Tag Archives: Self-Emasculation

Discouraging Husbands From Reading The Bible

Mike Winger runs the Bible Thinker ministry. In their very brief About Us section, they say,

BibleThinker is a ministry dedicated to helping you learn to think biblically about everything.

This title is very ironic considering how Mike has chosen to preach on marriage. In his Bible study titled “How To Be A Husband” – The LOST art of biblical manliness!, Mike does what most preachers today are want to do. This is a sermon absolutely swarming with insufferable “cute” moments wherein Mike tells an unfunny self-deprecating story, mocks men in general, sucks up to women, the usual fare. He does at least pretend to be preaching from the Scripture, but then dropped this little gem at 28:45:

This video was uploaded on December 10th, 2015.

But, this is our calling: To nourish and to cherish her, so I, I tried to remind myself of these words, and I encourage husbands to do the same. To learn and study Ephesians, ignoring the part about what your wife is supposed to do, and focusing on the part about what we’re supposed to do. Because, I can’t be the evaluator of her, it’s- her is unto the Lord. I’m not her evaluator, I’m not her boss, I’m not that. I’m an authority in the marriage, but I’m not, I’m not, the boss. That’s, gosh, if your boss followed you home, *laughs* and tried to be the boss of everything you did, you wouldn’t have a good relationship with him. *laughs*

I can imagine one of Mike’s peers scolding him: “Mike! Dude, you’re not supposed to tell them that!” Talk about letting the mask slip!

Telling men to mind their own business about wifely submission is mainstream in Christian churches, but Mike has taken it to a whole new level. This is a man whose ministry motto is to help people think biblically, and as part of his strategy, he is straight up telling husbands to ignore what the Bible says. He’s afraid that if husbands were to start reading those dreaded passages about wifely submission, they might commit the dreaded sin of quoting those passages to their wives, and that’s ABUSE. I’m not joking in the slightest:

This video was uploaded on December 5th, 2015.

I memorize the Scriptures to the husband, I don’t memorize the ones to my wife because that wouldn’t be healthy for me. *laughs* It’s not about me making sure, you know, in fact, I’ve never opened the Bible, went to my wife, and said, “You know, it says, here you’re supposed to submit.” I’ve never done that cuz I do consider that to be abuse. I don’t think that that’s, um, I don’t think that’s what I’m called to do. I’m not saying there’s never any scenario where you could do that, but I haven’t found one yet, um, where I’ve done that to my bride. Um, even, even if I felt she was not in submission to me in some way I just was like, it’s not my job. She’s not my child, she’s my bride.

Because of statements like this, these videos are intensely difficult to listen to, so I haven’t listened to them from beginning to end. It’s likely Mike examined Ephesians 5:25-27 at some point, but whether he did or not, we need to recognize that there is a mandate here that commands husbands to teach their wives what the Bible says.

Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.

By Mike Winger’s definition of abuse, God himself was commanding husbands to abuse their wives. This is complementarian hatred for husbands epitomized. What may shock you even more, however, is that as recently as September of this year, Mike Winger revealed that he still hasn’t even got out of the infancy stages of his studies of the subject.

Streamed live on September 24th, 2021

What are some good books for important topics like systematic theology, hermeneutics, complementarianism? Well, complementarianism, I’m just gonna have to say, I’m working on it. *laughs* Let me, lemme, I’ll make some book recommendations on that one when I teach on that in, however long it’s gonna take. I’m still in the beginning stages of the research there.

Complementarian hatred for the authority of the husband is so widespread that even Christian pastors like Mike Winger can harbor it without even being aware that his mentality has a doctrinal name. He won’t need to read many books written by complementarians before he discovers they’re his allies in his feminist crusade. The primary difference between them and Mike is that none of the best complementarians would be caught dead telling husbands to ignore what the Bible says. They may agree with just about everything else he says, but even for them, that’s going too far.

