In the first part of this series, “Is Red Pill Biblical”, we have covered the Red Pill concepts of the male and female imperatives as well as the alpha/beta paradigm and the alpha mindset. In this 6th part of our series we will now discuss the Red Pill concept of frame.
In one his earliest blog posts on his blog “The Rational Male”, Rollo Tomassi writes the following in his article entitled “Frame”:
“In psych terms, frame is an often subconscious, mutually acknowledged personal narrative under which auspices people will be influenced. One’s capacity for personal decisions, choices for well-being, emotional investments, religious beliefs and political persuasions (amongst many others) are all influenced and biased by the psychological narrative ‘framework’ under which we are most apt to accept as normalcy…
One important fact to consider, before I launch into too much detail, is to understand that frame is NOT power. The act of controlling the frame may be an exercise in power for some, but let me be clear from the start that the concept of frame is who’s ‘reality’ in which you choose to operate in relation to a woman. Both gender’s internalized concept of frame is influenced by our individual acculturation, socialization, psychological conditioning, upbringing, education, etc., but be clear on this, you are either operating in your own frame or you’re operating in hers“
As we can see from Tomassi’s quote above, frame in the Red Pill world is the concept that in every relationship either the man is operating in the woman’s world view or she is operating in his.
Later in the same post he states “Her genuine (unnegotiated) desire for you hinges upon you covertly establishing this narrative for her”. Basically, he is saying the man should bring the woman into his frame without her knowing he is trying to bring her into his frame. Essentially Tomassi is calling on men to perform the Red Pill equivalent of Jedi mind tricks on women. We will get more into this in the next post on the Red Pill concept of game.
According to Red Pill, if a man attempts to bring a woman into his frame (i.e. worldview) by overt or coercive measures he defeats the central focus of Red Pill ideology – to get a woman to have “genuine (unnegotiated)” sexual desire toward him.
Tomassi writes further in this post about the way most modern marriages go when he states the following:
“In most contemporary marriages and LTR arrangements, women tend to be the de facto authority. Men seek their wive’s “permission” to attempt even the most mundane activities they’d do without an afterthought while single. I have married friends tell me how ‘fortunate’ they are to be married to such an understanding wife that she’d “allow” him to watch hockey on their guest bedroom TV,…occasionally
…
What these men failed to realize is that frame, like power, abhors a vacuum. In the absence of the frame security a woman naturally seeks from a masculine male, this security need forces her to provide that security for herself.”
And near the end of the post he states:
“It is vital to the health of any LTR that a man establish his frame as the basis of their living together before any formal commitment is recognized. As I stated in the beginning, frame will be fluid and conditions will influence the balance, but the overall theme of your relationship needs to be led and molded by you.”
Where Red Pill is Right in its Teachings About Frame
Red Pill is spot on that power hates a vacuum and so does a couple’s worldview. If the man does not set the worldview in the relationship, then the woman will. But the couple will either operate in the woman’s worldview or the man’s. Anything illusions of a melded worldview are just that, illusions.
Red Pill is right that a man must establish his frame from the very beginning of any relationship.
The Bible would absolutely agree with Tomassi’s statement to men that “the overall theme of your relationship needs to be led and molded by you”. God actually speaks of trying to mold his wife Israel in the Old Testament:
“O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.”
Jeremiah 18:6 (KJV)
Where Red Pill is Wrong in its Teachings About Frame
Red Pill is absolutely wrong in its insistence on men using covert measures to bring women into their frame. What Red Pill asks men to do with both frame and game is to engage in what the Bible calls “craftiness”. I will talk more about the Biblical view of craftiness in my next article on the Red Pill concept of game.
The Bible tells men in Ephesians 5:25 that they are to love their wives “even as Christ also loved the church” and in Revelation 3:19 we see how Christ loved his churches when he states “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent”.
Red Pill rejects the overt measures of rebuking and disciplining a woman that the Bible calls all husbands to. A Christian man should always speak plainly to any woman he is with about his worldview and what he expects of her before he will consider courting her for marriage.
I have a friend of mine whose son recently married. But before he married his wife, they had kind of a rocky dating relationship. They actually broke up twice before getting back together a third time and then getting engaged and eventually married.
