MAGA bros - [Did not start out a political post]

[Phallarchist]

On 6/12/2022 at 8:11 PM, Sfmike64 said:

You don’t have to read it then……it’s not required.

I certainly don't read the screeds for content. It's just annoying to have to skip past walls of partisan blather to find the rare relevant response to the faggot's original sex question.

[BootmanLA]

7 hours ago, Phallarchist said:

I certainly don't read the screeds for content. It's just annoying to have to skip past walls of partisan blather to find the rare relevant response to the faggot's original sex question.

Perhaps if the original sex question hadn't included partisan blather in its formulation, the thread might have remained all about sex and it might have stayed in the general forum. Again, if you want to complain about politics in a thread, look to where the politics were first introduced. 

[BannedWord]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

Perhaps if the original sex question hadn't included partisan blather in its formulation, the thread might have remained all about sex and it might have stayed in the general forum. Again, if you want to complain about politics in a thread, look to where the politics were first introduced. 

It started, as @SeanBrah originally said, as a "fetish". Please see below.

On 6/13/2022 at 1:18 AM, SeanBrah said:

So, I initially was just kinda trying to discuss fetishization of these type of men... They feel superior to others strictly because of their lifestyle... Men who command respect. Literally not uncommon.

But for some reason, being interested in a certain thing, on a site where there are stories about stealthing straight men, THIS is what caused people to be upset.
I genuinely cannot believe the reception to this, On a site where dark fetishes are encouraged.
I'll just say this: nobody cares if you're NOT interested in it. Congrats, you're the majority. You're not who this post is for. Let other people enjoy things.

Initially my comments were pretty even-handed and conciliatory.  So I asked the Rodney King question of whether we could coexist even if we had differing political viewpoints. And we can see where that went. I won't reiterate it here, y'all can scroll back for yourselves to that point. 

Look, we're never going to reach any agreement on our politics, that much has been made clear in any political discussion here. My question initially was whether there is any common-ground. Hell, @SeanBrah had his point pretty well proven out: You're not into it. That point seemed dead back on page 4 of the comments: First at 4, Live at 5, Dead at 6. Geez, it'll be buried by 10 or 11. If the dude wants to be humiliated by someone in a MAGA hat, or someone else wants breath play with a dude wearing a Hilary Clinton mask, great for them. But don't think that y'all didn't start it, and it had to get moved to a political forum.

Perhaps best for anyone with diverse political leanings to stay clear of the LGBT Politics Forum from what a few of us have seen. Glad we added fuel to the vitriol.  Peace, out.

 

 

Edited June 16, 2022 by TheSRQDude
...

[BlackDude]

On 6/14/2022 at 8:05 AM, TheSRQDude said:

At the same media sources that squelched the Hunter Biden laptop story before the '20 election, and the NY Post was among the only outlets to cover the details, all the while Twitter and most social media squelched the story or locked any account that would mention it. 15 months later? NYT goes, "Oh, yeah, whoops, that story WAS true." We talk about making tougher gun laws, yet Biden's son literally lied on a firearms application to purchase a firearm. So rules for thee and not for me? Please. The media largely swings to the left, so does social media, and 86% of journalists identify as "liberal". I'm glad that works well for you now. 

As for the January 6th hearings, watch them if you like. I'm disappointed that we've turned the country into a Congressional Kangaroo court for what's largely been a show trial, produced by a former ABC News producer, and harping on Trump nearly 1.5 years after he's left office. He's gone, move along, you're all in office now so do something other than bleating on about the prior 4 years. I've switched it all off because it's so lopsided and we've seen the movie. "Cheetoh-man bad." We get it. 

Sure, we can talk about one demonstration on January 6th. But can we also talk about the nationwide riots that the media covered as "peaceful protests" that cost around 50+ people their lives and caused over $2B in property damage and why nothing was ever done about that? Or why BLM gets a pass on its use of 'charitable funds' to buy and flip real estate?

I don’t get the logic that says the media should cover the dealing of a private charity over the dealings of the president of the United States (Trump, Clinton, etc. equally). Because even if you believed that to be true, that $2M-$3M stolen by those black immigrants pales in comparison to 80% of the Red Cross “administrative costs.”

I also don’t get the logic why the loss is private property should get equal coverage of a “demonstration” that resulted in the breach of our nations capital.
 

You have black panthers who have been in jail since the 70s for even talking to a foreign government, but these “demonstrators” are getting slaps on the wrist (with little coverage).
 

I also seen little coverage of the assassination attempt of the governor of Michigan. 

 

[hntnhole]

12 minutes ago, BlackDude said:

80% of the Red Cross “administrative costs.

When Liddy Dole took over running that agency, I crossed it off my "regular" list.  Only when there are large-scale disasters that call for large-scale and immediate responses do I get in touch with them anymore.