My Favorite “Iron Rule”

Iron Rule of Tomassi #9
Never Self-Deprecate under any circumstance.

The Iron Rules is the chapter I will recommend people start with when I recommend The Rational Male to their reading. Most people are reluctant to read a book in the first place, so I say if you can’t make yourself read any other part of the book, at least read through The Iron Rules. The ninth rule listed above is easily my favorite, and I want to explain why.

Christian men always self-deprecate. From the pulpit, of course, but in day-to-day interactions too. We act like it’s an indication of virtue on the part of the men who do it. One easy example is a pastor in the pulpit making some unfunny joke about his wife’s only imperfection being her taste in men. That’s a common phenomena, but I see it as even more pervasive than that. Men in the exclusive company of other men routinely cut themselves down. Someone mentions working out, and another man pipes up to inform the group that he would go to the gym, but the boss-man (his wife) won’t let him. Some guy talks about his hobby, and makes sure to tell everyone that his wife loathed it so much he had to make a “man-cave” to pursue his interests. This is typical, unsolicited self-deprecation committed voluntarily by Christian men all the time.

This behavior goes beyond men-bad, women-good, of course. For example, some guy talks about working out, and another man, likely obese and generally unattractive, self-deprecates without even mentioning his wife. “Man, I would work out, but I’m just too lazy, and I just love pizza and ice cream too much! Lol!”

Clearly Christian men don’t think it’s inappropriate to joke about their personal failures in this way. That’s why I think Iron Rule #9 is my personal favorite, because making the conscious decision to live by it gives you light-bulb moment after light-bulb moment in your day-to-day interactions. I can personally attest to this, having been trained for most of my life to see self-deprecation as a good thing. In The Rational Male on page 234, Rollo wrote a couple sentences that make this point especially clear:

The message is ‘women love men who laugh at Men’. Thus, you have to be hyper-aware of it and unlearn it. You have to catch yourself in mid-sentence so to speak. Women operate in the sub-communications and when you overtly admit to a lack of confidence in yourself or your collective gender you may as well just LFBJ yourself.

Page 234 of The Rational Male by Rollo Tomassi

Rollo was talking mostly about women in this particular paragraph, but I would extend this to interactions where men are your primary or only audience. You do have to be hyper-aware of it, because catching yourself before you open your mouth takes a conscious, focused act of the will. The action itself is simple; It’s just keeping your mouth shut, basically. But, when you do stop yourself from self-deprecating, you will immediately feel a strong desire being denied its usual satisfaction. You want to make yourself look bad. It’s uncomfortable to not do it. But, it’s an eye-opening moment, because now you’re starting to see your self-deprecation for what it really is. Before you thought it was no big deal, but then you actually implemented the rule, and now it’s clear that it is a very big deal indeed. You really wanted to cut yourself down in front of your friends and family.

Stopping yourself before self-deprecation is good for you. The more you do it, the more your realize how pathetic it was all along. You enjoyed taking the opportunity to advertise what a loser you are. Heck, it gets you cheap laughs, doesn’t it? Relieves a little anxiety, right? Keeps everyone’s expectations low, and you can take comfort in embracing the truth that you’re just a lame, unexceptional dude among many. Stopping and recognizing your insecure behavior for what it really is will only reinforce your desire to keep it to yourself.

To my readers, if this is a lesson you haven’t learned yet, I highly recommend it. Implementing rule #9 yields immediate results. You don’t have to be in denial about your negative self image, but for God’s sake and your own, keep it to yourself! You will instantly see why once you take that simple step. Just because you have a character flaw relevant to the topic of conversation does not mean you should tell everyone about it. Stifle that desire to expose your failings! Your friends and family won’t even know to think less of you if you don’t tell them about it in the first place, so stop being your own worst enemy. You want to know a basic, simply way to improve your own confidence and self-esteem in general? This is the way to go.

Running all the big decisions by the missus first.

Last month Foster posted the following Tweet:

Bnonn liked this Tweet so much that he thought it worthy to incorporate into the notes for one of their email updates. Sharkly forwarded it to me, and as you can see, they changed the wording to reflect that they both govern their marriages in the same way.

Btw, every major to medium decision we make, we run past our wives. Is this because we need their approval to make a decision? Not at all. It’s because we desire their wisdom and feminine insight. They are our helpmates on our mission, and we find them to be very helpful. Thank God for godly wives!

It’s one thing to run some household-related decisions past your wife. It’s not necessarily for her approval, but she takes care of the house and kids, so she might have some insight or helpful suggestions to give. You might move ahead with that decision in spite of her protests, which is all well and good. However, with Foster and Bnonn, they go way beyond that. It’s not just some of the big decisions limited to the home, but every major one they make! And not just the big ones, but the medium ones too! All of them!

Both of these men know how bad this might sound to the skeptics in their audience. There’s a reason they assured their readers that they’re not doing this for their wives’ approval. Even if it were true, they only made themselves look bad in another way. These men aspire to be mentors of biblical masculinity to other Christian men. How on earth do they expect to accomplish that while also proudly proclaiming that they need their wives help to make every decision that doesn’t count as little?

Self-Delusion On Full Display

Noel Bouche wrote the following at the Men Stepping Up blog back in 2015:

And it’s hard enough to deal with testosterone, a fairly familiar and predictable substance; now we’re expected to deal skillfully with this utterly foreign material called estrogen? Just the thought of it can be emotionally exhausting, especially for someone like me who usually just wants to be left alone to retreat into a dark, silent man cave at the end of the day. Yet that is our calling, and these precious warrior princesses deserve nothing less than everything God has purposed for them to receive from their daddies.

First, real men don’t have “man caves”.

Second, there is no way Noel Bouche really believes his daughters are warriors. You can’t write at length that a daughter needs tenderness, kindness, hugs, hand-holding, etc., and still believe she’s a “warrior”.

Often, I’m not as tender as I should be because I forget how delicate their hearts are. You’d think after fifteen years of marriage I’d be cognizant every moment that no matter how tough, independent, and formidable my wife and daughters may be externally, internally their feminine soul will respond only to tenderness from me (see Hosea 2:14).

What we’re witnessing is a man taking great care to prove just how much he appreciates the manliness of the women in his life. His wife and daughters are delicate and in need of tender care, but they’re also tough, independent, and dangerous!

In reality, women are none of these things. One punch can land them in the hospital. Take away their money, and they transform into prostitutes. Tell them their cooking was lousy, and they break down in tears. They are in desperate need for protection and a gentle-hand, but this necessarily means they are not tough, independent, or anything of the sort.

Noel’s fantasy is clearly at odds with reality, and he knows this. He could have simply advised his readers on how to love their daughters as they truly are, but even if he only did that much, it would be too much. The very act of simply allowing the truth to stand on its own would shatter the illusion he wants to maintain. Some falsehood must be mixed into his parenting advice in order to keep his fantasy afloat. That’s what happens when you treasure the approval of feminists in the church. You lie and promote lies. That’s a sad reality when Christians are supposed to be lovers of the truth.

Punishment For Me, But Not For She.

Family Life co-founder Dennis Rainey disclosed how his wife reacts when he hurts her at a Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Panel Discussion in 2012.

Notice how comfortable Dennis Rainey is in revealing how Barbara will, if she’s not satisfied that he has repented, refuse to forgive him until she’s persuaded that he really has. He is very specific in declaring that she has the right to withhold forgiveness until his grovelling pays off. This would be embarrasing enough in its own right, but as Christian feminism is like secular feminism, he doesn’t believe he has the same right to treat her the same way.

I knew my attitude was wrong, and by an act of my will I asked God to take away my childish feelings of wanting to punish Barbara because she had hurt me.

This quote is from page 261 of Staying Close: Stopping the Natural Drift Toward Isolation in Marriage, a book both Dennis and Barbara authored together 9 years prior to the panel. Notice how he characterizes his desire to punish Barbara as childish in nature. It’s not a right- it’s something he needed to ask God to take away. In a nutshell, it was wrong for him to want to punish her despite her having hurt him. If you read the preceding pages, what Dennis did to “hurt” Barbara involved not wanting to listen to her whine about what a hard day she had at home. He was busy setting up an entire conference, but never mind that. She wanted to “talk” about her day. Unsurprisingly, he dragged his feet getting around to it, so she hit him with a pillow (pages 260-261).

Then, when Barbara finished feeding the baby, she put her in the crib, took a pillow, and hit me on top of the head! It wasn’t a very playful whack, and I got the message loud and clear. Smarting with anger, I took the pillow, propped it under my head, and rolled over to stare at the wall, dramatizing where our relationship was headed—straight toward isolation.

Then Barbara said, “Don’t you want to talk?”

Dennis Rainey suggested they take care of this the next day, which they did. No punishment for Barbara whatsoever. If Dennis had “hit” Barbara in any way, shape, or form, pillow or no pillow, he would have depicted himself as the scum of the earth who would need to do some serious grovelling. Flip the story around, and Barbara need not grovel for anything. In fact, she can pretend like her rotten behavior towards him isn’t shocking and revolting. “I just hit you with a pillow. What? You don’t want to talk? Aw, why naaaught?”

Keep in mind that Dennis Rainey isn’t some bumbling fool whose advice is regularly disregarded by real men. He is a celebrated and honored teacher on marriage. From his Biography on Amazon.com:

Dennis Rainey is the President and CEO of FamilyLife, a subsidiary of Campus Crusade for Christ. Since the organization began in 1976, Dennis’ leadership has enabled FamilyLife to grow into a dynamic and vital ministry that offers families blueprints for living godly lives. Dennis has authored or co-authored more than two dozen books including the best selling Moments Together for Couples and Staying Close. He has also received two Golden Medallion Awards from the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association. Dennis serves as the senior editor of the HomeBuilders Couples Series® which has sold over 2.5 million copies and has been translated into 47 languages.

The man may be completely and totally emasculated, but his influence reaches far and wide. He has turned it into a career with dozens of books, a radio show, multiple ministries, and more over the course of four decades. Yet his advice to other men is not to take control of your wife and scold her for her inexcusable behavior. In fact, even the desire to do so is demonized. This is how Christians have decided to view marriage in general: We call cuckold marriages Godly, and we declare husbands who wish to punish their wives sinful behavior as childish.

Now, why is the Christian church so effeminate again?

NEVER Give Up Your Hobbies

Ever. Be it video games, fishing, stamp-collecting, or in this case, hunting.

According to rumors, Prince Harry’s wife, Meghan, expressed her disdain of his affinity for hunting. He catered to her, and wound up selling a couple of his rifles, and it’s suggested that they were worth fifty-thousand pounds.

Harry’s selling of the guns is a confirmed fact, but it’s not confirmed that he sold them under pressure from his wife. If it is true, should he have done it? That’s a subject Stephen Arterburn and Fred Stoeker addressed back in 2001 with their book Every Woman’s Desire (now re-published under the title Every Man’s Marriage). In a nutshell, their answer would be yes, Harry should have sold his guns. But I’m going to offer my own running commentary on what Fred Stoeker wrote. This should demosntrate why married Christian men need to unapologetically keep their hobbies no matter how much their wives disapprove.

In one of the end-of-chapter evaluations, they say a husband ought to ask his wife the following (page 82):

Your Evaluation of Me As a Servant
16. To what extent do I understand that my time is not my own? Do I often unilaterally make decisions regarding my time?
17. To what extend do I understand that I don’t have a right to make unilateral decisions regarding hunting, golf, work, my friends, etc.?

