New SI Unit for Female Ugliness

Topic by Cipher Highwind

Cipher Highwind

Home Forums MGTOW Central New SI Unit for Female Ugliness

This topic contains 46 replies, has 13 voices, and was last updated by Cipher Highwind  Cipher Highwind 4 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 7 posts - 41 through 47 (of 47 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #35244

    Anonymous
    11

    @sidecar:  Is that even human?  That is the most vile fat pile I’ve ever seen.  I’m trying to figure out if she even has legs in there.  She looks like a giant damn tumor.

     

    #35247
    +1
    Sidecar
    sidecar
    Participant
    35837

    for any feminists or white knight manginas reading this trying to rationalize “He’s just a pig!”

    Call men “pigs” for wanting to date attractive women.  Call gold diggers “empowered” for only wanting to date rich men.

    Woman logic.

    Is that even human?

    Good question. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    That is the most vile fat pile I’ve ever seen. I’m trying to figure out if she even has legs in there. She looks like a giant damn tumor.

    And yet feminism wants to tell us that this is somehow beautiful.  Again, why the f~~~ does anyone take feminism seriously?

    #35617
    +1
    Peterfa
    peterfa
    Participant
    833

    Because Patriarchy… if you’d just check your privilege for one goddammed minute!

    #35623
    Smacktalk73
    Smacktalk73
    Participant
    296

    Personally, if I’m going to interact with women and put up with the typical abuse that they all dish out, may as well go for the ones that are easy on the eyes; that said I will acknowledge that the more attractive a woman is they <b>easier</b> it is for her to manipulate you, which is considerably more dangerous. So your mileage may vary, and I perfectly understand a man who is willing to dip his standards because its easier to deal with. I however, cannot do this because once you have gone up the beauty chart then its really hard to go back down. Its just… really hard to go from an 8-9 down to a 6. That said, if I ever did go down to a 6, I could probably forget about her with out much trouble, after all, she’s the same as the 8-9’s, just inferior in the only differentiating aspect.

    I think you should find ALL women hard to stomach — the idea that you’re willing to put up with the same s~~~ from a 8-9 at all when you wouldn’t stomach it from a 6 is YOUR vulnerability.   That 8-9 has a great advantage over you.

    Conversely, I see an overweight woman as having a problem I completely understand.  Depressed?  Don’t think it’s worth getting your ass off the couch and exercising?  Like to drown your problems in twinkies and hot dogs?

    F~~~, LIFE SUCKS and I completely understand all of those motivations.  It doesn’t make her more attractive to me, but I understand it.

    Wanting a woman to be a 8-9 on the scale is like a battered woman saying “but I only date big, strong, aggressive men … men are all pigs, why would I bother dating one that wasn’t a big hot hunk?”   You gotta say “well, you are certainly not doing anything to protect yourself from abuse.

    Again, I find fat itself repulsive, and I find laziness repulsive, but I also UNDERSTAND what gets a woman fat and lazy.  It’s human depression and sadness and lack of motivation, all things that I completely relate to.

    And I recognize that I turn into a stupid piece of jelly around a 8-9, and basically hand over my wallet.  Sure, it feels good in the moment, but I need to stay away from that s~~~.

    #35636
    Cipher Highwind
    Cipher Highwind
    Participant
    1144

    Because of Patriarchy… if you’d just check your privilege for one goddammed minute!

    (emphasis mine)

    It seems like people on the internet have forgotten that “because” is a conjunction, not a damn preposition. The only time that “because” does not take “of” is when it is a subordinating conjunction.

    #35642
    Vector Viking
    Vector Viking
    Participant
    413

    Yeah, because grammar!

    #35772
    Cipher Highwind
    Cipher Highwind
    Participant
    1144

    Yeah, because of grammar!

    (emphasis mine)

    I read that blog too; Stan Carey and Megan Garber are imbeciles of the highest degree as usage does not dictate grammatical correctness.

    The unfortunate and much abused English language lacks the standardisation of French. The latter has the Académie française to keep the rabble out.

    Others may be found here – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_regulators – note the lack of entry for “English”.

    It takes very little effort to speak and write properly, so one can only conclude that one does so improperly on account of pure stupidity, and I am grateful for this. If fools did not speak so poorly, one must go to greater lengths before determining one is a fool.

Viewing 7 posts - 41 through 47 (of 47 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.