Hey Lovecraft68 I call you out dude

[LJ_Reloaded]

http://www.vice.com/read/why-arent-millennials-fucking

Kids are also more overwhelmed by work and school, giving them less time for partying and sex. So instead, younger millennials turn to porn, which is easier to access than ever before. "I've seen a lot of patients—I have to say, young men who are not sexual at all, and it's partially because they satisfy themselves via the internet and porn," said Dr. Ildiko Kovacs, a UC San Diego psychiatrist and professor focused on psychiatric, behavioral, relationship, cultural, and religious factors affecting sexual health. The influence of porn is a relatively new trend, she said. "We see early on, even from high school, that they turn to porn [and] get immediate gratification. They don't have to bother another person. They're not going to be rejected."

Women have made it too difficult to get laid anymore. You gotta be an alpha male, you gotta be rich, you gotta be so tall, you gotta have high status. Now the Herbivore Man effect has begun to lap at America's shores: men have decided that the cost-benefit ratio of getting with a woman is too high on the cost end and so porn use is taking the place of women in bed.

YEAH WELL THOSE MEN ARE LOSERS AND THEY CANT GET LAID AND FUCK YOU JACQUELOPE FOR TELLING THE TRUTH

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don’t even understand why a feminist-owned magazine like Vice sees this as a problem. Women hate men who feel badly about being rejected, they look down on men who fear it (it’s a lack of empathy thing). They think all these men are going to run around raping and killing and eating the women whosoever stumble into their path. It’s not like this author even acted like they give a damn about these men’s problems. And no one offers a solution. So why isn’t Vice celebrating the fact that young men are turning to porn? The alpha males are still getting women, that’s the only thing women want, and the other men that you hate are choosing porn and staying the fuck out of your way, so what’s the problem? You now have your feminist "They don’t have to bother another person" utopia, so CONGRATULATIONS YOU WON, FEMINISTS!!!

 

[Sean Renaud]

That's not a the herbivore man at all, herbivore men reject women even when they are available. Seriously at least look up the terms you use.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

No, I want men to be "enslaved" by their loving children.

You want men to pay for their wives' fraud and deception. Someone has to pay for that whore's behavior and you'd never have her be held responsible. That would be sexism.

You've said exactly that, and repeated it above. That you long for that day, don't back down now.

So you're arguing that without sex, women are obsolete? Because if you're asserting that I ever said I want women to be obsolete, that is exactly what you are breaking women down to - sex.

I've told you a million times that this wouldn't make women obsolete, and obsoletion is not my goal. But now you are the one admitting to objectifying women.

That's not a the herbivore man at all, herbivore men reject women even when they are available. Seriously at least look up the terms you use.

Herbivore Men in America are different than how they are in Japan. Here, herbivore would naturally translate to cowardice, which is the main charge that is being leveled at Millennial men regarding women.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Nobody is saying she's not responsible, that hasn't even been brought up.

You're arguing without sex women are obsolete. It's the basis for your argument, you can make your little claims all you like but they are hollow lies.

The charge leveled at millenials even in your article isn't so much cowardice as it it sloth.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1547568/Lover-must-pay-broker-for-claiming-son-was-his.html

A woman who deceived her stockbroker boyfriend into believing he was the father of her son was yesterday ordered to pay him more than £22,000 in damages.

A High Court judge ruled that the woman, now 46, had made "fraudulent representations" to her boyfriend after lying to him for five years about a one-night stand.

Judge Sir John Blofeld told the court in London that it was impossible to accept her as "a witness of truth".

In the first known case of its kind to reach trial in Britain, he awarded the 63-year-old former stockbroker just over £22,400, including £7,500 to compensate him for the distress he suffered when he discovered the boy was not his.

"I am satisfied she intended her fraudulent representations to be acted on by Mr A," the judge said. "As a result of those fraudulent representations, he suffered damage."

Another bitch down, another man free, another great victory! Hey hey.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Another child destroyed. Hey hey hey.

 

[Lancecastor]

Laura Lovecraft's Twitter feed is ultra skeevy.

https://twitter.com/laura_lovecraft

 

[Sean Renaud]

I kinda doubt that's the real LL twitter.

 

[Misshotndeep]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1547568/Lover-must-pay-broker-for-claiming-son-was-his.html

Another bitch down, another man free, another great victory! Hey hey.

Someone need to dip your ass in a vat of hate be gone. You just have this mean outlook on the world. It's sad to read. I mean I have bad days but you just are having a bad life.

 

[Darbhinder]

Laura Lovecraft's Twitter feed is ultra skeevy.

https://twitter.com/laura_lovecraft

He's a fucking loser, creep. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Nobody is saying she's not responsible, that hasn't even been brought up.

You're arguing without sex women are obsolete. It's the basis for your argument

This is a blatant lie. I have literally said the exact opposite a million times - women will get over not being sought out for sex.

