The Indignity of Labor; Superiority of Whoredom and Rentboy Life

10 posts

Bronze Age Pervert

Nietzsche says that the habit of the philosopher was to consider everyone else, including statesmen, slaves compared to themselves. A big part of this, he adds, is that not having 2/3 of every day at your disposal makes you essentially a slave, no matter how many high-flown honors and dignities are bestowed on you in exchange. You see today, for example, among older Wall St. types, even when they make huge salaries, are tied down with the famous "golden handcuffs"; their lifestyle, wives, children, have tied up their money in all kinds of ways, they work like pack animals into their sixties.

In general ancient and medieval aristocracies looked down on labor (including commerce--I shouldn't need to add this, but I'm anticipating certain dumb counters about the dignity of the laborer as opposed to the greedy banker; both were despised); the motto of the Roman aristocracy was bellum et otium, war and leisure, and the duty of patricians everywhere from Archaic Greece to medieval Europe was to prepare for military enterprises and otherwise to keep clear of moneymaking, in particular of taking a daily wage, which was seen as dishonor. Their time was kept in hunting, athletic contests, love affairs, adventures, etc.; according to Kojeve only Christianity and Biblical morality made work dignified. It also made something else "dignified"; the sanctity of the body, or the idea that your body is your temple--another conceit that Nietzsche mocks. The Christian-Alexandrian civilization is based on the two myths of the dignity of labor and the dignity of individual human life, both of which would have been seen as soft and female lies by an ancient Greek.

These two moral conceits are what stand in the way of some, who would otherwise be capable, of becoming high-class rentboys. Now, don't get me wrong, the male prostitute was seen as execrable in Greece and Rome as well, but for entirely different reasons; it was assumed that if you took money from men for sex, that you would be the one on bottom. I think Martial or Juvenal remark, though, in decadent times, that men used to pay to be on top, but now they pay to be on bottom; so if it is a given that you could make money from having middle aged fags and faggotized men suck you off, while paying you for your time, I don't think something would stand in the way of a man of ancient Med mind. Someone is paying you to be your slave. On the other hand, the two moral conceits I mentioned above would stand in the way; because you would consider your body a temple, not to be sullied supposedly by this kind of dirty sexual act (and it is dirty), and on the other hand because you'd consider a normal job as the honorable alternative, because work is dignified.

I'd like to ask for a second about this second part, which is what my thread is about. Even if you grant that allowing middle aged men the privilege of paying you to suck your cock is faggoty, dirty, and dishonorable, I don't see what's much better about having a real job. You are still selling your body, and in this case also your energy and your mind, and not for a few hours a week, but for eight or more hours a day. You're at the mercy still of a faggot middle aged man, or worse, HR fat cunts and middle aged lesbians, who can fire you at a moment's notice and who otherwise inflict any number of indignities on you. Sure, you can save up to gain some level of independence, but so could ancient slaves, eventually buying their freedom. But I don't see any objective difference between this and being a rentboy, and in fact all the objective pros are on the side of the rentboy, namely, much more free time, being a lot more independent, selling only your body as opposed to your mind also, and in our time of decadence, being paid to be on top and to humiliate, as opposed to being an office bitch and being humiliated by coworkers and women or affirmative action cases in higher up positions. You're a contract worker and "entrepeneur" as opposed to taking a daily wage. To which you can add this, that as a formal worker you'd have to pay taxes, which is in itself an indignity today, seeing how your taxes go to support single mothers and their bastards, thereby making you a cuckold that pays for the upkeep of other men's children; among other ways in which your tax money is taken from you and misused. Why not instead literally jizz on the face of the tax collector and have him (or her, rarely) pay you?

Yes this may be an exercise in rationalization on my part, but I actually want to hear some objective argument about why having a regular job is in any way more honorable, as well as practically better, than working as a rentboy...assuming, of course, that you can pull it off and have enough clients and so on.

