Post: #76

by the homophobic logic used here all writers/philosophers/scientists would only be able to analyze and discuss groups of which they were a member and or people who were exactly like them.

that wouldnt work out so well for the world now would it?

Post: #77

(12-22-2013 12:04 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  homophobic

I don't see anybody posting who has an irrational fear of gays. Take this word out of your vocabulary. It's a part of "cisgendered," "creepy," and all the other faggity terms people use these days.

Post: #78

(12-22-2013 12:19 PM)Edmund Dantes Wrote:  

(12-22-2013 12:04 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  homophobic

I don't see anybody posting who has an irrational fear of gays. Take this word out of your vocabulary. It's a part of "cisgendered," "creepy," and all the other faggity terms people use these days.

It just goes to show how brainwashed men really are in blue pill thinking. White liberals will call foul much faster than the gays. I though white-knighting for women was bad enough, but gay men? Wow. We've really have reached the point of no return.

Post: #79

honestly i didnt even like the book that much but there is something really wrong when people think that only members of each specific subgroup are capable of writing on that specific subgroup.

how the hell can we have an understanding of anyone other than ourselves if simply are discredited by virtue of not being a member of that category?

are you telling me you discard any documentaries about any other group of people that isn't self produced?

all writings by white men about men of color, women, or indigenous people are worthless?

or are things really that short sighted?

when you make a statement ask yourself, if this is true then what else is true...and you'll see if your position has merit

Post: #80

OK reading the book and its pretty good. The best way to sum it up is if Robert Greene (aka the modern day Machiavelli) wrote a book on masculinity. I don't agree with everything he wrote but I got to give him credit he made a compelling argument for his POV throughout the book.

As for his sexuality. I am sure most of the men on this site have seen the movie "boondocks Saints". Donovan's writing makes it seem he is the equivalent of William Dafoe's character. He is Gay but that doesn't mean he isn't masculine.

Post: #81

Something else to think about, that I forgot to mention earlier. I assume most of you guys know that Chuck Palahniuk, the author of the book "Fight Club", is gay. Yup.

How many Tyler Durden/Fight Club motifs do we see in the manosphere? A lot. How influential has he been? Very influential.

Does that mean we're all secretly supporting his "gay agenda". No.

Things are not as simple as they appear.

Post: #82

Ok I've gotten further into the book and Donovan brings up the idea of Honor among men. That Honor is "a concern for one's reputation for strength, courage, and master with the context of an honor group comprised primarily of other men."

I bring this up because the book then goes about explaining the idea of dishonor and flamboyant dishonor (stereotypical gay behavior) as being so distasteful because its an openly committed act by a man of rejecting the things that make up honor (strength, courage, and mastery). Donovan further follows this logic to a discussion of homosexuality and homophobia. He makes an argument that homophobia isn't so much the fear of homosexuality, but a "fear that other men will unmask us, emasculate us, reveal to the world that we do not measure up, that we are real men, we are afraid to let other men see that fear"......

So with all that said I'm honestly starting to think that "the way of men" is in reality a how to be down low manual for Gay Men. At least when it comes to the masculinity and the avoidance of stereotypical homosexual mannerism Don't get me wrong the ideas he promotes from a sociological POV seem sound, however as a man while its very interesting to see a written explanation of how I (and my friends) interact. I think this book is a how to be "a man" aimed at men who didn't (or couldn't) have a proper masculine development when they were growing up. I still have a way to go before I finish this book, so my opinion might change radically by then

Post: #83

"I think this book is a how to be "a man" aimed at men who didn't (or couldn't) have a proper masculine development when they were growing up"

duh. those who did dont need a how to manual

Post: #84

Well I know that I just initially thought it would be more of a review of masculinity and it is in many ways (so far) also a breakdown of why men (regardless of sexual orientation) should submit to historical gender roles as a survival tactic.

In fact arguably Donovan's emphasis on masculinity as a survivor tactic is the strongest case for every man (regardless of sexual orientation) to read this book. Its also a good alternative case on why masculinity is as many around here believe at an all time low. Its not so much the fault of feminism that masculinity is far less in society as it is both feminism's rise and the lack of mass masculinity are both caused by modern society.

Civilization makes the need for a masculine mentality less as the standard of living increases, and odds you will have to survive and/or overcome a physical obstacle or enemy based on your wits or propensity for violence go down.

