Men Used to Die Before They Worried About Getting a Wife
Men in the modern day, post-war, have been sold this terrible lie that not only are they all entitled to a wife, but that they inevitably will fall into having a wife by some kind of happenstance. This is an absolute falsehood.
"Most men in history were married." No, most men in history died before they became men. Male infants die more often than female infants, and male children are more sensitive to disease. Adolescent men and boys cull themselves through risk-taking, ambition, and violence. Boys who survived this slaughter and became men were not only more likely to be married because there was less competition, but also because marriable traits (health, composure, gentleness or aggression, etc.) were positively selected for.
Men in the past had more of a chance at marriage because the ones who never would've gotten any play anyway never even got the chance to be upset about their lack of chances. It's not because the world was more traditional; the world was more dangerous.
Today, thanks to advances in medicine, infants rarely die in the Western and developed world. Praise be to God. It's also hardly socially acceptable to send children out without supervision. Even roughly supervised camping trips where things are likely to go wrong are discouraged. Mothers direct the social lives of their sons, ensuring they don't fall into the wrong crowd and die by gang or interpersonal violence.
These are not bad things. These are good things. I am against infant boys dying of disease, I am against 7th graders dying in horrific accidents, and I am certainly against 20-year-olds dying in war and through gang violence. It's astonishing that I feel I need to offer this disclaimer.
This is just a statistical reality.
A world where boys are not culled is a world where there are more men, and that is a world where men need to come to terms with an unfortunate reality: many of them will never marry.
This does not mean you, gentlemen reader, but you must understand that it could mean you. A wife is not a prize for existing-- they used to be a prize for surviving the disease of infancy, the accidents of puberty, and the danger and warfare of adolescence. When antibiotics and concerned mommies eliminate these factors, not only are unmarriable men left alive to experience this new world, but men who would be otherwise improved by surviving these factors are left unsharpened.
Men who have been saved from the reaping of their sex must work to sharpen themselves in the way they would've been sharpened naturally. This does not mean, as some authors have written, that men need to be chiseled slabs of man-meat (or twink-meat, as those authors seem to prefer), but it does mean they need to hone the core characteristics of survivability: intelligence (or if you can't, then general know-how), strength (any kind; women's preferences are wide and varied), jaw alignment, balance/agility, conflict-resolution of some kind, and disease resistance.
There are, thankfully, few men who have totally lost the genetic lottery. Most men can min/max whatever they've been given. For your study, I'll describe three of the most handsome men I know (still very low behind my fiancé).
He has a well-dressed and lithe body, unstyled yet always lovely blonde hair, high cheekbones, and a great smile. He's charming and disarmingly funny. He's kind and shy, which is a stark contrast to the company he keeps. He's brilliant and organized. He's of English and German descent.
I think I've seen him eat one piece of real food in the whole time I've known him-- the rest of the time, I think he exclusively eats Diet Coke and vanilla cake. Despite this intake as a college student, his jaw belies a childhood of being forced to eat his vegetables. Either that, or he has genetics so good they couldn't be stopped. Both are attractive traits.
He can't throw you across a room or lift rocks into the air, but he is exhausted by nothing. If he put effort in, I bet he'd be a fantastic runner or swimmer. I will try to convince him to take up swordplay, which would be appropriately aristocratic for his personality.
He will manage a woman's life like he manages his own, and his method of conflict resolution is purely intellectual. It would be miles beneath him to throw a punch.
Because of his less-than-stellar nutrition, he is probably low in disease resistance, but none of his physical form shows this. But perhaps down the line, it will. So watch out.
He's Semitic (Yes, I am aware the actual Xerxes of Persia is not Semitic)-- from a Lebanese crime family. He's dark featured with a striking nose, dark and rough eyebrows, and has greasy shoulder-length hair, ran through with waves. He's bearded, because, of course, every "Xerxes" must be. He's got a Mediterranean body type, and by that I mean moderately muscled with some amount of flesh. Of course, you must have flesh if you sit around drinking Arak and eating hummus all day. He has sharp teeth. His height is moderate, as are most of his other features.
What is immoderate about him is his personality and his arresting gaze. His eyes go from narrow and piercing to wide and entrancing in less than a second, and he always looks interested in what you're saying; his face is reactive. He, like The Thin White Duke, is funny and kind. I remember a moment where he pulled me out of a group where I was being talked about disparagingly, and comforted me about it. He does very good impressions and is a fantastic storyteller.
He's ambitious and well-connected. He has an anger problem and is not above coming to blows over a serious matter, especially one involving the women in his life. The only people who should feel totally "safe" around him are women and children. He's very comfortable with his masculinity and thus his femininity.
He's athletic enough to be alright at any sport he'd need to play to impress someone in a business or academic context. His vice is laziness and risk-taking. If he were unlucky or less well-formed, he probably would've been one of the few men to be culled as adolescents.
He's 6'6, but in my brain, he's 7 feet tall. He's built like a refrigerator, or like the side of a mountain, or some Chinese money-wasting statue, or something equally hulking. He's a power lifter and played hockey in high school. He's a Haitian and Dominican Bantu with a Cheshire smile that reminds me of the Totoro spirit from Studio Ghibli. Let's say he's well-marbled or "strong man" in his body composition. He could throw a woman across a room, and given what I know about his romantic life, probably has.
He's a great writer; pedantic, obstinate, contrarian, and creative; and one of the most politically well-informed people I know, both in terms of historical and contemporary politics. He's steady and tolerant, and a refreshingly straight shooter. He, like Xerxes and The Thin White Duke, is hilarious, somehow cracking offensive jokes in a way that makes everyone feel included.
The Warlord is immoderate in all things: in his athleticism, in his diet, in his attitudes, and in his opinions. Admittedly, I don't know his propensity to anger in the least, but I assume it's equally immoderate in the sense that it's like a switch that goes on and off. I'm probably lucky not to be acquainted with it. This Warlord's personal vice is Atheism, which he should get around to fixing, but this is not necessarily a vice of his archetype.
None of these men are the golden sun god or euro-tribesman that exist in the imagination of "Ancestral," or "Primitive," or "Trad" online posters. The Thin White Duke, Xerxes, and The Warlord are not pretending to be something they aren't. They aren't trying to convince the world or, worse, themselves, that they're a living copy of some mythic beast. Whether they know it or not (The Warlord certainly knows), they are embracing their genetic destiny.
A man in his natural environment (anthropologically speaking) will not necessarily look just like one image of a "peak-performance" man in Greek sculpture (none of whom were based on real men-- they were all fantastical idealizations). Rather, he will look like a full expression of his genes, which are influenced by the environment of his ancestors thousands of years ago. There is no reason a Nord should look like an Indian, nor an Ethiopian like a Southern Italian. These genes are not the same-- not built for the same environments or societies-- and none of them should try to rend themselves to fit the genetic code of the other.