President Camacho
If that's the case then why do you think it's nessecary to be the topper-- if you don't care about the sanctity of your body then why wouldn't you just take it in the ass? The pay would probably be better, and if work is "undignified" then being on the bottom by your logic would be superior since it is a passive position that involves in fact no real "work". You could even conceivably write poetry or philosophical treatises while taking it in the anus.
Bronze Age Pervert
Did ancient Greeks or Romans, or for that matter, many modern Meds, Latin Americans, etc., see being penetrated by another man as bad because it's a matter of the "sanctity of the body," or "your body is your temple," and the other things Nietzsche mocks--Christian attitudes that have in large part been preserved by moderns in secularized form? Or did they see it as faggoty, weak, and something that turns you into a woman? The two things aren't the same, and I'm not in the mood to explain the distinction to someone who's arguing in bad faith. How is fucking "work" anyway? Being penetrated is also much more painful.

If you really want to argue about this, no, the pay is not better; a point I tried to emphasize is that in degenerate eras, it's the "active" sort that is rarer and more prized, and as a matter of fact, better paid. There are even faggots who will pay you without you having to do anything. Ask Nic about "financial domination."

But don't focus on whether being a rentboy is good; answer my question...explain why having a real job is any better! It's in fact about as bad as being a passive rentboy, I'd agree with that.

Having a real job is better, because its a suffering, one of those which shape a man of character.

Hardships form a man of virtue, who knows the true value of things.

Bob Dylan Roof

Good post, like a passage out Journey to the End of the Night.

One problem, for me at least, is that I could never perform sexually with some decrepit boomer cinaedus. The mere thought of my organ penetrating the rancid, androgen marinated orifices of another man is enough to foreclose any possibility of arousal. I find it much easier to prostitute myself in other capacities in the workplace. Perhaps the distinction is only one of taste.

Also, I understand that you're only talking about the nobility, but it should be kept in mind that there was always a nobility to labor, as experienced by the laboring class, e.g., Hesiod's Works and Days.


Yeth, as Seneca says:

"But the study of philosophy is not to be postponed until you have leisure; everything else is to be neglected in order that we may attend to philosophy, for no amount of time is long enough for it, even though our lives be prolonged from boyhood to the uttermost bounds of time allotted to man. It makes little difference whether you leave philosophy out altogether or study it intermittently; for it does not stay as it was when you dropped it, but, because its continuity has been broken, it goes back to the position in which it was at the beginning, like things which fly apart when they are stretched taut. We must resist the affairs which occupy our time; they must not be untangled, but rather put out of the way. Indeed, there is no time that is unsuitable for helpful studies; and yet many a man fails to study amid the very circumstances which make study necessary."

Why do you think customers didn't pay to be bottom in Rome etc?


Stupendously well thought out BAP. Working is worse than being a fag whore, and paying taxes is cuckoldry. I agree, sincerely.

I would stop paying taxes immediatly if I could. And I would stop working if I could do it without having to penetrate another man. You see, it's this bit of it that you are over looking, my dear philosopher king. A man's anus, his balls, and his dick are all very icky, each of them on their own. Just way too icky. I'd rather stock shelves for minimum wage than touch a dick or a guy's butthole for money. Now if I were drugged out of my head, such that I couldn't recall my name, perchance I might not vomit during the act. Maybe inject trimix into my dick and I could get it up long enough to satisfy some fag. But that's a lot of effort. The cost of trimix and pill necessary to put me in this state, mentally void but erect, would eliminate any profit I'd make off the desperate homo.
But for you, this could work. You don't have that disgust for naked men and their genitals that heterosexual men do. It arouses you. So I say, go ahead. Do your part. The modern West is a faggot's paradise, and while normal healthy cis like myself slave away for an impotent old jew and his nigger fucking princess granddaughters, you can make a little more than us sucking his dick while he wears his wife's undrwear. I'll be proud one of us made it.

The west is very low on gaiety on world scale. It's high on visible gaiety, that is open gaiety.


Sex work is a horrible thing. Sex should be enjoyed between two people who love each other. BAP might think he can handle it but his soul is as corrosive as the rest of ours.

This does not mean that it should be outlawed or held in contempt. It's a pat of life.
Cadavre Exquis
What kind of faggotry is this?