[NEDenver]

The Hunter Biden laptop story isn't true, though.  There's no actual laptop and no actual hard drive that was ever in the laptop.  Instead there's a purported copy of the hard drive from Hunter Biden's laptop.  There are also some purported emails that can be proven were at one point in Hunter Biden's email, but they're mostly spam.  Then there's a whole bunch of crap that would be easily doctored.  In right wing media sources that lie and manipulate their audiences, this is absolute proof, but those same media sources also keep lying about the election results. 

The country is in for a whole lot of shit when so many people are so easily manipulated.  I don't even know if "manipulation" is the right word anymore.  It's more that they only want fairytales that match their predetermined viewpoint.  Anything that doesn't match it is thrown away as untrustworthy.

[BootmanLA]

2 hours ago, TheSRQDude said:

It started, as @SeanBrah originally said, as a "fetish". Please see below.

If someone had asked "Anyone into BernieBros?" or "Anyone else here a Clinton stan?" that would have been just as political as the original post.

To refresh people's memories, which may be faulty, he asked "is anyone else infatuated with MAGA bros?"

LITERALLY, the only thing he used to define the group was their political affiliation with Donald Trump. Seriously? You think that's an apolitical question?

Now, I get that he may have poorly phrased his initial post. I kind of doubt it, He didn't go on to say "I mean the kind of guy that...." or "You know, men with X or Y or Z characteristic" - Just that he was a "fuckin slave" to MAGA bros.

I honestly don't see how anyone with the ability to read can see this as anything BUT a political discussion - and more importantly, there's nothing WRONG with a political discussion.

But to whine and bitch and moan that a topic created specifically with the NAME OF A POLITICAL MOVEMENT as the defining characteristic of a fetish - and to be shocked that ermahgahd some people actually think he means MAGA when clearly he just said MAGA, can't  you read the difference - wasn't "political" until the non-MAGAS weighed in, is just too fucking twee for my senses. There is not an eyeroll emoji on the internet large enough for me to express my contempt of that notion.

[Guest]

On 6/11/2022 at 8:12 AM, SeanBrah said:

Holy shit, yall need to fuckin relax. You literally could've said nothing. The response to this is borderline insanity. Here's some advice:
"I like this?" Respond, interact, find mutuals.
"I don't like this" Say no, I do not like this and MOVE ON WITH YOUR LIFE.
Absolutely nothing about this post has to do with your beliefs, or mine for that matter. It was about a certain aesthetic. The fact that you have to be told the difference is disturbing. Work on yourself.

For a submissive bottom who finds dominant male attractive you've got a big mouth on you boy, when facing criticism from your elders and - may I say this - more experienced betters. 😈
In short: this is what happens and the only thing you can do is learn from it. Trying to change other people and how they choose to react is a dead-end.

Hmu in private if you are interested in having me explain this with the use of a pair of handcuffs and a paddle on ur ass.

With you in said position we can also discuss ur attraction to aforementioned group of guys if you like.

Ave Satanas!

[Guest]

On 6/13/2022 at 7:18 AM, SeanBrah said:

on a site where there are stories about stealthing straight men, THIS is what caused people to be upset.

As I grasp it, these stories might be found in parts of the site labeled 'FICTION'.

As for your defensive response to receiving criticism:
It's childish to lash out like this.
You're very young - having become entitled to vote not that long ago - so I feel you only earned this mild slap on the wrist, for now.

I suggest you take your own advise:
Just post new stuff in the appropriate sections of this website of our barebacking community, enjoy those threads, the other subjects you're into, the whole of this website and your life and all that it has to offer;
And move on.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

If someone had asked "Anyone into BernieBros?" or "Anyone else here a Clinton stan?" that would have been just as political as the original post.

To refresh people's memories, which may be faulty, he asked "is anyone else infatuated with MAGA bros?"

LITERALLY, the only thing he used to define the group was their political affiliation with Donald Trump. Seriously? You think that's an apolitical question?

Now, I get that he may have poorly phrased his initial post. I kind of doubt it, He didn't go on to say "I mean the kind of guy that...." or "You know, men with X or Y or Z characteristic" - Just that he was a "fuckin slave" to MAGA bros.

I honestly don't see how anyone with the ability to read can see this as anything BUT a political discussion - and more importantly, there's nothing WRONG with a political discussion.

But to whine and bitch and moan that a topic created specifically with the NAME OF A POLITICAL MOVEMENT as the defining characteristic of a fetish - and to be shocked that ermahgahd some people actually think he means MAGA when clearly he just said MAGA, can't  you read the difference - wasn't "political" until the non-MAGAS weighed in, is just too fucking twee for my senses. There is not an eyeroll emoji on the internet large enough for me to express my contempt of that notion.

I'm in full agreement with you. Would like to add that I perceive @SeanBrah as a child and when a young man acts like a brat he should be treated as a brat.

