Meme Thread for Both Posting and Discussing Memes

Aldarion

Neoreactionary Monarchist
60e.png

4d15dizedsk31.png
 

Ixian

Well-known member
Ah great, the ol' "I can't be bothered to prove my point so read this 500 page yawner and do all my work for me" defense. And holy cow, could you have picked something more annoying? The notes and the original all in the same font, terribly formatted, no spaces between paragraphs, with barely any indicator where the text leaves off and the criticism begins? Is this just an excuse to waste everybody else's time?

Alright let's take a look.



So basically we're going with the "I'll just claim everything's a conspiracy theory with no evidence to back it up and load it down with ad hominem fallacies" mode of criticism. How convincing.


There's a lot of this quibbling about grammar and exact meanings in this criticism, here we see them arguing that because the oldest boys getting railed might be 18, it's unfair to say young boys were getting railed. But that's not a reasonable argument, not every Greek youth was going to be at the very oldest age bracket in the first place, and further dedicating verbiage to quibbling about "Young boys" vs. "Old boys" is missing the forest for the trees, it's still boys getting railed.


What the actual fuck? This is what you consider viable? Your counter is that older men having sex with young boys is heterosexual?


Ah, whitewashing. Sure, the fact that to this day the scale is called the Kinsey Scale surely indicates that the APA wasn't heavily influenced by Kinsey. Note that contrasted to The Pink Swastika's deeply impressive references for everything, this rebuttal has zero evidence for all its claims about who had what influence.

Translation: These people were Cancelled, ergo we get to pretend they never existed and their evidence doesn't count. There's a huge amount of this kind of reasoning.

Saying anything negative about gays is proof it's untrue in the eyes of this critic.


A bizarre assumption that a guy wasn't gay before he came out of the closet... in the 1920s.

Their standing table was literally called Stammtisch 175, a then-famous homosexuality reference.

I could keep slogging through this painfully disorganized mess of lies but why? It's caught out in an extremely provable lie already, though honestly I could probably have stopped at "Gay sex between men and young boys is a heterosexual act." You've got nothing.

You have yet to prove he's a liar, or that there are any lies in his book. Your citations on the other hand, yeah they're chock full of easily obvious lies. Projecting much?

If I can chime in on the "actually they were fucking older teenage boys" bit, the Greeks would have just seen them as young boys, the concept of "teenagers" was pretty much invented in 1950s Western Society. It certainly wasn't a concept they had in ancient greece.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
Wasn't the 'coming of age' back then 15 or 16 anyway?
There's a pretty big "Depending on the culture" there, and even saying "Greek Culture" is painting in pretty broad strokes since every city effectively had its own culture and Athenian marriage customs were not Theban or Spartan customs. Also, there was a bit of "Depending on the gender" as far as coming of age.

Men tended to marry women quite a bit younger than themselves then. Fifteen-Year-Old Girl/Thirty-Year-Old Guy was pretty close to standard. The Fifteen-Year-Old Boy next to her would also be the, well, receiver for the Thirty-Year-Old Guy in that marriage. Marriage was also seen as primarily about childbirth and inheritance, love and romance were the domain of the pederastic relationships between a grown man and a young boy.
 

bintananth

behind a desk
Wasn't the 'coming of age' back then 15 or 16 anyway?
IIRC, In Ancient Greece that's about when a boy was considered mature enough to be "mentored" and girls were married off just to get that "good for almost nothing waste of space" out of the house. Ancient Greek men typically got married when they were about 30 and could afford to flaunt a wife and children.

That's also just the upper class ones we know about because of what was written. The everyday common people probably did not act like that and we know almost nothing about them.
 

What's the sitch?

Well-known member

explain please?

I remember seeing this one a few years back, I wish we lived the world where this was real, an innocent sort of world.

Blacks against Latino/hispanic eh? I'll be honest with you, I am very hesitant to interact with black people, as of late it seems anything can be interpreted as racism and get you attacked. Even these thoughts are racist in and of themselves, but it is reality that its just best to avoid trouble. The person in the suit may not have noticed the kids as they are very short and you can only kinda see from the eyes/mouth usually, but not very well. If they were looking or waving at someone else at the time they may not have noticed until the kids started pulling on the suit or screaming for attention, but by then it would be too late. Blacks are higher on the oppresion stack for now, but sentiment against them is slowly rising and if things fall apart they won't have white libs to protect them anymore and no one will else will care to defend them from all the enemies they have made and bridges they have burned as a group. Black lives matter, but how much, and to whom? Never ending gang violence and drug use says otherwise.

Other things I wanna say about "blacks" vs "latino" but perhaps too spicy even for here.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top