Post: #1

Post: #2

Please retitle the thread. While most of us can understand that you feel bitter about this blatant lying, it is not justifiable to title a thread in a manner that most people misinterpret.

Also, those 2 guys are low testosterone bitchboys. Except for desperate fatties and uglies, no woman should want to sleep with them out of basic self-respect. Would you rather listen to them or someone who has worked hard and knows enough about women to make an educated statement about getting with them?

Post: #3

(06-02-2014 11:50 PM)xpatplayer Wrote:  Please retitle the thread. While most of us can understand that you feel bitter about this blatant lying, it is not justifiable to title a thread in a manner that most people misinterpret.

Also, those 2 guys are low testosterone bitchboys. Except for desperate fatties and uglies, no woman should want to sleep with them out of basic self-respect.

I'm not sure what you are getting at regarding the thread title, be more specific.

Post: #4

(06-02-2014 11:53 PM)Andoran Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 11:50 PM)xpatplayer Wrote:  Please retitle the thread. While most of us can understand that you feel bitter about this blatant lying, it is not justifiable to title a thread in a manner that most people misinterpret.

Also, those 2 guys are low testosterone bitchboys. Except for desperate fatties and uglies, no woman should want to sleep with them out of basic self-respect.

I'm not sure what you are getting at regarding the thread title, be more specific.

When I clicked the thread, I thought a liberal was actually giving great advice about pickup. Instead, it was about 2 losers trying to justify their white-knighting and beta-ness on camera.

Post: #5

The best response I've ever seen to this kind of thinking, by Yohami. It's good enough that I'll reprint the whole thing if you can't be bothered clicking through.

Just Treat Women As People And Everything Will Be All Right

Quote:…you say?

The moment you treat women as “people”, aka, as you treat invisible men, they will get offended.

* * *

Women dont want to be treated as men, so who is people?

Somehow this branch of people deserves to be looked into its uniqueness, be appreciated and celebrated for their tiny differences, be given a judgement-free pass for their mistakes and flaws, be catered to their subtle and non subtle desires, spoken and hidden wants – this branch of people deserves automatic respect, deserves to be nor objectified nor cataloged nor put on evidence nor made feel in any way inadequate, while they keep the right to objectify, catalog, judge and make others feel inadequate.

Because they are people, just a lot more special.

* * *

Like anything in feminism, “same” means “more”.

A woman is more than just a woman because she’s ALSO a human being. A woman should be appreciated if she has a beautiful body, but never should made feel bad if she’s ugly or fat. A woman should be celebrated if she has skills and degrees and should be championed to win, but should not be criticised nor be labeled a loser if she fails or lacks the ambition to make it happen. A woman should be given the freedom and the power, but not the blame nor the chains nor the judgement nor the responsibility. A woman should be praised if she has virtue but also be celebrated if she lacks it, should be respected for all the attributes she shares with other women, but also acknowledged for everything that sets her apart. Because she’s people. Or, just like what you would do with a man, if that man was the golden prince who could do no wrong. A woman is more than just a body, a personality, a role – she’s human, she’s a person, she’s unique.

On the other hand a man is still just a man, most likely a pig.

Post: #6

I had actually assumed that brilliant was sarcastic.

Post: #7

That dark haired chode's twitter is here: Matt Binder.

Hyper-aggressive, self-satisfied progressive online? Check.
Interest in signals of masculinity (GoT, WWE, etc) Check.
Always riding in to save women from themselves or men? Check.

White Knight Beta detected.

Best definition of beta? A man who desperately wants to want to be a man. Does everything but actually be a man, relying on signals of masculinity: tattoos, facial hair, hyper interest in sports or perceived manly TV shows/movies/stereotypical interests. For liberal types, spends lots of time criticizing men and masculinity, often times men they envy or wish to emulate but don't have the inner will.

As for the commentary, consider this bit. Just right now, a Law & Order episode featured Sam Waterson and his female co-counsel (Serena Southerlyn) dining with the state's psychiatrist. The defendant had killed an actress, a woman known for her extremely narrow views on life and her controlling behavior of men. The psychiatrist said that most men do not like women like this, as women like this reinforce the idea that the American man is a debased, ill formed human in desperate need of remedy.

Southerlyn got worked up, badgering the psychiatrist and threatened to walk out. He replied, "My point exactly, the stereotypical controlling behavior exhibited by women towards men and their opinions." Waterson smirks, leans back and says, "I didn't say it." The scene ends after that.

I share this because these manginas reinforce the tiresome social narrative that we men are in desperate need of remedy for our "problematic masculinity," needless displays of dominance and how nice guys are not really nice. All of these social vectors paint a portrait of men who if they just let go of their sexist bullshit, they could see women as humans and we can finally have our sexual utopia that women have been impatiently waiting since our evolution from apes.

The discussions of "problematic" issues around pick-up relate simultaneously to the desire for agendered relationship and sex advice and the maintenance of the social narrative of men as in need of fixing - at the hands of a woman. The former is desired mostly by women, who want advice to both women and men reflect what women want, not what men want. The latter relates to our cultural milieu that benefits from our nervousness that results in us opening our pocketbooks.

Confident, self-assured men are a threat to the nature of consumerism that pervades relationship/sex advice in general and PUA specifically. Marketing and advertising has little functional difference from propaganda and is aimed at exploiting our anxiety and shame. Men's Health, Pick-up conferences, books, etc. all exploit this anxiety. As such, modern advice simply makes people think they are moving forward, but in reality they are on a treadmill. Real, substantive advice is either ignored or treated as abhorrent.

