How Homosexual Athletes Are Ruining Sports

Formerly retired NBA player Jason Collins recently returned to action against the Los Angeles Lakers this week, to the tune of eleven minutes played, five personal fouls, and zero points. 

I stand 5’9, and even I could put up a stat line like that in the NBA.

Realistically, it should have just been another day in the life of a mediocre, bench-warming NBA player.  Instead, Collins’ debuts made the headlines of just about every major media outlet, and he even impressed the president of the United States with his outstanding courage.  Courage for what, you say?

Being a homosexual.

Yeah, what a real hero.  Do you think Obama gives a personal call to all soldiers who demonstrate bravery on the battlefield?  I doubt it.

Collins’ return to the NBA (his announcement on his sexuality was announced last year) came shortly after NFL prospect Michael Sam recently came out of the closet, making him the first potential openly gay NFL athlete.  Guess who praised him for his outstanding courage, as well?  None other than the first lady Michelle Obama herself:

— FLOTUS (@FLOTUS) February 10, 2014

Truthfully, I could care less about whether these two men prefer other men or women.  The fact of the matter is, their “courage and bravery” is poised to send American sports, and as a direct result, the American culture, further down the left-ward path.


The gridirons and hardwood floors of the NBA and NFL have always been a place of blood, sweat, and tears.

On the gridiron, Michael Sam, who has not taken a single snap in the NFL, has turned the NFL, ESPN, and all sports media outlets into his personal circus since his coming-out announcement.  LGBT activists are overjoyed at the announcement, thinking he will be a symbol of courage, as an inspiration to the future’s gay in-the-closet athletes who fear being judged in the harsh confines of the locker room by their fellow, pussy-juggling teammates.

In reality, Michael Sam is simply the first drop of poison in entering the NFL system, and it will continue to spread.  What people are failing to realize is that locker rooms are not at all politically correct.  Players do not censor themselves like we are forced to do in the corporate world.  While homosexuality has been gaining acceptance momentum in society as a whole, the locker room is a vastly different animal.

You see, locker rooms are one of the last true places that contain only, or close to only men.  It is a place where men are free to make all of the crude jokes they want; where they are free to bond together as males without fear of outside judgment.  Of course, Sam claims the people making these jokes are simply uneducated:

“I’ve been in locker rooms where all kinds of slurs have been said,” Sam said. “I don’t think anyone means it. They might be naive and uneducated but as time goes on everyone will adapt.”

Of course, he then goes on to say, “I just wish you guys will see me as Michael Sam the football player instead of Michael Sam the gay football player,” while sporting a rainbow-colored ‘Stand with Sam’ pin around his neck.

I don’t know what the hell one would expect if you make turn your coming-out announcement into a national media party, but since you’ve been hyped as the first openly gay NFL player, it is only natural that people are going to see you as “the gay football player.”  While Sam may have the support of the LGBT communities, more than likely he will simply be viewed as the odd one out in the NFL locker rooms, no matter how politically correct his teammates are to the media about the situation.

If Sam truly cared about being an effective football player in the NFL, he would have simply separated business from pleasure.  When Super Bowl winning quarterback for the Green Bay Packers, Aaron Rodgers, was rumored to be gay last year, he put an end to those rumors.  However, even if he had been gay, then up to that point, he had been living his life as a model homosexual.  His respect from his NFL peers would have remained intact, for keeping his personal life and exploits under wraps, and focusing on the task at hand, playing football.

Michael Sam, on the other hand, wanted to be famous.


Turning our attention to the hardwood basketball courts of the NBA, it’s easy to see what Jason Collins’ agenda was.  Apparently, he got so much publicity he’s been unable to set aside time for his former fiancé, former WNBA player Carolyn Moos, whom he was with for eight years:

A month before I was set to marry the man I loved, he called off the wedding. I had no idea why. He and I had been together for eight years. We had planned to have children, build a family. Nearly four years later, I got my answer. My former fiancé, Jason Collins, a pro basketball player with the Washington Wizards, announced last spring in Sports Illustrated that he is gay.

He didn’t even have the decency to tell her the article was running, or set aside any time to talk to her about it since then.  Sure, he may be courageous for being the first man in the four major American sports to come out of the closet, but he is also a coward whom walked out on the woman he was engaged to with nay an explanation.

I’d be the first to tell you that if you break up with a girl, you don’t owe her any closure.  However, if she is going to have the mainstream media knocking down her door, and she never really wronged you (and from all accounts, it doesn’t seem she did), then some explanation is in order.  The fact that he didnot taken the time to make a phone call to her and give her some answers shows he was too busy relishing in his new fame.

He wanted another shot at an NBA contract (imagine the backlash if he had never been signed again), and the chance to make more money than any retired NBA average player.

Some hero.

Gay rights activists want homosexuality to be viewed not only as acceptable, but natural.  They want to push gay propaganda on to children, and they will throw fits if they are not allowed to do so.  They are supporting athletes like Collins and Sam simply because of the publicity it brings to their movement.  It used to be that homosexuals wanted to be able to come out to their families and close friends.  Fair enough.  Then, they wanted the same rights as married male/female relationships.  They have been successful in getting those rights as well.  However, it’s still not enough.

No longer is it enough for homosexuals to be given equal opportunity and not be hated.  No, now they want to poison the entire nation, and that starts by hitting the sectors of culture that have been dominated by the masculine up to this point.

The selfish, diva-like actions of Sam and Collins have flung open the closet doors for all current and future American sports athletes.  Soon, the Vegas bookies will cease to bet about covering the spread, and instead ask people to place bets on the over and under about whether a player likes to take it up the ass.  Rather than beer being sold at sporting events, you will pay $20 for an appletini.

Say goodbye to the blood, sweat, and tears of the American sporting world.  They might as well dub it Project Runway.  You can blame the homosexual athletes like Collins and Sam for ruining sports, as they have injected the culture with poison, killing off one of the final forms of pure masculinity supported by the American public.

As of now, there is no antidote.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read More: America Is Becoming A Homosexual Nation

407 thoughts on “How Homosexual Athletes Are Ruining Sports”

  1. Michael Sam was going to be outed and had no choice, he tried to put a lid on it because he knew his draft status would take a hit, but he had former lovers and text messages about to come out. He took his agents advice and tried to get in front of the situation. It is fucked up because he was average until his senior year when he won all those SEC awards and became a legitimate NFL prospect , and his past came and bit him right in the ass ( no pun intended). Before this year he was reckless with his private life because he was a CFL prospect at best, then he had a kick ass senior year and ex boyfriends came out of the woodwork, harsh realm.

    1. i’m extremely curious if he’ll be drafted. i know every GM toes the line with the same routine – “he’s a good player, if we get to a point where talent meets value we’ll pick him” etc etc, but i really wonder how much of that is honest truth and how much is not wanting to create a PR shitstorm by admitting his value as a player, big or small, is 100% not worth the headaches. my personal bet is he won’t be drafted. i cannot fucking wait for may to roll around!

      1. I would not draft him. I am not a homophobe but you don’t bring that kind of discord into the locker room. See Terrell Owens for more examples of a toxic presence not worth the trouble. Or draft him last round then cut him, or free agent him then cut him like Tebow so it appears you gave him a chance. If I am the GM he is not worth the risk.

        1. Can’t be worse than the murderes, gf beaters, and DWI players they have in the locker rooms as is

        2. Actually it is. the only thing worse would be a child molester or a person who gambled against his own team. This is football after all. I have friends that played div 1 ball that beat the shit out of their girlfriends, killed a dude and got DUIs ,some all three, and it was not an issue. Truthfully some were gay , they would not admit it but they were, and that would have been an issue. A big fucking issue.

        3. I agree – but note you can be homosexual and also a murderer, BF beater or DWI/ druggie. These are not mutually exclusive concepts. .

        4. Well, if the murderers and gf beaters announced that they were going to murder or beat their gf’s on the news media prior to draft, I wouldn’t draft them either. Same reason, huge headache.

        5. I would draft him, instant ticket sales. The oh no, I don’t want him to see my wee-wee in the shower types will just have to get over it.
          I bet these idiots think that is he going to hit on them in the locker room.
          Lol, these grown ass men are petrified at the thought of having another man in their vicinity, because of his sexual habits. Sounds very masculine to me.

        6. So you’re all for men joining in the showers of women athletes, right? Don’t get me wrong, that would be rockin’ cool, since why would women object after all, unless they’re idiots that think men are going to hit on them in the locker room, right?

        7. So this is the truth, huh?
          We can put up curtains and dividers for you buddy. Or if it really bothers you that much, we can have a separate bathroom for you. Then would you finally stop talking about this.
          On another note, have you ever had a girl you didn’t find attractive come up and try to hit on you. Oh the horror, let’s discuss this everyday in church, on tv, etc. now. You would probably try and bash this guys head in huh, the question is why. If an ugly girl comes up to you and hits in you, no problem, but if a gay guy does it, you are somehow emasculated?
          It’s pathetic dude, grow up.
          Oh ya, and there are coed bathrooms in air of college dorms now. Oh the horror.

        8. Curtains would be an appropriate answer actually.
          The rest of your post was ad hominem. You seem to have little else. By its nature ad hominem is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Disregarded.

        9. Right on the money, there. The media turns a blind eye if the person doing those things happens to be gay. Doesn’t fit their heroic, courageous construct.

        10. It’s irrelevant to question why you are so against homosexuality, or a gay guy hitting on you. I think trying to get at the root of your problem with this man is very relevant.
          Also you do not appear to be intelligent or logical just because you use the phrase ad hominem.

        11. Oh, tuck in your vagina. The problem isn’t, “Oh no, teh gayz are in the locker room!” If the guy could refrain from running around the locker room with a raging hard-on for his whole career (which is now over), it shouldn’t be an issue now. The problem is that all these accolades are being dumped on these guys JUST because they’re gay.
          I realize pro sports are big business, but truthfully this will hurt pro sports in the long run. No way should a talentless hack be given a contract just because he’s a pecker-puffer. The league(s) will continue to push this crap and people will continue to lose interest in the game as a result. That’s really a damn shame.

        12. ” I have friends that played div 1 ball that beat the shit out of their
          girlfriends, killed a dude and got DUIs ,some all three, and it was not
          an issue.”
          So sociopathic cruelty and murder are A-OK but having sex with a boyfriend isn’t?
          If his coming out facilitates reflection on such a toxic culture then this is a great thing.

        13. What accolades? So the real issue is you are jealous? This doesn’t make you look any better buddy.
          Also he is considered a legitimate nfl draft prospect dog, that is why his agent told him to speak.
          One day I am going to figure this one out. I find it fascinating that so many people have such a strong reaction to this issue.

        14. I’m not a professional athlete, so I have no reason to be jealous. Jealousy is mostly confined within a group of peers and/or rivals. There are probably some athletes that are much better than Collins who resent his unearned celebrity status. Merit in sports is earned through performance on the field or court, not the bedroom. Further, I don’t give a flying fuck how “I look”. I don’t post shit on here to get “likes”.
          What accolades? Lol, come on dude. If the president and first lady call you up to tell you how courageous and awesome you are for coming out of the closet, Nike gives you a shoe deal when they never have previously, you become an overnight media darling, the league pressures teams to sign you to ANY contract so that “history can be made” when based on your merit alone, you’d be done. Google “accolades” if you need a definition.
          It’s not that difficult to understand. The goddamn horse has been dead for months, and they won’t quit beating it. You should be able to wrap your head around that. After all, I’m sure you’ve had plenty of practice.

        15. Is everything ad hominem to you? He’s actually making good points. I suppose that’s how you respond to good points, right? By calling them ad hominem.

        16. False. He’s attempting to personalize the argument and bring my personal person under attack in order to deflect from the conversation. Those may be “good points” to a leftist, but they’re bad debate technique and not worthy of reply.
          So now you know.

        17. But you never address the point he’s trying to make. Throw the personal attack aside, you never addressed the point.

        18. So if you are not jealous, why are you talking about the accolades? It defies logic, you still can’t explain what your problem is with this man.
          I suggest you are afraid you will be emasculated by showering with this man, you say that’s not it, it’s the accolades.
          Then I say oh it’s the accolades and you are jealous, you say that’s not it.
          So tell me, what is your problem with this man?
          Then you suggest I am gay because I support this man in his desire to be himself. Dude, I would do, and have done the same for you.

        19. “Merit in sports is earned through performance on the field or court, not the bedroom.”
          You’re obviously a retard, so I’ll repeat myself once more.
          My problem with this situation is not a gay man playing sports. It’s that he’s famous for being gay, which has nothing to do with the game.
          You are the one who is being illogical, but that just goes along with stupidity. GTFO.

        20. He is famous for being gay? As to why that would bother anybody if they weren’t jealous is beyond me, you can rationalize it all you want. Sounds like a first world problem to me.
          Also are you an nfl scout? Because the scouts are the ones projecting him as an nfl starter. I think I will take their opinion over yours buddy
          You do realize he was SEC defensive player of the year right? Do you know what that means. I watch a lot of football and I am going to go ahead and tell you that the SEC defensive player of the year is definitely going to get a look form the nfl.

        21. You’re talking about Michael Sam. I was talking about Jason Collins, who is more famous for being gay than anything else. Obfuscation isn’t going to win you any arguments.

        22. Eh, drafting a murderer doesn’t do well for publicity. Drafting a gay player guarantees cash flow off any gay person who likes sports. It’s a taboo situation for the time being that is great from a business aspect right now.

        23. Lol, you are definitely keeping us in the lead.
          Femeez – you be losin’!

        24. Keep smashing her until she finally realizes she is empty and has nothing of substance to argue.
          Lady, he fucked you up…. bye bye now

        25. That’s because y’alls, “point” is based in a personal attack. There is no reply other than to walk away or smash you. Since this is the interwebs, the latter is being attempted… coupled with educating y’all as to why your baseless posts aren’t worth tending to.
          If y’all would like to discuss the Lefts’ need to attempt queer Normalization for White countries then by all means, otherwise…. leave the discussion to the men.

      2. He is too small to play 4-3 DE, and too slow to play 3-4 OLB. I doubt he goes before the 4th round, as he is nothing more than a situational pass rusher.

    2. Who cares if he got ‘exposed’ though? All he really has to do in that situation is say ‘yeah I’m gay, so what? it’s not a big deal. If you have any football questions fine, I’m not answering anything else.’ And then from then on refuse to answer any questions about being gay to the point of walking out of interviews and so forth. Going and making a big show of it in the NYT is attention whoring basically.

      1. You are not being realistic, this is the NFL. If it was not for the text messages and multiple ex boyfriends about to out him his best option would have been to get engaged to some woman, have kids with some woman, or hide behind a fundamentalist christian front and ride out his career and come out in retirement. We all know that there are at least 5 active gay NFL players, they just knew they were going to the NFL early enough to not be reckless with their sex lives in college and leave a trail of text messages and sexting pics prior to being drafted. In Sam’s defense aside from his initial coming out he has kept it about football. He was not in Indianapolis with a rainbow flag or anything.

        1. Sure it’s realistic. It would actually be refreshing if he had taken a page from Charles Barkley.
          “I am not a symbol for anyone’s agenda. I am a professional athlete who happens to like to fuck dudes. Stick to asking me questions about the game or piss off.”
          All it takes is a set of balls.

        2. Dude, the NFL locker room is not the place to test new social boundaries when it comes to sexuality, it is not a liberal bastion of tolerance.

        3. ” If it was not for the text messages and multiple ex boyfriends about to
          out him his best option would have been to get engaged to some woman,
          have kids with some woman”
          Really? You consider pretending to be heteo and putting a wife and childrens’ lives at risk (because downlow men do NOT refrain from gay sex just because they marry a woman) to be a viable “option”?!?!
          “or hide behind a fundamentalist christian
          front and ride out his career and come out in retirement.”
          This is only slightly better (because a family’s health is not put at risk) but still dishonest and, yes, cowardly.

