Post: #26

(07-25-2018 12:08 PM)asdfk Wrote:  God, some of the replies in this thread....

(07-25-2018 09:37 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:29 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  All feminists are insane. Good riddance to human rot that's now physically rotting six feet under.

All unnecessary loss of human life is a tragedy.

^ This.

Here's the thing, FEMEN and the left would say good riddance to human rot to any member of this forum or conservative.

Not saying we need to stoop to their level, just saying what their obvious reactions would be.

So when guys on the forum say fuck her good riddance, it's to be expected from some on here.

Post: #27

(07-25-2018 10:48 AM)kaotic Wrote:  It's a shame she went to the feminist side, I wonder if she left a note or an email.

FEMEN to me was nothing but hot attention whores stripping for a political cause.

She did leave a note: «Вы все фейк»... "you're all fake"

Post: #28

This woman devoted her life to telling women that finding the right man and starting a family was a backwards thing to do, yes?

Her actions & rhetoric undoubtedly prevented some successful family formations.

Not a person worth mourning.

Post: #29

(07-25-2018 01:08 PM)Enoch Wrote:  This woman devoted her life to telling women that finding the right man and starting a family was a backwards thing to do, yes?

Her actions & rhetoric undoubtedly prevented some successful family formations.

Not a person worth mourning.

She didn't even do that. That was what they did back in the 1960s when they had clear-cut goals. Since then, the family structure has been damaged and women are in every workplace and college. So groups like Femen basically protest abstract concepts, not real issues.

According to online info, the group "challenged authoritarianism and racism" and fought "patriarchy in its three manifestations – sexual exploitation of women, dictatorship and religion."

They mostly did this by taking their clothes off in public places. This makes me think Femen was a venue for would-be strippers who felt actual stripping was beneath them intellectually, so they found a way to justify getting topless.

That said, Oksana Shachko had quit Femen, which had splintered into factions in the past few years. She was working as a painter in Paris recently. This must have been a big change for someone accustomed to massive media attention since the age of about 21.

Looking at this in that light, maybe she ended up like the child stars we see here in the U.S. They burn bright when they're young, but as soon as they fame fades and they have to live life beyond the public eye, they fall apart.

I spoke to Paul Petersen (SIC) several times about this when I was a reporter. He's a former child actor from "The Donna Reed Show" who now runs an advocacy group. He says the adjustment from fame to private life feels like going backwards and is difficult for even well-adjusted people to accept.

I'm guessing Oksana Shachko wasn't so well-adjusted.

Post: #30

(07-25-2018 12:28 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Here's the thing, FEMEN and the left would say good riddance to human rot to any member of this forum or conservative.

Not saying we need to stoop to their level, just saying what their obvious reactions would be.

So when guys on the forum say fuck her good riddance, it's to be expected from some on here.

Most people on either side of the political spectrum do not wish death and suffering to befall on people with a different political opinion.

Post: #31

(07-25-2018 01:38 PM)asdfk Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 12:28 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Here's the thing, FEMEN and the left would say good riddance to human rot to any member of this forum or conservative.

Not saying we need to stoop to their level, just saying what their obvious reactions would be.

So when guys on the forum say fuck her good riddance, it's to be expected from some on here.

Most people on either side of the political spectrum do not wish death and suffering to befall on people with a different political opinion.

I'd say this is true, but eroding little by little with every passing year with the polarization of politics.

Obviously, this forum is a very concentrated conservative side of the spectrum.

Post: #32

(07-25-2018 01:42 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I'd say this is true, but eroding little by little with every passing year with the polarization of politics.

I would agree with that. There's a fine line between the sort of black pill zombie apocalypse predictions that flow through the manosphere and open advocation for starting a zombie apocalypse.

Post: #33

(07-25-2018 01:38 PM)asdfk Wrote:  Most people on either side of the political spectrum do not wish death and suffering to befall on people with a different political opinion.

