Home › Forums › The Litter Box › Why are you guys complaining so much when you contribute f~~~ all
This topic contains 90 replies, has 33 voices, and was last updated by 
Atton 3 years, 5 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
That you in there Crazy, you driving that keyobard mate?
Didnt have ur account jacked? Sober behind the driving wheel?"Society is to blame" Denton
Anonymous11It is possible that the woman herself doesn’t even know she is involved with him.
I know a nutcase that was in love with a dead woman. He pestered her mother for about 18 months. It was some girl from his high school years that he had a crush on.
If I start saying crazy s~~~ outside of my normal crazy s~~~, then my account has been hijacked.
The f~~~ was all that?
I assumed the first post was a quoting failure. No big deal, could happen to anyone.
But then Crazy comes back as some sort of trad-con pod person and doubles down on it.
Crazy be crazy.
Did you recently get a girlfriend who is watching over your shoulder and tells you to post s~~~ like this?
"One of the best things internet exposed is just how insane women are." - Freeman_K
Anonymous18Did you recently get a girlfriend who is watching over your shoulder and tells you to post s~~~ like this?
LOL, never thought of that. A BJ for CC if the thread goes to page 5? What is it CC?
If I ever go crazy like this it’s the anal she offered me. All you fellas play it well and act real offended. #brocode
Anonymous42I think someone got his login. He sounds like a feminist right now or a BLM race baiter.
Dont feed the troll.
Anonymous11Most the racial stains I see here are direct toward the Hebrew race
I only despise Banksters for the things they have done to us all and not all Hebrews are Banksters. Most Banksters are Hebrew though around 80%. Two of my cousins are Hebrew, and they are good folks.
I don’t like being around racists of any hue. They give off bad vibes from their hatred. That “Canuck” rant seemed racist against whites to me. I think he was hijacked or had a mangina/woman get on his PC. Whatever it was, it was a troll.
Anonymous24I can’t even pretend to sort through all of this on so many levels. Firstly, I have not been around that long. Secondly, I do not watch Youtube content. And thirdly, I do not have the time to figure this all out right now.
All I can say is I have bumped heads with Trad-Cons and Muslim bashers here, and I am a white man. There is certainly a level of denial here as to what is causing problems in the world. Many just react to the bad results from invasions of countries who did nothing to their neighbors by wanting more blood and then are shocked and outraged when more terrorism happens. Many are playing right into their masters hands. Very few here place blame where needed in more than one arena.
With that said, this place is awesome. Free speech reigns supreme. Either fight or bow out. I choose to fight.
Anonymous24Most the racial stains I see here are direct toward the Hebrew race
I only despise Banksters for the things they have done to us all and not all Hebrews are Banksters. Most Banksters are Hebrew though around 80%. Two of my cousins are Hebrew, and they are good folks.
I don’t like being around racists of any hue. They give off bad vibes from their hatred. That “Canuck” rant seemed racist against whites to me. I think he was hijacked or had a mangina/woman get on his PC. Whatever it was, it was a troll.
I would also hope that with all that I say here that nobody mistakes criticism for racism.
Anonymous42I would also hope that with all that I say here that nobody mistakes criticism for racism.
Not at all Joe, you presented facts, not like me, shotgun on a scarecrow.
Anonymous42Correct me if I’m wrong, aren’t Muslims and Jews in the same race, ummmmm, like half brothers? Way back?
I say f~~~ em both if all they want to do is keep on fighting. We’re brothers of a somewhat intellectual nature aren’t we? We’re not foaming at the mouth to annihilate each other are we?
If you’ll notice I don’t say much about either, they’re brothers that fight, let them sort each other out,
wethis country should leave and get the f~~~ out of being Mr COP, Mr White Knight, MR Shot in the heart.Those assholes will be opening a can of man-made thermal sunshine, one brother killing another like the story Cane and Abel.
@Crazy, are you sure your account credentials have not been compromised? It’s like you’ve been hijacked.
AGREED!!
"It seems like there's times a body gets struck down so low, there ain't a power on earth that can ever bring him up again. Seems like something inside dies so he don't even want to get up again. But he does."
These seems out of character to me, but, I like the topic, so I’ll play.
