List of men with the highest # of sexual conquests

[drealm]

Found this article in a google search: http://www.puatraining.com/blog/10-grea ... rs-history

JACK NICHOLSON = 2,000
HUGH HEFNER = 2,000
JULIO IGLESIAS = 3,000
RON JEREMY = 4,000
GENE SIMMONS = 4,600
CHARLIE SHEEN = 5,000
UMBERTO BILLO = 8,000
WARREN BEATTY = 12,000
WILT CHAMBERLAIN = 20,000
FIDEL CASTRO = 35,000

I see two issues with this:

1) This necessarily destroys a large number of women. With the exception of Jeremy and Sheen, most women here were average civies.

2) In Maslow's hierarchy of needs sex is the among the lowest possible achievements. Sexual satiety should be used as a stepping stone towards other improvements.

How does HA feel about this? Would most of you want to emulate these men if given the choice?

[Banano]

Found this article in a google search: http://www.puatraining.com/blog/10-grea ... rs-history

JACK NICHOLSON = 2,000
HUGH HEFNER = 2,000
JULIO IGLESIAS = 3,000
RON JEREMY = 4,000
GENE SIMMONS = 4,600
CHARLIE SHEEN = 5,000
UMBERTO BILLO = 8,000
WARREN BEATTY = 12,000
WILT CHAMBERLAIN = 20,000
FIDEL CASTRO = 35,000

I see two issues with this:

1) This necessarily destroys a large number of women. With the exception of Jeremy and Sheen, most women here were average civies.

2) In Maslow's hierarchy of needs sex is the among the lowest possible achievements. Sexual satiety should be used as a stepping stone towards other improvements.

How does HA feel about this? Would most of you want to emulate these men if given the choice?

How do we know these numbers are true?
Castro having threseome with 2 women.... every day for the past 50 years

[drealm]

Found this article in a google search: http://www.puatraining.com/blog/10-grea ... rs-history

JACK NICHOLSON = 2,000
HUGH HEFNER = 2,000
JULIO IGLESIAS = 3,000
RON JEREMY = 4,000
GENE SIMMONS = 4,600
CHARLIE SHEEN = 5,000
UMBERTO BILLO = 8,000
WARREN BEATTY = 12,000
WILT CHAMBERLAIN = 20,000
FIDEL CASTRO = 35,000

I see two issues with this:

1) This necessarily destroys a large number of women. With the exception of Jeremy and Sheen, most women here were average civies.

2) In Maslow's hierarchy of needs sex is the among the lowest possible achievements. Sexual satiety should be used as a stepping stone towards other improvements.

How does HA feel about this? Would most of you want to emulate these men if given the choice?

How do we know these numbers are true?
Castro having threseome with 2 women.... every day for the past 50 years

Even if the real number was half it wouldn't make a difference to me. It's still a lot of destroyed women and a lot of time wasted on chasing tail.

[C.J.]

LOL at least half of those people are jews, or of jewish descent. Jews just wanna take away all the spoils of the world, such beautiful, dumb women(or regular women). You can tell they never earned them. They're dirty bastards.

Rom Jeremy is a particular jewish slob. That guy destroyed so many different women who were normal, it's hilarious.

[Tsar]

I wouldn't want to emulate those men. I wouldn't mind polygany and having multiple wives, but I wouldn't want to be a monger like those guys. They ruined women, all the American men on that list are thugs or bad boys, and I don't respect any of the celebrities on that list. Most of the women they slept with are whores. Ron Jeremy was a pornstar making his money f***ing women, Hugh Hefner started Playboy so he's like a pimp with hoes and he could sleep with most of them, and Charlie Sheen is a celebrity that is an adult "bad boy." I don't see anything I would want to emulate. The rest on that list I wouldn't want to emulate because that list isn't a womanizer list, it should be called a monger list.

[Teal Lantern]

I wouldn't want to emulate those men. I wouldn't mind polygany and having multiple wives, but I wouldn't want to be a monger like those guys. They ruined women, all the American men on that list are thugs or bad boys, and I don't respect any of the celebrities on that list. Most of the women they slept with are whores. Ron Jeremy was a p**nstar making his money f***ing women, Hugh Hefner started Playboy so he's like a pimp with hoes and he could sleep with most of them, and Charlie Sheen is a celebrity that is an adult "bad boy." I don't see anything I would want to emulate. The rest on that list I wouldn't want to emulate because that list isn't a womanizer list, it should be called a monger list.

Well, which is it?
If the women weren't coerced, then both statements cannot be true.

Other than that, I'd like to know how these men avoided diseases.

[Tsar]

Both statements can be true. In America most of the women were whores and brainwashed by feminism or the toxic pop-culture. In places that are not very Americanized the women might been a little ruined or naive, and then those men totally ruined the women.Whores everywhere in the world and there were whores across history so that doesn't change, but the population of whores in the world keeps rising. That is why a small population of mongers get dozens, hundreds, or thousands of whores.

A whore isn't valuable, a virtuous woman is valuable.

A man that had sex with one thousand beautiful whores and sluts is not something that is worthy of boasting about because it's a false sense of pride.

A man that has a dozen beautiful and virtuous women as wives in a polygynous relationship would be something to boast about because that would be a better achievement. The dozen women that man would have would be more valuable and something that creates a true sense of pride.

[Intolerant]

I hope one day polygamy will be legal, this society is very hypocritical towards it, you have a small elite number of mongers who want all the women to themselves whether it's through corruption or god knows what else they can come up with.

[Tsar]

Polygamy if legalized would be good and work only for moral men. Thugs would abuse it and be nothing but pimps. Feminists would want polygamy demand it be allowed for women.

Polygamy has historical tradition. Upper-class men, kings, and men who could afford multiple wives were allowed to take concubines. Each wife was held to the same standards of quality. In some cases it allowed a built in familial community and more socialization. It did not ruin morals and in some cases it actually provided moral support.

Same-sex marriage is not traditional and it ruins society. It's liberalization and it destroys the family structure. It's almost like feminism.

[Maker55]

Oh my god.....

Who cares?

Are you guys prudes or something?

If it's two consensual adults, I don't give a crap what they do behind the bedroom door.

[Cornfed]

Oh my god.....

Who cares?

Are you guys prudes or something?

If it's two consensual adults, I don't give a crap what they do behind the bedroom door.

The reason we should care is that these people may be turning women who might otherwise be wife material into worthless sluts, thereby destroying our society. The fact that the women are nominally consenting is irrelevant. Women are not volitional beings and therefore the whole notion of consent as applied to them is ridiculous. They should be having sex with who good men in rightful charge of them, such as their husbands and fathers, tell them to, not whoever they "want" to, which in practice means who the Jews/elite tell them to.

[C.J.]

Oh my god.....

Who cares?

Are you guys prudes or something?

If it's two consensual adults, I don't give a crap what they do behind the bedroom door.

It's not prude to NOT like men who ruin women for everbody(who are mostly dirty jews anyway). Also, you should go ahead and bed one of the dirty hoes(well, now they are anyway). Let me know what gifts you get after leaving!

A lot of the women these particular men ruined, were actually normal women - housewives, sisters, mothers, grandmothers, daughters. They were dumb. Back then, pornography was new, glamourous, promoted by the dirty jew as a scam to deflower tons of stupid women. Some people may not know this, but in sprituality, it's believed that when having sex with someone, you both exchange mental(and physical) baggage. Of course, people who're generally pure won't have many problems. But look up all the porn stars who've clearly died before it was their time to go - the majority of them had personal demons they couldn't defeat. And the physical seems to be covered by STDs, so...

There are many polygamists in india for example, but they are strong and responsible folks;it's not all sexy house with them, as the males have come to terms with all the responsibilities of multiple wives. It's clear many of you just want endless, derogatory sex for some reason. :p

[fschmidt]

If it's two consensual adults, I don't give a crap what they do behind the bedroom door.

So if it's your wife with another guy, you are fine with that?

[Tsar]

There are many polygamists in India for example, but they are strong and responsible folks;it's not all sexy house with them, as the males have come to terms with all the responsibilities of multiple wives. It's clear many of you just want endless, derogatory sex for some reason. :p

I also have strong beliefs on the sex and spirituality connections I agree that in polygamy a man has to be responsible and accept responsibility for multiple wives. Polygamy can only work in tradition societies, not liberal societies.

Many guys in my generation fantasize about sleeping with the hot porn-stars. It shows that they want derogatory sex just like the American women and college sluts. Most Anglo women are now unpaid porn-stars. Many have over one dozen sex partners by the time they're in their mid-twenties. Whores aren't marriage material and that's what most Anglo women are.

[drealm]

Tsar,

Won't polygamy lead to social unrest since some men will go without wives? Or are you suggesting these men should find an outlet through prostitutes? Even if prostitutes were permitted this would place a higher demand on them since they would be more scarce.