Also by Warrior Jon:

To Bond Together in Masculine Love

The Plague

The Warriors' Call

Warrior Jon: Sharp Tongue and even Sharper Pen

Manimal Love: The Story of Alex

Bill Weintraub

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-15-2009

Hey Jon

These are great!

Jon, when you first mentioned these to me, I wasn't real eager to hear them.

And that's because in recent years, I've tried to move the site and the Alliance away from what I'd call salacious material, and instead move it in the direction of thinking about what we might call, in effect, the moral uses of sex.

The fact is that the Greeks, as I've explained, believed that sex between Men had to have a moral purpose -- or it would degenerate into what we call analism.

And they were right.

So -- that's what I want our guys to think about it -- I want that to have their attention.

But your fantasies are not salacious -- they're what I would term "wholesome," and, as you say, "loving."

And I think the Greeks would approve.

Jon, do you understand that core point -- about Love between Men being a "yearning for moral beauty"?

And a strife of valour -- that is to say, a mutual striving which makes both Men more Virtuous?

Does that make sense to you?

Bill

John

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-15-2009

I believe i understand. Man loves Man, but it is not purely sexual, it is about the Man being Man...in the end, all that makes up a person. It's like trying to explain love all together...it's complicated. But i think that i understand what you mean.

Bill Weintraub

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-15-2009

Hi Jon

Let's take a look:

I believe i understand. Man loves Man, but it is not purely sexual, it is about the Man being Man...

Yes -- and the Man being Man in the moral sense.

Man posessing moral beauty -- which is ultimately moral heroism -- the ability to sacrifice self for country, friend, cause, or ideal -- and therefore being worthy of Love.

in the end, all that makes up a person.

Yes -- but the Greeks are particularly concerned with the moral aspect.

Their ideals center on Virtue -- in a way that ours no longer do.

The Greeks, even if they don't believe in the polytheistic Gods, virtually always believe in God.

And God as the source of Justice.

We have "faith" in things like -- markets.

That would seem very odd, to put it mildly, to the Greeks.

It's like trying to explain love all together...it's complicated. But i think that i understand what you mean.

Okay.

To understand this further, you have to understand the Greek word areté which I often use on the site.

You can look at this definition.

But the real place to start is Excellence Honor and the Molding of Men.

And guys, it's crucial that every Warrior read and understand that post.

Areté can mean excellence, and valour, and virtue, and manhood.

But the core point is that areté derives from Ares -- the Warrior God.

So -- although the Greeks recognized that women could have areté aka excellence too --

for the Greeks, in a male-male context, areté is an expression of Manhood.

Which is related directly to bravery in the fight.

Their word for Good -- "agathos" -- also means Brave.

And their word for Beautiful -- "kalos" -- also means Noble.

So there's a key point:

Beauty isn't beautiful -- unless it's brave.

And there's a word -- kalokagathia -- which combines beauty and bravery

Kalos + agathos =

Nobility and goodness

Beauty and bravery

Just being pretty doesn't cut it.

You have to be brave.

And you have to be good, which above all means Just.

Thus the idea of Virtuous Virility:

Just, Brave, Temperate, Wise

Those are our Warrior Values.

Those Four "Divine" Virtues are all aspects of areté.

Further, Plato says that Eros -- male-male Love -- is the Love for areté.

If that's so, then Eros is the Love of Fighting Spirit.

So -- the moral purpose of Eros is to improve the areté of both Men involved.

Which means that for the Greeks, Eros is characterized by both moral earnestness -- and erotic passion.

Does any of that make sense?

If not, try reading

• A Nation of Heroes;

• The Strife of Valour; and, of course

• Two Spearmen

And it's from that rejection, combined with heterosexualization, that analism ultimately derives.

That's the truth Jon.

Morals matter.

Even when you're rubbing cocks?

I'd say especially when you're rubbing cocks.

Why?

Because the world created by analism is incredibly corrupt.

The degree to which it tolerates not just bad behavior but murderous behavior, including but not limited to the deliberate spread of HIV, is, to use the word again, incredible.

