Where does the Gorean Theory come from?

Written by well known Gorean philosopher Marcus of AR

Tal, citizens.

We spend a lot of time saying “we hold these Gorean truths to be self-evident,” and if pressed, we fall back on “it’s all in the books.”

We’ve been accused, through the years, of failing to support our conclusions. Hell, I’ve lately even read supposedly “Gorean Essays” that are nothing less than apologetic whinge-screeds in which the author jibber-jabbers around Norman’s writing, desperately trying to explain how those ol’ Goreans really aren’t so bad, and how Norman’s comments on sex and gender issues– especially female slavery– were actually intended as a joke on the feminists of the 1970’s! Oh, John Norman, you wacky humorist, you, with your funny-ass brands and five-stranded kurts!

That’s so much bullshit, folks. Our extrapolated Gorean beliefs are based DIRECTLY AND SPECIFICALLY on John Norman’s Gor books. We added nothing to Norman’s arguments which wasn’t already there. We didn’t soften it, or try to explain away the scary parts, or any such thing. Whenever I wrote on the topic of Gorean thought or the Gorean ethos, I remained 100% pure and true to Norman’s own commentaries in the books.

People who actually refuse to believe Norman’s arguments don’t like to hear that, and would rather Norman’s comments be far more damning (in the case of his critics) or far more politically-correct (in the case of his would-be apologists).

Too, there is a lot of unnecessary smoke generated by misinterpretations, willful or not, of what Norman is saying and what it means. Especially in online circles, or among little lifestyle BDSM spin-off cliques who are desperate to alter John Norman’s message to better fit their own kinky play-parties.

But the truth is:

We never added anything to Norman’s message. We didn’t HAVE to reinterpret it. Because he spells it out absolutely and rather incontrovertibly through his writing.

What follows is an example of pure Norman, taken verbatim from my personal favorite Gor book, “Hunters of Gor”:

The Goreans do not believe, incidentally, that the human being is a simple function of the independent variables of his environment. They have never endorsed the “hollow body” theory of human beings, in which a human being is regarded as being essentially a product of externalities. They recognize the human being has a genetic endowment which may not be, scientifically, canceled out in favor of the predilection of theories developed by men incompetent in physiology. For example, it would not occur to a Gorean to speak of the “role” of a female sparrow feeding her young or the “role” of a lion in providing meat for its cubs. Goreans do not see the world in terms of metaphors taken from the artificiality of the theater. It is certain, of course, that certain genetic endowments have been selected by environmental considerations, and, in this sense, the environment is a significant factor. The teeth of the lion have had much to do with the fleetness of the antelopes.

Hunters of Gor, p.500

In Gorean thinking man and woman are natural animals, with genetic endowments shaped by thousands of generations of natural and sexual selection. Their actions and behavior, thus, though not independent of certain long-range environmental and sexual relationships, cannot be understood in terms of mere responses to the immediately present environment. The immediate environment determines what behavior will be successful, not what behavior is performed. Woman, like man, is the product of evolution, and, like man, is a complex genetic product, a product not only of natural selections but sexual selections.

Natural selections suggest that a woman who wished to belong to a man, who wished to remain with him, who wished to have children, who wished to care for them, who loved them, would have an advantage, in the long run, as far as her genetic type was concerned, of surviving, over a woman who did not care for men, who did not wish children, and so on. Female freedom, of a full sort, would not have been biologically practical.

The loving mother is a type favored by evolution. It is natural then that in modern women certain instincts should be felt. The sparrow does not feed her young because society has fooled her into playing that exploitative role. Similarly, sexual selection, as well as natural selection, is a significant dynamic of evolution, without which it is less comprehensible.

Men, being stronger, have had, generally, the option of deciding on women that please them. If women had been stronger, as in the spiders, for example, we might have a different race.

It is not unlikely that men, over the generations, have selected out for breeding, for marriage, women of certain sorts. Doubtless women are much more beautiful now than a hundred generations ago. Similarly a woman who was particularly ugly, threatening, vicious, stupid, cruel, etc., would not be a desirable mate.

No man can be blamed for not wishing to make his life miserable. Accordingly, statistically, he tends to select out women who are intelligent, loving and beautiful. Accordingly, men have, in effect, bred a certain kind of woman. Similarly, of course, in so far as choice has been theirs, women have tended to select out men who are, among other things, intelligent, energetic and strong. Few women, in their hearts, despite propaganda, really desire weak, feminine men. Such men, at any rate, are not those who figure in their sexual fantasies.

Norman tells us– “The Goreans do not believe…” and then explains precisely WHAT they do not believe. Then he tells us what they DO believe.

There is no mystery here. It is all spelled out in black and white. Norman does it paragraph after paragraph, for page after page, book after book after book.


And we agree, and we also believe it.

Because WE’RE “the Goreans.”

Similar passages to the one above can be found to back up every single Gorean philosophical point and essay comment I’ve ever written.

How anyone could misinterpret what Norman is saying– even if they were already predisposed to do so– strikes me as being hypocritical to the point of idiocy.

It’s all in there, folks. If someone pronounces themselves Gorean but then professes a diametrically opposed point of view, or if they claim they cannot figure out what Norman is trying to say no matter how hard they try– they are either morons, or they are lying through their non-Gorean teeth.

I wish you well!


Copyright © Marcus of Ar, All rights reserved.

Success! You're on the list.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: