Post: #1

I was discussing government-provided healthcare (which I personally do not support) with a friend's girlfriend, who studied at Wellesley College. She expressed her ideas about how all people deserve to have treatment for illnesses even if they don't work and cannot pay for their own medical expenses, and as she saw that I didn't agree, she got more and more aggressive. Eventually she said something like,

"Maybe the reason you don't support government healthcare is because you have a negative outlook toward life because of all the stuff that's happened to you recently."

I didn't let her faze me, and replied along the lines of, "I don't think that's actually relevant to my perspective on the role and function of government," and later called her out for going ad hominem on me. Even so, her comment cut me a little. Not because I think she spoke truthfully, but because she took something personal and tried to use it to break my confidence when she saw that she couldn't win an insignificant political discussion.

I think women do this sort of thing when they feel cornered and they see that they lack the upper hand in the conversation, and I personally find it unkind and unpleasant. I usually just power through it, either calling out the personal attack or ignoring it and refocusing the conversation on the topic at hand, but I want to ask:

How do you guys deal with it when you're trying to have a stimulating conversation with a girl and she gets personal because she can't win the discussion by normal means?

Post: #2

It's not just women, just turn on Faux News (Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly) or MSNBC (the dyke cunt) and you will see the following:

1. Have discussion topic
2. Have each side state their position
3. Make counterpoint
4. When counterpoint doesn't change minds, start getting louder and more aggressive (usually the host)
5. When shouting doesn't work, make ad hominem
6. End discussion abruptly
7. Declare yourself the winner

Rinse and repeat for each discussion

Post: #3

Best advice, don't try to have intellectual debates with girls.

They're bad enough with guys, double that with girls since they're completely irrational/emotional when debating. Also having a logical discussion about politics with a girl I'm trying to fuck is a sure fire way to dry that snatch.

Post: #4

Stefan Molyneux has some good insights on how to steer conversations with "statists". It's all about getting them to see the gun in the room. How all of these government goodies stem from coercion, and not cooperation.

Post: #5

For some reason, several years ago, I used to engage women in serious conversation. I used to do it for fun, especially if the group included a fat chick, because who cares what they say anyway.

And you're right, even if they didn't know you personally, they would try and use something about your appearance or whatever to try and throw you. You know the usuals, "you're a fag. You have a little dick. Maybe you should get laid more often."

I'm passed that stage now. I waste no time on convos with females unless it's going to directly lead me into their panties.

Post: #6

This vid is a classic. Annoying cunts "debating" in the manner described above, but the payoff at the end of the video is EPIC.

Post: #7

(09-20-2012 03:52 PM)Laser Wrote:  This vid is a classic. Annoying cunts "debating" in the manner described above, but the payoff at the end of the video is EPIC.

Good God that broad Tracy was annoying. But I like the way this guy handles himself. Calm, rational, and measured.

Post: #8

(09-20-2012 03:52 PM)Laser Wrote:  This vid is a classic. Annoying cunts "debating" in the manner described above, but the payoff at the end of the video is EPIC.

The last 2 minutes are pretty epic.

Post: #9

Like most have said in the manosphere, never get into an argument with a woman about a serious topic. They don't think logically so it will resort to personal attack on you or they will somehow twist your words and make it sound like you are attacking them personally.

Best to talk about nothing in particular, which can be tough at times but still better than the alternative.

Post: #10

Haha. I've just watched the last 20 seconds or so of that video ten times in a row.

Awesome.

Post: #11

(09-20-2012 03:52 PM)Laser Wrote:  

If scientists could turn the vibration of my sides into an energy source, America would have it's answer to it's dependence on oil.

This dude is awesome, I'm going to have to find more of him on youtube.

Post: #12

It's amazing how the discussion got twisted. She puts a car against children, as if to say men WOULDN'T choose their children. Women's goal is to marry and have kids, and it's MEN THAT GIVE THAT TO THEM. And women are every bit as materialistic - if it isn't a car, it's something else, like the size/style of their home, designer clothes/shoes, or other items within the household. She also trotted out the whole "women enter their sexual peak in their 30s" claptrap. They also trotted out the adage that men "mature" later, thus it takes them longer to figure out what they want to do. Bullshit on that. Men take longer to establish themselves in what they're doing, to get to an income level where they can provide the bitch they marry with all the shit she wants, that they themselves could gladly live without had they stayed single. The premise that guys don't still spend their money on women, while women pocket their own money is pure hamster. That hasn't changed in generations, and never will on a large scale.

Post: #13

I was watching some of the guy's (Marc Rudov) video. They are were all pretty much on point with stuff said in the manosphere. Divorce rape, pussy whipped betas, single mom sluts, etc. What's consistent though is the woman who he's arguing against always resorts to personal attacks, straw mans, and red herrings.

Post: #14

(09-20-2012 03:52 PM)Laser Wrote:  This vid is a classic. Annoying cunts "debating" in the manner described above, but the payoff at the end of the video is EPIC.

That guy is a bad ass!

Post: #15

And you also notice how when he blew her up at the end of the discussion about taking alimony, the host immediately tried to end the discussion. Exactly what women do when they have no retort. You don't collect ALIMONY because of the kids, that's what child support is for. You collect alimony because you can. I'm sure she can afford to take care of herself AND the kids if she wanted to (I'm not suggesting men shouldn't support their kids), but if women can get alimony AND child support, I doubt too many women would say no regardless of their own income. You ca't attack men for the importance they place on their income, then help yourself to it when it's convenient for you.

Post: #16

(09-20-2012 08:39 PM)Timoteo Wrote:  And you also notice how when he blew her up at the end of the discussion about taking alimony, the host immediately tried to end the discussion. Exactly what women do when they have no retort. You don't collect ALIMONY because of the kids, that's what child support is for. You collect alimony because you can. I'm sure she can afford to take care of herself AND the kids if she wanted to (I'm not suggesting men shouldn't support their kids), but if women can get alimony AND child support, I doubt too many women would say no regardless of their own income. You ca't attack men for the importance they place on their income, then help yourself to it when it's convenient for you.

Nor can you attack a man personally for his wife filing for divorce, then get anally pained when he brings up the fact that you are so strong and independent that your ex is legally forced to supplement your income.

Post: #17

Men continue to amaze me. It's been thousands of years and women have never been rational thinkers. Stop thinking you can have a rational conversation with one.

Post: #18

(09-20-2012 10:43 PM)Gmac Wrote:  Men continue to amaze me. It's been thousands of years and women have never been rational thinkers. Stop thinking you can have a rational conversation with one.

agreed. and if you can let go of your need for rationality, you can have some really fun conversations with girls. it's like playing make believe with a kid, or playing fetch with a dog. enjoy them for what they are.

Post: #19

(09-20-2012 01:41 PM)polymath Wrote:  I was discussing government-provided healthcare (which I personally do not support) with a friend's girlfriend, who studied at Wellesley College. She expressed her ideas about how all people deserve to have treatment for illnesses even if they don't work and cannot pay for their own medical expenses, and as she saw that I didn't agree, she got more and more aggressive. Eventually she said something like,

"Maybe the reason you don't support government healthcare is because you have a negative outlook toward life because of all the stuff that's happened to you recently."

I didn't let her faze me, and replied along the lines of, "I don't think that's actually relevant to my perspective on the role and function of government," and later called her out for going ad hominem on me. Even so, her comment cut me a little. Not because I think she spoke truthfully, but because she took something personal and tried to use it to break my confidence when she saw that she couldn't win an insignificant political discussion.

I think women do this sort of thing when they feel cornered and they see that they lack the upper hand in the conversation, and I personally find it unkind and unpleasant. I usually just power through it, either calling out the personal attack or ignoring it and refocusing the conversation on the topic at hand, but I want to ask:

How do you guys deal with it when you're trying to have a stimulating conversation with a girl and she gets personal because she can't win the discussion by normal means?

Haven't read the other replies yet, but will jump in.

Actually, having forum discussions has helped with with becoming "outcome independent" towards how discussions go. It's not like I'm no longer affected by these types of frustrating rhetorical tactics, but at least I'm more familiar with them. I'm not longer shocked, and am much less disappointed and rarely upset when I see the same old same old.

For many years I'd engage everyone and everyone, for as long as it took to plow through the stupidity and get an acknowledged response that they admit the internal logical inconsistencies of their view.

Then my strategy was to engage for a long time, until I had evidence that the person was not capable of logic, at which time I publicly blew them off, with an explanation as to why.

But lately I just notice that a logical conversation isn't likely, and there will be no satisfaction of any public acknowledgment of their inconsistencies. I just move on quickly, realizing that it's easier to find satisfaction elsewhere rather than engage.

