Shake The World

By On · 1 Comment

Flipped through this before bed last night. Thought my readers would enjoy this quote.

Could almost be Nietzsche.

“Your eyes on the horizon,

your spirit refusing to be confined to any borders.

The world before you.

Striving against its dangers — to prove yourself,

to make your heart quicken and your blood sing —

to drink deeply of the world’s pleasures.

Doing whatever you must to survive –

The fire within you unquenchable,

ever reaching for more — more –

you are a man of destiny, Cimmerian.

For good or ill, it is within you to shake the world.”

–  a seer, in CONAN Volume 2. The God in the Bowl and Other Stories

 

New Reviews of The Way of Men – With Some Criticisms

By On · 2 Comments

The Way of Men has been reviewed a few more times, and I’ve added the reviewers to the blogroll here.

As was noted in Prax Americana’s review, the majority of the reviews of the book so far have been almost 100% positive. These two bloggers each added some criticisms. I’m not worried about what lefty academics or feminists say about the book, because they’ll read the book with a fundamentally different conception of “what is best in life” than my target audience. I’m far more interested in what guys who liked the book had issues with. In the feedback I’ve received lately, there have been some common themes. I’ll address a few points.

TWOM isn’t “academic” enough

I actually pulled a lot of sources and related arguments out to achieve the overall effect that everyone seems to like about the book. Add a bunch of qualifications, and you end up with an overflow of verbage that is too guarded, says less, and says it weakly. The book wasn’t written for academics, it was written for average guys. Over the years I’ve come to see different levels of discourse. Mark Dyal, for instance, writes on one level of discourse, and I write on another, though often we say very similar things. To bring a message across to “the people,” you need to address different audiences in different ways. I address the audience I’d be most comfortable having a beer with. I’m a popular writer.

Definition of Manliness Isn’t Inclusive Enough

The Way of Men tried to answer two questions: 1) What is manliness/masculinity? 2) How does manliness/masculinity fit into the modern world?

I think I got question# 1 dead on. The way that we sense “manliness” in other men isn’t necessarily about how valuable any given man could, somehow be to a gang or civilization over time. It’s about basic survival instincts and immediate physical reality. That’s the masculinity that is most exclusive to men and most consistent across cultures and across human history. Are there other valuable roles for men within a gang — even roles that men are often better at than women, linked to predominantly male traits (engineering aptitude, for instance)? Of course.

The project of The Way of Men was to universalize a definition of what we perceive as manliness in other men.

I’m probably more of a priest/shaman type myself, and that’s often a male dominated role, and it has value in every culture, and value to almost every gang of men once you get past the SHTF stage. But, being honest with myself, I can’t say that priests/shamans, or even the guys who invent the weapons, are at the top of the manliness pyramid. I tried to resist the temptation to remake masculinity in my own image to attempt to leverage its high social value, which is what I see most authors who write about it do — consciously or unconsciously. Inventors want manliness to be about invention, and philosophers want manliness to be about philosophers, activists want masculinity to be about social leadership, and so on.

Why Do We Have to Start The World? Why Tear Everything Down And Lose So Much “Progress”?

This has to do with Question 2, and my failure to be uplifting about our prospects for reviving the tactical virtues within the context of our “advanced” bourgeois, globalist, technologically advanced society.

My response is simple:

How are YOU going to do it?

No one has an answer to that, beyond “well, I think there must be some way…”

How?

How are you going to remake, say, The United States, in its current form, into a civilization that encourages  rather than discourages, manliness in men? Through political change?

How?

I’m not trying to be snarky here. I really just don’t see another viable solution. How are you going to redesign the US in a way that obviously conflicts with the interests of both elites and women?

Tell me.

Why Should We Be So Concerned With The Emotional Needs of Men?

Why shouldn’t we?

Everything we do is catering to someone’s emotional needs. Right now, we are redesigning the world to suit the emotional needs of women, gays, nerds and conniving businessmen.

