Posts made by altoids582

And by realize that you were pretty gay, I don't mean that you just were into men and enjoyed looking at underwear ads, I mean like that you were super gay.

For me it was when I went by a gay bar and saw this guy, probably middle aged, in the parking lot in this ridiculous outfit with leather chaps with his ass hanging out, just some cod piece thing covering his dick, and a leather vest. Was like the sort of outfit you'd imagine someone putting on for some comedy movie with the most stereotypically gay leather outfit. And main thing I could think of when I saw this guy was that I wanted to get fucked silly by this guy as he called me his bitch.

Previous to that I usually felt like I was a pretty straight acting gay guy that wouldn't want to get into anything all that weird, feeling like while I may sleep with some guys that it was basically just wanting to be like hitting up a bro and having some fun, after that night I pretty much wanted to be fucked long and hard by older and/or black men that could make me feel like the only the only thing I was good for was being fucked.

If it became possible to switch orientation then I imagine becoming gay would be possible too. And given how fucked up some gender politics can be I wouldn't be surprised if some guys decided to switch to gay, because I know while I probably would have wanted to go straight when I was younger, that I've come to appreciate how fucking sweet it is being gay.

Why try sucking someone off if you don't want to swallow it?

Seems as goofy as when someone says they like to bottom even if they don't find it sexually satisfying. I mean seriously when I go down on a guy I feel like it's only right swallow that load.

I feel like it's kinda hot since it feels a bit like being trash talked which is sorta a turn on for me when a guy is fucking me.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/27/alt-right-commentator-gets-schooled-historian-diversity-roman/

There was a semi-recent incident that occurred online where a guy argues, seemingly earnestly, that Mediterraneans (who I was suppose look a bit swarthy?) existing in the Roman empire refutes the criticism of the BBCs recent educational cartoon that portrays blacks being in noticeable numbers in ancient Roman Britain.

It's kinda obvious that the guy doing the 'schooling' here was essentially ignoring the elephant in the room due to wanting do engage in fallacious fact checking, since he never actually touched on how sub Saharan Africans would be existing in Roman Britain in significant numbers. But that's pretty weird in its own right to try going into some weird diatribe to declare someone wrong while never bothering to ask the simple question of "why do you think that?" which could kinda help with trying to understand that person's point of view.

McCain has been acting brain damaged for years, now he at least has an excuse.

The only real reasons McCain would have to vote no are that he hated Trump's agenda or he didn't even know what the bill was.

Hating Trump is of course the case, but I doubt that's the reason here. Since McCain had also been trying to have the bill go into conference along with a couple other senators. In other words, they wanted to debate what would be in the bill some more which of course was promised to them as the bill was going to have to go back to the House anyway. Thing is this happened over the course of a couple days and given McCain's mental state due to his tumor, he may not have remembered that he was guaranteed the bill would be going to conference as he asked.

If he couldn't remember that some questions had already been asked during a congressional hearing within an hour of his asking those questions again, then how likely is it he'd remember the deal he made about the skinny repeal bill?

The only reference to data, however vague it is, in the Psychologytoday link is:

Analyses of large representative samples, from both the United States and the United Kingdom, confirm this prediction.  In both countries, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to be liberals than less intelligent children.  For example, among the American sample, those who identify themselves as “very liberal” in early adulthood have a mean childhood IQ of 106.4, whereas those who identify themselves as “very conservative” in early adulthood have a mean childhood IQ of 94.8.

Which is just odd to treat as meaningful. Kids never have a firm grasp of what is going on in politics because they don't have the experience to understand what is at work. So who cares what the political beliefs of children are?

As far as the amygdala argument, you could say that liberals having an underdeveloped amygdala leads to them not having a proper response to threats to their environment. For instance you could argue liberals while wanting to be nice and let in refugees are ignoring a potential threat since 'refugees' have been frequently found to be sympathetic to terrorist causes in Europe. Essentially meaning they're overly naive.

When it comes to the livescience.com story suggesting that conservatives are prejudiced, I'm not actually seeing any link on the page to the study in question. Trying to search for what study this article is based on just turns up more links to the specific article so I can't see what they're actually doing, but I strongly suspect it's a tad bullshit like many 'studies' which amount to nothing more than surveys with leading questions.

I think you are likely reading more into clickbait 'news' articles than you really ought to. It's pretty easy for some writers to come up with some flamboyant headlines to grab clicks based on the most bullshit information.

Like this article from Livescience recently: Has the Large Hadron Collider Disproved the Existence of Ghosts?
http://www.livescience.com/57973-has-large-hadron-collider-disproved-existence-of-ghosts.html

How the fuck can something like that be an article? Why are you taking a site like this seriously?

Or this Psychologytoday site, which has such profound articles as "The science of clean" and "Nine signs you're really an introvert". This is about as bullshit a site as Buzzfeed for fuck's sake. These are not sites you should be using to judge people's political beliefs. These sites thrive on feeding you comforting bullshit that makes you feel better about yourself or just pisses you off, they are not aimed at making you more knowledgeable about anything.

The OP pretends that liberalism is a mental disorder, based on the opinion of a right-wing conservative pundit.

That is like asking a Nazi for their opinion of Jews, or a member of the KKK their opinion of blacks, or a right-wing conservative pundit their opinion of gays.

I don't think you're going to find many critiques of a group from the group itself. Would you expect to watch Fox News and find arguments in favor of Democrats' policies? Would you go to Salon.com to find arguments in favor of Trump? Would you go The New York Times to find non-fake news?

@tempbo:

Bowling Green. Sweden. So many victims.

OMFG it's so fun to live in the US these days…..

The thing with bowling green seemed to be referring to this: https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/louisville/press-releases/2013/former-iraqi-terrorists-living-in-kentucky-sentenced-for-terrorist-activities

Two Iraqi citizens living in Bowling Green, Kentucky who admitted using improvised explosive devices (IEDs) against U.S. soldiers in Iraq and who attempted to send weapons and money to al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) for the purpose of killing U.S. soldiers were sentenced today to serve federal prison terms by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky.

Fox News had done a piece the day prior on the problems Sweden is dealing with in regards to immigration.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/833435244451753984

I'm not sure there's even evidence Trump said anything about an attack, that seems to have just been made up by some news outlets based on his something had been happening there.

I think this is the piece that was being referred to possibly: https://youtu.be/OSzjfAMk-RI

Also Sweden has not been doing fantastically well since they started bringing in so many 'refugees'.

http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article22916048.ab

http://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/162-000-kom-till-sverige-500-fick-jobb

The job situation for those immigrating to Sweden has been pretty shitty, which even has had some of those immigrating there complaining that Sweden shouldn't be accepting so many people if they don't even have jobs available.

@insex:

Now history continues, US with Trump still talking about "occupation" and sanctions, but we simply don't care, all this sanctions, only closed doors for foreign business, but open doors for our business. Our farmers pray: "do not cancel sanctions, business started to grow". About Crimea it's better to the whole world simply forget, it will be only with Russia. We like Trump only for one reason  :hug:, he doesn't want a WAR with us, cause as you saw in this 29 year-old video with ships, nothing has changed, we will fight in any case, if there will be real danger from US or other country.

I think Trump's White House's comments regarding Crimea are being exaggerated a bit regarding how meaningful they are.

He's seemed against the notion of doing more sanctions for just zero reason, with it also being a bit difficult to just immediately lift sanctions because you have mega anti-Russians like Senator McCain and much of the Democrats (since it's involved in their current narrative) that would flip their shit if Trump moved quickly on easing relations in the first couple weeks. There's also been the matter that there's a ton of employees in places like the state department that were eagerly anti-Trump and anti-Russia that seemed interested in working against him which need to be ousted first. There's been a massive amount of layoffs at the state department once Rex Tillerson got in which should probably help a bit. Some of those getting laid off even commented to reporters that this was terrible because it meant no one would be around to subvert the oval office as though that was something they were meant to be doing.

I feel like we'd be seeing more being done about improving relations if we didn't have so many lifetime bureaucrats that needed to be fired first which could only happen once the appropriate cabinet positions get confirmed.

@Eridanos:

UK voted (well most people in the UK voted) to leave the European Union.  It was the mayority's will so Theresa May has to respect that. The funny thing I find is that all those separatists politicians didn't have the balls to take the mantle in this cumbersome process.

Trump is a sign of the polarization in the USA, it also shows how the Left failed to care for American society as a whole.

Regarding both topics, considering UK's circumstances, I'd rather have all those who oppose the country to have a trade agreement with USA just because Trump is a loudmouth, misogynistic and whatever asshole, to reconsider.  UK will need many trade agreements and USA is just such a ripe market…America consumes and wastes like no other country.