    3. Collin’s announcement seemed a little peculiar because of the timing. However, why are we mad at the players instead of the media? The media is overhyping it. If the media would just treat this as a “so what?” situation then we could just get back to sports, but obviously there is no money in the philosophy. The media only gives a damn because running these stories only fattens their pockets.

    4. There’s more to it than a forced outing. The mainstream’s goal is the emasculation of American men. First target black men by insinuating that most are secretly gay then hype any black homosexual outings. The video below is part of that trend. First black men are targeted then white men.

  2. i think we have bigger things to worry about than gay athletes. who the hell cares? oh yeah, he didn’t recover that fumble cause his butt is sore from the pounding he took last night. whooptie fucking doo. now could we maybe get back to self-improvement, game and travelling? seems like a better use of our collective time, i’d say.

    1. but it is a hot topic these days and if this great site gets more hits better for the authors posting here..

      1. that’s true, i’d just hate for this site to turn into “men’s health” or some other general-purpose magazine/forum/website for men. the red pill is not for the masses.

    2. If we weren’t supposed to care then the gays wouldn’t make it a point to “out” themselves at news conferences. No, they want us to care, very deeply, about their status to the point that we’re cowed and shamed from saying anything about our own preferences.
      If they didn’t care, if none of us cared, nothing would be brought up in the first place.

      1. yes exactly… what about if i want to come out as a homo bashing mother fucker… it’s far more natural and there are plenty of examples in history of hetero men, bashing up faggots…. so i’m coming out… i like bashing faggots… my freedom of expression is fair enough, i was born as a homo bashing mf, and there is nothing i can do about it… now hand me a baseball bat and point out the nearest queer bar.
        it’s perfectly natural for men to bash things.

  3. If you’re a fruitcake, you’re a fruitcake. There is no need to broadcast it, it’s nobody else’s business. All this is about is an agenda to further effeminize and homosexualize men, especially black men. Look at our population numbers. Stupid sheep don’t see what the media is doing. Honestly, some people within the last few years were perfectly ok with dating the opposite sex but now they want to be gay? Do they not question why that is, if homosexuality/lesbianism is so-called “natural”?
    Agreed on the section about Jason Collins dogging out his fiance as well.

    1. Homosexuality is natural – some people are born that way. It is documented in hundreds of animal species.
      These gay athletes need to come out of the closet simply because they can’t stay in. There are too many female groupies in the mix who will spread rumors and the rest of the team and the media will find out anyway. They need to get ahead of the game and simply come out, and be honest about who they are. For this they should be commended.
      And no, it is not a media conspiracy – take the tinfoil off. If you are worried about what is happening to young black men, don’t concern yourself with the 1-2% that are gay, and do concern yourself with the 20% who are dropping out of high school, and the up to 50% in some jurisdictions who are in the criminal justice system in some capacity.

        1. fizziks is right, I could give a fuck about gay people getting married, fucking, or having a parade. NFL players however do give multiple fucks, and he will not get drafted as high as his talent would allow but for his coming out. It is a shame, but this is RoK, so it is reality. Life ain’t fair, we are all used it, hence the red pill.

        2. They make him sick because he wants a dick in his ass and he’s from a pseudo-Christian family that doesn’t believe in it.

        3. “People who fuck their siblings make me sick!”
          “Why? How does what they do or how they choose to live their lives affect you in any way?”

      1. “Homosexuality is natural – some people are born that way. It is documented in hundreds of animal species.”
        Oh here we fucking go…

        1. There are documented cases of sexual orientation change From homosexual to heterosexual functioning. The homos do get berserk over that fact

      2. No it’s not. If homosexuality is natural then a person would know they are so-called “gay” from the beginning. We wouldn’t have all these people suddenly changing orientations and then calling themselves bi, or gay. And, as humans we are held to a higher standard of conduct than animals. The lion chases the gazelle and eats him. Some animals eat their own young. Some animals eat their own crap. Should we repeat this behavior since it is “natural” to animals?
        And, this is but one of many black issues I’m concerned with, but one that happened to be relevant to the topic.

        1. @Damien: The reason you perceive people as “changing” their orientation is because coming out of the closet is traumatic. Most peoples’ friends and family would not be accepting of them being gay. So it takes them a long time to work through the issues and finally decide to come out. They spend potentially years pretending to be straight, then come out. It isn’t that they’re changed, it is that they’ve finally decided to be honest with themselves and others.

        2. Actually homosexuality in some men can have a genetic basis. This is why you have different phenotypic expressions of male sexuality running the gamut from extremely feminine gay men, masculine gay men, bisexual men, asexual men, heterosexual men that are not that into sex, heterosexual men with “normal” sex drives and Hypersexual heterosexual men. There are genetically heterosexual men that engage in homsexual behaviour (men raped, men in prison, men in the middle east,India and Africa where males are kept separate from women due to culture, male prostitutes, men molested in their youth with a gay fetish, ect.) but they are outliers. Lesbians are a different story, so I won’t get into it.

        3. If it doesn’t matter whether homosexuality is natural, why did you just argue that it was UN-natural?

        4. It still makes no sense; how can a person be born gay if their parents were obviously straight? And how can it be genetic, when the gene is a dead-end and should have died out a long time ago?

        5. So you’re denying that there are people out there just jumping on the current homosexual trend since it’s the in-thing right now?

        6. It makes a lot of sense. Two non autistic parents have autistic children, two mentally healthy people cannot produce a mentally challenged child and two straight parents can easily have gay children. I explained in depth in these comments further down give it a look and tell me your thoughts.

        7. Genes aren’t the be all and end all – it’s not hard to find identical twins where one twin is heterosexual and the other homosexual should you care to look, and there’s various other factors at work in the development of a human being, such as environmental factors, exposure to too much or not enough of particular hormones in the womb. Obviously there is not one set template for how a human is meant to be, otherwise we’d all look the same and be intellectually equal etc.
          Plus there’s also theories that genes that increase the fertility of a particular sex might have the effect of increasing the chances of homosexuality if possessed by the opposite sex, which would obviously lead to said gene being somewhat more complicated than a dead end. Trade-offs and all that.
          Plus if being gay is a ‘fad’ it’s a fad that’s doing far better than fat acceptance in browbeating people to find things they’re not naturally attracted to sexy and alluring.

        8. And, autism most likely is not genetic. So, that doesn’t really support the argument that homosexuality is genetic.

        9. some people were ‘in’ and now they’ve come out. That’s obviously been the case for some, but do you really think that myth holds true for everyone who suddenly announced, particularly in adulthood or mid-life that they’re gay. There is a campaign going on, and there’s an incentive system in place – I don’t much like the article, but the author’s right about the kind of praise and encouragement being used to sway the situation. What worries me is that there have been demonstrably deceptive campaigns to skew our perceptions of homosexuality. For the record I don’t think its unnatural as an orientation. I think its unnatural in the way its being promoted by the left,

        10. “No it’s not. If homosexuality is natural then a person would know they are so-called “gay” from the beginning.”
          Do you know any gay people IRL? I do. And they DO know from the beginning, as far back into their childhood as they can remember. And yes, there are also people who choose it later. Both exist.

        11. A black HBDer of Jamaican descent who refers to himself as “the anti-Malcom Gladwell” has written about this;
          “Homosexuality (the “gay germ” hypothesis)
          Last year, Greg Cochran reiterated what I have called his “gay germ” hypothesis,that is, that obligate male homosexuality is caused by a pathogen, likely a virus. Through a lot of erudite discussion, and not without
          much contention – including from me – Cochran deconstructed every alternate explanation for homosexuality. Homosexuality was long an evolutionary mystery, as one would think that lack of interest in the
          opposite sex would be highly counterproductive in a Darwinian sense. Andit turns out that this is correct. Between the low concordance between identical twins (Cochran noted it as 25%; subsequent study has shown that that number is even lower, at 11%),the lack of compensatory selection, the absence of the trait in
          hunter-gatherers, Cochran was led to believe that a pathogen was only explanation (see Greg Cochran’s posts on the subject). I have come to agree, and indeed, I noted a possible connection between this pathogen and the behavioral trait of homophobia (see A Gay Germ? Is Homophobia a Clue?).Homophobia appears to be oriented towards keeping gays away from children, which may suggest a sensitive period for infection that may
          exist in childhood. Indeed, in the height of irony for the “born that way” meme about homosexuality, homophobia appears to be much more heritable, being closer to 50% heritable. Homophobes are far more “born that way” than are homosexuals (also see this recent article by Sean
          Thomas: Homosexuality is natural. Fine. But what if homophobia is natural, too?)”



        12. Your stupidity also has a genetic basis. You will never realize how fuckin’ stupid you are because that would go against your nature.

        13. Two freaky parents can have a freaky son. I mean, you may be an exception, but this is almost a natural law.

        14. Your being an asshole is not genetic, it is a choice you made and the result of shitty parenting. Choose better asshole, and fight your shitty upbringing.
          See, me talking shit to you about your dickishness choice, unlike most male homosexual behavior. I could have said something intelligent but that would not be as fun as pointing out that you are an asshole and your parents could have done better.

      3. Natural my arse. Homosexuality is an aberration in the natural kingdom akin to puppies born with two heads or things like that. If that were the case, mammals would be hermaphrodite, the only way in which homosexuality is natural…

        1. Why would you even say that? What is so terribly evil about being gay? It shouldn’t even matter whether the person is gay, bi or heterosexual, as long as their sexual preference is with adult people who want to have sex with them. That’s all. There is no other right or wrong.
          Coming out as being gay is different in America than where I come from. I don’t believe it’s easy, especially when some people dislike homosexuality. Most religions have traditional values that judge homosexuality as a sin and these religions are still huge enough to make a difference. Here in the Netherlands we accept bi- and homosexuality in such a way that it doesn’t really matter what your sexuality is, as long as it’s consensual and healthy. Guess who go out of their way to hurt people? Homophobes.
          Change is good. Change hurts. Traditions are important for those who grew up with them. The only way to judge a situation is by looking at what is happening right now. Does pedophilia seem like a good thing right now? No. Not to me and hopefully not to anyone. So outlaw it.
          This “natural” talk is hopeless. There are examples for bith sides and arguments that come down to gut feeling more than anything. If you really think that humanity is better off without homosexuality, than prove it to me.
          Personally, not having children isn’t bad about homosexuality. There’s enough of us consuming the world already, so I can get used to a few less fertile marriages.

      4. “Homosexuality is natural – some people are born that way. It is documented in hundreds of animal species.”
        Logic fail.
        Birth defects happen in all species.
        Birth defects are not the natural state of birth for any species, else species wouldn’t survive. Defects are the exception, the exception does not make up the rule.
        Serial murderers are born in “nature”, but they are “natural” in no other aspect. In the general human population they are the thin percentage of a percentage of a percentage, else we’d be dead as a species, having murdered each other long ago.
        “Natural” means more than “occurs in nature”. Most people (correctly) use it to describe “normal”. Homosexuality is not normal, it’s an abnormality that is contained to 1%-3% of the human population.
        I think the point about homosexuality being an “in your face” thing is valid, there is a clear push seen by anybody with eyes to normalize homosexuality, which utilizes very totalitarian methods to get this point across.
        The “coming out” was not courageous. He wanted to ensure that he got picked, and now of any time in history is the time for a homosexual to get anything he/she wants simply by outing himself and then daring others to not give him what he wants. This is the world we live in, and enabling these scheming, twisted pricks by giving them a falsely earned label of courage is simple idiocy.
        Courage is bravery in the face of adversity. There is no adversity to being gay these days, there is no stigma to being gay, coming “out” these days is a ho hum affair at best. It was a PR stunt and look, it sure worked on you didn’t it?

        1. He was going to be outed, he had no choice but to come out. He went from a early second round pick before coming out, to possibly undrafted free agent post coming out. I kind of feel sorry for him, he really had no control over the situation and he had such a good year in the SEC.

        2. That’s a much more rational stand to take than “he’s so courageous!” and other enabling simpering most do. If it’s a matter of logic and shooting down a potential obstacle, fine. His “fans” however are attempting to make a non-heroic act into something akin to the trials of Odysseus.

        3. If it was a genetic defect, we would expect 100% of identical twins to have the same sexual preferences. Likewise, 100% of identical twins should either be or not be serial killers.
          Obviously neither is the case. Both are heavily influenced by environmental factors.

        4. Kinsey said homosexuals are 10% of the population, whilst other studies recently suggested 19%. That’s a lot more than I thought it would be.
          The above studies don’t include bi-sexuality, which is a further 2% of the population.

        5. The Kinsey pronouncement was shown as demonstrably flawed long, long ago. Other studies suffer from the same exact bias, without the excuse of being ignorant of accurate methods of good statistics gathering.
          It’s 1-3% homosexual, combined for both genders.

        6. So you don’t find it ironic that you are posting under a pseudonym on a website because you don’t want people to associate you with your comments…but this man announcing to the world that he identifies with a group that is vilified, for which he could be beaten, fired or otherwise discriminated against is not heroic?
          I would say it takes courage, much more courage than you are displaying Ghost of Jefferson.

        7. More ad hominem. If you can’t argue the facts, attack the debate opponent personally instead of the argument. It’s a logical fallacy for a reason Lg, hence it’s irrelevant. You need this to be personal to turn it into an emotional pissing contest. I will give you no such return.

        8. I would think there’d be more bisexuals than homosexuals.
          In South Asia and the Middle East where marriages are arranged and social segregation of the sexes is normal, many young men and women often have sexual encounters with each other until they get married to the opposite sex. Its not considered gay. This was also common in the traditional English boarding school culture and probably still is to some extent, perhaps even more.

        9. In Middle East and South Asia, where marriages are arranged, and virginity is still valued, many modern young men and women DO have sexual encounters before marriage – but up the ass.
          A lot of Middle Eastern women do that (heterosexual anal sex)to protect their virginity. A lot of women of Middle Eastern/North African descent in Europe (especially France) also practice anal sex before marriage to keep their hymens intact. In North Africa, a lot of Middle Eastern or North African women travel to Morocco for cosmetic hymen restoration surgery, in case of accidental vaginal sex before marriage.
          And some of these women in that part of the world don’t even consider anal to be sex, and sex is only considered to be sex when it’s vaginal.
          The question which arises: Is heterosexual anal a form of release for bisexuality/homosexuality? Many men who practice anal with their women, often like heterosexual anal sex more to vaginal sex, and tend to be more open to bisexual encounters.

        10. Seriously? I have zero issues with gays, bis, and/or trans but there is no way it’s remotely close to 10-20% are gay or bi.

        11. Natural, adjective – existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.
          Is English your Second language?

        12. Kinsey was a menace — an aggressive, psychopathic predatorial homosexual pedophile who literally masturbated infant children. He was also a Jew, which is perhaps why “seth” is deifying the man. Wake the fuck up.

        13. this is true. I was fucking this young Turkish girl in 2005. anal was the only penetration allowed. she then went on the marry some unsuspecting douche from her country. I felt sorry for him. he thought she was an innocent untouched girl, when in fact, she was a used up slut. worse part, she use to do the same thing with a married man before I met her.

        14. What is it with equating fucking a girl in the ass with latent homosexuality? It’s fucking annoying!
          Statistically, Gay men engage in oral sex far more than anal, so by that standard should we entertain the thought that liking blow-jobs from girls makes you a fruit in denial?
          Lesbians lick each other’s boxes quite frequently, so should we give women shit and make dyke accusations for wanting their man to go down on them too?
          The only TRUE and INHERENT gay sex by technical standards is docking and scissoring; everything else is neutral.

        15. “for which he could be beaten, fired or otherwise discriminated against is not heroic?”
          Maybe if you live in the middle ages. In the 21st century however, coming out as a “homophobe” takes much more courage than coming out as a faggot.
          Considering the positive attention by the jewish media and the nig nogs in the white house, does it really seem that courageous?

        16. Perhaps you might want to re read the comments in this article. Again, I find it hilarious that this guy (and the author) don’t even want to identify themselves on a website…but the Michael Sam guy, no he is a spoiled brat deserving of nothing. What he did takes no courage at all….blah blah
          Lest you think this is a third world problem or something relegated to the past, did you see the law your cohorts tried to pass in arizona.
          And another thing, I saw the press conference for 10 mins a little while ago and that was it. I think this guy watches way too much tv.