Nerds want to invent things because that’s what makes them happy. We don’t need AI, for instance, and it sounds like a terrible fucking Pandora’s Box-slash-science fiction horror movie, but nerds want to nerd out on it and businessmen think money could be made, so both groups do what they do and invent some bullshit narrative to make themselves feel morally superior for doing exactly what they want to do. They sell it to us as “inevitable progress” and equate “new” with “good.” Personally, I’d see them all hanged by the neck until dead for “species treason” — I’ve read so many posts from science guys wistfully fantasizing about the end of the human race, like that’s the best thing that could ever happen. By comparison, I find the whole violent breakdown of society fairly reasonable and humane.

Society is always designed around our idea of what is best in life. That’s an emotional thing.

Isn’t There Something Better Between A) The Bonobo Masturbation Society and B) Violent Gang Life?

Yeah, I think there is. I think there’s a sweet spot. Veblen called it “High Barbarian.” Sparta, Early Rome, pre-Edo Japan.

To get there we need B) and eventually we always seem to end up with some version of A).

Maybe there is some futurist sweet spot. Maybe we become Klingons. Hard and strong, with technology. But we can’t get there from here.

I’m not saying Violent Gang Anarchy will be fun and swell. I’m not that naive. I don’t expect to become a swaggering warlord. I don’t really even expect to survive. I’m not really that bad at civilized life, and it’s all I’ve ever known. But the current global Zeitgeist will — must — pathologize masculinity and slander, possibly even erase, the history of masculine virtue to prop up its new egalitarian, technophilic mythologies.

Thanks for reading and thinking about the book.  I will probably develop some responses to your thoughts and questions and criticisms into an essay or so for the next book. Writing is a thinking process.

Get Serious Skills for Serious Times

By On · Add Comment

After reading The Way of Men, some guys write me to ask “what next?”

If you’re watching the collapse of their future and the masturbatory well-behaved-slave lifestyle it offers non-elite men…if you’re hoping for a return to The Way of The Gang and the tactical virtues…then it makes sense to learn how to fight.

As the State hollows out and can no longer afford or inspire honest police, you’ll need to be able to defend yourself, and attack others if necessary. You’ll need to master the skills that will be needed by men on the perimeter.

Gangs and the big gangs we call governments don’t fight with swords or spears or arrows anymore.

They fight with GUNS.

While The Way of Men has been read and recommended by many present and former members of the military and law enforcement community, other readers may have absolutely no experience with the primary weapons of our age. If you weren’t raised with guns — I wasn’t — I know that guns can be a little intimidating. (They’re supposed to be, right?) As a gun noob myself, I’ve wondered, “I know I need to learn about this stuff, but where do I even start?”

Now, I think I can pass along an answer to guys who are looking for an entry point into the wide world of guns.

A few months ago, I was contacted by Silent Bob and Strategist Jack from the blog Warriors & Capitalists. Their whole crew has read The Way of Men, and Strategist Jack reviewed it here.

He wrote:

“These are tumultuous times and as a man who was good at being a man said many years ago… timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty, and as your reviewer concluded when he finished the book – “Good men” got us into the fix we’re in today… it’s going to take men who are “good at being men” to get us out it.  The Way of Men joins my “must-read” bookshelf which includes Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, Michael Porter’s Competitive Advantage, Bill Lind’s Maneuver Warfare, my collection of Patrick O’Brian and CS Forrester novels, and my John Boyd monographs. The Way of Men is now a required read for anybody joining our gang.”

Bob and Jack aren’t just bloggers, they are serious firearms instructors and 2nd Amendment advocates. They run Pulse Firearms Training in the Chicago area, and they’ve come up with a structured system for learning basic (and advanced) firearms skills. More than that, they’ve been studying the psychology of fighting (and killing, if necessary) for years. Ron (who goes by Silent Bob online) is a former Marine, with 25 years of experience training thousands of civilians, soldiers, sailors, Marines, and law enforcement officers. He’s got some cred, and he knows what he’s talking (and writing) about. Mike (Strategist Jack) has spent much of his career as a consultant, teaching business owners to apply combat-based “maneuver theory” to business operations.