I think there is a logical point to this. If every man refused to have sex with a woman before marriage, and refused to marry a woman that divorced for s~~~ty reasons, we would see a drastic drop in divorce. That is not too hard to see.
The problem is that you’re not going to get every man to behave and agree that way. It just isn’t going to happen. I see it similar to communism. It looks good on paper, but it does not take into account the inherit selfishness and laziness of humans. Therefore, the ideal fails, and a system which utilizes and attempts to control common human nature, like capitalism, is better.
For the record, I did not have sex with my wife before I married her. She was no virgin herself, but I don’t even think that mattered. The societal message she embraced was that she deserved to be happy at all times, and when she was not, it was time to divorce. I don’t think sex really factored in, unless she was under the believe that no one would touch her again if she got a divorce. That is independent of her or I’s personal sexual history since society says you can divorce and do whatever you want.
Yes, divorce rose with the ‘sexual revolution’, but that was also around the same time divorce laws changed and women were given ‘equality’ without responsibility. Large groups of men refusing to have sex with women has a positive impact. Large groups of men having sex, but refusing to commit also has a positive impact, though not as big. A change in the laws to remove all the benefits women receive at the expense of men is what is going to really bring solid change.
And FYI, I do not think MGTOW have any sort of obligation to put aside their personal goals, in favor of goals that best meet what they see as best for society. In other words, do what’s best for you. If that happens to help society as a whole, great.
Ok. Then do it.
The f~~~ was all that? But then Crazy comes back as some sort of trad-con pod person and doubles down on it.
I don’t know. It doesn’t make any sense.
• “You’re a racist” followed by “you white boys are truly f~~~ing dumb”.
• “Divorce is a big problem” followed by “I never had a girlfriend lol”.
• “Too many women spread their legs before marriage” followed by “YOU are responsible for that!”.
• “I guess”… followed by “Use logic”.And last night +4 emails “you c*ck s*cking f~~g*ts, lol”.
I don’t know how it’s possible to call someone a c*ck s*cking f~~g*t after you just “accused” that person of having sex with women – and talked about it like some big problem.
This doesn’t seem like the usual behavior of Crazy, he’s never acted like this before.
What if Canuck’s account has been hijacked? This is not like Canuck. He tends to be a little more low key.
His account hasn’t been compromised. We have seen this behavior from him before. A few months ago he slaughtered our mailbox one night exactly same thing happened. Very similar to this. Lashing out from nowhere. We went back and forth with him to NO resolve.
And then a long period of silence and then he started to post again. I will even personally respond under him, usually supporting what he posted with a thought. Never a response to my reply – until this s~~~.
I truly hope that whatever issue is taking place here will get resolved. This sounds like an account that has been compromised.
He can contact us in the future and work it out. But not until he tells us THE PRECISE PROBLEM he has. We keep asking “what is your problem exactly? Please be specific. And will not answer it or make an effort to work it out.
Even yesterday “you chicken s~~~ running off like that” but I had to go to work. Like I owed its to him to stick around and argue with him for as long as he wanted. I have no interest in combatting our members. There is not A SINGLE REASON for a member to lash out at us like that…. and if there is, I want to know what it is. But if he won’t even tell us (because he CAN’T) then there is nothing we can do.
So back on topic now….
I think there is a logical point to this. If every man refused to have sex with a woman before marriage, and refused to marry a woman that divorced for s~~~ty reasons, we would see a drastic drop in divorce. That is not too hard to see.
Yeah. You’re right and I agree with you… in a society where a marriage contract isn’t a fraudulent contract, and assuming you’re interested in signing one in the first place.
But rewind that thought for a second…..
“If every man refused to have sex with a woman before marriage”That’s totally unrealistic. Let’s pretend for a moment that a marriage contract actually had any benefit for a man. I know it’s a big stretch, but try it.
It is an ABSOLUTE indisputable FACT (and makes perfect sense) that you are +10,000 times more likely to meet a woman you’re willing to have sex with —- than a woman you’re willing to sit across from, listen to, date , spend extended amounts of time with, live with, put up with, eat with, make vows until death with, and sign a life-contract with.
The criteria for sex to happen (for men and women) depends on ONE thing only:
The instant natural concept of ATTRACTION.You don’t even need to “like” her or know her – at all!
Same is true for women.But the criteria for a marriage contract and cohabitation, depends on a mile long list of things that are worked on and earned – over time. It’s actually a requirement for you to like her.
Every man has met more women that he is willing to have sex with, than women he’s willing to live with. So to curb all biology and throw it all aside until marriage is grossly dishonest, damn near impossible, and totally unnatural.
How is it possible to expect any human being to do that?? I dont’ even expect a woman to keep her legs closed until marriage – for exactly the same reason. But the modern women never gets to pretend like her vagina is made of Ming-dynasty porcelain anymore.
FACT: Women are more promiscuous and have more sexual partners than men.
Women are responsible for that. MGTOW sure as f~~~ are not.
If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.If every man refused to have sex with a woman before marriage, and refused to marry a woman that divorced for s~~~ty reasons, we would see a drastic drop in divorce.
I don’t think men refusing to have sex before marriage would accomplish anything. In fact I think it might be counterproductive.
You see I don’t believe the number of sexual partners a woman has causes her to be more likely to get divorces. This is a case of correlation, not causation. It’s more that a woman who seeks out many sexual partners is the sort of faithless woman who will also readily initiate divorce.
Now there’s nothing necessarily wrong with sluts. The problem is that so many men ignore the warning signs of their slutty past and marry them regardless. However, if men outright refuse sex outside marriage, then there would be no warning signs to go by and they would be completely blindsided when these women file for divorce.
The only thing that will reduce the divorce rate is eliminating the fat profits women make from it.
So don’t refuse non-marital sex. Refuse marriage.
#nohymennodiamond
We have seen this behavior from him before. A few months ago he slaughtered our mailbox one night exactly same thing happened. Very similar to this. Lashing out from nowhere. We went back and forth with him to NO resolve.
And then a long period of silence and then he started to post again. I will even personally respond under him, usually supporting what he posted with a thought. Never a response to my reply – until this s~~~.
This is pure speculation, but maybe he’s off his meds? Assuming he’s normally on them. This just seems so out of the blue, well, crazy.
Anonymous24Correct me if I’m wrong, aren’t Muslims and Jews in the same race, ummmmm, like half brothers? Way back?
Well, there is evidence that biblical Jews are more likely copper skinned, as Jesus was supposedly. Modern Jews, and certainly the ones in prominent positions in U.S. and Israel are mainly Anglo. So at some point Judaism got high-jacked to some extent… Now when someone tries to shut down criticism against Jews by finger pointing and calling someone an anti-Semite, this is used 100% incorrectly. A Semite actually includes Arabs, so using this term to mean anti-Jewish is somewhat of a backhanded slap in the face for Arabs. Not many people understand this.
So, basically, Biblical Jews have little to no relation to today’s Anglo-Jews, but yes, historically Arabs and Jews are more closely related than one would think. I think that Semites not only shared a language, but they all believed to be descendants of Shem and or Abraham or something…
This problem arises because Jewish religious identity has been muddied with race identity for reasons, in my opinion, of avoiding criticism. For how can a race also be a religion? Would this not be then, by definition, a racist religion? Criticize the religion, you get called a racist… Perfect defense mechanism.
There is no Jewish DNA marker. There have been books written about it, no blind study can find such a genetic mark. For how could one? How is it possible to find a genetic marker of a religion? And if one did so, this would be evidence of the religion being RACIST. So it is a lose lose argument for those who try to say being Jewish is a race.
Example- Elizabeth Banks married a Jew, converted to Judaism, what is she genetically? This goes on for generation after generation… How can one still claim a religion to be a race? And more importantly, why would they?
don’t think men refusing to have sex before marriage would accomplish anything. In fact I think it might be counterproductive.
You see I don’t believe the number of sexual partners a woman has causes her to be more likely to get divorces. This is a case of correlation, not causation. It’s more that a woman who seeks out many sexual partners is the sort of faithless woman who will also readily initiate divorce.Well, that’s why I stated “and refused to marry a woman that divorced for s~~~ty reasons”. I agree that a virgin bride may still divorce for cash and prizes, but she also does it with the thought that somebody else will want her. It would not eliminate divorce, but most women would not divorce if divorce meant no man would ever touch her again. I honestly think that would be more effective than removing the cash and prizes.
And to be clear, I do agree that it’s an ideal that is not going to happen, and maybe shouldn’t. That’s said, I can appreciate someone going monk for the cause, but I would not hold it against a man for looking out for his own interests above what’s best for men and society in general.
Ok. Then do it.
Well, that’s why I stated “and refused to marry a woman that divorced for s~~~ty reasons”
But that should already be obvious. Don’t even f~~~ divorcées. No exceptions.
But I’m talking about the foolish men who marry women who have themselves not yet been married (and so never divorced), but have had many many sexual partners. Those women are a ticking divorce time bomb. Not because they’ve had many sexual partners, but simply because that’s the sort of person they are. If men refuse to f~~~ them before marriage, then how can men tell if they are slutty divorce bombs or not before making the mistake of marrying them?
I honestly think that would be more effective than removing the cash and prizes.
Eliminate the cash and prizes and sluts won’t be so interested in marrying in the first place. No marriage means no divorce. Because marriage is all about money and property, and has absolutely nothing to do with love. And if a woman only gets to take away from a marriage what she, herself brought to the table, then who cares if she leaves? Why the f~~~ would a man want to be with any woman who wants to divorce him?
The problem is not divorce in itself. The problem is that right now women get to leave men in divorce and take with them everything he has worked so hard to earn. Eliminate that and all the other “problems” either go away on their own or stop being problems.
Well, that’s why I stated “and refused to marry a woman that divorced for s~~~ty reasons”
But that should already be obvious. Don’t even f~~~ divorcées. No exceptions.
Every woman I’ve slept with post my divorce has been a divorcée
But I’m talking about the foolish men who marry women who have themselves not yet been married (and so never divorced), but have had many many sexual partners. Those women are a ticking divorce time bomb. Not because they’ve had many sexual partners, but simply because that’s the sort of person they are. If men refuse to f~~~ them before marriage, then how can men tell if they are slutty divorce bombs or not before making the mistake of marrying them?
I don’t see how sleeping with a woman will tell you she’s a ‘slutty divorce bomb’. I think men can know what sort of person they are just by spending time with them. Also, what type of person she is greatly curbed by the consequences of her actions. Not being able to touch another man again, not getting the attention she craves. if she pulls the divorce string would be a big deterrent to letting out her inner ‘slutty divorce bomb’. She could still be a horrible wife and go for divorce, but she has consequences.
I honestly think that would be more effective than removing the cash and prizes.
Eliminate the cash and prizes and sluts won’t be so interested in marrying in the first place.
That is only true because she can have her kid and get male attention outside of marriage. But if those things are only in marriage, then she has a real choice to make.
No marriage means no divorce. Because marriage is all about money and property, and has absolutely nothing to do with love. And if a woman only gets to take away from a marriage what she, herself brought to the table, then who cares if she leaves? Why the f~~~ would a man want to be with any woman who wants to divorce him?
Marriage is only about money and property today because you can get children and male attention outside of marriage. Assuming a man has access to the kids as he desires, he wouldn’t want to stay married if she wants out. However, why would she want out if she can’t ever get male attention again? In fact, I’d think she’d be more likely to behave for fear her husband divorces her…again leaving her without male attention.
It seems clear to me that there are more sluts and women with s~~~ty behavior today then there was 60 years ago. I don’t think it’s because women have biological changed, but because they are allowed to be so with minimized consequences.
The problem is not divorce in itself. The problem is that right now women get to leave men in divorce and take with them everything he has worked so hard to earn. Eliminate that and all the other “problems” either go away on their own or stop being problems.
I disagree. Finances are only part of the fallout from divorce. If you loved your wife, the emotional trauma is absolutely devastating, as well as the impact it has on your children.
I am not at all trying to say that cash and prizes are irrelevant as they do have a huge impact. Fixing that alone would be big. I’m saying that removing sex, or more accurately male attention and access to kids, outside of marriage would also have a huge impact, more so I think. Ideally, both would be great.
That said, removing sex outside of marriage has it’s drawbacks to, since men don’t get to have the sex either. Cash and prizes removal has no such side effect.
Ok. Then do it.
- AuthorPosts
The topic ‘Why are you guys complaining so much when you contribute f~~~ all’ is closed to new replies.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
