Misogynistic Christian Single Guy Blog – Keeping Singles Single | Re: Frank Swift of Geek in the Wilderness Blog
The individual who heads the blog “A Geek in the Wilderness,” who writes under the name “Frank Swift,” laments the situation of singles in the church, but his views on marriage, singleness, and genders are not only contributing to his own lasting singleness, but his are some of the same mindsets the church at large has as well, and which are making marriage for Christians more difficult.
In other words, Mr. Swift is himself supporting the very marriage and prolonged singleness problems he is so upset about.
Before I continue further, the blog in question is located here:
The tagline of his blog is
- “One geek/nerd hybrid journeys through history and the world in an epic search for truth, justice… and great pizza.”
I like pizza, but I can tell you after exchanging a few posts with this guy, he is not very interested in truth.
Swift does not seem open to having his views about gender roles and women questioned. A guy who is in search of truth would be open to re-examining his views, I would think.
Swift keeps parroting the same unproven, unfounded, unbiblical assumptions about women over and over in his replies to me.
I do credit Swift with initially allowing a few of my posts to stand on his blog (I myself don’t do that too much with this blog, since I use it to vent, not to debate).
I was polite in my initial batch of posts, despite Swift’s insufferable, obnoxious sexism on display. He has since replied to a few of those posts and has injected ad hominem into the replies (more about that below).
Mr. Swift’s blog first caught my attention when I was searching for material about Christian singles.
One of his pages turned up in the results, and it was this one:
Aspects of that page were interesting, but some of his views were troubling, such as this (Link): (Source):
- A marriage and family successfully functioning as one cohesive unit provides the skillset needed to run a church as one cohesive unit.
One does not have to be married to have have the skills or competence to “run a church” as “one cohesive unit.”
Some churches have in fact hired un-married men who are in their 30s who successfully ran the churches, though an un-married serving as pastor is very rare, as most churches are heavily biased against unmarried people. But it has happened on occasion, and the un-married were successful in their position.
The Bible does contain commentary along the lines that if a man is married, that he ought to have but one wife and other such qualifications(*), but the Bible does not exclude singles from leadership positions, as Swift believes.
*((Link): What does the “husband of one wife” phrase in 1 Timothy 3:2 mean? Can a divorced man serve as a pastor, elder, or deacon?)
The Bible places singleness on the same level of acceptance to God, and the same level of importance of singleness, as it does marriage, and at some points, the Apostle Paul writes singleness may be preferable to marriage because an unmarried person has more undivided attention than a married person.
None of that is to say that a single who wants to get married is sinning.
There is nothing sinful or selfish about wanting to get married, and other Christians need to stop discouraging and shaming Christians for wanting to get married, by saying things such as, “stop making marriage an idol,” “Jesus is all you need,” and so on, and by refusing to pray for singles, and such.
I explained to this Swift guy in one of my posts on his “Geek in the Wilderness” blog that the church has turned marriage and the nuclear family into an idol (with the “nuclear family” being an invention of 1950s American television programming; it is not quite a “biblical” presentation of family).
I gave Swift Bible verses on his blog where Jesus Christ said that Christians are not to put flesh and blood family before spiritual brothers and sisters in Christ.
(I have many blog pages about this topic, such as these two: (Link): The Bible Does Not Teach Christians to “Focus On The Family” – The Idolization of Family by American Christians (article), and (Link): If the Family Is Central, Christ Isn’t)
This all seems to fall on deaf ears with this guy.
He, like a lot of conservative Christians, continue to make secular feminism into the “boogey man” and the root of all ills in American culture, which it is not.
I am only surprised that Swift did not drag up the other favorite scapegoat and punching bag of evangelicals and conservative Christians: homosexuals, or the legalization of homosexual marriage.
To recap for anyone who is new to this blog: I myself am right wing, vote Republican, am a social conservative (and so I do not support homosexuality). For many years, I was a devout Christian. (I am by no means a left winger who embraces all views of secular feminism or the Democratic Party.) You can read more about my background and views on this blog’s “About Me” page.
