Bill Weintraub

Re: trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion

3-29-09

Hey Phil,

Thank you for this wonderful letter.

Phil, let's take a look:

I have recently been pointed to the web site that I never knew existed.

Okay.

I'm sorry you didn't know we existed.

There's been a lot of censorship in the gay press and online about us.

But please thank the person for me who sent you to our site.

It's really helpful when guys do that.

I am totaly blown away! Finally a place where I belong.

Yes -- that's right -- you belong here.

I've been a misfit all my life.

Phil, I understand what you're saying, but you're not the misfit.

It's "gay male culture," which we call analism --

which is in error.

So Phil, sometimes guys write to me and say, I felt like a freak, I thought I was a freak.

Or I thought I was weird.

And I point out to them that what's weird and freakish is stickin your dick in a hole full of shit and calling it sex.

That's weird.

Wanting to connect genitally to another Man -- phallus to phallus -- is normal and natural.

I love men but have never been 'gay' enough to fit in.

Phil, I hear you.

Phil, there's a difference between Men Loving Men / guys being into guys;

and "gay."

It's normal and natural for guys to seek affection, intimacy, love, and mutually-genital sex with other guys.

As my foreign friend says,

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

So there's male sexual desire for other men, which is a universal male phenomenon;

and then there's "gay" -- or analism -- a tiny subculture which evolved out of a heterosexualized idea of sex between males.

So:

Loving Men -- and "gay" -- are two very different things.

I have never been into anal sex

Phil, that speaks well of you.

and have been rejected often for that reason.

Yep -- that's true of virtually all our gay-identified Alliance guys.

There is also a noticeable lack of self esteem in the gay scene.

Yep -- something the gay establishment wants to blame on homophobia.

But if you look around, you see that same lack of self esteem among gay-identified males in the big non-homophobic cities like San Francisco.

Question:

If homophobia is the cause of low self esteem, why do those self-esteem problems persist in a place like SF?

Answer:

It's the anal.

Anal is at the root of the low self esteem and substance abuse which characterize much of the "gay community."

Not to mention HIV infection.

I do not mean to come across as if I'm better than those I speak of.

Okay.

But maybe you are better.

Maybe the fact that you were willing and able to think for yourself and resist the constant pressure and coercion to do anal -- says that in some sense you are better.

Phil, the "gay community" is constantly telling us to "honor diversity" -- that is, don't make judgements.

But that same "gay community" was and is constantly judging you and tearing you down because you won't do anal.

So maybe you have a right -- to judge that community and the values which are at its core.

And maybe, when looked at objectively, your values are better.

I just didn't fit in. I developed a strong sense that trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion is what it was all about and felt like a misfit because of it.

Right.

And here's the kicker -- for thousands of years, Men Loving Men was characterized by "trust, honor, loyalty, love, and devotion."

Again, present-day "gay male culture" is the anomaly.

Not you.

You're well within the mainstream of how --historically -- Men who Love Men -- have behaved.

Faithfully -- with Fidelity.

We talk about that in many, many articles and posts on this site and on this board, including

• I wasn't aware that homosexuality was about love early on; and

• Reclaiming Our Nobility as Men.

Ck em out.

I've lived a life of a loner for a very long time. Just a couple of friends and my right hand accounted for most of my sex life since I was a young man.

I understand.

I am a biker (yes a Harley) and prefer to ride alone or with straight guys because I enjoy the masculinity that i'd be missing from hanging with gay men.

Phil, I hear you and I totally agree.

I've barely scanned your web sight and can't wait to come back time and time again.

Good.

And Phil, because the sites are very large, I'm sending you our Alliance welcome letter which contains links that may help guide your reading.

This is where I belong.

Right!

And remember that.

Phil, you're no longer alone.

Hold tight to that truth.

Finally!

I hear you, and again, I'm very glad you found us --

and Welcome to the Alliance!

Bill Weintraub

Guys --

Virtually all of the gay-identified Men in the Alliance have been told that we were "misfits" because we wouldn't do anal.

I certainly was.

I was told that way back in 1975, by a fellow "gay activist" who informed me that "you're not really gay if you don't get fucked."

