Here is the general for right-wing, conservative, anti-SJW, "redpilled" or /pol/ack gay guys.
It's stupid to create those threads on /pol/, since /pol/ is to discuss politics, not shitpost about our our sex and love life. This board is the right place for that.
Subjects of discussion:
>tfw no right-wing bf
>coming out as right-wing in the gay community
>famous gay right-wingers
>self-defense against Muslim homophobes
It's not just Syrians, desu. It's mass immigration of all kinds into white countries, illegal and legal. The H1B and similar programs need to be stopped as well. It's trade deals that screw us in favor of profits.
What do you gays think about the street mobs in Germany btfo-ing those Muslims? I think hooligans are notoriously bad towards gays, but I feel like after they sweep the streets more moderate voices could take control of the conversation.
is he balding from one side or something?
Moderate voices are always needed, but hooligans shouldn't exist. There is a serious lack of effort being put into ensuring men don't become hooligans - instead a lot of it is put towards keeping women out of shenanigans. Sommers pointed this out in her book, where authorities will spend more to try and put women in places men excel at, and just waste money while homeless/poor men and boys wind up turning to drugs and what have you.
Looks like a cow's lick more than balding.
Great thread, anon.
People have to act smart and strategically. Violence against refugees turns them into the victims at the moment people were starting to realize they were the threat. Non-violence doesn't mean passivity, you can still protest, you can even form self-defense militias. But you can't do things that will turn people to the migrants' defense.
Immigrants will have to be removed but you need to get political power first.
Germany's gotta pretty good precedent for doing it the way it's going right now though. The authorities have shown they clearly can't really contain the situation. I won't be surprised if a lot of rapefugees turn up dead after Germany's big spring celebration.
>Emperor Trump's campaign manager
>proudly wears a pink triangle pins
MGTOW? Gayness is the ultimate step of MGTOW, spending your life with your male best friend, as equals.
>what do you think about transhumanism
I'm for whatever helps humans become god-like superhumans: stronger, healthier, more intelligent, young for centuries, with whole new capacities, etc.
I'm against whatever is just plain degeneracy (for instance real-life, genetically modified furries).
I tried to be super /pol/. Maybe still am. Was very into natsoc. Into socialist values, but divided along vaguely national lines. Love EU. Believe in Europe as a modern, secular version christendom with common cultural links in christianity, the enlightenment and freedom of thought, speech and expression to help bind us together as a people. white people, basically. Non-EU immigration, Islam, Frankfurt school of thought, neoliberalism, these are the enemy. the EU may have been set up according to neoliberal capitalist principles but Europe is culturally under siege and being undermined by multinational policy dictating media. Multiculturalism has divided people with mistrust. People had to be closed off in separate groups in the first place to need to be broken open with 'multiculturalism' and 'tolerance'. Tolerance and acceptance were Enlightenment views, along with early feminism and women in education. Anything beyond Romanticism has been a forced movement on Western Civilization, all building towards the goal of making money and having a multinational elite with absolute power and no accountability. 'Tolerance' and 'acceptance of others' as modern tenets have become twisted. Political correctness meaning 'treating others with respect'- the notion of respect has been twisted, and it isn't stemming from the idea that others deserve respect as they're people and equally valid as you. Some people are more valid than others. You are told this. Veiled threats and fear pervades all. Everyone is pointing fingers at each other, calling 'repression', various 'isms' and declaring privilege, when the real privileged oppressors sit comfy. Here's looking at you, Murdoch.
I just wanna marry my girlfriend, live, mind my own business, not be threatened by brown people, actually have a job, not live in a state of fear, and not have my culture or nation eroded around me.
I don't know, he still looks qt in this recent video:
I think it's just that he mistreats his hair so much and so often that it ends up looking like shit half of the time.
>Into socialist values
Here's your mistake imho
>I just wanna marry my girlfriend
These days you simply don-... Wait, how the flying fuck does divorce work for gay/lesbian marriages in the first place?
This is why we have surrogate mothers you filthy jew, get the fuck back in the oven where you belong
See above, just don't rush the oven
Fuck off faggot. Homosexuality was illegal in Nazi Germany after the faggot riddled SA was purged.
Don't pretend you are one of us, shirking your responsibility to reproduce with a white woman makes you a degenerate.
