IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Protective Stupidity
and the
Debasement of Language
Under Analism

by

Bill Weintraub


1984: The Ministry of Truth, with its slogan "Ignorance is Strength," is in the background

It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you -- something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you, almost, to deny the evidence of your senses. In the end, the Party would anounce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later; the logic of their position demanded it. [1]

George Orwell, 1984

Doublethink, crimestop, and protective stupidity

In his dystopian novel of a one-party police state, 1984, George Orwell wrote about a thought process called "doublethink": "holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." [2]

In many ways, that idea is the essence of both Ingsoc (English Socialism), the dominant ideology of 1984, and Newspeak, the artificial language which Orwell invented for his dystopia, which was characterized by three slogans:

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

A "dys-topia," of course, is the opposite of a "u-topia": it's an imaginary future society in which people are miserable and controlled instead of being happy and free.

But a dystopia is also a literary invention which uses trends present in contemporary society to critique that society.

And in creating 1984, Orwell was pointing to the debasement of language in contemporary political thought and action.

Such debasement is typical of totalitarian systems.

And that's what analism is:

A dominant culture which seeks to control the sex lives of all men who have sex with men and which censors or otherwise silences competing points of view.

As is true with any dominant culture, while analism doesn't tolerate and, as we know, censors criticism from outside the culture, analism is primarily concerned with preventing those within the culture from deviating from cultural norms.

And that's a phenomenon which Orwell well understood.

Here, for example, is a passage from 1984 where Orwell describes a component of "doublethink" called, in Newspeak, "crimestop" -- a form of self-censorship:

[Crimestop] includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity. [3]

Why "protective" stupidity?

Because by self-censoring, the individual avoids conflict, which can be very dangerous, with the majority culture.

He protects himself, in effect, by being stupid.

Let's take that same passage, and simply substitute the word "analism" for Ingsoc:

Crimestop includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to analism, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.

Anyone who's debated analists -- as have guys like Greg Milliken and Chuck Tarver [15] and Oscar Vallejo and Beagle Jones and David McQuarrie -- will recognize instantly the patterns Orwell has laid out:

  1. Not grasping analogies.

    For example: It's an analist article of faith that "It's all sex and it's all good."

    We've pointed out that, to the contrary, there are profound differences in pleasure and risk among the various sex acts available to men who have sex with men;

    and that it's normal for human beings to make assessments of pleasure and risk before undertaking almost any action.

    In that regard, we've made an analogy to food, noting that human beings routinely evaluate food in a number of ways, including taste, nutritional value, how it was grown or processed, and the likelihood of getting sick or dying from eating it.

    Similarly, humans differentiate between the pleasures and risks of crossing a busy city street at rush hour and ambling down a quiet country road.

    Analists resolutely refuse to grasp these analogies, insisting that all sexual acts entail risk, and that "Frot is risky too."

    Frot isn't risky.

    It's safe.

    Analists are not interested in that fact.

    They object to any and all analogies, no matter now apt; including those which reference cigarette smoking, and public health efforts to de-glamorize smoking and otherwise encourage people to stop smoking through organized campaigns.

  2. Failing to perceive logical errors.

    For example: We've pointed out that since an anus is not a vagina, what works sexually for a man and a woman -- penetrative, penile-vaginal sex -- is, logically, not a good model for a man and a man, neither of whom has a vagina.

    Again, analists routinely refuse to perceive their logical errors.

    They'll admit that an anus is not a vagina, but then insist that they can treat it as one.

    They cannot.

    Nevertheless, analists will routinely refer to their anuses as their manginas, mancunts, boypussies, etc; and will insist on using a male-female model of top-bottom / butch-femme / butch-bitch for a homosexual act, even though that model does not and cannot possibly work for men who have sex with men. [4]

  3. Misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they're inimical to analism.

    For example: We've said that sex is about genitals, not about anuses.

    There's no question that the genitals are the generators of erotic sensation and energy, and that clearly sex between men should focus on the genitals, as it does for the vast majority of the world's people.

    That argument is repeatedly either misunderstood or simply ignored.

  4. Being bored or repelled by any train of thought leading in a heretical, that is, pro-Frot, direction.

    For example: The same analists who say in their personal profiles on internet dating sites that they're seeking men who are "masculine" and "straight-acting," claim to be repelled by our rejection of effeminacy.

    Why?

    Because effeminacy, which both facilitates and is a consequence of anal penetration, is part and parcel of analism.

    And rejection of effeminacy is therefore, de facto, heresy.

As I said, anyone who's debated analists has seen all four of these processes, which are basically just defense mechanisms, in play.

So, in essence, these mechanisms, which Orwell termed "doublethink" and "crimestop," are both forms of, again in Orwell's phrase, "protective stupidity": the ability to retain and parrot orthodox -- that is, mainstream -- beliefs even when you know they're false.

In other words, protective stupidity means holding onto orthodoxy even when doing so makes no sense whatsoever.

DANGER!

Beware the new-age bunny

I had reason to think of this recently when a self-styled gay spirituality guru -- the sort of guy my late lover and I used to call a new-age bunny -- contacted me to say that he was writing a column about Frot and the Frot Movement for his blog.

He said he wanted to interview me for the column, but within a few hours of his initial email, he announced that he'd already written the piece, and wouldn't need my help.

In his column, he praised Frot and aspects of our Man2Man Alliance work, while insisting that anal penetration could be retained as a major part of gay male practice, and that the claims of "some Frot activists" that anal was "inherently disease-spreading, unnatural, and degrading," were false.

Are those claims false?

And are Frot and anal essentially equal?

Let's take a look.

Are Frot and anal penetration essentially equal?

No, they are not.

What's more, the idea that both anal and Frot are equally valid is an example of doublethink -- "holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them" -- and protective stupidity -- "holding onto orthodoxy even when doing so makes no sense whatsoever."

Why?

To believe that anal's valid, you have to believe that anuses, feces, rectal odors, pain, disease, inequality, domination, degradation and effeminization make for good and valid sex between men -- that is, a valid expression of love and desire by one man towards another.

You can't believe that and also believe that Frot, which is founded upon phallus, equality, freedom, health, unalloyed joy, mutual genitality, and the exaltation of masculinity is also a valid expression of love and desire between men.

How can you believe both?

If, for example, it's good for two men to mutually exalt their masculinity through phallic bonding, how can degrading and effeminizing a man through anal penetration also be good?

It can't be.

If it's good for sex to be healthy, it can't simultaneously be good for sex to be high risk, disease-ridden, and dangerous.

If it's good for sex to be about genitals, it can't also be good for sex to be about anuses.

Because an anus is not a vagina, or in any other way a genital organ.

Here's an illustration from What Sex Is which compares Frot and anal:

FROT

phallus

fidelity

masculinity

equality

freedom

pleasure

health

LIFE

anal

anus

promiscuity

effeminacy

submission

subjugation

pain

disease

death

The two practices could not be less alike or farther apart:

 FROT

 phallus

 fidelity

 masculinity

 equality

 freedom

 pleasure

 health

 LIFE

 anal

 anus

 promiscuity

 effeminacy

 submission

 subjugation

 pain

 disease

 death

Truth is, in every respect Frot and anal are diametric opposites.

Yet there are men like our new-age bunny out there -- practitioners of analist doublethink and buttboy protective stupidity -- who will attempt to assert that both practices are equally valid.

That won't work.