The biggest different between conservatives and leftists that i see is that conservatives just want to be left alone and don't want to bother others, whereas leftists seem to want to transform the world according to their ideals through compulsion. I think this is the main reason that far leftists have got away with their insanity for so long - most conservatives have just tried to ignore it and get on with their lives without trying to push back. This has mostly been a fine strategy up until quite recently, when the left was emboldened by its success and just went too far, and conservatives began to push back. This pushback has only been relatively mild, but it hit them hard. If they had just stepped off the throttle a few years ago, I don't believe that Trump, Brexit or the rise of right wing parties in Europe would have ever happened. Have they learnt from this strategic mistake? Of course not, and leftist insanity louder than ever. They are like a school yard bully that doesn't learn from a bloody nose, and will only be humbled by a savage beating.

Eventually there will come a point where the right will understand that they fighting an existential battle for their values and way of life, and it won't be pretty unfortunately. Life in the West has been so comfortable and peaceful for such a long time that we've forgotten the lessons of history. The savagery and brutality of war is something that only occurs in far off lands, and we never consider that it could ever visit our shores. But it will come, probably sooner than we except, and it will be brutal. I know that sounds hyperbolic, but nobody in early 20th century Europe expected the devastation of the two world wars - it was a time of unprecedented (up to that point) prosperity, peace and innovation, and the idea that this would all be destroyed by war was unthinkable. Nobody expected that tens off millions of men, women and children would be slaughtered for political and ideological reasons. And yet that's exactly what happened.

So it's true that for now very few people wish death or suffering for others, but history shows us that this can change very quickly. And when the pendulum gains momentum it soon becomes becomes unstoppable.

Post: #34

Perhaps she was preparing to tell some thruths about some people....

Femen is a bunch of brainless and retarded chicks (mostly hot) who are on the payroll of globalists/jews...and who joins the clubs, normally does not leave the club...alive.

Priceless Putin reaction...

Post: #35

(07-25-2018 09:33 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:29 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  All feminists are insane. Good riddance to human rot that's now physically rotting six feet under.

That's harsh. Wouldn't you say radical feminism is actually the fault of the men in her society? Women are, after all, simply large children.

Let me address this.

In no way, ever, is Feminism even remotely men's fault. However, it's not the fault of childlike women either.

Here is my theory, feel free to pick this apart:

Feminism is very easily identified as a movement created by lesbians specifically to get their revenge on married (pretty) women. Lesbians and various other ugly/angry women, usually very intelligent (high IQs) but emotionally stunted by the hate they feel for being ignored by men and other cute women in high school.

Women have always had their own "society". Men don't control women's society...we manage the infrastructure, the buildings, the food supply, the military...we are the builders of the structure. But women "inhabit" our structure with their own rules and systems. They tell us what they want, we build it. But they are in charge.

Women's society has 3 groups in my view:

-20% of women are naturally happy, sweet, and love everything about having relationships men. They are naturally "evangelists" for their love of men. These women are universally successful in every society in every age. They are "happy".

-60% of women are neutral. They can have good relationships with men or not, depending on where they are led. They are "sheep". Women are naturally inclined to follow the herd, so control of this group is important.

-20% of women are ugly or have angry/resentful/egotistical personalities that make it impossible for them to build successful relationships with men. They are "witches".

For most of human history, the "20% happy" women were in charge. They ran women's society. The 60% sheep-like women followed their rules. Women's society was based on the idea of building and maintaining healthy relationships with men...just as a jockey must build a successful relationship with his prizewinning stallion racehorse. Life was harsh, starvation and disease were rampant, technology didn't exist. Without relationships with men, women and children would instantly starve. Women ran their local villages with an iron fist, to ensure the survival of the community.

The 20% of women who were ugly/angry could never succeed in this Woman's society, they were the losers, the outcasts, the witches and the spinsters. Not having husbands and children, they starved quickly. Married, successful women made sure their daughters were kept far, far away from these witches, so that their hatred of men (which can be seductive) would not spread. If witches/lesbians got too much power, they were killed. See my post on witches.

What happened in the 1960s was, the 20% ugly/angry women created Feminism and used modern PR techniques ("big lies") to slowly, gradually lure the 60% sheep-like women over to their side. Part of this is that the 20% happy women lost interest in preventing this perversion. With modern society, they no longer have to be as careful to prevent collapse of women's society. They can just marry millionaires (which is what the top 20% of happy women do) and enjoy their lives. So the witches were allowed to take over.