That's the reason Mexico won't give up relationships with USA so easily...an increase of 25% exports to USA generates more income that a 50% increase in our exports with the rest of Latin America (yes, building trade agreements with other countries as a safety net is the ideal and most sensible thing to do, but the American market is just too voracious and good to just leave without trying)

Was only a few years ago that even Clinton was in favor of a border wall and Bernie Sanders seemed to talk a bit about how awful some of our trade agreements are. So I don't think Trump himself is an example of polarization in the country so much as the reaction to him.

Just talking about statistics like the 80% of women crossing the southern border illegally are raped at some point along their journey and stating famously "somebody's doing the raping", resulted in Trump getting labeled as a racist who was calling all Mexicans rapists. That's pretty fucked up.

There was also the famous tape that leaked where Trump talked about how when you're famous that women will let you even just grab them by the pussy, which the media then lambasted him for  by saying he had been into molesting women against their will. That's fucked up too.

There was also the point where Trump suggested not allowing anti-semites into the country, which resulted in the Jewish anti-defamation league saying this was anti-semitic to want to ban anti-semites. Which is pretty fucked up but also kinda funny.

It's been pretty routine to just watch the media misrepresent people and facts for a long while now to help with bolstering their people's own personal politics or agendas. Which wouldn't even necessarily be that bad if people were more interested in seeing what the other side of these stories are, but they're often not. It's more comforting to just read stories that back up your own personal politics and make you feel more virtuous for having what positions you already have. It probably doesn't help that a lot of the more mainstream media was very adamantly liberal which could give those with similar politics the false belief that everyone must obviously be sharing their politics since that's all they saw in the media they consumed.

@royalcrown89:

@raphjd:

At least you admit, though not directly, that everything is about race/racism to you.

You are right, I don't know how to view everything through race/racism lenses like you.

I never said I speak for anyone but myself.   I realize there are a lot of SJWs that cuck for BLM and the like.  Hell, there are even massive self loathing cucks in the Uhuru movement.

I was just reminding you that there are blacks that people like you call "coons" and "white washed" who don't view everything through "crackers are evil" lenses.

We hate racism just as much as you do, but we don't view everything as racist.   An argument between 2 people of different races over the best color for a car is just that, not some racist crap that people like you view it as.

I've been in a lot of situations where I saw racist stuff so since you're talking about how you shouldn't view everything as racist it means you don't care about whether racism is bad or not.

I know when I started getting more active with having a sex life (really just bottoming), that I had some trouble with needing to take a while with foreplay to get to where I could handle getting fucked by someone that was a bit larger.

After a couple years though and actively playing around with various toys, I've found I can get to where I can relax and take in a larger dick without near as much trouble as I used to. To an extent I think there's a bit of apprehension that made it difficult to just relax my hole a bit, whereas now I can look at it as just 'normalish' so it can take just a couple minutes of foreplay to get right into getting fucked hard (which feels a lot more fun than gentle bullshit fucking some guys get into trying).

@insex:

and NOW here comes TRUMP, you can criticize him for anything you want.
But the most important thing that he will save you from the WAR, from the REAL WAR.
The most of you don't know about it nothing, and don't imagine what is it.

Russian people know a lot about war, and don't want it again, but if the war will start, we will fight.  :cool2:

Thus, if for you TRUMP = homophobe, racist, rapist and other things. Please imagine, will you still moaning about it, when your hometown will lie in ruins after nuclear bomb, i don't think so…

I'm still amazed how little attention anyone people have to Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton both talking during the second(?) Democratic primary debate that they wanted to form a Bush style coalition of countries to go into Syria with. Both even seemed perfectly comfortable with having the US fighting Russia as though that made any sense whatsoever.

It's helped to make me incredibly happy to see as Trump was getting into office all those "moderate rebel" groups lamenting they weren't receiving so much support from the US anymore. America's foreign policy has been batshit insane for years and we finally have someone in office that is against going dick waving with our military in every country that looks at us funny. Yet in spite of this, we have a collection of Russophobic journalists in the media that try fear mongering regarding Russia at every turn, some of the loonier ones like Louise Mensch suggesting anyone on social media that isn't petrified of Russia (or even god forbid pro-Putin) is secretly some paid Russian internet troll.

I doubt any relationship with a major age gap (like more than 7 years or so) would last. You'd start running into the problem of just having different priorities in life which would make it impossible to want to stay together.

I think about 56 when I was like 21.

Was honestly kinda terrible since it made me start looking primarily at older men for sex.

5-5.5 inch dicks seem fine to me as long as the guy isn't lazy in bed which the majority of guys can kinda be.

I've tried it a few times, but always found I was terrible about noticing the notifications because of how funky the free version is so I wouldn't notice I had gotten any messages unless I lurked in the app for hours on end.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military

Funky article about nonsense with Turkey being dealt with by intelligence folks.

_Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the DIA between 2012 and 2014, confirmed that his agency had sent a constant stream of classified warnings to the civilian leadership about the dire consequences of toppling Assad. The jihadists, he said, were in control of the opposition. Turkey wasn’t doing enough to stop the smuggling of foreign fighters and weapons across the border. ‘If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic,’ Flynn told me. ‘We understood Isis’s long-term strategy and its campaign plans, and we also discussed the fact that Turkey was looking the other way when it came to the growth of the Islamic State inside Syria.’ The DIA’s reporting, he said, ‘got enormous pushback’ from the Obama administration. ‘I felt that they did not want to hear the truth.’

‘Our policy of arming the opposition to Assad was unsuccessful and actually having a negative impact,’ the former JCS adviser said. ‘The Joint Chiefs believed that Assad should not be replaced by fundamentalists. The administration’s policy was contradictory. They wanted Assad to go but the opposition was dominated by extremists. So who was going to replace him? To say Assad’s got to go is fine, but if you follow that through – therefore anyone is better. It’s the “anybody else is better” issue that the JCS had with Obama’s policy.’ The Joint Chiefs felt that a direct challenge to Obama’s policy would have ‘had a zero chance of success’.

So in the autumn of 2013 they decided to take steps against the extremists without going through political channels, by providing US intelligence to the militaries of other nations, on the understanding that it would be passed on to the Syrian army and used against the common enemy, Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State._

I like this bit too.

_The press conference failed to deal with the far more urgent impasse between the two men on the matter of Erdoğan. Obama defended Turkey’s right to defend its borders; Hollande said it was ‘a matter of urgency’ for Turkey to take action against terrorists. The JCS adviser told me that one of Hollande’s main goals in flying to Washington had been to try to persuade Obama to join the EU in a mutual declaration of war against Islamic State. Obama said no.

The Europeans had pointedly not gone to Nato, to which Turkey belongs, for such a declaration. ‘Turkey is the problem,’ the JCS adviser said._

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2015/12/17/erdogan-sultan-turkey/

Turkey seems more insane these days than I would thought.

_Erdoğan’s dominance of Turkish politics is both a consequence and a cause of the weakness of the country’s institutions. As an ambitious prime minister in the 2000s, he cut back the power of the country’s secular military and civilian bureaucracies, which had used strong-arm tactics with many human rights abuses including torture, aimed at preventing Islamists such as Erdoğan from assuming power in the past. This campaign culminated in August 2013 with the jailing of dozens of high army officers, including a former chief of the general staff, for plotting against the government. Senior officers nowadays shy away from making any decision of consequence. As a European diplomat in Turkey put it, “You won’t find four Turkish generals in a room these days, for fear of being accused of plotting.” Every army promotion above the rank of major has to be approved by the president.

Also in 2013 Erdoğan was challenged by a powerful religious movement inspired by Fethullah Gülen, a Turkish preacher living in eastern Pennsylvania who enjoys strong support from Turkey’s judiciary and police. The movement has been called a “moderate blend of Islam”; although its workings are often obscure, its publications emphasize science, technology, and multiparty democracy. Erdoğan had previously been able to intimidate military officers, but judges and prosecutors, some connected with Gülen, have been able to preserve independent power. In December 2013 more than fifty prominent pro-government figures were questioned about corruption by prosecutors, some of them thought to be sympathetic to Gülen. Later the same investigation was said to raise questions about the corrupt behavior of Erdoğan’s son Bilal. Since then Erdoğan has said he is trying to eradicate the “parallel structure” within the bureaucracy that allegedly has ties to Gülen. Thousands of prosecutors and police officers have been sacked or transferred. Several judicial officials have been jailed (including a judge who had awarded bail to arrested followers of Gülen).

Just after the recent election, in the early hours of November 2, forty-four officials in the İzmir region, including senior bureaucrats and policemen, were arrested by police officers loyal to Erdoğan. An Istanbul court has banned travel by a further fifty-four prosecutors and judges on suspicion of terrorism or attempting to overthrow the government. Rightly or wrongly, some have been said to have connections with Gülen._