I have recently attended the Kingston, New York LGBTQWXYZ Center's Thursday Night Gay Men's Meetup. It is basically a group of between 25 and 40 men sitting in a circle, discussing the night's chosen topic, which is usually arrived at by the controlling facilitators. Topics have included “When did you come out (if you've come out)?” and “Why do we hate the feminine so much?” (That last one was my last meeting, it was condescending and hostile to those of us not trans-gendered. At one point a queen named Esmerelda barked: “What's wrong with you? You're lying when you say you never wanted to be a woman.”)
Someone brought up the idea how major religions were tribalism gone wild, in a room full of self-professed “gays” all trying to out queer each other. The irony of the remark was not understood by the participants. When an elder was challenged on how could he have had erotic contact exclusively with males, and never consider himself “gay”, he brilliantly responded: “You were married to a woman for 40 plus years, and have three children. You fucked women for decades- does that make you straight?”
These recent experiences remind me of the struggles on several “Bro” sites, especially Str8Bro.
The controller of Str8Bro openly and regularly laments about how hard it is to be Bro, which in his definition means liking anal stimulation, unrequited love with naked or barely clothed collegiate jocks, lots of “nutting”, wearing jock straps, and now obligatory female “cheesecake” pictures, so it all doesn't get “too homo” (no homo?). Str8Bro regularly kicks “gays” off of his site, for “making it too queer” by their input and comments (which include many calling him a spastic “closet case”). Str8Bro has also been contacted by MBP, and he considers MBP “a hate group”, because we don't post pictures of naked co-ed women to fawn over.
What both of these have in common is an obsession with the bi-straight-gay paradigm of masculinity.
This twisted triad was created in 1870 by Rabbi Karl Westphal in Berlin, Germany, and has been used successfully to define and control males ever since.
The triple paradigm is quite unfair, as it defines males by something they are not, females. When defined by something outside themselves, males are reduced to being evaluated by their usefulness to the fempire and the females in their lives, simplified as the worker-breeder-soldier unit. In this context, males are rendered domesticated, and are therefore controllable and harmless. Any male deviating from prescribed service to woman and/ or country is ostracized as either a predator, a pervert, or a wildman. All are viewed as intensively dangerous, a threat to life, limb, mothers and children. The “victory” the “gay rights” movement has gained is actually a surrender into this pathology, and a betrayal of holistic, complete masculinity. Instead of living a charade masquerading as “straight”, “gays” fought for acceptance, and went from being viewed as infected outsiders ready to rape children and convert red-blooded “straight” boys and men to their evil ways, to being considered the chic, fashionable, female-safe eunuchs like in the sultan's harem in days of yore. They have become the new uber-females, the “corrected and safe” genderfuck queers, and as always, emasculated if they are to be accepted. What makes them safe isn't a physical castration, as “gay” culture is very cock-conscious in a very objected way. It is more of a psychological castration, and an outright denial of the sacred masculine heritage.
Boys are taught that adult men are dangerous, and will sexually abuse them when given the chance, and any adult male spending any time or attention on a younger male must be a pedophile or a chickenhawk, looking to use the boy as his bitch. When men are kept en masse from the boys, the normal needed bonding between males of different ages does not occur, and within a few generations, the males are unrooted and malleable for control. Female attempts at mentoring boys don't work, as females know nothing of masculinity beyond their own desires and needs form a man. The African-American and Hispanic communities are prime examples of how this deficit manifest- all the adult males are either jailed, dead, or gone, and the females turn the boys into playthings for other women. There is also a much higher incidence of “femme-gays” in these communities with no men.Simply put, males need other males in their lives; males need male mentors, and other males to imprint on and learn masculinity from. No female, no matter how well-intentioned, can teach a boy to be a man.
So, when all of the preferences/identities/pathologies are removed, what does it mean to truly be a male? I think the answer is both physiological and esoteric, and that the two are deeply and inseparably intertwined.
The unique combination of chemicals, nerve pathways, and structures in a natural male provide a medium for the masculine spirit to root in, experience, and grow. The masculine spirit, the Chic'chan, is how a male connects to the creation, how he connects to the cosmos. It is the force that makes him truly masculine, and it is a force well beyond the confines of societial definitions. The Chic'chan is empathic, creative, impulsive, playful; it is streaming, joyous, and entirely connected. And it is this sacred masculine energy which requires valor, autonomy, and self-definition. Chic'chan appears when it wants, and cannot be controlled or denied; indeed, Chic'chan does as it pleases. It is this free-wielding consciousness that the fempire has so much trouble with.
This tri-cameral labelling system to enslave males and the Chic'chan is a disgusting pathology whose time has ended. We are just within living memory of a time before the widespread push of this misandric, male-denying paradigm into the American consciousness, there are still men alive who remember the time before, though they are now very old.
Instead of yet another history lecture, let me get right to the point- the time of the male-hating,female-worship based empire has ended, the time of the Itiban uprising is ended. There is now no good reason for a male to be stuck into a crippling pathology as his definition for himself his masculinity. To allow himself to fall into these mindframes is a self-chosen surrender. Excuses of peer-pressure, social dynamics, etc. are no longer valid. The choice of what it is to be a male, as well as you own definition for yourself are nobody's but your own. To continue to label yourself as anything but male, and to live in an enslaving paradigm is unacceptable, and it will only happen if you allow it to, if you surrender into it. We adult males also have the duty to mentor, teach, guide, and share with each other, as well as those younger than us. Reach out to your brother-men, and to the boys in your lives, and share, live, and learn from each other. You have no excuse not to live, love, express, and create freely! How beautiful can your being be?
Palahniuk's Fight Club has spawned hundreds of actual fight clubs, and fueled the interest in MMA and "traditional" martial arts. That is good. But, quite unintended, many broken imperial males have looked to Fight Club for some sense of guidance on how to be a man. Quite obviously in his text, Palahniuk makes fun of and warns carefully on this, even the movie shows warnings of the insanity and futility of this. Because they are hungry for any model of masculinity, these broken boys- a "generation of boys raised by women"- who are suffering from the post-feminist emasculated mindframe, latch onto the pathology as a viable masculine paradigm. This was totally unintended, and completely out of context. Palahniuk is openly homoerotic, he has a male partner, and in real life is sweet, compassionate, and tender. When one has limited sensory comprehension, and only likes to use fragments of Khazarian psychobabble, they quickly become dangerous, twisted, and quite non-male- as evidenced by Str8Bro, and Adam/Kevin.
In the post, http://www.str8bro.net/2011/01/one-of-best-representations-of.html#more Adam/Kevin claims "it is one of the BEST representations of masculinity in film." 
In this worldview, men can only show love and eroticism through violence and rape, and are incapable of full humanity. I take great umbrage to this, and find it a hateful statement. I also believe this post totally exposes and invalidates Str8Bro as a masculinist or male resource, he shows clearly that he is NOT a student of masculinity at all, but a duitful vassal of Dworkin, Friedan, Sanger, and the rest of the hate-spewing, insane eugenic feminist demons. 
