Bill Weintraub

Bill Weintraub

AGOGE

the spear-points of young men blossom there

Reply: Flesh and Spirit

12-18-07


Hi Guys.

Sometimes, when an intial post in a message thread is very long;

and when the replies too are very long;

I post the replies in two places:

  1. With the intial post; and

  2. In a separate message thread.

And that's what I'm doing here, with the replies to AGOGE: The Spear-points of Young Men Blossom There.

So: this message thread contains the replies to AGOGE: The Spear-points of Young Men Blossom There.

And those replies can also be found in that thread.

Guys, it's VERY IMPORTANT that if you haven't yet read the first post in AGOGE: The Spear-points of Young Men Blossom There, that you read it NOW.

Otherwise, these replies won't make sense to you.

But once you've read the first post, starting on this page may be an easier way for you to read the replies, which at this point include one from Robert Loring and one from me -- with significant input from Frances and NW.

Also guys, another reason I'm posting the replies in their own message thread is that I plan to refer back to them in some forthcoming posts.

So it's important that you read the replies.

Thanks guys.

I hope you not only enjoy but find informative and enlightening both AGOGE: The Spear-points of Young Men Blossom There; and this AGOGE Reply.

Bill


Robert Loring

Re: agoge The Spear-Points of Young Men Blossom There

11-8-2007

All I can say about this post, Bill, is WOW! It is absolutely excellent and very well done. I agree with you that in our heterosexualized society all we have is a pseudo-masculinity and in such a society it is not possible to have an agoge since our society does not sanction M2M sex or relationships. Hopefully, one day that will change but probably in a society that will succeed our present one. I really do not see it happening in our present homophobic, unnatural=natural society today.

One thing that stands out, among many others, in your post is that you stated a man needs his warrior brothers when he is crushed and you are absolutely right. In fact, most men who come to this site come here crushed because they lost something they truly loved when they were young (ie: their frot buddy). That's why I've commented before that so many men today are already defeated in their own minds and they can thank society for that defeat.


Bill Weintraub

Re: agoge The Spear-Points of Young Men Blossom There

12-12-2007

Thank you Robert.

Guys, I'm sorry this reply has been so long delayed; but Patrick is very ill.

Partly as a consequence of being delayed, it's a long reply.

And it's somewhat rambling.

But I hope you'll read through it.

And to help, I've put up headers throughout the reply.

A large part of my purpose in writing this reply was and is to sustain hope among you.

You must have hope and you must have dreams.

Without hope and without dreams -- Men cannot live.

So -- one of the things we talk about in this reply is a Warrior Community.

This is an idea which is still in its infancy.

But there's sufficient interest that I want to keep it before the Alliance.

That said, a Warrior Community may not be right for you personally.

I want to emphasize that there are other options, options we've talked about for years and which we'll continue to pursue --

Including Regional Chapters, which you really should be doing.

But a Community is also something we need to think about.

Because you have to understand what Men once had; and what YOU can have again.

You have to understand what's been taken from you; and what's YOURS to reclaim.

You must understand those things.

And think about them.

And, yes, dream about them.

Today, I heard a sad story from NW.

And that story is one of the reasons I'm going forward with this reply, even though with Patrick so sick working on it has been a tremendous effort.

This is the story:

A few days ago a friend of NW's was killed in an automobile accident.

We'll call him Jim.

Jim was a gay-identified man.

Jim, who was in his 30s, and had therefore come out into his city's analist subculture at its peak, was nevertheless very curious about wrestling and mixed martial arts.

And that's how NW and Jim met -- through that interest.

Here's what NW said about Jim:

Jim and I had spent the night together just a few weeks ago.

Jim was not some phony fake macho guy. He was REALLY interested in learning wrestling for the man2man body contact and feel of aggression of the activity.

I showed him some frot in bed including the guard position used in modern MMA submission fights and submission grappling. And I demonstrated some wrestling rides and holds for "controlling your man" while in the top position. I always try to make introductory learning fun for a new never-experienced-aggression-before-male like him.

I told him that this totally naked wrestling was what our ancestors did up until the advent of Christianity.

I explained to him--and I think he totally understood--that the "gay community" aspect of anal intercourse was totally out of sync as well as physiologically wrong and Psychologically wrong. And that it was in contrast to normal male aggression and intimacy.

He listened to it all with fascination, concentration and intensity. He had the intelligence---to be a wrestler. He wanted so much to cross that line into complete maleness.

Right in bed I showed him some grape-vines, butt rides, and butt drags like we called them in wrestling practices. I reached in for his ball sack from the back and said this is officially called a butt drag, but all wrestlers eventually learn to think of it as a ball grab (even if they can't talk about it). I said, "Don't do it too much to the man or the guy might stand up and sock you in the face for it, or he might insist on going home with you after the match." He laughed.

(You see the Turks, doing olive oil wrestling, grab balls all the time. And males learn to do it in this sport to "hurt" their opponent a little bit, WITHOUT injuring each other's Man-hood. It's ALL about control, technique and the lack of fear to engage another male, to engage another male in anything.

Men learn from this full body contact aggression to respect each other with care, RIGHT DOWN TO THEIR BALLS.)

Jim listened to every word of it. He was fascinated with the whole aspect of mingling intimacy and aggression into one. He, like most males in America today, had been deprived of that necessary and beautiful component of Man-hood.

BTW I'm buying some 10x10 wrestling mats today to add to the ones I have. I need to start a little wrestling club....for guys like him.

So -- what have we got?

A guy named Jim who was gay-identified but Masculine.

And who "was fascinated with the whole aspect of mingling intimacy and aggression into one."

But who didn't know how to do it.

Because: "He, like most males in America today, had been deprived of that necessary and beautiful component of Man-hood."

Nonetheless, says NW, Jim "wanted so much to cross that line into complete maleness."

That's what EVERY MALE WANTS.

And that's why -- We will continue this Fight.

And why -- We will Win.

But -- it's too late for Jim.

He's dead.

And all he knew of Men Loving Men while he was alive -- was analism.

Which is no love at all.

Jim was supposed to go to his first UFC-style fight in just a few days.

Won't happen now.

You need to understand that.

Life is fleeting.

And dillying and dallying -- gets you nowhere.

So: this reply is for Jim -- and all the Men like him.

Who are "fascinated with the whole aspect of mingling intimacy and aggression into one."

Who have "been deprived of that necessary and beautiful component of Manhood."

And who want "so much to cross that line into complete maleness."

"Intimacy and aggression" says NW.

Later in this post NW talks about the "Intimacy of Aggression."

For MEN, there are two core Male Intimacies: the Intimacy of Aggression and the Intimacy of Affection.

Aggressive Intimacy and Affectional Intimacy.

MEN need BOTH.

The agoge understood that -- and gave them both.

And so must we.

We must show Men how to have both Male Aggression and Male Affection in their lives -- together, and again.

Now, let's talk about Robert Loring, who posted the first reply to this thread.

Guys, for those of you who are new to the Alliance, Robert Loring is the author of

The Warrior God;

Brothers of the Heart;

Jesus and the Truth;

The Ultimate Defeat; and

Warrior Christendom --

among many, many very very very very very important posts and articles on this Man2Man Alliance site.

There's a list of Robert's articles following The Warrior God; please, guys, take some time to familiarize yourself with Robert's work, which is uniformly excellent and which will help you.

And, by the way, Robert first brought up the crucial concept of guys being "defeated in their own minds" in his reply to Warrior Jim's Society's Procrustean Bed -- like all Robert's replies, it's excellent, and again, important reading.

As are ALL the posts on this board.

If a post is on this board, it's because it's important.

Important as a statement of personal truth for the guy who posted;

And important because it can and will help YOU.

Yes -- YOU.

So -- read all the posts.

They're in Warriors Speak, starting here, and going forward in time.

Sure, there's a lot to read.

But that reading will help you.

More than you can imagine.

And more than anything else you'll encounter anywhere else in the culture today.

Now, I'm glad to see from the responses I've been getting to this post, that people understand what I'm saying.

I was concerned that they wouldn't.

But they do.

Let's take a look:

I -- Flesh and Spirit

As I was writing this post, I was thinking of Bill G's wonderful post of four years ago, What It Means To Be a Man;

in which he said that we here express, "The great ideals of the Homeric world, and what it means to be a man, not a poser."

"The great ideals of the Homeric world"

Very important.

Lycurgus -- the maybe-mythical-and-maybe-not Spartan Lawgiver who created the Eunomia and the agoge -- was inspired by the great ideals of the Homeric world.

How can I be so sure?

Because all of the ancient world was inspired by those ideals.

Homer was the Bible of that world.

And Plato was its philosopher.

And it is to Men like Homer and Plato that we need look.

We need to be inspired by the great ideals of the Homeric world -- just as those ideals inspired our Spartan Warrior brothers.

Who understood what it meant to be a Man -- not a poser.

In his novel Julian, Gore Vidal, attributing the words to the 4th century AD pagan philosopher Libanius, says that "Homer sang of a pristine world of flesh and spirit."

A pristine world -- uncorrupted, noble, and pure.

Of flesh and spirit.

A Homeric World.

A World of Warriors.

Achilles bandages Patroclus' wound.

Achilles slays Hector.

Priam asks Achilles for Hector's body.

Ajax returns the body of the fallen Achilles to the Greek camp.

A Warrior is mourned and remembered on an Athenian stele.

The world that you see is pristine.

In flesh and in spirit.

Clean and pure.

Uncorrupted and noble.

Heroic.

What you see are Men in their Natural State.

Natural.

A World of Naked Valour.

A State of Natural Masculinity.


II -- Truth or Lie

Robert:

I agree with you that in our heterosexualized society all we have is a pseudo-masculinity and in such a society it is not possible to have an agoge since our society does not sanction M2M sex or relationships.

Right.

"in our heterosexualized society all we have is a pseudo-masculinity"

That's a core point.

In our heterosexualized society, what some call "social" or "cultural" masculinity is pseudo-masculinity, which works to cover up, subvert, and then destroy the True and Natural Masculinity of MEN.

The pseudo-masculinity of our era defines "masculinity" as "exclusive heterosexuality";

rather than the Willingness and indeed Eagerness to FIGHT -- which is one hallmark of Natural Masculinity;

and the need, openly and honestly expressed, to bond with a fellow MAN -- a fellow WARRIOR.

Which is the other hallmark of Natural Masculinity.

Pseudo-masculinity is exclusively heterosexual and, paradoxically, effeminized;

While Natural Masculinity is the opposite -- that is to say, "bisexual," with a strong emphasis on same-sex needs and desires, and Masculine.

So: Natural Masculinity is Masculine.

And Natural Masculinity is Natural.

Remember what my foreign friend said:

same-sex needs are the basis of a man's natural positive masculinity

And, he said, such desire between Men is not unusual or unnatural or abnormal:

male sexual desire for men cannot be tied down to a minority group. Rather it is a universal male phenomenon, especially strong amongst masculine-identified men

"male sexual desire for men is a universal male phenomenon"

So: pseudo-masculinity is the LIE.

Natural Masculinity is the TRUTH.

In this life, you can serve the TRUTH or you can serve the lie.

BUT YOU CANNOT SERVE BOTH.

IT'S NOT POSSIBLE.

Our society serves the lie.

WE SERVE THE TRUTH.

The Truth is Natural Masculinity.

The Truth is Naked Valour.

The Truth is Man-Loving Men.

Back to Robert:

"in such a society it is not possible to have an agoge since our society does not sanction M2M sex or relationships."

Right.

Several points:

"in such a society"

In society as it's currently structured --

"it is not possible to have an agoge"

not without a lot of work and a very clear consciousness of what we're doing

"since our society does not sanction M2M sex or relationships."

Right.

What I would say is that our society is beginning to sanction M2M sex and relationships -- which would be to the good -- EXCEPT

that what it's sanctioning is NOT true M2M sex and NOT true Man2Man relationships.

Instead, the society is sanctioning a HETEROSEXUALIZED form of "sex" between Men, in which, as NW so brilliantly pointed out, one male becomes the female-male and the other the male-male;

and relationships aka marriages between males too are structured on a heterosexualized model.

"Marriage."

Now, I'm "married" to Patrick.

But we're not a male-female couple.

What we are -- are two fierce Men who Love each other.

We're not "in a marriage" in the conventional 20th / 21st century heterosexual sense.

Rather, we are bonded Warrior Brothers.

What Robert has called Cymbrogi.

Once again, our society serves the heterosexualized lie.

Heterosexuality.

A lie, a fraud.

In fact, in terms of the sheer numbers of people affected, heterosexuality is without question the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the face of the planet.

We serve the TRUTH.

The historical and cross-cultural TRUTH about MAN-LOVING MEN.


III -- Crushed and Defeated

Robert's next point:

One thing that stands out, among many others, in your post is that you stated a man needs his warrior brothers when he is crushed and you are absolutely right. In fact, most men who come to this site come here crushed because they lost something they truly loved when they were young (ie: their frot buddy). That's why I've commented before that so many men today are already defeated in their own minds and they can thank society for that defeat.

Absolutely right.

In this society, MEN get crushed.

And they get crushed when they are YOUNG, and DEFENCELESS.

Lawrence and Gary, Luke and Stephen, Robert and Ted, Randy and Gary, Studcuddler and his cousin -- and many many many others -- CRUSHED -- when young and defenceless.

And Robert is absolutely right that to lose something and someone you truly love when you are young and unable to understand what has happened -- will leave you DEFEATED IN YOUR OWN MINDS.

But suppose that when you were young, you didn't have a Frot buddy who you lost -- suppose instead that all you had was a dream.

A Warrior Dream.

A Warrior Dream of Love between MEN.

And you were told over and over and over again that that dream made you immoral, immature, diseased and sick.

Suppose you were told over and over again that you were living in a fantasy land, that your dream could never be lived, your hopes never realized, that your love could never exist.

That too would leave you defeated in your own mind.

Now:

The purpose of this site and this work is to UNDO that defeat.

And to see to it that the NEXT GENERATION of young Men are NOT defeated in that way.

We do that by serving the TRUTH.

By speaking the TRUTH.


IV -- Man-Loving Men

Along those lines, here are some comments from Frances:

Your agoge piece was brilliant and beautiful. I view it as a bookend to your Escaping the Trap of Heterosexualization piece. In that piece you talked about how we got here, and touched on where to go from here. In the agoge piece, you're laying it out starkly. Here's the way. Not easy, but essential. If guys can't be empowered by the Spartan ideal I don't know what it would take, or if such males would be even worth the effort.

...

Sparta, and that ideal, really puts in your face the idea of What the Hell is Manhood? Guys need to think of that. And, when they look around them at guys in our world who live their straight, or gay, little lives they should be able to figure out that proud MAN-LOVING Spartans were the real deal. And, they fucked women occasionally, because we've got to keep going as a race. But, Spartan women weren't exactly suffering. They were among the most ardent supporters of the Spartan way of life. Little surprise there when you look at what their sisters in Athens had to put up with. And, of course they had passionate sexual same-sex relationships themselves.

...

Yes, Novus Spartia cannot wait on cataclysms for its birth. But, it probably won't be hurt by one. I read something about how the terrain of Lakonia, I guess it's called, made it very defensible. So, if you ever can buy land, I hope you keep that in mind too.

I have no doubt about making it with sustainable agriculture. ... The thing is is that all the outside supports in the world outside could crumble. Having way too many people is going to lead to war for resources and fierce competition. We're talking combat. No, I'm not a survivalist, but I think it's probably a reality waiting for us. Guys in Novus Spartia and its life-giving women will be the lucky ones.

Again, the agoge piece was very powerful, and that incitement to nude combat reminded me of Patrick "plucking" ( I think he wrote) at Paco's shirt.

Right -- here's from Patrick v Paco:

i reached over and plucked at his tank top shirt...he smiled brightly and peeled it off exposing his torso for me. he was totally ripped,... his abs, chest and shoulder muscles stood out like something from a wall chart in an anatomy class...slim, but thickly muscled.

Patrick wouldn't fight Paco if he wore a shirt.

Paco wanted to fight.

And Paco knew what Patrick wanted.

So Paco took off his shirt -- and they fought.

Neither Patrick nor Paco spoke the other's language.

But they both understood:

nudam incessare pugnam

incite to nude combat

They stripped and they fought.

And experienced yet another Masculine passage through rage to love.

Let's get back to Frances' main points.

I view [this post] as a bookend to your Escaping the Trap of Heterosexualization piece. In that piece you talked about how we got here, and touched on where to go from here. In the agoge piece, you're laying it out starkly. Here's the way. Not easy, but essential. If guys can't be empowered by the Spartan ideal I don't know what it would take, or if such males would be even worth the effort.

Right.

Heterosexualization has gotten us where we are.

It's a trap.

For Men -- and for Women.

We have to escape that trap.

To do that, we have to look at what's worked in the past.

The agoge worked.

It created the conditions in which Men's Natural Masculinty could and did flourish.

agoge

It's the way.

Frances:

Sparta, and that ideal, really puts in your face the idea of What the Hell is Manhood? Guys need to think of that. And, when they look around them at guys in our world who live their straight, or gay, little lives they should be able to figure out that proud MAN-LOVING Spartans were the real deal. And, they fucked women occasionally, because we've got to keep going as a race. But, Spartan women weren't exactly suffering. They were among the most ardent supporters of the Spartan way of life. Little surprise there when you look at what their sisters in Athens had to put up with. And, of course they had passionate sexual same-sex relationships themselves.

Right.

Sparta freed Men to be Men and Women to be Women.

Today no one is free.

Instead, what people have today are "little lives."

Built on consumerism.

And nothing else.

"Proud MAN-LOVING Spartans were the real deal."

Right.

The real deal.

Not posers.

These MAN-LOVING MEN had a Warrior Ideal of loyalty to each other and to Sparta; and of service to the Spartan Warrior State.

And, when necessary, those same MAN-LOVING MEN would sacrifice themselves for all of Greece -- which is to say, for the Free World as it existed in their time.

So their vision was far bigger than just Sparta.

And towards the end, just before the Roman conquest, they sought to extend that vision to all of Greece.






V -- Novus Spartia

Frances:

Yes, Novus Spartia cannot wait on cataclysms for its birth. But, it probably won't be hurt by one. I read something about how the terrain of Lakonia, I guess it's called, made it very defensible. So, if you ever can buy land, I hope you keep that in mind too.

I have no doubt about making it with sustainable agriculture. ... The thing is is that all the outside supports in the world outside could crumble. Having way too many people is going to lead to war for resources and fierce competition. We're talking combat. No, I'm not a survivalist, but I think it's probably a reality waiting for us. Guys in Novus Spartia and its life-giving women will be the lucky ones.

Okay.

What's this about?

I've tried to get you guys to do Regional Chapters.

So that you wouldn't forever be defeated in your own minds.

You don't want to do them.

I could say, as I have, that that's your loss.

But the fact is -- we have to do something.

Guys find -- "stumble upon" is the usual term -- the site, and they're full of enthusiasm.

They think they've finally found a community, a home.

Well, it may be, but it's an internet community.

Very limited.

Robert says that the vast majority of you have been defeated in your own minds --

and that you can thank society for that defeat.

That's correct.

The cultural forces which weigh upon and CRUSH you -- to use Robert's word -- are immense.

And absent real-world support, it's very difficult for you to resist them.

And very difficult for you to truly change.

Again, Robert uses the word "crushed."

And that's right.

You're battered over and over and over again by those societal forces of heterosexualization and sexual orientation.

You're hit with them over and over and over again.

Like a fighter on the ropes, you're bludgeoned into submission.

Until you have no will to resist.

Robert has said, Change the thinking, change the behavior.

And that too is correct.

But you have to be in a PLACE where you *can* think.

Where you can resist.

If you're constantly being hit -- hit and hit and hit -- with no one there to help and support you -- you eventually crumble.

Emasculated and unmanned, you're made ready for what Robert properly calls The Ultimate Defeat.

You need a PLACE.

A place where you can think.

Where you can resist.

Where you can LIVE.


VI -- On the Ropes

So: for guys living in this society, change is extremely difficult.

For example:

I've been working with NW aka Naked Wrestler for years.

Years.

I've talked to him on the phone for years.

It's only recently though, that he's really understood that he's not "gay," that he's a MAN, that the gay-straight categories are a result of heterosexualization --

AND that he's been able to make the connection between his life and the lives of MEN in the ancient world.

Now he does understand.

But it's taken a very long time.

And he has two huge advantages -- he trains in Fight Sport; and he lives with a pro fighter, who fortunately, is not an American and not a puritan, and whose Masculinity is a lot closer to Natural than you ordinarily find in this country.

So NW now understands.

His letters to me are truly luminous with understanding.

They're a joy to read.

But it's taken a long time.

Too long.

Why has it taken so long?

Because NW lives in our heterosexualized culture.

And, like I said, it's very difficult to escape that culture.

Fact: Whether you're gay-identified or straight-identified, heterosexualization hampers and hinders you at every turn.

If you read this board, and if you reflect honestly on your own life, you know that's true.

Yet that heterosexualized culture, as destructive as it is, is all that you know.

Or put better, all that you're *allowed* to know.

It surrounds you.

And binds you.

Binds you hand and foot.

It binds you and blinds you.

Blinds you to the truth.

And leaves you constantly, as Robert said, crushed and defeated in your own mind.

Battered, crushed, and defeated -- like a fighter on the ropes.

It's difficult -- almost impossible for most of you -- living in that culture, and taking all those hits, to see your way clear for even a few moments.

And even when you do, chances are that you're pulled and pummeled back into the culture time and time again.

Not good.

That's why it's taken so long, despite all his advantages, for NW.

And again, NW has advantages that most guys just don't have.


VII -- Fighting Back

I used the metaphor of a fighter on the ropes.

In Fight School, you're taught how to fight your way off the ropes -- and out of a corner.

Which means that NW understands -- not just in his mind, but IN HIS BODY -- what it means to FIGHT BACK.

He knows what it means to take a punch -- and to throw a punch -- and to CONNECT with that punch.

He knows what it means to get hit in the face -- and to HIT BACK.

The vast majority of you don't.

What's more, he's been *trained* in HOW to hit -- to fight -- back.

The vast majority of you haven't.

And he's been *taught* that it's RIGHT to fight back.

That his Male Aggression is HONORABLE and WORTHY.


HONORABLE and WORTHY

The vast majority of you don't understand that.

Example:

In 2004 a man wrote to me, characterizing himself as having been an activist in the gay community in the 1970s and 80s and into the present, and saying that he'd founded a chapter of Integrity, which is an organization for gay-identified Episcopalians, in his native town.

He stated that he agreed with us about anal -- which he's never liked.

And in particular, this guy, who's about ten years older than me, noted that he'd lived through the 60s and 70s and knew that what we're saying about the shift in sexual fashion -- is the truth.

Here's part of his letter:

For decades, I have been put off by the growing popularity of anal sex. I have always been afraid of it and thought it to be unwise. Even before the advent of HIV, it created health risks which were best avoided. I'm old enough to remember when it was not popular.

You may wish, if possible, to check the archives of The Advocate to verify what I am saying.

In the 1970s, the classifieds section of The Advocate was not a separate publication, i.e., the classifieds consisted of the back pages of the same publication. In addition to advertisements for models and masseurs, there were personal advertisements which specifically specified what approaches to sex were preferred by the advertiser. One thing was totally clear: anal was in a small minority; oral was in a large majority.

A survey at the time (I don't know exactly how it was taken) showed that the majority of gay men were not into anal.

When I moved in 1978 to San Diego, I used to get Update, which was a gay periodical published in San Diego. Even then, oral was more popular than anal. I couldn't state exactly when anal became more popular than anything else, but I believe that the trend was well established by the early 1980s.

There is no doubt that AIDS would be a rare disease in the U.S. if anal were not popular.

No kidding.

So -- this is a guy who doesn't like anal, who considered anal to be, years ago, "unwise," and who clearly remembers that it didn't used to be popular.

And who thought it worthwhile to write to me and say so.

At the same time, this is a guy who's been very active in a very mainstream, very establishment, gay organization -- Integrity.

And in his 2004 letter, he felt constrained to say,

The warrior concept doesn't really do anything for me, but if others like it, I'm not about to object.

Okay.

That was in 2004.

A few days before Thanksgiving -- late in 2007 -- I got another letter from him.

Now, he's clearly been keeping up with the site, because he mentions that he'd lived in a third-world country for a number of years, in which men could freely put their arms around each other, hold hands, and hug, "without arousing suspicions about their sexuality."

And he notes, "as pointed out in your web site, that was possible in the U.S. til near the middle of the 20th century."

Actually, we didn't say that, but it's close enough.

But then he says -- and please bear with me --

The push towards the warrior image and fighting on your web site is somewhat off-putting to me. It seems to me that it is possible to be masculine without engaging in violence.

AARGH!!!!!!!!!!

I've spent eight years talking about the difference between aggression and violence.

And of course at no place on the site do we endorse or recommend violence.

Do we?

But what you're hearing is the voice of the gay establishment:

"Any expression of male aggression -- is bad."

"It's violence."

Now -- this guy is almost seventy years old.

He's been out for at least forty years, and maybe fifty.

Yet he's never been in a relationship.

Is it possible, and indeed likely, that if he'd acknowledged and honored his own innate and biological Natural Male Aggression -- instead of hewing so close to the party line all these years -- he would have had a lover?

Yes.

Because males who are attracted to other males -- that is to say, ALL males -- are attracted to Masculinity.

And, as my foreign friend says, "Fighting Spirit is the hallmark of Masculinity."

So this is a guy who's been out for four decades or more, and who had the courage, at some point, to be in some way an activist in the gay community --

and who's been utterly shafted by that community and its dominant ideology of anal, promiscuity, and effeminacy.

Doesn't matter.

Whenever he writes to me, he feels that he must put distance between himself and the Warrior Ideal.

Even though, as he admits in his more recent letter,

Not that violence [sic] is always wrong; decades ago, I used physical means to defend a very shy guy who was being harassed by four other guys, after verbal means failed.

After the confrontation, those guys were afraid of me. Actually, I didn't even remember what I did since seeing what they were doing so incensed me that my brain ceased to function normally.

Now, you may say to me, Well, Bill, you could talk to him about that incident and help him see that male aggression is not ipso facto a bad thing.

To which I reply, Indeed I could.

I could spend the next ten years emailing back and forth with him and guys like him on the web, and then I too will be seventy years old --

And we won't be any closer to realizing our goals.

Will we?

NO.

Because every time I score a point with this guy -- and all the guys like him -- via email, the culture in which he lives will contradict me two or three thousand times.

Actually more like ten thousand times.

So it's all Bambi meets Godzilla.

In which I get to be Bambi.

Not my life's ambition.

Think about NW.

I said that NW's been taught that it's Honorable and Worthy to Fight Back.

He's spent many years in a social milieu that supports his fighting back.

Our gay Episcopalian has not.

He was successful in the one fight he had.

But there was no one there to interpret it for him and to support him in his success.

Instead, he believes that his exercise of a basic Male INSTINCT -- to defend the weak -- was, fundamentally, wrong.

Because it was "violent."

He needs to be in a milieu in which he is told -- not once -- but repeatedly -- that Fighting is Honorable and Aggression Worthy.

And that Victory is to be celebrated.

Sidebar:

Life lessons:

When Patrick was six years old, he was playing outside on a warm day, wearing just shorts and flip-flops, when a neighborhood kid of the same age swung at him with a piece of broken glass.

Patrick grabbed him by the hair and punched him in the face, till he ran away.

The kid's big brother -- considerably bigger -- returned in his place and pushed Patrick down into an areaway filled with broken glass.

So Patrick was covered with broken glass.

Patrick's aunt, who was black, saw what happened, pulled Patrick out of the glass, and complained to the parents of the other kids.

Who responded with a string of anti-Irish and anti-black epithets.

Patrick's father, who had a fearsome reputation as a fighter, then appeared; the offending parents immediately ran into their house and locked their door.

Patrick's father warned them to leave Patrick alone, and then took Patrick home.

When they got there, and after Patrick's mom had removed all the broken glass from Patrick's shirtless body, Patrick's father hit him -- in the mouth.

Patrick said, What's that for?

And his father responded, A little bit of pain isn't going to kill you.

The lesson was this:

The worst thing in life isn't getting hurt.

It's being afraid.

The worst thing in life isn't getting hurt.

The worst thing in life -- is not fighting back.

Fighting isn't free.

You always get hurt in a fight;

But if when attacked, you Fight Back, you come out of the Fight with your Manhood intact.

Now, no doubt many of you are appalled by Patrick's father's striking his son.

And we can, if we wish, fault his parenting skills.

Though Patrick is actually a very well-adjusted guy with great love for both his father and mother.

Fact is, they lived in a very rough neighborhood.

And neither Patrick nor his father are big men.

They're actually below the average height, and though they're large-boned, they're not heavy, so they don't look it.

Again, they're both gifted with a natural athleticism, and with a bodily structure which gives their punches a tremendous wallop.

But just by looking at them -- you wouldn't know that.

In a tough neighborhood, a bully looking for a target would find someone like Patrick very attractive.

Which his father knew.

Which is why his father wanted to be sure that Patrick would fight not just a boy his size -- but a bigger boy as well.

Fight him with such ferocity -- that the bigger boy would never attack again.

Over the years, what Patrick's father taught him was to go all out in a fight.

You have to fight, he said, as though you're going to kill the other guy.

You won't succeed in doing that.

But if you fight like that, you'll never have to fight the same guy twice.

Even if you lose, you'll inflict so much damage, that he'll never bother you again.

That's the truth guys.

Of course Patrick and his father were talking about street fights.

Which neither Patrick's father, nor Patrick, nor we, in any way glorify.

Patrick eventually sought out training in martial arts.

As did I.

We pay a lot of attention to martial arts and to mixed martial arts (MMA) in the Alliance, and for a reason -- the martial arts in general are empowering; while mixed martial arts in particular have a distinct relationship to a core element of ancient Greek athleticism.

Of course mixed martial arts is skin-on-skin -- not nude, but then, we're living not in pagan Greece, but in puritan America.

But there's another, and more important element, and it's this:

Mixed martial arts fighting is what comes closest in our era to capturing the Greek idea and ideal of the Agon -- the contest -- which the Greeks defined, as I noted earlier, as one man's strenuous physical effort to overcome another.

That's what you see in mixed martial arts:

One man's strenuous physical effort to overcome another.

Conducted, generally speaking, in an atmosphere of male camaraderie and good fellowship, which is fostered by the dojo and the fight school, the modern-day equivalents of the palestrae.

And which treats Male Aggression as Honorable and Worthy.

Of course MMA is not ancient Greece.

Not only is there no nudity; but there are no herms -- which we can think of as godly phalluses and phallic gods -- in the fight schools; nor other than some maudlin religiosity, is there any overt sense of the Sacred in the Fight.

So the Fight Schools are not blessed with the presence of divine figures like Hermes and Pollux; and the competitions themselves are not religious festivals -- as they were in the ancient world.

Rather, the competitions are staged to benefit promoters -- businessmen and women.

And unlike in the ancient world, where palestrae were supported either by the commune of the city-state itself or by rich individuals as a civic duty, most fight schools are privately owned and are for-profit ventures.

Not all -- Patrick's dojo was without walls and free for inner-city kids.

But most fight schools today are businesses, which have to make money.

That means that they're usually not homosocial environments, but are mixed gender, since the owners can't afford to turn away potential students.

And though there's plenty of amateurism at the local level, the fighters you see on TV are professionals -- they're paid.

So there are many differences.

But MMA is what, in our little corner of the space-time continuum, we've got in the way of -- and which comes closest to -- the classic Agon.

Does that mean that many people involved with MMA today have a sense of the idealism -- civic, communal, and religious -- associated with ancient Greek fight sports?

My answer is No, I wouldn't think so.

I've said that there's no overt sense today of the Fight as Sacred; nor is there any sense of the Fight School as a Sacred Space -- not at least in the Greek sense.

And that's important.

To be fair, dojos teaching a traditional Asian martial art, like karate, may well attempt to communicate some of the principles of Eastern spirituality to their students.

They may even tell the students that the dojo is a temple.

But that's within the context of a larger society which views fighting, fight sports, male aggression, and male sexuality -- as profane -- and religion as something which is restricted to church.

That's not the way it was for the Greeks -- for whom all of life was, as Frances has said, imbued with spirit.

And for whom Fighting in particular was Sacred.

So: by ancient standards -- and in this case, since we're speaking of the agoge, it's ancient standards which matter -- in MMA today there's no overt sense of the Fight as Sacred; nor is there any sense of the Fight School as a Sacred Space.

And, like I say, that's important.

Nor is there any true sense of the Fight School as a communal and civic space.

That too is important.

Nor is there any sense of the need for the Fight School to be a homosocial space.

When people do have those feelings today, not only are they likely to be unexpressed, but they're even more likely to be inchoate -- that's to say, felt, perhaps, but barely understood.

So: guys going to a fight school might to some degree think of the school as a communal space, but in reality it's not -- it's privately owned.

The owner might well have a sense of the school as performing a civic duty -- but he's also running a business, and has to constantly worry about his bottom-line.

Again, the owner might well recognize that there's a difference between single-gender classes and mixed-gender classes; but again, he has to maximize profits, and in addition there's not only the law but contemporary feelings about gender equity which he must take into account.

And while some guys -- no doubt most -- sense the eroticism underlying and accompanying the Fight, they dare not express that to their fellows;

nor would any dare say that, to them, the Fight is Sacred.

So the Agon, as we see it today, has been divorced from its Sacred, as well as its Communal, aspect.

That's a problem -- and I'll have more to say about it below.

Nevertheless, and given that right now we're concerned with helping Men to see once again that Male Aggression expressed in Fighting is Honorable and Worthy, and that Fighting Back is a necessary part of being a Man -- let's look at some more pix from mixed martial arts, which I remind you is a sport, pitting Men who choose to and are qualified to fight each other, against each other; and in which there are rules to protect and safeguard the fighters.

This is a mixed martial artist named Clay Guida.

He's had a big career.

And he's taken some hits:

But he doesn't quit.

As you can see in this fight with the formidable Josh Thomson.

Josh (on the left) and Clay are clowning affectionately at the weigh-in -- we've seen this before and it speaks to the good-natured quality of the sport and the fighters --

but as you'll see, the fight itself is a serious and grim undertaking, a strenuous struggle by one man to overcome another:


JoshxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxClay

So -- Clay doesn't quit.

And while he might lose a fight, he's victorious in others.

Why?

Because he has what all males need:

The Support of his Fellow Men:



In a fight, there may be moments of doubt:

They can be overcome:

And then there's victory:


VIII -- A Warrior Community

So: Our gay Episcopalian needs to be in a milieu in which he is told -- not once -- but repeatedly -- that Fighting is Honorable and Aggression Worthy.

That:

Fighting is Man.

Man is Good.

Fighting is Good.

He needs a Warrior Community.

Within which he can experience what NW correctly refers to as the "Intimacy of Aggression," which, though our society is in massive denial about it, is a form of male-male intimacy vital to Men.

As NW says,

Guys who never cross the line into body contact sports to experience the Intimacy of Aggression are never complete.

And the same is true of what we might call the Intimacy of Affection.

Men need BOTH:

Male-Male Aggression.

Male-Male Affection.

Both are intimate.

Both are essential.

You all need BOTH.

And in order to experience them fully, free of doubt and hesitation, you need a Warrior Community.

Doesn't matter whether you're a gay-identified Episcopalian or a straight-identified fundamentalist -- or atheist or anything else.

You're hit with the lies of heterosexualization and sexual orientation so often and so repeatedly that you cannot, on your own, think or fight your way clear of them.

You need a Warrior Community.

We have a community of sorts here online.

But clearly that's not enough.

We need something in the real world.

And that's what Frances is talking about.

Getting our own land -- and re-establishing the agoge.

Can't be done?

That's what you always say.

Which just illustrates Robert's point -- you're defeated in your own minds.

You're pre-defeated.

The powers-that-be love you.

You're the ideal opponent.

Lying helplessly on your back -- waiting to get kicked;

or lying on your stomach with your head in the sand and your butt in the air.

Predictably, you get fucked over and fucked and fucked and fucked over.

It's lose-lose.

That's your life -- lose-lose.

So -- what about a Warrior community?

Well, with Patrick as sick as he is, I'm clearly not in a position to do much about it.

Not at this moment.

I'd better repeat that:

With Patrick as sick as he is, I'm clearly not in a position to do much about a community.

Not at this moment.

But here's what I think -- and how I feel:


IX -- The Realm of Truth

My life has been dominated by what some might call a conundrum.

From earliest childhood on, my feelings towards other Men have been affectionate, affiliative, intimate, and erotic.

And I've been aware -- because I'm a human being -- that other boys and Men shared those feelings.

But society said I was wrong.

First society said I was the only male to have those feelings.

And that the feelings -- and I -- were immoral.

Then I was told I was the only male to have those feelings -- and that they were diseased.

Then I was told that other males, albeit a tiny minority, did share those feelings, and they too were immoral and diseased.

More recently I've been told that other males share those feelings, and that though they may not be immoral or diseased, they are without question a minority -- a tiny minority, "genetically" determined, completely discrete and separate from "normal" males, who are exclusively heterosexual.

I'm now in my sixtieth year on this earth.

Talk about cataclysms -- I've seen a few, including AIDS, which killed my lover and all of our friends.

But not once, in those six decades, and remarkably, has society told me the TRUTH about MEN.

NOT ONCE.

It's been left to me to figure out the Truth.

I've had to do it pretty much on my own.

With the help of some friends.

Well, having spent sixty years on this quest, I'm not prepared to abandon it because heterosexualization and its constant rebuffs to your own Natural Masculinity have left so many of you afraid --

afraid of living.

Harsh?

Look, Robert says you've been crushed -- and we know that's true.

You've been crushed by the weight of the lies.

And if you've been so crushed, we must then undo those lies, that you may be RAISED UP.

That you may STAND ERECT in every True and Manly sense.

Again, Robert says you've been defeated in your own minds.

Which is correct, and to which I reply, the purpose of this site and of this work -- of this MAN2MAN ALLIANCE -- is to UNDO that defeat.

And if that's our purpose, which it is, WE MUST WORK TOWARDS REALIZING IT.

Frances told me that, though she doesn't much care for the Romans -- and there's certainly a lot about them not to like -- she did like this quote from a Roman playwright:

No one can be happy who has been thrust outside the pale of truth. And there are two ways that one can be removed from this realm: by lying, or by being lied to.

~ Lucius Annaeus Seneca

We've all been thrust outside the realm of truth.

Because we've all been lied to.

But that doesn't mean that we should respond by continuing the lie.

Lawrence, understandably, at one point was talking about a "Ministry of Discretion."

But that would of necessity be a Ministry of Deceit.

Because we'd be telling Men that they can be happy hiding in the shadows and lurking in a lie.

They cannot be.

MEN were meant to live.

As I like to say, Openly and Honestly.

Which is why Thoreau said:

Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth.

He's right.

You can lose money, and fame, and even love.

But once attained, you cannot lose the TRUTH.

Just the way it is.

And I am determined to see the Truth through.

Truth is to be valued for its own sake.

And because Truth will lead to Victory.


X -- Warriorhood

A few weeks back -- before I got the email from the gay Episcopalian -- I got an email from another guy.

And he, unlike gay Episcopalian, thank goodness, identifies as a Warrior.

That he identifies as a Warrior tells me that he's been able to work free of some of the shackles of heterosexualization.

He's been STRONG enough to do that.

This is some of what he said:

Hi Bill, I know you must be tired of hearing the same story from all the warriors. I was so awestruck and overwhelmed by your site that just suddenly made me feel a sense of belonging. I have always known the warrior ethos and you just confirmed it.

Especially the Greco-Roman stuff, as I truly believe that in some cosmic way, I was there and it was my way of life, which I still live by.

Thanks again for giving us hope.

What I said to this guy in response was about this bit:

"the Greco-Roman stuff, as I truly believe that in some cosmic way, I was there and it was my way of life, which I still live by."

Here's what I said:

Let me suggest something to you about that belief.

Of course it's possible and/or you may choose to believe that you're a re-incarnated Greek or something of that nature, but there's a more down-to-earth explanation.

Which is that when Men like ourselves look at the ancient world, and particularly the Greeks, what we see is a way of life which is not only natural to us, but which, historically and cross-culturally, has been the norm for Men for millenia.

The Greeks -- and the Romans -- left a particularly vivid record of their societies, but what you're seeing is really just a Warrior society.

What we call Warriordom.

Which at one time spanned the globe.

Warriordom can be thought of as creating bonds of intimacy and affection between Men -- bonds which we refer to as Warriorhood.

And like I say, Warriorhood used to be the norm.

That changed over time, culminating with the historical process we call heterosexualization.

Which means that it's really important, for your sake, that you come to understand what heterosexualization is and how it's impacted not just your life but the lives of all Men.

You also said, "and it was my way of life, which I still live by."

Yes, exactly.

That it feels so right to you -- as it does to me and your fellow Warriors in the Alliance -- and that you feel that you still live by it -- is again, because it's a normal and natural way for Men to live.

And I then suggested some articles he might want to look at -- and you too:

Our new Warrior wrote back and said he would read the articles, and added,

Again, thanks for providing a communal society for us.


XI -- A Communal Society

There's a moment in Statius' retelling of Seven Against Thebes --

when negotiations between the opposing armies suddenly fail.

And the Men equally suddenly find themselves at war.

This is Melville's translation:

Tydeus drew his sword and called
His comrades. Savage shouts arose as rage
Seethed on all sides. War came in disarry,
Captains confounded with the rank and file,
Orders ignored, and infantry mixed up
With cavalry and scurrying chariots.

Unorganized the mass came streaming on,
Not pausing to display a battle-line,
Or scan the enemy. So the young flower
Of Argos and Thebes in sudden swarms
Were locked...

So what you have is a vivid picture of "the young flower of Argos and Thebes" locked in war.

The Latin reads

sic subitis Thebana Argivaque pubes conflixere globis

And the Latin is easy:

So in sudden swarms (sic subitis globis) Thebana Argivaque pubes (the youth of Argos and Thebes) conflixere (came into conflict)

Thebana Argivaque pubes

It's the word "pubes" which concerns us.

It means "youth."

But it also means the markers of puberty.

Melville's choice of words -- "the young flower of Argos and Thebes" -- is inspired.

It's like Terpander's "the spear-points of young men blossom there."

It captures the bloom of puberty.

As did the agoge.

Which was part of the Eu-Nomia -- the Good Rule of the Spartans.

A communal society.

Informed by a communal ideal.

A Warrior Ideal.

Let me quote for a moment from a New York Review of Books' article on a new book by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich:

If modern democracies are to survive the shock of Reich's "supercapitalism," they need to be bound by something more than the pursuit of private economic advantage, particularly when the latter accrues to ever fewer beneficiaries: the idea of a society held together by pecuniary interests alone is, in Mill's words, "essentially repulsive." A civilized society requires more than self-interest, whether deluded or enlightened, for its shared narrative of purpose. "The greatest asset of public action is its ability to satisfy vaguely felt needs for higher purpose in the lives of men and women."

The danger today is that, having devalued public action, we are no longer clear just what does bind us together. The late Bernard Williams, after describing the "objective teleology of human nature" in Greek ethical thought - the belief that there are facts about man's place in the world which determined that he was meant to lead a cooperative life - concluded that

some version of this belief has been held by most ethical outlooks subsequently; we are perhaps more conscious now of having to do without it than anyone has been since some fifth-century Sophists first doubted it.

In which case who, today, will take responsibility for what Jan Patocka called the "Soul of the City"?

There are two overriding reasons to worry about the soul of the city, and to fear that it cannot be satisfactorily substituted with a story of indefinite economic growth, or even the creative destruction of the wrecking ball of capitalist innovation. The first reason is that this story is not very appealing. It leaves a lot of people out, both at home and abroad; it wreaks havoc with the natural environment; and its consequences are unattractive and uninspiring. Abundance (as Daniel Bell once observed) may be the American substitute for socialism; but as shared social objectives go, shopping remains something of an underachievement. In the early years of the French Revolution the Marquis de Condorcet was dismayed at the prospect of commercial society that was opening before him (as it is opening before us): the idea that "liberty will be no more, in the eyes of an avid nation, than a necessary condition for the security of financial operations." We ought to share his revulsion.

The second source of anxiety is that the never-ending story may not last. Even economies have histories. The last time the capitalist world passed through a period of unprecedented expansion and great wealth creation, during the "globalization" avant le mot of the world economy in the imperial decades preceding World War I, there was a widespread assumption in Britain - much as there is in the US and Western Europe today - that this was the threshold of an unprecedented age of indefinite peace and prosperity. Anyone seeking an account of this confidence - and what became of it - can do no better than read Keynes's Economic Consequences of the Peace: a summary of the illusions of a world on the edge of catastrophe, written in the aftermath of the war that was to put an end to all such irenic fancies for the next fifty years.

So, the writer -- whose name is Tony Judt -- speaks of "the need for higher purpose in the lives of men and women."

He notes that our greatest Western thinkers have believed that a society held together by money alone is "essentially repulsive"; and that the last period of globalization, marked by "unprecedented expansion and great wealth creation," led directly to the cataclysms of World War I, bolshevism, the Great Depression, the rise of fascism, and World War II.

From greed and unbridled materialism -- comes cataclysm.

Yet there is an alternative.

A cooperative life.

A communal society.

Frances speaks of a communal society.

Our newest warrior speaks of a communal society.

As did the Spartans -- and the other Greeks:

the "objective teleology [purposefulness] of human nature" in Greek ethical thought - the belief that there are facts about man's place in the world which determined that he was meant to lead a cooperative life

Those other Greeks include Libanius, the great pagan philosopher I mentioned at the beginning of this reply, who sought to preserve Hellenism -- and its belief in Man -- against the onslaughts of the barbarians and of state Christianity, which was busily destroying the temples of the gods.

And human freedom.

Time for another sidebar.

This one about Freedom and Christianity:

I recently read an op-ed in the International Herald Tribune which claimed that Christianity, with its incarnate God and notion of the unity-in-diversity of the Trinity, was far more supportive of human freedom than is Islam, whose God is transcendent.

The guy who wrote the article, Adrian Pabst, is a lot like our old friend commited Catholic.

That is to say, he's a young, unprincipled, unscrupulous, and fundamentally duplicitous intellectual attack dog of the ultra-conservative religious right.

I don't know if Mr Pabst, like "commited Catholic," is Roman Catholic, but his work certainly has that Catholic Encyclopedia sensibility.

And once again, what Pabst claimed was that that Christianity, with its incarnate God and notion of the unity-in-diversity of the Trinity, was far more supportive of human freedom than is Islam, whose God is transcendent.

Historically, however, that's not true.

The idea of human freedom was first developed by the pagan Greeks.

And the pagan Romans were far more tolerant of religious -- and human -- diversity -- than were their Christian European successors.

Indeed, during the thousand years that an absolutist Christianity held sway in Europe, freedom was virtually forgotten -- while diversity was punished.

During that same period, the lands governed by Islam were actually more tolerant of diversity -- if not more free.

Freedom in Europe was reborn during the Renaissance, when the grip of Christianity was weakened.

Freedom in the West is an essentially secular -- and pagan -- idea.

Yes, the notion of an Incarnate God and of the three-in-one or "triune" God were borrowed -- some would say stolen -- from paganism.

But having appropriated those ideas, Christianity did not apply them in a democratic way.

Similarly, "commited Catholic" claimed, in an email to me, that the Church had "a more humane understanding of love and affection and the place of sexual desire in flourishing" than did the Greeks.

Really?

The Church's approach to love, affection, and intimacy between Men is to tell us that we are immoral, disordered, and diseased.

And that our normal and natural same-sex needs and desires are to be rigidly suppressed.

The Greek approach is to honor and exalt love and affection among Men.

And to encourage Warriors -- to openly and honestly love -- Warriors.

Under which regime are MEN more likely to Flourish?

Remember what NW said:

"this totally naked wrestling was what our ancestors did up until the advent of Christianity."

Right.

Is it "more humane" to teach Men to be ashamed of their genitals?

To teach Men to fear and to flee from bodily contact with each other?

To teach them that they can never and must never LOVE?



XII -- The TRUTH About MEN

So: We're telling the Truth about MEN.

And we're telling the Truth about MEN and FREEDOM.

And when Men hear that Truth -- they respond.

Make no mistake:

Both the cataclysm kid and the gay Episcopalian have responded to our message too.

The problem is that they, like the vast majority of you, are only willing to take the tiniest of baby steps.

And the moment that someone says boo to you about even one of those steps -- you beat a hasty retreat.

No.

Jim -- the guy I mentioned at the beginning of this reply, the guy who got killed, and whose life and death finally motivated me to finish this reply -- Jim responded to our message too.

NW:

Jim listened to every word of it. He was fascinated with the whole aspect of mingling intimacy and aggression into one. He, like most males in America today, had been deprived of that necessary and beautiful component of Man-hood.

Jim had been deprived.

Jim responded.

But he died before he could enjoy the new information NW had given him.

He died "deprived of that necessary and beautiful component of Man-hood."

Frances:

Sparta, and that ideal, really puts in your face the idea of What the Hell is Manhood? Guys need to think of that. And, when they look around them at guys in our world who live their straight, or gay, little lives they should be able to figure out that proud MAN-LOVING Spartans were the real deal.

She's right.

"Proud MAN-LOVING Spartans were the real deal."

What do you want to be?

The real deal?

Or:

Trapped forever in your "straight, or gay, little lives"?

You only get one go round after all.

It would be a shame, wouldn't it, to die -- without ever having lived.

TRUTH.

Truth is what matters.

I lost Brett.

And we -- and I do mean we -- will almost certainly lose Patrick.

But I -- and some of us -- will not lose the Truth about Men.

And if the best way to preserve that truth is through a Warrior Community -- a communal society -- that's what we'll do.

Lawrence is enthused with this idea.

As you should all be.

I've advised him to be more cautious on the web.

But not to be less enthused.

Frances says:

Having way too many people is going to lead to war for resources and fierce competition. We're talking combat. No, I'm not a survivalist, but I think it's probably a reality waiting for us. Guys in Novus Spartia and its life-giving women will be the lucky ones.

Is she right that "way too many people is going to lead to war for resources and fierce competition"?

I don't know.

What I do know is that many scientists think that the UN projections on global warming which came out in November are too rosy.

And that James Lovelock, the UK scientist who's been way ahead of the curve on global ecology, thinks that it's too late to stop the cataclysm which is on its way.

Is Lovelock right?

I don't know.

But a sustainable community -- is always a good idea.

And as Frances says, if we establish such a community, "Guys in Novus Spartia and its life-giving women will be the lucky ones."

Lucky is right.

Look again at this picture, this picture from that pristine Homeric world of flesh and spirit:

In it, the artist has encapsulated the three ages of Man.

On the right is a boy.

He's naked, as a boy in the agoge would be.

He's smiling and joyful, happy and secure in his Masculine World.

In the center is Achilles, the Warrior.

He too is happy.

Above him are the instruments of his craft:

A sword; a shield; a helmet.

That's all he needs to go into battle, the field of Naked Valour.

And below him is the body of his enemy, Hector, who he fought and defeated honorably, in Nude Combat.

Cruel?

Achilles killed Hector because Hector killed Patroclus -- Achilles' Warrior Brother.

On the left is the Old Man, Priam.

Three Men, at three stages of life.

In this Warrior society, each has his place.

His honored place.

The boy's is the agoge.

Achilles' place is the field of battle -- and the Assembly.

While Priam is an Elder; and his place is in the Gerousia -- the Council of Elders.

These Men live in a pristine world of flesh and spirit.

Pure and noble;

Heroic and uncorrupted.

Can that world be reclaimed?

YES.

It takes only the WILL to do it.

Are you lacking in that WILL?

Look again at what you could have.

I said this painting represents the three ages of Man, but it can also represent the three constituents of the Eu-Nomia -- the Good Rule:

On the right, the Youth and the agoge.

In the middle, the Warrior and the Ekklesia -- the Assembly.

On the left, the Elder and the Gerousia -- the Council of Elders.

This is what Men had.

This is what You can have again:










That's enough for now; Patrick needs me.

One more thing, however:

You've not been donating.

NO.

A handful of people are supporting this site and this work.

NO.

You DONATE.

Because I can be lost too.

And the truth is -- you can't survive more losses.

DONATE.

Part with a few dollars.

You can spare them.

You cannot spare the Truth.

I'ved talked of a "pristine world of flesh and spirit."

Some of you hearing the word "pristine" may think "prissy."

But our English word pristine, which we usually use to mean unsullied and unspolied, derives from the Roman word pristinus, which simply means former, previous, earlier.

So: that pristine world of flesh and spirit is the former world, the earlier world, the previous world, the one which preceded heterosexualization.

The memory of that world is one you carry, I suspect, in your Y chromosome, which is passed from father to son virtually unchanged.

Which means that your Y chromosome was the Y chromosome of a Warrior -- actually of many Warriors.

That's why the Warrior Realm -- Warriordom -- speaks so powerfully to you.

That's why the Brotherhood of Warriors -- a Brotherhood of both Flesh and Spirit -- WARRIORHOOD -- calls out to you.

It's a Truth you carry with you.

It's a Truth that's in your blood.

For thousands of years, in the ancient world, Men looked to the Truth.

They looked to the Light.

And then -- they looked away.

But we have returned to the Light and to those ancient Truths.

And having refound them, we will renew them and revitalize them.

That ALL MANKIND can once again be FREE.

Thank you Robert, Frances, and NW.

You're true Warriors.

Bill Weintraub

December 12, 2007

© All material Copyright 2007 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.


PS

I know this is a long post.

If you want to re-read a section of the reply, you can use these links:

I -- Flesh and Spirit

II -- Truth or Lie

III -- Crushed and Defeated

IV -- Man-Loving Men

V -- Novus Spartia

VI -- On the Ropes

VII -- Fighting Back

VIII -- A Warrior Community

IX -- The Realm of Truth

X -- Warriorhood

XI -- A Communal Society

XII -- The TRUTH About MEN







REPLY FROM

Redd

Re: agoge: The Spear-Points of Young Men Blossom There

12-26-2007

My sister's boyfriend is fifty, dating again after twenty years of being single resulting from divorce. He has two adult daughters and a twelve year old son, and he epitomizes the longing for Masculinity that men desire and need.

As you know, I don't believe men are straight or gay. I think men are men, and most of us are confused about what being a man is. Gay-identified men seem to think effeminacy and sodomy define them, and the straight-identified man seems to think that his relationship with women defines his masculinity. Many gay-identified men denounce their manhood because they believe in the heterosexual paradigm of male and female, thinking that a gay relationship requires that one of the males in a couple assume the feminine role. The straight-identified man is probably worst: he frowns on anything masculine outside of sports and cultivates a relationship with his female partner only. She is his exclusive relationship.

I'm on a dating internet site, and one of my matches said that she wanted a man who would be her "everything" and she would be his "everything." This idea that a woman and man could be each other's everything is fantasy. NO woman can be a man's everything, and no man a woman's. Married men and straight-identified men suffer because, I believe, they lack male companionship. They lack the freedom to enjoy men's company non-sexually for fear of desiring that company sexually. They have bought into this idea that a woman can be their "everything." Heterosexualism champions this false idea of "everything" through another concept, "soulmates."

The movie "Deck the Hall" staring Danny Devito and Matthew Broderick demonstrates this fear in the scene where Broderick's character is returning to consciousness after falling into a frozen pond. Devito strips the unconscious Broderick naked, strips naked himself, and cuddles with Broderick in a sleeping bag to generate warmth. Broderick comes to and once he realizes he's naked, body-to-body with Devito, Broderick screams nonstop. The message: "I am not gay; I don't touch other men." Broderick's character turns a non-sexual situation into a sexual one.

What's problematic with this scene and scenes in other films that show similar reactions of men who come or might come body-to-body with men is this: despite the non-sexual nature of the scene, the heterosexual notion of man that men don't touch men prevails. Profssor Ibson makes a good point on this in Picturing Men. Professor Ibson cites Douglas Allanbrook. Ibson says "Allanbrook reminds us (without directly saying so) that it is just as inhibiting to believe that intimacy must involve sex as it is to insist that it dare not" (177, Picturing Men).

Heterosexualism and gay have defined all touch as sexual; hence, they distort, maybe "misrepresent" is a better word, all touch whether sexual or not.

Men are suffering because they lack male companionship or male intimacy because they "believe that intimacy must involve sex" and they suffer because they fear society's "insist[ing] that [male intimacy] dare not [involve sex].

I've said once that I believe that the violence (the child and spousal abuse for example) we see men enact has a strong bearing in their lacking male intimacy. Denying men their natural right to express their aggressive manhood creates frustrated, angry men.

Back to my sister's boyfriend: He recognizes his timidity, his son's timidity (I recognize mine), and I think most men recognize their timidity. We see timidity in other men. And we hate timidity. We hate that as boys our mothers protected us from being hurt. We hate that we were taught to fear a fight, to fear a punch, to avoid roughhousing with the boys.

Yet, Bill, and here's where heterosexism emasculates boys, we were condemned, usually by those very people who protected us, for not being tough. Boys in my neighborhood were dubbed sissy not because they were gay but because they were not tough; they didn't play sports well, which was the main way of determining toughness.

You know what though? Not every man can succeed at conventional sports like football or hockey or basketball. But all men can fight. ALL MEN AND BOYS CAN FIGHT.

Football or hockey does not demonstrate masculinity like fighting.

Just think what would have happened to a boy who after a fight had his buddy throw his arm around the fighter's shoulders and congratulate the fighter's efforts? That gesture would be similar to Patrick's father's punching Patrick in the mouth. Fight. Don't worry about winning. Just fight. Even if a boy cries, as long as he fights, his tears aren't defeat.

On a different note, I hope Patrick is finding some relief. His troubles seem to have ignited your fire for the passion you have for the Alliance. You celebrate him.

Godspeed

Redd


Interested readers can find a continuation of this discussion in

Agoge Reply III: The Longing for Masculinity.




Add a reply to this discussion

Back to Personal Stories








AND


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 learn more about Heroic Homosex.

And here to learn more about Heroes.

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


Warriors Speak Home

Cockrub Warriors Site Guide

The Man2Man Alliance

Heroic Homosex

Frot Men

Heroes

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 | 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.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx