Dangerous Men Make for the Best Men

posted by Brandon Morse at RedState 

When is a man truly useless? 

If I were to line up 100 people I'd probably get 100 answers, but for me, I think it's when a man abandons his primary purpose as a male, and that's to provide and protect. 

To be clear, there are a lot of men out there who probably couldn't hold themselves in a fight or couldn't lift anything heavier than a golden retriever, however a man's lack of strength and/or combat ability doesn't mean he won't protect. You can be a street fighter with arms the size of truck tires, and you're still going to lose to a guy with spaghetti noodle arms, bad eyesight, and a 9mm SIG Sauer. 

The will to fight and protect just has to be there. 

No one understands this better than the state. A government that wants more power is going to see to it that the public becomes way less dangerous first, and in order to do that it has to get the population to willingly give over its own power. In the United States, this often takes the form of convincing you to willingly act against your own rights, especially your First and Second Amendment rights. 

However, what often doesn't get talked about is the attack on men's will to protect and defend. 

If there's one thing the government fears, it's men willing to fight. 

That's not to say fighting women aren't a problem either, but women tend to fight differently than men do. Women fight better with words, and are excellent at pushing for change within civilized systems. This is one of the reasons why Democrats are so gynocentric in their mentality. Women are highly effective social engineers. You'll find that many of the most effective groups fighting culture rot today are headed up by women. There's a reason Moms for Liberty was placed on a terrorist list by leftists. They're effective. 

But social engineering has its limits, and that's where men come in. If diplomacy fails, we resort to — as Padmé Amidala calls it — "aggressive negotiations." Triggers are going to have to get pulled to restore the peace and reestablish order. It's here that men shine, and it's here that authoritarians really start to sweat. If the men of the United States of America were truly motivated to, they could forcefully remove those in power, throw down corrupt leaders, and reestablish the United States with an updated and more airtight constitution in a matter of days. There's nothing the state could really do about it. 

Even when not in situations where violence is needed, men are excellent leaders and decision makers. They're solution-oriented and effective at implementing these solutions, even in the midst of pushback. 

So the key to control is to kick that will to fight out of men, and to do that, you have to have a multi-front assault on masculinity and the inherent drives of men. It's something that has to be done over a long period of time, and if you look at our current situation in terms of the state of masculinity, you'll see this very plan has been in motion for a while. 

There are a lot of useless men walking around. I can remember watching a Gen Z male discuss how many Gen Z men wouldn't be soldiers because they're mentally ill, and how guns are tacky, and how if the draft did happen for WW3, most Gen Z males would just not go. 

To be clear, I hardly think he speaks for all Gen Z males, and at this point, I doubt it will be them getting called up for service. However, this sentiment isn't necessarily rare, either. The thing is, while generational rivalries are fun to talk about (and I think some of you openly obsess over), I don't necessarily blame these young males. 

Our society, including our schools, have done a lot to both intentionally and unintentionally remove the fighting spirit and masculinity of men. Boys are treated like "defective girls" as psychologist Michael Thompson put it. Their natural energy and rambunctiousness is suppressed with rules and even drugs. Their preoccupation with action-based play, mock battles, and games that center on good vs. evil have become punishable offenses. 

They tell young men that their masculinity is evil, and needs to be reduced if not eliminated entirely. It's "toxic," and needs to be reimagined to be softer, passive... and quiet. In media, the men are no loner displayed as strong, they're not put into leadership roles, and if they are, then there's always a female counterpart who is always better in every way that counts. Stars even go so far as to display themselves in women's clothing, showing that masculinity is just a social construct and men should embrace this new softer side of themselves by acting like women. 

It's no mistake that some of the most high-profile people in the last few years are men who identity as women or, at the very least, have separated themselves from masculinity entirely. 

Then we wonder why so many males, like the Gen Z would-be draft dodger above, exist. They had the masculinity beaten out of them by what amounts to emotional and mental abuse that society said they deserved because of how they were born. 

And sadly, I can't say this is just a product of leftist mainstream social engineering. There are plenty of men out trying to raise soft boys because they were brought up the same way, because society pressured their parents into a "modern" way of parenting. Go on TikTok right now, and you'll see endless videos about soft parenting that convince mothers and even fathers that doing it any other way is "damaging" to your child, effectively scaring parents into raising self-absorbed cowards. They don't mean to, that's not their intent, but these parents are feeling societal pressures that many parents throughout the ages have had to deal with in some form or another. 

Of course, then there's the way society comes down on masculinity in social situations. Commercials like the Gillette "We Believe" ad painted the very nature of men as ridiculous and awful, and while the pushback cost P&G billions, all it did was teach big stage tastemakers not to attack men directly and do it subversively instead. Corporations began promoting "transgender" people, celebrating males becoming females. 

There were also legal punishments for being masculine, and you saw that recently in the form of Daniel Penny, a man who stood up for the innocent and took down a violent criminal, neutralizing him and saving others. Penny was thankfully found innocent in a court of law, but let's not pretend this wasn't an attempt to dissuade onlooking men from being a hero when the time came. 

Carl Jackson brought up this very point in a recent program where he said, "if you abolish chivalry, you increase the nanny state." He brings up the fact that the left wants me to "tuck their testicles" and notes, as I have, that they've been "largely successful." 

This can't continue. Society needs men. It needs masculinity. 

Thankfully, men stepped up and voted in droves this election season to return masculinity to many parts of our government. The election of Donald Trump was, as I've said in a video recently, masculinity's revenge on a society that had attacked and abused it too much. 

But this isn't enough. 

We have to start celebrating masculinity. We have to start encouraging boys to be boys. We have to make men dangerous again. 

Because a free, stable society cannot exist if dangerous men aren't there to protect and maintain it. There is no civilization if men aren't willing to fight for it. There is no order if dangerous men aren't willing to establish it.