Bill Weintraub:

"He urged his fellow pastors to renounce any sins they might be tempted to commit and live pure lives."

This is a sad story in so far as this man doesn't appear to have been a Haggard.

It sounds as though he was genuinely devoted to his congregation.

At the same time, it would appear that he believed that homosexuality is a sin.

It isn't.

And that's why I feel so strongly about these statements:

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

In his most recent post on this board -- his reply to My best friend -- Robert Loring referred to "the sacredness of M2M love."

That's right.

M2M Love is Sacred.

Sacred M2M Love.

Sacred Phallic Love.

The Sacred Love of Comrades.

The Sacred Love of Brothers.

The Sacred Love of Warrior Brothers.

What killed the Rev Dugan were the filthy stinking LIES put forward not just ad nauseam but ad mortem by people like Haggard.

Which treat the Sacred Love of Men as something "dirty, repulsive, and immoral."

And it's telling that the Rev Dugan was tricked -- IF that's what happened -- into meeting his occasional sex partner at an "adult" bookstore.

Because if he'd had a sense of M2M as Sacred -- he would never have gone there.

So this is a sad story.

And I'm not glad that Dugan is dead.

But if he taught his congregants that the Love of Men is sin -- he too was part of the problem.

I feel very strongly that just as we have to talk A LOT about Masculinity and Manliness --

so too we have to talk A LOT about the Sacredness of MAN2MAN;

And we have to make clear that M2M -- Manhood 2 Manhood -- Phallus 2 Phallus -- is something which should be practiced ONLY between bonded Warrior brothers.

I've posted a lot in the last few days about The Comradeship of Wounds.

Why?

Because I'm trying to get you guys to understand something about M2M.

It's all over the ancient literature.

But to me it's best summed up in this statement by Sioux Warrior and American physician Charles Eastman in his book The Soul of the Indian:

The highest type of friendship is the relation of "brother-friend" or "life-and-death friend." This bond is between man and man, is usually formed in early youth, and can only be broken by death. It is the essence of comradeship and fraternal love, without thought of pleasure or gain, but rather for moral support and inspiration. Each is vowed to die for the other, if need be, and nothing denied the brother-friend, but neither is anything required that is not in accord with the highest conceptions of the Warrior mind.

Let's look at what Eastman says:

The highest type of friendship is the relation of "brother-friend" or "life-and-death friend."

Right -- that we all understand.

This bond is between man and man, is usually formed in early youth, and can only be broken by death.

This too we understand.

It is the essence of comradeship and fraternal love, without thought of pleasure or gain, but rather for moral support and inspiration.

"Comradeship and fraternal love" -- that we understand.

"Moral support and inspiration" -- that too we understand.

But what about this:

"Without thought of pleasure or gain"

"Gain" we understand -- this is not a financial arrangement.

But what about "pleasure" -- does he mean "no sex?"

I don't know for sure, because Eastman was an American Indian writing for a late-nineteenth-century European-American audience.

And he most certainly would have concealed any same-sex activity -- all colonialized peoples learn to do that very early in their colonialization.

However, I don't think that's what he means.

Sex between bonded Warrior brothers is pleasurable.

But it's not undertaken for pleasure.

It's done as a deep and abiding expression of Love.

Indeed, as the most profound physical expression possible of Love between Men.

Because it's expressed through the mutual merging of Manhood.

A Holy and Sacred Union expressed Man 2 Man and Manhood 2 Manhood.

That's what it is.

And in that sense, Phallic Bonding is done "without thought of pleasure or gain."

Because pleasure is not the motivation.

Rather, it's an intense longing to be as physically close to another MAN -- and not just any Man, but your very own Warrior brother -- as you can be.

Two Men cannot be physically closer than they are during the Holy Sacrament of Frot.

The Sacrament culminates in the free mingling of Warrior Semen.

And that is Holy.

Many, many of the Men who've posted on this board have referred to the Holy and Sacramental nature of Frot.

