duendy said:
well, i await your response to my response
Buddha1 said:
I am writing a somewhat long sequence of how I hypothesise femininity as well as masculine bonds came to be persecuted. I think I'll post it by tommorrow.
Duendy, here is that post that has been long due:
This is an attempt to weave the various strands of broken history and human nature, based on my study and analysis.
THE STORY OF PERSECUTION OF FEMININITY IN MALES
In the pre-marriage days, humans were divided into men, women and the two-spirited groups. Men and women lead separate lives into separate groups, and the two-spirited males served as their connection. Men bonded sexually with other men, women with other women, while the two-spirited males (today's feminine gendered males, I can't say if it included meterosexuals) could bond with both men and women. (evidence of this can be found in chimpanzeees and tribal societies)
Male-male love bonds were institutionalised, and the earliest forms of marriage was probably between people of the same sex --- as evidenced from several ancient tribalistic societies.
The two spirited people had a lot of power and they basically ruled the society (as is evident from some tribal societies of American Indians). Men and women both listened to them, and they exercised a lot of power.
When humans moved to far off places, and they needed to grow their population fast to settle in these areas, they decided to force all men to participate in the procreation process. The decision was probably the most pragmatic one in those times and was probably taken by the two-spirited people for the rest in all good intention.
For several centuries after that the society would have struggled to force men into marriage. The biggest enemy would be the masculine bonds (male-male sexual bonds), which men have always tended to prefer over sexual bonds with women (as evidenced by all bisexual societies).
So they gradually developed twofold pressures:
- to force men away from other men.
- to force men into sexual bonds with women
They only wanted to do the above two partly and only as much as was needed for procreation.
As men and women were force-trained to live together in one family, the two-spirited males gradually became redundant and they lost the importance and authority that they once had.
An important tool --- perhaps the most important tool for forcing men into the above became 'social masculinity'. In the pre-marriage days, men used to have 'tests' where adolescent boys had to prove their masculinity to be accepted as men. This test included activities to measure the physical/ mental/ emotional strengths and capabilities of men.
Those who failed the tests were not included in the men's group and had to live like an outcaste with no respect and rights.
The society gradually made the ability to procreate an important precondition for being a part of the male group or in other words a basic proof of manhood. This is the source of our notion of manhood today.
There were in the beginning no serious attempts to totally force men away from other men sexually. Though these bonds were partly restricted. Men had to marry and procreate, other than that they were free to do much what they wanted to. Male-male love bonds were still institutionalised.
When men were forced to marry and procreate using social manhood as a stick and carrot, there was another group of males who had no stake in social masculinity and so was still opposing 'marriage' with women (when men had no choice but to comply, after "steeling themselves up"
*). These were the feminine gendered males who had little or no sexual need for women.
As the two-spirited feminine gendered males became obsolete in the society, femininity in males had already lost its traditional respect, dignity and authority.
With this the feminine gendered males who liked men and who refused to marry, became the target of social ire. They were made outcaste from the society. Their rights were taken away and they were denigrated beyond belief. What happened with time was that this group of feminine gendered males became synonymous with "males who are females and who like to get fucked anally like women". In due course of time, this group of transgendered males adopted all the roles of post-marriage institution women.
By linking 'getting fucked' with the group of transgendered males --- a redundant human quality now, the society denigrated both the things. The act of 'getting fucked' and 'femininity in males' (evidence masculinity in the times of vikings as reflected in this article on
Viking Homosexuality --- I don't agree with the analysis in this article but it does contain facts). Men in the forthcoming generations had to prove that they did not have an interest in any of the above two, to get social manhood.
Of course, most femininie gendered males hid their femininity and it now became too much denigrated, and in case they had a predominant sexual need for men, they had to hide it too. Except when both of these qualities were in extreme. Then they had to live a life like an outcaste.
Masculine gendered men on the other hand continued to enjoy sex with each other, as long as they married and produced children. But 'sex with women' became more intricately linked with 'masculinity'. And even if men had receptive anal sex, they did not admit it openly (just like today). What they would openly admit and talk about was that they had the 'capacity' to fuck both men and women. Masculinity became synonymous with the act of penetration (with no link with the sex of the partner) and femininity became linked with being penetrated. (evidence 'masculinilty' in the times of vikings)
Obviously, there was no concept of homosexuality and all men were supposed to have a sexual interest in other men.
This situation was pretty much unchanged till the start of the Christ era. Then the whole world increased the fire on male-male bonds --- especially Christianity and later Islam. Other religions only used social masculinity to deal with the 'menace' of same-sex needs and to make it stigmatised socially. Sex with men went underground (i.e. behind the scences) but it was still in the mainstream and it was quite tolerated there, as long as people kept quiet about it, did not make an issue of it, and outwardly showed only a sexual interest in women. Of course, they had to fulfill their duties of marriage and procreation. If same-sex bonds became a hurdle in the latter, they were not tolerated. (as evidenced from traditional societies even today)
There was still no concept of 'homosexuality' or 'homosexuals'. Just of 'Catamites' --- i.e. of feminine gendered males who 'got fucked'.
Femininity in males, meanwhile too became even further marginalised and even punishable by death in the Christian societies. Islamic societies, though not only tolerated but gave a respectable place to feminine gendered males and they were even free to have sex with men. Because they were not considered men at all.
This is in short the story of denigration of femininity in men.
*Even today when they ask you to prove you can have "sex with women" it is done as if they are asking you to mount atop Mt. Everest, i.e. asking you to do something very unpleasant that will test your stamina to bear the 'unnatural'. Like circumcision. Like being stung by a hundred bees.
