Why do women rub their little clits while reading romance novels yet men aren't interested at all in that genre...
>Women make up 84 percent of romance book buyers, and men make up 16 percent. https://www.rwa.org/p/cm/ld/fid=582
Is it cultural conditioning and the patriarchy creating this gender difference or is it something biological?
>>7428317
biological
I cannot be assed to explain this in detail since the explanation would be so long but you can be assured that I am correct
polite sage since I'm not adding much to the thread
Here's how it was explained to me by a female friend who actually does read romance novels: she said a lot of women care far more about the feelings of attachment and longing that goes with it than they do the actual physical benis in bagina. I think this bears out because a lot of women don't seem to care if their men cheat, so long as side-stuff is just sex and nothing more.
Men, weirdly, don't seem to care if their women are longing for or have attachment to other guys, so long as it doesn't get physical. It's odd.
>>7428317
Romance novels are to females what pornography is to males.
>>7428319
>a lot of women don't seem to care if their men cheat, so long as side-stuff is just sex and nothing more.
wut?
>>7428321
question is Why.
>>7428318
Dumbest, emptiest post I've seen all day.
>here's my shitty opinion
>but I'm too lazy to back it up
why post then?
The Romance genre is not open to men, it is discriminatory it is matriarchal and biased and fits Female power fantasies and balbalablbalabl INEQUALITY
>>7428319
Because being c.ucked is being a quadruple genetic failure. Not only didn't you reproduce, but you were duped into caring for some other guy's offspring.
On the other hand, c.ucking is winning the genetic lottery for females. Not only do you get Chad Studly's superior genetics, but you syphon off all the resources from an entire devoted chump instead of a tiny sliver of Chad the Conqueror's warchest along with his manly beatings of your ass that get you so wet.
>>7428329
because if someone knowledgeable is actually assed to write the long explanation, the OP will know it's not just a verbose novice pulling eloquent shit out of his ass, someone else out there has the same opinion
but I'm not stupid enough to write an essay with shit tonne of sources >4free just so that retards with no knowledge on the subject can tell me "cool story bro"
>>7428335
then why post if none of it matters anyway? why not just lurk?
>>7428334
>a tiny sliver of Chad the Conqueror's warchest along with his manly beatings
You really do think like this, don't you.
>>7428325
True story, man. It can be hard to separate the two out, because you think "she's mad he cheated", but is she mad he had sex, or is she mad he has a relationship with another girl? It seems to you like they're one in the same, but they're often not.
A lot of portrayals of women finding out their men cheated, they get mad and fight, but after the initial anger dies down they ask something like "is she prettier than me?" or "do you love her?" Shows what she really cares about—not the sex, but the link he has with the girl.
Guys, on the other hand, don't give a fuck about any link she has with anyone. All they care about is whether or not they fuck.
>>7428344
Also, guys never ask that "do you love him" or "is he handsomer than me" shit. Because they don't care. lel.
>>7428326
Biology. Millions of years of evolution.
The goal of a man is to plant his seed in as many places as he can. The goal of a woman is to find a dependable man who will support her while she carries his children.
>>7428344
I dont have much experience but last gf I had got mad if I even checked out other girls at the mall, if she caught me cheating I'd probably be murdered
>>7428321
a coping mechanism for very sick individuals?
>>7428346
>The goal of a man is to plant his seed in as many places as he can. The goal of a woman is to find a dependable man who will support her while she carries his children.
what does that have to do the romance genre? Men aren't exactly writing and reading stories about Alphas planting seeds everywhere. And women don't read romance because they enjoy reading about dependable guys and bearing kids, they read them for the sexy sex scenes
>>7428347
You probably weren't together long, right? I'm talking about mostly married couples or people who've been together for a while.
Young couples who've been together for a short while, they both get mad when the other checks other people out, because they know they have no real history together and the bond could easily be broken in minutes.
>>7428351
It's mental for the women and physical for men.
>>7428351
>Men aren't exactly writing and reading stories about Alphas planting seeds everywhere
There are actually quite a few pornographic novels.
Anyways, pornographic novels were replaced by pornographic videos, just like romance novels were replaced by rom coms.
>And women don't read romance because they enjoy reading about dependable guys and bearing kids, they read them for the sexy sex scenes
No, they read it for the emotions. If they really cared only about the sexy sex they'd just watch porn like guys do.
>>7428360
>, just like romance novels were replaced
they aren't replaced, they are the #1 selling genre and women are gobbling them up more than ever.
>No, they read it for the emotions. If they really cared only about the sexy sex they'd just watch porn like guys do.
