The sexodus: Men giving up on women and checking out

[nobody123]

All but 3 percent of those who committed violent crimes against children were men.

Weren't you saying mere days ago that it was predominantly women who commit violent crimes against children? Do you even bother reading over your bogostats, or do you just go with whatever supports the most recent bit of idiocy that pops into your head?

Actually, forget I asked. Sorry for bothering you. You've already Godwinned this thread. Carry on. Here, I'll give you a prompt... evil feminazi bitches be all:

 

[canada-man]

Nobody once again display his poor reading comprehension. Most parents that abuse their kids are mothers. That's what I said

 

[nobody123]

Nobody once again display his poor reading comprehension. Most parents that abuse their kids are mothers. That's what I said

My apologies. I didn't realise you were going with some ill-defined and not-at-all quantifiable definition of "abuse". But of course you are, since you admire and respect it so much the the ebul feminazis do the same thing. Carry on.

 

[VIPhunter]

Reaction 1: I am not a pedophile. I don't want to date children either physical or mental children.
If you expect someone to hold the door open for you [and are not disabled] and pay your way, you are a child... and in terms of paying a mooch.
Reaction 2: I have no interest in being some woman's performing circus monkey. I have a small problem. Integrity and pride. Oh please stay with me, I'll pay you and open the door for you and jump around and entertain you while you sit there like a princess and judge me. Fuck that. I got a hand and a bottle of lube.


1: Either you are understating your case or you are full of shit. Women just throwing themselves at you wherever you go and you are not studly? Or maybe you wear your 6 figure income on your sleeves, women do tend to be shallow in that case.

2: in 4 and a half decade I've never met a willing woman without paying her first. Never. I am not the only person I can say that for. I know others who have met 1 and they were far from sexy [but they stuck it out and rightly so because they never met anyone after either].
3: I am a very friendly outgoing person. Unless someone is on the job and have to be nice to me, generally conversations within moments veer quickly to the I've embarrassed my species and should go back to my swamp. Never any willingness on her part to continue the conversation and not having the assburgers I can pick up on that thankfully for them.
4: Fuck you. I find it hilarious. Females call guys cheap because the guy won't pay their way. I man WTF. Do people even listen to themselves anymore. Does anybody lead an examined fucking life. The only thing worse than some mooch female going that self serving route is some white knight magina going that route. Dating doesn't take money if you have a vagina, this is not fair, this is not equal treatment, especially when childfree never married women actually make more than men.
5" Well excuse men for liking things. Not that video games are a big part of my life and I don't like sport.
6: Well excuse men for not having a certain interest. I've been around, doesn't really lead to much in the way of stories I find.
7: Dating should be fun? Wouldn't know.
8: What if you have a shit job and don't have the world by its tail. Oh yeah. I guess if you can fake seniority you got it made.

The TLDR version of what you wrote.

Women are money grubbing mooches and if you either can't or are not willing to work yourself to an early grave [or lie about it] you might as well not have a penis.
Yet you claim not to understand what we are on about. Interesting.

BTW on a very personal note. I hope and if I were religious I would pray that your wife finds out and takes you to the cleaners. I find your general attitude very insulting and offensive.

Classy.

Um, yeah. And men are sex crazed, porn addicted, unenlightened and lazy.

There's nothing wrong for paying for sex. You do it one way or another. As my Great Grandmother used to say, "Life ain't fair, kid, work with what you have'


Don't get angry with me, or don't be envious.

It's not the the runt of any litter that gets to mate. Is that not basic evolution?

Or at least nature.

 

[asterwald]

Classy.

Um, yeah. And men are sex crazed, porn addicted, unenlightened and lazy.

There's nothing wrong for paying for sex. You do it one way or another. As my Great Grandmother used to say, "Life ain't fair, kid, work with what you have'


Don't get angry with me, or don't be envious.

It's not the the runt of any litter that gets to mate. Is that not basic evolution?

Or at least nature.

Here is your "evolution" lol. In times of recession, dumb people breed more.

 

[asterwald]

 

[canada-man]

a message from Sandman

 

[VIPhunter]

Hey whatever. Point is, Male animals bash the fuck out of them selves for the chance to mate. Crap Male Mountain goats smashing their brains in, or male walrus' gouging their necks to pieces. No thanks to that noise. I think we have it easy, compared to other animals.

When I say 'willing', I mean women are willing to talk, get to know you, go for a coffee, a drink....where you take it after (is up to you. I don't mean you meet em on a bust they whip out your dick before they know your name, and you fuck em in front of strangers for fun. I'm thinking this is more the exception than the rule.)

Is not the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Why not work with women on their own terms, vs. your terms??

 

[canada-man]

a video by Spetsnaz

 

[canada-man]

another video by Spetnaz

 

[canada-man]

http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/07/w...nes-about-having-to-wait-to-use-the-bathroom/

Wealthy, Pampered White Woman Whines About Having To Wait To Use The Bathroom

 

[mdo2886]

Women in Toronto are a bit stuck up and bitchy, and it isn't the easiest place to approach them, but in my opinion are just begging to be picked up or even just chatted up by a confident man. I'm not talking about on the Internet or at bars but in regular, everyday situations. Sure you will get rejected more times than not, but I think you might find you'll be more successful than you might think. Men are such pussies these days, hiding in their basements and going on Tinder, I am convinced that if you have a bit of confidence, aren't an ogre and are somewhat interesting, you would clean up.

 

[canada-man]

another video by Spetsnaz

 

[canada-man]

feminasties defending the charlie hebdo terrorists.





Well what a surpise – feministing.com comes out in support of the Charlie Hebdo murders :

http://feministing.com/2015/01/08/j...arlie-hebdo-massacre-and-duelling-extremisms/


Another feminist hag defending the murders : http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/01/the-non-innocence-of-non-muslims/

 

[nobody123]

feminasties defending the charlie hebdo terrorists.

Well what a surpise – feministing.com comes out in support of the Charlie Hebdo murders :

http://feministing.com/2015/01/08/j...arlie-hebdo-massacre-and-duelling-extremisms/

Are you functionally illiterate? Please show us exactly where in that article she defends the terrorists, cause I can't find it try as I might.

On a related note, can you show the court on this doll where the feminists touched you?

 

[cdnsimon]

feminasties defending the charlie hebdo terrorists.





Well what a surpise – feministing.com comes out in support of the Charlie Hebdo murders :

http://feministing.com/2015/01/08/j...arlie-hebdo-massacre-and-duelling-extremisms/


Another feminist hag defending the murders : http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/01/the-non-innocence-of-non-muslims/

Canada-man, are you sure you've got the right webpages?

The first link goes to an article where this is said:

I support the sentiment, the empathy, the compassion that the slogan represents at its best (even if many are using it as a cover to spread Islamophobia as a misguided form of protest against Islamic extremism). But the simple fact is, I am not Charlie. I couldn’t be. Rather, I’m the sort of person who’d only ever get to be an ugly, rude caricature in their pages — a trans woman, a Latina, Puerto Rican but in the same community of Latinos scapegoated for various and sundry evils in the US, much as Muslims are in France. I’d never be the one wielding the pen, merely the lewd, pornographic subject and nothing more. I’d be fit for only the consumption of a privileged community, their joke, an unwilling jester. No, je ne suis pas Charlie.

Here the person is saying that she would only ever be depicted as a character in their pages - not the powerful. She goes on to say:

When I spoke on this issue on Twitter yesterday one man accused me of justifying the murders, falsely claiming that I’d argued that the slain writers and cartoonists “had it coming.” This sort of bad faith was compounded by the same individual spreading Islamophobic propaganda; free speech for him, but not for anyone who treats Charlie Hebdo as anything less than pristine (something I suspect their irreverent staff would have found quite laughable). And certainly no free speech for Muslims who are loudly expected to do nothing but “condemn” this atrocity, and then make no other meaningful contribution to this discussion.

I believe that what she is saying is that there needs to be room for criticism. The timing of these types of comments may need some retooling, but I don't come to the same conclusion you do after reading large sections of that page.

The second link has, what I interpret, a very short commentary about what another person said. It does not appear that the opinions of the blogger were presented on that page, just the opinion os another person. It also appears that the blogger writes with thick sarcasm. About the comments of the Swiss reporter; the linked page is not in English.

 

[canada-man]

Are you functionally illiterate? Please show us exactly where in that article she defends the terrorists, cause I can't find it try as I might.

On a related note, can you show the court on this doll where the feminists touched you?

i don't associate with feminists and SJWs. i don't out myself in situations where i would be vulnerable


she is making a moral equivalence between muslim terrorists and those reacting to muslim terrorist activities. that's moral relativism. and typical cry racism when people criticize them

 

[cdnsimon]

i don't associate with feminists and SJWs. i don't out myself in situations where i would be vulnerable


she is making a moral equivalence between muslim terrorists and those reacting to muslim terrorist activities. that's moral relativism. and typical cry racism when people criticize them

I don't interpret her statements as equivalent to a justification/rationalization of the events. She did not say she supported those acts - she said the opposite many times:

What happened to the staff of Charlie Hebdo yesterday sent a chill down my spine

I support the sentiment, the empathy, the compassion that the slogan represents at its best

Whatever one’s feelings on the Hebdo cartoons and editorial line, the staff not only had a right to publish it, but the society and culture in which they intervened had (and retains) a right to reply. To do otherwise, to freeze these slain writers and cartoonists in amber upon a pedestal is to actually disrespect them and their work, to pull it from the stream of discourse that is the life essence of creative work.

The worst thing we could do in the wake of this massacre is to wrap ourselves in knots defending free speech in the abstract while finishing the work of terrorists by torching what is left of it.

The last part about free speech seems to be saying that we should allow criticism of the newspaper, it drawings, etc., because that criticism is a part of free speech - what many stand up for. Allowing only one view of the publication would be similar to what the terrorists wanted to do: only have their view present.

Again, the timing could be better for this message.

 

[canada-man]

 

[cdnsimon]

I came across this: http://paper-bird.net/2015/01/09/why-i-am-not-charlie/

So far a good read.