[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
I really fail to see what is lacking in men today compared to 30-50 years ago?
[/quote]
A spine.[/quote]
And how do you figure that? [/quote]
Because they spend their lives on their knees.
The way they are socialized allows for no other posture.
Ah, socialzed, how ambiguous of me…
Muah…ha…
While this is a fantastic thread, is the best thing you paragons of masculinity had to do on a Friday night is to make sure that DB Cooper understands that if he blissfully goes on with life he is ignoring the immediate threat of big brother?
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doing something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?
[quote]groo wrote:
While this is a fantastic thread, is the best thing you paragons of masculinity had to do on a Friday night is to make sure that DB Cooper understands that if he blissfully goes on with life he is ignoring the immediate threat of big brother?
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doint something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?[/quote]
Was fucking, posted afterwards.
Time zones, ya know?
[quote]orion wrote:
Bullshit and you know better.
<---- Libertarian.
[/quote]
I said ‘maybe’ to cover the bases but would’ve picked you as a libertarian. Rothbard, Rockwell, Von Mises Institute and Ron Paul are of course all associated with the paleo wing of libertarianism and there is crossover with paleo-conservatism. Rothbard founded the paleo-con think tank John Randolph club.
But they DON’T deal with the consequences do they? That’s the whole point. The consequences of their actions affect everyone and degrade the civil society.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
While this is a fantastic thread, is the best thing you paragons of masculinity had to do on a Friday night is to make sure that DB Cooper understands that if he blissfully goes on with life he is ignoring the immediate threat of big brother?
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doint something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?[/quote]
Was fucking, posted afterwards.
Time zones, ya know?[/quote]
I didn’t mean you generally I see Euros leading the charge to men becoming limp wristed girly reflections of our prior glory. I only feel confident in our Mexican and Canadian brothers…but sometimes I am not sure about Canada.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
Bullshit and you know better.
<---- Libertarian.
[/quote]
I said ‘maybe’ to cover the bases but would’ve picked you as a libertarian. Rothbard, Rockwell, Von Mises Institute and Ron Paul are of course all associated with the paleo wing of libertarianism and there is crossover with paleo-conservatism. Rothbard founded the paleo-con think tank John Randolph club.
But they DON’T deal with the consequences do they? That’s the whole point. The consequences of their actions affect everyone and degrade the civil society.[/quote]
yeah, but that would stop rather quickly if they had to pay their own way.
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
While this is a fantastic thread, is the best thing you paragons of masculinity had to do on a Friday night is to make sure that DB Cooper understands that if he blissfully goes on with life he is ignoring the immediate threat of big brother?
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doint something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?[/quote]
Was fucking, posted afterwards.
Time zones, ya know?[/quote]
I didn’t mean you generally I see Euros leading the charge to men becoming limp wristed girly reflections of our prior glory. I only feel confident in our Mexican and Canadian brothers…but sometimes I am not sure about Canada.
[/quote]
Leading the charge?
More like sashaying in front, giggling incontrollibly.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
While this is a fantastic thread, is the best thing you paragons of masculinity had to do on a Friday night is to make sure that DB Cooper understands that if he blissfully goes on with life he is ignoring the immediate threat of big brother?
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doint something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?[/quote]
Was fucking, posted afterwards.
Time zones, ya know?[/quote]
I didn’t mean you generally I see Euros leading the charge to men becoming limp wristed girly reflections of our prior glory. I only feel confident in our Mexican and Canadian brothers…but sometimes I am not sure about Canada.
[/quote]
Leading the charge?
More like sashaying in front, giggling incontrollibly.[/quote]
Tomato tomato etc.
[quote]groo wrote:
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
[/quote]
Assuming that were true, I would still like to cause him as much damage as possible before the thought police arrive and drag me off to room 101 in the Ministry of Love.
[quote]
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doing something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?[/quote]
Different time zone. And I’m saving my energy for Monday night. What’s your excuse?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
[/quote]
Assuming that were true, I would still like to cause him as much damage as possible before the thought police arrive and drag me off to room 101 in the Ministry of Love.
[quote]
Shouldn’t most of you be out fighting something, hunting something or fucking something or doing something else a bit more atavistic instead of typing on the internet?[/quote]
Different time zone. And I’m saving my energy for Monday night. What’s your excuse?[/quote]
Putting off going to work for a few minutes.
All my fun atavistic days are past me besides. I don’t hold that what you choose to do in your spare time makes you a man. I also think that comparing sports to true violence is stupid. Some things are closer but even the combat sports have many rules. People that lived in truly violent times had more brutish shorter lives. There’s nothing glorious about that.
Is someone doing a driveby shooting more of a man? Or a drug cartel chopping off a guy’s head something manly? Clearly its not simply violence that makes a man.
[quote]groo wrote:
Putting off going to work for a few minutes.
All my fun atavistic days are past me besides. I don’t hold that what you choose to do in your spare time makes you a man. I also think that comparing sports to true violence is stupid. Some things are closer but even the combat sports have many rules. People that lived in truly violent times had more brutish shorter lives. There’s nothing glorious about that.
Is someone doing a driveby shooting more of a man? Or a drug cartel chopping off a guy’s head something manly? Clearly its not simply violence that makes a man.
[/quote]
I think you’ve mixed me up with another poster. I didn’t compare sports to violence or glorify violence.
Man is masculine when he dominates the world, his family, when woman obeys to him… also man is masculine when he is mentally and physically ready for a combat, for survival… wether he is heavyweight powerlifter build like or middle weight boxer… doesn’t really matter… Too bad, civilization forces a lot of men to become mentally and physically useful only for licking clitoris of western feminist ladies… Going to a gym and pumping those muscles usually is just a butaphorical masculinity which even looks funny…
[quote]IFlashBack wrote:
So… you guys have made a lot of claims of what a masculine man should be… but there are literally no examples.
What are some examples of what a masculine man should be?
Arnold?
Hulk Hogan?
Khal Drogo?
James Bond?
[/quote]
Half those people aren’t even real, and this is exactly what I was talking about when I said a lot of people’s idea about what a masculine man is is simply contrived Hollywood bullshit. Arnold? The guy couldn’t even handle the responsibility of being faithful to his wife. He lied to her and cheated on her. THAT part of him isn’t masculine at all.
Hulk Hogan? A fucking wrestler?
James Bond? C’mon.
Khal Drogo? Really?
They are masculine in the sense that they can take care of their families and themselves, but that’s about it.
[quote]Xav wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Take the whole gun thing. Who the fuck needs an automatic weapon?
[/quote]
Anyone who values freedom and self preservation.
Then you don’t understand history and politics. Democracy doesn’t and can’t last indefinitely. Armed citizenry are the only defence against the totalitarian regime that, by a logical progression must at some stage establish itself. America pays a high price for freedom but it’s a price that must be paid.
‘According to Polybius’ elaboration of the theory (of anacyclosis), the state begins in a form of primitive monarchy. The state will emerge from monarchy under the leadership of an influential and wise king; this represents the emergence of “kingship”. Political power will pass by hereditary succession to the children of the king, who will abuse their authority for their own gain; this represents the degeneration of kingship into “tyranny”. Some of the more influential and powerful men of the state will grow weary of the abuses of tyrants, and will overthrow them; this represents the ascendancy of “aristocracy” (as well as the end of the “rule by the one” and the beginning of the “rule by the few”). Just as the descendants of kings, however, political influence will pass to the descendants of the aristocrats, and these descendants will begin to abuse their power and influence, as the tyrants before them; this represents the decline of aristocracy and the beginning of “oligarchy”. As Polybius explains, the people will by this stage in the political evolution of the state decide to take political matters into their own hands. This point of the cycle sees the emergence of “democracy”, as well as the beginning of “rule by the many”. In the same way that the descendants of kings and aristocrats abused their political status, so too will the descendants of democrats. Accordingly, democracy degenerates into “ochlocracy”, literally, “mob-rule”. During ochlocracy, according to Polybius, the people of the state will become corrupted, and will develop a sense of entitlement and will be conditioned to accept the pandering of demagogues. Eventually, the state will be engulfed in chaos, and the competing claims of demagogues will culminate in a single (sometimes virtuous) demagogue claiming absolute power, bringing the state full-circle back to monarchy.'[/quote]
Very interesting, I’d never heard of this cycle.
However, what’s the difference exactly between democracy and “mob-rule”? Aren’t these essentially the same?
Let’s suppose we have to try to prevent the degradation of democracy in “mob-rule”. Are you sure guns will help? Won’t guns actually make it harder for a democratic government to avoid mob rule? Doesn’t the mob have to be controlled in a certain way to avoid this mob rule?
If we are in “mob rule” and want to avoid a demagogue claiming absolute power guns might help indeed. However the cost (in lives) will be huge and the end result will be the same. There’s always a winner. Not to mention that you never see it coming. Do you think the majority saw coming what Hitler became? That’s the definition of a demagogue, he appeals and controls the masses, making an idea of armed resistance quite futile. The idea of armed resistance only works if you have the vast majority of the population at your side. How will you fare while being a minority and having better trained and equipped ennemies?
[/quote]
Mob rule is when the people in one half of the democracy don’t get their politicians into office every four years. This year it’s mob rule in the eyes of the Republicans, four years from now it will probably be mob rule in the eyes of the Democrats if the Republicans take the White House, or as Democrats are more likely to call it, an oligarchy.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
If what you are describing is as inevitable as you and Polybius claim it is, then you’re all but physically-threatened as it is. And again, you’d be a fool to wait for it to happen. By that time it will be too late for you and your family. [/quote]
I’m not waiting. I’m engaged in the political process. The political process has thankfully, not broken down yet.[/quote]
Yes, but are you prepared for when/if it does break down? The skills I listed in my last two posts to Orion aren’t easily acquired. They take YEARS to acquire and become familiar with. Have you started the process? What about your family? Do you have a wife and/or children? Are your children old enough to handle a gun and fight for themselves? It would be nice to ship them off to the Orient or something like that so they avoid all the bloodshed, but let’s face it, a man in the position you could very well find yourself in cannot afford to send off able-bodied people of any kind.
Are you preparing your children, if you have any? Let’s assume that if you don’t have any now, you will have one/some by the time the shit goes down, because it WILL go down, right? History has shown us that the changes Polybius has described virtually never happen strictly within the political system. Are you prepared for extra-political action? Are you prepared to bring your sons and/or daughters into the fight with you? The Vietcong and the NVA had many, many women taking up arms and fighting as well, young and old alike.
Are you enrolling your children in some sort of martial arts classes? Are they skilled at hand-to-hand combat? Are they taking shooting classes? Ever take them camping? Are you prepared to send them to their certain death so that others may live?
I understand that you’re engaged in the political process and I commend you for it. I wish there were more people in THIS country who had that sort of commitment to enacting change through the political system. But if what you are describing and what Polybius claims is an inevitability, you would be an absolute FOOL to assume that you can enact meaningful change strictly within it. Are you making the preparations I described to Orion JUST IN CASE?
Because if you aren’t, you’re fucked.[/quote]
This is all a red herring. You don’t have to be a guerrilla fighter to contribute to preserving democracy/republicanism nor to contribute to the revolution when that becomes necessary.[/quote]
There’s nothing “masculine” about staying out of the fight or avoiding it all together when the fight has appeared at your doorstep. What you are talking about is revolution. How often do revolutions occur within a political system and society that doesn’t come with some good old-fashioned fighting of some sort. Red herring my ass. And if you aren’t going to be resorting to guerrilla warfare in the first place then WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU NEED THE RIGHT TO BEAR AUTOMATIC WEAPONS FOR?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Are Orion and SexMachine making the same preparations that Chechens have made? Do they live in some dirt poor country, or they a part of the bourgeois and totally unprepared to live the life of the common guerrilla soldier.[/quote]
I’m sure when the shit hits the fan that people ‘unprepared for the life of a common guerrilla soldier’ would still prefer to be armed for self preservation and protection of their families and property than to be unarmed.[/quote]
Well sure, but without the proper precautions having your own gun ready for these eventualities is no different than keeping a stock car in your garage in case someone asks you to fill in for Jimmy Johnson at the Daytona 500 without ever having driven the course before.[/quote]
Sorry, I missed these posts due to posting time delay. That is not an apt analogy. As I said, not everyone is going to be a guerrilla fighter but firearms will help people survive and protect themselves and their families.[/quote]
Not if they aren’t prepared to use them, pal. Not if they aren’t prepared. Your guns might protect you against the odd storm trooper or two, but what are you going to do when a 1000lb bomb gets dropped through your living room ceiling? Then what?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]Karado wrote:
“Examples”? You really want examples?
[/quote]
Sorry for the thread hijack. Back to topic…[/quote]
This guy is NOT masculine at all. John Fucking Wayne was a goddamned coward. This is a guy who tried to physically attack a Native American woman at the Academy Awards, who was less than half his size, simply because she had the nerve to use the forum Marlon Brando provided her by letting her accept his award for him to decry the massive amount of injustice being done to her people. She stood up for what she believed in, a VERY “masculine” trait if there ever was one, and John Wayne tried to assault her. Yeah, what a fucking man.
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Subject_17 wrote:
Seems like these ?hormone mimicking? or ?endocrine disrupting? chemicals are going to be hard to avoid without making any drastic lifestyle changes.[/quote]
You can’t avoid it without change on worldwide scale. You deal with this by not destroying the concept of testosterone therapy and informing people that being a guy isn’t something you try to prevent.[/quote]
Can you elaborate on this? Because at face value I’d have to conclude you advocate testosterone therapy for teenagers and young men. I hope that’s not what you are saying.[/quote]
I am a little concerned your thought process jumped to “teenagers and young men” instead of “adult men”.
Why do people do that?
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]groo wrote:
Big brother has already won. It won the hearts and minds it doesn’t need guns.
[/quote]
Assuming that were true, I would still like to cause him as much damage as possible before the thought police arrive and drag me off to room 101 in the Ministry of Love.
True… not violence makes a man, violence makes a man look like animal… although animals aren’t violent just for the sake of violence as some young men are… The position in this life, in the family makes a man… you cannot be the strongest man, but you still have to act like a man… very funny, nowadays lots of women act like a man, and I usually treat them like a man… I am just confused how to treat those men that act like a woman…
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]xjusticex2013x wrote:
I play video games too, but mainly Arkham City ATM; the fact that I get to play as Batman nullifies any adverse affects, perceived or otherwise.[/quote]
Is that the game where you can play as the Joker or the Batman? I love Batman so much I actually thought about getting an XBox or Playstation or whatever the hell it’s on just so I could play that one game when I heard that it was so good. If that is the game I’m thinking of, I think all of society’s problems can be linked to what I would assume is a massive amount of people choosing to be the Joker instead of Batman.[/quote]
Nah; you play as Bats, with some time allocated to playing as Catwoman’s hot ass. 
FTR, I play on PC.