Reply from:

Bill Weintraub

Re: C2C-Dance of the Lovers

3-19-2011

Hey Mark

Thank you for writing to me and for your kind words about my work and our sites.

I'm glad they've resonated and been meaningful for you.

Mark, let's take a look:

I was thrilled to find your website

Mark, that's great!

I'm glad you found us and that we can be here for you.

. . . it brought many things into perspective for me, what I like, what turns me on, what is upside down with much of the gay community and healing of a wound of feeling alone on an island of my own making,

Okay.

Mark, that island was not of your making.

Certainly not in the sense that that's where you wanted to be.

It's where you had to be given the choices that analism and heterosexism -- both artifacts of heterosexualization

-- were offering you.

missing out on my own masculine beauty that simply desires to express itself through genital pleasure and shared pleasure with another... heart to heart, as opposed to submission, domination, power, and control of one over the other.

Yes.

"masculine beauty that simply desires to express itself through genital pleasure and shared pleasure with another... heart to heart"

is an excellent description of Frot.

And "submission, domination, power, and control of one over the other."

is an accurate description of anal.

Oddly, it is as if there is discord, a split between what naturally expresses as childhood sexuality and what is learned and assimilated as behavior on 'how to be Gay' with all the right gestures and implicit acceptance of socialized norms of conformity.

Right.

Mark, you say "it is as if there is discord,"

It's not as "as if," however.

There is is a discord "between what naturally expresses as childhood sexuality and what is learned and assimilated as behavior on 'how to be Gay' with all the right gestures and implicit acceptance of socialized norms of conformity."

That discord is, as you indicate, "learned and assimilated" -- and therefore cultural.

Which is why we refer to a dominant *culture* of anal penetration.

Where's the gay freedom in that?

Good question.

Of course there is no "gay" freedom.

Just "gay" oppression -- specifically, "gays" oppressing Men.

I just could not "be" what I was not, but at the same time, I could not deny erotic moments of C2C contact. This in-fact was the source of my conflict for years.

Mark, I understand, and so do your fellow Warriors.

I have been rubbing my cock all my life

Me too!

It's a completely innocent, natural, and organic male behavior.

. . . I recall those first moments of "getting that feeling" using a bar of soap on the bottom of the bath tub slipping joyfully up down when wet and alone.

For the majority of my life (and I am now 50) I was not able to understand how my sexual orientation toward women and men could possibly fit-into the narrow confines of the "gay scene."

Right.

"narrow confines of the 'gay scene' " is of course correct.

The "gay scene" as presently constituted is extremely narrow -- it's a trap, analogous to Plato's Cave, suffocating and stultifying.

Bisexual as a label was also not enough.

Right.

And hopefully, Mark, as you understand or will come to understand, those labels of sexual orientation are false and extremely misleading.

We discuss that at some length in our Man2Man Alliance policy paper Sex Between Men: An Activity, Not a Condition.

And I hope that you'll read and re-read that article, and the suggested articles which accompany it.

There was no rational or emotional integrity to be found in simply ascribing to myself, some pre-defined label to establish my place in the current social-sexual structure of the prevailing culture and society for which I found myself.

Right.

And again, you're correct.

These are "pre-defined [cultural] labels" which have "NO rational or emotional integrity."

They are artifacts, as you rightly say, "in the current social-sexual structure of the prevailing culture and society".

How can one express one's being and not simply conform and do so with guilt and shame and feeling rejected and alone?

Another good question.

Believe me, being born and raised in San Francisco, literally forced me to confront my own conflicting judgments and projections and the judgments and projects from others, from both, so label, "gay" and "straight" communities in and around the San Francisco, Bay Area. I witness first-hand how the gay-scene evolved

Right.

And that's a crucial piece of understanding.

That the "gay scene" *evolved*.

It was NOT always the way it is now.

Something which the average gay-identified male does not understand.

Because the "gay" leadership doesn't want him to understand it.

Yet the emphasis on anal is VERY recent.

As is the whole idea of "homosexuality" and "being gay."

as an outsider looking in, mostly unwilling or unable to give into what just did not make sense to me as a man who loves. A man who has a wealth of love to give. Hence, what does it mean to love and share love with another -- without all the bullshit and labels?

Another good question.

Of course, the erotic desire and interest in a cock was there from early age, first with my own and then others. I was surrounded by cocks. Being one of 8 brothers in a large family. I was certain that I was not as my grandfather used to call a "happy." His reference to a self-proclaimed man who acted "gay." To say the least, both inwardly and outwardly I was left very confused. On the one hand, I enjoyed the eroticism of a hard cock and on the other I enjoyed sensual and intimate heart connection with a woman, but I just could not identify with what I saw/experienced with some gay men.

