.
>>543520282No one that is not as stupid as you says this in the first place you insufferable retard
>>543520282You are a dumbass. Men structurally hold more systemic, financial, and physical dominance in patriarchal systems.The two hierarchies pull in opposite directions. The woman’s age advantage is partially offset or checked by the structural and physical advantages men hold in society.
>>543520435I am a communist but I am pro-men, unlike you. I have read Marx. So here is the sticky for /pol/ and here are all of your fallacies plus a nifty conclusion for you. This is not reddit, so you are going to have to argue with me without the help of mods and downvote swarms ◝(¬‿¬)◜>Ad hominem“You are a dumbass” attacks the person, not the meme.>Begging the question“Patriarchal systems” assumes the conclusion that men hold power, then uses it to explain the double standard.>Hasty generalization“Men structurally hold more systemic, financial, and physical dominance” applies to all men. An 18-21 man does not have financial dominance over a 30+ woman.>False cause / oversimplification“The two hierarchies pull in opposite directions” is vague. It does not prove the top panel is predatory and the bottom is fine.>Special pleadingThe meme shows the same critic condemning one age gap and praising another. The response tries to exempt the bottom panel without addressing the inconsistency.>Straw manThe meme does not say the two situations are identical. It points out hypocrisy. The response attacks a fake equivalence argument.>Non sequiturEven if men hold structural power, it does not follow that older man/younger woman is predatory while older woman/younger man is not.>ConclusionThe response uses patriarchy as a magic word to erase the double standard shown in the image. That is not an argument.
>>543520357>>543520435Retarded communist faggots who deserve death
>>543520435why is it "bad" for a man to hold power over his woman?
>>543520755You are not a marxist then>>543520819Because inequality is wrong
>>543520799Do you work to earn money? Then you are not a capitalist, you are a wagie CHUD. I own my own buisness and am a communist, I own my production. You get paid a small percentage of yours by your master. You want to be a cuck for capitalists who own you like we used to own niggers.
>>543520435We don't live in a patriarchy and men don't have any more power in society than women do.
>>543520871>inequality is wrongNature is wrong ?
brown pedotrannies hate high testosterone MILF fuckers
>>543520932Tell me you don't understand sociological definitions of power without telling me. Sociological power isn't about whether you personally feel powerful in your day-to-day life. It’s about institutional, systemic, and material control.Women hold fewer than 10% of Fortune 500 CEO spots. The vast majority of institutional wealth remains concentrated among men. Men commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime and intimate partner violence. Power dynamics in private relationships are always informed by that background reality.
>>543520871>be me>communist anon>see this liberal faggot defending the double standard with "muh patriarchy">he says men structurally dominate women>true under capitalism>but he treats men and women as classes>that is liberal idealism>capital is the primary hierarchy>a broke 18yo male has zero power over a 30yo woman with money>a rich 60yo man has power over both>the age gap double standard is capital pricing youth and beauty>it is not men vs women, it is capital vs labor>if you want to end the double standard, abolish private property and the bourgeois family>anything else is bourgeois moralizing
>>543521045You mean low testosterone retarded submissive beta males like you. Enjoy your dusty used up vaginas.
My dad told me he would beat the fuck out of me if i passed highschool (which i did) as a virgin so i had sex with a girlWhat do now? Im only 19
>>543520282What's up, nerd.I just got done sodomizing my 27 year old pregnant wife. We've been together for 8 years and will soon have our 5th child.I'm 43.
>>543520799Qed lmao
>>543521061The average man does not more power in society over the average woman. You are only talking about the upper echelon of society and of course you would that's the only place where women are disadvantaged.As for the violence argument that doesn't mean shit there is no systematic oppression of women in that regard.
>>543521061>communist anon here>he opens with “tell me you don't understand sociological definitions of power”>ad hominem and poisoning the well>condescension is not an argument>then he appeals to “sociological definitions” as if sociology is one voice>appeal to authority>sociology is contested, not a magic word>then he drops Fortune 500 CEOs, wealth, violent crime>hasty generalization and ecological fallacy>he takes group-level stats and applies them to every individual man and woman>a broke 18yo man is not a Fortune 500 CEO>a homeless man has no institutional power over a female CEO>he conflates class power with gender power>the CEOs and wealth are a capitalist class issue, not a “men” issue>most men are also exploited by those same capitalists>then he says men commit most violent crime>red herring>violent crime stats do not prove that all men hold power over all women in private relationships>it proves some men are violent, which is not the same as systemic power>then he says “power dynamics are always informed by that background reality”>vague and unfalsifiable>no mechanism, no evidence>thought-terminating cliche>he is a liberal idealist>he uses gender as the primary contradiction>marx says class is primary>capital vs labor>if you want to help women, abolish private property and the bourgeois family>anything else is bourgeois cope>t. communist anon Come on, argue with a communist who knows theory. You are a moralizing bourgeois simp. You are no communist. Hell you probably have not read the communist manifesto even though it is like 15 pages kek.