That's a judgement.

Yet I get letters all the time from guys like Phil saying, in effect, I don't want to judge anyone.

And my response is, as you've just read, Okay, but you've been judged, and very harshly too, all your gay life by your fellows.

Why shouldn't you make some judgements of your own?

Particularly given that the facts are all on your side.

The facts:

We call it shit sex because it is shit sex.

We call it pain sex because it is pain sex.

We call it disease sex because it is disease sex.

We call it death sex because it is death sex.

We say an anus is not a vagina because an anus is NOT a vagina.

The dissimilarities are huge.

There's no genital tissue in the anus.

No naturally occuring immunological defences.

The mucosal lining of the anus is pathetically thin.

The walls of the anus weak.

The anus is not self-lubricating.

Nor is it, compared to the vagina, elastic.

All in all, the anus is singularly ill-suited to being penetrated.

It's weak, frail, fragile, easily damaged and completely defenseless, a major vector for disease, and totally lacking in genital tissue.

Those are the facts.

So why not make some judgements?

The facts -- FACTS -- are ALL on your side.

And those facts are not only about anal.

Phil says,

I developed a strong sense that trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion is what it was all about and felt like a misfit because of it.

So Phil was a misfit twice over -- first because he wouldn't do anal;

and second because he valued "trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion" and believed that that was what male-male relationships were supposed to be about.

GUESS WHAT?

The facts are on his side.

The historical facts.

History is on his side.

History says -- You're right Phil!

Here's John Boswell, the openly gay chair of the history department at Yale until his death from AIDS in 1995, writing about the ancient world:

Most ancient writers -- in striking opposition to their modern counterparts -- generally entertained higher expectations of the fidelity and permanence of homosexual passions than of heterosexual feelings.

Plutarch adduces with evident disapproval cases of husbands who allowed their wives to be unfaithful to gain some advantage, and then notes, "By contrast, of all the many [same-sex] lovers there were and have been, do you know of a single one who surrendered his beloved, even to gain favor from Zeus? I do not." (Erotikos 760B).

The proponent of same-sex passion in the Hellenistic Affairs of the Heart says that wisdom and experience teach that love between males is the most stable of loves. This prejudice [sic] was doubtless influenced by the Symposium of Plato, in which heterosexual relationships and feelings are characterized as "vulgar," and their same-sex equivalents as "heavenly."

This contrast exercised wide influence on subsequent discussions of love.

~ Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in PreModern Europe, 74.

Doubtless the most surprising and counter-intuitive aspect of same-sex eroticism was not its frequency or duration, but its long and hallowed relationship to democracy and military valor, which modern military officials tend to find improbable or even unbelievable.

Boswell goes on to note that in Plato's Symposium, the character named

Phaedrus argued that no one's behavior is better than that of those [same-sex] couples who are in love, because they would rather behave badly in sight of father or comrade than in view of those they love. He even advanced the idea that:

if we could somehow contrive to have a city or an army composed of lovers and those they loved, they could not be better citizens of their country than by thus refraining from all that is base in a mutual rivalry for honor; and such men as these, when fighting side by side, one might almost consider able to make a little band victorious over all the world. For a man in love would surely choose to have all the rest of the host rather than the one he loves see him forsaking his station, or flinging away his arms; sooner than this, he would prefer to die many deaths: while, as for leaving the one he loves in the lurch, or not succoring him in peril, no man is such a craven that the influence of Love [Eros] cannot inspire him with a courage that makes him equal to the bravest born; and without doubt what Homer calls a "fury inspired" by a god in certain heroes is the effect produced on lovers by Love's peculiar power. Moreover, only such as are in love will consent to die for others.

~ Symposium 179

So -- in the ancient world, male-male relationships were not about anal and promiscuity.

They were about Phallus and Fidelity.

Which were expressions of Strength and Honor.

Oh yeah.

Martial.

Masculine.

Monogamous.

That wasn't just the ideal.

That was the REALITY.

That's what it was about.

Yet Phil is considered a "misfit."

Well, hey, I guess if not being into promiscuity, effeminacy, and shit sex makes you a misfit -- then a misfit is what you want to be.