Particularly because the differences are not restricted to the mechanics of the practices themselves, but have without question an effect upon the character of the men involved:

Strong, noble, decent, and caring

Here's how our gay spirituality guy aka new-age bunny ended his piece:

The Man2Man Alliance gives a provocative introduction to men with a new vision of sex, a vision in tune with the historical emphasis on manly love between heroes and warriors. They're into man on man mating, not just the rubbing of genitalia. And they're into love between men who are strong, noble, decent, and caring. These are ideas whose time has come.

"Strong, noble, decent, and caring"

He's right that those are valuable character traits.

But how can a man who's "strong, noble, decent, and caring" -- those are my words by the way, though the blogger didn't bother to say so -- how can a man who has those qualities --

engage in anal penetration?

To put it country simple: Would a noble, decent, and caring man fuck another man up the ass?

No.

Of course not.

Forget the words "noble" and "decent" for a moment.

Would a man who's "caring" subject another man to the risk of pathogenic disease and mechanical damage through the painful act of anal penetration?

No.

Yet our gay spirituality guy wants you to believe that's so.

Of course you can assert that a man who rips open another man's anus in pursuit of his own selfish sexual pleasure is noble, decent, and caring.

But in so doing you totally devalue the words.

And that's what Orwell was talking about.

The debasement of language.

And of human beings.

Yang-Yang, Yin-Yang, or none of the above?

As I said, our gay spirituality guy is a new-age bunny, which means that he's substituted trendy forms of spirituality, such as Wicca, Taoism, and Tantra, for the more traditional Judeo-Christian views.

This particular new age bunny has yin-yang coming out the yin-yang.

For those of you who haven't been living in a 60s time warp, yin and yang are principles of Eastern philosophy.

They're opposites, and yin is often said to be feminine, yang masculine.

In that respect, says our bunny, cock-to-cock is yang-yang, that is, masculine-masculine sex.

Fine so far as it goes.

But if dick-to-dick is yang-yang, does that mean that dick-in-shithole is yang-yin?

Our bunny thinks so, but he's wrong.

In classical yin-yang theory, the presence of one (yin) implies the existence of the other (yang), which is its diametrical opposite.

So: the presence of a vagina implies the existence of a penis.

Brought together, they create a unity: the unity of opposites.

Following, for a moment, that train of thought, we can ask, Does the presence of an anus imply the existence of a penis?

No it does not.

Of course the presence of an anus implies the existence of excrement.

But in terms of "opposing" body parts, the presence of an anus implies the existence of a mouth -- and that's all.

The mouth ingests; the anus excretes.

The penis has nothing to do with the anus.

We can say that with confidence because in nature there are many creatures which have mouths and anuses, but no penis.

For example, the earthworm.

So: the opposite to the anus is the mouth; and when each is in its proper place, they create a unity without which the creature could not survive.

Whether that's a unity of opposites is questionable.

But biologically it's a necessity.

rimming promotes disease

Does that mean we should, for spiritual reasons, bring the anus and mouth together, as people do during oral-anal contact, so-called rimming?

No.

At that point the entire yin-yang enterprise collapses and becomes absurd.

Because, for one thing, when we bring mouth and anus together, we promote disease.

Just as we do when we bring penis and anus together.

anal penetration promotes disease

And that's not surprising.

Because, unlike the vagina, the anus did not evolve, nor was it designed, to be penetrated.

An anus is not a vagina -- it's not, if we're going to use these terms, *authentically* yin.

A vagina is, certainly, yin.

But not an anus.

And that's what this debate is about.

Do gay and bi men have a right to sex which is mutually and simultaneously genital?

Or are they condemned, in a futile pursuit of a hetero model, to an act which is forever unequal, brutish, dirty, and deadly?

And re-framing the debate in terms of yang-yin does not change that question.

The yang-yin dichotomy works, to a certain extent, when talking about penis and vagina because that dichotomy assumes that underlying the division there is an essential unity.

And that's true of penis-vagina.

Morphologically, as I discuss in What Sex Is, the tissues of the penis and vagina are the same -- erectile, and richly sensorially endowed.

The Equivalent Morphology of the Male and Female Genitals


erectile tissues are found in the penis

which is richly endowed with sensory nerve endings

the glans penis is particularly sensitive
while the skin of the scrotum is very sensitive


erectile tissues are found in the clitoris and around the entrance to the vagina
which is richly endowed with sensory nerve endings

the glans clitoris is particularly sensitive
while the lining of the vagina is morphologically equivalent to the skin of the scrotum

So while the penis inserts and the vagina receives, while the penis is "active" and the vagina "passive," they're united by morphology, and their differences express an underlying unity of tissue.

That is NOT true, however, of the tissues of the anus.

There's no genital tissue, no erectile tissue in the anus.

It's solely an organ of fecal excretion.

Furthermore, we don't require of hetero couples that the gals don strap-ons and penetrate their hubbies before we proclaim that they're spiritually balanced.

Why then should we require this of gay men?

Again, the error being made -- and it's a vulgar error, vulgar in the sense of popular and unthinking -- is that sex between men must follow a hetero model.

Without truly understanding what sex between a man and a woman is.

Sure, it's penetrative.

But above all, it's genital.

A Man and a Woman

When a man and a woman have penile-vaginal sex, the intense pleasure in the act results not from penetration per se, but from genital rubbing -- to repeat, it is mutual genital rubbing which produces the intense mutual pleasure of penile-vaginal sex.


Moreover, a significant portion of that pleasure comes from the man rubbing his phallus against the woman's engorged clitoris, part of which emerges from the surrounding tissue to form a glans, and all of which is the morphological equivalent of his phallus.

In addition to those erectile tissues in the clitoris, there are erectile tissues located around the vaginal entrance, which are also morphologically equivalent to those of the penis.

These erectile tissues in the clitoris and vaginal entrance are richly supplied with sensory nerve fibers.

During penile-vaginal sex, it is the rubbing of these genital tissues in both the man and woman which creates pleasure.

Penetration is incidental to sexual pleasure, and though necessary for procreation, sexual pleasure derives not from penetration per se but from the rubbing of the penis against the clitoral tissues and those near the surface of the vagina.

And although the position of their bodies and the male's greater physical strength may suggest that the man is dominating the woman, in reality penile-vaginal sex is meant to be and usually is a co-operative act, a genital and spiritual union, in which each partner experiences intense genital pleasure based morphologically on erectile tissue, and in which each seeks to augment both their pleasure and that of their partner through maximizing the sensations generated by genital rubbing.


A Man and a Man

In the case of two men, the erectile tissues are those of their phalluses -- cocks, dicks, and cranks.

Once again, the erectile tissues of the penis are morphologically equivalent to those of the clitoris and entrance to the vagina.

The glans penis and the glans clitoris are morphologically identical, and for that reason are the most sensitive part of the genitals in both men and women.

To repeat, in both men and women, those erectile tissues are morphologically identical, consisting of cavernous tissues that become engorged with blood and which are richly supplied with exquisitely sensitive sensory nerve endings.

In fact, says biologist Sensei Patrick, "If you turn a woman's squirrel inside out, you essentially have a crank."


got squirrel?
no prob dudes
you got each other

And that's right.

Because the genital tissues of the male and female are morphologically equivalent.

So when you rub cocks, morphologically you're doing the same thing, you're experiencing the same sort of sensorially intense and super pleasurable genital connection, as when a man and a woman connect through their genitals - cock, clit, and vagina.

You're connecting and rubbing your sensorily rich erectile tissues with those of another person -- someone you desire and love.

