Emasculating the male

Its the epitome of white scholarship. I like to use your own sources against you.

So how does the Wikipedia article on "Homosexuality in Ancient Greece" validate the self asserted claim that Julius Caesar had sex with Nicomedes the IV of Bithynia?

Do you have any credible historians or historical documentation to validate your self asserted claim?
 
Yeah, I have seen the article before. Grip strength as a measure of manliness.

I warned you that article wasn't for you.

Your warning was a joke. The article is only relevant if you want a stagnant, unchanging society. In other words, it is not relevant. It does not look at health. It looks at grip strength. Exactly how does that make one a "better man"?
 
That should have passed you by because I never said what she claimed. You let her hypnotize you with her bad reading comprehension. :laugh:

Is this incomprehensible post trying to lecture others on comprehension skills?
 
Its the epitome of white scholarship. I like to use your own sources against you.

So how does the Wikipedia article on "Homosexuality in Ancient Greece" validate the self asserted claim that Julius Caesar had sex with Nicomedes the IV of Bithynia?

Do you have any credible historians or historical documentation to validate your self asserted claim?
It doesnt. The one I gave you about Homosexuality In Ancient Rome does though. You have bad reading comprehension as well i see. :laugh:
 
Asclepias

19905c3b92c4cedcc60da8eaa2dca5dff1803473021e0284531b86e32c860773.jpg


I am done with the village idiot for today. God speed folks!
 
You made yourself look the fool and let the Tipsy make you look like a bigger fool. How did you mistake Greece for Rome? :laugh:

Homosexuality in ancient Rome - Wikipedia

I am 99% certain that you went back and edited that, because in my history is the link

Homosexuality in ancient Greece - Wikipedia

If not then I apologize, but the point still stands.

You have offered zero historians or historical documentation to validate your self asserted claims. Could you offer just one historian or piece of historical documentation to validate your claim?
 
You made yourself look the fool and let the Tipsy make you look like a bigger fool. How did you mistake Greece for Rome? :laugh:

Homosexuality in ancient Rome - Wikipedia

I am 99% certain that you went back and edited that, because in my history is the link

Homosexuality in ancient Greece - Wikipedia

If not then I apologize, but the point still stands.

You have offered zero historians or historical documentation to validate your self asserted claims. Could you offer just one historian or piece of historical documentation to validate your claim?
If that was true then you could link to where it ever said Greece. Since you cant you have egg on your face for letting someone as illiterate as Tipsy make you look as dumb as she is.
laugh.gif
 
You made yourself look the fool and let the Tipsy make you look like a bigger fool. How did you mistake Greece for Rome? :laugh:

Homosexuality in ancient Rome - Wikipedia

I am 99% certain that you went back and edited that, because in my history is the link

Homosexuality in ancient Greece - Wikipedia

If not then I apologize, but the point still stands.

You have offered zero historians or historical documentation to validate your self asserted claims. Could you offer just one historian or piece of historical documentation to validate your claim?


Matter of fact here is your quote of it saying Rome. You got played by the imbecile Tipsy.
laugh.gif


Emasculating the male


Wikipedia is your scholarly source? Your intellectual incompetency is showing.

What historians or historical documentation validate your self asserted claim?

The majority of editors on English wikipedia are undoubtebly white by the way
 

Yeah, I have seen the article before. Grip strength as a measure of manliness. lol

But if I allow that college males are physically weaker now than 50 years ago (it would be an average, of course, since our athletes are bigger, faster, & stronger), the question would be a matter of which skills and attributes matter in today's world.

A man from 50 years ago might have a stronger grip. How is he at computer skills? Can he work a smartphone? Can he manage a business that is now global and requires instant action?

And more importantly, will the man treat women as property or as equals in a relationship? Will he insist on beating up queers, or will he live & let live? Maybe he can't build a porch or rebuild the engine on the family car. But he can create animation, spreadsheets, or a multitude of other skills that help him make a living and pay others to perform manual labor tasks for him. So the newer man has more time to spend teaching his kids how to be quality people. He will have more time to spend with his love.

This idea that a man who is not physically stronger and is violent is pure bullshit. In the past we were stronger because we had to be. It is no longer a requirement in today's world. If you WANT to be strong, there has never been a better time. Exercise systems, nutrition and training have never been better. But that is now a choice a person can make, not a survival requirement.
Weak men are essential. Women have to beat up on someone.

On your knees and cry like a baby.

LMAO!! Too funny. But apparently you prefer having a strong grip (both hands, so your sex life is not a workout) to having skills that actually work in today's world.

Evolution is all about the females choosing the best mate. The one who can best provide for her and their offspring. The manual laborer is not a better mate than the man who builds a business.

Physical strength is no longer the valued commodity it once was. A man who honors his word, takes care of those in his charge, protects the weak, encourages those who are ready to give up, is gentle with a woman, takes part in raising his children, and who does not seek to denigrate those who are different, is far more a man than the guy with the muscles and no honor or integrity. The faithful man is far more a man than the one who cheats on his spouse. The man who helps others is far more a man than the one who only tears things down.

All it takes is time in the gym and a decent diet to build muscles. I'm in the gym most weekday mornings. It is not much of a challenge. facing a changing world without fear is a much bigger challenge. Accepting those who choose to be different is a bigger challenge too. I suggest you adapt and learn.

Masculinity in a man is far more than having muscles and good nutrition. The male has a warrior spirit and a killer attitude. He may well take care of the kids and not cheat on his wife, he might not do so well at protecting the weak. Men can do everything you say and still be weak, fearful and answer threats with timidity.

Personally I never much cared. I never expected any man to protect me or take care of me anyway. I tend to be a bit abusive toward men, many like it. The world should lament the loss of real men, those powerful men that blazed trails and built countries. But then, that's why Harlequin publishes books.
 
Asclepias said:
The stuck some dudes too. That makes them gay in my book.

Your book is highly questionable and contested.

I believe the evidence that Alexander the Great is homosexual is based on a vague excerpt from one piece of old documentation, although I know you do not like playing the "white game of proof." :lmao:
Doesnt matter what you believe. We know whites have tried to cover it up for some weird reason that most if not all the prominent greeks were gay.

This came up during a discussion of Julius Ceasar.

Alexander the Great was probably gay although to all respected writings Alexander was, or at least purported to be asexual. He had three wives, but only one offspring from Roxana, supposedly because his mother was berating him for an heir.

Philoxenus, commander of the sea, sent Alexander two boys as beautiful as they could be. Alexander went into a fury and asked what shameful thing Philoxenus had ever seen in him that would lead him to make such a shameful proposal.

We may never know, partly because todays politics will change history to make Alexander gay whether he ever was.

Julius Caesar was probably not gay at all. None if his three wives ever thought he was. Caesar was famous for having lavish parties inviting only women. A noted womanizer he had multiple mistresses and numerous children.
 

Forum List

Back
Top