If, for example, someone had written, in 1979, a science fiction in which the leaders of a worldwide, wealthy, and very influential subculture tolerate and tacitly approve of its members infecting each other with a deadly virus through a fetishistic act -- it would have seemed incredible.

Yet that's what's gone on for three decades -- thirty years.

Incredible.

But we have to believe it -- because it's true.

That's what's happened.

Given that the culture is so corrupt, I've tried very hard for the last ten years to keep cockrub and Frot -- free of corruption.

I've fought efforts to commercialize the word Frot because the people who want to do that want to make Frot every bit as sleazy as anal is today.

And that's just the logic of those who think of sex as "recreational" -- of sex as play.

They'll turn an act that we consider a Holy Sacrament -- into a vehicle for raunch, kink, and sleaze.

They'll corrupt, because that's all they know how to do.

And Jon, if we don't fight them -- they'll succeed.

Bill Weintraub

October 15, 2009

© All material Copyright 2009 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.

John

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-16-2009

Yes, I understand the Greek's ideal ... it's the same ideal I hold. That sex has to have a moral purpose, that Men have to be loved through that moral purpose. Virtue, Self-control, wisdom, bravery, Just. All of this makes sense to me ... and i think that I definately get it inside.

I have read the two spearmen post and the page about valour. I believe that i understand, but i am, quite frankly, a bit confused. I admire and am attracted to men and all of the qualities that make a man : Virtue, Chilvary, the act of being Noble, Honesty, Integrity, Bravery, Wisdom, Justice. But, the thing that is confusing me, according to the pages which I read, is that you seem to be pointing out that we should love the FIGHT in other men. That I understand, and I like guys who will stand up for themselves and others and show bravery, but I am not attracted to bloody-violence ... does that make sense. It probably sounds rather stupid, but that is the way I feel. If I am to fight a guy that I like, then i would much rather do so in wrestling, rather than boxing or punching. Perhaps that makes me a little less of a Warrior, I don't know. I am simply trying to make sense of where my place in all of this is.

Bill Weintraub

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-16-2009

Hey Jon

Let's take a look:

Yes, I understand the Greek's ideal ... it's the same ideal I hold. That sex has to have a moral purpose, that Men have to be loved through that moral purpose. Virtue, Self-control, wisdom, bravery, Just. All of this makes sense to me ... and i think that I definately get it inside.

That's right.

I have read the two spears and page about valour. I believe that i understand, but i am, quite frankly, a bit confused. I admire and am attracted to men and all of the qualities that make a man : Virtue, Chilvary, the act of being Noble, Honesty, Integrity, Bravery, Wisdom, Justice. But, the thing that is confusing me, according to the pages of which I read, is that you seem to be pointing out that we should love the FIGHT in other men.

Yes, I don't just seem to be pointing it out, I am pointing it out.

"we should love the FIGHT in other men."

That's right.

We should love the Fight in other Men.

Fight in the sense of Fighting Spirit.

We're talking about Fighting Spirit.

Fighting Spirit is the hallmark of Masculinity.

And we're saying, as the Greeks did, that it's natural for a Man to love and admire the Fighting Spirit in another Man.

Provided of course, that that Fighting Spirit is used in the service of Justice -- of Virtue.

This is a little complicated, because Fighting Spirit, in the form of Courage, is part of Virtue.

And there are those who argue -- many, actually, including Winston Churchill -- that Courage is the most important virtue because it enables all the others.

As Warrior Chris pointed out to me, you can't have Justice -- without Courage.

Courage creates and defends Justice -- makes it possible.

And like I said, Winston Churchill agrees:

Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality that guarantees all the others.

Nevertheless, most Greeks and most people today would say that Fighting Spirit should be deployed, in effect, in the service of Virtue -- which again, is Justice.

Brett, for example, had great Fighting Spirit.

And he used that Fighting Spirit to try to improve the plight of gay people, which in the late 1970s and early 80s, was dreadful.

Patrick has great Fighting Spirit.

He used it in his ministry, in working to teach karate to kids at risk from gangs, and in trying to help other guys understand their "bisexuality" and Frot.

And you, Jon, have Fighting Spirit in spades:

About gay bashers you said to me -- "Hell, I'm not afraid of those sorry ass gay-bashers. Bring 'em on!"

In The Warriors' Call you said:

"To battle with Courage and Fearlessness,

To win."

In Alliance Youth: "It's time for the Warriors to make a stand!"

In Sharper Pen you said: "remember fellow Warriors: We are Warriors, and we will never fall, ever."

Those are all expressions of your Fighting Spirit.

As is the scene in Manimal Love: The Story of Alex, where Alex fights off the predator beast:

then he was down there, beside of the other male Manimal, a rock in hand and his body between the Predator and the other male, who was bleeding on one of his legs.

"Come on, you bastard," Alex growled, his lips snarled up in a battle pose, the tip of his canines -- a little longer than that of Humans on Earth -- sharp.

The Predator blinked its yellow lizard eyes and opened its razor-teeth filled maw, lunging at Alex. Alex spun aside, grabbing the other male with his free hand and pulling him out of the path of the Predator. Then, before the horrid lizard could understand why it had missed its prey, Alex had jumped atop the Predator's head and was bashing it between the eyes with the sharp rock in his hands. The monster hissed its fury at the Manimal on its back, opening and closing its horrible mouth with an audible snap. But there was nothing the creature could do, for Alex was hanging on tightly with one hand, and with his legs, while he pounded the monster in the eyes with the rock.

Like I say, Jon, Fightng Spirit -- in spades.

But -- that doesn't mean you have to pound the Man you Love in the eyes with a rock.

That's not what we're advocating.

And neither are the Greeks.

To understand Areté, you need to read the article titled Excellence, Honor, and the Molding of Men.

That's a core article and thus really important.

The concept of Areté, as Werner Jaeger explains, starts off as bravery in battle.

It then evolves to encompass the Four Divine Virtues of Justice, Courage, Temperance, and Wisdom --

and to see its ultimate expression as Moral Heroism -- again, the willingness to sacrifice self for family, friend, country, cause.

In Alex's fight with the predator -- that's what he exhibits -- moral heroism.

Expressed as a willingness to Fight -- when necessary.

Alex doesn't know Bo -- the guy he's defending.

He could let Bo be killed and eaten by the predator.

He doesn't.

He risks his own life to save the life of a stranger.

And when he attacks -- he's not gentle about it:

He growls, he snarls, and he bashes the predator in the head with a rock.

He proceeds with what Patrick would call "extreme prejudice."

And that, Jon, is how you have to Fight in that sort of life-and-death situation.

You can't sort-of fight.

Because you'll get creamed -- and in the worst case, killed.

And you clearly understand that -- because Alex fights the predator -- all out.

That's how you have to Fight -- in that situation.

In addition, in fighting to save Bo's life, Alex demonstrates Warrior altruism -- which is a key Warrior trait.

That I understand, and I like guys who will stand up for themselves and others and show bravery,

Good.

Because you're one of those guys.

but I am not attracted to bloody-violence...does that make sense.

Sure it makes sense.

We don't endorse mindless violence.

Or encourage it.

But -- is the violence in Manimal Love: The Story of Alex -- mindless?

No.

Alex is defending a fellow being who's under attack.

If Alex didn't fight the predator -- Bo would be killed.

It probably sounds rather stupid,

No, it doesn't sound stupid.

but that is the way I feel. If I am to fight a guy that I like, then i would much rather do so in wrestling, rather than boxing or punching.

Yes, and that's fine.

Jon, you don't ever have to, so far as the Alliance is concerned, physically fight anyone.

Though we do recommend that you train in a martial art or other fight sport -- which you say you want to do -- so that you have the experience of fighting in a controlled setting.

Jon -- same-sex Love -- Eros -- in ancient Greece took place in the context of the Palaistra -- the Wrestling School or Fight School.

Those guys all wrestled together -- nude -- from an early age and throughout a good part of their adult life.

They were expected to do that.

To spend most afternoons -- wrestling.

That was the context in which same-sex love affairs blossomed.

And as Prof Miller says in Ancient Greek Athletics: "The "emphasis [was] on emotional bonds, a loving relationship that would result in permanence and stability. Profligate homosexuality [sic] was scorned and condemned."

Is there a connection between the Fighting Spirit which was inculcated in the Fight School -- and "a loving relationship that would result in permanence and stability"?

In my view, yes.

One of the problems, Jon, that Men face today, and one of the components of analism, is the constant attack on Masculinity.

Which includes Fighting Spirit.

And there's a logic to it.

If Fighting Spirit and Masculinity are bad, Jon, then it makes sense for a male to be emasculated through anal penetration.

Many acts of anal penetration.

Promiscuous acts of anal penetration.

That's why so many feminists are such ardent supporters of analism.

Because they see it as depriving the male of his Masculinity -- which to them is a negative quality.

Remember what the guy I call "my foreign friend" says:

The heterosexual society cares only for women. It sees men only as a problematic group that comes in the way of what is called women's rights.

Gay men are one of the most ardent supporters of heterosexualisation. They represent the dust bin created by the heterosexualised society to contain the mutilated/ negativised remnants of male-male sex that survives after the intense oppression of them in the mainstream...

Gay men (when I say gay men I mean feminine identified males who like men) derive immense power from the heterosexual society. In fact they owe the heterosexual society their existence.

Why?

Because, as he says

If there is no heterosexual society there would be no homosexuals. And no heterosexuals either. Male-male sex is isolated only because in the western society, its spaces and its customs are completely heterosexualised (i.e. made mixed gender with pressures to be heterosexual). But heterosexual spaces are themselves unnatural --- and it was only through financial and technological power brought by industrialisation that the western society could create such an artificial unnatural heterosexual environment.

So -- present-day "homosexuals" aka "gay men" are dependent upon "an artificial unnatural heterosexual environment" for their existence.

Their culture -- which is emasculating -- is a by-product of that environment.

And Jon, you're very aware, in your own writing, of the emasculating nature of anal and analism:

I have, thankfully, never allowed myself to be attracted to a guy that I knew was into anal, and, therefore, I have never been in a relationship. Which I think is good, because I have not suffered the humiliation of being emasculated, or to emasculate another. I like Men who are Men, do you get what I'm saying? And I will not, WILL NOT, be fucked up the ass or emasculate another Man by fucking him up the ass.

You're opposed to emasculation.

And so are we.

The analists see emasculation as a social good -- as a positive.

It puts the male "in touch with his feminine side."

We don't believe Men have a feminine side.

We believe that Men can be and are loving and nurturing as an expression of their innate maleness -- their Masculinity.

So:

We seek to reclaim our Masculinity.

And to celebrate it.

To us, Masculinity -- which includes Fighting Spirit -- is a social good and a positive.

Emasculation is bad.

Masculinity is good.

Perhaps that makes me a little less of a Warrior,

No.

Jon, you're a Warrior

Like I said, you exhibit Fighting Spirit.

And that's the Hallmark of the Warrior.

And your various posts are calls to Moral Heroism.

For Men to stand up against an oppressor.

Jon, did you see the quote from Frederick Douglass?

It's in my reply to Sharper Pen:

This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.

In your own work, Jon, you say essentially the same thing: that there must be a struggle.

I don't know. I am simply trying to make sense of where my place in all of this is.

I understand.

Again:

"This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle."

You understand that.

And that's what matters.

Clearly, we're involved in a moral struggle.

And Jon, you have to see how the analists have behaved in that struggle.

They're incredibly base and low.

Ignoble.

Un-virtuous.

Their behavior is, as Xenophon would say, cowardly and unmanly.

To which Socrates would add, shameful, foul, and evil.

Jon, if you're still feeling confused or uncomfortable around any of these issues, please let me know.

I don't want to lose you over this because you are so very clearly a Warrior.

Bill

John

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-18-2009

I believe that you have helped me clear up my confusion...I simply misinterpreted the message that was being made. (Which a bunch of newcomers may do...) But you have helped me understand what you meant. I would fight like all the hordes of hell to defend another person, especially if it were my mate, but I would never go out of my way to pick a fight, or to fight just for the hell of it. And i think that i was hung up on that for some reason, usually i can understand things, but that seemed to stumble me for a moment. But, i realize my misinterpretation. Thank you for helping me clear that up.