What we have now is that the balance of power in female society has shifted fundamentally. 80% of women now hate men. The witches are in charge of the sheep. If Hillary had won, they would have had control of the nuclear arsenal. This has never happened before.

Nobody knows what is going to happen now. But the 20/60/20 model is useful to remember.

Post: #36

Wicca = Feminism

Feminism = Lesbianism

Lesbianism = Narcissism.

Post: #37

Great post MrLemon. But I think you're missing a key point: the catalyst. The "ugly 20%" as you mentioned has existed throughout all time. What was the spark that gave them the power they have today?

I say it was a realization in the early part of the 20th century that men were the earners and women the spenders. Giving women more rights and the ability to vote was good for big American industry, which was exploding at the time. Give women equal status, and they'll buy more shit.

Post: #38

(07-25-2018 11:44 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:36 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:33 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:29 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  All feminists are insane. Good riddance to human rot that's now physically rotting six feet under.

That's harsh. Wouldn't you say radical feminism is actually the fault of the men in her society? Women are, after all, simply large children.

Blaming men only is too convenient as it takes credit away from normal, good natured women who resist feminism.

Wouldn't you say most of those good natured women are the way they are due to good parenting and positive, both male and female, people in their lives?

I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but 300,000 years of feminine instincts don't suddenly disappear because of a few generations of bra burning, career focused, family hating, METOO nut cases. Women feel repulsion, and at some deep level most women are repulsed by feminism. Women have to make the conscious choice to partake in it.

Post: #39

(07-25-2018 05:43 PM)RIslander Wrote:  Great post MrLemon. But I think you're missing a key point: the catalyst. The "ugly 20%" as you mentioned has existed throughout all time. What was the spark that gave them the power they have today?

I say it was a realization in the early part of the 20th century that men were the earners and women the spenders. Giving women more rights and the ability to vote was good for big American industry, which was exploding at the time. Give women equal status, and they'll buy more shit.

Yah, I Agee completely. The catalyst was the rise of technology, which let's face it, changed everything completely.

Before 1900 women didn't give a shit about "the vote" because it really didn't affect them at all. There was no technology, no charitiy, no government regulators at all. You could live your entire life without seeing a single Federal employee, not even once. Women ran their local towns with an iron fist, their men toed the line. Men fought wars and hunted buffalo, and the women wanted nothing to do that any of that. They just wanted the spoils brought back to feed the kids.

After 1900 -- all that changed completely. Government took on a huge new role. By some strange coincidence, at that same time, suddenly women decided that they needed the vote. Women are geniuses at making sure that everything men do or invent is converted into benefits for women. It's an instinct they've honed.

Men of course gave it to them, because men in Anglo countries do what their wives order them to do.

Then technology, WW2, the atom bomb. Think how utterly the world changed in just 50 years. Unbelievable change.

I'm not surprised that in the 1960s Feminism sprung up. The society of the world was in wild swinging chaos. The witches and lesbos had been waiting for millennia for their moment.

Now they have infected all of the human race with their insanity and it's witches, lesbos, gays, trannies, commies, and all the freaks, haters, and losers of the human race, all empowered by Twitter to broadcast their mental diseases into the minds of 1 billion children. God help us.

Post: #40

(07-25-2018 04:31 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:33 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:29 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  All feminists are insane. Good riddance to human rot that's now physically rotting six feet under.

That's harsh. Wouldn't you say radical feminism is actually the fault of the men in her society? Women are, after all, simply large children.

Let me address this.

In no way, ever, is Feminism even remotely men's fault. However, it's not the fault of childlike women either.

Here is my theory, feel free to pick this apart:

Feminism is very easily identified as a movement created by lesbians specifically to get their revenge on married (pretty) women. Lesbians and various other ugly/angry women, usually very intelligent (high IQs) but emotionally stunted by the hate they feel for being ignored by men and other cute women in high school.

Women have always had their own "society". Men don't control women's society...we manage the infrastructure, the buildings, the food supply, the military...we are the builders of the structure. But women "inhabit" our structure with their own rules and systems. They tell us what they want, we build it. But they are in charge.

Women's society has 3 groups in my view:

-20% of women are naturally happy, sweet, and love everything about having relationships men. They are naturally "evangelists" for their love of men. These women are universally successful in every society in every age. They are "happy".

-60% of women are neutral. They can have good relationships with men or not, depending on where they are led. They are "sheep". Women are naturally inclined to follow the herd, so control of this group is important.

-20% of women are ugly or have angry/resentful/egotistical personalities that make it impossible for them to build successful relationships with men. They are "witches".

For most of human history, the "20% happy" women were in charge. They ran women's society. The 60% sheep-like women followed their rules. Women's society was based on the idea of building and maintaining healthy relationships with men...just as a jockey must build a successful relationship with his prizewinning stallion racehorse. Life was harsh, starvation and disease were rampant, technology didn't exist. Without relationships with men, women and children would instantly starve. Women ran their local villages with an iron fist, to ensure the survival of the community.

The 20% of women who were ugly/angry could never succeed in this Woman's society, they were the losers, the outcasts, the witches and the spinsters. Not having husbands and children, they starved quickly. Married, successful women made sure their daughters were kept far, far away from these witches, so that their hatred of men (which can be seductive) would not spread. If witches/lesbians got too much power, they were killed. See my post on witches.

What happened in the 1960s was, the 20% ugly/angry women created Feminism and used modern PR techniques ("big lies") to slowly, gradually lure the 60% sheep-like women over to their side. Part of this is that the 20% happy women lost interest in preventing this perversion. With modern society, they no longer have to be as careful to prevent collapse of women's society. They can just marry millionaires (which is what the top 20% of happy women do) and enjoy their lives. So the witches were allowed to take over.

What we have now is that the balance of power in female society has shifted fundamentally. 80% of women now hate men. The witches are in charge of the sheep. If Hillary had won, they would have had control of the nuclear arsenal. This has never happened before.

Nobody knows what is going to happen now. But the 20/60/20 model is useful to remember.

What the good sources of info you came across that informed your post?

Post: #41

(07-25-2018 01:29 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 01:08 PM)Enoch Wrote:  This woman devoted her life to telling women that finding the right man and starting a family was a backwards thing to do, yes?

Her actions & rhetoric undoubtedly prevented some successful family formations.

Not a person worth mourning.

She didn't even do that. That was what they did back in the 1960s when they had clear-cut goals. Since then, the family structure has been damaged and women are in every workplace and college. So groups like Femen basically protest abstract concepts, not real issues.

According to online info, the group "challenged authoritarianism and racism" and fought "patriarchy in its three manifestations – sexual exploitation of women, dictatorship and religion."

So she bought into Marxism since only Marxism and the crazy ideologies rooted in Marxism (socialism, communism, feminism) view history as a one dimensional power struggle between oppressor and the oppressed. And she took her clothes off in public to change the world.

She proves once again that liberalism is a mental disorder.

Post: #42

(07-25-2018 05:43 PM)RIslander Wrote:  Great post MrLemon. But I think you're missing a key point: the catalyst. The "ugly 20%" as you mentioned has existed throughout all time. What was the spark that gave them the power they have today?

I say it was a realization in the early part of the 20th century that men were the earners and women the spenders. Giving women more rights and the ability to vote was good for big American industry, which was exploding at the time. Give women equal status, and they'll buy more shit.

You're on the right track, but you're not quite there. Feminism was set up for two main reasons:

1- to dilute the labor force and drive down wages. Men used to support their families with one income, but now that women have joined the workforce and diluted wages, women are nearly forced to work, and they also get soaked as taxpayers.

2- to destroy the social fiber. Kids grow in daycare centers and pre-schools, so parents have less influence over them. We're one big step closer to the Brave New World vision of familyless test tube babies.

People from broken families turn into neurotic consumers and are easier to control and manipulate.

Post: #43

I note from that picture it was quite cold that day.

Post: #44

(07-25-2018 07:46 PM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 04:31 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:33 AM)RIslander Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:29 AM)HornyRamone Wrote:  All feminists are insane. Good riddance to human rot that's now physically rotting six feet under.

That's harsh. Wouldn't you say radical feminism is actually the fault of the men in her society? Women are, after all, simply large children.

Let me address this.

In no way, ever, is Feminism even remotely men's fault. However, it's not the fault of childlike women either.

