Are You Not What You Are Being Told You Are?

www.dn.se...

This is a piece in Swedish about the quest for masculinity in a modern society. Pop it into a translator if you like.

I see guys having problems of this nature all the time, and I am frustrated by it. The language around it is that women should reduce themselves, or men should reduce themselves for society to work. Or that the solution is more ball teams.

There seems to an idea that strong women want strong men to reduce themselves. I certainly do not. I am frustrated by this view constantly.

How stupid is it for men to be attracted to weak pliable women, or women to be wanting to be with weak pliable men? For reproductive purposes the concept is stupid.

The existing social order is leaving many people unable to cope with how to interact. Without some pre-existing boundaries, many people are confused. Women too - I work with many women who just cannot seem to negotiate how to be in a long term relationship or even figure out how to meet men. So the core of what these guys are noticing isn’t all wrong.

Minus a strong cultural dictate, or religious direction, people do indeed seem to be a bit lost in their interpersonal relationships.

I have a sneaking suspicion, that in re-tooling society that we've whitewashed the individuated tribal dynamic. That the cultural revolution has ignored the manifestation of tribal archetypes, or thought that they were not important.

But here's my question - is the problem that, you are not any of the things that you are being told you are?

Are you looking around at society and finding that what you are is not to found in it?

reply to post by Aeons


you need to start a Fight Club.

I think the biggest problem is that we're so caught up in "being a man" or "being a woman" that we forget to simply be ourselves.

It's also that both genders have many different archetypes now, but all those archetypes are just caricatures with no real depth. Strong women are always portrayed as harpies with no tenderness; strong men are always portrayed as playboys who lack even the most basic of manners.

In traditional Slavic society, you weren't a man until you'd built your own house, planted a tree and had a son.
How many westerners can say they've done that? Getting a mortgage on a McMansion doesn't count...

In times of war and conflict, women have more male babies.

The environment of the tribe has a deep impact on us as individuals, and on ourselves as socieities.

I suspect that the archetypes of the tribe are far more fundamental to our nature. Impacting our physiology, our brain development, our reproduction.

Humans survived some very severe significant populace reducing events throughout our evolution. Survived based not just on the work of an individual, but in how that individual could work in a tribe.

This is not to say that this is *all* you are. However, I do suspect that it has more impact than is being found in modern society.

Let me give you a personal example. I am married to a big, strong, very intelligent man. University educated, tradesman sheet metal worker. When plumbing his genealogy on the female side, what I found had me ask him a question.

"Hey dear, if you lived 2, 3, 4 centuries ago, what is your job?" His answer, "I don't know? Blacksmith." Yeah, that's right. You're a blacksmith. Of Blacksmiths, of blacksmiths, of blacksmiths, etc. That's exactly what his line is. Blacksmiths as far back as a I can go through his female line.

reply to post by Aeons


What I am was never found to be in society no matter the place or time, and I don't think it's just me, but it could be. But anyways, yes something is afoot, and much more is going on then then meets the eye. Personally I do not care all that much, it is what it is. And ultimately it is what the mass consciousness of humanity wants it to be. People are always what they want to be, and get what they wanted. Even if there wishes are brought to life not quite as they thought they would be.

All societies and every tribe and every role so far in the whole of history has been overrated, lets see what the insanity brings I say. Everything is as it should be, and when people go on about strong this or strong that....I do have a habit of testing there silly presumptions, and so far all have failed that test.

But hey aeons, there all confused because they yet whine that they didn't get there picture perfect delusions. There still living in there bubbles and there still waiting for that which has long passed by.

Yeah, I'm not quite so metaphysically not caring about society. What can I say, I actually give a carp about people and society. Here and tomorrow, and not just in some Ah-The-Universe-Shall-Go-Dark-One-Day-So-What kinda way.

O.K. I'll bite.

I'm descended from pre-revolution Russian aristocratic stock on my mom's side. Spawn of one of the dozens of little Princelings who got the hell out of Dodgeski at the first smell of smoke.

If the contention here is that one's function in the larger societal organism is determined by what one's matrilineal ancestors did for a living, I can provide a corroborating example.