And we MUST continue to put that forward.

Otherwise, all that's out there is religious right vs analist left.

And not only is that NO GOOD --

but it's FALSE.

I know because I've lived and experienced the Holy Sacrament of Frot.

And so have MILLIONS of other MEN.

OUR VOICES MUST BE HEARD.

Dugan is gone; Haggard is damned.

So be it.

We must continue to be the Voice of Truth --

about MAN2MAN

and about SACRED MAN2MAN LOVE.

I often call upon you to FIGHT BACK.

I often call upon you to DONATE.

Brent Dugan died by his own hand, alone, forlorn, forsaken, believing himself unloved and unworthy of love.

In a motel room.

A place where people go for anonymous and soulless encounters.

Believe me, that's something a pastor knows all too well.

Brent Dugan chose to end his life in that empty place, in misery and despair.

I'm asking you to do SOMETHING to save the next Brent Dugan.

Will you do it?

Will you?

Bill Weintraub

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

Bill Weintraub

Re: Third pastor outed -- commits suicide

2-10-2007

There've been no responses to this post and this tragedy.

Which is really disgusting.

Nor have there been any donations.

That too is disgusting.

Because EVERY ONE of you has, to some degree, been where Brent Dugan was.

You ALL know how this man SUFFERED.

Because you've all been there.

EVERY ONE OF YOU.

But you don't care.

Because you don't care about anyone but yourselves.

The beginning and end of your philosophy is ME.

ME ME ME ME ME ME ME

That's it.

And if YOU're not suicidal at this moment -- you don't care about anyone else killing himself.

Well, I do.

AND I DON'T LIKE BEING ASSOCIATED WITH PEOPLE WHO DON'T.

Think about that the next time you want something from me.

It's unlikely to be forthcoming.

Now, as it happens Brent Dugan and I were about the same age.

And we grew up in similar places -- he in Pittsburgh, me in Baltimore, which in the 1950s were both basically gritty working-class towns.

Of course I never met Brent and now he's dead so I never will.

But I think I know a bit about what he was like.

As a little boy, I bet he had dreams and hopes of being a warrior.

I bet he did.

A Christian warrior.

Perhaps a Warrior-cleric.

He probably played the sorts of games we all did -- of soldiers and cowboys and indians and knights and heroes.

He probably had a best friend.

To whom he felt very close.

I bet he was a sweet kid.

But when he hit adolescence, his perfectly NORMAL and NATURAL same-sex feelings and desires overwhelmed him.

It was the worst possible place and time to be a masculine-identified boy who was in touch with his own same-sex desires.

The WORST.

In this country, the Eisenhower years and after into the JFK / LBJ presidencies constituted without question the single most homophobic era in history.

Not just American history.

All of history.

And that's when he grew up.

If he was born in 46, he would have been 14 in 1960.

What a shame.

So -- he hid and concealed those feelings.

Because he didn't have ANY CHOICE.

NONE.

And he would have isolated himself from other boys.

So that he didn't get found out.

Now, here's what my foreign friend told us happens to such kids -- I've modified this a bit to fit the situation of a deeply-closeted teen:

When a masculine-identified young man associates himself with the gay group --- psychologically made to believe he is one of them --- he will find himself a misfit in the strongly third-sex gay culture. But since there is no other social space for him, he will force himself to relate to the gays.

The entire experience will subdue his natural masculinity and make him more effeminate. Although he will still be 'macho', compared to the real gays.

But such a masculine-identified 'gay' identified man will just become a vulnerable, unsure and maladjusted man -- sometimes known as a "nice guy" -- a description often used for non-feminine gay men whose masculinity is suppressed.

Let's look at this one:

When a masculine-identified young man associates himself with the gay group --- psychologically made to believe he is one of them --- he will find himself a misfit in the strongly third-sex gay culture. But since there is no other social space for him, he will force himself to relate to the gays.

What happens psychologically to an adolescent like Brent is that in his mind, he "associates himself with the gay group -- [he is] psychologically made to believe he is one of them"

Right.

"he will find himself a misfit in the strongly third-sex gay culture. But since there is no other social space for him, he will force himself to relate to the gays."

That's right too.

Of course, if we can believe his self-report at the very end of his life, for most of his life Brent had no contact with gays.

But PSYCHOLOGICALLY that's what and who he thought he had to be -- a femmy gay man.

And -- to his credit -- he couldn't accept that.

Nevertheless:

The entire experience will subdue his natural masculinity and make him more effeminate. Although he will still be 'macho', compared to the real gays.

But such a masculine identified 'gay' identified man will just become a vulnerable, unsure and maladjusted man -- sometimes known as a "nice guy" -- a description often used for non-feminine gay men whose masculinity is suppressed.

A "vulnerable, unsure, and maladjusted man"

I don't know if Brent could be considered "maladjusted" -- he went to college and divinity school and had a successful career as a cleric.

But he was most certainly "vulnerable and unsure."

ALL HIS ADULT LIFE.

And eventually his vulnerability and uncertainty killed him.

Now, I don't completely agree with my foreign friend's ideas on the derivation of "nice guy" -- I think that strongly masculine men can be nice guys too.

However, was Brent a "nice guy?"

Yes -- according to the description left on the Pittsburgh Presbytery's website:

"Brent was and is deeply respected in this presbytery, known for the fruit he bore in ministry, his caring and thoughtfulness, and for his humble, missional leadership. He was a very dear man."

"Caring, thoughtful, humble, dear"

He was a nice guy.

And now he's dead.

Let me make clear that being a "nice guy" should not be an indictment of anyone.

But when someone like Brent kills himself we need to look at why.

Brent was one of us.

He was a Man who loved Men.

He suppressed his same-sex feelings because he was raised in a time and place that taught him to do that.

And he suppressed them for 56 years.

I was luckier than Brent.

I suppressed my feelings for 24 years -- and then I came out.

But I had help.

I was helped by a movement called GAY LIBERATION.

GAY LIBERATION was a great and powerful force for good in the lives of MEN who love MEN.

When I came out I came out as a gay MAN.

And that was thanks to Gay Lib.

Gay Lib welcomed masculine-identified men and offered new role models for masculine-identified men -- men who couldn't identify with people like Liberace and Paul Lynde -- and in so doing made it possible for us to come out and openly and proudly acknowledge our love of other Men.

But Gay Lib was a revolutionary force and like all revolutionary forces, it didn't last long.

It started in 1970, and by 1975 it was done.

People wanted order and stability.

And at that point the reactionary ideologies of analism and effeminacy took over.

And have held power ever since.

So: Gay Liberation may have come too late for Brent.

Or maybe it didn't reach into the seminary -- where he was.

Or maybe he couldn't hear its message.

But if he didn't hear its message by 1975 -- he was out of luck.

Because what replaced it would not have appealed to a man like Brent.

So he spent the next 30 years in isolation.

In service to his church and congregation -- yes.

But in terrible isolation.

And then some "man" claimed to befriend him.

And instead jerked him around and betrayed him.

Who knows why?

And what was the TV station thinking?

It's one thing for a public figure like Ted Haggard, who'd built an evangelical movement on homophobia, to be caught with a male prostitute.

It's quite another if a local minister goes to an adult bookstore.

Has no one from KDKA-TV ever gone to an adult bookstore?

Or ordered something from Victoria's Secret?

What this is about is the terrible decline in journalistic standards.

If someone from Brent's congregation had seen him there and started a brouhaha in the church -- that would have been a legitimate story.

But to entrap him -- No.

In any case, once the entrapment was in play, Brent's fate was sealed.

The point is that Brent Dugan couldn't see he had choices.

Because no one was there to show him.

"He urged his fellow pastors to renounce any sins they might be tempted to commit and live pure lives."

But homosexuality is not a sin.

And a life lived in the True Love of another Man and in Phallic Bond with that Man is PURE.

There's nothing more pure than the True Love of Man for Man.

As the ancients recognized and as Charles Eastman said:

The highest type of friendship is the relation of "brother-friend" or "life-and-death friend." This bond is between man and man, is usually formed in early youth, and can only be broken by death. It is the essence of comradeship and fraternal love, without thought of pleasure or gain, but rather for moral support and inspiration. Each is vowed to die for the other, if need be, and nothing denied the brother-friend, but neither is anything required that is not in accord with the highest conceptions of the Warrior mind.

And in terms of the physical expression of that Love, there's nothing more pure, more innocent, more natural, or more true, than the merging of Phallus with Phallus.

Manhood with Manhood.

It's a totally Natural, Innocent, and Pure expression of the Love of Man for Man.

Brent Dugan is gone.

He left us without knowing that sort of love.

But there are literally MILLIONS OF MEN LIKE HIM -- just waiting to hear our message.

AND YOU WON'T HELP THEM.

What the fuck is the matter with you?

Can you explain it to me?

I'm waiting to hear a reason.

How bout this one:

Why should I help you if you won't help them?

Why?

In the last ten days I've put up three big articles -- on Statius, on The Comradeship of Wounds, on Achilles -- plus articles on the follow-up to Haggard and what's going down with Dr Chin.

And articles from Naked Wrestler.

And I have many more from him, from me, from other guys, in the hopper.

But why should I do them?

Why should I do anything for people who are as SELFISH and UNGRATEFUL as you are?

DONATE.

Right now a handful of people are keeping the sites alive.

It's ridiculous.

Two hundred of you sending in $10 a month would get us there.

Right now we have ONE.

So: I want and expect to see some reaction to this MAN's death.

I want and expect to see that someone cares.

And if I don't see that I'm not doing anything for you.

You can twist in the wind.

You can get fucked up the ass and get HIV -- preferably mutant HIV and several strains at that.

I wonder how many of you are negative because of this site -- and who still won't donate.

Here's one for the books:

In October, I got the following letter from an NYC psychotherapist named -- I should use his name but I won't -- at least today:

Dear Mr. Weintraub:

I stumbled onto your website some months ago and was astounded by your clear thinking and unerring sense of the dangers of conditioned intelligence. Your position in favor of frot and against anal penetration is well-argued and eminently defensible from every vantage point one can conceive of.

As a gay therapist in New York City, I constantly battle the ghetto-ized thinking of young men swept up into the so-called Chelsea gay culture. It is so discouraging watching young men embrace a "community" that has completely and ironically identified with the aggressor and the oppressor. Even my colleagues in the mental health field have embraced the politically-correct sensibilities of the editors of Poz, etc. One leading gay activist has just published a book explaining and rationalizing barebacking. Of course, all of his arguments are based on internalized homophobia, rampant drug use, etc., but never does he address the fundamental issue which is this: why is anal penetration so extolled as the pinnacle of sexual expression? You have and continue to do this with great courage and insight.

In my efforts to speak out, I have become a pariah in this NYC gay community. I've even been called homophobic. None of this is true, of course, but that has been the price I have paid for speaking out. The best I can do is work therapeutically one-on-one with young men to get them to examine their conditioned intelligence.

Thank you for your good work.

John Doe, LCSW

I wrote back and said, Great John, let's post that letter.

And we need donations too.

Here's his response:

Thanks, Bill, for your thoughtful response.

Answering your questions: first, the gay activist who has recently published a book on barebacking is Michael Shernoff. I forget the title, but the subtitle uses the term "barebacking." An excerpt from his book was also published in the Journal of the NASW [National Association of Social Work] recently. I believe he still teaches on the adjunct faculty of Hunter College and Columbia. He's politically-correct to the nth degree and a staunch member of the gay establishment here. He once supervised me in my training. He and Odets are a perfect fit intellectually.

Bill, you're welcome to use my letter, but could you omit my name nad email address? It's a small world and I'm useless if I only preach to the converted, so to speak. Part of my success now as a therapist is having no identifications with any group or movement. In fact, I don't even identify myself as a gay therapist -- just as one who is sensitive to gay issues. That way, men and women wrestling with coming out issues don't feel that I would have an agenda in treatment. No bullying, just questioning and exploring in a Socratic manner the nature of their belief systems. That way, as you know, we get to the truth.

A donation, however, to help your work is quite possible. It can't be much, Bill, but I'll come up with something!

Let's take a look at this.

Mr Doe, LCSW, mentions a fellow psychotherapist named Shernoff who's part of the gay establishment, who's adjunct faculty at Columbia and Hunter, and who's written about barebacking.

Then Mr Doe says that he doesn't want his name used on this site because -- uhhhhhhhhhhhh??? -- he doesn't want "identifications with any group or movement."

Why?

If Shernoff, a psychotherapist whom he characterizes as a "gay activist," can talk about barebacking, why can't Doe talk about Frot?

Why?

I mean, barebacking is a movement too -- without any question.

And analism is a movement.

That's the whole point.

Does Doe's rationale make any sense?

I know, I know, it's the socratic method and all that bullshit -- but isn't he really just protecting his practice?

Isn't that just a puny excuse for putting himself first?

As do you all.

And if he's going to bring up Socrates -- Socrates taught in public spaces like the palestra and the marketplace -- openly, under his own name, even though his views were often not popular in his community.

(For those who don't remember -- Socrates was convicted of impiety and forced to kill himself.)

So I don't think Mr Doe can hide behind the sainted memory of Socrates -- because Socrates was not afraid to say what he thought.

As a matter of fact he chose to die.

He could have chosen exile.

He chose to die so that the Athenian public would have to face the consequences of their actions.

But therapist Doe is afraid to use the word Frot in public.

Wow.

That's Socratic all right.

Now, a few months back, we reported on an article in the Village Voice titled Field of Queens.

In which a conservative, previously bi kid into fidelity came out in NYC and promptly tried to commit suicide because of the promiscuity and emptiness; -- and then got into a gay soccer league.

After his suicide attempt, that kid went to a psychotherapist.

If he went to Shernoff, based on what Doe says in his letter, he would hear endorsements of the gay status quo.

If he went to Doe -- he'd hear about alternatives.

But Doe doesn't want him to know that.

That makes no sense.

Shernoff's book, by the way, is titled Without Condoms: Unprotected Sex, Gay Men and Barebacking.

Hmmmmmmmmm.

Since "without condoms," "unprotected sex [sic]," and "barebacking" are the same thing, it could have just been called Barebacking: Barebacking, Gay Men, and Barebacking.

I wonder why Shernoff didn't ask us to be part of that book?

Maybe because no one -- including gutless wonders like Mr Doe -- will speak up for us in NYC.

Then Doe says, "A donation, however, to help your work is quite possible. It can't be much, Bill, but I'll come up with something!"

"It can't be much" -- no kidding.

Needless to say, NOTHING ever appeared.

So Doe makes use of this site and my work, but he won't lend his name to what he believes and he won't even support it financially.

Do you wonder that I get disgusted?

Do you?

YOU DONATE.

YOU DONATE TO THE MEMORY OF BRENT DUGAN.

Or I will fucking close this thing down.

BECAUSE YOU DON'T DESERVE IT.

Bill Weintraub

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

silverback7m

Re: Third pastor outed -- commits suicide

2-13-2007

Bill

I sincerely appreciate your efforts on our behalf. The enormity of our task is something that will last for at least another generation. I am 64 years old. I could use the excuse "I'm not going to be around so why should I care." There is a malignate attitude of I don't give a damn brother so keep on trukin. It has corroded the very foundation of this generation. Addicted complacency has replaced commitment. The poor young brothers are dying in Iraq. Who cares. I do!