3. The Christian roots of feminism.
Without Christianity, women are chattel. Period. They were a man's
property everywhere before Christianity obtained, they are his property
everywhere that Christianity has not yet obtained. Christianity is the
revolution in theo-political thought that universally calls for (among a
very many other things) the dignity of women.Of course, we have
recently deracinated the faith from its divine soil and subtracted the
Christ from Christianity. The result was the sprouting of secular
substitutes which must end up, as Nietzsche taught, withering in the nihil:
Marxism, feminism, environmentalism, pacifism. Absent the grace of a
divine foundation, every -ism eventually devolves into a fight to the
death for power.The first Mosaic commandment is, "I AM the LORD
your God..." The first Christian commandment is, "You shall love the
Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all
your strength, and with all your mind..." These precede more specific
directives and thereby frame those ancillary applications, such as "Do
not murder," grounding them in the most essential thing. The secular
substitutes such as feminism believe they can begin with the
unaided assertion to "love your neighbor as yourself" independent of
that grounding, or with the declaration that "all [wo]men are created
equal" without referring first to "Nature and Nature's God," which
dignifies it as something more than a fervent and impossible wish.
Christianity
therefore shares many of the ends of its secular substitutes. But
absent the understanding of how Christianity diverges from feminism at their essences,
most will see the shared goals and assume both creeds to be in
alliance. This is certainly true with evo-psych atheist PUAs who have
no mental acuity to distinguish among whom they regard as their allied
enemies.
It is a damnable weakness for MRAs and PUAs and MGTOWs
and all them to contemplate the equal (infinite) dignity of women,
simply because they are beleaguered by a feminism that has usurped the
name of "dignity" as an instrument to reduce men. Can't risk giving aid
or comfort to the enemy! But in the last analysis, we are all made in
the Imago Dei. Women have dignity qua women within their
submissive role, just as men become "no longer servants but friends" of
their Lord by submitting themselves with all their "heart, soul,
strength, and mind" to Him. These subtleties confound the game
evangelists who adopted their creeds through half-baked seminars and
websites, creating binary categories and inflammable straw men. But
within those subtleties are the elements of reconciliation
And from Vox himself:
Everyone understands that men are fallen, even the Churchians and feminists. But the Churchians and the Average Frustrated Chumps believe that women are less than entirely fallen and that they are the moral superiors of men rather than the fallen moral inferiors, as both Game and Christianity teach.
Game and Christianity are held to be at odds for three reasons.
1. Individual interpretation. While Christianity is a fairly straightforward set of "I believe" principles made explicit in the Nicene Creed, game is largely an empty vessel into which enlightened chumps pour their frustrations. So you get citations of Roissy's Poon Commandments for lack of a formal dogma, and they are set against uneducated assertions of what constitutes proper Christianity (a confusion resident in that insipid neologism "Churchianity," another all-things-to-all-people term).
As a result, you will see monomaniacs like GBFM on Dalrock's site preaching sophistry about how his understanding of game is irreconcilable with his understanding of the church.
2. The proper use of power. Game narrowly understood as evolutionary psychology deployed for the purposes of promiscuity has the greatest currency on the internet. Of course it does; "game" (what used to be known as savoir-faire, aplomb, suavity, confidence, mastery, sangfroid) and the "alpha" attitude (what used to be known as manliness, leadership, and thumos) was first put into practice against modern feminism by pick-up artists, motivated by pussy. This is how revolutions in ideas proceed. They begin in dark corridors motivated by low passions, because it is the potential satiety of those passions which give them the courage to be transgressive against the prevailing regime. But eventually the ideas are refined when the initial courage reaches enough of critical mass for it to be expressed openly, more generally, and without fear of reprisal. For a while euphemism and "dark arts" and samizdat are essential.
But, as in all matters, the Christian is suspicious of the use of power, though not allergic to it. Game is the first hint of a new, paradigm-shifting power, distinguished by its application to picking up drunk coeds. Since its modern rediscovery is rooted in the pussy pursuit, the cunt hunt is regarded as central to the creed. The Christian is enjoined not to sin, but he is not prohibited from wielding power. So the Christian will have disagreements about the ends to which game power should be applied, particularly since the undisciplined endless tail-chase of better orgasms is unworthy of an incipient power with the capacity to fell the cultural tyranny of our age, feminism.
This Christian approach leads to disagreement and confusion about whether the power of game is at odds with Christianity itself. But there is no contradiction between Christians wielding game for righteous purposes any more than there is between Christians wielding firearms in a just cause. That said, ignoramuses on both sides will insist on an eternal incompatibility.