The journey from "namard" (non-man) to "homosexual" and how it disempowered men

The entire world has a concept of a category of males who are males, yet not men. They're known as non-males in different ways, e.g. Namard in India. Originally, they were known as males who were females from inside, or males who had a female soul. However, the politics of male gender and sexuality redefined them and stigmatized them as "non-men males." The male gender and politics, by the start of the middle ages, had already been misdefining the non-males as "males who cannot penetrate" and hence "get penetrated by men." Mind you, this is not the same as the today's identity of 'men who like men.' (1) They were not men, but non-men males, and (2) What defined them was their act of indulging in receptive anal sex, not their attraction to or sexual desire for men, which was rightly seen to be present in all males.

This definition of manhood, needless to say, acted as an absolute pressure on men to have sex with women to be qualified as one of the men. And it took away their space to say that they don't like to have sex with women, because, although, desire was not part of the now formal definition of manhood, the anti-man forces, informally, widely enforced the rule that not wanting to penetrate was the same as not being able to penetrate (which was seen as being because of impotency, which was propagated to be the same as being a 'non-man' male, something which lead to many of them want to be penetrated by men. It's the myth created by the politics of medieval male gender and sexuality, which the modern anti-man forces, when they defeated the men's spaces, further distorted to create the concept of 'homosexuals' and later, their opposites, 'heterosexuals.')

The non-males were formally exempt from this pressure to have sex with women, but then they never really wanted to be part of the men's identity, group or space. They wanted to be 'diferent.' They were NOT one of the men. They did not want manhood. They wanted 'womanhood.' In fact, some of them actually wanted to get rid of the outer signs of it (penis) and many went to great lengths to appear 'women' from the outside. They were already women from the inside.

It were the lesser feminine of these males, who were not outright transgendered, yet were still non-men males, who thought of the idea of defining themselves as 'men who like men,' when the new human institution of science, building upon mores and beliefs that Christianity created, demolished the gender differences between the 'men' males, and the 'non-men' males, and said, anyone born with a penis is a 'man.' The non-man males had heen looking for a new identity in this new scheme of things. Till now they'd survived underground in the Christian society as 'third genders,' as 'non-men' males.

One of them (Karl Ulrichs), a self-professed 'female inside male body' -- sincerely believing in the outer appearance of men created by the politics of gender and sexuality -- started to see the difference between the 'men' and the 'non-men' males in terms of sexual preferences. The men were outwardly only having sex with women (The fact however, was, that almost 100% of them were having sex with males, mostly other 'normative' males (men), and many were into deep emotional bonds with them, that were for all practical purposes romantic bonds ... even in a highly hostile Christian society, that considered sodomy a sin. In fact, the men openly acknowledged their interest in each other within men's spaces. But outside of the men's spaces: In formal spaces, in front of women, and in front of 'non-men' males, they always displayed an exclusive interest in women. Thus for these spaces, men were already seen as basically 'heterosexual' -- but it was never their identity. Of course, women and men had no way of seeing the pressures that were working on men, because these pressures exploited the need for 'manhood' that men had, and women and non-men had no way of understanding 'manhood' or this need. Indeed, it was also because, men could not talk about this pressure or acknowledge that they feel it, because, just doing it would put a question mark on their manhood -- not by men themselves, but by the formal society, controlled by vested anti-man interests.

So, Mr/Ms Karl Ulrichs, 1869, started a new concept, a social category which he called 'males who wanted to have sex with males', which later Westphal, a crooked scientist, further developed into the clinical concept of 'homosexuality.' Of course, the entire Western world, heavily influenced by the Christian need to keep men off from each other, immediately saw in this theiri perfect saviour in the present scientific world, which needed a 'Scientific' flog to beat men's bonds.

Meanwhile, the entire non-man community of the time (which did not include most non-males who wanted women) eagerly lapped up the new concept and the new social space/ category/ identity that the modern world was happily giving over to them. The modern West was only too happy to let the non-men define themselves as 'men who like men,' because, they knew, this would mean, that the men would disown it like fleas. But, in those early years of so-called 'homosexual movement' (which is actually a modern non-man movement), the protagonists openly defined themselves as a 'third sex' or an 'intermediate sex.' Later on, it was decided to drop the reference to gender, as almost as part of another conspiracy, the emerging queer throught process was: Gender is trash, the real difference is who you want to have sex with. And the non-men became so powerful with the modern world giving them more and more social power and space, in order to use them as pawns in their game to control men's gender and sexuality, that the modern non-men aggressively started to impose their concepts on the real, normative men, who broke the formal, modern men's code and acknoweledged liking men. They defined them as 'closet cases' and denigrated them as 'one of them' but "who cannot come to terms with their sexuality." For these 'gay chauvinists' anyone who wants to love another man without accepting their categorization is someone who is "unable to accept his sexuality" thereby passing the root of the problem from the conspiracy against men onto the victims of it.

Not that the men did not protest. A number of men have continuously protested and warned against the invalid concept of 'sexual orientation' and its dangers. I

Indeed, the concept of 'homosexuality' and 'sexual orientation' proved lethal for men's bonds in men's spaces. They wiped it out from the 'straight' spaces and made them totally, well, near totally 'heterosexuals.' This is the power of modern Science to work against and destory nature.

Meanwhile, as Science becomes more and more powerful to effectively kill men's ability to love another man, Christianity continues to wield immense influence in the highly fundamentalist US, as the basic driving force, to use any available means -- whether by hook or crook (and Christianity is infamous for its blatant use of unfair meanas to get its ways, like when it pursues religious conversions) -- to keep up the intense hostility against male need for affection and intimacy from men.



The anti-men forces.

Originally, they were the rulers who just wanted to employ men like livestocks to given them more and more children to become their 'subjects.' These rulers, reserved the right to love and have sex with men to themselves, so much so that it came to be seen as a luxury that only noblemen could indulge in freely.

But, as time passed by, and rulers changed, and power went from the kings to 'religion' especially in the West, the conspiracy against men that disempowered men a great deal, created artificial sources of power, using the power wrested from this disempowerment. And vested interests grew around these unnatural, artificial power sources, that sustained their power from it. These power sources were based on the continuous disempowerment of men for their sustencance, and thus these anti-man vested interests, not from the rulers, but from within the subjects, had an immense vested interest in keeping men enslaved and disempowered. These vested interests who were already very powerful, would invade and capture every new, promising human institution that the real men created, that had the power to liberate them -- starting with 'religion' (the anti-man forces controlled religion, and abused its power to make sex between men a sin against god ... and to force men to be married, procreate and even to 'love' their women) ... and then going over to Science in the modern world (and science created the system of 'sexual orientation' with which men could be forced to be heterosexual with the threat of being isolated as one of the non-males (now wrongly known as 'homosexuals', and all those studies on 'homosexuality' and 'homosexuals' that validate the unnatural concepts), and yes, of course, the Media.