So /pol/ this seems like pretty solid argumentation here...
is there any way to counter this?
Previously tried and failed attempts include but are not limited to:
>cooties from previous penises
you use utensils are restaurants don't you?
>would you eat cereal if 48 dicks were dipped in it?
Do you drink water? animals shit and pee in the ocean and rivers right?
>lock and key argument
>being a slut is easy being a stud is hard
okay... say this is true. so what? easy = bad? hard=good? why? please defend this.
>loose vagina
>she absorbs semen dna man
pure myths
>she will be less happy, worse wife
marriage is not for everybody. if you still believe in this custom that's your problem.
>I want to have a virgin because I am a virgin myself
two virgins have awful sex. you're much better off with an experienced and kind teacher
>she's likely to cheat
implying someone who never experienced another won't want to try
also stop posting stats that include religious repressed people who marry virgin and never divorce.
SORRY /pol/ you must try harder.
>>71036632
Personally I find the facial expressions much more persuasive than the words.
>>71036632
>what is STDS
/thread
>>71036803
>What is condom, safe sex, testing?
>>71036632
CONFUCIUS: "'A key that can open many locks is called a master key, but a lock that can be opened by many keys is USELESS.'”
What the fuck is up with this autist and cereal?
Also, eating a variety of cereals obviously compares to chocking on nigger dick every weekend.
Fuck John Green and fuck the nu-males that are destroying this country.
If your food analogy is so great, then shouldn't prostitution be legal.
I mean, there's nothing wrong with you and several other people paying your hard earned money to some consenting cereal in exchange for eating it.
And yet most feminists I've talked to said they hated prostitution, why? My cereal analogy is flawless that means they should accept it as the truth
>>71037037
have you ever met, known or even heard of anyone in real life who chokes on nigger dick every weekend?
please get meme'd harder man.
Ignoring the financial aspect, I'd say a better analogy would be driving a new vs. old, used car.
>>71037237
What's with the dead eyes?
>>71036994
Things most people don't do in their late teens and early 20's.
>>71036632
Top cuck.
>>71036632
Psicosexual health. The fact that she is promiscuous is telling you about the quality of the mental state she lives, there's nothing wrong with whores though is their function, you can fuck whores and dump them after you use them, they exist since the very beginning of humanity and I don't think they are going away.
>>71036632
dude, you are now in state of negation, just live on or commit suicide already
>>71036632
>roastie trying to justify her meat flaps
>>71036632
Why the fuck is this posted everyday?
>>71036632
>>71037237
Go out and you will meet many people that do anon.
>>71036632
If you believe in evolution you would know that monogamy developed among humans as a way to ensure that males know it is their offspring and to ensure that the female will have herself and the child provided for. Since humans have such a long developmental time, this was necessary for the survival of the species.
When someone tells you to accept the fact that they have slept with lots of other people, your brain recoils. Not because society has programmed you, but because your biology is screaming at you that she is a bad mate. Men are attracted to certain things. Only cucks will marry a woman with lots of previous partners, as they can only take the scraps better men don't want anymore. Despite attempted feminist reprogramming, men will still find certain traits attractive and unnatractive. This is despite what cucks will try to have you believe since they cannot accept that they failed at attracting a decent woman.
>>71036994
>condoms
condoms do not protect from all STD's
>Safe sex
You basically listed "condoms" twice. And there's no way to have penetrative intercourse without placing yourself at risk of getting an STD
>testing
>"HOW DARE YOU ASSUME I HAVE AN STD SHITLORD. I'M NEVER GETTING TESTED"
>you eat using utensils other people have touched
utensils that can be sterilized somewhat by being put through a hot dishwasher and scrubbed clean. If someone with a cold uses that spoon and you use it after it's been thoroughly washed your chances of catching a cold from it are very, very low. As opposed to fucking someone with genital herpes, in which case your chance of catching said herpes is very, very high.
>>71037549
>that finger
>>71036632
Drinking water is a necessity.
Dicking a girl is not.
What the fuck, OP?
>>71037532
so how the fuck will i sleep with many women if all of them are only supposed to fuck one guy? I will get to fuck 1000 women, while 999 men will die as virgins?
Never understood this. You must be an unsecure faggot to hate "sluts".
>>71036632
There are plenty of arguments against it because its wrong
>>71036632
>i am for subjecting women's vaginas to boiling water and harsh strrilizing chemicals just like restaurant utensils
literally your first point.
>>71037583
you just gave yourself away virgin.
safe sex =/= condom
there are safe sexual practices that limit fluid and skin contact. there are ways to eat pussy to limit exposure to hpv. anal play and more.
condoms are PART of safe sexual practices.
>>71037571
5-star post, sir.
>>71036632
What is it with men with very high eyebrows being always beta cucklords? Seriously, I have never met a man that has high eyebrows and isn't an utterly emasculated male.
>>71036632
Its funny that you don't have much argument besides saying "so what"
>>71037770
thank you i was looking for this one
>>71037571
*drops mic*
*clap clap*
>>71037571
if you know anything about evolution you know that we evolved to have INTERVAGINAL SPERM COMPETITION where gang rape was the normal way to have sex.
our sperm literally swims and competes with other sperm, our dicks are shaped like plungers to get competing semen out of the way.
we can cum in minutes because rape was the normal way to have sex and women moan loudly to attract other males for the usual gang rape.
sorry but monogamy is just a BETA concept reinforced by virgin religious losers for controlling women.
you're a beta and in favor of it
that's the only thing natural about monogamy.
>>71037870
What's wrong with being a virgin?
You can't force me to think your way, and I disagree with that you think.
I'm content to keep trying to do things the way I want to do them.
>>71038221
>controlling women is for betas
Omega cuck spotted
>>71037765
>so how the fuck will i sleep with many women if all of them are only supposed to fuck one guy?
You won't be the one sleeping with them you beta cuck.
Jokes aside, the same sluts sleep with many 'alpha' males, so while you'll get the odd idiot claiming he's slept with 100 women it's likely those same women have each slept with that many guys.
Basically the sluts and alphas all fuck each other, it's why STIs are so common amongst them. Most other people are monogamous, but today's culture promotes a 'try before you buy' attitude to relationships so they go through a few before settling on one.
>>71037870
explain how you can have "safe" sex while limiting skin contact
none of your eating pussy shit, i'm talking literal fucking intercourse
>>71038277
Absolutely nothing. It's just that the kikes in your country are telling people everywhere to lose it as quickly as possible.
>>71036632
I don't think there's much to debunk here, it's true that the sexual life of your partner should be irrelevant especially if we're talking about mature adults here, but women don't have casual sex the way men do, they have casual relationships they get tired of.
A man having fucked 40 women could easily mean just that, he had sex with 40 different women with no real relationship, probably getting drunk at bars/parties.
A woman having fucked 40 men can easily mean she had a dozen of failed relationships, that's a red flag for anyone looking for commitment.
Plus women don't gain value by having sex, if anything they get looser and worse, instead men with experience are way better lovers than some random cuck, their value raises with experience.
>>71037870
>you just gave yourself away virgin
>there are safe sexual practices that limit fluid and skin contact
notice how I said "penetrative intercourse". As in copulating, having PIV sex with or without condor.
Yes, I'm sure you'll have a fantastic relationship with your partner who has herpes through only anal play and rubbing your face against her breakouts. I mean, if you're a bugchaser congratulations, it's your lucky day.
Enjoy it while the rest of us enjoy picking emotionally stable partners that don't have a history of short, fleeting, destructive relationships that aren't riddled with diseases
>>71037237
Yeah, you.
#rekt
>>71036632
If someone has had 48 sexual partners all that tells me is they have intimacy issues, problems forming/maintaining relationships, and seemingly have no problem using someone else's body to masturbate with.
Why would you even want someone like that in your life? Forget about putting your dick in her.
Women have something we all want, sex. It's almost always the girls decision in the end to choose a male. When they choose many males in a short space of time, it shows lack of self control. I don't get why people don't understand this, I don't want a girl with bad judgement.
>>71038382
PIV(penis in vagina) sex is only part of sex and doesn't always happen. there are lots of way to get off before that happens. some people don't even enjoy that.
anyways if you are penetrating then the best protection is condoms. grooming your genitals and making sure you don't have cuts or rashes from grooming or excessing grinding is part of safe sex against getting skin based stds.
just google it.
>>71036632
I actually support your wives, daughters, and moms being as sexually liberated as possible. Makes it easier for me to fuck them. I will explain the ramifications of slut behavior to my wife and my daughter in the privacy of my home.
Go on. Be free. I am fully in support of this, senpai.
>2016
>not riding the tiger to its fullest extent
>not inheriting the earth
>>71036632
Yep. Sexual partners and cherriors are definitely analogous
>>71037330
Probably from choking on nigger dick every weekend
>>71037765
I think in reality no one hate sluts, I think most people hate this kind of rhetoric, where they tell you that sluts and non-sluts have the same quality output
>>71038221
'Cept I'm talking about man, not early hominids. While your model is true for many of the early hominid species, they also had a development time of around 4 years to whereas Homo Erectus has a developmental time of around 16 years. This is when monogamy starts, in the paleolithic. So, when advocating for many sex partners, you are almost saying you would rather regress to the likes of Homo Ergaster than a Homo Sapien.
>mfw you manage to be more of a cuck than a Neanderthal
>>71037583
never noticed how orange that guy is
>I want to have a virgin because I am a virgin myself
>two virgins have awful sex. you're much better off with an experienced and kind teacher
Because if you're a virgin, sex with your partner will be terrible forever, and neither of you will learn anything for the Sex Exam.
Also quality of sex is the MOST IMPORTANT THING IN LIFE.
This argument is shit.
>>71036632
The answer is so fucking simple it hurts.
Each sexual partner is a potential lifetime partner.
If the female had many potential lifetime partners but remains single and looking for a good dicking, what does that tell you?
It tells you that XX number of men had a chance to keep her, but decided not to.
Or that she had XX chances to settle, but decided not to.
It indicates that she is either "poor quality goods upon closer inspection", which would be why men who did dick her didn't consider her worth sticking around her for too long.
Or that she is highly picky and will not accept anything short of perfect. Since if she had so many opportunities to reproduce and settle and still chose freedom it indicates that: yes you could have a good chance to dick her, but no, she would not agree to be your wife, or would not want to stick around for long.
Here's a comparison:
If you're buying a car and it has 4 years and 10 previous owners, you may feel that something is fishy. Clearly none of the people who bought it felt it worthy of keeping it. In fact, most seem to have gone through the trouble of finding a replacement very soon after purchasing it. Perhaps they learned that the car is bad? Perhaps the car is really worse than it looks? We do like to use the behaviour of others to give us hints on what is a good deal and what is not. We rely on information of those who had been there before us. In this case it doesn't mean the car is bad, but it means it is more likely to be. Maybe they all had some weird different reason for changing cars, maybe it wasn't the car at all. But do you know that? No. Given other options you will probably try to go for something more secure. More certain.
Given how much of an investment raising children or starting a family is, do you believe it is wrong that both men and women try to minimise the risks of getting themselves into a bad deal?
>>71037502
Mr Green has nothing better to do
>>71039545
This is the same for women, by the way. Try to convince a woman to consider settling down with you if you tell her that your average relationship lasts 2 weeks, and you've had 15 "semi-serious" partners in the last 6 months.
She will think that you're not serious about settling down. She will think you're either poor quality goods, or you're too picky in the long run. She will think you're too immature and are only chasing tail.
This all comes down to what kind of a relationship you're looking for. If it's just dicking then Chads are the best for women, good lay, experienced, and highly desirable. But how is it so difficult to accept that, when it comes to starting a family, the priorities of what we want in a partner change? It is perfectly normal that we may view behavioural patterns in women that we found hot when looking for a pussy for the night as not necessarily as good when considering starting a family with that person.
>>71039545
what you're saying if fine if and only if having sex with someone was always part of a partner find process.
except it isn't. people choose sexual partners at different points in their lives for many different reasons...almost no one is looking for a life partner in high school or college.
so there is no implicit evaluation like you suggest of the goods.
There is just two people who wanted to have sex and have great orgasms then went their separate ways.
I understand this concept triggers /pol/ because they can't have casual fun sex on account of being fat right wing losers.
