Psychophant

So what? A 105 year old dude can still marry a 54 year old women and the relationship can be successfull. Those are just numbers and creepy is not an argument. Would you argue that a 105 year old dude is 51 years more mature than a 54 year old chick or is the difference the life experience? 19 years vs 30 years would be 6 years before brain maturity in the first case. What exactly could the younger partner lacking and what makes her a good partner? It is not like a personality change or something. The age maturity argument should not be a thought-terminating cliché.

Yeah, a Fleshlight yuppy would be great, operated by the means of wet hands and lots of industrial diamonds for just US$800.00 or the Fleshlight pervy, operated by the means of wet hands, aluminum and a lot of will power, for just about US$250.00 and last but not least me, operated by a perverted and sadistic chick.

Since beauty is also a subjective standard, a preference, e. g. of people who desire fattys, this statement is wrong. Not anything that is perceived as dysfunction is really a dysfunction. Covered in tattoos is a good example in this case. Enabling something means you would have an obligation to intefer otherwise it would be just inaction.

Great music, lads: ... but she is one of these "good" feminists, which means she is not exactly into thinking.

Creepy is a buzz word and stands for undesireable, usually coined by entitled chicks who are looking for prince charming. Besides that creepy and low are just adjectives. Sexual gratification is the cheapest form of compensation in the dating game. Honesty ≄ openess. If you don't want to take the risk of curry favoring with her, you better not attend the game otherwise she might string you along and exploit you. It is about the whole package man, don't forget about biological factors. It is about status, picker and chooser are of higher status than those people who have to curry favor them if this is considered "the norm," cuz it is the stronger and more comfortable position. The former have to spend less time and energy for the search. The only advantage for men to be in this submissive position is, that it is easier to sense a trap. You know that if you were once pulled over by a gold digger who approached you instead. Since humans aren't just bold apes and therefore their actions aren't limited by the animal kingdom, therfore the accident of birth shouldn't be the main drive of the dating game. Am I asking a chick out just because I am a man. No way dude, I am not playing the dating game.

Only if you take it seriously. You are in charge of your body functions to a certain degree. Otherwise you could argue that if someone says something you don't like, it was an impairment of your body functions, so that someone occupied your brain functionality. Another example, a "fraidy cat" personality, someone who suffered significant trauma in his life and his property, the body, would be violated on a constant basis, cuz any "false" remark would cause blood pressure to rise and his cortisol level, too. It is a violation of the NAP in case of todlers, because their brain is damaged for the rest of their lives.

@Lians Thus you refer to physical exercise and its benefits.

Ach, the only problem I see here is similar to all the ostensibly good flavours of feminism like sexpositive feminism etc., they have no impact in reality. If you state that you against slavery and pro-selfownership, you have exactly zero impact on anything. It is like saying "I don't like sauerkraut, it makes me puke."

I got one, "There is only one peach with a hole in the middle." Oh my, it wasn't him. That's my favourite "How can you be that dumb about your own dick." It was this podcast with a dude who was clueless about his affinity for women below average attractiveness.

... which renders the argument for the superiority of documentations over blog posts being pointless if it is just about getting the message accross. You could make a blog post with follow-up revelations.

A blogpost is just a different format for presenting facts and information. One format is not superior over the other in that perspective.

Ach, feminists ain't hypocrits, they are just selective about the part of reality they accept.

That is exactly what I meant. Stef underestimates the "magical ingredience," enthusiasm in this case. I wonder how high the rate of illitarates among those unlearners really is. Is his daughter a genius - to debunk the second objection? I found a great quote: "The great scandal of education is that every time you teach a child something you deprive them of the opportunity to discover it for themselves." http://www.unlearning101.com/fuhgetaboutit_the_art_of_/2011/08/unlearning-learning.html Insightfull ted video: http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education

1. emotional defensiveness (being concerned) 2. emotional defensiveness ( being emotional manipulative, e. g. trying to shame or distracted by becoming the agent for all women, playing things down or denialing thing) 3. hostility ( trying to extort, throwing a womenly tantrum) Ah, so you think that white knights are mysogynists in denial who are idealizing their relationship with their mother, right?. This might be true. I am not a white knight, in fact I am quite the opposite, because I discovered the true nature of the beast, so to speak and my moronic father made excuses and played female misbehaviour down, so that in hindsight he accidantialy created my pass towards anti gynocentrism + antifeminism + voluntarism. I have been fucked over by females a lot of time, so no excuses for mommy there.

How about calling things by their proper name? That would be like leaving the chatroom + there are situations you cannot leave, in real life, the internet is part of. That's being precise and correct. It is not like you have to answer someone or read someone's comment and if you are emotionally drawn to do it, you are most likely emotionally a little bit immature. That proves my point. It is actually rather paretoish 20/80 20% do it 80% don't.

He simply points out that cancer is not a womens' problem only, nothing else. It is not about as to why she is doing breast cancer research after all, it is about the one sided focus for no good reason. You don't become a researcher to research in favour of only one group of people.

I'd use Edmund in Shakespear' King Lear instead of Edmund in King Lear. I am a kraut, too and ain't got no problem in helping yankee buddies out.

Is this nurture or is this nature? During a depression, I panicked in the doctors office and talked until I run down with the doctor. Two birds with one stone, kiss her until she runs down. Alternatively you could retreat from the conversation.

That is exactly the study I quoted on detailed. Post 5, yo. 64 dudes had to fill in a questionaire and were brain scanned but the result is anything but representative or clear.

Anything a human being does is human, because it is a part of actions a human is capable of. If you would only assign the more complex actions and interactions to humans, shitting wasn't a human need at all, the same applies to eating. You just created an abitrary standard called not human asigned to a human being.

There will allways be concepts in any concept. Since people ain't hairy monkeys any more, refering to people as alpha is obsolete. You can be virtous without adding value to others and who says that productivity has the highest value? The most important thing, you don't have to play the status game.

Novel in these context means 100% of all novels ever written. It doesn't require a science degree to understand that. Once you have an exception, you nailed it. Oh my, whyle a distortion on electric guitars might be a necessity for good music, you can hardly make the claim, that the same amount of information condensed on a website would make a book superior in terms of knowledge compared to those website, even the writing style is not unique to a book. If the first analogy fails, so does the second, because the first one is a prerequisite for the second. Once you have a standard, knowledge, you don't need Jimi Hendrix and One Direction in this comparission but fact and fiction.

In "real life" those people don't have a function to ignore others, so they are most likely emotionally a little bit immature and it is a continuum, not a black and white thing. Like Stef said, not to be a bad person doesn't make you a good person. What about the actual criticism that your posts end up in nirvana, because you don't know, who is actually ignoring you?

That means you must be intelligent enough to recognize intelligent people. I'd suggest to start with controverse statements first like, " I don't respect women" To respect groups of people by default, you would have to know each member personally. How could you respect someone you don't even know? @5:10 If you treat women differently, just because they are woman, you are the dickhead, Jeffries.

There is plenty of room for improvement. You cannot distinguish people who ignore you from people who blocked you, cannot distinguish an mature approach from an immature one. One idea is an autoblock option, people who blocked you are invisible to you - saves time and energy. Next idea is a lock symbol with a transparency effect on the user who blocked you - the same applies here.