Posts
from





















WARRIOR NAKED WRESTLER

Naked Wrestler

The Mingling of ManSweat and ManBlood

12-14-2010

Wow. Start of the blood in that fight is a turn on.

When two guys Fight, the blood spilled down their bodies mixed with their sweat is really a turn on. Then the sweat and blood mixes as they grapple around and it's like a mingling of manliness,

The mingling of manblood and mansweat.

It's just as sweet as the mingling of mancum and mansperm when guys cum together, cock2cock.

Only men can really enjoy that mingling of blood, sweat, and cum.

Sooner or later it will become the norm for fighters to share cocks after their fights...They probably already do. And we just don't hear about it----yet.

Fighting.

And Aggression.

For me, Fighting and Aggression is what it's always been about.

I was thinking about that because I went to a group JO event [at "The Jacks"] on Sunday. And I realized there that I've lost interest in that stuff. I was thinking about that while at the event.

I realized that what has always turned me on was the sensation of some kind of aggression from another dude while going cock2cock. So many of the guys there are not manly enough for me. AND a number of them are into anal and looking to pick someone up for it, even though it's strictly not allowed at an event. It becomes a total turn off. Some guys will ask you if you ever fuck. Butt fuckers are persistent. I always reject them in an instant.

For me, I get a hard cock when I tie-up with some guy who has biceps, pecs, and good trapezius muscles like a wrestler. And we start muscling each other around buck naked. THEN my cock gets excited. I just cannot get turned up by a thin, unmanly guy, ESPECIALLY if he acts femmy. It totally turns me off. I have thought that way since I was a very small boy. It's why wrestling around on the grass in grade school, or wrestling on the mats in high school or college always hardened up my cock.

I can't see it any other way.


Reply from:

Bill Weintraub

Re: The Mingling of ManSweat and ManBlood

12-17-10

Hey Warrior NW

It's great hearing from you!

Wow. Start of the blood in that fight is a turn on.

Yeah -- it's incredibly hot.

There's nothing like Men and Blood.

ManSweat and ManBlood -- like you say -- mingling:

When two guys Fight, the blood spilled down their bodies mixed with their sweat is really a turn on. Then the sweat and blood mixes as they grapple around and it's like a mingling of manliness,

The mingling of manblood and mansweat.

It's just as sweet as the mingling of mancum and mansperm when guys cum together, cock2cock.

Only men can really enjoy that mingling of blood, sweat, and cum.

Sooner or later it will become the norm for fighters to share cocks after their fights...They probably already do. And we just don't hear about it----yet.

Bill:

Right.

Fighters sharing Cock.

Men sharing Manhood.

We'll talk more about that later.

NW:

Fighting.

And Aggression.

For me, Fighting and Aggression is what it's always been about.

Bill:

For me too!

NW:

I was thinking about that because I went to a group JO event [at "The Jacks"] on Sunday. And I realized there that I've lost interest in that stuff.

Bill:

Okay.

NW, from my point of view, that was inevitable.

As I've told you, I did the Jacks -- group JO -- way back when I lived in NYC.

I lost interest too.

And for those who don't know:

"The Jacks" is an organization -- with branches in many cities -- for *group* jack off -- JO -- and mutual masturbation.

Group.

It's group sex.

I was thinking about that while at the event.

Right.

I realized that what has always turned me on was the sensation of some kind of aggression from another dude while going cock2cock.

Right.

You and I are alike.

We need the Aggression.

And we're right to need it.

We're Men.

Men need Aggression.

Let's repeat that.

The reason you need Aggression, NW, is that -- YOU'RE A MAN.

MEN NEED AGGRESSION.

In sport.

And in sex.

Men need Aggression in Sex.

Maybe not with Women, though it can certainly be there for Men.

But MEN need Aggression with each other in Sex.

Cock2Cock is about Aggression.

That's why, when I re-did the Alliance splash page I changed it from "phallus-to-phallus" to "Phallus-against-Phallus."




Because that's what it is.

It's Cock AGAINST Cock.

The Cocks are Fighting.

Cock AGAINST Cock.





What else are two MEN going to do during sex?

They can either assume heterosexualized 'sex roles' -- top and bottom, butch / femme --

or they can both be --

MEN!!!!!!!!!!!

If they're both MEN they're gonna Fight with their Cocks -- because that's what Male sexuality is.

It's AGGRESSIVE.

It can't be any other way.

Right now the whole "males who have sex with males" world has been taken over by "people" who HATE Men and Manliness.

They HATE Men

and Masculinity

and Manliness.

And they're using "sex" between males -- to destroy men.

That's their goal.

So many of the guys there are not manly enough for me.

No kidding.

It's a "gay" group.

They're indoctrinated into UN-manliness.

They're TAUGHT to be femmy.

You'll never find what you want from those sorts of males.

Who really are NOT male any longer.

They still have penises -- but -- they won't for long.

What do I mean by that?

The LOGIC of their culture is for them to become fe-males -- in some way or another.

They can't do that at the moment and retain sexual function.

But sooner or later that'll be possible -- there'll be surgery that converts a penis into a fully functioning clit and vagina.

And that's what they'll do.

Or, NW, there'll be surgery that puts erectile tissue into the anus.

And then they won't need their penises.

They won't keep them, NW, because mentally and emotionally those fags are anti-Man.