Where Mr. Swift got rude, sexist, and very obnoxious with me was in this thread (I have not yet checked to see if he left me comments in the other thread):
In that thread, and a few others I glanced over, he continually makes all manner of unfounded assumptions about about women in general, such as this quote:
- Women likewise are more effective caretakers and nurturers because of the experience of raising their own children…
The Bible simply does not rigidly define gender roles or say that God designed women to be “nurturers” and males “leaders.”
Women have been socialized by secular society, parents, and churches, to be passive, sweet, submissive, cookie bakers; it’s not they these qualities are necessarily intrinsic to women.
I am a woman, but I was always a tom boy growing up. I preferred climbing trees, wearing converse sneakers, and watching Bat Man.
I hated pink clothing, wearing dresses, playing with Barbie dolls, and sitting around quietly as a kid. I wanted to go on adventures and have fun.
I had little interest in taking on Biblical or stereotypical “feminine” roles – which equated to being quiet, passive, sitting still, and playing with Barbie dolls.
People do not neatly fall into gender-defined boxes and patterns, no matter how badly you want them to.
I cited, for Swift, examples from the Bible of women who were ordained by God to lead men and women, to teach men (such as Apostle Junia, Deborah in the Old Testament, etc).
I at first was going to link to Mr. Swift’s page about singleness with a recommendation for it.
However, Swift, who makes himself out to be a Christian single, he is very sexist, Misogynistic, anti-singlehood, rude, condescending, and bitter (really, he is – I know a lot of married Christians try to shut down singles who want to air legitimate grievances by calling them “bitter,” but if you read through this guy’s blog, particularly his comments to me, he comes off as quite bitter).
I’m not sure of Swift’s age, but he seems to be in his early or mid 20s, very little life experience is evidenced, very narrow views of how life and relationships ‘should’ be, or how he thinks women “should” be permeate his thoughts.
Here is the first thread of Swift’s blog where I left several comments last night – initially, all my blog posts on his blog went through instantly, but now he has them set to moderation:
As I explained in a post on Swift’s page (“Single ladies, I’m ready to provide, are you ready to cook?”), I suppose there is nothing wrong with a man having a personal preference for a more demure, passive type partner…
Nor is it necessarily wrong, I guess, if both a man and a woman fully consent to enter a marriage based on a 1950s “Ward and June Cleaver” model, where the husband works all day and the wife stays at home all day baking bread.
However, these days, that sort of lifestyle is not achievable for most people; it takes two incomes, the man and women working, to pay the bills.
Anyway, my problem with this guy is mostly his tone. He demands that all women every where, or any women who enters his life, live by his very rigid gender roles.
He comes off as being very controlling.
I tried to explain to this guy that if he does not re-evaluate and re-consider his attitudes towards women, he will either
1. remain single a very long time (or forever), or
2. will attract only emotionally damaged women
And usually, in scenario 2, such women may develop severe depression and anxiety, and a divorce by either spouse may be a result.
Women who have depression (and / or anxiety) often cannot function. They cannot perform daily chores or tasks, or so much as get out of bed daily and brush their teeth, let alone dust the furniture, cook, do laundry, etc., because their mental health problems prohibit it.
As people grow older, they change over time: their personality, or desires in life, or goals. This is a FACT of life this guy denied, if I remember right.
The person you are when you are at 40 years old is not the same person you are when you were 20. (I’m not even the same now as I was just three years ago.) This ‘changing with age’ business is especially true FOR WOMEN.
That is, you can start out a marriage when you are 25 years of age to a submissive, passive wife, but as she grows older and gains more life experience, she may change her mind about various things – including you.
She may tire of playing the submissive role and demand a change, or she may just decide to divorce.
In a comment to another woman on his blog, Swift said he is advocating submission for any woman he marries, not slavery or being a doormat.
I told Swift that his views on “submission” read the same to me as sexism or slavery. I honestly did not see much of a difference and still do not.
This guy is so incredibly condescending towards me and other females who visit his blog, he will never get a girlfriend, much less get married.
If Swift cannot get dates or get married, it has nothing to do with feminism or gender roles, but every thing to do with the fact that he acts like an asshole. Nobody, not even other men, enjoy the company of obnoxious assholes -unless they are obnoxious assholes too.
Especially not the males that subscribe to “beta” male talk and “alpha” male talk, and so on (I noticed Swift links or visited blogs that have those sorts of men on them).
I tried to warn Swift of all this, but he is so wrapped up in defending his legalistic, sexist, unbiblical views of women and maintaining the illusion that secular feminism is all that is wrong with the world, it didn’t get through.
It’s possible Swift’s blog is one great big troll blog. Maybe he posts incendiary views intentionally to work women up.
But if he is “for real,” as I said, he is bound to stay single, and he said on one post, or he implies, that he would like to marry one day.
What Swift fails to realize is that no amount of bitching about feminism or acting like an ass to women on the internet will make him attractive to women and will, hence, keep him unmarried for years to come.
Swift surpasses Mark Driscoll and John Piper in sexism. That is truly a feat.
Among other purposes, Jesus Christ came to set women free of the sexism and rigid gender roles of that (or any) era and culture, and to make their loads lighter ((Link): Matthew 11:30), but you see guys like Swift who want women to go right back under a yoke and bondage to secular American 1950s culture (that is, it would be considered bondage for women who do not wish to live like that).
Swift seriously suggests on his web page that women should stay at home all day and “make sandwiches” for their spouses.
In the year and a half leading up to my mother’s death, she got so weak she had to stay in bed all day, she could barely do anything on her own (she lacked the strength), and my dad had to feed my Mom sandwiches.
My dad did not expect my Mom to serve him or wait on him not at that time, nor really at others; he waited on her in her time of sickness (I also helped take care for her).
There comes a time when your wife is dead, you miss her, and you’d give anything to have her back. You would not give a SHIT about “submissiveness,” or “authority,” or if she is adhering to your idea of “biblical gender roles”.
Swift has several other rules he feels a wife must perform that are of an equal menial level of sandwich- making; these are all his little man-made rules that have no support in the Bible. Which is intriguing, because he passes himself off as someone who supposedly cares about what the Bible says – but he really doesn’t care.
Swift also perverts the Bible’s use of the words “submit” and “authority,” and concepts and verses that mention headship, and related matters.
Christ called on all believers, and husbands are not excluded from this, to enact “servant leadership,” and to refrain from “lording authority over one another.”
Here is some related reading on those issues:
- PDF: (Link): “Does Kephale Mean ‘Source’ or ‘Authority Over’ in Greek Literature?”: A Rebuttal by Richard S. Cervin
As you can see from Matthew chapter 20, Jesus does not endorse husbands lording authority over their wives – or anyone:
- But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.
“It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Swift’s manner of interpretation of passages such as Ephesians 5:22-33 (which talks about wives submitting themselves to their husbands) nullify and contradict Jesus’ intent. Just like the Pharisees used to do with Scripture; see (Link): Matthew 15.
Swift and gender complementarians such as him ignore this Ephesians verse, which calls on all believers to submit to one another:
- Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. (Ephesians 5:21)
And of course, this one is usually ignored:
- There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)
I’ve written before how adhering to strict gender roles, as Swift wishes all Chrisitans (and Non Christians?) to do actually keeps singles apart, and keeps them from marrying.
And Swift, in at least one post, claims to be very upset that singles such as him are not able to marry. If that is so, why are you perpetuating the very attitudes and situations that are keeping Christian singles single?
With Swift’s insistence on every one living by strict gender roles (and his rude attitude towards women), he is shooting himself in the foot.
See my posts on this topic here (though these are just a few; I have several post, but will only link to about three or four here):
- (Link): How Christians Keep Christians Single (part 3) – Restrictive Gender Roles Taught as Biblical
(Link): Why Unmarried – Single Christians Should Be Concerned about the Gender Role Controversy – Preachers are teaching that Single Men are not “fully in God’s image” (and that Single Women are not “fully in God’s image” – singles are “sub human”)
The funny thing is, no matter how badly Swift and other conservative Christians want it to, America is never returning to 1950s, nuclear family culture. Those days are gone. They’re not coming back.
Complaining and bitching about missing those days, or wishing they were back, or blaming women or feminism for everything, is not going to do anything to make American culture revert to 1953 America.
And, if you are a Christian, what the hell is so special about 1950s culture that it should supercede or replace biblical teachings on gender and marriage? Your ’50s “June and Ward Cleaver” type marriages are from a TV show decades ago; they’re not on display in the Scriptures nor are they endorsed or held up as marital examples in the Word of God.
I just posted this thread the other day on my blog:
(Link): (Articles) Marriage Rate At All Time Low
-And I don’t think that is changing. You can pine for 1955 as much as you want, when people married when they were 20, stayed married forever, and the guy worked 9 to 5 while the wife stayed at home all day, but it’s not coming back.
Live in the here and now. Accept reality.
I also mentioned to Swift that the sort of women who end up being attracted to controlling, rude, pro- rigid- gender role guys such as him (women who want a husband to take care of them), tend to be emotionally damaged – usually they are codependent.
Some of these women are gold-diggers (looking for a sugar daddy to support them financially), but most women who permit themselves to marrying or dating a controller, ‘in-charge’ guy who works and pay the bills, are usually mentally or emotionally ill – which I do not mean as a put-down, but as a statement of fact.
Now, if Swift is an abusive asshole (and maybe he; is I don’t know) maybe that is fine with him.
If, however, Swift’s blog is serious, and it’s not some kind of elaborate prank, and he really wants a loving, quality marriage with an equal to share life with…
- (not a doormat to wait on him as though she is a maid – but the way he defines submission and authority, and the way he is so condescending to women, it really amounts to “doormat,” contrary to his assurances he does not mean that),
he is not going to be able to attract a woman necessary for a healthy marriage.
At one point, Swift said if I desire to attract a man, I would have to learn “domestic skills,” and (I think it was implied), be submissive.
I already possess “domestic skills.” It does not take “skill” to run a dust rag across a table top, or run a load of dirty laundry.
I told Swift in a reply today I absolutely do not wish to attract a man like him, so I would not cater to a man in that fashion.
Because if you cater to a man, as Swift suggests you do, you will attract abusive, controlling, manipulative, or selfish men. -No thank you.
Being a sweet little “Susie Homemaker” type, that is, being very compliant and passive (a codependent) – which is what “biblical gender complementarians” define as “biblical womanhood” – is what attracts abusive males and females, or narcissists, or bullies to that type of woman in the first place.
This is information I have lived out myself, a female relative of mine has lived out, and therapists in books and blogs about abuse and codependency have brought it up time and again.
The psychologists say if you do not want to attract selfish or abusive people to you, you have to develop boundaries, which consists in part of acting contrary to the sweet, passive, complaint female you were brain-washed into being by society, church, or parents.
Swift is advocating for women to have poor boundaries and to identify themselves in or through their spouse: this is a recipe for a woman to attract an abuser.
Further, Christian women are to define themselves in relation to Jesus Christ, not their earthly spouse. Nowhere does the Bible tell women to put husband first – not in authority or in anything else- or to base their life goals or purposes or identity in a spouse.
I used to be engaged. When I did thoughtful gestures for my ex-fiance, such as buy him nice presents, or ride out to his home to care for him when he got very sick, do you know why I did it? Because I cared about the guy, that’s why.
Not because I was trying to fill someone’s idea of what a woman “should” do, or how a woman “should” act.
There were other occasions when I visited my ex fiance’ at his home, where I cleaned his house for him – but, he did not ask, expect, or order me to do so; I did it to be caring.
Swift is controlling and probably would be physically or emotionally abusive in a relationship; there are so many red flags raised on his blog, that I hope women who run across this guy in real life avoid him.
If Swift marries, and if his wife disagrees with him, or tires of his type of “submissiveness,” he will probably break a few of her ribs, give her a black eye. That is how he comes across in his posts.
His attitude reeks of bitterness against women.
You’ll notice on my blog, while I sometimes display anger, I don’t hate men or direct anger mainly or solely at men.
I don’t focus exclusively on men being the problem with dating, marriage, and relationships or society. I do not blame the male gender for every problem under the sun, or for every relationship problem that’s ever existed.
My anger on my blog is generally directed at the church culture, in that contemporary Christianity shoves singles aside and fixates on marriage and married people.
