Robert Loring

Re: Warriors & Freedom

4-30-2004

Once I was told by a gay friend that I could not be gay because I was "not like" other gay men. He went on to say that I could not be gay because I was "too aggressive" and because I had a temper. Personally, his comments did not offend me at all and, in fact, I was glad he said what he said. Glad because I did not want to be the overly passive, weak, indecisive, cowaring-down type at all. In fact, I took his comments as a compliment rather than as an offense.

For myself, being aggressive has always been a part of me. It is a part of my manhood. It is something that I honor and am not ashamed of. I see my aggressive streak as a part of natural masculinity and I do not use it to tower over others. Rather, it is this aggressive warrior part of me that has helped me survive through the years. It is that part of me which I have drawn on many times in the past for strength and inspiration along with motivation.

I must admit that I have never understood the passive, weak, indecisive, cowaring-down type. In fact, I have always considered such behavior as being demeaning. Yet, I understand that this is what the BFD expects one to act like because the BFD is out to destroy one's masculinity. In my way of thinking these behaviors signal defeat. They signal a person who has surrendered and who has given up and given in just to "fit in". It is sad that such men do not realize the cost of such giving in to fit in because it costs them not only physically but psychospiritually as well.

I have always honored and like the warrior/soldier image. As a child and teen I liked competive games. I liked dressing in military fatigues or wearing nothing but levi cut offs and shoes. I liked watching movies about soldiers modern and ancient. I liked being a male and I liked my own warrior aggressive streak. I liked growing my facial hair and never once considered shaving off any body hair as I seen it as a part of my own masculinity and was proud of it. I came to like hunting and hiking and still do alot of hiking yet today because I love being out in nature.

I think all men have a warrior and aggressive streak within them. And, I think that warrior part of us needs to be honored instead of shamed. I think that when we give up and give in to the BFD and become weak acting that we dishonor that warrior part of ourselves. We shame the natural warrior within us. Being a warrior-type is not, in my book, a "sin" and it is certainly nothing to be ashamed of. It is often from our warrior side that we gather and gain our strength because it empowers us and strengthens us to stand up for ourselves against the many social onslaughts that we all face from all aspects of our out-of-the-norm society.

When we give in and give up we disempower ourselves and we become like straw houses trying to stand against the shifting winds. It is our warrior side that turns that straw into brick and it is the brick in us which is able to stand against the shifting winds. As straw we simply blow away becoming more and more weak and indecisive. Surrender disempowers us and it will disempower us completely if we are not careful. I say be proud of your warrior side and aggressive streak! I say it is nothing to be ashamed of. I say be proud of you masculinity and manhood. Be proud of your body hair and of being a man! For, before anything else we are MEN!

The warrior is something that is innate in man I think. It is something that connects us with all other men past, present, and future. It is the warrior within each of us that connects us to the BROTHERHOOD of man. It is a part of us which is meant to be honored and not ashamed of. It is that part of us which compels us to succeed and to survive. It is that part of us which strengthens us so that we may overcome the obstacles we encounter in our lives. If we become ashamed of our strength, our warrior side, then we are already defeated within our ownselves. We have already given in and given up.

My friend never did understand my warrior-aggressive streak and, I admit at the time, I never understood his passiveness and submissiveness. In fact, I detested the way he acted, honestly. Yet, I felt sorry for him because I knew that he had already been defeated within his ownself by the dictates of the BFD. I never was successful in bringing out the warrior in him which I am sure was there...somewhere. Distance began to grow between us after that conversation and it has now been a long time since we have seen each other. I went down my warrior way and he, I suppose, continued down the path of passivism and weakness. I have often wondered just how defeated he is today. I have often wondered if he is even still alive or did he succumb to AIDS. I have often wondered just how disempowered he is today because he was already pretty much disempowered at the age of 22.

Sir Robert

Bill Weintraub

Re: Warriors & Freedom

4-30-2004

Thank you Robert for another really wonderful post.

Over the last year Robert Loring has made a series of very important posts, including Brotherhood, this one on "Warriors and Freedom," and three which we've recently added to Frot: The Next Sexual Revolution:

A Case of Rape;

Brothers of the Heart; and,

The Ultimate Defeat.

Plus, he's the author of the very popular We ARE Warriors.

One of the things Robert very clearly understands is that Heroic Homosex and The Man2Man Alliance exist on more than one level.

At its most basic our message is clear:

Frot, not anal

Fidelity, not promiscuity

Masculinity, not effeminacy

But on another level, our message is more complex.

For example, when we talk about Frot we are indeed, as Robert says, talking about Freedom.

When we talk about masculinity, what we're saying is that men who have sex with men are men -- nothing more and nothing less.

They're not intergendered or intersexed, they're not genetically anomalous, they're men, ordinary men who are doing something which is essentially and naturally male.

That truth is core to everything we do and say here: men who have sex with men are men.

Nothing else.

Which means, as Robert says, that we have a right to our masculinity -- as do all men.

And that our masculinity is something we should prize and cherish and honor.

And part of masculinity, as Robert also says, is being aggressive.

That doesn't mean being inappropriately aggressive.

But it does mean recognizing that being aggressive is a major part of the sociobiology of being male -- and that men ignore or seek to deny it at their peril.

Historically, over the last few millenia, the model for male aggression has been the warrior.

And though warriors can be, as Robert pointed out, free spirits, more often they work in tightly bonded groups with other warriors.

That masculine ability to bond extremely tightly with other males in the service of defense and aggression is one of our most distinctive human characteristics.

While not entirely unique to human beings, it's founded upon two sociobiologic traits in human life: the "retention of males" and "reciprocal altruism."

These are not mysterious.

Among many animals, including gorillas, males are basically booted out of the family group when they reach "adolescence," and go off on their own to find a mate or mates -- a harem.

This usually involves a lot of conflict with other adolescent males and of course adult males -- and not infrequently results in fights to the death.

Humans, on the other hand, retain, as do chimpanzees, males within the group or tribe or clan at puberty.

These males then bond and form warrior bands, which are used to gain reproductive advantage -- that is, sex -- and to defend territory.

Clearly, bonded groups of males have a great advantage over lone males, and are easily able to chase away individual would-be interlopers.

These males are able to bond through "reciprocal altruism," which means simply I'll do something for you if you do something for me.

Human beings understand "reciprocal altruism" instinctively.

That's why we like it when someone does us a favor and get angry if we do a favor and it's not returned.

*Reciprocal* altruism, as much as love, makes our human world go round.

And that's what warrior bonds are about.

These bonds become, under duress such as in war, incredibly intense, so much so that it's not unusual to hear solidiers say that they loved the men in their unit more than their families, even more than their wives.

Why? Because they knew that their buddies were willing to die for them.

That's the essence of reciprocal altruism in the warrior bond.

Now, in our culture, when men refer to that sort of love among comrades, they're speaking, usually, of a non-sexual but still very powerful love.

But historically, warrior cultures have always recognized that some warriors -- and in some cultures all warriors -- will form particularly intense bonds with one other warrior, that these bonds will be in part erotic in nature, that the two warriors so bonded will be sexually and emotionally monogamous or Faithful, and that these erotically-bonded warrior pairs make extremely effective fighting units.

That is an historical and poetic truth, amply testified to in both history and myth, and it is not an anamolous or unusual behavior among warriors.

To the contrary: it is a common, ordinary, male behavior.

Men who are paired erotically do not have to go to war, however, to experience the power of the warrior bond.

For example, many men who cared, as I did, for a partner with AIDS, learned, if they stayed the course, just how powerful bonding under duress can be.

So: masculinity and aggression are part of being male.

They are not attributes we should shun or be ashamed of.

Masculinity is not the same as "macho" or "hypermasculinity" or other forms of posturing.

But being masculine, and being comfortable with aggression, is part of our heritage as men.

That's why I encourage men -- basically all men -- to train in some combat sport -- like a martial art.

And I think that's particularly important because boys are no longer automatically given that sort of warrior training.

Properly taught, a martial art confers discipline and gives the male control and confidence in his use of aggression.

So that men learn to be comfortable with being aggressive while also being in control of their aggressive impulses.

Thank you again Robert Loring.

Those interested can read more about male sociobiology in our Warriors Speak message thread Superheroes, Myths, and Wrestling Buddies -- Part II and in Mythic Identification and the Warrior Bond.

Joel

Re: Warriors & Freedom

12-26-2004

Yesterday I was watching The Lord of the Rings: the Two Towers. I was struck by the scene of Aragorn and Theoden discussing the fate of Helm's Deep. It was a moment of despair for Theoden. The Uruk-hai had taken over the keep and were smashing through the final barrier to their victory. Theoden felt all was lost, until Aragorn stepped in to encourage the King of the Rohan. Aragorn appealed to Theoden's sense of honor and duty to his people. He appealed to Theoden as one warrior to another.

Theoden was ready to give in to the Uruk-hai, to give in to the certain destruction that stood on the otherside of the wooden doors. Only darkness and servitude and death could come from the Uruk-hai.

But Aragorn's words struck a cord with Theoden. They revived the waning spirit, the Warrior Spirit, and reminded Theoden of something very important. It was better to die in an act of freedom, than to live under the dark tyranny of Sauron. It calls to mind the statement of Patrick Henry, "give me liberty or give me death."

Freedom is an essential part of being a warrior, so much so that the ancient Teutons who conquered the Roman province of Gaul referred to themselves as the Franks, which meant 'the free people.' Freedom was intimately tied to the Teutonic warrior culture. Only freemen were warriors. The distinction, in fact, between a warrior and a soldier, is that the latter is bound to an authority above him, while the former is not bound to any authority.

Freedom and warriorcraft are two sides of the coin of manhood. One supports the other. Freedom cannot exist in a man who is unwilling to fight and die to protect it.

Servitude is the opposite of war. Peace, peace of mind, is a consequence of Freedom. One cannot have freedom and peace without the qualities of a warrior: honor, respect, love, compassion, fidelity and the ideas mentioned in this website. So much of human history demonstrates what happens when warriors do not rise against the forces of tyranny. Entire cultures are wiped away, entire races are decimated. The consequence of standing down in the face of tyranny is servitude, which is spiritual death.

Theoden and Aragorn led the Rohirrim out to battle the Uruk-hai. The surprise of the cavalry attack, along with the providential arrival of Gandalf and the other Rohirrim stemmed the tide of Saruman's troops. Notice that it was a frontal assault, not a defensive posture, that broke the ranks of the Uruk-hai. It was the willingness to put everything on the line that pushed the Rohirrim to victory. Likewise it is when we are willing to push forward from our position that we will make headway and change our condition.

Ave Victoria Triumphusque