This post is also available in: Deutsch
Are men lonelier now than they have been in the past? What is the nature of male loneliness? Does it differ in quality from female loneliness? Is an epidemic of loneliness a harbinger of social collapse? Can loneliness be a force for good?
These are important questions that never get asked in our anti-male climate of hate, except among dissidents for the truth. Zero HP Lovecraft wrote a fantastic Twatter thread on the topic, which I will reprint in full here.
I was reading in an old book yesterday, and the author remarked, only in passing, that young men in particular tend to feel very lonely. It’s striking and shocking that he could say a very obvious thing like this without “evidence”, which is an appeal to authority
If you make a statement about the nature of men or women, there is a kind of luminary who will come out of the woodwork to ask, incredulously, “evidence?!” as if she would read a scientific paper and change her mind, as if social science research were anything but fiat
But back to loneliness, and obviousness. Things that once were obvious are now quite hidden; we have rejected the wisdom of the past in favor of modern ideas. Who could doubt that we, from our vantage point atop a mountain of smart phones, know better than all of our ancestors?
(There is a treasure we can find in modernity, which was denied to people as recently as 2 generations ago; the joy of discovery. All literary works written prior to the 20th c. have been so defamed and hidden that we may discover them anew, as if we were the first to read them)
I was thinking about loneliness, and the loneliness that a young man feels, and I think he feels lonely in three distinct ways.
1. He feels loneliness for a woman.
2. He feels loneliness for a brotherhood.
3. He feels loneliness for a lord, which we may think of as being for god
And these three types of loneliness are not commutative, and the satiation of one will amplify the emptiness from the others.
Fulfillment of one desire has the curious property of reminding a man of other desires still unfulfilled. How often among you, men readers, have you felt the pang of lost male friendship or dispiriting purposelessness right at the moments in life you were most sexually satisfied with a rotating queue of eager beavers?
And in modernity we men have been forced to pretend that these feelings are inconsequential, or wicked, or non-existent, respectively
We have been told that these three forms of loneliness that a man feels are instances of “toxic masculinity,” and the cure for these problems is supposed to be a systematic abandonment of masculine ways of thinking and being
Our loneliness, they say, comes from our alienation from our feelings. Women, who are obviously “in touch” with their feelings, do not have OUR problems, but because we “suppress” our feelings, our suffering traps us, and we even impose it on women!
The component of male lived experience that is wholly unaccessible to women, more than any other, is the colossal and abyssal apathy of the universe towards you. Women cannot relate to this, except perhaps women of exceptional ugliness, childless crones, and FtM transexuals
AKA the Fundamental Premise.
My friends, we lack the language to articulate the magnitude of this monstrous insult, but fortunately I have been blessed by the good lord with the gift of the gab, so let me see if I can elucidate.
Kant taught us that an object is monstrous if by its magnitude, it annihilates the end that its concept constitutes. This means that a thing can become so vast as to become incomprehensible, and then we can no longer discern its telos, its purpose
First, the loneliness that we feel for a woman, we are told, is a case of entitlement, which is an unjust belief that one deserves something. We are not supposed to suppress our pains, we are supposed to “be vulnerable”, but only in ways that women have prescribed
Only an entitled loser who can’t get laid would ever express the pain that he feels from his hardships attracting a woman, of course. So this is not a pain we are allowed to feel, because this pain imposes on women, even if only in general. Only “toxic” males feel this pain
Second, the loneliness that we feel for a brotherhood, we are told, is an engine of oppression and exclusion. When men are allowed to form mens’ organizations, they use them to systematically exclude women from power and influence. Therefore, all male spaces must be denatured
In this program for society, any group of men assembling together for any reason must be seen with suspicion. If men do wish to associate on the basis of shared masculine interests, the only option they have is informal purposeless groups built around an interest in drinking
But men need male friendship, and in particular, they need to be able to struggle together towards mutual goals. No one ever questions that women might have or pursue this need, but if men express a desire for exclusively male spaces, they are defamed as gay or misogynistic
Third, there is the loneliness that we feel for a lord, which is the desire to follow a worthy leader. This is the hardest to understand, especially in America, where we are taught that all leaders are evil, and that the ideal is to be “free,” which means to be leaderless
If there are leaders, we are told, there will be abuses of power, and somehow it would be better that the whole world devolve into a centerless shamble than for even one person ever to abuse their power. And no one even thinks of the abuses we suffer at the hands of the void
In older times, the pain of having no lord was well known, as in the famous Anglo-Saxon elegy “The Wanderer”, a poet laments:
Since long years ago
I hid my lord
in the darkness of the earth,
and I, wretched, from there
travelled most sorrowfully
over the frozen waves
I have shared this fragment of a poem with you because I believe that verse can awaken us to an emotion we had hidden in ourselves, even when we had no awareness or language with which to find it.
