Why homosexuals shouldn't write about manhood
Continuing with the theme from my last post on a homosexual as the main contributor for the Virtus blog of Alternative Right, this same writer has a new post up titled; "MAN vs. 'Person'." The article got quite a few negative responses.
Read the article if you will, but here is the crunch of it all. Voicing his surprise
Has Alternative Right now finally reached the level of importance where it attracts obsessive Marxist/feminist concern trolls, Trojans and evangelists?
Donovan, the author of the article, ends one of his comments by saying
if your manhood needs a woman's validation -- the feminists have already won.It is frighteningly misogynistic and weirdly narcissistic. Why show "valor, manliness, excellence, courage, character, and worth" if not partly to validate the other 50% of the population, which is made up of women as sisters, mothers, and, of course, wives? Donovan seems to buff up his masculinity just for the sake of masculinity.
No one in the fifty-strong list of commenters has picked up on this loosely placed sentence. The conservative ones are probably got taken aback by the feminist connotations. The "manly" ones have bought the idea that men can do their thing without women telling them what to do.
But, I think Donovan is more hardcore than that. He seems to be saying that since he doesn’t need women to be virile, neither should other men.
Alternative Right is progressing into a strange site. It has embraced those elements which contribute to our culture's decadence and decline: homosexual virility, neopaganism, anti-Christianity, anti-Semitism, atheism, anti-Americanism (here is the strange article where the author denounces – crucifies – American women), and even to some extent a subtle misogyny (those "Gamers" seem to post there).