Right.

And Mark, try to understand:

There's no such thing as "gay men."

There are just guys who identify as "gay."

The whole idea of "gay" is pseudo-scientific;

as is documented in this article written for The New York Review of Books.

"Gay" has NO objective biological reality.

It's a very recent cultural construct -- and that's all it is.

They always seemed to be acting "gay" or acting out of some notion of a gay-identity. Much of what I felt and saw was fake and false

Right.

Because it is "fake and false."

. . . another mask, another persona traded-in for the old be "straight" and "fit-in" persona.

That's exactly right.

It's a mask.

But remember, Mark, it's now a societally-sanctioned mask.

Very important that you, and all our guys, understand that.

"Gay" is cultural, and culturally-sanctioned.

Both of which had nothing to do with discovering one's true sexual expression or desire,

Right.

let alone discovering the feeling of emancipation and freedom-from socially controlled norms of expected gender behavior.

Okay.

Mark, I'm not sure what you mean by "socially-controlled norms of expected gender behavior."

If you mean, as is commonly believed in the "LGBT community," that "gender" is culturally constructed -- there you and the Alliance part company.

"Gender" in our view is by-and-large biological.

So -- "sexual orientation" is culturally constructed.

But gender is biological.

Sure there are cultural norms -- but those norms -- on the whole -- flow from biology.

And, by the way, the "LGBT community" is not consistent or coherent in the way it treats gender.

On the one hand, it wants to view gender as culturally-constructed, because that's the feminist line on gender.

Nevermind what evolutionary biology tells us about the genetically-determined differing reproductive strategies of male and female, as noted in this New York Times article, for example:

Natural selection, [evolutionary biologists] say in an article in the current issue of Evolution, will favor the activation of paternal genes that underlie altruistic behavior and maternal genes that promote selfishness. "Your paternal genes want you to be nicer to your neighbors than your maternal genes do," Dr. Gardner said in an interview.

Nevermind about all that silly evolutionary and genetic evidence --

-- gender MUST be culturally-constructed so that Women can be "free."

But the "T" of the "LGBT community" has a totally different narrative.

What the "transgendered" claim is that both their biological sex and "assigned gender identity" are at odds with what they call their "core gender identity."

And that as a consequence, they experience a "gender dysphoria" which can be only relieved through "sex change."

So -- according to the "trannies," there are three variables:

1. Biological sex -- which by definition is -- biological.

2. Assigned gender identity -- it's "assigned," therefore it's cultural.

3. Core gender identity.

What about core gender identity?

Well, if there is such a thing as "core gender identity" --

which in the vast majority of the world's people matches both biological sex and therefore "assigned gender identity" --

that "core gender identity" *must* be biological.

It can't be cultural -- that's already been covered by "assigned gender identity."

It is, according to the "trannies," the conflict between assigned gender identity -- culture -- and core gender identity -- biology -- which creates the dysphoria.

Now -- in my view, there are holes in the "tranny" narrative, just as there are in the "gay" narrative.

But the "gay" leadership has enthusiastically endorsed the "tranny" narrative.

In which case, according to the "gay" leadership, core gender identity exists, and it's -- BIOLOGICAL.

So -- it comes down to the question -- What is Masculinity?

At its most basic, says my foreign friend, Masculinity is simply the male's *inner* feeling of being a Man.

To which I add, and liking it.

So -- inwardly, I feel myself, and have always felt myself, to be a Man.

And -- I *like* being a Man.

More than like it.

I love it.

I love having a cock and balls.

I love having muscles and body hair.

I love the way my sweat smells.

And so forth.

And I have since I was a child and adolescent:

I often use these two over-the-top pix by Matt because I feel they express the way adolescent boys feel about their Masculinity.

Now -- is there a cultural element to this?

Sure.

When I was a boy -- in the 1950s -- the cultural ideal wasn't as pumped up.

My physical ideal -- what I wanted to look like -- was a lot closer to this:

But -- it's still about muscularity and sweat and body hair and -- Aggression.

Which we'll address a bit later on.

And if someone -- maybe Matt himself -- had been able, through some time warp, to show me this picture back in 1960 --

would I have responded to its testosterone-driven Maleness and Muscularity and Masculinity?

Yes!

I know that because we had a book at home, published in 1935, and which had belonged to my father or one of his brothers.

