Masculine Gay fed up

>>7637359
y u mad tho

>>7637365
Did you read what I said???

File: smug_asuka.jpg (219KB, 560x577px)

219KB, 560x577px

>>7637359
So when are you gonna start HRT?

>>7637359
Why do you prefer hairy ass, and shit on your dick?

Do you like urinary tract infections?

>>7637379
This is exactly what I mean the sneering at masculine gay men. Trying to feminise us and turn us into women.

>During the Roman Empire the bravest strongest most masculine soilders were homosexual

Fuck off with this homosexual historical revisionism

The Romans hated you faggots.

>>7637391
Why are you lesbians always trying to prove to everyone that your masculine. Its actually quite pathetic, you are women and always will be. No matter how many tattoos you get and piercings you get

Oh look, LAND got out again.

>>7637415
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome

>>7637438
huh what does that mean???

>>7637359
Fucking finally preach that shit man, can't stand the cunts at my school acting like I'm some kind of gay best friend queer steryotype they can parade around to seem cool and accepting, I hope those cunts burn.

>>7637359
> b...but f-four-chan is f-for boys only!
Anybody who thinks 4chan is some kind of secret no-girls-allowed club needs to start taking their meds again.
Also, please note that the board is called /lgbt/ not /gay/

>>7637556
GIVE US OUR OWN BOARD

>>7637572
you're giving us a bad name stop being such a fucking autist.

>>7637577
Excuse who is "US"
Are you scared I will upset the females and the trans on this board for stating WHO I AM???
Just because I dont fit into your constricted stereotype does not mean I am going to conform to you.

>>7637359
>it's yet ANOTHER masthcfag whining about other people's lives

why are """"masculine"""" men always trying to police everyone's behavior?

>>7637359
Have you ever beaten a cishet for saying you deserve to die?

No? You kissed their ass and begged for the sweat from their crack?

Then you're not masculine.

real masc men don't use 4chan anyways
get over yourself

>>7637359
>you know something I'm just fed up
rest is tl'dr.
Too bad. keep whining.

File: try harder.jpg (92KB, 463x700px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 463x700px

>>7637359
That's just great.
You go do that.

File: 1475442875542.png (82KB, 654x525px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 654x525px

The most depraved gays I've known have all been "mathc".

>>7637685
Even better why do they throw a hissy fit when someone questions how manly they are?

>I AM A MAN

Good thing you put that in caps, helps people you more seriously.

File: 1483695991602.gif (602KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 500x281px

I'm not flamboyant, but I don't mind being "the woman" in a relationship.

>>7638149
mathc gays tend to be the worst quite frankly at everything
not only underachievers in life, but also they tend to gossip a whole fucking lot
it just gets tiring, y'know? You thought you were entering a relationship with a good man but he's a fucking brain dead retard who loves reality tv, going to the gym, hates reading, and talks way too fucking much.

File: download (8).jpg (10KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x225px

>>7638326
Same.

>>7637359
Go suck a hypermasc cock and relax bud

>>7637577
> Oy vey goyim, accept feminism as natural. You'll only smash the cisheterowhitemalearchy with there help

>>7637359
I agree with you op, came out to my cousin and she just wants me to be her gay best friend, just fuck off

>>7639226
I would prefer to live under a matriarchy than the current CIS WHITE MALE patriarchy tbqh fagpai

>>7637359
lmao nerd

>>7637359
Dude. Chill.

I'm a feminine lesbian and share your distaste for butch gay women, but geez. Chill.

OP, I am with you, as a gay homosexual myself I am fed up with this effeminate bullshit, the SJW nonsense and the trans* psychos that inhabit the /lgbt/ space on 4chan. We really should have our own board.

>>7637359
Girl you need to work on your internalized homophobia

File: 1448695716611.jpg (39KB, 252x368px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 252x368px

>>7637359

Dude I just wandered in from /r9k/ to shitpost, but I like your style and you make good points. It is an unfortunate facet of our society, encouraging gay men to act like women.

TRU-GAY UPRISING WHEN

>>7640675
Don't even start with that bullshit. gay != effeminate. Penises are the most masculine part of a man's body, and I love them.

File: QOfZ5r8.jpg.png (832KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 1920x1080px

Their as already a board for that. It's called /HM

File: hades eyeroll.gif (438KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 500x300px

>mfw this board is infested by /pol/shitters and /r9k/crybabies

Take a ticket and get in line OP.

File: IMG_7961.jpg (402KB, 1330x2091px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1330x2091px

>>7637359
>>7637544
>>7639226
>>7640567
>>7640667
>>7640676
>all these mathcfag tears

>>7640724
Disgusting SJW shill.

>i don't like transbians because they won't fuck me

File: BF4636A6-934F-4D6C-BFB8-4957CF43D225-12784-000009A76DDF0436_tmp.jpg (25KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x480px

>>7640726

>gay guy thinks he can be masc
lol please, there's nothing masculine about choking on a thick cock
At least us dickgirls admit we're crazy degenerates, it's time you did too.

>>7640785
There is nothing feminine about a penis. It is at the very core of masculinity

File: IMG_7130.jpg (57KB, 372x396px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 372x396px

>>7640789
>it's a fags delude themselves into thinking they're the apex of masculinity episode

File: 1483068277495.jpg (240KB, 621x900px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 621x900px

>>7637359
Yeah it's stupid m8. We all gotta put up with shit like that. Like how edgy kids on youtube comments and what not think you should be killed out right cause of how you are.

>>7640789
There's nothing more feminine than sucking a penis or being penetrated by a penis, and frottage is still pretty feminine too, whatever Jack Donovan might say.

>>7637359
>WE WUZ ROMANS AND SHIT
christ, fags hit a new low

>>7637359
>Yeah I admit it I am a homosexual, I like men. But I am not a flaming queen who is part of a community, I AM A MAN, indistinguishable from straight guys and now because of flamers everybody thinks gays are weak and flamboyant.
good for you! be just like a straight guy, except for wanting a boyfriend instead of a girlfriend. a boyfriend to be sexy and submissive and to please you and make you feel like a man while you make her feel like a woman.

can we date?

>>7637400
Are you that triggered by other people? If you like being masculine and talking to masculine dudes about masculine things go ahead. You don't sound sane whining about how you can't force people to be how you want them to be.

>>7638326
>>7638540
>being "the woman" in a relationship
What do you mean?

I'm bi, not gay but I also dislike the flamboyant gays. Like I like dick too, that doesn't mean I've gotta dress up in pink, dye my hair neon and wear lipstick. I had friends for 3 years that didn't know I was gay until I came around with a boyfriend rather than a girlfriend for the first time. Although, I've got nothing against lesbians and women.

>>7641269
Why are you linking to a worthless straight disease, and then claiming you know anything about fags?

>>7640603
>the current CIS WHITE MALE patriarchy
>the current
>patriarchy
Except right now we don't live under patriarchy. We live under gynocentrism.

>>7641400
Being submissive and getting dominated by the other man.

>>7641400
Being the one that doesn't have any rights and never stands up for what they want or need.

File: 1470089603386.jpg (22KB, 212x211px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 212x211px

>>7641422
>gynocentrism

>>7641415
Can you explain to this guy why he is wrong? >>7633502 >>7639361

>>7641604
You can't explain to someone that they're wrong when they already know they're wrong, and that's precisely why they do what they do.

There's not reason to set a bad example, and encourage others to start a dialogue in good faith with a parasite. The only answer for that trash is to silence it.

>>7641609
But how to silence that kind of post when other people reply to it?

>>7641586
See >>7641568

>>7641640
Abuse. It's scientifically proven to work on everybody. It works better on some than others, these pedophiles are rather resistant, as nearly all pedophiles and psychopaths and I hope I don't have to explain to you why they need to be abused quite vigorously to make them settle down. But in the abscence of mods or admins to ban them, laws to imprison them, guns to kill them, or parents that would teach them to not be such worthless pieces of shit, just about the only other option is abuse. Verbal, for instance.

If it has a lot of friends helping it, make sure they know they are worthless dog shit as well. If it has a lot of family protecting it, make sure all of them know they're worthless dog shit as well. If complete strangers will go out of their way to defend some dog shit out of their pity, make sure they know they're dog shit for defending pure evil as well.

>>7641779
as nearly all pedophiles *are psychopaths

>>7641779
In the case of the quoted posts, what kind of verbal abuse would work?

File: welcometofit2.png (2MB, 2260x3650px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2260x3650px

>>7637359
>Its time for an exclusively gay board FOR MEN ONLY
FOR REAL MEN NOT FAKES OR WOMEN WANNABEES OR GENDER MIXERS

But /fit already exists anon.

>>7641903
>mirin a 10/10 girl wearing tight spandex
A G P
G
P

>>7641819
Any. It doesn't really matter. It doesn't even need to be composed of actual comprehendable words. Growling very loudly would work fine irl. It's only frequency, persistence and never accepting any excuse for why you should stop that matters. Of course, hitting close to home may work a little better. All Christians are terrified of hell, and since they can be terrified of something that isn't real, they're terrified of anything as scary as, say, a spider, or a mote of dust, so reminding them of their cowardice works wonders. Pedophiles live in a state of constant fear that their fetish will be found out, which would seem to contradict the findings that they are almost all psychopaths, but while the psychologists argue this or that little social construct they call psychology, the simple fact is even bad people don't like being hurt. Remind the world that trolling started as a particularly pedo-tastic form for conservatism, which is already fundamentally pedo from the get-go.