As this topic has been moved to the political sub-forum there's a question or rather a trend I'm worried about I'd like to put to you:

What the fuck is wrong with the - clearly adult - men and women in previously serious political parties like the GOP in the US, the Conservatives in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and - for that matter - the conservative-liberal Dutch party VVD who's leader serves as the Prime Minister in my own li'll neck of the woods (The Netherlands)?

Although they've never represented my political points of view it used to be possible to politely disagree.

Now it seems that these have succeeded in magnifying their power-base by catering to - bluntly put - racist, ultra-nationalist, authoritarian, anti-democratic and perhaps even fascist tendencies in the populace.

Besides your own insights, I'd like to ask any decent Republican and Conservative members of BZ:

Is there a way that they can influence their parties to again become faithful to the democratic values their parties were founded on?

 

What the OP might not have realised (still emerging from his infant-state) that glorifying virile and strong manhood and a sort of purity of men has always been an effective way for populist groups to gain power. Hitler's Nazi party used it as one of the methods to get into power for one. (Hold your mouth @SeanBrah, listen and you might learn something).

But all of this - including the leadership-cultus that goes with it - is not something I would have expected to happen within the classic political right or conservative movements of our Western Hemisphere.

 

Edited June 17, 2022 by Guest

[Phallarchist]

12 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

Perhaps if the original sex question hadn't included partisan blather in its formulation, the thread might have remained all about sex and it might have stayed in the general forum.

On a sex forum, political excreta shouldn't be allowed to pollute erotic content. If anything, the off-topic responses should be flushed out into a separate topic in whatever irrelevant garbage-pail section is appropriate. Of course, there are already countless such collections of identical opinions, and it would no doubt would be frustrating for people whose primary kink is delivering lectures to boys who get clit-hard over doughy dimwits in red hats. It would be much better for these misguided faglets to dedicate themselves to acquiring the latest pox or getting castrated—by a Democrat, of course.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Phallarchist said:

people whose primary kink is delivering lectures to boys who get clit-hard over doughy dimwits in red hats

I plead guilty as charged and throw myself at the mercy of this court.

[hntnhole]

2 hours ago, Phallarchist said:

On a sex forum, political excreta shouldn't be allowed to pollute erotic content. If anything, the off-topic responses should be flushed out into a separate topic in whatever irrelevant garbage-pail section is appropriate. Of course, there are already countless such collections of identical opinions, and it would no doubt would be frustrating for people whose primary kink is delivering lectures to boys who get clit-hard over doughy dimwits in red hats. It would be much better for these misguided faglets to dedicate themselves to acquiring the latest pox or getting castrated—by a Democrat, of course.

What a deliciously irreverent post first thing in the morning !!!  Thanks for the "a laugh a line" submission - makes my day.  😁

[BlackDude]

I believe this post got the reaction that was intended. 
 

 

[BannedWord]

4 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

Besides your own insights, I'd like to ask any decent Republican and Conservative members of BZ:

Is there a way that they can influence their parties to again become faithful to the democratic values their parties were founded on?

Conservative (small-c) - I'm to the right of most people here. I accept that. Pretty sure I'm not 'fuckable' to most here if I even say I'm conservative, and that's cool too (I probably wouldn't want to fuck them either if I knew that side of them, so it plays both ways).

So I've been a local activist as well. My perspective from that experience to accomplish what you're asking:

1. Do your research. Determine what represents your views, your community's. Educate yourself on issues and facts.
2. Ask questions. Demand answers and accountability. If they try to deflect your question, point out their deflections.
3. Support those who represent those views. Grass roots efforts work, I've done it before for a local candidate going up against a very Trump-like blow-hard (we won).
4. Vote. Get others to vote. Talk about your candidate but not to push down another as if "you're an idiot for supporting so-and-so". That only gets the vitriol started.

That's what worked for us, and it brought a lot of good people around and made them recognize their votes mattered. Oh, rooting out corruption in the political systems is always a good thing. I mentioned in another post that I brought a class-action against a Board of Elections to ensure transparency and fair voting (many precincts only had 60% of ballots while others had 102%, and we brought close to 90% of registered voters to the polls, so chaos ensued). Suing a County isn't easy and many of us took a lot of grief over it, but the result mattered and we got everything we wanted when we settled. I'm putting all of those out there as background so y'all don't think I'm some right-wing nutcase trying to convince you to to abandon your own beliefs. I'm a realist, and those of us who did all of this ranged from staunch conservatives to Sanders-type Democrats. We did what mattered.

I'll respectfully ask this. What's wrong with asking everyone to be more civil, regardless of political leaning? Serious question. I really don't care if you're liberal, progressive, moderate, conservative, MAGA, socialist or communist. When someone denigrates another's rights to their views, no matter how incorrect you think they are, they're no better than those they denigrate. We all need to be more civil toward each other.