What does /his/ think about this book? I read it and it was k.
This desu. All these neo-manliness things tend to be a bit silly.
If you really want manly books, don't read books that try to be manly. Read these:
Storm of Steel - Ernst Junger
The Saga of the Volsungs
The Iliad & The Odyssey - Homer
The Gallic War - Julius Caesar
I mean how is fucking men (as dominant obviously) less masculine than fucking women?
See that one comedian about how gays are more masculine because they wanna fuck a bloke, mate.
It's just obvious to most people that guys who like getting their dicks all shitty up another guy's hairy butthole aren't the best role models for how to be a man.
>It's just obvious
It's not though, sticking your dick up a male butthole (filthy or clean, hairy or shaved) doesn't look like it has anything to do with traditional masculinity.
Yeah but poop is still gross and people who want it near their genitals shouldn't be surprised if they don't get taken seriously.
>sticking your dick up a male butthole doesn't look like it has anything to do with traditional masculinity
Are you serious?
Anal sex is disgusting no matter who does it.
It's the equivalent of playing in a sewage facility and it mistakes an exit for an entrance.
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
- Leviticus 18:22
Not at all, actually, he only talks about what it meant to be a man in traditional societies and sees a very insightful distinction between being a good man vs. Being good AT being a man, but I wouldn't expect a machiatto swilling noodle-armed faggot like you to get it. Keep talking shit bruh no one ITT would last a fucking day in a survival scenario. Neither would I but at least I'm not some memer with a lisp and an autographed copy of some gay hipster shit like neutral meme hotel talking shit about ways of life I have absolutely no experience with
>implying that's bad
>in any way
But going back to OP's topic. I'm quite comfortable/satisfied with my masculinity so I personally don't see much gain in owning such books.
However if the author actually bashes on effeminate guys as other post said, then I guess it could help fruity faggots into becoming more normal
And if you are a man who fucks men, you are a faggot.
>Getting fucked in the ass
>it's totally no homo and not even gay.
Depends. If you reciprocate and get fucked, you are definitely gay.
Take prison rape for instance. The bulls who do the fucking ain't necessarily fags, they'd probably get tons of pussy outside prison.
Let me tell you why homosexuality is not masculine.
Point 1: masculinity is proven by having women, notice the plural.
Point 2: homosexuality is not part of the natural order of things, which necessarily leads to procreation.
Point 3: homosexuality eventually places the individual in a passive stance, whether in the relationship or in any other social group, position that is, of course, not masculine.
Applying an image to the things you have sex with is the unmasculine part.
The most masculine way possible is to view them all as holes to fuck, everything else aside. Because the most important aspect here is maximizing your personal satisfaction and power.
To put it in simpler terms.
You shouldn't care about men or women at all, you should care about yourself and getting what you want regardless of anyone else. In the case of sex everything should be a non-factor except putting your cock in someone else.
>Applying an image to the things you have sex with is the unmasculine part.
Are you a fucking Muslim, in addition to being a fag?
>The most masculine way possible is to view them all as holes to fuck, everything else aside. Because the most important aspect here is maximizing your personal satisfaction and power.
So the manliest possible behavior is being a chronic masturbator?
Well no one knows how Rome was founded, but the myth is that Romus killed Remulus over the argument on what to name their village.
The rape of the Sabine Women is generally treated as proper myth, too. But I dunno about the rest.
Fantastic book, very very solid understanding of masculinity. Who gives a shit if he was a faggot? Alexander was a faggot. Achilles was a faggot. Caesar was a faggot.
Being a faggot is a definite negative in terms of masculinity itself, but it doesn't disqualify someone completely from the title of Man.
Wasn't he the guy that said one of the primary problems with gay culture is that it acts as a distinct subculture that treats homosexual men as something different (and lesser) from heterosexual men? I'm inclined to agree, save the fact that homosexual subculture is basically a byproduct of being attacked by culture at large and not likely to vanish over night.