Castration anxiety is rife. (Game of Thrones/HBO)

Little is known about the ecstatic rites of Cybele, a pre-Hellenic goddess associated with nature and wildness. Shrines have been found throughout Europe, though she was originally from Mesopotamia. And numerous sources describe her mendicant priesthood: castrated men who bleached their hair, and wore heavy makeup and elaborate feminine costumes. They were said to mimic the mythic figure of Attis, a mortal who — the legend goes — was driven to a frenzy by a jealous Cybele, and castrated himself before becoming her deathless consort.
Cybele’s sidekick and her priests are just one example of the castrated divinities, and mortal men, who appear throughout history and culture, from the sun-god Osiris in ancient Egypt to Freud’s more metaphorical “castration anxiety”. And this figure — and fear — lurks even in the modern world.
A rash of “trend” pieces has sought to encourage men to sterilise themselves — even, in one case, filming the actual surgery. Along with stories about chemicals destroying sperm counts and laboratories creating embryos without sperm, it’s no wonder some men might feel a little paranoid — all the more so since the vasectomy “trend” is clearly manufactured by a PR agency. It’s not strictly castration, but the two are routinely conflated in the popular mind. And this perception is expressed in increasingly colourful terms: for example, Tucker Carlson’s recent documentary, The End of Men, featured plenty of chaps who seem certain that something like a campaign to persuade men to self-castrate is at least metaphorically under way.
These same men often rail against a perceived feminine culture that stifles masculine vigour via mechanisms such as safetyism, victim culture and hatred of hierarchy. And with women now a majority in sectors such college admissions, journalism, teaching and HR, and even scaling the heights of the US military-industrial complex, it could indeed be that this increasingly palpable presence is changing public life in ways that are less than congenial to at least some men.
But the meanings of the castration complex are, well, complex. This most brutal un-manning has carried many meanings in different times and places. Xenophon writes about eunuchs as guards in ancient Persian harems, while the theme of (forcible) sexual continence was echoed in the early Christian era by Justin Martyr, who approvingly recounts a young man’s petition to a Roman prefect for permission to be castrated, so as to prove that Christians were as sexually chaste as they claimed to be. The Byzantine empire prized them as generals, because their lack of progeny meant they had no complicated ties to rival aristocratic families.
And if castration anxiety is rearing its head again, the underlying driver today may be more technology than ideology. When Freud described the “castration complex”, he was living through an age that saw perhaps the most drastic ever displacement of brute physical strength: an overwhelmingly male attribute. Thanks to technology, as Marx observes in Das Kapital, a male labour force could increasingly be replaced in factories with a less physically strong one comprising cheaper women and children.
Perhaps the fear Freud describes as universal was more historically specific than he thought. Strikingly, the first wave of industrialisation in Russia, from the 18th century onward, also saw the emergence of the first castration cult since antiquity. Calling themselves the Skoptsy — the “Castrated Ones” — this heretical Christian sect conducted religious services reminiscent of the rites of Cybele, while adherents of both sexes amputated all visible primary sex characteristics.
Since the Skoptsy were stamped out by Stalin in the early 20th century, the digital age has replaced the industrial one. In turn, this has arguably accelerated the obsolescence not just of men, but of biological sex, as an ever-growing swathe of work is now knowledge-based and thus equally open to both sexes, while more and more of us socialise in a disembodied way online. And in this context, the interactions of both sexes are long on talking and short on physical violence. Online, that is, both men and women are forced to socialise in a feminine key.
More than two millennia ago, the castrated figure of Attis was used by poets to convey ambivalence about masculine sexuality. For Catullus, Attis is driven to self-castration by Veneris nimio odio, “an excessive loathing of sex”. Ovid, meanwhile, characterises Attis along similar lines — except in this account, Attis is punished for seeking full adult sexuality. In his Metamorphoses, Attis promises Cybele that he’ll remain a boy — but when he breaks this by making love to a nymph, she drives him mad and he self-castrates.
So as the digital transition forces ever more social interaction into a disembodied, “post-gender” mode, perhaps it makes sense that we’re dusting off Attis and Cybele again. When all our social lives are virtual-only, how is any of us to make sense of our relationship to normal human sexuality?
As our technology lurches into the new and unsettling terrain of AI and biotechnology, echoes of the Skoptsy and the rites of Cybele are once again being heard — along with an increasingly tormented relation to normal human desire and procreation. The “nullo” subculture, for example, seek to “nullify” all visible sex characteristics: icons include the Japanese artist Mao Sugiyama, who cooked and served his penis and testicles for a paying private banquet in 2012, garnished with (what else?) button mushrooms.
Clinics now offer “Nullification” cosmetic surgeries as a “gender-expansive” option. And if you don’t want to pay for bespoke junk, the internet will provide: earlier this year, a basement flat in Finsbury Park was raided and several men arrested, following discovery that a man known as “The Eunuch Maker” was livestreaming consensual male castrations for a paying audience and promoting the events via Twitter.
According to some corners of the weird internet, this isn’t a disaster but our post-human future coming into view. The notorious, pseudonymous 2018 Gender Acceleration: A Blackpaper argues that “technocapital” is an accelerating, self-replicating, and increasingly autonomous process to bring about an ultimate victory of the feminine over the masculine principle, with “a return back to the ocean, back to a sexless, genderless slime swarmachine”.
And while this is unlikely to be literally true, the more respectable WEF-funded futurists are also now wondering now whether runaway technology could bring about the end of humanity (at least, of most of it). Yuval Noah Harari recently warned that because “the future is about developing more and more sophisticated technology” such as bioengineering and AI, we may end up with a situation where “we just don’t need the vast majority of the population”. While this future is less luridly rendered than Gender Acceleration’s “sexless, genderless slime swarmachine”, a scenario in which the human majority is dismissed as functionally irrelevant biomass is every bit as dystopian.
But even if escalating uncertainty about runaway technology were driving a few men to film their own neutering, whether on TikTok or the dark web, we probably shouldn’t jump from this to predicting the abolition of sex. We should take seriously the pathological symptoms accompanying our turbulent times — but only as pathological symptoms. Reports of men’s demise are as greatly exaggerated as progressive claims that we can somehow do without sex dimorphism.
And this is because conditions for a dreaded (or heralded) triumph of the technofeminine are very unevenly distributed. For one thing, most women have beloved male partners, relatives, friends and children, and most well-adjusted people of either sexes are revolted by the idea of one sex achieving total victory over the other.
And even those so online they’re immune to ordinary reality-checks may, in due course, be confronted by a more visceral one, should the world grow more unsettled. Throughout history, it’s usually been men who have defended order (and their loved ones), sometimes at great risk to their own safety. And the decades since the turn of the millennium have seen two international financial crises, terrorist attacks, a return of great-power politics, a global pandemic and rocketing inflation. This rolling crisis shows no signs of abating. And only peaceful and prosperous societies have the luxury of pretending we can do without brute force as a guarantor of peace and order.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeChina, then, is extending its reach accross the world, eager as any other technologically advanced nation for resources to sustain itself and feed its greater ambitions. They have a great advantage over the West of being able to do this quite shamelessly, uninhibited by concern with the morality of exploitation – something the West’s university educated class have come to believe is all that really matters.
Our elites would like us to put up with an increasingly regressive culture just so long as we can’t be accused of the (alleged) sin of exploitation. While China wins the future we will win “the huddled masses yearning…” for a First World life. While China benefits from the use of natural resources wherever it can find them we will “benefit” from a rewilded environment bringing joy only to privileged (and deluded) latter-day Romantics.
Excellent point, well made.
“While China benefits from the use of natural resources wherever it can find them we will “benefit” from a rewilded environment bringing joy only to privileged (and deluded) latter-day Romantics.”
The “rewilded environment” is merely the ‘bait’ while acres upon acres of solar panel and wind farms will be the ‘switch’. And still there will not be enough energy for the UK huddled masses under Net Zero.
Excellent point, well made.
“While China benefits from the use of natural resources wherever it can find them we will “benefit” from a rewilded environment bringing joy only to privileged (and deluded) latter-day Romantics.”