Post: #85

So I finished "The Way of Men" and here is my final verdict. This book has gone from a breakdown of masculinity to a breakdown of how society has robbed men of it. It is pure Ether towards our modern way of living in a lot of ways.

Even a lot of the various activities talked about here (one of the few sanctuary of masculinity online) are broken down to show how its just another side effect of men being compartmentalized by society into expressing ourselves in safe, controlled activities. Even worse these type of activities are often experienced vicariously because they are not the norm in modern society and require a lot of effort to do successfully.

On that note this is also definitely one of those books some Conservative preacher in the South of the United States 50 years ago would of used to make a name for himself by organizing a a congregation (or town) to have the book banned. There are some really dangerous ideas dispersed throughout the book that every reader of this book will have to grapple with on a personal and philosophical level.

At its core beyond defining Masculinity (or Machismo) Donovan preaches a DIY ethos based on masculinity (strength, courage, mastery, and honor) and male group dynamic as a survival tactic. However, when the last three chapters of your book are named "What's best in life?", "Start the world" and "Start a gang" its clear Donovan is not scared of being controversial. As a former Ad man I see the wisdom in that as a way to gain attention for his thoughts, but in many ways the contents of those same chapters boil down into the equivalent of joining a social club of men you feel you can rely on. At times throughout the book I felt Donovan wanted to say more than that but in these modern times of domestic spying what sane man would?

So in conclusion I recommend "The Way of Men" highly for anyone who is say a fan of the writings of Henry David Thoreau, and his belief that “Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them". However while Thoreau is famous for his belief that isolation was a form of civil disobedience. Donovan's belief is that in the modern world where isolation is the norm, actually having strong bonds with you male peers is the modern worlds only clear form of civil disobedience.

One last note, if the Author being Gay stops anyone from reading this book that's their loss, it has some really interesting ideas in it and was very well written overall. As a grown man some (hell a lot) of what was written in the first half of the book felt like basic common sense to me, but the second half of the book is where it really earns the cover price.

Post: #86

^ You nailed it mate. It's very Fight Club-esque in it's ethos. The fact that both Donovan and Palahniuk are gay may have something to do with it (joke). Hopefully more people on here will read it now thanks to your review.

It's got some excellent and valuable ideas in there that many members of RVF would enjoy reading about. If you still can't get over Donovan's sexuality then it's your loss I suppose.

Post: #87

The way of the game ( The Way of Men by Jack Donovan ) STRENGTH, COURAGE, MASTERY, HONOR puts things perspective for me more so than this.....





Feminism Propaganda The Mask You Live In Coming in 2014, an exploration of American masculinity.

Post: #88

(12-22-2013 12:19 PM)Edmund Dantes Wrote:  

(12-22-2013 12:04 PM)reaper23 Wrote:  homophobic

I don't see anybody posting who has an irrational fear of gays. Take this word out of your vocabulary. It's a part of "cisgendered," "creepy," and all the other faggity terms people use these days.

No, no its not. It is a specific term used to describe behavior and thinking such as the kind I'm witnessing on this thread and in other threads on this board relating to homosexuality.

Your attempt to lump me in with the feminists and other chicky retards who don't use logic to make arguments and simply rely on their emotions as their guide, is transparent and frankly just as lame as a chick that uses "creepy."

When a person's credibility is discarded simply because of who they are, without giving any consideration to the argument made, that my friends is a blatant - ISM - be it sexism, racism, or homophobia.

See, I don't think we have a word for sexualityism do we? so in turn we use homophobia to describe the behavior and thinking. Just like gynophobia/androphobia or xenophobia might do the same vis a vis sexism and racism.

I don't believe that women (or gays) are somehow inferior to men. What I do believe is that we've both been endowed with certain attributes that when focused upon lead to harmonious relations between the two sexes. Men, to be leaders and provide rationality, and women to be nurturers and to provide emotion and care. The biggest mistake feminism ever made was deciding not to champion the inherent strengths of women and instead wishing they could be men. But I digress.

Point is, yes, it is homophobic to discard a man's thoughts based on the fact he likes to fuck a man in the ass. And if you take those positions you should own up to it. State it. Be a real man. Say - "I don't respect him because of who he choses to fuck and his opinions mean nothing to me, their relative merits notwithstanding."

And this way, those of us who operate in the world of rational thinking, away from fears and emotion, will know who to listen to and who not to.

Post: #89

The Way Of Men and Fight Club are two of the best books written about masculinity in our lifetimes. Has anyone here actually read either and been disappointed? Can anyone actually point to passages where Donovan pushes his 'gay agenda' on us?

Those of you ripping on Donovan for being gay need to make a distinction between 1) Being homosexual, and 2) Advocating for the exaltation of the homosexual lifestyle. The latter is a choice, the former is beyond a man's control.

Maybe the reason gay guys like Donovan and Palahniuk have a lot to teach us about masculinity is because they've had to grapple with the question 'what does it mean to be a man?' for their whole lives, while the rest of us decided that our masculinity can be measured by how many girls we can bang.

Post: #90

Yeah, I just got done reading the book. Extremely interesting and gives no hints at being written by a homosexual in the slightest. Based on the concepts of masculinity discussed and the way they are addressed, I think most readers will find sexuality actually has no real bearing (or very little) in this case.

As someone who has always attached his personal concept of real manhood with the lone wolf persona, the premise of the book challenged a lot of my ideas. I'm going to give it another more-focused read.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #91

Haven't read the book, I'll take a look at it.

Theory: Homosexuality is actually hyper-masculinity and a response to the overly feminized society we live in. Men have no steady framework for which to discover themselves whereas women have a rapidly digestible framework that they're comfortable with by the time they're 14. While it works great for women, it is sorely lacking for men and creates all sorts of issues.

Men, lacking a similar framework, end up falling back on natural impulses which then creates this hyper-masculinity. Men are horny beings so who better to have sex with than another man!

I see african american culture in a similar vein. There is a massive "down-low" culture amongst them. One can use HIV/AIDs to track homosexuality among say African Americans. Female black lady gets aids? Look at her boyfriend....

At the same time, if those are your proclivities then go for it. I personally don't care. It bothers me when a subculture becomes pushed to the front fold. I like Jack's style of homosexuality and I can respect such an individual. I work with similar guys at my office and they're alright.

I can't stand main stream gay culture however.

Edit: Last random bit to add: I also wouldn't be surprised if this is how paleo societies lived as well. Jack said it best, "I can get laid in under 3 hours." What if he could go out, whack some chick over the head, drag her back to the cave (which has awesome logistics), and thus extend his blood line by one more kid. I don't have nostalgia for the past, but I do think the future we have isn't the right one.

Post: #92

(12-27-2013 10:58 AM)Frost Wrote:  The Way Of Men and Fight Club are two of the best books written about masculinity in our lifetimes. Has anyone here actually read either and been disappointed? Can anyone actually point to passages where Donovan pushes his 'gay agenda' on us?

Those of you ripping on Donovan for being gay need to make a distinction between 1) Being homosexual, and 2) Advocating for the exaltation of the homosexual lifestyle. The latter is a choice, the former is beyond a man's control.

Maybe the reason gay guys like Donovan and Palahniuk have a lot to teach us about masculinity is because they've had to grapple with the question 'what does it mean to be a man?' for their whole lives, while the rest of us decided that our masculinity can be measured by how many girls we can bang.

Regarding 'Fight Club' my opinion is in line with Roosh's - the only book I've ever read where the movie was better.

Post: #93

Matt Forney just posted this to Twitter, and I wanted to share it on this thread as well. Some prescient comments by Jack Donovan:

Post: #94

(12-27-2013 10:58 AM)Frost Wrote:  The Way Of Men and Fight Club are two of the best books written about masculinity in our lifetimes. Has anyone here actually read either and been disappointed?

Yes. Having read Fight Club after watching the movie I was dissapointed at how lame, artsy-fartsy and armchair revolutionary Tyler Durden was compared to the Tyler Durden from the movie.

I would go as far as stating that Fight Club is the only film which is actually far superior to the book it originated from, but since I havnt read The Godfather, Im going to leave that statement open for now.

Post: #95

Off topic, but the American Psycho movie is better than the book. It does a much better job of capturing the absurdity of the character and his life. Easton Ellis is a good writer, but he's generally to in love with the things that he's writing about to do good satire.

Post: #96

(01-13-2014 03:38 AM)j r Wrote:  Easton Ellis is a good writer, but he's generally to in love with the things that he's writing about to do good satire.

Hes gay too.