It was titled Big Arms, and it had pix of body-builders of that era, including this one:

I thought then and I think now that both the pic and the Man are incredibly hot.

So -- from childhood on, I had, and I have now, no desire to be anything other than a Man.

Is that cultural?

I have no reason to think so.

To me, my Manliness is an inward and biological quality which is ultimately divine in origin.

So -- in the Alliance we say that Masculinity is a Divine Principle and Manhood a Divine Gift.

And that's how I experience my Manhood -- as a Divine Gift.

We have articles on the site about The Holy Sacrament of Frot;

And Worshipping the Warrior God:

The Warrior God is the God of Manhood and Manliness.

He holds the sceptre of Manhood and rules the realm of Manliness.

The Warrior Kosmos.

And to be in His presence is to experience, in effect, an Ecstasy, an Inebriation, of the Male.

So -- coming back to the issue of Masculinity --

one reason we view Masculinity as biological is that cross-culturally and historically, Men behave very similarly.

The New York Times article I just cited speaks of altruism as a male trait and selfishness as a female trait.

That male altruism leads to what we call Warrior Altruism --

and we have about three thousand years of literature which describe and depict Warrior Altruism over a broad range of cultures.

Similarly -- Wrestling -- what we might call Playful Fighting or Playful Wrestling -- is found worldwide among males.

And the form the Wrestling takes is always the same -- it's not about rules and points -- rather, it goes for a takedown.

And wherever possible, it's done nude.

It's a very simple, and very universally male, behavior.

And the takedown is at its core because ultimately that's a battlefield skill.

But -- it needn't ever be used on a battlefield.

Men enjoy Wrestling -- just for the sake of Wrestling.

And they enjoy it worldwide, cross-culturally and throughout history.

Men like Fighting.

It's fun.

Man Fight.

Man Fun.

Look at the expression on these guys' faces -- again, this is an Ecstasy, an Inebriation, of the Male.

Their Fighting puts them, in Greek terms, in the presence of the Warrior God.

They're, in the Greek phrase, "sun Arei" -- "with Ares."

And they experience that Inebriation of Manliness, that Ecstasy of Manhood, which comes from His presence.

Fight Sport -- Combat Sport -- is Loved by Men because of that Ecstasy and Inebriation of Manliness and Manhood.

As one of our Warriors who trains in boxing put it:

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.

That's why Men Fight.

For that Inebriation of the Male:

And it's biological -- not cultural.

Also -- anyone who's trained in a Fight Sport knows that the training develops the male body to perfection.

Which strongly suggests that the male body was designed -- or evolved -- to Fight.

And the Western ideal of the male body -- the Greek canon -- derives directly from Greek athletes who trained daily in Fight Sport at the palestrai - gymnasia of the Greek city-states.

Those athletes served as models for the great Greek sculptors whose works are, again, canonical.

And it's not just their physical bodies which you see in the sculptures;

it's also their Areté, their Manly Excellence.

As the great classicist Werner Jaeger explains:

The athletes who appear in early Greek sculpture are the embodiments of the noblest gymnastic areté of a young man in the full power of health and training.

So:

Warrior Masculinity -- Warrior Manliness -- Warrior Manhood -- which is born of the Male need to Fight -- matters.

Let's get back to Mark's letter:

Moreover, the being "gay" aspect of subtle domination, power-manipulation which strips a sexual partner of his own masculinity,

Yes -- that's exactly right.

Analism and anal strip the male of his Masculinity.

which turns another human being into a sex object for self-gratification, much like women have been subjugated and turned into "submissive, manipulated sex objects" throughout history,

Yes -- "gay" treats males as females.

It has to.

That's the logic of its view of the male.

appeared to me as the same old male desire for power through domination and submission

Yes.

But I wouldn't say the "desire for power" is exclusively male.

It plainly is not.

Women like -- and seek -- power too.

And right now, Women are seeking -- and gaining -- power over Men.

that has perverted society and the shared sexual expression between human beings. Again, just more bondage and I do not mean with leather or latex.

Yes.

Analism is certainly a form of bondage.

"Gay" has become or turned into the concept that a man, must by definition be a "butt-fucker or the butt getting fucked" and the whole beauty of shared love between two men, through equality and the beating heart of a peaceful warrior

Okay.

Let's talk about Warrior and peaceful and not-so-peaceful.

In our view, Men are by nature Aggressive.

And -- since by nature -- properly so.

Traditionally, and historically, Men have been taught to be Warriors.