Nearly everyone wants to follow a strong and powerful leader, though many are unaware of it. Leading is very hard, and it weighs heavily on the soul. Only a truly callous person could carry the burden of leadership without feeling its weight
To follow a great leader is far more freeing than the filthy rags that leftists have the shamelessness to call “emancipation”. Sartre referred to the awareness that you alone bear responsibility for your actions as nausea.
If a truly great leader appeared, if a man could truly tell us the way to be, if he could preach a gospel of radiant power, most would gladly follow. But we see no leaders like that today. You would gladly be a sheep for the right shepherd, my friends. It would be so liberating
To compensate for our lordlessness, we fall into the worship of celebrities, or CEOs, or politicians, or even twitter gurus, and we build a proxy of the aura of a leader; a little from here, a little from there, never quite filling the gap
We men are guilty of suppressing our emotions! That’s what they say. But is a child guilty of suppressing his incontinence? Is shame not the right reaction when you piss yourself in public? (Oh god, that’s ableist!) If we showed you our true emotions, you would shriek ever louder
Women don’t want to know what men really feel and think. The knowledge would poison their hearts if it didn’t first scare them stiff.
We do not have your PERMISSION to tell you of our loneliness. These emotions do grievous harm to you: the need for a woman, the need for brothers, the need for god. These emotions oppress you, my love, and when I say “my love” I refer to all women everywhere, truly
In the deranged thought of the devil, all differences between men and women are seen as aberrations. Man does not emerge from the womb fully formed; to be worthy, he must be tempered, and the shame he is made to feel for showing weakness is part of the fire that forges him
The proper emotions of man are not the emotions of weakness, which are the emotions of children, and which are suitable for women, because they must raise children and be among children, the better to empathize WITH their children.
And again, man does not emerge from the womb fully formed, which is why he must learn mastery of his emotions just as he must learn mastery of his bladder. Only the most contemptible kind of idiot imagines that induction into manhood could come without pain, or without sacrifices
This is what they want to take from you! Is it pleasant for the block of marble to be struck by the sculptor’s chisel? Do you think order, and prosperity, and security could come without a cost?
In our soft androgynized city lives it can be hard to see the value in masculine strength, which is developed through galvanizing pain. Certainly the only people in our nice safe neighborhoods who live by violence are poor and low status. We must unequivocally renounce them
Feminists call the structure of society the “the big Other” and by this they mean all social orders are antagonistic to them. When a father teaches rules to his child, they call this castration. Could anything be more alien, more alienating, or more opposed to life and humanity?
Every time this topic comes around, I see people asking, “what about toxic femininity?” I’ll solve the puzzle for you. Toxic femininity already has a name in polite society: they call it feminism.
I’d add a fourth kind of male loneliness: the loneliness he feels for the man he has yet to become.
Thwarted passion, a decision to avoid a risky venture, procrastination…these things will deprive a man of the ideal he always strives toward, and in the depths of that deprivation he will feel lonely for the company, and the mentorship, of his idealized self.
Game — learned charisma — will help relieve at least three of the four kinds of male loneliness. A more charismatic man will attract women, will be admired by other men, and will advance towards his idealized self.
Only the loneliness for a lord, or a leader, resists the panacea of Game, because inherent in Game is pride, a necessary salve for a generation of men soaked in the soyjuice of toxic feminism, but nevertheless a salve that contraindicates the humility required to accept a lord in one’s life, and to follow him. However, this natural opposition is superficial and short-lived, because a newfound, deeper pride is summoned when a man has purpose, and a banner under which to fight.
One more thing I’ll add. Men want to be part of something larger. Women don’t have that urge, at least not in the way it’s expressed and felt in men. If men are denied participation in a greater calling, they feel the loneliness for numbers 2, 3, and 4 (brotherhood, lord/leader, idealized self or, as a commenter pessimistically put it, the man he could have been). This is why vapid consumerism and obsession with the gossipy mundane doesn’t fulfill men like it does women. Men are outward-focused; women are inward-focused. Evolution has seen to it that women, as the generators and nurturers of family, direct their attention to close interpersonal relationships and are unmoved by the callings that speak to men.
Sure, you could say the pussyhatters — predominantly comprised of middle-aged catladies and bitter post-wall shrews with a smattering of quasi-female soyboy lackeys — are an example of women being part of something larger than themselves and their tiny fiefdoms, but you’ll notice how quickly the energy of that movement fizzled, and that’s because it wasn’t about working together to achieve a goal or realize a shared vision; it was about venting.
Women are unhappier than they have ever been, but the source of their loneliness is the severing of those family bonds and generational continuities that they are stewards over and which give women meaning in their lives.
I firmly believe that the fight against globohomoism is today’s greater calling that will stir White men to embrace once again the primal virtues which reverberate in men’s souls.