Notice how it’s taken as a given that husbands don’t have the right to make unilateral decisions for themselves. A husband must run his decision by his wife first since he is literally, not figuratively, asking for her evaluation of him as a servant. This is critical because when husband’s give up their innocuous hobbies, it’s not because their best friend told them to. Men wouldn’t even think of being so cruel to their own friend. The reason husbands do it is always because his lovely bride objected to it, and he caved to the pressure.

(Pages 103-104)
I instantly knew why grown men spent every weekend for two and a half months tromping through frosty fields during pheasant season. I couldn’t wait to return. I was captured.
Lurching through our door at five o’clock that afternoon, I gushed every detail to Brenda. “Honey, you won’t believe this,” I exclaimed. “I’ve finally found a hobby I love! Wow! The guys and I are going out again next Saturday, and I can hardly wait.”
Brenda failed to return my enthusiasm. She couldn’t imagine how climbing hill and dale and stumbling through cornstalks and switch grass could be relaxing. But there was more. Saturdays were family days, and she looked forward to them all week long.”Sweetheart, you can’t imagine how good it makes me feel to know you’ve found a hobby you love,” she began. “You’ve needed one for a long time, but you need to understand what this means to my life. Hunting means I’ll have to handle the kids six days a week all by myself. Besides, what good are Saturdays without the fun you bring to the mix?”


First, there is no way his wife talked the way Fred wrote her. The level of formality in her speech as written isn’t how normal people talk. But let’s take Fred at his word that this is the gist of what she said.

His wife reacts first by lying, since she obviously didn’t feel good about what Fred wanted to do. She complains that she’ll have to take care of the kids by herself more if he indulges in this hobby she knows he needs. Then she condescends to him as though she were persuading a sulking child to come play with the other boys and girls instead of playing by himself.

Let’s continue.

I glossed over her concerns since I really had fun pheasant hunting. “I know it’s a sacrifice for you,” I admitted. “But it’s a short season—only two-and-a-half-months long. I have to make the most of it now.”
Brenda wasn’t tracking. “I really do wish you could do it every weekend,” she said. “But hunting would steal too much time from me and the kids. With Sunday school and church, they really only see you on Saturdays as it is.”
My position in this conversation was slipping.

Fred classifies his rebuttal to Brenda’s disapproval as glossing over her concerns. Technically, he’s correct. He could have called her out for being passive-aggressive and talking down to him. But this is a man gushing over a newfound passion of his. He is happy. He is joyous. He’s not in a mood to lay a smack down, so he tries a quick appeal to reason.

Brenda rebuts his appeal by saying that the kids only “really” get to see Fred on Saturdays. Sundays don’t count because of Sunday school and church. That stops them from “really” seeing him, whatever that means. The point is that it’s not sufficient in Brenda’s eyes to allow Fred to use Saturdays to indulge a hobby that, again, she knows he needs to indulge in.

She continued, “Since you like hunting this much, we should agree now how many times per year you can go. This way, you won’t be tempted to stretch it when your buddies call.”

Translation: We need to nip this in the bud now before it becomes a bigger problem. You can go hunting, but only after I approve your yearly allowance. Once that’s done, I’ll relax knowing you’ll be too scared of my spanking to step out of line.

This suggestion—a good one—caught me flatfooted. Advantage Brenda.

It wasn’t a suggestion in the first place, never mind a good or bad one. It’s a demand coupled with a back-handed warning.

Thinking rapidly, I knew I should be as “sacrificial” as possible. “How about three times?” I offered. That didn’t seem like much to ask for when pheasant season lasted fifteen weeks.

Fred’s cowardly reaction to Brenda’s disapproval was to freak out. Despite that he only has 15 days out of the entire year to hunt, he was so panicked that he instantly dropped his demands by 80%. Was that enough for Brenda?

“How about two?”
“Two? Come on, sweetheart, be reasonable! Three is already a huge sacrifice for me, and you know it. I have every right to go hunting at least three times a year!”