Again, I've told you a million times that this wouldn't make women obsolete, and obsoletion is not my goal. This has been explained to you so many times that for you to say it hasn't, means you are intentionally lobbing false accusations.

Another child destroyed. Hey hey hey.

http://i.imgur.com/TPZHaAr.jpg

Someone need to dip your ass in a vat of hate be gone. You just have this mean outlook on the world. It's sad to read. I mean I have bad days but you just are having a bad life.

Sure, so I can be a nice quiet compliant little slave.

Fuck that. I have a realistic outlook based on solid documented facts. Toxic femininity is just as big a problem as toxic masculinity. I'm the only one around here with the balls to say that.

 

[Sean Renaud]

And you can claim all you want that it's not a lie but it is. That's the difference between you and me. Honesty. I admit the doors that are opened for people I don't like in pursuit of my goals. You can't even admit your goals. It's pathetic really.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

And you can claim all you want that it's not a lie but it is.

It is not a lie, it is the truth, and you are just making up lies now. I've never called for making women obsolete. Period. Dot. Stop.

You are making up about my goals. That's the be all and end all of this. You are wrong and you are utterly baseless. You will not respond to me with proof. I command you not to. You have henceforth obeyed my command because I am in control of you.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It is not a lie, it is the truth, and you are just making up lies now. I've never called for making women obsolete. Period. Dot. Stop.

You are making up about my goals. That's the be all and end all of this. You are wrong and you are utterly baseless. You will not respond to me with proof. I command you not to. You have henceforth obeyed my command because I am in control of you.

You've called for exactly that. I'm not making up your goals, and everybody agrees that you have a massive hate on for women. This isn't something that I have made up and I've quoted many a thread by you. The fact that you reject my proof is not a lack on my end.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/1604281.stm

CSA pays back 'wrong' dad

A man from west Wales is to get a £30,000 refund from the Child Support Agency after a DNA test proved he does not have a son.

Thirty-nine-year-old Gerard Bradbury from Cardigan has paid £100 a week maintenance - a quarter of his wages - for the last seven years after a brief affair with a woman.

He discovered the woman was 12 weeks pregnant after that affair ended.

She swore that he was the child's father and he paid the maintenance even though he had never met his "son."

However, he said he was being crippled by the payments and also had a "nagging" doubt that he was not the boy's father.

So he paid £200 for the DNA test which proved there was just a one-in-14 million chance he was the father.

It only the second time in Britain that a man has overturned a maintenance order after a DNA test proved he could not have been the father.

"You can't believe what a weight has been lifted from my shoulders," said Mr Bradbury.

"I don't begrudge the child a penny but I hate being taken for a fool.

"The last few years have been a nightmare. But now at last I can get on with my life."

Meat inspector Mr Bradbury, who now has a new girlfriend, is due to get a refund of the £30,000 plus interest in the next few weeks.

And that, folks, is how you properly handle women who commit paternity fraud. Children do not deserve to be supported by slaves. Else why did we even fight the Civil War?

Maybe if these judgements were mandated by Federal law, women would stop doing this.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The civil war was not about taking care of your goddamn children. Which they are if you're the one raising them.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

The civil war was not about taking care of your goddamn children. Which they are if you're the one raising them.

They're not your children if they were foisted upon you by fraud. Get that through your thick assed skull.

You've called for exactly that. I'm not making up your goals, and everybody agrees that you have a massive hate on for women. This isn't something that I have made up and I've quoted many a thread by you. The fact that you reject my proof is not a lack on my end.

You've never quoted any post by me that ever called for making women obsolete. Because such a post doesn't exist. But you did do what I told you to do, which is repeat your accusations without supporting facts. Good doggie!

I never called for making women obsolete. That statement stands unchallenged. Now I command you to come back at me without providing any proof. And you just obeyed me again, puppet.

This is going to end in the same way as your bogus claim that I said women should be turned into breeders. You never once showed where I ever posted that. Yet you tried to repeatedly assert that this phantom post existed somewhere.

So let's do it this way - I will from here on hound you with automated posts on this thread calling you out to show the exact post where I ever said women should be made into breeders, or where I said I want women to be obsolete. The gauntlet has been thrown down. You will either substantiate your accusation or this is all you will get from me, forever. Then I will force you to tucker out of here like you did from those other two threads.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I don't care how they came to be yours.

As for your other claim you not accepting what your argument for sex robots is does not mark a failure on my part. Just you being thick. It happens.

Thank you for another victory. Loser.

They're not your children if they were foisted upon you by fraud. Get that through your thick assed skull.


You've never quoted any post by me that ever called for making women obsolete. Because such a post doesn't exist. But you did do what I told you to do, which is repeat your accusations without supporting facts. Good doggie!