The reason they broke up is because his son was establishing his frame during the dating relationship, his Christian world view, including his belief in Biblical gender roles and the man being the head of the woman in all things. If she would rebel against his leadership on any issue, he would send her away and wait for her to come back and repent. Each time she attempted to take control of the frame or really the worldview under which their relationship would operate, he would remind her that as a couple they would operate in his worldview or they would not be a couple at all.
Red Pill is right that women deep down want men to establish the frame of their relationship. Some women will of course test the man’s resolve but eventually submit to his worldview. But where Red Pill is wrong is that this is not true for all women. There are some women who will constantly battle to control the frame of their relationship with a man. And some will not reveal their true intent to control the frame until after marriage.
From a Christian perspective we can explain this behavior in women as greater and lesser degrees of the corruption of their God given feminine natures. Remember that God’s original design of woman was for her to submit to and serve man. In the context of this discussion of frame, God meant for women to operate within the frame of a man, first her father and then finally her husband. But sin corrupted a woman’s nature (as it did man’s) and it still does today.
Going back to the young man who recently married. He established his frame in a very overt way. He made it plain to her what his expectations were of her. She tested him several times and each time he sent her away. Eventually she came back after learning that she could move his resolve on these things and she loved and respected him for standing his ground. Now there are other women who would have left him and never returned. Again, it all comes down to the level of corruption of the woman’s nature.
We have already mentioned this previously in this series but we must mention it again here. Red Pill makes the entire point of a man’s life to covertly cause women to genuinely desire and want sex with him. But that is not the point of a man’s life from a Biblical perspective.
God created man to image him and thereby bring him glory (1 Corinthians 11:7). A man’s powerful driving sexual desire is certainly a part of his God given nature and man displays certain aspects of God’s nature in his sexual desire for woman. But man was created to image God in far more ways than just his sexual desire toward woman.
God created the woman for the man (1 Corinthians 11:9) so that man could image God as a husband in marriage and father to his children. God says in 1 Timothy 3:4 that a man must be “One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity”.
Conclusion
The Red Pill concept of frame, that a man must establish his worldview as the one he and any potential woman he marries will live in is a Biblical concept. God says that the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church and that women are to be subject to their husbands in everything (Ephesians 5:23-24). He tells men that they are to love their wives as Christ loves his church and an essential part of Christ’s love for his church is his rebuking and disciplining of his church (Revelation 3:19). The scriptures tell us of wives in 1 Corinthians 14:35 “if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home”. The man is to set the worldview for the woman. That is the plain teaching of the Bible.
However, the Bible and Red Pill part ways when it comes to the method for a man to establish frame in a relationship with a woman and the reason for his establishing frame in the first place.
Red Pill encourages men to use covert and subtle means to bring women into their frame while the Bible discourages craftiness for Christians (2 Corinthians 4:2). The Bible tells us in Proverbs 27:5 “Open rebuke is better than secret love”. Men should speak plainly and establish the parameters of their relationship early with potential wives. And after marriage they should use instruction, rebuke and discipline to keep their wives within their frame (worldview).
Red Pill sees the entire reason for men trying to get women into their frame is to invoke “genuine (unnegotiated)” sexual desire toward them. But as Christian men the only “LTR” we are authorized to enter into with a woman is marriage. And our purpose for entering into marriage is more than getting a woman to genuinely desire us sexually.
I am not saying there is anything wrong with a man wanting a woman to genuinely sexually desire him. God wants his people to genuinely desire him. But a man who understands his purpose in God’s creation understands that his establishing of frame with a woman is not simply to get laid.
Marriage is about imaging or displaying the relationship between God and his people, between Christ and his Church. It is about a man demonstrating all the attributes of God with his life including his love for his people. Some of those attributes include teaching, rebuking and disciplining one’s wife and children. Other attributes include showing them grace, mercy and compassion as well as providing for them, sacrificing for them and protecting them.
So, should you as a man establish frame in a relationship with a woman you are looking at as a potential spouse? Certainly. Should you continue to keep her in that frame when you are married? Absolutely. Is it possible your woman will appreciate and even find your more sexually desirable for establishing frame with her? Yes. But there are some women who will not respect you as a man trying to establish frame with them. They will resist at every turn. Others will pretend to be in your frame and only when you are married, they will attempt to take control of the frame of your relationship.
And as you set about to establish frame with a woman, you should do it using God’s methods, not Red Pill’s methods. And you should never forget the overarching reason you are called by God to establish frame in your woman’s life in the first place.
In the last part of this series we will cover the topic of “Is The Red Pill Concept of Game Biblical?”
Biblical Gender Roles 
The Red Pill is a blueprint, which means that individual cases and results may vary, just as each man’s frame does.
The above essay is generally accurate for the concepts covered. But it’s somewhat biased to only cite Rollo as an authority of the Red Pill. Rollo’s viewpoints come from evolutionary psychology, which does offer a lot of insight, but he frequently gets the Christian stance wrong.
Not all proponents of the Red Pill believe that the primary goal of maintaining frame is to get laid, especially those who are Christians. For those who have other types of goals, the Red Pill offers a tested praxeology about how things work. What one chooses to do with that information is up to each man.
For comparison, here’s another concept of frame that might be more agreeable to Christians.
https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/what-is-frame/
Jack,
Thanks for your input. I consider it a compliment that you said I got it “generally accurate”. I am aware that Rollo certainly is not the only Red Pill writer and he himself admits he is not the inventor of Red Pill and it was a grass roots community built concept. I am also aware that there is a Christian variant of Red Pill which does hold to sexual fidelity and the fact that God has reserved sex for marriage.
But from what I have seen of the Christian Red Pill folks elsewhere(maybe you are not included in this) is they think much like Rollo that Red Pill is a covert philosophy. In other words it all about a man’s influence and him just pulling in a woman through covert and subtle means. Do you agree with that? While I certainly think Christian men should be men of good character, be examples and live their lives in a way that attract good Christian women I do not think a man’s authority over his woman is by passive influence only. This is what most complimentarian teachers teach and they are wrong. I believe a man’s call to rebuke and discipline his wife is God’s call to him to use overt, not covert measures to consistently keep her in line with where believes God wants her to be. He is to be continually and actively washing her with the Word of God as Ephesians 5:25-27 commands.
I agree with Rollo that a man should mold his woman, but he would only see that done through passive influence. I believe a man’s molding of his woman involves direct and overt means.
Certainly Red Pill teaches men to be confident and cool under pressure, to know who they are, what they believe in and to not live one’s life to fit and please the crowd. It certainly teaches men not to live for the approval of women. And those are good things as I have said in this series. But a primary part of Red Pill is man’s drive to sow his seed. It is his imperative. If you divorce the male imperative to sow one’s seed, to evoke “genuine desire” in women and so get sex do you know what that is – it is MGTOW which is a Red Pill off shoot. Is it not? Please correct if I am misunderstanding that.
My point in this series is to show something that Red Pill and Blue Pill both miss. Both praxeologies seek to only to evoke the desired emotional responses from women which will then lead to desired actions from women. They simply differ on HOW to evoke the desired emotional responses.
From everything I have seen of Red Pill, it completely rejects a man appealing to a woman’s sense of duty and honor as if women are incapable of having any such sense. So for Red Pill – a father teaching his daughter it is her duty to give her body to her future husband and her duty to cultivate a desire for her future husband – is utter absurdity and a fools errand. For a husband to appeal to his wife’s sense of duty to God and her faith in appealing to her to willingly give her body to him as well as cultivating her own desire for him is also seen by Red Pill as a fool’s errand.
But we know from history that women when properly trained in their faith can actually have a great sense of duty and honor. In other words if a woman truly loves God and his Word she can and will love her husband. A woman can learn to give her body, even when she does not desire it, from a sense of duty and honor. This is all foreign to Red Pill from what I have seen.
I look forward to your responses.
BGR says: I believe a man’s call to rebuke and discipline his wife is God’s call to him to use overt, not covert measures to consistently keep her in line with where believes God wants her to be.
1 Peter 3:7a Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge …
I wouldn’t be so hasty and dogmatic to rule out using covert methods to assist your overt methods in succeeding. We are to be wise, and using covert measures in an effort to make your overt methods work better is certainly employing wisdom.
BGR says: From everything I have seen of Red Pill, it completely rejects a man appealing to a woman’s sense of duty and honor as if women are incapable of having any such sense.
Unfortunately that is exactly what some of us are up against. We find ourselves married to phony Christians who are actually unrepentant whores who believe themselves to be divinely entitled goddesses above having to obey God most high. Such women have no honor, no shame, no sense of duty to their husband, or even God Himself. And they’ve got all the false churches backing up these “goddesses” and supporting their rebellion unquestioningly. Trust me! I have appealed to my wife’s duty, sense of honor, and purported Christian faith, endlessly, and her behavioral addiction, and her bondage to sin wins out every time. If I am going to get anywhere while her “church” stands against me, without even listening to my side of things, I’m going to need every possible advantage I can leverage, both overt and covert, while also praying for the intervention of God.
I agree with Jack, for some of us, frame is not about getting laid. In my case I’m just trying to keep my son’s mother from keeping them from having a father. The best way to assure my sons can have a full time father would be to reconcile back into my sexless marriage. Basically to continue being a eunuch for the kingdom of Christ. Not that I ever accept that as an acceptable situation, or ever see my wife as being anything other than a contemptible whore, until she repents and turns from her wickedness. But I operate based upon my principles, regardless of the rest of the world.
I literally am being like Christ in that I have laid down my life for an undeserving and unrepentant whore. I am being the citizen of Zion described in psalm 15: He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not. For me, that vow to my own hurt was my wedding vow. I got unequally yoked to a completely false and faithless woman who constantly returns evil for good. Yet I maintain a God authored frame, in a world of satanic selfishness.
I overcome the world through Christ who strengthens me, and I resist the devil. By the blood of the Lamb and by my works of faith, my life will stand as an eternal testimony, a reproof against my detractors and their faithlessness, evidence that one man with faith stood while they fled, one man fought while they cowered, one man suffered for his fidelity to the Lord while they compromised with evil, proving themselves unfit to reign with Christ.
I’m loving the series!
RP emphasizes covert methods because most people, especially Christians, stumble upon RP after trying every overt method available. So I think the emphasis is more of a selection bias and not a “these are the only methods available.” Of course, if you are able to lead your woman in a great manner with overt methods then there is no reason to ‘get crafty.’
But in the culture we live in – feminism / child support / title 9 / marriage 2.0 / virtually no pastor preaching submission – sadly that is rarely the case.
And RP is all about ‘what works.’ So if appealing to a woman’s honor/duty and guiding with discipline work for you, then great. But when most RP men have gotten together, especially those Christians who have been burned by following what their pastor’s advised, the general consensus has been that usually such overt methods result in nothing but furthering the distance.
I think there is a difference in teleology. According to the Westminster shorter catechism, the chief end of man is to glorify Him and enjoy Him forever. The red-pill teleology is for men to enjoy women and escape the pain of female indignation, duplicity and rejection. The Christian sets as his earthly goal to be holy, by embracing the grace of Christ, emulating Christ and obedience to the law of Christ. Christ is his end not women.
Interestingly the MGTOW solution is to avoid the aspects of Christ as a husband, because the bride is too sinful and loving her is painfully unpleasant. Yet, that is what Christ does, love a sinful bride that He acquired through a painful death. MGTOW is right, women cause pain, but avoiding pain is not the chief end of man.
Unfortunately, the institutional bride of Christ, has embraced the telos of pleasing women and enjoying their praise more than emulating Christ and lead them to the holiness of repentance. The shepherds continue to club the rams and support the ewes grazing from the toxic weeds of feminism. Of course the shepherds by their malfeasance are scoring major red-pill points. The chicks dig them as they bash men and buttress the inner goddess in those daughters of the king.
If we forget our purpose any one will do, after all nature abhors a vacuum.
Sharkly,
I am truly sorry to hear of the situation with your wife. What you are facing and who you are dealing with is actually very similar to some of the regular commenters I have on this blog.
If you don’t know my story here is a brief synopsis. My first wife (whom I met in a very conservative church by the way) didn’t sexually deny me, but the problem was she didn’t sexually deny her boyfriend that she had on the side either. When I found out about her affairs I did try to forgive her and restore the marriage, but she was never truly repentant – so I divorced her. Then in my second marriage I had to confront my second wife’s sexual denial toward me.
My point is I 100% agree with you that some women, in fact most women today, have no sense of duty or honor. But what I am saying is that just as we as men have a duty to try and instill a sense of duty and honor first toward God and then secondly toward marriage and family in our children, so too we have this same responsibility toward our wives.
Many women, like your wife and my ex wife will not learn or even hear of anything related to duty or honor. They live their lives 100% by their feelings. Other women while agreeing on a surface level about the duties God has given them as wives fail to truly implement that sense of duty in their lives and translate that into action.
I totally agree with you about how infested with feminism the church is today. I talk about that all the time on this blog. Those of us who still believe the whole Bible, including the doctrines of Biblical gender roles, will get little to no support from most church leadership today.
I say all this to say “I hear you man”. I truly do.
I am not saying a husband can’t use some covert means to augment his overt means in dealing with his wife. But here is my point. The driving method, the predominant method of man dealing with his wife should be overt. He should speak plainly and she should know where stands at all times. Could he supplement some more covert things with his primarily overt dealings with his wife? Sure.
But Red Pill teaching is very much the opposite. It teaches men to deal only covertly with women thus appealing to attempting to manipulate them at a emotional level by covert means rather that dealing with the spiritual side and the spiritual problem. Red Pill is radically opposed to men trying to overtly exercise their control over women and certainly it would be opposed to men rebuking and disciplining their wives as the Bible calls for. That is my point.
M.K.
First thanks for writing. Glad the series has been a blessing to you.
Regarding your comment:
“And RP is all about ‘what works.’”
What works for what? For getting more genuinely desired sex from your wife? For keeping the woman with you so she won’t divorce you and leave you financially destitute? If your goal in life is only to get as much sex as you can and/or avoid the risk of financial devastation then you might as well go MGTOW and just have casual sex with women and not get in a relationships with women.
But if you are a Christian man who believes the Bible then you can’t do that. You as a man were created to image God with your life. And you can’t fully image God without being a husband and father, thus you must seek out marriage to fulfill your created purpose to image God(unless you are one the select few who have the gift of celibacy for undistracted service to God.)
It is crystal clear from the Bible that if a man is following God’s command to love his wife “even as Christ also loved the church” (Ephesians 5:25) he will exercise that love as Christ did toward his church when he stated “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent”. A man is called to rebuke and chasten his wife not matter what the cost.
Now are there both overt and more subtle forms of discipline? Certainly. I have spoken on this blog many times about the the more subtle forms of discipline a man can engage in with his wife some of which include the silent treatment and giving her less of his free time. These can have noticeable affects on woman’s behavior.
But the fact is if a man sets about to obey God’s Word by disciplining his wife with various means she may sexually deny him or even threaten divorce. Now according to Red Pill if she sexually denies him or threatens divorce then “what he is doing is not working” and therefore it is wrong. But as Christians we called to obey God no matter how those under our authority respond to us.
Again – I am not against everything Red Pill teaches. I think they have made many valid observations of human behavior. And I believe the Red Pill teaching that men cannot make their wives the center of their lives and pleasing her the center of their lives is in direct agreement with the Bible. But in this series I am trying sort the good from the bad so to speak in Red Pill.
Jonadab,
In regard to your statement:
I think you really nailed it with the statements above. Our modern western civilization is obsessed with trying to rid themselves of any pain in this life. The whole opioid epidemic is a perfect example of this. A driving force in feminism has been their quest to free women from the abuse and pain of being with men and in this way Red Pill is simply the flip side of the coin in trying to free men from the abuse and pain that being with women can often bring them.
But the truth is we live in a sin cursed world. Husbands will sometimes sinfully cause pain to their wives and wives will sometimes sinfully cause pain to their husbands. And until God makes the world anew and rids it of sin there will always be various forms of pain and suffering in this world.
You are spot on that the chief end of man is not to find ways to avoid pain and suffering, but to bring glory to God. And as I have said many times on this blog and will continue to say the primary way a man was meant to bring glory to God was by imaging him with his life. Sometimes, often times, a man pursuing this goal of imaging God with his life will suffer greatly on account of that pursuit. Be he should count such suffering as worthwhile suffering for the glory of God.