Bill Weintraub

Re: my ultimate fantasy

10-23-2009

Hi Jon,

I believe that you have helped me clear up my confusion...

Good.

I simply misinterpreted the message that was being made. (Which a bunch of newcomers may do...)

Okay.

It's true that guys acculturated into analism, guys coming out of analist / anti-masculine / effeminist culture may well misinterpret the message.

They may see it, as a recent visitor did, for example as "hypermasculine" -- which it isn't.

So, not too long ago, a guy submitted this ad for Frot Club:

I'm a handsome, well hung, masculine, 5'11" growing bodybuilder who's a frot peg in an anal world - an affectionate, tactile man seeking c2c bliss. I'm a lover not a fighter but have to admit I'm intruiged by hypermasculinity and the wrestling scene. ...

I wrote back to him and said,

I like your post, but --

in the Alliance, we never use the term "hypermasculinity" to refer to normal and natural male aggression as expressed in fight sports like wrestling and mixed martial arts.

That's not hypermasculinity.

It's masculinity.

There's a difference.

And we would never characterize normal masculinity, maleness, being a guy -- as hypermasculinity.

Because that buys into the idea -- all too common in our society and particularly in "gay culture" -- that being a guy -- is bad.

It isn't.

Now, in the case of this guy, he was easy to work with, and he re-wrote his ad -- you can, if you're interested, read it here.

So -- it's important that we help people and especially Men understand that what the anti-masculinists call "hypermasculine" is just normal masculinity.

And that if two guys want to spar or wrestle or even have a full-contact fight -- civilization as we know it will not come to an end.

But it's also true Jon, that some people will run away from the site no matter what we do.

That was brought home to me very clearly in early April, when a man wrote to me, full of enthusiasm for the Alliance.

Indeed, he was so enthusiastic that he sent me the same letter three times -- for posting, he said.

And I had his post all ready to go, when, on the next day, he got cold feet and asked me not to post.

Why?

Because he was disturbed, he said, by the Masculinist nature of the site, and our failure to recognize the male's "feminine side."

And I think too because he more into oral than Frot.

I'm certain that was part of it.

Yet in his initial letter to me and the Alliance, he made a number of statements evincing great support for Masculinity.

Which went like this:

• That we'd put into words many things he'd been confused about.

• That as a youth and young man he'd disliked the stripped-of-masculinity gay male stereotypes presented by the media.

• That he'd believed that to love a man he had to be a woman -- and that that belief had driven his sexuality underground for many years.

• That he didn't like anal, and felt degraded and angry when someone tried to force him to do anal.

• That he'd been accused of being "hetero-normative" and bigoted for refusing to bottom.

• That the pressure to be labeled top or bottom is enormous.

• That he wants to be a Man loving a Man -- and nothing different.

Sound familiar?

So clearly -- our message hit a nerve with this man.

And then he said, but I don't pass judgement on what people do sexually, and don't want others to pass judgement on me:

Personally, I believe whatever two people feel comfortable doing with each other--sexually or otherwise--is great; I don't pass judgment

In response, I said to him -- and we'll call him "Joe" --

Joe -- like all other human beings, you make judgements every day of your life, many many many times.

Judgements about what to eat, about what to wear, about where to live, about how to earn money, about who to associate with, etc.

Life is full of judgements.

But in this one matter, you've been told by your fellow "gay men" that you must NOT make judgements --

even as they judge YOU over and over and over again.

Tearing you down, calling you names, and impugning just about everything about you.

How come it's okay for them to judge you -- but not for you to judge them?

And why do you think they're so afraid -- which they are -- of your judgement?

Now, before going further, Joe, I have to point out to you that you've already said -- and authorized me to post -- that you felt "degraded" by someone's attempt at anal penetration upon your body.

That right there Joe is a major league judgement.

And there's no way around that.

You also said that "stripped-of-all-masculinity stereotypes" bothered you -- that you couldn't identify with them.

That too is a judgement.

It says that you value Masculinity, and that you don't want to be stripped of yours in the name of "sexual orientation."

That's a judgement.

And then you said, "I want to be a MAN loving a MAN, and nothing different."

That's a really huge judgement Joe dude!