Not only that, but there's one spot on your dick which is particularly sensitive and which gets particularly stimulated during cock2cock sex -- it's called the frenulum.

The frenulum is the bundled-nerve area just under the glans which is so sensitive in most guys that continued stimulation there can cause orgasm.

For guys in C2C sex, the sensuous and even rough rubbing of cocks causes this super-sensitive nerve bundle to be super-stimulated as a partner's tip glides and probes over the area. That means that in addition to the glans itself, the most sensitive part of the penis is stimulated during phallic mating.

So one of the prime reasons the C2C orgasm is so intense between buds is that they experience an increased stimulation right where the penis is super-sensitive.

And men know that instinctively. Most guys report that the first time they went cock2cock the other guy instinctively sought out and located their frenulum with his own cockhead----because that's where it felt really great for him too.

The frenulum. The natural good spot. In most cock2cock pics you can see that the guys are instinctively bringing those portions of their cocks together.


So: sex is about genitals.

And for the vast majority of the world's people -- for 99.99999% of its humanity -- if it's not genital, it's not sex.

To repeat: If it's not genital, it's not sex.

The essence of heterosex, as it is the essence of homosex, is its genitality -- it's mutual genitality.


Mutual Genitality
The Essence of HeteroSex The Essence of HomoSex

Take that away, and it's no longer sex.

No matter what these analist fools and buttboy buffoons may say.

They cannot have it both ways.

If Frot is a valid expression of male-male sexuality, then anal is not.

Because Frot is about genitals, and manhood, and at the center of Frot is the proposition that sex between men is about sex between their genital organs -- what Don Frazer calls "genital mating: the mating of their male anatomy" -- and thus their manhood.

When penis and testicles are joined: a quintessentially male intercourse

Here's what Don says, in men who like to have sex with men and Ways of Making Love, about true male coupling:

"We love our maleness, and that of our partners."

I can't think of anything that describes true homosex better, or indicates clearly how buddies can experience that SHARED masculinity through genital/genital coupling.

When penis and testicles are joined, it is a quintessentially MALE intercourse, with sexual "communion" felt by both partners directly through their cocks, and being stimulated by totally masculine contact. No feminization, no penetration, only true male/male SHARED excitement. Better still, partners achieve a natural, fully male union when they climax as MEN, offering up their semen as tribute to each other's masculinity. A unique combo of strength and tenderness at the same time.

Nothing more beautifully can describe how "we love our maleness, and that of our partners."

And most "gay" guys are just regular-guys seeking union with other regular-guy types, not the femme/butch stereotypes we've all seen in bars, etc.

Lets continue to define ourselves as males, so everyone knows where we stand.

The point being that simply being "anti" something (such as anti-anal) out there in the trenches of misery and self loathing that often characterize "gay" (non-sequitur) society is not enough. Here on this forum, we proudly proclaim our maleness and the beauty of sharing those fundamental masculine feelings with another through genital mating.

We are PRO cock-to-cock.....defiantly challenging the he/she culture by advocating the true homosexual union of male anatomy. Not as a substitute for penetration, but in fact the REAL THING.....the main event enabling male union in the most direct and intimate experience by joining cocks and balls and sharing the culmination of masculinity together as equals.

Those of us who KNOW what it's like need to put our feelings into words that can inspire those "real guys" out there who may have only an unfulfilled need and no idea how to share it. Yeah. When you feel your buddy cum with you it's special 'cause you're joining honestly as males.

It's the quintessential masculine experience that needs to be trumpeted for the beauty of it.

So, says Don, we're celebrating "the true homosexual union of male anatomy ... joining cocks and balls and sharing the culmination of masculinity together as equals."

And we're advocating the mating of the male genitals, of our manhood.

But anal penetration is not about genitals, and most certainly not about manhood.

Nor is anal about, as Don puts it, "joining honestly as males."

It's about anuses, and one man turning another into a pseudo-woman so he can get his rocks off.

That's not honest.

Nor is it noble, or decent, or caring.

And it will never be.


Dirt, Danger, and Degradation

Now: our new-age bunny accuses me of claiming that "anal is inherently disease-spreading, unnatural, and degrading."

Guess what?

Anal does spread disease, it is unnatural, and it's degrading too.

Let's start with disease.

Spreading disease

Every -- that's EVERY -- doctor, sex educator, and safer-sex educator emphasizes that anal penetration is the highest risk "sex" act two people can perform.

HIGHEST RISK.

They're talking about risk of disease.

Now, my pseudo-spiritual pseudo-friend says, yes, but it's not *inherently* disease-spreading.

What nonsense.

Of course it is.

The anus was not designed to be penetrated.

When you penetrate it, you damage it, and in so doing you expose the blood of the penetrated partner to whatever's in his anal canal and in or on your dick; you expose your dick -- and if you have foreskin, this is a huge problem -- to whatever's in his anal canal, in his rectal secretions, and in his blood; and you get shit on your dick which then travels with your dick outside of the bottom's anus and into the great wide world.

And that damage pertains be it with dick, dildo, or digit.

Here's what ano-rectal surgeon Dr. Stephen Goldstone of The Advocate and GayHealth.com says about anal and risk:

Anal sex is the highest risk sex act [sic] that men who have sex with men can perform. Virtually every STD can pass between partners during anal sex, and for most, penetration isn't necessary and a condom may not protect you. STDs are harder to diagnose when they are inside your anal canal and not on your penis. STDs commonly passed during anal sex include: HIV, herpes simplex, gonorrhea, syphilis, molluscum contagiosum, crabs, human papillomavirus (HPV), hepatitis, and chlamydia. [5]

"Not inherently disease-spreading."

Among sex acts, anal penetration *defines* disease-spreading.

And no amount of new-age nonsense and solipsistic pseudo-spiritual sophistry will change that fact.

Truth is, prior to the 1970s, there was no difference between the health of gay men and straight men.

By 1980 -- that is to say, five years after the onset of what I've called "the great anal penetration frenzy" -- the gay male community had undergone successive epidemics of crabs, scabies, syphilis, gonorrhea, HPV, herpes, hepatitis, and HIV.

Plus all the oral-anally-vectored diseases such as amoebiasis and giardiasis.

HIV prevalence among American gay men is 25%, higher than most African countries.

And where are we today?

HIV prevalence among American gay men is 25% -- that's higher than in most sub-Saharan African countries. [6]

In point of fact, if you take the average of all sub-Saharan African countries, HIV prevalence is only 7.4%. [7]

Which means that HIV prevalence among gay men in America is more than three times (3X!) as great as among people in the poorest, and worst medically served, continent on earth.

That's not all.

Sixty-seven percent (67%!) of gay men are infected with anal HPV -- which causes anal cancer.

That includes a whopping 95% of all HIV+ gay guys [8] and 57% of all HIV negative men. [9]

The risk factor for the negative guys is engaging in receptive anal penetration.

HPV prevalence in Nigerian women, by contrast, is only 26%. [10]

Again, American gay men, most of whom are by global standards fantastically wealthy, far outstrip the poorest of the poor when it comes to sexually transmitted disease.

Now we're told that "the rate of antibiotic resistance among men engaging in homosexual activity is 23.8% -- eight times the rate in heterosexuals." [11]

23.8% -- that's an amazing figure.

30 years ago, if you got gonorrhea, it could be easily treated.

Now, chances are one in four that if you get gonorrhea from a gay man, it will be an antibiotic resistant strain.

And this is not a new story.