/pol/ and the far right have that attitude, the general public probably doesn't. Unless the anti-refugee violence is clearly directed at those individuals who engage in violent crime, the public is going to see the refugees as victims - or at least no worse than the ethnic Europeans who attack them. I mean, that's the whole thing with mob violence - it's not logical, it's usually based on strong attitudes of hatred between groups. And showing that the European right wing and the refugees hate each other won't really convince anyone that the refugees should be kicked out of Europe.
LGBT people are too small a minority to make a meaningful difference in reproduction, especially since the falling white birth rates are primarily an economical phenomenon. It's like trying to put out a burning oil tanker with a glass of water.
Too far away for the time being, even with huge technological leaps, I doubt I'll get to realistically experience such before death.
You guys get unnecessary hate, feels bad man.
>tfw the EU will never turn into a conservative federation, with this qt as Holy Roman Emperor of Europe
Well that's certainly wrong if you're talking about white people in countries with declining white population. It's every white males duty to have white children.
>I would like to develop a couple of ideas for you on the question of homosexuality. There are those homosexuals who take the view: what I do is my business, a purely private matter. However, all things which take place in the sexual sphere are not the private affair of the individual, but signify the life and death of the nation, signify world power or 'swissification.' The people which has many children has the candidature for world power and world domination. A people of good race which has too few children has a one-way ticket to the grave, for insignificance in fifty or a hundred years, for burial in two hundred and fifty years....
>Therefore we must be absolutely clear that if we continue to have this burden in Germany, without being able to fight it, then that is the end of Germany, and the end of the Germanic world....
Himmler predicted it. White genocide is real. If you aren't reproducing you are part of the problem.
>gays ~3% of total pop
>white gays even less than 1% realistically
>white gays having 1-2 kids is going to stop the declining
Anon, that's a bit much. A better target would be christian whites and encouraging 1 more child.
Yes but a feminine male will never have the womanly features a real woman who cares about her kids does. He'll never be able to breastfeed the kids. He'll never be able to look after them like a caring mother would.
Women are biologically programmed to care for their kids.
>thinking I was just talking about america
White gays are not in any reasonable manner a substantial portion of the population - even in white exclusive nations. With half the effort you put in to try and persuade gays, you can convince heterosexual couples to have just one more kid for 10x the impact.
Or you could just say "it's ever males duty to have white children". It's not a difficult task, we were doing it for hundreds of years right up until about 15 years ago.
Why make exceptions for a few deviants?
I'm used to it, and I don't feel the need to broadcast it everywhere.
I don't really like being the complete center of attentionn anyway.
However, I see mgtow media as real nuggets of wisdom up to a point (thanks to tfm in particular)
Stating that has no impact on reality. It's nice to meme it up, but just like believing we live in a capitalist utopia - it just isn't realistic.
>doing it for hundreds of years
Well actually no there were loads of exceptions to the rule. Of course, you don't hear much about them outside of grand political figures/philosophers because they have no legacy.
How many kids do you have?
I'm of the school of "Don't ask don't tell" and quiet gay activity. I think that where it concerns a matter of the state, gays should be extended civil unions. That doesn't have anything to do with religious marriage, and a civil union's benefits would basically hinge on fulfilling many of the same things that a typical marriage does.
I further advocate for a comprehensive census that will track the population growth or decline. In the interest of maximizing fairness, I am sure that everyday citizens should be able to work out an accord. A homosexual couple needn't necessarily have children ( though the science is making that increasingly possible ) but perhaps could convince a heterosexual couple to have additional children in their stead.
You can keep making excuses if you want, nobodies stopping you. Just don't pretend you are a white nationalist when you have zero intentions of continuing the traditional white western family. You're a poser faggot at best.
>I think that where it concerns a matter of the state, gays should be extended civil unions. That doesn't have anything to do with religious marriage, and a civil union's benefits would basically hinge on fulfilling many of the same things that a typical marriage does.
This way of thinking has always puzzled me because in my country a marriage is a legally defined civil union, performed by the mayor or a civil servant. Then people can have a religious wedding ceremony if they want, of any kind, but it has no legal value.
>Implying implied implications
Tbh, the only reason I'm not planning on havong my child(ren) (yet) is because I'm studying. I'll establish BEFORE marriage(if it happens), childrens and all that crap. Nevertheless, I'll see how it happens (if it doess) in time
A lot of people don't recognize that there's a difference, or they just don't recognize the state's definition of marriage. Polygamous marriage for example is illegal in most western states but people still claim to be married, often under a religious pretext. Similarly, people will claim that government recognized gay marriages aren't real marriage, or they'll complain about the use of "gay marriage" without recognizing that they ( the straight religious couple ) are functionally in two marriages of which only one matches the gay couple - a religious marriage with no state value and a separate state recognized civil union.
