(no subject)
Jun. 3rd, 2025 | 09:49 am
RE: https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=128
I know some apparently straight men who go to Thailand bars to get fellatio from ladyboys; it is a bit like in ancient Greece a married man would have a boy lover on the side.
This means perhaps that our modern concepts of "straight" and "gay" are not precise scientific markers dividing the population into two unequal parts, but more of a social convenience labels rooted in Victorian moral code than we are willing to acknowledge.
Even in medieval times there was well-known problem within monasteries; as soon as the Church started cleansing them from concubines that some wealthy monks kept rather openly, the monks turned to homosexual practices, and it was so widespread that it became a subject of early satirical literature, - see for example, The Romance of the Rose.
In more modern times, Stalinist Gulag camps, divided into male and female half, saw its own portion of homosexual practices - both lesbian and gay, - some willing, some unwilling; and oddly enough the females could be as vicious rapists as males under such conditions.
One may see sexual desire as thirst or hunger - when there is no better water around, a human can drink from a muddy puddle, and a hungry person may try to eat an article the rest of us will find disgusting. Still, some very sated individuals may be willing to try foods that are weird and unusual, like monkey brains, or even taste human flesh, out of curiosity.
The same thing may be said about sexual subjects. When a teenager has an overwhelming sexual desire, it may be easily projected onto a random object, ranging from a human of the opposite sex to one's own fingers, and when repeated, it may become a steady habit.
I see the current situation as such: marriage is broken down as an institution by the efforts of the global Left; society is atomised into individuals seeking as much personal gratification as possible.
The upper classes, wealthy and powerful managerial elite, is over-sated, it seeks novelty and excitement in their sexual lives, with parties full of booze, drugs, prostitutes of various standings and trannies to spice it up.
The lower classes are sexually starved and are willing to satisfy their hunger with anything and anybody, including trannies.
Both of these categories seek social approval for their behaviour, and our mainstream media is only too willing to oblige.
I know some apparently straight men who go to Thailand bars to get fellatio from ladyboys; it is a bit like in ancient Greece a married man would have a boy lover on the side.
This means perhaps that our modern concepts of "straight" and "gay" are not precise scientific markers dividing the population into two unequal parts, but more of a social convenience labels rooted in Victorian moral code than we are willing to acknowledge.
Even in medieval times there was well-known problem within monasteries; as soon as the Church started cleansing them from concubines that some wealthy monks kept rather openly, the monks turned to homosexual practices, and it was so widespread that it became a subject of early satirical literature, - see for example, The Romance of the Rose.
In more modern times, Stalinist Gulag camps, divided into male and female half, saw its own portion of homosexual practices - both lesbian and gay, - some willing, some unwilling; and oddly enough the females could be as vicious rapists as males under such conditions.
One may see sexual desire as thirst or hunger - when there is no better water around, a human can drink from a muddy puddle, and a hungry person may try to eat an article the rest of us will find disgusting. Still, some very sated individuals may be willing to try foods that are weird and unusual, like monkey brains, or even taste human flesh, out of curiosity.
The same thing may be said about sexual subjects. When a teenager has an overwhelming sexual desire, it may be easily projected onto a random object, ranging from a human of the opposite sex to one's own fingers, and when repeated, it may become a steady habit.
I see the current situation as such: marriage is broken down as an institution by the efforts of the global Left; society is atomised into individuals seeking as much personal gratification as possible.
The upper classes, wealthy and powerful managerial elite, is over-sated, it seeks novelty and excitement in their sexual lives, with parties full of booze, drugs, prostitutes of various standings and trannies to spice it up.
The lower classes are sexually starved and are willing to satisfy their hunger with anything and anybody, including trannies.
Both of these categories seek social approval for their behaviour, and our mainstream media is only too willing to oblige.
Link | Leave a comment {2} | Add to Memories
(no subject)
Jun. 3rd, 2025 | 10:45 am
Classic liberalism works ONLY because it accepts certain conservative values without questioning.
John Stuart Mill and Edmund Burke would never "deconstruct" marriage, family, sexes, races and classes.
Today, both classic liberalism and classic conservatism are almost entirely swept into a basket of ultra-right "deplorables".
The primacy of personal liberty, protected by firmly written and well-practised law within any given society, over that society's mores and powers is what makes a distinction between Liberal and Conservative - yet today this distinction is almost entirely and deliberately forgotten and turned to null. Surely, for personal liberty to exist in Liberal terms and be protected and such, the person must be born into the given society in Conservative terms.
What comes first, Liberalism or Conservatism? It is a chicken-and-egg question. Sure, dinosaurs laid eggs before chickens came to be, but chickens lay eggs for "us", not the philosophical abstraction.
John Stuart Mill and Edmund Burke would never "deconstruct" marriage, family, sexes, races and classes.
Today, both classic liberalism and classic conservatism are almost entirely swept into a basket of ultra-right "deplorables".
The primacy of personal liberty, protected by firmly written and well-practised law within any given society, over that society's mores and powers is what makes a distinction between Liberal and Conservative - yet today this distinction is almost entirely and deliberately forgotten and turned to null. Surely, for personal liberty to exist in Liberal terms and be protected and such, the person must be born into the given society in Conservative terms.
What comes first, Liberalism or Conservatism? It is a chicken-and-egg question. Sure, dinosaurs laid eggs before chickens came to be, but chickens lay eggs for "us", not the philosophical abstraction.
Link | Leave a comment | Add to Memories
(no subject)
Jun. 3rd, 2025 | 02:05 pm
Just wow. The academia rot goes far beyound Left vs Right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m7LnLg
https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/192
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m7LnLg
https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/192