AND a number of them are into anal and looking to pick someone up for it, even though it's strictly not allowed at an event. It becomes a total turn off. Some guys will ask you if you ever fuck. Butt fuckers are persistent.

Right.

Because their culture tells them to be persistent.

To push and pursue and pressure and coerce.

To do whatever it takes to get their shitsticks in your ass.

To never let up.

They're told that buttfuck is an entitlement.

And if they don't get it, to feel angry and wronged.

And to push all the harder, to threaten and blackmail and nag and demand -- until they do get it.

That's what they do.

We have post after post on the site describing that.

The most recent being Polyamorous in Portland:

On our first few nights together he made love to me like we'd been together for years. Then he started getting angry because I wouldn't give him anal sex [sic]. Our love making dropped off dramatically after that, even though he had other men who gave it [anal] to him.

Here's what another guy said in an email:

I attribute my not having a partner to the fact that I've always preferred mutual j/o and rubbing. This wasn't the norm. Penetration was the order of the day. Yes, I've succumbed to anal -- you know what -- I'd be a hypocrite if I stated otherwise. But I hated it; yet it was the closest I could get to some semblance of intimacy, if you will. Plus, after the anal submission, I often felt useless and/or less than. Man, it was awful. I felt debased.

He did anal because it "was the order of the day."

He "succumbed to anal."

But he "hated it."

It left him feeling "useless and debased."

And isn't that a grand tribute to anal and the analists.

What despicable creatures they are.

To FORCE a fellow "gay" male to do something which leaves him feeling so horrible.

Which is why, NW, I've said to you before that you should REPORT the shitfaeries to the guy who runs the Jacks.

You've never said you do that.

And my feeling is you think it's wrong to do that -- that it's snitching.

NO.

NW, those shitqueens are your enemy -- every one of them.

You're at war with them.

Just like you're at war with the Islamo-fascists.

Look at these demonstrators and think about it:

That's what they -- in this case I mean the buttboys -- believe.

They think they should be free to stuff anal up everyone's butt.

And that NO ONE should be free to say NO.

Or be free to practice Frot.

Or free to criticize anal.

This is from Jason's post:

In my case, I've spent almost ten years up till now not totally feeling like I fit into the gay community because of how much weight is put on anal sex: it was a HUGE point of dissent for me. And I have to say that I really felt the grips of "anal tyranny," which fucked with my self-esteem a good amount. I always felt so childish because time passed and time passed and I never, never got over how off-putting anal sex was. The pain, the pressure, the smell, the soreness, the sick feeling it gave me, the way it made me feel afterwards -- unfulfilled, used, let down, filthy, ashamed.

I've been the victim of good deal of head games. I spent almost four years in a relationship with someone who I think pretty clearly resented me for never wanting to have anal. So often I got messages that not doing anal was not enough, that there was no satisfaction unless the holy, manmade pinnacle of homosexuality was practiced. "We don't have sex!! You don't see that as a problem?!" (We don't have ANY sex??) "You'll like it." (Not likely.) "It'll be so hot once you like it." (Sure.) So great: there was one point of contention and source of distress in that relationship, not to mention what a huge weight it was to always have that expectation hanging over me. In my eyes, my aversion to anal also had plenty to do with his desires to date other people while we were doing long-distance. To my knowledge he didn't do this, but the implicit rationale was still crystal clear for me. And it messed with my head.

. . .

[In young adulthood] I had a great experience with a guy. We fooled around on occasion, and while I didn't usually get much enjoyment out of it on my end, there was one night where it was like the Fourth of July. I never knew how powerful it was to cum by dick-rubbing, how wrapped up in it you could get when you're sweating and your breath is in sync with the other guy.

So keeping those thoughts in mind really ... um, comforted me. That was how I conceived of sex with men, you know? As an expression of masculinity. With sweat, playful aggression, and hormones raging. But I came to never think of those things as sex. Not only had I been "corrected" numerous times in my life that 'sex' is only what happens when there's penetration to the point where I accepted it, but I had over time also internalized the anal doctrine, so that what I had done before and enjoyed immensely was reduced to child's play and even something UNmasculine. You bet I thought of it just the opposite deep down, but I also thought I was wrong.

Notice that Jason was "corrected numerous times that 'sex' is only what happens when there's anal penetration";

That he internalized the analist doctrine.

That he began denigrating Frot and thinking of it as child's play, etc.

Through spreading those sorts of cultural messages -- and practices -- the analists fully intend for buttfuck to dominate the world.

Dr Green just told me about an "AIDS Activist" group in Africa -- mainly white -- who are pushing anal and saying that HIV should be seen "as a virus that can be transmitted in many ways."

NOT true.

At least 90% and most people think 99% of HIV infection among males who have sex with males is due to -- ANAL.

It's the anal.

And look at these bozos.

The buttboys have already said outright that I should be put in jail.

They censor and silence us wherever they can.

They flag our posts, they scrub our posts, they keep us out of the print media.

They're the buttfuck dictators and sex police of your world.

Which they intend to dominate and control completely.

And they DO NOT CARE how many people get fucked over or DIE along the way.

In their insane lust for anal, they've already killed millions of their fellow "gay" males.

That killing continues even as I type these words.

In the US alone, each and every day, 73 "gay" males get infected with HIV -- by 73 other "gay" males.

That's who does the infecting.

"Gay" males.

Shitfaeries.

