Kevin Samuels Dead at 56

[RustyShackleford]

The same way he talked to the women is the exact same way he talked to the men. The issue is he started out talking to the men first to begin with and then switched up and started talking to women to help bring them up to speed.

Kevin caught fire because a lot of individuals (both men and women) were not accustomed to a man talking to women directly the way he did. It was “shocking” to some people, but was applauded by men that felt/thought the same way as him. When you go to the doctor to get a diagnosis you can’t be mad at the doctor for telling you YOUR health issues. Kevin showed that you don’t have to have this weak/roll over mentality that a lot of todays men have when it comes to todays women.

Sorry not really buying this

I think he blew up mainly because he is was entertaining to a certain audience. Sure there is a uniqueness to his approach but if someone keeps listening for months it is hard to believe the novelty of his tone is the draw. I think people were entertained with how he talked to certain women.

I think he was smart enough to realize that.

I get why he was appealing to certain people, I disagree with your take as to why he was though

 

[kingfoamnyc]

It started with men.

 

[executive76]

Trending on Twitter for some reason. Maybe it's the Russians

 

[tokes99]

Sorry not really buying this

I think he blew up mainly because he is was entertaining to a certain audience. Sure there is a uniqueness to his approach but if someone keeps listening for months it is hard to believe the novelty of his tone is the draw. I think people were entertained with how he talked to certain women.

I think he was smart enough to realize that.

I get why he was appealing to certain people, I disagree with your take as to why he was though

while i wouldn’t necessarily recommend going back through his content, i think he was very consistent in his demeanor, at least from what i’ve seen outside of the viral stuff…most interactions would start fairly benign but he would challenge, or interrogate depending one’s perception, some assertion/statement and their response would tend to guide the rest of the conversation

The same way he talked to the women is the exact same way he talked to the men. The issue is he started out talking to the men first to begin with and then switched up and started talking to women to help bring them up to speed.

Kevin caught fire because a lot of individuals (both men and women) were not accustomed to a man talking to women directly the way he did. It was “shocking” to some people, but was applauded by men that felt/thought the same way as him. When you go to the doctor to get a diagnosis you can’t be mad at the doctor for telling you YOUR health issues. Kevin showed that you don’t have to have this weak/roll over mentality that a lot of todays men have when it comes to todays women.

i don’t think he started talking to women to ‘bring them up to speed’ he himself had admitted as much…i think he just realized it makes for more entertaining content; which isn’t saying he didn’t believe in or have conviction in the arguments he made.

i do agree that most of the umbrage he elicited was because he was rather direct, almost to the point of unnecessarily being abrasive, which many would remark in their interaction with him even tho they ultimately agreed with the sentiment of his ‘message’ if just not really feeling the way he communicated to women in particular…which ironically was the only reason they knew of him in the 1st place

 

[RustyShackleford]

while i wouldn’t necessarily recommend going back through his content, i think he was very consistent in his demeanor, at least from what i’ve seen outside of the viral stuff…most interactions would start fairly benign but he would challenge, or interrogate depending one’s perception, some assertion/statement and their response would tend to guide the rest of the conversation

Not saying he is inconsistent

Just saying he hit on a certain type of content that made him blow up. He did other videos before, on other subjects, about style and men.

But once you know what brings in the most viewers, then the smart play would be to feed your audience what they want, what has the most entertainment value.

He seemed aware of what his audience wanted.

Plus there are examples of him going back and forth with women for extended periods of time and not getting through to them. And never changing his approach.

So I'm not really buying he struck that tone mainly to get through to people. That's how he wanted to talk, helped him blow up, that was entertaining to his audience, so he didn't move off of what he thought was a winning formula no matter the amount of criticism you get.

 

[Present]

 

[deuce king]

Sorry not really buying this

I think he blew up mainly because he is was entertaining to a certain audience. Sure there is a uniqueness to his approach but if someone keeps listening for months it is hard to believe the novelty of his tone is the draw. I think people were entertained with how he talked to certain women.

I think he was smart enough to realize that.

I get why he was appealing to certain people, I disagree with your take as to why he was though

In the words of The Rock…..”It doesn’t matter what you think”………just like it doesn’t matter what you buy. The fact of the matter is he started off by talking to the men…..then he switched his target audience to the women. The same way he talked to the men…..is the exact same way he talked to the women. He didn’t go viral talking to the men with his tone and delivery because generally speaking that’s how men talk, or should talk to men when needed. He then talked to the women and helped get them straight……which was and is well needed.

