Post: #151

(07-19-2014 05:58 PM)Heathree Wrote:  ^ I'd like to know what sort of reaction Carl Ligerfield (left dude last picture) would get if he went into an average neighbourhood dressed like that

I totally want to dress like that. I'm about 72% of the way there.

Post: #152

(07-19-2014 05:55 PM)Gimlet Wrote:  

(07-19-2014 03:06 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  ...

In summary, there IS NO SMV value for gay men over 50.

Of course there is, so long as the gay man is rich and powerful.

The gay and lesbian relationships follow along the same lines as our own heterosexual ones.

There is always one partner who is the more masculine and dominant one, in ideal circumstances he is the provider. While the Alpha and Beta states cannot be transferred 100% there are huge overlaps there.

The feminine gays feel attraction towards the dominant ones with Game and the ones who have great wealth can attract younger hotter men.

You can even observe it among the lesbians - Rollo Tomassi has some stuff on his site as he interacted with lesbians who did not understand that one partner even among their relationships has to be the more dominant one.

Now of course the gay community is way more promiscuous than ours, so relationships are usually "open" in one form or another.

Personally I am quite tolerant towards gays - live and let live. Just don't shove it down my throat as something superior and relationships of homosexuals simply cannot be equated to conventional mother/father marriages. It is simply not preferable for children. I would never let them adopt any kid. If they want one, then they should hire a surrogate or in the case of lesbians bear the child. Then at least there is one biological parent who has a much more saner connection to the child.

Even Roissy wrote that he frequented gay clubs because in tough environments like DC it was easier to game the girls there. I have three gay acquaintances who are extremely balanced and masculine and hardly anyone would realize that they are gay. One is an high-tech entrepreneur and geek, one is an artist and one is a middle-level manager - all of them nice guys. I never asked them about their sexual life, because I do not care.

The problem in our society are not gays - they have been around forever - the problem is the promotion and glorification of the culture and treating their relationships as completely equal to conventional ones for children.

Post: #153

(07-20-2014 04:17 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  The problem in our society are not gays - they have been around forever - the problem is the promotion and glorification of the culture and treating their relationships as completely equal to conventional ones for children.

I agree. I don't really give a fuck whether or not someone is gay, straight, bisexual, black, white, green, whatever. However, I think that it's intellectually dishonest to say that they live the same lifestyle as heterosexuals. Also, I hate the fact that their agenda is pushed onto everyone else.

There's an article out there somewhere about a man raised by two lesbians. He said it was awful and he had no idea how to be a man.

Post: #154

"There's an article out there somewhere about a man raised by two lesbians. He said it was awful and he had no idea how to be a man."

This is something that I wish was discussed more.

The Cathedral will have you think that it's okay to be raised by a homosexual couple because it fits into their model of gender ambiguity and misdirection. But for people like us, we know that gender roles are reinforced by what kids see in their parents. The wife is caring and sweet, while the father is the MAN of the house. Being raised by homos will never give you a solid blend of masculinity and femininity.

Post: #155

Gays transfer their wealth across generations by getting boytoys when they are younger. These boytoys, if they are smart, will use the early financial leverage to get a boost to their career and make tons of money. Then, when these boytoys get old they will have enough money to attract young men. The cycle has been repeating itself for centuries most likely.

Post: #156

(07-20-2014 04:57 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Gays transfer their wealth across generations by getting boytoys when they are younger. These boytoys, if they are smart, will use the early financial leverage to get a boost to their career and make tons of money. Then, when these boytoys get old they will have enough money to attract young men. The cycle has been repeating itself for centuries most likely.

But all they do is consume, and stating "generation" give the notion they carry over life which they don't. The wealth gets "transferd" to the boy toys but all they do is buy drugs and clothes. Where are the swaths of gay humanitarians setting up foundations and building schools and libraries? They are hard- programmed to burn through it all before they burn themselves.

Your grandpa gave you a house or a boat, something of value. He helped make you by raising your father to be a stand up guy that could get a girl to plant his seed in the first place, all that has value in the big picture.

A old gay dude with money gives his boy toy is Visa..

They both die off. Story is over.

Post: #157

(07-20-2014 10:06 PM)kosko Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 04:57 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Gays transfer their wealth across generations by getting boytoys when they are younger. These boytoys, if they are smart, will use the early financial leverage to get a boost to their career and make tons of money. Then, when these boytoys get old they will have enough money to attract young men. The cycle has been repeating itself for centuries most likely.

But all they do is consume, and stating "generation" give the notion they carry over life which they don't. The wealth gets "transferd" to the boy toys but all they do is buy drugs and clothes. Where are the swaths of gay humanitarians setting up foundations and building schools and libraries? They are hard- programmed to burn through it all before they burn themselves.

Your grandpa gave you a house or a boat, something of value. He helped make you by raising your father to be a stand up guy that could get a girl to plant his seed in the first place, all that has value in the big picture.

A old gay dude with money gives his boy toy is Visa..

They both die off. Story is over.

Yes - it is a very destructive disease which parasites itself off the main body of healthy hetrosexuals.

Post: #158

(07-16-2014 09:48 AM)scorpion Wrote:  The article really drives home just how different homosexuals are from the rest of us. They have a mental illness that essentially turns them into depraved perverts, who are obsessed with having sex with men to such a degree that they disregard their own health and the health of others. It is outrageous, absolutely outrageous, to label these people as normal and healthy, and to equate their sexual perversions with normal heterosexual behavior, much less marriage.

This forum for better or worse celebrates both rawdogging and fucking as many girls as possible. Some members say they run through 60+ girls a year and many no doubt wish they could fuck even more, meanwhile Roosh himself tries to rawdog as many of his conquests as he can. Why is it only depraved and debaucherous when the homo's do it?

It's naive think that homosexuals are "just like us", but the only reason the vast majority of straight men aren't having similar sex lives is because they can't. And don't take that to mean I'm defending unprotected sex.

Post: #159

(07-21-2014 11:32 AM)Deluge Wrote:  This forum for better or worse celebrates both rawdogging and fucking as many girls as possible. Some members say they run through 60+ girls a year and many no doubt wish they could fuck even more, meanwhile Roosh himself tries to rawdog as many of his conquests as he can. Why is it only depraved and debaucherous when the homo's do it?

It's naive think that homosexuals are "just like us", but the only reason the vast majority of straight men aren't having similar sex lives is because they can't. And don't take that to mean I'm defending unprotected sex.

1) Did you overlook the facts posted in this thread about how homosexuals have 30x the AIDS infection rate as normal people? They also have grossly elevated rates for other STDs as well. This essentially turns the homosexual community into a giant petri dish for the evolution of increasingly virulent disease strains. This alone makes them an extreme public health menace.

2) Even if homosexuals had no elevated disease risk, there is still the issue of "cultural homosexuality" that is being shoved in peoples' faces. Most people don't care what goes on behind closed doors, the issue is when deviant sexuality is normalized and brought into the public square.

3) You ignore the clear links between pedophilia and homosexuality. No such link exists between pedophiles and normal heterosexuals.

4) Players trying to seduce and rawdog women is simply an exaggerated and accelerated version of the normal human courtship process, which is healthy and necessary for the survival of the species. There is no analog between this behavior and the type of debauchery that is normal among homosexuals.

5) Among normal heterosexuals, the most extreme outliers in terms of sexuality are the hyper promiscuous players and those in the BDSM/fetish community. Both represent a tiny fraction of total heterosexuals. In contrast, the majority of homosexuals would fall into one of these two categories.

Homosexuals are basically just sex perverts. The homosexual's entire life revolves around his sexual perversions. I don't say that out of judgment, but out of pity. It is a mental illness. We are hurting not only society by pretending otherwise, but homosexuals themselves, by giving them license and free rein to abandon themselves to their debauchery rather than trying to help them control their destructive urges.

Post: #160

Quote:1) Did you overlook the facts posted in this thread about how homosexuals have 30x the AIDS infection rate as normal people? They also have grossly elevated rates for other STDs as well. This essentially turns the homosexual community into a giant petri dish for the evolution of increasingly virulent disease strains. This alone makes them an extreme public health menace.

Just because HIV is very rare amongst non-IV drug using straight people doesn't mean that rawdogging isn't an unhealthy practice for us too. Just because we probably won't catch anything that'll kill us doesn't change that fact, slut's today don't care about using condoms and are petri dishes too. Not to mention the high risk of unwanted pregnancy...

Quote:2) Even if homosexuals had no elevated disease risk, there is still the issue of "cultural homosexuality" that is being shoved in peoples' faces. Most people don't care what goes on behind closed doors, the issue is when deviant sexuality is normalized and brought into the public square.

I have no qualms with this point.

Quote:3) You ignore the clear links between pedophilia and homosexuality. No such link exists between pedophiles and normal heterosexuals.

By definition this is simply not true, but that's irrelevant and I know arguing with you about it wont change anyone's mind. The thing is though you didn't mention pedophilia once in the very long post I quoted, your contention was that gay men's sex lives are debaucherous and unhealthy due to their promiscuity and not using condoms.

Quote:5) Among normal heterosexuals, the most extreme outliers in terms of sexuality are the hyper promiscuous players and those in the BDSM/fetish community. Both represent a tiny fraction of total heterosexuals. In contrast, the majority of homosexuals would fall into one of these two categories.

Like I said, the only reason the vast majority of straight men don't also lead "hyper promiscuous" sex lives is because they can't.

Quote:4) Players trying to seduce and rawdog women is simply an exaggerated and accelerated version of the normal human courtship process, which is healthy and necessary for the survival of the species. There is no analog between this behavior and the type of debauchery that is normal among homosexuals.

What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year? Why is only the later destructive and not the former? It seems to me like you're giving players a pass because straight sex is necessary for procreation, or because you don't want to offend people on a forum for players. I personally don't care if you think promiscuity and unsafe sex is destructive/immoral/debaucherous or what have you, but at least be consistent with your position.

Post: #161

Here's a different angle:

Quote:What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

There is no significant difference.

However, a straight man doing that is a rational choice in today's sexual market. Thus, if you want to blame someone, blame women who have created such a market. Men are simply adapting.

As opposed to gays, where this is more of a "popular" rather than "rational" choice and is not under such a strong outside influence.

Just my 2cc.

Post: #162

(07-21-2014 01:34 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Here's a different angle:

Quote:What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

There is no significant difference.

Exactly. Glad you agree.

(07-21-2014 01:34 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  However, a straight man doing that is a rational choice in today's sexual market. Thus, if you want to blame someone, blame women who have created such a market. Men are simply adapting.

As opposed to gays, where this is more of a "popular" rather than "rational" choice and is not under such a strong outside influence.

Just my 2cc.

This bit doesn't make sense, especially the 2nd paragraph. Gay men don't have to deal with women being the gatekeepers of sex, so they're hyper-promiscuous. Top players have to deal with women being the gatekeepers of sex but they have really good keys so they're also hyper-promiscuous. I don't see how players indulging in the promiscuity they have available to them is any more a "rational" choice then fags doing the same.

Post: #163

(07-21-2014 01:26 PM)Deluge Wrote:  What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year? Why is only the later destructive and not the former?

You are falling into the trap of equating no-condom penis in vagina sex with bareback anal.

How many guys, given unlimited access, would rawdog 50 girls a year ANALLY? Let's be generous and say that 5-10 of those were as part of group sex and they weren't the first one in.

"I'd hate myself if I had that kind of attitude, if I were that weak." - Arnold

Post: #164

(07-21-2014 01:34 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Quote:What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

There is no significant difference.

The one important difference is that straight men are mostly engaging in vaginal intercourse, whereas gay men are mostly engaging in anal intercourse, and the latter is a much higher risk in terms of HIV transmission.

Moreover, anal sex is repulsive and a disease incubator and propagator, which is why it was a taboo in every society and in every era, until recently. Homophobia is a reflex, not the result of careful analysis and reasoning. Vaginal sex is necessary for the survival of the human species. Apples and oranges.

Having said that, I personally don't understand rawdogging. I did rawdog three women in my whole life, all ex girlfriends, and when the time came for an HIV test, waiting for the test results was extremely agonizing. I hate condoms, but I hate the waiting game even more.

Post: #165

(07-21-2014 01:26 PM)Deluge Wrote:  What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

I'm gonna take a guess and say anywhere from 20-30 years of life expectancy.

Post: #166

(07-20-2014 01:37 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 04:17 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  The problem in our society are not gays - they have been around forever - the problem is the promotion and glorification of the culture and treating their relationships as completely equal to conventional ones for children.

I agree. I don't really give a fuck whether or not someone is gay, straight, bisexual, black, white, green, whatever. However, I think that it's intellectually dishonest to say that they live the same lifestyle as heterosexuals. Also, I hate the fact that their agenda is pushed onto everyone else.

There's an article out there somewhere about a man raised by two lesbians. He said it was awful and he had no idea how to be a man.

This article? http://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/grow...told-story

Post: #167

(07-21-2014 01:26 PM)Deluge Wrote:  What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

Easy. In the gay community, 30 of those rawdogged men have had sex with 50 other guys in the past year. Another 10 had over 100 partners, and another 10 had fewer than 25.

In the straight community, 30 of those rawdogged women had sex with only 1 other guy in the past year. 10 of the women had sex with more than 5 guys, and the other 10 didn't have sex with anyone.


Now do you get the picture? STDs spread like butter in the gay community because everyone is fucking everyone. Compare that to the straight community, where 90% of men have had fewer than 25 partners.

Thus the guy who fucks 50 women is a fucking pimp, and probably won't catch anything serious because most women are clean. Meanwhile, the fag who fucks 50 men is a disgusting freak, and is exposing himself to thousands of other men and has significant risk of transmission.

Post: #168

Deluge: would you have the same reaction if:

1) Your son told you that he rawdogged twenty girls in the past year (a respectable number for a player and much greater promiscuity than the average heterosexual man).

2) Your son told you he was exploring his sexuality as a gay bottom and was fucked bareback by twenty homosexuals in the past month (a realistic number for homosexuals who participate in the sex party/orgy scene, which is a large percentage of them).

If you honestly think the two are equatable, then you should have the same reaction to both.

Post: #169

Deluge, you're making a mistake here. You are pushing the angle that straight promiscuous men should be just as ashamed of/criticized for their behaviour as promiscuous gay men are and that I am somehow "defending" straight men. I am not! In fact, I agree with you! While I could draw beads and claim that one is worse than the other like Scorpion and Samseau reasonably are, I do find both unpalatable. They're both symptoms of deeply ill societies and appear only during periods of decline.

I'm not denying the existence of maladies or their similarities. I'm simply acknowledging that one malady is more understandable than the others - and thus less deserving of indignation. It is unreasonable for you to expect me to get outraged over a straight alpha guy banging 50 women a year when I so well understand the market forces creating and sustaining him. It would be pointless to moralize about him: he is simply a tool wielded by those with real power in the market. I thus refuse to do it. Why get angry at a hapless tool?

If in your view we truly must moralize about someone to make it "fair" or "equal", the better equivalency would be doing it about gays and women, rather than gays and players.

Post: #170

Gays acquire and spread diseases much more easily. Period.

If vaginal sex transmission rates were the same as gay anal receptive rates no sane guy would be raw-dogging a chick with an unknown status.

But they aren't the same, nor is the average hetero man or woman nearly as promiscuous as the average gay man.

Post: #171

The whole bug chasing thing is chilling. It literally reads as a nasty way for nature to de-select those unfit. A sexual perversion towards HIV infection.

Post: #172

(07-21-2014 01:54 PM)Cunnilinguist Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 01:26 PM)Deluge Wrote:  What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

I'm gonna take a guess and say anywhere from 20-30 years of life expectancy.

But thanks to the invention of socialised medicine and drugs like Truvada, the main difference is no longer 20-30 years of life expectancy, but rather ~$1 million worth of drugs over the life of each homosexual.

And who will pay for all of that? Us!

Post: #173

(07-21-2014 02:12 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-21-2014 01:26 PM)Deluge Wrote:  What's the difference between a straight man rawdogging 50 girls a year and a gay man rawdogging 50 guys a year?

Easy. In the gay community, 30 of those rawdogged men have had sex with 50 other guys in the past year. Another 10 had over 100 partners, and another 10 had fewer than 25.

In the straight community, 30 of those rawdogged women had sex with only 1 other guy in the past year. 10 of the women had sex with more than 5 guys, and the other 10 didn't have sex with anyone.


Now do you get the picture? STDs spread like butter in the gay community because everyone is fucking everyone. Compare that to the straight community, where 90% of men have had fewer than 25 partners.

Thus the guy who fucks 50 women is a fucking pimp, and probably won't catch anything serious because most women are clean. Meanwhile, the fag who fucks 50 men is a disgusting freak, and is exposing himself to thousands of other men and has significant risk of transmission.

Not only that, but sodomy is a vastly more efficient way to spread STDs than vaginal sex. Not just AIDS, but virtually everything else, as well. The rectum was clearly not "designed" to be used for anything but shitting. Even with lots of lube, tears in the skin almost always occur, which leads to blood exposure.

The vagina is a thick, tough, muscular, self-lubricating sheath that developed to hold up to two quite physically traumatic events: fucking and child birth. The rectum is exceedingly thin and delicate, in comparison.

In order for the above scenario to be equivalent in terms of potential disease transmission, the straight guy would have to have vastly more sex partners than the gay guy, since vaginal (and oral) sex is much less likely to spread a given disease, even if one of the partners has it. In addition, women of course have much lower rates of STDs than gay men, which further makes the two situations very different.

Post: #174

(07-21-2014 01:56 PM)RockHard Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 01:37 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 04:17 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  The problem in our society are not gays - they have been around forever - the problem is the promotion and glorification of the culture and treating their relationships as completely equal to conventional ones for children.

I agree. I don't really give a fuck whether or not someone is gay, straight, bisexual, black, white, green, whatever. However, I think that it's intellectually dishonest to say that they live the same lifestyle as heterosexuals. Also, I hate the fact that their agenda is pushed onto everyone else.

There's an article out there somewhere about a man raised by two lesbians. He said it was awful and he had no idea how to be a man.

This article? http://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/grow...told-story

I feel sorry for that poor bastard in the link. The man went through a life of hell and confusion because of his demented dike mothers. That shit is child abuse.

Post: #175

(07-21-2014 01:56 PM)RockHard Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 01:37 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(07-20-2014 04:17 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  The problem in our society are not gays - they have been around forever - the problem is the promotion and glorification of the culture and treating their relationships as completely equal to conventional ones for children.

I agree. I don't really give a fuck whether or not someone is gay, straight, bisexual, black, white, green, whatever. However, I think that it's intellectually dishonest to say that they live the same lifestyle as heterosexuals. Also, I hate the fact that their agenda is pushed onto everyone else.

There's an article out there somewhere about a man raised by two lesbians. He said it was awful and he had no idea how to be a man.

This article? http://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/grow...told-story

Yeah, that might be it. I read it over a year ago.