>having a small penis is misogynistic

>writer is a w*man
Opinion fucking discarded

File: be60d77.png (40 KB, 200x200)

40 KB PNG

>>16180547
OP
Are you not awares that body shamed men lash out more often? If they look at their penis and think it can never be changed and/or they are not sexy they will act out in order for them to seem more virile.

I'm sure this has even been spoken about in Greek times.

>>16180577
I am which is why I think action needs to be taken against them. I used to think they were just a funny joke, not a group of people who would shoot me for their biological shortcomings. Women with flat chests don’t do that.

>>16180547
I want to mock this paper but if I could turn internet shitposting into an academic profession I'd do it too

>>16180582
>women don't do that
Reputation destruction is akin to death.

>>16180586
Women with flat chests don’t shoot up sororities like known incel and dicklette Elliot Rodger.

>>16180547
The most entitled group of people by a stupendous margin, white women, should really be the last people on earth to talk about how entitled others are. There is no way I'm reading another article by an obnoxiously entitled hateful feminist bullying downtrodden men.

>>16180563
>>16180569
>>16180597
small dick energy tbqhf

>>16180547
>reddit
>REDDIT
kek cant make this up
>woman
>paper
>its about some drama on reddit

>>16180547
She should look at 20 year olds with terminal cancer and evaluate their entitlement discourse next.

>>16180547
>peer reviewed article accepted reddit as a source
What the fuck am I doing with my life where I’m wasting years to get a doctorate when I could just make shitpost publications using shitpost websites to make money??

>>16180547
>references TVtropes and Reddit in the opening page
Into the trash it goes.

>>16180582
You live in a world that you have to share with other people. Your own entitlement is on display here, thinking you DON'T deserve to get shot because of someone else's biological shortcomings, just like the guys in the OP are entitled for thinking they deserve to have basic human amenities like romantic relationships and property.

I know you will never realize the contradiction you have backed yourself into here, but the fact is your life is worth as much as theirs. Which is to say, nothing, and you should consider yourself lucky that the system we have allows you to exist freely and in safety. That system that has been built by men who contribute to society because it's more beneficial than tearing it down.

>>16180547
>23 pages

>>16180591
women with flat chests are still women

>>16181634
This is true. You can see how small-dicked men aren't men because their behavior devolves into posting such drivel as >>16181560. Small-dicked men--actually, let's call them boys--can't survive in a caste system since they are naturally inferior, so they demand communism. By the same token, they act like they're better than everyone else somehow(?) due to rampant vitriolic narcissism.

Look right here at this boy: >>16181560. He immediately calls for violence against other people when every rational person in this thread is saying, "Hey, maybe shooting up people because of your small dick isn't a good thing." It's genuine derangement. A woman with a flat chest will still act like a woman, you know, flirty, bubbly, uplifting, supportive. But a small-dicked boy just wants to make the world worse for everyone in it, dragging everyone down to his level.

>>16180547
Whitebois getting red angry LMFAO

>>16181657
I realize this is bait, but since it's clearly coming from a genuine place in your heart, I will reply anyway.

First off, because I am a rampant vitriolic narcissist, I want you to know that my dick isn't small. It's definitely what I would describe as "sufficiently large", given that the way I consistently make females orgasm more than anyone else is by purposely massaging their cervix with my very hard, very thick penis. I am also excellent at reading physical cues during sex and I know how to pleasure women. Ever make a girl cum so much she can't think or speak straight anymore and turns into a wet sopping mess unable to even function for several hours? I have, a few times. It's great.

Secondly, you are a worthless cocksucker. By haphazardly discarding the needs and feelings of an entire group of people based on something they can't control, you out yourself as a worthless bigot and open yourself up to the same treatment. Fundamentally speaking, there is 0 reason why you should be afforded the ethical protections of the social contract, because you are asking for the social contract to be broken to your own benefit and the detriment of others. This means nice frivolous pleasantries like morality automatically go out the window, and the result is cold hard natural order. Which is something that, as a woman or a disgusting machiavellian psychopath(but what's the difference), I am sure you are aware of.

Bedeviled egg, you malicious ganderer of dark triadism. I am the lobster and I am here to tell you you should fear the small dicked incel

File: Allie%202015.jpg (28 KB, 350x350)

28 KB JPG

who hurt her?

File: image-20170516-11956-2u4y1a.jpg (16 KB, 238x238)

16 KB JPG

which one of you incel chuds cheated on her?

>>16181683
>>16181684
dang she cute

>>16180547
>let me discribe the etymology of entitlement because I need a higher word count
Do &Humanities really?

>>16180547
Dicklets should just transition.

>>16182546
this
if your dick cant put in the work maybe your ass can

>>16181678
>By haphazardly discarding the needs and feelings of an entire group of people based on something they can't control, you out yourself as a worthless bigot and open yourself up to the same treatment
Consider this: it's not their small penises that are the issue, it's how they relate to their penises and how they take it out on the world around them. You say we should fear the small-dicked incel; that is precisely the issue.

>>16182978
No, the issue is that we live in a misandrist society where women are free to get implants (or even reductions!) while men are permanently trapped in their bodies EXCEPT if the decide to get it amputated.

>>16182984
Are you ascribing misandry to nature?

>>16182984
Consider the following: having a small penis is not even an inherent problem if you're not salty about it

>>16180547
I sense fat, ugly wall energy. Disgusting. When will women give up this rhetorical chicancery?

>>16181634
Preach it, brother. There are women with flat chests and fake chests. There are women with long hair and no hair. There are women with fat asses and no ass. There are women with uteruses and women without uteruses. There are tall women and short women. There are women with penises and women without penises. Women come in all shapes and sizes.

>>16181683
>>16181684
Was expecting some pink haired femicunt. Instead she looks kind of like a normie. Maybe partially on the spectrum. I take her opinion more seriously now, about as seriously as I can take a woman's opinion. I wonder what kind of man she's attracted to. Is she married?

>>16183002
Back off, fucker, I saw her first!

>>16180547
>>16183002
>>16182984
>>16181560
>>16181470
The main error implicitly assumed in this analysis is that people with more or less irreversible problems (disabilities, deformities, mental deficiencies etc.) suffer mainly from avoidable discrimination and not from unavoidable consequences of their condition. Obesity is a different issue because it can be easily corrected and only has marginal consequences after skin reduction surgery.
But if you are deformed, no matter how much you force society to nominally accept you, people are still free to seek equally desirable friends and sexual partners.
Pretending that deformed or mentally deficient people are not inherently less desirable to be around than beautiful, smart people and it's all just cultural preference is itself gaslighting. There is obviously a larger biological component inherent to the survival instinct and seeking desirable mates which is the basis of sexual evolution.
I'm all for trying to make life better for biologically disadvantaged people, but let's not pretend we can completely solve the problem without some sort of rigorous Stalinist regime on steroids where an authority figure completely dictating who everyone is allowed to have sex with, marry, be friends with etc. which ironically to leftists would be considered entitlement of males to have access to the female body and violation of consent.

>>16183464
>The main error implicitly assumed in this analysis is that people with more or less irreversible problems (disabilities, deformities, mental deficiencies etc.) suffer mainly from avoidable discrimination and not from unavoidable consequences of their condition
I don't think that's assumed? The main problem discussed is entitlement.

>>16183468
I'm talking about this part

>Given their critique of dickshaming as a form of body shaming and the ways in which
>they are harmed by hegemonic patriarchal expectations, it would seem as if the men of
>SDP could find solidarity with progressive groups like body positive feminists, fat acti-
>vists, or disability activists. Unfortunately, these coalitions never materialize because
>the assumptions, values, and idioms of SDP are retrogressive rather than progressive.

The difference I suppose is that these men are smart enough to know that their problems do not have any real solutions.
Going public and, say, demanding that small dick jokes on TV are banned, would only lead to them getting made fun of behind closed doors and be perceived as undesirable by females who otherwise might not have known they had a small penis before even getting to the sex act.
And let's be real, the main consequence of having a small penis is not being made fun of, it's having less access to women. Nobody would care about small penis jokes if the condition was otherwise inconsequential.
For, say, obese women or disabled people or non-white people, complaining is a little more likely to work, since their issues, unlike not being desired by women, are much amenable to be solved (more accessibility, more access to jobs, clothing in bigger sizes etc.). And being obese or disable or non white is immediately apparent so they are not revealing the condition itself while complaining.
Incels are pretty much in the same place. Society is not going to reorganize itself to force women to be in relationships with men they aren't attracted to, so much like complaining about small dick acceptance is useless, so is complaining about being an incel. You are only advertising your undesirability to the world. When it comes to this, being an obese woman is somewhat similar, except obesity is much easier to fix.

>>16183501
Having a small dick strikes as typically something that a woman is only going to find out when you already "have access" to her. It's not a very visible disability in that regard.
But more to the point, the problem isn't having a small dick, it's letting that fact dominate your whole life. I'm not particularly well-endowed and I don't mind saying it because I'm not bothered by it and I'm more than capable of satisfying my girlfriend.

>>16183501
Cool except in our modern society you—yes, YOU—can pay for pussy AND continue your genetic lineage by being a sperm donor if you meet the donation facility’s requirements. Spoiler alert: dick size isn’t one of them.

So when everyone is critical of small dick doods shooting up schools, it’s because society had GIVEN small dicked boys numerous other avenues to get their primal urges out. But instead of being productive, they piss and shit and scream and shoot. They could be out making bread to pull on the honies and instead they’re taking out a Desert Eagle to shoot chicks.

>>16180547
I think that entitlement as a rhetorical strategy is a useful framework, and now I have a word for when e.g. someone claims to understand my motives and worldview better than I do after having exchanged all of three replies with me on a Tibetan prayer wheel forum: undue epistemic entitlement.
Shame it's from a paper about small dick problems.

>>16183501
so nonwhites and fats are braver than small dicked incels in that they publically advocate for themselves?

>>16181634
>women with flat chests are still women
>>16180591
>Women with flat chests don’t shoot up sororities like known incel and dicklette Elliot Rodger.
Umm.
A large number of male to female and female to male transsexuals have shot up schools lol.

>>16183691
/sci/ has repeatedly claimed that trans(wo)men are not real (wo)men. You're not allowed to suddenly claim they are now to fit your disgusting narrative.

>>16183688
I didn't say that. I said it would be more advantageous for a non white person to campaign against discrimination than for a person with a micropenis. For a fat person it would be more advantageous to simply lose the weight rather than try to get accepted by society.
I don't think I said anything about the rates at which they do try to influence society to accept them.

>>16183509
Not necessarily, she can tell all her friends after she had sex with you. And by "having access" I am talking about having a relationship or being friends with benefits, not only having sex once.
>I'm not particularly well-endowed and I don't mind saying it because I'm not bothered by it and I'm more than capable of satisfying my girlfriend.
Good for you but that's not the same for everybody. There are men with truly tiny penises that cannot possibly satisfy a woman.

>>16183514
I'm not familiar with how "sperm banks" work because AFAIK they don't exist in my country, but don't sperm banks show pictures of the donor to the woman and let her choose?
Anyway, I don't think that's relevant. People don't care about theoretically having an unconfirmed shot at having offspring. People want to meet their children and raise them, teach them and transfer their values to them, and live the experience of having a family.
Likewise, I am sure there must be some satisfaction in paying for pussy, but it's shallow. Most people want a woman to be attracted to them, not just to have sex with them for money. Especially when we're talking about prostitution instead of gold digging, in which case you can at least lie to yourself about why she's with you.
Not to mention that not everybody with a small dick is going to be wealthy. That's like saying to black people or women who complain about discrimination "but if you try really hard you can do better than 99% of men". It may be true to an extent but it's beside the point.

>>16180547
>How can we be expected to deal with men (primarily white men) who feel entitled to having sex and a female house slave despite having a small penis?
Holy shit. Someone hasn't heard of India, China or the Middle East...
>I have here a peer reviewed article from an academic journal that breaks down each and every single undue entitlement these small-dicked white guys think they're supposed to have, and I never realized how bad white dudes' psychosis actually is. This was an eye-opening read for me, and made me realize that the line between a dicklette and an incel (a known terrorist sub-group of the Western world's population)
90% of the fucking posters on incel reddit are Indian these days.
>is way too fine to consider separate from each other. Is there a way to put small-dicked (smaller than 18cm x 13cm) dudes into re-education (with possible chemical castration) camps so they don't commit a bombing just because they're biological failures?
Lol, you can tell at this point that it isn't a biological woman writing this. It's a tranny with a big dick fetish.
95% of the world's population has a dick equal to or less than 16cm in length. The majority of women have a vaginal depth of around 13 cm. The majority of women feel pain when their cervix is hammered.
So biological women don't want a rare pain inducing 20cm long penis that they will never come across in their lives anyway because it's so rare.
The writer has clearly never had sex with anything but their own anal dildo that they never wash.

>>16183695
>/sci/ has repeatedly claimed that trans(wo)men are not real (wo)men. You're not allowed to suddenly claim they are now to fit your disgusting narrative.
Calm down mentally ill tranny anon.
female to male transsexuals are still biological women. /sci/ agrees with that.
I am clearly allowed to say that.
This is clearly your paper that you're shilling.

>>16183695
>You're not allowed to suddenly claim they are now to fit your disgusting narrative.
It's not my narrative. It's yours.
According to your own narrative, women shoot up schools all the time.

>>16183705
>People want to meet their children and raise them, teach them and transfer their values to them, and live the experience of having a family.
>Likewise, I am sure there must be some satisfaction in paying for pussy, but it's shallow.
>Not to mention that not everybody with a small dick is going to be wealthy.
lots of entitlement in your reply...

>>16183705
>I didn't say that. I said it would be more advantageous for a non white person to campaign against discrimination than for a person with a micropenis. For a fat person it would be more advantageous to simply lose the weight rather than try to get accepted by society.
>I don't think I said anything about the rates at which they do try to influence society to accept them.
You did say that and you're just repeating what you said again.
>Not necessarily, she can tell all her friends after she had sex with you. And by "having access" I am talking about having a relationship or being friends with benefits, not only having sex once.
You're a tranny that's completely clueless when it comes to heterosexual relationships, and it shows. You're autistic too. You're basing all your opinions off of the shitty porn you watch.
>Good for you but that's not the same for everybody. There are men with truly tiny penises that cannot possibly satisfy a woman.
The irony of a tranny who removed their dick pretending to be a woman so they can berate straight white men because they won't them lol.
Insanity.
>>16183705
>I'm not familiar with how "sperm banks" work because AFAIK they don't exist in my country, but don't sperm banks show pictures of the donor to the woman and let her choose?
The number of times people requested a donor of the same ethnicity as them only for the wrong ethnicity to be given refutes this.

>>16183705
>Anyway, I don't think that's relevant. People don't care about theoretically having an unconfirmed shot at having offspring. People want to meet their children and raise them, teach them and transfer their values to them, and live the experience of having a family.
If that was true, single mothers, sperm and egg doners, single fathers and orphanages / government care homes wouldn't exist.
>Likewise, I am sure there must be some satisfaction in paying for pussy, but it's shallow. Most people want a woman to be attracted to them, not just to have sex with them for money. Especially when we're talking about prostitution instead of gold digging, in which case you can at least lie to yourself about why she's with you.
>Not to mention that not everybody with a small dick is going to be wealthy. That's like saying to black people or women who complain about discrimination "but if you try really hard you can do better than 99% of men". It may be true to an extent but it's beside the point.
Lol, you're not a woman. You're a mentally ill man that cut off their dick. So you're basically just talking about yourself. Not only that but women by default all have micropenises. It's called the clitoris.

File: 62063856.jpg (39 KB, 318x500)

39 KB JPG

>>16180547
There isn't even any evidence that male school shooters have below average endowment. Or that anyone has shot up a school because they had a small dick.

But the Nashville shooter did have tiny non-existent breasts...

Maybe I should come up with a bullshit theory about small breasted women shooting up schools?

>>16183741
Do it. See if it gets published. And when it doesn't expose the journals as being filled with idiots a la sokal affair

>>16180547
Actually I just want to be able to own land

>>16183716
I suppose. According to the article, (undue) entitlement is demanding or believing to be deserving of (it's not clear from the wording if both must be met or it's enough to either demand or believe to be deserving of) "gendered resources (desire, sex, care,
affection, credibility)".
I don't know if the authors would agree that (heterosexual) people would be unhappy without ever having such gendered resources, or it is still entitlement to expect to be given access to something even if that something is a prerequisite for happiness.
I also would be interested to know if she believes that it is possible to be deserving of such things, and if she has any criteria she believes need to be met to be deserving of them.


>>16183721
>You did say that and you're just repeating what you said again.
Nah, there is a clear difference.
>You're a tranny
Not true.
>that's completely clueless when it comes to heterosexual relationships, and it shows.
Probably, I've never really been in one (hetero or homo).
>You're autistic too.
Maybe, undiagnosed. I'm not sure autism is real. I think it's just a broad category to group "weird, but not quite retarded" people. I don't think it's very useful.
>You're basing all your opinions off of the shitty porn you watch.
I don't think so. For the most part I don't watch porn with dicks in it, I prefer solo.
>The irony of a tranny who removed their dick pretending to be a woman so they can berate straight white men because they won't them lol.
>Insanity.
Fortunately, my dick is still securely attached to my body and I've no intentions of removing it.
>The number of times people requested a donor of the same ethnicity as them only for the wrong ethnicity to be given refutes this.
Fair enough. Like I said I don't know how it works.
I'm not interested in possibly having offspring that I don't know anything about.
I kinda would like to have children the normal way but at this point I doubt it's going to happen.

>>16183725
>If that was true, single mothers, sperm and egg doners, single fathers and orphanages / government care homes wouldn't exist.
There is a difference between having sex with unintended consequences and donating sperm.
By that logic, people like having STDs, otherwise there wouldn't be any.
>Lol, you're not a woman.
Sure I'm not.
>You're a mentally ill man that cut off their dick.
See my previous reply.
>So you're basically just talking about yourself.
Nah, I think my penis is average.
>Not only that but women by default all have micropenises. It's called the clitoris.
The clitoris is not needed to provide pleasure to the other person, only to feel pleasure and the pleasure it gives its owner does not depend on its size. Unlike the penis.

>>16183847
>I suppose.
Not "I suppose". Objectively you are entitled. You're full of it.
>Nah, there is a clear difference.
No there isn't. You're so used to saying nothing in many words that you don't even notice it anymore.
>Not true.
It's true, you are a tranny.
>Probably, I've never really been in one (hetero or homo).
Not surprising since you're an autistic tranny.
>Maybe, undiagnosed.
No, you are autistic. Without a doubt, you're autistic.
>I don't think so.
You do. You're a sexless porn watching autistic tranny taking out their frustrations with life on straight white men who won't fuck you.
>Fortunately, my dick is still securely attached to my body
No, it isn't. It's gone. That's where all your projection concerning small dicks comes from.
>Fair enough. Like I said I don't know how it works.
Why do you keep on giving your opinions on things you know absolutely nothing about?

>>16183852
>There is a difference between having sex with unintended consequences and donating sperm.
>By that logic, people like having STDs, otherwise there wouldn't be any.
How is a father abandoning their kids because they don't give a fuck "unintended consequences"?
It isn't. You just don't understand that some people want kids but only want to see them once a year until they are young adults.
Also yes, there is a whole gay subculture around bug chasing", so purposely having unprotected sex with HIV positive individuals so they can "get the gift".
>Sure I'm not.
Yep, you're a tranny.
>Nah, I think my penis is average.
You don't have one. You cut it off.
>The clitoris is not needed to provide pleasure to the other person
It is actually. Without a clitoris most woman wouldn't ever have sex because they wouldn't get any pleasure from it. A sexless person can't pleasure anyone.
Also a woman with a shallow or overly loose/tight vagina can't pleasure anyone either, yet you don't see straight men getting out a fucking ruler to measure the dimensions of a woman's pussy.
You're insane and out of touch with everything.
Like a fucking alien from out of space.

>>16183862
>Not "I suppose". Objectively you are entitled. You're full of it.
Ok. Do you hold the same definition of entitlement as the author of the paper?
>No there isn't. You're so used to saying nothing in many words that you don't even notice it anymore.
I claimed it would more beneficial to do X being a member of group A over being a member of group B. I claimed nothing about how often X is done by group A or group B. So group B being more brave than group A because X is more frequent among group B does not follow, because I said nothing about the frequency of X in group B and group A to begin with.
>It's true, you are a tranny.
What's a tranny? I thought you meant "transexual". By definition a transexual is a man who claims to be a woman. If both you and I agree that I am a man, I must not be claiming to be a woman, since claiming to be a man and claiming to be a woman are part of a disjunctive statement, and to agree to be a man I must be claiming to be a man. Therefore it follows that I am not claiming to be a woman and thus not transexual.
>Not surprising since you're an autistic tranny.
Maybe I am autistic if such thing exists, but definitely not a tranny.
>No, you are autistic. Without a doubt, you're autistic.
So far you have been an unreliable source of information.
>You do. You're a sexless
Yes.
>porn watching
Yes.
>autistic
Maybe.
>tranny
I don't think so.
>taking out their frustrations with life on straight white men
Sometimes, but only on videogames, and only incidentally. Usually I don't know the race or the gender of the player I'm griefing in GTA Online.
>who won't fuck you.
Is that something that sounds like a good time to you? Got anything to share with the class? Promise we wont judge, bro.

>>16180547
You can enlarge your penis with exercises, small penis problems are fixable from development stages.
>Men sharing own problems and vulnerabilities become entitlement terrorist for waiting a normal life
Academia just accelerate the radicalization of young men.

>>16183890
>Ok. Do you hold the same definition of entitlement as the author of the paper?
You are the author fuckface. You're getting a reaction from 4chan to add onto your other online sources.

>I claimed it would more beneficial to do X being a member of group A
That isn't what you said. Once again more wordy nothingness.

>What's a tranny?
It's you.
>>16183890
>Maybe I am autistic
You are anon. No doubt about it.

>So far you have been an unreliable source of information.
Said the autistic sexless tranny that is a pathological liar lol.

>Sometimes, but only on videogames
And batshit insane papers that you self-post on 4chan for attention.

>Is that something that sounds like a good time to you?
Obviously not. So why do transsexuals insist on straight men fucking them?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDoeUnWpccA
"Claire looks for guys on the beach - Young, Trans and Looking for Love: Preview - BBC Three"

>Got anything to share with the class? Promise we wont judge, bro.
Said the sexless autistic tranny that is obsessed with hating straight white men lol.
Holy shit you're insane.

>>16183879
>How is a father abandoning their kids because they don't give a fuck "unintended consequences"?
That isn't, I meant the unintended consequence being the pregnancy, because of a method of birth control failed or they just had unprotected sex and hoped not to get pregnant.
>It isn't. You just don't understand that some people want kids but only want to see them once a year until they are young adults.
That's different from donating sperm and not seeing them ever.
>Also yes, there is a whole gay subculture around bug chasing", so purposely having unprotected sex with HIV positive individuals so they can "get the gift".
Ok, but outside of /pol/ infographics I assume it's extremely uncommon. Less than 1 in 1000. Sorry if I spoke in absolutes, I am sure some people want to donate sperm so technically they have offspring, but it's not a common thing.
>Yep, you're a tranny.
Prove it.
>You don't have one. You cut it off.
You sound like a broken record from /pol/ but hey you are free to believe whatever you want.
>It is actually. Without a clitoris most woman wouldn't ever have sex because they wouldn't get any pleasure from it. A sexless person can't pleasure anyone.
>Also a woman with a shallow or overly loose/tight vagina can't pleasure anyone either, yet you don't see straight men getting out a fucking ruler to measure the dimensions of a woman's pussy.
Well, for whatever reason it is harder for men to get in a relationship with their "looks match" than for women, so it's not as big of a problem for women if they can't pleasure their partner as it is for men.
>You're insane and out of touch with everything.
>Like a fucking alien from out of space.
Sorry, I spend too much time in my room.

>>16180547
Very disappointing read, went into this expecting a memetic statistic like 41% but it was nothing more than a glorified article. Didn't even bother compiling any data, "she" just looked through a subreddit and tried connecting it to racism and transphobia.

>>16183904
>That isn't, I meant the unintended consequence being the pregnancy
You don't know what you meant. You've got no idea.
>That's different from donating sperm and not seeing them ever.
Lol, no it's not.
>Ok, but outside of /pol/ infographics
What the absolute fuck are you talking about. Nobody found out about HIV bug chasing amongst gay men from /pol/. It's well known public info.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cu03LOQS04
Bug Chasers: The Men Who Want HIV | Channel 4 Documentaries
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErNVwD3w-0
Bug Chasing for HIV: Is It Real?
>I assume it's extremely uncommon.
Once again you love giving opinions on things you know absolutely nothing about. It's called lying.
>Prove it.
You don't know anything about biological women yet you're pretending to be one. You're the most transparent dumb fuck ever.
>You sound like a broken record
You don't like being told you're a tranny. You want people to think you're a woman.
>Well, for whatever reason it is harder for men to get in a relationship with their "looks match" than for women, so it's not as big of a problem for women if they can't pleasure their partner as it is for men.
Once again, you're going to give a mini speech on something you know nothing about because you're an autistic tranny that's never had sex.
>Sorry, I spend too much time in my room.
...

>>16183902
>You are the author fuckface. You're getting a reaction from 4chan to add onto your other online sources.
I hope you are trolling. You sound like a paranoid schizo.
>That isn't what you said. Once again more wordy nothingness.
It was.
>It's you.
Nope.
>You are anon. No doubt about it.
You are entitled to your opinion.
>Said the autistic sexless tranny that is a pathological liar lol.
You're just paranoid.
>And batshit insane papers that you self-post on 4chan for attention.
Sorry to disappoint you but I dropped out of college.
>Obviously not. So why do transsexuals insist on straight men fucking them?
I suppose it's to validate whether they really hold a higher social status than before they started LARPing as women, which is probably one of the big reasons why they decided to begin doing it in the first place.
>Said the sexless autistic tranny that is obsessed with hating straight white men lol.
I don't hate straight white men. I don't hate anyone lol. I'm a bit jealous of men with pure european ascendancy (I'm a slightly brown south american), but I don't hate them.
>Holy shit you're insane.
You sound unhinged.

>>16183914
And yet look at the depth of conversation it has generated. Isn't conversation more important than data? Shouldn't we be talking and discussing things instead of just scouring useless information no one will cross-reference anyways?

>>16183920
>You don't know what you meant. You've got no idea.
If you say so.
>Lol, no it's not.
If I had children and saw them occasionally I'd still feel I fulfilled my biological imperative. But not if I didn't see them at all.
>What the absolute fuck are you talking about. Nobody found out about HIV bug chasing amongst gay men from /pol/. It's well known public info.
Wow, I had no idea it was that mainstream.
But again, what do you think the amount of people who do that is? I would guess 1 in 10000 maybe.
>Once again you love giving opinions on things you know absolutely nothing about. It's called lying.
In my opinion lying implies being deliberately wrong but ok.
>You don't know anything about biological women yet you're pretending to be one. You're the most transparent dumb fuck ever.
Or maybe you're just a schizo.
>You don't like being told you're a tranny. You want people to think you're a woman.
Uhh no.
>Once again, you're going to give a mini speech on something you know nothing about
Maybe hah.
>because you're an autistic tranny that's never had sex.
If you say so.

>>16183921
>I hope you are trolling. You sound like a paranoid schizo.
The article your quoting sounds like it was written by you and cites fucking reddit of all places with no data compilation. That isn't schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is cutting your dick off and then forcing everyone to call you "Ma'am" instead of "Sir".
>It was.
It isn't what you said. You're lying via obfuscation.
>You are entitled to your opinion.
It's not an opinion. YOU ARE an autistic sexless tranny.
>Sorry to disappoint you but I dropped out of college.
Sounds like the author of the paper did too.
What a coincidence.
>I suppose it's to validate whether they really
Lol, just a few minutes ago you were denying that they did that.
Holy shit you're a stupid snake.
>I don't hate straight white men.
You do.
>You sound unhinged.
People aren't "unhinged" when they get annoyed at transsexuals, pedophiles, idiots etc.
That's a normal justified reaction.

>>16180547
is she saying that wanting to complain about getting bullied and living a garbage life for your small dick is misogynistic and entitled?

>>16183930
>If I had children and saw them occasionally I'd still feel I fulfilled my biological imperative. But not if I didn't see them at all.
Once again. That's the exact same response an alien from out of space would give.
>Wow, I had no idea it was that mainstream.
>But again, what do you think the amount of people who do that is? I would guess 1 in 10000 maybe.
That's not a guess. That's just blatant lying and making shit up after admitting you have no idea what you are talking about. It's actually worse now because HIV can be managed with antiretroviral therapy that can be obtained with welfare. You don't even need a job to get it in America.
>In my opinion lying implies being deliberately wrong but ok.
Which is what you're doing...
>Or maybe you're just a schizo.
Logical thinking isn't schizophrenia tranny anon.
>Uhh no.
Uhh yes, tranny anon.

>>16183950
>is she saying that wanting to complain about getting bullied and living a garbage life for your small dick is misogynistic and entitled?
He is saying that. It's a tranny. Yep, that's basically the gist of the paper.

>>16183952
grim

>>16183952
?
>>16181683
>>16181684
???

File: maxresdefault.jpg (96 KB, 1280x720)

96 KB JPG

>>16183957
Plastic surgeons are very good these days and state welfare will pay for most of it in the UK and many American states.

This pic is Blaire White for example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cm_63_XFik

>>16183940
>The article your quoting sounds like it was written by you and cites fucking reddit of all places with no data compilation. That isn't schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is cutting your dick off and then forcing everyone to call you "Ma'am" instead of "Sir".
Research in the humanities isn't done in the same way as in the hard sciences.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVxvLd6cF0k
Why is putting a bunch of people in a room and analyzing their behavior so different from observing their behavior somewhere like Reddit? Sure, one important difference is that you cannot tell basic facts about that person like age, sex, ethnicity, whether someone is being paid to shill a certain viewpoint etc. But still I think you can make some basic inferences.
Personally I think it's cool when sociologists write about obscure Internet communities. Sure, it's propaganda, it has to be or they wouldn't get paid to write it. But still. Remember when a fucking 4chan general of all places got a paper written about it and published on Nature? I used to post in that thread and thought it was cool to be famous. Of course it's going to be framed within the dominant """leftist""" theories in academia, but that doesn't mean it cannot be interesting. I find the article in the OP kind of interesting even if we disagree on many things.
>It isn't what you said. You're lying via obfuscation.
If you believe I'm the author then I can see why you think that.
>Sounds like the author of the paper did too.
>What a coincidence.
Why would they publish an article from someone without a college degree?
>Lol, just a few minutes ago you were denying that they did that.
Where specifically?
>You do.
If you say so.
>People aren't "unhinged" when they get annoyed at transsexuals, pedophiles, idiots etc.
You don't sound unhinged because you get annoyed at those, you sound unhinged because you seem to believe that I am the author of the article and a tranny. I hope for your own mental wellbeing you're trolling.

>>16183977
>Research in the humanities isn't done in the same way as in the hard sciences.
>>16183921
>Sorry to disappoint you but I dropped out of college.

>>16183977
>Personally I think it's cool when sociologists write about obscure Internet communities
No shit, It's what you did. Oh, and by the way, you're not a sociologist.
>Why would they publish an article from someone without a college degree?
Tertiary institutions do it all the time.
You write up your little idiot piece, they edit it and make it look more presentable.
>You don't sound unhinged because
Thank you.

>>16183951
>Once again. That's the exact same response an alien from out of space would give.
I wouldn't say that in real life, but here I don't care what others think. It's the only term I know to describe the desire to reproduce. I could've said that but that probably sounds alien as well. I suppose the normal way to talk about it would be to say "the desire to have children" but that is not as specific because it could also mean for example adopting, and it doesn't imply that it's a built in biological instinct and not merely a personal desire.
>That's not a guess. That's just blatant lying and making shit up after admitting you have no idea what you are talking about. It's actually worse now because HIV can be managed with antiretroviral therapy that can be obtained with welfare. You don't even need a job to get it in America.
What number would you give?
I'm just going by my life experience. I've only known 1 openly homosexual man in my whole life. Maybe it's different where you live.
If we assume there is 1 male homo per 100 people, then if only 1 for every 100 homo men is a bug chaser, then 1 out of every 10000 people in the general population is a bug chaser.
If it's 1 out of 10 homo men, then it's 1 out of 1000 people.
If it's 1 out of 3 homo men, then it's 1 out of 300.

>>16183989
So you don't think I am Allie Rowland?

>>16183991
>I wouldn't say that in real life
You would actually. You're an autistic sexless transexual that rarely goes outside.
>What number would you give?
>I'm just going by my life experience.
Your life experience of being a virgin and playing video games 24/7 on welfare with autism.
You're just making shit up.
You're lying again.
It's all you ever do.

>>16180602
I got dat uzi, the barrel ain't too big but the clip sure is ya feel me

>>16183996
Haha, nah, welfare doesn't exist in my third world country.
I do have a part time job and I only play vidya a few hours on the weekends.
Welfare recipients in the US probably get paid more money than I do.
I am going back to school though, hopefully in a couple years that will change.

>>16184003
>Haha, nah, welfare doesn't exist in my third world country.
You don't live in a third world country...
>I do have a part time job
You don't have a job.
>I am going back to school though
No you're not.

>>16184006
Still waiting for an answer to the other question.
Make up your mind, do you think I am Rowland or a degree-less ghost writer that does it for free?

>>16184008
>Still waiting for an answer to the other question.
You never asked a question you stupid fuck. Wow are you autistic.
>Make up your mind, do you think I am Rowland or a degree-less ghost writer that does it for free?
You're literally the only person confused here. Your brain is incapable of taking in anything it seems.

>>16183991
>If it's 1 out of 10 homo men, then it's 1 out of 1000 people.

"Australia’s epidemic has been characterised by transmission among men who have sex with men. Sexual transmission between men accounted for 68% of newly diagnosed HIV infection in Australia between 2013 and 2017, increasing to 82% of newly acquired infection.[63] The Gay Community Period Surveys found a self-reported HIV prevalence of 8% among men attached to the gay community.[63] Data from sentinel surveillance sites reported HIV incidence of 0.85 per 100 person-years in 2016."
https://hivmanagement.ashm.org.au/the-epidemiology-of-hiv-in-australia/key-populations-in-the-australian-hiv-epidemic/

"MSM are disproportionately at risk for HIV infection. In the United States, the estimated lifetime risk for HIV infection among MSM is one in six, compared with heterosexual men at one in 524 and heterosexual women at one in 253 (191)."
https://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment-guidelines/msm.htm

It isn't like these people don't know what HIV is or how to avoid it. This isn't the 1970's.
Without a doubt the majority got it because they want it.

Raging dicklets ITT proving the point

>>16183950
>>16183952
The opposite, actually. She says that, contrary to popular attitudes, the pain expressed by these men is valid and worthy of recognition, and body shaming is wrong regardless of the target. She distinguishes between "due" and "undue" entitlement, and also forms of entitlement.
- They are due affective entitlement, because their suffering should be acknowledged
- They are due epistemic entitlement because they have knowledge of their own experiences
However, they frequently move beyond these into undue entitlement.
- Undue affective entitlement because they insist that their suffering is uniquely awful, worse than any other experienced by anyone, the worst form of discrimination, and therefore the only one truly worthy of consideration
- Undue epistemic entitlement because they think their experiences trump those of everyone else, including men who don't experience mental anguish over their small penises and women who prefer small penises and find them pleasurable.
In effect, the small-dicked men employ these as a discursive strategy to uphold a patriarchal hierarchy which they view as natural, even though it puts them at the bottom. It appears to be some sort of perverse self-loathing impulse (but this last part I've added myself).

You should also be aware that her methodology is "lurking" and that direct interaction would taint her results, so no, it is quite unlikely that she posted her paper here to gather data, not in the least because she doesn't have to. She already published one paper on the topic and reddit provided more than enough material for it.

>>16184162
And, for examples of undue epistemitc entitlement ITT, see for example one Anon's insistence that their interlocutor is a tranny and at the same time the (cis female) author of the paper.

>>16184162
>>16184165
too intelligent for /sci/

>>16183509
It's absurd levels of gas-lighting to pretend that shaming small-dicked incels their entire lives has no effect on them and that any problems they have are entirely of their own making. Especially since these problems are the kind that you can hide, so most people indeed do hide them because revealing them would be shameful. And after years or even decades of hiding who you are, you will be incredibly insecure about it. That's 100 % a consequence of society shaming men for these characteristics, and as such the problems these men face because of them are also entirely the fault of the society.

>>16184162
>- Undue affective entitlement because they insist that their suffering is uniquely awful, worse than any other experienced by anyone, the worst form of discrimination, and therefore the only one truly worthy of consideration
If she says such a thing, she's clearly an ideologue letting her feelings get in the way of science. That's a ridiculous hyperbole. Not even terminal cancer patients feel like that, even though many are in extreme pain and outright demand someone to give them relief.
>- Undue epistemic entitlement because they think their experiences trump those of everyone else, including men who don't experience mental anguish over their small penises and women who prefer small penises and find them pleasurable.
Another ridiculous hypoerbole.

People talking about their problems on a forum dedicated to such problems does not mean that their entire lives revolve around those problems and that only those problems matter. This kind of text is so typical to the poltiically possessed people, really. It's the same with immigration. Criticise it, and the first thing you'll hear is "roflmao, all your problems are caused by immigrants? Touch grass, chud!"

>patriarchal hierarchy
That says everything anyone needs to know about her.

File: 1697478703102463.jpg (12 KB, 297x313)

12 KB JPG

>>16182978
>that is precisely the issue.
I don't care if retards are scared of small dick boogeymen who are out to get them, personally. That's fucking stupid, first of all. I also hate listening to retards who feel entitled to safety and think the answer is to demonize and ostracize those who are deemed as a threat on totally arbitrary whims, on the basis of some kind of supposed entitlement(blatant hypocrisy, accusing detractors and targets of narcissism, social shaming tactic).

Nobody is going to kill you because their dick is small, unless you're a woman and you cheat on them[spoiler]lmao[/spoiler]. They might, however, lash out in some way because they are systematically demonized and estranged from society for whatever of a long list of reasons. For anyone who is truly socially minded and honest, this is the issue, not the retarded batshit insane retardation spewed from the mouths of mentally deficient women pretending to be academics.

If you were also honest, and if you also cared about the future, this should have already been obvious.

BUT, if your goal is to eliminate substandard men from the pool of suitors out of petty spite or an innate disgust over their existence, in the way that women CONSTANTLY do throughout their entire lives, then by all means, continue to pretend it's men with small dicks that are the "problem". Meanwhile I will be thinking on how to write my treatise on the evils of women and how their innate sexual psychology inevitably leads to the downfall of any given civilization.

>>16184632
Maybe if you took a step back from controlling normal human behavior and allowed females to satisfy their urges by letting men with large penises have sex with them regularly, society wouldn’t have any downfall?