I am sometimes critical of aspects of the male gender, such as the tendency of male Christians to be too picky regarding female physical appearance, but even on that topic, I give women a bit of a correction (read it here: (Link): Article: I’m Overweight and My Boyfriend’s Not. Big Freaking Deal)
I have defended men on this blog before, or exposed sexism against male singles (because I do not like male singles being bashed any more than I like to see female singles being bashed), such as:
- (Link): Why Unmarried – Single Christians Should Be Concerned about the Gender Role Controversy – Preachers are teaching that Single Men are not “fully in God’s image” (and that Single Women are not “fully in God’s image”)
It’s true that males, including Christian ones, are very picky and sexist and obsessed about female physical appearance. Sometimes female gender complementarians aid and abet this pathetic behavior.
These types of Christian men also ignore that females are “visually oriented” and that many women prefer hot, muscular, good looking, built, sexy men to fat men, bald guys, or stick thin guys.
Women are expected by secular culture, but also by Christian culture, to remain thin, in shape, and remain youthful looking no matter how old they become, but males generally get a pass on all this – why, I don’t know, because most women don’t want to date ugly, stick thin, or fat males.
As I’ve discussed on older blog entries, despite the fact most of us single women online do not post photos of ourselves, male Christian bloggers and male and female Christian authors who dispense dating advice, assume – just ASSUME – that any un-married female reading their blog post or book is still single because she must be fat and ugly.
This feeds back into another stereotype about singles: it is assumed if you are single it is because you are lacking in some way.
When the reality is most likely you look okay, you’re not fat, you’re a decent person, and you’re not terribly flawed – you simply have not bumped into a compatible partner.
I mention this because when Frank Swift went into an ad hominem against me on his blog, and despite not knowing what I look like, nor does he know my precise age, he said to me,
- that you learn some domestic skills if you want to attract men, since you are well past the flower of your youth and beauty and won’t be able to rely on those to work in your advantage anymore.
That is a lot of sexism, ageism, and lookism on display all in one comment.
As I told Swift on his blog (though I do not know if he has published my comment, he now has me set to moderated), I never used my physical appearance to attract men.
I was always a brainy, shy, introvert. I was never the sex- pot type who batted her eye lashes at guys.
I’ve had friends post photos of me in their homes, and when male friends saw these photos, ask the mutual friend or family member to set up a date between them and myself.
So even though I was not a flirty, vapid sex pot type, guys still found me pretty, though, and would flirt or ask me for dates… and they still do.
I also told this Swift guy that I am on a dating site (where I have recent photos of myself posted).
Despite the fact I limit my age preferences on the dating site to men who are in the early-40s age range, I still get men from their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and older, who flirt with me on the dating site and who ask me out.
Some of these guys on the dating site are way too old for me (guys with white hair, for example), and some are homely, but some are average- looking to very good- looking.
It’s also rather sad that Swift thinks that the only, or supreme quality, that a truly loving, caring man would care about is my appearance.
The Bible says that youth and beauty is fleeting, and so men are not to judge a person based solely, or primarily, on his or her looks. I don’t think Swift ever reads the Bible, but he sort of acts like he believes in it.
I figure, and this is based on Swift’s behavior and propensity to judge me based on my looks despite not knowing what I look like, that either Swift is a-
1. flabby, obese geek who can’t get a date or girlfriend,
2. he’s one of those stick- thin nerds who has no muscular development and probably isn’t even manly enough to grow a beard.
Maybe Swift perceives himself as one of those “nice guys” who can’t get any dates, so he becomes a sexist, woman- hating asshole (see: (Link): Nice Guys – the bitter single men who complain women don’t like nice men)
Maybe Swift is one of those obese tubs of lard, or under-developed guys (who has the physique of a five year old girl) who feels entitled to a Megan Fox movie tar clone or Victoria Secret model?
Guys such as Swift usually show this level of animosity towards women because they can’t get what they desire (the stereotypical hot women Hollywood fawns over – Angelina Jolie used to be the standard here), because they themselves are unattractive (yet consider themselves so “nice”).
