Men and Women
A few days ago I heard an interview on the radio with a man. I think he was a famous singer in a rock band or a pop band. He said something along the lines of: "At that point I realized, that I need a woman in my life to be happy."
Exactly. That's it. I've heard that before. And it's that exact reason that's at work, when men don't support other men on a collegial basis. Why men can't hardly be friends with other men, like women can among themselves. It is also one of the primary reasons for my Living Among Horses project. And at the same time it's dilemma, the reason why I cannot find men to support it or even be interested in it. The project simply doesn't have any tits or a vagina. And doesn't pretend to, from day one.
But first things first: There are very, very many men who believe this. Who truly believe, with all their heart, that they cannot be happy without a woman. And when you look at men's behavior and what they do in life, it becomes obvious, that it's not just a few men who believe this, but a vast majority of men. And they don't just believe it, they also act according to it. They believe it so strongly, that many, or even most of them sacrifice a lot, or even everything for it.
What's really unfortunate about this are two things: One, men often don't realize, just what it is that they are sacrificing for it. It has become or seems so 'natural' for them and our society that men, all men do this, and must do this, that nobody takes count. It's just what's expected and what a man is supposed to do, right? And two, that they damn well might be happy, or even happier, if they would choose otherwise.
Many men, or even most men, at some point in life, or even continually, sacrifice their morals, their principals and some, sometimes even their lives. Just to be with a woman and to have a woman of their own. Because they believe so strongly, exactly that which the man on the radio said. That they cannot be happy without a woman.
If you take evolution into consideration, really, I must admit, it's no wonder men believe this and are like this. Nature, or evolution, literally selected them for millions of years, to believe just exactly that, and nothing else. After all, it was those men (and males) who believed that, who recreated and reproduced, not those who believed otherwise.
But we are not our genes. We can be happy, even if we don't reproduce. Our genes might be immortal if we reproduce, and give us corresponding rewards if we do, but we will die anyway. And maybe we should take that into consideration when we listen to our instincts. Therefore, in this text, I will argue the opposite. I will try to show that a man, any man, does not need a woman to be happy in his life. Naturally, women won't want to hear that, but they have their own text to chew on: "Teaching Women about their Sexuality"
How to be happy as a man without a woman isn't trivial though. That's why I wrote this text and that's why I am trying to realize the idea presented on this webpage in support of this with the Living Among Horses project. But before we dive into the details and mechanics of how to be happy as a man without a woman, and I do mean as a heterosexual man, not as a homosexual, we need to take a closer look at why this might even be important in the first place.
[^ Back to top ^]
A Kingdom for Women
If being or living with a woman is the most important thing for a man, and, as said, this is the most important thing for very many men, or even a vast majority of men, then this has dire consequences. Consequences, not just for men themselves, but for all of society and therefore for all humans, including women. Consequences which many people, not just men, but women also, are not aware of.
Have you ever heard the saying, "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely."? Well, there is truth in it when it comes to human beings. And, what men who want to have a woman in their life above all else don't realize, women, which they perceive as angles and holy beings, really, just like they, are just mere human beings. Despite their better and sexy looks and their often much more pleasant behavior, under the hood, they have exactly the same set of mistakes, interests and egoisms. They might look better, more elegant, move more gracefully and be way better in social interaction and in manipulating others to perceive them as good and as angles, but under the hood, just like men, they are human beings. With all their selfishness, greed for power and lust for control.
So when men say "A Kingdom for A Woman!" and are willing to sacrifice everything, a whole kingdom for women, what does that mean? I mean if it were just one man who acts like that, it could be put off as a folly. He could be judged to be a fruitcake and it wouldn't have any kind of impact or effect on society. But what if every single man acted that way? And what if men and women are not the same after all? What if men who don't act that way really are needed, needed direly, for a sane, mature and functional society? What then? Might we end up in the mess that we are in today?
[^ Back to top ^]
Who watches the "Watchmen"
One of the best comics, at least for adults, that I have ever read is 'Watchmen'. On the surface it's a story about several super heroes, the 'Watchmen' who "watch" society and act, in other words, intervene when they see crime. What's special about this comic is, unlike others, it makes it a subject that these super heroes, despite their super powers, are human beings with all the normal flaws and mistakes of human beings. With the shortcomings, the egoisms, the self-interests and all other flaws that human beings usually come with. A central message of the story thus is: Who watches the Watchmen?
If the watchmen control society and make sure there is no crime in society, then who makes sure the Watchmen don't do any wrong? The Watchmen themselves?
The point is, this is impossible, and the 'Watchmen' comic goes to great lengths and does a good job in showing this.
Why did I bring this up?
We were talking about men and women, and how direly many men, even most or a vast majority of men, need women. And why that might be a problem. Not just for the men in question themselves, but for all of society and the human race.
As I said, while women appear and seem much nicer and better than men, under the hood, they are motivated by the same amount of egoism and self-interest.
Men, because of their ugly outsides, their ruthless behavior and their greater inclination to solve problems with violence instead of deceptive cunning, are subjected to very strong and strict control by society. Society, and by that I mean both women and other men, watch very carefully that men don't do anything wrong. If a man makes even the smallest mistake, it's very likely that that will get him into jail. Men have created laws and the justice system to control each other. To make sure, that no man has an unfair advantage over another man.
But with women, this great justice system of men, all their laws, everything that puts men under very strict control, everything that "watches" men and makes sure everything is just and fair between them, doesn't work. This because all those laws were made for men and to correct men, not women. Although women can be just as egoistic and ruthless and in dire, very dire need of correction, as men, that's just a human condition, all the laws and the justice system which men made, hardly ever apply to women. Or manage to correct or discipline women. All of men's laws and men's and society's justice system fails to correct women and to hold them accountable for their failings and their egoisms at the expense others. Or when is the last time you have seen a woman put behind bars for life or even executed, for destroying another person's life with slander, intrigues, lies, and other, perhaps even more clandestine manipulations? It just doesn't happen. Men's laws and men's justice system, what keeps men in check and corrects them when they do wrong, simply does not apply to women. And women know it and readily exploit it. And that is a problem. And it's getting more of a problem, the more society chooses to turn a blind eye on it. I believe this is the true cause for the burning of witches in the middle ages.
Women really are as different from men as super heroes are from normal people. And the reasons for this are sexual, and in the end, even anatomical and evolutionary. Men must compete, and that very hard, for the most important thing in life: Procreation. Immortality of one's genes. That's what it's all about. Women don't. While almost 100% of all women in human evolution procreated and made their genes immortal, with some work, granted, but not with competition, only 60% of men were able to do this. And they did, almost all, try very, very hard. Of course, this all has to do with the womb. Men must search, and search hard and thus fight hard for a place to put their genes for procreation. Not like it used to be when we were still fish. Women are born with it. This has dire consequences. One of the most striking one perhaps is, that men establish hierarchies, and must establish hierarchies to determine who gets the right to procreate, and who doesn't. And this too, has dire consequences:
Honesty is a direct function of, and created by honor. And honor is a direct function of, and created by hierarchy. Without a hierarchy, there is no sense or purpose in honor. And without honor, there is no sense or purpose in honesty. It's just stupid. Honesty is made, to give honor. And honor is made, to go up in hierarchy. And hierarchy is made, among males, to be able to procreate and get, what all females are given for free at birth: The right to make one's genes immortal, to procreate.
This is fundamental, because, since girls and women don't have to compete for procreation, they are not interested in hierarchies. This becomes clearly evident from any behavioral study, even of small children playing. And because girls and women are not interested in hierarchies, consequently, they have no purpose for, or understanding of honor. To them, it's utterly ridiculous. They don't have it, they don't need it, they don't understand it, and it doesn't apply to them. They are simply outside of it, and if it pleases you, above. And because girls and women have no use or interest in honor, consequently and naturally, they also have no use or interest in honesty. At least not if it doesn't immediately benefit them directly and in the moment. Oh, they want their men to be honest, but they have no motivation or purpose of their own to be honest themselves. For what? To gain honor? To go up in hierarchy? To finally find a woman to have sex and children with? Because honesty is created by honor, and honor by hierarchies and hierarchies by hard competition for the chance to procreate, girls and women just don't have it.
Luckily for us all, women also don't have testosterone and male brains, or not much of it on average, and thus are much less inclined to see only physical violence as the only solution to a problem. Still, the situation is far from perfect, because with modern civilization, the ability for physical violence to do great harm and injustice onto other is less and less important and more and more a thing of the past. Manipulation, slander, deceit and intrigues, all the things which women are far better than any man, become all the more important means and weapons in a society which is abandoning physical violence. Suddenly, and the first time in (human) evolution, having testosterone is no longer a - or the only qualification, for the necessity of being controlled.
This is where the great 'Watchmen' story comes in. Much like women in our current society, the Watchmen in the comic stand above society and its laws. While the Watchmen in the comic claim to be good and to do only good as you would expect from super heroes, just like from women, nobody controls them. Just like women. So who watches the Watchmen? If men's laws fail to correct or even bring to public attention women's failings and errors, then who or what watches women? Who controls or corrects them, when they are in need of control or correction? Who watches the Watchmen?
[^ Back to top ^]
Male Independence: Why it is important
Male independence: Why is it necessary?
Men have a gender-specific characteristic that makes them control each other. Perhaps it is born out of sexual envy, that no man wants another man to have an unfair advantage in the race for procreation, for the immortal life of one's genes, and thus for women. It is this characteristic which made men create laws and the justice system. To control each other. To make sure, no man was unfair or had an unfair advantage.
Women don't have this characteristic. They don't need it. Unlike men, they don't seek to control each other, they don't try to make sure that none has an unfair advantage. Unlike men, when it comes to procreation, to the immortal life of one's genes, being a women, per se, is an unfair advantage. So unlike men, women being women, and thus already unfairly advantaged, don't seek to control over other women to make sure they don't have an unfair advantage. Being woman, as is, is defined by having an unfair advantage when it comes to procreation. The consequence of this is, if other women do bad things, women might talk bad about them, if that, but they will not seek to stop them and correct them, to discipline them. Not like men, and women, do with men.
Who watches the Watchmen?
This is why it is direly important, not from a psychological point of view, that too, but from society's point of view, that men are independent of women. At least some men must be independent of women sometimes, if anyone ever wants to correct them when they think they can do whatever pleases them, even at the expense of others.
This is why independence from women, for men, is so direly important. Not just for men themselves, and for their ego, their self-esteem and for their psychological well-being, that too, but in a much greater sense, for all of society. Women are the majority sex of almost any society. And if the majority of a society has no bonds and no limits, and feels, truly feels it can do whatever it wants, without risking any kind of punishment or retaliation, even at the expense of others, and that is the case with very many women and their specific kinds of crimes and failings, then that is a problem. As with any kind of human being who feels he or she is totally outside any kind of control. A problem for all of society. Even if these failings might not be typical male failings, such as physical violence, but other, typical female failings. And those do exist, just as numerous as men's, even if we cannot see them.
So if women believe they can do whatever they please, then who's fault is that? Is it women's fault? Is it women's fault alone? If a blind man walks into clear and present danger and a seeing man sees that and doesn't intervene, who's fault is that? Is it the blind man's fault? His fault alone?
I have met and encountered many, very many women who believed just that. Who very obviously and shockingly clearly believe that they can lie, cheat, intrigue, slander other people and ruthlessly harm them and their lives, in any which way they please, just because it happens to benefit them in some way at that particular time, - just as long as they don't use any kind of physical violence or any other kind of provable, seemingly male behavior. So if there are a lot of women like that in western societies these days, then who's fault is that?
Or to put it in other words, who must fix it? Who even has the capabilities to try and fix it? Who must repair this? The blind man himself? Who must put this back into order? Women themselves?
Again: Who watches the Watchmen?
Men cannot take over this direly important role, important also for women themselves and for all of society, when they are so heavily dependent of and on women for all their needs. Not just their sexual needs, but also their emotional needs. And this they are and they do, in a very strong manner. To a very severe, a perverted extent.
Only someone who is completely independent, or at least who can temporarily assume a mentally completely independent position, can take on and exercise a disciplining role, a 'fatherly' correcting role. A person who constantly sexually lust after and seeks the bodies of women, or is emotionally completely dependent on women, and therefore their goodwill, and thereby severely makes him- or herself dependent of or on them, constantly adjusts and aligns his or her deeds and actions to the goodwill of women. And this severely compromises and corrupts his or her disciplining abilities, conflicts his or her interests and justice.
