Mancheeze discusses how the form of ultra-masculinity connected with gay men is also endemic to the “masculinists.”
The gay male art of the 50’s and 60’s by Tom of Finland was a focal point for this change. His art emulated the homoerotic images of the Nazis in their pressed uniforms, ripped muscular structures, with large penises. They were the ultimate symbols of virility, power, and performance in which the ‘true man’ resides. It was an edict to completely reject anything related to ‘feminine’ gender because women, and hence ‘femininity’, didn’t have power. Chiseled features, muscular bodies, and the constant desire for sexual domination became the gendered vision of gayness and manhood.
We can see the same striving for the ultimate masculine over at A Voice for Men. The same image that gay male culture holds dear is precisely what Paul Elam prescribes and sells to his followers.
Sadomasochism was crucial to gay culture because it clearly delineated the weak from the strong and masculinity depends on a weak object (women, children or sissie boys) upon which to enact its will and exist. Capitalists noticed this shift in gay male culture and gay S&M porn was born. Sexual prowess in the form of public sex with as many men as possible was also critical since the more sex you had without any interpersonal ties, the more manly you became.
We see Elam engaging in the masculine fantasy by playing the dominant over his submissive followers. He abuses them, calls them ‘manginas,’ psychologically shaming them, and they come back for more just like submissives in the gay clubs who are initiated into manhood by being fisted, urinated upon, and debased publicly. This is how men prove their manhood. Just yesterday Elam posted a video of a man in his garage tinkering with a car. He titled the video a ‘Manly Man.’ On Twitter, Elam questions the manhood of other men and writes articles teaching men how to ‘man up.’
The first two parts of this image have been reposted a lot, but I had never seen the complete set before. This makes a lot more sense.
You may have noticed that the new thing in marketing is the “story.” Products have to have some kind of story associated with them, usually in advertisements or on the back of the package. I think the reason why I hate this practice so much is that it glorifies consumerism. By consuming this or that product, you become a hero (in your own mind, anyway!). Activism by buying stuff. It’s disgusting. And these soulless people help further this trend along.
A theory is supposed to help you modelize reality in some limited aspect, and help you understand it. If your theory is that anything goes, then that’s a shit “theory.”
If your gender theory tells you that you need to do surgery on your genitals so that your external appearance matches society’s stereotypical view of how people should behave, then maybe it’s time to abandon the idea of gender altogether and recognize that biological sex is a reality, but that our personalities (and bodies) are fine just the way they are.
If your gender theory tells you that a person who has been given male privilege starting at 3 months – and has made use of that privilege for his entire life – has more insight into what being a woman really is than people born and raised as women their entire lives, then your gender theory is giving men an expert status over the one thing that up until recently they weren’t considered experts on. Groundbreaking!
If your gender theory tells you that a woman must put a penis in her body in order to prove that she is a lesbian, then your gender theory is rape apologia barely disguised and you should be ashamed of yourself.
If your gender theory tells you that penises and vaginas literally don’t exist, then your gender theory is literally insane.
Look, people. Have whatever personality you want. That’s great. Dress how you want. Do it all! But don’t tell me that a person who acts feminine, whatever that means, must now be a woman, and a person who acts masculine, whatever that means, must now be a man. That’s enforcing a strict code of behavior, not releasing us from bonds. You’re actually more conservative than the conservatives! Think about it, please.
I’ve found a new place to hang out. It’s called the Black Flag Coalition, a place for leftists (real leftists, not Democrats) and Anarchists of all stripes to discuss things. So if you have an interest in those kinds of subjects, come and meet me some time.
Dumby at Freudian Nightmare wrote an amazing entry about the falsity of the evolutionary psychology view of the world, and the views of men about procreation in general.
Those Evo Psych dudes really get my goat. They seem to forget that the reproduction of the species absolutely does not require all individual animals of that species to reproduce. Its just a potential of individuals. What does this mean?, simply that all animals have a choice to use this potential or or not. We do not die from not reproducing. We do not waste away for lack of sex. Its not like food, shelter, or sociality. Choice is actually built in. Evolution is not just the sum total of biological selection because on top of all of that, individual animals are making choices to reproduce or not based on environmental circumstances. It is more like a collective consciousness.
We have a narrative that humans have never before understood reproduction or where babies come from, not until now. Not until science and modernity. Westerners like to deride people who don’t “know where babies come from”, its a euphemism for calling someone an idiot . The ironic thing is that western culture doesn’t know where babies come from. It is we modern humans, male culture, who does not seem to understand reproduction. Many men believe that reproduction is required, that evolution requires their participation, that sex is a human right or need. That contraception meets a need that has always existed. That sex is really only real when it risks unwanted reproduction.
Why is that the real kind? Specifically and precisely because that is the male’s experience of sex when they control it. Its telling of their ignorance that they fly boat loads of condoms over to third world countries, where they rain down, in their minds, like golden tickets to freedom. But babies and overpopulation do not come from lack of contraception.
From Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal (1, 2, 3).
purplesagefem makes an interesting comparison between limb-lenghtening in India and untested transgender surgeries.
Hmm, the surgery is risky and might cripple people for life, but they threaten to commit suicide if they don’t get the surgery, so doctors are performing it anyway. That sounds familiar too!
“Though he has performed the surgery successfully on hundreds of people, Sarin admits: “It’s madness to do it.”
Still, he feels successful limb lengthening can transform a person’s life: “You can barely recognise them. It’s worth it when you see how much their self esteem grows.”
It’s completely mad to risk being crippled for life by lengthening your limbs, but it’s worth the risk because their self esteem improves? Unfortunately, that sounds familiar too.