You can tell who the real fans are vs. those that just watch his highlight videos and didn’t really catch the message from beginning to end. Kevin was consistent with his approach no matter who he was talking to. That’s why he is well respected.

while i wouldn’t necessarily recommend going back through his content, i think he was very consistent in his demeanor, at least from what i’ve seen outside of the viral stuff…most interactions would start fairly benign but he would challenge, or interrogate depending one’s perception, some assertion/statement and their response would tend to guide the rest of the conversation



i don’t think he started talking to women to ‘bring them up to speed’ he himself had admitted as much…i think he just realized it makes for more entertaining content; which isn’t saying he didn’t believe in or have conviction in the arguments he made.

i do agree that most of the umbrage he elicited was because he was rather direct, almost to the point of unnecessarily being abrasive, which many would remark in their interaction with him even tho they ultimately agreed with the sentiment of his ‘message’ if just not really feeling the way he communicated to women in particular…which ironically was the only reason they knew of him in the 1st place

Negative champ. Kevin did start talking to the women to “bring them up to speed” as he admitted because he helped get the men up to a certain level, and the problem that many men stated was that they elevated their game due to Kevin’s teachings but they couldn’t find any women at their new level. The new high value men that Kevin created didn’t see or find any high value women to be by their side.

 

[RustyShackleford]

In the words of The Rock…..”It doesn’t matter what you think”………just like it doesn’t matter what you buy. The fact of the matter is he started off by talking to the men…..then he switched his target audience to the women. The same way he talked to the men…..is the exact same way he talked to the women. He didn’t go viral talking to the men with his tone and delivery because generally speaking that’s how men talk, or should talk to men when needed. He then talked to the women and helped get them straight……which was and is well needed.

You can tell who the real fans are vs. those that just watch his highlight videos and didn’t really catch the message from beginning to end. Kevin was consistent with his approach no matter who he was talking to. That’s why he is well respected.

I get it, you were a big fan.

But this is a discussion forum, so my opinion matters as little as yours. But not buying your argument. Sorry champ

 

[WASHED KING]

Kevin's tone seemed to be for entertainment purposes

He blew up talking like that, he knows that is what his audience wants, so he is giving it to them

I've seen dude talk to women for 20 mins plus, in a sharp tone, and they still don't accept a lot of what he says

I don't think it does much one way or the other with certain people

Kevin was a funny guy. It was a little sassy but the combination of his suits, candles, and background of his office or whatever he streamed from made it comedic.

If the Boondocks was still around and making new episodes I could imagine a Kevin Samuels episode fitting right in.

 

[aquatic barefoot]

“…If you’re not under any man’s protection/guidance, you’re left to fend for yourself”.

Seems logical to me; wonder if these women understand this.

 

[Present]

“…If you’re not under any man’s protection/guidance, you’re left to fend for yourself”.

Seems logical to me; wonder if these women understand this.

Simple.

Accountability without Authority is failure.

Authority without Accountability is failure.

These are the politically incorrect facts that aren't impacted by political incorrectness.

If you call yourself a Christian, then the idea that a husband has authority over his wife is not controversial, in the least.

The Nature of a Husband’s Headship

It is critical that we understand not only the fact of Adam’s authority as Eve’s head, but also the nature of that authority in marriage. Adam’s authority in marriage means he has a unique responsibility to 1) ensure the family is moving in a God-glorying direction, and 2) secure the well-being of everyone else in the family.² How do we derive this explication of headship from Eden?

Adam received the commission to “work and keep” the garden before the creation of Eve (Gen. 2:15). The words God spoke to Adam and Eve in Genesis3:16-19 prove that this continued to be a unique and/or primary responsibility of Adam, even after Eve’s arrival on the scene to help him fulfill God’s intention for mankind. The command to “work and keep” the garden meant more than primary responsibility for physical provision. The garden was not designed by God merely to be good for food; it was also for mankind’s delight (2:8-9),and especially for man’s enjoyment of sacred communion with God (3:8a). God’s garden design was about more than man’s hunger; it was for his happiness and holiness too.