Almost four years ago -- in February of 2002 -- I wrote about a gay man who'd picked up a very dangerous strain of gonorrhea and had to be treated in hospital:

In a recent 365Gay column, safer sex educator James Murray related the frightening story of a man who had contracted gonorrhea anally. The gonorrhea got into his bloodstream and he required intravenous treatments in a hospital. [12]

"a man who had contracted gonorrhea anally"

No surprise there.

Anal penetration is dangerous.

It will always be dangerous, because the anatomy and physiology of the anus and rectum make it so.

Unnatural

"Not inherently unnatural."

What on earth does that mean?

If anal penetration is not inherently unnatural -- NOTHING is inherently unnatural.

Swallowing toads, drinking motor oil, gouging out your eyes -- not unnatural either.

The level of danger associated with anal penetration -- which is far higher than that of penile-vaginal sex -- tells you that the anus did not evolve nor was it designed to be penetrated.

What's more, anal penetration is a learned behavior.

By definition, that makes it unnatural.

Guys don't have to learn how to rub cocks.

They have to be taught how to do anal.

Indeed, there are entire books -- The Joy [sic] of Gay [sic] Sex [sic] -- and websites -- Gay Health [sic] dot com -- which have been created to do just that.

Look at the long list of instructions ano-rectal surgeon Dr. Stephen Goldstone of GayHealth gives on how to do anal.

Technique

Sex between men; sex between women and men: Because of the high risk of passing STDs during anal sex and foreplay, place a condom on your partner as soon as his penis is going to come in close contact with your anal area -- even if he isn't going to penetrate you. Put a lot of lubricant on your partner's condom-covered penis and on the outside of your anus. Beware of the "two finger stretch" to get ready for him because this can tear your sphincter muscles easier than his penis. ...As soon as the head of his penis pushes against your anus, the internal and external sphincter muscles contract. You will feel a sharp pain. Stay there! Within 30 to 60 seconds your muscles will relax. You can then safely sit the rest of the way down on him. Move up and down a few times and by then your muscles will be sufficiently relaxed so you can go to any position you want. Do not stimulate your penis while you are trying to take your partner. This also sets up a strong reflex that contracts your sphincter muscles even tighter.

...

Hygiene

No matter how hard you try, your anus will always be an anus. You can't sterilize it. You can, however, gently wash the outer skin with a moist cloth or pad (try Tucks) to remove any fecal residue stuck to your skin. Avoid wet toilet paper or tissues because they flake and leave behind annoying bits of paper. If necessary, try to move your bowels prior to sex. I do not advise enemas or douching, which may increase the risk of HIV transmission. Enemas -- even if they are just plain water -- irritate the lining of your colon and make it easier for HIV to get in or out. The motion of the sex toy, your partner's hand or penis also stimulates colon contractions. Frequently you won't evacuate the entire liquid enema before sex, and the remainder is forced out during sex by increased colon contractions, making a bigger mess than the one you took the enema to avoid.

...

Complications

Bleeding: most often from a hemorrhoid of fissure (tear). If you see blood, stop. Most often the bleeding stops quickly. Do not have anal sex again until you stop bleeding with bowel movements. If you have hemorrhoids, experiment with different positions to see if you can tolerate one better than the other. Many men find that when the receptive partner is on his stomach, his hemorrhoids experience less swelling and bleeding.

Pain: Pain during anal sex most often results from your sphincter muscles going into spasm or from a tear. You can tear the sphincters or your delicate anal lining (a fissure). If it hurts, stop anal sex. Try treating your fissure conservatively with stool softeners, sitz baths (warm soaks) and hold off having sex until you are healed. STDs can often be present with pain in your anal area but the pain usually doesn't begin until several days after sex. Pain that begins during or immediately after sex usually results from a fissure or sphincter injury.

Perforation: A true tear through your colon wall is a very rare complication of anal sex. A penis is pliable and does not have the strength to rupture your colon. A toy, on the other hand, can cause serious damage - especially if it is long. Your colon makes a sharp bend to the left, approximately eight inches up. A penis can bang against this turn and you might notice a sharp pain in the pit of your stomach. It usually won't push through. A hard toy can push through and when it does, you are in a life and death situation. You feel intense pain and must get right to a hospital. Delay and the bacteria can spread throughout your abdomen. This type of infection (peritonitis) can take your life.

Incontinence: Incontinence is an inability to control your bowels or gas. If your anal sex is pain free, your muscles should be fine and you don't have to worry about this dreaded complication. Those who enjoy fisting or large toys can permanently overstretch their sphincters and are at increased risk for incontinence in later life.

STDs: Anal sex is the highest risk sex act that men who have sex with men can perform. Virtually every STD can pass between partners during anal sex, and for most, penetration isn't necessary and a condom may not protect you. STDs are harder to diagnose when they are inside your anal canal and not on your penis. STDs commonly passed during anal sex include: HIV, herpes simplex, gonorrhea, syphilis, molluscum contagiosum, crabs, human papillomavirus (HPV), hepatitis, and chlamydia. MEN: Put a condom on early -- as soon as you anticipate contact between the anus and penis. Remember that fingers and toys used during foreplay can also carry STDs between partners. A condom doesn't cover the base of your partner's shaft, his scrotum or pubic hair -- these are all places where STDs can lurk or land.

HIV Risk

Anal sex is the highest risk sex act two men can perform.

This is also true for a woman if she's the anal receptive partner with a man. Your risk increases dramatically in proportion to the number or partners you have and if your sex is unprotected (whether you are inserting or receiving). One medical study published in 1987 found that anal sex with one partner increased your chances of catching HIV by three times -- five or more partners increased it 18 times. [13]

[emphases mine]

Technique. Hygiene. Complications. Perforation. Pain. Incontinence. STDs. HIV risk.

How could an act which is natural be fraught with so many dangers?

That defies evolution.

Beyond, however, the question of learning, is the question of whether it can ever be "natural" for a human being to seek contact with another's anus and fecal matter.

The answer is NO -- of course not.

That's not a natural act.

As Frot man Mark says:

They don't call your ass a "shithole" for nothing. Would you stick your finger in a pile of shit? Would you rub your cock in a pile of shit? Would you lick a pile of shit? But that's what the butt boys are doing when you come right down to it. And claiming it is erotic. Right.

But think about it---people can "eroticize" anything. How many kids imagine that licking a filthy smelly butthole is sexy? But there are many gay men into this. (That's one thing even I have not tried---yuck!) Are they wired to like this? How about getting an arm up your ass?

How bout it yin-yang bros?

Is getting an arm up your ass an inherently natural act?

Or licking someone else's butthole?

"Filthy smelly butthole," as Mark correctly characterizes it.

Who on earth are you kidding?

As Warrior Chris says:

Would you stick your penis in a car exhaust pipe? A littered hole in the ground? or in a moldy fungus-growing loaf of bread perhaps? Of course not, but all of the above are much more of a cleaner situation than inserting your cock in an ass, AND SAFER...

Anal is an unnatural act.

And not only is it unnatural, it's

Degrading

It's degrading to have contact with shit.

That's how we define degrading.

To be submerged in feces and filth.

Of course that's degrading.

The only way analists can avoid that conclusion is by re-defining and in the process completely devaluing the term "degrading."

They can say, for example, that degrading means being bathed in ambrosia.

At which point, the term degrading no longer has meaning.

That's what happens to language in Orwell's 1984 -- it loses its meaning under the assault of an irrational orthodoxy.

And that's what's going on with the buttboyz.

In the name of analism, spreading disease isn't disease-spreading, unnatural isn't unnatural, and degrading isn't degrading.

