new

This is nonsense. It is the Biblical duty of wives to satisfy their husbands.

You people are seeking to take everything away from men, from entertainment to video games. If at the very least your bastardized modern-day version of Christianity cannot guarantee to men that their wives have a duty to satisfy them, as Christianity traditionally did for hundreds of years, then your bastardized modern-day version of Christianity will not have men.

In the ideal world, men would be perfect. Men would be like Jesus. Men would be completely celibate. Men would not marry. As Paul said, it is good for a man not to touch a woman at all (1 Corinthians 7:1) and his guidance on marriage was merely only a concession/permission, not a commandment (1 Corinthians 7:6), because celibacy is preferable and inherently less sinful than sex even within marriage, which is at best just a distraction from prayer and devotion.

However, Paul recognized that a compromise was necessary. There was something extremely obvious to Paul that is apparently not obvious to "Christians" today: most men are not able to withstand celibacy and they have natural uncontrollable lustful urges. Something must be done about this. And something had to be done about this in the first century. Otherwise, Christianity wouldn't have ever attracted men and it would've died off in the first century.

And so:
Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. (1 Corinthians 7:3)

If women are not fulfilling their Biblical role to act as dutiful wives and "personal porn stars" for their husbands, whether that's due to letting themselves go, rejecting marriage in favor of hypergamy, career-chasing, or whatever it is women do to fuck up the sexual marketplace, they are equally as culpable for the sins of lustful men who cannot find wives to fulfil their Biblical role.

People don't get it. Even those who might view history through a more sympathetic lens toward WWII era Germany are not members of the NSDAP (which was banned in Germany 80 years ago), and thus, are not Nazis by technicality alone.

Sure, there is the meaningless term "Neo-Nazi," which few people would willingly identify with. You'll scarcely find someone label themself a "Neo-Nazi" even if they do have sympathies toward WWII era Germany, so if you do put that label on someone you're already in the territory of false accusations.

But the reason why it's a meaningless label is because it's completely oxymoronic. A "Neo-Nazi" can't exist because the NSDAP was a uniquely German phenomenon for uniquely German problems of the mid-20th century.

The NSDAP's primary goals were to:
- Unite German-speaking European territories
- Abolish the Treaty of Versailles and St. Germain
- Abolish unearned income
- Expand protections for German works (in the face of the peace treaties that diminished quality of life for German workers)
- Remove foreign influence from German government
- And, yes, minimize the role of Jews in German society

Why would an American in 2024 be so concerned about the Treaty of Versailles, a document signed over 100 years ago? Or why would an American in 2024 be seeking to united the German-speaking territories of Europe?

Obviously, those are not the primary concern of any American in 2024. Because they are uniquely German positions for uniquely German problems of the mid-20th century.

As such, the term Neo-Nazi doesn't make sense. There are no Nazis in 2024. There are no Neo-Nazis. The term "Neo-Nazi" is used as a catch-all term for all unsavory characters who dislike Jews. Using this loose definition for "Neo-Nazi" you can find all sorts of unlikely people to be Neo-Nazis. The Palestinians are Neo-Nazis! The Iranians are Neo-Nazis! Revisionist historians are Neo-Nazis! Twitch streamer Hasan Piker is simultaneously a communist AND a Nazi!

Uhhh... but the Ukrainians, who allied with the actual Nazis in WWII, and still wear swastika patches on their uniforms in 2024? Nah, they can't be Nazis because Putin and "muh Russia" are Nazis.

See how absurd all these "Nazi" accusations are?