What makes a man a real man

Traits of a real man or What makes a man a man. Plenty of advice in AskMen or the Art of Maniliness, but irrespective of this, there are definite traits that define masculinity.

Does men’s masculinity have to be earned and continually proven or is it simply a point reached where men don’t feel weird holding their GF’s or wife’s purse.

Huge cock, over 8 inches. That’s a must. Absence of that? Not a man.

Beats his wife. Wait, he has no wife. He beats women he sleeps with – he is a women sleeper, not a husband.

Beats his women sleepies three times a day, must show who’s a man who’s a woman. Not beating them? Becomes the same thing as women. Worse, women end up beating him.

Does not give a shit about anything. Like, about anything. Not even philosophy.

Makes babies all around the world. Not a father. Leaves that job to women. He’s too much of a man to be a father. Fathers are wimps.

Everything he does, he does for women. Doing something for its own sake? That’s for wimps.

Laughs at conquerors for doing too much work. Alexander the Wimp, he calls him.

Has fun. Lots of fun. Never lacking fun.

Ejaculates several times a day, target: random hot pussy from the streets.

Only 10’s, everything below makes him a woman.

Posts on philosophy forums, never discussing philosophy.

Always speaks loudly, must show who’s the threat.

Likes to fight, in bars, unprovoked, must show who the real alpha is.

Lives a healthy lifestyle, mostly in a gym.

Nice to women before he fucks them, rude to them afterwards.

….don’t feel weird holding their GF’s or wife’s purse?

If by purse you mean vagina, then yes.

No. I mean handbag, wallet, purse.

No need to hold it, just let the girl drop it on the ground. Trust me, it won’t go anywhere, even if you spend the entire night fucking in the public.

From your response, men can easily lose their sense of masculinity, simply it seems, when asked to hold the GF’s handbag and when your masculinity is challenged, you responded by the need to restore it,

Which seems to say, masculinity is tenuous at the very least.

If he’s a real man, she won’t ask him to hold her purse, she’ll simply drop it on the ground and forget about it. If she asks him, he’s a wimp. If she listens to her, he’s a double-wimp. Nothing is lost here, only revealed. The only thing possibly lost is his belief in his own masculinity.

Did you ever fuck in the public, A Shieldmaiden?

Would you?

A real man can continue a masquarade and still, go on with responsibility, not with standing the odds,
can face the midnight sun of sleeplessness,
of the shallow draw of populism
of the ordeals of the war against triviality,
unafraid to reveal the underside of a mask
live in spite,
and garner manhood,
by measures diffeent, then by those
as those favoured by wispy little starry eyed girls,
whose papa was not the model rock
whence the chip come
but a millstone for whom and by
they must brave
look for mr goodbar, perpetually.

Magnus Anderson wrote:

A common way to restore masculinity is through aggression.

A common way to say “fuck me” is to answer my question in an incomprehensible way. This is because the point of your message is not content, your content is just a placeholder content, the point of your message is that there is a message, a response, to something I’ve said, implying “look, I am interested” but in a manner which allows you to hide your true intentions from others, to defend yourself from accusations by reinterpreting the vague in a different way. I know all of this, no need to play such games with me, but I am not in the mood right now.

So, let’s get back to the topic, okay? What is a real man?

Mag Anderson wrote:

Is your definition above, one of jest or how you perceive a man should be.

Here is another rendition of a real man:


What do you think, Maiden?

There is a very real distinction between a real man and a wimp. This isn’t made-up stuff, it is real and it is set in stone, it’s not something you can redefine to fit your whims. Nonetheless, understanding the distinction is extremely difficult, and if you go out into the real world and observe how people think, you will see that there’s a huge disagreement on what it really means to be “a real man”.

Masculinity is characterized by assertiveness. The masculine type is the type that asserts himself, his values, onto the world around him. He is the dominant type: he shapes the world to fit his needs, he does not shape his needs to fit the world. A real man, then, is a man who asserts himself, whereas a wimp is a passive man, a man who shapes himself to fit other people’s expectations.

Such a distinction, however, is imprecise because it conflates certain forms of fake masculinity, the so-called hyper-masculinity, with real masculinity. In other words, it does not make a clear distinction between what it means to be truly masculine and what it means to be hyper-masculine.

The problem lies in the process of assertion. All genuine assertion starts with one’s needs: before you can assert yourself physically, you must assert your needs into your own brain. In other words, you must be in tune with your needs, you must know yourself, you must be honest with yourself. This isn’t an intellectual process, but a physical, more precisely, an emotional process, a right-brain activity where the individual forces his own “true self” to stay on top of all other “selves”. What the individual does is force his emotions from the background, the unconscious, to the foreground, the conscious. He thereby becomes honest with oneself. Failure to do so leads to denial, where emotions become trapped inside various parts of one’s body. This state is not necessarily painful, it is only painful in the case of emotional rebellion, which is to say, in the case of the “true self” trying to break out free from the biological slavery. This rebellion can be controlled, leading to pleasurable denial, known as hedonism. The individual becomes peaceful and content, no longer desiring domination (or only desiring it as a means, not as an end.)

For real masculinity to be replicated, one must replicate the entire process, starting with asserting one’s needs into one’s brain. If this step is left out, and only the latter parts of the process are replicated, parts such as physical violence, hyper-masculinity, or fake masculinity, is the result. An example is a man trying to be angry without actually being angry (no drive for anger) or an angry man with a drive for sadness he cannot force into his consciousness.

The higher organism has higher number of drives, making it very difficult for it to remain connected to its drives. The pattern of its drives tends to be far too complex, far too irregular, for its brain to stay in tune with them. For example, drives can change very quickly, or be tightly interwoven, thus increasing the possibility of exaggeration.

I have a very precise understanding of the concept of posturing: every disconnection from one’s needs is a form of posturing. This makes my concept of posturing far broader than the popular one. Biological slaves, those who are detached from their needs, are forced into perpetual posturing, no matter what they do, how they change. In fact, biological slaves do not care about becoming biologically (and eventually physically) free, about becoming genuine/honest/who they really are, all they care about is pleasure and pain, how to maximize pleasure (maintain their biological slavery) and minimize pain (keep their biological slaves from rebelling.) As such, they merely change one form of posturing with another, depending on which one gives them the mental peace they need.

I live in the world full of biological slaves who are physically free. There is a lot of talk about how to become “a real man” but almost no talk about how to become genuine. All they care about is pleasure. Consequently, all of their talk is superficial, concerned only with the symptoms and never with the root.

Then there are the feminine types who define themselves in opposition to the hyper-masculine type. The two types can see each other’s mistakes, but they can never see their own mistakes. In a bizarre way, the two types complement each other. When a man who is not hyper-masculine tries to make a difference between what it means to be “a real man” and what it means to be a “wimp”, the feminine type will falsely accuse you of hyper-masculinity.

There is no way around it.

Riddick is a cool movie character. Good films too.
I wouldn’t say he is hyper-masculine, because he actually backs up what he says.

He is ultra-masculine, not hyper-masculine; a good archetype of the “real” man: self-sufficient, assertive, survivalist, strong, quick-witted, etc.

Kind of irrelevant, but funny: the creator of that franchise clearly has some sort of phallic-obsession. You know, the falling penis shaped space-craft in the Pitch Black film ( the first scene ), Riddick’s name ( Rid-DICK), that one tom-boy girl, who said " thanks for saving our dicks ", etc.

To the OP, self-control is another major defining aspect of a “real” man, probably the defining aspect.
Without strong self-control, you give into fear, have no direction in life, become indecisive, and so on.

Self-control is an ordering; ordering is masculine. The feminine is the chaos that wants to be dominated by the ordering, subsumed in it.


Something is not right with you for sure. Please get it checked before it goes out of hand.

And, i am not mocking but quite serious. Your thinking may lead you in some serious trouble in the real world.

Take care.

With love,


Honestly, and this is a follow up to previous post, a man cna be judged only by the sandards he set for himself, albeit be it a reaso able and worth-while one-and his ability to live by them and stand his ground in defense of them. A large member is ok, (although i heard you can do also with a smaller one, but women i knew didn’t really respond to size as as a sine quo non of their feelings) In addition, size matters, as far as physique is concerned, only to the extent that a male can give assurance to a female’s feelings of security. But there afre various ways to give such assurance besides brawn. Emotional well being goes hand i hand in understanding the partner. Freudians contgend that the men who purchase large caliber guns to compensate for their lack of physical bravado, often buy higher caliber, larger guns, in inverse proportion to their feelings of inadequecy, as to the size of their penis. Hence it’s erotic power as value.

Sanjay, my man, you are a good man not a real man, real men do not walk down the streets, they are too dangerous, they are kept in prison cells. They end their posts with “moron” not “with love”.