Post: #97

(01-13-2014 03:38 AM)j r Wrote:  Off topic, but the American Psycho movie is better than the book. It does a much better job of capturing the absurdity of the character and his life. Easton Ellis is a good writer, but he's generally to in love with the things that he's writing about to do good satire.

Highly disagree, but to each their own.

First off, the book is WAYYY more graphic. There's no way they could have made an honest conversion without an NC-17 rating.

Second, I enjoy Ellis' indulgent and repetitious tirades about Huey Lewis, Genesis, and all the fashion stuff. He builds a pretty stark landscape of monotony punctuated with these insane and gruesome events. You don't get the same effect in the movie.

To make a true carryover of the book, the movie would have had to be much longer, and frankly not the type of thing anyone would want to sit through. I do enjoy it and thinking Christian Bale did a fantastic job, but I still like the book better.

I haven't read "The Way of Men" but long ago I had to accept that some of our greatest cultural works are produced by gay men or otherwise deviant individuals. You can go through the annals of time and many of our best philosophers, composers, painters, sculptors, authors, etc have either had a screw loose, been suicidal, schizo, gay, pederasts, transvestites, you name it.

Does that make their work any less great? I would use the example of Tchaikovsky, who happens to be one of my favorite composers. Go listen to his Symphony no. 6 "Pathetique" over and over until you really start to get it. It's fucking tragic, and a truly awesome work. He was a closet homosexual, does that make him less of a composer?

Okay so the gripe is that gay men shouldn't be an authority on masculinity. I won't argue that here nor there but the analogy of listening to Lindy West for game advice is ridiculous.

Lindy West is:
-Fat
-American female
-Feminist.

Any one of those three things would automatically disqualify her opinion on anything, but all three just takes it over the edge. Gay men are still men, who have superior reasoning skills and a higher capacity for intelligence. Being gay doesn't suddenly make them stupid.

Post: #98

The Way of Men had a big impact on my life. There were always so many unanswered questions about what masculinity really is - it was this vague, undefinable thing that was so important and controlled so much of my behavior but I didn't truly understand it. Donovan makes it very clear, and also explains much of the frustration that we feel as men in the modern age. I've written about it: Fascist at Heart http://wp.me/p4n7vv-7X and Psychology of Survivalism http://wp.me/p4n7vv-1E

Post: #99

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio3fou...140806.php


Great interview by Jack on Red Ice Radio, the red-pill podcast of choice in Scandinavia. (in English)

Post: #100

Having read "The way of men", I'm a fan of Donovan's work.

I've just listened to an essay he wrote on published on his podcast (Start the World) last November, called "All they have is fear". Some of the topics discussed are: violence, why liberals/progressives have such angst towards aggression, feminism, xenophobia, racism, fear and fear of being afraid, amongst others. It's very much worth its time.

Here are some of the excerpts that really resonated with me:

Quote:[Progressives] have been protected all of their lives. They are the meek who have inherited the earth, and like all spoiled brats they have no experiential understanding of what it took to create their world or what is required to maintain it. Like an heiress who doesn’t care where the money comes from as long as she gets to keep spending it, they have no practical understanding of violence or its role in maintaining their safety.
[...]
People who have been protected all of their lives, and who have no interest in self-defense, don’t see themselves in the guardian role. They have always lived inside the perimeter, like women, children and the infirm. For the protected, the role of protection is “someone else’s job.” They feel secure because it is in their nature to trust that someone else will protect them from harm.

Masculine men see violence as their responsibility, and the protected see violence as someone else’s responsibility. Threats are as abstract to them as electrical power is to me. My dad was an electrician, but I have no idea how that shit really works, and I don’t care as long as the lights go on when I turn the switch. I’m not afraid of the lights going out. I never think about it. It’s someone else’s job.[/b]

Quote:When a woman says she’s for equal rights, or that she thinks people should help refugees or that she’s against racism, I chalk it up to natural empathy and moral signalling. She’s telling people that she is of high moral virtue based on the criteria of the society she lives in. Instead of making a big deal about being a lady or a Christian or a virgin, she’s hard-signalling the only kind of moral purity anyone cares about here in this international empire of nothing.

When a man makes sure to tell me that he’s against racism or sexism or xenophobia or homophobia or transphobia or whatever the thing of the day is…

…all I see is fear.

He’s afraid of losing his job.

He’s afraid of losing customers.

He’s afraid of getting kicked out of school.

He’s afraid of being smeared by the media.

The essay can also be read or listened to in full on his website.