This process took many, many years of participating in forums. Ten or twenty - I don't know.

And as for women, I'm a little bit surprised to hear you say "when you're trying to have a stimulating conversation", as I can't remember the last time I've even tried that. That might be the problem right there.

I've heard it said at least 50 times by 50 different people, it is extremely rare to find in one woman someone you want to fuck and someone you can have a stimulating discussion with. You might be fishing for unicorns.

Post: #20

(09-20-2012 02:05 PM)cibo Wrote:  Best advice, don't try to have intellectual debates with girls.

They're bad enough with guys, double that with girls since they're completely irrational/emotional when debating. Also having a logical discussion about politics with a girl I'm trying to fuck is a sure fire way to dry that snatch.

100% true

Chris Rock Wrote:Another thing fellas,
DON'T ARGUE!
You cannot win. You can never beat a woman in an argument, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.
Cuz man, we are handicapped when it comes to argument, cuz we have a need to MAKE SENSE~~
Women ain't got a lot of little thing like sense stuck up their argument. Cuz she ain't in it for sense, she's in it for distance and irritation.

"How long can I talk before this motherfucker snaps?~"

The rantings of a young man in a feminized society


my personal opinion is that (contrary to popular belief that girls develop faster than boys) as for their rational/logic side they stop at age 5 and stay there for the whole fucking life. they're like children. nobody gets into discussion when a child say something stupid. it's more like "yeah yeah ok nice nice go play somewhere" with a pat on the head. and that's the best way to handle women too IMO

Post: #21

(09-21-2012 02:59 AM)XXL Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 02:05 PM)cibo Wrote:  Best advice, don't try to have intellectual debates with girls.

They're bad enough with guys, double that with girls since they're completely irrational/emotional when debating. Also having a logical discussion about politics with a girl I'm trying to fuck is a sure fire way to dry that snatch.

100% true

Chris Rock Wrote:Another thing fellas,
DON'T ARGUE!
You cannot win. You can never beat a woman in an argument, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.
Cuz man, we are handicapped when it comes to argument, cuz we have a need to MAKE SENSE~~
Women ain't got a lot of little thing like sense stuck up their argument. Cuz she ain't in it for sense, she's in it for distance and irritation.

"How long can I talk before this motherfucker snaps?~"

The rantings of a young man in a feminized society


my personal opinion is that (contrary to popular belief that girls develop faster than boys) as for their rational/logic side they stop at age 5 and stay there for the whole fucking life. they're like children. nobody gets into discussion when a child say something stupid. it's more like "yeah yeah ok nice nice go play somewhere" with a pat on the head. and that's the best way to handle women too IMO

This is something you hear women repeat ad-nauseum. Because women want to marry and start families earlier than males, they spin that into maturity. Or because men still engage in the kinds of activities that they may have enjoyed as boys (activities girls/women have never been interested in), they use this as some sort of sign of arrested development or immaturity. What it really means is men have INTERESTS, while most women are simply looking for some guy to latch onto, even while trumpeting their strength and independence. Our refusal to "get serious" and "settle down" with them angers and frustrates, so they attempt to shame us by calling us immature.

Post: #22

Based on my many, many years on this planet, I am almost convinced that women are biologically incapable of using logic and reason.

Post: #23

From Roissy's blog.

Quote:http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2009/12/1...uctionism/

Why 99.9% of history’s accomplishments have been achieved by men:

Quote: Researchers using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study brain activation have found that men and women respond differently to positive and negative stimuli, according to a study presented today at the annual meeting of theRadiological Society of North America (RSNA).

“Men may direct more attention to sensory aspects of emotional stimuli and tend to process them in terms of implications for required action, whereas women direct more attention to the feelings engendered by emotional stimuli,” said Andrzej Urbanik, M.D., Ph.D., chair of Radiology at Jagiellonian University Hospital in Krakow, Poland.

Like a little fifteen year old girl, defending her feelings inside.

How does that old saying go? Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument. Which preference is more likely to lead one away from the truth? I’ve said it before: Suffrage is the poison pill that eventually destroys the body politic of a nation.

Post: #24

(09-21-2012 01:59 PM)Tigre Wrote:  How does that old saying go? Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument.

I'm not sure why he called it an "old saying" in that post, as in a previous post he quoted me saying that and gave credit.

Post: #25

I sure that somewhere there is a women who does not resort to ad hominem attacks when losing an argument. I, however, have never met such a woman.