You must log in or register to comment.
The funniest of their traits is where they think it’s gay to wash your butt. Yes it’s a thing.
I don’t give a shit about owning a gun. You’ll pry my sprayer bidet from my cold, dead hands.
How… How do you plan to defend it?
That’s the beauty, it’s self-defending.
I’m guessing the fad originated due to being too fat/inflexible to do it properly, then using the not-gay excuse to try to turn it into a macho thing.
Not just to soapbox others about your straightness, but also to assure yourself of your agency and superiority.
deleted by creator
Sometimes, Always, Never, cuz one fancy boi was too big for his waistcoats
Also have heard it about sitting to pee
Oh wow, I was double-gay this morning.
“I prefer butter on the bottom side of my toast.”
“TO WAR!!!”
"I’M NOT WILLING TO FIGHT YOU! I’LL KILL YOU FOR DECLARING BATTLE!
HOW DARE YOU DECLARE BATTLE IN MY FIEFDOM WITHOUT ME! BRING ME THEIR HEADS!
This subject got me curious so I read up on dueling. Apparently in the sword era most duels were to “first blood” not to the death, and even after pistols became the preferred weapon the object wasn’t to kill an opponent or even to win. It was more important to demonstrate courage by showing up. Both parties upheld their honor simply by going through with it. Most deaths that occurred were from infections, not from the wound itself being fatal. It was also common and acceptable to try to avoid a duel through negotiation or an apology.
What OP meant by petty disagreements is unclear, but duel challenges were often made over matters of honor. Some of the issues might seem petty to us today, but in the dueling community reputation and image were vital social currency. For a rough comparison consider modern celebrities losing fans and jobs because of bad tweets (or even for liking the wrong tweet).
The challenge: demand satisfaction. If they apologize, no need for further action.
In some cultures dueling scars were also considered manly so a lot of those duels were mutually agreed on in advance with both participants really just trying to give eachother cool dueling scars in the hopes of seeming more attractive.
Are you really defending the concept of dueling for honor?
Oh FFS no. I’m just bringing some historical material to the forum. Why do people read everything like it asserts some position or other? Try just absorbing the information.
I have never seen a more easily offended person as a person who calls others snowflake.
When anti-snowflakes see 2 men kiss
It’s always the most insecure looking dudes who take their profile pics with sunglasses on in the front seat of their Dodge Ram, or mildly muscular/tattooed guys who have taken 50+ successive shirtless selfies, smirking in front of a mirror. It’s even funnier when you note how many times they went back through their old pics and re-posted the previous ones.
“I’m insulted enough that we’re going to shoot at each other over it” in a time where anesthesia was “drink a few swings of liqueur before I use these pliers to dig out the bullet and hope it hit only mostly unimportant things inside” still seems pretty ballsy.
We can use that whisky as antiseptic! Hopefully you don’t die of infection
Maybe it was just an elaborate excuse to get piss drunk.
But that’s what they consider to be manly.
Toxic men don’t consider anger to be an emotion.
It’s an interesting comparison because it seems to me dueling comes from times and places where personal reputation was much more important to life destiny than now due to a lack of protective legal and other institutional infrastructure that dampens the risks in living and working with strangers.
So maybe any rising sensitivity in the present is due to the feeling that this infrastructure is weakened.
i think if someone spilling the “people didn’t used to be so offended…” agenda, that basically means they were bullied into being jerks
deleted by creator
I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with the point, but all those duel things were mostly about honor and usually among the elites. A lot of them “had” to do it even if they didn’t want to, because of the social norms and stuff.
Oh so so weak that they couldn’t say no to being told by some poncy dipshit that they needed to put themselves in danger over something they definitely didn’t care about.
People don’t change, just the time they live in
There are multiple types of bitch which one might be.
At the same time men in the past had a thicker skin then “men” today, they could (and did) crossdress while still being confident in themselves as straight men (Specifically common in the military). Today “men” will see someone wearing a pink shirt and get pissed at them for “trying to make them gay”.
The people you described as “today men” existed back then, too. We just didn’t hear about it, because it was acceptable and the status quo.
It was much more normal and acceptable to be homophobic back then. You hear about it more nowadays, because times have changed and homophobia is actually being seen for the disgusting trait that it is. The majority of people actually call it out nowadays, but they didn’t back then.
Sir, you have insulted my ancestors, and I cannot allow this insult to stand. I challenge you to a duel!
