Post: #51

(06-02-2014 05:14 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Not necessarily. Shorter lifespan also means shorter period spent in elderly years, during which medical care is most expensive. It could easily be the opposite.

It probably costs less to care for someone who suddenly dies from antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea at 55 than to care for someone who withers away from dementia between 60 and 80.

I'm talking about life insurance, not health insurance.

Post: #52

Oh sorry, misread your post. As far as life insurance goes, I'd say that yes, it might be the case. But it could also be reflected in a smaller payout in case of death (reflecting less "savings" and "productive value" from a shorter lifespan) rather than higher payments.

Post: #53

It's the medical care and kids that make gays seem "ahead" money and savings wise into old age. Gays indeed average higher savings for retirement then hetro people but this is because gays by majority don't have kids to siphon off their resources.

Let's put gay life expectancy on the stage right now. In the 70s and 80s it was a national public health crisis in that African-American men lagged behind national averages in life expectancy, at it's peak Black American men lagged 7.6 years which was at the it's peak in the 70s. There is literally mountains of research on this topic if you dig around. Next, is the fact that gays have a lower life expectancy average then Russia which has the lowest average among any developed nation (64 years). If Gays were a country they would be dead last in the OECD, and would have the same life expectancy average as vibrant places such as Liberia, Afghanistan, and The Congo.

So, swap out gays and insert anybody else. Imagine the institutional and health crisis that would be going on to address this. Why isn't this front page news? Why do even gays seem to not give a fuck about this? Gay media will report on it at times, I've seen Toronto gay pap are covers in the newsstand talk specifically on one cover about the fact that in many gay couples, of their is a large age gap the older partner dies in his 50s (!!!) and it's not the obvious reasons of HIV for this. But this is a solo and you never hear gay groups attempting to make any of their core issues known on a mainstream level ....

Also, how does this effect the kids argument? I've been vocal on gay marriage just being a scam to get at children, so How can you justify turning over a baby to a gay couple at 35 whom will likely both die before the kid turns 18?? The kid will be left likely a large sum of money but that dosn't paper over the emotional stress the kid has to deal with in butting both his parents. Does not matter if it's two dads or a normal hetro set of parents as it will fuck the kid up regardless.

Why is society trolling and not looking into this?
As I noted gays aren't trying to press this in the mainstream. It's largely females, bisexual men (ultimate trolls), and maybe a few white knights, whom do the deeds of not wanting this data out.

Post: #54

(06-01-2014 09:03 AM)ColSpanker Wrote:  Some days I just don't want to live on this planet.

Why this planet?

Homosexuality, especially homo propaganda, is practically outlawed in many regions of this planet, including the largest country in the world.

Post: #55

(06-02-2014 05:47 AM)kosko Wrote:  Also, how does this effect the kids argument? I've been vocal on gay marriage just being a scam to get at children,

I've interacted with enough gay men through work and social connections to think they don't really want children, or to get married. (Every partnered guy has been in an 'open relationship'). The only gays I knew who had kids were because they'd been targeted for their sperm by lesbian couples, were barely involved in their child's life, and it usually worked out as well as you'd imagined.

Gay men strike me as largely infantile - they're trapped in a pre-pubescent mindset, misunderstanding how peer group norms dictate acceptable behaviour that you need to ape to avoid becoming a social outcast that most children start figuring out around 13 or so, when puberty hits and they're aware that they're being judged by those around them. It's why you'll be at a polite dinner party and suddenly the gay guy is talking about fisting without realising it's not appropriate for the situation.

I never feel like gay guys have figured out socialisation. They're the younger kid on the playground, throwing a tantrum. "You don't like me! You have to like me! I'll MAKE you like me." Then they run off to tell the teacher to make you play with them.

So, no, I don't think they're after kids. Gay men want the right to have children or get married because they're been told NO. That's all it is. You ever seen a child do something you've told them not to just to spite you? Same deal.

I was manning the BBQ at a work function last year, and one of the flaming nurses comes up. I warn him not to touch the pot until I get him some gloves, as it's really hot.

He touches the pot. Sound of sizzling flesh. God bless him, he tries to save face before putting his hand in his drink. "It's not THAT hot."

It's this constant toddleresque need to antagonise authority figures - like they're still feeling out the safe boundaries of rebellion and exploration away from their parents, except it's still happening at 50 instead of being resolved by 5.

Interacting with gay guys is sort of like babysitting without getting paid. Look at me! Look at me! Me me me me me!

Post: #56

(06-01-2014 08:48 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  It's funny ...They conveniently dropped any reference to gay or LGBT. It's now the "NJ Pride" parade and festival.

http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/201..._park.html

Thats actually kind of good in the long run. People can just show up with state flags and make it about 'state pride' instead of rainbow flags. Why not even throw in some racial pride groups and make it a total shit show.

Post: #57

(06-02-2014 06:54 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 05:47 AM)kosko Wrote:  Also, how does this effect the kids argument? I've been vocal on gay marriage just being a scam to get at children,

I've interacted with enough gay men through work and social connections to think they don't really want children, or to get married. (Every partnered guy has been in an 'open relationship'). The only gays I knew who had kids were because they'd been targeted for their sperm by lesbian couples, were barely involved in their child's life, and it usually worked out as well as you'd imagined.

Gay men strike me as largely infantile - they're trapped in a pre-pubescent mindset, misunderstanding how peer group norms dictate acceptable behaviour that you need to ape to avoid becoming a social outcast that most children start figuring out around 13 or so, when puberty hits and they're aware that they're being judged by those around them. It's why you'll be at a polite dinner party and suddenly the gay guy is talking about fisting without realising it's not appropriate for the situation.

I never feel like gay guys have figured out socialisation. They're the younger kid on the playground, throwing a tantrum. "You don't like me! You have to like me! I'll MAKE you like me." Then they run off to tell the teacher to make you play with them.

So, no, I don't think they're after kids. Gay men want the right to have children or get married because they're been told NO. That's all it is. You ever seen a child do something you've told them not to just to spite you? Same deal.

I was manning the BBQ at a work function last year, and one of the flaming nurses comes up. I warn him not to touch the pot until I get him some gloves, as it's really hot.

He touches the pot. Sound of sizzling flesh. God bless him, he tries to save face before putting his hand in his drink. "It's not THAT hot."

It's this constant toddleresque need to antagonise authority figures - like they're still feeling out the safe boundaries of rebellion and exploration away from their parents, except it's still happening at 50 instead of being resolved by 5.

Interacting with gay guys is sort of like babysitting without getting paid. Look at me! Look at me! Me me me me me!

The inverse is also true, our lesbian logging laborers were generally good employees that ended up in jail for beating their spouses and partners just as much as the men did...whereas the straight women had the following two priorities 1. how much could they complain and 2. who could they fuck in order to get a better assignment.

Post: #58

Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

Post: #59

(06-02-2014 12:17 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

True. The best revenge against fags is to have children (at least 2) and raise them well.

Post: #60

(06-02-2014 12:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 12:17 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

True. The best revenge against fags is to have children (at least 2) and raise them well.

And most importantly, not send them to public school. But I guess you kinda had that covered with "raise them well."

Post: #61

Like others have said, gays use their sexuality to deflect their true problems.

Their true problems being that they act and dress in a weird and unlikable way.

If they assessed their true problems: lack of proper social conditioning, they would lead much happier more emotionally healthy lives.

Personally, I find it sick that high level liberals in their quest for power are pushing gays in a direction that further ostracizes them from society.

Post: #62

(06-02-2014 12:17 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

I'm more live and let live. The gays don't worry me. What I don't like is being expected to constantly-drop everything I'm doing and cheerlead them through every minor crisis in their life and tell them how unique and beautiful and special they are. It's narcissism again: they don't treat us like autonomous human beings with our own lives, goals and problems. We're an audience who is expected to clap on command, and nothing more.

A woman I used to work with once commented that she was convinced that one of the male nurses seemed to think the moment he left the room, we just sat there, staring into space like broken puppets until he returned.

Most of the gay men I've met talk AT you, not TO you, and their style of conversation is self-focused. They don't invite you to talk by asking questions that show they're listening to you, they're simply waiting for you to stop talking so they can keep talking about themselves further. It's why it's common to see them with other gays having parallel conversations - an exchange of information where two people aren't really listening to each other - something else you normally see in young children when they play together.

I actually remember one of them saying to me. "How are you? Not that I actually care, I've just been told it's polite to ask," before launching into a conversation about his latest drama. Since charisma is largely convincingly-people you are genuinely-interested in them and what they're saying without appearing distracted and disconnected, you can see why this kind of behaviour would make gays unlikeable to people, and that's without considering their habit of being sexually-inappropriate in conversation.

I don't actually see them as acting feminine. I see what they do as an eight-year-old boy's mocking performance of what he thinks women are. It's very "ewww, girl germs" to me, which, makes sense, given their absolute raging misogyny for women, particularly their sexual parts. I've no idea why women love them so much when gays call them 'Fish'. It's like gays think vaginas are diseased, the absolute horror on their faces when they talk about them is nothing but hysteria.

My girlfriend has a flaming gay friend. She's often on the phone talking him off the ledge. I asked her once how she handled it. She just shrugged and said, "I know it always blows over once he does a lap of his goldfish bowl."

I will admit a tiny minority I've met were unplugged, having swallowed their own version of the red pill. They were absolutely lost because society - particularly women - only expected them to fill their role as funny little clown.

Post: #63

(06-02-2014 03:24 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 12:17 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

I'm more live and let live. The gays don't worry me. What I don't like is being expected to constantly-drop everything I'm doing and cheerlead them through every minor crisis in their life and tell them how unique and beautiful and special they are. It's narcissism again: they don't treat us like autonomous human beings with our own lives, goals and problems. We're an audience who is expected to clap on command, and nothing more.

A woman I used to work with once commented that she was convinced that one of the male nurses seemed to think the moment he left the room, we just sat there, staring into space like broken puppets until he returned.

Most of the gay men I've met talk AT you, not TO you, and their style of conversation is self-focused. They don't invite you to talk by asking questions that show they're listening to you, they're simply waiting for you to stop talking so they can keep talking about themselves further. It's why it's common to see them with other gays having parallel conversations - an exchange of information where two people aren't really listening to each other - something else you normally see in young children when they play together.

I actually remember one of them saying to me. "How are you? Not that I actually care, I've just been told it's polite to ask," before launching into a conversation about his latest drama. Since charisma is largely convincingly-people you are genuinely-interested in them and what they're saying without appearing distracted and disconnected, you can see why this kind of behaviour would make gays unlikeable to people, and that's without considering their habit of being sexually-inappropriate in conversation.

I don't actually see them as acting feminine. I see what they do as an eight-year-old boy's mocking performance of what he thinks women are. It's very "ewww, girl germs" to me, which, makes sense, given their absolute raging misogyny for women, particularly their sexual parts. I've no idea why women love them so much when gays call them 'Fish'. It's like gays think vaginas are diseased, the absolute horror on their faces when they talk about them is nothing but hysteria.

My girlfriend has a flaming gay friend. She's often on the phone talking him off the ledge. I asked her once how she handled it. She just shrugged and said, "I know it always blows over once he does a lap of his goldfish bowl."

I will admit a tiny minority I've met were unplugged, having swallowed their own version of the red pill. They were absolutely lost because society - particularly women - only expected them to fill their role as funny little clown.

I know what you mean. I have one gay friend who is a very mature and astute guy. In fact, gay is the last thing you'd expect to hear from him. He's legit looking for a monogamous relationship with another man and doesn't want to hook up and be in an open relationship. I feel bad for him because even he complains of all the "faggots" running around and acting like immature girls.

A second former friend of mine who has tried numerously to get into my pants (that's why he ' s former friend) is married to another guy who views me as a threat. It's sad because he extolls the open relationship lifestyle yet it is clearly obvious his partner isn't too pleased with it.

I've gone so far asr to threaten mentioning his behavior to his hushand. He clammed up real quick. I'm sick of the attitude he has too.

It's sadr most of them act like children

Post: #64

I met one of your US soldiers a few nights ago. He enlightened me on the Iraq conflict and told me that he had kissed many men before, then went on to describe 'man love' being something you can only truly appreciate when you 'fight another man' and learn to destroy him. Apparently he had put his tongue to many men and thought it was "Rad!"... he dropped many 'hints' of this continually throughout the night intermixed with some extreme violent talk and bragged that he full on made out with a guy to get some women to make out with each other. He became extremely irrate when I questioned his notion of 'going to Iraq to save babies'. He suddenly told me he had personally cut up someone with a knife and smashed peoples skulls into walls and that I needed to tone it down.

The other libtard I was with started beratting me for 'goading' him into action. Instead they thought, I should merely sit quietly and nod and if I had any opinion keep it to myself or say it to their squads so I could be cut to pieces. He said this with a straight face and the other man nodding all the way. Both of these males are married to women here and both are ex-military. Then said that if I had a problem with this, maybe its cause I was gay. Suffice to say, I won't be inviting them out, ever again. Both Americans... both HATE Russians because Russians hate freedom and gay rights.

If this is the future of your country men, people should be terrified.

Post: #65

I should probably give this one its own thread. Get ready.

Yahoo's execrable feminist section Shine just did a story on parents who were given an award for allowing their 6-year-old girl to "transition" into being a boy.

They made a video to commemorate the occasion and that's what earned them the honor:

"The video was created and first shared on May 22 at the Annual Harvey Milk Diversity Breakfast* in San Diego, a major event that honors the slain LGBT activist and, this year, celebrated the release of the new Harvey Milk commemorative postage stamp. Ryland and his parents, San Diego real estate agents Jeff and Hillary Whittington, received this year’s Inspiration Award at the event, eliciting much applause and many tears from the 1,000-plus attendees."

I don't know which is worse, these attention-whoring parents or the media, which is "celebrating" it. I understand kids have issues, but letting someone that young choose their sex (or "gender") strikes me as wildly wrong. Kids aren't allowed to choose what's for dinner. Yet we're letting them choose to be another sex?!

* Yes, there was an actual "Diversity Breakfast." Not a "South Park" parody of an idea, but an actual event.

Post: #66

(06-02-2014 04:03 PM)frenchie Wrote:  I know what you mean. I have one gay friend who is a very mature and astute guy. In fact, gay is the last thing you'd expect to hear from him. He's legit looking for a monogamous relationship with another man and doesn't want to hook up and be in an open relationship. I feel bad for him because even he complains of all the "faggots" running around and acting like immature girls.

A second former friend of mine who has tried numerously to get into my pants (that's why he ' s former friend) is married to another guy who views me as a threat. It's sad because he extolls the open relationship lifestyle yet it is clearly obvious his partner isn't too pleased with it.

I've gone so far asr to threaten mentioning his behavior to his hushand. He clammed up real quick. I'm sick of the attitude he has too.

It's sadr most of them act like children

I have a sneaking suspicion that the gay guys who are monogamous and LTR-orientated would have lower SMV in the gay marketplace than the majority and can't compete in it: the gay version of 'The Wall', aging or ugly. The status of the relationship as 'open' or 'closed' would be dictated by whichever partner is the better-looking one of the pair.

I've noticed the ones who don't act like children have had harder, less comfortable lives that have forced them to become emotionally-resilient, and they're far-less typically-gay because of it.

One of the most hardcore motherfuckers I know is gay. You'd never guess. Hell, he doesn't even call it that: "That's a whole 'nother thing and I'm not whatever that is." His attitude is that gay guys don't have sex with each other to emotionally connect - they simply use each other's bodies to masturbate - because the thrill comes from being desired by someone else, as validation of their attractiveness. The sex act is secondary - it's the narcissistic supply they're addicted to. Kind of like chicks with social media.

Most commonly, he says, the performance involves aping what they sexually-desire most - straight men - so you end up with them obsessed with Paraphilia that signifies straight masculinity: army fatigues, cop uniforms, lumberjacks, firemen, leather gear, etc. All the hoary male stripper concepts that appeal to women.

Since they're children who don't understand peer socialism, they think wearing these things is equivalent to actually having the same masculine-qualities possessed by those archetypes, so thing their performace is more genuine, and, as such, get to feel their masculinity is validated by their partner desiring them.

You know how some kids are really into dress-ups, will wrap a towel around their necks, think it makes them Superman, and then go jump off the roof? Same thing.

You can see why anonymous sex is encouraged in their culture - they simply don't care who their partner is, just what he represents.

I think there's something solid to his theories. I keep telling him he should write a book.

Post: #67

(06-02-2014 04:29 PM)BadWolf Wrote:  I met one of your US soldiers a few nights ago. He enlightened me on the Iraq conflict and told me that he had kissed many men before, then went on to describe 'man love' being something you can only truly appreciate when you 'fight another man' and learn to destroy him.

He's just a gay guy , who has a plausible-deniability wife, probably due to a lower class upbringing. The giveaway: gay men filter every life experience they have through their sexuality, and, expect their audience to think the exact way they do: fighting a man is sexual to him because he's sexually-attracted to men.

I remember a gay guy goading me for ages to get me to admit that after a rugby game, when all the men are showering together, it must be really 'homoerotic' because you're all so 'muscley and fit and naked together'. He seemed to honestly believe that all guys are secretly gay, and just hiding their attraction to each other.

I said "But we're not sexually-attracted to men, so there's no sexual vibe to us at all."

"It'd have to be sexy!"

"If I put you in the showers with women, would you feel a sexual vibe?"

He instantly went off on a 'girl germs' style rant about girls. I knew I could count on the raging misogyny of gay men to make him to see equivalency.

I get hit on a LOT by gays. Their clichéd form of attack is to offer you head. "If you shut your eyes, it will feel just like a girl is doing it."

Which is why I always say, "If that's true, then you can suck my dick if you shut your eyes and fuck a woman first."

None of them has ever called my bluff. You'd think vagina was rotting, flyblown meat to them. I once heard one describe it as a 'mutilated axe wound'.

Post: #68

(06-02-2014 12:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 12:17 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

True. The best revenge against fags is to have children (at least 2) and raise them well.

Only if we can prevent them from access to other people's children, that is to say, prevent gay marriage.

Post: #69

(06-02-2014 05:44 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 12:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 12:17 PM)frenchie Wrote:  Don't worry too much about the gays. They will slowly but surely die off one by one. Nature has already levied its punishment and without them being able to have kids, their ideals will disappear.

Give it time, the pendulum of culture will swing back in the opposite way.

True. The best revenge against fags is to have children (at least 2) and raise them well.

Only if we can prevent them from access to other people's children, that is to say, prevent gay marriage.

lawl, fag marriages aren't going to stay together or produce nearly enough children to make a lasting difference.

I also wonder how many of the adopted children of fag marriages are nothing more than future pedo cases?