Here is my theory, feel free to pick this apart:

Feminism is very easily identified as a movement created by lesbians specifically to get their revenge on married (pretty) women. Lesbians and various other ugly/angry women, usually very intelligent (high IQs) but emotionally stunted by the hate they feel for being ignored by men and other cute women in high school.

Women have always had their own "society". Men don't control women's society...we manage the infrastructure, the buildings, the food supply, the military...we are the builders of the structure. But women "inhabit" our structure with their own rules and systems. They tell us what they want, we build it. But they are in charge.

Women's society has 3 groups in my view:

-20% of women are naturally happy, sweet, and love everything about having relationships men. They are naturally "evangelists" for their love of men. These women are universally successful in every society in every age. They are "happy".

-60% of women are neutral. They can have good relationships with men or not, depending on where they are led. They are "sheep". Women are naturally inclined to follow the herd, so control of this group is important.

-20% of women are ugly or have angry/resentful/egotistical personalities that make it impossible for them to build successful relationships with men. They are "witches".

For most of human history, the "20% happy" women were in charge. They ran women's society. The 60% sheep-like women followed their rules. Women's society was based on the idea of building and maintaining healthy relationships with men...just as a jockey must build a successful relationship with his prizewinning stallion racehorse. Life was harsh, starvation and disease were rampant, technology didn't exist. Without relationships with men, women and children would instantly starve. Women ran their local villages with an iron fist, to ensure the survival of the community.

The 20% of women who were ugly/angry could never succeed in this Woman's society, they were the losers, the outcasts, the witches and the spinsters. Not having husbands and children, they starved quickly. Married, successful women made sure their daughters were kept far, far away from these witches, so that their hatred of men (which can be seductive) would not spread. If witches/lesbians got too much power, they were killed. See my post on witches.

What happened in the 1960s was, the 20% ugly/angry women created Feminism and used modern PR techniques ("big lies") to slowly, gradually lure the 60% sheep-like women over to their side. Part of this is that the 20% happy women lost interest in preventing this perversion. With modern society, they no longer have to be as careful to prevent collapse of women's society. They can just marry millionaires (which is what the top 20% of happy women do) and enjoy their lives. So the witches were allowed to take over.

What we have now is that the balance of power in female society has shifted fundamentally. 80% of women now hate men. The witches are in charge of the sheep. If Hillary had won, they would have had control of the nuclear arsenal. This has never happened before.

Nobody knows what is going to happen now. But the 20/60/20 model is useful to remember.

What the good sources of info you came across that informed your post?

I pulled it out of my ass. Want a sniff?

Post: #45

(07-25-2018 02:49 PM)Rocha Wrote:  

Is it just me or does Putin look at her flat non existent titties and then smile and laugh?

(07-25-2018 04:31 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  In no way, ever, is Feminism even remotely men's fault. However, it's not the fault of childlike women either.
Feminism is very easily identified as a movement created by lesbians specifically to get their revenge on married (pretty) women.

I generally disagree. I believe feminism started way before the 1960s.

The main cause of feminism is technology. The sexual revolution was caused by the invention of birth control. This is what allowed women to be promiscuous without fear of getting pregnant. Modern medicine cures STD's... ect.

The shift from hard construction and industrial work to a service economy is what has encouraged women to want careers and work. I promise if most jobs required hard manual labor... there would be damn few career women.

Now... what causes women to be man hating lesbians? The truly deranged feminists and lesbians are typically victims of sexual violence of some kind. I've seen this frequently. There is also a contingent that cannot even get access to an average guy... these are essentially female incels.

Post: #46

Nah, female incels have wide open access to male incels.

Lesbians are not victims of sexual violence, they're mostly deranged lefties who irrationally perceive any slight as some kind of sexual violation. Lesbians are also the fattest class of people, because they lack self-restraint, and because they weren't raised properly so they don't know how to cook and and end up eating out all the time.

Post: #47

(07-25-2018 04:31 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  Let me address this.

In no way, ever, is Feminism even remotely men's fault. However, it's not the fault of childlike women either.

Here is my theory, feel free to pick this apart:

Feminism is very easily identified as a movement created by lesbians specifically to get their revenge on married (pretty) women. Lesbians and various other ugly/angry women, usually very intelligent (high IQs) but emotionally stunted by the hate they feel for being ignored by men and other cute women in high school.

Interestingly enough, Player Supreme said that feminism was created by Lesbians. I'e asked few women old enough to remember that era who I respect if they felt there was some truth to that idea and the general answer has been along the lines of "Yes, I actually did get that feeling about them".

Post: #48

@MrLemon

Sure if the stuff is good

But in all seriousness I did find women ruling villages with men toeing the line overall hard to believe. So I am looking for more verification.

Post: #49

(07-25-2018 05:43 PM)RIslander Wrote:  Great post MrLemon. But I think you're missing a key point: the catalyst. The "ugly 20%" as you mentioned has existed throughout all time. What was the spark that gave them the power they have today?

I say it was a realization in the early part of the 20th century that men were the earners and women the spenders. Giving women more rights and the ability to vote was good for big American industry, which was exploding at the time. Give women equal status, and they'll buy more shit.

I think this is on the money. They've been Matrons, and Headmistresses and strict old aunts for centuries.
They had a position and a social circle of sorts among their extended family, who would probably roll their eyes upon receiving her letter, but force a smile and tolerate her for a few days during her circuit staying with sisters/nieces/nephews (who she probably had a genuine fondness for despite her criticisms)

Then one day the spinsters all got together and created one of the most successful emotional appeal marketing campaigns in human history...


Every girl ever has at some point felt unfairly treated for being a girl (real or imagined).



"Why come Johnny gets to go fishing?"

"I HATE that dress!"

"But I wanna play He-Man too!"

Every woman is an older version of that girl.

*Soothing Female Voiceover*
"Have you ever felt like you've been treated unfairly just for being a girl?"

*Every woman ever nods*
"Uh huh"

*Soothing Female Voiceover*
"We're on your side, we want to make sure it's never unfair for you"

*Grown up little girls everywhere*
"Well that sounds fair"

Post: #50

(07-25-2018 10:44 PM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  @MrLemon

Sure if the stuff is good

But in all seriousness I did find women ruling villages with men toeing the line overall hard to believe. So I am looking for more verification.

This isn't reddit, You need to stop this bullshit, now.

If you don't believe the guy, go to:

a) The library

b)Google

Use the search function, dewey decimal system, whatever to find the sources he was talking about, OR find sources that prove him wrong, post it on the forums, and have a fucking discussion like men do.

It would go something like

"I went ahead and looked this up and it turns out. . . .etc etc"

That goes a LONG way farther than saying something that equals "Source?" Yes, even if dressed up with flowery words, it still comes off like that, Men can see through the flowery bullshit all day everyday anyway, it's usually just not worth it to call someone out on, you'll just usually get ignored, and remembered for being "that guy"

"That guy" gets remembered in a bad way.

"That guy" usually gets ignored.

. . .And don't give me that whole "the burden of proof is on the person making the claim" That shit doesn't work as:

a)This is discussion forum, not a court of law

b)The information is widely available (I can think of at least one book off the top of my head that discusses this)

c)Discussion is a lot more than just plain facts and figures, you have to persuade. going "source!?" Is like someone yelling "Prove it!" Works on children, but on Adult men, you're just going to get ignored or told to gtfo. Doing this is just as bad as doing the cuck grimace in pictures.

d)with c) you're just looking like ̶a̶ ̶n̶e̶e̶d̶l̶e̶s̶s̶l̶y̶ ̶c̶o̶m̶b̶a̶t̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶c̶u̶n̶t̶, "That Guy" and no one really likes to talk to one of those.

e)You should have realized that since no one else engaged you in conversation in the thread that you were in purely stupid territory to begin with.

f)Notice that Mr.Lemon said you could pull his theory apart if you wanted: this promotes discussion, You on the other hand, did none of this. EndsExpect, however did, he disagreed, he laid out points why as well. Again, This is how you have a discussion.

You really need to think your posts through, Remember, This isn't reddit, This shit may fly on reddit, but here, someone will eventually call you out on it.

Be better.

P.S. I apologize to Roosh and the mods in advance if this was too harsh, but with the rash of low quality posters lately, it's starting to get a little annoying.