Why are so many of the female Russia leaders/empresses rather notorious for being whores?
Elizaveta and Catherine both have explicit evidence that they were practically insatiable in regards to their lust.
I've never seen any other leaders with so much evidence of their promiscuity or infidelity. At first I thought "oh well maybe it was done after they were dead to demonize them because they were female rulers" but it was these two SPECIFICALLY none of the other females really have this issue. I can't think of any prominent female rulers from other nations that have such a ridiculously promiscuous reputation.
Both fucked people like it was going out of style and had little to no standards. Catherine has the obvious rumors of bestiality and apparently had an entire "fetish room" filled with creepy sex shit and tons of carved/styled penis/vagina sculptures.
What is it about female Russian leaders? Is there something in the water? Are morals simply not as stringent over there? Was this a form of feminism and female rebellion?
I'm just trying to imagine how well it would go over if we found out Obama was getting fucked in the ass by 20+ dudes each year. Does it not damage a countries reputation as a whole when this can of scandalous shit goes down?
>>484872
>I'm just trying to imagine how well it would go over if we found out Obama
Did you forgot about Clinton?
>>484883
Clinton had sex with 2-3 women from what I understand and most men here in American give it the
>Heh alright bro, high five!
kind of treatment.
It is different in my head when you are fucking someone as opposed to BEING fucked. Maybe it is a power thing but I don't think sovereign liege when I think "letting someone else dominate your body".
Hence why I think the situation would be different if Clinton was getting fucked in the ass every other week by some new flavor of the month intern.
Also we are talking the difference between someone who had sex with a few people to someone who was rapidly approaching the triple digits of number of people who have run train on you.
>>484900
>It is different in my head when you are fucking someone as opposed to BEING fucked. Maybe it is a power thing but I don't think sovereign liege when I think "letting someone else dominate your body".
That's the same bias Romans had about sex.
>>484907
Is it? Is it a weird point of view to have? I've always kind of felt this way about it.
But taking my viewpoint into consideration, would you not consider it kind of depressing as a citizen of a country if you knew the head of your country was getting fucked 10 ways from Sunday all the time by everyone from the lowliest commoners and scummiest soldiers to the highest nobility?
Maybe it is because I think a leader is someone you should be able to take pride in, I mean would Russia be so pro-Putin if they knew random slavs were having their way with him all the time?
Certainly there must have been SOMEONE in Russia during Elizaveta's or Catherine's rule who was like "Holy fuck, what is happening to our country right now that this person is the head of state?"
Was everyone just to scared to speak up?
>>484935
>Is it? Is it a weird point of view to have? I've always kind of felt this way about it.
It's pretty common, although people rarely ever elaborate on the feeling.
>would you not consider it kind of depressing as a citizen of a country if you knew the head of your country was getting fucked 10 ways from Sunday all the time by everyone from the lowliest commoners and scummiest soldiers to the highest nobility?
I grew up in the Clinton years, so I don't really find it so weird. I'd rather a pussy/cock hound than most of the Presidential candidates running right now.
>Certainly there must have been SOMEONE in Russia during Elizaveta's or Catherine's rule who was like "Holy fuck, what is happening to our country right now that this person is the head of state?"
IIRC, a lot of the Catherine stories were exaggerations by gossip hounds and political rivals. For example, most people think she died fucking a horse, when in reality she got an aneurysm while trying to force a shit.
>>484954
From what I understand some of the Catherine stories were exaggerations but a lot of them were based in reality.
She actually had 20+ partners from what I understand, and literally exiled/killed some of the ones who were unfaithful to her despite being the castle bicycle (everyone gets a ride) herself.
The creepy sex fetish room was also documented/confirmed by SS officers during WWII from what I understand.
This kind of shit isn't normally for a ruler so I guess I'm asking what the fuck was wrong with Catherine?
Did she have a really messed up upbringing that I just don't know about or something?
I mean she had her husband (the actual Russian) killed and then proceeded to fuck dudes like it was going out of style. Did her husband like do weird shit to her that messed her up internally and made her seek approval/confirmation/self-worth from dick?
>>484972
Masculine-type women are notoriously horny I think
she would certainly fit the bill for being almost a man in woman's clothing so it follows that she would be as sex-craved
>>484981
Is it really that simply? I mean I genuinely don't know, it is apparent she had something kind of wrong with her moral compass but I feel like there must be more to it.
I mean she literally cared more about dick than her own children.
"In one instance the empress gave to one of her court favourites fifty-thousand rubles on her birthday, while Paul received a cheap watch."
What in the actual fuck was wrong with this woman? I've never taken a dick before it my life but does it really fucking enrapture you so that you forsake both family and reason for it?
>>484872
Here's a clue, son.
They're ALL whores.
>>485016
It made her feel really good? Like any other vice. She was in a position of power and abused it to indulge in her vices.
>>485097
I guess, but what other leaders have indugled to that extent? Where they basically said
>fuck family, fuck ruling, and fuck international relations
>I NEED X AND NOTHING BUT X
She literally claimed she couldn't rule properly if she wasn't sharing her bed with someone. She would just frivolously waste the nation's resources on whichever FOTM lover she was riding that day.
What are rulers did this kind of shit and weren't fucking murdered for it?
I mean I guess Paul kind of redeemed himself/his father by dishonored her so blatantly and having the nice shrines she built for her lovers destroyed or re-purposed but god damn.
How is she not like a giant mark of shame on Russian history?
>>485084
This. Your mom would probably fuck a horse too if given the chance, OP.
From another thread
>aristocrats
>not perverts
>>484972
>This kind of shit isn't normally for a ruler so I guess I'm asking what the fuck was wrong with Catherine?
This kind of shit is depressingly normal for a ruler.
>>484900
The Russian Queens were kinda the ones fucking others if you think about it. They requested it, so it happened, and by default they were dominatory.