After reviewing The Way of Men, the Pulse Firearms guys offered me a tour of their online basic training  course for new gun owners – The Pulse O2DA Armory. It’s a great resource that contains more than 900 pages, 45 videos and 400 photos, a detailed 5-day kickstart training plan, and a 12-month training and dry-practice regimen designed to make the Pulse O2DA Armory member fundamentally proficient with handgun, shotgun and rifle. There are recommendations on what weapons and accessories to buy (I’ve been outfitting my shotgun for a while, so I took particular note of these), as well as how to hold, load, reload and work with your weapon. There are also documents and links that dig into the theory behind their system, as well as resources to help you prepare yourself mentally for the stress of lethal force combat.

If you’re trying to figure out “what next?,” and you don’t know anything about guns, that’s what’s next.

And if you want to get started off right with firearms, The Pulse O2DA Armory is a smart and cost-effective way to do it.

When I first started looking around for information on guns, I flipped through Amazon and a dozen other sites, trying to figure out what books or videos might be good, and what would be garbage, and what was worth buying. For $9.95, you can sign up for The Pulse O2DA Armory, get yourself a weapon, and try out their kick-start program.

When you try out The Pulse O2DA Armory, you also help support my work. Because the guys at pulse liked The Way of Men, I get a cut of membership dues I refer. So if you ever thought of donating to this site — sign up for the The Pulse O2DA Armory and get something useful out of the deal.

Glenn Beck has Lifelock, and it’s about time this here fight club got a sponsor, too.

Update on Keto: Get More Potassium

By On · Add Comment

Grass-fed Double Goat Cheese Brie Burger with Olives and Fresh Garden ArugulaTo my surprise, one of the most popular posts on this web site is the one I wrote on using a ketogenic diet as a fast “finishing move” for weight loss. I never actually got around to doing a keto cut this winter myself — at the time I felt more like lifting than dieting. But spring is here, the sun is shining, and I like to run a bit lighter in the summer months. So I’m on day 5 of a two-week keto sprint.

One problem I had last time with keto was that I tended to get lightheaded while doing squat or any kind of strenuous lifting. Someone advised me that it might be a blood pressure issue. My blood pressure has always been a little on the high side, and keto tends to double my normal sodium intake because cured meats are just the most convenient way to go keto for me.

I’ve been doing some reading on sodium and blood pressure, and some sources seem to suggest that balancing the ration of sodium to potassium can help keep blood pressure under control. I’m not a doctor, but I’ve been taking potassium supplements and lightheadedness has been normal or minimal this time around — and I just finished a fairly strenuous CrossFit workout involving a lot of fast squatting and jumping — so you may want to try that and see if it works for you.

Further reading: 

Confetti Culture

By On · Add Comment

Global “culture” isn’t exactly nothing. It’s something. Global culture was a stack of colored paper, one distinctive color for every distinctive people and culture that existed. Then the slow shredders of imperialism and colonial capitalism got juiced up by information technology. Now, every culture has been shredded—or hole-punched—and we’re left with a mixed-up, world-sized recycle bin full of everything and everyone that ever was. And we’re supposed to throw a big party. We’re supposed to throw the confetti in the air again and again and again forever and ever. But it always comes down about the same. One big mixed up – but colorful! – mess. It’s festive, but the mess is all there is, and you can’t really separate the piles. Well, you could, but that would be inefficient and it is clear that our supervisors do not approve. Nothing will ever be allowed to become anything again, so all you have is the mess. So you keep celebrating the mess, because what else is there to do?

This Microsoft commercial is global confetti culture.

It’s isn’t anything, but it isn’t quite nothing. Just a big, exciting, flamboyant, manic, multicolored mess.

