>>1509 Study cited by the previously-referenced PsychologyToday article: "Sexual desire, not hypersexuality, is related to neurophysiological responses elicited by sexual images." Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology. 2013 Jul 16; 3: 20770. PMC3960022. doi:10.3402/snp.v3i0.20770. Response to that study: "‘High desire’, or ‘merely’ an addiction? A response to Steele et al." Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology. 2014 Feb 21; 4. PMC3975913. doi:10.3402/snp.v4.23833. Related studies: "Internet sex addiction treated with naltrexone." Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2008 Feb; 83(2): 226-30. PMID 18241634. doi:10.4065/83.2.226. "Can Pornography be Addictive? An fMRI Study of Men Seeking Treatment for Problematic Pornography Use." Neuropsychopharmacology. 2017 Sep; 42(10): 2021-2031. PMC5561346. doi:10.1038/npp.2017.78. "The assessment and treatment of adult heterosexual men with self-perceived problematic pornography use: A review." Addictive Behaviors. 2018 Feb; 77: 217-224. PMID 29069616. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.10.010. "Moral Incongruence and Pornography Use: A Critical Review and Integration." The Journal of Sex Research. 2019 Jan; 56(1): 29-37. PMID 29412013. doi:10.1080/00224499.2018.1427204. "Online Porn Addiction: What We Know and What We Don’t—A Systematic Review." Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2019 Jan 15; 8(1): 91. PMID 30650522. doi:10.3390/jcm8010091. "The Assessment of Problematic Internet Pornography Use: A Comparison of Three Scales with Mixed Methods." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020 Jan; 17(2): 488. PMC7014272. doi:10.3390/ijerph17020488.

>>1508 I don't see how it's an ad hominem or in any way wrong to point out the issues with using PT and Ley as authorities, considering their previous actions. YBOP is anti-pornography, but it doesn't rely on think pieces, but literal mountains of research that Ley and PT jump over because it doesn't fit the narrative they want. Here's some of the data that was cited in the YBOP links, though: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4600144/ >1) Neuroscience of Internet Pornography Addiction: A Review and Update (Love et al., 2015 >Many recognize that several behaviors potentially affecting the reward circuitry in human brains lead to a loss of control and other symptoms of addiction in at least some individuals. Regarding Internet addiction, neuroscientific research supports the assumption that underlying neural processes are similar to substance addiction… Within this review, we give a summary of the concepts proposed underlying addiction and give an overview about neuroscientific studies on Internet addiction and Internet gaming disorder. Moreover, we reviewed available neuroscientific literature on Internet pornography addiction and connect the results to the addiction model. The review leads to the conclusion that Internet pornography addiction fits into the addiction framework and shares similar basic mechanisms with substance addiction. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/ >Is Internet Pornography Causing Sexual Dysfunctions? A Review with Clinical Reports >Traditional factors that once explained men’s sexual difficulties appear insufficient to account for the sharp rise in erectile dysfunction, delayed ejaculation, decreased sexual satisfaction, and diminished libido during partnered sex in men under 40. This review (1) considers data from multiple domains, e.g., clinical, biological (addiction/urology), psychological (sexual conditioning), sociological; and (2) presents a series of clinical reports, all with the aim of proposing a possible direction for future research of this phenomenon. Alterations to the brain's motivational system are explored as a possible etiology underlying pornography-related sexual dysfunctions. This review also considers evidence that Internet pornography’s unique properties (limitless novelty, potential for easy escalation to more extreme material, video format, etc.) may be potent enough to condition sexual arousal to aspects of Internet pornography use that do not readily transition to real-life partners, such that sex with desired partners may not register as meeting expectations and arousal declines. Clinical reports suggest that terminating Internet pornography use is sometimes sufficient to reverse negative effects, underscoring the need for extensive investigation using methodologies that have subjects remove the variable of Internet pornography use. In the interim, a simple diagnostic protocol for assessing patients with porn-induced sexual dysfunction is put forth. >3.4. Neuroadaptations Related to Internet Pornography-Induced Sexual Difficulties: We hypothesize that pornography-induced sexual difficulties involve both hyperactivity and hypoactivity in the brain’s motivational system [72, 129] and neural correlates of each, or both, have been identified in recent studies on Internet pornography users [31, 48, 52, 53, 54, 86, 113, 114, 115, 120, 121, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134]. There's just a huge-ass list of studies on this topic, all here, without need for commentary from the creator of the site: https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/relevant-research-and-articles-about-the-studies/brain-studies-on-porn-users-sex-addicts/

Certain scientists will come up with studies that say whatever a certain group wants to hear. It's about lobby and funds. PT cites studies that say porn is not addictive and YBOP cites studies that say it is addictive. Until someone conducts a serious study on this matter, it is hard to know the truth.

>>1519 What would count as a "serious" study in this context?

>>1514 The issue is not using them as authorities: a logically-fallacious ad hominem argument is attacking the sources in order to suggest that they are wrong instead of providing actual evidence disproving any particular claim(s) that they made. >>1519 > Certain scientists will come up with studies that say whatever a certain group wants to hear. It's about lobby and funds. That's why people should look for studies in peer-reviewed journals* that hopefully check for conflicts of interest and such. Then, if one or more people with potentially-conflicting interests (co-)author a study that is allowed to be published after peer review, ideally there is clear documentation of potentially-conflicting interests in each study. * I am intentionally not including the word "reputable," because that is getting into the territory of an appeal to authority: "you should believe the study because that journal is reputable!" Humans are fallible, and so even "reputable" journals can publish studies with flaws and even false information.

>>1514 > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4600144/ One thing which makes me wary of that study is that the authors repeatedly cite the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM), which at the time included decidedly non-scientific "spiritual" aspects in its definition of addiction as quoted in the study from ASAM's web site. > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/ It should be noted there is a conflict of interest laid out in that study: "Gary Wilson is the author of Your Brain on Porn: Internet Pornography and the Emerging Science of Addiction. He holds an unremunerated, honorary position at The Reward Foundation, the Registered Scottish Charity to which his book proceeds are donated." Don't take this to mean I'm suggesting anything in the study is wrong for that reason, though. In fact, the study makes sense: if people become desensitized due to pornography (ab)use, then certainly sexual dysfunction might be expected e.g. if a person's partner is unable or unwilling to satisfy the person's pornography-altered desires. > https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/relevant-research-and-articles-about-the-studies/brain-studies-on-porn-users-sex-addicts/ There is indeed plenty of information there. I am just skeptical that pornography (ab)use has the potential for _all_ aspects of addiction, particularly physiological dependence and withdrawal. If it does not, then using the word "addiction" is inappropriate IMO. As I noted previously, obsession/compulsion might instead be more fitting.

Porn does bad to your mind and to society, but it is not the root of the problem

>>880 The more gay and bisexual men in a society, the more misogynistic and unnatural this society is. Just take a look at ancient greece. Yet we see all these stupid women gladly advocating for them cause they think gay men are their bffs

>>1557 IF that were true I'd expect muslim countries to be super tolerant of gay men. Oh wait...

>>1560 Muslim men are gay. As someone said above: >It's actually culturally accepted for men in some Muslim countries to anally rape young boys as not to 'defile' girls so they are virgins for their husbands

>>1557 I think the more interesting question is what happens with robosexuality.

>>1562 Robosexuality? That ain't THE threat specifically... But artificial wombs + artificial eggs + trans women/sexual robots.. then you have the whole men trying to replace us combo .

>>1467 >asexual Anon, there's no such thing as asexuality let alone an asexual MAN

>>1564 how isn't it possible to be asexual? men are retarded, that's another story, but pretty sure if either women or men have low test it's possible, no?

>>1561 That sounds like Bacha Bazi, which is an archaic Afghan (I forgot what specific ethnic group) practice rather than a "Muslim" practice.

>>1581 Pashtun, and not archaic at all according to testimony I've heard from soldiers who'd served in Afghanistan.

>>1583 Really, that shit is still going on?? Wild.

>>1584 Apparently rather than being heterosexual they are doesn't-have-a-beard-osexual.

>>1557 >>1560 ""The proscription against male-male fucking is the lid on masculinity, the limiting principle which keeps masculinity from being simply an endless firestorm of undifferenciated self...The straight male's phobic reaction to male homosexuality can then be seen as a fear of an unrestricted, unlimited, ungovern masculinity" It could well be argued in response that the act of fucking another man would in fact strengthen male bonding rather than destroy it. That can be seen as a problem for a feminist analysis too since it is male bonding that forms the scaffolding of male supremacy and it is not in women's interest necessarily that it should be stronger"

>>1585 Kek

>>1586 Where are you getting this from?

>>1590 The Lesbian Heresy: A Feminist Perspective on the Lesbian Sexual Revolution

I saw a dude say that women aren't true allies to bisexual/pansexual men because they won't date men who date transwomen or men who are bisexual. Seems like another way for men to try to guilt women into sex/relationships. I've even seen some homophobic incels, say that women support the LGBTQ+ the most but won't date bisexual/trans attracted males, so basically we are trying to push this on everyone else but us. (like women aren't attacked the most in all of this) So I guess in order for us to care we have to give men pussy. Thing is, I've seen gay men have NO issues saying they don't want to date bisexual men and bisexual men saying they don't want to date bisexual men or men, but they aren't seen as homophobic. There are bisexual men who would never date a man, but then shame a woman for not wanting to date men who are bisexual. With women we either have to suck girl dick and bisexual dick or we are transphobic homophobic tards. This is the true goal. These movements are always pushed by men attracted to women, because gay troons know that straight/bisexual men aren't going to let them dick watch, but gay, straight, bisexual men of all backgrounds STAY clit watching and shaming women for who we do or don't want to fuck. yet if we do it to them it's a problem. This is why I have no issue saying tranny chasers are disgusting and I'd never date a bisexual man, but at this point, I'm thinking of sticking to the lady pond because it feels like a lot of men prefer women but have a kink for men, cross dressers and troons, yet they claim they are "Straight".

You know what pisses me off big time? How this is not talked about: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4zoZERF8SK4 Some days ago I met this gay dude who started to openly disclosure his sexual life to me and my friends. He was particularly proud about a random married "straight" (they like to think these guys are straight regardless of the illogically in this) he had sex with that same day. He doesn't know the guy, had never seen him before. He said they talked a bit and apparently the guy has a wife and she is pregnant. He then went off about how much he loves to fuck with "straight" *married* men and how they are the best. This gay dude has sex with complete strangers literally almost every single day. The only thing I could think about while he was telling us that is what if the guy he fucked with that day has contracted an STD from having indiscriminate sex with other men and has passed it to his wife and therefore to the baby as well. Go back months before and I'm part of a facebook support group for abusive relationships (which the majority of members are women) and there was this post from a woman whose husband got her HIV. A quick look on anonymous forums and the likes will show you how many men consider themselves straight, have wives or girlfriends but still have sex with men and a huge part are especially attracted to trannies. There are also HIV positive men who purposelly infect women with a disease they probably got from men in the first place. I then think about how much men are responsible for spreading STDs and have even spread a disease that has no cure. Men are a threat to women in many ways and one of them is their sexual behavior. Still, people are concerned about controlling women's sexuality only. This is insane. I can't imagine what I would do if I were on any of those women's places, nothing I could do would be capable of relieving my anger for men and their primitive, inferior behavior and brain. Yet nobody talks about this. Can you imagine if HIV was a "women's thing" instead? How men would treat us? Well, I'm pretty sure it will be at a point though now that trannies are increasingly being categorized as women

>>1736 This is nightmare fuel. How do you even vet for this. Scrotes out here living double lives, lying and fucking away at anything but it's women who are demonized for wanting to leave and divorce

>>1736 Everyone hates DL men except for the gay men and trannies who sleep with them. I also don't believe every person fucking a married man does not know, nope. Some of them know and don't care they are all men at the end of the day. A bunch of men thinking with their dicks, so fuck the wives and GF's. They want to fuck a "Straight" man with a wife and the "Straight" man wants to fuck a tranny or a man. DL men/Chasers are fucking dangerous. I blame DL men for HIV being introduced to women, because DL men tend to have more risky sex with anyone with a dick. Men know same sex encounters are gay/bisexual, yet they want them because they are gay/bisexual or got hooked on tranny porn. Notice how trans women, porn and all kinds of crazy shit is trying to be normalized by MEN? They want women to be okay with being with fucked up men. Even when A DL man is exposed, men apart of the alphabet gang come out and try to pull the, "if people were accepting he wouldn't have to hide it!" By "people" they mean women, not men who I regularly see shun and joke on gay men/bisexual men and especially tranny chasers. Men dick watch eachother. I've been on a lot of forums where men constantly judge eachother for who they fuck, so you telling me the only reason DL men can't be out , is society? Or other men judging them? If they be honest with women they'd have NO issues, but they don't.