The “rewilded environment” is merely the ‘bait’ while acres upon acres of solar panel and wind farms will be the ‘switch’. And still there will not be enough energy for the UK huddled masses under Net Zero.
China, then, is extending its reach accross the world, eager as any other technologically advanced nation for resources to sustain itself and feed its greater ambitions. They have a great advantage over the West of being able to do this quite shamelessly, uninhibited by concern with the morality of exploitation – something the West’s university educated class have come to believe is all that really matters.
Our elites would like us to put up with an increasingly regressive culture just so long as we can’t be accused of the (alleged) sin of exploitation. While China wins the future we will win “the huddled masses yearning…” for a First World life. While China benefits from the use of natural resources wherever it can find them we will “benefit” from a rewilded environment bringing joy only to privileged (and deluded) latter-day Romantics.
Caplan avoids the Orientalism of Clinton, Blair, Bush and Obama, in that he refuses to map Western political structures onto the Global South. He knew, before Bush and Blair found out the hard way, you cannot drop democracy from a bomb-bay door at 30,000 ft.
However, he embraces the Orientalism of seeing the Global South as an irredeemable shambles, unable and unwilling to better itself. He denies the people there any agency to choose and work for the future of their choice.
If we want to help, we should do it with knowledge and humility. If we are tempted to offer our opinions, we should zip our lips.
“you cannot drop democracy from a bomb-bay door at 30,000 ft.”
An excellent metaphor, I thank you.
It is not, alas, an original insight, but thank you for the compliment.
It is not, alas, an original insight, but thank you for the compliment.
Well, I guess that’s now the popular image of the 2003 Gulf War – particularly among those who have always been itching to put Tony Blair on trial for war crimes [that includes one or two grubby Lefties of my unwelcome acquaintance].
It would be more true to say that one of the West’s great delusions is that all the peoples of the world are yearning for democracy and would grasp it with both hands if they could. We just need to help them out by ousting the tyrannical regimes which prevent them from fulfilling this alleged yearning.
Unfortunately, democracy is not looking too successful, even in our own backyard.
democracy is not looking too successful,
If you assume that we are in fact living in a democracy which is highly debatable .However,it still beats theocracy ,autocracy and anarchy!
That depends on your beliefs hopes and aspirations:
If you believe that God has given us firm instructions on how we should live then theocracy is the way to go. If you hope for an orderly world run with a firm hand then autocracy holds some appeal. If you aspire to freedom from the authority of other men then anarchy must be tempting aspiration.Democracy means settling for the tyranny of the majority (in theory at least), Of course you really have to worry about how intelligent and well informed that majority is.
I’ve seen how intelligent our experts and elite are and on balance I think large parts of majority are a good deal better informed than many might think.
Or, a constitutional democracy that limits the powers of the governing majority and protects everyone including those not in the majority from outrageous acts.
I’ve seen how intelligent our experts and elite are and on balance I think large parts of majority are a good deal better informed than many might think.
Or, a constitutional democracy that limits the powers of the governing majority and protects everyone including those not in the majority from outrageous acts.
That depends on your beliefs hopes and aspirations:
If you believe that God has given us firm instructions on how we should live then theocracy is the way to go. If you hope for an orderly world run with a firm hand then autocracy holds some appeal. If you aspire to freedom from the authority of other men then anarchy must be tempting aspiration.Democracy means settling for the tyranny of the majority (in theory at least), Of course you really have to worry about how intelligent and well informed that majority is.
The demise of democracy was accelerated by the arrival of Covid 19, though the infection of Marxist doctrine within the western democratic body politic has been steadily sapping its vitality since the 1950s.
What a sheltered life you’ve led
What a sheltered life you’ve led
democracy is not looking too successful,
If you assume that we are in fact living in a democracy which is highly debatable .However,it still beats theocracy ,autocracy and anarchy!
The demise of democracy was accelerated by the arrival of Covid 19, though the infection of Marxist doctrine within the western democratic body politic has been steadily sapping its vitality since the 1950s.
I agree but I think that the whole situation is a double-sided mess and far more complex and there are always just as many dishonest actors on their side as ours; cue the huddled masses beating their breasts for the cameras demanding ‘freedom’, the constant requests for endless money and weapons, all the jockeying for supremacy among rival groups and the siphoning off of funds.
An NGO speaking on the radio who’d spent his whole life trying to ‘help’ said he finally came to the conclusion that 90% of it had been a complete waste of time. But we can’t do nothing supposedly as that would be uncaring and so it goes on. White saviour complex anybody ?
“you cannot drop democracy from a bomb-bay door at 30,000 ft.”
An excellent metaphor, I thank you.
Well, I guess that’s now the popular image of the 2003 Gulf War – particularly among those who have always been itching to put Tony Blair on trial for war crimes [that includes one or two grubby Lefties of my unwelcome acquaintance].
It would be more true to say that one of the West’s great delusions is that all the peoples of the world are yearning for democracy and would grasp it with both hands if they could. We just need to help them out by ousting the tyrannical regimes which prevent them from fulfilling this alleged yearning.
Unfortunately, democracy is not looking too successful, even in our own backyard.
I agree but I think that the whole situation is a double-sided mess and far more complex and there are always just as many dishonest actors on their side as ours; cue the huddled masses beating their breasts for the cameras demanding ‘freedom’, the constant requests for endless money and weapons, all the jockeying for supremacy among rival groups and the siphoning off of funds.
An NGO speaking on the radio who’d spent his whole life trying to ‘help’ said he finally came to the conclusion that 90% of it had been a complete waste of time. But we can’t do nothing supposedly as that would be uncaring and so it goes on. White saviour complex anybody ?
Caplan avoids the Orientalism of Clinton, Blair, Bush and Obama, in that he refuses to map Western political structures onto the Global South. He knew, before Bush and Blair found out the hard way, you cannot drop democracy from a bomb-bay door at 30,000 ft.
However, he embraces the Orientalism of seeing the Global South as an irredeemable shambles, unable and unwilling to better itself. He denies the people there any agency to choose and work for the future of their choice.
If we want to help, we should do it with knowledge and humility. If we are tempted to offer our opinions, we should zip our lips.
“and without its perennial curse: foreign meddling.”
It seems to me that the Arab/Muslim world has done more that its fair share of ‘meddling’ too.
“and without its perennial curse: foreign meddling.”
It seems to me that the Arab/Muslim world has done more that its fair share of ‘meddling’ too.
Bit of a quibble – the Turks, Greeks, and Armenians may have co-existed under the Ottoman empire, but it wasn’t peaceful – the latter two were subject conquered peoples – as were the Arabs further south. Nationalism may have played a part in cracking that order, but Ottoman caprice and brutality were significant even before the modern concept of nationalism arose.
Exactly,
total nonsense about Ottoman Empire.
Equally applicable to Russian Empire, Greater Serbia and all other European colonial powers.
Whether newly independent countries can govern themselves (Africa anyone?) Is another matter.
Exactly,
total nonsense about Ottoman Empire.
Equally applicable to Russian Empire, Greater Serbia and all other European colonial powers.
Whether newly independent countries can govern themselves (Africa anyone?) Is another matter.
Bit of a quibble – the Turks, Greeks, and Armenians may have co-existed under the Ottoman empire, but it wasn’t peaceful – the latter two were subject conquered peoples – as were the Arabs further south. Nationalism may have played a part in cracking that order, but Ottoman caprice and brutality were significant even before the modern concept of nationalism arose.
Am I the only one to find the cloying sycophancy nauseating?
No.
No.
Am I the only one to find the cloying sycophancy nauseating?
Peter Frankopan’s The Silk Roads is also very good on this.
Peter Frankopan’s The Silk Roads is also very good on this.
Fascinating article and debate below.
The question is: what do we do about it?
• Lose our illusions


• Recognise our values are not universal
values
• Arm. Because the truth of the second bullet will not necessarily be accepted by our opponents; ie they will make the same mistake and try and impose their version of ‘universalist’ values.
One might be tempted to quote Sun Tzu about the need to know oneself, before you seek to know your opponent.
It is interesting that Moslems are outraged at Israel but have no problems with how China treats its Moslem minority. The Houthis have proclaimed that Chinese ships are free to sail past their blockade of the red sea. Even Turkey has no problems with genocidal treatment of Turkish speaking minorities in China. They even deport exiles to China.
In a wonderfully succinct book — The Tragic Mind- Kaplan plunders the Greeks and Shakespeare to help us fully comprehend the difference between tyranny and chaos.
“This tendency to view the world as an extension of the United States is simple, and simplistic.”
The reality is that in its role as melting pot, it’s much more that the United States is an extension of the world – which gives it the duty extend the mechanisms of its own success back to its antecedents. Yes, it’s “cultural imperialism,” and is not only a good thing for the world, it’s the mandatory thing for the world. Or we can leave them endlessly murdering each other to their hearts’ content – which was going on long before modern imperialism.
Whiteness: the best thing that ever happened.
Albertus Magnus, the 13th century sage, polymath, and saint, associated a very white complexion with effeminacy, barbarianism, and slow intelligence.
Albertus Magnus, De animalibus, ed. Hermann Stadler (Münster: Aschendorff, 1920), Lib. XX, Tract. 1, Cap. 11, 1305
I see you’ve decided to bring race into it. I didn’t. I’m talking about culture. Look at the direction in which world population flows and you’ll find the successful culture. Unfortunately, we can’t solve world poverty by evacuating the Third World to the First. What we can do is export First World culture to the suffering Third World. That begins by admitting that First World culture is more successful and deserves to be emulated. Perhaps you disagree and have chosen to vote with your feet for the Third World?
“That begins by admitting that First World culture is more successful and deserves to be emulated.”
I agree. However, note that the woke refer to First World culture as ‘whiteness’ so it’s them bringing race into it, not me. Still I do think race is a factor. Is it just a coincidence that FWC and a white population are so tightly coincident? I suspect that the race shapes the culture and then the culture shapes the race so that the two things become soft-linked. In the same way, we see that all Arab countries share a certain similarity and that everywhere that Blacks rule — from Zimbabwe to Detroit — the same sort of dysfunction will prevail — as useful generalizations!
“That begins by admitting that First World culture is more successful and deserves to be emulated.”
I agree. However, note that the woke refer to First World culture as ‘whiteness’ so it’s them bringing race into it, not me. Still I do think race is a factor. Is it just a coincidence that FWC and a white population are so tightly coincident? I suspect that the race shapes the culture and then the culture shapes the race so that the two things become soft-linked. In the same way, we see that all Arab countries share a certain similarity and that everywhere that Blacks rule — from Zimbabwe to Detroit — the same sort of dysfunction will prevail — as useful generalizations!
Albertus Magnus, the 13th century sage, polymath, and saint, associated a very white complexion with effeminacy, barbarianism, and slow intelligence.
Albertus Magnus, De animalibus, ed. Hermann Stadler (Münster: Aschendorff, 1920), Lib. XX, Tract. 1, Cap. 11, 1305
I see you’ve decided to bring race into it. I didn’t. I’m talking about culture. Look at the direction in which world population flows and you’ll find the successful culture. Unfortunately, we can’t solve world poverty by evacuating the Third World to the First. What we can do is export First World culture to the suffering Third World. That begins by admitting that First World culture is more successful and deserves to be emulated. Perhaps you disagree and have chosen to vote with your feet for the Third World?
And who said satire was dead. The US is no kind of example to the rest of the world. Not on any level.
Whiteness: the best thing that ever happened.
And who said satire was dead. The US is no kind of example to the rest of the world. Not on any level.
“This tendency to view the world as an extension of the United States is simple, and simplistic.”
The reality is that in its role as melting pot, it’s much more that the United States is an extension of the world – which gives it the duty extend the mechanisms of its own success back to its antecedents. Yes, it’s “cultural imperialism,” and is not only a good thing for the world, it’s the mandatory thing for the world. Or we can leave them endlessly murdering each other to their hearts’ content – which was going on long before modern imperialism.
With your simplistic maunderings on the topic of Ukraine, this really is the pot calling the kettle black, Mr Patrikarkos.
With your simplistic maunderings on the topic of Ukraine, this really is the pot calling the kettle black, Mr Patrikarkos.