Nope. There's romance, then there's erotic-romance, then theres pure erotica.
erotic romance and pure erotica sell the most, they focus more on the sex than the romance part. And the descriptions are much more in depth and lewd. Women are suckers for that stuff, it's crazy
>>7428319
>Men, weirdly, don't seem to care if their women are longing for or have attachment to other guys
That doesn't hold true to me at all. I can't imagine too many men would be okay with someone who is supposed to love them soley harboring the same feelings for another person. That's absurd.
>>7428369
Fidelity is a meme. That's why I live 2D lyfe.
>>7428369
>supposed to love them solely
How 12 are you?
>>7428386
If being faithful is childish, then I'll accept that. It's not impossible, it wasn't even a question of difficulty for me. And if I've felt it, someone else has as well.
>the patriarchy
are you serious
>>7428390
How long was your longest relationship?
>>7428396
3 months shy of 3 years.
>>7428397
Not very long at all, but long enough that you surely must know this isn't about "fidelity". Had she no ex that she loved? Did you just make her not talk about it, or did she just not talk about it as a matter of course?
Most people, men and women, have other people they love or at least very fond affection for. Women in particular get mad about it, but it's not like it doesn't exist.
That love for others, men find easily to live with so long as it isn't physical. I hope here isn't where you tell me you're spechul and care very much if your one true-ue-ue still loves an ex.
I popped a boner to a Salon article earlier today
>>7428410
>Had she no ex that she loved?
She had no serious relationship prior to ours.
>Did you just make her not talk about it, or did she just not talk about it as a matter of course?
She told me her entire life's story, and was always excited to tell me anything and everything.
>Most people, men and women, have other people they love or at least very fond affection for.
Romantically? I lost any attractions I believed to be romantic when I had found her. She lost interest in just about every other human.
>I hope here isn't where you tell me you're spechul and care very much if your one true-ue-ue still loves an ex.
What an awful mindset. I don't believe it to be special in the least, however, you yourself are pushing an equally idiotic idea that we're all the same. I'm not claiming I possess a singular unique trait. Others feel this way, it's not special. I don't know why it's so hip to deny those feelings exist place yourself and others in a "Everyone's the exact same" enclosure.
I don't even believe I'm part of a special little group of "true" romantics. I think some people don't give a shit about people's past, and I think others care about it deeply, and others mind it somewhere in between.
>>7428423
You're alright, anon!
>>7428318
>being sure about something incorrect
>>7428410
>not very long at all
Are you fucking joking?
For the average demographic of this site, that is uncharacteristically long.
Man, you're just fucking making this shit up as you go, aren't you?
>>7428423
>She lost interest in just about every other human.
Evidently not.
>>7428428
>Man, you're just fucking making this shit up as you go, aren't you?
obviously he is. That's why most of it is just baseless assumptions and pop-psychology
>>7428429
Well, I left her. 6 months later she eventually recovered and found someone new, they recently celebrated their 5th or 6th anniversary.
>>7428428
>For the average demographic of this site
Irrelevant. For the average demographic of this site, "touching a boobie" is on the to-do list. Such a handicap is hardly applicable to the issue at hand.
>>7428432
>she eventually recovered
Yeah, right. How could she, ever?
>>7428345
>"was he bigger than me?"
>>7428436
At least you made it obvious this time.
>>7428317
do women actually masturbate to them or do they just feeling horny reading lewd pulp
>>7428439
>mfw a girl in class judges me for reading lolita
>mfw this same girl says 50 shades of gray is the best book she ever read
please imagine an image with the title killmenow.jpg, didn't find a suiting one on my hard drive
>>7428319
>>7428325
>>7428344
I'd like to point out something very depressing here.
For men, it's normal to go to a brothel when you're married or have a girlfriend. They do it as a planned group activity. Despite it being cheating. Men do cheating as a planned group activity, systematically, paying money to do it. Pretty sick. They defined this as being socially acceptable and women seem to have given up hope.
I even once argued with a dude on some feminist issues, and he was claiming women cheat more, and claimed he couldn't think of a single guy in his life who he knew to have cheated, despite knowing several women who cheated. I asked him whether he really couldn't think of any guys who were married and still went to a brothel. That made him think a bit, then burst out "b-but that's different!" Pathetic. Some men literally do not even realize it when they cheat.
When a woman has an affair, even a single one, unplanned/going with the flow, feeling some shame/guilt throughout, she is nevertheless demonized to an extreme extent. Called a cheating whore, slut, manipulative, deranged, morally bankrupt. Pushed into deep self-hate.
This is insanely fucked up.
I'm a guy, and I still stand with the women on this one.
If you fail to have a proper, mutually emotionally fulfilling relationship with your partner and see her as a friend, and even go out buying sex from strangers because you don't even care about your partner THAT much (not to say only caring about your partner for sex is acceptable in any way), then you should absolutely not be surprised when she seeks fulfillment externally, all the while being too afraid to break up or admit that she likes someone else, because you'd absolutely lose your shit.
>>7428460
You should both feel bad.
>>7428526
>For men, it's normal to go to a brothel when you're married or have a girlfriend.
I think you're approaching this is far too general terms. That doesn't seem normal at all.
>>7428526
>For men, it's normal to go to a brothel when you're married or have a girlfriend.
uh no not at all
>They do it as a planned group activity
where the fuck do you live
>>7428526
Both men and women should be demonized for being untrustworthy.
>You should both feel bad.
That anon should feel bad for reading Lolita. You're on the wrong neighborhood, pal.
>>7428526
How many times has this story gotten you laid with your female friends?
>>7428544
Huh, I expected people to call me a beta kek.
I guess it works both ways. Anyways, I mean the things I say.
But indeed, one day, I will actually encourage a woman married to an asshole to cheat on her husband with me, you just wait.
>>7428551
>c-uck becomes kek on /lit/
I love you moot.
Wait...
MMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTT, COME BACK
>>7428551
Alternatively, you could be a decent human being and suggest that she reevaluate the situation she's in to see if this is really where she wanted to be. From there, if she decided to divorce, you can then start dating her.
>>7428540
>I had the argument experience I mentioned in Germany. It was a German guy. Prior to that I experienced west-Turkish men having the same attitude.
as a German: going to a brothel while in a relationship is in no way normal in Germany - it isn't even normal when you're not in a relationship
>>7428559
I should restate:
it is "normal" to go to a brothel when not in a relationship (after all, they're common), but it's clearly not a thing you discuss openly, or inform your peers about.
>>7428570
It's unethical. You would also be enabling, thus rationalizing her betrayal of him. She would be an idiot to settle with an asshole, and you would be an asshole to convince her exploiting him is good. Immoral actions that lead to immoral ends.
>>7428551
>But indeed, one day, I will actually encourage a woman married to an asshole to cheat on her husband with me, you just wait.
You said beta before I did.
You clearly don't get laid much nor have you been in the company of men who do get laid.
No one uses prostitutes anymore because you just don't have to. In part thanks to the internet, we are returning to the sexual liberation that ended in the 80s with the aids panic. Men and women are now freely and willingly fucking more than ever.
If you aren't a part of that, I suggest you work on improving yourself rather than posting passive aggressive generalisations on a mongolian sock puppet board.
>>7428593
>mongolian sock puppet board
I laughed.
Anyway, for one you took my fantas- *cough* I mean joke too seriously, and for second, I'm pretty often in the company of men who "get laid" or are married. They do sicken me, with their dirty jokes, gloating over pornography, nonchalant acceptance of sexual violence. Your equation of a prostitute and a (girl)friend sickens me. Virtually all of male-dominated culture deeply sickens me.
Finding refugee within a genuinely emotional relationship with a woman who feels the way I do is my fantasy. I'm not sure if I'll ever seriously pursue it. Women who have relationships with said disgusting men do sort of disappoint me, after all.
anyone else read the title of the book in OP's image before lookin at her junk?
>>7428648
Me.
I'm against the sexual objectification of women and true to my ideals.I still looked at her though. But then I felt positive things.
>>7428659
oh no question that we looked at her after, but made sure she was reading a book worth a shit first.
>>7428664
>>7428666
hiding your buttface with an old man? the gall, the noive, the moxy.
>>7428664
you must wait 3 minutes blah blah blah
>>7428670
What the fuck is noive?
>>7428677
moxy and or gall.
>>7428677
Forgot my image.
>>7428680
>Means "nerve". "If I Only Had the Noive" is a quote from "The Wizard of Oz" (1939 film) sung by the lion.
Sick reference bro.
>>7428684
Wobbuffet
>>7428681
those books disappoint me. at least she's taking a shit on them. we can save 1984 though.
>>7428688
>>7428689
They could be a lot worse.
Seems like Orwell's popular with the sort of women who take photos of themselves artfully nude.
>>7428701
>she's definitely not even reading that.
>he doesn't read books telepathically through forehead contact
>>7428699
not really, lolita? girl with the dragon tattoo? rape fetishist anyone?
also, is that some new reading craze that the young people invented?
"so, you grab a book you like and careen backwards onto the floor, it'll get you so fucking high, and the next page is sick crazy bro."
This one has to be there but I'm not a fan of it.
>>7428702
i see palahniuk over there too, the filthy pleb.
>>7428706
At least it's not Twilight.
>is that some new reading craze that the young people invented?
Yes. Haven't you heard of it? Get with the times grandpa.
>>7428711
Oh we are plebs. Filthy, filthy plebs. We need to be punished. Fetch your leather bookmark ;)
>>7428707
jesus fucking christ, LOOK at those books. not a god damn one, except MAYBE arabian nights. put them all in boxes, send em to good will. maybe someone can make clothes out of em if they're not too ashamed of wearing james patterson.
>>7428526
Brothels? Planned groups? That's like something from the 1800s.
>>7428719
No shit, don't you recognise the woman?
>>7428716
i think you've unlocked a new fetish for me.
those whores would get such bad papercuts in the webbings between their toes, they'd be screaming Gaddis and Goncharov by the end of the night.
>>7428725
>>7428722
recognize women? no. they all look the same to me.
>>7428725
That's fucked up, have some more.
>>7428729
That's pretty normal. Like when you never see many black or asian people early in life, they all look the same until you've gotten to know a few.
>>7428733
These are basically travel books and a bimbo in non-prescription glasses with her tits out.
>>7428731
i wonder if i could fashion a rack out of a bookshelf, and break their legs like misery but with a book hammer against an OED. it'd be great since instead of being forced to write a novel, they'd be forced to read one.
>>7428739
>>7428740
I'm not sure you'd have to go to such great extremes.
I assume people want me to continue.
This looks like a textbook.
>>7428319
What an absolute load of shit.
>>7428759
Spamming models is already quite tasteless but if you're going to post voyeuristic celeb pics now then please fuck right off.
i'd hit it.
>>7428758
I have no idea what the tattoo says, I just like the aesthetic.
Not totally sure what reader's digest is so I can't help.
>>7428766
I'm doing neither of those things, get off your high horse, it seems to have irritated your vagina.
>>7428767
Nice, I didn't have that one.
>>7428773
>seems to have irritated your vagina
You're using actively sexist insults now.
I'm not a woman but I should *not* need to mention that when it's irrelevant whether I am or am not.
And yes, that was a voyeuristic photo of Emma Watson. To be precise, it was most likely taken with voyeuristic intent, not with her consent.
>>7428778
yeah marylin was cool beans.
"but honey, i just got to the part where he's having an existential crisis!"
>>7428789
How did you manage to get all that sand in your jap's eye? Someone twisted your frenulum?
>>7428788
is that fucking blood on her dress? she's so hot for the palimpsests that she didnt even bother to stuff herself with that copy of catcher in the rye today
>>7428796
I never noticed the blood before. The books look photoshopped in, I suspect it's not a real book.
>>7428795
i always thought it was japs gap, also, does she have a cavalcade of cats working as her slaves?
>>7428526
>I even once argued with a dude on some feminist issues, and he was claiming women cheat more, and claimed he couldn't think of a single guy in his life who he knew to have cheated, despite knowing several women who cheated. I asked him whether he really couldn't think of any guys who were married and still went to a brothel. That made him think a bit, then burst out "b-but that's different!" Pathetic. Some men literally do not even realize it when they cheat.
Oh dear, anecdotal evidence vs anecdotal evidence, sounds like a thrilling debate.
>>7428801
>slaves
They're clearly super-happy to serve.
>>7428806
Your two posts are two persons (since I'm one of them)
>>7428801
>A cavalcade is a procession or parade on horseback, or a mass trail ride by a company of riders.
But props to you for trying to use it in a sentence.
I don't like being reminded pretty girls exist
Ending on a cute, not sexy, note.
>>7428334
What gets a person so bent out of shape they can write stuff like "Chad Studly's superior genetics" in a sincere way?
>>7428796
You have no idea what palimpsest means.
>>7428817
>those titles
>>7428817
>"cute"
>normie equivalent of weeaboo hugging his waifu bodypillow
gross af
>>7428712
dat glutteus maximus
>>7428526
>>7428540
Cut the bullshit, are you talking about non-white "Germans"?
>>7430123
No, it was a fat white German.
And if I didn't misinterpret something he said in a hasty anxious tone, he actually joined these brothel-cheating people himself. Something like "they weren't very close friends!!" he said.
Really, it's a planned social activity for some men, even in a progressive country like Germany, to go cheating, in groups, paying money to do it.
>>7428736
>If I don't post it on instagram how will I find validation?
>>7430146
>some
There's the key word.
>>7428351
>Men aren't exactly writing stories about Alphas planting seeds everywhere
I think you'll find they are, your likely so used to it you don't notice it.
>>7428346
>The goal of a woman is to find a dependable man who will support her while she carries his children.
More like "to find a timid man who will support her while she carries another man's children"
>>7430348
this is u
>>7430377
Why does everyone tarnish ponies with MRA bullshit? ;_;
>>7430387
ponies have no place in your life unless you're an 11 year old girl
>>7428317
man, I thought I was the only one who fapped to Spinoza
>>7430391
But I love the show. It's cutesy-wutesy and cuddly as can be!
>>7430377
>>7430369
Mad Chadbusted cunts detected
>>7430453
probably cuz blacks skew every statistic negatively, 70% of black men abandon their families and have illegitimate kids
I thought this was a board about books not about /adv/.
>>7430377
It's less complicated than what the comic tries to imply.
Blonde guy is attractive, fat dude isn't. Of course, dudes that call themselves "nice guys" are usually pieces of shit, but that's tangential.
>>7430377
awkward neckbeards spend all their time rationalizing their failure, instead of improving themselves and their lives. see: >>7430453
Girls flit about the surface of life and are easily buffeted by meaningless storms, while even relatively shallow men tend to live at least a little bit beneath the surface. Every retarded wageslave guy with an IQ of 90 has some faded dream of revolutionizing bike pumps, or opening a toupee store with firehose Rogaine dispensers. Every guy has SOMETHING. Women by comparison are genuinely, truly happy to live entirely on the ephemera of life, gliding around on shifting surface appearances.
Every single man trapped in an awful cubicle in a dead-end job at a stagnant company is aware of it, even if he has buried it inside him. He's aware that there is a Him, something that should be cultivated even if it hasn't been, that is trapped. Women just osmose completely to their surroundings. Their "Her" is designed to graft onto wherever they are and become part of its petty social hierarchy. Women are 100% completely happy just waking up every day, engaging in office drama and spiteful dislike of random bitches in the mail room, browsing Facebook to gossip about people they used to know, passing the time until they go to sleep. They could literally do that for eternity. Forever. They don't want conclusions to the drama. They want it to go on like a syne wave of mild perturbances and reversals, for all time.
Men and women love in the same way. Men are looking for something transcendent and fateful, whether sexually or romantically or both. They've been taught that companionship for them is either about conquest (getting hot bitches, i.e., it's a quest), or transcendent love (finding and "earning" true love, i.e., it's a quest). Women have been taught that they are the OBJECT of all quests. They are surrounded by suppliant questers. For them it's not an individualized story of themselves-against-the-world in search of the final goal, like it is for men. It's stochastic, eternal, unmoving in its constant self-cancelling illusion of movement. They sit and wait. They judge an unending train of suitors, a visual field composed entirely of suitors, in the same white noise as their daily office drama. For men, romance means the romantic journey in its original narrative sense, the adventure. For women it means a neverending series of flings with Chad, which are perceived as one never-ending fling with Chadness itself. One Chad is replaced with another, their succession never perceived as having discrete endings or beginnings. Women exist in a permanent, generalised field of Chad.
>>7430615
Women read romance novels because that's the life they want. Every week, they want to be brilliantly in love with another Chad, the only Chad they could ever love. Then, when they get tired of Pirate Chad next week, they want to be brilliantly in love with Movie Star Chad, again, the only Chad they could ever love. Illusion of change.
Narrative arc, destiny, overcoming, struggle, beginning-and-end, creation-and-destruction, they're all fundamentally masculine ways of perceiving the subject's interaction with the world. Woman is Gaia, Tiamat, the primordial ooze, primeval Chaos, the chthonic original state of all creation myths whose eternal existence before its insemination is paradoxical and overcome by the singularity of the male "event" of penetration. Man adds meaning to the ooze by impregnating it, but it always exist underneath reality, as the Earth itself, to swallow man up again some day.
It's why they can read the same book with a different title over and over again. It's why they never create anything new. It's why stagnant consensus is more important to groups of women than innovation or goal completion. They are stagnation itself. Romance novels are a window into their most important drive, their ONLY drive, which is the reproductive cycle. The same thing, over and over again, forever. Men are the ones who create stories fundamentally against nature, moving perpendicular to the gaian earth rather than back into its womb, phallic monoliths aimed at the sky and out of the ooze.
>>7430615
>>7430622
>incoherent drivel
>Chad Chad Chad Chad
>>7430669
I can't stop laughing at the juxtaposition between your comment and the pic.
Post more of these comics family.
>>7430669
Females on /lit/ are easier to detect than vegans on.. anywhere, really.
>>7430669
>Roastie rebuttals
>>7430669
This is why no one takes women seriously. They can't even address a single argument without a bunch of bullshit or ad-homs.
>>7430622
Seems like you're actually just mad you're not "a Chad".
>>7430802
Total lack of self-awareness: the post
>>7430615
Your very existence shames me and every thinking man in the world. I imagine this is how the Germans feel.
Women get so fucking mad when found out lmao
>>7430835
lol xD
>>7430615
>>7430622
This is beautifully written and I've saved it for future inspiration. Thanks guy.
ps. Fuck off roasties.
>>7430807
>incoherent drivel
>Chad Chad Chad Chad
I don't see much to address here. Am I wrong?
>>7430843
It's pseud garbage. Stick to Schopenhauer because he could at least write
>>7430802
>>7430780
>>7430622
>>7430453
>>7430865
I don't see anything wrong with this comic. Stay mad roasties.
>>7428317
This is now my background pic
>>7430872
This is why few people take /r9k/ seriously.
>>7430865
>>7430876
Enjoy your cats.
>>7430884
Why is it that /r9k/ posters resort to ad homs and bullshit? It's almost as if they're genetically inferior.
>>7430884
the case of elliot rodger made me realize all muslims are isis sympathizers at heart...every autist and nogf type of beta sort of likes him a little bit, most people just dismiss him as an evil killer but you read his book and you're like the poor man suffered so much, he seems pretty chill, i would have played japanese video games with him and bitches about how chicks like assholes...but then imagine if he was muslim and wrote a story sympathizing with isis, you'd be like omg evil doer gas all muslims race war now! so the same way you find elliot radger a little sympathetic is how muslims find the san bernadino killers, every oppressed muslim chick thinks the wife shooting at the cops with ar-15 out the back window of her husbands suv is at least a little bit cool, the same way you think elliot rodger is pretty chill although he went maybe too far
>women ITT
>>7430906
kek good point desu
Women's physical and psychological are separate. That's why romance serves as women porn, because pure physical images simply don't do it for them.
It's also why you get scores of >tfw no gf on /fit/ even though they put hours into looking good. It's why if you ask most females for advice on attracting women, they will probably say 'just be yourself'. Because they want an emotional connection.
Books on this subject include The Mating Mind by Geoffry Miller and A Million Wicked Thoughts by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam
>>7430894
>they're genetically inferior
No shit, they're genetically "inferior" as judged by the opposite sex. That doesn't at all imply that they are inferior in intelligence, rationality, or ability. Women select pretty terrible attributes as it is, they should hardly be seen as the yardstick from which to compare male worth. Why do women love criminals, drug dealers and celebrity? They value meaningless social status above actual talent and tangible skill.
>>7430906
Shia Muslims would hate ISIS since ISIS murders them
>>7430894
Agreed. They put themselves in the same level as women when discussing.
>>7430921
Exactly.
>>7430906
>all muslims are isis sympathizers
>isis mostly kills muslims
:|
>>7430918
>That doesn't at all imply that they are inferior in intelligence, rationality, or ability.
If you were intelligent or "able" you would be accomplished and not whining on /r9k/.
>>7430926
>most betas are elliot rodger sympathizers
>he killed more beta asian men than women
:|
>>7428526
>>7428614
This is the most pathetic betacvck shit I've ever read in my life holy shit
Please tell me this is a troll and that there's not some emasculated sap who actually thinks like this
>Finding refugee within a genuinely emotional relationship with a woman who feels the way I do is my fantasy.
>a woman who feels the way I do
Newsflash: this will never happen because women don't love the same way men do. For all intents and purposes they are incapable of love
All the great philosophers knew this. All men who are good with women know this. If you're not good with women (which is pretty evident) ask a friend of yours who is. He will set you straight
>>7430931
I'm pretty sure the Syrians, Kurds, Iranians, and others fighting ISIS don't sympathize with ISIS.
>>7430930
>believing success depends solely on skill and not mostly on luck
>>7430931
you were the one claiming that all muslims are isis sympathizers and that all betas are elliot rodger sympathizers. i just showed where your logic was wrong
>>7430934
Who hurt you, anon? Was it your mother? Your sister?
>>7430941
lrn2opportunism
>>7428334
>yfw the predominant pattern among our closest primate relatives is that females who are dedicated to Chimp Studly's cheat on them with betas and let Studly raise the offspring as their own
>>7430944
they're not fighting too hard now are they? sort of like how france was "fighting the nazis" but then surrendered after about ten minutes, because lets face it the french hate juifs more than germans
>>7430941
The people on /r9k/ are men who faced difficult situations in their life and then used some defect of theirs to justify their failures and now they complain about women as being the source of the majority of their problems.
They didn't have skills in the first place and if they did they wouldn't wallow in self-pity.
>>7430918
>>7430908
>>7430934
>>7430930
I am "accomplished". I make $12k a month, I'm respected in my field and I've read hundreds of books. Just because I don't have a girlfriend doesn't mean I haven't succeeded in other areas of life. The pessimism of tfwnogf and refreshing honesty of /r9k/ inspires my writing.
I guess it's hard for women to accept that their ability to select winners is so faulty.
>>7430955
what the fuck?
>>7428317
Because the only thing that really matters in human women's lives, throughout all of their evolutionary history, is choosing the best man possible to fuck them.
While men have had to excel in many more ways because they are expendable, only one man is required to mate with many women, the percentage of human men born who have successfully passed on their genes is much lower than for women. And as a result men have other priorities they need to excel in in order to pass on their genes and so are more successful when they are interested in a variety of things and self-improvement instead of SIMPLY spending all day fantasising about their future romance.
/r9k/ and /pol/ are so fucking stupid.
>>7430917
>Million Wicked Thoughts
Glad you brought this up
>Leon F. Seltzer (psychologist), has offered explanations based on evolutionary psychology. Serial killers, in his view, are cases of alpha males that tend to attract women. This is because such males were good at protecting women and their offspring in our evolutionary history. Women nowadays may consciously realize that it is unwise to date a serial killer, but they are nevertheless attracted to them, as he notes "as a therapist I've encountered many women who bemoaned their vulnerability toward dominant men who, consciously, they recognized were all wrong for them."[3] As evidence of women's fantasy preference for dominant men, he refers to the book A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the World's Largest Experiment Reveals about Human Desire by Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam. Seltzer discusses Ogas and Gaddam's argument that this fantasy is the dominant plot of most erotic/romantic books and movies written for women but the fantasy always holds that this male dominance is conditional, "it doesn’t really represent the man’s innermost reality." [3]
>>7430966
>desperately trying to validate himself on an anonymous image board
Truly this indicates a successful and thriving life.
>>7430974
This entire thread is a daily reminder that evolutionary psychology is dead and a shit science, and the only purpose it serves nowadays is that internet neckbeards can justify their virgin loser status (best example: itt)
>Popper_and_Feyerabend_spinning_in_their_graves.tiff
>>7430966
What is this supposed to prove? It doesn't change that /r9k/ is filled with people who just want to whine about everything in their lives. It's better to just suck it up and move on.
>>7430976
>oh no he doesn't derive his status from vagina
>>7430966
>I am "accomplished". I make $12k a month...
>>7430966
if you're so smart why can't you figure out how to get a gf? maybe instead of reading STEM books about nerdy shit no one cares about you should read some literature so you can learn to be less of an autistic freak, have a nice day
>>7430982
Why is it that people like you can only form strawmen to knock down, speak in memes, cannot articulate your ideas well, and make idiotic assumptions of others?
>>7428319
it's not very odd, it makes perfect sense biologically and evolutionarily.
Women lose out from infidelity when a man cheats and falls for another women to the extent he sponsors that women and the kids he has with that women rather than the original wife. Women don't lose out from cheating when a man just fucks another woman because a woman always knows that any time she gives birth she is guaranteed to have passed on her genes successfully.
On the other hand men lose out from physical infidelity, because of your mate fucks another man and has his child and you think that it's yours, you could end up not passing on your own genes and instead helping raise another man's child.
>>7430983
fuck man
haha
>>7430979
>evolutionary psychology is dead
Only a nutty leftist would say something like that.
>>7430961
>>7430965
>>7430983
mein gott kek
>people making arguments others don't like
>others respond "muh virgin neckbeard"
/lit/ in a nutshell. I literally can't distinguish this place from reddit
>>7431002
This is you:
>"God is dead"
>Only a fedora would say something like that.
>>7428317
Biological. Please realize humans are slightly more evolved apes.
>>7431010
Then leave. :)
>>7430873
you're welcome bro
>>7431010
/lit/ is full of leftists and that's how leftists "argue". Yell racist, sexist, neckbeard until the other person stops posting.
>>7431010
women only know how to socially shame people, they literally can't even conceptualise arguing against words or concepts
when you are arguing with someone you are doing this heuristic analysis of your argument vs. theirs, but when women are arguing with someone they just think HOW CAN I CALL THIS MAN A VIRGIN?? BOY I SURE WOULDN'T FUCK HIM, IF HE KNEW THAT I BET HE'D CHANGE HIS OPINION SO THAT I'D FUCK HIM
truth doesn't exist to a vagina, only social coercion. this is why feminists are all obsessed with foucault, it makes perfect sense to them.
>>7431028
>>7431010
>>7430985
>why can't you figure out how to get a gf
>implying women are logical
>implying that I'd want to waste my precious limited time on earth forming a faux personality to be appealing to tasteless whores
>an autistic freak
I wouldn't be where I am now if everyone had accepted me for who I am. It gave me the drive to succeed that all others lacked. Five minutes with my own hand relieves the loneliness away but a lifetime of trying won't fix their mental deficiency. I don't wish to have been born any other way.
>>7430983
<3
>>7431028
Didn't you just do the same thing, only instead of "racist, sexist, neckbeard" you used "leftist"?
>>7431041
but there are people who make 12k a month AND gets tons of pussy, so you're still a loser
*sad trombone*
>>7431046
Leftist, roastie, terrorist, marxist, SJW, etc.
>>7431046
leftist isn't derogatory though. It's a label, but it's not intended to be an ad hominem
>>7431046
No, because I'm not engaged in an argument.
>>7431041
Good for you, but this is not your blog faggot.
>>7430987
Because your tiny little girlbrain cannot grasp exposition beyond bite-sized tweets, my dear
>>7431048
Even if you're a billionaire, some will still outclass you. What's your point? I'm content that I surpass everyone I grew up with and all the girls who declined my advances.
>>7431059
But I'm not female or the guy you were talking to before. I was just pointing out how stupid you seem to a third-party.
>>7431036
>women only know how to socially shame people
>>7431059
Do you honestly believe that there are any girls posting in this thread?
>>7431076
There's at least one severely unfunny person whose jokes are all undermined by their own asspain, so probably
>>7431062
I remember one time back when howard stern was still on the broadcast radio the people at work always put his show on in the morning, and one day he called up some girl he went to a jewish summer camp or something with, who dissed his akward teen advances and never gave him any play one youthful summer...and he was like "ha! i bet you wish you had slept with me now! look how fucking successful and famous i am!", she was like "awww, Howard you're funny hehe, but my husband is a programmer, we live comfortably, but it was fun knowing you that summer" I was like lmao stern btfo
>>7431064
I didn't ask if you were. You're not laughing at me because this is my third post in the thread and I'm not involved in your mspaint brigade with the other person.
>>7431076
The only people who seem like women in this thread are the buttblasted ones whining about how women hurt their feelings.
>>7431086
>woman
>admitting failure
pick one
>>7430979
I do have a girlfriend. I'm not a virgin or a loser so your argument is literally invalid
Once again, anyone who is remotely successful with women know that the majority of them are basically subhuman. Your shaming tactics don't work on attractive people who get laid regularly
>>7430987
>Why is it that people like you can only form strawmen to knock down, speak in memes, cannot articulate your ideas well, and make idiotic assumptions of others?
You mean like the anon who superimposes text that flusters his fanny over an image of a fat guy?
>>7431073
That's all you're doing. Your very post is some kind of ironic fulfilment of the observation. If you had the level of reason and abstract thought of a man, you'd realise it.
>>7430966
>I am "accomplished". I make $12k a month
>mfw poor people brag about making 12k a month
>>7431093
Are you implying that women are infallible and can do no wrong?
>>>/t/umblr
>>7431062
>I'm content that I surpass everyone
>>7431098
i was thinking the same thing, 12k isn't even close to cracking the one percent, it's like top 20 percent at best, i guess 12k isn't bad for the provinces but in a world city that's not something you brag about unless you're at a homeless shelter
>>7431062
you didn't surpass them in having sex, the most important activity for all multi-cellular organisms in existence
>>7431107
10/10
>>7431103
>Take it like a man. Stop whining like bitches.
There you go again. The cycle of social shaming continues. You really do lack all self awareness. This is why women make shitty authors.
>>7428526
Well executed bait.
>>7431118
I'm not a woman but your bitching makes it seem like you are.
>>7431126
>I'm not a woman but your bitching makes it seem like you are.
kek
>>7431096
>Your shaming tactics don't work on attractive people who get laid regularly
>>7431147
>P-please don't hurt my feelings with ad homs! >_<
>But I'll insult you all the while! :)
>>7431147
>replying to roasties and their white knights
>>7431147
It's a pretty powerful weapon though, isn't it?
>>7431147
What's with men being so feminine these days? Do insults over the internet really hurt you that much?