>>1736 This actually happens surprisingly often, I talked to a woman who actually got HIV from her husband, he had some strange preference for black crossdressers. The strange part is that she still stayed with him even after all of this, it's as if she chose to remain dependant on this man who clearly gave no thought for her well-being, he basically handed her a death sentence.

>>1738 They are not thinking with their dicks. They are thinking with their brains and they are 100% aware of everything. Thing is: They don't care at all. And trust me, none of these guys are doing this because society is homophobic or something. They WANT to have girlfriends, wives and a family. They think they are entitled of having a that. In a way they see women as "romantic partners" but they have sex with men. They all try to normalize this shit cause men are the definition of scum and degeneracy. I read an article the other day about a girl who lost her virginity at 22 to her first boyfriend and got both pregnant and HIV from him. He was bisexual and was cheating on her with men during their relationship. At the end she mentioned she is still a positive person and that she just doesn't date anyone but still dreams of marrying one day. She also said she doesn't feel angry towards him and forgives him. Even though he never even said sorry. Even though he disappeared and left her with the kid. Even though he gave a disease that has no cure and probably will never have. She probably won't ever have sex again or accomplish her big dream of getting married, which for most women, is the only thing that makes life worth living. She will suffer from the stigma of having HIV and is going to be called all names even though that was her first time. And she still "doesn't feel angry towards him and forgives him"... And this is exactly why scrotes, the scum of the earth, do what they do: Cause women are not angry. Women don't have the slightest idea of what actually have always been going on, the reality about men, how many of their boyfriends and husbands are putting them at risk no matter how "straight" these men seem to be or look. Women are alienated because of how silent society is about all of this and romance propaganda

>>1763 Spot on, anon. That is so heartbreaking. You know (and I think I've complained about it here) but this forgiveness culture that women are so pressured into buying into is so dangerous for women. It neuters us of our righteous anger that is usually necessary to motivate us to seek justice and encourage other women to be vigilant and seek justice for themselves too, or at the least, to be realistic about the fact that these are straight up evil people. I'm so tired of the "he has his problems too and I understand and forgive him", when there's nothing to understand about these people except that they are malicious for no good reason. These men don't care and they aren't not thinking. They just have 0 consideration for these women as people, as friends, as partners they should protect. There's no love there. In many cases, no matter how much these women try to please these men and think only positively of them, they still resent these women and think these women are even deserving of disease for any reason - for having asked that they be monogamous, for just being a woman, for not having a dick when they want one, for not being down to fuck at any moment, for leaving the mayonnaise out on the table, for anything. As far as romance propaganda goes, it leaves women completely deluded and oblivious to obvious red flags and it paints perceptiveness as paranoia so long as it's experienced by a woman.

>>1766 Crazy to think women are passive to ALL of this shit while men do mass shootings targeting women because 10/10 tall blond models didn't want to fuck with their ugly and primitive asses The absolute state of our society anon

Jesus this thread is depressing. There is something seriously sinister and twisted about men's sexuality. It's an ever consuming, ever growing void that is never satisfied. There's no restraint, or self control. No self reflection, honor or loyalty to anyone, anything. Family means nothing, ideology means nothing, bodily health means nothing. It's all trumped by this obsessive, hedonistic desire of the flesh, and to be repeated until the literal death of their bodies. It's so repugnant. It's hard existing around such a twisted, gnawing energy, hard to be around men. Even in (seemingly) non-sexual situations, it's always present. Waiting, developing, mutating and festering. How the fuck can people stand it? How can one stand to be around such filth and absolute decay of the human essence? To be so trapped in such a base, subhuman state? Sorry for the rambling, just reading about those HIV stories really got to me. Fuck. That could be any woman we know.

>>1869 Their shriveled, decayed, remnant of a chromosome makes them be this way. The male desires only two things: destruction and replication. And they established patriarchy and control society with one intent: spreading their defective Y easier, by coercing and manipulating women into accepting so. Every action committed on the external world by them reflect really well what they're in a genetic level. Literal parasites. Once you realize it, this whole hell starts to make sense.