Unfortunately for those types of men (is Frank Swift among them?) the culture would not rate as hotties:
- (Link): Superman, Man Candy -and- Christian Women Are Visual And Enjoy Looking At Built, Hot, Sexy Men
The Frank Swifts of the world are guaranteed to repel women with their horrible attitudes and remain single forever.
Even if Swift has movie star Brad Pitt level good looks; has a great body; and a chiseled jaw and full head of hair, his sheer massive sexism and assholery is complete Woman Repellent.
Swift, who says in one post he is upset that the church is not doing more to help Christian singles marry, is himself also contributing to the unintended Christian tendency to Keep Christian Singles Single Forever: via counter productive, insane, stupid dating advice; and via support of unbiblical, strict gender role views.
You’re not going to get June Cleaver for a wife, men.
If you do manage to scrape one up, like I said, she will most likely be psychologically damaged. That spells a marriage that will end in divorce: either the wife will initiate the divorce, or the husband will.
Women who come from childhoods where dad was an alcoholic who beat them up, or Mom was a depressed person who stayed in bed all day and didn’t meet the kid’s needs, grow up to be codependents.
These types of women latch on to a relationship to find meaning and love.
They won’t love you for you. They will love you so that you will not abandon them.
They wrongly try to fill the emptiness and quest for identity and meaning with a man… and sooner or later, most men get tired of playing God to a woman. The constant neediness and cling-i-ness becomes a turn off, and it is tiring.
It’s exhausting trying to play a role only God can fill. I know because I’ve had female friends and family who have expected me to play Savior/ God role to them.
There are other scenarios that can lead to a woman being codependent in adulthood, but those are common ones (i.e., Mom who ignores the kid’s needs, or Dad the alcoholic who beats the kid up).
Churches encourage females to be codependent, which they should not do.
Conservative Christians and their churches wrap codependency up under the heading of “biblical gender roles,” “traditional gender roles,” “husband headship,” “wifely submission,” and “biblical gender complementarianism,” and other labels.
It all sounds so religious and spiritual, but it’s anti- biblical.
And these “traditional gender roles” proponents cherry-pick a small number of verses that have words in them such as “headship,” and what have you, and pervert the Bible’s intent on how men and women are to relate to each other, both in and outside of marriage.
And such Christians keep women who are already codependent trapped in codependency, unless or until that woman wakes up to all this, tires of it, or reads material about it, or sees a therapist who helps her out of it.
From reading the guy’s blog and his encounters with me, Swift is going to stay single for a long, long time, possibly forever, unless he seriously re-evaluates his views on gender roles, women, marriage; unless he changes how he treats women; and unless he adjusts his views that being married means being more ‘mature,’ or that the Bible forbids singles from serving in leadership roles.
July 23, 2013 EDIT.
The following showed up in my comments area of my blog’s dashboard; a post by Swift, where he wrongly assumes that I am a Christian and a feminist, and that I am a “Christian feminist” – that is one reason the guy is going to stay single.
I have not read his entire post, nor do I have plans to, not at this stage.
Swift keeps making sweeping assumptions about particular people, or entire groups of people (such as women, or feminists). He stereotypes entire groups of people, he assumes he knows me, and my exact views and thoughts on everything – he doesn’t.
I’m sorry Swift feels this is a “long screed.” I guess he has a hard time reading anything longer than a comic book.
- Fisking the many splendored arguments of “Christian” feminists – A Geek in the Wilderness
Submitted on 2013/07/23 at 4:42 am
[…] was ridiculously repetitive and verbose (and if you think I’m kidding about verbose, see her latest screed about me on her blog), but the arguments are such that I’ve heard them so repeatedly by different women that I felt […]
He’s going to stay single indefinitely.
I have no doubt SWift probably -in his latest sexist screed- continues to try to twist the Bible to say husbands may lord authority over women, when the Bible teaches the concept of “servant leadership,” and does not endorse a concept of a husband having “authority over” a wife.
These types of men are usually “Beta” males (they like that phrase; or else the phrase ‘nice guys’) who are bitter because they can’t get any dates –
And instead of honestly evaluating themselves to see how they may be turning women off, to learn from women so they can change and get a healthy relationship, they either continue to lash out at feminists or women in general, or keep pining for American culture to return to 1954, which it is not going to do.
Related topics, this blog: