There is a lot of speculation out there about how and why the author of Androphilia ended up 1) so concerned about straight men and masculinity, and 2) writing for the far right. I won’t say this is my only reason, but part of the reason I ended up pro-manliness, pro-patriarchy and about half a fascist is because I saw in the gay world the “ultimate end” of the feminist, liberationist mentality. I saw how men who care more about being desired than being honorable behave. I got lucky in my personal life, but I’ve seen what “the gay lifestyle” is like for a lot of those guys behind the press release image. It’s self-gratification and adolescence without end. It’s not that these guys don’t want to be good people, but abandoning traditional family structures and rejecting social pressure from other men to be stronger, braver and more competent tends to produce a lot of lonely, flaky, pointlessly self-destructive men who are in perpetual need of sexual validation.

There are a lot of “hidden costs” to a lifestyle that looks — especially to a young, reasonably attractive guy — like freedom and fun. Feminist males and a lot of MRAs want to see themselves as brave for “rejecting outdated models of masculinity,” but the truth is that our society makes “rejecting outdated models of masculinity” the easiest thing to do in the world. It’s not rebellious or courageous, it’s officially encouraged. (By the United Nations, for starters.) It’s lowering the bar and relieving yourself of the burden of having to impress other men — knowing that the approval of women is infinitely easier to come by.

It’s troubling when I see straight men heading the same way, proudly carrying the banners of “liberation” and “freedom.”

My new essay for Alternative Right wonders if it is really so much better to be obsessed with being sexually desirable than it is to be obsessed with being masculine. Which one really frees you, and which one makes you a tool?

Read Everyone a Harlot at Alternative Right