It implies that males who do anal -- aren't men.

That they're something "different."

Wow!

Judgement city!

But no matter what I said, it wasn't enough.

He felt he had to remain in mainstream gay -- that is, analist -- culture.

No matter how hostile that culture was and is to him.

Clearly, we have to understand that we won't win them all.

And that we can't be all things to all people.

So Jon:

I feel that the integrity and honesty of the sites -- and of my work -- and of the fact that my name, my full name, appears on every page of the site -- speak for themselves.

But -- our work is difficult because it challenges one of the great dominant ideologies of our time.

And not everyone is strong enough to escape that ideology.

Nevertheless, and all that said, fact is that most people don't have a problem with the sort of sport fighting which we support.

In part, I would think, because many recognize that within the context of the Alliance, it's a metaphor for and way of making graphic the idea and ideal of Fighting Spirit.

But you have helped me understand what you meant. I would fight like all the hordes of hell to defend another person, especially if it were my mate,

Yes, I know you would.

but I would never go out of my way to pick a fight, or to fight just for the hell of it. And i think that i was hung up on that for some reason, usually i can understand things, but that seemed to stumble me for a moment. But, i realize my misinterpretation. Thank you for helping me clear that up.

Jon, you're welcome.

Jon, part of this, I feel, is a matter of life experience.

For example:

The guy we call Naked Wrestler, aka NW, is a wrestler and mixed martial arts (mma) fighter.

In other words, he's a recreational or sport fighter.

And he likes blood.

Because to him, it's part of the sport.

And he loves the sport.

These are some pix he sent me:

If those pix bother you, what you need to remember is that this is a voluntary activity.

It's something guys do because they like doing it.

Usually because they love doing it.

So -- NW likes blood -- which to him is part of the sport.

Patrick, by contrast, was a street fighter, kick-boxer, and martial artist.

But he was a street fighter first.

He associates blood with street fights.

So he's not particularly fond of blood.

Because there's a big difference between a street fight -- and a sport fight.

Now:

The Greeks, like NW, were sport fighters.

They had three fight sports: Wrestling, Pankration, and Boxing.

Blood was part of Pankration and Boxing.

You can see it in the vase paintings:

And I think it's safe to say that they liked the blood.

Because, like NW, they associated it with sports which they really loved.

And I do too, by the way, because I too am -- or at least was -- a recreational fighter.

And I'll tell you Jon, that for guys like me and NW, there's nothing better in this world -- aside from sex with the guy you love -- than fighting.

It's the highest high I know.

Fighting is a high.

It feels really great.

And it produces wonderful camraderie.

This is from an old post by a novice boxer called still sparring

The bond was so powerful. Sparring is the best connection I've ever had with another man, and being there was like belonging to a secret brotherhood, like everyone had discovered some great, vast secret that came straight out of our hearts, and we were celebrating it every round.

And, by the way, this boxer too likes the bloody aspect of the sport:

I love the smells, the leather, all the armor you wear in the ring (headgear and mouthpiece), the blood.

Again, blood is part of the sport.

And here's something from a reply this same guy wrote to another post:

The truth is that masculinity is the best thing in the world. Whenever I wrestle another guy, or we put our arms around each other after a hard round of sparring, it feels like some spiritual mission has been fulfilled -- in those moments I always feel so complete, like I'm accepted in a brotherhood of kings. It's like the trust you've just built together will let you conquer the world. it's incredible.

"it feels like some spiritual mission has been fulfilled -- in those moments I always feel so complete, like I'm accepted in a brotherhood of kings. It's like the trust you've just built together will let you conquer the world. it's incredible."

Bill:

"incredible" is a good word.

Like I say, the camaraderie is wonderful.

Plus -- and not surprisingly given what the experience is like:

Most sport fighters are just the nicest guys you'll ever meet.

They're laid back, they're relaxed, they're easy -- they're sweethearts.

Of course there are some exceptions --

but on the whole, they're really great guys.

And it's really pleasant being with them.

A lot better, I assure you, than hanging out with a bunch of contentious, nasty buttqueens.

Again, it's just really nice being with fighters and being part of the sport.