I can understand why right-lgbt get a lot of flak though. They have been severely misrepresented by the subversive elements of the left. I think that in a more secular situation where right-lgbt aren't driven to hide their identities they can practice much more wholesome behavior.
( and this has been evidenced by the gay couples I've met who raise adopted children )
Close enough, France.
Pic related, Florian Philippot, VP of the National Front, which he rules in the shadows, using Marine Le Pen as his puppet because of her name. He managed to double the party's score and it might come close to victory next election. If that happens hell probably become PM.
Gas, just as *most of the party's leadership*. Gay people are also more likely to vote for the party than the rest of the population.
That school is very similar to mine. I'm of the dont ask dont tell policies as well - but not the stigmas surrounding it. What I mean by this, is people really need to stop being so goddamn nosy about relationships. My choices at this point are either lying, or acting as if I'm a dateless virgin - where I shouldn't be talking about anything in general.
>perhaps could convince a heterosexual couple to have additional children in their stead.
I'm actually all for social responsibility, being relatively wealthy with quite a lot of downtime, I have no problem with helping straight white couples in whatever way. Whether that's babysitting if they have jobs, paying for baby clothes, these sort of things that I'm sure could be done on a bigger scale. Instead of welfare for all these refugees, welfare for straight couples who can't seem to afford the luxury of two jobs + raising a baby.
Well it depends on location really. Civil Unions in America only exist in a couple of states. Instead of looking to expand this coverage (both in depth and reach), gays has been manipulated into believing we should be focusing on Marriage.
Differs from state to state, nation to nation. Which is why so many are confused.
>It's every white males duty to have white children.
That me be your belief, but as I mentioned before it's not really enough to make a practical difference.
>Why make exceptions for a few deviants?
Because it's not really worth the trouble. The difference it would make wouldn't fix the problem, or even make a noticeable difference. It would make a miniscule difference, but why even bother when you could get better results by focusing your efforts on something else.
Right. We also have to keep in mind the temporal nature of the problem of low birth rates, which is why my stance on abortion is "complicated". I'm all for white people having kids because the populations are in decline, but if they were stabilized it wouldn't become 100% necessary for everyone to have a kid. I'd still encourage it for as many as possible because genetics seem to be a very important factor, but I don't think that after be get past this crisis we'll need to be putting people in jail for not having babies. lol
I mean who was that gay guy they made the movie about, Turing? Tuering? Invented the cpu or something like that. That guy's contributions to white society far outweighed what having 1-2 kids would do. Sure ideally he'd donate some sperm or something, but it's still complete nonsense to suggest that just by not having a kid you haven't done anything to help white society. ( and societies globally in this case )
/pol/ here. I secretly love /lgbt/ but I'm not gay. I just fantasize of the emotional bond men can share... And some traps are attractive.
On abortion and eugenics in general, I'm largely in favor. It would stabilize the issue of mass migrant breeding (ie the same baby cap china put on its own citizens, we apply to others), but the core issue is that the governments don't work for the people anymore. If majority of population doesn't want refugees, it'll be forced anyways (and then they'll just have forced the "majority" through brute force). There is no direct citizen -> government relationship and democracies fail to function without it, which is why current democratic societies are so broken these days.
Being a closet conservative is way harder than being a closet gay. People are generally okay with homos, even natsoc and conservative friends of mine. Everyone hates conservatives. Even my grandma is a sanders supporter
Had the same problem. Find a guy who was cheated on in the past and got completely crushed by it. Cons: he's going to be a bit suspicious and jealous. Pros: he'll never cheat on you.
For the love of fuck, faggots can't be right wing. Stop pretending that you're some special alt-right sect or some shit, you're just a bunch of mentally ill perverts who need to find Christ.
May god cleanse your ill souls, hopefully your sinner ways shall be washed away by the lords will. Amen.
Because you could get a much larger increase in population by encouraging straight people to reproduce. It's illogical to focus efforts on getting a minuscule improvement when those same efforts applied could achieve a large improvement.
Indeed. People are also generally partial towards deference when they've been civilized. The liberal elites like to change specific important things, then rest on the fact that no average person is going to tip the cart to try and force things back. A good example of this is the capital punishment issue. Bans on capital punishment aren't actually that popular and weren't put in through referendum.
It is really sad that toxic feminism and lesbians have pushed gay men to the point that they do not feel welcome in their own movement. Straight cis women are putting on the mask of trans oppression and more welcome in the GAY movement. We are not allowed to talk about employment discrimination or hate crimes that only effect gay men and trans women but instead we have to hear about how triggering it is for cis women not to be called a made up pronoun.
>worships a dead kike on a stick who told people to be weak and submissive
Who says that we cant just find a white woman and raise that baby that we fertilized her with?
I read that they turned an egg cell into a sperm cell and vise versa, probably great to make the white race great desu
Hopefully you will find Jesus and the Lord, you will be punished and damned to hell for your degeneracy and deviation otherwise.
Hitler had it right when he gassed you perverted freaks, it's what you deserved. It's what the lord would've wanted. When rope day comes 'round, you'll have your time to go. Retribution will come.
Let's face it, you'll never actually admit that faggots need to have white children with women because you wouldn't be able to take your boyfriends cock anymore and call yourself a white nationalist.
It's like talking to a brick wall, you just don't want to admit your deviancy is wrong and not good for the white race. I'm gay, but I will have children with a white woman, because I myself know that there's more to life than empty homosexual relationships.
>Let's face it, you'll never actually admit that faggots need to have white children with women because you wouldn't be able to take your boyfriends cock anymore and call yourself a white nationalist.
I'm neither gay nor claim to be a white nationalist. But yes, logically it makes sense for both gays and straights to reproduce - HOWEVER as far as telling people to reproduce, you'll have a higher effect on birth rate if you tell it to straights rather than gays. Straights are a much larger proportion of the population, and are generally already willing to have some kids.
Ha, at least I'm not a self-hating degenerate, you're barely any better than Race-Mixers and the Kikes who raised you. You've betrayed the masterrace and your own people, choosing to be a disgusting freak.
Real rightwingers don't like it when faggots pose in our communities. Remember that, nancy boy.
I mean yeah that's always possible, but personally being a near-virgin (long story short: sex only lasted a minute, nobody came, was just door knocking lmao) there's nothing new external experiences could bring that I wouldn't be able to convince whomever I'm dating to do/try out IMO. Like at that point if he's not into trying something new, he's probably not that into the relationship.
They were purged because Rohm was planning a coup, not because they were homosexual. Same with the Jews. They weren't arrested simply for being Jews. They were arrested for being subversive communists. We need intelligent people in the National Socialist movement, not brainless thugs.
What I mean is that especially in this age it's near impossible to find a partner comfortable with the idea of only having had sex with one person their entire life. At least for girls there's a remnant of old morality, but not so much in men, who think a low number of partners is a sign of failure.
The gay couple, of course. Now get to it, you lazy faggots. It's not like lesbians are going to pick up the slack, or even should.
The same negative outcomes brought about by single mother households come at exact the same rate in two mother households.
One of the dads, or a female relative, or a nanny.
I thought the point was perpetuating the white race, not meeting your criteria of the best traditional family. As if a gay man married to a woman he doesn't love and sexually reppressed is going to be the basis of a perfect family either.
>not so much in men, who think a low number of partners is a sign of failure.
Pretty much. Dating is an eternal struggle because if I don't have sex within the first couple of dates I'm a bore - if I don't list a handful of lays I'm inexperienced and therefore useless. I still don't think it's impossible, but definitely nearing annoying levels of 'why'.
You realize the only way for you to "know" that is to trust the words of ancient Jewish books, right?
Religion in itself is pretty ridiculous, but an antisemite worshiping a Jewish god and his Jewish son because he trusts blindly Jewish books, that is beyond hillarious.
Outlawing homosexuality is silly. Homosexuality is a condition. That's like outlawing cancer. You can outlaw homosexual acts, but again they're just going to happen behind the scenes.
There are places where this has to be changed, such as with pedophilia because it presents a real risk to children. You can't simply abide by pedophilia the same way you can live with consenting gay adults.
Again we aren't talking about WEW KIDS LOOK AT ME DILDOS WHILE I HAMP MINZ YEE-HAW pride gay. We're talking two citizens quietly being in love minding their own business gay. Science will continue its inevitable march towards correcting or dictating sexuality in vitro as we develop more impressive control over reproductive health. It's not a matter of condoning homosexuality forever and letting it exist after we've developed the means to correct it, it's about recognizing that we have allies across the spectrum and that acting on divisive impulses merely leads to cannibalistic purges.
I for one want to win, not die feeling good about myself because of some arbitrary self-appointed standard.
That's not the point. You're mentally ill. You have a disease. Yet, you refuse to cleanse yourself? Why is this? You are a laughing stock to your own people, your own group. You can't even be a dirty brainwashed leftist correctly. So instead, you masquerade as a proper right-wing gentleman, most likely to try and spread your perversion to proper, productive straight white men. You just don't realize it.
You are ridiculous. You are the problem with this country. You are not right-wing. You are not a conservative. You never will be. Stop pretending.
Basically. The event was a huge whiplash against Hitler's overthrow. No one was safe at that point, Hitler was in tantrum mode. Doesn't matter whether it was Catholics or Conservatives who voted in favor of the enabling act, the purge was being done if you were even suspected to have criticized the Nazi's or to have ties to the planned overthrow.
>So then why did they outlaw homosexuality?
Mussolini encouraged Hitler to do so because the SA was embarrassing Hitler on a global scale (or so Mussolini made Hitler believe). He also outlawed drunkenness and high living, if that makes you feel any better.
Shut up infection. You just danked a meme again. "I'll pretend it's ok for you to be gay, you just can't be TOO gay." Eat shit you retarded pedophile. You should be killed slowly you bitch.
>you will never be Trump's fuck puppet dressed like pic related
Nah. See I have kids, I'm doing something for the white race. I'm going to teach them all about how the faggots who played princess with each other stood up and did what had to be done while angry virgins pounded their keyboards impotently.
You're probably one of those retards who doesn't recognize how much good Milo has done to fight back against SJWs, just because he's gay. Gays are one of the most privileged people in the media right now in terms of what they can say. You'd have to be an idiot to try and shut them out of any revolutionary movement.
Anyone who was put to death would have been a partisan fighter, who according to international agreements, are fair game to execute. A lot of them happened to be communist jews. Other deaths were from Typhus, and starving towards the end of the war when railways, and roads were bombed, slowing supply lines.
They outlawed homosexuality because all kinds of sex and pornography was rampant. Such public sexual acts are not good for a country.
>muh dad was a muslim refugee in the 70s
>he's a republican
Sandnigger mudslimes really aren't that bad desu senpai.
Plus white european women are 100% asking for it in every way. So fuckem.
>Sandnigger mudslimes really aren't that bad desu senpai.
damn you must be a under 5 feet with all that anger just bottled right up
To be fair, I'm sure the trolls don't want to recognize any position that isn't theirs - regardless of sexuality. It's a common feat of young kids who spend way too much time on /pol/.
> sex and pornography was rampant.
>That's like outlawing guns because murder is not good for a country.
You completely missed anything that anon had to say, just to make a shit analogy.
>someone expresses anger
>"you lose because you bottle up lolololol"
>"be a under 5 feet again desu meme"
I can tell when you infections are starting to cry, because you go from making no sense to making random noises like a dying animal that really make no sense.
People with different opinions than you are the shitty ones.
Not Arab Muslims who regularly massacre people and rape 9-year-olds.
Do you have any principles at all, or do you base your entire moral compass on how many cheap social points you can gain?
Unless this "rampant sex and pornography" was predominantly homosexual, it really doesn't make sense. And in any case it still doesn't explain why banning homosexuality (rather than banning and properly punishing public sex, pornography - i.e. the actual problems) would make sense. I get the impression you're just stretching to find a way to say the Nazis REALLY weren't that bad when it came to their treatment of homosexuals.
Infections can't cry though, did you mean blisters
well they did meet in gay bars quite often so sayonara kojima-san
>Nazis REALLY weren't that bad when it came to their treatment of homosexuals.
Except, that anon wasn't me and I'm not deluding myself into believing it was some great utopia. After a certain point they did crackdown on homosexuals quite severely - but a lot of it is interlaced with other things and not just explicit homosexuality.
We should not have a general.
Every thread on /lgbt/ is /pol/ general.
The dykes want to gas transbians and there is a strong anti-feminist and anti-islam vibe everywhere, as it should be.
>Plus white european women are 100% asking for it in every way
No we don't.
We do this since we expect sandnigger to do the same when SHTF, which they won't.
We were trying to show an example and it backfired enormously.
In the oven you go
ITT: Pink washing
How do you feel that your nazi friends don't actually accept you and that they'll get rid of all the lgbt community, including you, as soon as they can?
Curious to hear about people's experience of "coming out" as right-wing or whatever your politics are in the LGBT community. Share your stories?
>Live in village in the middle of no-where
>1gb internet and not even a left-cuck fag in a 50 mile radius
At-least I have the slow down-fall of my country to keep me occupied.
Tfw got my berniefag trans gf to support trump and become a racial realist
He's not the Habsburg heir, senpai.
pic related is
Ach no do what your ancestors did and invade England out of boredom. Assuming of course you are Scottish. You can even kick out the refugees and liberate England in the world's goofiest civil war. You just tell the brits you're in charge now and you'll kick out the refugees for free.
I'm Cruz 2016, he has a better chance of winning in the generals and will hopefully replace 3-4 SCOTUS justices over his most likely 2 terms with pro 1st and 2nd amendment justices
Hopefully all white males too
You're all failures and need to get real jobs. Stop wasting my oxygen, you inbred racist retards.
>I do have a real job, anon. That is why I am a conservative
I'm liberal, and planning on going to pharmacy school.
I hate conservatives because they want to control other people's lives.
Like holy shit kill yourself.
>I hate conservatives because they want to control other people's lives.
If anything, anon, liberals want to control people's lives more. Liberals want to take more of your money. Liberals want to take more of your freedoms away. Liberals are the ones who want to control your life under pretenses of egalitarianism.
Liberals want liberty for everybody, and to give all Americans an opportunity to improve their life. Conservatives want to fuck everybody, expect like 10% of the united States purely out of self interest, fear, and religion.
>implying modern day liberals and progressives aren't using it as a buzzword
Classical liberal is a political term that refers to libertarianism.
Conservatives are traditionalists with free market beliefs
B8 is not GR8
>traditionalists with free market beliefs
I didn't know oppressing blacks, jews, gays, muslims, women and mexicans was a free market.
I didn't know that only taxing the pocket change of people who make billions of dollars was a free market. I didn't know throwing in a scary number of people in jail just for smoking dude weed lmao, or having a drug addiction.
I didn't know fueling the Mexican drug cartel was being traditionalist. I didn't know telling a woman she can't get an abortion or she goes to hell was written in the constitution. I didn't know only giving healthcare to people who were born with opportunity was tradition, unless it's an aristocracy i guess. Jeez how did I not realize.
>oppressing blacks, jews, gays, muslims, women and mexicans
>I think someone took a wrong turn on their way to tumblr
I think that's a really clever come back, and I'm glad that your only response to an actual argument is to go to another website.
Look at the people running for president right now. One has three old white people, granted one is a new and another is a woman. The other side has a black man who is in fourth, two Hispanics, one born in another country, a fat man, a man in a mixed race marriage, and a woman. Not only that they have liberals and conservatives,social, on that stage. Diversity of thought I more important. Not all right wingers are anti drug. In fact I know more conservative pot heads. than not. Really your comment is tumblr tier of ignorant. I wouldn't even let reddit deal with an idiot like you
I don't care if a black jewish gay man runs for president. If he believes that there should be a 1%, believes people need to racially oppressed, and believes in church and state, he needs to go into the trash.
ITT: Conservatives getting BTFO
Here you go anon, try learning about the political landscape before talking about it pls.
>thinking polls in january predict the result of the election
Cruz is a hardline conservative and Clinton's campaign is already prepared to rally feminists and LGBT votes against him.
Trump is very moderate on social issues, is ready to attack Clinton when it hurts (corruption), and is a real master persuader who has proved he was capable to manipulate public opinion at will.
>Trump is very moderate on social issues,
can't brump the crump ja? :DD
>I'm planning to go to pharmacy school.
Thank you for your service. If there's one thing our society needs, it's more losers doling out crazy pills at CVS.
Your friendly /pol/ neighbor here. Not a fan of homosexuality to be honest but not disgusted by it. I find twerking to be far more degenerate than homo love.
Ofcourse slutty gays/lesbians are equally disgusting as slutty women.
I secretly admire every lgbt person that displays disgust towards thugish arabs and blacks.
Yes my arm looks tanned but i am pale as fuck during winter.
I haven't browsed today. Sometimes i need a day off from all this evidence about where the world is going.
I am normally calm but sometimes i stumble upon things that make my blood boil.
Slutty gays are degenerate as fuck. The promiscuousness of the gay community has always bothered me. It personally worries me slightly that I won't be able to find a partner.
I hope you don't find pure, monogamous homolove to be too degenerate. Homosexuality is natural, but acting like a manwhore barebacking across boy's town is disgusting.
It's a public space, just get a group of 20+ guys and walk in there. If anyone challenges you then you all just say "I'm trans". Don't follow/harass the radfems or anything, just keep walking around. They'll lose their shit and leave eventually.
so should we be trying NOT to be gay? It's pretty degenerate and doesn't help our people at all, and I'm pretty sure making it more acceptable encourages homosexual behavior in others, I mean, it seems all the more common for normal guys to have cited experiences where they've sucked dick and more and more dudes are identifying as bi now.
Seriously concerned about this though, no nationalist group in their right minds would tolerate open homofaggotry, so should we try to "fix" the gay somehow?
Yep. With explicite support from Sarah Palin and implicite support from Gov. Branstad, Trump will definitely win in Iowa. Combined with his enormous lead in New Hamphire, he is practically sure to get the nomination.
Not all /polgbt/ is nationalist or fully conservative.
I'm practically and anarchist I want no control over anyone's life which is why I want as little govt as possible.
NAXALT is a fallacious argument though, it's like there's a hive of termites, some are eating at the foundation of your home and others are eating off of logs in woodpile, you don't refuse to exterminate them because "not all termites are eating at the foundation of my home!", you exterminate them because of the ones who do, regardless if they're a minority because the fact is, comparatively to other species, these animals are proving a danger to your well being far above the others AND they reproduce much faster too.
Not saying we need to kill the muzzies, just saying the logic behind NAXALT is wrong.
Is that bait?
Most of the Muslim world supports death for homosexuals, as mandated by Shariah. In several Muslim countries (and ONLY Muslim countries) it is the State's law as well.
Even "moderate" Western Muslims agree:
Supporting death for homosexuals isn't the same as being willing to do it yourself. If you pick a random sample of ten Muslims, chances are there will be at least one who has never killed anyone. Of course, they still probably won't compare favorably to a random sample of ten Christians or Hindus or whatever.
Isn't homosexuality illegal in Russia? And btw, you say it's ONLY Muslim countries that have formal laws against homosexuality, but I don't think India and the countries of southern Africa are Muslim countries.
>so should we be trying NOT to be gay?
No, being gay is redpilled, the ultimate stadium of MGTOW and misogyny.
Homophobia is rooted in Jewish religious tricks, while the founders of Western Civilization practiced it proudly.
>Isn't homosexuality illegal in Russia
It's not illegal but there's laws against homosexual portrayal in the media as well as against adoption for same-sex couples. They might also not allow SRS as well, but I'm not certain, it seems like something they'd be against though.
>No, being gay is redpilled,
>the ultimate stadium of MGTOW and misogyny
according to your definitions it just sounds like hedonism excused with pseudo-intellectualism.
>Homophobia is rooted in Jewish religious tricks
I partly agree, but it was never totally permissable in any society, it was still kind of a dishonorable thing to do.
>while the founders of Western Civilization practiced it proudly.
now this is just false
>Supporting death for homosexuals isn't the same as being willing to do it yourself.
So Muslims are alright because most of them won't bother to kill me, they'll just wait for others to do it?
>Isn't homosexuality illegal in Russia?
Absolutely not. They outlawed "gay propaganda" (whatever it means), and are now considering banning public displays of affection by gay couples too. Which is disgusting, but in the countries shown on that map, you can go to jail or get killed even if you just have sex with a guy in the privacy of your own bedroom.
As of now it is perfectly legal to be gay in Russia, what is illegal is to say it's normal and acceptable. Not defending that law, on the contrary, but I'm saying what it is.
The media presents Putin's Russia as persecuting gays but stays completely silent about Muslim countries *killing* them.
>So Muslims are alright because most of them won't bother to kill me, they'll just wait for others to do it?
I didn't say that. I just said that IN A PURELY STATISTICAL SENSE OF THE WORD Muslims who kill gays are not STATISTICALLY representative of the Muslim population. Doesn't mean they're good people or anything.
Yeah, the law is pretty much skewed in western media/minds. There's a lot you cannot do socially, but realistically there are no laws preventing actual homosexuality. Still, that doesn't stop citizens from beating up homosexuals if they desire, or stop authorities from turning the other cheek. So in that situation, there's some adjustments that need to be made in that, but the law that has already been made isn't as bad as what Nazi's did after '33 like the media implies.
I think the only places I've actually seen footage or images were from UK 'right wing' news sites, fox news, or vice. Kind of odd IMO.
>As of now it is perfectly legal to be gay in Russia
It's only legal on paper.
Which doesn't mean much if it's ignored all together.
Sure Volkswagen had good scores on their emission tests, but these scores didn't mean jack shit since they rigged the tests.
>The media presents Putin's Russia as persecuting gays
Because he is.
>but stays completely silent about Muslim countries *killing* them.
Because they're pro muslim while they should remain completely neutral as that's their job and the point of journalistic integrity.
Legbutt trap here
I hate kebab they must be removed
Actually joining military to help remove kebab and get a heavily discounted transition
These backwards rapists must be stopped.
The media talks about ISIS because they are today's enemies. What do they say about actual countries, our "allies"?
What I meant more specifically is that the media backlash against Russia about LGBT rights (even calling for boycott of Russian products and boycott of the Olympic Games) is a ridiculous double standard compared to the complete non-reaction against Muslim countries doing much worse. Making cartoons of Putin putting stuff up his ass is super-progressive, but making cartoons of Muhammad putting stuff up his ass is offensive and racist. Go figure.
>Because they're pro muslim while they should remain completely neutral as that's their job and the point of journalistic integrity.
I don't think it's so much being "pro-Muslim" as not wanting to generate hostility towards countries we are on good terms with.
>It's only legal on paper.
If you're going to include illegal gay bashings, then I have to revise my stance: being gay gets you killed EVERYWHERE in the Muslim world, not just in the few countries which have the death penalty for them. Ever heard about "honor killing"?
>not wanting to generate hostility towards countries we are on good terms with.
They shouldn't care about things like that. Let politics fix that shit, not journalism.
>being gay gets you killed EVERYWHERE in the not western world
ftfy. Even the west is poor when it comes to "lgbt" rights
>they're saying that the law is vague enough that people can actually face legal consequences for being gay.
Nobody ever faces consequences for gay bashings because nobody cares. The only reason a case is ever made is to pacify the lgbt groups so that they can pretend someone is protecting them.
>for being gay
Not really. Again, being vague while simultaneously criticizing the vagueness of laws is how people get confused.
If you are doing anything that constitutes as gay propaganda - teaching kids about homosexuality for example and normalizing it, you will be punished. I'm not proclaiming people shouldn't educate others about what homosexuality is - but it is absolutely not a requirement to being gay.
Due to it being legal on paper to be gay, you cannot actually be thrown in prison just for being a privately homosexual person. Now, here's where things get tricky - they may 'stalk' you of sorts to try and get you to slip up, or commit fraud to do so, but you cannot be persecuted for just being a homosexual. This legality also doesn't stop officials from being "blind" to hate crimes - but this is a problem NEARLY worldwide.
But "gay propaganda" isn't clearly defined. Like, if you have sex with the curtains open, post about being gay on the internet, etc etc all that could be classified as gay propaganda.
ISIS killing lgbt is verified by mainstream media of basically every stripe. The difference is just the spin that different outlets put on it. It of course ranges from congratulatory to apologist/condescension to vilified.
The USA is spood fed a lot of bullshit about Russia and global politics in general, but it seems like a lot of that is being undermined by the internet. Not only are there outlets dedicated to getting the opposite view across, there are outlets giving a more measured view and many people are using the internet to find the facts for themselves. It's easier than ever for people with even basic curiosity to check 2-3 sites to get a better idea of what's going on.
That's largely why you don't see as much traction for wars in the Ukraine, Syria, etc against Russia. Iran is probably the only place where you can still get most of the country to agree about hating them, but even then they managed to get the nuclear deal through.
>Due to it being legal on paper to be gay, you cannot actually be thrown in prison just for being a privately homosexual person.
And who is gonna stop them?
Nobody. The entire system is rigged against you and a meaningless phrase on a piece of paper isn't gonna stop that.