A little glitch though in these modern times is when she’s pure from dick but she HAS laid with another woman. Whoever she lays with, their bodies during coitus become ONE FLESH. Entities and demons are free to pass between bodies at that point. Prostitutes and sluts are so dangerous for men because these women carry with them the demons which possessed every ‘john’ and bum and serial killer that she’s spread her legs for.
If she’s only laid with another woman though, TO REMAIN RIGHTEOUS she must remain with that woman and offer herself as a PACKAGE DEAL like two female twins joined at the hip. ONE MAN and only one man alone could accept them as wives(plural), to whom the women would remain loyal to keep the union pure on the spiritual plane.
Feminists openly promote promiscuity with their “slut walks” and trying to change “walk of shame” to “stride of pride.” It’s only logical that the male response would be to take advantage of encouraged female promiscuity. They think they can make men believe a slut is on the same level as a faithful woman. Wrong. Men will always see sluts as low-status women. Sluts are the bottom of the barrel. They’re good for a fuck, but nothing else. You definitely don’t want to wife one up, unless you want to spend the rest of your life raising other men’s children. It happens to stupid betas all the time. I’ve known a few…
Unfortunately, the idea going through the minds of most of those people is that sluts will be really good in bed and will sexually satisfy them. To them, better a slut who is good in bed and is enthusiastic about her sexuality than a virgin who is a rookie in bed and will probably be ‘sexually incompatible’.
Personally, I think the problem with sexually compatibility could be solved be adjusting the testosterone levels of both partners.
The worst part is having to look at these women when they do their “slut walk”. You can feel the tremors as these fat ass “sluts” walk down the road.
It’s almost as if the local burger joint is having a promotion for Free Fries Friday or Saturday Free Shakes.
These turds roll and the tremors are felt for miles.
Soooo… the author of this article would agree with the advice if it included this clausule: “nothing of this applies if you have been a slut, though. Nothing you can do at this point will make you worthwile”. But then it does not quite sound like something you get told at a church, right?
Billionaire at the top of the “church” sends bullshit indicators peaking into the red.
Virgin or whore, any woman will destroy a man in the end. Their nature drives them to emotionally abuse a man into permanent compliance before she hits menopause. Sad but true.
The pussy cartel works only when the world consists of entire generations of marriage centered women – even in the past the pussy cartel was only effective due to high pressure for young couples to marry. Those women won’t be able to effect that unless they are 18 year old virgins. But I guess it appeals to those single mothers who are fed lies. The funny thing is that those very same women still have their Casanova lovers aside from the Beta providers they let wait until marriage – but the prize then can be yours:
It also helps a lot if her dad vetts the boyfriends.
My mom once said that my dad was the only man her father wasn’t able to scare away by looking at them.
Those are the old times. A dad had a better sense to select those men who had honest intentions. Mothers are more easily swayed by Players.
But with sexual “freedom” all bets are off. It’s r-selection from now on. The pussy cartel won’t work.
“Old times?” It was only the early 70s!
From what I gather, it wasn’t so much “selection” but rather a non-verbal communication of “If you screw up I’ll fuck you up.”
I’ve seen pictures of Grandpa after the war; he was a small guy, but he just had a look about him which you probably could only get by signing up at 17 to shoot Japanese people.
A mother eyeballs a girl that her son brings home. The mom can detect if the girl is some party hussie or if she can so much as sew a rip in a kid’s pants. The dad, on the other hand, sees his son bring home some hot stripper for example, and he gives his son the golfer’s clap approval while the mom begins scheming to oust the whore.
Traditionally with dads, the boys that his silly daughter brings home, he’s able to see right through them. He’ll pass judgement quickly and projects very well that he is prepared to kill on the spot any threat to the structural integrity of the family and its gene pool.
This is under TRADITIONAL norms. The patriarchal family has been all but smashed to bits and little of this is practiced today.
Yep. She let alpha Mc thugster hit it hard for free and now expects beta simp to marry her.
Agree. They have their nice little beta providers and they’ll have a little something on the side (now and then) when needed – with an Alpha.
Any man (who is a man) will square his woman away from day one. If she falls out of line, then get her back in line (or kick her off of your bus). You are the driver – there is only one bus – your bus.
Apparently UCK has the full support of Prostitutes World Wide (PWW). There are even rumours circulating that a prostitute helped lubricate the processes behind the scenes in establishing the first church.
“Lubricate the process”.
Yeah..? That was intentional wording.
I thought so, very poignant, I appreciate that.
Nice, Floyd. Lube it up.
It’s not the manosphere, the Red Pill or tired caricatures of “players” UKCG need to concern themselves with. The empowered Sheryl Sandbergs of the world are far more influential than any Casanova ever will be:
“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”
― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead
http://therationalmale.com/2014/06/18/controlling-interests/
http://therationalmale.com/2014/08/07/open-hypergamy/
given that the only possible explanation for her meteoric rise to the top involves her having slept her way up the hierarchy the above presumably means she considers Larry Summers and Paige, Sergey Brin and Zuckerberg etc as crazy bad boys who she’d never want to commit to. Of course that could just be the tip of the iceberg
This woman represents all the qualities I want to avoid in a woman. She wrote a book on how to wind up in an unhappy marriage. I feel bad for her husband he’s still blue pill, until he catches her cheating on him.
Agree. The message this church sends is another example of shifting the focus (the blame) onto the man (versus telling women – straight up – to stop being whores).
You can’t turn a whore into a housewife.
I read that some where……(laughs)
so 10% of a man’s wealth goes to god but at least 50% goes to women. Pretty much establishes the pecking order
I remember this church – they used to have a branch in down market wood green north london. There’s nothing bad that hasn’t been said about it. Poor black people have always been easy pickings. Pentecostal type services encourage feeling and emotion over any kind of critical engagement, usually with lots of music and clapping to get people into a frenzy. Coincidentally some pyramid scheme presentations do the same. At least with the latter its guaranteed to work until as inevitable someone stops singing and clapping and starts thinking things through. Unlikely to happen if the issue is betas and the remote possibility of sex after marriage
just did a search for Universal Church of the Kingdom of God and some of the top searches are:
universal church exposed
universal church of the kingdom of god satanic
universal church of the kingdom of god illuminati
universal church of the kingdom of god temple of solomon
What about Palo Mayombe?
If that first photo is any indication, I am happy to leave the female congregants for thirsty betas….
Amen.
UKC…. picking up where the Catholic Church left off after Luther demolished their predatory spiritual shakedowns.
The irony here is that the descriptions the church puts out regarding the “Casanova” actually describes a beta: “comments of flattery”, “promising the world”, manipulation using guilt (guilt isn’t a feeling I want associated with me) and my favourite: men that say “I want to share my love with you physically”.
Getting a woman into bed is about being fun and playful and teasing.
The church says “be wary of these guys” but describes them as completely opposite yo what they are.
Money-oriented church. Fucking redundance.
Why join any church that has a government stamp of approval on it. Non government approved churches are called names like ‘cults’ and are defamed until they bend over to the state.
Using potential future sex as a weapon to control men seems to be common among women. I have been a victim of this tactic several times with my previous girlfriends. After a while though, I said “Fuck this” and simply stopped being a bitch. This is like trusting a con artist who constantly promises you he will pay you later. I might be single but at least I am no longer begging for sex like a loser to women.
2 decades ago (I was in my late teens) with a previous girlfriend I put up with that shit up until the point where she dumped me for someone else.
It is one of those things I wish I could go back in time and slap myself. But I’m going to do the next best thing… teach my son not to put up with that shit from any woman.
I’m sure you’re aware how many married guys put up with that shit until the inevitable divorce rape.
No hymen, no diamond.
If a woman is a virgin then she can hold out for as long as she wants, right up until the wedding night. That means she must have had no sex, no anal sex, no oral sex, no handjobs – nothing more than kissing. Obviously very few women observe this in the west – so no more putting women on pedestals; most are promiscuous due to moral decay, feminism and unwed mothers/broken families.
If a woman has engaged in any sexual behaviour with a previous boyfriend/vacation fling/one night stand then the rules change. She might be girlfriend material but all depends, she’s not wife material, either have a fling yourself or if she is really good and hot then she can be a girlfriend. But she must never hold out on you: Either she gives you sex within 2 dates or dump her. If she ever says she “doesn’t feel like it” remember she gave herself to some player on a vacation when she was 19 (“he was a really sweet kind guy who listened to me” etc) – dump her and find another.
Feminism has made women disposable; every year another set of girls arrive on the dating market. So remember that 22 year old will in not many years hit the wall. Men are the catch now, not women.
I perfectly agree with your stance on feminism, but there’s an overall problem with your previous paragraphs as well as with this article.
Leaving beside this ‘church”s shenanigans and intricate controversy that surrounds it, if you focus on the message that it sends- women should weed out the ‘bad boys’ and go for men who are ‘marriage-material’ and who want to settle down. I am strictly referring to the principle (not what kind of women, their attractiveness etc.). This correlates with the ‘no hymen, no ring’ opener you have there.
The entire idea- that women shouldn’t pop their goods and basically be sluts is the same idea that this website’s articles constantly reiterate. How the world would be a better place if women stayed chaste or at least had a 1-2 boyfriends, not 12. How the nuclear family has been destroyed by women and their sluttiness that de-incentivizes men to seek marriage, etc.
But when the same thing is proposed in this ‘church”s thesis- keep your legs closed and seek marriage- the whole wave of backlash appears. How women are materialistic cunts and will only give it to rich guys, how they’re seeking for ‘beta bucks’, using sex to control men, etc.
So, generalizing here on this website- men like having sex without having to marry the respective woman/women, but at the same time they expect most women to be pristine virgins.
Women are supposed to be chaste and dedicate their best youth years (fertility, beauty etc) to their husbands and their families, in ‘exchange’ for support and a lifelong commitment, but they are simultaneously greedy whores who prey for innocent men’s wallets and will only spread their legs for cold hard cash.
A woman is also supposed to guard her coochie and not just throw it out like that, to the first ‘alpha’ (alpha fucks and all that), but then using sex as a weapon to control men is a horrible, deceitful and duplicitary behavior.
Am I getting this right, or is this some sort of logical fallacy? It is perfectly logical that if a man sleeps with a woman who gives it away easily, she is a slut and won’t be a virgin for the future husband. At the same time, the woman who doesn’t sleep with him and therefore remains chaste for her husband to be is a greedy whore who’s selling her pussy and is dead set on manipulation.
Guys, make up your minds. Seriously.
I’m so surprised to see such an article on a website where 80% of articles are mourning the decline of traditional values, women’s chastity and old school relationships and criticizes the ‘sluttiness’ of the West.
Lot’s of good counter arguments to the post in the comments.
This church, however shady it may be, is trying to deliver a worthwhile message to the women.
Okay. They are trying to do it without alienating the core paying membership, hence the woman is passive and the man may or may not be evil. “Don’t sleep with him unless he is ready to commit.”
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Again, it is up to the guy to decide to “man up and stay”. Maybe that is the gist of the complaint in this article.
But. Let’s reverse the agency of the message. Let’s make the woman have that agency. “Don’t sleep with him unless you are sure you can keep him.”
Same message, but much better advice!
But that’s the problem…it’s not the same message.
If anything, it’s playing right into their “natural” selection – which is to hold out for the beta chump who is going to pay for everything (nice guy). She’ll still fuck the hot guy she runs into, she’ll just keep her beta guy around for the money and other benefits.
This “church” is after the money – Love Schools…what a fucking joke. The message should be:
Stop being whores. You cannot turn a whore into a housewife.
I’m not paying full price for a used car.
I’d just use those tricks that guy’s dad uses to seduce 19 year olds.
Marriage… How quaint.
Bunch of hyprocrites. The more moral they display in public the sicker they are in private. Always has been, always will be.
The church unfortunately has become corrupt not only in the UK. In USA also…
So a church is telling it’s members to not have sex till marriage? Forgive me for only skimming the article, but how is this worthy of its own article?
They are doing whatever it takes to force men to marry. Bottom line you put out for me honey by the Third date or your ass is gone. I know you gave lesser men better pussy for free. Don’t play me bitch. Looks like the price of pussy is too low and the cartel wants to cut production.
The best thing about religion is the mad money you can make in it if you’re good winning friends and influencing people.
LOL, yeah black woman hold out for sex from black man…. that’ll be the day. The average black woman in the usa might not be as good looking as a white woman, but no black man will ever go without sex. There will always be easier black women.
IMHO Nicolas Taleb is overrated — he writes overcomplicated books about fairly basic concepts and he comes off as resentful and angry towards academics in general.. this idea that men of action and men of thought are somehow separate is nonsensical. Men of thought take action by the mere act of producing their thoughts if they are thinking. What is a man of action.. like a man who works in business? Just a different kind of action.
Orwell was a socialist – yes a socialist — he has written about being a socialist. and so was Camus..just fyi
I have read and studied marx and I don’t think cultural marxism is a bad thing.. only to reactionaries and libertarians.. and from the way I read a lot of this website, you lot might as well all be MRA’s… i get the sense that you all, especially roosh, are reactionaries, anti-statists without understanding that marxism is also anti-statists..anyway
Nicely written piece w/Interesting argument.. I will comment later with my thoughts..
Legalize prostitution and abolish marriage and child support. Isn’t it obvious that women were never capable of genuine intimacy and equitable partnerships? That is why traditional marriage developed in the first place, to counteract innate female hypergamy. If it was natural or even possible for women to simply pair bond and raise families, there would have been no need to institutionalize gender relations through marriage.
“And if the sex is not worth the wait, then neither is the marriage. ”
I know it wasn’t the intended message, but it implies marriage with chaste girls, that many dudes around here seem to hold to a very high standard, is not worth the wait either.
The ones who have daddy issues are the easiest ones.