What sort of insanity, and foolishness, and stupidity, would seek to protect and prop up this self-destructive, self-loathing behavior, which has cost hundreds of thousands -- probably millions -- of gay and bi male lives.

It's SICKENING that anyone would do that.

But to do it in the name of advancing tolerance for Frot -- is particularly obscene.

A New Way

We offer men a NEW way -- not more of the old, not more of the same.

And our offer is based on a completely sound analysis of what sex is, and what anal penetration is not.

Sex is about genitals.

Which means that:

SEX BETWEEN MEN IS ABOUT PHALLUSES.


genital - genital sex
two erect cocks
engorged with blood
richly supplied with sensory nerve fibers
rubbing for maximum pleasure


That's WHAT SEX IS.

The Ultimate Defeat: In this collage by Sensei Patrick, promiscuity, effeminacy, degradation, and disease are imposed by the analist sex police -- enforcers of the Buttfuck Dictatorship's cultural norms

Anal penetration is NOT sex.

It is, rather, a bizarre and fetishistic behavior which substitutes the inherently unnatural, degrading, and disease-spreading practices of analism for the natural, ennobling, and healthy act of phallic bonding.

That's the truth.

Like our new-age bunny, anal penetration is a fraud and a sham, and if the buttboyz insist on calling it sex, they should call it what it is: shit sex, pain sex, disease sex, and death sex.

Any gay man who would defend this act, in the face of the ongoing death, degradation, and dysfunction it has spread through our community, is a traitor to homosex -- and should be treated as such.

Seeing what's in front of your nose

Orwell warned that "To see what is in front of one's nose requires a constant struggle."

And, he went on to say,

We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue. And then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield. [14]

"Believing things which we know to be untrue." -- That is precisely what the buttboyz are doing when they say anal is NOT inherently disease-spreading.

What a disgusting and nauseating lie.

"And then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts."

Exactly.

That's the only way they can claim that anal is not inherently disease-spreading.

Or un-natural.

Or degrading.

By twisting the facts.

And changing the definitions.

A totally unnatural and learned behavior -- anal penetration -- now becomes "natural."

How?

How could it ever be natural to get fucked up the ass?

That's not what the ass is there for.

Nor can it ever be natural to stick your dick in a pile of shit.

That's not what your dick is for.

And a totally degrading and demeaning behavior is now somehow to be associated with decency and caring and nobility and strength.

NO.

NO.

NO.

That's just more ANALIST BULLSHIT.

A decent, caring, strong, not to say noble, man, does NOT fuck another man in the ass.

Analism has completely twisted the definition of what's normal, natural, and decent, sexually, between men.

We will not let that stand.

Not now.

Not ever.

The Warrior Way: Strong, noble, decent, and caring


Members of the Sacred Band of Thebes are decorated after the battle of Leuctra.
Illustration by Angus McBride

Once again, let's consider the way our pseudo-spiritual blogger ended his column:

The Man2Man Alliance gives a provocative introduction to men with a new vision of sex, a vision in tune with the historical emphasis on manly love between heroes and warriors. They're into man on man mating, not just the rubbing of genitalia. And they're into love between men who are strong, noble, decent, and caring. These are ideas whose time has come.

"Strong, noble, decent, and caring"

He's right that those are valuable character traits.

But I and my fellow Frot men did not simply pull these words, and these traits, out of the air.

Rather, they are what we have come to see, over the last five years, as inherent and intrinsic in a Phallus-centered man2man practice which prizes Fidelity and celebrates Masculinity.

These attributes are intertwined and inter-related.

And over the last five years I've developed a number of distinctive logos to express that relationship:






You cannot simply take those words or those traits and paste them onto anal and analists.

That doesn't work now and cannot ever work.

For just as Fidelity and Masculinity are intrinsic to Frot, so effeminacy and promiscuity are intrinsic to the false practice known as anal.

APED: Anal, Promiscuity, Effeminacy, and The Denial of Degradation

As I discuss in Part 3 of an anus is not a vagina, there's an inter-relationship between and among anal penetration, effeminacy, and gay male promiscuity.

This is a notion which is anathema to the gay male/analist leadership and its gender feminist allies.

Nevertheless, this is how it works:

As sexually dimorphic beings, we conceive of men as penetrative and women as being penetrated.

This is not simply a function of culture.

Rather, it's a function of our most basic biology, and that's how we experience it.

On a visceral, subconscious, and indeed inchoate level.

When a man is penetrated, the act, he feels, turns him into a pseudo-woman.

And he is effeminized by it.

This point the gay leadership will not accept.

They insist that men experience penetration as degrading only because a patriarchal culture tells them it is, and that with enough education or what is really indoctrination -- and at this point, the AIDS Service Organizations (ASOs) and their "safer-sex" educators are the prime agents of that propaganda -- a man will understand that it's not intrinsically degrading to be penetrated.

That is nonsense.

It might not be nonsense if human sexuality was purely a function of culture.

But human sexuality is not purely a function of culture -- it's primarily a function of biology.

Of course culture shapes some of our expression of that biology.

But it cannot change the underlying biology, nor the essentially dualistic nature of the process.

And for that reason, men experience penetration as degrading.

artifacts of buttfuck culture

A tanned top fucks a pale, effeminized bottom, his fists clenched and face distorted with pain; surrounding them are tee-shirts sold on gay.com, reading "pitcher, catcher, tight end, wide receiver." The catalog copy boasts, "As seen on TV's 'Queer As Folk.' The Catcher shirt is married in spirit to the Pitcher shirt. Great athletic mesh sports design with an underlying dirty and direct message!...a subtle [sic] and naughty message... a subtle filthy message for bros in the know." At the bottom is the ultimate analist self-defining tee: PIG.

That's why, in the ancient world, and no doubt in many places still in the contemporary world, victorious soldiers raped their male prisoners -- to degrade and humiliate them.

What happens among contemporary gay men, though, is in some ways worse, since those gay men are taught to be in denial about what has actually happened.

The reality of the experience, however, breaks through in effeminacy, in self-loathing language, and in self-destructive behavior.

Thus it's common, as we've discussed, for anally receptive men to refer to themselves as mancunts, bottombitches, and pussyboys -- and -- most significantly -- as sluts and whores.

Sluts and whores of course are promiscuous women.

And that's the role these men assume.

So: anal penetration leads to effeminization which leads to promiscuity which leads to more anal penetration.


And so it goes.

Over time, the behaviors feed into and reinforce each other.

Effeminacy, for example, is both consequent to and facilitates anal penetration.

While a degraded, effeminate self-image leads to more promiscuity.


Were the leadership correct that men can be taught to accept penetration and not experience it as being in variance with their masculinity -- we would not see this process.

But men cannot be taught that.

We've had thirty years, after all, of analist propaganda about the allegedly masculine glories of being penetrated.

And still anally-receptive men refer to themselves as bottom bitches and sluts and whores.

It's more than apparent, after three decades of this particular social experiment, that anal penetration is, for a man as for a woman, intrinsically degrading.

Masculinity and aggression

How about the opposite -- does a man have to penetrate in order to retain his sense of being a man?

No.

Masculinity is biologically innate.

And because masculinity is innate, gay-identified Frot men retain their masculinity without penetrating men or women; that is to say, they experience themselves -- and those who know them experience them -- as masculine.

And they are certainly not effeminized.

Which is not surprising.

Because by not allowing themselves to be penetrated, they keep themselves completely out of the penetration, effeminization, promiscuity loop.