I never called for making women obsolete. That statement stands unchallenged. Now I command you to come back at me without providing any proof. And you just obeyed me again, puppet.

This is going to end in the same way as your bogus claim that I said women should be turned into breeders. You never once showed where I ever posted that. Yet you tried to repeatedly assert that this phantom post existed somewhere.

So let's do it this way - I will from here on hound you with automated posts on this thread calling you out to show the exact post where I ever said women should be made into breeders, or where I said I want women to be obsolete. The gauntlet has been thrown down. You will either substantiate your accusation or this is all you will get from me, forever. Then I will force you to tucker out of here like you did from those other two threads.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I don't care how they came to be yours.

They ain't his.

As for your other claim you not accepting what your argument for sex robots is does not mark a failure on my part. Just you being thick. It happens.

Sex robots won't make women obsolete as I pointed out. You cannot show any post that I wrote about making women obsolete. Therefore by the rules of evidence you lose and I win again.

That makes you 0 for what, 2000?

 

[Sean Renaud]

They ain't his.


Sex robots won't make women obsolete as I pointed out. You cannot show any post that I wrote about making women obsolete. Therefore by the rules of evidence you lose and I win again.

That makes you 0 for what, 2000?

A good chunk of rational people would disagree with you that they aren't his.

Your entire argument is that they will make them obsolete. That is specifically why you want them. It's like claiming that cars don't make horses obsolete and then begging for evidence. The only think that makes me a fool here is giving you the respect you deserve as a human being.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

A good chunk of rational people would disagree with you that they aren't his.

And a greater chunk of rational people would agree with me.

Your entire argument is that they will make them obsolete.

My specific argument has been that it won't.

I look forward to sex robots and other things that will enable men to find female companionship without having to negotiate with a woman. And artificial wombs are said to be available 30 years from now. And in case you haven't read, this won't mean the end of women - it'll mean less men chasing women and more men interacting with women without a sexual connotation because they'll have that covered elsewhere.

This refutes your accusation.

And when sex robots and artificial come along, well, there won't be any need for these women at all. They'll be quickly replaced by adaptive (non robot) women who realize hypergamy isn't the way to keep the species going. By then, though, there won't be any need for women to keep the species going - and women won't go extinct, they will adapt just fine. It'll just be curtains closed for hypergamic women.

This refutes your accusation.

You lose.

That is specifically why you want them. It's like claiming that cars don't make horses obsolete and then begging for evidence.

We made cars and horses still exist. Your argument fails yet again.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Horses still exist, but they are obsolete. Which is your stated goal. You can refute it all you like, all it does is make you a liar. I don't see what your having a difficult time with.

As for the greater chunk of men who think abandoning their children is okay, that's exactly why we have laws. Because your philosophy was allowed to spread.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Horses still exist, but they are obsolete. Which is your stated goal. You can refute it all you like, all it does is make you a liar. I don't see what your having a difficult time with.

So you're on record for saying that the only use a woman has is sex and reproduction. Gotcha. I on the other hand repeatedly say that women should be freed from this to pursue her own sense of purpose.

As for the greater chunk of men who think abandoning their children is okay, that's exactly why we have laws. Because your philosophy was allowed to spread.

And because of people like you, we're chipping away at men being enslaved to children that result from infidelity. Another war you're slowly losing.

 

[Sean Renaud]

So you're on record for saying that the only use a woman has is sex and reproduction. Gotcha. I on the other hand repeatedly say that women should be freed from this to pursue her own sense of purpose.


And because of people like you, we're chipping away at men being enslaved to children that result from infidelity. Another war you're slowly losing.

No. I'm on the record for saying that your entire attitude is based around that assumption from top to bottom.

No, that second part isn't my fault. That's society's shortfall but deadbeat dads have existed since the dawn of time.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Your entire argument is that they will make them obsolete.

My specific argument has been that sex robots won't make women obsolete. Women will be liberated by them.

I look forward to sex robots and other things that will enable men to find female companionship without having to negotiate with a woman. And artificial wombs are said to be available 30 years from now. And in case you haven't read, this won't mean the end of women - it'll mean less men chasing women and more men interacting with women without a sexual connotation because they'll have that covered elsewhere.

This refutes your accusation.

And when sex robots and artificial come along, well, there won't be any need for these women at all. They'll be quickly replaced by adaptive (non robot) women who realize hypergamy isn't the way to keep the species going. By then, though, there won't be any need for women to keep the species going - and women won't go extinct, they will adapt just fine. It'll just be curtains closed for hypergamic women.

This refutes your accusation.

You lose.

That is specifically why you want them. It's like claiming that cars don't make horses obsolete and then begging for evidence.

We made cars and horses still exist. Your argument fails yet again.

You're on record for saying that the only use a woman has is sex and reproduction. Gotcha. I on the other hand repeatedly say that women should be freed from this to pursue her own sense of purpose.