But it's only in the bizarre world of analism that someone like Phil would be considered a "misfit."

Throughout both space and time, Phil's values -- "trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion" --

Phil's values, in point of fact, are the values of the vast majority of human beings, including the vast majority of Men, and the vast majority of Men who've Loved Men.

I thank Phil for his post.

I ask the rest of you -- how long are you going to allow analist and heterosexist bullshit to rule, run, and ruin your lives?

How long?

How long are you willing to "live" as misfits and freaks --

because like Phil you're into Phallus and Fidelity, Strength and Honor.

How long?

Warrior Chris, in his first email to me, talked about "reclaiming our nobility as Men."

Isn't that what you'd rather be doing?

Not living the ignominious life of a freak among your "gay" "friends" and/or "straight" "buddies" --

but living the Noble and Heroic Life of a Man.

You only have one sweet precious life.

Isn't it time you got it right?

FIGHT BACK.

SAVE YOUR LIFE.

Bill Weintraub

March 29, 2009

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

Brian Hulme

Re: trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion

4-8-2009

I want to take this chance to welcome Warrior and fellow Biker Phil to the Alliance. Like you Phil I crave the company of masculine men and I have been into biking since the 70's but let me tell you of something sexy that happened between me and my fellow masculine biker.

Before I got my first bike he (let's call him "John") took me on the back of his bike (a little 50cc moped) down the country lanes (this is in England) I held on round his waist and he moved my left hand down to his dick and opened his visor said "rub it" very soon he was very stiff and he moved my hand I thought he wanted it to stop, how wrong! In fact John was moving my hand so he could unzip his fly and get his dick out!

Then he moved my hand back and said " Wank me off" (Wank is JO in the USA) so I gripped it and gave him a good rub, how he kept control of the bike down that narrow lane at 65 to 70 mph with me wanking him I don't know. But it goes to show that the masculine man can enjoy not only sharing his masculinity but a sexual encounter with another equally masculine man.

with Warrior Love

Brian

Bill Weintraub

Re: trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion

4-8-2009

Thank you Brian.

Brian's anecdote is a good example of a straight-identified guy seeking out sex with another guy.

What we seek to do is free guys so that they can go beyond isolated sexual incidents with other Men, about which they may feel odd or strange -- that is, conflicted -- to the point described in Phil's post --

to the point where they and another Man can live with "trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion."

Which is how Men in the ancient world lived.

They lived under a regime of Eros -- Eros being their word for and the god of male-male love.

Eros was informed by the yearning for moral beauty and by the constant striving of both male partners to excel, to be ever more Virtuous and Valorous, Righteous and Brave.

So -- what's needed is for guys like John to accept that -- he's a MAN.

And that being a MAN includes being into another Man -- Faithfully -- with "trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion."

And the same holds true of course for gay-identified males --

They too must accept that they're Men, and that being into a Man means "trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion."

That "trust, honor, loyalty, love, devotion" being expressed, as I said in my first reply, not as anal promiscuity --

but as Phallic Fidelity.

That's what's needed, and that's where we need to move society.

As I talked about in from homosexuality to analism, these will be "paradigm shifts" -- changes in the cultural model and its norms--

For both straight-identified males and gay-identified males.

Indeed, the very idea of "gay" and "straight," of sexual orientation, will fade and pass away.

And with it, the pseudo and false masculinity which dominates the lives of men today.

It will be replaced by Natural Masculinity -- in which same-sex needs and desires are integral and honored.

In FROT Vs fraud, Joe said that changing society in this way will "be a profound rite of passage for both the individual and the group, our civilization and its members. "

Profound, and, he added, necessary.

To achieve this necessary and profound rite of passage we need, as Joe also said, "Heroes" -- true Warriors -- capable of "much courage, sacrifice, and self-discovery."

Once again, what we need are Heroes -- true Warriors -- capable of courage, sacrifice, and self-discovery -- to bring about this necessary and profound change.

Which will benefit all Men -- and Women.

Brian is one of those Heroes.

As is Phil.

Join them.

Fight Back.

Save Your Life.

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