Homosexuality

Sexual-fluidity

Alright readers, please return your seats and tray tables to their upright position and make sure your seat belts are securely fastened, this is going to be a bumpy ride. I’ve had a good portion of this post in the ‘can’ so to speak for some time, but as of yet hadn’t the purpose to publish it. I understand the potential for misunderstanding this essay is going to have, but as most of you know, unplugging guys from the Matrix is dirty work, and I’ve always been one who likes to get his hands dirty.

In the time I’ve spent writing in the manosphere both as a blog writer and a forum commenter I can only remember a handful of instances where I’ve read any attempt to define how Game is applicable to homosexuals. For the most part, personal ideologies tend to prevent Game-aware writers from objectively addressing how homosexuality actually validates a universal application of Game.

It’s kind of a shame that a lot of Game proponents would rather avoid how a larger understanding of Game is confirmed in homosexual relations. I’ll admit to some hesitancy as well, however one of my earliest posts, Sexual Fluidity, addressed exactly how an evolved  template for heterosexual gender roles is still the applicable one in homosexual relations. I also defined the dominant / submissive dynamic all intergender relations establish in Master & Servant.

Before I get myself into the inevitable morass this post will likely generate, please have a read of the Rational Male policy about morality. My purpose in setting this out isn’t to persecute anyone, nor should an objective grasp of Game be limited by personal ideologies. I realize bias in both observations and interpretation is always going to be unavoidable – I can’t scroll through my Twitter feed without reading personal perspectives regarding gay marriage these days. Just understand my point here isn’t to pass judgement on anyone (readers will do this for themselves), but rather to illustrate the universality of Game and gender dynamics.

Finally, I have to add that my interpretations here are going to be limited by experience. I tend to write from an authoritative perspective in all my posts, however, my interpretations here are rooted in my knowledge of Game and intergender dynamics not firsthand knowledge. I’m not gay so if you think my perspective is incomplete or I haven’t addressed something you think is important please feel free to make me aware of them in the comments hereafter. This is very much a work in progress and I’m open to anyone’s corrections.

The following story was related to me via email about 4 months ago by a gay male reader. With his permission, I’m going to repost it here, but I’ve changed his name to ensure his anonymity:

Hello Rollo,

I just wanted to start this message off by saying I absolutely love your blog and I am now in the process of ordering your book off of Amazon.  However, I have a very interesting question I was wondering if you could assist me with.

I am a 23 y/o gay male, and as you may have guessed, my best friend is an attractive 22 year old female. We have both dabbled in stripping since we were 18 but as of recently we have begun to make the transition to “sugar babies” to pay off our tuition.

The mind games involved in crafting a sense of “oneitis” are certainly true. Prior to even finding your blog, we have been exercising these realizations with great success. Thus, I was very excited to see a blog with 100% similar views to how we both view the standard STRAIGHT relationship.

See where I’m going with this? Men and women have clearly defined “roles” and personality types due to years of evolution. If you are a young and attractive female, men almost instinctively understand the need to compensate with cash and or providing a sense of security…especially if you are playing your cards correctly.

The issue at hand for me, however, is that the same principles don’t seem to be working. “Strip club” hustle is far different than the mind games involved in a relationship, and when I do strip, I leave with a healthy amount of money. However, when trying to cross over into “sugar baby” territory, I feel as though I am playing with a different set of rules.

Essentially, gay people are a hybrid between man and woman. I feel as though, in some cases, I posses a very “feminine” view about certain things, but due to my extensive testing and researching of human psychology, I have adopted a much more “alpha” and “masculine” personality type as well. This “alpha male” persona originally started out as an “act”, but through sheer perseverance I can honestly say it is a part of who I am now. Since then, I have a long list of gay men who want to date me. In hook-up culture gay world, finding sex is as easy as signing onto a website or downloading an application. Thus, getting a gay male to actually feel the need to “date you” is an art form in itself.

However – because gay men operate off of feminine mindsets by DEFAULT, they are attracted to my Alpha personality. But due to my “alpha”, and or “male” personality type, they simultaneously do not feel the need to spoil me with cash. I’ve hung out with a multitude of gay millionaires, I’ve gone on a few vacations, etc. however, I can’t achieve the same success as my friend.

She has had “allowances” as high as 3,000 a week…has had her tuition paid off, and has been purchased a brand new 30,000 car. She’s been all over the world. Granted, she “understands” the game and plays it well. However, I want a slice of this pie.

Do you have any experience with gay/lesbian mind sets? Do you have any tips to cross over from “alpha boyfriend” to “spoil me”. I have been having a difficult time in regard to hustling. Gay men, ironically, prefer “normal” relationships. Unlike straight men who are more than willing to spend some extra money to jump to the next league, if you understand what I mean.

It seems as though I must fabricate a “loving relationship” for 6 months before I am ever going to be handed any sort of allowance. The “trip for two” vacations are fun, but at the same time, I do not actually ENJOY their presence and they can sense this. Any suggestions?

 

First off, any ‘advice’ I could offer is going to come from my understanding of heterosexual dynamics. After having worked in the liquor and casino industries for almost 20 years now, I’ve had the opportunity to work with and market to a gay demographic, and to this day I still have homosexual friends I’ve made who hit me up for advice. I’ll tell you what I tell them, Game is universal, but I think the disconnect comes from thinking that being homosexual in someway disqualifies a person from the strictures of how the sexes evolved and how they interact.

Naturally Mark’s stripper girlfriend will be the control for this study; as with most attractive strippers she understands (and capitalizes on) the natural dominant-submissive gender architecture, and the provisioning / protector aspect men innately apply to a high SMV mating prospect. Mark also correctly identifies how ONEitis influences and reinforces this dynamic, as well as its utility to transactional sex.

I will however disagree with Mark’s assertion that homosexuals are in some way ‘hybrids’ of men and women. If you read through my Sexual Fluidity post you’ll come to realize that even in homosexual relationships there is almost invariably a dominant and submissive partner, either of which reflect the evolved natures of intersexual relations – dominant, masculine male to submissive, feminine female. It’s not that a homosexual is gender-role indecisive or is some hybrid of the two, it’s about determining who’ll be the male and who’ll be the female.

In many posts I’ve made the point that the soul-mate myth and the fallacy of the ONE are founded in a popularized ideological normalization. For instance the Carl Jung idea of anima & animus is so embedded in our culture that we take it for granted. For the past 70+ years popular culture has operated from an unquestioned idea that men and women possess both masculine and feminine aspects of their personalities. Why? Because at some point Carl Jung proposed the theory and a culture embraced and perpetuated the idea that “men ought to get in touch with their feminine sides” as a means to an end for another agenda. No one even thinks to question the origins of this concept much less the veracity of it. Small wonder that so many women and too many men get agitated and hostile at the idea that this basic of their identity understanding could very well be horse shit.

I had a very depressive lesbian friend once cry to me about how she kept falling in love with various girlfriends, but the template for her breakups was always the same. She was a very tall, and attractive, short haired woman. The vibe she projected was obvious to anyone, a butch, dominant extroverted impression, however when she got into (or thought she was getting into) a monogamous relationship – something she very much wanted – she would do what most Beta men do in their LTRs. She presented an ‘Alpha’ dominance that appealed to more fem lesbians, but when she got into an LTR that Alpha presence faded to fem Beta dependence much in the same way men who learn Game will “backslide” to their comfortable Beta ways – and much to the disappointment of a woman who believed she was going to play the submissive role.

And just like a backsliding Beta, my lesbian friend’s girlfriends would predictably leave the LTR, confused as to why they’d been sold into playing the dominant / decisive role with a woman who appeared to be the pants wearing partner. Cue the heartrending ONEitis endemic to a Beta mindset, get depressed and repeat the cycle again.

The sexes may be the same, but the roles either play don’t. This dynamic is perhaps the most damning indictment of gender equalism. Even when both sexes are the same the Game doesn’t change. For all the equalist cries that men and women are fundamentally identical, just with different plumbing, the nature of a committed relationship still reverts to an unequal dom/sub footing.

Mark’s frustration rests in his inability to convince the men he ‘hustles’ to get ONEitis for him. I’d suggest that part of this is due simply to men’s sexual strategy and appetites being prone to variety, but also because he can’t pull off the submissive, provisioning-necessitousness message his girlfriend naturally does. No gay man (as yet) wants to assume this role with him, but damn near every heterosexual man with a heartbeat and normal testosterone levels will fall in line to provide for an SMV peaked 22 year old woman with a body nice enough to be a high end stripper.

A Gay Perspective

For the record I believe homosexuality is a nature vs. nurture issue.

So with that in mind, here is the Rollo Tomassi take on homosexuality: Until such time as biologists can empirically prove a ‘gay gene’ (or genetic combinations that predispose a person to homosexuality), I believe the root of homosexual sexual expression is behavioral. Human beings have a biological need for sexual expression: masturbation is usually the first, then we move on to more complex socio-sexual behaviors. In short, we like to get off. It feels good, it’s a stress relief and orgasm (plus the resulting endorphin release) has health benefits.

Sexual behaviors and patterns become progressively associated with environmental prompts, situational stimuli, as well as a multitude of reward/reinforcers and punishments depending upon the social acceptability or unacceptability of the that sexual behavior.

That’s not to say there isn’t a biological aspect to this; when I see a semi-nude woman (conditioned stimuli) I get a hard-on (unconditioned response). My body reacts in preparation for sexual behavior by flushing my system with a cocktail of hormones that increase my heart rate, heighten my senses and gives me an erection. However it’s the associations, and prior rewards or punishments, that prompt the biological response. For instance, why do I get turned on by a naked Jessica Alba, but disgusted (physical revulsion) when I see a maggot filled animal carcass?

When I hear homosexuals tell me “I can’t help being gay”, I believe them.

Through any set of circumstances their sexual expression has been reinforced to the point where it has become normal for them – they literally can’t help but be gay, because that’s what prompts sexual response for them. They also, literally, do not make a choice to be gay; their sexual response was brought about from circumstances that rewarded (or more so than from what wasn’t) that behavior. The obvious criticism is that for the most part homosexuality is viewed as a deviant or perverted sexual expression and is discouraged. However it’s just this taboo that makes the sexual expression an even more tantalizing reward.

As I stated above, sexual release is a biological need. Heterosexual men entering a male only prison population, can and do engage in homosexuality and then resume heterosexual behavior upon their reintroduction to society. Are they gay or were they simply resorting to the only sexual expression they had available to them in their given environment?

What about bi-sexuality? Do bisexuals have only half the genetic material to make them half-gay or has their sexual conditioning been such that they’re aroused by both genders?

There are some people born with both male and female sexual plumbing, what gender should they pursue in life? Is this their choice when you consider it’s their parents who decide to raise the child as a boy or a girl?

Feminist Gender Decisions 

The problem with even attempting to define gender into a genetic vs. behavioral answer is further complicated by the people trying to define it. Just by even asking the question “Is homosexuality a choice or a genetic predisposition?” casts the one asking into one camp or another. You’re either a ‘homophobe’ or you’re an immoral hedonist by choice. Both sides are equally polarized and equally misled because they aren’t encouraged to look for answers, and when they do, the bias of their motivations for doing so become suspect.

Is gender itself biological or behavioral? This is an issue that Feminism struggles with to this day.

If gender is primarily a learned behavior then the issue of being oppressed by design is valid, but homosexuality as a genetic cause is invalid (or certainly less valid). But then, women’s biology, and the degree to which their innate hormonal differences play (estrogen, oxytocin) and the behavior manifested due to them, in molding their gender must also be taken into consideration.

The problem with asking questions like this now becomes one of polarization. Neither homosexuals nor moralists really want a definitive answer as to whether homosexuality is genetic or behavioral. The longer it goes unanswered, the longer each has to effect their own agenda. If homosexuality is proven not to be primarily genetic, then homosexuals as an oppressed underclass lose in their bid to make their status a civil rights issue.

If it is proven to be genetic, then moralists are forced to reevaluate not only their position on homosexuality, but also their philosophical concepts of predestination and personal accountability. So it’s really not in the interests of either faction to look for real definitive answers. The longer we all remain in limbo the longer either have to try to change minds.

You see feminism relies on the idea that gender is taught, not innate. It’s a classic nature vs. nurture paradox. And they’ll use this conveniently and interchangably.

To feminists, little girls are little girls because society defines their gender in their upbringing (play with this pink dolly), but ask them to explain why gays are gay and it has nothing to do with their behavior or their environment, now it’s genetic – they can’t help it they, were born that way. The problem is that this contradicts itself. If gender is learned, then homosexuality is all learned/reinforced behavior, but if gender is inherent then feminism is a sham as women are fighting against a psycho-biological order. They can’t help it, women were born that way, right?

Gay Animals

Yes, homosexuality does have parallels in other animals. However, what’s conveniently overlooked is that most instances of this animal homosexuality often occurs in social animals that rely on a collective group for survival (like penguins). Homosexuality is almost non-existent in predatory animals. Among these social animals, homosexuality is generally exhibited in higher frequency only when the population of the collective has excessively higher proportions of one sex. Homosexuality is also exhibited in lower order animals such as insects and amphibians, however it’s postulated that this homosexuality is an instinctive survival mechanism necessary to prompt sexual amorphism. Certain animals (particularly fish and amphibians) have an ability to change sex (sexual amorphism) when high frequency or exclusively same sex members dominate a breeding population.

I think it’s a bit of a stretch to define homosexuality based on the amorphous breeding habits of fire toed newts, but in principle there may be environmental triggers that prompt homosexual behavior.

Earlier I made the example of heterosexual prisoners resorting to homosexual behavior in jail and then returning to heterosexual behavior after their release. Is that person a “homosexual”, or were they simply resorting to the only sexual expression available to them in their controlled environment? Are post-Wall women who resort to Sexual Fluidity due to an inability to find a suitably dominant male really gay or are they also responding to the pressures of the sexual environment they find themselves in? Is the (subjectively) higher incidence of human homosexuality a response to environmental pressures that have developed in the past 60 years? With greater female “independence” and feminine hypergamy dictating the social / breeding  environment in the sexual marketplace I think a strong case could be made.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Speak your mind

128 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chavez
Chavez
7 years ago

Very interesting post. Homosexuality combines several interesting psychological and sociological topics. In analyzing some 22 year old “exploring” sexuality, it seems easy to apply hormonal/sexual dynamics as well as use the term “confused”. What I have always thought of as being the definitive explanation is explaining the kid we all knew when we were kids. The boy who was effeminate at an early age. Someone I knew, who grew up in a very religious household, raised similar to his older brothers, and was “gay” before he was thinking about guys. This was not sexual confusion, not a hardware issue, but… Read more »

Sisyphean
7 years ago
Reply to  Chavez

In my high school class I was that effeminate seeming guy that everyone thought was gay. I was terrible at sports but excelled in drama club and art class (and also math). Yet I’ve never had any interest in men what so ever. Now I’m in my 30’s, I make great money, I’m fit and women notice me far more than they used to. Not every girlyman is homosexual, some of us grow up into men, albeit artsy/literary men, but just like any niche: if you’re very good it’s a living.

Deep Strength
7 years ago

Just for reference, the twin studies on identical twins (homozygous) show that approximately if one twin is homosexual that the other has about a 40-50% chance of being homosexual. If being homosexual was purely genetic then you’d expect 100% of the homozygous twins (given that they have the same genetic material) to be homosexual. That’s not the case. This indicates that there is likely some genetic component while there is also likely some behavioral or environmental component. It’s not polarized just like males and females aren’t polarized. I believe research shows that you have to be in the top 15%… Read more »

boxsterpaul
7 years ago

Rollo, There is a third mechanism which both sides don’t acknowledge. The pregnancy itself. There are some idea is that the pregnant mother is stressed, which causes the “boy” to be less of a “man”. She releases androstendione, a weaker form of testosterone. Innersex “birthdefects”, occur at a rate of 1 for 2000, this is part of the physical manifestation of the stress. My understanding is there are different times during the pregnancy in which the mind, body receive chemicals to trigger different areas of growth of the fetus during pregnancy. This ides makes some sense, with your idea that… Read more »

BetaSexual
BetaSexual
7 years ago

In the case of homosexuality I feel it is primarily a result of opportunism. Exclusive biological homosexuality is too harmful of a trait evolutionarily to not be weeded out in a few generations… much less millions of years. As for the rise of homosexuality… Sex is becoming harder and harder to obtain for the average guy… thanks to hyper-hypergamy of women further enhanced by online dating, etc. In such a harsh and competitive environment many straight men are resorting to some sexual relief from other men anonymously. Don’t believe me? Go on craigslist personals section for your city and see… Read more »

Lion
Lion
7 years ago

She had allowances upwards of 3,000 a week? He’d better be gettin’ some at least 10 times per week for that (at 300 a pop), and each session had better be mind blowing. That is insane.

Lion
Lion
7 years ago

My childhood was very sheltered, and for the longest time, I thought boys and girls both had penises. I didn’t have sisters or female cousins to show me their parts, so I assumed we’re all alike down below. I grew up in the 70s and 80s, and I didn’t have cable TV. When I saw my uncle’s posters of naked women in his garage, I was confused, and I assumed they had tiny penises hidden under all that bush. Well, to be honest, and considering the disadvantage of being sheltered, I’m not exactly sure how I turned out to be… Read more »

trackback

[…] Homosexuality (Josh Sway) […]

bbb
bbb
7 years ago

Demand and supply. Lots of horny but discriminating heterosexual men / few hot women; lots of horny indiscriminating homosexual men / lots of horny indiscriminating homosexual men. Or maybe I am wrong….

Self-AbsorbingJr.
Self-AbsorbingJr.
7 years ago

Rollo have you watched this series?

http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1vuho8/the_documentary_that_made_scandinavians_cut_all/

Explores very interesting topics – a must read!

Dominic
Dominic
7 years ago

When I hear homosexuals tell me “I can’t help being gay”, I believe them. Through any set of circumstances their sexual expression has been reinforced to the point where it has become normal for them – they literally can’t help but be gay, because that’s what prompts sexual response for them. They also, literally, do not make a choice to be gay; their sexual response was brought about from circumstances that rewarded (or more so than from what wasn’t) that behavior. The obvious criticism is that for the most part homosexuality is viewed as a deviant or perverted sexual expression… Read more »

Kaizen
Kaizen
7 years ago

Makes me think of this prisoner in a Ross Kemp documentary:

Joël Cuerrier
7 years ago

Reblogged this on joelcuerrier.

Flip
Flip
7 years ago

He can’t get paid like his female friend since casual sex is far more easily available from gay men than straight women.

I think homosexuality must have a large genetic/biological aspect. I’ve also seen children that you thought would turn out being gay or lesbian, and they tended to do so when they grew up.

I’ve also thought that bisexual men are fundamentally gay while bisexual women are fundamentally straight.

Another Paradox
Another Paradox
7 years ago

That was another great post. You generally were careful with the wording of Gender and Sexuality. However when you describe (I think correctly) that gender is nature not nurture, why is sexuality the other way around. You said that being Gay is a result of something in the behavior side, but discount the same in gender roles. How then does a gay man become the submissive partner, how does he bury the masculine “provider” side? I just have interacted with too many Gay men to not think that there actions are so feminine as to suggest that this is their… Read more »

TLM
TLM
7 years ago

This post is gay.

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

“The mind games involved in crafting a sense of “oneitis” are certainly true. Prior to even finding your blog, we have been exercising these realizations with great success. …Do you have any tips to cross over from “alpha boyfriend” to “spoil me”.” “Mark’s frustration rests in his inability to convince the men he ‘hustles’ to get ONEitis for him.” Apparently he knows what works to get the things he wants – i.e. be more like a girl, but he doesn’t want to do it. “I’ve hung out with a multitude of gay millionaires, I’ve gone on a few vacations, etc.… Read more »

Tarnished
7 years ago

“What about bi-sexuality? Do bisexuals have only half the genetic material to make them half-gay or has their sexual conditioning been such that they’re aroused by both genders?” I’m bisexual, and I believe this type of sexuality most of all is conditioned. Even if they do end up finding a “gay gene” I’m fairly confident that they will never find a “bi gene”. Perhaps people who are bi have different levels of estrogen/testosterone than most, but that’s about as far as I’d go. Note that, just like in homo and hetero sexuality types, bisexuals don’t automatically find every man and… Read more »

Johnycomelately
Johnycomelately
7 years ago

“Are they also responding to the pressures of the sexual environment they find themselves in?”

For men porn mitigates a lot of the environmental factors, if it weren’t for digital sex simulation homosexuality rates would have presumably skyrocketed.

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

“I’m open to anyone’s corrections.” Fair play, chief .. here goes The Curse of the Autocomplete strikes again! para. 4, line 5; “bother”>both wandering apostrophe in para. 14, line 5; “want’s”>wants (and “provisioning-necessitousness message” give me a funny feeling in my tummy, but I expect it’s creeping dialect divergence either side of the Atlantic yet again. I’d chop the “-ness” bit. But what do I know?) para 24; (if I haven’t miscounted by now), line 4 ; “cast”>casts para 26; “women’s biology, and the degree to which their innate hormonal differences play (estrogen, oxytocin) and the behavior manifested” something funny… Read more »

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

Thought for the day: homophobia has as much a genetic component as does homosexuality.

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Tam re: “para 26; “women’s biology, and the degree to which their innate hormonal differences play (estrogen, oxytocin) and the behavior manifested” something funny going on here, but damned if I can figure it out. Word gone AWOL maybe? Need to ask someone smarter than what I are.” That whole part is handwaving appeal to knowledge not in evidence, and is the sort of thing that would be summarized in a scientific paper like “As discussed in Smithers et al. [37] and Baifong and Chungwu [38], the interplay of estrogen and oxytocin” etc.

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

I find it, I don’t know, either interesting or amusing, whichever gets me in least trouble (ha!), that a gay man finds it annoying that he has to calibrate his girliness. Color me not entirely convinced.

JackBlack23
JackBlack23
7 years ago

Who knew I would have so much in common with a lesbian? Your friend’s plight exactly mirrors my own experience as a straight guy … “killing the beta” was not an easy or pleasant process and something I still occasionally struggle with in my weaker moments …

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

jf12 oo er it’s still there ..
.. about the actual content, I have not a scooby.
To be pursued elsewhere, when the confounded interwebs stop crapping out on me (Easter Moday, is everybody facebooking their granny or something?).
I was only pointing at literals and other grammar-type drudgery, and noticed a bit of broke stuff in there but couldn’t work out what it was supposed to be. If anything..

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Tam, yes but my point is that I think it’s shorthand intended to be semaphoring something. Although I agree that paragraph suffers from a crunchiness, it is rather typical of Rollo’s style, which includes a great deal of hard bits cemented loosely together.

This is not the same as “cobbled together”, which is probably closer to my own style. Often my intended style, my as-yet-unmanifested destiny, is piles of smoking rubble which would destroy anyone who got close enough to vainly try to unpack.

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

Holey moley. “Easter Monday”!
I’m off to hide behind the bike shed, with a cig.

Grunion
Grunion
7 years ago

Rollo, the thing that bothered me about the article is that for some reason you felt it necessary to use three full paragraphs to excuse yourself for writing the article, lest the group you write about falls into uncontrollable fits of hysteria, when it is known to most adults that hysteria is co-morbid with the homosexual condition. Anonymous Conservative proposes in his book on r/K selection theory and politics that homosexuality is an extreme r-type, competition- and violence avoiding mating strategy used by males less able to compete with the (K-selected) alphas who get the females and actually procreate –… Read more »

LucasBly
7 years ago

Just for fun, I’m going to kick in my theory here, that homophobia is simply thinly veiled jealousy. The real reason straight people get upset about a small group of men and women achieving special, positive recognition for being gay, is that they are jealous gay people are getting special permission to be sexually deviant, and they’re not. The straight people are jealous their fetishes aren’t getting similar positive press. Per internet meme Rule 34, “if it exists, there is porn for it”. The natural extension of Rule 34, is that I believe it’s likely every human has a unique… Read more »

Jack.Rayner
7 years ago

I think your Genes vs Environment dichotomy is lacking one small, but important fact: The womb, and the hormones that we are exposed to therein, fall under “Environment”, but most people are unaware of this.

The absence of a “gay gene” does not mean that homosexuality is a result of post-birth conditioning/environmental factors. The research I’ve seen builds a very strong case for the womb argument.

I highly recommend that you give the lectures on this Stanford University playlist a watch, particularly all of the ones with “Behavior[al]” in their title. You’ll thank yourself for doing so, Rollo. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?p=848F2368C90DDC3D

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Tam, after the school system deemphasized Easter many years ago it’s become something of a tradition to celebrate Bad Monday in these parts by playing hooky the day after Easter. On my way home for lunch today I passed by, rather rapidly, a neighbor daughter and her two friends who decided to be partly-sunning on too-small bath towels on her front lawn. My wife greeted me with what I initially thought might have been an accusation “Did you see what little Miss So-and-so was doing?” “Um, me? see? um …” “She was Smoking!”

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

Cripes, jf12, is that the missus expressing an interest in the HB-rating of young ladies? “Smoking” inna Jim Carrey/Mask stylee? I’d take her to task if I were you, about her sexual orientation. :¬p Or was it merely inhaling, like wot Slick Willy never done? [sub for il maestro; I’d certainly give it a go. Thing is, it’s not the ones I manage to spot that give me nightmares. It’s the iceberg of unrecognized “errors” that chafe (don’t you like how hard I try to regularize my stuff for you guys? Mutual comprehension, that’s the ticket). I only know what… Read more »

JKL
JKL
7 years ago

@ Deep Strength

No you got it wrong. What that indicates is that there is not a meaningful genetic component. People differ so genetics play a role in everyone but clearly “nurture” is the overwhelming factor.

Tarrou
Tarrou
7 years ago

Without getting into the description and causes of homosexuality, one of the best things about having a large gay community is that it provides a “control group” for social observation. For instance: “Porn is all about degrading women you say? Let’s have a look at gay porn, oh look, it’s pretty much the same, just with guys substituted. Maybe it’s about what turns guys on, and not about women at all!” “Spousal abuse is a male-on-female thing, you say? Well, let’s have a look at lesbian couples. The same rates of domestic abuse? Maybe it’s a relationship thing, not a… Read more »

Shooter
Shooter
7 years ago

Tarrou said: “I, for one, have great hopes for the gay community. Once they shed the political alliances with feminism, they will be the one area of society completely beyond women’s social control. This has great potential.” You ignore the STDs, the psychological illnesses, and general depravity of this ‘community’. Honestly, they don’t care for feminists, and transgenders have even gone after Gloria Steinem for catering to naturally born women. The revolutionaries eat their own. As it is, there is no benefit to having a gay community whatsoever, and if you want to see a classic example, look at the… Read more »

Johnycomelately
Johnycomelately
7 years ago

Concerning sexual environment, Asian American males have homosexual rates several times larger than any other ethnic group. Since Asian males are on the lowest rung of the SMV sexual totem pole it certainly makes sense that environment is a factor. Of course the issue is whether single motherhood, divorcess, sluts, hyperagamous high earners, Alpha harems, obesity and those that have left it too late will significantly diminish the pool of ‘available’ women and contribute to higher homosexual rates. The inordinant attention attractive women have in the Western market does seem to express an under supply of available women It’s interesting… Read more »

Mark Minter
7 years ago

Well, you certainly bit off on a controversial topic here. I just finished a piece that I posted called: Bonobos: The first hairy lesbian feminist sluts http://demarkate.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/36-bonobos It details how bonobos are a matriarchal dominated species who are quite promiscuous and have far more sex, sex of all kinds, hetero and homo, in many different positions, oral, kissing, and masturbation than is considered “natural”, meaning based on reproduction. Bonobos and chimps are the two animals most close to humans genetically. And the largest majority of the homosexual sex occurs between females. Which is considered the basis of female bonding in… Read more »

Mark Minter
7 years ago

Also your base assumptions, vis a vis, female sugar babies vs male ones, is backed by work by social and evolutionary antropology using the Tullock Competition Success Function and Evolutionary Invasive Analysis in determination of the path from promiscuity to monogamy. The assumption is that ancient men divided social efforts between mating, mate guarding, care, and provisioning. The mathematical models show that with data to reach what is called Evolutionary Adaptivness Equilibrium, then … The High Value Males will spend 100% of time mating to extend Paternity, (offspring). The majority of conceptions will go to high status males. (What we… Read more »

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

Re: bonobo. There is little enough sex qua sex, especially between females. The lone matriarch captain of a troop allows a few privileged females to groom her in order to establish those lieutenants’ positiona in the troop. Some of that grooming extend to genital areas. But it’s really just touching, sensual at best, not sexual. Essentially none of the female-female genital contact is more than merely comforting, and almost all of the activities logged were extremely fleeting. The matriarch consumes the majority of grooming of females by females; it is not at all egalitarian. Almost all of the sex as… Read more »

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

JohnnyCL: “the increasingly higher rates of homosexuality in the West” Maybe that’s got something to do with us decadent westies not eagerly stringing the poor old poofs up? Like they do in glorious islamic republic of Iran, to pick a particularly egregious case. I think similar BDSM nastiness occurs in “advanced” eastern states such as the great screwdriver plant of Malaysia, but I’m not sure and can’t be fussed to google it. If not them, then another one or two nearby. They’re always at it. It’s always possible that such a state of affairs might lead a chap to conceal… Read more »

Cad and Bounder
Cad and Bounder
7 years ago

If homosexuality is, at least partly, behavioural in origin, then the incessant promotion of gay relations as being ‘equal’ to heterosexual relations (witness the sickening criticisms of Russia over this issue) then the logical consequence is that more young boys will turn into homosexuals.

The greater sex drive of boys, compounded by figures in authority encouraging homosexual relations, and the ‘go-girl’ empowerment mentality will ensure that this happens.

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

“The majority of conceptions will go to high status males. (What we see in the manosphere top 20% dominating 80% of conceptions, the top 5% of high status controlling of 30-40%) and I repeat, in a promiscuous environment.”

Wow! Two-three iterations of that, and Men shall truly be as Gods.
Wonder why it’s not happened before??

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Cad and Bounder, the reality of governmental promotion of homosexuality is still a taboo subject, at least since Haldeman’s “The Forever War” (1974), and probably before. Predictably, even back then the controversies about its “homolife” concept centered around whether we should draw the line in the sand when homosexuality becomes mandatory, rather than acceptable, since acceptable was already considered a lost cause. This moving of goalposts is always problematic.

D-Man
D-Man
7 years ago

Often wondered why those two grievance industry heavyweights (feminists with their “everything is a social construct” trope, and the LGBTQ set with their “born this way” mantra) haven’t duked it out yet. The answer is, each can only lose by doing so. Both groups still benefit enormously from whipguilting their host: the civilization largely built by human beings who do not “identify” as either one. So there must still be some meat on that particular carcass. Others profit enormously from the misdirection all this creates, so it’s in their best interest to promote both feminist and gay agendas, while carefully… Read more »

GhostOfJefferson
GhostOfJefferson
7 years ago

@Cad and Bounder The greater sex drive of boys, compounded by figures in authority encouraging homosexual relations, and the ‘go-girl’ empowerment mentality will ensure that this happens. The influence of parents, especially a strong father figure complimented by a good mother, negates social conditioning to a very, very large degree. This is the reason for the constant push to destroy the traditional family, as we stand in the way of their various agendas. And it’s true, my son and daughter are, under my guidance and our family’s demonstrations through actions and words, hardcore, reality focused conservative-libertarians and they’re not even… Read more »

Fred Flange
Fred Flange
7 years ago

The “gender as social construct” ideology – which is just Soviet-era Lysenko-ism applied to psychology and sociology – will have to yield to the growing evidence validating Game, Evo-Psych and the immutability of gender roles in the gay population as gays and lesbian coupling becomes more common. To wit: how in a stable parenting couple, one parent takes on the nurturing “female” mother role, while the other takes on the “male” disciplinary role. If gender were a “social construct” one could change like a pair of socks, that wouldn’t keep happening. To wit: how the gay male singles scene is… Read more »

Heartiste
Heartiste
7 years ago

Gay

Badpainter
Badpainter
7 years ago

Rollo,

Re: Sexual Fluidity

How fluid can male sexuality be in the aggregate when 5% of the population is LGBT and so very many more straight men are incels?

I’d think prison populations would be less than ideal groups to study. You’d have to account for numerous behavioral issues that are concentrated in that population like impulse control, need for instant gratification, incoherent or incomplete moral/ethical structures, past abuse histories, etc.

YaReally
7 years ago

wow ballsy article topic to tackle in the Manosphere enviro where people tend to be super anti anything-that-isn’t-straight-white-and-male lol I totally don’t have a dog in this talk at all except to offer a PUA perspective on it. We’re notably way more tolerant of different people/types because we go out and we meet and socialize with SO many literal THOUSANDS of new different people each year, that we gain a very broad perspective on things (since we meet so many different viewpoints and meet good/bad people of all types and learn to get inside people’s head to figure out what… Read more »

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Badpainter, true that prison populations are less than ideal. Even so, very very few prisoners are only gay behind bars. Although a much higher than typical (almost said normal) percentage of men in prison report *some* kind of homosexual experience during incarceration, there is much less sex, repeat much much much less sex going on in a prison than in a similarly sized ghetto outside.

Correct that the correct question to ask is what percentage of hetero male incels turn to each other for sexual comfort at least sometimes. And the answer is zero or close enough.

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago

@Rollo – I think you would benefit by reading J. Michael Bailey’s “The Man Who Would Be Queen” and some of his more recent YouTube videos on the nature of sexual orientation. He offers a couple of new ideas in the book about transexualism, but along the way he reprises the known science on homosexuality. He’s a psychologist out of Northwestern who has studied homosexuality significantly and deeply. He explores the following ideas: 1. He believes homosexuality is clearly biologically occurring. The strongest theory out there currently focuses on fetal homormonal exposure – there are some great twin studies on… Read more »

Cad and Bounder
Cad and Bounder
7 years ago

@GhostOfJefferson Unfortunately the evidence is that the non-shared environment is far more powerful than the shared environment in determining the variance in behaviour. This problematic when considering the non-genetic component of behaviour. Naturally, if you raise your kids in an environment where you are, to a certain extent, determining their non-shared environment (which includes peers at school etc) then you can have an influence. However, not everyone can do this, and children have a multitude of channels of influence from the media and entertainment industry, not to mention the equalist mafia in education. James Q Wilson describes this point much… Read more »

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Rollo, one well-known but exceedingly under-discussed aspect of butch lesbians is that they are the givers of sex and the fems are the receivers. Yes, it’s kind of obvious in a way, but if one took feminist’s propaganda seriously, then one ought to expect the “man” to be demanding, i.e. one ought to expect that the butch would tend to force the fem to satisfy the butch. But the opposite is true.

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago

I just have to add that I find some of the views about homosexuality expressed on this on this thread to be shockingly belligerent and ingnorant. I’m becoming more and more disappointed in the manosphere as I meet more white separatists, legitimate misogynists and homophobes all over the place. The deeper I go, the more I understand why many people dismiss the manosphere utterly.

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago
Reply to  Rollo Tomassi

@ Rollo – I don’t debate knuckle dragging queer bashers so I’m not about to start parsing out the various ignorant comments made on this thread. As men we know lots of men have idiotic ideas about homosexuality and in the manosphere many supposed “seers” blather on about it in the most ignorant and boorish way one can imagine. It’s a blind spot for many game gurus, and demonstrates to me that they aren’t actually gurus and makes suspect most of the other tripe they spew as received wisdom to so many gullible men. This “web academic” pseudo-scientific pose stuff… Read more »

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

@Rollo, Brynn, obviously.

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

Re: girl game for gays. A flamboyantly gay nephew of mine is nearing 50. A long time ago, longer than I’ve been married, so maybe he was in his early 20s like “Mark”, he decided the sugar daddy lifestyle was for him. He zestfully became the World’s Greatest Housekeepstress, making his own cute apron and matching oven mitts for example. He cooks really good food, from personal experience. I think he’s had only a couple LTR since, older men of course, but he has been “married” to a world-renowned but corpulent proctologist (not joking) about his own age for over… Read more »

GhostOfJefferson
GhostOfJefferson
7 years ago

@Cad and Bounder Unfortunately the evidence is that the non-shared environment is far more powerful than the shared environment in determining the variance in behaviour. There are “studies” and there is real life. You can’t control everything they do and are exposed to clearly, and I’m not stating that they won’t be influenced in some way by others, but by instilling a clear, easy to understand set of axioms in them from the time they can understand language forward and helping them grow those axioms from general principles to morals virtues and ethics over time, you fight off a lot… Read more »

Cad and Bounder
Cad and Bounder
7 years ago

@GhostOfJefferson I can only quote what the research says on the subject, and there is a substantive body of work (James Q Wilson was the leading criminologist in the U.S.) demonstrating that non-shared> shared. Of course, we are talking about the non-genetic component here. Your personal example is a good one, and I think we agree more than we disagree on this subject. For example, earlier you wrote: “they’re not even out of high school yet. The area we live in is affluent and has many intact families, and the kids seem much more immune to the propaganda than you’d… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago

@Cad – Love Murray’s book, “Coming Apart” and a great reference of it in your comment. Are you saying that the shared environment in Fishtown is relatively stronger because of the weakness of the non-shared environment there? Or do the values in Fishtown’s average non-shared environment more closely mirror the shared environment? My sense is the latter as I think to presume a cultural vacuum would be biased. As for Ghost’s insistence on the key difference his and his friends non-shared environment being attributable to some exceptional parenting on his behalf, I have no reason to doubt him. But I… Read more »

Monolith351
Monolith351
7 years ago

@ Boxster Paul. I would really like to see some more research done on this “stressed preganancy” phenomenon as whilst full gene expression cannot take place without the start up hardware supplied by the female during pregnancy (Stewart & Cohen) this effect seems too frequently used by women as an extortion tactic to control their partner during the pregnancy. “Oh, you’re stressing me out – don’t do that… do this” Which in the Fem-to-RealTalk translator, gives the implied threat as follows… “Do as a I say, or your son will have birth defects.” … I know, because I have experienced… Read more »

Cad and Bounder
Cad and Bounder
7 years ago

@Glenn Note,we are discussing non-genetic factors. 1. Non-shared (peers, classmates teachers, outside family influences) environment is more influential than shared (mainly family influences, or just things that siblings have in common) in shaping behaviour 2. Belmont is more culturally homogenous than Fishtown. Everyone has similar values, so your Belmont child will pick up values, beliefs, behaviours from NON-shared environmental sources (other kids etc) that are similar to what you have. 3. Fishtown kids will receive a hotch-potch of opinions and influences from the non-shared environment, all of which will dilute the kind of values that you have. These include feminism,… Read more »

Chris Mackney
Chris Mackney
7 years ago

Chris Mackney committed suicide on December 29, 2013 because his ex wife was using the divorce courts in America to torture him and kidnap his children from him. He wrote a 4 page suicide note before killing himself. http://www.brainsyntax.com/Portal/Material/1/Lasttestamentofalovingfatherabusedbythefamilycourtsystem.pdf MAKE THIS VIRAL! THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE EVER TO HIT THE MRA/MANOSPHERE WORLD. THIS IS WHY YOU NEVER GET MARRIED IN AMERICA!!!!!!!!! LATEST UPDATE: The ex-wife is such a psychopath that is she trying to copyright her ex husband’s suicide note, in order to prevent it from being circulated on the internet. She is using her lawyers to threaten… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago
Reply to  Chris Mackney

@ Chris M – Yeah, I’m not so sure that this doxing of the wife is a good idea. I could care less about her but what about his kids – now? Their Dad has just killed himself, do you think it’s great idea to now make an international social media event of it? Don’t get me wrong, I’m deeply sympathetic and his suicide note hit me deep – everyone should read it. But what I took away from it is how he internalized that his value to HIMSELF was being a father and a husband, that he could not… Read more »

jf12
jf12
7 years ago

Re: shared diversity vs non-shared diversity. Provided it’s not the SAME diversity, I believe a diverse shared environment can offset the hodgepodge of the non-shared. Put in shoe leather, I mean that a boy raised among an extended family and good neighborhood continually seeing the socio-sexual success of a diversity of “our” good men – soldiers, farmers, engineers, scholar, ditchdiggers – will necessarily be less susceptible to influences from the non-shared that encourage “their” men to be bad. Naturally, the opposite is true if all he sees close by around him are men who are beat down emotionally by their… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago

@Cad – Gosh, thanks for letting me know environmental factors aren’t genetic – oops, what about epigenetics? Fyi, this is why I don’t play “web academic” as I call it. Let’s stop with all the blathering about shared versus non-shared environments and get back to the topic at hand. Do you believe that homosexuality is caused by nurture? Is that the reason for you elaborately explaining your views on shared vs non-shared environments? Cuz that’s bullshit. Homosexuality cannot be imposed on a person. If you actually believe that, show me the experiments – don’t bother, you can’t. This has all… Read more »

ropeyarns
7 years ago

The original poster’s problem is that he is fishing with the wrong BAIT! His hot stripper girlfriend has the right bait. She wants a rich guy looking for a hot “girlfriend”. The OP is looking for a rich guy who wants a hot “boyfriend” however, these rich guys are either Alpha or Alpha in their mind. Alpha guys do not want a hot Alpha long term boy toy. He needs to start looking at guys who want his type. Maybe old money types that aren’t really Alpha. Also up that age range! Older guys may want to keep him around.… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago

All interested in the science, here is a recent interview with a leading academic, J. Michael Bailey looking at sexual orientation. He reprises what he found via twin studies and other research in this brief commentary. http://youtu.be/r9IHTFB0bAc

He makes some basic distinctions that will help the ignorant people on this thread think about this issue more clearly. It’s not nurture – it’s completely inborn (just not totally or even strongly genetic).

RickRolls
RickRolls
7 years ago

On the genetics of homosexuality: The fact that having an identical twin that is homosexual gives a 50% chance of being gay is actually evidence for the ‘gay gene’ being a real thing, for reasons that are not yet known, every time a genetic link to behavprove is found, the gene ‘expresses’ at a 50% rate (there is a 50% chance of developing schizophrenia if your twin does, for example). The woman in this example is probably as close as you can get to a female ‘Red Pill’, much as male PUA’s use the insight to get what they desire… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago
Reply to  RickRolls

Uhh, why don’t you take a scientist’s word on the genetics instead of “speculating” about genetics (kind of like speculating about physics, lol), ad the facts are plain. There is evidence of genetics being a driver but after 20 years of looking there is no “gay gene” – nothing of the sort. Note the that major point that Bailey is trying to get across to non-scientists is the difference between something being genetically determined and something being “inborn”. Homosexuality is still inborn – that’s the most important point the twin studies prove (because genetics are held constant as is the… Read more »

D-Man
D-Man
7 years ago

It’s clear that in our society today, the messages we get from western governments, education, and mainstream media are a push towards universal acceptance. It doesn’t matter to these groups whether the explanation for someone’s nature or behaviour is inborn, learned through exposure, chosen, or any combination thereof. And I agree with that for the most part. But we are not there. The problem is, it’s not taken far enough. It’s not universal. A certain group is not extended the same acceptance. (I can almost hear the groans as people read this, but what does that tell you about how… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago
Reply to  D-Man

Plenty of sympathy for Chris Mackney – just none for doxing his wife now based on doing what’s best for his kids. Can you tell the difference? It’s subtle, I know, and that’s hard for web gadflies, but try, I swear, it will be good for you.

D-Man
D-Man
7 years ago

Aye, gotcha. Wasn’t advocating the dox. Though the kids are nowhere near out of the woods either way, and I’ve already forgotten the woman’s name. “What’s best for the kids” are 5 very dangerous words, and their misguided application is a big part of the problem, that’s what I was trying to say. When I said guys’ll keep snapping, I was thinking more of the different kind, the one that gets the ratings. In case you misunderstand, I’m not saying that’s good either; it’s more of a “what did you expect?” All goes to my point, guys need help developing… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago
Reply to  D-Man

@ D-Man – You speak as though it’s unknowable whether the suicide of a parent is bad for children or not when that’s not the case at all. Let’s ask Rollo – you have training in psychology – what kind of risk factor for a wide range of developmental, behavioral, emotional and psychological issues is the suicide of a parent for young children? I know – I’ve spoken with mental health professionals about this – it’s probably one of the larger markers/risk factors for a child. So yeah, while I have huge empathy/sympathy for Mackney, he has fucked his kids… Read more »

RickRolls
RickRolls
7 years ago

I have to admit that I don’t really understand the anger and bitterness expressed so frequently in the ‘Red Pill’ community. It’s less intense here than on many sites (where it can cross into flat-out misogyny as bad as any feminist could theorize), but it’s still present. When I had my ‘awakening’, my first thought was ‘Now I feel stupid’. I don’t feel like my previous beta-ness was something that was inflicted on me, but rather that I had done it to myself. Sure, I was responding to signals and outright advice that was wrong from top to bottom, but… Read more »

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago
Reply to  RickRolls

@ Rick – Uh, our entire society has formalized a set of gynocentric female imperatives that have been shoved down your throat since the day you were born. Just like the horse doesn’t know he could spit the bit out, men are filled with lies and myths about women and their own identity. Check out http://www.gynocentrism.com for a nice overview of how romance, courtly love and chivalric ideas conspire to have men serve women and worship them. You did not get there on your own.

D-Man
D-Man
7 years ago

“You speak as though”?

You read as though. Watch what words you put in peoples mouths.

Everything else you say is reasonable and I agree with.

Glenn
Glenn
7 years ago

@ D-Man – Words straight from your mouth. ““What’s best for the kids” are 5 very dangerous words, and their misguided application is a big part of the problem, that’s what I was trying to say.” Hence my straightening you out on how the suicide of a parent affects children.

And don’t tell me to “watch” anything like you are straightening me out or something. A better idea would be to keep track of what you say and you’ll be much better at conversing with people in the future – free advice.

RickRolls
RickRolls
7 years ago

@Glenn: Followed your link, and I’ve read similar theorization, butthey seem to assume their conclusion: Gynocentrism is an active program that is actively hostile to the needs and desires of men. Frankly, I don’t see it, we come back to the perennial punchline of the Battle of the Sexes: Too much fraternizing with the enemy. It implies a fundamental impossibility for men and women to meet as moral equals. It’s just misogyny with a ‘She hit me first’ whining sophistry laid over the top. I don’t see the root of our problem in feminism, or even in birth control (although… Read more »

D-Man
D-Man
7 years ago

Hey Glenn, I can tell this is an emotional thing for you and I’m not looking to make enemies, but c’mon man, at no point did I say anything about suicide not affecting kids, nor did I even advocate doxxing the mom. Relax dude, no need to concern-troll. I’m glad you didn’t do it, and I don’t say that flippantly. All I’m trying to say is, the status quo is pushing inherently fallible human beings past their breaking point. No, it’s not an excuse for them to fuck their kids up even more just to make a point, I’m not… Read more »

D-Man
D-Man
7 years ago

(by players, I don’t mean womanizers…, I mean if we try and make a society fair by hobbling half its members, everyone ends up worse off)

RickRolls very interesting theory

Richard
Richard
7 years ago

it’s a very long rambling article that brings up some interesting points, but never reaches any solid conclusion…. The idea of sub / dom roles in a relationship is nothing new…. Take it one step further though and what many people do in an LTR is try to recreate a version of their own childhood…. since all children are submissive to a large extent and since the soft relaxing side of being ‘taken care of’ is very much a part of a child’s existence, this is actually the goal of many people in an LTR whether they realise it or… Read more »

Richard
Richard
7 years ago

……….. but your gay boy admits it…. he alphas up to get boyfriends, but is frustrated he can’t have the submissive advantages the girl was experiencing….. men can alpha up in a relationship and restore the balance and ‘put the wife in her place’….. but do they really want to…. and do they really have the energy to dominate 24.7.. … perhaps sometimes they want to chill in peace or even be ‘taken care of’. women can be happy in the submissive role, but that role lacks freedom of expression and liberty as it always defers to the ‘man of… Read more »

Cylux
Cylux
7 years ago

If the guy who contacted you wanted to be a kept man or given a 3 grand a week allowance for spreading his cheeks he should have started 5 years earlier. Yer average rich gay guy with a penchant for Twinks might pay the way for an 18 year old lad, but not for a 23 year old guy. Plus some gender-based social mores, i.e. man can look after self (disposable), women needs looking after (protected), also come into play. Indeed he’s very lucky that those trips where his desire to not be with them was picked up upon didn’t… Read more »

Vicus
Vicus
7 years ago

Brain food for true seeker…http://www.viewzone.com/homosexual.html

Trev Duckman
7 years ago

Your last few paragraphs/conclusion are a very objective assessment of homosexuality.

Combining that with the concise dismantling of feminism’s core is a veritable ‘money shot’.

LAX
LAX
7 years ago

What? You say Lesbians are lesbian because they don’t find a male dominant for them? – Come on, how do you explain “Butch”-Type Lesbians then? As for the rest? – Telling us that we are more or less incapable of rising above biology (meaning men need to be dominant and woman submissive? – I call BS on that (we should attempt to become more then the flesh we are!)…For I am dominant enough, but I don’t want to be dominant all the time in a relationship (that becomes kind of boring…there is no fire if your GF does not fight… Read more »

LAX
LAX
7 years ago

And me again: Why does your wife become un-attractive if she is dominant? Why do you all accept that there are no relationships among equals? (meaning: dominant/submissive – toss that crap out, if something is important to you, take the lead, if something is important to your partner: let her/him have it…why not? – as long as you don’t become a whimp, this works very well (my father and my stepmother are like that and it works great, he let’s her go wild if it’s really important to her, but also steps up to the plate when something is important… Read more »

Cylux
Cylux
7 years ago

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… Read more »

trackback

[…] 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 […]

Rol
Rol
7 years ago

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… Read more »

Mike
Mike
7 years ago

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,… Read more »

trackback

[…] 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 […]

Derpifer
Derpifer
6 years ago

Ever seen the documentary Hjernevask about the scandinavian equality paradox?

rugby11ljh
rugby11ljh
6 years ago

What a good read.

RedErik
RedErik
5 years ago

It’s always remarkable to me in reading these Manosphere blogs the lack of historical knowledge most men with opinions seem to have. Heterosexuality and pussy addiction are modern plagues. Abrahamic religions are to blame for that. Historically throughout many Ancient cultures, especially Grecco-Roman, Persian etc, male-male love was the norm. I think innately we are all bisexual by nature. I am bisexual myself but lean towards men opting only to have relationships with other men for the past apx 15 yrs. Women were not valued as life partners men were burdened to love and forced to hate simultaneously. They were… Read more »

rugby11
rugby11
5 years ago

“Are they gay or were they simply resorting to the only sexual expression they had available to them in their given environment?”

Fascinating

rugby11
rugby11
4 years ago
rugby11
rugby11
3 years ago

“What about bi-sexuality? Do bisexuals have only half the genetic material to make them half-gay or has their sexual conditioning been such that they’re aroused by both genders?”
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpmLkDnZUbzyTZOQQRhlgfXvlew-MGDy_

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpmLkDnZUbzyKoLJoLAtJjspvo951-tUv

rugby11
rugby11
3 years ago

ay

rugby11
rugby11
3 years ago

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11548240
“Those with a bisexual identity were more likely to have had homosexual experiences as adolescents and to describe their adult sexual behavior as predominantly or sometimes homosexual rather than predominantly heterosexual.”
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499209551640
Mating with 8
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/09/110920-squid-mating-oceans-weird-science-animals/
http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/26212/3/2014%20Cohort%20Effect%20the%20Coming%20Out%20Experiences%20Bisexual%20Men%20Sociology.pdf

128
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: