- 0 Posts
- 43 Comments
Oh another delusional person.
You seriously think there’s no such thing as physical attractiveness? If you seriously believe that, you’re most likely suffering from actual brain damage. What is more likely is you’re pretending it doesn’t, so you don’t have to feel bad about not being in the attractive group. Too bad. ;P
Well, I guess there’s really no hope for you anymore. Well, with PAT it would be probably possible, but I seriously doubt it at that point.
“More visibly damaged”
Ah, so because I pointed out that you actually admitted to there being a difference, you’re now eating your words and saying “there’s no difference in physical attractiveness”.
Either you’re lying to keep up the pretense you need to (because of your own level of attractiveness), or you literally have brain damage. You don’t want to see the ugly truth that ugly people are at a disadvantage, both male and female. :)
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-05637-007 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1975-01055-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-01479-006
“Vaginal wetness because of facial symmetry isn’t real.”
Weird way to try to say that “I don’t want to admit that women have the capacity to be sexually attracted to how someone looks, despite that being an objective and incontrovertible fact, because I’ve never had that happen to me, so it can’t be real, because I don’t want to admit what an uggo I myself am”.
You know what definitely is real though? Vaginal dryness after hearing sentences like “vaginal wetness because of facial symmetry”. Such incel comments. You’re trying to objectify women to the extent that you don’t even want to think about there being an actual person who gets aroused because of something they see, so you don’t even talk of arousal, you talk of “vaginal wetness”. Would you ever write “penile stiffness” when talking about getting hard?
I can see after this conversation why you’d need those delusions to be true, because with the rhetorical output of a teenage incel, you’re definitely never gonna induce “vaginal wetness” in anyone.
Weird how pretty much every relationship I’ve been in as a man has been me getting money and chores out of the women, instead of the other way around. So I guess you’re also gonna pretend that you don’t understand the sterotype of the extremely good looking guy who goes around banging the wives of the less-than-attractive men while they’re at work? What exactly is the woman getting out the guy she’s fucking in secret?
Teaching young men that they can be liked for who they are is just…harmful.
Wrong. It’s the exact way we avoid them turning out like you, a delusional guy saying “ugly chicks” and “vaginal wetness” while being on the lowest ladder of male attractiveness.
The good point is that even people like you can improve. Just stop with the crazy misogyny, go to therapy, hit the gym and take care of your skin. Facial features don’t matter as much as your facial expressions. So there’s hope for you yet, but only after you fix yourself up, psyche and all.
Give the second man the first man’s cosmetic surgery budget and they’d bear a striking resemblance
So you admit that there IS a difference in their physical attractiveness, which means that such a thing does exist, meaning you admit you said something you don’t actually believe in.
My point exactly.
Don’t worry, the bitterness of having crushed so hard on a person you didn’t even manage to talk to will fade when you grow up. Well, hopefully you do at some point at least. I don’t know how ugly you are, but it can’t be much uglier than your rhetoric. I suspect you keep reading some of the “tips” of others (internally and externally) ugly guys like whathisface who’s locked up in Romania.
So you’re saying there is ZERO DIFFERENCE in physical attractiveness between the two pictures I posted?
Jesus you’re bitter. You should look into psychedelic assisted therapy.
They will only pretend to like you so they can get money, things and chores from you.
I’ve been offered money to have sex with women, several times.
Weird how they’ve given me money, things and done my chores if they only want those things from me, huh?
The reason you feel that way is that you’re a bitter misogynist who writes things like “that’s for ugly chicks”, while actively pretending attractiveness in men doesn’t exist so you don’t have to face being an “ugly chick” yourself.
Yeah, it’s true golddiggers exist, but if you stop being such a massive cunt you might one who isn’t.
But that’s all in your future, as I’m pretty positive I’m talking to a teenager who’s annoyed that his crush liked the boy with the more expensive phone or a newer vehicle of some sort, something to that effect.
You’ll get over it.
What is? The lack of any differentiation on physical attraction between males?
Are you sure you’re not just deluding yourself that that doesn’t exist since you don’t like the position you’d fall into?
You’re saying there’s no difference in physical attractiveness between Brad Pitt and someone like this man?
They aren’t?
Americans live in an authoritarian plutocracy, but refuse to believe it
Mobilisation would be voluntary and open only to certain categories of prisoners.
Among those not eligible to serve include those found guilty of sexual violence, killing two or more people, serious corruption and former high-ranking officials, Shuliak said.
Only prisoners with under three years left to serve on their sentence may apply, she said. Any prisoners who are mobilised would be granted parole rather than a pardon.
Simply untrue according to the article, but it’s not like you bothered to even click the link, right?
Mobilisation would be voluntary and open only to certain categories of prisoners.
Among those not eligible to serve include those found guilty of sexual violence, killing two or more people, serious corruption and former high-ranking officials, Shuliak said.
Only prisoners with under three years left to serve on their sentence may apply, she said. Any prisoners who are mobilised would be granted parole rather than a pardon.
They’re giving the option for prisoners to apply to be a part of defending Ukraine. They’re not conscripting rapists to cannon fodder battalions or anything like that, ffs.
I see you’re also a man of culture.
A rat, a cat, a dog, a person, a human, a horse and an elephant all piss with a full bladder,
Who finishes first?
Weirdly enough, according to science, it’s the same time for every mammal to urinate (except really small ones like mice because liquid dynamics starts behaving differently, surface tension etc).
https://www.theverge.com/2013/10/19/4855076/the-law-of-urination-mammals-take-21-seconds-to-pee
If you wish to taste some Finnish ones, I’m sure I can bottle and ship some of our tapwater for you guys to taste.
Idk I’m not sure about the rules myself but I imagined it as a man saying that to a bro who would reference the first dude as “a guy” while still referencing women as females.
So essentially it’s just about consistency. For me at least. Either “man / woman” or “male / female”.
Idk I’m not the language police
Definitely.
[NOT OKAY] “Hey guys, check out those females!”
[Okay.] “There were seventy-five males and sixty females in the study.”
[NOT OKAY] “Gonna go out with my favourite females tonight” (unless you’re a girl in a girls night out and doing a comedic take on the bro culture)
[Okay] “The shoplifter was ~170cm tall, female, wore large sunglasses and ran surprisingly fast for someone in such high heels smelling so strongly of chardonnay”
I feel like “guys” is definitely colloquially gender-neutral in most contexts.
“Fireman” is clearly a patriarchic term that literally has “man” in it. In English “firefighter” is commonplace nowadays, but in my native Finnish, a lot of professions have “man” in the term, much in the vein of “policeman”, “ombudsman”, the Finnish equivalent of “janitor”, roughly translated directly as “building/house-man”.
We’ve replaced loads. Most of them are good. Some new terms feel natural and get taken into use, but replacing “man” with “person” rarely works for us without feeling incredibly awkward to use.
So my point is that we can reclaim those terms as gender neutral. Context matters. N-word being acceptable among black people is completely acceptable (and actually a very nice tool for emphasis when properly utilised), and it’s even in songs without anyone accusing the artists of racism. (Well, for pop songs at least, no racist hillbilly songs made it to that level.) That being said, it definitely doesn’t take away from it’s power as a slur if someone uses it in such a way.
So I suggest we’ll just use “guys, bro, dudes” as gender neutral and rely that people will understand from context when they’re actually used to address men/exclude women etc.
Also, isn’t “buddy” sort of neutral already? *goes to check* OoooooOoOooooh, it’s from “brother” originally. Guess it’s not as neutral originally.
Well that’s s new one for me.
I didn’t?
Also, that is the direct translation, yes, but a more accurate (context wise) would be conscientious objector.
I’m a supply core NCO in the reserves, served 362 days. I went in the second batch of 2009. That’s why I said “I served II/09”
I don’t think conscription is bad at all. It was one of the best years of my life.
Especially because ours is very much flexible and has options like unarmed service or civil service. (And with Russia neighbouring us with a long border, a conscription army is needed.) The only thing is that currently it only applies to males (and you can be excused for several reasons, like being a Jehova’s witness). It’s flexible when you do your conscription as well. Many people go to uni before the army. Not most, but many. And if you’re for instance a competitor in a sport on a high level, you’ll can get lots of free days from the time you serve. Some people like Kimi Räikkönen or Jarkko Nieminen for instance did “serve” their conscription, but in reality it was them going in for a few days/weeks every now and then when they had the time.
I would’ve never joined the American military, had I been American.
I believe in defending my country, not attacking others.
Well I have been accused of that a fair few times by some rather adamant defenders of Israel who, for some reason, said the UN and literally all international news outlets were “Hamas propaganda”, despite not being to show any sources for their own claims. Or perhaps some story in “the times of israel”, a clearly very unbiased source.
I’ve never been further South than Amsterdam, lol.
Oh man. Totaalikieltäytyminen is so easy nowadays, god damn.
I served II/09 so it’s been a while.
Thanks for the info. Guess the mad bastards managed it then, because I did hang around totari people as well, and that’s where I actually learned this idea. Because he had counted prison capacity in Finland and it was something like 1-3% of every batch who would need to say “nope” and they just wouldn’t fit into prison anymore.
I really would like to know the details of when this was on the board being discussed.
First good news I’ve heard today, ty man.
You might, if the context really called for it. Like when talking about the difference between morning wood and actual arousal. You know the difference right? But you don’t have enough empathy to understand women also get aroused, and it’s not just about “vaginal wetness”. Which is why describing a man getting horny as “getting penile stiffness”.
But you’re having trouble being honest, so that’s just another example of it. More with yourself than with me.
I’m not the one slut-shaming someone. It’s none of your business who someone has sex with, and the fact that you instantly go to “slut” instead of say, abusive, uncaring husband whom the woman is no longer in love with, says a lot, doesn’t it?
The first comment of yours I replied to had “ugly chicks” in it. First off… “chicks”? Second, saying things like that is exactly why women perceive you as incredibly unattractive. Because unlike for you, women aren’t interested just in physical attractiveness. It is one of many factors that come into play as to whether a person is attractive or not. A woman might say they’d have sex with a person based on their physical attractiveness, but if they had to do it based on talking to someone for a minutes, being a shallow misogynistic dick would override even the best looks. Because despite your delusions, women do actually have thoughts and feelings.
“I”, “I”, “I”, “me”, “me”, “me”, “me”. “I have no friends, I don’t get anything but scam calls, people don’t like me, everyone is out to scam me” … “I’m not the problem”.
No, you’re not the problem. You have a problem. You’re depressed. Get help for it.
Yes, problems exist. Yes, shitty people exist. But “only the Sith deal in absolutes” and so-on. You definitely need therapy.
Do you know what also exist? Difference in physical attractiveness between men. For instance, you seem completely incapable of making women or anyone like you for that matter. I’ve never had a problem with it. Actually, I’ve had a problem making friends too easily, and women fawning over me too much. Even to the point I’ve realised I could actually abuse them, just like all the good looking assholes in the movies. The problem is, that’s the sort of assholery I’m really not into. So I don’t.
People might not really love you, but how deeply fucked up do you have to be to think that your situation is extrapolated to every single other person?
So I guess you may have just never really even experienced love. And that’s why I honestly suggest you look into psychedelic-assisted therapy. Jokes aside, it fucking works. No-one wants to be around a misery like you, but don’t think that means that no-one wants to be around anyone, that friends don’t care for each other, that you can’t love someone or have meaningful relationships. It’s weird how you keep pretending women are some sort of parasites, but yet you never address the implication that it works both ways, which means you think men “actually” love women, but that women just don’t have the ability.
Which is loud as fuck for “I had a bad relationship and never had the coping tools to get over it so now I’m nearing 40 and I’m alone, sad and scared, so I lash out and pretend caring isn’t real like some sort of teenage incel”
So you’re still saying that there’s no difference in physical attractiveness between Brad Pitt and say… you? ;P