To know how to Fight.

But, traditionally and historically, they've also been taught NOT to Fight -- in anger -- unless it's necessary to Fight.

That view, nowadays, is best expressed by the traditional eastern martial arts, such as karate.

For example, my husband, Patrick, is a former street fighter and kick boxer who has a black belt in karate.

He has a saying: "Peace should be the way of the warrior, for he bears the cost of war."

That's a traditional martial arts point of view.

The traditional arts teach guys how to be aggressive in a very controlled way, while also teaching them to avoid conflict.

Which is why we urge ALL our guys to train in a martial art.

In my view, the problem with talking about "peaceful" warriors is that you risk doing what the analists do -- denying Masculine Aggression and de facto castrating Men.

We don't, and won't, do that.

We acknowledge -- and celebrate -- that Men are by nature combative and aggressive.

We see Frot as the sexual expression of that male need for combat.

Not dominance -- but combat.

There's a difference.

So Mark -- you're free to accept or reject anything I say.

But my thinking is of a piece.

Heterosexualization, which is an historical process, creates a heterosexualized society.

That society views Women as good and Men as bad.

It's as 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."

Analism is an artifact -- a cultural construct -- of heterosexualization.

It imposes a male-female model on a male-male act.

And it extols effeminacy.

Anal penetration is seen as a social good precisely because it de-masculinizes -- and effeminizes.

That doesn't work for us.

We like -- We Love -- Masculinity and Manliness.

And we think that to deny them is to do violence to the male and to the Man.

Translation: You, Mark, complain -- and rightly so -- about having your male-male needs and desires forced into an analist paradigm.

But that analist paradigm is the result of an anti-male and anti-masculine bias which runs throughout heterosexualized society.

To the extent that you accept that bias -- you acquiesce in your own oppression.

And you'll never be free of that oppression.

Freedom requires that you embrace your Masculinity, your Manliness, your Manhood.

And your Warriorhood.

Even if doing so offends a heterosexualized, feminized, and effeminized culture which is now the majority culture.

If you don't do that, Mark, in my experience, what will happen is that you'll yo-yo -- between us -- the Frot Movement -- and "Gay."

And you'll be constantly conflicted.

What I've seen over the years is that the guys who do best are the guys who make a clean and decisive break from their former culture, whether it's religious right or analism.

I know -- believe me -- that it's not easy to make that break.

At its most basic, you lose "friends."

But I wasn't willing to pass the rest of my years hearing my "friends" extol the act which killed my lover.

And many millions more.

And, Mark, absent that break, you'll always be vulnerable to peer pressure -- in your case, most likely, from gay-identified, analist, effeminist, and feminist "friends."

has virtually gone missing, has been destroyed, taken-over and corrupted. In fact, I am pretty much tired of the word "Gay."

Right -- and good.

Both the word and the reality have become oppressive.

What does "Gay" have to do with sharing Love with another Human Being? How well does the word carry any meaning associated with love between brothers and men? How does word "gay" free any one from the bondage and illusion of normative sexual conformity?

All good questions.

So thank you Bill.

Mark, you're very welcome, and I appreciate your thanks.

I just wanted you to know that for at least one man, you have brought a clarity and perspective that I have been seeking to understand for many many years, and the story does not end here. In fact, it is only a beginning.

Mark, that's great.

And thank you again for writing.

Bill Weintraub

So guys:

What I want to emphasize in my reply to Mark is:

The Male Ecstasy and Inebriation which Men experience through Masculinity, Manliness, Manhood --

and Warriorhood.

As I said to Mark, the Warrior God is the God of Manhood and Manliness.

He holds the sceptre of Manhood and rules the realm of Manliness.

The Warrior Kosmos.

And to be in His presence is to experience that Ecstasy and Inebriation of the Male.

How do you come to be in the presence of the Warrior God?

Prayer is one way.

Fighting -- Fight Sport -- is another.

It's that basic.

And that's what this pic is about:

Learn from it --

if you can.

Bill Weintraub

March 19, 2011

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

who reject anal penetration, promiscuity, and effeminacy
among men who have sex with men

and

---

---

This aspect of our work is the one that's most disturbing and indeed frightening to our opponents:

That we combine the Love of Man with the Love of Fighting Spirit.

Which is Warrior Spirit.

The Warrior God is the Guardian of that Spirit.

You may call him Jesus Christ as Robert Loring does.

You may call him Ares as did the Greeks.

What's important is that you understand and acknowledge

the vital role He plays in Your Life.

---

---