Men cannot watch over women and set boundaries for women, as they do, very strongly so, for other men, when they are dependent on women, or in other words, when they are not independent of them. Men who sexually lust after women, or even just require women emotionally, need to be with them like children, make themselves dependent of or on them. They are not independent of them and thus are not the right men, are not fit for the job, to control or correct women when they fail. And that happens and unfortunately, this applies to all men. Or to a vast majority of men. Just like the man in the radio interview at the beginning of this text.
[^ Back to top ^]
How to Break the Male Dependence on Women
Now that we've seen how important it is for men to be independent of women, not just for men themselves and their psychological well-being, we haven't even touched upon that and I leave it to the reader, to make up his or her own mind about the importance of that (and he or she should), but for all of society, we can start to think about how to attain and reach that goal. How can men become independent of women? How can men's dependence of women be broken? Or more generally, male dependence of females? - Without breaking the man or the male thereby. Naturally.
Well, that's the point. This is where the Living Among Horses project is a school which can teach that like no other school ever could. The Living Among Horses project, if it is or were realized, is or would be a school of wisdom, which can or could teach better than any other institution or effort, for men to learn independence of women. Including men's strongest dependence on women, their sexuality and their sexual one.
Why is this the case?
Because in the Living Among Horses project, men would live completely without women and, what's more, they would also have the great example, of how other, much more natural beings than they, handle a situation like that: Horses.
In the Living Among Horses project, men can - or could learn, that they don't need women. They could learn, that they do not depend on having sex with women, or on any other aspect of women, in order to be happy. They can, or could learn that a natural male sexual drive, even when not satisfied with a woman, does not have to be a source of unhappiness. They can or could learn, that in order to be happy, a natural male sexual drive does not even have to be satisfied at all. At least certainly not necessarily with women. They could learn, that while the male sexual drive certainly is one of the strongest drives, or perhaps even the strongest drive of all, that perhaps, it still isn't the most important one that needs to be satisfied in order to be happy. That although they might be weaker and not as imposing and clear as their sexual drive, there might be other needs and instincts, non-sexual ones, which might play a far more substantial role in happiness. And, and that's essential, that these needs don't need women to be satisfied.
Men could learn that trusting friendships and close, even physically intimate relationships with other males, even if they occur with another species and involve no kind of sexual satisfaction or release at all, can be a much more profound and stable source of happiness, than excessive dependence of or on women. In other words, in the Living Among Horses project, men can or could learn how to be nothing less than "true men". Because a man who is dependent of a woman, and that applies to almost all men, especially of today's western societies, is not a real man. No matter if that woman is his mother, his wife, his boss, his employee, his friend or partner, or a whore who he abuses.
For generations and for centuries men bought into the lie and false belief of the "lone wolf". The lone ranger hero. Men always knew that independence of women was direly important, even if they didn't know why. Unfortunately, for centuries, men believed that this means, that to be a real man, they must not only be independent of women, but independent of anyone and everyone. Of any and all other living beings. After all, being close friends with anything but a woman just isn't natural and thus doesn't seem manly, right? In other words, only a lone wolf would meet the definition or ideal of a "real man".
Of course, this is impossible for a social being, such as a human being. And that includes men. It is a lie. Just as it is a lie for social beings such has horses or wolves who live in herds and packs. Just as it is for stallions who are locked in bared-up single detention box-stalls because of it.
Just because it is direly important that men are and can be independent of women, does not mean they are or must be solitary. Or even should try. - Solitary beings or animals, which don't need or depend on others. The Living Among Horses project seeks to correct this misconception. They are not and they do. Perhaps just not on women. Why, that isn't trivial to understand, hence the need for a proper school, or an institution like the Living Among Horses project. And, before you think this is some kind of homosexual endeavor, that's the point, this is independent of sexual orientation. In fact, it applies to heterosexual men, and their huge sexual dependence on women, among others, just as much, or even more so, than to homosexual men. The key term is, after all: Independence.
What this all boils down to are two things: Male independence of women, and, as a consequence of that, male maturity. Both things are direly missing and absent in today's men.
[^ Back to top ^]