This passage is taken from Andy Nowicki's recently-published Ruminations of a Low-Status Male, Volume 3: On Being Unwanted, now available on Kindle and in paperback
From the very start, the low-status male’s sex drive is a
source of endless misfortune, even of calamity. Despite this indisputable fact,
he still adheres to the demands of his libido and husbands it quite
unthriftily, in a particularly egregious instance of “Stockholm syndrome.” He
cannot fathom the notion of denying himself sex, even though, should he level
with himself for a mere moment, he would be forced to admit that his concupiscence
(or “thirst,” in today’s parlance) is his downfall.
For the low-status male, expressions of sexuality inevitably manifest to the world as “creepiness.” From the start, he finds himself wanting the very thing which it is considered absurd for him to have, much less to want.
He is then faced with a stark decision:
(1) to remain true to who he is, low-status and all,
or
(2) to seek
to obliterate the integrity of his being for the sake of gaining status, in
order that he might entertain some hope of satiating his (conditioned) desires.
Most low-status men, to be sure, choose the latter route
almost automatically, like trained Pavlovian hounds of horniness. But it isn’t
just desire for sex that animates them; perhaps even more motivating is the
desperation to escape being belittled and ostracized as losers. The notion of
being viewed as sexually appealing obviously has far greater egoic allure than
the notion of persisting in his dalit-dom,
and since the way to achieve appeal is through gaining status, one naturally
enough opts to do what one can to rise through the ranks to improve one’s lot,
whatever such a course of action might require.
I have heard men admit as much, without even a trace of
shame, even going so far as to proclaim their allegiance to status over
principle as a badge of honor.
One guy casually remarked that he used to play
“Dungeons and Dragons” with his nerdy friends as a kid, but he “wisely” chose
to give all of that up—as well as giving up his nerdy friends—when he
realized that he wanted girls to like him.
 |
| "No more D n D for me! I wanna be cool, now..." |
He then learned to play guitar and
behave more “aloofly,” instead of being so dorkily cheerful and eager all the
time. Another spoke of how he stopped playing basketball with his buddies and
took up golf instead, out of an awareness that it “better suited” the image he
was attempting to cultivate as an “upwardly-mobile” man. Others have embraced
styles of dress, or genres of music, or manners of speaking, which are
completely foreign to their temperaments, out of a bid for greater social
acceptance and acclaim.
Stories like these are, in fact, legion; they occur so
commonly that we almost forget their significance. What they represent,
however, could be summed up as an inversion of a familiar adage:
This question is asked in a “rhetorical” manner, yet many
behave as if it were a query for which a legitimate answer—besides a flat “It doesn’t profit a man”—could actually be
entertained. An answer I have heard runs something like this:
“You silly fool, with your outmoded notions of ‘integrity,” ‘honor,’ and ‘authenticity’… What do you have against self-improvement? If a man finds himself a loser, relegated to the bottom of the (proverbial) human food chain, should he not try to better his lot? If that means taking a long, hard look at himself and altering—yes, altering—his identity, on a basic level… the better to enhance his long-term prospects of living an enjoyable and worthwhile life, then how does your silly, moralistic argument invoking ‘integrity,’ ‘honor,’ or ‘authenticity’ even hold sway? None of us is really anything at our core… we are blank slates, and we ultimately choose what we write across our hearts… so if we have “loser” scrawled upon our being, why not whip out an eraser, and compose a more flattering epithet for ourselves? After all, if the foundation of a house is rotten, should it not be torn down, and afterwards remodeled with a more winsome and alluring structure?”
The best way to respond to such sophistry is ridicule. The truth
is that we all are something fundamental at our core; we are not mere masks or
costumes flung over spiritless mannequins. We all called to self-preservation,
not merely of body (to the extent that such a task is possible), but also, and
more importantly, of mind.
 |
| The esoteric meaning of the teen sex comedy... |
This is why the sensitive spirit experiences a
twinge of conscience when he betrays himself; it is why he suffers a nasty
inner lash whenever he finds himself behaving in a manner unworthy of the truth
he is called to defend. He is keenly aware that he is something other than a
blank slate bearing scribblings that can easily be deleted and amended; rather,
he is a man, created with certain
attributes which are absolutely and positively his, and that being the best man he can be also means being true to
himself in the best possible way.
Thus he cannot opt out of the struggle for authenticity so
blithely, without serious consequences forthcoming. Because in fighting to be
authentic, he isn’t just taking a stand for his own freedom to “be himself”;
more crucially, he is taking a stand for truth, and against deceit. The
struggle, that is, involves himself, but also something far bigger than just
himself.; it is not just a parlor game of semantic one-upsmanship, nor is it
merely grounded in some naïve, misguided but ultimately ego-based idealism.
In fact, it encompasses everything, both big and small; it
is but one theater in a war whose battleground is global in scope and
monumental in significance.
Andy Nowicki, assistant editor of Alternative Right, is the author of eight books, including Under the Nihil, The Columbine Pilgrim, Considering Suicide, and Beauty and the Least. Visit his Soundcloud page and his YouTube channel. His author page is Alt Right Novelist.
