Comments on: Homosexuality

By: Derpifer

Derpifer — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:43:46 +0000

Ever seen the documentary Hjernevask about the scandinavian equality paradox?

By: The Red Pill for LGBTQs | Sebastian Zearing

The Red Pill for LGBTQs | Sebastian Zearing — Sun, 08 Feb 2015 02:19:27 +0000

[…] Further, it’s actually a complete coincidence that I open this blog mere days after his Homosexuality post. Perhaps I should take that as an omen of good luck! At any rate, if you’re interested […]

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 14 May 2014 16:28:29 +0000

Very nice article. I think you touched on something important though and somehow came to a realisation about the truth of this nature vs. nurture debate. As I think you discovered without actually wording it; it’s a false paradox and not a valid debate as you can never really remove or ignore genetics or the environment when considering people’s motivations. It’s a meaningless debate because they both play a fundamental role in influencing behaviour. Your own examples prove this point. Also, through your eating habits, exercise and mental practices you can alter and improve or worsen your genetic makeup. Moreover, changing your environment and circumstances will have a profound effect on your psychology. Those two constructs are continually influencing and affecting each other, albeit the environment is much less stable than a person’s genetic disposition.

By: Rol

Rol — Mon, 12 May 2014 01:59:20 +0000

I have a tough time understanding men who fuck other men while in prison and then reverting back to women when they’re out.

I’d settle for a lifetime of magazines/movies (whatever they allow in prison) then to begin fucking other men, as a heterosexual.

I think you have to already have some tendency or curiosity to go through with it. A huge part of getting off for me is the act of dominating a feminine woman with all her smells, soft skin and general submissiveness.

Men are absolute boner killers for me. The deep voices, adams apple, facial/body hair, narrow hips, muscles, aggression, etc. How in the hell can a genuinely straight man look beyond this?

By: The Red Pill for LGBTQs | The Rational Queer

The Red Pill for LGBTQs | The Rational Queer — Tue, 06 May 2014 01:49:39 +0000

By: Rollo Tomassi

Rollo Tomassi — Fri, 02 May 2014 18:05:49 +0000

Feminism is the misguided idea that a more “equal” society can be achieved by devoting an effort entirely and exclusively to one sex.

By: Cylux

Cylux — Fri, 02 May 2014 17:36:02 +0000

Why does pro-male (men’s rights activism etc.) always need to be against feminism (I myself tend to agree with a lot of goals of feminism (at least the goals of back when feminism started: equality with men and freedom for women!)

Well ‘pro-male’ is a rather broad brushstroke there, MRA’s and Game advocates are generally NOT in the same camp, and haven’t you really just answered your own question?

Feminism is an ideology, if it’s goals are no longer equality of opportunity, then they’re something else. A lot of feminist rhetoric is explicitly anti-male to the point where some feminists have convinced themselves it is necessary to specifically deny any male children they have breast milk because it would add to their ‘inherent unfair advantage’, it frequently deliberately confuses equality of opportunity with equality of outcome to the point where it uses the lack of the latter for evidence of the lack of the former (despite each form of equality being incompatible with one another), ignores or belittles problems faced by men, or in some cases overtly regards the hardship suffered as a positive development, – at what point do you write off a political ideology as being bad and corrupting for society, exactly?

By: Rollo Tomassi

Rollo Tomassi — Fri, 02 May 2014 15:18:00 +0000

More correlation for the sex-limited populations theory:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018506X14000804