And you can choose to use words that entertain you. That's how I kill two birds with one stone. I already enjoy hurting nazis, but when I use words that amuse me, I enjoy it twice as much. I don't look at insulting them as some sort of burden that's costing me my time, most of the time making fun of them is more fun than playing video games or watching a movie.

File: 1465277817791.jpg (263KB, 728x1024px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 728x1024px

>>7641269
>WE WUZ ROMANS AND SHIT
Haha I love it!

It's that time again, reposting

>>7642058
>/pol/_pretending_to_be_/lgbt/.jpg

>>7642061
ha ha yeah i am sure they are only pretending..

>>7640726
No, not everyone against you is a shill, people can earnestly disagree with you without being paid to do so.

And if you'd like to know why I personally disagree with you, I just find it ironic that some gay guys who often claim to be masculine tend to throw tantrums whenever said masculinity is questioned, gossip like women, and tend to be degenerate underachievers who believe their sexuality makes them the apex of masculinity.

Mind you, I'm not saying a gay guy can be masculine, it's just very hard to envision Heracles bitching about young Greek boys made to service their teachers for training being feminine, y'know.

tl,dr:You're not acting very masculine right now.

>>7642069
Not saying they aren't repressed fags, but that comic is just presenting /pol/ opinions with an /lgbt/ flag.

You know, exactly like how the left pretends anything they don't like is homophobic when they presume to speak for us.

>>7638326
Good

>>7637359
I'm a masc gay and you're full of shit. Just hang out with the people you like, straight or otherwise. Be confident and no one will judge you for your sexuality. Also stop coming here if you don't like it.

>>7637359
i like masculine gays, just today i had a homoerotic daydream where i find Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson having sex and i get naked with them and we make it a threesome, i got hard and fapped just thinking about it, i love masculine gay men, i would love to suck a nice big dick while rubbing their strong hairy chest and firm stomach, then giving them my ass to pound until i feel their cock start throbbing and my ass gets all sloppy with cum

yeah, i know what you mean

>>7637359
Lol OP you remind me of my cousin with the worst gay voice who sometimes dyes his hair pink who just swears up and down that he's a masculine "straight acting" gay and that he hates "flamers" and "faggots"

>>7637556
its more like /lgbtttttttttttt/ tho

>>7643086
but we don't mind you lgb's having occasional threads too!

>>7643086
>see more gays then trannies irl
>come here and it's mostly trannies

>>7643141
There are probably a lot of trans people (and gays) that you're missing.

>>7641969
I want to know more, just because you seem especially good at knowing what makes people tick and using that against them. Can you help me with a certain situation?

>>7637435
Saying someone can't be masculine because they're a woman is like saying an airplane can't fly because it's not a bird.

>>7637609
>Are you scared I will upset the females and the trans on this board for stating WHO I AM???
No one's trying to stop you from being a mascfag. But if you go around being an attention whore and whining about femgays being WHO THEY ARE without a hint of self-awareness, of course people are going to think you're retarded.

>>7640726
Why do cloverfags always make such terrible reddit-tier posts?

>>7641422
-centrism is orthagonal to -archy. Archy means where you're power is, centrism is about what you focus on. Just because women are considered a valuable commodity doesn't mean they're the ones in charge of society.


>>7641604
Not them, but

1st post: assumes all psychological statuses are the result of conditioning, assumes all brain areas have moderately high lifelong neuroplasticity (when in fact there's evidence that both are wrong with regards to gender dysphoria)

second post: uses the example of trans suicide and stuff to imply that NO ONE is happy transitioning, despite the fact that less than half of trannies even ATTEMPT suicide once in their lives.

>>7637359
>fed up with trans
All "straight" tgirls essentially have masc gay bfs. And they're always really over the top too, like uber repressed Catholic guidos who fill up your voice mail.

>>7644291
>admits society is focused on women
>b-but it's still patriarchy guise!

>>7644417
I explained that in the post. Patriarchy is a society RULED by men. Just because those men consider women valuable, doesn't mean it's a matriarchy.

>>7644492
maybe its because having a leader whos fucking WEAKER and less aggressive than its followers is a shitty idea?

Also, I'd like a citation that greeks were hugely homosexual, and it was accepted.

>>7644492
the point is you've rendered the term meaningless. you argue semantics to define a female-biased society as "men", so that you can continue feminist bitching as though women are the ones in the unprivileged role.

>>7644492
Men RULING things means absolutely nothing if women are the ultimate source of value.
At least stay true to feminist teachings instead of this retarded shit. Goddamn you're making every other feminist look like a retard.

If a patriarchal society exists, then we are ruled by men and men are the ultimate source of value, women are only worth the children they produce. Classic shit dumbass.

I don't do anything outwardly "gay" but I have a babyface and that sort of inflection to my voice. Completely involuntary but can be somewhat suppressed if I need to. I indulge in the occasional "yass queen" with friends semi-ironically :)

Anyways OP, you should try /mascgen/ maybe.

>>7644530
>maybe its because having a leader whos fucking WEAKER and less aggressive than its followers is a shitty idea?
Irrelevant. It doesn't matter WHY men are the leaders, just that they ARE. That's what patriarchy MEANS.

>Also, I'd like a citation that greeks were hugely homosexual, and it was accepted.
I wasn't the one who said that.

>>7644537
I only "argued semantics" insofar as insisting on the correct, actual meaning of words. And women ARE unprivileged, even today they are denied autonomy by men. Valuing something doesn't automatically grant it privilege, that's like saying society is ruled by children and pets, simply because we make an effort to protect them.

>>7644574
>Men RULING things means absolutely nothing if women are the ultimate source of value.
It means we live in a patriarchy. You can't claim that we live in a matriarchy when the main role of women in society is as property.

>If a patriarchal society exists, then we are ruled by men and men are the ultimate source of value
-archy is about leadership, it has nothing to do with "the source of value". That's like saying medieval Europe was an agrarchy, not a monarchy, since even though it was ruled by kings, it depended on farmers to create value.

>>7644610
>And women ARE unprivileged, even today they are denied autonomy by men.
Get out liar. Feminism is female supremacism.

>>7644610
it is relevant.

Do you yell its unfair for bosses to be more experienced?

File: 1485338644608.jpg (890KB, 1500x1633px) Image search: [Google]

890KB, 1500x1633px

fuck off you fairy poof

>>7644628
>Get out liar. Feminism is female supremacism.
Wow great argument fagtron, you sure convinced me with those hot opinions.

>>7644649
>Do you yell its unfair for bosses to be more experienced?
No, but it does mean that businesses are run meritocratically. Saying we live in a patriarchy is nothing more than a statement of fact - it by itself is not a value judgement.

>>7644669
>not a value of judgement

Fine, I was just getting on people who say patriarchy is bad. Anything else is backwards.

>>7644679
I'd say that patriarchy is bad because it essentially makes it impossible to have a truly gender egalitarian society. But that is not implicit in the statement that society is a patriarchy.

>>7644691
men and women aren't the same

One is better as a leader, the other a follower

And leaders are KINDA necessary, particularly because you know, disagreements will happen

heres a question : in an egalitarian society, a husband and wife are disagreeing over a life or death situation

What do?

File: 1393498958590.jpg (174KB, 960x895px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 960x895px

>>7644622
>That's like saying medieval Europe was an agrarchy
can't even eat w/o crops

>>7638212
For real. Whatever you like boats or some shit. Have fun with that. If people expect you to be different just because you love to eat man ass that's on them.

>>7646363
if I'm completely honest, its probably because effeminate "softer" gays are less "horrific" than manly aggressive bear gays, and have been made the norm to sort of make the gays "family friendly" by the lgbt, to make them seem harmless and cute...till you see the aids and shit everywhere at least.

>>7637359
You're not allowed to be masculine and gay anon. How dare you don't conform to being a feminine gay like every other homo.

Don't you know there's only one type of gay person and that's it?

>>7637359
You're disgustng and a shame to homosexuality.

You think that being straight acting and straight looking will protect you from dicrimination and endear you to the patriarchal structures.

You're fucking wrong. Homosexual Romans and greek didn't fucknaround with straight acting Homosexual, they had their boys who they woukd fuck and then discard. But society at large laughed behind their backs and were found to be lacking aelf control and giving in to degenerate impulses.

You must be one of the idiots who thinks the T has no place in LGBT. Transgendered women and flamimg queers threw the bricks at stonewall and began the homosexual acceptance movement.

You rhink you're safe? You're not.
You think your conservative take you aas an equal? You're not. You're just a tool for excercising their power.

You're beyond pathetic and need to take a long hard look at your life.

>>7637359
>But I am not a flaming queen who is part of a community, I AM A MAN, indistinguishable from straight guys and now because of flamers everybody thinks gays are weak and flamboyant.
Have a little fun for once and get your cheeks out of your ass, faggot.

>>7647115
"straight acting" is a phrase people use when they're trying to convey that they're just not into the gay scene or they don't make a big deal about their sexuality. It doesn't mean they are actually 'acting'.

People get so triggered by that phrase.

I don't agree with some of the anti women comments in OP post, but I resent the fact that you think you can tell him how to behave, and that he's somehow insulting the gay community by not conforming to your idea of a gay person.

There are many gay people that simply don't enjoy the culture that surrounds being gay. That's okay because we're a diverse group that are only linked together because our dicks get hard for other dicks. It's unreasonable to expect one culture norm to work for everyone.

It just so happens that the more 'obvious' gays are the ones that came out first and built a specific culture and community. In the modern age, where coming out is no big deal, there are lots of different openly gay types of men. And it's okay that a culture that grew off the back of a subset of gays doesn't appeal to them.

>>7640642
truth

>>7647168
Very much this.

Also, a friend asked me the other day: Other than "straight-acting", what are some derogatory terms for masc gay guys? Inquiring minds need to know.

>>7637556
There are women on 4chooons and always have been, but those "Im a girl! with a penis!" faggots should just go hang themselves.

>>7647269
What if I forget to mention the penis part?

How can you not like imperator Adrianus?

>>7646374
Campy gays were less threatening to a hetero and more conservative western society. Cool. We accept that historical tidbit. It doesn't mean that you need to conform to that stereotype. And nobody is going to reasonably tell you that you should. They'll make jokes about wanting a shopping buddy or someone to decorate their house on the cheap, but they would honestly probably be more annoyed or concerned if you changed your entire personality to fit into a gay stereotype if that's not something you were ever interested in to begin with.

Are you mad because you just want other "masc" guys to hang with and fuck? You can find them now. We have Craigslist, grindr, scruff, and daddyhunt. You'll probably have to look in an older age bracket than you might want to if you're a late teen or in your early 20s, but there are a ton of guys who mellow out by their 30s or never predicated their interests on gay stereotypes to begin with. There are interesting people who just like the D out there.

>>7637359
>>During the Roman Empire the bravest strongest most masculine soilders were homosexual now a days most act like woman.

No they weren't.

You're thinking of one specific band of Greek soldiers.

Homosexuality in Roman times, even Greek times, is wildly overexaggerated.

>>7647168
lol do you want a fucking award for not being a flamer or some shit?

>>7644722
>One is better as a leader, the other a follower
That's only true on average. I say we shouldn't take gender into account at all, and instead judge people for their individual merits. With patriarchy, you end up with a man with poor leadership skills being more likely to become a boss than a woman with good leadership skills, with is inefficient and retarded.

>heres a question : in an egalitarian society, a husband and wife are disagreeing over a life or death situation
>What do?
That can't be answered without knowing the specifics, the whole point of gender egalitarianism is to not judge people differently based on their gender. So it would be no different than if it was two people of the same sex disagreeing.

>>7648818
I don't really understand what you mean.

All I said is that the gay culture that exists is not a one-size-all thing that suits everyone, and that no-one should be vilified for not conforming to one idea of what it means to be gay.

What's wrong with that?

>>7648678
>mad
I'm staight =) and you fags are gross

I was just pointing out the fact

nice projecting though famalam.

>>7648947
>judge peoiple
Good point, but heres the problem : we don't always have time, or the means, to get to KNOW people as individuals. So, if we don't we base them on STEREOTYPES, and information available.

>man bad leader, woman good leader
This happens from time to time, but if you honestly don't know the full extent of eithers skills, which would you pick?

>can't be answered

this is a cop out, the point of it NOT being specific is the same as above : you probably DON'T have all information

The last thing you want is a fight for power (2 people fighting over control means there IS no control) and naturally a man is better at using force to STAY in control.

so 2 scenarios

>scenario A : man is in charge. Shit goes down, he orders the woman to follow him. She resists, but he just forces her, does what needs to be done, and has force to get shit done better

>scenario B: Woman is in charge, but man disagrees. Fight ensues, man tries to be reasonable, cant, ends up fighting her but the extra time used means the danger kills them both, because they didn't just START MOVING

This is the problem, having a weak leader in a tense situation runs a strong risk of them being overthrown, and why would you have a leader who can be overthrown by 1 other person?

The only acceptions to this is if someone is incredibly smart or enigmatic, and if the situation does not need strength, but these are hyper specific examples.

