I was amused but not amazed at the treatise on masculinity written against me by Ms. Tegan Beechey on Oct. 14, where she perfectly demonstrates Norman Mailer’s dictum on the hallmark bad political writing: “It’s impossible to disagree with the author.” Presumably, my philippic on a culture stacked against young males of all races is prima facie proof that I must be a misogynist member of a patriarchal society that enables rape culture. In a similar vein, I, a firm believer in Jungian synchronicity, found it most appropriate and unintentionally hilarious that the front page of The Kent Stater that day featured an article on teaching the men of Kent State male self-awareness. (“Hi, I’m Robert and I’m a misogynist, but I’m getting over it.”) 

Concerning the question of violence, which makes Ms. Beechy boil in rage, I neither promote violence nor disparage it. I find it necessary in appropriate situations. As I have often pointed out in the pages of this very newspaper, the violence of the Palestinians is necessary to cast off colonial oppression. The violence of the Israelis is contemptible precisely because it is unnecessary; rather, it is the violence of the bully boy.  

The reason many of us on the Manosphere admire gay men who write on male aggression, from Chuck Palahniuk (“Fight Club”) to Jack Donovan (“The Way of Men”) is their insistence that masculinity is not a social construct but a biological product that must be preserved. This goes for female violence as well. Since I’ve already recommended “Fight Club” to Ms. Paniaga let me take this opportunity to urge Ms. Beechey to watch Abel Ferrara’s classic film, “Ms. 45.” Don’t talk the language of postmodernism with a potential rapist—acquaint his face with the pavement!

Dr. Julio Cesar Pino