Consequently, Adam’s working and keeping the garden, as it relates to headship over Eve, meant more than simply making sure she was fed (physical well-being); it also aimed for her ongoing enjoyment of God’s good gifts (emotional well-being) and, most importantly, ongoing enjoyment of God himself (spiritual well-being).3 Adam was called to cultivate this continual happy state of affairs (“work”), and also guard against any threats to it (“keep” could also be translated “guard”). Since Adam was given chief responsibility as human provider and protector in the garden, he should have crushed the serpent’s head with his heel. He didn’t.

Adam also received the divine prohibition about the forbidden tree prior to God’s fashioning Eve (Gen. 2:16-17). Alistair Roberts observes that “on both occasions when God subsequently speaks of the law concerning the tree (3:11, 17), he addresses [Adam] in particular, speaking of it as a law both delivered to him alone and as a law concerning him most particularly.”4 Rightly, then, when the couple transgresses this command, Adam is condemned for not leading his wife well, nor protecting her and the sacred garden, in trusting obedience to God’s word (Gen. 3:6c, 9, 17a). Later biblical authors see what is clear in the book of Genesis: God holds Adam primarily responsible for the couple’s fall (cf. Rom. 5:12-19, despite 1 Tim. 2:14).

I hope you noticed how often I have used the words “responsible” and “responsibility” above. Adam’s headship mean the was primarily responsible to ensure the family kept moving in a God-glorifying direction; it was his responsibility to secure the well-being of the family. Fundamentally, headship is a responsibility, not a privilege. It is a burden to bear, not an advantage to flaunt. Adam’s authority in marriage is a God-centered and Eve-centered thing, not some kind of “upper hand” for Adam’s own benefit.

Furthermore, the language of “primary” is important to note as well. Eve participates significantly in safeguarding the well-being and God-glorifying direction of the family (see Proverbs 31!),even as Adam has a special responsibility to make sure these things come to be. She is created to be his “helper” (2:18; cf. 1 Cor. 11:7-, to support and join him in his mission to glorify God and see others blessed by God’s goodness.

Complementarian Co-Regency

Adam’s loving, serving headship over Eve is not the only concept of authority that is meant to shape their marriage together. There is also an authority that they stand under together, as well as an authority that they share and are called to express together. That first line of authority in the ideal marriage of creation is very clear: Adam and Eve stand together under the authority of God. Both are His creation. They are His image bearers. While Adam is primarily held responsible for the Fall, still both are held responsible. We often apply this principle of God’s authority to male headship with an eye on the wife’s submission; she is not free to follow the husband’s leadership into sin. But we must also strongly emphasize how this applies to a husband. He is not free to sin against his wife in any way in his role as marital head.

In addition to the authority they stand under together, we see in Eden an authority that Adam and Eve share and express together. After blessing Adam and Eve, God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” (Gen. 1:2. God gives Adam and Eve authority to have dominion on and over the earth – together.5

Egalitarians use this text as a club to try and obliterate Adam’s unique authority within the marriage. Obviously, that isn’t the right move. Complementarians, however, cite this text as an affirmation of the equality of man and woman’s dignity and value as image-bearers (a good thing!), but may underemphasize the shared authority that God grants man and woman here. Too often, the only authority in marriage recognized in Eden is Adam’s headship. But we must hold these things together: Adam and Eve are called by God to exercise authority together over their home and all other spheres of their shared life, as a co-regency; yet within that one-flesh partnership of co-regents Adam bears the burden of serving as head.

In heavy-handed misuses of a husband’s authority, he (functionally) takes his wife out of the compound subject of Gen.1:28 and puts her on the other side of the verb. But we do not read, “God blessed Adam, and said to him, ‘Subdue the earth and have dominion over every living thing on it, including Eve.’” In a complementarian marriage, the wife is not merely the highest-ranking official in the realm where the husband has dominion. She is queen of the castle, ruling beside her husband, striving with him to exercise dominion over all aspects of their shared life together for the glory of God and good of those under/around them. Both are upper management in their household (1 Tim. 3:4-5, 12, 5:14; cf. Prov. 31:10-31).6

Balance is needed here. The concept of joint rule does not flatten out distinctions between the two. As stated above, this shared authority in marriage does not cancel out male headship in it. Adam possesses a divinely granted, non-reciprocal, benevolent authority over Eve. He is the leader (bears the burden of primary responsibility) within their co-regency. They are not joint “heads” as they exercise this joint rule. Neither does their co-regency mean they play precisely the same parts in “subduing and filling” their shared dominion (Gen.1:2. Eve shares in this worldwide rule by leaning in to those things that are distinct about how God made her as a woman, complementary to Adam, enabling them to fulfill the Genesis 1:28 commission in a way he couldn’t on his own, and couldn’t with just a duplicate of himself.7Thus, a husband is called to lead his wife to the end that they exercise dominion together in their home and shared life (their “world”), each with their own emphases and specialties. In this way, a husband serves as an authority over his wife while they submit to authority together and express authority together.

