Reddit reviews Androphilia

You'll occasionally see posts here that I think are very clear-cut cases of internalized homophobia. Gay people wishing they could become straight, inquiring about how effective "conversion therapy" is, etc. They are gay men who hate themselves because they know they're attracted to men; either they air those grievances, or they go into deep deep denial about their sexuality.

I think the sentiments you describe are similar, but distinct from "internalized homophobia". Let's take the example of a gay person not liking fems (or whatever other term you listed above, they're all synonymous). This sentiment is not a disgust of yourself because you're literally gay, but a disgust of sharing a label (gay) with certain other people (fems), because you feel as if those other people (fems) are associating attributes you don't like or don't feel you embody (bitchiness, neuroticism, femininity, annoyance, flamboyance, rudeness, etc.) with the label that you share (gay). It's a fear of other people associating you with the attributes you don't like.

In 2006, a book written by a gay guy named Jack Donovan was released called: "Androphilia: Rejecting the Gay Identity. Reclaiming Masculinity.", and the tagline itself reflects this sentiment (I haven't read the book, nor do I plan on doing so). Here is a quote from the back cover of the book:

>Gay is a subculture, a slur, a set of gestures, a slang, a look, a posture, a parade, a rainbow flag, a film genre, a taste in music, a hairstyle, a marketing demographic, a bumper sticker, a political agenda and philosophical viewpoint. Gay is a pre-packaged, superficial persona–a lifestyle. It’s a sexual identity that has almost nothing to do with sexuality. Androphilia is a rejection of the overloaded gay identity and a return to a discussion of homosexuality in terms of desire. Homosexual men have been paradoxically cast as the enemies of masculinity–slaves to the feminist pipe dream of a “gender-neutral” (read: anti-male, pro-female) world.

So... there you have it. In my opinion, I would not consider Jack Donovan to be "internally homophobic". He very much embraces the idea of having sex with men, and I don't think he hates himself. If anything, Jack Donovan is pretty much a plain old, regular, run-of-the-mill homophobe. His is the same attitude that people like Mike Pence and the Westboro Baptist Church have of gay people, except that those two have the additional hangup of "gay sex is icky".

Now, I'm not saying that if you (general you) find fems annoying, then you are automatically homophobic. But if the reason you don't like them is that you fear that their annoying behavior will reflect badly on you because you're also gay, then it's getting a bit into the homophobic territory, at least a hatred of the label "gay". And I don't think you have "internalized" homophobia at all. That should be reserved for gay people who actually hate their gay selves or completely suppress/hide/deny their gay selves.

This is an argument presented in the book androphilia. I don't really endorce this idea, but I'll give the argument.

Marriage is about the sexual reproduction of children. When the state first started having a marriage registry, it was to ensure women would have property to live off of in case of a divorce. This was because women could not work, and women were better at taking care of children than men. 2 men cannot physically reproduce, and they aren't obligated to take care of their adopted children in the same way. Even if they could, the homosexuals could work themselves. Therefore, we shouldn't have the state recognize gay marriages.

Not only that, but gay marriage promotes the idea that gay men are all effeminate, so it alienates a lot of gay men. If men are obsessed with a marriage ceremony, they're acting like women. If it is such a big deal, it makes gay men look feminine.

Androphilia?

Oh my favorite is Jack Donovan's Androphilia it is a must read! I read it when I first came out and it was amazing.

I'm not saying it invalidates his work, I just thought it was worth mentioning.

Jack Donovan's Homosexual book:

>Androphilia is a book written by a homosexual for homosexuals who feel isolated from the gay world.

.

>Although homosexual, the author attacks the "gay movement" frontally. He admits, that homosexuality is a part of his personality - with a pronounciaton of "part", instead the "gay movement" makes an ideology of it, including feminism, victimism and political leftism. But why should a man who loves men, so the author, precisely admit an anti-male ideology? The author rejects the term "gay" for himself and replaces it by "androphile", thus emphazising his male qualities.


https://www.amazon.com/Androphilia-Jack-Donovan/dp/0985452315/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492951699&sr=8-1&keywords=Androphilia


>Jack Donovan’s version of male supremacy is radically different from that. He’s a former Satanist, not a Christian, and he doesn’t anchor his ideas in the Bible, but rather in evolutionary psychology — an approach that’s probably meaningless, if not satanic, to Adam and Eve creationists. He doesn’t focus on the family, but on championing a kind of male comradeship free of female constraints. This comradeship allows room for sexual relations between men, and Donovan is himself openly homosexual, which would of course be taboo in the Christian right.

.

>Donovan advocates “androphilia,” by which he means love or sex between masculine men. He doesn’t call himself gay, rejects gay culture as effeminate, and justifies homophobia as a defense of masculinity rooted in the male gang’s collective survival needs. This might sound like self-hatred, but Donovan isn’t hiding or apologizing for his own sexuality; he’s defining it in a way that’s radically at odds with prevailing LGBT politics. His version of homosexuality is a consummation of the priority that men in his ideal gang place on each other. As he has commented, “When you get right down to it, when it comes to sex, homos are just men without women getting in the way.”

.

>White nationalist intellectual forums such as Richard Spencer’s National Policy Institute and Greg Johnson’s Counter-Currents have given Donovan a forum, and Counter-Currents has also published homosexual white nationalist James O’Meara. Even in Klan and Nazi skinhead circles, where Donovan’s homosexuality is often vilified, AFN notes that “more often than not…there is tacit approval of his inclusion and even a sort of backhanded support.”

.

>Donovan is homosexual, & not anti-homosexual. He neither advertises nor hides his homosexuality, nor does he encourage the punishment of homosexual acts in others. This is significant progress if/as this is coming from a homosexual on the “far right!”

.

>Donovan's particular homosexual experiences color his unfamiliar choice of words and ideas.


http://threewayfight.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/jack-donovan-on-men-masculine-tribalism.html

>Simply put, Jack doesn’t like faggots, as he calls them. No, not at all. They seem to offend every fiber in his uber-manly being. It is an especially unusual position, in my opinion, considering that Jack is homosexual.

.

>ss a homosexual male living in a culture that unfortunately often does not regard him as a man.

https://www.avoiceformen.com/miscellaneous/what-the-fuck-is-wrong-with-jack-donovan/

.

>Re: Jack's sexuality, every time I hear someone complain about how a homo (Jack hates it when people describe him as "gay," even wrote a whole book denouncing gay culture) is incapable of understanding masculinity, I want to laugh at them. I'm friends with Jack in real life; he's a solid, reliable guy. Not one of his detractors would have the balls to impugn his masculinity to his face.

>Dismissing someone's arguments because of some unrelated aspect of their persona is bitch behavior. It's what feminists and women do. It has no place among men.

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-15208-post-464704.html

Less bizarrely and safer for work is this.

Have you read Androphilia by Jack Donovan?