Author Topic: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!  (Read 61060 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #120 on: June 16, 2014, 07:38:35 PM »
0
Quote from: Omega
As I already told you these my claims are derived from text of LoverofFDRAddict. and she is generalizing that all women by saying "having children someday is a fundamental part of me expressing my femininity", "That's rejecting a fundamental aspect of femininity."

She is talking from subjective, nonscientific experience about herself, whereas you are pontificating as if you know some universal, immutable truths about women.

Quote from: Omega
also my claims are based on PUA science. I also doubted if these claims are true, but considerable amount of men did lots of research how to pick up and seduce women and they developed decent theories how female brain works.
If you like I can find you few lectures on you tube of books about that.
Unfortunately, we've already established that your understanding of science is very poor. I don't fault you for that, but I won't respect your pretense of knowledge. Either don't appeal to science, or learn how to actually do science.
I'm familiar with the basics of Pick-up Asshat pseudoscience. Someday I intend on writing long diatribes debunking every bit of it, but I'm sure someone out there has already gotten a head start for me. Just know that that shit is not recognized as valid by mainstream psychology.

Quote from: Omega
No, it is not what feminists want, they want advantages of masculinity while retaining femininity.
in other words they want to eat their cake and keep it too.

If feminists just wanted to be capable to chose their stereotypical gender  they would demand to change how men live.
If woman decides to enter society of men she must start acting like man not demand every man to turn into woman and adapt to her needs.

lest say you enter group of men who make dirty jokes and cuss like sailors. how do you behave:
1: Join them doing same
2: Get offended by their behavior and demand to change it to suit your needs.

if you enter workplace where other are men and get sexually harassed what do you do:
1 retaliate by kicking offender in the balls
2 get offended and complain to authority or feminist friends.
Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me, brah
Keep Calm And Disobey

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #121 on: June 16, 2014, 08:44:35 PM »
0
Unfortunately, we've already established that your understanding of science is very poor. I don't fault you for that, but I won't respect your pretense of knowledge. Either don't appeal to science, or learn how to actually do science.
I'm familiar with the basics of Pick-up Asshat pseudoscience. Someday I intend on writing long diatribes debunking every bit of it, but I'm sure someone out there has already gotten a head start for me. Just know that that shit is not recognized as valid by mainstream psychology.

Science from pseudoscience differs by fact that science actually works,
and as i see PUA methods are confirmed to work well.
If you want to debunk them you must prove that your pick up method works better.
PUA's are not some crazy fanatics who hate women, they have very objective goal and work on developing most effective methods to achieve it. While mainstream science has very little interest in truth and it is severely affected by censorship and work ethic.


Quote
Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me, brah
No there is plenty of choices.
all what matters is if you expect everyone adapt to your needs your you adapt to everyone else.



HonestlyMate

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #122 on: June 16, 2014, 10:09:58 PM »
0
Feminism originally was simply a part of the struggle for equality, civil rights, etc. There's no dispute about that. The feminism you're attacking has little to nothing to do with that, yet they still call themselves that... I suppose. I'm not sure how to respond to you - and I really have nothing to do with this discussion; however I don't give a damn so here goes:

People seek group and identity belongings. Most the people you see shouting about this or that in regards to MRAs or Feminists or what have you that are attacking the identity of others while clinging to a group identity of their own simply have had bad individual experiences and extrapolate it and generalize it to the entirety of whatever characteristics can be described of the person(s) that they (rightfully or wrongfully) feel hurt them. In many cases you really do have a mixture of weird clashes between mainstream thought and media, and reality, on both sides. Mainstream media and politics like to play them up against eachother, it's no coincidence that identity politics are now splitting up the people's movements - it's a power play. New style  'identity politics trumps all' thinking can basically have its goals achieved without changing the structure of society at all, or ever being even remotely a danger to power. (this goes both ways, notice how the "choices" for the concerned citizens is being painted in the media as "if you believe in anything conspiratorial you must be this, and if you don't believe in that but only organic eruptions of societal patterns then you must be 'that'; if you think [this absolute] then you're this, if you disagree then you must be this [other absolute] fighting the first one. (but never touch the money and wealth power controlling society)]"


There really is no difference (other than purely biological) between the genders. When you bring up things like pickup skills or whatever - these are rituals and games that some people play, both genders; while others don't.
Individually, flaw wise, thought wise etc. there's no difference, it's just a matter of exclusion.

