[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / coz / fin0be / late / ttgg ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

A collective of people engaged in pretty much what the name suggests
Winner of the 77nd Attention-Hungry Games
/x/ - Paranormal Phenomena and The RCP Authority

April 2019 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Tags: leftism (CLICK HERE FOR MORE LEFTIST 8CHAN BOARDS), politics, activism, news

File: 809f8b00270de3d⋯.jpeg (143.32 KB, 660x440, 3:2, 25130100.623220.6515.jpeg)

 No.2866030

Why homosexual relationships was banned in USSR? Because of the reactionary Russian society maybe? To what extent were people really homophobic? Why there were no attempts to combat this ban?

 No.2866033

The immediate cause for the ban on homosexuality seems to have been a report made by NKVD chief Yagoda claiming clandestine anti-Soviet activities on the part of many homosexuals and asking that a law be made to deal with this supposed threat. Stalin concurred.

Homosexuality wasn't explicitly made legal before Stalin, it was simply no longer a criminal offense to engage in homosexual acts. But there was certainly a lot more cultural openness in the 1920s (as well as political debates.)


 No.2866038

File: 3c47932dcd9f5ce⋯.jpg (50.7 KB, 690x276, 5:2, sat01.jpg)

Because heterosexuality is enforced in societies suffering from necessity and the USSR never dealt with necessity.


 No.2866042

could you elaborate the fuck on that


 No.2866047

>>2866042

(me) meant to respond to you >>2866038


 No.2866054

File: 3e0e75e8330fd10⋯.jpg (678.12 KB, 2000x1060, 100:53, 00-mikhail-khmelko-the-tri….jpg)

>>2866042

The hetero-nuclear family structure is required under in societies with resource-scarcity and low wages. The USSR had those.

The Soviet government couldn't afford to let people experiment with their sexuality, they needed to produce lots of babies in order to compete with the west.


 No.2866057

>>2866054

Alright, it's just that you said "the USSR never dealt with necessity", which doesn't really fit with the rest of the stuff you were talking about. Also there's an explanation above regarding a report by a NKVD agent that seems more plausible.


 No.2866059


 No.2866063

>>2866054

then how come modern day capitalism with its resource scarcity and low wages has so many gay people?


 No.2866065

>>2866054

also compared to Russia under the Tsar the USSR had more abundance


 No.2866067

>>2866063

>so many gay people

<less than 5 percent of the population


 No.2866069

The idea that people will want less that or more that in scarcity or abundance reminds me of the soviets criminalizing abortion again because they thought people didn't need it anymore.

Its restriction was actually portrayed as a fulfillment of Lenin-era policy. To quote one author (Pat Sloan, Soviet Democracy, 1937, pp. 125-126):

>A matter which has raised considerable doubts in the minds of many protagonists of sex-equality in this country is the law, passed in 1936, making abortion illegal except in cases where it is justified by consideration for a woman's health or the danger of hereditary disease. This change in the law has been treated as an attack on sex-equality.

>It is of the greatest importance in this connection, to refer back to the text of the original law which legalised abortion in Soviet Russia in 1921. It is important to note that in this law not a word was said about sex-equality, and the right to have an abortion was never put forward as a fundamental right of the Soviet woman. On the contrary, abortion was treated as a social evil, but an evil which was likely to be less harmful when practised legally than when carried out under conditions of secrecy. Here is part of the text of the original law permitting abortion:

>>"During the past decades the number of women resorting to artificial discontinuation of pregnancy has grown both in the West and in this country. The legislation of all countries combats this evil by punishing the woman who chooses to have an abortion and the doctor who performs it. Without leading to favourable results, this method of combating abortion has driven the operation underground and made the woman a victim of mercenary and often ignorant quacks who make a profession of secret operations. As a result, up to 50 per cent of such women are infected in the course of the operation, and up to 4 per cent of them die.

>>"The Workers' and Peasants' Government is conscious of this serious evil to the community. It combats this evil by propaganda against abortions among working women. By working for Socialism, and by introducing the protection of maternity and infancy on an extensive scale, it feels assured of achieving the gradual disappearance of this evil. But as moral survivals of the past and the difficult economic conditions of the present still compel many women to resort to this operation. . ." it is allowed in State hospitals.

>The essential feature of this law is that it was based on "difficult economic conditions," and was of a temporary nature. The right to abortion was never introduced as one of the rights of Soviet women, to be enjoyed in all circumstances. It was considered an "evil," and was introduced as a makeshift to combat the serious mortality rate from illegal abortions carried out under unsatisfactory conditions. There is evidence that, at the present time, owing to the increased knowledge of contraceptives on the one hand and the growing sense of economic security on the other, women will not now practise abortion in this way, and that therefore the permissive law is no longer necessary in the interests of health. Abortion in Soviet legislation has always been regarded primarily as a question of health, not of equality. Since thousands of women have been neglecting the use of contraceptives because they could obtain an abortion, the legality of the less satisfactory method of discontinuing pregnancy has actually to some extent prevented more satisfactory methods from being used of avoiding pregnancy altogether.

Needless to say, the notion that Soviet women had no more need to recourse to abortion was erroneous (plenty continued to do so illegally), and abortion was thus relegalized after Stalin's death.


 No.2866070

>>2866067

probably the most in recorded history no i cannot back that up with stats but its pretty obvious this is a time when being gay is extremely accepted


 No.2866072

>>2866069

truth of the matter is it was part of a broader social conservatism brought in under Stalin, and the one guy who could've gotten rid of it, Khrushchev, chose to keep it in place


 No.2866074

>>2866070

homosexuality as a category is a modern invention, but the socio-sexual relationship of the same sex has always kinda been around in the same frequency. The proceeding bigotry of Christianity made being gay or bi a closeted thing for a while afterwards so today it may seem like people are "turning gay" or whatever.


 No.2866077

Homosexuality is not a leftist issue.

The USSR did what it could to defend proletariat society, homosexuality has several aspects that are quite damaging. The Communist party clearly saw this and did what it needed to to stop the damage


 No.2866078

>>2866065

>also compared to Russia under the Tsar the USSR had more abundance

and?


 No.2866079

>>2866077

obviously…..


 No.2866087

Stalin did a number of things wrong and in many ways Stalinism was severely flawed and you can be critical of them without believing western propaganda about a gorillian kulaks personally murdered by him or being a Tr*t.

This is a good article about it:

https://www.marxist.com/bolshevik-decriminalisation-of-homosexuality-intentional-or-oversight.htm


 No.2866095

>>2866087

most criticisms of stalin are ahistorical - his great work defeated the fascists, he is a European hero.


 No.2866096

>>2866074

>The proceeding bigotry of Christianity made being gay or bi a closeted thing for a while afterwards so today it may seem like people are "turning gay" or whatever.

Pagans were just as bigoted


 No.2866102

>>2866096

pagans have never had the institutional power of the Christians.

neo-paganism has a very queer slant these days anyhow, but Christianity remains reactionary.


 No.2866107

>>2866102

Pagans executed homosexuals

Read Tacitus

the acceptance of it only occurred in Rome during the decline.

liberals Christians today accept homos.

neo pagans are irrelevant to the subject


 No.2866115

>>2866107

neo pagans are the contemporary development of the pagan tradition: new-agers, wiccans, satanists, occultists and so on.

and like i said, institutional power is what is heavily important here. why are you defending Christianity so much? they have been nothing but a detriment to most of society throughout history: Killing scientists and revolutionaries.


 No.2866116

>>2866074

Fair enough but in that case it isn’t gotten rid of “for necessity to make babies” if it’s mostly been the same throughout all the various need to make babies periods


 No.2866117

>>2866067

5% of seven billion people is a lot.


 No.2866119

>>2866117

yes, if you twist it on a relativistic scale, sure, maybe.


 No.2866121

>>2866116

babies = future workers


 No.2866122

>>2866119

That's not twisting, it's how proportions work.


 No.2866123

>>2866095

Call him a hero if you want idrc I think he did some good things and don't hate him but he has a lot of the revolution's blood on his hands from the show trials and purges of the old Bolsheviks. Baffles me the way people think the way to be the most radical committed Bolshevik is to support the guy who basically declared that all of them were traitors and sabatoeurs besides himself and Lenin.


 No.2866124

>>2866078

so contrary to the theory which says that necessity dictates the banning of homosexuality due to adverse economic conditions, in fact it was banned even though the economy was better

>>2866121

right but show me any actual evidence that this is why the decision was made specifically and not just a knock on effect


 No.2866126

File: 606b2a585704a2d⋯.jpg (275.67 KB, 1200x901, 1200:901, 8fa757_5882557.jpg)

>>2866115

>neo pagans are the contemporary development of the pagan tradition: new-agers, wiccans, satanists, occultists and so on.

this is incorrect. Neo Paganism is a recreation, reinvented movement. it uses the aesthetics of ancient paganism however the old religion has been lost.

>and like i said, institutional power is what is heavily important here.

I'm not sure what you are meaning here by "institutional power"

Pagan treatment of homosexuals was very similar to christian treatment

>why are you defending Christianity so much?

I'm not. You said something that was incorrect.

>they have been nothing but a detriment to most of society throughout history: Killing scientists and revolutionaries.

this is a different topic


 No.2866127

>>2866122

the idea of statistics is to fix something to a proportional scale, reverting it back to raw numbers is silly.


 No.2866128

>>2866124

Was homosexuality legal under the Tsar?


 No.2866129

>>2866126

>Pagan treatment of homosexuals was very similar to christian treatment

how are you telling us this if

> the old religion has been lost.

>>2866128

no


 No.2866130

>>2866124

>so contrary to the theory which says that necessity dictates the banning of homosexuality due to adverse economic conditions, in fact it was banned even though the economy was better

The economy still needed improvement. The USSR needed to build up the defend the revolution from the rise of fascism.


 No.2866132

>>2866124

idk specifically about the soviet union, but the historical and material reality is that children will grow up to become exploited, unless they develop in a bourgeois environment.


 No.2866134

>>2866124

also to add to this, the Soviet Union did not have a population problem, it has a growing population.


 No.2866135

>>2866129

>how are you telling us this if

>the old religion has been lost.

Historical events and theology are two different things entirely


 No.2866136

>>2866126

Catholic church had power over many institutions in society and still do today -pagans have never come close to this type of influence.


 No.2866138

>>2866135

true i was just wondering if you had some source material of how pagans treated homosexuals.

which part is this in response to?

>>2866130

>The economy still needed improvement. The USSR needed to build up the defend the revolution from the rise of fascism.

okay sure but can you link this specifically to the banning of homosexuality with evidence that is beyond circumstantial


 No.2866139

>>2866136

>Catholic church had power over many institutions in society and still do today -pagans have never come close to this type of influence.

Pagan tradition acted in the same way though


 No.2866140

>>2866132

i fucked up my post, which part is this in response to ?


 No.2866141

>>2866138

>true i was just wondering if you had some source material of how pagans treated homosexuals.

Taictus's Book: Germania.

One of the best primary sources on Germanic pagans


 No.2866142

>>2866138

>okay sure but can you link this specifically to the banning of homosexuality with evidence that is beyond circumstantial

gays tend to be weak and frail and too afraid to fight fascists


 No.2866143

>>2866139

it is not about tradition, it is about money and property. An evil man is not as bad as an evil collective. Marxists attempt to analyse the "bigger picture" rather than specific evils and such.


 No.2866144

>>2866140

babies being workers


 No.2866147

>>2866143

>it is not about tradition, it is about money and property. An evil man is not as bad as an evil collective. Marxists attempt to analyse the "bigger picture" rather than specific evils and such.

ok but what does that matter in this case?


 No.2866154

homosexuality is objectively unhealthy. fags always end up losing anal continence. you don't even have to get into aids. it's an objectively unhealthy activity and degenerate in the literal sense of the word.


 No.2866155

>>2866154

most casual gay sex is blowjobs, anal takes time to prepare unless you like shit on your dick.


 No.2866156

>>2866147

idek what we're supposed to be talking about anymore


 No.2866165

>>2866142

citation needed. Also this doesn't connect any of these things to specific soviet policy.

>>2866144

yeh but is there any evidence that is the reason


 No.2866168

>>2866165

i said that idk about the soviet union's policy on "making babies". Babies as raw potential resources offer work, so i assume so.


 No.2866170

>>2866030

Banning romantic homosexual relationships to support population growth was probably a good idea. But why the ban of sex between friends? Guess sexuality was more rigid back then.

>>2866074

>The proceeding bigotry of Christianity made being gay or bi a closeted thing for a while afterwards so today it may seem like people are "turning gay" or whatever.

The USSR was state-athist though. And Christians were at most 30% of the population.

>>2866115

>neo pagans are the contemporary development of the pagan tradition

No, neopaganism is mostly a bunch of radlibs who don’t like Christianity but think Atheism is a “silicone valley cult” or some stupid shit. The exception is the fascist neopagans which are ultra-reactionary and want to murder gays.


 No.2866174

>>2866154

it's an objectively unhealthy activity

maybe this was once so, when people were also objectively dirtier, material conditions have however changed, the level of cleanliness is higher, there are condoms, you can get preventative aids medication etc.

The resources it takes to ban and enforce ban of being gay outweigh how dangerous it is.

Trials are expensive, prisons are very expensive (and also wont change anything). Most likely you'd have more school shootings etc


 No.2866180

>>2866174

aids is a cia plot to stigmatize homosexuals


 No.2866189

>>2866180

No it sin’t. The ICA gives zero fucks if your gay or straight. All they care about is if your willing to kill communists. If you say yes the CIA will give you with a six digit salary job.


 No.2866196

>>2866189

homophobia is an extension of the stigma to create divide in the working class and to promote reactionary ideologies.


 No.2866200

>>2866165

>citation needed.

its not needed actually

>Also this doesn't connect any of these things to specific soviet policy.

the soviets needed strong men not twinks


 No.2866201

>>2866170

>Banning romantic homosexual relationships to support population growth was probably a good idea. But why the ban of sex between friends? Guess sexuality was more rigid back then.

casual sex is bad for social cohesion


 No.2866203

>>2866174

>maybe this was once so, when people were also objectively dirtier, material conditions have however changed, the level of cleanliness is higher, there are condoms, you can get preventative aids medication etc.

yet this still happens at rates much higher than hetros

>The resources it takes to ban and enforce ban of being gay outweigh how dangerous it is.

>Trials are expensive, prisons are very expensive (and also wont change anything).

you can't really put a price on the damage it does.

>Most likely you'd have more school shootings etc

But school shootings happen the most after we allowed homos to roam free


 No.2866204

>>2866196

homo acceptance is an extension to create divide in the working class and to promote reactionary ideologies.


 No.2866205

>>2866201

Only if their are STDs. Which can be gotten rid of in a generation via quarantining of infected indiviudals.


 No.2866206

>>2866204

so stupid


 No.2866209

Homosexuality is the creator of Fascism. All Fascist socties were made by Homosexuals. Greeks were Homosexuals, Romans were Homosexual, Nazis did their beer hall in a gay bar.


 No.2866211


 No.2866214

File: 4aaa0e2a5585eb0⋯.jpg (215.69 KB, 1600x900, 16:9, 1495773372969.jpg)


 No.2866215

>>2866211

Fascism is based off of gay culture. I mean, think of it. You have a sugar daddy who gives you inconditional love who makes you feel ashamed for being inferior and if you break his heart you're get tortured or killed, you spend all your time with other guys in good old tight uniforms, you have a bunch of young men follow you and ready to die for you, and when you die in battle you die in the arms of another man and out there on the battlefield you can be free to do what you want away from it all. If you despise fun you can get away with it because of your connections and if you fall out of line you get mad fun of, it's not a surprise that some great intelligence officers were Homosexuals because of how much they had to hide the fact they were gay. Because of how many men are made if you are gay you want the best of the best to fuck with because you have the pick of the barrel, which ties into the whole eugenics thing.


 No.2866217

>>2866215

schizo


 No.2866218

It is funny how this thread is going on and yet /leftytrash/ is the gayest place I have ever seen.

Is this legit or are you joyboys trolling?


 No.2866220

Is this the only way one could make Fascism appealing?


 No.2866221

>>2866220

fuck meant to reply to >>2866215


 No.2866223

>>2866214

samefag


 No.2866226

>>2866205

>Only if their are STDs. Which can be gotten rid of in a generation via quarantining of infected indiviudals.

ok but with the same logic we can get rid of homosexuals


 No.2866230

>>2866226

homosexuals come from hetero parents, it is a phenomenon which will occur beyond any form social engineering.


 No.2866232

>>2866230

>homosexuals come from hetero parents, it is a phenomenon which will occur beyond any form social engineering.

but it is that social engineering that has created the modern homosexual

with counter social engineering and a change in material conditions we can reverse the effects


 No.2866237

>>2866232

what factors do you believe cause homosexuality?


 No.2866239

>>2866215

Fascism isn't based off gay culture you mong. It was drafted up by Mussolini as an attempt for capitalism to preserve itself by trying to make the bourgousie and the proles unified in class colleberation. I have no idea why a predominently catholic country in the 1910's-1940's would be at all accepting of homosexuality.

You're an idiot and are just trying to hipster justify your need to condemn the morons of /pol/ by making them out to be gay as hell, which they are but that is mostly because this iteration of fascism needs to wear a mask that is somewhat more accepting of the gays than it is now.

>>2866203

STD rates for lesbians are actually lower than that of heterosexual couples, let alone homosexual men.

Correlation =/= causation.


 No.2866245

>>2866237

>what factors do you believe cause homosexuality?

lack of decent healthcare

modern homosexuality: capitalist alienation


 No.2866246

>>2866239

Lesbians don't have intercourse


 No.2866248

>>2866246

holy heck BTFO


 No.2866250

>>2866246

>>2866248

So the anti-gay guy was just one person samefagging. 5/10 you baited me but you could've tried harder to get in some real clicks.


 No.2866251

>>2866245

>capitalist alienation

can you be specific?


 No.2866253

>>2866250

not that guy but he's right lesbians don't ACTUALLY participate in any kind of real intercouse therefore their std rates are non existent

how dumb r u


 No.2866254

>>2866250

>So the anti-gay guy was just one person samefagging. 5/10 you baited me but you could've tried harder to get in some real clicks.

no that's not me


 No.2866257

>>2866251

>can you be specific?

Are you unfamiliar with Marx's theory on alienation or do you not understand how it could result in mental illness?


 No.2866260

>>2866253

Yeah no shit. Are you saying that female homosexual relationships are fine for some reason while male ones aren't?

>>2866254

Looking at the time that you posted that might be the case. Although honestly this all comes off as trying to be contrarian to whatever liberals think without actually understanding that not everything that comes from capitalism is evil.


 No.2866264

>>2866107

>Tacitus

>germanics

>all pagans

retard

Celts were notorious as having lots of gays, and if anything Early Rome/Greece were when it was most accepted so I'm baffled how you got it backwards.

Also hilarious since Romans did not give a flying fuck if you were the guy fucking a man, only if you were the bottom were you ostracized.

This also fails to take into account the rest of the world, where boyfucking was rampant.

I mean for fucks sake Tokugawa era Japan had Manjushri popularly known as the patron saint of homos. Japan did not actually persecute gays until the Meiji Reforms when they felt they had to act like the West in everything, and even that wasn't around long.

I'm a bit surprised no one called you out on this earlier honestly


 No.2866265

>>2866257

don't you think it's ableist to discriminate against homos then? it woud be like bullying a depressed person. if they are the product of their environment then you should have sympathty, right?


 No.2866268

>>2866260

>Looking at the time that you posted that might be the case. Although honestly this all comes off as trying to be contrarian to whatever liberals think without actually understanding that not everything that comes from capitalism is evil.

I haven't even mentioned liberals


 No.2866270

>>2866268

You said that homosexuality was caused by capitalist alienation.

>>2866264

I'm sure there was a subset of Romans who felt that homosexuality was gross when Tacitus was written, but I don't know how reliable of a source Tacitus is, since he was a Roman and not a German. I just assumed it was the same as it was in Rome. Where catching was unmanly but not illegal.


 No.2866272

>>2866264

>retard

no u

>Celts were notorious as having lots of gays

funny because Tacitus mentions none of this

[citation needed]

>and if anything Early Rome/Greece were when it was most accepted so I'm baffled how you got it backwards.

In greece it was only pederasty, homosexuality was only accepted toward the end of the their society signifying a decline

>Also hilarious since Romans did not give a flying fuck if you were the guy fucking a man, only if you were the bottom were you ostracized.

This was only during the end when things were collapsing. Same with the acceptance of mass prostitution

>This also fails to take into account the rest of the world, where boyfucking was rampant.

we're talking about pagans here.

>I mean for fucks sake Tokugawa era Japan had Manjushri popularly known as the patron saint of homos. Japan did not actually persecute gays until the Meiji Reforms when they felt they had to act like the West in everything, and even that wasn't around long.

I don't really care that wasn't the topic

>I'm a bit surprised no one called you out on this earlier honestly

well you haven't been correct in the slightest so…. yeah


 No.2866273

>>2866270

>You said that homosexuality was caused by capitalist alienation.

Yes lots of mental disorders are a result of capitalist alienation


 No.2866274

>>2866270

>I'm sure there was a subset of Romans who felt that homosexuality was gross when Tacitus was written, but I don't know how reliable of a source Tacitus is, since he was a Roman and not a German. I just assumed it was the same as it was in Rome. Where catching was unmanly but not illegal.

Tacitus is the most reliable source we have

Also Romans killed fags too, they just got more relaxed toward their end


 No.2866283

>funny because Tacitus mentions none of this

Is Tacitus the sole authority on the subject?

>according to Aristotle, although most "belligerent nations" were strongly influenced by their women, the Celts were unusual because their men openly preferred male lovers (Politics II 1269b).[35] H. D. Rankin in Celts and the Classical World notes that "Athenaeus echoes this comment (603a) and so does Ammianus (30.9). It seems to be the general opinion of antiquity."[36] In book XIII of his Deipnosophists, the Roman Greek rhetorician and grammarian Athenaeus, repeating assertions made by Diodorus Siculus in the 1st century BC (Bibliotheca historica 5:32), wrote that Celtic women were beautiful but that the men preferred to sleep together. Diodorus went further, stating that "the young men will offer themselves to strangers and are insulted if the offer is refused". Rankin argues that the ultimate source of these assertions is likely to be Poseidonius and speculates that these authors may be recording male "bonding rituals".[37]

>In greece it was only pederasty, homosexuality was only accepted toward the end of the their society signifying a decline

The Sacred Band of Thebes would like to have a word with you, to say nothing of your idiocy assuming pederasty signals the decline of a civilization, considering it was a thing throughout Greco-Roman society even in the early years

>This was only during the end when things were collapsing. Same with the acceptance of mass prostitution

bullshit, source me where the hell you're getting this idea from

>we're talking about pagans here.

what is "pagan" to you? because it's normal definition would be anyone unchristian (and since we're talking about homosexuality I'll say nonabrahamic).

>I don't really care that wasn't the topic

you're wrong on the other topic in any case, but again you seem to have a retarded notion of what "pagan" is


 No.2866286

>>2866283

Just to add this grafitti was from Pompeii in 79AD, would you consider that the era of decline for Rome?

>I.2.20 (Bar/Brothel of Innulus and Papilio); 3932: Weep, you girls. My penis has given you up. Now it penetrates men’s behinds. Goodbye, wondrous femininity!


 No.2866291

>>2866033

>Homosexuality was not explicitly made legal

>It was simply no longer a criminal offence

These mean the same thing


 No.2866292

>>2866063

>resource scarcity

>low wages

What planet are you on? A minimum wage job today provides an ability to buy a Kia on finance – personal transportation that is more comfortable than any Rolls Royce built in the 70's.


 No.2866294

>>2866054

You're fucking deluded, stop LARPing as a theorist


 No.2866296

>>2866294

but that's all this board is


 No.2866297

>>2866257

This isn’t the same guy I got into an argument wit the other day he’s a polack false flagger he used exactly the same kind e of argument. He won’t be able to tell you which conditions


 No.2866298

>>2866274

>they just got more relaxed toward their end

once again I have literally no idea how you've managed to have things flipped so badly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT_history

notice how after 200CE homosexuality starts getting persecuted in general, versus before where the only ones who MIGHT be persecuted were receiving gays?


 No.2866300

File: 19dd2a26c99c90b⋯.jpg (33.33 KB, 495x314, 495:314, WagesVsProductivity.jpg)

>>2866218

Ted Haggard is a /leftypol/ idol.

>>2866230

>>2866232

You can’t get (some) guys to not have sex with other guys, but you can get them to have sex with women and have kids. (which is nessicary for the continuation of society)

>>2866264

>Early Rome/Greece were when it was most accepted so I'm baffled how you got it backwards.

In Greece it was only allowed if it was an older man fucking a preteen. Not a god thing. For Rome it was only okay if the sub was a slave Also pretty shit.

>>2866270

>You said that homosexuality was caused by capitalist alienation.

Not homosexuality per say, but lifestyles that discourage the formation of normal families are on the rise due to alienation.

>>2866292

I don’t know about Europe, but for Burgers, our wages haven’t rised since the seventies.

>>2866298

Homosexuality in Rome was a tool of class oppression where Roman Porky would fuck slaves in the butt as a form of domination.


 No.2866302

>>2866292

>Don't criticize modernity in any way because cars have improved in the last 40 years

SHUT THE FUCK UP BOOMER


 No.2866304

>>2866300

Do we really need to pop that much children out? I do agree with you that families are not being made because of capitalism though. I have no idea why you want to force gay men to have sex with women. You could just extract the semen from a particularly bullish queer guy and fertilize that seed with a man who is infertile and wants to have a kid with his wife anyways.

Or maybe just give that jizz to some lesbians, who knows.


 No.2866309

>>2866300

there are enough heteros to fulfill the role of procreation. gays, in today's heteronormativity seem to gravitate towards nuclear family structures anyhow and adopt unwanted kids. this is a perfect supplementary feature.


 No.2866311

>>2866309

This is what they have always done and it’s why they are an evolutionary benefit. They don’t create more mouths to feed but they feed mouths.


 No.2866312

>>2866309

On top of that, not engaging in family relationships allows more time to do other things such as science, art etc


 No.2866313

>>2866311

i heard some theory that homosexuality occurs because human societies are supposed to be communal, with large family structures, and gays act as babysitters and such.

idk how true that is though.


 No.2866314

у, дратути


 No.2866317

File: b31ac899ed787d0⋯.png (444.85 KB, 687x778, 687:778, 8yiueka8ue101.png)

>>2866312

has the homosexual of yesteryear been replaced by the incel? they have become neets who spend time in informational fields and don't engage in a heterosexual lifestyle.


 No.2866319

>>2866313

It's probably how they acted, but homosexuality is likely just a psychological mutation that is rather benign-ish.


 No.2866321

>>2866313

>>2866319

animal homosexuality exists beyond and outside of the human species and is not unique to it


 No.2866323

>>2866319

are gay animals psychologically mutated also?


 No.2866325

>>2866321

yes, but homosexuality in humans is specific to the species' mode of social organisation. I'm bi myself so no hate or anything.


 No.2866329

>>2866304

99% of the time people aren’t “straight” or “gay” but bi.

>>2866312

If people don’t procreate they aren’t invested in the future of society. Thus the phenomena of boomers supporting the gutting of all welfare that isn’t social security, opposing nuclear energy, and supporting the importation of Saudi Oil. Because none of this will effect them because by the time the world turns to shit they’ll be dead, and it won’t effect their children because they have none. Our world is being desroyed because those with power have no reason to care about our future.


 No.2866331

File: 19b4d5cab5a65e6⋯.jpg (41.58 KB, 640x360, 16:9, p015w8v2.jpg)

>Alarmed by the passage of the new law against sodomy, Whyte wrote to Stalin directly, offering a case for why homosexuality should not be outlawed in a Communist society. In the letter, Whyte relies on a combination of Marxist-Leninist theory and scientific theories of “constitutional homosexuality”; he uses himself as an example of a homosexual who is also a good Communist. Stalin read Whyte’s letter, marked it with the words “an idiot and a degenerate,” and had it archived. When it was finally published by a Russian journal in 1993, it was with the sub-heading “Humor from the Secret Archives.”


 No.2866335

>>2866331

stalin a straight savage 👊🔥😂


 No.2866337

>>2866329

>If people don’t procreate they aren’t invested in the future of society. Thus the phenomena of boomers supporting the gutting of all welfare that isn’t social security

considering Boomers are like that regardless of whether they have children or not you've kinda invalidated your own point


 No.2866342

>>2866337

Boomers with children tend to be more willing to support suc-dems like Bernie and shit like the Green New Deal. While those without think the biggest problem in society is that the world is flat or some dumb shit.


 No.2866353

>>2866342

>Boomers with children tend to be more willing to support suc-dems like Bernie and shit like the Green New Deal.

except Boomers and Silents overwhelmingly support Biden, and are more conservative than Millenials and Zoomers who are the main reason succdem stuff has had a renaissance

I'm going to be lazy

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1112877379125379077

>While those without think the biggest problem in society is that the world is flat or some dumb shit.

My aunt has three kids and is a Qtard, also listens to shit like ancient astronauts and such


 No.2866357

File: 5da42ea47d0fe9b⋯.png (26.98 KB, 806x498, 403:249, D3G7pa2XkAIIW09.png)

>>2866353

>that graph

And Hillary has a 99% chance of being prez. Also most of the Boomers who protested against nuclear energy when Carter tried to make it America’s predominate energy source never had children.


 No.2866359

>>2866357

>And Hillary has a 99% chance of being prez

outing yourself as a retard I see but discounting inconvenient polling averages.

I'll just note now that the national polls were basically correct but state polls fucked up royally in the midwest.

also daily reminder retards tried this shit in 2012 and were BTFO, and were again last year.

>Also most of the Boomers who protested against nuclear energy when Carter tried to make it America’s predominate energy source never had children.

source?

also remember Boomers are notorious for having gone way more conservative after the 70s


 No.2866365

>>2866329

>If people don’t procreate they aren’t invested in the future of society

People are inherently invested in the future of society in the same way they're inherently invested in the present of it. That which drives the sciences and the arts doesn't have to be and isn't some physical insurance like a child or other communal ties, or fear of death, or whatever.


 No.2866392

Weren't the laws regarding homosexuality in the USSR primarily made to deal in pederasty?


 No.2866394

>>2866283

>Is Tacitus the sole authority on the subject?

Tacitus is the best source we have on the ancient pagans.

>>according to Aristotle

there is no evidence Aristotle ever ventured into Gaul

>The Sacred Band of Thebes would like to have a word with you

actions of a single group is not a big enough sample size to claim that it is a reflection of society as a whole.

>to say nothing of your idiocy assuming pederasty signals the decline of a civilization

not pederasty, homosexuality which is where pederasty leads.

>bullshit, source me where the hell you're getting this idea from

The History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire.

Also read Cato the Elder.

Most History books about Rome will tell you the same.

>what is "pagan" to you? because it's normal definition would be anyone unchristian (and since we're talking about homosexuality I'll say nonabrahamic).

Well if you paid attention to the string of replies we are talking about the European people around Rome, more specifically the Germanic pagans prior to Christianity

>you're wrong on the other topic in any case, but again you seem to have a retarded notion of what "pagan" is

the topic isn't about the Japanese. So you're wrong in that regard

>>2866286

>Just to add this grafitti was from Pompeii in 79AD, would you consider that the era of decline for Rome?

Yes read Cato the Elder


 No.2866402

File: 28ddc008a954588⋯.png (67.9 KB, 600x477, 200:159, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2866300

>wages only

total compensation of wages + benefits have been rising with productivity, though still not equivalent.


 No.2866404

>>2866402

>source: heritage.org

why did you post this garbage?


 No.2866453

>>2866402

Only 69% of workers even have benefits, though.

So for 31% of workers, wages only is accurate.


 No.2866458

File: 50b7c751953c22b⋯.png (317.77 KB, 478x358, 239:179, 1452732480925.png)

>>2866402

>sourcing literally capitalist apologia

Could you don't?


 No.2866463

>>2866136

What's your point?


 No.2866477

Gay people have loose lips, open minds, and high standards. Philosopher, scientists, and other honest souls find comfort among them. Gay people shine the way sociopaths pretend to, so the forces of darkness hate the light they cast.


 No.2866526

>>2866402

wages have risen, but not real wages. People are able to afford to buy only what they could in the 70s because wage increases have been at the same rate as inflation, thus eating up any increase in wages.


 No.2866548

File: befd74dd8dc37ed⋯.jpg (96.12 KB, 636x773, 636:773, american npc.jpg)

>>2866402

I think I've seen the "debunking" of the productivity and wage gap before and it relies on some sleight of hand where this total compensation (which would logically keep up with productivity, with a slowly growing gap because of higher fixed capital) includes employee wages and benefits and *drum rolls* dividends, executive salaries etc.

But it presents the formula of compensation equalling wages and benefits but if you read between the lines it's implied this is only part of the equation, the part not mentioned is the increased share of executive salaries and shareholder dividends.

So it's literally self-evident and does not debunk the original point at all.

>wages haven't kept up with productivity, shrinking the relative share of labor in compensation

>"ummm yes but have you considered total compensation has still kept up with productivity?? :)"

>that's exactly the point, the share of wages as part of total compensation has decreased

Capitalist propaganda is embarassing.


 No.2866552

>>2866548

>includes employee wages and benefits and *drum rolls* dividends, executive salaries etc.

Also Healthcare. paid maternity leave etc.


 No.2866553

File: 89ae9ab4a33eec2⋯.jpg (48.7 KB, 928x580, 8:5, theresa may grimace.jpg)

>>2866402

>heritage foundation calculations


 No.2866556

>>2866553

<I don't like them so they're incorrect.

npc pls go


 No.2866563

>>2866402

>Consumption=Wages

Being able to afford more lead toys doesn’t mean shit when rent and healthcare skyrocket in price.


 No.2866564

>>2866563

>Being able to afford more lead toys doesn’t mean shit when rent and healthcare skyrocket in price.

but so many jobs now give people healthcare and the government is increasing paying for more people's healthcare


 No.2866592

>>2866564

>but so many jobs now give people healthcare

Co-pays are still very high. Even people who are employed sometimes don’t go to doctors due to expensive co-pays.

>>2866564

>and the government is increasing paying for more people's healthcare

No they aren’t. Obamacare didn’t pay for shit. All it did was give money to healthcare companies.


 No.2866594

>>2866592

>Co-pays are still very high. Even people who are employed sometimes don’t go to doctors due to expensive co-pays.

and yet these people still have iphones

>No they aren’t. Obamacare didn’t pay for shit. All it did was give money to healthcare companies.

employers have to pay 1/3 of healthcare to full time workers.

That is on top of companies that pay for your healthcare regardless of obama care


 No.2866595

>>2866594

>and yet these people still have iphones

Shit arguement. You do not know if people who cannot afford a co-pay have an iphone and if they do it could be an older one they bought 5 years ago.

>employers have to pay 1/3 of healthcare to full time workers.

>That is on top of companies that pay for your healthcare regardless of obama care

The buck is passed around until you pay for it. Through taxes, increasing premiums, increasing costs. The worker pays the company profits.

Is your dad on the board for United Healthcare or something?


 No.2866600

>>2866595

>Shit arguement

nope. It shows people are willing to pay for consumer shit rather than their health

>The buck is passed around until you pay for it. Through taxes, increasing premiums, increasing costs. The worker pays the company profits.

exactly, thanks government for rising prices


 No.2866602

>>2866394

>Tacitus is the best source we have on the ancient pagans.

"best" does not mean sole

>there is no evidence Aristotle ever ventured into Gaul

firstly the Celts were not just in Gaul, secondly him reporting whatever the current opinion of the Celts was is just as useful as Tacitus' personal impression

>actions of a single group is not a big enough sample size to claim that it is a reflection of society as a whole.

We could also get into the Spartans, but also hilarious since pederasty was the domain of the middle and upper classes

>not pederasty, homosexuality which is where pederasty leads.

pederasty is a form of homosexuality, and I have no idea how you're extrapolating that they somehow run in an arc but it's hilarious.

>The History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire.

jesus christ, you're actually taking Gibbon as a source on homosexuality? let alone his propensities on pagans and christians

>Also read Cato the Elder.

holy shit, you're taking the writings of a notorious puritanical roman moralfag as evidence?

>Well if you paid attention to the string of replies we are talking about the European people around Rome, more specifically the Germanic pagans prior to Christianity

quite frankly I didn't care about your response thread until you went full retard, and have kept doing so

>the topic isn't about the Japanese. So you're wrong in that regard

the thread topic is actually about the USSR's gay policy, so you're wrong anyway

>Yes read Cato the Elder

If you somehow consider the peak of the Roman Empire an era of decline you have to be taking some drugs or be mentally retarded


 No.2866603

>>2866556

>don't like them

not him but do you seriously think they aren't cherry picking statistics and deliberately highlighting a "trend" that is probably misleading?

I mean just pick up any history book where the dude wants to present a new view of the topic, it's pretty clear when they start cherry picking most of the time


 No.2866608

>>2866600

>nope. It shows people are willing to pay for consumer shit rather than their health

You need a smartphone or a computer in modern society. Many jobs require people apply online and e-mail their bosses. In addition to the gig economy which you need a phone for obvious reasons to get a job there.

>>2866600

>exactly, thanks government for rising prices

If we had a nationalized healthcare system costs would be lower because we wouldn’t have to pay for Porky’s profits.


 No.2866617

>>2866602

>"best" does not mean sole

I didn't say it did.

However Tacitus is an authority on the subject when compared to someone who probably never seen the Celts in person

>firstly the Celts were not just in Gaul, secondly him reporting whatever the current opinion of the Celts was is just as useful as Tacitus' personal impression

"general opinion of the celts from the average Roman" is a fact and is not equal to primary sources.

>We could also get into the Spartans, but also hilarious since pederasty was the domain of the middle and upper classes

pederasty is like homosex lite. eventually it ended up bad for them however there was virtually no adult men in homosexual relationships.

>pederasty is a form of homosexuality, and I have no idea how you're extrapolating that they somehow run in an arc but it's hilarious.

all the more reasons to ban homosex

>jesus christ, you're actually taking Gibbon as a source on homosexuality? let alone his propensities on pagans and christians

>holy shit, you're taking the writings of a notorious puritanical roman moralfag as evidence?

<I don't like the conclusions they came to so they're wrong

that is not how research works sorry.

>quite frankly I didn't care about your response thread until you went full retard, and have kept doing so

ok? irrelevant tbh

>the thread topic is actually about the USSR's gay policy, so you're wrong anyway

i don't care? I was replying to you(or someone) who said christians started anti gay bigotry

>If you somehow consider the peak of the Roman Empire an era of decline you have to be taking some drugs or be mentally retarded

"peak" is subjective.

also if you feel you have to respond with butthurt rather than evidence you are the one taking drugs or retarded.


 No.2866618

>>2866603

idk maybe you can look at the data and come to a conclusions rather than just rejecting everything that doesn't fit your world view


 No.2866620

>>2866402

>I don't know how to make a new thread

You boomer pieces of shit sicken me.


 No.2866621

>>2866608

>You need a smartphone or a computer in modern society

no you don't

>Many jobs require people apply online and e-mail their bosses

this doesn't require you to own one.

>In addition to the gig economy which you need a phone for obvious reasons to get a job there.

why would you even work one of those trap jobs.

>If we had a nationalized healthcare system costs would be lower because we wouldn’t have to pay for Porky’s profits.

if the government stayed out of healthcare and everyone had to pay out of pocket competition would drive prices down


 No.2866636

>>2866621

>no you don't

In the first world you do

>>2866621

>this doesn't require you to own one.

it does

>>2866621

>why would you even work one of those trap jobs.

Because in many parts of the first world their the only jobs available after free trade and the abolition of tariffs caused deindustrialization.

>>2866621

>if the government stayed out of healthcare and everyone had to pay out of pocket competition would drive prices down

If this was true why is it that healthcare prices pre-Obamacare were still very high, higher than in Britain where they have a NHS.


 No.2866651

>>2866636

>first world

Not only in the first world. You really NEED a phone and a computer. If you are not available to your boss/the manager 24/7, you have a good chance of losing the job.

It's a shit world, but that's how it is right now.

Even when it's not your shift, and you are SUPPOSED to have time to rest, missing a call can spell disaster.

Honestly I have no idea what the guy you replied to has in mind when saying "job" and it honestly sounds like he's some retard that actually never worked a day in his life besides washing the dishes at home at best.


 No.2866673

>>2866636

>In the first world you do

You still don't

it just makes things easier

>it does

no it doesn't

you can still access computers daily without owning one

>Because in many parts of the first world their the only jobs available after free trade and the abolition of tariffs caused deindustrialization.

then don't work these jobs

>If this was true why is it that healthcare prices pre-Obamacare were still very high, higher than in Britain where they have a NHS.

And? the NHS is cheap not because its so good but because the government keeps costs low and makes up the difference through the exploitation of the third world.


 No.2866675

>>2866651

>Not only in the first world. You really NEED a phone and a computer

lol you don't

>If you are not available to your boss/the manager 24/7, you have a good chance of losing the job.

this is only the case if you work salary and considered always on call

>It's a shit world, but that's how it is right now.

yet its better than anytime before it.

>Even when it's not your shift, and you are SUPPOSED to have time to rest, missing a call can spell disaster.

no it can't.

>Honestly I have no idea what the guy you replied to has in mind when saying "job" and it honestly sounds like he's some retard that actually never worked a day in his life besides washing the dishes at home at best.

sounds like you're making up horror stories


 No.2866685

File: 36b5d451af8a9e5⋯.jpg (73.78 KB, 250x343, 250:343, f7df33048e885d2a8a053002a8….jpg)

I, pressident Mandrill Yang, will institute a universal mandrill income, "the banana dividend", independent of one's work status. This would lift millions of mandrill youfs out of poverty and incraese our economy by 14% by 2025, and would encourage entrepreneurship in our nation. Vote for me.


 No.2866696

File: 9abebd04804e142⋯.pdf (3.67 MB, structure of proletarian u….pdf)

>>2866673

>>2866675

>you still don't

>no it doesn't

>no it can't

>lol you don't

argument_not_found.tiff

>you can still access computers daily without owning one

You can't do so freely and without paying though, much less on demand if you're asked to do so. This makes you much less versatile and desirable in the job market, considering it prohibits you from performing a wide variety of activities, in particular those that make up the jobs that tend to pay the most. In order words, "paying for consumer shit" can actually be a way to "pull yourself by your bootstraps", if you even believe in bullshit like that. This is also particularly true in the third world where being always available to a foreign boss is a huge advantage in terms of competition.

>then don't work these jobs

Don't worry about unemployment, my fellow working man. You can just go on the dole, beg like a dog, or become a prostitute! :^)


 No.2866710

>>2866651

>Not only in the first world. You really NEED a phone and a computer

lol you don't

>If you are not available to your boss/the manager 24/7, you have a good chance of losing the job.

this is only the case if you work salary and considered always on call

>It's a shit world, but that's how it is right now.

yet its better than anytime before it.

>Even when it's not your shift, and you are SUPPOSED to have time to rest, missing a call can spell disaster.

no it can't.

>Honestly I have no idea what the guy you replied to has in mind when saying "job" and it honestly sounds like he's some retard that actually never worked a day in his life besides washing the dishes at home at best.

sounds like you're making up horror stories >>2866696

>>you still don't

>

>>no it doesn't

>

>>no it can't

>

>>lol you don't

>

>argument_not_found.tiff

same for you.

>You can't do so freely and without paying though, much less on demand if you're asked to do so.

yes you can its called a library.

>This makes you much less versatile and desirable in the job market

>considering it prohibits you from performing a wide variety of activities, in particular those that make up the jobs that tend to pay the most.

I said it was viable not optimal.

>paying for consumer shit" can actually be a way to "pull yourself by your bootstraps", if you even believe in bullshit like that. This is also particularly true in the third world where being always available to a foreign boss is a huge advantage in terms of competition.

even then you can get it for cheap, a thinkpad can cost under $100

>Don't worry about unemployment, my fellow working man. You can just go on the dole, beg like a dog, or become a prostitute! :^)

not an argument


 No.2866720

>>2866174

>Most likely you'd have more school shootings etc

Homosexual repression has nothing to do with school shootings. The thing a lot of school shooter share is that they were on SSRIs (Meds for depression) and I think all of them were heterosexual.

School shootings are also caused by compulsory education, which breeds bullying since kids can’t disengage from people that are menacing them. And schools don’t have to put in any effort to make schools appealing to children so they turn into the modern kid jails they are today.


 No.2866721

everything I don't like is larp


 No.2866724

>>2866675

>no it can't.

Yes it can you dipshit. Have you ever had that kind of a job? If you're experienced, valuable to the company or have a nice boss that you get along with, you might get away with it a couple of times. If it's your first month, you might not get another call for half a year, if ever. In the meantime, you've got bills to pay.

Holy fuck am I tired of politically opinionated people claiming to know how the precariat lives but are instead obviously trust-fund kids or NEETs. They're also predominantly useless liberals or far-right cunts. You will all be marched into the ocean


 No.2866730

>>2866724

>Yes it can you dipshit.

yes you can retard

>Have you ever had that kind of a job? If you're experienced, valuable to the company or have a nice boss that you get along with, you might get away with it a couple of times. If it's your first month, you might not get another call for half a year, if ever. In the meantime, you've got bills to pay.

unless you work salary or do something like manage the place most of the time you're not required to answer phone calls. And unless you agree to answering calls on your off time you can't get fired for that. At least thats how it is in the US

>Holy fuck am I tired of politically opinionated people claiming to know how the precariat lives but are instead obviously trust-fund kids or NEETs. They're also predominantly useless liberals or far-right cunts. You will all be marched into the ocean

you understand we have labor laws right? Of course its not as good as Socialism but its not this made up dystopia


 No.2866747

>>2866730

>unless you work salary or do something like manage the place most of the time you're not required to answer phone calls. And unless you agree to answering calls on your off time you can't get fired for that. At least thats how it is in the US

I'm talking about on-call jobs. I.e., you need a phone just to be informed about when you're supposed to meet up at work the next day. Even if you work shifts, you're supposed to be reachable in case you need to cover for a no-show or in case there's a lot to do. If you don't, there are a thousand unemployed seeking to take your place.

>inb4 just get a better job

>you understand we have labor laws right? Of course its not as good as Socialism but its not this made up dystopia

Don't mean shit if they're not enforced or adhered to. It's not like they'll tell you explicitly to be available 24/7, but it's heavily implied by the fact that missing a call could render you unemployed for weeks on end. I live in Norway where labour laws are far better than in the US, btw. Thinking the mere existence of labour laws negate predation in the workplace and social dumping is just fucking naive.


 No.2866757

>>2866747

>I'm talking about on-call jobs. I.e., you need a phone just to be informed about when you're supposed to meet up at work the next day. Even if you work shifts, you're supposed to be reachable in case you need to cover for a no-show or in case there's a lot to do. If you don't, there are a thousand unemployed seeking to take your place.

Some people feel like the money is worth it.

If you don't then don't take a job to the terms you don't agree with. and before you shit post I'm going to say it again:Of course its not as good as Socialism but its not this made up dystopia

>Don't mean shit if they're not enforced or adhered to.

Well they are so this is irrelevant.

>inb4 some special scenario where the court case didn't end up well.

>It's not like they'll tell you explicitly to be available 24/7, but it's heavily implied by the fact that missing a call could render you unemployed for weeks on end.

then don't take a job if you can't do what is expected of you.

Also we have unemployment.

>I live in Norway where labour laws are far better than in the US, btw. Thinking the mere existence of labour laws negate predation in the workplace and social dumping is just fucking naive.

It doesn't negate the problems but it does with the problems you're talking about


 No.2866984

>>2866617

>However Tacitus is an authority on the subject when compared to someone who probably never seen the Celts in person

considering his tendency to moralize shit would you really have expected him to talk about their absolute gayness? he has a tendency to highlight shit in comparison to the naughty empire, and in that sense the german anecdote is useful

>"general opinion of the celts from the average Roman" is a fact and is not equal to primary sources.

considering multiple other sources I'd say that would at the least equal it out

>pederasty is like homosex lite. eventually it ended up bad for them however there was virtually no adult men in homosexual relationships.

>virtually no

bullshit

you don't have a law threatening to revoke a citizens citizenship if they bottom if no adult male did it

and it is not "homosex lite" it's literally pedophilia of the gay variety

>all the more reasons to ban homosex

should be ban sex between the opposite sexes because of pedos? and before you go "but that wasn't a problem" we're going to just get bogged down in the cultural differences on the matter of women so lets not

><I don't like the conclusions they came to so they're wrong

>that is not how research works sorry.

Are you seriously suggesting a 200 year old work that is well known for its biases is not only a useful source beyond perhaps a brief introduction, but is a neutral account of homosexuality in the ancient world?

you'd be laughed out of academia if you spewed this bullshit seriously

>"peak" is subjective.

You'd be in the distinct minority to try to claim from Augustus to like Trajan wasn't the peak of the Empire

>also if you feel you have to respond with butthurt rather than evidence you are the one taking drugs or retarded.

I'm more shocked at your retardation honestly

I mean someone seriously using Gibbon as a source is fucking hilarious


 No.2869132

>>2866984

>you'd be laughed out of academia if you spewed this bullshit seriously

Academia is a useless sack of shit though. Why should their standards be valued at all? All they are is a bunch of retarted Labor Aristocrats.


 No.2869282

>>2866984

>considering his tendency to moralize shit would you really have expected him to talk about their absolute gayness?

>he has a tendency to highlight shit in comparison to the naughty empire, and in that sense the german anecdote is useful

Who tacitus or Aristotle?

>considering multiple other sources I'd say that would at the least equal it out

What you are calling "general roman perception" is not multiple sources

>you don't have a law threatening to revoke a citizens citizenship if they bottom if no adult male did it

Yeah its just worse to be the bottom hence the law

>and it is not "homosex lite" it's literally pedophilia of the gay variety

It literally is homo lite

Boys are just underdeveloped men

>

should be ban sex between the opposite sexes because of pedos? and before you go "but that wasn't a problem" we're going to just get bogged down in the cultural differences on the matter of women so lets not

Well not just because pedos but that's a step in the right direction

>Are you seriously suggesting a 200 year old work that is well known for its biases is not only a useful source beyond perhaps a brief introduction, but is a neutral account of homosexuality in the ancient world?

Oh yes its bias because you don't like it

>you'd be laughed out of academia if you spewed this bullshit seriously

No u

>You'd be in the distinct minority to try to claim from Augustus to like Trajan wasn't the peak of the Empire

appeal to majority fallacy

>I'm more shocked at your retardation honestly

>I mean someone seriously using Gibbon as a source is fucking hilarious

I'd be shocked at your butthurt

But I'm not thats common for people losing a debate to replace an argument for anger when they can longer make said argument


 No.2869739

>>2869132

>Academia is a useless sack of shit though. Why should their standards be valued at all? All they are is a bunch of retarted Labor Aristocrats.

a broken clock is right twice a day

especially with history considering the massive developments in the field in the oh 200 years since Gibbon I'd say you can imagine why it's so farcical

>>2869282

>Who tacitus or Aristotle?

Tacitus

>What you are calling "general roman perception" is not multiple sources

I did not specify "roman", also there are literally multiple people in the sources I copied, I don't know why you're acting like I just listed Aristotle

>It literally is homo lite

fucking little girls is literally hetero lite, I do not understand where you're going with this

>Oh yes its bias because you don't like it

>the historian who is infamous for christfags bad pagans good

>because I don't like it

pick one

I actually like his prose for the record and he's entertaining, but acting like he's a good source for roman history is hilarious beyond noting it as a milestone in historiography

>appeal to majority fallacy

I mean you can claim the literal peak of the empire is somehow its decadent decline but don't pretend I need to act like its correct

also I'm not sure why you're projecting that I'm angry, because I'm more mildly amused than anything.

I'm still surprised I've found someone genuinely citing Gibbon as a historical source, it's like finding a unicorn


 No.2869754

>>2869739

>especially with history considering the massive developments in the field in the oh 200 years since Even 200 years ago, the best philosophers. Marx, Eangles, and Lenin. Did not come from Academia.


 No.2869760

File: 8104034d2e73f85⋯.png (145.99 KB, 500x512, 125:128, ts-so-hard-to-be-an-alpha-….png)

File: cfffc33b5282230⋯.jpg (62.9 KB, 749x500, 749:500, 2yylpv.jpg)

>Back in the day (circa 2012), the joke was that people pretend to be alphas on their keyboards, bragging of exploits that never happened, often followed by "Please buy my book and subscribe to my channel." I guess, back then people were in cope-mode, unaware of their real (abysmally low) value on the sexual market. Back in 2012-2013, people hoped that with just more reading PUA blogs and so on, they would get the girl. Well, now in 2019, they realize that it was a pipe-dream; it was over all along.

>So now, instead of bragging about all the sex you get on a regular basis with 10/10s, you brag about all the sex you can't get even with fugly post-wall landwhales. Seems that people always need to signal that they aren't low status, and since we all became realistic about our lack of sex life, we now accord each other pity-points (really, status-points) for how celibate we are.

>Someone needs to send a memo to the Feminists (Tumblrinas, Twitterinas, and Buzzfeederati) that we no longer pretend to be Chads, but rather, we now emphasize our sexual frustration for purely Machiavellian reasons.

https://weebs.is/threads/its-kinda-ironic.2679/


 No.2869868

>>2866402

>>2866548

The fact that insanely expensive garbage healthcare that doesn’t cover anything factors into total compensation is all you need to safely disregard this.

Let’s see how the numbers run after Medicare for all is implemented and people are no longer getting thousands of dollars (theoretically) in fringe benefits.

You wanna know something epic? One time my old employer had me on part-time and I only made 9,000 dollars for the year. But when I sat down with my manager, my compensation package for that year was worth $12,000 dollars. I had no healthcare, no vacation benefits, no sick days, nothing, no stock option and a 401k that I hadn’t paid a dime into.

So, where did the 3,000 come from? My best guess is a combination of taxes withheld and the 20% discount I got at work. But, I almost never bought anything so, that 20% would be a theoretical thing - theoretically if I was plowing most of my income back into the store then the compensation might level out.

I’m willing to bet there’s a lot of workers pulling down big bucks on paper but in reality their take-home pay isn’t even enough to get by.


 No.2870010

>>2866402

>>2866548

I also suggest that we make consideration that whereas wages and salary pay is effectively unconditional, that is, you get paid if you show up to work, getting paid through benefits is restrictively conditional. No matter what the benefits are "worth" you simply will not receive that compensation if you do not fulfill the requirements set. You do not receive the value of a company healthcare plan if you do not get sick or injured. You do not receive the value of paid leave if you don't use it before it expires. You do not receive the value of any of these other setups unless you actually go through with using them, and it is easy to see how companies can encourage employees to either not follow through with them, to contest them, or to find other ways of paying out less than even a realistic valuation of what the benefit is worth in terms of lost potential direct payment.


 No.2870041

File: f740449d0c28d6f⋯.png (680.04 KB, 1192x1616, 149:202, inceldom.png)


 No.2870042

>>2870041

it was posted on /b/ as well.


 No.2870111

homosexuality is fascist


 No.2870113

>>2870111

this again.


 No.2870326

>>2869754

>Even 200 years ago, the best philosophers. Marx, Eangles, and Lenin. Did not come from Academia.

philosophy is a different animal than the field of history m8

we've had a lot of different evidence come to light in the last 200 years, you also have to consider the massive shift in worldview of a brit in the late 18th century and now

you seem to be assuming every academic field operates exactly the same


 No.2870342

File: fcf1715f365094f⋯.jpg (25.86 KB, 370x278, 185:139, TedHaggard.jpg)

>>2870111

heterosexuality is liberal


 No.2878520

>>2866030

HIV and AIDS


 No.2879252

>>2869739

>Tacitus

yes he highlighted things about the Roman Empire, your point?

>I did not specify "roman", also there are literally multiple people in the sources I copied,

then what are you talking about?

>I don't know why you're acting like I just listed Aristotle

because that is all you given

>fucking little girls is literally hetero lite, I do not understand where you're going with this

pederasty isn't as gay as adult male on male homosex

>Oh yes its bias because you don't like it

>the historian who is infamous for christfags bad pagans good

>because I don't like it

>pick one

>I actually like his prose for the record and he's entertaining, but acting like he's a good source for roman history is hilarious beyond noting it as a milestone in historiography

sounds like you're just mad you're being beaten here.

Tatitus was pagan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

>I mean you can claim the literal peak of the empire

This is subjective

>also I'm not sure why you're projecting that I'm angry, because I'm more mildly amused than anything.

<I'm not angry! I'm just AMUSED

yeah ok bud

>I'm still surprised I've found someone genuinely citing Gibbon as a historical source, it's like finding a unicorn

<Your sources completely destroy my argument so I'm going to shitpost

well friend I suppose you've been beaten


 No.2879268

The ussr lived through two famines, a purge against kulaks and then had a nation which wanted to completely enslave and obliterate them knocking at their door immediately after. Stalin decriminalize abortion and homosexuality as a way to compensate,because anticommunism and somewhat isolationist foreign policy to keep out wreckers made immigration to the SU and particularly Russia very low. Was it ideal? No. Did it help solve the USSR's demographic crisis? Absolutely. Is it remotely relevant to modern debates within leftist movements and Stalin's legacy? Absolutely not

Remember that porky only became pro-sexual revolution and pro-feminist and so on because it both meant wider markets to sell to in the age of hyper consumerism, more workers with less resentment against the boss because he pretends to be woke, and more false consciousness raised among more conservative workers to keep them from uniting with minorities and women or at least make them suspect of "the left" being able to do anything for them.

I don't think homophobia or misogyny is good but I'm not going to try and cancel Stalin for doing what was probably a historical necessity for the survival of the ussr in the face of potential conquering by the fascists (who would have been 100000x worse for queer people and women) and if you think this is even worth discussing beyond debunking a historical readings of the scenario (IE Stalin was a red f.ascist who hated gays and women and so on) then you're probably still heavily influenced by your former liberalism and you need to either crush that shit or go back to your local Democrat Cops of America meeting where someone with such idiosyncratic gender identity that there isn't even a word for it yet gets mad at you for calling them "she"

Can we please stop bumping this stupid fucking thread now


 No.2879270

>>2879268

Meant to say Stalin REcriminalized not decriminalized abortion and homosexuality sorry


 No.2879303

>>2879252

>reviving a ten day old discussion

lmao holy shit, seething much?

>yes he highlighted things about the Roman Empire, your point?

you mean highlighting so called roman fun as compared to the based germanics?

>because that is all you given

are you illiterate? because in the post

>aristotle

>athenaeus

>Diodorus

were all talked about

>pederasty isn't as gay as adult male on male homosex

are there shades of homo or heterosexuality now?

>sounds like you're just mad you're being beaten here.

what?

also that bit about christfags bad pagans good was referring to Gibbon retard, I genuinely think you are incapable of understanding what you read

>This is subjective

almost everything is subjective, but considering 90% of historians would call that the peak of the empire you're still a minority opinion m8

>Your sources completely destroy my argument so I'm going to shitpost

>bullshitting

one source is a moralizing self hating roman and the other is infamous for his agenda in his history, I don't see how you're arguing they somehow "destroy" my arguments

not to mention you keep getting BTFO on other points that you just conveniently drop and act like didn't happen lmao

I think you have actual autism m8


 No.2879312

>>2879268

>Stalin decriminalize abortion and homosexuality as a way to compensate,because anticommunism and somewhat isolationist foreign policy to keep out wreckers made immigration to the SU and particularly Russia very low. Was it ideal? No. Did it help solve the USSR's demographic crisis? Absolutely. Is it remotely relevant to modern debates within leftist movements and Stalin's legacy? Absolutely not

Stalin recriminalized homosex and abortion because those things destroy nations. Faggotry and baby killing are not leftist positions.

>Remember that porky only became pro-sexual revolution and pro-feminist and so on because it both meant wider markets to sell to in the age of hyper consumerism, more workers with less resentment against the boss because he pretends to be woke, and more false consciousness raised among more conservative workers to keep them from uniting with minorities and women or at least make them suspect of "the left" being able to do anything for them.

Absolutely agree.

>I don't think homophobia or misogyny is good

Using terms that are manufactured to make you feel a certain way about actions or thoughts is not good practice.

i.e. misogyny is used to shame people into agreeing with liberal feminists.

>I'm not going to try and cancel Stalin for doing what was probably a historical necessity for the survival of the ussr in the face of potential conquering by the fascists (who would have been 100000x worse for queer people and women) and if you think this is even worth discussing beyond debunking a historical readings of the scenario (IE Stalin was a red f.ascist who hated gays and women and so on) then you're probably still heavily influenced by your former liberalism and you need to either crush that shit or go back to your local Democrat Cops of America meeting where someone with such idiosyncratic gender identity that there isn't even a word for it yet gets mad at you for calling them "she"

wanting homosexuality from poisoning your community is not fascist


 No.2879319

>>2879268

>No. Did it help solve the USSR's demographic crisis? Absolutely.

bullshit

possibly abortion (I say possibly because you're assuming underground abortions don't happen)but gays are at max 5% of the population, you're also magically assuming every one of those gay men decided they were magically capable of being with a woman and had kids with them

also Stalin WAS actually reactionary, I'm sure being a seminarian was part of it, otherwise how do you explain shit like

>>2866331

it was a mix of that and Stalin using social conservatism as a way to calm down the peasants who were pissed at the state over collectivization and dekulakization. which along with WW2 worked. Not sure why this can't be true and the fact Stalin wasn't a "red f.ascist"


 No.2879322

>>2879312

Not trying to stir up anything I just haven't been reading the thread so I don't know if you have said so or not but am genuinely curious. Are you a recent /pol/ lurker from the Peterson zizek debate?


 No.2879323

>>2879319

I said it helped faggot I didn't say it did all of the work.

>also Stalin WAS reactionary

That's why he entered into a coalition with the Nazis and fascists and informed political parties sympathetic to him in western nations that they should do the same right?


 No.2879326

>>2879303

>>reviving a ten day old discussion

>lmao holy shit, seething much?

well you're replying so you must be aswell

>you mean highlighting so called roman fun as compared to the based germanics?

obviously you haven't read germania

>are you illiterate? because in the post

you only mentioned aristole by name then insisted there are "tons of other historical sources but failed to provide any

>aristotle

>athenaeus

>Diodorus

>were all talked about

oh there we go, Now what about them is relevant?

>are there shades of homo or heterosexuality now?

well clearly fucking something that hasn't developed into an adult male is not the same as fucking an adult male. Or do you disagree pedo?

>what?

>also that bit about christfags bad pagans good was referring to Gibbon retard, I genuinely think you are incapable of understanding what you rea

<Historian X is mean

not an argument

>almost everything is subjective, but considering 90% of historians would call that the peak of the empire you're still a minority opinion m8

you just made that stat up.

>one source is a moralizing self hating roman

<Insults are just as good as an argument

2/10 do you have anything of substance to argue against Tacitus? No? Alright then.

>and the other is infamous for his agenda in his history,

<Historian writes something I don't like MUST be a hidden anti gay agenda

wew lad none of these hold up in debate try again.

>I don't see how you're arguing they somehow "destroy" my arguments

because you have failed to make a counter argument

>not to mention you keep getting BTFO on other points that you just conveniently drop and act like didn't happen lmao

where?

>I think you have actual autism m8

I think you do


 No.2879328

>>2879322

>Not trying to stir up anything I just haven't been reading the thread so I don't know if you have said so or not but am genuinely curious. Are you a recent /pol/ lurker from the Peterson zizek debate?

No I've been here for a while. A while back I was a NK flag but just forgot to turn it back on.

Marxist-Leninist etc.


 No.2879333

>>2879323

>I said it helped faggot I didn't say it did all of the work.

I severely doubt it "helped" at any more than some incredibly marginal bit, if you were really worried about demographics you'd be doing other shit.

>That's why he entered into a coalition with the Nazis and fascists and informed political parties sympathetic to him in western nations that they should do the same right?

first of all social conservatism=/=reactionary, let alone assuming this automatically makes him sympathetic to the nazis. not sure why you assume just because he didn't like gays he automatically needed to be bros with hitler


 No.2879337

>>2879319

Also you're aware that during the 50s and earlier gay men fathered children with women all the fucking time right? And yeah underground abortions still happened but to assume that they were so common that they negated the effects of the abortion ban is fucking stupid. That's like saying the one child policy didn't contribute to China's current demographic crisis because economic development and more women entering the workforce tends to result in low birthrates anyway.


 No.2879348

>>2879333

>social conservatism=/=reactionary

Lol

>he didn't have to be bros with Hitler

I didn't say that fag I said if Stalin was a true reactionary it would have behooved him a lot more to pursue a united front with the right to push out any American or western European influence than to unite with the West and convince communist parties on that region to unite with liberal and social democratic parties who in those days were the ones who caved to social liberalism in favor of material betterment albeit less so than after the 1960s


 No.2879352

>>2879326

>well you're replying so you must be aswell

no? I saw in the catalogue this thread was getting revived and was curious who was posting, then saw you decided to revive this little debate

>obviously you haven't read germania

are you arguing he didn't like german values on some issues compared to roman ones?

>you only mentioned aristole by name then insisted there are "tons of other historical sources but failed to provide any

did you not read beyond the first sentence of the paragraph I posted about this?lmao

>oh there we go, Now what about them is relevant?

ok yeah you definitely are basically reading only the first sentence of everything

>well clearly fucking something that hasn't developed into an adult male is not the same as fucking an adult male. Or do you disagree pedo?

are you fucking retarded? wanting to fuck a man makes you gay or bi, wanting to fuck a child or either sex makes you a pedo of either the gay or straight variety, what part of this is hard to understand?

>Historian X is mean

>mean

lol what, how do you construe

>having an agenda to say christfags suck pagans good

mean? and why would I? the guy evidently defending homos, support christfaggotry?

retard

>you just made that stat up.

the period is literally called the Pax Romana, how dense can you be dude?

>2/10 do you have anything of substance to argue against Tacitus? No? Alright then.

we've already done the substance?

>Historian writes something I don't like MUST be a hidden anti gay agenda

>anti-christian agenda=anti-gay agenda

lad are you schizo or retarded? not even memeing

>where?

rereade your posts where you magically keep dropping half your arguments till we're down to you being autistic about tacitus,gibbon, and whether there are shades of homosexuality


 No.2879365

>>2879337

>Also you're aware that during the 50s and earlier gay men fathered children with women all the fucking time right?

>all the fucking time

yes? are you assuming a large portion simply didn't marry at all? which was also a thing during that period?

> And yeah underground abortions still happened but to assume that they were so common that they negated the effects of the abortion ban is fucking stupid

negated entirely no, muted the effects yes

>That's like saying the one child policy didn't contribute to China's current demographic crisis because economic development and more women entering the workforce tends to result in low birthrates anyway.

honestly I don't think it did as much as we meme, it did keep it slightly lower yes but part of the West's growth rate is propped up by immigration which distorts it anyway

>>2879348

>Lol

are you seriously arguing hating gays means someone also wants to enslave the proles?

>I didn't say that fag

but you did

>if Stalin was a true reactionary it would have behooved him a lot more to pursue a united front with the right to push out any American or western European influence than to unite with the West and convince communist parties on that region to unite with liberal and social democratic parties who in those days were the ones who caved to social liberalism in favor of material betterment albeit less so than after the 1960s

once again you're assuming agreeing to hate gays magically means they agree on everything else, which is quite obviously not the case

did you buy the nazbol meme or something?


 No.2879386

>>2879365

I literally explained exactly how it would behoove someone who is reactionary more to ally with fascists even if they are not a fascist themselves makes sense. It's partially how Hitler gained state power in the first place, the Conservatives thought they could corral him and use the coalition to boost their own control over Germany to weaken both the SPD and the commies

You're the one who seems to have bought the nazbol meme that every conservative decision Stalin made was out of some ideological commitment rather than a response to a problem (effective or not)


 No.2879398

>>2879352

>no? I saw in the catalogue this thread was getting revived and was curious who was posting, then saw you decided to revive this little debate

you're replying so you must be aswell

>are you arguing he didn't like german values on some issues compared to roman ones?

No you're arguing that it seems like.

>did you not read beyond the first sentence of the paragraph I posted about this?lmao

you only mentioned aristole by name then insisted there are "tons of other historical sources but failed to provide any

>ok yeah you definitely are basically reading only the first sentence of everything

shitposting

>are you fucking retarded? wanting to fuck a man makes you gay or bi, wanting to fuck a child or either sex makes you a pedo of either the gay or straight variety, what part of this is hard to understand?

fucking something that hasn't developed into an adult male is not the same as fucking an adult male.

>Historian X is mean

>mean

>lol what, how do you construe

this is literally what you said

>mean? and why would I? the guy evidently defending homos, support christfaggotry?

retard

supporting homos retarded

>the period is literally called the Pax Romana, how dense can you be dude?

and?


 No.2879412

gay pride and the general decadence of gay culture is part of how capitalists use gays my friend. To make a wedge issue effective you have to make the people it represents seem threatening and weird. So when the State institutionalizes tolerance of gays it simultaneously finds petite bourg gays who are naturally alien from the working class generally and promotes them and their stupid aesthetics as being representative of gay culture in general and normalizes the shaming of gays who don't want to get on board with stupid shit like gay pride by gays who do because it's part of their "identity". Before "gay cultureTM" actual gay culture usually was just reflective of whatever was going on in the cultural aesthetics of the time. If you went to a gay bar in the 1920s it would mostly look like any other speak easy save for the occasional tranny or whatever.

If you make an identity's cultural signifiers as bizarre and decadent as possible it helps keep people divided a lot easier than if you allow them to just naturally assimilate. It's why liberals get so buttmad over Buka bans and shit, It's not to defend immigrants for their sake but to keep them from assimilating. It's the same reason reparations for black people has reemerged in the run up to the upcoming election, because it makes it harder to talk about universal programs and for workers to decide on a list or demands for a general strike. This type of shit is one of the biggest reasons Occupy Wall Street ate itself and why the Western Left had been in limbo ever since.

I don't care that you find gay pride disgusting but if you attribute it's decadence to homosexuality itself rather than its commoditization and managed acceptance into society you're doing what porky wants my friend.


 No.2879422

>>2879384

>face book boomer memes

get out, cunt


 No.2879427

>>2879384

Yeah, the two homos on the left are tossing some salad.


 No.2879599

>>2866030

Homosexuality is repulsive. Its caused by pedos molesting boys and the USSR was much more progressive in tackling the issue than the Capitalists who to this day encourage child abuse in poor countries (eg. Thailand) and poor communities in rich countries (eg. the UK). Stalin did nothing wrong.


 No.2879603

>>2866095

>European

Eurasian.


 No.2879605

>>2866174

bullets are cheap


 No.2879766

>>2879605

Trials are still expensive and time consuming.


 No.2879768

>>2879766

Who said anything about trials?


 No.2879779

>>2879768

ah yes gays are so horrible that we need to have summary executions in the streets without evidence on a literally victimless, damageless crime.

this is not at all retarded.


 No.2879807

>>2879779

I see you have fallen for capitalist propaganda to promote homosexuality. Homosexuality isnt a victimless crime. They victimise each other with deadly and incurable sexual disease. They victimise the children they molest and indoctrinate. They victimise their families by exposing them to the above. Homosexuality victimises society as a whole because they are subversive, dangerous perverts incapable of even the basic function in life, that is reproduction. Homosexuality is a disease (seemingly incurable) and summary execution of homosexuals is as much for the benefit of themselves as the rest of society. Honestly I think with all the evidence of homosexuality on social media a trial is completely unnecessary to weed them out and it would only take a few thousands executions in each region before the disease is under control.


 No.2879827

The amount of people actually persecuted solely for homosexuality in the USSR was very small. Less than 1% of homosexuals actually. Most convictions for "homosexuality" included charges of child molestation or some other crime, such as plain political crimes.


 No.2879864

>>2879807

Feels feels everywhere and not an argument to think.

I'd execute you myself for being such a gigantic faggot that inflicts itself on society.


 No.2879903

>>2879864

Not if I execute you first.


 No.2879961

>>2879903

Real question, are you one of our boards angry resident incels?


 No.2879985

>>2879864

>STDs are just feels.

yeah this is why no one takes anarkiddies seriously


 No.2880022

>>2879398

>you're replying so you must be aswell

you revived a thread that hadn't had a post in ten days to reply and are trying to say you weren't asshurt? lmao

doesn't mean I won't keep refuting your retardation

>No you're arguing that it seems like.

what?

how exactly are you saying he was propping up rome compared to the germans when one of them was okay with boyfucking/also had other homosexuality but didn't like to acknowledge it, while the other supposedly threw gays in swamps?you're contradicting your own ideas here

>you only mentioned aristole by name then insisted there are "tons of other historical sources but failed to provide any

the names I provided are literally all in the same paragraph I posted, you really can't read m8

>fucking something that hasn't developed into an adult male is not the same as fucking an adult male.

homosexuality-wanting to fuck men

heterosexuality-wanting to fuck women

pedophilia-wanting to fuck underage of either

a man fucking a boy is not a "shade" of homo you unironic retard, it's a homosexual/bisexual pedophile

>this is literally what you said

cite where I "literally" said that then, because I'm calling bullshit

>retard

>has no response but to say retard

lmao

whatever

>and?

and you're still the minority opinion?


 No.2880201

>>2879985

>gay sex causes spontaneous production of STDs


 No.2880255

>>2866030

homosexuals are very open to blackmail, subterfuge, bribery, etc. so it makes sense to distance yourself from them in a politically sensitive situation.


 No.2880447

>>2880022

>you revived a thread that hadn't had a post in ten days to reply and are trying to say you weren't asshurt? lmao

replying so you must be aswell

>how exactly are you saying he was propping up rome compared to the germans when one of them was okay with boyfucking/also had other homosexuality but didn't like to acknowledge it, while the other supposedly threw gays in swamps?you're contradicting your own ideas here

Tacitus accurately documented Pagan treatment of homosexuals which was to throw them into the bog.

>the names I provided are literally all in the same paragraph I posted, you really can't read m8

now that you mentioned them how are the relevant?

>homosexuality-wanting to fuck men

>heterosexuality-wanting to fuck women

>pedophilia-wanting to fuck underage of either

>a man fucking a boy is not a "shade" of homo you unironic retard, it's a homosexual/bisexual pedophile

you contradicted yourself here.

A boy is not the same as a man

>cite where I "literally" said that then, because I'm calling bullshit

see above

>and you're still the minority opinion?

and?


 No.2880478

>>2880255

Here in the year 2019 none of this is any more or less true about homosexuals than anyone else. You're just a homophobe.


 No.2880482

>>2880478

>using homophobic unironically

you're just a liberal


 No.2880485

>>2880201

It does just look at the last century


 No.2880552

>>2880255

Doesn't that require homosexuality to be considered a social evil?


 No.2880558

>>2880485

You realise that if HIV/AIDS was a little shitty disease from Congo that was brought over to the US, right? And if you really want to spin it as a result of some social moral problem, then you should blame colonialism *and Belgians*


 No.2880628

>>2880558

>You realise that if HIV/AIDS was a little shitty disease from Congo that was brought over to the US, right? And if you really want to spin it as a result of some social moral problem, then you should blame colonialism *and Belgians*

That does not negate the damage homosexuality does


 No.2880685

>>2880628

So let's say a new hypothetical disease arises that is only transmitted by intervaginal sex. Would it suddenly make straight people a threat to humanity? Also I remind you that aids is a risk for heterosexuals just as much as gays.


 No.2880691

>>2880685

It is only a risk for sexhavers and therefore an instrument of divine justice.


 No.2880706

>>2880485

Feels > reals!


 No.2880732

>>2880706

<STDs are feels

Imagine hating the proletariat this much


 No.2880734

>>2880685

>So let's say a new hypothetical disease arises that is only transmitted by intervaginal sex. Would it suddenly make straight people a threat to humanity?

Hypothetical are a waste of time.

But yes

>Also I remind you that aids is a risk for heterosexuals just as much as gays.

In theory yes but in practice gays have astronomical rates of AIDs compared to straights


 No.2880735

>>2880732

Imagine actually thinking STD's spontaneously generated out of gay sex.


 No.2880743

>>2880735

>Imagine actually thinking STD's spontaneously generated out of gay sex.

you're just shitposting now


 No.2880767

>>2880743

>>gay sex causes spontaneous production of STDs

>It does just look at the last century


 No.2880772

>>2880767

Yeah gays have insane rates of STDs

You're fighting an uphill battle here bud


 No.2880784

fags


 No.2880794

>>2880772

>spontaneous production


 No.2880801

>>2880794

reported for shitposting


 No.2880931

>>2880447

>replying so you must be aswell

>repeating something makes it true

lmao, maximum autism

>Tacitus accurately documented Pagan treatment of homosexuals which was to throw them into the bog.

see above

>now that you mentioned them how are the relevant?

>why are the sources supporting my argument relevant?

>A boy is not the same as a man

in what universe?

>see above

above where? you've never actually shown where I supposedly said this?

also you really should sage this shit because I see no reason why this autism should bump what was a dead thread


 No.2881162

>>2866463

That Christianity whether we like it or not still informs our discussions of homosexuality, paganism does not.


 No.2881163

>>2866273

Words like "mental disorder" mean things


 No.2881174

The decimation family structure was on the table, however it was reached to the conclusion that a healthy family keeps the society in check. That's why every fun and debauchery, that could harm the family structure of USSR, was eradicated.


 No.2881228

>100 million people die every 5 year because of capitalism

>BUT WHAT ABOUT MUH GAY RIGHTS IN SOCIALIST COUNTRIES?!


 No.2881230

File: 5d2aa4d2b9968b2⋯.jpg (109.72 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, 1532337906860.jpg)

>>2881228

>posted unironically


 No.2881234

>>2881230

LGBTBBQ deserve the gulag. Nothing but idpol.


 No.2881238

>>2880931

>lmao, maximum autism

you're just as autistic m8

>see above

Tacitus accurately documented Pagan treatment of homosexuals which was to throw them into the bog.

>>A boy is not the same as a man

>in what universe?

what is puberty

>also you really should sage this shit because I see no reason why this autism should bump what was a dead thread

well you clearly ran out of defenses for your fag posting

>>2880931

>also you really should sage this shit because I see no reason why this autism should bump what was a dead thread


 No.2881242

File: 70612059f059ef0⋯.jpg (95.93 KB, 1115x1155, 223:231, fuckoff.jpg)

>>2881234

this is on the same level as saying kill all white people


 No.2881252

>>2881242

No because idpol is bad

white people advance communism


 No.2881415

>>2881234

>LGBTBBQ deserve the gulag.

t Saudi Crown Prince


 No.2881436

"Homosexuals are bad"

T. board full of furries and people who thirsted after the Tomofag.


 No.2881620

File: fcf1715f365094f⋯.jpg (25.86 KB, 370x278, 185:139, TedHaggard.jpg)

>>2881436

That’s 8chan in general, not just this board. Go to any board and ask people their thoughts of LGB issues. Everyone will give answers straight out of the GOP's 1996 platform. Then post some gay porn and everyone will call it hot.


 No.2881938

>>2879412

this is honestly a galaxy brain take, thanks anon. I've had some trouble putting it to words. I feel like the ideal communist society would allow for a return to seeing homosexuality as a behavior rather than an identity.


 No.2881957

homosexuality was at this point considered synonymous with pedophilia i'm not saying it is i'm just saying that most public perceptions back then considered it that.


 No.2882091

>>2866291 ìt's not a criminal offense to smoke weed, but it's not legal


 No.2882096

>>2882091

>ìt's not a criminal offense

>but it's not legal

These are mutually exclusive statements unless you're going to go into some incredibly autistic retarded legalese territory.


 No.2882149

>>2882096

You clearly don't understand the difference between decriminalized and legalized


 No.2882180

>>2882149

>"unless you're going to go into some incredibly autistic retarded legalese territory."

The difference between the two is literally nothing but masking the state punishment whether its a fine or a criminal record


 No.2882295

>>2866272

>[citation needed]

Julius Caesar's reports on Gaul.


 No.2882319

>>2882180

>The difference between the two is literally nothing but masking the state punishment whether its a fine or a criminal record

Yeah and you don't understand the difference so you're over simplifying things.

Sorry but you're wrong.


 No.2882320

>>2882295

>Julius Caesar's reports on Gaul.

The romans also claimed the celts weaponry was so inferior their swords bended after a single strike, and they had to flatten it back out with their feet. We know this is false from archeological findings, and in fact their metal working was far superior than any other peoples in europe. Also there's plenty of celtic bog bodies, executed the exact same way Tacitus described in Germania.

There is solid evidence that Tacitus is correct and Caesar is not.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / coz / fin0be / late / ttgg ]