You see, women and men being leaders are different in ANOTHER way. Men leading is a NATURAL construct. Its existience is because men are STRONGER, more AGGRESSIVE, BIGGER, and more COMPETITIVE on average

Women leading is a SOCIAL construct, which only exists so long as all of that "society" agrees to it

But if you have disagreement, upheaval of social rules is VERY common, and one of those rules can be "follow the woman".

>>7648986
and who, exactly, do you think is villifying you? because it's most definitely not straight people.

the only thing i can even begin to imagine you're talking about is femmy guys poking fun

>>7649044
The notion of leadership as a "natural construct" is inherently absurd, because leadership, by definition, is a social relationship. A leader cannot lead without the consent of those being led. It doesn't matter how strong, how aggressive you are, if people aren't willing to follow you, you're not a leader. All leadership is a social construct, insofar as it requires convincing the followers to accept your leadership.

>>7648947
And so, if theres a disagreement, and social upheaval in conflict (as there often IS....and "social upheval" can just be in a group of a couple people, btw, anytime someone says "fuck these rules") then its VERY likely, a man will say "fuck this shit" and overpower the woman whos supposed to be the leader, because HE has strength, she DOESN'T, and its effortless to beat her this way.

So now the MAN is in charge, not out of social construct, but out of NATURAL construct.

If someone wants to overthrow him, its NOT just disagreeing, its NOT just disrespecting his leadership, they must physically impose on him

And this is why women are usually bad leaders. They are WEAKER.

>>7649079
>absurd
leadership is, but the CAUSES are not always social.

subordination is social, yes, but WHY are people subordinate?

It can be out of respect, social setup, but the most effective is a bit of fear

And women generally cause less fear than men.

>>7649079
Quite simply, one can be a crude leader by saying "do this or ill hurt you".

Women cannot rely on this very well at all, however, so this tool of leadership is gone

meanwhile good men rely upon

"I care for you, I have done this before, I am strong and will not falter, I will guide you to success, I will take care of hard stuff with you" AND "Do it, or ill hurt you" is always on the table to prevent rebellion. And as established, rebellion is MORE damaging to the effectiveness for a group than a shitty leader.

It also doesn't help men are more dominant, women more submissive, and sexually, women are rarely viewed as a threat.... its kinda backwards to have a woman as a leader if she sexually is a follower, and can be physically dominated, and used for pleasure very easily

I mean, be honest : if not for the social construct, would you really want a leader who you can bend over and fuck by sheer force? How are they a leader if they are that easy to overthrow?

>>7649119
In short, leadership is most effective by looking at the lowest common denominator : Strength and power.

All the intelligence, all the charisma, all the wisdom in the world, is potentially at risk if theres not strength to back it up.

People will always want to disobey, and if they have an easy way of doing it (force) then it WILL be done.

>>7637359
I fucking love you for speaking about this! I'm questioning "transman" because I love men, I fucking love dick and manly twinks and I am thinking about transitioning but I don't want to be labelled as a lesbian because women disgust me too, I hate being born one. Like I understand. I love masculine gay guys, they aren't weak and over the top like those who do drag and preach their sexuality to everyone they meet. I fucking respect you dude.

>>7649097
That system of leadership is counter-productive and arguably dangerous in a life-or-death situation anyway, since it selects leaders based on strength or aggression, not their ability to actually make decisions that won't get everyone killed. The most common leadership model in the real world is a social one, leaders aren't selected via trial by combat, a leader's followers will try to stop you from harming them. Even when leadership is selected through violent means (e.g. a civil war), charisma and leadership skills are far more important than physical strength and personal combat ability. One warrior, no matter how strong, won't be able to take on a whole army, so in those scenarios a weak person who has the support of the people is more likely to win. Likewise, on a smaller, more personal scale, people don't fight duels to decide leadership, if someone is weak, but has skills that the people believe are necessary to keep them alive, the people will fight to protect them. Even a strong person is at a huge disadvantage if they're outnumbered like that.

>>7649119
>I mean, be honest : if not for the social construct, would you really want a leader who you can bend over and fuck by sheer force? How are they a leader if they are that easy to overthrow?
All leaders are vulnerable. Fucking is irrelevant, virtually any leader no matter how strong can be killed by a bullet to the head. Any rando can get a gun and take them out, how then can any leader be said to be strong? There's a reason why all prominent leaders these days are followed around by bodyguards, it's not about your personal strength, but rather your ability to inspire others to risk their lives to protect you. THAT's how a modern leader survives. If you're strong, but unpopular, your leadership position is fragile - people see you as a threat, and when they see a way to dispose of you, they will do so.

>>7649135
if you love men, why are you becoming LESS desirable by making yourself hairy and grosss? And still dickless?

if you like men, being feminine would attract more

>>7649169
>what is gender dysphoria

>>7649169
>not all men are hairy and gross
>QUESTIONING I AM STILK NOT SURE WHAT TO DO
>dickless? hm...surgery? 7" is good enough. Technology is advancing.
>I like manly gay subs and twinks?
>feminism is cancer
>Feminists are retarded

>>7649143
>Dangerous
Your assuming all men who are physically formidable are lunatics who cant into reason

Your also assuming that women WOULD NOT need strength to keep shit in line

YOU ARE ALSO forgetting that rebellion is more damaging than a flawed LEADER.

>charisma and intelligence are more important

Please tell me, on a 1v1 of people who FUNDAMENTALLY disagree with you, how you will get them to follow you WITHOUT force, or the threat of force.

Its less that strength is the thing you need THE MOST of, and more that you cannot lead WITHOUT it. You don't need hercules to be a leader over say, an actual general, but if the actual general is half the size of everyone else, he WONT inspire much confidence

ALSO, part of being a leader means knowing what your fucking DOING, and a woman trying to lead combat, or anything physically demanding, when she knows nothing about it because shes NEVER done it, and CANNOT do it (warfare, or any physically intensive stuff) nobody will be quick to believe her

Part of it is "this guys done xyz for years" or "did you hear about this guy doing abc?"

>>7649158
>all leaders are vulnerable

Some less than others faggot.

Compare a petite woman, to the rock dwayne johnson.....which one would you gamble you could beat in a fight, faggot?

Which one would you be more comfortable challenging their leadership, faggot?

>guns
guns kill bigger creatures less effectively. Less bleeding, less trauma overall, stronger immune system.

>promenent leaders

Leaders of govornment have a different dynamic than mano e mano

Sure, a world LEADER doesn't need strength as much, but if its you, and a handful of say, 6 other people, strength is HUGE.

>>7649201
But you realize that your making yourself an outcast, and disgusting to perhaps 98% of men, right?

Straight men will find you repulsive, and most GAY men will find you repulsive

GD or not, your shooting yourself in the head for your chances of finding someone to like you

You gotta choose : do you want MOST men to find you attractive or do you want to "treat" GD?

>>7649242
>still questioning
no shit, trannies always are, always trying to find some way to "make it work". They do this for all their life, till they realize it can't work, not the way they want it to at all.

>surgery
I'm not gay, but pretty sure most dude wouldn't want a frankendick.

You seen them? They look like a giant fucking skin tag or something

Even the "better crafted" ones look like they got left on a waffle iron or some shit, and they have a risk of ripping off. Plus you don't REALLY feel your dick like a man, its just playing pretend with sewn on props of flesh.

>>7649280
>Your assuming all men who are physically formidable are lunatics who cant into reason
People who are emotionally compromised are more likely to act with aggression and violence. They also have less awareness of risk and danger, and so are more willing be aggressive when it's irrational. Certainly strong men can be good leaders, but choosing leaders on the basis of strength isn't a good way to ensure you get a leader who will keep you safe. You seem to be viewing leadership as this simplistic thing where you either have it or you don't, and if you don't have it, you die. In an actual life or death situation, it's better to have no leader at all than a leader that will just lead us into greater danger and get us all killed.

>Compare a petite woman, to the rock dwayne johnson.....which one would you gamble you could beat in a fight, faggot?
Both would die from a bullet to the head, which is the most logical way to take down a leader these days. At least then, you have a chance to get lost in the crowd after fighting, whereas if you try fighting them hand-to-hand, even if you're strong enough to win, you're out in the open, where you can be seen and attacked by the leader's supporters.

>Which one would you be more comfortable challenging their leadership, faggot?
This presupposes that a leader would be inclined to offer you a fair fight. Duelling isn't really a thing these days, that whole view of honor has pretty much died out. It only really made sense in violent times when leaders ruled through fear, rather than with the consent of the governed. Challenging President Trump to a duel, for example, would make no sense at all - even without the Secret Service, some of his supporters would gladly take me out before I got anywhere near him.

>>7649311
Not all trans men like other men, why do you assume I want men to find me attractive? Plus most trans guys are pretty buff and hot, even if they're manlets. Agreed with the dick thing, but straight women are more accepting

>>7649280
>guns kill bigger creatures less effectively. Less bleeding, less trauma overall, stronger immune system.
Even pistols are powerful enough to incapacitate a particularly strong person if you hit them in the right spot. And even if your first shot doesn't stop them, it's easy to fire another and keep reloading.

>Sure, a world LEADER doesn't need strength as much, but if its you, and a handful of say, 6 other people, strength is HUGE.
Even 5-1 is pretty poor odds. Especially when there's so many unpredictable factors - say everyone is unarmed, but there's a crowbar or something nearby, but only one of them - the outcome of the fight heavily depends on who gets to it first. And again, in a "life-threatening" situation, it doesn't take much to get someone killed - if those other 5 don't like your leadership, they can take advantage of the situation to "dispose" of you.

>>7649311
>You gotta choose : do you want MOST men to find you attractive or do you want to "treat" GD?
Most people would find treating gender dysphoria more important. It's hard to enjoy a relationship if you're disgusted with yourself.

A real man doesn't give a shit what other people do.

>>7649330
Weren't you the one saying you "loved men, and dick"? Sounds pretty fucking straight to me... ...or, well, you would call it "gay".

>>7649329
>implying men are emotionally compromised
>implying those who don't fear are less rational than those FROZEN by fear
>implying a fearless man is unaware shit might kill him
>implying a brave man will just get himself killed without fear, because logical mind doesn't say "Id like to walk away from this"
>implying brave men are suicidal and lead into danger
>implying lack of fear means lack of awareness of danger and risk

my GOD your retarded, have you ever MET a brave, good man?!?!

>bullet to the head
protip : mens skulls are THICKER, bigger, and the head is harder to hit than other parts of the body, and this is assuming he doesn't come for your ass, and you don't fucking miss when he comes to gut you

>fair fight
You completely missed what I said about leading in a small situation, like a handful of guys right?

In this situation, constructs like police, military, do not exists in the situation, and are not relevant at all.

its just you, and 6 other people. nothing else. And in THIS situation, asuming you even HAD guns, would you want to try reducing your numbers with a FATAL blow to try and take control, or would you just go with it, knowing its better off than destroying your unit from the inside?

I myself, would rather present logical reason, and be calm than be violent, unless I felt I could HARMLESSLY overpower someone. Because keeping people safe is more important than arguing over ideas

>your probably a tranny with no concept of how leadership works

>>7649341
>hit the right spot
rolling the dice, and why would you kill someone off of your group?

>5v1
nobody said the other 4 were on your side dipshit.

The other 4 are presumed to be on the fence, looking for a stimulus to make them follow someone, or even thoughts of leading THEMSELVES

Your ASSUMING every one of them would be there to back you up

>>7649346
its hard to get a relationship if others find YOU disgusting

and besides, a lover can boost confidence in yourself

honestly, think about if a man was ALLLL over you for affection, petting, kissing, groping, cuddling, and giving gifts, ect.... Wouldn't that reduce stress a bit?

>>7649352
>real men don't give a fuck about anything at all
lel

>>7649405
No I wasn't that "gay" anon, I like girls only.

And sure in your hypothetical scenario, the strongest or at least most experienced man would rule. But that doesn't mean in modern politics that women can't make rational decisions to rule a country.

>>7649405
>>implying men are emotionally compromised
They most definitely can be. And those are the ones most likely to be drawn to violence and aggression.

>>implying those who don't fear are less rational than those FROZEN by fear
Being frozen by fear is arguably closer to a rational response, because you are acting in accordance with the self-preservation principle. That is the whole reason why we evolved to have the fear instinct. There are certainly times when overriding that instinct is called for, but it's the sort of thing that you should only do if you really know what you're doing.

>>my GOD your retarded, have you ever MET a brave, good man?!?!
I have, but I've also encountered men who put the lives of themselves and others at needless risk in an attempt to be "brave".

>mens skulls are THICKER, bigger
How many men do you know of that survived a bullet to the head?

>would you want to try reducing your numbers with a FATAL blow to try and take control
>and why would you kill someone off of your group?
Because you feel that the leader is putting the whole group in danger.

>nobody said the other 4 were on your side dipshit.
>The other 4 are presumed to be on the fence, looking for a stimulus to make them follow someone, or even thoughts of leading THEMSELVES
>Your ASSUMING every one of them would be there to back you up
I'm describing a POTENTIAL situation, not what I think it's guaranteed to be. The point being, that strength doesn't help you much IF you're such a terrible leader that no one wants to follow you.

>>7649417
>and besides, a lover can boost confidence in yourself
>honestly, think about if a man was ALLLL over you for affection, petting, kissing, groping, cuddling, and giving gifts, ect.... Wouldn't that reduce stress a bit?
Those effects are only temporary. And depending on another in that way means that if they ever decide to leave you, you have nothing left but to an hero. It's far better to become a complete person in your own right, than to try to fill those holes with other people.