Same as "racism" or anything else that creates an 'other'. While you can say there are trends and "weights" in the statistics, when you look at individual scenarios you always have to take into account that specific individual existence, their story, etc. That's something that people who cling to red pill, rad-mra, and rad-fem, or blue pill, or anything else many many times all ignore.

They just want someone to exclude. Someone who they can treat as automatons, scripts to manipulate. This separation between people who look for this and those that do not, does not follow any gender or racial lines; but they sure to like to mark gender and racial lines in the sand retroactively.

Yes pickup "tricks" work on a lot of women, as they do on a lot of men. It says nothing about either men or women.

./feel free to mod/delete this, it's a buzzed rant and I'm not sure who I'm replying to. Anyway, I love reading this forum, but whatever.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #123 on: June 17, 2014, 05:29:05 AM »
0
Yes pickup "tricks" work on a lot of women, as they do on a lot of men. It says nothing about either men or women.
Pic up tricks are different for men and women and they say a lot about both of sexes. because they tap into subconscious mind. No matter is woman brags how independent she is and how she wants equality, if that woman goes to bet with guy who treat her like his well trained dog, it shows us that this woman is really nothing more than dog in lion skin.
same can be said about other choices, if certain woman get abused a lot and she contestant chooses guys who abuse her it is her deliberate choice he may consciously hate her life, but unconsciously she is seeking to be abused.

Of course everyone makes mistakes but those who do not learn from their mistakes can be suspected to like them.

Prodigal son

  • Guest
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #124 on: June 17, 2014, 07:26:06 AM »
0
Of course everyone makes mistakes but those who do not learn from their mistakes can be suspected to like them.

I think that's true. Some areas of psychology have obsessed for years about the reason people don't learn from their mistakes. Molyneux hisself makes a ton of money out of all this and starts inventing stories in his exquisitely crafted mind about a fellow called Simon who was, in Stef's narrative, a boxer who chose that profession because his father used to stuff him inside an old cardboard box, the young lad being so ugly that he preferred not to regard him, or something like that.
What we end up with, if we follow that line of reasoning, is a whole troop of howling human beings who are doing precisely what they want but simultaneously complaining about it and blaming others for it whenever results are suboptimal (which, life being life, they frequently are).
If you are unfortunate enough to be one of the people being blamed for such terrible things, then I wish you fortitude. Your perceived guilt cannot be assuaged with friendly smiles, cups of tea or bottles of Scotch, because to release you from your assigned role would require your accusers to take responsibility for their actions entirely, and that can be quite tiresome and may even involve some expense.

HonestlyMate

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #125 on: June 17, 2014, 07:49:23 AM »
0
The exact same thing can be said about males, mate. There are plenty of guys with the exact same behaviour; prone to abusive relationships. Plenty of "lion"-guys being owned by their partner.
People are like that.

What you notice might be based in a great deal on the lens (to use a cliche, which I hate by the way - this particular one especially - "it's all perspective!", ugh. No, it ain't. But sometimes it can be.) you use to view the world with.

Attraction makes things very different. If you are attracted to women and view them as a potential partner, there is an additional layer to what you see in them. It's not there to those you are not attracted to. You might not recognize the behaviour patterns in males (if you are male, and not attracted to males) around you relationship-wise, so maybe you don't see the character you're describing in a woman in the post of yours that I'm replying to; in a man, because you don't pickup on those signs to begin with.

And again even more so related to the comment you make about abuse.


 ... if certain woman get abused a lot and she contestant chooses guys who abuse her it is her deliberate choice he may consciously hate her life, but unconsciously she is seeking to be abused.


The exact same thing... goes for males. It might be a reoccurring pattern, it might be based in who knows what, it could be for a number of reasons - but people ending up in abusive relationships is kind of the horror/scare of relationships. Think about the advice that quite a few of the "life coaches" that might share your views, give, to their audience; "get out of toxic relations! Remove the vampires in your life!".

They're telling the (in this context) mostly male audience to get out of... the exact same kind of relationship you are describing. (or in some cases, creating it out of thin air and unnecessarily creating the conflict to entrap his audience, such as what Molyenux might be doing)

Yes, some of these people might be unconsciously "seeking to be abused"; others are not, however. It says nothing about choice, though (in fact, by the very premise of it being an unconscious decision to begin with, makes it crystal clear that it has nothing to do with choice...), and even less about genders. (and I'm not sure if you're somehow using that as a way of making the entire notion of someone being caught in an abusive relationship as "your own fault"?)

There are however some types of abusive relationships and abuse in general that are much more noticeable than others. That has much to do with media imagery, and culturally reinforced gender roles. (in other words, no different than putting on a uniform; except you might not know you put it on to begin with)

Prodigal son

  • Guest
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #126 on: June 17, 2014, 12:55:49 PM »
0
Yes, some of these people might be unconsciously "seeking to be abused"; others are not, however. It says nothing about choice, though (in fact, by the very premise of it being an unconscious decision to begin with, makes it crystal clear that it has nothing to do with choice...)

Don't you think it is a potentially hazardous move to place people's unconscious choices outside their personal jurisdiction?
Murder, by analogy, carries a stiffer penalty, but manslaughter is still a crime. I might claim that I forgot to put the handbrake on or some other matter (and this is consequently within the realm of the unconscious mind), but I am still responsible for the damage that ensues. If I find myself being subjected to abuse and fail to remove myself from that situation, then I think I have a duty to examine my motives and make my peace with them. Otherwise surely we must forensically examine each harm done, to establish the percentage of unconscious drive and the percentage of premeditated choice of both aggressor and victim. I doubt many would come to the dock confessing to too much of the latter. You see, if we use unconscious desires as a prima facie argument to absolve a victim of complicity in his or her victimhood, then we must also use the same yardstick to judge and at least partially absolve the harm-doer. Indeed, this practice has become so pervasive (and profitable) in modern legal systems that it is not uncommon to find the aggressor rewarded and the victim punished still further.

HonestlyMate

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 16
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #127 on: June 17, 2014, 01:27:12 PM »
0
Yes, some of these people might be unconsciously "seeking to be abused"; others are not, however. It says nothing about choice, though (in fact, by the very premise of it being an unconscious decision to begin with, makes it crystal clear that it has nothing to do with choice...)

Don't you think it is a potentially hazardous move to place people's unconscious choices outside their personal jurisdiction?
Murder, by analogy, carries a stiffer penalty, but manslaughter is still a crime. I might claim that I forgot to put the handbrake on or some other matter (and this is consequently within the realm of the unconscious mind), but I am still responsible for the damage that ensues. If I find myself being subjected to abuse and fail to remove myself from that situation, then I think I have a duty to examine my motives and make my peace with them. Otherwise surely we must forensically examine each harm done, to establish the percentage of unconscious drive and the percentage of premeditated choice of both aggressor and victim. I doubt many would come to the dock confessing to too much of the latter. You see, if we use unconscious desires as a prima facie argument to absolve a victim of complicity in his or her victimhood, then we must also use the same yardstick to judge and at least partially absolve the harm-doer. Indeed, this practice has become so pervasive (and profitable) in modern legal systems that it is not uncommon to find the aggressor rewarded and the victim punished still further.

I don't exactly disagree with you on this, but I think there's a lot of nuances to it based on context and I'd draw clear lines between any situation where something is actively being done or a specific task requiring continued action and judgement (preferably focused); and a more or less passive/at ease situation where the person is more or less not fully aware of "actively doing the task of living and socialising" (I don't think very many are).

The situation of feeling an attraction that you can't explain, or casually picking the purple candy at the store instead of the chocolate bar - that's the category I'd place many "unconscious" choices made when socialising/trying to create new connections or looking for a partner of some sort. It's sort of a "meh" context to begin with. The stereotype of the 'agent' in an abusive relationship will also typically be the more active part.

So you already have a more "safe" feeling situation (not like driving a crane, and you don't even really think about it as an "act" in the same sense as doing a specific task - probably), and you might already be showing off or playing into a pattern of someone who appears vulnerable (in which case yes, you would be "attracting" a certain kind of attention; but again a person looking for investment advice at a bank being taken advantage of by those that they think were friendly/helping them is "attracting" in the same manner; and that's not exactly something I'd want to excuse), if you're unlucky 'the stars will align' and off you go into the same pattern.

I get what you're saying, but I wouldn't really apply it universally to begin with. Different categories, and most importantly looking at it on an individual case by case basis (as if it were a trial for that matter, and what the hell would I know about most people's relationships so scratch that I guess - but I hope you know what I mean).

I agree they should try to remove themselves from those situations, but while I don't discount all conceptions of what people refer to as choices and free will in the sense that you're sort of (I think) implying there - and I certainly don't discount the illusion of it - I think many times people ask much more than they know of the "victims"; in some cases asking them to break down walls between their conscious and "unconscious" mind that they themselves haven't had to even touch or think about (though obviously some have), because they were by circumstance alone lucky enough to not be stuck with that pattern that they didn't really know where came from.

Maybe their equivalent would simply be just as simple as that "purple candy or chocolate bar".

That'd make it enter existential unfairness, something people don't like to think about without either jumping into a framework of nihilism or claiming every decision is a choice that you "knew" and "made" full well - i.e blaming the poor for being poor; and that if not for "poor choices" and these unfortunate 'paths walked' then everything would be perfect and fine. Or it'd delve into other conceptions of it if the first don't fit - such as original sin, punishment from the past lives, etc.

But yea, that's a whole other matter. Actually what you brought up leads to a really long and far reaching point that I don't think has a specific answer.

LoverofFDRAddict

  • Guest
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #128 on: June 17, 2014, 01:51:44 PM »
0
Thanks for the defense there.  Yes, I was talking about my experience and those of my peers and I don't pretend to know if they extrapolate to a larger population but I sometimes like to speculate.  But I try to be intellectually honest when I'm speculating and not act like my speculation is a fundamental truth about the universe.  Unlike Stef and his disciples like my ex.

Funny abuse came up of course in this thread.  This post is going to be all sidetrack but oh well, I hope the moderation in this forum isn't hard core.  I've always been one who dates nice nerdy guys who treat me well but lately I have been letting my ex get more and more verbally and emotionally abusive to me as he got more and more brainwashed.  The reason was that I could remember how sweet he used to be and I really hoped that man would come back, but he is gone completely.  He turned into a different person and doesn't respect any opinions outside of his own.  He turned into a total jerk.  Just because you joined a cult doesn't mean it's ok to be a dick.  I finally told him I won't be seeing him at all anymore.  I kept getting better when I get away from him for a few days because I'm actually a very happy person most of the time, then he would ask if I would let him stay at my place and he would start a huge fight and be mean to me, then a part of his tactic is to make me feel like it's all my fault and I'm the one not being supportive.  He is only a drain on my happiness, positiveness, energy and love right now.  He's a black hole and I need to stay away from the event horizon.

Personally, the way my ex blames women and talks lately, I think he is just turning into male version of a femiNazi.  Dude, grow up, take control of your life and start taking responsibility for your own choices and even for your own thoughts and internal world.  Blaming the other gender for all your problems in this modern life is just dumb whether you are male or female.  Part of how I know he is brainwashed is the way he speculates about my future actions or behavior based on what he has been listening to on FDR about women and feminists instead of basing in on how I have acted in the past in our relationship, ie. he is using generalizations on me instead of his actual experience.  It's like he listened to Moly bitch and generalize about women so long that he started to hate us all and not recognize that we are actually just people too.  That is the same thing that rad feminists get completely wrong.  Men OR women OR parents aren't all bad, everyone is just a person with some pros and cons, some things they are working on, some needs, etc.  My ex BF clearly needs to get some help and I can't help him with that now but I still don't think he is a bad person, just sick in the head.

