Real Men: Married To The Brotherhood

The more I read the writings of Christian and “Catholic” Patriocentrists, the more I am convinced that the entire “search for Biblical Headship or Normative Gender Roles,” is simply a manipulative tool for social engineering. Radical Catholics, Extremist Muslims, Radical Evangelical Christians, and Fundamentalist Mormons, share an identical agenda for the women in these superficially diverse religious counterfeits. The goal, I believe, is to create a new society, one in which the family, the basic unit of civilization, is replaced by the “Mannerbund.” “Mannerbund,” is from the German, “oath of men.” The term means, “Brotherhood of Men” and designates groups of men bound together by an oath or covenant to strive together for a common goal. “Mannerbunds,” historically, have been bands of men joined by common rituals and practices, usually wearing some type of uniform or clothing with insignia to mark their union with one another. They are characterized by exclusion of women.

A civilization based on the Mannerbund presupposes the segregation of men and women into two “gender appropriate spheres, or dominions.” The external, civic world is, according to this ideology, the proper domain of men. This realm is for men alone. This is the place in which men strive, through constant battle, to achieve a state of perfection and “the fullness of their manhood.” Men do not strive on their own, but engage in battle against the forces of chaos together. The masses of people must be governed by special groups of elite men, the warrior caste, “the Political Soldiers,” who become true noblemen because they struggle with their weaknesses and the decadence of the world, and have attained “aristocracy of soul.”

In the “perfect Mannerbund-based society,” the woman has a single function, the birthing of offspring. The women is not to enter the “domain of the men,” she has no business there. Men, being rational, intellectual creatures, are best suited to be one another’s companions. The presence of the “feminine element” in the world only serves to dilute the masculine “virtus,” and is, therefore, to be eliminated. The woman must remain in seclusion in her home. In radical Islamic Patriocentric culture, women enter the “domain of men” shrouded in the burqa, as a shadow, a non-being who remains, by the use of the burqa, segregated and entombed.

In a Patriocentrist society based on the Mannerbund, women do not need to be educated, since their “domain” is uniquely the home and since they only need to attend to the basic care and training of children. Boys are to be removed from the home when they reach puberty, in order to be educated by men, while the girls continue in the home being domestic. Letters of a prominent Patriarchalist insist that girls in Universities are silly distractions and ought to run along home and let the boys get on with becoming men. Also encouraged is the concept that “no woman should exercise authority over men.” This discourages the entry of women in civil society in any capacity that might give them authority over men whatsoever. Women enter into the civil arena as intruders, as aliens.

The headmaster of a private boys school was heard telling parents at a Basketball game, “We must get these boys away from their mothers!” There is a growing push to send boys away from their homes to boys’ schools where they will not be “infected by the feminizing influence of their mothers.” (It’s interesting that sending your boys away to school also removes them from the influence of the father.)

Now the newest trend in the Mannerbund movement is the encouragement of “Male Friendships.” This is the next step in establishing the spirit of the Mannerbund. The first stage of the movement was to convince women that the “Biblical, normative” behavior of a true Christian women was to relinquish her place in the “world,” even if she did not have children, and remain in her home or occupied exclusively with matters domestic. (What one “Catholic” Patriarchial genius calls the “delegated domain proper to women!”)

In spite of 2000 years of history of gender-integrated Christendom, replete with examples of Christian females being Queens, teachers, merchants, scholars etc., Christian women are now, in droves, embracing the “bury myself alive” movement. (Disclaimer: as the sometimes cabin-feverish yet very happy mother of five little ones, two of whom I attempt to home school, I am not disparaging the duty of state of mothers whose children need them at home! I am referring here to the idea of all women, regardless of whether or not they have children, being oriented to a life with no involvement in external social matters, as though they are not one half of the population and deeply impacted by the order in civil society.)

Attributing the agenda of a social revolution to Patriocentrists may seem like an exaggeration, but our own generation has the spectacle of a quarter of a billion women living in virtual “house arrest” because their countries were taken over by men with an identical philosophy as that of many radical “Catholic” Patriocentrists. The Patriocentrists’ admiration for Islamic countries is not only inspired by the anti-Semitism that reigns there, but by the prevailing Mannerbund-based social order. Islamic gender policies prompted one “Catholic” Patriocentrist to say from his pulpit, “At least Muslim men know how to treat their women.” This same Catholic exclaimed that there was great “wisdom in the wearing of the burqa.”

The theme of “Male Friendship,” of encouraging men to spend their occupational and recreational time exclusively in the society of men is the “spirit of Brotherhood,” and male fellowship. It will become a more topic in circles infected with Patriocentrism. Conservatives who were first trained to see themselves as the “patriarch of the home, the king and bishop of the hearth,” will now be indoctrinated that their duty is not primarily to their families, but, rather, to the male friends with whom they are to “do battle and subdue the chaos of the world.” Shifting the emotional loyalty of the man from the wife and children to the “Brotherhood,” is the next step in the social engineering intended by the Patriocentrist Perrenialists.

Many lectures and writings of Patriocentrists belittle the emotional, romantic love between husband and wife. The constant “drum beat” in the conservative movement is “male role vs.female role ...his domain vs. her domain…his calling vs. her calling.” Everything is presented as a division, a separation. Little by little, this sense of the family as a “partitioned” organism leads to the breakdown of union. The Jansenist, cynical view of the personal love between the husband and wife causes those targeted by Patriocentrist propaganda to see this bond as unimportant. Tedious articles by one Patriarch in particular claim that men are not really interested in personal relationships. Such matters are not consistent with the cool, rational intellect of the male. Men reading the articles will be advised that the silly matter of human, emotional interaction, particularly romance, is the stuff of women. Somehow, the man is “less manly” for having a romantic and emotional attachment to his wife. This makes it easier for the Patriocentrists to encourage the husband to consider his “friendship” with his wife as secondary to his union with his male friends.

Touchstone Magazine printed an article by Anthony Esolen entitled, “A Requiem of Friendship.” On the cover of the Magazine, the article is showcased with the sub-title “The Love That No Longer Dares Speak Its Name.” In the article, the author laments that the homosexual movement has made heterosexual men afraid to physically express the deep male friendships they have with men. He upbraids as “victims of the sexual revolution” those who have suspicions of irregularity when men physically demonstrate their affection to one another.

I, personally, have never heard any of my heterosexual male friends express their dismay at having to restrain themselves from physical exchanges with their male heterosexual colleagues, but this, according to Esolen, is distressing and should be matter of deep concern for civilization. (One example of behavior we are wrong to question is that of teen-age boys swimming nude together.) Esolen speaks of the importance of men being able to form profound, demonstrative friendships with one another and cites examples from history of important, heterosexual men who had male bedfellows. The article can be found at the link listed below and is very important reading for those monitoring the Patriarchy. Particularly disturbing is the chapter entitled, “The Safely Shared Bed.” It calls for the “right” of heterosexual men to share a good night’s sleep with co-workers…after all…the bond between men is the basis of society! Esolen’s article is an example of “collective grooming” of members of the conservative movement in order to advance this concept of Mannerbund, to put more and more emphasis on the ties between men. Who will suffer from this alienation of the father and husband from his natural center, the home? Of course, it will be the family.

Ultimately, it will be the Mannerbund, the “Band of Brothers” that will demand the full allegiance and loyalty of the man. The growing, near-paranoid obsession with modesty in women’s dress and the segregation of men and women in social activities is part of this agenda to focus the attention of the men on the Brotherhood. Strong attachments to the wife and home lessen the man’s involvement with the all-male group according to this thinking.

Here is Esolen's article, Requiem for Friendship.

Here is an Evangelical Patriarch’s ramblings (dangerous, even though outrageous) on Male Friendships. Please listen to the audio sample.

Please see also this outline for the “Order of the Iron Wreath.” It was composed by Baron Julius Evola, an Italian Patriocentrist whose ideology concerning the Brotherhood of Men and the place of women in society was governed by the principles of Patriocentricity. These ideas frighteningly resemble those of the most prominent “Catholic Patriocentrists.”

We have a face and a mind.
Fight the Mental Burqa!