They infect each other.

NW, there is not ONE of those buttboys at those events who wouldn't take you home, fuck you, and give you HIV -- and not lose one second's sleep over it.

They'd fuck you, and forget you.

And if they gave you HIV, it would be your fault.

That's how they "think."

So -- they are your enemy.

And -- if you keep going to the events -- which it sounds like you won't -- but if you do -- you should report each and every one of them every time it happens to the Jacks' organizer.

Now -- he may not do anything about it --

and that wouldn't surprise me.

But you should NOT, through your silence, help those guys use a group dedicated to JO as a way of recruiting guys into anal.

And thus effeminizing them.

FIGHT BACK.

They are utter assholes.

And they're anti-Man.

They're contemptible.

And that's what they should get from you -- contempt.

I always reject them in an instant.


Get outta here!

Good!

For me, I get a hard cock when I tie-up with some guy who has biceps, pecs, and good trapezius muscles like a wrestler. And we start muscling each other around buck naked. THEN my cock gets excited.

RIGHT!

I just cannot get turned up by a thin, unmanly guy, ESPECIALLY if he acts femmy. It totally turns me off.

Of course it does.

Warrior NW -- you're a MAN.

Men are into the Manliness of Men;

and the femininity of Women.

I know -- you don't feel anything for Women.

But in a properly run culture you would.

As I've told you, at Sparta the guys lived in barracks.

They spent the vast majority of their time with other Men.

And with their dicks out.

Because of that, Lycurgus, their law-giver, had the girls learn to wrestle -- nude -- and learn to throw the javelin and discus -- nude -- both to toughen their bodies and make them strong for pregnancy and childbirth, and to do away with effeminacy and "sheltered upbringing":

He made the young girls no less than the young men grow used to walking nude in processions, as well as to dancing and singing at certain festivals with the young men looking on.

In other words, he displayed the girls, who had strong, athletic bodies, nude -- in front of the boys.

Lygurgus did that as a means of encouraging the young men to marry:

There were these inducements to marry. I mean the processions of girls, and the nudity, and the competitions which the young men watched, attracted by a compulsion not of an intellectual type, but (as Plato says), a sexual one.

Clearly, then, in a pre-heterosexualized culture like Sparta's, in which, as classicist Michael Grant says, "the ethos was homosexual [sic]"; but which we would say was simply normatively Manly and Man2Man -- the state had to make sure that the boys would develop an interest in women.

In other words, if the *norm* is guys spending virtually all of their time with other guys, and also having love affairs with those guys --

if that's normative --

then the state has to make an effort to insure that the boys develop an interest in women -- and marry.

And having done that, the lives of the Men have also to be arranged so that their interest in women is maintained.

Which makes what our society calls "heterosexuality" look far less automatic, axiomatic, or inevitable -- than it's presumed to be.

So:

At Sparta, a newly-married Man would quietly leave his barracks -- his all-male group -- after dinner and go off and fuck his wife.

Then he'd come back to the barracks and sleep with the other Men.

The custom was to capture women for marriage -- not when they were slight or immature, but when they were in their prime and ripe for it. The so-called 'bridesmaid' took charge of the captured girl. She first shaved her head to the scalp, then dressed her in a man's cloak and sandals, and laid her down alone on a mattress in the dark. The bridegroom -- who was not drunk and thus not impotent, but sober as always -- first had dinner in the men's messes, then would slip in, undo her belt, lift her and carry her to the bed. After spending only a short time with her, he would part discreetly so as to sleep wherever he usually did along with the other young men.

And this continued to be his practice thereafter: while spending the day with his male contemporaries, and going to sleep with them, he would warily visit his bride in secret . . . It was not just for a short period that young men would do this, but for long enough that some might even have children before they saw their own wives in daylight.

Such intercourse was not only an exercise in self-control and moderation, but also meant that partners were fertile physically, always fresh for love, and ready for intercourse rather than being sated and pale from unrestricted sexual activity. Moreover, some lingering glow of desire and affection was always left in both.

~ Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus, translated by Talbot

So NW -- Men derive their Masculinity from contact with other Men -- from contact with the Male Group.

A wise culture ensures that they have LOTS of that contact -- throughout their lives, and especially in boyhood.

It's what my foreign friend says:

Masculine male groups and bonds play an extremely important role in the development of physical, mental, emotional and social aspects of natural masculinity. As such they are an important part of the positive environment that all boys should have. An otherwise masculine identified man who is deprived of membership in a masculine male group / bond during his growing years will be less than 1/4 naturally masculine than if he had such an opportunity. Boys have a natural tendency to seek to join male-only groups, and it's their natural right.

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.

Let's replay that:

"Boys have a natural tendency to seek to join male-only groups, and it's their natural right."

It's their NATURAL RIGHT.

You have a right to that.

"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."

That's what Sparta was --

the boys lived in "herds" -- small groups which were run by an older boy who was supervised by the MEN.

Every adult male Spartan had the right to intervene with any of the boys and their herds.

And they were encouraged to Fight each other.

Constantly.

And that was Sparta.

But -- as you can see from the excerpts from Lucian in The Secret Craft of Warriorhood -- even in a place like Athens, the male group and fighting was crucial to the raising of boys.

NW, this was the rule ALL OVER THE WORLD.

Until very recently, the whole world was a Warriordom.

All MEN were Warriors.

