Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite

Bill Weintraub

Bill Weintraub

Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite


I've now had an opportunity to accurately assess the damage which was done on 11/6.

Because of the huge number of posts on this board, it was time-consuming to do that.

But it was also an opportunity to re-catalogue and to re-read many of the posts, which are really terrific.

And one of the best things you can do in terms of empowering yourself is just read those posts.

Even if you've read them all, I encourage you to re-visit them.

They're incredibly powerful.

And they're now all on webpages and can easily be accessed via Warriors Speak VIII.

Which reproduces the message list on this Personal Stories board.

If you don't see your post in that list, by the way, it doesn't mean your post isn't in our Warriors Speak archives.

Some posts are grouped together.

For example, many of rm aka silverback's posts are on the page titled Remember.

And there are more than thirty posts collected on the page titled I love FROT.

So the posts are all there.

Now, in addition to re-reading many posts and re-cataloging, I've of course notified the individuals whose posts were deleted so they would know that the request to delete didn't come from the Alliance.

This is the response of Gavin Kirby, author of Situation in Scotland, which was deleted.

It's disgusting that people can be as spiteful as that - sending out spurious delete messages to (I assume) censor posts on a free discussion board, wasting everyone's time and effort in the process. I suppose it could be taken positively - if people are that desperate, it means they know at some level that they're losing (or at least that they can't win by honest means).

Of course, I didn't realise the message was a hoax and, thinking it was a real request (to clear up space on the forum or whatever), clicked on it. So I didn't want my post to be deleted, and you can restore it. I want this guy to see that he's made no difference - who knows, he might come to his senses.

Gavin's certainly right that these people know "they can't win by honest means."

He's right too that "they're losing" -- intellectually, they lost a long time ago.

And Gavin's also right that the spammer has "made no difference."

All the posts are safely archived, and will be back up on this board shortly;

and if anything, we're stronger in terms of organization as a result of this attack.

Nevertheless, as Gavin says this was a "spiteful" attack.

Petty, cowardly, ugly, and mean.

Here's a list of what was deleted.

You'll notice that what the spammer went after were discussions of Masculinity, bisexuality, and just plain analist stupidity.

And that fits with what really bothers these people.

They detest Masculinity; they don't like bisexuality -- that is to say, normal male sexuality; and they don't like anything which challenges their buttboy status quo:

So these will all be going back up, and they'll each be prefaced by Gavin's words:

"Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite"

When you see those words preceding a message thread, remember that it was the analists' goal to silence the MEN who posted in that thread FOREVER.

That was the goal.

Now, when I first wrote about these attacks, I asked you guys to donate.

Your response has been




So I have a question for you:

What the fuck is the matter with you?

Are you terminally stupid?

That's terminally as in fatally.

Because when someone attacks you -- you have to respond.

Or he'll keep coming.

Until you're dead.

I told you that this guy had spent almost three hours attacking the board before we intercepted him.

Most likely he would have gone all day.

And I said that you needed to make a comparable effort -- such as donating two or three hours salary.

Which you did NOT do.

But, as I said, your effort has to match his.


At least match his.

Or we'll never win.



Instead of donating, what you like to do is "niggle."

I get little niggling emails -- petty, niggling emails.

Like the people who were upset that I talked about the fundamentals of the Christian Faith in the Ted Haggard message thread.

But Ted Haggard is a Christian after all.

Not just a Christian, but a leading evangelical, very vocal in his condemnations of "homosexuality," who was caught in a same-sex sex scandal.

It makes sense therefore to examine his beliefs and actions in the light of what Christianity actually teaches.

Fact is, there are a lot of evangelical men who visit this site who are confused by people like Haggard.

When Haggard says sex between men is a sin -- they believe him.

So it's appropriate to look at what's really going on.

Then I get emails from people who say, oh, I think there are people who are born with a male and female spirit.


But there's no proof of that.

And one of the things you have to ask about trendy little belief systems like that one is -- what's the impact on your own life?

Because if human beings are part male and part female -- doesn't it make sense to explore your "feminine side"?

And shouldn't you then get penetrated anally -- and learn to enjoy it?

As Robert Loring keeps saying, ideas precede action.

What you think determines how you behave.

So it matters what you believe.

I bet that most of you are pretty careful about what you eat -- what you put in your mouth.

But it never seems to occur to you to question what's going into your brain.

Yet there are ideas out there which are just as toxic as trans fats and LDLs.

Ideas like, "it's bad to be a Man."

This is from feminist writer Alice Walker, author of The Color Purple.

She's referencing, she says, an anthropologist named Perkins who studied the Swa people of the Amazon:

Man, the [Swa] say, has a destructive nature: it is his job therefore to cut down trees when firewood or canoes are needed. His job also to hunt down and kill animals when there is need for more protein. His job to make war, when that becomes a necessity. The woman's nature is thought to be nurturing and conserving. Therefore her role is to care for the home and garden, the domesticated animals and the children. She inspires the men. But perhaps her most important duty is to tell the men when to stop.

It is the woman who says: Stop. We have enough firewood and canoes, don't cut down any more trees. Stop. We have enough meat; don't kill any more animals. Stop. This war is stupid and using up too many of our resources. Stop. Perkins says that when the Swa are brought to this [Western] culture they observe that it is almost completely masculine. That the men have cut down so many trees and built so many excessively tall buildings that the forest itself is dying; they have built roads without end and killed animals without number. When, ask the Swa, are the women going to say Stop?

Indeed. When are the women, and the Feminine within women and men, going to say Stop?

So in Walker's view, Men and Masculinity are purely destructive.

Women are "nurturing and conserving" -- and the source of inspiration for men.

And without "the Feminine within women and men" -- men will destroy forever.

Is that true?


Two guys fight.

One submits.

They hug.


Man Fight.

Man Hug.

Is the latter a manifestation of "the Feminine within?"


The Hug is as MASCULINE as the Fight.

They're both Masculine.

The Fight is Masculine.

The Hug is Masculine.

No matter what Walker may think.

In point of fact, and as Patrick has said, "Masculinity in men is what keeps us alive on this planet."

Even among the Swa.

Let's assume, for a moment, that Walker's depiction of the Swa is accurate -- which I assure you it is not.

But let's pretend for a moment that it is.

The men provide wood for fires and canoes -- and probably some sort of shelter; they hunt for meat; and they make war "when necessary."

Without men, meat -- which is a huge source of calories and necessary amino acids -- can be neither hunted nor cooked; there are no canoes for transport; and the women of the tribe will be raped and their children killed by marauders.

Of course without men there wouldn't be any children -- but that's something else Walker conveniently sets aside.

When a man and a woman procreate -- is the man destructive?

Give me a break.

Walker claims the women say "Stop -- we have enough meat."

But men the world over know not to over-hunt.

Even American men.

And the Swa are subsistence hunter-gatherers; I doubt they ever truly have enough meat.

The myths that Walker is presenting -- and she's very influential -- are remarkably bigoted, biased, and FALSE.

But she's putting them forth.

"Man has a destructive nature."

We don't agree.

What we believe, what we say, and what the analist vandal was trying to PREVENT us from saying, is that Masculinity is a Divine principle and Manhood a Divine gift.


Man is Man. He ain't got no feminine in him. His glory is his masculinity, just as women's glory is their femininity. Man is whole; woman is whole.


In short, a lot of what we "know" about society are cultural creations. Man, masculinity, manhood, etc. isn't a cultural creation. Woman isn't a cultural creation. Man is man; woman is woman. He ain't no woman; she ain't no man. Man is whole and woman is whole. Manhood is divine; womanhood is divine.

Culture has separated man from himself by telling him that he has a feminine aspect, a feminine gene. Rather than recognizing that man2man is man, not feminine.

"man2man is man, not feminine"

That's the absolute heart of the matter.

Man2Man is Man.

Masculinity is a Divine principle.

Manhood a Divine gift.

Danielou: "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."

The erect penis "emits semen, the source of life."

How destructive is that?

"It is then called the phallus."

Phallus is Manhood

Manhood is Man.

That's what we believe and that's what bothers the cowardly, spiteful vandals who tried to destroy this board.

Again, look at what was deleted.

I repeat what I said on November 8.

These people are contemptuous of you.

To them, your life has no validity.

You are at best immature and incomplete.

Your masculinity is a danger and a threat.

And what you have to say should not be heard.

The only reasonable response is to say: I WILL BE HEARD.








And I won't let anyone silence me, I won't let anyone censor me, I won't let anyone shut me up.

Not these "religious" hypocrites and not these ridiculous cuntboys, whose "sex" life centers on their shitholes.



Are you proud of your Manhood?

Proud to be into Frot?

Proud that you don't do anal?

Are you?

Because that's what this is about.

Earlier today Jon -- in the uncertain future message thread -- wondered why more people don't donate.

The short answer is -- self-oppression:

people buying into and believing the lies that are told about them by their oppressors.

In the case of the men who use this site, there are three lies:

1. If you don't do anal, you're not truly gay and you're not adult -- you're immature and incomplete.

2. Real men don't love other men.

3. Sex between men is a sin.

95% -- at least -- of the men who use this site believe at least one of those lies and most of them believe all three.

Clearly, if you think of yourself as immature and incomplete, and not a real man, and a sinner -- you're not going to back this effort.

You'll come to the site, and you'll enjoy it while you're here, but you 'll remain imprisoned by your doubt and self-hate.

Robert Loring: Change the thinking, change the behavior.

The first thing the vast majority of you have to do is change your thinking.

And I'll tell you point blank that you may think you've changed your thinking, but if you're not donating or otherwise supporting this effort -- you have NOT changed your thinking.

Because if you HAD changed your thinking, you'd be doing something about all those terrible lies which are told about you -- day in and day out, 24/7/365.

And you'd react strongly to this recent effort to censor you and the TRUTH.

As did Gavin: "It's disgusting that people can be as spiteful as that"

He's right.

It's disgusting.

You should be outraged.

And you should respond accordingly.

You can't punch the vandal in the nose.

He's a complete and utter coward who's hiding behind the internet.

But you can donate.

That will hurt him.

Because it's the one thing he really doesn't want you to do.



© All material Copyright 2006 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.


Re: Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite


I'm encouraged to give for several reasons, mainly because I see the value and need for men to affirm masculinity and I recognize (perhaps because of the profession I'm in) the attack on masculinity expressed in bias statements like Alice Walker's. If a man said similar comments about women, screams of gender bias and sexism would be on the news morning, noon, and night.

I'm also encouraged because I'm frustrated. I know what it's like when others benefit from the fruits of your labor but do nothing to contribute except whine or opine.

You rely on a faithful few to forward the cause of many. Your pleas for more participation goes unheeded, but the many continue without hesitation their whining and opining and requesting and writing.

They're happy you're there, but they won't support.

Really, all Bill has to do to get others to donate is say he's been called by the Lord, open every post with "The Lord told me" and say "thus saith the Lord" as if prophesying, and tell how blessed we'll be "giving to the Lord." Oh yeah, he has to be sure to give book, chapter, and verse to support his claims.

Am I being facetious? Somewhat. The God-called-me-method brings in millions weekly. Religious America responds to charisma when they believe the person who says God called him. This method is the orthodoxy that drives American religion. Frankly, Bill would probably get more donors. I bet Ted Haggard, even now, would not have problems getting donations. Why? Because he holds onto his money: God talk.

But, behold, Bill isn't going to lie for donatons. Isn't his honesty and integrity reason enough to donate?


Re: Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite


I don't get "immature and incomplete". That would be like a man saying to a woman "I'm tired of all this cock and cunt foreplay. I want REAL SEX." How do you think the women you have known would have responded to this? The vast majority of free women would show no hesitation about setting the immature and incomplete one straight. Subjugated women (think Taliban) would probably go along to get along, rather than being beaten, or executed by a society that believes she has no right to self-protection against a violent husband.

Who the hell is beating men?

In this season of "brotherly love" I will donate in the name of my brothers, because, sadly, though no wealthier than most of then, I appear to be freer.

Greg Milliken

Re: Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite


I think every post I've made on this board was targeted for deletion. I received about 30 or 40 spams during the attack. I'm not sure what it is about a college graduate (actually, at the time I made most of those posts I was still IN college) that makes these analists fear so much, but I have to be doing something right.

There's a different reason I choose to donate. You can go almost anywhere on the Internet and find appeals to man's lowest common denominator. "Why not, everyone else does it," "Don't knock it until you've tried it," "It's not THAT dangerous/bad for you/risky," "I could get hit by a bus tomorrow," "Don't hate the sinner, hate the sin," "If I'm going to hell anyway I might as well enjoy my life," "I'd bottom for him," "God (Jesus) hates faggots," ad infinitum.

But I come to Bill's website and I think it must be one of the only places on the Internet that appeals to man's virtues and highest honor.

Virtue. Truth. Masculinity. Honor. Frot. Phallus. Fidelity. Commitment. Justice. Brotherhood.

From what I gather, a lot of guys come here and just think one part of the message should told. I have a couple problems with that. For starters, if everyone got their way and Bill took out the parts that people wanted to take out, NO part of the message would be told.

Second, why should we aim for ONLY frot, or ONLY masculinity, or ONLY fidelity, or ONLY anal in some circumstances, or ONLY promiscuity in open relationships, or ONLY masculinity when around our straight friends

When we can aim for all of it?

Virtue. Truth. Masculinity. Honor. Frot. Phallus. Fidelity. Commitment. Justice. Brotherhood.

If you are trying to be your best, for example like Diego Sanchez on The Ultimate Fighter, even a tiny crack in your resolve can take you down.

For the average person, the average tearing that occurs in an average session of anal intercourse won't affect their lives.

But what if you were training to fight against the toughest, strongest, most skilled fighters in the world? Would that tearing in your anus affect you enough to take you down? Would it when a small distraction at a critical moment means the difference between being the best and getting the snot knocked out of you?


Most people have it backward: they think that they should live for their desires.

But when your desires don't add to your life, they diminish it.

And if your desires diminish your life, they must diminish your desires too.

Because when you have no life you have no desires.

Why do you think so many men burn out in their early twenties and thirties and succumb to drugs, STDs, obesity, violence, etc.?

Because their desires burned down their lives until they had neither lives nor desires.

But some people match their desires to an increase in their lives. When your desires bring you more life, it makes sense that your desires will increase too.

Don't those of us who die healthy and old have the greatest desire for life?

So what will we do? Will we continue to support the lowest common denominator until there is nothing left of us to support it?

Or will we reach for the highest goal and expand ever outward in our greatness?

I know why I support Bill's site and his work.

It's a shame that after two years of knowing about this website, that's still all it is.

A website.

In two years we could have easily organized regional chapters.

We could have easily collected enough donations to launch an ad campaign.

We could have easily made headway against the analists and their propaganda food poisoning.

But what did you do?

Are you more alive today than you were two years ago?

Has reaching for that lowest point on the ground made you happier about your life?

Or is it time to start reaching in another direction?

I've made appeals like this before.

Over the past two years I've made quite a few of them.

And over time they keep getting stronger.

What about you? Is the only reason you don't donate because you're just too lazy to click the mouse pointer? You're too lazy to go through the inconvenience of not having an extra couple bucks each month?

Life, like everything, is limited by what you put into it.

Put in nothing, and get nothing back.

Bill Weintraub

Re: Cowardly sabotage -- deleted by analist spite


Thank you Redd, Frances, and Greg.

Three really great posts.

Redd talks about whining and opining.

That's right.

I'm thinking of starting a new feature on this board, called Whine of the Day.

Because I sure get a lot of them.

Redd also says, "I bet Ted Haggard, even now, would not have problems getting donations. Why? Because he holds onto his money: God talk."

That's correct.

And very dispiriting.

Ted Haggard was caught in a monstrous LIE.

And it doesn't matter.

His ministry -- New Life -- is chuggin right along.

They just say "God, God, God" and the money keeps pouring in.

We tell the TRUTH.

What happens?

We lose donors.

We lost at least one donor last month because I dared to discuss the rudiments of the Christian Faith.

But that discussion is germane to the lives of many of our men.

Truth is, I'd been remiss if I hadn't discussed it.

Doesn't matter.

One -- or maybe more -- of our militant atheists walked.

I don't know whether to be grateful that he donated as long as he did;

or angry that he'd quit because I talked about religion.

I suppose I can be both.

Another thing that gets me about our quitter is that I've been writing about the relationship between male sexuality and spirituality since 2001.

For example, there's Masculinity and Spirit, in which I say,

We never hear that phallus is sacred, or that masculinity is holy, or that our lives are heroic -- but they are.

"phallus is sacred, masculinity is holy, our lives are heroic"

That's 2001.

"Masculinity is a Divine Principle, Manhood a Divine Gift, and Frot a Holy Sacrament."

That's 2006.

My position hasn't changed.

Doesn't matter to people who want an excuse to stop giving.

Nevertheless, this is what I said in 2001:

Sex itself is a sacred act, it connects us with the power and love of another man, and we need to always think of it that way.

And of course for the men in this club, the most powerful expression of sex between men is phallic mating - cock2cock and dick2dick.

Living in a society that denigrates sex, it's sometimes difficult to remember that sex is sacred, but we can do so if we build and maintain communities for ourselves that reinforce our understanding of what sex is.

That includes communities like this one, warrior communities, whose members understand the power of the phallus, just as ancient warrior cultures did.

That's what I said.

But people don't want to donate.

They'd rather "whine and opine," as Redd says.

That gets old really fast.

I got an email from a man who said he was 71, had posted in Frot Club the day before, and still hadn't found a partner.

He'd given it a whole day before complaining.

He also provided the little riff about men having a male and female spirit.

But this is a man who's been into frottage all his life and has been alone all his life.

Is there a connection between the idea of the "feminine within" and his seven decades of loneliness?

Oh yeah.

Yet he'll go on endorsing and even worse believing in what is nothing more than an empty ideology -- even though it works to his detriment.


Now, Frances asks, "Who the hell is beating men?"

Good question.

Frances has a way of doing that -- asking good questions.

As she did when she asked to what oppressed minority the Greek heroes Orestes and Pylades had belonged.

They didn't belong to a minority.

They were MEN.

Just like the guys who are reading this post.

You're MEN too.

Even if you're gay-identified.

You're still a MAN.

You're not anything else.

And as Frances points out, no one's physically beating you into having a form of sex you don't like.

So: Frances is talking here about gay-identified men who are being told they're immature or incomplete because they won't do anal.

And she's pointing out that Frot is true genital-genital sex, just like penile-vaginal, and that women in a place like America would never accept a male partner dictating the terms of sex in the way that buttboys do to Frot men all the time:

The vast majority of free women would show no hesitation about setting the immature and incomplete one straight. Subjugated women (think Taliban) would probably go along to get along, rather than being beaten, or executed by a society that believes she has no right to self-protection against a violent husband.

Who the hell is beating men?

In this season of "brotherly love" I will donate in the name of my brothers, because, sadly, though no wealthier than most of then, I appear to be freer.

"Who the hell is beating men?"

In general, Frances is right that men are not mistreated in this country the women are in a place like Afghanistan.

But, we do have to look at Frances' question a little more closely.

First of all, there is spousal abuse in the gay community -- among both gay male and lesbian couples.

Robert Loring talks about that in a very personal context in his article A Case of Rape, and I strongly urge you to read it.

Cause if your lover beats you because you won't have sex or for any other reason -- you need to get out, and you need to get help.

And in most places there is help for the victims of domestic abuse.

In addition, as I've written about a great deal, there's enormous pressure and coercion to do anal.

That pressure is cultural -- as again, we've talked about a great deal.

And one of the points to this site is to help you understand that cultural pressure and withstand it.

There's also the pressure and coercion which occurs in dating situations.

I talk about that in Is unwanted anal penetration date rape?

Basically, buttboy date-rapers use the same techniques on their male victims as do straight-identified guys on their female victims:

Persistent physical attempts; and

Emotional blackmail.

"Persistent physical attempts" means that the guy tries over and over and over and over again to enter you, and finally you "let him."

"Emotional blackmail" means the guy says, If you don't let me fuck you, I won't love you.

Frances: "Who the hell is beating men?"

If you're reading this post, and you're not Frances, chances are you're a MAN.

And Frances is correct that you have it within your physical and emotional power to resist both forms of coercion.

If a guy tries to push you down and push into you -- you push him off.

And then you leave or you tell him to leave.

If a guy tries emotional blackmail, tell him you're not interested in a lover who's into anal.

Your ability to do those things will be much much greater if you've trained in a martial art or at a fight school and are in touch with your innate MASCULINE POWER.

That's why I keep telling you to do that.

If you won't do it, there's not much more I can do for you -- is there?

But that's what you need to do: you need to get in touch with your MALE AGGRESSIVE POWER.

Otherwise you will get beat up -- physically and emotionally.

The other night Naked Wrestler, who trains in a fight sport, called me on his cell phone from his car.

While we were talking someone tried to break into the car.

NW was very relaxed about it.

He said "I can handle it," and he did.

The intruder went away.


They can read it in your body language.

And they avoid getting in your way.

So you need to learn how to FIGHT and FIGHT BACK.

It's very rare for a straight-identified guy to get raped -- because most straight-identified guys have some experience of fighting.

