What do you think?
Rate this book
Männerphantasien #2
Male Fantasies, Vol. 2: Male Bodies - Psychoanalyzing the White Terror
Libro usado en buenas condiciones, por su antiguedad podria contener señales normales de uso
508 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1983
21 people are currently reading
1556 people want to read
About the author
Klaus Theweleit
54 books38 followersKlaus Theweleit is a German sociologist and writer.
Theweleit studied German studies and English studies in Kiel and Freiburg. From 1969-1972, he worked as a freelancer for a public radio station (Südwestfunk).
His book Männerphantasien (1977); translated as Male Fantasies (1987), a study of the fascist consciousness in general and the bodily experience of these former soldiers in particular, easily detected in their hatefilled, near-illiterate books, was well received and much discussed.
Theweleit writes in a non orthodox, highly personal and associative style. His book are heavily illustrated with cartoons, advertisements, engravings, posters and artwork.
Theweleit lives in Freiburg, he teaches in Germany, the United States, Switzerland, and Austria. He was a lecturer at the Institute of Sociology at the University of Freiburg and lecturer at the film academy in Berlin. From 1998 until retirement he was a professor for "art and theory" at the Staatlichen Akademie für Bildende Künste, the art college, at Karlsruhe.
Source: Wikipedia
Theweleit studied German studies and English studies in Kiel and Freiburg. From 1969-1972, he worked as a freelancer for a public radio station (Südwestfunk).
His book Männerphantasien (1977); translated as Male Fantasies (1987), a study of the fascist consciousness in general and the bodily experience of these former soldiers in particular, easily detected in their hatefilled, near-illiterate books, was well received and much discussed.
Theweleit writes in a non orthodox, highly personal and associative style. His book are heavily illustrated with cartoons, advertisements, engravings, posters and artwork.
Theweleit lives in Freiburg, he teaches in Germany, the United States, Switzerland, and Austria. He was a lecturer at the Institute of Sociology at the University of Freiburg and lecturer at the film academy in Berlin. From 1998 until retirement he was a professor for "art and theory" at the Staatlichen Akademie für Bildende Künste, the art college, at Karlsruhe.
Source: Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
December 21, 2021
I can't believe Theweleit used this kind of language in a scientific book in 1977/78: While dissecting the psychotic masculinity in which white terror is rooted, his language does not refrain from underlining the pathetic aspects of it, so we hear a lot about, you know, the obsession of German soldiers with the wish to have the biggest, hardest dicks (yes, Theweleit writes "Schwänze", dicks) and incest, about female sexuality as a threat, and homosexuality as power-play. As Theweleit once again draws from different scientific disciplines to ponder the roots of male fascism and gives lots of examples from different historic events, novels, and images, it's pretty easy to read, and it doesn't get tedious despite its extreme length.
This is an important text when it comes to the study of toxic masculinity and how it rules and destroys not only female, but also male bodies in its dehumanizing strife to turn men into efficient machines. And btw: Again and again, I see people discussing Ernst Jünger as the prototypical, badass soldier (which is already a widely contested view in Germany) - Theweleit quotes his works quite frequently and makes it clear why Jünger, the person, was a sad case wrapped up in a worldview that made him deny himself to be an actual person, instead of just a body armor.
Although some of his claims are certainly overreaching and the Freudian analysis is partly outdated, Klaus Theweleit, himself the son of a Nazi, is the actual badass here: He aims to break the cycle.
This is an important text when it comes to the study of toxic masculinity and how it rules and destroys not only female, but also male bodies in its dehumanizing strife to turn men into efficient machines. And btw: Again and again, I see people discussing Ernst Jünger as the prototypical, badass soldier (which is already a widely contested view in Germany) - Theweleit quotes his works quite frequently and makes it clear why Jünger, the person, was a sad case wrapped up in a worldview that made him deny himself to be an actual person, instead of just a body armor.
Although some of his claims are certainly overreaching and the Freudian analysis is partly outdated, Klaus Theweleit, himself the son of a Nazi, is the actual badass here: He aims to break the cycle.
August 27, 2025
read most of this for reading group a month or two back just never finished the conclusion, so i’ve forgotten most of how i felt about it. interesting to jump into without having read volume one, the ideas are distinct and thoroughly explained enough that i didn’t feel particularly lost but i imagine the grounding of vol. one would’ve given me better footing for this one. i enjoyed the first half more than the second, especially the mass and it’s counterparts, but on the whole i felt myself consistently going “yep! sounds right to me!”. a lot of great comics, and a lot of nazi imagery that made this embarrassing to read on the tube
November 8, 2025
in honor of theo i finally post this
phenomenology? hermeneutics? cultural anthropology? what is this book? well. its really fun to talk about with your good friends. a few questions remain unanswered though.
- can we apply these conclusions to other sociocultural contexts? it seems that the only justifiable answer is that any relatable point is purely accidental. i might have too much israel on the brain, but man, maybe i commit the ultimate faux pax of saying there could be something in common across fascist societies. sorry klaus
- to what extent does the fascist and his violence remain conscious- at the surface of the mind- present and intentional rather than symbolic and representative? how can we ascribe (if at all) blame?
stay tuned for volume three. i hope the wife approves
phenomenology? hermeneutics? cultural anthropology? what is this book? well. its really fun to talk about with your good friends. a few questions remain unanswered though.
- can we apply these conclusions to other sociocultural contexts? it seems that the only justifiable answer is that any relatable point is purely accidental. i might have too much israel on the brain, but man, maybe i commit the ultimate faux pax of saying there could be something in common across fascist societies. sorry klaus
- to what extent does the fascist and his violence remain conscious- at the surface of the mind- present and intentional rather than symbolic and representative? how can we ascribe (if at all) blame?
stay tuned for volume three. i hope the wife approves
April 12, 2023
"Even the terms used to describe such men —as 'latent' homosexuals — are inadequate; for what is 'latent' about society's manifest demands that attraction be channeled into 'the masculine'; that 'femininity' be both devalued and encoded as the repository of every threat to the male 'ego'?"
July 10, 2025
Not as concise as Vol. 1, but it definitely lands the plane. Theweleit's done several minor miracles here, namely (1) making a psychoanalytical & historical text on the Freikorps that's surprisingly approachable if you give it a chance (2) writing, essentially, a 1000-page zine on horny nazi freaks and (3) giving me just enough Deleuze/Guattari & Wilhelm Reich that I don't need to read their works any time soon. I'm not at a place in my life where I can handle canonical psychoanalysis texts, and that's okay!
An apology to all my friends who've heard me tell the horse anecdote from Vol. 1 over and over and over and
An apology to all my friends who've heard me tell the horse anecdote from Vol. 1 over and over and over and
July 27, 2025
this volume is just as fantastic as the first. it began to wear on me though, due to its necessary structural features: a lack of structure, repetitiousness, a sort of constancy of flow which i suppose i am not allowed to fear. i can't imagine what it would take to organise such a book, let alone to think it
January 22, 2022
overall less compelling than vol. 1, which seemed much more focused and grounded in its critique. this time i couldn't quite pin down whether or not Theweleit was working from Lacan or Deleuze's definition of desire, seemed to oscillate between the two. i got into more formal critique in my thesis so i don't feel like doing that here, but i will give credit where it's due: Theweleit reintroduced micropolitics into the consideration of fascism without Reich's orgone theory baggage, and for that he's worth reading.
November 19, 2024
gonna bring up male psychosexual fascist theory at thanksgiving dinner
April 12, 2019
Male Fantasies Vol. 2 is very different approach to understanding fascism than what I am used to reading. Theweleit uses literature written by Junger, von Salomon, Goebbels, and other 1920's inter-war German fascists and Freikorps men and applies a Freudian feminist psychosexual literary critique that completely rules out economic and historical factors of explanation. The author argues that fascism was strictly an irrational phenomenon that reached its climax in fascist ritual ceremonies (similar to Bataille) and killing. Influenced by the Frankfurt school, Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari and the late 1960's New Left, I'm not entirely sure how much I agree with Theweleit, but this makes for an entertaining read. Interestingly, author's digressions on gender and patriarchy prophetically sounds much like how gender is being revolutionized by the Left today.
The library accidentally sent me the second volume first so that is why I'm reading it before I get to the first volume.
The library accidentally sent me the second volume first so that is why I'm reading it before I get to the first volume.
November 3, 2012
sick pictures, klaus
April 27, 2016
this is by far the best analysis of the "state of mind" of fascist men, or rather an exploration of their desires, that i have ever read. a+
April 6, 2025
Klaus Theweleit’s groundbreaking work, Male Fantasies, published in two volumes in 1977 and 1978, remains a seminal exploration of the psycho-sexual architecture of early 20th-century German fascism.
Theweleit’s book offers a psychohistorical analysis of the Freikorps, paramilitary terrorist groups that roamed Germany in the aftermath of World War I aiming to violently suppress communists (who were attempting to seize power in various places in the chaotic aftermath of Imperial Germany’s collapse in 1918) and that would evolve into the shock troops and advance guard of Adolph Hitler’s national socialist movement. Using the Freikorps as his historical launchpad, Theweleit’s book develops a more general account of the mindset of the “soldier male” — a figure Theweleit says is defined by a terror of libidinal and social fluidity, a desire for iron-fisted control over his corporeal self and the world around him, and a violent repudiation of anything associated with the feminine. Women in this view were a threat to masculine virtue, which meant they needed to kept strictly segregated from male spaces and life, and engaged only in a modality of firm and absolute subordination.
Theweleit’s central contention is that fascism, far from being a mere political program, is the political expression of a deeply rooted male subjectivation. The “soldier males” of the Freikorps, Theweleit argues, were men who, due to a combination of social, historical, and psychological factors, were unable to form a stable sense of self. Traumatized by the Fronterlebnis of the War, humiliated by its politically catastrophic conclusion, and returning to a rapidly changing society where traditional gender roles were in flux, these men found themselves incapable of achieving a stable egoic integration. They recoiled from the perceived disintegration of the traditional order, clinging to fantasies of absolute control and rigidly policed boundaries. Theirs was a Manichean world, defined by a stark dichotomy between the “hard” armored male body and the “soft,” threatening, and ultimately annihilating force of the feminine.
This “feminine,” it must be stressed, is less about biological women than it is about a principle of undifferentiation: emotionality, sexual openness, and the blurring of social roles. The soldier male, in Theweleit’s reading, fears anything that threatens to dissolve the integument of the self. In this symbolic economy, women become the vessels of this threat, embodying chaos, irrationality, and the abyss of dissolution. The Freikorps narratives, as Theweleit meticulously documents, are replete with images of women as floods, tidal waves, and castrating monsters — chthonic forces poised to overwhelm the fragile male ego.
To counter this perceived threat, the soldier male constructs a carapace, both literal and figurative. He molds his body into a weapon, a fortress, through violence and a draconian regime of self-discipline. He seeks to transform himself into a machine, impervious to feeling and change. This internal battle is then projected onto the external world, resulting in a political aesthetic of totalitarian order: hierarchy, discipline, and the ruthless suppression of dissent.
The Freikorps’s violent misogyny, therefore, was not merely an expression of sexual frustration or a desire for domination, but a desperate attempt to maintain a fragile sense of self. The annihilation of the feminine became a necessary act of self-preservation, finding its political expression in the crushing of leftist movements, the persecution of "degenerate" elements, and the pursuit of a mythic, purified national body.
Theweleit’s book offers a psychohistorical analysis of the Freikorps, paramilitary terrorist groups that roamed Germany in the aftermath of World War I aiming to violently suppress communists (who were attempting to seize power in various places in the chaotic aftermath of Imperial Germany’s collapse in 1918) and that would evolve into the shock troops and advance guard of Adolph Hitler’s national socialist movement. Using the Freikorps as his historical launchpad, Theweleit’s book develops a more general account of the mindset of the “soldier male” — a figure Theweleit says is defined by a terror of libidinal and social fluidity, a desire for iron-fisted control over his corporeal self and the world around him, and a violent repudiation of anything associated with the feminine. Women in this view were a threat to masculine virtue, which meant they needed to kept strictly segregated from male spaces and life, and engaged only in a modality of firm and absolute subordination.
Theweleit’s central contention is that fascism, far from being a mere political program, is the political expression of a deeply rooted male subjectivation. The “soldier males” of the Freikorps, Theweleit argues, were men who, due to a combination of social, historical, and psychological factors, were unable to form a stable sense of self. Traumatized by the Fronterlebnis of the War, humiliated by its politically catastrophic conclusion, and returning to a rapidly changing society where traditional gender roles were in flux, these men found themselves incapable of achieving a stable egoic integration. They recoiled from the perceived disintegration of the traditional order, clinging to fantasies of absolute control and rigidly policed boundaries. Theirs was a Manichean world, defined by a stark dichotomy between the “hard” armored male body and the “soft,” threatening, and ultimately annihilating force of the feminine.
This “feminine,” it must be stressed, is less about biological women than it is about a principle of undifferentiation: emotionality, sexual openness, and the blurring of social roles. The soldier male, in Theweleit’s reading, fears anything that threatens to dissolve the integument of the self. In this symbolic economy, women become the vessels of this threat, embodying chaos, irrationality, and the abyss of dissolution. The Freikorps narratives, as Theweleit meticulously documents, are replete with images of women as floods, tidal waves, and castrating monsters — chthonic forces poised to overwhelm the fragile male ego.
To counter this perceived threat, the soldier male constructs a carapace, both literal and figurative. He molds his body into a weapon, a fortress, through violence and a draconian regime of self-discipline. He seeks to transform himself into a machine, impervious to feeling and change. This internal battle is then projected onto the external world, resulting in a political aesthetic of totalitarian order: hierarchy, discipline, and the ruthless suppression of dissent.
The Freikorps’s violent misogyny, therefore, was not merely an expression of sexual frustration or a desire for domination, but a desperate attempt to maintain a fragile sense of self. The annihilation of the feminine became a necessary act of self-preservation, finding its political expression in the crushing of leftist movements, the persecution of "degenerate" elements, and the pursuit of a mythic, purified national body.
Read
September 24, 2025An incredibly interesting look into the psyche of the male Nazi soldier; what I have more trouble following is where Theweleit thinks this perception of the world (and the attending drives) comes from. If I understand correctly (which I am not sure about), Theweleit argues that the fascist impulse can arise independently of economic influences; the author recognizes capitalism plays a significant part in the production of a fascist psyche, but suggests that this is something independent of a specific mode of production. If that is the case, I have a hard time seeing exactly how preventing a fascist psyche from taking root in a society happens. I think the author is trying to construct a more general theory about the production of desire, which does not directly correlate to specific economic and socio-political formations. My general lack of a background in psychoanalysis is probably hampering things here.
I was also reading this as I am immensely curious in trying to understand the psycho-sexual pathologies of the modern day, especially compared with the world historical example of horny Nazi freaks. What I found a little surprising/confounding was the distance between the pathologies of fascist soldiers then, and the variety of freaks we have today. Some things seemed directly translatable- for instance, I found myself comparing modern day U.S. veterans and their propensity towards violence (which, if not willingly taken up is forcibly beaten into them) with the violent self-perception of the Nazi soldier; however, there seems to be no end to the new (and no less terrifying) pathologies of the modern age that in my view have no direct correlation to the past.
I was also reading this as I am immensely curious in trying to understand the psycho-sexual pathologies of the modern day, especially compared with the world historical example of horny Nazi freaks. What I found a little surprising/confounding was the distance between the pathologies of fascist soldiers then, and the variety of freaks we have today. Some things seemed directly translatable- for instance, I found myself comparing modern day U.S. veterans and their propensity towards violence (which, if not willingly taken up is forcibly beaten into them) with the violent self-perception of the Nazi soldier; however, there seems to be no end to the new (and no less terrifying) pathologies of the modern age that in my view have no direct correlation to the past.
January 16, 2025
Much easier to read than the first volume. I'm not sure if that's symptomatic of getting more familiar with Theweleit's style, or if I found it more concise, or if it's just because there were more images in this book than the last. This does not mean it was better. I found vol. 1's premise and investigation a little more interesting. Again, the reliance of being familiar with psychoanalysis was annoying. Some of the sections were pretty provocative, but I struggle to feel like I've digested the whole of the argument here. This is an author who prioritizes prose over clarity, is my impression. I guess what I've taken away here is: The protofascist soldier male is their own ideal of the perfect person (and that person is a man because women cannot be perfect, lest they are virgin, unattainable, and nonexistent). The soldier male has been developed by the culture of the army, hardened and freed from emotion and feeling. Via this conditioning, they become members of the 'totality machine', or happy little cogs in the larger picture. The blackout by exhaustion is the only orgasm they allow themselves, aside from murder and gore. The 'front' for the soldier male is the material world, interactions with his being, which is a societal/cultural outsider. There are other conversations about homosexuality, the nation, sadism, anal sex and masturbation that were interesting but not really aligned with the above. As always, I can appreciate criticisms of the organized left, too.
Altogether, I think I'm done with reading Theweleit.
Altogether, I think I'm done with reading Theweleit.
July 30, 2025
this volume continues what the first left off with, which is a vast, sprawling set of images. the order it presents them in is itself suggestive of a point, one which has left me with a certain impression, i don't think there's a right order to these images, either. klaus' literary achievement is to sicken you at the same time that he shows you the role of violence as a psychical maintenance process. i find it curious how klaus ends the book with a few remarks on political economy, bringing us back to where we probably ought to be, i.e., face to face with the marxists of the time. the reason to read male fantasies as a complete work is that it becomes less and less of a book of literary criticism, and more a sketch of the micro- and macro-politics of fascism: from the polity's genesis in the (lack of) ego-formation to its outpouring from the psyche into the Event of the beer hall putsch. i read this book as containing much that we can learn in terms of marxist (or even progressive) strategy: in understanding how and why the fascists are Like That, we can make ourselves sturdy against the threat of fascism, and more importantly, against fascists. minus one star for volume 2 because there's no aquatic ape hypothesis (joking. chapters sometimes overstayed their welcome, points buried a bit deeper in paragraphs than volume 1). if goodreads had the letterboxd big four for your profile then this would be one of my books there
February 25, 2024
I spent 6 years of my life reading everything I could get my hands on about the German revolution and civil war in 1918-1923, including archival issues of Vorwaerts and Freiheit and the untranslated volumes of Richard Mueller's memoirs. But something in the motivation and behavior of the Freikorps seemed always inexplicable, until I read Theweleit. It felt like watching the keystone of an arch slide into place.
I'm cautious of historical analogy, and I think comparisons between Weimar and the USA are largely spurious (we had our own White Terror, if we would bother to remember it), but I think this book does the best job of any book I've yet read of situating individual psychology as a driving force in mass political conflict in a way that it theoretically useful in the present. It is one of the only genuinely convincing critiques of orthodox marxism I've encountered.
You have to read these two books. Everything strange, everything profane and idiosyncratic, every digression and theoretical leap is generative and difficult and feels necessary.
Also it's very funny.
I'm cautious of historical analogy, and I think comparisons between Weimar and the USA are largely spurious (we had our own White Terror, if we would bother to remember it), but I think this book does the best job of any book I've yet read of situating individual psychology as a driving force in mass political conflict in a way that it theoretically useful in the present. It is one of the only genuinely convincing critiques of orthodox marxism I've encountered.
You have to read these two books. Everything strange, everything profane and idiosyncratic, every digression and theoretical leap is generative and difficult and feels necessary.
Also it's very funny.
September 7, 2024
such an interesting book. it explores the fascist consciousness by examining how the bodily experiences of former soldiers reveal a deep need for domination...sound familiar? let's connect this to Zionism which of course, is intimately tied to Nazism. the insatiable desire not only to destroy populations and seize land but also to appropriate culture and possessions. Sexualization is portrayed as a way to enact fantasies of total control. the book further suggests that fascism attacks human desires by labeling them as effeminate, unhealthy, or criminal, and hypothesizes that soldiers’ fear of decomposition drives them to kill as an escape from internal unfulfillment
January 28, 2020
oh geez i remember when i first found this on archive, and i read it and i didnt know what i was reading
i had foudn it while researching raceplay for a short PROJECT-THESIS-ESSAY thing i had... insightful... never read the other volumes... probably i should.
fine read...d...
i had foudn it while researching raceplay for a short PROJECT-THESIS-ESSAY thing i had... insightful... never read the other volumes... probably i should.
fine read...d...
September 2, 2020
"bloody mass" = red
"empty space" = white
melting "blackout" = black
"empty space" = white
melting "blackout" = black
February 20, 2023
he was psycho analyzing back in the 70s at a level that we still aren’t ready for today. an innovator
January 13, 2021
An unintended cautionary tale of the dangers of misapplying clinical psychological methodologies on macro-social phenomenon.
Read
May 16, 2007I read the first part of this second volume of Male Fantasies, which seems to take as its object of study the figure of the soldier both as an abstract possibility and as a historical fact of the Nazi regime. The historical may be interesting, but the really useful parts are the abstractable theoretical points on how the opposition isn't exactly crowd-vs.-individual, but formed-crowd-(army)-vs.-unformed-crowd-(mass,race); the formation of the army, as in Freud, comes to serve as an externalized skeleton that keeps ones dead desires in control until they are able to be released--as the desire for death--on the battlefield. His other interesting point is that the appearance of governmental secrecy gives people a feeling of security on the analogy that their own bodies contain an unknowable mystery -- thus the pure logic that goes on behind doors acts as a seal on the governance of the body. (And, consequently, an attempt at an open politics will fail to move people affectively until the body is known, a point which matches up very well with Teresa Brennan's Transmission of Affect.)
November 2, 2008
What does it say that I've only read Volume 2....
March 29, 2011
finally got around to vol.2.
April 2, 2017
I thought vol 1 was bad....
...I was wrong.
This book is among the most terrifying that I have ever read.
...I was wrong.
This book is among the most terrifying that I have ever read.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews