In seeking masculine companionship, or in accepting non-intimate relations with a woman [1] the man and his fellow, as with the hero and his fellow-fighter or the hero and the shaman, seek a purely spiritual bond that is forged in the face of a commonly understood pursuit.
In the case of two men fighting an enemy together we have the simplest example.
Then there is the case of the young fighter going into the ring where the old fighter had been before.
Thirdly, there is the rare case of the female observer who actually understands the trials the man is facing and appreciates his efforts on her behalf, on behalf of the company, the tribe, the race, the nation, or simply on the behalf of any person who succeeds through suffering. Nursing in modern warfare is a surviving niche for this ancient impulse.
Modernity is an advanced state of technological civilization in which man is thrice removed from the trials of life: he does not seek, does not hunt, does not fight, but engages in tasks previously reserved for women and is now at their spiritual mercy. Modernity therefore favors the feminine holistically, with an all encompassing drive to feminize the male.
The Vile Root is an ongoing exploration of masculine negation offered as a resource to the reader of the Masculine Axis. Men have often claimed that it was they who built civilization and that women are their cultivated version of a wild seed. It is not so. Some men have duplicitously engineered civilization to domesticate most men, using women alternately as hostages and purveyors of the system.
The primary tool a woman uses to domesticate, neuter, denature, emasculate a man, is a tactic called invalidation. Invalidation is the means by which womankind engage in the spiritual mutilation of their children, their men and their fellow women. Women are so addicted to the mechanics of impulsive invalidation that they continuously mutilate themselves in their own mind’s eye. Most women that employ invalidation techniques to hollow and then crush the persons in their life circle do not even realize what they do and cannot qualify the process.
As a teenager, my friends and I noticed that as soon as a youth began dating woman he left the group, ignored all of his old friends and wed himself to her, keeping her exclusive company. He stopped playing contact sports, stopped taking all risks, cared no more for the approval of his mates other than the jealousy of virgins for his mated status. This is less so now than it was in my youth, largely because society in general has taken up the woman’s divisive whip. One may now be emasculated by a woman you do not know—by some bitch on TV, by some feminized sissy in the locker room at the YMCA, by a coworker.
It is enough to state that in terms of the larger society the civilized woman has only three purposes:
1. to bring forth young,
2. to invalidate those tiny souls so that they will become self-policing gears in the social engine,
3. and to invalidate those men and aspiring men in their own mind’s eye, to snatch away the life of a race by blowing out the heroic flame in a man’s soul and planting in its stead the vile root of self-doubt that shall curse him in his every endeavor.
It is important to remember, that even if you consider yourself a civilized man and a defender of civilization, that civilization itself yearns for your destruction, has a driving thirst to evaporate your masculine identity. All that is necessary for a civilization to fall is for it to succeed in denaturing its men, for the men who protect civilization to permit its weak, its meek, its simpering its seductive to drain them of their barbaric impulses, for the irony of every civilization is that it can only stand up against itself and its assailants through the intercession of barbarian hands. A civilization rises on the shoulders of the very men it rejects and then crumbles in their absence.
Notes
1. Cultures with habitually poor martial legacies and weak sissy men prohibit platonic friendship between men and women. I believe this is done for the purpose of domesticating the mind, of depriving the man or youth of healthy, no strings attached admiration. This hero-cultivating relationship was provided to a limited degree [it can never by widespread, really] via the tradition of unconsummated courtly love, in the High Middle Ages in which a knight would fight purely for a single woman’s admiration. This was a later stylist remnant of something that had existed earlier in The West, was probably always thin on the ground and is currently extinct.
Under the God of Things
link › jameslafond.blogspot.com
This is tripe. It is all assertions and not facts. The conclusions are forwarded as truth and come across as if writer expects they are beyond reproach.
This is my premise for the theory, for which I will present anecdotes as examples to advance the theory, which is based primarily on experience, particularly my experience coaching and advising young men, who have been negatively impacted by this behavior, as well as my own lifetime of experiences with invalidation such as: "only black men can box" and "the only path to success is a university education," etc.