But analist date rape is common among gay men.

Just read this board.

I wasn't really into it, but I let him fuck me.

Warrior Gideon, for example, talked about how "being gently forced into anal sex always made me feel submissive, less than a man"

And this is from one of our earliest posters -- Darrell:

a couple years later, in 84, i had my second experience. after 20 minutes of kissing and rubbing, i came. i was still turned on, so i kept my hard-on. a couple more minutes of kissing, then i found myself being positioned on my stomach. i knew exactly what was about to happen, and tho i didnt really want it to, i allowed it. however, after 5 minutes of intense pain, i put an end to it!

turns out i became positive by this experience. i found out in 86. i only had one other sexual encounter--in 86. i still keep in contact with the guy from 86, and he is negative (the guy from 84 died of AIDS in 90).

after the initial shock, i took a common sense approach to my situation. if frottage is what i was into, that is all that i would do. now, sucking is fine also, but i know that i could live happily with kissing and frottage only. not only is it safe--preventing me from infecting someone, and preventing me from being re-infected--but i find it a total turn-on.

nothing is better that kissing, and the feel of a man's body rubbing against mine. i have not engaged in anal sex since 86, and feel that is the reason i am extremely healthy today.

So: it's always a mistake to do anal.

It's never a mistake not to.

Nevertheless, unwanted anal penetration is still extremely common.

But you have it in your power to resist that.

All you have to do is say -- NO.






That's all you have to say.

What about promiscuity?

Not complicated.






What about effeminacy?





Not real complicated.

How bout when someone calls you "girl"?

Answer: "I don't see any girls in the room."

"I'm a MAN."

When you say "I don't see any girls in this room" -- it shuts the buttboys up.

Because there's no way they can respond.

Even if there are women in the room -- they aren't girls.

And the men aren't girls.

There are no girls present.

That's it.

I'm not a girl.

You're not a girl.

Nobody's a girl.

Now, Greg said:

I come to Bill's website and I think it must be one of the only places on the Internet that appeals to man's virtues and highest honor.

Virtue. Truth. Masculinity. Honor. Frot. Phallus. Fidelity. Commitment. Justice. Brotherhood.

From what I gather, a lot of guys come here and just think one part of the message should told. I have a couple problems with that. For starters, if everyone got their way and Bill took out the parts that people wanted to take out, NO part of the message would be told.

Second, why should we aim for ONLY frot, or ONLY masculinity, or ONLY fidelity, or ONLY anal in some circumstances, or ONLY promiscuity in open relationships, or ONLY masculinity when around our straight friends

When we can aim for all of it?

Virtue. Truth. Masculinity. Honor. Frot. Phallus. Fidelity. Commitment. Justice. Brotherhood.


Our message is indivisible.

What is needed is for Men who Love Men to return to values which are authentically Male, and which we, correctly, characterize as part of the Warrior Ethos:




Again, those values are indivisible.

Look at Greg's list:

Virtue. Truth. Masculinity. Honor. Frot. Phallus. Fidelity. Commitment. Justice. Brotherhood.

You can't stick anal and anus in the list in place of Frot and Phallus.

Just won't work.

Try it and see:

Masculinity. Honor. Fidelity. Commitment.

anal. anus.


Masculinity. Honor. Fidelity. Commitment.

Frot. Phallus.


Why are Phallus and Frot aka Phallic Bonding in that list?

Because Phallus is, as Danielou says, "the sacred symbol of man's creative power."

And because Phallic Bonding is a holy sacrament which brings together two MEN to create a higher MANHOOD.


Masculinity is a Divine Principle, Manhood a Divine Gift, and Phallic Bonding a Holy Sacrament.

When we re-order the lives of Men who Love Men on that basis, we will see genuine change.

We will see an end to sleaze, to promiscuity, and to disease.

The Warrior Ethos and The Warrior Way will again govern the lives of Men, who will understand:


Thank you Redd, Frances, and Greg.

True Warriors all.

Bill Weintraub

© All material Copyright 2006 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.

Add a reply to this discussion

Back to Personal Stories


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

To learn more about Frot, ck out What's Hot About Frot

Or visit our FAQs page.

Warriors Speak Home

Cockrub Warriors Site Guide

The Man2Man Alliance

Heroic Homosex

Frot Men


Frot Club

Personal Stories

| 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 |
| 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 - 2010 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.