But there is a difference between a wife suffering on account of her husband’s sin and a husband suffering on account of his wife’s sin. A wife is not called to wash her husband with the Word, rebuke and discipline him. She is called to win him with her behavior, with her godly influence alone. A husband has a greater responsibility in this regard toward his wife who causes him such suffering. He is called to wash her with the Word, to rebuke her and to chasten her.
So yes is it possible that a woman will still cause a man pain and suffering and remain in her sinful ways after he attempts to discipline her? Absolutely. It happens all the time. In fact might she cause him more pain in the form of sexual denial or even divorce for his attempts to discipline her. You bet. But this is a man’s call. This is the duty God has given him.
BGR wrote,
The answer is complicated, so I can’t reply with a simple yes or no. It’s complicated because there are several aspects of an intersexual interaction. Namely these, mentioned in the essay above.
1. active vs. passive
2. overt vs. covert
3. covert vs. crafty
The context of these approaches need to be examined, or else any discussion of the topic will be interlaced with confusion. I’ve written a response aimed at sorting out the differences and nuances here.
https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2020/01/27/do-not-let-your-left-hand-know-what-your-right-hand-is-doing/
However, when you say that wife moulding should involve direct and overt means, I sense that you may be referring to a more specific context or purpose, such as game or creating attraction. Could you elaborate on what you mean (after reading the content of my post)?
Jack,
This was a fantastic article that you wrote. As I said on the comment on your blog, I don’t really think I saw anything in that article that I would disagree with.
Regarding your statement:
Yes game and creating attraction were a part, perhaps a large part of where I am targeting when I am speaking of a man using direct and overt means. However I think it is more than just about that. It is about what you said in your article “In Red Pill praxeology, there are elements of both overt and covert operation. The overt strategy is as BGR described, teaching, rebuking, moulding the woman, and “washing her clean” from false notions and debilitating habits”. So while sexual frequency, attraction and desire certainly are a huge gage of the health of the marriage, we would agree they are not the only thing.
So I believe a husband should be instructing his wife in all things, including her sexual duties, but also so much more. Like her work ethic around the house, how she disciplines the children, her speech to other women (not engaging in gossip). And this instruction should for the most be overt and direct.
I will respond to a few more statements you made in your article in their own comments.
Jack,
Your Statement(from your post):
You see I learn something new every day. I was unaware that other Red Pill bloggers (even Christian ones) believed in dragging their women “along for the ride, whether she likes it or not”. I absolutely agree with the statement above that a man needs to have his life centered on his God-given purpose in life (which is to image God and display his attributes with his life).
Your Statement(from your post):
I think we would do well to have a sharp distinction between the Christianized version of Red Pill from and the secular version of Red Pill. Rollo and other more secular Red Pill folks would reject the idea of a man overtly rebuking his wife and teaching her moral duties as found in the Bible. For him and other Red Pill folks, the moulding and shaping a woman to a man is all done through covert means or passive influence.
Jack,
Ok on further review of your post I did find something that I may have a slight disagreement with you on unless I misunderstanding you.
In your post you state:
If the situation is in private and she is not making a show in front of others to shame you as her husband then I would agree a husband does not always have to engage in these situations and sometimes it might actually be better to walk away from her and ignore her. I have written many times on the Biblical advice to men “It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a wide house”. Sometimes it is best to walk way from brawling wife and not give her the satisfaction of a response. I have done this many times with wife over the years when I know she is just trying pick a fight.
However if the woman publicly dissents from her husband he needs to call that out publicly. For instance a woman directly contradicting her husband in front his friends, family or children and saying how she thinks he is wrong in various ways in most cases this needs to be dealt with publicly. Would you agree with this?
A wife’s disrespect for her husband in the presence of family and friends is a complicated context. In general, I agree with you that the husband needs to respond immediately and strongly. If he does not, this behavior will become worse over time, and other people will gain a negative impression of the husband.
I totally agree. I think the development of the secular version of Red Pill is just about saturated. But the Christian version has a long way to go. I don’t believe it will be nearly as popular as the secular version either, at least, not until it is fully developed and bearing the good fruit of successful marriages.