In Islamic nations such as Bangladesh, it is common for men to kiss each other on the cheeks in greeting and even to hold hands in public. These customs carry no sexual connotations at all, since homosexuality is not in the social consciousness of Muslims, but rather symbolize "amity, devotion, and most importantly, equality in status."
Contrast this to the West, where men are increasingly distant from each other. We consider our fellow man not as a comrade of equal status, not as someone to show affection towards, but as a competitor for resources to brutally mog and bully. Why are Western men so alienated from one another, if not adversarial?
The hermeneutics of homosexual suspicion has been cited as a reason for the decline of male brotherhood, and while the perception of homosexuality being attached to male closeness is certainly pernicious, and a consequence of homosexuality being socially tolerated more broadly, I argue that the main issue here is feminism and the inclusion of women into male spaces. Nothing is more integral to Cultural Capitalism's erosion of male solidarity and the male socialist spirit than feminism!
When men have no disagreement over the partitioning of foids among them, they will tend to be amiable towards one another and collectivist in spirit. But with the introduction of foids given agency by feminism, men will then break apart their bonds in a zero-sum competition for status (and thus attractiveness in the eyes of foids). This is what atomizes men more than anything else.
Think about it from the perspective our our capitalist masters and bosses. What better way to incentivize conformity to capitalism than to "liberate" women -- status-driven animals who will naturally reward the men who adapt best to the status quo and accumulate the most individual worth at the expense of the collective well-being? The big problem now is that less and less men are getting rewarded for their conformity by foids, and this portends future trouble for the permanence of the capitalist system.
Contrast this to the West, where men are increasingly distant from each other. We consider our fellow man not as a comrade of equal status, not as someone to show affection towards, but as a competitor for resources to brutally mog and bully. Why are Western men so alienated from one another, if not adversarial?
The hermeneutics of homosexual suspicion has been cited as a reason for the decline of male brotherhood, and while the perception of homosexuality being attached to male closeness is certainly pernicious, and a consequence of homosexuality being socially tolerated more broadly, I argue that the main issue here is feminism and the inclusion of women into male spaces. Nothing is more integral to Cultural Capitalism's erosion of male solidarity and the male socialist spirit than feminism!
When men have no disagreement over the partitioning of foids among them, they will tend to be amiable towards one another and collectivist in spirit. But with the introduction of foids given agency by feminism, men will then break apart their bonds in a zero-sum competition for status (and thus attractiveness in the eyes of foids). This is what atomizes men more than anything else.
Think about it from the perspective our our capitalist masters and bosses. What better way to incentivize conformity to capitalism than to "liberate" women -- status-driven animals who will naturally reward the men who adapt best to the status quo and accumulate the most individual worth at the expense of the collective well-being? The big problem now is that less and less men are getting rewarded for their conformity by foids, and this portends future trouble for the permanence of the capitalist system.
Accusing two male friends of homosexuality for being too close with another is, in my opinion, merely a form of bullying -- a way of saying that those two men are lower status than you, since their needs for affection are apparently not satisfied by females and must be supplemented onto a man.