Some would say that this “global culture” is the new culture.

It is, but the problem with culture that has to appeal to everyone is that it either has to appeal to our collective experience of childlike silliness and wonder…

Spring colors! Dancing! Jumping up and down! Yummy food! We’re special! Recess! Naptime! Games! Sports! I’m better than you! Hit the kid you don’t like! I feel sad! Someone hurt my feelings! Poop! Someone got kicked in the nuts!

…or our shared “adult” desires…

Gossip! Sex! Feeling sexy! Get drunk! Buy cool stuff! High social status! I love you! I want you to love me!

These are the hooks of almost every hit pop song on the radio since WWII.


A bunch of appealing jumbled images and sounds that used to mean something, remixed and repurposed to mean…

Fun! Excitement! Party! NOW! YES!

People complain that our culture is dumbed down, but a culture for everyone has to be dumbed down. It has to be universalized. It can’t be too alien, or off-putting, or inaccessible, or specific to anyone or anything in any place at any time. Universalized culture is all-inclusive, but limited in its scope by that inclusiveness.

It is also limited in scope by the market. Marketing something to everyone, something that can’t offend or exclude anyone, has to be as safe and inane as the art in a bank. Marketing something to everyone can also cost a lot of money, so the creative process ultimately ends up in the hands of executives who report to shareholders. Eccentric patrons and noblemen have been replaced by pragmatic bean-counters.

Most people go with the flow. Most people accept and at least pretend to celebrate the big confetti culture. Blockbusters. Pop songs. The new video or movie or entertainment product that everyone is talking about. 40 million people watched the Oscars last year. 108 million watched the Superbowl  Almost half the world watched the 2010 FIFA World Cup. Literally. 3.2 billion people. It was sponsored by Adidas, Sony, Visa, and Coca-Cola.

Play! Toys! Money! Sugar!

The culture that doesn’t appeal to everyone becomes more interesting. It becomes distinct, and exclusive. A music “scene,” an artistic “movement,” an obscure genre of writing…something for people in the know. These are the things people want to identify themselves with, to distinguish themselves from others. These are the things that give them a sense of identity. These are the things that make people feel like they belong somewhere, not just anywhere. That they are someone, not just anyone.

Subcultures. Tribes. Teams. Cults. Gangs. Religions.

Everybody wants to be somebody.

Global culture is for anybody.

Fun! Excitement! Party! NOW! YES!

The Nomadic War Machine Against The State

By On · Add Comment

Mark Dyal’s new series on “Deleuze, Guattari, & The New Right” over at Counter-Currents has my head buzzing with ideas.

I’ll admit, the words “Deleuze” and “Guattari” had the freshman philosophy student in me yawning. Leftist French philosophers tend to be boner killers, and I can almost smell the cigarettes, cheese and kitty litter.

(Je n’ai rien against French cheese... I actually scored a couple wheels of Époisses de Bourgogne last night from work, and laid slices of it over dollops of rillette from Olympic Provisions to make the sickest grass-fed McFrenchy burger. Enjoy life! Ride that Tiger!)

Francophobia aside, Mark teased ideas out of Deleuze & Guattari that, paired with his neo-Spartan/anarcho-fascist/neo-tribalist/Nietzschean critique of bourgeois modernity — and some of my apocalyptic yearning from The Way of Men — set up a springboard for a whole bunch of ideas about what we can do to fight The Nothing of culture-and-manhood killing progressive global consumerism.

(UPDATED with part 4)

Here are links to the first three four parts of Dyal’s exploration of Deleuze & Guattari:

 

 

 

No One Wants Crazy People To Have Guns, But Who Decides Who Is Crazy?

By On · 1 Comment

It sounds like a common sense measure.

Keep guns out of the hands of people who are “unstable.”

You don’t want people who might “snap” to have access to an arsenal, right?

To anyone who opposes tighter restrictions on gun sales, especially to those deemed “mentally ill,” police state progressives will respond:

“So you want crazy people to have free access to guns?”

Well, no. Of course not. No one wants some freak who hears voices and thinks the neighbor’s dog is the Devil to be sitting at his windowsill rubbing himself as he moves a holographic reticle over the bodies of strangers taking a walk in the park.

The problem isn’t whether or not lunatics should be able to go on wild-eyed, no-questions-asked shopping sprees at the local gun shop, giddily fondling armor piercing rounds and drooling all over high capacity magazines.

The problem is: who decides who is a nut?

The answer, unfortunately, is politically progressive women.

According to a 2011 article released by the American Psychological Association, the new “experts” in psychology—people who have earned PhDs—are now over 60% women in every area of study but cognitive psychology. There are dramatically more female PhDs in developmental, family, clinical, counseling and “social and personality” fields.

What’s more, these women and many of their male counterparts overwhelmingly belong to the same political demographic that wants to ban or reduce access to firearms for everyone.  As many as 80% of psychology professors identify as Democrats or politically “liberal.” In a New York Times article, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt argued that social psychologists have become a “tribal-moral community.”

“If a group circles around sacred values, they will evolve into a tribal-moral community,” he said. “They’ll embrace science whenever it supports their sacred values, but they’ll ditch it or distort it as soon as it threatens a sacred value.” It’s easy for social scientists to observe this process in other communities, like the fundamentalist Christians who embrace “intelligent design” while rejecting Darwinism.”

Listen to Haidt’s speech on “Post-Partisan Psychology” here.

Chances are that these women and their progressive male colleagues — who will be consulted as “experts” by lawyers, judges, policy-makers, doctors, law enforcement officers and the media to determine who is mentally “healthy” and who is mentally “unfit” to own a weapon –will live in a gun-free household. One survey said that 40% of male Democrats and 24% of female Democrats are said to live in a household with a gun.  When broken down according to who actually owns the guns in any given household, a more recent survey showed that only 12% of American women own guns, and only 32% of all self-identified Democrats own guns.

There is every reason to assume that an industry dominated by female Democrats, and which has demonstrated a willingness to discriminate against socially and politically conservative peers in academia, will also demonstrate bias against patients and subjects who hold views and values that run contrary to the interests of their own “tribal-moral community.”

So many ideological positions have already been tagged as “phobias.” Homophobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia. It’s easy to pathologize someone else’s concerns or dismiss them as “irrational,” especially if you don’t share the same concerns. Especially if what they think is bad is something you think is good. Big-government advocates believe that their political opponents have an irrational fear of government regulation and aggression. People who don’t go with the flow are routinely dismissed as kooks and conspiracy theorists. Those on the right in America are often referred to as “wing-nuts.”

How hard would it be for a female psychologist to perceive “preppers,” for instance, to be suffering from some “paranoid delusion?”

It would seem perfectly rational for a well-to-do female Democrat who has never owned, lived with, or even fired a gun to regard virtually all men who invest a lot of time and money in firearms as suffering from some sort of inadequacy or paranoia.

Pre-PC masculinity (meaning: masculinity) itself is characterized by feminist psychologists and sociologists as being a “tough guise” adopted to deal with irrational fears.

The mental health industry provides a convenient backdoor workaround for police state progressives who want to disarm the (predominantly white) men who oppose their ideological agenda.

It sounds reasonable to say that the mentally ill shouldn’t have access to guns, but taking greater measures to prevent the mentally ill from having guns increases the ability of progressive women to disarm men who don’t share their views or tell them what they want to hear. “Common sense” measures like this create more ways for America’s corrupt police state to call on these women to silence, discredit, and disarm perceived enemies of the police state.

In fact, referring to the American government as a “corrupt police state” could be enough for any Obama-worshiping progressive woman to characterize me as a “dangerous, paranoid extremist.”

What’s to stop them from characterizing YOU as a “dangerous, paranoid extremist?”

After writing this, I decided to send $20 to Gun Owners of America, “The Only No-Compromise Gun Lobby in Washington.”

I’m not much for political action, because I understand that elites manage our choices, but lobby groups fuck with their official narrative in a  useful way.

It Keeps Happening.

By On · Add Comment

A couple of weeks ago, I got to digging through some family history.

People hope to find a lost connection to nobility or some famous historical figure. I found pretty much what I expected. I come from a long line of jobbers. Two hundred and fifty years of cowkeepers, whitesmiths, blacksmiths, gardeners, electricians and fishermen. A lot of them worked odd job after odd job well into their eighties. My most august relation was a prominent Hastings fishmonger who made a stink at an 1833 town meeting over Brits who were sneaking French fish to market inland and interfering with the local fishing economy.

Kids of my generation were raised to think they were special. We grew up spoiled in a pocket of American prosperity and we were flattered by naïve schoolteachers and people trying to sell us things — like higher education, or some paper-thin consumer identity. We were supposed to be better than everyone who came before us. More “enlightened.”

I recently started my 38th job. I’m going to a trade school for what will probably be my 39th job. That will be a job for every year I’ve been alive. I collected the biggest spread between 13 and 30, before I settled down some.

I guess there are things you could say make me “special.”  But what’s also true is that I’m a tenth generation jobber. My pap worked for the railroad his whole life and retired on a nice union pension, but he’s probably the only man in my patriarchal line who got to do that. Even my dad’s been jobbing since the economy ate shit.

After doing a lot of different blue collar and working class jobs, you start to pick up the gruff, world-weary humor that comes with the work. You work your ass off every day, dealing with variables that are out of your control, taking blame for things that have nothing to do with you. You get talked to like a child by desk-jockeys and bean counters who work half as hard, or guys who have been around the longest, or by other jobbers who caught a sense of entitlement from the people they serve.

I’m not complaining, mind you. I chose my line of work because I like it. I’d rather do what I do than be the desk-jockey or the bean-counter or the high class help. I’ve been down that road. If I could be bothered to scheme constantly about ways to get money, I’d probably have a lot more.

Not too long ago, a Cuban guy about my age and I were complaining to each other about work. Like you do. Nothing that really mattered. Just everyday bullshit.

Then he started complaining about a younger co-worker who walked by.

“He’s always too happy. He gets too excited. He needs to calm down.”

“He hasn’t figured it out yet,” I explained.

“Figured out what?”

“That it keeps happening.”

“Huh?”

“You know this bullshit here, this bullshit we are bitching about now?”

“Yeah.”

“He thinks it’s temporary. You and I know that this bullshit, it just keeps fucking happening. You keep getting older, and there’s just more bullshit.”

He laughed.

Every so often I run into him at the gym and ask about the old job.

“You know, just more bullshit.”

Gay Marriage: “What-The-Fuck-Ever.”

By On · 1 Comment

I’ve been arguing against same-sex marriage since around 2005.

I’m not against same-sex marriage because I hate homosexual men, or because I don’t think they are capable of having long-term relationships. I’ve been with the same guy for 14 years.

The other day, I sat down to write “A Quick Guide to Trolling Gay Marriage.”

Who better than me? I’ve heard all of the arguments from gay marriage cheerleaders. I know what they’re going to say before they say it. I know they’re going to parrot completely ahistorical nonsense like “marriage is about LOVE” and it’s unfair and discriminatory to keep people who are “in LOVE” from getting married. I know that most of them are just going to regurgitate the same talking points about “rights and responsibilities” that gay rights advocates dreamed up and leaked into the sympathetic media – from MTV to MSNBC. Most of them don’t even know where their information comes from, or who generates it, or why they believe what they believe. It’s easy to push their buttons, because it’s an emotional issue. They’re plugged into the progressive hive mind, and gacked out on the melodrama of the “struggle for civil rights.” The idea of fighting for “equal rights” sounds noble and exciting and they’re all for it. They feel like Rosa Parks every time they update their Facebook profile to stand up for gay marriage, and who are we to deflate that kind of delusional self-importance?

Gay men want the option to GET married more than they want to BE married, and you’ll often find that the guys who talk about being “second class citizens” because they “can’t get legally married” have never had a relationship that lasted longer than three years, but they do manage to have semi-anonymous sex on a fairly regular basis. I’ve met a lot of homosexual men over the years, and the percentage of them who actually ARE in long-term, monogamous relationships is infinitesimally small. Probably smaller than the percentage of exclusive male homosexuals within the mainstream male population, which means less than 3-5%. If gay marriage is legalized, more young, foolish gay males will probably get hitched, but that doesn’t mean they will stay hitched. If half of straight couples get divorced, the percentage of gay male couples who get married and then divorce will surely be at least as high as their straight counterparts. So everyone is talking about “expanding” the institution of marriage to benefit 50% of 5% of 5% of the male population. With some insanely generous rounding, that’s what — maybe 200,000 dudes, including male children and senior citizens. (And, though you’d never know it here in the Beaver State, there are more exclusively homosexual men than women. More dykes will get married, though (because even butch girls like weddings) so let’s say all of this is about what might be good for 400,000 people out of 300 million.) There are always the supposed “psychological benefits” to the so-called LGBT community, but all of the government approval in the world won’t fix those nagging “daddy issues.” And the actual affects of “institutional discrimination” that sociology majors love to write about are always so darned difficult to quantify unless you ignore any politically incorrect variables. Like “daddy issues.”

So anyway, I sat down to write a quick, funny guide to trolling gay marriage. But it didn’t feel right. Because the truth is, I really don’t fucking care anymore.

In this, I believe I have my finger on the pulse of America’s “Silent Majority.”  At least, the “Silent Majority” of American men.  We think gay marriage is stupid, but we don’t fucking care anymore. If two faggots want to fight over who gets to wear the wedding gown – have the fuck at it.

WHAT. THE. FUCK. EVER.

Seriously, dudes. Knock yourselves the fuck out.

Gay marriage is stupid and offensive. It’s a grotesque mockery of traditional marriage and traditional religious values to the point of being completely Satanic. In fact, the High Priest of the Church of Satan was ahead of the curve on this. He’s been all for it for years. (I used to have friendly arguments with him and his wife about it, actually.)

Any given gay marriage won’t meaningfully effect anything, but symbolically, sanctioning gay marriage is like a Black Mass profaning heterosexuality and nature itself.

Gay men actually tend to have a dark, sophisticated sense of humor, and at least a few of them understand and enjoy the camp absurdity of gay marriage in the way they enjoy John Waters films.

The real net effect that gay marriage with have – that gay marriage is designed to have – on the general population is the further erosion and subversion of sex roles and gender norms.

But, in that case – what else is fucking new?

Every day American culture is a little more like a Black Mass against nature and manhood and anything decent or beautiful or noble or worth saving. Western Civilization has become a Black Mass for Western Civilization. Everything our better fathers believed in has been spit on and placed like a tainted Host between the yeasty thighs of a giggling whore.

In some formerly great nations, like England, I could probably be jailed for “hate speech” even writing that.

Simon Sheppard, author of All About Women, was recently arrested for hate speech after a librarian informed on him. The Nordic countries – famous for being places the Vikings left – are talking about criminalizing any open criticism of anything Nordic feminists say. How far off from that prison planet nightmare is America? How many years will the First Amendment hold – especially if the Second is compromised? Political Correctness is already enforced in the workplace. And it’s already a crime to refuse to make lesbians a wedding cake.

The simple fact is that gay marriage IS going to happen in the United States.

It’s not going to happen because it is good or rational. It’s going to happen because it really doesn’t matter, and it makes people feel good. Gay marriage is a good distraction, something silly and fun that Americans can agree to agree on even as social fractures widen over issues that do matter – like gun control, immigration, foreign policy and what to do about widespread economic and political corruption. It’s an issue that the progressive puppet media can congratulate Americans for coming ‘round on – as Time recently did. Americans want to feel like their opinion matters, and siding with a change that seems to be inevitable empowers them. Americans want to be on “the winning side of history,” a desire as cynical as it sounds.

Sure, average Americans have finally decided they are “OK” with gay marriage, but at least 12 million average Americans have watched Two and a Half Men every year for the past decade. The fact that Americans have  decided something is “good enough” doesn’t actually  make it ”good.”

While drones fill the skies and the police state expands, millions of TV tray head-nodders can congratulate themselves for being “forward thinking.”

As for the rest of us, as for the men who are left…well, what’s one more fucking gross indignity?

Right?

What’s one more vile, stupid thing?

What’s one more petty emasculation, one more mockery of everything our ancestors stood for?

What’s one more used condom in the landfill?

People who get mad about gay marriage still think they can fix all of this somehow. With their “vote” or something, I guess.

Me, I’m not mad. At least, I’m not mad at the stupid gays for acting like stupid gays. I mean, if gay men were known for acting like great and serious men, “faggot” wouldn’t be an insult. There are a handful of pretty respectable homos out there, but most gays are sadly “as advertised.” Expecting gays to stop throwing flamboyant tantrums is like expecting Irish men to drink whiskey in moderation.

One can always hope.

No, go ahead and throw one more shit-stained rubber in the landfill. Maybe that will be the one. Or maybe it won’t. I don’t care anymore if gays get married in this society, because what I am really looking forward to is this society’s collapse. I want to see their Candyland, upside-down rainbow dyke future destroyed.

Please. Somebody…

START THE WORLD.

 

White Men Were Never Made of Marble

By On · Add Comment

Sculptures are just sculptures.

The men who modeled for Greek statues were probably sunburnt, hairy and scarred.

How could anyone make it through the Spartan agōgē without shredded knuckles, a busted forehead, or a badly healed broken nose?

Our fathers didn’t have sunscreen, and I doubt the average man had the time to wash, tone and moisturize.  The Greeks, the Romans, the Celts and the Norsemen had moles and freckles and the occasional zit. Their faces were dried by the winter wind and hardened in the summer heat.

They had calloused palms and dirty feet.

And how close could you shave your face with one of their knives?

To keep white skin pure, you have to protect it. You have to hide it. You have to be precious with it.

And what does a man look like who protects himself from sunshine, danger and exertion?

Not a Greek statue.

The protected man with perfectly white, unblemished skin is a marshmallow.  And marshmallow men don’t look that great naked.

Many Ancient Greek men actually considered paleness to be a sign of effeminacy. Passive adult homosexuals were referred to as leukopygoi, or “white-arses.” [1]

The modern metrosexual fitness model is probably the closest thing to the toned, smooth marble ideal found in Greek sculpture, though most of them tan anyway.  And, in the pursuit of that ideal Classical body they lose the whole point of having that body. They aren’t striving to be strong, hardy, healthy citizens, ready and able to defend the city-state. They aren’t trying to embody man’s physical potential or represent an ideal. They want to be looked at and adored and desired. They’re more like whores than warriors.

The body of the Classical man isn’t admirable because it is pretty. It remains a timeless ideal because the Classical body is the product of struggle, toil and pain. It is the product of courage and it is evidence of strength.

The perfect body of the Classical man is a Platonic form, but a statue is just a thing, and if it inspires reverence, it’s important to think about the virtues it was designed to represent.

Plato himself was a big, broad-backed wrestler.

I bet he had some pretty good scuffs and scars.

And if he did, I bet he was proud of them.

[1] Eva Cantarella. Bisexuality in the Ancient World. Yale Nota Bene, 2002. Page 47.

← Previous Entries