And all boys were raised to be Warriors.

So -- let's come back to this word "herd" -- in Spartan Greek, it's Boua.

Which derives from the Greek word for Bull.

These were herds of bull-calves.

Eager to Fight -- and become MEN.

Plutarch:

[In their herds, the boys were] accustomed to live together and be brought up together, playing and learning as a group. The captaincy of the Herd was conferred upon the boy who displayed the soundest judgement and the best fighting spirit. The others kept their eyes on him, responded to his instructions, and endured their punishments from him, so that altogether this training served as practice in learning ready obedience. Moreover, as they exercised, boys were constantly watched by their elders, who were always spurring them on to fight and contend with one another; in this their chief object was to get to know each boy's character, in particular how bold he was, and how far he was likely to stand his ground in combat and struggle.

~ Life of Lycurgus, translated by Talbot

Fighting, Struggle, and Strife, then, was part of the daily training of the youths.

As it was, it must be said, in every polis.

Plutarch even uses the word "philo-neikia" --

Philo = love of

So:

Philo-sophia = love of wisdom;

While philo-neikia = love of strife, love of combat, love of fighting.

And that's what the Men wanted to see in the Boys -- the Love of Strife, the Love of Fighting.

I have thought that way since I was a very small boy.

Of course you have.

That's because you're a Man.

It's built-in to you.

You've wanted it all your life.

It's why wrestling around on the grass in grade school,

or wrestling on the mats in high school or college

always hardened up my cock.

Right.

NW, ALL guys get HARD wrestling.

It's part of being a guy.

I can't see it any other way.

Right.

And you shouldn't have to see it any other way.

You're seeing it right.

NW -- I really appreciate your permission to post this email.

Because too many of our guys just do not get it.

They need to hear it -- from you.

From Warrior NW.


Now, NW --

You also talked about two Fighters sharing Cocks after their Fight.

And I said Right --

Fighters sharing Cock.

Men sharing Manhood.

This is something else we need to talk about in light of your disaffection with and from groups like the Jacks.

And while you may not like hearing this, NW, it's the truth.

Historically and cross-culturally, MEN are NOT promiscuous with MEN.

When a Fighter shared his Cock --

When a Man shared his Manhood --

It was with ONE other MAN.

And in private.

Not in a group.

That's another problem -- a huge problem -- with the Jacks.

It takes a dyadic, Two Man, MAN2MAN and MAN AGAINST MAN, Manly and Masculine act --

Cock Combat -- Phallic Fight --




and puts it into a "gay male" and promiscuous setting.

What it is, NW, is a "modern" -- that is, gay-ized -- take on a traditional Male-Male activity.

And because "gay" = promiscuous, the Jacks are "promiscuous."

But that's not the way guys relate to guys.

Guys are one-on-one with each other.

Traditionally and cross-culturally.

They may be promiscuous with Women.

But MANLY MEN are NOT promiscuous with other Men.

Promiscuity is for whores.

Who are either females, or anally-receptive transvestite males, or anally-receptive castrated males -- eunuchs.

Think about it.

In societies in which Men are promiscuous with Women -- like the Middle East -- they have harems -- aggregations of females.

You put a male into a harem-like setting -- and you de-masculinize him.

MEN have to be INDIVIDUALS.

NW --

Two STRONG INDIVIDUALS --

TWO BULLS --

can and will --

FIGHT EACH OTHER.

That's why the Fight Sports are all one-on-one.

It's true the Spartans had group Fights.

But as you know, in that sort of Gang Fight, what happens is that the guys self-select their opponent -- based on height and weight -- so that it's a fair Fight.

And it's still ONE-ON-ONE.

That's what Men need.

MEN need the MALE CONTEST -- THE AGON.

Which is ONE Man's strenuous physical struggle to overcome ONE other Man.

That's what a Fight is.

Two MEN Struggling to bring their Manhood to Perfection:














That's what a Fight is.

TWO Men Struggling to bring their Manhood to Perfection.

And that's what Man2Man sex has to be.

And it has to be One-on-One.

One-Against-One.





Two Men.

Two Cocks.

One Against the Other.

When you turn it into a group activity -- it "promiscu-izes" it -- and promiscuity DILUTES MASCULINITY.

Just the way it is.

I don't know if you understand that -- but --

the Male's Aggression has to focus on ONE other Male.

Otherwise, the aggression is scattered and diluted --

and so is the Aggressor's Masculinity.

What the Greeks called his Andragathia -- Andros = Man; Agathos = Good, Excellence, Virtue; Andragathia = Manly Excellence.













So -- this is what you said at the beginning of your email:

what has always turned me on was the sensation of some kind of aggression from another dude while going cock2cock

What has always turned you on is the sensation of Aggression from ANOTHER DUDE --

not a bunch of dudes --

but an-other = one other dude --

while going cock2cock.

Cock Against Cock is an Aggressive, Manly, Masculine, and Man Against Man activity.

Man Against Man = Two Men.

Authentic Fighting -- like Authentic Sex -- between Men is One-on-One.

The one place you see group fights in our culture is -- pro-wrestling.

And that's completely fake.

And they do it, in part, to lessen the Man2Man eroticism which is so prominent in pro-wrestling.

To push the Eros aside, and emphasize the Agon.

But TRUE MAN2MAN has to have both -- Agon and Eros.

