An Apology of Man
How many times have Europeans been taunted by Americans (especially until the early Obama era) for supposedly preferring to solve conflicts or issues non-violently? Or by failing to show enough outrage and animosity in particularly critical events (e.g. The Rotherham pedophile ring and the like)? Another example: how many times have we, as Europeans, indulged into denigration of the Swedes because of the known predicament of their country? I have.
There is a certain tendency to indulge in this kind of denigration in the Alt-Right/New Right, i.e. the tendency to harshly criticize the perceived loss of masculinity in certain countries, or even in the West as a whole.
But are we really less masculine, we western men?
It is true that in highly-polluted areas of Europe and the US things like xenoestrogens might be a real issue, and in any case I would recommend you briefly look up what xenoestrogens are. But that is a problemy that is hardly wide-spread in the West as of today.
What is true is that our lifestyle has undoubtedly become much more sedentary (we have all heard the story one billion times) – pretty much the entirety of the West jumped from a primarily blue-collar and primary sector-based economies to a primarily white-collar workforce in the last 20-30 years. Our grandfathers were farmers or labourers, we are employees and desk workers; something which is indeed not what our bodies evolved for.
The eternal struggle of the wilderness shaped male bodies for what is, to its most basic interpretation, the defence of our own resources (and partners) and the acquisition of new ones based entirely on muscular work (be it through war, agriculture, handicraft). And to be honest, for almost all of human existence, men were farmers and hunters – sometimes craftsmen. Even until recently everything built and used by humans was built and used thanks to someone’s muscle.
In terms of masculinity, there is no visible difference between a lumberjack and a factory worker, or between a blacksmith and a miller.
But today we have evolved as a society, and our interests lay primarily in items of abstract tangibility – services, financial shares, societal trends. Thus, we live in a society that is intrinsically not based on the work of men, or which hardly has need for specifically masculine labour. Even trades that are traditionally monopoly of men have been rendered increasingly “gender-neutral” ( at least on paper) thanks to the influence of western hyperfeminism, such as the armed forces, firefighting, or law enforcement.
Further in this direction: have we lost our consciousness of men as a category of people bound together not only by biological dispositions and attributes, but also by a (culturally-relative) specific set of ideas, roles, conceptions, prerogatives? Possibly.
What is certain is that we men have an undeniable disadvantage compared to women, i.e. our identity as men is determined and recognised primarily through societal rituals. Of course women have their own rituals as well, but an event such as the first mentruation is considered if not the primary ritual of passage, certainly at least an important and tangible step towards womanhood across human history and in almost all societies known to have existed.
What do men have that is comparable to menstruation? To be honest, nothing. Yes, we grow beards, but at considerably different rates, with extremely varying results, and in any case, they almost always serve as secondary factors in the definition of masculinity (by this i mean that they usually serve to reinforce a man’s masculinity, but they do not directly define it).
Hence, what do we have? The loss of virginity? Not really. Conscription/military service? Indeed, that could be considered an important rite of passage, but (unfortunately, I might say) conscription has been all but abolished in the West. We are in fact (and that is the observable reality) currently left without any meaningful means of identifying a precise moment in which we left youth and entered into manhood
Even countries with important traditions such as Jugendweihe have pretty much forgotten them, let alone the ancient, clear, and severe Roman separation between junior/senior.
Thus, that is the situation. How does it impact our current political and metapolitical predicament?
Well, what you are going to find is that the modern western state has been covertly but perceivably hostile to men for the good part of the last 4-5 decades.
Let’s make a simple example: why wasn’t the uncovering of the Rotherham pedo ring met with men marching through the streets, accompanied with the destruction of implicated businesses, culture centres and the like? Why don’t we see such events taking place in the streets of Europe after Rotherham, after the Paris attacks, after the umpteenth rape or riot by allogenic individuals in Sweden, after the Berlin lorry attack?
- First of all, the urbanites’ male culture and identity is inherently weaker and more atomized than the rural, clan-based Pakistani/Muslim/other allogenic ethnicities’. In the outskirts of European cities (if not in entire cities, like London), European men are outnumbered, and thus they have no numerical advantage.
- European men are being disarmed more and more, in a process that has been ongoing for decades. Third-worlders in Sweden have access to hand grenades. I’m not an expert of gun laws, but I doubt Swedes have the privilege to own grenades. And in some countries guns are banned outright.
- Men, somewhere in their minds, know that their system is against them. Third-worlders taunt and provoke native Europeans in immigrant-dominated areas on a daily basis. Someday, someone angrily yells a racial slur – he gets recorded by the allogenic invaders and with the aid of the treacherous media, he is tried and imprisoned, or at least fined (with a sidedish of slander/libel, being made redundant, etc. Etc. ).
Are western men more feminine? Or is it just that their hands are tied?
Some seem to think that it’s the consequences of sexual emancipation making men less dominant in general. However, i think this is generally a misconception; even disregarding more innocent things like the use of powder by males in the 1700s, let’s remind ourselves that in a majority of western countries literal cuckoldry was allowed under the guise of the Cicisbeo system (which, believe it or not, wasn’t exclusive to Southern Europe at all – even in Britain the “dandy” could under some circumstances become a Cicisbeo). It didn’t stop cuckolded noblemen from placing most of the Earth under European control. But back then the state wasn’t against them.
Indeed, what you are going to find is that if western men were truly as emasculated as some seem/want to believe, we wouldn’t need ever-increasing police repression of “islamophobes” or any other kind of right-wing dissident.
If the State were to close shop for barely one week, you’d be seeing death squads appearing on the streets of Western cities in the blink of an eye, while capital cities that have for all intents and purposes become foreign exclaves, like Paris or London, would be living under a state of semi-siege.
So, if the State wasn’t so hostile against Western Men, you could be sure that every rape would be retaliated against through massive destruction of allogenic property at least, and physical confrontations wouldn’t be unthinkable at all. But as we all know, if posses like that were to actually form in London or Paris today, they would be mercilessly repressed, without quarter – something which curiously enough almost never happens when third-worlders take to the streets.
Swedish Men are not “sissies”. They only happen to experience nigh-totalitarian repression of everything that is of spiritual and ideal value to them on a scale that is unprecedented in other countries.
Polish or Russian Men are not inherently “superior” or “manlier” when compared to French or German men. They simply have the luck of living in a culture that does not stifle them.