Post: #26

I've obtained rare footage of Vladimir Putin reading this article.

Post: #27

(10-13-2015 11:44 PM)Teutatis Wrote:  I didn't bother to read the article, like Quintus said, this is just another propaganda piece to make it seem more acceptable and common "hey, this is normal, you should do it too", but why did she specifically referred to white men doing this and not just man in general?

Because this concept has already is well-established by Academia and Journalism as existing in the African-American community, whether it is true or not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down-low_(sexual_slang)

It's far outside my realm of experience, but it's interesting to read the 'Media Interest' section and see that the media wrote 170 articles on the topic in 5 years... almost as if they had an agenda.

Post: #28

I have mentioned the problem of the gay-straight sex crossover before:

/thread-50618...pid1117270

The more crossover dudes they indoctrinate the better the chance of any of us getting diseases from women who have slept with guys who mess around for the wrong team.

Post: #29

interesting

Post: #30

(10-13-2015 08:33 PM)Captainstabbin Wrote:  To quote Dice Clay - "You either suck dick or you do not suck dick. There's no in between."

The Dice Man has been the beacon for decades.

Post: #31

There's definitely some shady shit going on with this faulty science! I can't remember the name of it, but there was a study that David D mentioned that clearly showed that a woman's sexuality is somewhat fluid while the one of a man is most likely to be on a set path ( being gay or straight). We're going to be ok over here, but imagine a young confused kid reading this dumb shit... and he might be tempted to try it out! Fuck things are getting worse and worse it seems!

Post: #32

What's abundantly clear is that women have no idea what sexual orientation really is.

A few months ago I wrote about my sexual encounters with a "lesbian". She claimed to never have slept with a man and continued to remind me that she was a lesbian even after we'd had sex. Like she was able to simply "decide" what label she wanted to be as if it were her favorite color. Female logic?

If they can't even figure out themselves, they shouldn't be an authority on sex, orientation, or anything else in that ballpark. It's clear they are only going to continue spreading blatant lies about men. They must think if they can get enough people to agree with them, suddenly these ridiculous notions will become true. Salon needs to go.

Post: #33

(10-13-2015 08:13 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  If you have sex with other men, you are gay. That's what the word means.
I thought being gay was supposed to be a point of pride for these people. Why are they trying to say that you can have sex with a man and be straight?

It's like the famous onion article.

Prediction:

Gay is going to be some sort of privilege/royalty term in the future. Articles will come out that say 'everyone bangs everyone...its gender fluidity'. However, to maintain victim status there will be 'pure' gays that claim things like "I am a woman, and i will only ever bang women"...and that purity will make them like the "master race" of gays, bi-s and trannies.

Post: #34

There is an easy way to test this writer's ideas.

Get a hidden camera. Go out with your sports-guy or work-guy buddies. Get a few drinks. Then put the moves on them and other guys in the vicinity.

What do you think would happen?

I think you'd get a dose of "fist fluidity" in your face. Or you'd get rejected by the crowd ("I might be liberal, but that doesn't mean you can touch me, perv -- see a shrink").

As for other cultures and evolution: Humans are here for one reason and one reason only, which is to continue the species. If American men are less inclined to be on "the downlow"* than other types of men, it means they're more evolved, not less, because being straight points the way to reproduction.

The push towards "gender fluidity" is backwards Third World-ism, not progressive by any means. The most "progressive" societies in t[/align]erms of actual intellectual progress were the most sexually repressive in a lot of ways (America circa 1940-1970, for example and England in its heyday).

* From what I gather, "the downlow" among black men in the U.S. evolved out of prison culture, where men are forced to be with other men because of threats of violence and/or straight-up rape. These men then take their damaged post-rape psyches into the real world and continued their sexual dysfunction.

This is not "progress." This is the result of sexual abuse.

I see this as similar to the way female rape victims often act out sexually later on. For a white female writer to pen an article that alludes to it being somehow liberating is ignorant at best, and heartless at worse.

Post: #35

Quote:“One of the things that men like about other men is how meaningless it is. It’s just for fun.”

Post: #36

(10-13-2015 09:21 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  There was a study that showed that when monitored straight men were only aroused by women, gay men by men and women by all sorts of things. The finding was that men are pretty binary in their likes while women's desires are more far-reaching.

Unfortunately, I can't find the articles on that study, but it was floating around the manosphere a few years ago. Maybe someone can find it.

Found it:

Quote:She found footage of bonobos, a species of ape, as they mated, and then, because the accompanying sounds were dull — “bonobos don’t seem to make much noise in sex,” she told me, “though the females give a kind of pleasure grin and make chirpy sounds” — she dubbed in some animated chimpanzee hooting and screeching.

She showed the short movie to men and women, straight and gay. To the same subjects, she also showed clips of heterosexual sex, male and female homosexual sex, a man masturbating, a woman masturbating, a chiseled man walking naked on a beach and a well-toned woman doing calisthenics in the nude.

The genitals of the volunteers were connected to plethysmographs — for the men, an apparatus that fits over the penis and gauges its swelling; for the women, a little plastic probe that sits in the vagina and, by bouncing light off the vaginal walls, measures genital blood flow. An engorgement of blood spurs a lubricating process called vaginal transudation: the seeping of moisture through the walls. The participants were also given a keypad so that they could rate how aroused they felt.

The men, on average, responded genitally in what Chivers terms “category specific” ways. Males who identified themselves as straight swelled while gazing at heterosexual or lesbian sex and while watching the masturbating and exercising women. They were mostly unmoved when the screen displayed only men.

Gay males were aroused in the opposite categorical pattern.

Any expectation that the animal sex would speak to something primitive within the men seemed to be mistaken; neither straights nor gays were stirred by the bonobos. And for the male participants, the subjective ratings on the keypad matched the readings of the plethysmograph. The men’s minds and genitals were in agreement.

All was different with the women. No matter what their self-proclaimed sexual orientation, they showed, on the whole, strong and swift genital arousal when the screen offered men with men, women with women and women with men.

They responded objectively much more to the exercising woman than to the strolling man, and their blood flow rose quickly — and markedly, though to a lesser degree than during all the human scenes except the footage of the ambling, strapping man — as they watched the apes. And with the women, especially the straight women, mind and genitals seemed scarcely to belong to the same person. The readings from the plethysmograph and the keypad weren’t in much accord.

During shots of lesbian coupling, heterosexual women reported less excitement than their vaginas indicated; watching gay men, they reported a great deal less; and viewing heterosexual intercourse, they reported much more. Among the lesbian volunteers, the two readings converged when women appeared on the screen. But when the films featured only men, the lesbians reported less engagement than the plethysmograph recorded. Whether straight or gay, the women claimed almost no arousal whatsoever while staring at the bonobos.

TL;DR: Women have no idea what turns them on.

Post: #37

What about all the prison rape stories you hear? Some say its about dominance, but its supposedly 'straight' men who engage in sex with other men... perhaps there is something to the notion that regardless of sexual preference, the absence of options results in abnormal sexual behavior.

Post: #38

I think it was Roissy who said that women have that omni-sexual receptivity to them because they were generally the recipients of rape, particularly in unstable regions where war brides were a big deal, and it's physically less traumatic for them to be aroused while being raped than otherwise.

I think he further theorized that the imaginary campus rape epidemic was because it was something most women jill off thinking about (basically that they're just so hot that some rapist is willing to risk getting murdered by her clansmen just to fuck her) and their collective lizard brains are secretly disappointed that this is not the case. I might be mistaken on the second bit, though.

Post: #39

Right now, they're justifying this phenomenon by calling it "meaningless". However, when more of the tortured Beta masses start doing it, they will try to push it upon everyone by calling it "deep", "serious", "life-changing" and "something that every 'straight' man should experience at least once".

Post: #40

(10-14-2015 09:14 AM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 09:21 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  There was a study that showed that when monitored straight men were only aroused by women, gay men by men and women by all sorts of things. The finding was that men are pretty binary in their likes while women's desires are more far-reaching.

Unfortunately, I can't find the articles on that study, but it was floating around the manosphere a few years ago. Maybe someone can find it.

Found it:

Quote:She found footage of bonobos, a species of ape, as they mated, and then, because the accompanying sounds were dull — “bonobos don’t seem to make much noise in sex,” she told me, “though the females give a kind of pleasure grin and make chirpy sounds” — she dubbed in some animated chimpanzee hooting and screeching.

Not again the Bonobos - someone in the 'sphere had a large article on it and debunked that crap. Bonobos in captivity indeed fuck anything just like many men engage in homosexual behaviors behind bars.

However as soon as released and studied in freedom, then Bonobos are heterosexual, aggressive, dominant and territorial. Humans are the same - their sexuality adapts out of necessity and not because that enjoy fucking another dude.

The numbers of homosexuals seem to be constant at 0,5%- 0.7% of the population (I count only those that were not abused - when you are sexually abused as a child, then your chances go way up to be gay).

That article is another point of promotion of homosexuality.

I have already read articles like: "Is not having gay sex homophobic?" as well as "Not wanting to fuck a black girl/man is racist!"

Fuck them all and their propaganda.

Post: #41

This likely is just some wider fantasy of gay men who want to have sex with 'straight' men. As so far as I've gathered a lot of gay men have fantasies of 'turning' a straight man.

That isn't going to happen though. The idea is absurd, you don't get girls, you jack off, not look to engage in homosex.

The only one's who be the target of such campaigns, if we are to look for sinister motives, are young teenagers with poor self esteem. Which would tie in fine with the recent push of pedophilia acceptance. I.e. the desire of homosexual adults to 'turn' a young straight boy, who just the other day was told in school of this bro-job and how 'it isn't a big deal'.

Does that sound like it is too much? I am not so sure.

Post: #42

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I'm getting.

It's simply undeniable that the modern man's very identity is under persistent attack.

This is an attempt to denigrate and humiliate men, and to smear normal male sexuality.

This guttersnipe author, Weisman, obviously has her own man-hating agenda. She clearly has some grudge against men and expresses it by shoveling these shit articles.

Let me pose a thought experiment that would send a bug up the asses of these people, and show that two can play this game.

How about if I publish an article with the title:

Why Female Genital Infibulation Is A Good Thing

I can put out some faux argument showing how the African practice of clitorectomy and sealing up the vagina is a great thing, and that all women should be "open-minded" to it.

Because, hey, after all, it's been going on in sub-Saharan Africa for 2000 years, right?

These articles put out by these hacks from Salon, Gawker, Buzzfeed, etc. are literally poison.

It's deliberate propaganda designed to demoralize, break down, and destroy the dignity of men. In this case, the target is (in her words) "white men."

I'm not convinced that the focus on "white men" rather than "all men" is just accidental. I think there is an even more devious, evil subterfuge going on here that Weisman is doing.

Sometimes I think that the "red pill" is only the first pill to be taken. There is another pill after the red pill, that opens doors to an even darker world than the red pill world. Behind the red pill world, lurks a world that holds even darker, more sinister secrets.

We get vague outlines of it here and there. But it's definitely there. It's like that dark matter out there in the universe that we can't see, but can sense is there. Maybe we should call it the black pill: the ultimate, most unsettling knowledge, reserved only for those who can handle it.

Post: #43

'Weisman'.

As I wrote in another thread.

99% of the time when reading degenerate destructive crap you know the tribe who wrote it.

That's literally in the literal sense. Try it out. 9/10 the author is tribe.

Post: #44

I stopped reading at Weisman.

Post: #45

There are dark subtexts here, that go beyond what we are permitted to discuss in polite society. But they are there, and cannot be wished away, or denied.

Post: #46

Live in any major city long enough and you will inevitably run into septic gays that try to befriend and convert new straight man meat to minimize their chances of catching the dreaded HIV AIDS life sentence.

This Weisman is just being a fag hag wing women for her flock of GBFs trying to stealth straight men to become their fresh meat... one evil tribal beezie who has likely not had solid wood since her college carousel days and is bitter about it making up crap that will generate curiosity clicks for her cucked employers.

Post: #47

Yeah, the cultural degenerates are really ramping up their campaigns. The gay marriage Supreme Court decision was one of many big battles they've already won. I liked this recent Roosh piece:

http://www.rooshv.com/why-homosexual-mar...raight-men

That helped open the floodgates to the whole range of other depravities: transsexualism, creeping acceptance of man-boy sexualizations, etc.

And at the same time while they're pushing warped sexual perversions, they are shaming and maligning normal, healthy sexual interactions between men and women.

The institutions that should be putting up a fight have either sold out, been co-opted, or have been cowed into silence. Look how the Church, the military, and the schools just cave and cave and cave.

They are radicalizing people with their agenda. The consequences will not be pleasant.

Post: #48

Quote:Sex therapist Susan Block agrees. “I hear about it going on in Saudi Arabia, in Latin America – I talk to guys from all over the world who are doing this. In all different cultures.”

The frack? I can understand in Saudi Arabia, were you have a very oppresive and culture, but in South America? Here if you fuck with guys you are a faggot, period.

Post: #49

^^^
She's lying, distorting, and pandering.

Post: #50

Salon the pedo acceptance rag says straight men like getting sodomized.

Salo the pedo acceptance rag lambasted Jim Webb last night because he was the only one not being an SJW stooge.

They've had quite an eventful last few weeks.