White-Knighting Errors in Theology

Byzantinized TOB, but still too many problems.

 

So Blue Pill

A married friend just texted me: “The husband is the head by divine right because he is the slave by the natural order.” Love it.

— Urban Hannon (@hannonregular) January 11, 2021

Still Selling TOB

Still time to register and watch tonight's event! https://t.co/FKok0xMfTI
one-hour VIRTUAL event:

Transform Catholic schools ... bless family and friends ... inspire saints ... and change the world — with St. John Paul II's life-changing teachings

— Ryan T. Anderson (@RyanTAnd) September 28, 2020

Latin Marriage Summit

In a couple of weeks, we are speaking at a virtual conference on marriage featuring an incredible lineup of Catholic speakers, authors, and people who have devoted their lives to ministry to marriage.

The theme is "How to Get the Marriage You Want from the Marriage You Have." pic.twitter.com/p94wfQbRqR

— Marriage for Life (@Grabowski_M4L) May 28, 2020

A list of those involved here.

For many of the prominent Latins involved with Latin mass media, the husband has blue-pill ideals concerning marriage, and this is especially true of the TOB people. No non-Latins as far as I am aware.

TOB Virtual Conference

NLM: May 8th: Free Virtual Conference on the Theology of the Body and the Writings of John Paul II by David Clayton



List of speaker follows:

TOB Still Around

Body Image and Self-Esteem Problems

Linked with hang-ups about sex? Only the author knows the truth about herself.

The Newest War on Women by Abigail Favale

She misunderstands feminism and the hypergamy which it cannot rid itself of.

The idea that women exist primarily for the pleasure of men has never been more explicit, more omnipresent, than in our ostensibly feminist age. Some feminists have even embraced this, singing the sex-positive praises of pornography and prostitution as somehow empowering for women. And even those willing to name and criticize the pervasive sexualization of women and girls are less willing to acknowledge the ways in which feminism itself has contributed to it. I often find it exhausting—and, yes, infuriating—to watch self-identifying feminists decry the rotten fruits of the sexual revolution while they simultaneously tend the roots.

Unlike the author (see what she writes later about her own experience as an adolescent), many women have no problem recognizing their sexuality and sexual desires, and they, before men, are the ones who sexualize themselves, so that they are desirable to men, even if they intend this display to be for only the right men.

It's simply not right that women can't easily find male slaves to meet all of their sexual demands. https://t.co/QHoSKM7KSz

— Roosh (@rooshv) April 10, 2019

A Convenient Opportunity for Sermonizing about Sex

But it ignores the fact that the transgressor of the new feminist norms is a leftist Muslim non-American: Commentary: Aziz Ansari's Hookup Was a Game of Russian Roulette by Leah Libresco Sargeant

Clueless about Sex Differences

The content of the message itself, how the "current culture" is toxic in its portrayal of masculinity, is a mix of good and bad. But the fact that a woman is saying this and apologizing, I find patronizing and ineffective for men who have taken any amount of the red pill. This sort of messaging could easily be put to use of the Feminine Imperative, without any changes to the message itself.

Why?

Liberals, Blacks, Catholics, and Jews watch more pornography.https://t.co/98vzeXxfad pic.twitter.com/jRRMvrUXwr

— Rolf Degen (@DegenRolf) December 12, 2017

Who said the sensitive, new-age man is gone?

He is alive and well among TOB Catholics!

MakeApp

The female is immunized against all dangers: one may call her a thot, roastie, slut, it all runs off her like water off a raincoat. But take off her makeup and you will be astonished at how she recoils, how injured she is, how she suddenly shrinks back: "I've been found out."

— Р. Голливуд (@pachkacigaret) November 14, 2017

Waiting for the first panderingly sincere TOBs-er to say #MakeApp is demeaning to women because it reduces their value to their appearance and that all women deserve to be loved. Count the # of fallacies there--here's a hint: there's one non-sequitur and one fallacy of equivocation.

All women should be loved with agape, but not all women inspire eros, nor should all women be wifed up. As for the objectification of women simply by looking: Men objectify everything -- it is a feature of male psychology and is tied to their being visually-oriented and primarily directed towards the external
world and action. In addition, visual markers of health and fertility are important for male-to-female attraction. Feminists, despite their credentials and "education," simply hate the Other because they don't understand him/them. Unfortunately some of their biggest allies and enablers in this respect are social conservatives.

Daily Femail article and video

The mental gymnastics and outrage of feminists over MakeApp is very amusing.

Blue-Pilled AMOGing

There's a Term Used by Gurney Halleck in David Lynch's Dune

"Bed play"? Some such euphemism.

Regarding the post on the [sexual] ascesis, I would be surprised if much was written on "love play" before the age of the manuals (and casuistry). What would be the justification for love play be? That all pleasure relating to touch/sensation between a husband and a wife is permissible in so far as it is ordered to the conjugal act/coitus? Otherwise it is "venial sin" or possibly "mortal sin." There are probably still some who have the view that this is too permissive.

What are the limits? TOB can be intrepreted in two different ways, with a permissive attitude towards everything in so far as "it is finishes in the conjugal act" and yet it may frown upon certain forms of "dominant" behavior as not being "gentlemanlike" or what have you.

I would maintain that some sorts of dominant behavior may be permissible (taking the initiative is the most bassic) while others are not because they are intrinsically disordered.

Curious if there is an academic or theological discussion of fantasy role-playing anywhere.

When St. Paul was talking about the necessity for husbands of pleasing their wives, was he also alluding to the bed?

TOB Enthusiasts = neo-Puritans?

Assuming an illegitimate authority over men in the name of passing on Christian moral teaching?

Putting the Cart Before the Horse

TOB presentations the the like -- Roman Catholic clerics should not be worrying about men and women not being able to communicate with one another or having sex with one another -- they should be worrying that their men are unable to attract Catholic women in the first place. Catholic men need to learn how to communicate with women when approaching them and trying to build attraction. Women need a different sort of lesson, with respect to "settling" and about what they are.

Priorities, people.

Another Trad Con Presentation of TOB?

Insight Scoop: Practical, 40-Day guide offers plan to detach from today’s toxic dating culture

Illusions About Female Sexuality

What about: It's ok because I like him!

Because woman must have some other motivation for sex than wanting to have sex...

Catholic tradcons --

Pure Womanhood by Crystalina Evert

Pure Womanhood: graduate launches initiative for young women
ITI Studium Generale graduate Chiara van Voorst returned to the Netherlands to found the movement "Pure Womanhood"

Feminists Gonna...

A Challenge to St. Paul on Women and a Reply to Fr. Scanlon by Harriet Murphy

The clueless female academic who may be smarter-than-average and thinks she's the equal of a man as a result?

A response: Getting Scripture Wrong: A Response to Harriet Murphy by Fr. Regis Scanlon, O.F.M. Cap

Too Much Enthusiasm?

Saint John Paul the Great

Author and Chastity Speaker Jason Evert discusses how to know #SaintJohnPaultheGreat even better through looking at...

Posted by EWTN on Friday, May 8, 2015

Ignatius Press
Lighthouse Catholic Media