>>71040079
You got btfo tbqh
>>71036632
First off. You do not get to suddenly start canceling arguments calling them 'myths'
We can procure articles and research supporting those myths, you or posters like you generally cannot present counter-evidence.
So loose-vagina and multiple-DNA child are on the table but fine, let's say that that's not such a big deal for some betas.
Then,
>She will be less happy, worse wife
Then that's fine, marriage is not for everyone but we do not want to hear about those types of women complaining that they cannot find a stable, long-term partner.
>she's likely to cheat
We don't imply anything. We simply put out there that people who have sex mainly in the context of a stable relationship already are less likely to cheat. People who have sex in no relationship to a minimal relationship ARE more likely to cheat.
And finally, one argument you haven't heard yet. What if it's just my preference to have a less promiscuous woman? Same way women can have any preference they want with men, why can't men do the same?
Also, the cereal analogy is bullshit:
>Eat sugary cereals of all flavors in your youth
>Never eat healthy, boring cereal
>get older
> need to take care of yourself
>eat healthy cereal because it's good for you
>but if you could eat sugary cereal with no health-issues, you would
So the analogy says that if I'm liable in a better financial situation than someone and they come onto me, chances are it's self-preservation on their part and no actual feelings are involved
>>71037394
/thread
>>71036632
>cooties from previous penises
are you five ?
>lock and key argument
Solid argument, you dont want shit products that everyone has, its why fucking diamonds cost abovenigger levels, even if the are trash desu , literally Diamond to begin with, and people gave it meaning and here we go.
in the same way , they gave meaning to a female´s vagina, the only problem here is the vagina has reached some kind of existential selfawareness in our lifetime and shits and pisses and eats all att the same time in the same place.
>loose vagina
do you want a flat tire ?
>she absorbs semen dna man
fuck me, i dont know, shes probably good att catching diseases tho
>I want to have a virgin because I am a virgin myself
same experience as taking shrooms, preferably solo is not the way to go. more meaningfull if both persons have a epiphany moment.
>she's likely to cheat
All women are, even muslims have the problems of wifes cheating, and they do it with the fucking consequences of beeing stoned to death
^ if that shit doesnt make sense then you are a reddit cuck.
>>71040079
>people choose sexual partners at different points in their lives for many different reasons
This is true, which is why I said the qualities we are looking for in people we want to sleep with are different than the qualities we look for in people we want to live with.
>almost no one is looking for a life partner in high school or college
You'd be amazed how many people around you marry their "high school sweetheart" and the like.
Also, this is what I said as well. But the argument is not that a person's sexual partners indicate how good they are for marriage. It's that what makes people popular as sexual partners is DIFFERENT and often OPPOSITE characteristics than what makes them popular as marital partners.
You see, just because she was a good lay while you were both looking for sex doesn't mean she is a good wife material. In fact most of the things that make her a good lay automatically make her a poorer wife prospect.
And I can explain that to a frustrated nu-male like you without having to call you a fat looser, like some sort of immature unstable child.
Which, by the way, are also qualities that are not wanted in potential husbands. Women like adventurous men who act without thinking when they seek excitement and adventure, but that won't make you a good husband in their eyes. Once they're all done fucking you, you will still end up alone.
>John "just tax me up" Green
He's basically saying that he should get anything he wants and he views others as objects.
>>71038541
>emotionally stable
>women
pick one
>>71036632
>do you like it when other people have sex with your wife?
>well there you go
>>71036632
Counter: John Green is a literal cuck.
>>71041605
Wouldn't that just enforce his opinions?
>>71036632
it literally takes no effort for women to get laid
it takes a ton of effort for a man to get laid
women are considered sluts for sleeping around
men are considered pussies for not sleeping around enough, extra bullying for virgin
the whole deal is balanced enough, nobody really cares
Cheerios is a brand, you buy more boxes and you can expect that every box you purchase is clean and unopened.
You would not buy an opened/used box.
John Green is a literal cuck, look it up.
He met his wife the first day at college, liked her right away but because of his crippling betaness she found him repulsive. For 4 years she fucked a bunch of dudes and Green just waited on her.
Eventually when she was damaged goods and Chad moved on to a newer model she got with John.
>>71042534
She had his kid though and takes his dick.
Who won? Chad or john?