I'm starting to think that FDR (and MRA?) attracts only men with low self esteem.  I am a very confident person, built through slowly accomplishing goals over time and pushing myself, but to me confidence leads me to be more humble and not assume that my opinions are true just because I believe they are.  Confidence leads me to being able to listen and hear and understand other perspectives.  The more I learn about other perspectives either my opinions evolve or get stronger and I think that is a good thing.  The whole FDR thing seems to be about getting so cocky in your opinions that you suddenly feel good about yourself, which feels great to someone who has low self esteem, and then you need to put other people down to keep feeling good about yourself.  Or maybe you think you can "save" them by showing them "the light" because you are on a high from that feeling and want to get others high too.  I can't really tell but I respect myself enough to realize that 1) I can't help him even if I stick around 2) I can't take this abusive behavior and still have enough love to give the people in my life who are actually kind and loving back to me and 3) Regardless of whether he leaves the cult or not, this man was never right for me.  Anyone who is capable of such a dark outlook on the world and such meanness to the person they supposedly love should never be the father of my children.

However, I also look at it as a learning experience.  I've never been in a relationship with a jerk and I always thought my friends who dated jerks were being so silly for putting up with their behavior.  Now I'm thankful my friends who have dated jerks are here to support me and let me know that I need to stop listening to my kind side and put my needs first.  Now I see how you can fall for someone and they can change.  Or they can be a jerk but you love them and you see why they are being a jerk and you hope you can be there for them so they can grow and change.  I'm just glad I only put up with it for a little while.  He changed so fast that it took me by surprise but thank god this all came out now before we had a family.  I can't believe I almost tried to procreate with this man!!!!

And I second the fact the men and women can be in abusive relationships.  My mom was the abusive one to my dad in my childhood, emotionally and verbally.  Seeing the way she treated my dad made me into the kind of person who lets her ex BF treat her the way I've let my ex treat me, as I'd rather be the victim than the aggressor.  But luckily we don't have 4 kids together so I can stick up for myself and get out now instead of having to make it work while that person is mentally ill and taking it out on the people around them who love them.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #129 on: June 17, 2014, 05:14:06 PM »
0
Quote
The exact same thing can be said about males, mate. There are plenty of guys with the exact same behaviour; prone to abusive relationships. Plenty of "lion"-guys being owned by their partner.
People are like that.
Of course I agree, there was no question about that.

Quote
If you are attracted to women and view them as a potential partner, there is an additional layer to what you see in them.
Usually friend and mate selection is based on fact how do you fell with that person not by logical and rational evaluation of objective factors and character compatibility issues. thus it is unconscious. Women like to use word "chemistry" to describe that.
PUA science is how to make women feel what you want them to feel by pushing right buttons in their unconscious mind instead of relying on chance and acting naturally.
It is equivalent of female makeup when women try to modify their looks to manipulate male minds.
compare it to street hookers who look like clowns and almost all males will admit that they look silly, but they will still chose one of those painted clowns to spend a night instead of one which looks natural.

Quote
The exact same thing... goes for males. It might be a reoccurring pattern, it might be based in who knows what, it could be for a number of reasons - but people ending up in abusive relationships is kind of the horror/scare of relationships. Think about the advice that quite a few of the "life coaches" that might share your views, give, to their audience; "get out of toxic relations! Remove the vampires in your life!".
I newer said  that only females are susceptible. I mentioned abuse just as example of how people make choices.

Quote
Yes, some of these people might be unconsciously "seeking to be abused"; others are not, however. It says nothing about choice, though (in fact, by the very premise of it being an unconscious decision to begin with, makes it crystal clear that it has nothing to do with choice...), and even less about genders. (and I'm not sure if you're somehow using that as a way of making the entire notion of someone being caught in an abusive relationship as "your own fault"?)

Again, it is completely normal to make mistakes.  But I was talking about those people who repeat them over and over. Anyone can accidentally end in abusive relationship, but if this happens 3 or 5 times in a row it is either incredibly bad luck or deliberate choice, especially in times when victim has plenty of evidence to make correct judgement but still failed.

Quote
Think about the advice that quite a few of the "life coaches" that might share your views, give, to their audience; "get out of toxic relations! Remove the vampires in your life!".
This is off topic, but i just want to mention that I do not ever suggest to anyone to end relationships with anyone under any reason. (maybe one exception is intimate relationships with someone full of self hatred.)
I am completely against any kind of breakups, if relationship is unsuccessful it can just fade away but there must be no official termination. anyone who is trying to beak any of your relationships  is abuser.
Stefan perfectly falls under that category, along with those life coaches whom you mentioned.
But general marriage and family is also kind of same thing, because it supposes that you will cut your ties with all your previous friends and focus on you wife or husband, this make you dependent and vulnerable to abuse.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2014, 05:42:33 PM by Omega »

King Schlong

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #130 on: June 17, 2014, 08:53:51 PM »
0

I may not know what it's like to endure that physical pain, but note that very few women have these complications - but every man has to put up with the passive-aggressive shit that results from every cycle.

Too bad.  Cycle results in woman available to mate 24/7/365


Kaz

  • Ideological Gadfly
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
  • "Dangerous Liaisons" by Rene Magritte
  • Respect: +154
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #131 on: June 17, 2014, 10:17:52 PM »
0
They just want someone to exclude. Someone who they can treat as automatons, scripts to manipulate. This separation between people who look for this and those that do not, does not follow any gender or racial lines; but they sure to like to mark gender and racial lines in the sand retroactively.

Scapegoating.  Excuses and justifications based on pseudo-victimhood caused by a sense of entitlement.

./feel free to mod/delete this, it's a buzzed rant and I'm not sure who I'm replying to. Anyway, I love reading this forum, but whatever.

Hello Mate, good to meet you.
Just because you have left FDR, it doesn't mean that FDR has left you.

"Taking responsibility for something and self-blame are horses of two entirely different colors. The former is empowering; the latter is paralyzing." ~ John Rosemond, Ph.D

LoverofFDRAddict

  • Guest
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #132 on: June 18, 2014, 11:49:25 AM »
0
I am completely against any kind of breakups, if relationship is unsuccessful it can just fade away but there must be no official termination. anyone who is trying to beak any of your relationships  is abuser.
Stefan perfectly falls under that category, along with those life coaches whom you mentioned.
But general marriage and family is also kind of same thing, because it supposes that you will cut your ties with all your previous friends and focus on you wife or husband, this make you dependent and vulnerable to abuse.
Wow, you are against any breakups?  That's a pretty extreme opinion.  Anyone trying to break up any of your relationships is an abuser?  What if the other person is physically, emotionally or verbally abusing you?  What if they are only a source of negativity in your life and you only just realized it?  My ex boyfriend is supposedly "breaking up" with me, but if he weren't I would be doing the breaking up because he is making my life hell.  That means I'm lucky to not be the abuser but if he wasn't willing to break up with me I would have to be the abuser?


I may not know what it's like to endure that physical pain, but note that very few women have these complications - but every man has to put up with the passive-aggressive shit that results from every cycle.
Too bad.  Cycle results in woman available to mate 24/7/365
One of the things I find kind of ironic about MRAs is that, I'm guessing, more single men are getting access to much more sex with women now than probably since hunter gatherer days and yet they are STILL whining because sometimes that sex comes at the cost of child support because, FYI, sex makes babies, in case you were raised in a red state and not told how the birds and the bees work.  If you are sleeping with a women you don't trust to use birth control when she told you she would, why the hell are you sleeping with her!?!?

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #133 on: June 18, 2014, 12:11:43 PM »
0
Wow, you are against any breakups?  That's a pretty extreme opinion.  Anyone trying to break up any of your relationships is an abuser?  What if the other person is physically, emotionally or verbally abusing you?  What if they are only a source of negativity in your life and you only just realized it?  My ex boyfriend is supposedly "breaking up" with me, but if he weren't I would be doing the breaking up because he is making my life hell.  That means I'm lucky to not be the abuser but if he wasn't willing to break up with me I would have to be the abuser?

If someone relationship is going too bad just halt it but do not terminate.
also if someone is abusing you I think best choice is to fight back and retaliate. only situation when you are powerless is when you are in relationship with some self hater. In that case you must be abuser yourself.

you did not understood me correctly: it was not about you or your friend deciding to break relationship, but some third party coming and trying to break you.
If someone else is trying to break your relationship with someone else only reason for doing that is to make you more vulnerable.

King Schlong

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #134 on: June 18, 2014, 11:52:50 PM »
0

also my claims are based on PUA science. I also doubted if these claims are true, but considerable amount of men did lots of research how to pick up and seduce women and they developed decent theories how female brain works.
If you like I can find you few lectures on you tube of books about that.


Bunk