Understanding Authority in Marriage — CBCD | Center for Biblical Counseling & Discipleship

The Bible very clearly teaches that a husband has a unique authority in a marriage – he is the head of his wife (Eph. 5:23, 1 Cor. 11:3, 1 Tim. 2:12-13). The Bible very clearly teaches that a wife should acknowledge and submit to his loving leadership (Eph. 5:22, 24, Col. 3:18, 1 Pt. 3:1, Titus 2:5)

thecbcd.org

 

[WASHED KING]

A bigger emphasis on character development outside of just improving your socio economic status would be great for the "Manosphere" or whatever you wanna call that segment.

Like if you don't have any soft skills and know how to talk to people/women adding in more money isn't going to fix that issue.

 

[Present]

(Culturally speaking) What the evidence shows us is if you're a physically attractive enough man, it doesn't matter if you have soft skills, money, character, or anything else these days to get women.

The point of character development as the "Manosphere" defines it has nothing to do with getting a woman.

It has everything to do with being the best version of yourself (physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually) with the idea being you will attract more women with a positive attitude and confidence based on personal achievement as a side effect of your self improvement efforts, but getting women is never to be the primary goal.

Basically serving your purpose as a man is to be useful to the group, not to get women.

It resembles chivalry before that word was coopted by Walt Disney movies

 

[frenchbreadbuilds]

A bigger emphasis on character development outside of just improving your socio economic status would be great for the "Manosphere" or whatever you wanna call that segment.

Like if you don't have any soft skills and know how to talk to people/women adding in more money isn't going to fix that issue.

i feel like this wont happen as long as the discussion is centered in the transactional aspects of human social interaction. I dont think Kevin really delved that deeply into it but he often spoke on "life is about relationships". Theres always been something valuable about being someone people want to be around. I feel like the modern day internet dating/self improvement discourse leaves that out alot.

 

[paulwest1985]

 

[Grine]

Another IG personalities

 

[Present]

 

[osh kosh bosh]

 

[WASHED KING]

Ain no way that video is real. Like this seems like propaganda. Who's recording?

But I need full details before I can cast judgement/opinion.

 

[paulwest1985]

Ain no way that video is real. Like this seems like propaganda. Who's recording?

But I need full details before I can cast judgement/opinion.

Unfortunately, it's real. The mother was the one recording. But I see how they took advantage of him. Dude seems.........kinda slow.

 

[WASHED KING]

Unfortunately, it's real. The mother was the one recording. But I see how they took advantage of him. Dude seems.........kinda slow.

Honestly I'm not judging being at his mom's crib as an adult especially in this economy. My issue is that there seemed to be no desire to leave.

I can't relate to that one at all. I moved back in with my folks for a year after a breakup and I couldn't stand it. I appreciate them being there for me and I value that support system to regroup but it feels like being a child all over again.

Like going on dates and having to explain the weird living situation? Massive L. I know for a fact it caused me to fumble the yambs at least on 3 different occasions.

 

[Present]

Unfortunately, it's real. The mother was the one recording. But I see how they took advantage of him. Dude seems.........kinda slow.

Definitely slow (and soft) - doing all that talking

Me:

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Honestly I'm not judging being at his mom's crib as an adult especially in this economy. My issue is that there seemed to be no desire to leave.

I can't relate to that one at all. I moved back in with my folks for a year after a breakup and I couldn't stand it. I appreciate them being there for me and I value that support system to regroup but it feels like being a child all over again.

Like going on dates and having to explain the weird living situation? Massive L. I know for a fact it caused me to fumble the yambs at least on 3 different occasions.

yah people are living at home longer and longer because of the housing crisis.

but his attitude is nasty.
if you a man living at home at that age you gotta be working towards a plan of some kind to get out.

and you better be ready to leave at the drop of a dime if asked.

 

[oidreez]

Ol Baby Boy

 

[paulwest1985]

Ol Baby Boy

This should have been the stepfather as soon as his mom walked out the room