A gay guy on my discord has a social media where he cosplays, and he cross dresses, it's NOT sexual at all he's a gay guy. He was showing us all the messages he gets from men, most of them white a few black guys, the worst thing is about 10 of them had profile pictures of them with women. I looked at a few, one was a married man with two kids and a trump supporter he was trying to get my friend to "See him" and telling him it'd be "Worth his time". One dude was a wanna be rapper a black dude, who had a son and a girlfriend. It really disturbed me. He had a conversation with one he thought was handsome, the guy basically told him that he wasn't gay because he assumed my friend was trans, when my friend said he wasn't, he said it's still not gay or bisexual because he was Asian and Asian men are feminine naturally. He was thinking about using the account to out the men with confirmed wives/gf's but we all told him not too, because it's dangerous. I just feel so bad for those women and it makes me paranoid. So many of the messages started with, "i'm not gay but-" It's depressing I just want a straight man, not addicted to porn, not into weird shit and not a cheater, shit was hard before but with this weird ass woke culture, it's like men won't come out, or they come out but put a fancy name on it, and when they do come out they get mad that women won't date them and it's suddenly our fault downlow men exist.

>>1872 You'll have more luck literally going to a tiny village and grooming one then bringing him back home. With religion going away moids are free to indulge every sexual impulse, and they will.

>>1870 It feels like knowing all of this makes you truly mad. There's no going back and forgetting this information, but how is one to progress normally knowing it? How does one retain their sanity and just not fall into the pits of unrelenting bitterness and cynicism? All these "supposed" masculine virtues, such as courage, honor, loyalty, discipline, all nothing but invented tales to keep their sick system going. I'm sure there may have been a few legendary men who had these traits, but they've been long dead, and their deeds and actions have ceased to have any meaningful impact in the rotting cesspool known as the modern man. What is loyalty to these men? What is courageousness, duty and obligation to the vulnerable and needed? What do these words even mean to the average man anymore, and how can they use them in their little rhetoric games against women? >>1872 At this point, I seriously don't know if it is possible. This society and porn, coupled with men's innate biological drives, may permanently destroy their capacity for a loving, healthy sexuality. I'm sorry to sound like such a bitter doomer. I don't know.

>>1876 I seriously don't know, anon. And I guess I've fallen already into extreme cynicism and bitterness because I don't believe in one bit that a supposed good dignified valuable male ever existed. And it's not only 'modern men'. History records shows us that male depravity is timeless and omnipresent. They either hide their sick intentions really well or fake some goodness to appeal to women & their peers. Remember women too often project their values and dignity onto men. We think that they're capable of what we are, when in fact we're the only ones who can create and nurture. My advice is redirecting this energy into Separatism.

>There's no going back and forgetting this information, but how is one to progress normally knowing it? How does one retain their sanity and just not fall into the pits of unrelenting bitterness and cynicism? There isn't a way. If you have blood running through your veins and 0,00001% of dignity this sort of thing should always revolt you and if you choose to close your eyes and live in the fantasy like I did, reality is gonna hit harder than ever at a point, you won't be able to keep the fantasy and you will deeply regret your choice forever. Being aware of reality is gonna make you sick cause the reality is sick and it is gonna keep being so for as long as women live in their fantasies. It is the revolt that comes from this that can generate the change, but sadly we are in very few numbers. This topic here is one not even radical feminists touch on a lot cause most still prefer to cherish male homosexual behavior despite it being inherently prejudicial to women >All these "supposed" masculine virtues, such as courage, honor, loyalty, discipline, all nothing but invented tales to keep their sick system going The world isn't fucked up now only. Exposed is a good word. It has been fucked up since someone implied men have any virtue let alone that honor, loyalty and etc are "masculine virtues". The world got fucked up when laughable absurds and insanities like these were created

>>1898 >There isn't a way. I don't think it's a depression sentance, I think a lot of women get this knowledge, then keep focusing on men for the rest of their lives, whether online or irl. Separatism, finding out the pro women stuff that was hidden from us, finding strong women who may not be radfems but still realize that men are parasites, etc. can make you live a sane life.

>>1892 This makes sense, it also explains why straight mens can have strong bonds that can be deeper then with their wives/gf's, but this same bond is never transferred when it's a same sex relationship. Like gay male relationships can be terribly toxic, two men could be best friends then start fucking and suddenly they treat eachother like shit. We all know how trans woman /male relationships turn out. Gay men/trans sometimes talk about " a man knowing what a man wants" but it's not true. Some straight men can be more in love and devoted to a male friend then any man in a gay relationship can be. I'm drunk and this sounds stupid, but right now it's making sense. Once sex gets involved men change it up. With women even before sex or just in general, but it feels like with men who are gay, sex is always the trigger to make a great male relationship go sour.

>>1900 Ever seen gay men websites/OLD? They're hypersexual in a level that might surpass straight dudes. Imagine being ruled by your hormones that much. It's actually gross. Testosterone is a helluva drug. What you said makes total sense, don't worry. Lol

>>1869 I'd liken it to trying to be friends with a sociopath. >>1872 Same energy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxdC2H2Nndg >he said it's still not gay or bisexual because he was Asian and Asian men are feminine naturally The second half being true doesn't change the fact that the first half is prison gay logic where the top isn't gay. The whole "i'm not gay but-" schtick seems to increase those bi men's arousal. Doesn't surprise me with the number of rice queens out there while the supply is even higher. >>1876 What was your father like? Because following your line of reasoning through to the end dangerously parallels incels who must admit their own mothers were whores. Most people in general do not have good, strong role models growing up. >>1898 Isn't the bigger thing to come to grips with the fact that the vast majority of people according to you will never have blood running through your veins and 0.00001% of dignity and are able to keep the fantasy? There's been talk about the Y chromosome which leads directly into genetic determinism which is always the black pill. >>1900 Good post. >>1901 I've heard it said that Tinder has been a disaster because it's based on the underlying assumption that heterosexual relationships work the same way as gay male sexuality. I have a gay friend who is a virgin and doesn't look at porn though, because he's disgusted by that.

>>1908 >What was your father like? Because following your line of reasoning through to the end dangerously parallels incels who must admit their own mothers were whores. Most people in general do not have good, strong role models growing up. >NAMALT >Calling women whores Really I don't know why people like you are in this website. Go back to CC or LC

>>1901 >Testosterone is a helluva drug >Falling for the "muh hormones" myth Anon, beware to not fall for the myth that has been perpetuated since ever that men have no or little control over their sexual behavior because of their hormones. This was made to excuse men's promiscuity and validate it. Women do have lower sex drives than scrotes, but females in nature are prosmicuous as fuck too. The reason most women don't behave like that is not only because we are more civilized than men, but also because men have been controlling women's sexuality for centuries to, for example, make it easier for them to be assured of the legitimacy of their paternity, since in their case the parent-child link isn't as visible as it is on maternity. Because it is not interesting for males to waste resources on somebody else's kids and every human's drive is that of passing on your DNA. They have built these things for their own benefit only at our expense, cause it isn't interesting for females in nature to loose their providers to other females, for example, but scrotes don't care and never did. They have never complied to monogamy. The hormones argument has also been used to excuse rape: although it is something that do happens in nature, men are still completely and easily capable of not doing it because humans are not fucking irrational animals. The reason men behave as promiscuous as they do is simply because patriarchy not only completely let's them, but also encourages them to do it. So it's all fun and comfortable for them. That's why whore, slut, bitch, hoe, son of a bitch, etc are insults and only to women and it's pretty much the same thing in most countries. Today we are seeing liberal feminism trying to free and sometimes encourage women to be just as promiscuous as men, when promiscuity is prejudicial to humans regardless of sex, instead of builting a culture that also serves to control men's sexuality. But don't take me wrong, I don't fully disregard what they are doing, cause on the other hand, we can also see that since men are not changing by themselves and we are not waking up in a matriarchal world tomorrow, it is better to have "equal rights" than to be the only controlled one and controlled by men.

>>1912 No, no anon. You got it all wrong. Nowhere I said I excuse men's degeneracy alone on their hormones. All I meant is test. plays a significant role on agression tendencies and arousal in males and this a scientific fact. Everything else you said is legit tho, patriarchy is the wheel that moves men's biological parasitism.

>>1901 >They're hypersexual in a level that might surpass straight dudes. Imho men are the same regardless of orientation and the difference boils down to straight men trying to sightly restrain themselves when hitting on women because saying "show bobs and vegana pls" right off the bat will get you blocked.

>>2041 I mean shit, some of them don't even restrain themselves.

Homo scrotes are the most misogynistic of all scrotes

>>2313 I think that's an ftm

>>2322 No it's not it's a feminine homo scrote