Please post statistics about more sex partners = worse marriage I need to btfo a normie
>>24820549
Yeah, that's wrong. You're just angry that you can't get any sex partners. Someone's past has no effect on their current relationships.
I've got a couple
>>24820549
those stastics from like 15 years ago?
>>24820580
So someone who has been in over 100 failed relationships means the next one will be stable?
>>24820581
>facts are sexist!
>>24820549
Pretty much introverts are babies?
>>24820549
I found this and blew out a slut on twitter. She went full damage control mode and I had a good laugh.
>>24820603
more info on sluts
>>24820673
I'm gunna need a screencap on that, or some shit. I love seeing normies get assblasted
>>24820721
Well she pretended to be all superior, but I knew she was going into panic mode. She didn't read the article I posted that went with this picture (and another one covering the stats for americans WITH a four-year college degree, which yielded the same results). She then moved the goalpost and claimed that this was only in the US and it doesn't apply to her country or something.
The funniest part is that I only responded to her twice and she sends this big wall of justifications. Full damage control.
>>24820759
>only a small minority of the worlds population doesn't have a 4 year degree
>>24820673
>>24820603
>>24820581
I posted these and they said
>"dude"
>"I bet you think the moonlanding was fake too"
>>24820846
deal with it shitlord, facts and reality don't apply to me! now pay for my niglet and buy me something
>>24820878
That's an excellent response. It implies that this is common knowledge and only an idiot would argue against these facts.
It's a tactic often used by disingenious debaters, but it's highly effective and the media uses it all the time with great success.