There's a bond you get from training with and -- FIGHTING them -- that you can't get anywhere else or from anyone else.

And the Greeks certainly knew that.

The city-states were little aggregations of guys who, every afternoon, hung out together and fought each other.

Nude.

That's the truth.

And I think that's part of the reason that male-male Eros among the Greeks and other Warrior peoples like the Celts was so benign and beneficial.

Because it was a natural outgrowth of guys training and fighting together.

Of course guys having sex with guys is normal and natural.

But I think when it emerges from the fight sport experience -- it's particularly sweet.

Jon, this is something from a Greek writer named Lucian, who wrote about Sparta and "the fighting of the youths":

they go into a place surrounded by water [known as Plantanistas, or Plane-Tree Grove], choose up sides, and fight as if in actual war [but without weapons], although as naked as we Athenians are, until one team drives the other out of the enclosure into the water, the Sons of Herakles beating the Sons of Lykurgos or vice versa; after this contest there is peace and no one would strike another.

"after this contest there is peace and no one would strike another."

That's instantly understandable to any sport fighter.

And the fights in Plantanistas were sport.

Did the Greeks idolize war?

NO.

Nor would they have confused the blood shed in war with the blood associated with sport fighting.

They were appalled, for example, by Rome and its gladiators.

They thought that was dreadful.

Which it was.

So -- there's male aggression in fight sport -- which we support -- and then there's violence.

Which we don't support.

Guys into fight sport know the difference.

I think a lot of other people -- probably most people -- don't.

Now, Jon -- I said a part of this -- I think a big part of it -- is life experience.

And since we're talking about Men, part of that is the male's experience of aggression when he's growing up.

As my foreign friend points out, it's important that he be part of a male group:

The masculinity of men flows from their group. It's like their natural masculinity combines and gets manifold when masculine identified men unite. The camaraderie, mutual understanding, support, playing together, learning the ways of the world as a male, dealing with roughs and toughs of life together --- they all help to develop the natural masculinity that exists within him.

"the roughs and toughs of life" -- in America we might call that rough-and-tumble.

It's important in other words that the male experience normal male aggression as he grows.

But not everyone has that experience -- especially nowadays.

And then there may be other problems.

For example, males who in childhood were physically and/or sexually abused -- may have a hard time dealing with normal male aggression.

Because abuse is violence.

And having had that sort of violence in their lives may well affect the way they feel about the sort of aggression present in fighting and fight sport.

But the normal male aggression of fight sport -- is not the same as the violence of an adult abusing a child.

It's not remotely the same deal.

Boxers, wrestlers, pankratiasts (mma) -- choose to fight.

They're matched in age, weight, height, and above all, skill level.

There's a referee.

The ideal -- and this is particulary true in amateur fights -- is a fair fight in which NO ONE gets hurt.

And in which afterwards, both guys feel great about themselves, about each other, about fighting.

Here's another truth:

The vast majority of guys you fight in fight sport are guys you like and respect.

While you're fighting -- you're fighting.

But when it's over, you like and respect them at least as much and usually a lot more.

That's why it's so common to see mma fighters hug after a fight.

It's a very intimate experience and a shared high.

And it feels great.

So, Jon, you wrote:

I would fight like all the hordes of hell to defend another person, especially if it were my mate, but I would never go out of my way to pick a fight, or to fight just for the hell of it.

Right.

I know you would fight like hell to defend someone

And of course you would never pick a fight.

But you might someday fight as part of your martial arts training.

That wouldn't be "just for the hell of it."

That would be because it was an experience you wanted to have.

Or you might not.

As I pointed out in my reply to that "still sparring" post, you're NEVER required to spar in any dojo.

It's an option and that's all it is.

So - Jon -- I took a chance and re-opened this issue with you.

I hope I didn't alienate you.

But I want you to know that for many guys, fight sport is wonderful.

It may not be for you.

But it's been part of the male experience for millenia, and millions of Men all over the world participate in it and love it.

Jon, in your previous email you said

I am simply trying to make sense of where my place in all of this is.

Jon, I think you're a true Warrior, and I think your place is with us.

Bill Weintraub

October 23, 2009

© All material Copyright 2009 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.