Friday, November 9, 2018


     Most of us over a certain age remember Esquire magazine as the premier journal for American men. Along with practical masculine advice, Esquire featured two-fisted, action-packed tales by the likes of Ernest Hemingway and Dashiell Hammett; sports news by the legendary Ring Lardner and artwork by Alberto Vargas. 

    But things changed at Esquire late in the effete Obama Era. At a gala soiree at the posh Le Coucou Restaurant in uptown New York City, Esquire's new editor Jay Fielding gushed to approving New York Times reporters that  "There was a period of time when Esquire had a real literary charisma, and there was a culture that responded to it... But times have changed. As we move into the era of transgender bathrooms and L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. studies, when millennials are more likely to take their cultural cues from Justin Bieber’s Instagram feed than 6,000-word profiles of Sean Penn, we are charged not just with bringing back Esquire’s glory days, but with also figuring out exactly what the Esquire man — that is, the American man — is in 2017." 

    So it shouldn't surprise anybody that, following the mass-shooting in Thousand Oaks, California, Esquire is jumping on the Gun Control bandwagon. An article penned yesterday by one Jack Holmes proclaims hysterically that "a world where one cannot leave his home unarmed  for fear of being shot is not a free world!" Actually, things like the 2nd Amendment prevent American communities from ending up like this. 

    The whole article is nothing really but the typical anti-gun talking points which have been debunked repeatedly. The real disgrace is that Esquire has degenerated to the level where self-defense is considered oh so passe. And even worse than that: a magazine purportedly for men's issues is ignoring the real cause of these acts of mass-violence. That cause is a deeply misandryist culture which is failing men radically. 

    The NPC Left will sneer at that claim, but it's simple common sense. If access to guns causes all of these shootings, why are they overwhelmingly committed by men? Women can get guns just as easily as we can. Why aren't women shooting up public places? The answer is that women are not being alienated nor marginalized in our culture. The epidemic of mass-murders are part of a social continuum. 

    As evidence of this, let's note a few other statistics. The 'LGBTetc' lobby which Fielding referenced above is an example. The Elites tell us that gender is an artificial social construct; yet 99.8% of so-called 'Gender Identity Disorder' cases are men. Men also have a suicide rate that is the leading cause of male deaths in some demographics. Alcoholism, drug addiction, and fatal accidents are also highest among men. 

    In the case of the Thousand Oaks shooter, he appears to have been a veteran with untreated shell-shock. By the way, he's not the first mass shooter who was mentally ill and untreated either. But it's not simply a case of mental illness. Marginalizing men has led to male radicalization. Men who are denied legitimacy in civilized society turn to violent sects like the Red Pills, Incels, Wahhabis, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, or violent gangs like MS-13. 

    Men are born with a fear of insignificance. The anti-male Cultural Elites denigrate masculinity---mostly because they themselves are insignificant males who are neurotically driven to 'deconstruct' true masculinity in order to escape their own fear of insignificance. Nature is never cheated. No little boy ever really dreams of becoming the next Colin Kaepernick, David Hogg, or Bruce Jenner. They are instinctively drawn to heroes, because they can sense strength tempered by goodness. 

    Our culture is going to keep experiencing these violent outbreaks so long as it continues to ignore reality. They can take away the guns but they can't change human nature. Civilization elevates our human nature. Take that away and the worst elements of human nature rises to the surface. 



  1. As you have stated elsewhere - a culture that doesn't produce heroes will produce thugs.

  2. "Women can get guns just as easily as we can. Why aren't women shooting up public places?"

    I think that just by nature and design, women are far more risk adverse. So our evil tends to be more passive/aggressive, less risky. It's not written in stone, but in general women are far less inclined toward outright confrontation.

    One of the problems with denigrating masculinity is that men need risk. Risky behavior is an important part of masculinity. Even of we weren't denigrating masculinity outright, modern society alone can be hard on men because they don't have enough healthy outlets for dragon slaying, conquest, heroics. Not much hunting, fishing, hiking, conquest, defending the land, going on in modern society.

    Wa has this gun safe law now and I was just pondering what a terrible message that sends to men. You're irresponsible, you can't be trusted with a gun,it's your fault there are bad guys in the world.

    In theory anyway, a bad guy could break into your house (wait patiently for you to get your gun out of the safe,) take it away from you, shoot a cop, and then you'll be the one charged for having an unsecured weapon. Meanwhile the bad guy is off the hook, probably just a innocent victim of mental illness or addiction. So what's happening now, we're actually rewarding bad examples of masculinity while punishing the positive, and we're demanding men suppress or repress their natural inclination towards risk. Well, what you try to repress is always going to grow.