BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:

That's because it's not a picture of him. It's of Josh Fruhlinger. He runs a blog making fun of the comics in the paper I used to read. He made fun of Be Like Dirk in passing once, I guess, and since he's a filthy sex-haver and the only person outside these dying forums who's ever given him attention it's a point of pride?

It is loving hilarious that the only dig he can come up with against him is that he owns a cat though.

BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:

That's because it's not a picture of him. It's of Josh Fruhlinger. He runs a blog making fun of the comics in the paper I used to read. He made fun of Be Like Dirk in passing once, I guess, and since he's a filthy sex-haver and the only person outside these dying forums who's ever given him attention it's a point of pride?

It is loving hilarious that the only dig he can come up with against him is that he owns a cat though.

BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:

That's because it's not a picture of him. It's of Josh Fruhlinger. He runs a blog making fun of the comics in the paper I used to read. He made fun of Be Like Dirk in passing once, I guess, and since he's a filthy sex-haver and the only person outside these dying forums who's ever given him attention it's a point of pride?

It is loving hilarious that the only dig he can come up with against him is that he owns a cat though.

Phuzzy posted:

Don't you see? That's how all those Bad Boys get all the women! Because they're assholes! LIKE DIRK! THAT FUCKER

A Fancy Bloke posted:

Someone post The Door. You know this motherfucker has tried it but it failed due to Dirk somehow

BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:

It is loving hilarious that the only dig he can come up with against him is that he owns a cat though.

facebook jihad posted:

Oh cool. Making fun of mra's again

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

MY PALE GOTH SKIN posted:

Snatch Duster posted:

ANIME IS BLOOD posted:

but, he angered the mods, so he is okay w/me

MY PALE GOTH SKIN posted:

E Equals MC Hammer posted:

Phuzzy your avatar makes me irrationally happy.

http://www.love-shy.com/lswiki/Bad-boy posted:

A bad boy is a type of man who is highly sexually attractive to women due to his carefree, no-holds-barred, unrepentantly dangerous attitude. Typically, a bad boy has the clothing and social scene to match. He may be physically attractive, though this is not a requirement.

Bad boys come in many different shapes and sizes. They range from bikers, to rock stars, to professional athletes, to actors with an edge. They may range from reasonably clean and legal to outright unsavory, such as prisoners, drug dealers and gang members.

The female attraction to bad boys can be explained by the need to sate urges for danger and unpredictability. A bad boy often does not care what others think, and does things on his own schedule, permitting little interference. This, combined with the danger he provides causes women to chase him relentlessly. An ability to do whatever one wants, even breaching etiquette or societal norms with little consequence signals the high-quality genes of an alpha male. The deep, reptilian hindbrain of a female is magnetically drawn to this.

Personalitists are split on the significance of the bad-boy phenomenon in attracting women. More feminist-opposed personalitists claim that a large percentage of women will go for bad boys, often to their own detriment, while leaving those lacking dark triad genes out in the cold. Feminist-friendly personalitists dispute this as an example of hyperbole, claiming that while women may be attracted to bad boys, they rarely act on such attraction, especially as they age. They claim that most women learn quickly to avoid such men, as they are usually bad news. Meanwhile, women will often dispute the claim that women as a whole see bad boys as attractive.

Looksists often dispute the notion of bad-boy attraction as nonsense, citing myriad examples of good-looking guys with decent personalities who have little problem with women. They will often claim that a person who is a bad boy can do so because he is good looking, and would otherwise not be taken seriously. This is despite evidence that many bad boys are overweight or otherwise physically unattractive.

quote:

Getting back to Sperm Wars, its findings reveal deception and trickery in women goes past their innate deceptiveness and all the way down to their biology:

Ten percent of children are not fathered by their “fathers”
Less than one percent of a man’s sperm is capable of fertilizing anything (the rest is there to fight off all other men’s sperm)
Vaginal mucus encourages some sperm but blocks others
A woman is far more likely to conceive through a casual fling than through sex with her regular partner because her body allows the sperm from the fling to pass through faster than that of her regular partner

Phuzzy posted:

Personalitists
Looksists

Dreddout posted:

are they making up imaginary professions to support their arguments now!?

TheChad posted:

ur an idiot if you don't gently caress black girls on the reg btw

Dreddout posted:

are they making up imaginary professions to support their arguments now!?

YeahTubaMike posted:

Hostile V posted:

Sometimes it feels like these guys are one long weekend of work away from self publishing their own dumb little young adult dystopian romance/action novel, the Sexhaver Games or whatever, using all of these words as future words.

"My father was a Looksist. My mother was a Personalist. I was born on Alphatide's Eve. To which clan do I belong? To what destiny should I work towards? What am I fighting for, besides the cashing-in of the privilege of boning every female character who has more than one defining physical characteristic such as "is a girl" and "capable of speech"."

Phuzzy posted:

Don't you see? That's how all those Bad Boys get all the women! Because they're assholes! LIKE DIRK! THAT FUCKER

YeahTubaMike posted:

that panel is loving incredible

YeahTubaMike posted:

that panel is loving incredible

drilldo squirt posted:

She owns.

Rutibex posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzdadYbS4aM

a hole-y ghost posted:

what did that guy expect, walking up to a girl that's clearly busy to tell her she's beautiful while he's got his cock in his hand.

Rutibex posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzdadYbS4aM

insufficient guns posted:

Amazing.

Wounded Unicorn posted:

Why is the alt-right obsessed with oh nevermind there's a word filter on it.

prefect posted:

I was expecting him to goof on MRAs, but then he was all "red pill" and "blue pill" and I became disappointed. Then I skipped ahead and he was explaining how, if you're using "trigger words" just to piss people off, you're just being an rear end in a top hat and helping nobody. So he's not all bad.

Klyith posted:

The origin of Men's Rights Activism wasn't the creepy PUA guys or delusional fedora-wearing redpillers, it was unhappy & angry divorcees. This dude strikes me as one of those ones. Divorce sucks, it breaks some people and the men turn super bitter. Not least because divorce in the US really is a place where the playing field is tilted in women's favor. Maybe for the educated middle-class white guy, that's his first experience dealing with a system biased against him.

This is the one place where they're refreshingly honest chauvinists with their system. They make no effort to say that it's not a double standard, then come up with lots of dumb reasons for why that double standard should exist and is good.


(also they would have ok having sex with just a single girl, if only the perfect girl they were pining for all those years ago would have deigned to have sex with them.)

Xequecal posted:

Redpillers seriously believe that when a woman has sex with multiple guys, it actually damages her and makes her biologically incapable of committing to monogamous relationships in the future. They'll actually tell you that women would be happier if we went back to the old system of sacred virginity and men essentially purchasing their new wives from their fathers, because this "allows" for women to actually be happy in a committed relationship.

Rutibex posted:

i think its reasonable to assume that someone who has enjoyed a lot of short term relationships and casual hook ups will want to enjoy more of them in the future, man or woman. why is it unreasonable to extrapolate future behavior based on past behavior?