Tragically, Fred is right. It would be a huge sacrifice for him, and Brenda DID know it. Unfortunately, he was the one who made the mistake in thinking his cowardice would appease his wife, who only wound up telling him that it still wasn’t enough.

(Page 105)
Let’s stop the conversation right here. Make a freeze-frame. Why couldn’t I do as I pleased? Hadn’t I earned the right to some relaxation? Wasn’t I the fellow who brought home the bacon twice a month, the leader who could unilaterally end a discussion on my terms and let the chips fall where they may? Besides, wasn’t the pursuit of happiness the right of every American?

Yes. Surprisingly, the answer to all of those rhetorical questions is yes.

(Page 106)
Let’s Be Reasonable
So how did my hunting story end? “C’mon, Brenda,” I pleased. “Be reasonable! I don’t think three Saturdays of pheasant hunting is too much to ask for.”
“Okay,” Brenda announced, breaking the stalemate. “I’ll be reasonable and give you the three days. I’m sure you’ll find it just as reasonable to provide me three full days of baby-sitting in return so I can shop with Pam.”

Fred should not be “asking” for anything in the first place. Here’s a perfect reason why you don’t give up your hobbies. A joyous man is broken down, made to think he should only enjoy his hobby less than 1% of the entire year, his wife demands he do it even less than that, and when he finally stands his ground on 3 out of 365 days, she relents only if he sacrifices even more of his own time. And not because she has a hobby of her own to indulge. It’s so she can go SHOPPING, of all things.

Brenda didn’t care a fig about fairness,

Obviously, so maybe you shouldn’t have let her dictate how you run your life.

but she cared dearly that I see the price I was asking them to pay. “Brenda, I really did think I was already sacrificing a ton to ask for only three Saturdays. Now you’re making me look like some weakling who has to ask his wife how often he can hunt.”

Fred, YOU made yourself look like a weakling who has to ask his wife for stuff. She disrespected you, but you’re the one who started negotiating for what you wanted. Why shouldn’t Brenda think she’s in a position to make demands when you treat her as if she is?

(Page 107)
“I know that, honey, and I’m not trying to take your authority away. But we have the kids for such a short time, and then they’ll be gone. You’re so valuable to them that it seems crazy to spend so much time hunting, no matter how much fun it is.”
It wasn’t long before I said, “Okay, my dear, two it is.” She gave me a big hug.

Aw, that’s just so sweet. Did she pat you on the head and give you a kiss? Did you get a cookie for being a good little boy?

I can hear you now. But that just didn’t seem right! Maybe. But was it right for me to hinder the primary call on Brenda’s life by hunting whenever it pleased me?
Would hunting every Saturday actually prevent her from raising Godly kids? That’s not the point. If she believes it would, then every time I stepped into the fields, I would be trampling her. That wouldn’t be right.

Behold the sick, miserable rationalizations of the brainwashed Christian cuck. This is a man who just conceded to his wife to only enjoy the one hobby he has ever had two days out of the entire year, and to do so any more? Well, that would be him trampling HER, not vice versa, you see. And if she is wrong to believe his hunting would hinder her motherly duties, that’s irrelevant. What she believes reigns supreme, even if he knows it’s wrong!

If this really is how this confrontation went down, Fred should have kept this entire thing between him and Brenda. At best, this serves as a cautionary tale for why Christian men need to be told BEFORE THEY MARRY to stand their ground against their wife’s disapproval. If they don’t, they’ll wind up like Fred. A man who finally found something to satisfy his need for fun, but guess what his lovely, sweet, reasonable wife decided was a great idea? It was to only let him have it two days out of the year. That’s what you get when you give up your hobbies.

P.S. If Fred or any Fred-like complimentarians want to dispute whether he really “needed” his hobby, then he and they had better think twice. Brenda said that he did. Even if she’s wrong, as Fred said, that’s not the point, so long as she believes it to be so. He wouldn’t want to trample her, now would he?