Of course many Frot men are not gay-identified but are rather bisexual and/or straight-identified; these men have usually had an extensive history of penile-vaginal sexual intercourse, and have a strong masculine identification.

But even gay-identified Frot men like myself, with little or no experience of penile-vaginal sex, retain our masculinity.

It's not necessary, then, for men to penetrate in order to have a masculine identity.

Because that masculine identity is part of their biological make-up -- literally, their genetic code.

But being penetrated is without question destructive of masculinity.

In addition, many Frot men, though not all, and independent of "sexual orientation," are into the more combative and aggressive expressions of Frot; and are into actual combat sports such as martial arts or wrestling as well.


wrestling often has an implicit frot component


as does jiu jitsu


as does UFC-style grappling


as does less formal fighting




which in frot is openly expressed







Thus, it's not surprising that many Frot men have wrestling fantasies, engage in combat sports, and seek to incorporate some element of those experiences into their sexual lives.

However, and because there's some confusion on this point, the extent of the aggression preceding and during sex should not be overstated. When we say "aggression," we're referring to typically male rough-housing and good-natured wrestling which may precede the actual Frot, and some mild roughness attendant upon male muscularity and male-male sexuality during sex itself.

We do *not* mean any expression of dominance or submission, or any infliction of pain.

Virtually no Frot men are interested in "dom/sub" or sado-masochistic practices.

But many are interested in, to some degree, combining fighting and sex.

In the Alliance, we conceptualize that desire as "natural male sex aggression":

Natural male sex aggression

is our Man2Man Alliance phrase for the hormonally-mediated tendency of males to

  • behave at once aggressively and erotically towards other males;
  • become sexually aroused by fighting; and,
  • seek to in some way combine fighting and sex.

In the male, both sex and aggression are mediated by testosterone, and the two frequently feed upon each other.

A victorious boxer; his sperm count is up

For example, it's been demonstrated that winning a fight raises the victor's sperm count.

And that successful completion of a military exercise raises testosterone levels in all soldiers in the winning squad.

So fighting both requires and often raises testosterone, and higher levels of testosterone increase sex drive.

Many other typically male activities, such as rough-housing and "horsing around," raise testosterone levels as well, and it can be argued that much stereotypically male activity, particularly in groups, has the function of raising testosterone.


more boxers: their testosterone is way up

Thus men are frequently involved in activities, including various forms of fighting, which increase testosterone levels; and it's not surprising that men frequently associate, in varying degree, fighting and sex.

Among Frot men, that association commonly manifests as an abiding interest in myth and superheroes; fantasies about combining fighting and Frot; and various practices which do just that.

A common "Fighting and Frot" fantasy imagines two warriors, two mythic figures, or two comic book superheroes, meeting in battle, wrestling or otherwise fighting in a way which progresses to cock combat, and finally, at the moment when, as Mart Finn has said, "fighting cocks become mating cocks," bonding sexually, emotionally, and spiritually through Frot.

Thus Frot men frequently combine a combat scenario with an extreme male-bonding scenario, in which fighting leads to passionate love-making and, ideally, a life-long union of warrior brothers and heroic lovers.

(For more about natural male sex aggression and the role of myth, see our very popular adult article Superheroes, Myths, and Wrestling Buddies, in our collection of autobiographical statements, Warriors Speak.)

In short, it's natural for men to be aggressive during sex, and crucial that both men have the ability to be equally aggressive.

Does that mild aggression play a role in our essentially masculine IDs?

Yes.

Men need to be, to some degree, aggressive, including sexually.

And there's no question that many Frot men get off on each other's aggression during Frot, and in particular on the sense of phallic fighting, which is heightened by the sensation of mutual phallic thrusting, even when there's no overt "cock combat."

Phallic Thrusting

Phallic thrusting is key to male sexuality.

*Mutual* phallic thrusting is key to the shared masculinity and shared masculine experience of Frot.

This is not complicated.

In anal penetration, there's an active and a passive partner: one masculine, the other pseudo-feminine.

In Frot, both men are equally active: both are equally masculine.

Both participate equally in the biologically-mandated phallic thrusting which is at the heart of male sexuality.

That shared thrusting, equally aggressive, equally combative, and equally male, is the masculine essence of Frot.

And that's the reason there's such a sharp cultural divide between Frot men and analists.

Because while both are "men who have sex with men," their mindsets, assumptions, and practice could not be less alike.

During anal penetration, the receptive partner ceases to be a man; and, over time, analism degrades his manhood.

In Frot, both men remain men throughout the experience; Frot *enhances* the masculinity of both partners.

That's why it's essential, in this culture war, for Frot men to defeat the intergendered, effeminist view of MSM.

Analist MSM take a literally perverse pride in the role reversals and effeminization of anal penetration.

Frot men totally reject effeminization and any notion of gender-bending.

Frot men are proud to be men -- they enjoy and indeed revel in their masculinity, and in their shared masculinity during Frot.

Here are five views of Frot by the noted Frot artist EROS V; notice how in each instance the experience is mutually genital and equally masculine for both partners:


Frot:
both men are being stimulated genitally
through their mutual phallic thrusting


Frot:
both men are being stimulated genitally
through their mutual phallic thrusting


Frot:
both men are being stimulated genitally
through their mutual phallic thrusting


Frot:
both men are being stimulated genitally
through their mutual phallic thrusting


Frot:
both men are being stimulated genitally
through their mutual phallic thrusting

Warrior Homosex is Heroic Homosex
Heroic Homosex is Warrior Homosex

So: The mutual, phallic, genitality of Frot; the shared aggression, expressed through mutual phallic thrusting, of Frot; and the mutual exaltation of masculinity inherent in Frot is what produces the character elements we associate with the fully-realized Frot man: strength, decency, nobility, and caring.

What does "nobility" mean in this context?

It means the ability to sacrifice oneself.

Nobility in that regard is another term for

Warrior Altruism

The warrior's willingness to give his life for his fellow warriors.

Warrior altruism is an integral part of the Warrior Ethos: courage, fidelity, self-sacrifice, and prowess in battle.

Warrior altruism is a particular manifestation of the trait sociobiologists call "reciprocal altruism," which can be described in somewhat simplified terms as: I'll do something for you if I'm relatively certain that you, at some point in the future, will do something for me.

Among those male-bonded groups of fighters we call warriors, reciprocal altruism takes an extreme, but very effective form: I'll die for you if you'll die for me.

The norm of warrior altruism, however, also manifests in non-lethal, non-combat, dyadic situations, and is what makes male-male couples who are emotionally and sexually faithful so powerful and so strongly bonded.

Because, ultimately, the men in these couples know they would die for each other.

Such bonds are honored in myth and epic -- Gilgamesh, The Iliad, The Celtic Tain; and in history -- David and Jonathan, Harmodius and Aristogeiton, the Sacred Band of Thebes, Alexander and Hephaestion.

See also Fidelity, Heroes, Heroic Homosex, Warrior Ethos, and Heroic Love.

Can we expect to see these attributes of decency, strength, caring, and nobility, in a man whose sexual life is spent in dominating, subjugating, and in fact brutally and thuggishly using his male partners as little more than sperm repositories?

Or in a man whose masculinity and genitality is steadily stripped from him in an act of debasement and effeminization which treats him as a pseudo-woman?

The answer in both cases is No.

The dysfunction that we see in so much of gay male life is a direct consequence of the centrality of anal penetration to gay male lives.

