We spend a lot of time on this part of the internet hating on abrasive feminists. I’m not saying that the likes of Lindy West and Jessica Valenti haven’t earned our general ill-will, but I’ve begun to think that they really are not the worst of the enemies men face in this society today. The most militant opponent of the red-pill man is, in fact, the mangina.
I’m not the first to say that, nor am I about to be the first to discuss the particular mangina on whose words this post will focus. He’s been talked about in the manosphere before, and for good reason. The man I speak of is none other than Hugo Schwyzer:
Today, gentlemen, Hugo Schwyzer would like you to consider taking it up the rear for gender equality:
Want to make straight men better in bed — and better feminist allies? The path may be simple: fuck them up the ass. According to one brand new book, the path to making men more compassionate, appreciative and playful may be straight through their butts.
In The Ultimate Guide to Prostate Pleasure: Erotic Exploration for Men and Their Partners, Charlie Glickman and Aislinn Emirzian make the case that straight “men who get into anal penetration are among the most secure in their masculinity: because they’ve examined themselves, faced their fears.”
No, he’s not done yet:
In a deeply misogynistic culture, there are few greater fears with which men are raised than the fear of being labeled as someone who acts like a woman, allowing himself to be penetrated…In his Myth of the Modern Homosexual, historian and cultural theorist Rictor Norton explains that the term “asshole” developed as a homophobic (and thus woman-hating) slur…
…Glickman and Emirzian acknowledge that this myth is persistent: “The idea that penetration is an act of dominance is almost certainly tied in to sexism and the notion that the woman’s role is inferior. Plenty of men have absorbed these ideas at a subconscious level. Even if a man doesn’t think it is an act of dominance when he penetrates his (male or female) partner, he may still hesitate to switch roles because he is afraid that it will mean losing his masculinity if he takes a turn catching instead of pitching.”
At this point you may be struggling to continue absorbing this insanity, but let’s finish this off:
The payoff for clearing those hurdles, Glickman says, is nothing less than the radical transformation of heterosexual sex. In 2011, Glickman wrote a column entitled “How Pegging Can Save the World,” arguing that no other erotic experience a man can undergo can create greater empathy with women than being penetrated by his partner…the sooner men get over their anxiety and guilt, the more fun they and their partners will have. And maybe, just maybe, we can peg our way right out of sexism itself.
Alright, we’ve made it.
Contained within this absurd narrative is a clear insight into what could be considered a larger agenda of emasculation, and that agenda involves what I like to call straight shaming. Consider the following implications of this piece.
It is not enough now to merely be a heterosexual and tolerate those who have different orientations. Now, to truly combat misogyny in the eyes of folks like Schwyzer, one must be fully open to participating in homosexual acts.
If you are a heterosexual male uncomfortable with the idea of partaking in a homosexual act, you are…
a) promoting the perpetuation of a misogynistic culture
b) showing that you’re not comfortable in your own sexuality
c) promoting homophobia (which is now, apparently, also analogous to woman-hate)
Going by this logic, any male who is not open to participating in a homosexual act is now presumed to be insecure and, therefore, deemed secretly gay or bi.
Males who are open to those acts are deemed tolerant and worthy combatants against sexism and misogyny. Their open performance of these acts also essentially renders them gay or bi, just like their less “open” peers.
Meanwhile, the actual homosexuals (gay and bi men) are still as they always were.
Where does this logic leave us, then?
EVERY MAN IS GAY OR BI.
The goal is not just to promote the tolerance of homosexuality, but to promote the dominance of homosexuality. That is, to make homosexuality and openness to engaging in it the only acceptable way forward for any given man.
It is imperative that any heterosexual male concerned with self-improvement be aware of this phenomenon. There’s nothing wrong with homosexuality—I don’t believe it is a choice and I think we should recognize the right of those who are so inclined to live as they will.
That being said, there is also nothing wrong with being an unabashedly heterosexual male. You can rest assured that given the choice between that model of masculinity and the emasculated variant advocated here by Schwyzer, women will largely spring for the former, claims of their “anti-sexism” and opposition to “gender stereotypes” be damned.
Don’t believe me? Take a look at our media. Do the ideal examples of masculinity in the media that women above the age of consent spend enormous amounts of time fantasizing about and swooning over resemble effete men with a penchant for getting it up the butt?
Or do they look like these guys?
The answer should make things very clear.
Women do desire actual men, and no male should apologize for satisfying that demand.
Read Next: The Physical Decline of Modern Man