Which is why when you look at authentic ONE-ON-ONE FIGHTING, ONE-ON-ONE MMA -- the Eroticism is inescapable.

And that's because it's ONE-ON-ONE.

ONE-AGAINST-ONE.

So, NW, this is what you said:

When two guys Fight, the blood spilled down their bodies mixed with their sweat is really a turn on. Then the sweat and blood mixes as they grapple around and it's like a mingling of manliness,

The mingling of manblood and mansweat.

It's just as sweet as the mingling of mancum and mansperm when guys cum together, cock2cock.

Only men can really enjoy that mingling of blood, sweat, and cum.

Sooner or later it will become the norm for fighters to share cocks after their fights...They probably already do. And we just don't hear about it----yet.

Right.

So -- TWO guys FIGHT.

They Sweat.

They Bleed.

ManSweat.

ManBlood.

Then the sweat and blood mixes as they grapple around and it's like a mingling of manliness,

The mingling of manblood and mansweat.

It's just as sweet as the mingling of mancum and mansperm when guys cum together, cock2cock.

Right.

And sweetest of all is the Mingling of ManBlood and ManSweat and ManCum --

When Two Men Fight Sweat Bleed and Cum Together.

TWO MEN.

MAN2MAN.

MAN AGAINST MAN.

Now:

I know my foreign friend says

Masculine male groups and bonds play an extremely important role in the development of physical, mental, emotional and social aspects of natural masculinity. As such they are an important part of the positive environment that all boys should have.

But, you'll notice, he's talking about children.

Boys.

Boys have a natural tendency to seek to join male-only groups, and it's their natural right.

But there comes that time, that magical moment in the life of the Man -- perhaps even when he's still a ManBoy --

when he puts the male group of childhood aside so as to engage in True Man2Man -- with one other Man.

Man Against Man.

It's only then that the True Mingling of ManBlood and ManSweat and ManCum can occur.

When Two Men Fight Sweat Bleed and Cum Together.

So -- don't dilute your Masculinity, don't dilute your Manliness, don't dilute your Aggression.

Go COCK AGAINST COCK with ONE other guy.

Everything else is analism.

I don't care if it calls itself Radical Faeries or New York Jacks or Alternative Gays or -- anything else.

It's all the same deal.

It's all built upon promiscuity.

Which is unManly.

Most of our guys understand that anal is unManly.

But they get taken in by promiscuity because they see bands of Warriors -- such as in pics from World War II or our current wars -- and they think, that's Manly -- which it is.

But -- the guys in those pics are not engaging in group sex.

That's not what you see.

Not at all.

Yes, they've banded together to fight a common enemy.

That's so.

But the most intense BONDING takes place at the one-on-one level:

Even when the guys are in groups:

The most intense bond is one-on-one.

Because that's how Men are.

They want and need that one-on-one bond.

And then they start wrestling --

Because they want and need the male body contact.

In a male way.

In a way that's Aggressive.

The Greeks understood all that.

They had their guys wrestle together from a very early age.

Wrestling was a Contest -- an Agon.

Out of those agones there developed one-on-one relationships.

Love affairs.

Agon led to Eros.

And --

As we saw in The Secret Craft of Warriorhood, those relationships had a military function.

The love affair was also a Contest.

Because all of Greek life was a Contest.

The love affair was a Competition of Courage.

As Prof Lendon says, grouped together in military units,

lovers competed with each other and dreaded to be shamed in the presence of those they loved.

Eros was very consciously put in the service of Ares.

Ares created Eros.

Eros served Ares.

And from Eros' service of Ares came Areté -- Manly Prowess, Manly Valour --

as seen in Aristeia -- acts of Heroism.

So -- Ares and Agon create Eros.

Eros serves both Ares and Agon.

In fact, Ares and Agon work *together* to create Eros -- which then serves them both.

Now:

The ultimate military unit is the dyad -- Two Guys -- one-on-one --

Competing in Courage while Fighting FOR each other.

Sexual promiscuity, as we saw in Polyamorous in Portland, dissolves and destroys the bonds between Men.

And not only that.

It destroys Manliness.

Men did not evolve, nor were they designed or created, to be promiscuous with other Men.

They are meant to form a Warrior Bond -- with one other Man.

They are meant to both Fight him and Love him.










And that happens most archetypally in Gilgamesh -- the world's first epic.

Enkidu and Gilgamesh meet, Fight, Love.

We see that in the Greeks too.

For years I've used this little ancient Greek bas-relief on our pages:

When you look at it more closely, you can see that one guy is bigger than the other:

Which suggests very strongly that they're Lovers.






So guys -- ideally, the Warrior Bond is formed through a Fight.

A Passage through Rage to Love.

Love, says Aeschylus, is the Fight's Holy Consummation.

And he's right.

While Warrior NW speaks of the mingling of Sweat, Blood, and Cum.

And he's right too.

So -- don't be fooled by the charlatans and frauds out there who tell you that you can be sexual with any number of partners and that the sex will somehow deepen the bond with each.

NO.

That's a LIE.

Promiscuity always -- ALWAYS -- whether it's "concurrent" -- as in a group like the Jacks --

or "serial" -- one partner, then another partner, then another, etc --

DESTROYS.

Promiscuity destroys the loving bonds between Men.

Only a Bond which is totally exclusive sexually and emotionally, physically and spiritually -- will endure.

Life is tough.

Bad things happen.

The longer you live, the more likely you are to experience those bad things.

When, as we saw in Polyamorous in Portland, one of our guys was facing homelessness, his promiscuous "boyfriend" refused to help him.

Which was completely predictable.

Our guy was just a toy -- a piece of meat -- to that male.

That our guy still has a roof over his head is because of his "EX" -- a Man with whom he had a *relationship* twenty years ago -- and who came to his rescue.

That's not surprising.

Our position -- my position -- on issues such as promiscuity vs Fidelity is well and thoroughly thought out, and the product of both my life experience and my research.

Masculine, MANLY, Men are not meant to be promiscuous with other Men.

They are meant to be Faithful.

Life is hard.

Life is uncertain.

As Xenophon, quoting Sokrates, says:

You may plant a field well; but you know not who shall gather the fruits: you may build a house well; but you know not who shall dwell in it: able to command, you cannot know whether it is profitable to command: versed in statecraft, you know not whether it is profitable to guide the state: though, for your delight, you marry a pretty woman, you cannot tell whether she will bring you sorrow: though you form a party among men mighty in the state, you know not whether they will cause you to be driven from the state.

You know not.

You don't know.

Life is hard, life is uncertain, bad things happen to the best of us.

A True and Manly Love, Forged in the Fire of ManFight and Sealed with the Sacred Elixir of ManSweat - ManBlood - ManCum is your one true and best bulwark.

Don't let the analists and religious fanatics destroy it.

Which means -- stop dithering.

Because by the time you're homeless or mortally ill or in the depths of depression --

it'll be too late.

FIGHT BACK.

FIGHT BACK NOW.

NOW.

WHILE YOU STILL CAN.

I thank Warrior NW for this post and for his brave and honest life.

Bill Weintraub

December 17, 2010

© All material Copyright 2010 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.


Reply from:

Warrior MAN Brian Hulme

Re: The Mingling of ManSweat and ManBlood

12-22-10

When Warrior NW writes a posting I know it will be something GOOD, but I was not ready for just how good this time, WOW! as I read what NW said, I liked it, then I felt something stirring in my jeans, yes I was getting what you in the U.S.A. call "a boner" or, as we on this side of the pond, would say "a hard on".

If this is what happens just reading about it then I can not wait -- may The Warrior God bring me a Man into my life to experience the "combative and aggressive" LOVE that two MEN can have in EROS. But if I must wait then from what NW tells me it will be worth the wait -- so I guess I need some Warrior self control in the mean time.

Warrior Love to you Bill, and Patrick, and not forgetting NW, and also a good Christmas to all Warriors,

Brian












Add a reply to this discussion

Back to Personal Stories









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

and






AND


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

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

Or visit our FAQs page.


Warriors Speak Home

Cockrub Warriors Site Guide

The Man2Man Alliance

Heroic Homosex

Frot Men

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.










It was my own innate understanding of the essentially Combative and Aggressive nature of Men, and my own instinctual relating of that to the testicles, which produced those fantasies and gave them so much power in my life.





































In this Dialogue, written in the first century AD by Lucian but presenting an imagined conversation between the *sixth century BC* Athenian lawgiver Solon and a Scythian visitor to Athens named Anacharsis, we get some idea of what that training was like -- starting with Athenian kids, and then progressing to Spartan youth:

Anacharsis: And another thing, my dear Solon, why are those young men acting in this way? Look, some of them are grappling and tripping each other, others are choking their friends and twisting their limbs, rolling about in the mud and wallowing like pigs. But before they began to do this, I noticed they first took off their clothes, then put oil on themselves, and in a peaceful fashion took turns in rubbing each other. But now, experiencing some emotion I do not understand, they have lowered their heads and are crashing into each other, and butting their heads together like rams! And look! There is one who has just seized the other by the legs and thrown him down; then he flopped on him and did not allow him to get up, but shoved him down into the mud. And now he is finally twisting his legs around the other person's waist and choking him with his arm under his throat. The other is slapping him on the shoulder, trying to ask him, I suppose, not to choke him to death. They do not avoid getting covered with dirt even to save the oil, but on the contrary wipe it off, and smearing themselves with mud and rivers of perspiration they make themselves ridiculous, in my opinion, by sliding in and out of each other's hands like eels.

Others are acting in the same way in the open part of the courtyard. However, these are not in the mud, but they have this deep sand in the pit which they sprinkle on themselves and each other, just like roosters, so that they cannot break out of their grasp, I imagine, since the sand decreases the slipperiness and offers a surer grip on a dry skin.

Others also covered with dust are standing up straight and striking and kicking each other. See that one there! Poor fellow, he seems to be ready to spit out a mouthful of teeth considering how full of blood and sand his mouth is; he has got a blow to the jaw, as you can see for yourself. But the official there does not separate them and stop the fight -- at least I assume he is an official from his scarlet cloak. On the contrary he encourages them and cheers the one who struck that blow.

All around different people are all exercising: some raise their knees as if running, although they remain in the same place, and as they jump up they kick the air.

What I want to know is, what reason do they have for doing this? It seems to me these actions are almost insane, and there is no one who can easily persuade me that people who act like this have not lost all their senses.

[Solon explains that customs differ from one land to another. He then explains to Anacharsis what is happening.]

Solon: This place, dear Anacharsis, is what we call a gymnasion and it and is sacred to Lykeian Apollo. You can see his statue, leaning against a stele, holding his bow in his left hand. His right arm is bent above his head as if the artist were showing the God resting, as if he had completed some laborious task. As for those exercises in the nude, the one done in the mud is called wrestling. Those in the dust are also wrestling. Those who strike each other standing upright we call pankratiasts. We have other athletic events: we have contests in boxing, diskos, and the long jump, and the winner is considered superior to his fellows and takes the prize.

Anacharsis: These prizes of yours now; what are they?

Solon: At Olympia there is a crown of wild olive; at Isthmia, one of pine; at Nemea, one woven of celery; at the Pythian Games, laurel berries sacred to the god, and here at home at the Panathenaic Games, oil from olive trees which grow in the sacred precincts. What are you laughing at, Anacharsis? Do these prizes seem valueless to you?

[Solon explains the symbolic value of the prizes, justifies the pursuit of athletics, the education of the citizens. Then Anacharsis asks Solon to explain the government of Athens.]

Solon: It is not easy, my friend, to explain everything at once in concise form, but if you will take one thing at a time you will learn everything about our belief in the gods, as well as our attitude toward parents, marriage, or anything else.

I will now explain our theory about young men and how we treat them from the time when they begin to know the difference between right and wrong and are entering manhood and sustaining hardships, so that you may learn why we require them to undergo these exercises and force them to subject their bodies to toil, not just because of the athletic games and the prizes they may win there, for few of them have the ability to do that, but so that they may try to gain a greater good for the entire city and for themselves. For there is another contest set up for all good citizens and the crown is not made of pine nor of wild olive nor of celery, but is one which includes all of man's happiness, that is to say, freedom for each person individually and for the state in general: wealth, glory, pleasure in our traditional feast days, having the entire family safe from harm, and in a word, to have the best of all the blessings one could have from the gods.

All this happiness is woven into the crown to which I referred and is acquired in the contest to which these exhausting exercises lead.

[Solon goes into more detail about the training of young men and about the responsibility of the citizens.]

Solon: As for physical training, which you particularly wanted to hear about, we proceed as follows. When the boys reach an age when they are no longer soft and uncoordinated, we strip them naked. We do this because first, we think they should get used to the weather, learning to live with different seasons, so they are not bothered by the heat nor do they yield to the cold. Then we massage them with olive oil and condition the skin. For since we see that leather which is softened by olive oil does not easily crack and is much stronger, even though it is not alive, why should we not think that live bodies would benefit from oil? Next we have thought up different kinds of athletics and have appointed coaches for each type. We teach one how to box, another how to compete in the pankration, so that they can become used to hard work, to stand up to blows face to face, and not to yield through fear of injury.

This creates two valuable traits in our young men: it makes them brave in the face of danger and unsparing of their bodies, and it also makes them strong and vigorous. Those who wrestle and push against each other learn how to fall safely and spring up nimbly, to endure pushing, grappling, twisting, and choking, and to be able to lift their opponent off the ground. They are not learning useless skills but they get the one thing which is the first and most important thing in life: through this training their bodies become stronger and capable of enduring pain. There is another thing too which is not unimportant. From this training they acquire skills which they may need some day in war. For it is clear that if a man so trained grapples with an enemy, he will trip and throw him more quickly and if he is thrown he will know how to regain his feet as easily as possible. For we prepare our men, Anacharsis, for the supreme contest, war, and we expect to have much better soldiers out of young men who have had this training, that is, the previous conditioning and training of naked bodies, which makes them not only stronger and healthier, more agile and fit, but also causes them to outweigh their opponents.

You can see, I should think, the results of this, what they are like when armed, or even without weapons how they would strike terror in their enemies. Our troops are not fat, pale, and useless nor are they white and scrawny ... enervated by lying in the shade, simultaneously shivering and streaming with rivers of sweat, gasping beneath their helmets, particularly if the sun, as now, is burning with noontime heat. What use could people be who get thirsty and cannot endure dust; soldiers who panic if they see blood, who die of terror before they come close enough to throw their spears or to close with the enemy? But our troops have skin of high color, darkened by the sun, and faces like real men; they display great vigor, fire, and virility. They glow with good health, and are neither shriveled skeletons nor excessively heavy, but they have been carved to perfect symmetry; they have used up and sweated off useless and excess flesh, and that which is left is strong, supple, and free, and they vigorously keep this healthy condition. For just as the winnowers do with wheat, so our athletes do with their bodies, removing the chaff and the husks and leaving the grain in a clean pile.

Through training like this a man can't avoid being healthy and can stand up indefinitely under stress. Such a man would sweat only after some time, and he would seldom be seen to be ill. Suppose someone were to take two torches and throw one into the grain and the other into the straw and chaff -- you see, I am returning to the figure of the winnower. The straw, I think, would burst into flames much more quickly, but the grain would burn slowly with no large flames blazing up nor would it burn all at once, but it would smoulder slowly and eventually it too would be burned.

Neither disease nor fatigue could easily attack and overcome such a body or easily defeat it. For it has good inner resources which defend it against attacks from outside, so as not to let them in, neither does it admit the sun or the cold to its hurt. To avoid yielding to hardships, great vigor springs up within, something prepared long in advance and held in reserve for time of need. This vigor fills up at once and waters the body in a crisis and makes it strong for a long time. For the previous training in bearing strain and hardship does not weaken their strength but increases it, and when you fan it the fire burns stronger.