What did my family do? Administering farms and land stewardship, mostly. (Uh, and if being a profligate dilettante counts as a profession, we'll throw that in there too.)

Which is precisely what we continued to do here in America, our prosperity diminishing with each successive generation. My great-grandfather, first of our line to be born in the U.S.A., used the remains of the family fortune to establish a very large and lucrative farm. He did very little by way of actual farm labor, as he administered his holdings so skillfully that he didn't need to.

Insofar as it is possible to be landed gentry in America, that seems to be what my forbears were shooting for. Well, the profligate strain also proved out, and my granddad and uncle subsequently ran the farm into the ground.

By the time I was born, the farm was just a series of photos in an album, and no one felt much like reminiscing over what must have been a shameful and embarrassing loss. Which is why I felt like I'd been sucker-punched when I came across this thread.

Because, see, I am working in eco-agriculture. And never, ever, in a million years would I have tied my ancestry to that. I can't account for the link by way of having been raised to the profession. If anything, my family influence would have inculcated an aversion to farming in me.

So are we possibly discussing genetic memory here?

Edit to add: I can't help but think that you are onto something vital. What happens if one's heritable function is made obsolete? Does one flounder about and feel alienated? Does one try to shift cultural conditions to accommodate one's inborn nature?

Landed aristocracy was rendered obsolete. My ancestors attempted, I think, to continue to ply the family trade. They failed spectacularly when trying to make the adjustment to a culture opposed to the very notion of their type of person existing.

It is worth noting that every member of my family on mom's side from my granddad on has leap-frogged from one profession to the next, never settling on one for more than a few years at a time. Me included. Until I got into the Eco-Ag.

Any other professions or "types" being phased out? Not simply changed to a different technological platform (i.e. blacksmith ->metal fabrication), but actively eliminated?

This is nothing that a little crossdressing and a strapon can't fix.

Seriously.

Try it.

You will find that life can be a pain in the arse for both sexes.

It is best to work together as equals.

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by mistermonculousWhat did my family do? Administering farms and land stewardship, mostly. (Uh, and if being a profligate dilettante counts as a profession, we'll throw that in there too.)

This made me laugh. If I went up a male line with my logic here, there is a chance that other than being a mother, my default is carousing assassin.

Originally posted by mistermonculousEdit to add: I can't help but think that you are onto something vital here. What happens if one's heritable function is made obsolete? Does one flounder about and feel alienated? Does one try to shift cultural conditions to accommodate one's inborn nature? Landed aristocracy was rendered obsolete. My ancestors attempted, I think, to continue to ply the family trade. They failed spectacularly when trying to make the adjustment to a culture opposed to the very notion of their type of person existing.

It is worth noting that every member of my family on mom's side from my granddad on has leap-frogged from one profession to the next, never settling on one for more than a few years at a time. Me included. Until I got into the Eco-Ag.

When the Family Of Orgin Poop hit the fan, and my husband had to drop out of University he jumped around for a few years and then ended up in his "default" job is what it looks like to me.

Not that he isn't capable of other things. It just is very interesting that he ended up in what looks like a default function.

I'm wondering for some time if some of the existential angst some men are feeling is less that women have pushed them down by having expanded roles in a modern society, so much as that the are NOT what they are being told they are. When society hits a rough patch, that they simply do not see their default around.

If you don't have a word for something, if you've never seen it, how do you describe it?

I think that some might suggest that these people just need to be phased out then - but if they've got some tribal function that has become unavailable won't we need these people again at some point? When we colonize other planets? If there is a disaster and a severe population reduction? Is this an indication that we're missing something in the modern dynamic?

I don't think that everyone is necessarily walking around with some internal default. Some degree of the population must not be. Different cultural groups must have some degree of differentiation in their specializations . But in cases of consistent trait selection, as in when a series of women consistently marry or breed for a set of traits, those traits have likely become somewhat refined.

What if some of these men who are frustrated are these people?

I contemplated that some of them might be "protector" types - but then why aren't they drawn to being police officiers or soldiers?

Any other professions or "types" being phased out? Not simply changed to a different technological platform (i.e. blacksmith ->metal fabrication), but actively eliminated?

I don't know. I think that western societies sure don't have a place for functions that must have had a consistent selection restriction. Modern soldiers for example don't do what some similar functions did in the past, but they surely have had some selection restriction happening in the past.

This is kind of the question I'd like to ask some guys - more men than women because I think women still have many of their defaults available. What *are* you? What is it that you are supposed to be? But then, how do they answer if what they are isn't something they've ever seen?

I'm wondering for some time if some of the existential angst some men are feeling is less that women have pushed them down by having expanded roles in a modern society, so much as that the are NOT what they are being told they are. When society hits a rough patch, that they simply do not see their default around.

Or when society is becalmed, those set to negotiate rough patches find themselves idle. Those in a position to do so, may engineer turbulence just to provide themselves a niche. Any alternative explanation to the ol' "those darn womens took all our jobs, and made us get butt implants" screed is well worth looking into.

I think that some might suggest that these people just need to be phased out then -

If the explanation above has any salt, and those who are geared to deal with *hitstorms start cloud-seeding just to feel like they have a function, I guess some will be suggesting that they be phased out very loudly. I'm not among them.

but if they've got some tribal function that has become unavailable won't we need these people again at some point? When we colonize other planets? If there is a disaster and a severe population reduction? Is this an indication that we're missing something in the modern dynamic?

Oh, yeah. I'd say so. Those traits which are currently inconvenient, even when they're applied w/i a military context, may prove invaluable in the future. But, really, what does it say about what we're missing in our social structure, right now, that we have erased a principle which may have been key to our survival? That those who embody it have no frame of reference for what they are? It seems like we've developed all sorts of stop-gaps (organically, not by design) to deal with our poor un-niched men. *cough*1st person shooters*cough*

What if some of these men who are frustrated are these people?

And if they are, they may be casting about for any wrong-headed ideological construct on which to pin their deep-seated sense of displacement.

I contemplated that some of them might be "protector" types - but then why aren't they drawn to being police officiers or soldiers?

A distaste for hierarchy native to the type?

reply to post by Aestheteka


Well 2 out of 3. I built a house with my own hands, planted several trees but I have a daughter. I suppose next time I get to Europe I better remove my genitals.

reply to post by Aeons


I've never fit into Societal-norms...and it HAS been kinda painful. Was teased as a kid for being fat...still fat. I'm almost 30, no kids, newly engaged (and I ASKED HIM, thankyavurymuch!). Kind of a rare bird in my neck of the woods. And it makes one torn. I want to be true to myself, but I definitely feel the weight of friends and family's expectations (whether they realize they're directing any at me or not).

But, in the end, it's MY life. And I'll do what I want, what makes ME happy. I'm the one who has to live with the decisions I make, so I'm going to make darn sure they're ones I enjoy living with.

Originally posted by Aestheteka
In traditional Slavic society, you weren't a man until you'd built your own house, planted a tree and had a son.
How many westerners can say they've done that? Getting a mortgage on a McMansion doesn't count...

O.K., let's run with this for a while.

There seems to be an indelible historical tie between self-sufficiency and manliness. And as you astutely point out, opportunities to manifest self-sufficient behaviors are few and far between in the West.

Aeons is also hitting her marks by pointing out the Protection angle. Protection used to apply to one's immediate family, or one's tribe. That instinct(?) is now directed to increasingly abstract targets. Most people's ability to connect meaningfully to an abstraction is limited. Which is why any successful nationalist movement will always try to frame the citizen's connection to the state in familial terms.

If we're discussing the sorts of traits I think we're talking about, it might be useful to see where those manifested traits are diverted. I suspect we'll find that there's a strong link to suspended adolescence. We bonzai these types into overgrown teens, and thus neuter their destabilizing influence on the social body.

Originally posted by mistermonculous
Oh, yeah. I'd say so. Those traits which are currently inconvenient, even when they're applied w/i a military context, may prove invaluable in the future. But, really, what does it say about what we're missing in our social structure, right now, that we have erased a principle which may have been key to our survival? That those who embody it have no frame of reference for what they are? It seems like we've developed all sorts of stop-gaps (organically, not by design) to deal with our poor un-niched men. *cough*1st person shooters*cough*

What if some of these men who are frustrated are these people?

And if they are, they may be casting about for any wrong-headed ideological construct on which to pin their deep-seated sense of displacement.

I contemplated that some of them might be "protector" types - but then why aren't they drawn to being police officiers or soldiers?

A distaste for hierarchy native to the type?

edit on 1-11-2011 by mistermonculous because: floop.

I have been wondering if some of these guys are finding themselves in the online world. Would some of these people have trained lots, but had lots of idle time? Lots of time to be dads, and fathers.

Is it distaste for hierarchy is native? I mean, hierarchy tends to be a killer itself. Avoiding it might make for an excellent survival technique. But clearly, these guys are highly social, so avoidance of society isn't there.

I have a sneaking suspicion that more ball teams doesn't address the underlying issue of how to give these men an outlet. Online clearly isn't enough. Then if you factor in that that they can't acquire resources that way, and it doesn't give them any cred amoungst many women, it esssentially negates what has to be an essential part of their character. The fundamental need to be husbands and fathers.

I think part of this is caused by all this politically correct bull crap.

I think society has become more concerned what others may think rather than just being themselves. Our society relies too heavily on trying to fit in, thus worrying more about others feelings than themselves.

This country does more feeling than thinking.

I have a sneaking suspicion that more ball teams doesn't address the underlying issue of how to give these men an outlet. Online clearly isn't enough. Then if you factor in that that they can't acquire resources that way, and it doesn't give them any cred amoungst many women, it esssentially negates what has to be an essential part of their character. The fundamental need to be husbands and fathers.

You mean a full set of Shiny Purple Words is not catnip to the ladies?

But, yeah, you hit it square.

If all outlets for satisfying these intrinsic proclivities have only an abstract payoff, we'll shortly see two mass-scale results:

1. They'll begin to take action in unsanctioned arenas (as you say, the inclination to aggregate is very much present, even if they don't act on it by enlisting).

2. They won't get any action; and the type will, indeed, be phased out.

I don't think that this is possibly the only variation where this is happening, but it does seem to be possibly one of the most problematic.

See, I bet that there are more than enough of them to cause havoc.

And some of them are smart. And some of the other men who are not as unenfranchised are carrying these traits around too.

If they hit on something that is rings true, and it activates them as a group, I bet that this group of men has more than the necessary ability to shoulder everyone out of their way.

And no, monitor tan isn't all that attractive on men. I am a GOD amoungst pixels! I say that lovingly, as an attractive woman who likes shooting guns, likes FPS games, and has a thing for control freak geeks.

Originally posted by Aeons
I don't think that this is possibly the only variation where this is happening, but it does seem to be possibly one of the most problematic.

Yes, ma'am. Give these guys a game, and you provide a harmless outlet for their natural inclinations, and also a place to form groups based on their mutual hobby, thus lessening their sense of alienation. Innocuous enough, yes?

Maybe not so much. I would posit: give these guys a game, and you give them a means to practice behavior they are naturally inclined toward; and the opportunity to meet others with whom they have more in common than just a shared hobby. Terminology like "Clans" doesn't just *poof* appear out of a vacuum.

Not intending to shut down our Gamez, just pointing out a fairly obvious possibility.

See, I bet that there are more than enough of them to cause havoc.

In this context alone, there may be millions.

If they hit on something that is rings true, and it activates them as a group, I bet that this group of men has more than the necessary ability to shoulder everyone out of their way.

Like if Anonymous had teeth, tactical proficiency, and discipline? Yup, makes me a little nervous.

And no, monitor tan isn't all that attractive on men. I am a GOD amoungst pixels! I say that lovingly, as an attractive woman who likes shooting guns, likes FPS games, and has a thing for control freak geeks.

I respectfully request that you donate to an egg bank, madam.

Originally posted by mistermonculous

Originally posted by AeonsI respectfully request that you donate to an egg bank, madam.

edit on 1-11-2011 by mistermonculous because: (no reason given)

I had two daughters and a son. I'm working on it!

I'm also am probably amoungst a very very small number of people whose actual cells are in a database, catalogued and partially mapped, and whose mitochondrial dna is full mapped. The world blows up tomorrow, I intend for mine to be an available and obvious source.