Insecure men who need female guidance is a manifestation of women's insecurity vis a vie their value towards men. They need classes of men who need their headship and moral guidance to feel secure in their identity. An uncontrollable male is dangerous, as he could rupture her identity at any moment while also being incredibly sexually alluring.

As far as these two chodes are concerned, liberal types like to engage in puritanical-type restriction of sexuality, but not because of a desire for repression of anti-social energy, but as a cessation of needs that can only be met from without, outside the self. This is narcissism, as they are seeking the tamp down as much as they can on needs and desires that can't be met by yourself alone. The rage that results from the realization that a person cannot meet most if not all of your needs if terrifying, so it must be repressed in order to simply exist.

The political analysis about "generalizing" is moronic, as we often say things like "Men like the NFL" or "Women enjoy Lifetime." Implicit in the observations is that it is a general observation: Most NFL fans are men, most viewers of Lifetime are women. Just because one man is indifferent to football or a woman is bored with Lifetime doesn't mean they are not real men or women, just men or women who don't behave, like or act like the majority of men or women. It is ridiculous to whine, whine, whine about how society socializes men and women differently and this is intolerable but we cannot, ever, talk about how this manifests itself. Unless it is "problematic" behavior by men towards women.

Post: #8

(06-03-2014 01:37 AM)2Wycked Wrote:  Best definition of beta? A man who desperately wants to want to be a man. Does everything but actually be a man.

Post: #9

(06-02-2014 11:50 PM)xpatplayer Wrote:  When I clicked the thread, I thought a liberal was actually giving great advice about pickup. Instead, it was about 2 losers trying to justify their white-knighting and beta-ness on camera.

I thought adding liberal to the title was enough of a give-away, when was the last time a you read something made by a mangina leftist who was worthy of consideration?

Post: #10

Before they showed the 2nd guy - from his voice I thought it was a woman.

Betas always sound as if they are retelling what teacher madame wants to hear from them in front of class. This case is no exception. I believe largest part into initiating oneself into proper manhood in this age is to dis-learn to be a good school boy.

Post: #11

They have strong game denial.

A symptom of seeing bigger, more muscular guys just being dicks to women and getting a notch out of it. Their viewpoint of the world collapses at this point so they withdraw into what they known.

Game denialism.

Post: #12

(06-03-2014 02:06 AM)Andoran Wrote:  

(06-02-2014 11:50 PM)xpatplayer Wrote:  When I clicked the thread, I thought a liberal was actually giving great advice about pickup. Instead, it was about 2 losers trying to justify their white-knighting and beta-ness on camera.

I thought adding liberal to the title was enough of a give-away, when was the last time a you read something made by a mangina leftist who was worthy of consideration?

Probably the last time I read something made by a rightwing nutjob that was worthy of consideration. At least you seem to have sucked it up and changed the deceptive title.

Post: #13

A lesson from the 1980s - be very suspicious of anyone declaring themselves a "majority".

Were they working up to a point in here? I just wasted 3 minutes of my life listening to two grown men blather. Surely there must've been a point in the rest of the show? First 30 seconds of transcript:

Quote:Amanda wrote a really good piece and she's, you know, she's great, she's a really sharp analyst of these things, and I hope that that... that was where the reaction, you know, that I had last week was, was coming from, and I, I just gotta reiterate a million times, it's nothing to do, it's nothing to do. Cause I, I really did, I saw people make comments that like, look, I relate to this stuff in the same way that someone else might relate to like self-development, or improving your - and I, I have no...

I don't care what you think of Rush Limbaugh, but listen to Rush for 30 seconds. He makes statements and commands authority. Rush would say the same thing in the same amount of time using half the words. Same with Bill O'Reilly. Same thing with Bill Maher. This guy is just a no-talent hack running his mouth.

Speaking of conflating things, the guy's assumption that using game makes you a dirtbag would be a good place to start.

Post: #14

(06-03-2014 11:55 AM)RockHard Wrote:  A lesson from the 1980s - be very suspicious of anyone declaring themselves a "majority".

Were they working up to a point in here? I just wasted 3 minutes of my life listening to two grown men blather. Surely there must've been a point in the rest of the show? First 30 seconds of transcript:

Quote:Amanda wrote a really good piece and she's, you know, she's great, she's a really sharp analyst of these things, and I hope that that... that was where the reaction, you know, that I had last week was, was coming from, and I, I just gotta reiterate a million times, it's nothing to do, it's nothing to do. Cause I, I really did, I saw people make comments that like, look, I relate to this stuff in the same way that someone else might relate to like self-development, or improving your - and I, I have no...

I don't care what you think of Rush Limbaugh, but listen to Rush for 30 seconds. He makes statements and commands authority. Rush would say the same thing in the same amount of time using half the words. Same with Bill O'Reilly. Same thing with Bill Maher. This guy is just a no-talent hack running his mouth.

Speaking of conflating things, the guy's assumption that using game makes you a dirtbag would be a good place to start.

Listening to Bill Maher made me more articulate. Part of the reason the modern left sounds so whiny is because they don't listen to anyone with authority. Listen to FDR & Clinton and then listen to Obama or most other modern progressives (The Young Turks being a notable exception).

I think part of it is because low-testosterone behavior is encouraged in modern liberal communities. Listening to O'Reilly talking about about the VA scandal right now, he knows he wants to say, he's very articulate & the listener understands these points. The Left however does not have such role-models.