We train them to run, getting them to endure long distances as well as speeding them up for swiftness in the sprints. This running is not done on a firm springy surface but in deep sand, where it is not easy to place one's foot forcefully and not to push off from it, since the foot slips against the yielding sand. We train them to jump over ditches, if they have to, or any other obstacles, and in addition we train them to do this even when they carry lead weights as large as they can hold. They also compete in the javelin throw for distance. In the gymnasium you also saw another athletic implement, bronze, circular, like a tiny shield with no bar or straps. You handled it as it lay there and expressed the view that it was heavy and hard to hold on to because it was so smooth. Well, they throw this up in the air both high and out, competing to see who can throw the longest and pass beyond the others. This exercise strengthens the shoulders and builds up the arms and legs.

As for this mud and dust, which originally seemed so amusing to you, my friend, listen while I tell you why it is used. First, their fall will not be on unyielding dirt but they will fall safely on soft ground. Next, their slipperiness has to be greater when they sweat in the mud. You likened them to eels, but the facts are neither useless nor humorous: it adds not a little to strength of the sinews when they are forced to hold firmly to people in this condition when they are trying to slip away. Do not think it is easy to pick up a sweaty man in the mud, covered with oil and trying to get out of your arms. All these skills, as I said earlier, are useful in combat, if it were necessary to pick up a wounded friend and carry him easily to safety or to seize an enemy and bring him back in your arms. And for this reason we train them beyond what is necessary, so that when they have practiced hard tasks they may do smaller ones with much greater facility.

We believe the dust is used for the opposite reason than the oil is, that is, so that a competitor may not slip out of his opponent's grasp. For after they have been trained in the mud to hold fast to something which is escaping from them because of its slipperiness, they then practice escaping out of the arms of their opponent, no matter how impossibly firm they may be held. Furthermore when this dust is used liberally it checks the perspiration and makes their strength last longer and furnishes protection against harm from drafts which otherwise attack the body when the pores are open. Besides, the dust rubs off the accumulation of dirt and makes the skin gleam.

I should dearly like to stand one of those white-skinned fellows who live in the shade beside one of our boys who work out in the Lykeion, and after I had washed off the dust and the mud, ask you which one you would like to resemble. For I know that you would choose at first glance, without hesitation, even without putting either through any tests, the one which is solid and hard rather than soft, weak, and pale, because what little blood he has has been withdrawn into the interior of his body.

[Anacharsis then ridicules the idea that athletic training could be useful in war. Why not save your strength, he asks. Solon explains that strength cannot be saved like a bottle of wine; it must be constantly used.]

Anacharsis: I just don't understand what you said, Solon. It is too intellectual for me and requires a sharp mind and keen insight. But above all, tell me this, why, in the Olympic Games and at Isthmia and Delphi and elsewhere, where so many competitors, you say, assemble to see these young men compete, you never have a contest with weapons but you bring them before the spectators all naked and exhibit them getting kicked and punched, and then, if they have won, give them berries and wild olives? It would be worth knowing why you do this.

Solon: My dear Anacharsis, we do this because we think that their enthusiasm for athletics will increase if they see that those who excel at them are honored and are presented to crowds of Greeks by heralds. Because they are to appear stripped before so many people, they try to get into good condition, so that when they are naked they will not be ashamed, and each one works to make himself capable of winning. As for the prizes, as I said earlier, they are not insignificant: to be praised by the spectators, to be a recognized celebrity, and to be pointed out as the best of one's group. As a result of these prizes, many of the spectators who are of the right age for competition go away completely in love with courage and struggle. If someone should remove love of glory from our lives, what good would we ever achieve, Anacharsis, or who would strive to accomplish some shining deed? But now it is possible for you to imagine from these games what sort of men these would be under arms, fighting for fatherland and children and wives and temples, when they show so much desire for victory in competing for laurel berries and wild olives.

Furthermore, how would you feel if you should observe fights between quails and between roosters here among us, and see the great interest which is shown in them? Wouldn't you laugh, particularly if you should learn that we do this in accordance with our laws and all men of military age are instructed to be present and to see these birds fight until they are exhausted? But it is no laughing matter, for eagerness for danger creeps insensibly into their souls so that they try not to seem less courageous and bold than the roosters nor to give in too soon because of injury or fatigue or any other distress.

As for trying them in armed combat and seeing them receive wounds -- never! It is brutal and dreadfully wrong, and in addition it is economically unfeasible to destroy the bravest, whom we could better use against our enemies.

Since you tell me, Anacharsis, that you expect to travel to the rest of Greece, if you get to Sparta, remember not to laugh at them nor think that they have no purpose when they compete in a theater, rushing together and striking each other, fighting over a ball, or when 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, 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. In particular, do not laugh if you see them being whipped at the altar, streaming with blood, with mothers and fathers standing by, not at all bothered by what is happening but on the contrary threatening them if they do not hold up under the blows, urging them to bear up under the pain as long as possible, and to be strong under this hideous treatment. To tell the truth, many have died in these contests, not thinking it manly to yield before the eyes of their friends and relatives while they are still alive, no, not even to flinch. You will see honors paid to statues of people like this erected at public expense by the state of Sparta.

~ translated by Sweet.

Please click here to Return to the main article.