It is NOT possible, nor is it reasonable to believe, that the gay community can keep anal at the center of gay male practice and at the same time move that community in the direction which our gay spirituality guru says is needed:

The Man2Man Alliance gives a provocative introduction to men with a new vision of sex, a vision in tune with the historical emphasis on manly love between heroes and warriors. They're into man on man mating, not just the rubbing of genitalia. And they're into love between men who are strong, noble, decent, and caring. These are ideas whose time has come.

  • "Manly love between heroes and warriors," he says.

    Love between heroes and warriors cannot be expressed in acts of domination and submission.

    That's not how it works.

    You cannot effeminize a man and then expect him to fight at your side.

    And no warrior culture does so.

    Nor would a hero brutalize his lover.

    Heroic Love, properly defined, is love between equals -- and that means between men who elect to bond phallically, phallically and faithfully, through Frot.

  • "Man on man mating," he says, "not just the rubbing of genitalia."

    He's correct that true love between men, the mating of man with man, is about more than genitals.

    But, as we've seen, the form taken by the physical expression of that love matters.

    The mating of man with man must be expressed by the mating of the male genitalia, the mating of our mutual manhood.

    Just as the mating of man with woman is expressed through the mating of male and female genitalia, so must the mating of man with man be expressed through the mating of the male genitals, what Don Frazer calls a quintessentially male intercourse: the joining of penis and testicles.

    That conclusion is inescapable.

    The alternative is to perpetrate an erotic and affiliational fraud every time two men "have sex" by treating the anus as a counterfeit vagina and the rectum as an ersatz womb.

    The results of so doing are dehumanizing, devastating, and, ultimately, deadly, for both partners.

  • "Love between men who are strong, noble, decent, and caring."

    That is indeed what we seek.

    And it's no accident that it's the Frot Movement which calls for the cultivation of these traits.

    You cannot build a community on raunch, kink, promiscuity, and sleaze.

    It cannot be done.

    Yet that's what the gay male leadership, including guys like our spirituality guru, continue to want to do.

    That leadership is in denial about the realities of anal penetration: the dirt, the disease, the degradation.

    And a community cannot be built on denial.

We offer men a NEW way -- not more of the old, not more of the same.

We say that Heroic Homosex is Warrior Homosex; and that Warrior Homosex is Heroic Homosex.

If men are to regain their ancient and honorable identities as warriors, they must return to an Heroic concept of sex between men:

One which is indeed decent, caring, noble, and strong.

Only then will Men who Love Men realize the true power of that Love;

and become a Force for renewal and rebirth in the human community.

But for that to happen, men into Frot have to recognize the realities of analism, of analist doublethink and protective stupidity, and stand shoulder to shoulder against the foolish analist belief that "Ignorance is Strength."

It is not.

TRUTH is strength.

There's no ally more powerful than truth.

If Frot men will be true to themselves and to their practice, they will prevail.

FIGHT BACK.

SAVE YOUR LIFE.

Bill Weintraub

November 15, 2005

© All material Copyright 2005 - 2011 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.


Afterword

Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. -- Voltaire.

In Orwell's novel 1984, the Party demanded that citizens believe that war was peace, freedom slavery, and ignorance strength.

Just as analism demands that gay men believe that anal penetration is not inherently disease spreading, unnatural, or degrading.

And just as some analists are now demanding that we believe that Frot and anal are essentially equal.

None of which is true.

Frot and anal are not the same, nor can they comfortably co-exist.

The practices known to us as Frot and anal are the result of two highly conflicting views of the nature of sex and the nature of men who have sex with men.

They cannot both be simultaneously correct, and they are not.

The analysis of Frot activists like myself about the nature of sex -- it is genital; and that of men who have sex with men -- they are men -- is correct.

And we are correct about the nature of anal penetration: that it is inherently disease-spreading, unnatural and degrading.

Of course anal spreads disease.

That's why the Surgeon General has said, "Condoms provide some protection, but anal intercourse is simply too dangerous to practice." [16]

And of course anal is unnatural and degrading.

In 1984, Orwell says that "The essence of oligarchical rule is not father-to-son inheritance, but the persistence of a certain world-view and a certain way of life, imposed by the dead upon the living." [17]

I've described elsewhere [18] how the AIDS crisis has, ironically, resulted in the perpetuation of the anal hegemony.

In a very real sense, "a certain world-view and a certain way of life," namely analism, is being imposed by our AIDS dead upon the living.

That must stop.

As must the constant debasement of language under which analism thrives.

Ignorance is NOT strength.

Pretending that an anus is a vagina, that men who have sex with men are women, that the anus is not uniquely vulnerable when penetrated, and that men can be penetrated anally without being degraded, has not made the gay male community stronger.

To the contrary.

These false and indeed nonsensical beliefs have weakened the community and made it increasingly dysfunctional.

It's more than time that the community recognized these truths: that sex is about genitals; that men who have sex with men are MEN; and that the only true sex between men therefore is genital mating, that is, penile-penile rubbing: Phallic Bonding through Frot.

And we need also to recognize that it's good for men to be Masculine; and that Fidelity is the gold standard in human relationships and should be the gold standard therefore of male-male relationships too.

Recognizing these truths, The Man2Man Alliance will go forward with our work of creating an m2m culture in which Phallus-to-Phallus is celebrated, Masculinity honored, and Fidelity cherished.

Bill Weintraub

November 15, 2005

© All material Copyright 2005 - 2011 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.



NOTES

1. Orwell, G. (1949). 1984. London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc, p. 69. The page numbers refer to the Signet Classic edition of 1961.

2. Orwell, p. 176.

3. Orwell, p. 175.

4. Indeed, this is one of the most striking aspects of analist Dr. Stephen Goldstone's writing about anal "sex": he states, in a number of places, that "an anus is not a vagina," and then works to facilitate men treating it as such.

See, for example, Goldstone, S. (2003, July 25). Is a fissure causing my pain during anal sex? GayHealth.com.

5. Goldstone, S. Anal sex. GayHealth.com website. Not dated.

6. Sifakis, et al. (2005, June 24). Report of the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports.

7. UNAIDS. (2004). Regional HIV and AIDS estimates, end 2004.

8. Chin-Hong PV et al. (2005). Age-related prevalence of anal cancer precursors in homosexual men: the EXPLORE study. J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 896-905, 2005.

9. Chin-Hong PV et al. (2004). Age-specific prevalence of anal human papillomavirus infection in HIV-negative sexually active men who have sex with men: the EXPLORE study. J Infect Dis 190 (on-line edition), 2004.

10. Clifford GM, Gallus S, Herrero R et al. Worldwide distribution of human papillomavirus types in cytologically normal women in the International Agency for Research on Cancer HPV prevalence surveys: a pooled analysis. The Lancet. 2005. Early online publication August 16, 2005.

See this abstract: HPV prevalence in Nigerian women.

11. Maugh, TH. (2005, November 9). Gay sex called key to rise in syphilis.

12. Weintraub, B. (2002, February 23). Risk Reduction or Cultural Change? Available on The Man2Man Alliance.

13. Goldstone, S. Anal sex. GayHealth.com website. Not dated.

14. Orwell, George. In Front of Your Nose, 1945-1950 (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell). Edited by Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus. Nonpareil: 2000.

15. Tarver, Chuck. Fighting the Conformity That Kills. (2003, August). Paper presented at the Black Gay Research Summit.

16. Food and Drug Administration. (2005, July). Are condoms strong enough for anal intercourse?

17. Orwell. 1984, p. 173.

18. See Weintraub, B. (2004, February 5). Multipartnered Pansexualism or Heroic Love for a full discussion of the way AIDS prevention programs came to reinforce the dominant culture of anal penetration.

Available on The Man2Man Alliance.


For more on sexual dimorphism, see Buss, D. M. (1994). The strategies of human mating. American Scientist 82(3):238-239. See also Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human innate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12:1-49.

And: Konner, M. (1982). The Tangled Wing: Biological Constraints on the Human Spirit. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, p. 109.

Also: For a discussion of reciprocal altruism and its role in male-bonding, see Ghiglieri, MP. (1999). The Dark Side of Man: Tracing the Origins of Male Violence. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus, pp 186-190.


For more about the health risks to heterosexuals of anal penetration, see Halperin, DT. (1999, December). Heterosexual anal intercourse: prevalence, cultural factors, and HIV infection and other health risks, part I. AIDS Patient Care 13 (12):717-730.

And: Halperin, DT, Shiboski, SC, Palefsky, JM, and Padian, N. (2002) High level of HIV infection from anal intercourse: a neglected risk factor in heterosexual AIDS prevention. Poster presentation at the 2002 XIV International AIDS Conference in Barcelona.


For the mechanical damage caused by anal penetration, see Miles, AJG, et al. (1993, March). Effect of anoreceptive intercourse on anorectal function. J of R Soc of Med. 86:144-147.

For the dangers to the insertive partner of anal penetration, see Zuckerman, RA, Whittington, LH, Celum, CL, et al. (2004, July 1). Higher Concentration of HIV RNA in Rectal Mucosa Secretions than in Blood and Seminal Plasma, among Men Who Have Sex with Men, Independent of Antiretroviral Therapy. J of Inf Dis 190 (1): 156-162.


For a full discussion of the dangers inherent in sexual promiscuity, readers are referred to our Man2Man Alliance policy paper Why Be Faithful?

For the value of Fidelity for men, see Whitehead, BD and Popenoe, D. (2004, July). The State of Our Unions 2004 / Essay: The Marrying Kind: Which Men Marry and Why. Rutgers University.


For the role of "safer-sex" campaigns in increasing HIV prevalence, see Richens, J., Imrie, J., & Weiss, H. (2003). Sex and death: why does HIV continue to spread when so many people know about the risks? J. of R. Statist Soc A 2003;166, 207-215.


For the dangers of anal-oral "sex" see Rompalo, A. (1990, November). Sexually transmitted causes of gastrointestinal symptoms in homosexual men. Medical Clinics of North America. 74(6):1633-1645.


For the way in which gay culture created the AIDS epidemic, see Rotello, Gabriel. (1998). Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men. New York: Plume.


For the limited efficacy of condoms, see Weller S, Davis, K. Condom effectiveness in reducing heterosexual HIV transmission (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1 2003. Oxford: Update Software.

And: Zenilman, J.M., Weisman, C.S., Rompalo, A.M., Ellish, N., Upchurch, D.M., Hook E.W. 3rd et al. (1995). Condom use to prevent incident STDs: the validity of self-reported condom use. Sex. Transm. Dis.; 22,15-21.


To understand the parallels between analist denigration of men who don't do anal, and the heterosexual denigration of homosexuals, see Weintraub, B. (1999, December). Hyacinthine love, or some thoughts on cock-rubbing and the cultural tyranny of butt-fucking; and Weintraub, B. (2000, November). Frot: the next sexual revolution. Both are available on The Man2ManAlliance website.


Also of interest:

Weintraub, B. (2003, February). Biological Imperative or Cultural Dictate? Bug-chasing, Bare-backing, and the Safer Sex Establishment. On The Man2Man Alliance.

Weintraub, B. (2000, October). The Buttfuck Dictatorship available on The Man2Man Alliance.

Weintraub, B. (2002, February 16). Do gay men have to be promiscuous?. 365Gay.com. Available on The Man2Man Alliance.

Weintraub, B. (2001, August). Heroic Homosex: Toward a New Concept of M2M. On The Man2Man Alliance.


See Weintraub, B. (2004, February 5). Multipartnered Pansexualism or Heroic Love for a selection of representative cultural messages from the dominant culture of anal penetration.


For an example of the sort of treatment Frot Movement ideas receive in the gay male press, see Weintraub, B. (2005, September). Walter Odets, the sex police, and the big lie, where I look more deeply at the congruities between analist cant and totalitarian propaganda.

For further discussion of press censorship of my and other Alliance work, see the introductory notes to the articles under Weintraub, B. (2000, November 6), Frot: The Next Sexual Revolution.


Finally, for an appreciation of the spiritual aspects of the phallus, see Danielou, Alain. The Phallus: Sacred Symbol of Male Creative Power. (1995). Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions. Danielou's introductory words are worth noting:

It is only when the penis stands up straight that it emits semen, the source of life. It is then called the phallus, and has been considered, since earliest prehistory, the image of the creative principle, a symbol of the process by which the Supreme Being procreates the Universe.

This is not the case of a symbol plucked at random but the recognition of the continuity of the process that links all the various levels of manifestation, according to cosmological theory. The phallus is really the image of the creator in mankind, and we rediscover the worship of it at the origin of every religion.

A source of pleasure, the phallus evokes divine bliss, the Being of Joy. Within the microcosm of the living being it represents the progenitor, which is always present in its work.

Contempt for this sacred emblem, as well as degradation and debasement of it, pushes man from the divine reality. It provokes the anger of the gods and leads to the decline of the species. The man who scorns the very symbol of the life principle abandons his kind to the powers of death.


"Of each particular thing, ask what is it in and of itself, what is its nature, what does it do, and what needs does it fill by doing it?" -- Marcus Aurelius as interpreted by Sensei Patrick


Bill Weintraub heads The Man2Man Alliance, an organization of men into Frot


FidelityAlliance

Why Be Faithful

An Introduction to Frot and The Man2Man Alliance


is presented by The Man2Man Alliance, an organization of men into Frot

Click here to read An Introduction to Frot and The Man2Man Alliance.

Click here to understand more about Heroic Homosex.

Or visit our FAQs page to learn more about Frot Men.


[[]]

Frot: The Next Sexual Revolution Home

The Man2Man Alliance

Heroic Homosex

Frot Men

Heroes

Cockrub Warriors

FidelityAlliance

Personal Stories

Frot Club

| What's Hot About Frot | Hyacinthine Love | THE FIGHT | Kevin! | Cockrub Warriors of Mars | The Avenger | Antagony | TUFF GUYZ | Musings of a BGM into Frot | Warriors Speak | Ask Sensei Patrick | Warrior Fiction | Frot: The Next Sexual Revolution | Sex Between Men: An Activity, Not A Condition |
| Heroes Site Guide | Toward a New Concept of M2M | What Sex Is |In Search of an Heroic Friend | Masculinity and Spirit |
| Jocks and Cocks | Gilgamesh | The Greeks | Hoplites! | The Warrior Bond | Nude Combat | Phallic, Masculine, Heroic | Reading |
| Heroic Homosex Home | Cockrub Warriors Home | Heroes Home | Story of Bill and Brett Home | Frot Club Home |
| Definitions | FAQs | Join Us | Contact Us | Tell Your Story |

© All material on this site Copyright 2001 - 2011 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.


"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices," Voltaire wrote.

"Of each particular thing, ask what is it in and of itself, what is its nature, what does it do, and what needs does it fill by doing it?" -- Marcus Aurelius as interpreted by Sensei Patrick


Ignorance is NOT strength