I use this site to build books from front to back. The advancing of critical comments such as yours are important to the process. For instance, it is obvious to me now, after reading your comment, that I should have given a brief narration of my experience with this process as an introduction.
Here is one common example, which happened to me last night, when a coworker said, "Oh, you don't have much to do tonight." I, in fact, had the heaviest order on the crew. His comment was meant to strike at my confidence, to keep me on the defensive so I would not notice that he had the light load of the night, a fact that means nothing to me. This is a type of "projection" I suppose and makes the early going for new employees very trying.
This is said, in the business I work in [retail food], constantly by some coworkers to others in order to instill in them a sense that they don't measure up. Working in 34 supermarkets over four decades, I have noted this as a dominant behavior common to all companies, in all departments and from top to bottom, in both union and non-union stores.
I have long noticed that men who come to me for boxing instruction have suffered much of this type of discouragement from mothers and others in their life. Overcoming this third-person negativity is often the boxing trainer's greatest hurdle.
I would recommend, as a source, a small red book, published towards the end of the last century, titled Nasty People.
Thanks, Rob.
A civilization rise on the shoulders of the very men it rejects, and then
crumbles in their absence! Amen, Amen, Amen! May I add, or murders them!
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I was sent to your article from Gab.com. Anyway, I get where you're coming from but I happen to believe it is the maneuvering for dominance, like in the incident you mention in your response, that makes men who and what they are. We are meant to dominate and control. And we need to learn and develop these skills. History shows us what happens when women take over, everything falls apart. With a few excepts this is not only the norm but the actual rule. It can be seen clearly in society today, woman are quickly replacing men in the work force in places they don't have the skills or intelligence to be and things are collapsing. Hence their need to bring in the Muslims- they need alphas to come back into society and put them in their place and the milquetoast beta males (who got that way being raised exclusively by mothers) that are already here aren't up to the task. Now I can say all of this stuff but none of it means anything because I can't demonstrate the truth of any of it, I just happen to believe it is true. For a thesis to have any validity at all it has to be sent into the sphere of objectivity and tested with the scientific method meaning pulled apart and re-constructed with evidence (not interpretation). Otherwise it comes off, in my case, as hate speech.
Rob, thanks for the well-reasoned response.
I absolutely agree that the maneuver for dominance is what makes us men and may even be what we are.
I see the female form of pecking order aggression toxic to the male, particularly the boy. I think this is why traditional societies remove the boy from the women's sphere when he begins to develop physically.
The invalidation concept—how I am looking at it—has to do with the support element of the society negating the individual. For instance, I think we can agree that getting punched in the face is an important rite of passage for a man, however a mother publicly punching out her son while calling him a "bitch-ass nigga" [which happened and was applauded during the Baltimore Riots] is going to retard, distort and/or twist his development, and has been the every mechanism which has hampered so many young men in that community from developing a balanced approach to aggression.
To use football as an example, the players on the other team should knock the snot out of you and test you, maybe even snarl stuff about your mother to test your discipline. But for the water boy or cheer leaders to insult, mock and even strike their own player is a negative interaction, which, if done at the wrong time, can harm the young man's development by twisting him.
I am not an alpha male and have spent much of my life helping them succeed from a fringe position. I see much modern dysfunction, from TV comedy to feminism, as a way to retard the development of the all important alpha male. The only masculine type that gains power from invalidation is the fringe taboo type or psychopath—which I call the Omega—who feed on it. These types can be valuable tools for the alpha [Enkidu was the taboo counterpart-sidekick to Gilgamesh, the alpha male], but if your society starts having them as its heroes [Jason Bourne, the Man with no Name, Vampires, Werewolves, etc.,] rather than heroizing the alpha male, that is a society in trouble. A healthy society has Wyatt Erp, not Doc Holiday as its hero, Daniel Boone, not Mingo, the Lone Ranger not Tonto...
Thanks again, Rob.