        17. But it DOESN’T take that much courage to come out especially when people will fire you and cast you as the villain if you speak your mind. Just ask people like James Watson.

        18. Kinsey was a jooo tool. 19% is absolutely insane, there is no observable evidence of this argument. Maybe in jooo york shitty and SanFranSicko but otherwise, homos are an uncommon ABERRATION and an affront upon the Lord.

        19. I agree that Kinsey was a horrible man, but he was brought up in a Methodist home. Jews are not guilty of causing all the ills that plague the world.

      5. there may be some examples of homos in nature, both in animals and humans… HOWEVER that is a very small minority…. the rest is personal programming…. and more dangerously social programming…. it’s unfortunate that enough men have been allowed to program themselves to be gay…. but it’s a total catastrophe if everyone in society is open to being programmed and worse is actively programmed…
        and this social side is where homosexuality has become the bed follow of socialism and Marxism.
        Although it was probably wrong to persecute homos so much in history… now we are swinging the other way, so it’s more politically correct and more privileged to be homo, than to be straight and this is a massive social ERROR.

        1. “The problem being that once men switch to homo, it’s not like a couple
          of college girls playing with each other, men that start homo activities
          are homos and lose all attraction to women”
          Not true. In sexually conservative cultures found in South Asia and the Middle East, many young men engage in homo sexual behavior until they get married. This is because social segregation of the sexes, as enforced by family and culture, is the norm and facilitates the arranged marriage process.
          Many of them stop have sex with other men once they are married and can FINALLY have sex with a woman.

        2. if you can have sex with a man, you are gay. Its not because you can not have sex with a woman, and are forced to go the other route. If your a man and can insert your johnson in another mans ass, Your Gay.

        1. Penguins, Dogs, Deer, some primates. that just off the top of my head from graduate level genetics phenotypic expression courses. I am too lazy to hit google up but the info is out there. for the record I am currently in a MD/PhD program in Biotech with a focus on viral and bacterial vectors in genetics.

      6. Although homosexuality is documented within nature, exclusive homosexuality is virtually unheard of. The practice, by animals, is as masturbatory one designed to provide sexual release.
        There is a huge variation of sexual preference identified in identical twins, despite sharing the exact same genetic make up – how is this possible if some people are born that way?
        There are other environmental factors correlated with homosexuality, but I can’t be bothered to elaborate. The case is closed with the former.

      7. “Homosexuality is natural – some people are born that way. It is documented in hundreds of animal species.”
        Pedophiles can’t help themselves either. Doesn’t make either of them right. Some people are both sociopaths. Doesn’t make that right either.

      8. I’m not the most knowledgeable on animals but I would bring two things to focus.
        First, animals gauge almost everything by smell. Not which sex organs the other animal had. I would imagine this could lead to quite a few mix ups as far as who’s mounting what.
        Second, to my knowledge gay animals don’t fuck. They will simply mount each other and give a couple humps or whatever to make the other animal submit. I’m not convinced it’s sexual. It’s just a dominance ploy.
        Plus if homosexuality was a gene, it would have been lost long ago considering gays biologically cannot create offspring.
        Also I wonder, is there a gene for the Rediculous accent 90% of gay men magically acquire

        1. Actually gays can reproduce but the genetic defect is not necessarily the result of gay men reproducing. Most genetic gay men are not first born, tend to have older fathers, and are pregnancies that occur in older females. Sam is the youngest of 4 or 5 siblings if i recall correctly. Remember nutrition, infections, drugs, and hormones in utero are just as likely to lead to pathologic mutations as birth order and the age of parents. Gay people and animals have always existed and will continue to exist until biotechnology advances or the world ends.

      9. Alright, being gay is natural but it is anti-society. WTF do I mean? Well, only hetero couples make kids, and once you promote homosexuality, you have societal breakdown; in too many numerous ways to discuss in a short post. I have no problem with people being gay. I DO have a problem with homosexuality being promoted, whilst hetero couples/males are given a big F U. That’s like reverse discrimination.
        When at the age of consent, a person should be free to express their sexuality, without being shamed for it. But they shouldn’t have society and mass media ramming it down their throats FROM A YOUNG AGE that they should be gay. That’s social conditioning/brainwashing.

        1. Being gay is anti society? Gays haven’t done anywhere near the level of damage single mothers have to society.
          Do you know what cause and effect is?
          Also population is too high anyway.
          Also if not breeding is a problem, blame the women who wait until they are 35 and then get baby rabies for the low population growth. How can 10% of the male population not fucking be a problem?
          I don’t get morally offended by homophobia but most homophobes are idiots.

      10. Wrong. Identical twins would share that same gay preference right? Jason Collins’ identical twin, Jarron Collins, is not gay.

      11. So it’s a problem for female groupies to spread gay rumors but it’s not an issue when almost every sports/news outlet plasters confirmation that said player is gay all over the country??? And how much do you bargain with these females? These are the same women who will claim you have a small penis or lie about being knocked up by you when its really someone elses kid, or shes just lying to get some abortion cash out of you.
        Then you change the topic to black male dropout rates and black male incarceration. As if not having a father in the household, and hypermasculinity has nothing to do with that. Something Jason Collins, Michael Sam, and Magic Johnsons fruitcake son are all obviously suffering from. They just went in the opposite direction.
        But guess what else? Jason Collins and Michael Sam didn’t turn out much better than the same high school dropouts that got caught in the legal system. Because they’re still puppets for whites in the sports industry, and now in media. Funny how some whites bash black males for not aspiring to be more than rappers/sports stars but when the same people announce they are gay they are exempt from said criticisms.
        Maybe being a neutered black man is okay for you looking on the outside, but not for me as a black male as I live this life and I represent it.
        Liberals like you putting a microscope on our communities and coddling us with this feminist nonsense is a huge part of why our community is in the dump it’s in. All you other black ROK/MRA/MGOTW readers need to start speaking up I can’t be the only one who sees this going on.

      12. “Homosexuality is natural – some people are born that way. It is documented in hundreds of animal species.”
        That doesn’t mean it’s not abnormal or maladaptive you dumbfuck.
        Also, most of these “animal species” took it up the ass in captivity. Hardly natural.

      13. You know what else is natural? The fact that you were born as a moron. Does that make your condition desirable? Absolutely not.

      14. There hasn’t been ONE single study that has proven a genetic link that gays are “born that way”. Or is it a sexual preference (as in you have a choice)? Who knows, its all the same propaganda.
        If you believe in evolution then you’d think that after millions of years of sexual breeding and evolution you’d still have 1-2% of the population born strictly homosexual?
        I’d also be willing to bet that gays either grew up with weak/absent father figures, had been molested by men, or had low testosterone during gestation.

    2. ” All this is about is an agenda to further effeminize and homosexualize men, especially black men”
      I’ve seen the videos about the agenda to exterminate the Black American Male via social engineering. But Damien I’ve also seen your comments here and if you were genuinely concerned about it, you would not be “going your own way” but seeking out a black woman to marry (Black Love!) and have lots of black male babies with to ensure your perpetuation into the future.
      Instead you are opting for Darwinian failure.

  4. I wonder whether these pieces that criticize these athletes are actually that naive or deliberately obfuscating.
    The fact is that women throw themselves at professional, college, and even high school footballers and basketballers. Word would get around to the rest of the team and the college or town extremely quickly if one teammate was not availing himself of these opportunities. For this reason, remaining discretely in the closet, as you seem to want them to do, is simply NOT an option for these guys.
    Do you not understand that? Do you not understand that these guys could not keep it to themselves in the closet? Not without engaging in an exhausting full-time coverup PR operation, anyway. So they have to come out in public, if they want to lead something approaching a normal life.
    They are not rubbing your face in their homosexuality, they are doing what they have to do to get on with their life and continue to play sports. And yes, in the context of being on a team full of enormous men, some of whom may be homophobic, it IS courageous for them to come out of the closet. Collins and Sam are brave for what they have done and should be commended.

    1. Collins waited till he was washed up to come out and is in the NBA which is different than the NFL. Sam was going to be exposed and was too careless prior to becoming a prospect because he was a “late bloomer” in term of talent. Had Sam known he would be a prospect 3 years ago he would still be in the closet. The NFL is a different world than any other team sport, Kordell Stewart knew this and stayed in the closet. The amount of pussy he turned down was crazy, everyone knows Kordell is gay yet he never comes out, and he is retired.

  5. Most of you are a bunch of fucking Homophobes.
    I love pussy, and I even love anal sex. I love shoving my dick in a new pussy as many times as I can. If a guy has a genetic predeposition, with phenotypical expressions of those genes that encourage him to want to stick his dick in some guys ass, a guy who is willing, btw, then by all means, so be it. It just means I get that much more pussy.
    This article disgusts me, makes me want to puke. I don’t see @truthfultrouble writing about Ben fucking rapemoreberger, or Michael Fucking Vick for dog fighting and brandishing weapons, or Pacman Jones… The list goes on and on:
    So a guy, who is a lot bigger, and a lot better than you (Yes, Jason Collins would kick your fucking ass and slam down your throat) is gay, and god forbid, he announces it. Big Fucking Deal.
    What I would like to see if Jason Collins dick shoved down your throat… studies show guys like @truthfultrouble are actually turned on by gay porn more than a non-homophobe…
    You people disgust me.

    1. the problem is not that he’s a homo or that he announces it…
      the problem is the social privilege that homos demand…

      1. I agree Ray. The whole notion of equality, with some being more equal than others through legislation, is disgusting. As it stand, every human being in America is part of a protect class excluding the white heterosexual male.

        1. The social privilege of NOT BEING DISCRIMINATED against?
          You don’t happen to belong to the KKK, do you?
          Every man is created equal, except those that you don’t agree with, aren’t the same color as you, like guys instead of girls, or go to a different church.

        2. No, I am saying legal protections against discrimination are already in place via the constitution. We don’t need additional laws defining the rights of each group of citizens. The constitution covers it. I never said any of the things that you seem to believe that I did.

        3. Michael Sams came out last august 2013 to his teammates and everyone in MU new his sexual orientation. The real story is that it was never a big deal…

        4. In Santa Fe NM a man refused to photo a gay wedding on religious grounds. Was fined and sanctioned. This is where this gay stuff is going….

      2. if we stop writing stories about it and bringing it into the spotlight as something special it takes the power out of “outings” and just it means nothing other then…nothing. you’re gay..big deal..move along no special privilege but everybody keeps writing articles like this to dramatize it which is what they want

  6. Oh no, somebody call a wambulance. Do you realize your incessant fascination and whining is why Michael Sam had to come out. Way to play the victim.
    He realized that if he didn’t come out, he would be outed, followed around and questioned incessantly. You know why, because you conservative types just can’t stop talking about homos. Do you think it is left wing types that are fascinated, no, they have already moved on.
    I watched his press conference last weekend, he was asked if he wanted to be a trailblazer, he replied no, I just want to be Michael Sam. In fact he seemed like a very mature, collected young man. I support this mans right to work, free of harassment and questioning, period, point blank.
    You know if you hate the gays so much, why are you constantly talking about them? You would think it would be a waste of time.

    1. Not to pick a nit, but nobody was talking about him or “homos” until he brought up the topic.
      It is precisely the left which is fascinated with it, they can’t stop running around proclaiming their “tolerance” of everything except normal people. If they aren’t focused on race, they’re focused on sexual orientation. They scream at the top of their lungs in our faces, then when we answer their shrill screaming suddenly we’re the ones “obsessed”.
      Get a better line of logic kid, yours is full of fail.
      “I support this mans right to work, free of harassment and questioning, period, point blank.”
      There is no such right. For anybody. Period. Point blank.

      1. I am not left wing btw, but I do support their rights. People like me are not the ones who are scared of showering with homosexuals, people like you are, that is why this is an issue.
        If you want to support people harassing others at work because of their personal choices, go right ahead. I support personal freedom, and a general mind your own fucking business mentality. But more power to you.
        Oh ya and I hope it happens to you bro. One day somebody is going to deny you a job because of “xyz” and I will be laughing at it, because you are a contributor to the problem.

        1. “I am not left wing btw, but I do support their rights. People like me are not the ones who are scared of showering with homosexuals, people like you are, that is why this is an issue. ”
          Projection, ad hominem. Disregarded.
          “If you want to support people harassing others at work because of their personal choices, go right ahead. I support personal freedom, and ageneral mind your own fucking business mentality. But more power to
          you. ”
          I do support the right of employers to allow any behavior they wish in their workplace that do not violate natural rights found in the BOR. Thanks for your allowance of my rights.
          “Oh ya and I hope it happens to you bro. One day somebody is going to deny you a job because if “xyz” and I will be laughing at it, because you are a contributor to the problem.”
          Of course you would, you are after all, despite denials, a leftist. Vengeance against those who do not kowtow to your political demands is part and parcel part of being on the left. You live for dogma enforcement after all.
          That said, more ad hominem, ergo, disregarded as pertinent to the topic at hand. Try harder to be rational or expect to be ignored. Strike that, be ignored since it’s clear by your other posts you have nothing to contribute but snark, sneers and ad hominem.

        2. News flash, supporting an issues in tandem with the left wing, does not make you left wing.
          The employer supports this man, so if they say he shouldn’t be harassed, guess what, the players must kowtow or quit.
          I do not wish that you would be denied a job because of your beliefs, I hope that you are denied a job because you are making it more difficult for others to go to theirs. Then you will develop empathy for this man.

  7. Most teams won’t hire an “out and proud” player because you just KNOW he’s gonna scream “homophobia” if you decide to drop him. The only team for which a gay player would be a rational choice would be one in a metro area with a very large gay population; keep him on the bench as a mascot until he gets too fat to move.

      1. More likely San Francisco will get him, and next year the NFL will force them to rename the team “The 69ers”. “49ers” will be deemed an offensive name, due to being a masculinist construct.

  8. One problem is that the sports media is composed of journalists who passed through the same brainwashing academies that members of the mainstream news outlets did, and are thus predisposed to the same kind of social justice salivation over the prospects of victimhood, imaginary barriers, and the deconstruction of institutions. Much like the mainstream press wants, and aids in the transformation of society to something more their liking, so too do these sports reporters wish to see the transformation of sport into a model more in line with their worldview. I’m sure it incenses them that they can not reconcile their love of sports with their political beliefs, so like any other American leftists twats, they need to reorder everything else so they can feel comfortable.

  9. I’m more concerned about how gay rights activists are pushing young girls to be lesbians or bi.
    This will destroy society more than a bunch of gay guys.
    Think about it. If 50% of the male population is gay, this will not affect the women ,since women go after the top 30% of guys anyways, plus older men for younger women aswell and not vice versa.
    If anything, a campaign needs to be done to make beta omega white knighting male gay…less competition for us guys…and also less annoying cockblocking .
    As much as I cannot stand homosexual stuff, gay men really do not pose a problem, but lesbian women are a threat, they are the most vehement feminists, they are the ones who can influence women not be cunts.
    ofcourse the only gay men who are a threat are those that made sex and the city…but they know where the money was so I look at that show as a brilliant business idea. That show was chick crack lie big brother was.

    1. i’m still hung on the girlie girlie thing…. on the one hand two chicks playing with each other, makes them hornier and more sexual and doesn’t automatically turn them into raging dykes with arm tattoos and motorbikes….
      they also might get along with each other and other men, better when they are having more orgasms….
      so it could actually be good for men.
      on the other hand, two girls going into a gay lifestyle and abhorring any man in their lives, well that’s two men that need to turn gay to balance it….. it’s certainly an extra barrier to an alpha male to get though…. and an extra defense mechanism for any chick to avoid being sexual with a man.

      1. Man, just finger girls and nibble or their sensitive sexual zones(the word escapes me), they get horny and kinder and feminine and sexual. I is amazing man, you can literally see the girls making a face that tells you they are wet down there. You don’t need to get a girl to lez out to achieve them to be sexual and feminine.
        Even at first I thought the girl doing the experimenting stuff was harmless, but then you have to remember, women are easily influenced, and if feminist tell them being a lesbian is better, they will listen to mother hen feminist over the alpha male.
        Ofcourse it does not hurt us men, we can get laid, but it will destroy society and cause the beta males to get even less pussy because not the girls who do not have an alpha cock will just settle for a girl, hence the gay lifestyle.
        Secondly, two beta men turning gay is far more unlikely, but should probably be encouraged more…if anything it will keep betas and omegas from suffering at the hands of women and corrupt law courts and keep them sexually satisfied so they do not rage and destroy society.
        Lesbian cohertion destroys society

        1. nah… we don’t want gay men….. beta men are weak and insecure… gay men are empowered and entitled and favor their own kind. BAD!
          the girl / girl thing is probably ok with male supervision…. it’s when it’s done with homo / les / feminist / media publicity / mother hen driving it that it’s bad and liable to get out of control.
          all of these minorities are fine, but as we can see from the black (ex-slave) population in america… the abuse is passed down from generation to generation, so that nigger boy in the hood that shot a homie last week, is like that because 300 years ago some white red neck, whipped and tortured his great great grand father….. who passed it onto his kids and their kids etc….
          so the gays and lesbians and feminists that feel down trodden and abused will tend to pass that onto future generations…. the feminist mother hen encourages young girls to go lez, because of her own suffering with men….. BAD!

        2. ” it’s when it’s done with homo / les / feminist / media publicity / mother hen driving it that it’s bad and liable to get out of control.”
          “so the gays and lesbians and feminists that feel down trodden and abused will tend to pass that onto future generations…. the feminist mother hen encourages young girls to go lez, because of her own suffering with men….. BAD!”
          But that is just it. These are the tow things happening. It is not done with male supervision. it is done with les / feminist / media publicity / mother hen driving it

      2. “that’s two men that need to turn gay to balance it….. it’s certainly an extra barrier for an alpha male to get though…. and an extra defense mechanism for any chick to avoid being sexual with a man.”
        It’s possible to pick (and hook up) with girls at gay pride parades and stuff like that. Girls that hang out with gay guys are just as DTF (if not more) than girls that don’t. If they’re straight chicks, they’re still horny and have needs. Nothing really changes

    2. Right on. Lesbians are the real problem because women are easily influenced. If a woman is really homosexual but I believe that they are so easily manipulated that with all this nonsense peer pressure to be homosexual, that’s where a lot of the young ones are going to go.

      1. All done with the les / feminist / media publicity / mother hen driving it as Ray said.
        It all starts innocently with “girls should experiment” and then escalates into something ominous.
        Also lesbian porn has a huge role to play in all this.

  10. I don’t pay much attention to all that media noise. I don’t even watch pregame shows. I just watch the games, so a gay player in a game has about as much impact on my life as a gay actor in a movie.

    1. And that’s a fair stand. However, now they’re going to ban the words “nigger” and “faggot” on the field (and likely in the locker room) so it will in fact start impacting game play. Both of those words are normal in that culture and guaranteed you’ll start seeing unspecified “unsportsmanlike conduct” penalties called with shocking regularity for a while.
      Then of course they’ll invent new words that will take time to get to the thought police, and then more word bans, etc. It will impact game play, since it’s more than about some guy coming out, it’s more akin to an attempt to purposefully change cultures. As it always has been.
      I actually agree with your statement, I’m a libertarian at heart and could give two shits about somebody’s orientation or anything other than their individual value at what they’re doing. But man, these last ten years or so, having so much stuff that has nothing to do with reality shoved down my throat by the MSM, gays and race baiters who cannot *stand* that somebody, somewhere doesn’t stand up and cheer when they fart, well, just say that it’s worn down my ability to defend stuff like this. I’m all for being whomever you wish to be, but not if it is implemented via cultural Marxism.

  11. “What people are failing to realize is that locker rooms are not at all politically correct. Players do not censor themselves like we are forced to do in the corporate world.”
    They recognize this fact quite clearly. That’s what all this is about; to leave no place left where one does not have to self censor one’s opinions to conform to PC boilerplate.

    1. Eric I gotta agree with you. The PC police will not be happy until you censor your own fucking thoughts, it is mentally exhausting keeping up with who is offended by what. The shit changes every goddamn week.

    2. Exactly. It’s much in the same vein as that judge forcing a bakery owner to make weddings cakes for homosexual couples even if it went against their religious beliefs.

    3. Eric has hit the nail on the head. This one particular player likely isn’t going by that agenda, but the huge push by leftist MSM/cultural Marxism jump on people like him as banner carriers for their cause without fail.

      1. Exactly. The ultimate goal of these people is some Orwellian fantasy world where the entire population is walking on eggshells…forever.

      2. Soviets hated gays. Your paranoia is very telling.
        Only mental cases believe in cultural Marxism.

  12. all fine and good provided the gay men shove off and use the ladies locker room…. it’s only fair.

    1. Locker and rest rooms are divided by gender (as in what tackle you have), not by who you want to fuck. A gay man is still a man. Neither the locker room or the rest room is a sexual place.

  13. Why is it always “LGBT”?
    Shouldn’t it be “BGLT” in alphabetical order so as not to imply that one victim group has higher status than another? Are lesbians more important than gays and bis?
    Because it was lesbian feminist activists (read : professional victims) that started this initiative. Gays just wanted to be left alone. The feminists tacked on G because they always want to project that they are helping everybody and to keep their fingers in the funding stream. Then, well, had to add the B for inclusion. And finally, the T to really demonstrate they were advocating for marginalized victims.

    1. Proper grammar would dictate you put the adjective first, so it should actually be GBLT. Gay Bacon Lettuce Tomato.

  14. Real men aren’t bothered by gays and aren’t so insecure that they wish gays would hide who they are to avoid “discomfort.” Real men don’t feel any discomfort around gay men.

    1. What you posted is called a logical fallacy. Look up that term on Google then report back which one you violated, if you want to learn how to debate effectively.

      1. Easy to claim, hard to prove. Nothing illogical about my post at all, except that you don’t want to hear the truth.

      2. I figured you weren’t up to the challenge. It’s clear you don’t understand the concept of what a logical fallacy even is, given your answer about “nothing illogical about my post at all”.
        Never read classical debate texts, huh? Interesting. This is why the left never wins in the realm of ideas and have to rely on emotions and logical fallacies to advance their agenda.

        1. I figured you wouldn’t be able to explain the logical fallacy you claimed, and I was right. You can’t.

        2. Jesus, you’re pathetic kid. You don’t know and don’t care to learn. I was giving you a chance to self examine and use your own nascent investigative powers to figure out your own error. But you clearly belong to the Left, which means that you need to be spoon fed bits of information by others to absorb instead of doing some intellectual lifting on your own, and lack initiative for self betterment.
          It’s not even worth talking to you from this point, I know the fallacy you engaged in, it’s boilerplate and basic, and I’m not going to share it with you. If I didn’t know what it was I wouldn’t be able to call you out on your first post in the first place (logic 101, duh). Many others here know exactly what I’m referencing. You don’t. Fun stuff.
          You are left to either figure it out on your own, which you won’t do, or snark and sneer and claim victory while sitting flatly in the shitpile of defeat, which I predict is the course you will take. Your loss.
          I know you need the last word, go ahead, I’ll scroll past it and not bother reading it. Hopefully some day you’ll obtain the gift of intellectual curiosity. Until then, slainte.

        3. A few logical fallacies, a term which GOJ apparenty likes to throw around without understanding it:
          Tu quoque. Ad hominem. Well poisoning. False analogy. Begging the question. Straw man. Post hoc. Non sequitur. Special pleading
          Come on, which is it? and why? Clearly you don’t like being called out when you lazily make a claim you can’t support, but you still have a chance. Please explain which logical fallacy I employed, and how it’s a fallacy. Don’t retreat even further into pathetic defeat than you already have….. LOL.

        4. An “eyeroll” would be appropriate at this point.
          Look, I feel sorry for you, to the point that I’m breaking my word and answering. You clearly do not posses enough intellectual curiosity to explore on your own. A habit you should consider breaking, as intellectual investigative curiosity beats having to be spoon fed everything by leaps and bounds.
          Yours was a form of No True Scotsman.
          Your initial post: “Real men aren’t bothered by gays and aren’t so insecure that they wish
          gays would hide who they are to avoid “discomfort.” Real men don’t feel
          any discomfort around gay men”
          No True Scotsman would look like this in example:
          A: Scotsmen wear kilts.
          B: I’m a Scotsman and I’ve never worn a kilt
          A: All REAL(true) Scotsmen wear kilts.
          Your statement implied that *real* men would ABC, thus precluding all forms of men who do not engage in ABC as a counter argument. No *real* man ABC/No True Scotsman ABC.
          You’re making this too easy and your mockery is self defeating even if you do not see it as such. Since I’ve actually studied rhetoric for quite a while in my lifetime and know most common fallacies rote, your ability to quote from Google without understanding is not impressive.
          I sincerely hope I’ve helped you learn something today regarding your use of rhetoric. Put down the Hate Response long enough to reflect that maybe it’s ok to engage in an error, then commit to correcting the error so that you’re not caught in it again. Seriously, it’s ok to be wrong, admit such, learn, grow, then move forward, even if it came at the hand of somebody with whom you disagree.

        5. Swing and a miss! I’m quite familiar with the No True Scotsman fallacy (I hear it from braindead losers on the Christian Right all the time), and I didn’t commit it here. What I engaged in was simply ‘shaming’–pointing out that those who hate gays are pathetic cowards and weaklings.
          Nice try, though. Be sure to shower us with more of your brilliance if you can find any… and if you can live with the digrace of having your error exposed.

        6. You clearly cannot admit error. Your method of “shaming” was the No True Scotsman fallacy. We’re done talking at this point, and I apologize to the reading audience for engaging the troll for this long.

    2. I am hetero and I prefer gay male retail support staff. They are very knowledgeable and helpful despite being flamboyant. Also with my Pierce Brosnan/Christian Bale good looks they go out of their way to assist me, while the retail chicks only show me their cleavage as if I am getting some special favor.

      1. Funny you mention this. I was talking to my gf the other day and was talking about the exact thing you mentioned. If I walk into a neimans or nordstrom to get some clothes there is either, a) some chick working there who will tell me everything looks good and I should buy it thinking that her obvious obnoxious “flirty” talk will get me to buy it. Whenever I deal with one of them I try on shit I know is hideous just to hear how fake she will say its awesome or b) a gay or fashion forward male who will help me find what I am looking for and what actually looks good and fits my odd body type.

    3. This is the NFL though, not the smartest guys in the class. It is like prison, any sign of weakness and you are done. Jonathan Martin was weak and you see how that went down. Like it or not gay is perceived as weak , especially in the NFL. that is just the reality of the situation, it is not right but it is how it is.

    4. I have no problem with gay men per se. But having too many and promoting this agenda will collapse society. They don’t have kids. We have a low enough birthrate as it is. In order for a society to have a future, the future members of that society have to show up. There’s a reason why its called ‘the decline and collapse of the West’, as portrayed by many strategists from decades ago.

      1. Oh, are we running out of people? I hadn’t heard. Every single person in the country is well-fed, well-housed, and healthy, eh? Got too many resources to go around?
        Well, it’s a good thing we have birth control, fertility drugs, abortion, IVG, and dozens of other technologies available to adjust our population in any direction we want at a whim, isn’t it? *grin*

    5. “Real men don’t feel any discomfort around gay men.”
      – Of course, any real man will do. Especially when a gay is standing behind him.
      Gays are more sluttier and sexually desperate, and broach the topic of sex first, more than slutty women.
      And also in the men’s urinals when you’re taking a piss. The last thing you want is a gay man standing next to you asking or begging to suck off the last dregs of piss from your cock, and then to start giving you a blowjob. That’s what gays do.
      Travel to Far East, SE Asia or Philippines and then tell us whether you don’t feel discomfort around gays, REAL MAN.

      1. Because straight men regularly get molested and raped by gay men in Western society. It’s bascially all over the news daily.

        1. Actually yes, straight men do get raped. It goes unreported in the news, for obvious reasons.
          My First Sergeant when I was stationed in California was out jogging one morning. A van pulled over (it was around 5:30 am), a bunch of men in nun’s habits jumped out and ganged up on him, drug him into the van, and gang raped him after tying him up. They left him on the street corner when they were done, still tied up. Nuns of Perpetual Indulgence. He was broken physically and spiritually and committed suicide within a year. All unreported on the news. This was the mid 1980’s.
          And of course, one has to forget what the word “prison” means in order to buy your line as well.
          Don’t tell me that straight men aren’t raped by gay men. That’s a lie.

        2. Exceptions prove the rule as they say. Some men get raped by gay men but it’s a very rare occurance. Prison is a different issue, straight men rape straight men there.

        3. I gave you examples of gay men raping straight men. One I even saw in real life. Trying to exclude the other with rationalizations of course, is expected.
          Your assertion is incorrect, and you admit as much, now moving the goal post to “yeah, ok, some, but it’s rare”. I’d suggest next time trying to qualify your assertions a bit so as to not get called our on a gross generalization.

        4. My assertion is not incorrect and I didn’t admit such a thing. I’ve never said anything like “Never in human history a straight man got raped by a gay man”. I’ve never said that, go read my post again if you don’t agree. What I have said is that it is not something that happens in large numbers on a daily basis, and is a rare occurance. Prove me wrong. One story of what you saw won’t do it. The assertion that most gay men are slutty and sexually desperate and often rape straight men is bullshit.

  15. Who the fuck cares? Some of the most intelligent people I’ve met were gay. Why the hell would anyone waste their time caring about something so fucking retarded? Personally, judging someone for being gay, to me, is like judging someone by the color of their skin or the choice of their religion.
    By the way, homosexuality is, to a large part, natural. Go and read The Canterbury Tales, which were written in the Middle Ages. Chaucer makes lots of references to homosexuality there. I believe Shakespeare does, but I’m not familiar enough with Shakespeare. I’m sure you can find Roman and Geek literature that refers to homosexuality too.

    1. Referring homosexuality in literature is one thing. Openly celebrating it in front of a whole nation is another

      1. “Referring homosexuality in literature is one thing. Openly celebrating it in front of a whole nation is another”
        Historically, they were basically the same thing. People used to go watch plays like we watch TV because TV (or whatever else) didn’t exist back then. There’s a good argument to say that people did openly celebrate it. Also, why would you give a shit? Again, some of the most intelligent people I met were gay and some of our best thinkers today are gay. What does being gay have anything to do with the way you speak and think? I judge others based on their character and intelligence, not on sexual orientation. Most men are dumbasses though, so I don’t know about them.

        1. The first ones that come to mind who are gay or bisexual. There are plenty more where this came from.J.M. Keynes
          Nate Silver
          Alan Turing
          You may not like any of them personally, but you cannot deny their talent (in the case of Alan Turing, anyone that denies his mathematical talent is a person who doesn’t know math). All of those thinkers are very, very intelligent people. Those are the ones that come to the top of my head by the way. I know there are many more. Many ancient thinkers were gay or bisexual, including Plato and Socrates. I don’t swing that way, but there’s nothing wrong with people who do and I certainly don’t think it’s intelligent to isolate those people away from our society when they can give us ideas and different ways of thought. Two of them, Keynes and Turing, were critical in the management of WWII. In the case of Keynes, he basically managed the finances for the Treasury during the war. It was the first major war of that magnitude that didn’t result in extremely high inflation because of his management (I can get into the details, but it’s kinda technical).

        2. Ah yes, the cultural cancer that tries to label men in the ancient past as “gay’. Socrates and Plato were philosophers, and chances are very high that Socrates was simply a rhetorical fictional character created by Plato in order to spread his own works further in discussions in his Academy.
          There is zero proof that Plato was gay, what is brought out today is conjecture based upon making huge leaps of faith and misinterpreting twice translated words while neglecting the context of 2,000+ years. And to claim Socrates as gay is silly since, again, he likely was a fictional character.
          I’ve noticed this trend a lot since the mid 1990’s, retro-fitting creative geniuses into the “gay” paradigm without a shred of actual proof. Mis-translate, misconstrue, take out of context and apply modern assumptions to fit the claim, front that as proof, walk away, that’s how the game is played. It’s sophomoric at best.
          You can have Keynes however, as his theories are so laughably wrong as to deserve mockery. I have no idea about the last two, never bothered to check, since my clock isn’t wound enough to care to examine the sexual claims of every human being on the planet who has made it into a newspaper. Unlike the current cultural Marxist agenda, which demands it be made so.

        3. “You can have Keynes however, as his theories are so laughably wrong as to deserve mockery.”
          I don’t think you understand what he actually said. He revolutionized many aspects of probability theory, successfully called WWII, found a way to run WWII without massive inflation, and came up with a large part of the monetary system after WWII. If the world listened to Keynes instead of Harry Dexter White at Bretton Woods, the financial system that Keynes laid out would still be alive to this day. The Chinese government and the PBoC even came out in support of his Bancor plan as a better system. You need to know what you’re talking about.
          By the way, in old Pagan societies like Greece and Rome, homosexuality was very, very common. I’m also not retro-fitting anything. You clearly don’t understand any bit of what these guys have done and it’s probably due to your own ignorance.

        4. “I don’t think you understand what he actually said.”
          Conjecture, I’ve read his works and am quite aware of what he’s said. Conjecture irrelevant.
          “By the way, in old Pagan societies like Greece and Rome, homosexuality was very, very common.”
          In modern society homosexuality is made to seem quite accepted at a cultural level, deducing from your logic then a historian from the future would be correct to assume any writing from this period came from a homosexual. See the flaw in that line of thinking?
          “I’m also not retro-fitting anything.”
          You sure were. You assumed without proof using a broad cultural reference as applicable to all in that culture. Since the Greeks obviously reproduced sexually the best that can be conjectured about them is that many were bi-sexual, which last check, is not homosexual (homo meaning “only” of course, where “bi” implies more than one, specifically…two).
          “You clearly don’t understand any bit of what these guys have done and it’s probably due to your own ignorance.”
          Ad hominem, irrelevant.

        5. So of the five you listed, four are dead and the other one analyzes baseball and elections. Thanks, I understand now.

        6. Uhhh…. Silver did way more than just analyze baseball. He did a lot of revolutionary things in statistics. This isn’t just me that says this by the way. It’s Nassim Taleb, who’s about as rigorous and understands this stuff better than anyone else in the world.

        7. “In modern society homosexuality is made to seem quite accepted at a cultural level, deducing from your logic then a historian from the future would be correct to assume any writing from this period came from a homosexual. See the flaw in that line of thinking?”
          What are you talking about? How is that my logic? You’re putting words in my mouth of things I never said. It was accepted in some societies and disdained in others. I’m willing to bet that it was much more common than what any of us realize. Even Shakespeare and Chaucer talk about it. I’m sure you could find Roman and Greek painting where they depict homosexuality. Some cultures are a bit more flexible while others are more rigid. History moves back and forth between the two. In terms of politics, history moves back and forth between a large and small state in all walks of life. All have their uses at different times in history. It’s just a matter of preference and anyone can have their pick.
          “You sure were. You assumed without proof using a broad cultural reference as applicable to all in that culture. Since the Greeks obviously reproduced sexually the best that can be conjectured about them is that many were bi-sexual, which last check, is not homosexual (homo meaning “only” of course, where “bi” implies more than one, specifically…two).”
          You clearly didn’t bother to read my initial comment, where I said gay or bisexual. I’m not saying that the entire society was homosexual and it’s obvious that they did reproduce. Even Chaucer talks about homosexuality and I’m pretty sure Shakespeare does too (but it’s been a while since I’ve touched Shakespeare). Greece and Rome weren’t the only ones either. A lot of Pagan societies were open about such matters. It wasn’t a big deal for them. Actually, Pagan societies were much more tolerant than monotheistic societies and all of the world’s largest powers were extremely tolerant to the intelligent. The reason they were tolerant is because they were trying to import human capital. Societies like Rome, Persia, and the Mongol empire (particularly the Mongol empire) were very explicit about this. The reason they were so tolerant is because it was a political ploy and a very good one at that.
          You’re saying that Socrates didn’t exist. That’s ridiculous.
          “You assumed without proof using a broad cultural reference as applicable to all in that culture.”
          I never assumed that. You implied that’s what I assumed.

        8. I think Socrates was probably bisexual, not gay, but it was common then. Dude, there were places where lots of men would meet, hang out naked, and get fucked up. What do you think happened in those times dude? Use some common sense.
          As for Silver’s accomplishments in math/statistics, they’re impressive. He’s done a lot of work in that field and it’s very good too. He’s done a lot of work in Bayesian statistics, which is my personal favorite.

        9. First of all, I’m not your “dude.”
          Secondly, I will repeat my previous question:
          “What evidence do you have that Socrates was gay?”
          “I think” and “was probably” are not acceptable answers.

        10. Dude, I don’t give a fuck. What the hell are you gonna do? Facepalm?
          As for Socrates, just look at the way their culture was structured and use common sense. Look at the environment where they’d discuss philosophy and ideas and put two and two together.

        11. First: “Who the fuck cares?”
          Then: “I don’t give a fuck”
          Yes, I’m facepalming.
          “As for Socrates, just look at the way their culture was structured and use common sense.”
          So, zero evidence? I see.
          “Look at the environment where they’d discuss philosophy and ideas and put two and two together.”
          Lollzz. Thanks dude.

        12. It wasn’t just the Greeks either. It was all Pagan societies that were structured that way.

          Homosexuality and bisexuality were a part of their culture, so I’m willing to bet that it wasn’t just Socrates, but many more that were gay. He was a Greek philosopher in a society were homosexuality was perfectly okay. I’m sure he had sex with guys. There’s probably much more evidence on the internet too.

        13. There is some talk of Socrates liking other men on that Wiki page too, but it’s Wiki, so you’ve gotta be careful.
          “Socrates’ love of Alcibiades, which was more than reciprocated, is held as an example of chaste pederasty.[citation needed] Phaedrus, in the Platonic dialogue the Symposium states:
          For I know not any greater blessing to a young man who is beginning in life than a virtuous lover, or to a lover than a beloved youth. For the principle, I say, neither kindred, nor honor, nor wealth, nor any motive is able to implant so well as love. Of what am I speaking? Of the sense of honor and dishonor, without which neither states nor individuals ever do any good or great work… And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonor and emulating one another in honor; and it is scarcely an exaggeration to say that when fighting at each other’s side, although a mere handful, they would overcome the world.[45]
          The Athenian stranger in Plato’s Laws blames pederasty for promoting civil strife and driving many to their wits’ end, and recommends the prohibition of sexual intercourse with boys, laying out a path whereby this may be accomplished.[46]”

        14. Apparently it was in Xenophon’s Symposium. Xenophon was a historian and philosopher as well. That would be your citation. There are probably many more examples as well.

        15. As opposed to more ignorant? Hmmmmmm. I will defer to your expertise on that subject.

    2. Don’t worry, trouble maker will figure it out in ten years, when even his conservative friends have moved on.
      Either then, or the first time he is discriminated against. For example, if somebody finds out he writes for ROK and ostracized him because if it. Then he would get it.

      1. All I care about is the intelligence and character of the people at hand. I do not judge by the color of someone’s skin, the choice of their religion, or by their sexual preference. I’ve met plenty of intelligent gays or intelligent atheists/agnostics/Christians/Hindus/Muslims and I’ve even met extremely intelligent women. One of the most intelligent people have been women who were my statistics professors (many of them had way more common sense than most men). They were more intelligent than 99.9% of men. I will say this though: I do judge based on whether others judge by sexual preference, religion, or skin color.

        1. You don’t exactly strike me as having a full set of cards friend.
          I guess then that it makes sense that you’d worship people who are “intelligent” to the exclusion of all their other traits; you know, like character and morality.

        2. “All I care about is the intelligence and character of the people at hand.”
          I have a dreaaaammm. lol

        3. Morality is subjective and it depends on time and place. What the Mongols found as moral is very different from what the Christians found as moral, but my definition of morality is closer to the Mongols than it is to the Christians. Also, I don’t think it’s possible to enforce morality from the top-down without causing problems, but that’s a different issue for a different day.

    3. Nobody should give two shits who anyone fucks. That’s the point. Who somebody fucks is no basis for celebrity status, it should be a private matter. Also, strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords is no basis for a system of government…
      Juvenal’s “Sixteen Satires” refers to homosexuality quite a bit. In fact, he pokes quite a bit of fun at them and it’s funny as hell, despite his being rumored to be a little light in the loafers himself. Gonna have to disagree about it being natural, though. Just because something has occurred throughout history doesn’t mean it’s normal.

      1. Exactly. Downs syndrome has also been occurring throughout history; that shit ain’t normal.

    4. You might as well say “Some of the most intelligent people I’ve met molested little boys” for all the sense that argument makes.
      You can absolutely judge someone for being a flagrant faggot in the same manner that you can judge a hambeast for being an obese cunt.
      None of us dislike the Jack Donovans of the world; it’s the Jason Collins causing the media circus that annoy.

        1. Argued like a true woman.
          If you ever develop your mind enough to compete in a man’s sport, feel free to come back and attack our logic.

        2. I wasn’t arguing, I was telling you that you suck. One who attacks a person only because of his or her gender is the real idiot.

        3. Observe the typical female gentlemen:
          Unable to compete in the realm of logic and facts, they snipe random insults from the peanut gallery.

      1. I’m not talking about the obnoxious gay guys that act stupid as fuck and take attention whoring to another level. I’m talking about normal people who happen to be gay. I know plenty that are like that.
        I also never argued that molestation was okay. I don’t view homosexuality as immoral and I think that a large part of “morality” is bullshit.

        1. Rewind and look at your comment; you start by saying “Some of the most intelligent people I’ve met were gay.”
          Come on kid, what does that even mean? Like I said, you might as well say “Some of the most intelligent people I’ve met were into bestiality.”

        2. “Come on kid, what does that even mean? Like I said, you might as well say “Some of the most intelligent people I’ve met were into bestiality.”
          How are you making that leap? Also, why the fuck do you care what other people do on their own free time? I don’t give a fuck. I’ve got better shit to worry about

        3. Jesus kid.
          “Some of the smartest people I know watch the WNBA”
          I’m making fun of your comment about fags who happen to be smart. What’s your point? There can’t be one because it’s a stupid observation.
          Get with the program.

        4. “There can’t be one because it’s a stupid observation.”
          You’re an ignorant dumbass dude. It was common in some societies historically. It’s not a big fucking deal. Get your fucking head out of your ass.

        5. What’s this? You’re insulting me without addressing the logic of my observation that the intelligence of fairies has nothing to do with anything? Sounds like a woman!
          I hear you can lower that estrogen by not using plastics with BPA friend.

  16. I contend that spectator sports are far more damaging to the manosphere than homosexuality.

    1. I’d be interested in hearing your thesis on that contention. Not saying you’re wrong or right, I’m just curious as to your logic and reasoning.

    2. Sports and sciences are probably the only two meritocracies left in the brave new world.
      How exactly are sports more damaging to the manosphere?

      1. Participating in sports and earning that merit is great. Watching sports makes you a follower though, not a leader.

    3. Agreed. “Bread and Circuses” are what pro sports have become. Pro sports the new religion….

  17. I think football went downhill when they started wearing helmets and armor…
    And I am not surprised some of them are gay. What self-respecting man wears tights?

  18. stop writing about it and making a big deal about it and they’ll go away. as long as we keep having these conversations then it brings them into the spotlight (which is what they want). like a woman, ignore it and it goes away. make a big deal about it..and drama ensues. refuse to discuss it and it takes the power away from all these “outings” and it’s not special anymore. they’re all getting you to discuss it which then brings out more of this behavior of “outing.” If you’re gay…your gay take the power out of being gay. I think some people now turn gay for the attention it brings from the PC side

  19. Among the group of male friends of mine who played college football, most if not all of them are betas. Twelve years of structured athletics in a teamwork environment with alpha coaches barking you down all day every day as you scurry to appease – your beta.
    Many got married after going ga-ga over some groupy from the dorms, and are now overweight push-overs addicted to watching athletics on television with their alpha wives (matching jerzies too).

  20. I don’t understand where this gay-hate is coming from? Is this now considered alpha? Do we really want to poison the manosphere with this can of worms?
    The way I see it, is every time a gay man comes out of closet there is an extra Carolyn Moos on the market that isn’t taken.
    Reading the comments some seem to forget that sexual orientation is not something that one chooses. I like girls. I can’t make myself like guys. No matter how much I try. A gay man finds himself in a similar situation.
    One should try to put himself in their shoes. What if the whole World was homosexual (we could procreate in laboratories by swapping genetic material)? What if homosexuality was norm and heterosexuality was abnormal? I would have to hide my sexual desire for women. I would have to pretend that I like men. That is the situation a gay man has to live with – especially someone who is an athlete and under scrutiny of public opinion. Live and let live.
    How does obsessing over another man’s sexuality makes someone a better man? It doesn’t and we shouldn’t even care.
    American football with their tight pants, large shoulder pads, and men grabbing each other’s asses has always been disturbingly homoerotic. That’s why a real man prefers soccer (you know, REAL football).

    1. I think what the author is getting at is that these guys are making money with all the publicity instead of their talents. When black and latinos started to play football and baseball… they were good. I mean Jackie Robinson, Roberto Clemente, Juan Marichal, Jim Thorpe, Charles Willis… Those guys were good. Really good. They were all All-Stars.
      My take: I’ll sit on it and wait 10 years. If in 10 years, none of the best players is homosexual then I will say it was all about money. We’ll see.

    2. “The way I see it, is every time a gay man comes out of closet there is an extra Carolyn Moos on the market that isn’t taken.”
      Can you imagine the baggage that chick is gonna have, probably for the rest of her life? She wasted eight years of her life with this dude, and said she never suspected he was gay. Dude didn’t even give her a heads up.

      1. Oh, come on. Real talk. It’s pretty anti-homosexual, even if it is vague.
        “Oh we’re fine with gays…just as long we don’t see or hear about them, because you know, purity of football and all that”

        1. I wasn’t aware that being disgusted with gay pride displays was anti homosexual.
          Think about it kid, everyone likes and respects Jack Donovan—you wouldn’t know he was gay unless you read it in a comment like this; he doesn’t wear it on his sleeve and pretend to be some bullshit hero.

    3. There’s a lot of good info in the manosphere but the white supremacists, conspiracy theorists, and right wing wackjobs are it’s glaring Achilles’ heel. To them everything is anti-white, an organized conspiracy by the “elites”, or the fault of the left and marxism. Everything is black and white and there’s no reasonable middle ground.

  21. I read this article yesterday, crowing that Jason Collins has the NBA’s best-selling jersey (at least he did for a minute). It then goes on to say that the number 98 he will wear (if he gets more than a 10-day contract) is a tribute to Matthew Shepard, who the article states was murdered for being gay. Cute, right? Only thing is, they’re promoting their feel-good agenda with lies, as usual.

  22. The “gay community” will not be satisfied until homosexual men are free to grab small boys from their parent’s arms, molest them in public, and have the public applaud them for doing so.
    Don’t believe me? Look at the trajectory so far, and also go to Google Images and type “Folsom Street Fair” to see what the gays in San Francisco do en masse, in public, and with the blessing of the U.S. government.

    1. Don’t know about all that, but if you look at all that flap with the winter games in Sochi, everyone was losing their minds about the horrible anti-gay Russians. All they had really said was “leave our kids alone”. That’s just terrible, unacceptable bigotry. Reason being, that’s the only way homosexuals can “reproduce”. Not saying all (or even most) gays are child molesters, but many gays were sexually abused at an early age.

    2. The Folsom Street fair is attended by a fringe of the gay community. Do you think the men who visit dominatrixes are representative of all heterosexual men?

    3. “According to the American Psychological Association, “homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.” Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation’s leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.
      Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because “he often finds adults of either sex repulsive” and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may “regress” to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.
      The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.
      Some anti-gay ideologues cite the American College of Pediatricians’ opposition to same-sex parenting as if the organization were a legitimate professional body. In fact, the so-called college is a tiny breakaway faction of the similarly named, 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics that requires, as a condition of membership, that joiners “hold true to the group’s core beliefs … [including] that the traditional family unit, headed by an opposite-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and” raising of children.” The group’s 2010 publication Facts About Youth was described by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association as non-factual. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, was one of several legitimate researchers who said Facts misrepresented their findings. “It is disturbing to me to see special interest groups distort my scientific observations to make a point against homosexuality,” he wrote. “The information they present is misleading and incorrect.”
      – ((
      Just thought’d it’d be interesting for you to take a look at…

      1. This guy actually quoted the $PLCenter…
        “The information they present is misleading and incorrect.”

        1. Oh, you want a different source then? Here:
          *”An especially pernicious myth is that most adults who sexually abuse children are gay. A number of researchers have looked at this question to determine if homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals, and the data indicate that’s not the case.
          For example, in a 1989 study led by Kurt Freund of the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Canada, scientists showed pictures of children to adult gay and straight males, and measured sexual arousal. Homosexual men reacted no more strongly to pictures of male children than heterosexual men reacted to pictures of female children.
          A 1994 study, led by Carole Jenny of the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, surveyed 269 cases of children who were sexually molested by adults. In 82 percent of cases, the alleged offender was a heterosexual partner of a close relative of the child, the researchers reported in the journal Pediatrics. In only two out of 269 cases, the offender was identified as being gay or lesbian.
          “The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children,” wrote Gregory M. Herek, a professor of psychology at the University of California at Davis, on his website. Herek, who was not involved in the 1989 or 1994 studies, compiled a review of research on the topic.”*
          Skip to about number 3, but hey, look at the others if you want:

  23. Like the great footballer Antonio Di Natale said: “Professionally, I admire Prandelli and am fond of the man, but I
    disagree with him [on homosexuality],” Di Natale was quoted as saying by
    La Repubblica. “Breaking the taboo of homosexuality in football is difficult, almost impossible. I wonder how the fans would react?
    sorry, but I disagree with the choice to go public, at least in
    football because privacy is very important. Our world, in some respects,
    is very complex.”
    From playing football since early age i cannot think how strange it would be to be so close to a homosexual as you are in a team and especially in the locker-room. Seriously, there is a lot of strange stuff going on in men’s locker-rooms, initiations, ribs and so on. I think it would disrupt the whole state of the locker-room if there were a guy who also was sexually attracted to you or your teammates.
    And not for being rude to homosexuals but there is something wrong with them. Seriously, their mating-system is not funtioning right because there is nothing that says ass-fucking the same gender would be a good thing for him in the long run. He gains nothing from that.

  24. Trouble. Maker you will get alot of heat from bitches and fags. The whole society is pushing towards gay acceptance dude. You’re better of calling someone a nigger than fag. The penalities will be less servere, I know from expirience with the law.

  25. Wait till the new speech codes and penalties for saying the “N” and “F” words kick in.
    Thank you gays….
    Locker room as an inner sanctum for dudes ? Ha …long gone. Chick sports reporters have had locker room access for years. Can’t even take a shit anymore…

  26. Gay people are fine people and upstanding citizens. There are probably some gay people in the major sports leagues right now.
    The problem is: men stop acting like brothers as soon as sex gets introduced. Doesn’t matter heterosexual, or homosexual sex. The problem would be the same if the major leagues started introducing women. Men start closing off themselves or white knighting and refusing orders. Men dont bond the same if they have to be concious of sex. (Women in male platoons is also a bad idea).
    Michael Sam, Jason Collins, they also have a responsibility. Having outed themselves a gay, they cannot now make that an on the field issue without impacting team chemistry.

  27. “You see, locker rooms are one of the last true places that contain only,
    or close to only men. It is a place where men are free to make all of
    the crude jokes they want; where they are free to bond together as males
    without fear of outside judgment. ”
    So being a “man” to you boils down to being “crude”? That’s more of a class thing than anything else. And if you really want to hear crude talk, evesdrop on a bunch of a women discussing their mens’ sizes and skills in the sack. They leave nothing to the imagination.
    “they are free to bond together as males without fear of outside judgment”
    What about inside judgement?

  28. I watched the combine and he’s not a good player, but I’m sure he’ll be drafted by a franchise that will later say “hey did you see what a gay friendly environment we are?” And this franchise will for sure get gays support. I think everybody who’s drafted should deserve it because he’s got the skills, not because he’s famous for his sexuality. What I also hate is the breasts cancer campaign in the nfl… Everybody wearing rose clothes and shoes, whaaaaat?! It is a male game, they should promote prostate cancer awareness… I don’t see women do that, why should men do it for women??

  29. Yup – going further down the drain!
    I agree with Roosh that homosexualism is a good part created by external factors. While it is true (according to plenty of research) that some gays have a brain structure similar to women and have way lower testosterone levels than most men I think that the majority can decide either way – be straight or gay.
    Now of course society pushes those 60-80% who could go both ways towards the gay camp as something natural. (Nevermind also some chemicals that exacerbate the process (BPAs, estrogen in the water supply etc.).

    1. In contrary to what you and Douche “think”, there is no scientifical evidence that someone can choose to be gay.

        1. Some of your comments:
          “Because straight men regularly get molested and raped by gay men in Western society. It’s bascially (sic) all over the news daily.
          “You suck.”
          The end.

      1. Then you should read some stuff that bisexual men put out. It is not a set deal by far. Some gays write about their own experiences. And it is not the religious kind who decide to go for a straight relationship in the end. For some – sure – it is a set deal almost from birth.

      2. BTW – you are right concerning the point of choosing to be gay. The scientific evidence is there concerning biological factors. The choosing part is based on observations and individual perceptions also from gay-sphere-bloggers who report being pressured and scorned for sometimes choosing a wife and kids. This should not come as a surprise when i.e. looking at the prison population where even high-level Alpha man resort to gay relationships. That ought tell you something, but I guess that little million-fold detail gets overlooked all the time. Also the strong connection to motherly abuse of single-mother households etc. But of course the millions of non-gay-prisoners choosing gay lifestyles and the destructive single-mother-households are perfectly ignored by the best science community that money and doctrines can buy.

        1. Scientific evidence that one can choose to change his sexual orientation is there? Show it then. I highly doubt there is though, heck, there isn’t even any evidence this ridiculous alpha/beta shit you idiotosphere guys release all day as if it were proven, is true, so I would be suprised.

  30. Oh, boo hoo. So now locker room can’t make gay jokes? Big
    flipping deal. Trust me, I think the English language is flexible enough for
    you to find some other slurs to use. If there wasn’t such a big stigma with
    homosexuality to begin with, then this really would be a non-issue. People would’ve
    just shrugged their shoulders and went about their marry way.

    1. The only people making it a big deal is the Left, and they’re doing it by intent in order to drive their agenda. That’s the point. The kid is nearly irrelevant to them, except as a plot device to further their narrative and continued assault via cultural Marxism. It is no mistake, NONE, that the first thing to follow his announcement were the immediate speech code restrictions that the NFL is announcing, e.g. – a demand to change the current culture of the NFL. That’s how cultural Marxism works, it’s not about people being who they want to be, it’s about controlling thoughts and speech of anybody against its agenda. And that’s exactly what’s going on, right now, in clear living color.
      Why any thinking person would approve of cultural Marxism is beyond me, though clearly some do. Intruding on the culture of others and demanding compliance to one’s different standards of thought and speech is about as shrill Lefty as you can get.
      The NFL is free to make any decision it wishes, being a private institution. It’s rather the tactics that are on clear display that are being commented on. Similar tactics are used in regards to non-private entities as well (public universities for example), which should scare the living shit out of anybody concerned with freedom I’d hope.

      1. Sorry *yawn* you almost lost me there when you brought up “Marxism”. Honestly, you might as well just get to the point, and scream “Communism!” I mean, that’s what you wanna say, right?
        Anywho, I’m getting off track. Look, I’d like to think that homophobia isn’t so ingrained in the culture, that a little LGBT acceptance would hurt it in any radical way. If your comfortable in your own sexuality, then it really shouldn’t be that big of a deal if the person next to you in the locker-room is gay. If it does, then well…that’d be your own personal problem to deal with.
        If you truly wish for “Football to just be Football”, then it has to be even playing field (no pun intended)…for everyone, and that includes the LGBT. If you truly want to Left to stop making a big deal out of it, then maybe the Right should consider just accept homosexuality to some capacity. Or at least accept it to the point where it doesn’t gain media attention.

        1. They’re all about freedom of speech, as long as they agree with it. Stop towing the party line though and there’s gonna be big problems in the little city tonight.

        2. Oh don’t get me wrong, making things too PC can be a problem. Especially if you’re in the field of entertainment like me. It’s there’s a point, then by all means, be offensive if that’s how you choose to communicate it (just don’t be surprise if people get offended).
          The only reason I get tired of hearing about it, is that the right uses the phrase so much that it’s basically kinda become a nonsense, buzzword. Kind of like how a Tumblr users, and the phrase “check your privilege”

        3. Oh, we believe in the “First Amendment Rights”
          Just not Hate Speech (Which by the by, isn’t protected by the first amendment)

        4. Guss, did homo’s ever think that the rest of us might not be interested in hearing that their defining identity is their sexual habits ?
          If the LGBTHIJKLMNOP community would just stop feeling compelled to tell us about their sex life they might actually get treated like regular people.

        5. Uh huh, and who gets to decide what hate speech is?
          That’s working out real well in Britain I hear.

        6. Glad you’re not my lawyer. So-called “Hate Speech” is absolutely protected by the First Amendment.

        7. Not really,

          Granted, the “Hate Speech” bit does have it’s obvious loophole. For example, as the article states, the Westboro Baptist church can obvious still express their hateful views towards homosexuals (and to an even grosser extent…protest at a dead soldier’s funeral)….however, once it crosses the line into “Fighting Words”, then it’s 100% not protected by the first amendment. For example, you say you hate christians, but you can’t burn a cross on someone’s lawn.

        8. Well, you do realize you have the option of just simply…not reacting back, right?. A simple shrug, and maybe a “Good for You” for good measure, and it becomes a non-issue.
          But so long as there is an audience who will overreact whenever they see two dudes kissing, so too will there be a media outlet that’s more then willing to report it.

      2. And now, a demand to change my cultural outlook. Sorry, not interested.
        Your tone and wording seem similar, and I can’t help but notice that it’s almost exactly the same as somebody else on the thread that you’re giving attaboys to. Interesting, but off topic of course.
        I gave you an answer, whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant to me at this point.

        1. Well that depends. Does your cultural outlook include demeaning, or harming a specific group of people? I mean, you’re free to think that if you want…it’s just a very shitty outlook is all I’m saying.

  31. The NFL has gotten worse over last several years thanks to overbearing leftist thinking. Receivers, who can defend themselves by not attempting to catch a pass near a defender, now have been called “defenseless” and defenders are restricted from hitting them in ways that were previously legal and exciting to fans. Ronnie Lott, a HOFer, would be fined out of the league these days with his precisely timed hits to receivers just as they caught the ball. A bunch more rules protecting QBs, Goodell handing out fines as if he knew football well. And the Saints bounty scandal was ridiculous: it’s up to the refs to call penalties on the field, not for wire tappers to seek intent in locker room pep talks. If I was Sean Payton, prolly 2nd best coach in league behind Belichek, I would prolly hire a hitman to go after Goodell for that year long suspension. The flags these days are out of control. Refs infuence games more than they should & the unneccessary roughness calls are arbitrary & inconsistent. They can extend game-changing drives, etc. The NFL was getting faggy before Michael Sam.

    1. Sounds to me like you’re less concerned with, “We need to stop cultural Marxism.” but rather, “I’m just pissed that my favorite teams got flagged” XD Oh, and I’m sure there’s some stuff about “player safety” and all that somewhere, but really, who cares about that, I’m I right, Mark?

      1. I’m not a Saints fan. My favorite team (Ravens) won the super bowl two years ago in a flukey way so I’m not bitter but honestly I care a lot less about any NFL team now than I did a few years ago. Yes, many of these new rules are about control & have little to do with concern for safety or the integrity of the game. Why else would Goodell punish players for off-field marijuana use? Without getting a DUI or starting trouble when under the influence, guys are getting fined & suspended just because it shows up in their urine test. It’s a PR thing upon which Goodell is flexing his muscle: authoritarianism.
        Actually, I don’t really care about all of that “player safety” crap. They’re supposed to be modern-day gladiators. When I played pee wee football the coaches talked to us & our parents about the risks involved. Everyone knew it. But if you want to play at the highest levels where there is fame & fortune, you should be willing to pay the bodily price. In the run up to the big brain injury settlementment that the NFL gave to former players, Drew Brees on behalf of NFLPA said something along the lines of ‘those old players knew the risks but didn’t handle their $ wisely and now just want more $ from the modern success of the NFL.’ I agree. It’s just BS PC litigation and PR spinning. The old helmet-to-helmet hits on WRs were awesome. And I played WR in HS.

        1. Oh sure, Football is can be a dangerous sport, and there’s always the possibility of injury. And It’d be one thing if the players where at least compensated medically…but sadly, many of them aren’t. And it’s still a pretty shitty attitude for the NFL to have to just shrugged it off and pretty much say, “Oh, you have permanent brain damage? Fuck you, we already got ours.”

        2. “compensated medically”? WTF are you talking about? They (Including bench players making the veteran minimum) worked for half a year and earned more than 90% of people in the country who worked the whole year. If the NFL didn’t offer employer-sponsored health insurance, they paid these guys enough to buy it on their own. But being somewhat frugal, working another job (such as overseeing a business) in the offseason, carefully planning for retirement, and buying health insurance isn’t as cool as buying cars, bling, hos, furs, mansions, etc. Brees was right, they blew their money on stupid shit and then they wanted a handout. The injuries that led to permanent brain damage were fine with the players when they were famous millionaires with adoring fans and aggressive groupies. When their bank accounts ran out, the NFL became the bad guy to them.

        3. Of course that still doesn’t change the fact that NFL protocol (at least back in the 70’s and 80’s) would force players who suffered concussions to play in the very game they got the injury from.

        4. BS. They put themselves back in the games. Even today, trainers and doctors say the biggest obstacle to getting a concussed player out of the game is the player himself.

  32. For a second I had forgotten that the left and marxism is the source of all evil. Thanks for reminding me.

  33. I don’t have any problem with homosexuality at all but I hate how everything that interesting or creative or energetic about masculinity gets co-opted into gay culture as homoerotic. Masculinity gets chopped up and all that is left is aspiring to be Dilbert and live in a bedroom community.

  34. On a different note entirely: We should be all in favor for many more men outing themselves as gay. Whenever a supposed Alpha Man becomes uninteresting to the female population the more is there for the rest.

    1. If you think they’re not having sex with women because they’re supposedly gay, you need to read more Game literature.
      Look up “the secret society” of women, natural alphas, and gay males.

        1. I think you’re missing what I’m saying; supposedly gay men still have sex with women.
          I guess if you look at it at a relationship level, I can see what you’re saying, but that kind of thinking is mostly irrelevant to us anyway.

        2. Maybe you are right with that. Famous stars will get laid no matter what.
          Anyone tried gaming by feigning to be sexually confused? That is apart from picking up chicks at gay bars as recommended by Roissy? 🙂
          Frankly I am not sure it would work at all unless you game her while being an incredibly masculine and dominant gay and she gets curious. I met some highly masculine gays, so who knows – might work.

  35. Again, what is up with the homophobic angle? I mean, okay, I get you hate ladies. That much I can grasp. But why homosexuals? Is this just some stupid “Alpha/Beta” thing I’m not getting, or that it conflicts with “traditional relationships”, or some crap like that?

    1. You missed the point of the article. It is not about homophobia. It is about the fact that homosexuality is promoted by the media as a kind of heroic statement. If it were truly a matter of equality, it should be a non-issue: “So you are gay? What do I care?”
      It is the same blatant promotion whenever there is one female engineer going public with ONE bloody invention – ONE PRECIOUS SNOWFLAKE did a contribution to science – YEAAAHHHH – you go girl! While millions of male engineers and scientists get ignored.

      1. Well, and perhaps if the other side didn’t get into a huff about it every time the media brings it up, then maybe this would just be another non-issue.
        I mean, let’s face facts here, if there wasn’t such a large amount of homophobes to rile up, then there really wouldn’t be any point in the media bringing it up. I would dare say that the media would mention it once…and then everyone would go about their merry day.

    2. It really has nothing to do with homosexuals.
      This article is about homosexuals acting like women and pretending they deserve a gold star for breathing.
      If you can’t understand that, you need to back up and re-examine the propaganda you’ve been consuming.

      1. Oh, I’m not even really commenting on the article at this point. I mean this is, what, the third article in within a week that painted gay men in a negative light? All I’m pointing out is that this sight has a very, very weird bias towards homosexuals.

        1. Claiming that this article and others like it paints gay men in a negative light is the same as claiming that prior articles paint heterosexual men in a negative light because we make fun of white knights.
          You’re too obsessed with the labels these men claim for themselves; you’re not seeing the lifestyle being condemned because all you see is the sodomy.

        2. Well, you would have a point….
          ….or at least you would’ve had I not read the “About” section of RoK that forbids homosexuals from actually commenting on the site.

        3. Honestly, it really wouldn’t hurt RoK’s image if 1.) They got rid of that stupid rule. 2.) The occasional positive article on Homosexuality. Because honestly, the base principles on the RoK can apply to any sexaulity.

        4. What’s your point?
          This is a site for heterosexual men; women aren’t allowed to comment here either.

        5. Women I can understand (to a certain degree anyway). But why homosexual men? To me, that shows a certain degree of bias or fear.

        6. It explains it right in the tagline: “for heterosexual men.”
          What could possibly be gained by allowing libertarians to speak at the democrat national convention?

        7. So? Does that necessarily have to mean “Heterosexual Men = You must think lesser of Homosexual Men”?
          You know…unless there some sort of christian undertone I’m not aware of.

        8. This site advertised Jack Donovan’s book, “The Way of Men” for several months. It’s how I discovered Jack Donovan.
          There is a review here about how that book was great before or during the advertisement.
          That’s as close to being “positive” on homosexuality as you’re going to get from a website targeted towards heterosexual men.

        9. Go back far enough and you’ll note a common theme being “a man’s worth can be directly attributed to how many women he has slept with or is able to sleep with.”
          So yes, we pretty much think less of homosexual men by default, but some supposedly homosexual men have slain more pussy than most betas, so you could say we’re pretty “equal opportunity” about it.
          Then there are guys like Jack Donovan, which this website has been exceptionally kind to and advertised for. When we have common ground and understand eachother, we have no problem respecting eachother.

        10. Well, then that just brings up more questions, since the last time I checked, Jack Donovan was an open homosexual….inyet he still’s preaches what he does. Doesn’t that in itself prove there is a section of homosexual men that shares similar beliefs to the RoK?

        11. Well, then that dynamic is still there, the sexuality just changed. You think homosexuals don’t think of their sexual conquests as something of merit? Again, you bring up Jack Donavan, and he pretty much proves that you have that dynamic why still having a different sexuality.

        12. That’s my point; he writes about issues concerning men and this site is kind to him. He is respected and admired here.
          That being said, this site isn’t targeted towards him.
          What’s hard to understand about that?

        13. No, you see we don’t view sexual conflicts on other males as meaning anything at all.
          It takes a lot of effort to improve a notch count because women are women. This is why men who have sex with lots of women are respected.
          Homosexuals lose that game mostly by default.

        14. Again, I ask “Why?”. What would be lost if you accepted that community? It certainly wouldn’t hurt this site’s reputation any more than it already

        15. You think that psychological, manipulation BS doesn’t exist within the Homosexual community too? What; do you think Homosexual men just walk up to each other and say, “Hey buddy, wanna have butt sex?”, “Sure.” and that’s, that?

        16. Create your own site. ROK doesn’t do gay articles, because like sports and the military, introducing open homosexuals and women ruins the atmosphere.

        17. ROK isn’t concerned with helping its “image” in your eyes. Kindly fuck off somewhere else.

        18. You will never understand what would be lost, because you are a homosexual. Just like women don’t understand what is lost when they “break into the boys’ club”.

        19. Again, as I brought up in the comment I made to you before, that’s unless unless you lack the maturity, or comfort in your sexuality to do so. A real man wouldn’t get his little panties in a bunch just because he might be near some homosexauls.

        20. This right here. No one cares how “mature” RoK looks to irrelevants like homosexuals and women. What they call “mature” is cancer to real men.

        21. Irrelevant; men and women are different. Sodomy takes far less effort than closing on a woman.
          If you think otherwise, then there is nothing less to discuss; This site is not for you.

        22. Okay, if that’s how RoK really feels, then they’re more then welcome to do it….but just keep in mind, the homophobic angle usually doesn’t work out for large, public entities.

    3. Yeah, I’m not really getting it either. I was under the impression that one of the tenets shared by those that commented here was that an individual is entitled to seize material desires by whatever means they choose. The ‘red pill’ is about leaving behind any archaic sense of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and grabbing what we want.
      As such, I don’t know how you can fault Collins for exploiting his homosexuality to make money (assuming that’s what he’s doing). Isn’t he just acting in a way that is consistent with the Nietzschean/Machiavellian leanings of REK?
      Moreover, how can we suggest that homosexuality is ‘wrong’ if we negative the objectivity of ethics in the first place?
      My final comment is I’m not really getting the use of ‘cultural marxism’. Isn’t cultural marxism more descriptive (of the places that a hegemonic ideology is susceptible) rather than ideological (supporting the equal distribution of wealth, state owned means of production, etc.)? I would think that us as readers would embrace Gramsci’s ideas. Isn’t our goal to get rid of the leftist hegemony that now rules America?

    4. Trolls don’t ask questions seeking an answer. They only parrot platitudes that make the hamster brain feel better about its uncritical self. There’s truth in the articles and responses here, and that makes the hamster brain feel bad. Doesn’t it?

  36. None of this matters if your are a true Red Pill male. Professional sports are barely above the level of pro “wrassilin”. Just bread and circuses for the masses of dweebs and blue pills to keep them distracted from their pitiful existence. Once you go “red pill:” then it is like “Who the ef cares about these games, anyway, what does it have to do with me?”

  37. Just being gay is “brave” (or, at least, proudly telling everyone whether they care or not is) today… but soldiers fighting in Afghanistan are just “suckers” for not getting out of it somehow.

  38. I’ve given this site a lot of credence for the articles written. Many, highly inspiring and insightful. I flat out pity the moron who wrote it, as if he read a few posts on here, felt he became a man, and decided to flex his internet cojones for the world to see.
    Granted, this whole notion of glorifying those that come out of the closet will never make sense to me. Your gay? Great, nothing to see here, back to everyone’s day. I think it has to do with society being still so close minded that this still has to be a big deal. Then again, this country is only 50 years removed from blacks drinking from separate water fountains.
    But back to the author. Sorry breh, if the dude or chick can ball, run, jump, better than the rest of the competition, I don’t give a shit if they’re found to wear pantyhose over their head and wear a ball gag while being tailgunned by a tranny..
    Maybe I’ve missed the whole point being made by the author altogether, who knows.

    1. I think you’re right. The only bit which is of interest is the stuff about the locker room culture which will now be ‘endangered’ as it will need to be swept clear of possibly homophobic speech.
      The consensus here seems to be that homosexuality is the problem per se which is a matter of opinion. What this article fails to comment on is that these men who are ‘coming out’ as gay are engaging in identity politics that if the evidence of how it has so far been used is anything to go by has been used to attack the very idea and practice of masculinity. The ancient greeks etcs were obviously the original sportsmen. Whatever you think of the morality of homosexual acts / relationships Greek homosexuality arguably didn’t undermine masculinity. There are complicating factors such as pederasty, and you could argue the toss …or the reacharound if you prefer, but male culture & civilization peaked under the greeks, whereas feminism was pretty much nowhere to be seen (Sappho notwithstanding). My point is that if the concern here is only about the effect this will have on masculine culture, then it is the identity politics that is the problem, and the fact that that identity politics is a weapon in the hands of feminists & queer theorists etc. That’s to say ‘the coming out’ narrative is the problem not so much the actual practices which will exist in any culture

    2. Its about masculine spaces and what they represent. The article could have been written better with a more thorough understanding of why homosexuality sends healthy platonic male affection “into the closet”.

  39. The only thing that can save football is to eliminate platooning and go back to leather helmets.

  40. I find it retarded how they are called ‘courageous’ when being gay has got over so much that most people seem to see it as normal.. yet when the boyscouts initially refused to have gay leaders they were called ‘cowardly’.
    It’s the exact opposite, they were standing up against all these people saying “no we don’t believe in this shit”… I see no cowardice there and no bravery in these atheletes coming out.
    Unfortunately in the end the boyscouts gave in.

    1. It’s because intolerant pricks like you openly hate and harass gays. A promiment person like an athlete stands in the middle of the public and thus will get alot of hate and harassment from alot of intolerant pricks. That’s why it’s courageous. Pretty simple actually.

      1. Hahaha bullshit… this gay shit has got over so much that I actually get more crap for actually being against it these days than they do now from idiots like you who have accepted their brainwashing.
        Any normal guy is going to have a gut level revultion to gays and their tactic is to try to turn that around and tell us “if you hate them you must be gay yourself”. What alot of bs.

        1. “Any normal guy is going to have a gut level revultion to gays”
          And why would that be?

  41. No-one gives a shit about whether or not someone is gay except for God, and he’s not real.

  42. Who calls a man a faggot? Other men, exclusively. It’s an insult from one man to another, and in a locker room setting it’s often good-natured. What the feminazis and libtards fail to understand is that it isn’t really related to actual sexual orientation: it’s used to shame men into better sports performance. I assure you that if Collins was playing like Michael Jordan, his teammates would still give him shit for being gay, but it would be good-natured and he would be a valued member of the team regardless of his sexuality. His teammates would value him because he pulled his weight for the team.
    Feminism has reached the point where it is now becoming unacceptable for a man in a locker room to call another man a faggot, never mind if it is actually true. What’s next, you can’t shame another man into doing a better job by calling him a pussy? This is crazy. (Probably won’t be long before I can’t say that either…)

  43. wifey: “Not tonight. I have a headache”
    hubby: “You’ve had a headache the past 2 months!”
    fag: “Pssst! Hey buddy, how would you like to have all the no strings attached, drama free sex you could possibly want?”
    hub: “Sound’s great. But how?”
    fag: “All you gotta do is switch your brain from chicks to dicks and you’re all set.”
    hub: “OK, here goes.”
    a moment later
    hub: “Hey man, you look good enough to eat!”
    fag: “Let’s go!”
    and why doesn’t it happen?
    Because homosexuality is NOT a choice.
    So QUITE OBVIOUSLY it’s genetic.
    A mutation but genetic nonetheless.
    Seriously, NO MAN would be straight if he had a choice!
    Think about it.

    1. sexuality is a continuum. I’ve never had a dick up my ass, I imagine most people commenting haven’t either. For that same reason we can’t know that we wouldn’t like or respond to it somehow. What we do know is that if that happened it would change how we feel and think as men, and that’s something as straight men we reject. In other words most men will not want the identity that comes with receiving rather than giving. The whole ‘you are born gay’ thing is only half the story. Its genetics + environment / culture. Gay people argue that it isn’t a choice because they don’t want evangelical christians calling them sinners

    March 1, 2014, 11:30 A.M. Japan Standard Time Special news alert: About three hours ago Russian special forces engaged US ground troops in the Ukraine, according to Russian government and gnostic illuminati sources. This move was in response to the imminent bankruptcy of the Federal Reserve Board. .

  45. Homosexuals and pedophiles are the same crap, they just go for men of different age groups.
    I say we carry out an inquisition against homos so that we can rightfully torture, burn and kill them all.
    This will be awesome.

    1. you would have to do the same for lesbians..remember, they destroy society more than gay men.

      1. Yeah man, but we gotta keep the hot and the young ones for ourselves.
        Sorry old and ugly lesbians.

        1. nah we gotta convey the hot lesbians to become straight…a tough task, but it must be done. Time and time again damaged women who are hot as fuck go for bull dykes. Disgusting.

    2. under your previous fifth columnist incarnation ‘fuckthefags’ you wrote: “until they start hunting down and dragging the jews out of their houses, places of worship, places of work etc. and hang them on the nearest lampposts”.
      Anyone would think you were trying to get this site a bad name sockpuppet

      1. All the guys here are cool with this idea. I don’t see anyone complaining about it except you.
        Is this because you are michaelmobviously a faggot Jew?
        I mean, get over it, being a faggot Jew is better than being a slave in Egypt or a war prisoner.
        Allah is the one and only God and Mohammed is his prophet.
        P.S. I am half Jew, by the way.

        1. Yeah, everybody’s cool with torture and murder. And tomorrow there’ll be an article on how to pull concentration camp chicks.
          Still its good you’re not denying you’re the same sockpuppet whore I outed a week ago, still thrusting your little lesbian phallus through hell’s gaping gloryhole in the hope someone, anyone will be prepared to gobble

        2. You should get a job as a prison guard, cocksucker. There you will find what you need.
          First, you find a ridiculous reason to police my behavior and spy on me. And now you start to make conjectures about the size of my penis and my sexual life.
          I wonder who is the greatest deep-throat homo in this drama?
          I am cool with torturing and burning alive all pedophiles and potential pedophiles (please read homosexuals).
          So what the fuck are you gonna do? Right now everyone is ROK is laughing behind your back, rainbow faggot.

        3. So if I say your posts are you “thrusting your little lesbian phallus” I am making “conjectures about the size of your penis”. You certainly reason like a feminist.
          You claim you are “cool with torturing and burning alive all pedophiles and potential
          pedophiles (please read homosexuals).”
          Does that mean you’re now soft on jews and no longer want to “hang them on the nearest lamposts? Fine, if you believe those things go shout them in the town square rather than hiding behind ever changing internet monikers. But you don’t believe those things. You’re a fake nazi. You’re phallus is a strap-on, and you’re
          little hips are thrusting into nothing
          But the serious point is this site is saying something important, promoting debate you will get nowhere else and you’re response to that is to vomit poison that damages its credibility and plays into its detractors
          If you act like a sockpuppet / fifth columinst expect to be called out as one.

  46. If you want to understand why men’s sports are under attack you have to look at the feminist analysis of sports. Raewyn Connell, a transwoman / feminist introduced the concept of hegemonic masculinity. The following is a quote from the wiki article on ‘hegemonic masculinity”: “commercial sports are a focus of media representations of masculinity, and the developing field of sports sociology found significant use of the concept of hegemonic masculinity. It was deployed in understanding the popularity of body-contact confrontational sports which function as an endlessly renewed symbol of masculinity and in understanding the violence and homophobia frequently found in sporting environments.”
    If gay players want to enter sports they need to make sure they’re not doing it to destroy the culture and weaken masculinity. Unfortunately its hard to believe that the feminist state isn’t interested in encouraging gay men in male sports for exactly that reason. I very much doubt that people like Connell & Sams etc are even aware that they’re being used in this way.

  47. I don’t have any beef with gay dudes. The ones I’ve met were usually nice and just out to party. Some are annoying, but not threatening. As disgusting as what they do is, I don’t feel threatened by it. To me, it’s just like a completely different world.. it’s like hearing about how they eat dogs in China. Fucking nasty, but I they probably think that some our customs are equally as distasteful.
    From what I’ve seen, gay guys are a completely different culture from angry dykes. A lot of them share values similar to ours.. good taste in style, being healthy and not being fat, not being controlled by women.
    Let them have their sodomy and all that shit. I’ve never seen a gay guy blog in the style of something like Jezzebel that goes out of it’s way to talk shit about guys. In all likely hood, the only beef they have with straight guys is they probably think a lot of men in America dress like shit. I agree with that.
    I do think that overly promoting gayness to “counter” the hetero influence in culture is bullshit. I might be wrong about how who is pushing all that, but I’d be curious to see what organizations, if any are behind it. I’m betting that it’s some kind of Man-hater “feminist” group.
    What’s interesting is that it seems like things have actually gotten easier for the player as they have gotten harder for the blue button up guys.
    This is the cognitive dissonance we face as redpill players. As players, we want pussy to get easier. As regular guys, we want to return to pre “feminist.”

  48. The writer of this article is a bigot and a homophobe! Wait for it…wait for it…..wait for it….Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!
    The writer of this article is mostly CORRECT!!!! No one need to know these players were gay. No one asked if they were and no one cared. Why does America need to know if some dude is fucking another dude up the ass or if he’s getting fucked up the ass? NOBODY ELSE feels the need to tell the media or anyone else they are fucking someone or about their sexual preference. Homosexuals would argue “because I just want to be me”. Who is stopping you? Fuck who you want to fuck……NO ONE CARES! You can get your asshole filled with whatever you like or go to town sucking on some poor bastards dick. Just don’t tell the rest of the world about it. We didn’t ask and we don’t want to know. We don’t agree with you, find it sick, unhealthy and totally disgusting, and we never will agree with you. It’s unnatural, detrimental to your health and serves no logical purpose. But it is your choice to do so and that is fine. KEEP IT YOUR CHOICE! To yourself like every other heterosexual man in America does. We don’t go broadcasting to the news media and anyone who will listen, “HEY, I’M STAIGHT!”
    You see how stupid that sounds. EXACTLY!

  49. My two bits:
    1)Lockeroom culture was always gay now its going to be gayer
    2)Men lost control of the lockeroom when they started allowing women to enter and they did nothing about. Its the only “professional” setting where employees are essential forced to strip naked in the presence of the opposite gender. It was only a matter of time before men in the lockeroom were further emasculated. And it will continue.

    1. Can’t argue with #2. I seem to remember an incident years ago with a female reporter in a locker room and the big to-do that came from the “shocking” behavior that the players exhibited when she was there.
      Gasp! To think men might act like men!

  50. Personally, I’ve never given a fuck about what consenting adults do in their bedroom. This is a self-serving ideology, for I don’t want some moral squad assholes banging on my door when I’m doing something kinky to my girl.
    Homosexuals inherently pose no threat to me, for they are only less than 5% percent of the total population. I DO, however, think that these homophile Social justice Warriors, who are fighting to end “hetero-normative” and “gender-binary” culture, are abominable and psychotic.
    Of course we live in a “hetero-normative” culture! We comprise of over 95% of the total population! (that also includes transsexuals and those gender-queer attention-whores.) Does it make sense to smash a functional norm, simply to spare the feelings of a few genetic dead-ends?

  51. Meh, straight men are just angry that gay people and women are starting to matter to society. Long live the homosexual agenda!

    1. I’m not angry at all.
      However I most certainly am uneasy and annoyed at continually having an agenda pushed on to society and someone else’s sexuality paraded in my face.
      And especially those who can’t pick a gender.
      But then again, if I disagree with homosexuality or propaganda in any manner whatsoever I’m instantly a “homophobe.”

  52. You make some good points (that Collins and Sam are divas and their attention whoring is gonna take away from their teams), but this article is mostly trash. Homosexuals aren’t ruining sports. I would bet everything I own that the other players in the locker room don’t give a fuck how open someone else is with his sexuality as long as he can play. If the title of the article was “Jason Collins is a Shit Person”, I might agree with you, but his gayness has nothing to do with it. The guy is just a failing athlete who happens to be gay and came out to keep the end of his career going.
    Soon enough there will be a gay player who’s really, really good. He won’t be over the top with his sexuality, but he won’t hide it either. And people won’t write articles like this because they will respect him.

  53. Homosexual males have a more negative effect on team and military morale than females. The only places in western society where men can show one another affection, which we call “male bonding” is on the battlefield, or on the battlefield’s less violent analogue – the playing field, court, pitch. This is why you will see more men hug or be physically affectionate during sporting events. Not because they are “latently gay” but because sports (just like battle) create a space where “real men” are assumed to be present. Men don’t have to wonder if a “love pat” or a hug could be misinterpreted as a sexual advance by the other male, because they are all assumed to be hetero-sexual, real men. Homosexuality used to be such a foreign concept in Western society that men were much more comfortable being physically close and affectionate with one another. No one would ever misinterpret it as homosexual attraction, because the display of homosexuality was almost non-existent. This is why gays ruin institutions that otherwise provide men with an outlet to interact on a deeper level with other men. They throw a question mark into the equation and most men will put their guard up as a result.

    1. Well, if that question mark exists and they’re too insecure in their own sexuality to just man up, and be honest with their fellow teammates…then that’s their problem, not the institution in question.

      1. And frogs should fly, and women should pee standing up.
        The institutions in question are ruined when homosexuals disrupt the atmosphere. You can completely discount a truth that I revealed to you about male friendships in your desire to make the world be as you wish it were, or you can observe and acknowledge the truth in my statement.
        There is no other explanation needed than for one to watch a football game and how teammates openly show affection to one another in a way that doesn’t occur in other areas of life. The only reason this happens organically is because homosexuality is assumed to not be present.
        I explained to you the reason that 1) war and 2) sports are the primary realms for male bonding and healthy platonic affection. You can observe this reality by flipping on ESPN. These arenas as “safe” and “acceptable” for platonic male bonding. Guess what? ALL of society used to be safe and acceptable for platonic male bonding and affection.
        By including open homosexuals in these sports, we will lose the last bastions of acceptable male bonding and platonic male affection.
        It is not the same dynamic, but it is a similar dynamic experienced when “all male” clubs and societies are infiltrated by femicunts.

        1. ….and they still can. Again, if being around homosexuals makes you uncomfortable, that’s your problem.

        2. Its a universal reality. The only men who claim they relate equally to, and are equally comfortable being affectionate to homosexual men are saying it only to gain social approval.

        3. Or, you know, maybe homosexuals aren’t are predatory as you make them out to be, and that you actually can be around homosexual men in a platonic, buddy-buddy way. I mean, I know what would take a certain amount of maturity, which might be hard for you, but it’s completely doable.

        4. What I posted has nothing to do with homosexuals being predatory. Stop moving the goal posts. Its about bastions of male bonding a platonic affection diappearing with the introduction of open homosexuality. This is where the “no-homo” phenomenon comes from. Stop blaming hetereosexual men for their lack of “tolerance” and acceptance of homosexuals. Gay men are not the same as straight men. Gays have their spaces, just as women do. What they should not do is detract from heterosexual male spaces, because heterosexual male spaces are a rarity these days anyway. Thank you for solidifying my stance that gay men are, in fact, as much the enemy of heterosexual men as liberal feminists.

      2. Never mind. I read more of your responses and I realize that you, being a homosexual, are blind to the realities of platonic male affection. It doesn’t make sense to you, because your male relationships are also sexual and so the boundaries don’t make sense to you. If you’d like a ROK type site for your and your “gaybros”, then “man up” and create one. You won’t have an audience, though, and you know it. That’s why you troll around ROK. Just like a femicunt, its a club you can’t join and never will.

        1. Yes, because as we all know, apparently gay men can never have platonic friendships with other men….because logic?

        2. Not in the same way heterosexual men do. No. Heterosexual men do not evaluate other men as potential sexual partners. That alone precludes you from understanding anything in this discussion.

        3. Again, assuming that all homosexual men see all men, regardless of their sexuality, as potential sexual partners. Which of course would be a gross generalization of homosexual men. Trust me, they’re much more picky then you give them credit for.
          Of course, if you’re worried about homosexual men being attracted to you in particular (which usually tends to be the root of this fear or bias). Well, let me just settle that right here. *ahem* No homosexual would ever want to sleep with you. Ever. To them, I’m sure you’d be like that regretful one night stand you had while drunk.

  54. I have a lot of respect for those gay athletes (and other celebrities) that keep their gay life private and stay in the closet. They at least have the decency to go about their own business as men and not to rub all of society’s nose in their shit.
    Although I guess I’m sure that’s hard now with groupies wanting to publicize every hookup with a celeb, and social media leaving a snail trail of your entire life experiences.

    1. The odd thing about it though, is that if there wasn’t an outcry against homosexuality to begin with, then there would be nothing for media outlets to exploit. No disproportionate hate, no shocking news to therefore report on.

  55. It’s sad that the media completely ignored how Moos was treated. Did she go eight years without sex? If the media wasn’t actively searching for gay athletes to parade around would Collins have ever come out?

  56. I’ve seen so many comments here saying ‘being gay is natural’, isn’t that some sort of naturalistic fallacy?

  57. And I’m sure the military will go to shit if Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is repealed too.. Oh fuck. Everyone is over that already. Being a real man means not giving a fuck if someone is homosexual and let them lead their lives. No one has ever had a problem with me because I lead an openly hetero life, I’m sure no one has been prejudiced toward you for living similarly. I don’t know what it is like to live “in the closet” because I’ve never had to and I don’t think we should force our professional athletes too either.
    And if you think you would be able to even survive a typical NBA game down center being 5’9″ I already know you are absolutely out of touch.
    Your’e a fucking homophobe. Admit it and let society progress.

  58. We’ll all be better off if we spend less time watching/caring about large national leagues and more time actually playing sports in local leagues.
    Go join your local rugby league, get dirty, and get off the goddamn couch.

  59. That’s all? Just some brouhaha over some gay guys coming out?
    This article isn’t really about homosexuals are ruining sports. You haven’t said anything about how the presence of gay guys changes the way basketball/football are played. That’s because it hasn’t changed, let alone “been ruined”. There’s no difference between the entertainment value and sportsmanship of these games now and before these guys came out. (By contrast, soccer’s been ruined since players can overdramatize their injuries to interrupt games and fake fouls).
    Nor is your problem is not with Michael Sam being gay. No, your problem is with the media’s overcelebratory reaction to him being gay. People calling someone a hero for something that doesnt really seem heroic (especially when you compare it to the ultimate hero: the soldier) is neither new nor specific to homosexuals coming out. Funnily enough, it’s overinflammatory titles to articles like this that add to the problem, not solve it. The media hypes people like Michael Sam _because_ they believe there are people who write things articles like “How homosexual athletes are ruining sports” without much reason behind it..

  60. Well I for one am just tired of this joooooish campaign to turn 95% of the population into non-breeding degenerates. And yes it is the joooz doing, because this shit comes out of Hollyweird and the media, both of which are owned by and for the joooooooz.

  61. Will all do respect my good friend your homophobia is
    demonstrating your false Alpha status.
    The difference between a man who has game and a man who does
    not is simple; self respect, tolerance and above all dignity. We don’t give
    shit and we don’t take shit…to put it in colloquial terminology.
    As such per your proposed argument that someone’s sexuality
    should be of any concern with respect to their performance be it in the field
    of play or in the grand game of life. It is not only ill conceived but demonstrates
    yourself doubts.
    We are men, are above petty arguments and irrational
    conjecture. Yes the NBA and the NFL are not acquainted nor sure how to deal
    with those who are not heterosexual. But that said we men should not be
    backwards in our thoughts or our actions nor ones to prejudge others. Those are
    the playing cards of the week of the beta and the whipped. Who bolster their papier-mâché
    armor with false bravado and misdirection.
    Is he a good player? Is he worth what he is getting paid?
    Who knows? But I doubt it’s you. Be a man, let the markets decide his
    capabilities. If he is a flash in the pan so be it. If he is truly talented and
    capable and just so happens to be a homosexual? So what!?
    I would go further to say you questioning his abilities
    based on his sexual orientation makes you look rather beta. Chest beating and proclamations
    of the defense of what you assume to be morally right? Very very beta move. An
    alpha we accept all on the ground of who they are as an individual, gay,
    straight, white, black, blue or green…and why? Because we are men. We are above
    the shrill voices.
    Now please grab your trucker hat and your Budweiser beer and
    step off your soap box. You are making an ass of yourself and in the process
    making the rest of us look bad in being associated with you.
    You are scaring away the fruit flies boy…but don’t worry we
    will save you a few fag hags.

  62. I’ve got an idea. Why don’t we gather the smartest, sexiest people in the world and give them the best education and resources while denying stupid, ugly people the right to have children? Afterwards, diversity would be worthless given the absolute ideals of this new perfect people, and all this talk of gays, sluts, feminists, white knights, blue pill people, and more may be pure history. Oh, what a dream. A semi-Nazi dream that’s a bit less violent. But still, what a brilliant plan! Talk to me. And don’t be a meanie weenie.

  63. It’s truly pathetic for any nation that the realm of sports of all things becomes the last bastion of masculinity.
    But you could see this coming with the pink sports wear fausted upon the players in the guise of breast cancer awareness in a culture where pink is traditionally a feminine color that had no place in men’s sports.
    It’s truly sad that children growing up may have no guidance to becoming a mature masculine man. Every outlet of masculinity is becoming effeminate.
    Traditionally in American society it was the boy scouts that taught discipline, honor, and virtues to boys in a safe masculine environment to transition them to men. But now that is under tremendous threat with the explosion of pedophilia and the intense pressure by corporate sponsors to allow gay scout leaders. Really? Can you imagine the problems of allowing heterosexual males as girl scout leaders? I can’t believe this shit.
    Even the marines talked about allowing women into combat roles.

  64. this fucking faggot piece of shit got drafted. I can’t wait until real puss’ lovin men ruin this fudge packing penis lover

  65. So, I take it homosexuals are evil and awful and inferior? From what I’ve been reading in the comments, there seems to be a lot of hatred towards homosexuals. I know what you should do! Why not just round them all up and put them to death, like the Bible commands? You can even make little gay camps to put them in while they await their slaughter! It’ll be fun!

  66. I wonder how many of you are just being pissy about the fact that homos represent the logical conclusion of your ideologies concerning sexual relationships.

  67. I can imagine the halftime shows becoming fruity gay parade mardi gras spectacles with trannies and gay men in tail feathera dancing. Whats next gay male cheerleaders. An all gay sports team, theater femme flamboyant gays taking up sports like taking it up the ass joining NFL. And the rules in the sports becoming pussified.

  68. Prison is a nest for converting straights into gays. If you commit crimes and go against the law you will be emasculated into a second class citizen.

  69. “Guess who praised him for his outstanding courage, as well? None other than the first lady Michelle Obama herself:
    You’re an inspiration to all of us, @MikeSamFootball. We couldn’t be prouder of your courage both on and off the field. -mo”
    Considering that Michael “Michelle” Obama is possibly or even probably a tranny, how is this any surprise?
    What? Think that’s a crazy statement. Yeah, so did I. Do a search on Youtube about it, though. Watch a few of the videos that come up. Definitive proof it ain’t, but the thing is, it does make more sense than the orthodox story we are told.

  70. Gay lobby propaganda at work in RoK comment section. Good job. Talk about ruining male spaces, fish a ton of those ruiners.

  71. Reminds me of Danica Patrick in NASCAR. Haw won ZERO races. Has zero aggressiveness to work her way to the front of a race. Is handed the best equipment Stewart Haas racing has to offer. Just sits in the middle of the pack hanging on for dear life and usually ends up wrecking some dude with mediocre equipment. So courageous, racing with all those men out there. She sucks. The commentators talk about her constantly it’s incredibly awkward to listen to. And for the love of god people stop saying she’s “hot.” She’s mediocre at best, talks like a man, she’s bow legged and walks like a cowboy. Whether you like NASCAR or not, you have to have balls to get the 800 horsepower machine to the front of the pack. Oh and last but not least, she covers her face when she’s wrecking instead of trying to save the car. Danica Patrick sucks at racing.

Comments are closed.