>>16184590
It's not just social shaming. To put the entire emphasis for blame onto society or some kind of systematic shame-based mechanism for the insecurity of these men is short-sighted and frankly dishonest. Having a small dick fucking sucks for the same reason that being substandard in any meaningful category fucking sucks. If at any point in their lives they are rejected or lose a meaningful relationship for any perceived deficiency, that is a legitimate cause for insecurity, and it has nothing to do with societal based shame. If a

>>16184634
That is exactly the problem retard. The answer IS to control normal human behavior, especially when it leads to social weakness and evolutionary based non-competitiveness. You are asking for society to not fucking work, because you are a petty vitriolic narcissist, an accusation levied at me from earlier in the thread. If you think you can hurt my feelings by trying to make me feel inadequate, you are wrong, and I am simply going to respond by knocking up the 18 year old who is asking for it, courting the snu snu volleyball player, and dicking down all the older women who don't get enough.

Then, I'm going to come online and be honest. I'm going to be honest and say that the problem is entitled high value men and entitled women who think they deserve to have exactly the kinds of sexual relationships they want without consideration for the workforce that allows them to be socially competitive and defend itself against outside aggression. I'm going to write about it, I'm going to convince other downtrodden men who don't get any pussy who play video games all day, and eventually enough of them are going to get mad that it's going to be a genuine social movement, and the pendulum can finally swing right back to modesty and patriarchy and remembering that women are dumb fucking children that can't be trusted with their own agency, because they are petty, and vile. Because that's the game, and at some point women lose.

>>16184645
No, you won’t do anything, because you can only impotently kick and scream over the internet, which is exactly the original author’s point. You’ve crossed a social line, and you’re as insane as eugenicists calling for the extermination of non-whites (whatever THAT means).

>>16184645
>>16184590
> If a
If a man loses his relationship for any reason related to inadequacy, that is something that gets ingrained into his memory. And it happens, all the time, and is the fundamental impetus for a lot of restrictive social norms throughout the world. Even in smaller social groups you will see restrictions enforced in some capacity on people who go after married/taken women for about this reason. And to pretend that there aren't legitimate material consequences for something like, say, a small penis is just totally fucking asinine. That affects some guys in the same way that being short, poor, or ugly does.

Most girls don't like small dicks. Most girls don't like guys with no money. Most girls don't like guys who are ugly, or short.

You know what they do like? Having as much access to the highest quality mating partners they can have. That's why they will do shit like try to piss off guys by making them feel inadequate. They want substandard mating partners to get ye gone. The problem with this, is that most guys aren't 6'2 with a model face making 300k at wendy's, so compromises have to be made. The most obvious compromise is to restrict their dating access so that everyone has meaningful access to romantic relationships, so everyone can be happy and productive workers and contributing members of society.

Everyone being happy sounds compelling, no? It sounds like paradise. You know who doesn't think it's a paradise? Who thinks it's hell on earth? The women who want to continue to be able to pretend like they don't think 90% of guys they come into contact with are subhumans, disposable rags meant be to exploited for their usefulness but given nothing meaningful. To the modern women you are meant to provide economic utility, thank society for the opportunity, and die alone in your pod while eating the bugs.

>>16184657
>>16184590
That's the real reason this article was written. It's meant to enforce the idea that substandard men are meant to live and die as substandard worker drones, oppressed underneath the weight of others' blatant genetic superiority. You are a vile creature doomed to a purposeless bleak existence because you just aren't quite up to modern female dating standard. This is the view of modern women towards the majority of men, and it is exemplified by the dishonest of the woman who wrote this article, and even a couple of the retards posting in this thread(one of whom is probably the author herself)

>>16184656
you're literally retarded. You think this is bait and that you will win by provoking a socially faux pas response. I think I will win by being right and more persuasive to my target audience, who know that I am telling the truth, and CHANGING what is socially faux pas. You lose because you are short sighted and your entire worldview is based around social status and shame, because you are a woman or a narcissist. You cannot shame the righteous man, and you cannot stem the tide of social change and progressivism. You are on the wrong side of history, in this case. Sorry.

>>16184663
>>16184656
>because you are a woman or a narcissist.

actually I'm going to go ahead and amend this. I strongly suspect you are both.

>>16180547
>paper has about 1000 views, many of which are probably from anonymous on this board
>1 citation
Lol
Anyway I read the paper and I don't fully get the point. She seems to be saying that small dicked men are actually body shamed by society and they are rightfully grieved by this, but they take their anger out within the hierarchy of patriaechy rather than trying to deconstruct the norms which lead to this shaming or something.
Anyway it ultimately doesn't matter because we're going to genetically modify all men to be small, athletic, and have large penises and all women to be tall and thick and highly fecund. The small dick problems won't exist in the future because men will universally have large penises.

File: 1697690242403432.png (499 KB, 633x745)

499 KB PNG

So there's your rhetorical strategy you dumb fucking cunt. See you around. Maybe I'll see you on tinder, and I'll be one of the hot guys nice enough to fuck the shit out of you and string you along then ghost you because you were dumb enough not to get hitched when you were actually valuable to men and had something you COULD have provided, but didn't, because you were too fucking stupid to realize that the game you played in your 20s can be played the other way around when you're not hot anymore and you can't even have kids and you're so emotionally stunted nobody even values you for companionship.

Because that's the thing about the dumb fucking games of semantics and social shaming. None of it fucking matters at the end of the day because what matters is what's real, and what's real is nothing you believe matters because you're too fucking stupid to get it. That's why you have no options, and why all the young girls are getting action and you're not, because now you're a guy with a small dick except you can't fucking hide it until the pants come off and there's no one around to force guys to put up with you. Oh well, sucks to suck.

Maybe your impotent whining in the empty dilapidated recesses of liberal academia will be more impactful than my anonymous shitposting. Two sides of the same coin, except I know where the wind's blowing and I'm way, way fucking smarter than you. You are welcome to slobber all over my dick, maybe I'd even like you.

>>16184162
>>16184165
>>16184585
samefagging is embarrassing

>>16184645
Oh yeah, I'm sure you totally have a bunch of 18 year olds and volleyball players at your feet waiting to be dicked down. Lol.

>>16184693
Suuuure, it's not like even post wall women have a bunch of men willing to have sex with them. They absolutely do need the dick from the guy who hates women and obviously has some issues going on in his life. It's not like you hate women because they wont have sex with you, nooooo, you totally do get lots of sex, you just hate them because reasons (that have nothing to do with being at the bottom of the social hierarchy).

>>16184711
Your mistake is to assume that my anger is not justified. You feel entitled to being correct because of your social status. You even spell it out in your own fucking posts. I loathe you. My problem is I fucking hate this social hierarchy bullshit. So naturally, I hate women, and I hate you, because you are a moron.

Funny how you take issue with my fucking young attractive women and then try to deride me on the basis of old women not having enough suitors. You want to know what I know, that you are either too delusional or stupid to get? Even the older women want better mates. You might almost say. They feel. ENTITLED. to it. And they don't get enough of it. They want the absolute best and go through any number of hoops to get it. This is the basis for a lot of inter and intrasexual competition, like the unspoken motivation for the OP's paper. An impotent attempt to lash out at a perceived threat, that being masculine "entitled" rhetoric. Any way that it could be undermined will do. Especially if you can subtly link it to being on the bottom of the SOCIAL HIERARCHY or to guys who compensate for having small dicks. You fucking disgust me.

I'll be sure to think of you when I'm fucking this fertile bitch telling me she wants to be a mom. I don't even plan on sticking around either but I can tell she wants it so bad she might not even care. I can tell just by her fucking body, how fucking thick she is, how fertile, the fat depositions packed into all the right places. I'll make her a single mom in your honor, faggot. I wonder if she'll even beg me for it, after I've blown her fucking mind. I think we're working up to it for sure.

>>16184728
Dude why are you seething so much. They're baiting the shit out of you and you come off as cringe

>>16180582
>Women with flat chests don’t do that.
thats cuz they know that DFC >> cow udders

>>16184728
Why hate women on the social hierarchy? They are the objectively the only thing lower than the incel.

>>16184162
>Undue affective entitlement because they insist that their suffering is uniquely awful, worse than any other experienced by anyone, the worst form of discrimination, and therefore the only one truly worthy of consideration
they don't tho?

>Undue epistemic entitlement because they think their experiences trump those of everyone else, including men who don't experience mental anguish over their small penises and women who prefer small penises and find them pleasurable.
Isn't this the crowd that constantly harps on about believing other's lived experiences? And the concept of patriarchy seems to fit the definition of epistemic entitlement where one group's "knowledge is more valid than other groups".

Overall it seems like the author gave some token at the end to say "look im not just bullying people who will never be happy because sexual selection is a thing". Seems like she just wants them to lay down and die.

>>16184734
Bait me I bait back. I find that sort of behavior particularly disgusting and if retarded faggots like the bitch I just replied to think I can't get in their head right back they're wrong. What you don't see is that that retarded faggot is either

1. a dumb woman who has to be put in her place and know that she can't shame me or make me feel inadequate because I will simply fuck better women

or

2. a dipshit faggot retard who made the classic blunder of thinking he's in a superior position with greater leverage. I want him to know that as he's trying to play the game of social etiquette and "better values" that I am not only morally superior as a matter of course, but also fucking better women.

It's a dumb game I learned to recognize very early. It's status based. I hate it, but if I am to be baited into playing it I plan on winning. The first thing I learned about this particular game is that if you're going to induce it you better be able to win. That shiteating retard can't win and now he knows, like one of those retarded fucking faggots that would brag about having a high IQ on a place like this without realizing there is in fact a chance you run into someone smarter than you are.

I hope my explanation is satisfactory.

>>16184740
Because they are the ones that spend inordinate amounts of effort putting others down to raise themselves up. The vast majority of the social issues and endemic issues plaguing society today are due to woman's behavior regarding status climbing, which is intrinsically linked to their sexual psychology, because sex and the tertiary things accompanying it are the only motivators for women. I am actually fairly sure I can convincingly show this to be the case in an objective way and I plan to at some point.

This thread desperately needs an IP count.

>>16184751
Every board should have poster ID. It's still anonymous but you know who's who within the thread

>>16184751
When and why was that removed? I'm sure it was there a month or two ago.

>>16184754
mods have small dicks

>>16180547
Your mother doesn't mind my 15cm cock inside her. She calls it "le petite mort"

>>16184754
It was removed specifically for /v/ so the mods (who get paid money for video game advertising and 20 (You) responses) could self-shill and make more money, and the shill campaign would be more difficult to catch by regards who would willingly fall for inflammatory bait.

If you go to /v/, people who say Assassin’s Creed has been bad for years are still making mass threads (or replying to mass threads) about a black samurai in the latest AC game.

What happened to the post with the small guy and giant girl

>>16184835
He got married.

>>16184835
can't show that on a christian science board

>>16184857
Amen. May he never return.

>>16184857
/sci/ isn't a christian board
>>16185034
I'm not going anywhere, and we're going to genetically modify humans to make men small and women tall. There will only be small males and tall females by the end of the decade

>>16184728
>Your mistake is to assume that my anger is not justified.
Maybe, but how is it women's fault that you can't get laid? If you were a woman, wouldn't you try to find the best possible partner you can get?
>My problem is I fucking hate this social hierarchy bullshit.
I can tell, but by hating so much you are not helping your own situation in any way.
>Funny how you take issue with my fucking young attractive women
Oh, no, I don't take issue. I know you aren't doing it.
>I'll be sure to think of you when I'm fucking this fertile bitch telling me she wants to be a mom. I don't even plan on sticking around either but I can tell she wants it so bad she might not even care. I can tell just by her fucking body, how fucking thick she is, how fertile, the fat depositions packed into all the right places. I'll make her a single mom in your honor, faggot. I wonder if she'll even beg me for it, after I've blown her fucking mind. I think we're working up to it for sure.
Take your meds.

File: ctc.jpg (48 KB, 471x705)

48 KB JPG

>>16180547
Fuck off, /sci/ is for males, not for loose ass bitches.

>>16185126
I'm not the guy you're talking to, but there will only be small large dicked men and tall thick fecund women by the end of the decade, so your paper is pointless

>>16184748
Bro, nobody is believing a seething incel like you is "fucking better women". Again, try to hate less and be less angry. You can't change society but you can improve your own life.

>>16185150
>You can't change society
Wrong

>>16184598
She has quotes, Anon.
>>16184742
>Isn't this the crowd that constantly harps on about believing other's lived experiences?
You mean what these guys explicitly aren't doing?

>>16184657
>Everyone being happy sounds compelling, no?
Everyone save, presumably, all women, and a good deal of the incels who feel entitled to more

>>16184693
>your impotent whining
ironic

>>16185187
>You mean what these guys explicitly aren't doing?
with the cherry picked example in the paper?
Im sure no one in good faith doubts that a small percentage of aberrant women exist. the author uses them to imply that the sufferers are wrong/lying thus implying their lived experience is wrong/a lie. It's like saying blacks aren't discriminated against because a white person says they don't hate blacks. If you put that shit in front of one of these "researchers" they'd lose their minds.

lol this whole topic is ridiculous but im having fun

>>16185655
No, Anon. You are the one dismissing lived experiences right now. We might consider this proof, in fact, that the quoted bits are representative. What are the odds that we'd just happen to run into another one like you if you were rare? But no, it seems small-dicked men as a rule consider their own "lived experience" of interacting with a tiny subset of humanity to extrapolate to all humanity. If, indeed, they are even basing themselves on their own lived experiences and not stereotypes and biases. "Aberrant women" lol. If we can dismiss the opinions of "aberrant women" on those grounds then why should we care about aberrant men?

>>16185655
>It's like saying blacks aren't discriminated against because a white person says they don't hate blacks.
It's more like saying all black people don't like watermelon just because you've heard a black guy say he likes watermelon and you think stereotypes must exist for a reason. A female preference for huge dicks is itself a stereotype, and men, as a rule, seem to be far more obsessed with dick size than most women. To insist to a woman, to her face, that she must be lying because she doesn't conform to stereotypes is blatant sexist discrimination and denial of lived experiences, desperate attempts at reframing not withstanding.

>>16183464
>Pretending that deformed or mentally deficient people are not inherently less desirable to be around than beautiful, smart people and it's all just cultural preference is itself gaslighting.
Not that it has much impact on the rest of your argument, but I actually disagree with this statement. In practice I don't think it is as simple as assigning some value to each person associated with how "desirable" they are. Status, maybe is more approachable as a somewhat measurable trait, but other than that human relationships have a complexity that surpasses such a simplistic model.

Being ugly, disabled etc isnt some uniform effect in all cases. I think a better way to look at it is as a graph with edges between each person and some weight attatched to compatibility.

The reason I say this is because in many cases, being less physicially attractive or less intelligent could paradoxically make someone more attractive as a companion to members of some subset of the human population. In general, it appears that people naturally starify into groups within limited "distance" or buckets which are distinguished by range.

A particularly ugly person will probably not enjoy spending time with a group of friends that are significantly better looking than they are. Likewise with intelligence, social charm, etc.

For this reason i dont think its correct to make a sweeping claim that disabled/disfigured/etc persons are inherently less desirable.

>>16185655
>It's like saying blacks aren't discriminated against because a white person says they don't hate blacks.
This is the undue affective entitlement referenced in the paper

>there are now research papers that show discrimination against small dicks
>us with huge dicks that face discrimination get nothing
Once again my animosity for the tiny guy grows white-hot in intensity. Imagine being able to wear whatever shorts, pants, or underwear you want without being accused of having an erection or a sexual predator in public. Imagine being able to go balls-deep with any woman. Imagine being able to run easily.

I genuinely cannot understand small dudes. God gave them a gift, and they act like massive homos about it.

>>16186238
Even the Greeks knew what was up

>>16185126
Well, the obvious answer is to, once again, use social means to restrict the means of reproduction so that the worker class gets a more equitable stake in society, otherwise they have no reason to contribute and can just let everything fall apart. Maybe the mass imported immigrants we are taking in to make up for the evident demographic collapse(caused by women) will allow us to remain competitive on the global scale with an emerging china who isn't dumb enough to let its citizens submit to base impulses that lead to systemic unhappiness and an unsustainable future.

I am allowed to be hateful as I am allowed to be smarter than you, and I am allowed to be right. I am allowed to be attractive enough to have women trying to fuck me and know that they are disgusting creatures who need to be told what to do and how to live, which they LIKE by the way. As long as it's not one of the subhuman creatures they seek to eliminate through underhanded deceptive means, which again, fills me with the same disgust I feel reading your posts. I don't care that people have their own personal agendas dictated by instinct. We're human beings. We're supposed to overcome that by virtue of having empathy and the capacity to care about other people and the right thing. When I see people totally disregard their innate moral compass and sense of empathy so they can lie and try to get everything they want without regard for what's really the right thing, it fills me with the deepest seethe I have ever known. That is why I know it is morally justifiable to restrict people's behavior and to especially control the means with which people go about having relationships, because the alternative is disordered chaos, by its very definition, that leads to nothing good and never has, despite the misguided romantic notion that individuality trumps all, and has no ceiling which it can bust through into the realm of being unacceptable. The very logical basis you are trying to criticize me with

>>16180547
>Quarterly Journal of Speech
Not /sci/

>>16180547
>If one talks shit does one get hit?
Yes! *smacks*

>>16186279
>>16185126
So once again, I will tell you that you are an irredeemable piece of human garbage. Waste that deserves the fate you would condemn others to, and it is on the basis that you are an awful person and probably feel entitled to the very best, despite not deserving it. If you weren't broken, damaged goods, probably with a background in psychology(figures) you would be able to relate this to the reality plaguing your own soul, but you won't, just as you would accuse me of the same.

The difference is you are totally out of your depth with me. You waltzed into a conversation you were totally unprepared for by virtue of being morally bankrupt and unable to think for yourself. You either deal with your own traumas, which are probably mostly your fault, an immutable fact you will die before realizing, leading to your perpetually stunted emotional growth; or are a mental midget who has been unable to think for themselves for their entire lives, always restricted, always at capacity with your own thoughts, unable to rise above because of the same sort of innate restrictions that make so many uncompetitive in so many ways.

The basis of society is to bring everyone together with their strengths and weaknesses to live in harmony for the greater betterment of everyone. That doesn't mean that everyone should get the best sex all the time, just like it doesn't mean that everyone should have all the money, all the power, or anything. Compromises have to, and SHOULD be made, the extent of which varies on the situation. On the whole, though, the idea that women in particular should just be allowed to have sex with the best partners they can get, and cheat on their partners to do it, as you yourself probably stated, is such an abominable idea that the natural recourse is to commodify them and treat those who believe that as subhumans who belong in the stockades, deservedly mocked and shamed by a society with actual decent values.

>>16186279
>>16186297
tl;dr

u mad

>>16186238
>>16186247
this
it’s not that men with smaller penii can’t have sex it’s that they don’t because they can’t get out of their own heads meanwhile some men have penii so big they genuinely cannot have sex either because it’s too thick or it can’t get fully erect

>>16186300
also correct, and a better person than the retarded psych """people""" who post threads like this and expect to be able to say shit like men with small penises don't deserve to be happy and women should be able to cheat and sleep with whoever they want, whenever they want.

Notice how that standard isn't reciprocally applied to men, because if it were, it would mean that women have to sleep with the guys with small dicks too. This, of course, is a threat to their reproductive strategy which involves subtle underhanded shaming and social manipulation and aggression to accomplish their goals, which is why you will always see women and pussywhipped retards complain about shit like

>>16180547
>I don't think I should have to live in fear of guys with small dicks trying to have sex with me. I think they should be treated like the subhuman rags they are and allow me to psychologically torture them through womanly female means while I get instant easy access to the best possible mates, because that's just what's supposed to happen and it feels right for me

which is what the OP is really saying.

>>16186301
The plural of penis is penes or penises

>>16186308
Jesus Christ m8, are you having a manic episode or something?

>>16186310
whatever dr. dick sounds like you know alot about them

>>16186313
I'm a legitimate genius so I am always like this.

>>16186314
Yes, I have one

>>16186315
>>16186313
but also

maybe

File: what is a man.png (2.22 MB, 1920x1919)

2.22 MB PNG

>>16186308
It would be much easier to tell women they deserve all the rewards of the materialism they exhume since they take it as a compliment and are more prone to reading literature/replies phrased with fancy descriptions embellishing it.

>>16186315
We could tell, every self assumed "genius" here talks endlessly about dicks. Just look at OP for instance. It's as smart as a women will ever become.

>>16186329
The only thing I would want a woman to feel while reading my posts is the fear of an encroaching threat on her unrestricted way of life that she lives at the expense of millions, and the safety and wellbeing of the entire world and the human race.

File: Wrongdoor.jpg (13 KB, 486x360)

13 KB JPG

>>16186332
>Please anon, my clit can only get so hard!

>>16186334
Just as the wretched f*male hides her true thoughts and motives in her """academic""" papers meant to further her agenda of social aggression, so too will I hide my true feelings to the women I want to fuck. That is a charade that will end when I find the right one, or when I stop giving a fuck about how people view me, which will probably earn me respect anyway, especially from women who already see me as an attractive mate.

Their clits get more like, engorged by the way. They don't get hard. But having their pussy and clit get so fucking swollen you can suck it up like a lollipop is pretty nice. You should try it, faggot.

File: Bucket of piss.png (371 KB, 1691x808)

371 KB PNG

>>16186346
>or when I stop giving a fuck about how people view me, which will probably earn me respect anyway
Here's some wise words: One day you will stop giving a fuck about how people view you because others "respect" you speak of will become absolutely worthless. You will come to an age when you figure out everyone else is just a stupid rock ape on black planet and there is no liberation in agreeing with any of their stupid opinions, authority or otherwise. In fact, I will go so far as to say that you will reach a point in your life where you take offense at others misplace/misguided "respect" simple because that shit is old hat. Who fucking cares what some other monkey cares? I'm right and I know I'm right, and I don't care what you think. In fact I'll even make fun of you for complimenting me, imagine not knowing you're just speaking to a rock ape yourself!

>>16186354
I would like to think we are more than rock apes however I am inching in that direction

>>16186367
Concessions and cooperation are for normalfags
Billions must die

>>16186152
meaningless word salad garbage meant to confuse the outsider and insulate itself from criticism

totally worthless dishonest sentiment on its face

>>16185727
grow a brain. Oh wait you can't lol

>>16185193
which brings us to the issue that woman's happiness apparently comes at the parasitic expense of literally everyone except 5-10% of the male population. In which case, why should anyone care about their happiness? Except, of course, for the guys who've got some. What happens when society is made up of guys who can't get any? Think on that. An equitable society where everyone is partnered with someone is a nightmare to women. A society that is productive and properly functioning is a nightmare to the class of people who are telling the majority of the other half of the population they need more money, more access to education and opportunities, more everything, all while productivity, happiness, and effectiveness by every conceivable metric for a given civilization goes down the drain.

Oh, except for how often women can get laid off tinder, and how much government benefits they get.

>>16186655
It's clearly explained

>>16186662
>An equitable society where everyone is partnered with someone is a nightmare to women
Yeah women never want to settle down lol

>>16186662
>An equitable society where everyone is partnered with someone is a nightmare to women.
Yes. And it would be immoral to force them to partner up with anyone in particular. That said, women are net tax sinks. This money should either be taken away and refunded or used to develop companion bots for the half of the population that isn't a net tax burden.

>>16186681
lmao.

>>16186686
Nah. Let's operate in a better morality system that isn't just a dumber version of the incorrect choice in the trolley problem

>>16186677
It's also dishonest and without bearing on actual reality. Which comes as no surprise

>>16186748
I think you dismiss it on emotional grounds because you yourself are guilty of it.

>>16186764
I'm dismissing it on the logical grounds that some retard thinks there's a difference between the two things mentioned in this post >>16185655, and the snippets other people have posted itt. It's mixed in with militant jargon meant to give the impression of moral superiority and authority, when this is not logically earned in any meaningful fashion and presupposes that

1. the suffering of people with small dicks ISN'T worse than other groups who suffer from discrimination(which is also stupid because it supposes the suffering from this group is due to discrimination when it manifestly isn't)

2. that this group specifically demands better treatment than they deserve, and also presupposes that they DON'T deserve better treatment. It's a strawman argument, and it is so malicious and vile I struggle not to think to myself, of course this is written by a woman.

To be clear, I don't even believe in the concept of entitlement. That shit is so fucking stupid. There are motivations and actions and outcomes. I understand it can be hard for some to delineate the motivations of other people, but I am not going to act like I'm fucking retarded and don't understand that some people's motivations are in direct contrast with mine. When you say something like

>women deserve to have sex with the best possible mates at all opportunities and men should lay down and accept this
>small dicked men have no chance with women and instead of realizing the material consequences of their specific reality they should adhere to academic feminist dogma that shames them for being unhappy

then I will counter with

>women deserve to be treated as though they have no agency and should not be allowed to make decisions for themselves, especially with regards to sex and social relationships

>paper is about men
>someone on /sci/ makes it about women anyways

>>16186822
>>16186764
There is no fundamental moral or logical difference between these two things. Both sides have a similar motivation, to assert control over a natural selection process through social intervention. Both sides manifestly have the same action, complaint and social persuasion.

The difference is the outcome. On the one hand, one side is more likely to get what it wants because the group who would ascribe to the latter do not have the social power to enforce those values. But sooner or later society will get there, like it always does, like it always has, for thousands of years.

Don't think it won't happen. It's a natural back and forth process. All it takes is for enough people to get fed up with a particular brand of bullshit and make a change. The same way that women got fed up and demanded suffrage, so too will men get fed up and put a stop to that horseshit. The faster people realize the reality and the malicious intent and manipulations of women as a larger social class, the sooner that happens.

>>16186826
>it's not actually about women

retard.

>>16186822
That's a lot of sophistry to say that, yes, you do think the suffering of small-dicked men is uniquely worse than that faced by any other group, which is, of course, ridiculous.
>To be clear, I don't even believe in the concept of entitlement.
Right, it would only get in your way.

But seriously you've made it clear you haven't even read the paper.

i'm not reading all that. what happens if i have a 16x15.75 cm thicc benis?

>>16186851
white btw

>>16186833
Are you fucking serious? Of course it is. Why wouldn't it be? There are some people who have it worse than others. I'm not about to go making a value judgement on which groups have it worse, but to start off with an academic argument that presupposes that a particular group DOESN'T have it worse than anyone else and use that group's perceived suffering as the basis to deride and shame them without offering any objective support for ANY of that is more than just asinine.

Again, that's malicious, and the motivation for it(see: wanton social aggression and bullying) is to pre-emptively attack a perceived threat to their reproductive strategy and position of social power(see: total authority). This is what I take issue with.

I read as much as I needed to. I specifically referenced the definitions of various forms of entitlement to understand what the author is saying. I can disagree with an "academic" on a stronger basis than choosing to address strawman arguments with flimsy made up definitions for things that were made to serve a malicious agenda. Since I also have a brain, I am allowed to see ulterior motivations and decide to disregard flimsy arguments wholesale, especially when I come to the realization that those arguments are in bad faith. THEN, out of justified anger, I can choose to re-align my beliefs in direct opposition to the fucking BULLSHIT I just read, and choose to ignore anything else because I'm not so fucking stupid that I have to engage with blatant sophistry on my own end. You can choose to do the same, but I will take solace in knowing that not only am I right, but in the superior moral position, with a better more well thought out logical position. This might come as a surprise to you, but not everyone in the world is so fucking stupid as to crumble to the first sign of adversity. You are only further convincing me the right thing to do is to act in the same way as the author in the OP.

>>16186926
lmao dude just learn where the clitoris is and breathe through your mouth, it's healthier for you than writing a novel-length screed fulminating at strawwomen

>>16186926
btw you invoke logic but it is clear you don't even know what you're criticising and you're justifying both your ignorance and your response by your extreme emotional reaction. You have the outward trappings of rationality but only kneejerk reactions underneath.

>>16186931
I'm not sure what you think you can gain by attempting to attack me on the basis of being bad at sex and being attractive. I mean, I think you're doing this because you don't really have an argument and want to maintain a position of superiority, but I'm just going to go ahead and let you know all the women I've been with have told me more or less that I'm the best they've ever had, my dick is perfect, and I'm very attractive. I'm probably more sexually accomplished than you, and I really hope you call me or a liar or choose to disbelieve me because it gives me some pleasure to know that you're such a fucking retard you had to read probably at least some of what I wrote all so you could lie to yourself about how much of a dipshit and a bad person you are just to defend women

>>16186935
I know exactly what I'm criticizing. You are the one who evidently doesn't know what they're defending, and you're trying to maintain your false belief in your own rationality, which you do not possess.

>>16186938
>all the women I've been with have told me more or less that I'm the best they've ever had, my dick is perfect, and I'm very attractive
That's really not what the rest of your posts say. Your claim rather beggars belief under the best of circumstances.
I'm just looking for the reason you're so emotionally invested in this, because it's clearly pointless to try to engage you rationally.
>>16186940
>I know exactly what I'm criticizing.
No, you're going off on weird unrelated tangents all the time and entirely misrepresenting just about everything you pretend to be arguing against.

>>16186952
>That's really not what the rest of your posts say.
that's because you're fucking stupid and making blatant assumptions when you obviously don't really have the mental capacity to being so, if I'm going to be brutally frank with you. You strike me as profoundly stupid, the sort of person that thinks because they are a step or two above the people around them this makes you intelligent or an authority figure, when really you're a pretty small fish. You are actually so legitimately stupid you are taking the tautological definitions for emotionally charged arguments by a professor in communications at face value, and using those as the basis for a "rational argument" that would only be rational if one was to also accept those definitions at face value. This is patently absurd, and a trap that nobody really has to fall into. There is nothing wrong at all with stepping around it, a fact you seem unable to digest because of your aforementioned misplaced confidence in yourself and your own deficiencies.

It's pretty clear to me you are just unable to process novel information or legitimate clearly presented arguments that are outside of your starting depth(read: kiddy pool). That is your problem, and it's something I have been aware of since you started replying to me

>>16186963
>that's because you're fucking stupid and making blatant assumptions
No need to read beyond this, nothing worth reading is going to follow projection so blatant

>>16186965
>bro you don't know where the clit is and you're a mouth breather
>ur bad at sex can't get women and look ugly LMAO
>btw im just trying to figure out why you disagree with me don't take it seriously

the difference between you and me is so huge I literally could not explain it to you. I can make assumptions, because I am right when I do. When you do it, you fail. That is an assumption I can make, because I've watched it happen in this very thread.

Strong opinions matter little in the face of strong facts just thought I’d remind you all.

>>16186967
The difference between you and me is I don't even pretend to read your entire posts and I don't respond to imaginary points

Seek psychiatric help.

>>16186977
okay buddy, lie to yourself. Pretend you're rational too. Nobody is going to stop you

>>16186978
At least you gave up the novelist career lol
Might as well because you're capable of producing some of the dullest drivel my eyes have ever slid off

>>16186985
sorry, I forget it's hard to read for some people. Maybe you should consider getting help for your attention issues

>>16185727
>It's more like saying all black people don't like watermelon just because you've heard a black guy say he likes watermelon and you think stereotypes must exist for a reason.
I don't want to make any undue assumptions about this, so im just going to say I dont get what you're saying there

as far as:
>To insist to a woman, to her face, that she must be lying because she doesn't conform to stereotypes is blatant sexist discrimination and denial of lived experiences, desperate attempts at reframing not withstanding.
you didn't understand the post, Im not saying the woman was lying Im saying that the woman is not representative of the whole and she didn't even claim to represent a majority of women. The quote being included at all in the paper was irrelevant except for a cherry picked quote denying authenticity of what the woman said. The point that was made in the quoted post is that she doesn't represent the statistics of the group(ie women). Indeed men who are consistently derided by women are more able to gauge women's opinions as a whole than a single woman's opinion.

>>16187136 oops pretend
>>16185727 was >>16185731

Humans have created so many good things for the prospect of riches and fame
And yet still no proper penis enlargement
Isn't that crazy

ITT trolled dicklets

>>16187143
>t. buttmad lady

>>16187142
bro there's like soft muscle tissue and uhhh microveins and umm a ligament i think?? literally impossible to work with

>>16180547
This is why colleges and universities must divest from Israel. This researcher and paper on a subreddit meant that another researcher on the environment died.

It's hilarious given that the author also authored "Life-Saving Weapons: The Biolegitimacy of Drone Warfare." funded by the IDF.

>What are
not valid entitlements—indeed, what must be continually condemned—are the entitle-
ment claims bred of privilege that demand gendered resources (desire, sex, care,
affection, credibility) that men, because of their status as men, assert that they deserve
from women, because of their status as women.
what a brutal blackpilling
how are dicklets not murdering everyone? lol

>>16187292
small dick = low testosterone = impotent raging

>>16186988
I read for a living but you couldn't pay me enough to slog through your linguistic abominations

>My "all the women I've been with have told me more or less that I'm the best they've ever had, my dick is perfect, and I'm very attractive" t-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my t-shirt

You know, I think the paper is actually wrong about one of its basic assertions. Small dick jokes very often aren't really body shaming, but rather jabs at someone's insecurity and entitlement being on display. When you say things like "wow, compensating for something?" it's not really about the dick, the size of which only remains implied. It's about how you come across to other people as a person who is deeply dissatisfied with himself and how you're ironically broadcasting that fact to the world. It's Small Dick Energy regardless of your actual size. It is a different matter if someone has seen your penis and is commenting on it directly, but those cases tend to be private and personally motivated.

If you have bounced on BBC can you take small peepee whyte guys any more seriously?

>>16185779
Well I don't have any references but anecdotally, when I rate women from 0 to 10 it only deviates maybe 2 points from what some other men say (irl).
People universally desire european features (white, blond, green or blue eyes), both european and others and also across both sexes. And being tall, small noses, lack of naso labial folds, in the case of men big chin.
Personality is a bit more relative, and in the case of women it matters less. But generally people like others who are happy, well traveled, can play instruments, in the case of men thosr who are good at some sport, and of course being wealthy.
Of course it's not universal but it's mostly true for a big majority of people.
>because in many cases, being less physicially attractive or less intelligent could paradoxically make someone more attractive
They would change their mind real quick if the had a chance with them.

>>16186279
Dude everybody can see you don't get laid.
You seething isn't going to change anything, nobody cares. Rather than trying to change others, try to change yourself.
There is no need to humilliate yourself firther by LARPing online as something you're not.

File: 904e7020-398e-0134-b065-0(...).jpg (48 KB, 828x618)

48 KB JPG

Seething dicklets itt

>>16186297
I don't even disagree with you there. Maybe society would be better off with arranged marriages, who knows.
My point is you think you are Marx, but you are a factory worker. You are not fron some elite jewish family. You have no power or influence. So improve your own life instead of being angry at society and further lowering your chances of success.

>>16184585
>too intelligent for /sci/
Lol, holy shit you're a pathetic mentally ill samefagger.
This fucking thread is still going?
The autistic psychopath tranny OP is still talking to themselves in infinite stimming verbal diarrhea?
Haha.
Thinly veiled tranny big-dick fetish shit under the guise of white-hating social progressivism.
This whole thread is nothing more than a case study on low functioning autism and psychopathy demonstrated by the OP who doesn't even have a dick.

>>16187571
Meds. Take them.

>>16180547
>Understanding entitlement as a rhetorical strategy unearths the material and evaluative
qualities of entitlement claims as a politics of deservingness rooted in colonial domination
What the fuck does entitlement have to do with colonialism

>>16187608
Kys.

>>16187690
You could try reading it, but at a glance it seems pretty obvious that colonialism inherently requires entitlement because you're taking things that aren't yours

>>16187728
entitlement is a rhetorical strategy, per the paper.
I would claim that wanting to not be colonized is entitlement

>>16187745
A due entitlement, also per the paper.

>>16187789
couldn't find a definition in the paper for due entitlement; is it just an arbitrary judgement call?

>>16187794
People are entitled to being left alone. That is, you are entitled to not having someone barge in on you while you take a dump, or harangue you when you’re waiting in a line, or stand in front of your car and ask for your spare change. You are not entitled to things from others simply because you put in the effort, regardless of the degree of effort, such as a free video game for doing chores around the house, or a secure high-quality job by going to every networking event possible, or a couch to sleep on because you helped your friend resolve their marriage issues.

You’re also not entitled to a loving relationship with a woman just for the “virtue” of being a man. So when small-dicked men claim that their small dick is preventing them from having a loving relationship, or even just sex in general, that’s an undue entitlement because no one is entitled to that.

>>16187789
claiming that due entitlement exists is also undue entitlement

>>16187965
And yet women and colors harangued good men for rights.

>>16187965
How is recognizing a material fact even entitlement at all? Trying to assert that someone doesn't have the right to complain and shaming them on that basis is small minded. The OP doesn't even use men that tell anyone else this, she is literally lurking a sub on reddit where these men go to vent and find community amongst themselves.

That's not even entitlement at all. That's dealing with things. You might as well admit that the entire argument of entitlement doesn't matter and is utterly meaningless if you're going to twist around what it means to suit your needs. That's because it doesn't matter, at all.

>>16187965
Please clarify your position.
>or a secure high-quality job
Are they entitled to an insecure low quality job?
Is it ethical to leave a toddler to fend for himself in the wilderness?
Or are people entitled to a minimum of social interaction?
What is that minimum?
Is it possible to be happy without friends?
Is it possible to be happy without sex?
Are people entitled to happiness?

>>16187728
I get the argument that there's entitlement for there to take what's someone else's but not the cut off at colonialism.
You could call the roman conquest of europe entitlement. They took lands that weren't theirs, took slaves, installed new rulers. Or the arab conquest of the middle east and other territories. Or the mongol storm. The turkish conquest. Empires took what wasn't theirs since there were empires. People got replaced, displaced enslaved, sometimes completely wiped out. I don't get what's more entitled about colonialism then the other examples. It's just kinda assumed in the paper that you agree

> How can we be expected to deal with men (primarily white men) who feel entitled to having sex
>primarily white men

sure buddy, let's take a look at the rape stats again

>>16187986
>Trying to assert that someone doesn't have the right to complain and shaming them on that basis is small minded
The paper explicitly acknowledges that they do have the right to complain, though
>>16188032
>I don't get what's more entitled about colonialism then the other examples.
Yeah maybe it's simply not exhaustive

>>16188642
Nobody cares what the paper says. It was written by a hypocritical shitbag who got their job by kissing ass and toeing the party line. Have you ever even met someone that gets a degree in communications?

>>16188697
>Nobody cares what the paper says.
The person I responded to did.

>>16188701
I don't, actually, because I know it was written by a hypocritical shitbag who doesn't even believe what they said. Kind of like you

Why does the drop in libido in men occur in the 20s?

>>16188642
>Yeah maybe it's simply not exhaustive
It seems pretty selective.

>it's a law enforcement honeypot thread

do you think they remembered to include in the report that everything posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood? Maybe it's right after the part where they admit to agitating online incels into incriminating themselves under the new internet thought control acts.

>hey can you please not kill people because of your tiny dong?
>”IT’S A HONEYPOT THREAD”
You retards would say anything to absolve yourself of personal responsibility wouldn’t you?

gotcha law man

funny how that works the other way around too. maybe because you're projecting

File: file.png (14 KB, 271x143)

14 KB PNG

crazy!
>PP captcha

Imagine spending 3 years lurking a subreddit where men with small dicks vent about their problems so that you can write an opinion piece based on a bunch of cherry picked comments and publish it in a "peer-reviewed academic journal"
lmaooo

>>16190759
this is the future and self-actualization women wanted
who are we to question it?