>>543520282where is my zoomer girl in a skirt and thigh highs and single ponytail hair?t. 35 boomer.
>>54352106130+ men can't date 18 year olds but 30+ women can date 18 year olds because fewer than 10% of Fortune 500 CEO are womenthis is how retarded your argument is this is why I hate commie faggots
>>543521282Fuck you this guy is no communist. He is a certified liberal retard. I am a communist, and I make more money than you and bench more than you gypsy.
>>543521347Nah he is a real communist, if Marx was alive today he would speak exactly like this reddit fag.
>>543521219You’re conflating personal privilege with structural hegemony dumbass. The laws, workplace norms and economic policies written by that male-dominated upper echelon dictate the material conditions of the average woman every single dayAlso saying intimate partner violence 'doesn't mean shit' sociologically is wild. Women are socialized from childhood to alter their routes, monitor their drinks, appease hostile men to avoid escalation, and carefully navigate dating to avoid assault. Having your daily freedom of movement and bodily security dictated by the threat of violence from another demographic is the literal textbook definition of a power imbalance.
>>543521410>romanian gypsy anon says if Marx were alive he would speak like this reddit fag>wrong>Marx was a materialist, not a liberal sociologist>the reddit guy argues from “sociological power” and group stats>Marx argues from class relations and modes of production>the reddit guy says men hold power>Marx says capital holds power>a broke 18yo man has no power over a female CEO>a rich 60yo man has power over both>the reddit guy treats men as a class>that is idealism>Marx would call him a petty-bourgeois moralist>Marx and Engels wrote in The Origin of the Family that women’s oppression comes from private property, not from all men>they supported women’s liberation as part of proletarian revolution>they did not reduce politics to gender war>Marx would say the primary contradiction is capital vs labor>the reddit guy divides the working class by gender>that helps the ruling class>so the reddit guy is not a real communist>he is a liberal feminist with a reddit account>Marx was based because he analyzed capitalism, not because he posted like a reddit fag>if Marx were alive he would write about capital, not cry about Fortune 500 CEOs>he would say abolish private property, abolish the bourgeois family, and the double standard dies with them>anything else is bourgeois cope>t. communist anon>>543521472Come on prove you are not a Bourgeois Moralist and argue with me. You do not deserve to use that flag on here liberal scumbag.
>>543520282Looks like something you would find in deviantart.
>>543520282Why'd you make him a 2000s Millennial atheist instead of a zoom zoom feminist?
>>543520282you have it backwards. it's women calling it predatory
>>543520435>>543520871wake the fuck up, feminist. you won, not shut the fuck up and take responsibility for your actions
>>543521061>majority of wealth remains concentrated among menhypergamy. the H word you hate so much
>>543521751*noW shut the fuck up*
>>543521472Which laws, workplace norms and economic policies advantage men and disadvantage women?As for the second "argument" that's a straight up lie no woman I've known lives like that provide a study for that claim or suck my dick commie faggot.In fact, provide evidence in the form of studies for all your claims until now, I'm tired of your nonsense.
>>543521699You spend your last dollarydoo from centerlink buying petrol to sniff, ya dumbcunt?
>>543520435Women hold the majority of economic power now in the USA btwShow flag or israeli
>>543520932Women hold way more power than men as of the last decade or so. They have the power to ruin your life in the blink of an eye. No evidence needed.
>>543520282
>>543521993Yeah but you have to express this in a fancy way that makes this commie fag look like a retard. If you state the obvious like this anyone who doesn't know it for some reason will think he's right and you're wrong. That's how liberalism was able to spread so easily and win the culture war.
>>543520435men pay more in taxes because they DO more things with greater stakes
>>543521801Based
>>543522043This only happens because liberal "men" exist. If all men were conservative and all women were liberal the opinions would always be split 50/50 at this point it's like 80% "male sexuality baaaaad" everywhere you go.
>>543522096He refused to debate you because being a commie like him you've also mastered the art of fancy talk + logical fallacies.That's how they took over the world because midwits fall for these tactics every single time.
>>543520435hey where the fuck did you go, anon? i'm further to the left than you are. don't go!
>>543521801Have you ever actually asked your mother, your sister, a female friend, or a partner if they’ve ever held keys between their knuckles walking home alone at night? Have you ever asked them if they’ve had an uncomfortable interaction on public transit, checked their drink at a bar, shared their live GPS location with a friend during a date, or stayed silent when a man got aggressive because they were terrified of what he’d do if they rejected him?
>>543522218Epic, the commie retard is starting to disintegrate.>MY personal anecdotes are better than YOUR personal anecdotesYeah I did in fact speak with plenty of women my mother never does anything you mentioned and she' not afraid to yell at a man on the street. Now piss off retard provide studies that show this phenomenon is real or kys.
>>543522218have you ever thought maybe you should carry a fucking gun if you're gonna fly that flag, comrade?
>>543522170Yo Romanian anon, you are dropping the truth. I want you to have a good day, man. Hope you eat some good food and fuck a hot woman.See I am a racist, and a communist. So other Commies hate me. The right gets some things right. Racism, sexism, and basic structures of some parts of society they are dead on about. They just get fucked when it comes to understanding economics because too many right wingers are emotional retards. I only take based and correct positions. That guy is a liberal faggot. He does not deserve to be called a communist. I am tired of these liberal faggots trying to pose their pro-muslim, anti-man, anti-family, anti-woman, pro-tranny, pro-nigger, etc bullshit as communist.
>>543522417How did subhuman retards read this and then decided guns should be banned because of a few mass shootings?Did they think that Marx did not take into consideration the fact that gun violence might increase if everyone is armed? That would make him a retard of course he knew disputes might end up in deadly shootings if everyone is armed but still insisted on it.
>>543522417My wife has a conceal carry on her most days kek. She is a better shot than I am.The liberal faggot anon probably thinks guns are le-bad. >>543522218>real based manly communist anon here>anecdotes aren't a mode of production>fear is real, but it's not class analysis>have you ever asked who owns the factories?>capital fucks proletarian men and women alike>you're moralizing, not organizing>Marx would call this petty-bourgeois sentimentality>you're a radlib with a reddit account, not a communist>read Engels or shut up
>>543520435>You are a dumbass. Men structurally hold more systemicStopped reading there. Blow your brains out with your dad's gun.
>>543520282I've noticed one thing. Fagdditors do not ever have a problem with age difference in porn subreddits. 18-19 year old girls fucking 40-50 year old men and they never have a problem with it for some reason
>>543522563liberals are not leftists, anon
>>543522423Wouldn't that make you a Nazbol or some shit like that? I don't get the obsession with going all in for a side, I also think the constant dick sucking of millionaires on the right is ridiculous and that stops people from going to their side or they go despite the fact that a bunch of low class scum are ball licking their rich superiors who don't give a fuck about them.
>>543522724they also rationalize their ick in unhinged ways
>>543520435As it should beReddit is full of fat girls btw, not necessarily neckbeards
>>543522803>nazbolthat's made up bullshit
>>543522724Same for prostitution, we've been saying this for decades these people are brain dead. Prostitution is bad because women would not have sex with those men under different circumstances but put a camera in their face and it's okay all of a sudden.Only a tiny group hold the same views on prostitution and porn the rest are gooner retards
>>543522803It's largely because people want a convenient explanation for human degeneration. Economics in this case. The truth is too horrible to accept. Some of the people who do this, eventually cannot hide, and they kill themselves, usually artists.
The ones who are ok with prostitution because it's female liberation or whatever also don't have a problem with age gaps.Since clients are usually 15+ years older than the prostitutes they don't give a fuck as long as it's multiple single instance transactions the "problem" is when they start walking hand in hand on the street.These fuckers hate relationships.
And right wingers are doing the exact same thing. Make it make sense if you are 40+ walking around with an 18 yo you might get lynched.But if you are 40 and fuck a 18 yo whore nobody cares assuming they find out. Cause she's not a virginal angel like the other one is lmao
>>543522803Nah, I am just an oldschool trade unionist communist. I worked for a trade union for a decade before I started my own buisness. I think the world should be guided by men who do work. Society led by smart engineers, and tradesmen would be a utopia compared to this technocratic bullshit. Could you imagine if we actually tried to make material goods like cars and computers last decades? That is my dream. Not the endless brown hoard shit these women and fags propose. Remember communism was started and founded by working MEN. This liberal cancer doesn't deserve to use our title.
>>543523058Nobody gave a shit when I was 36 and had an 18 year old gf. Nobody said a damn thing to me. Her pussy was so fucking good, but man the age gap made it so our conversations would peter out. It was fun but I ended up marrying an older woman because she was more in line with me. Still younger than me but not half my age, kek. I have never used a prostitute but I am a libertarian when it comes to what people want to do with their own bodies. If a woman wants to sell herself and a man wants to buy, I do not think it is the states job to step in. I do think they should have to be licensed, taxed, and STD tested regularly. But whores should own their means of production. It is the worlds oldest profession for a reason, my gypsy friend.
>>543522198>>543522198>wall of text without any ids or sources or tags or numbericalsyou giga fucking suck at making these, im not even going to save this piece of crap. try again
>>543520755Those are informal fallacies. In every single case you’ve mentioned an argument can be made in that commits every single one of these “fallacies” and still be a valid argument. You conveniently omit the fallacy fallacy from your response too despite it being in your image lol
>>543523296>conversationsthe only woman i could have conversations with became a doctor. you shouldn't care about conversations with most women, they're fucking dumb. i have a WIDE range of interests and they don't. the fact of the matter is that most people are boring. it's not that YOU are the one that has to be interesting, you can't do anything intellectually with a woman that is so dumb it's like interacting with a blank slate. they're spending more time on social media which means they're getting brainrot faster than men of any demographic
>>543523410>hates words because they're too many>wants more words if they're sourceswho the fuck asked you to look everything up? why not research a handful of things on your own time?
>>543523474>fallacy fallacyjust admit you hate logic and can't discuss things rationally like an adult. you probably don't actually think logically, you're probably a beta cuck that waits for "relational webs" to gain "consensus" outside of evidence or rational thinking
>>543520435I hate to memeflag, but I'm not gonna get out-leftist'd by a tankie.Your entire argument relies on this silly idea that people from different economic and social classes should not be dating. However, the goal of any communist must be the total eradication of all hierarchies and classes. Demanding people stick with those of their own class among even things as trivial as romance serves only to reinforce class distinction and prevent people from different classes from uniting as one to destroy the current system.
>>543523474Fair point, and yeah, the fallacy fallacy is a real thing. But here's the thing: pointing out a fallacy doesn't mean I'm saying his conclusion is automatically false. I'm saying his reasoning is bad. You can have a true conclusion supported by a fallacious argument, but that doesn't make the argument good. And yeah, you can technically construct a valid argument that contains an informal fallacy if the fallacy doesn't affect the logical form, but that's not what's happening here. The fallacies I pointed out actually undermine the inferential link. So no, I'm not committing the fallacy fallacy. I'm just saying his argument is weak. If you want to defend his reasoning, go ahead, but "you used fallacies" isn't a counter to "your argument contains fallacies.">>543523504Look man, I love my wife. I can talk to her for hours. She is my homie. I got fucking lucky to be honest. She is significantly more intellectually stimulating than 99 percent of men I have had conversations with. You are coming from a place of thinking you are intrinsically better than women and that is in some points categorically false. Remember men are a wider bell curve for IQ women are a much tighter one. There are more 70 IQ retarded men and 130 IQ genius men than there are women at either spectrum. They are mainly 85 to 110 IQ (based on the basline race of the woman ie lower for jeets and niggers) I picked a woman who is a genius, those are particularly rare.
>>543520282Test
>>543523865>you are coming from a place that you are intrinsically better than womenno dude, i'm coming from a place of talking to hundreds of women and 99.9% of them have nothing interesting to say at all. they literally can't think for themselves. they try to signal that they can though, because they know it's socially rewarding. not the same as actually thinking for themselves.>men are a wider bell curve for IQ>standardized testingpic related>she is my homiegood for you. stop fucking telling me what i think "intrinsically" and instead realize you got the unicorn and when other dudes are griping about how horrible shit is, stop trying to say it's not so bad just because you got your statistically unlikely unicorn. every single guy that has a husband or gf is like this because they literally can't understand how fucking bad women are right now. you're intellectually dishonest because all of us know damn well that if your wife gets irrational you can't speak to her rationally, you placate her because she's a woman because if you don't she blows up and makes a big deal out of it like every single woman that has ever existed.
>>543524002wrong pic
>>543523831>communist anon here>you're right that cross-class dating is fine in theory>but you're a utopian idealist if you think that's how we get to communism>ML says the path is class struggle, not individual romance>dating across class lines doesn't abolish class, it usually just reproduces bourgeois power dynamics>and it can pacify class consciousness>the revolution comes from the proletariat organized as a class, not from fucking the bourgeoisie>if you haven't read Proudhon, Bakunin or Kropotkin you're a liberal with a red flag>put up or shut up>t. communist anon
>>543520755Just gonna be that guy here, but insulting people isn't ad hominem. Ad hominem is when you imply the person's argument is wrong because of the insult. Actual ad hominem on this type of topic usually looks like saying the guy's a pedophile, so the rest of his argument can be totally ignored. Meanwhile, adding an insult to one's own argument is just a matter of being disrespectful.
>>543524002Kek the first image was funny. I was kinda confused, maybe you meant IQ was cope. Shouldn't have corrected yourself imo.>I hear you. I was you once.>you're not wrong that smart women are rare. they are.>but you're wrong that they don't exist or that 99.9% have nothing to say.>you're talking to hundreds of women. where? tinder? bars? clubs? those places select for looks and social signaling, not depth.>if you fish in a puddle, don't complain there are no whales.>picrel is actually on your side: climbing a tree is a bullshit test for a fish. so is expecting every woman to think and debate like a man.>women are socialized differently. they don't always signal intelligence the way we do. doesn't mean it's not there.>you want a homie? then be a homie. stop treating every conversation as a debate you need to win.>if she gets irrational, you don't placate. you set a boundary and walk away if needed. that's on you to learn, not on all women to change.>I found my wife because I stopped looking for a unicorn and started looking for a person. I filtered for curiosity, kindness, and a sense of humor. The IQ was a bonus.>yes, male IQ has wider variance. more geniuses, more retards. women cluster in the middle. that means if you want a genius woman, you have to look harder and be worth her time.>stop burying your head. start working on yourself. get interesting. get fit. get a mission. then you'll attract the rare ones.>also drop the race shit. it's poison and it's not doing you any favors.>don't give up, anon. she's out there. but she won't show up if you're bitter.
>>543524260Ad hominem fallacy means: you attack the person instead of the argument.Latin: ad hominem = “to the person.”The core test:Does the attack show the claim is false?Or does it just give you a reason to dislike the person?If it only gives a reason to dislike them, it’s ad hominem.As in:Abusive ad hominemDirect insult instead of argument.Example: “You’re an idiot, so your point about taxes is wrong.”The insult does not prove the point wrong.Him or her, maybe it was a woman I was beating the shit out of kek, started with "You are a dumbass" as an abusive ad hominem. I won 80+ percent of the debates I had in college. This shit is my forte. It is why I have been coming to this website since 09 and /pol/ has been fun since around 2 months after Gaddafi was murdered.
>>543524147>ML says the path is class struggle, not individual romanceI'm not saying individual romance is the path towards anything. Rather, that attempts to constrain individual relationships across class boundaries only stands to worsen the class divide.>dating across class lines doesn't abolish class, it usually just reproduces bourgeois power dynamics>and it can pacify class consciousnessAnon, one of the issues we have right now is that the economic classes are not just separated politically but physically. The rich of the past would have had to share the sidewalks as the poor and be in constant contact with them. The rich of today are able to isolate themselves far more, and as such, they only develop a mindset that is non-empathetic towards the poor because they don't even know what their actual problems are. Think about how the racists on /pol/ feel about public transit. They'd never use it because they'd have to be in the presence of black people. We empathize more with people we see every day.>the revolution comes from the proletariat organized as a class, not from fucking the bourgeoisieIt's not about fucking them. It's about getting at least a portion of them to actually be on your side. Which you can't have if your sole focus is to create class barriers. Remember: your goal is to make those people into the same economic class as you, not to just kill them off.>if you haven't read Proudhon, Bakunin or Kropotkin you're a liberal with a red flag Leftism is about ideology, not who you've read. And quite frankly, I don't care about a bunch of old farts. I have a simple goal: get rid of the government and don't let anyone make a new one. It is 100% impossible to have hierarchies under anarchism. Its only issues is the lack of stability, so you must actively kill anyone who tries to create a state.
>>543520282>>543521718You forgot the third case: 50+ nigger and 18-21 white female.
>>543520435Judiasm is a matriarchy and we are ruled by Jews: no longer patriarchy. All jobs went to females+their foreigner pets these past 7 years as proof of it. If zionists are the problem then we aren't a patriarchy. Dumb bitch
>>543524499>think and debate like a manstrawman argument. i'm telling you women don't even think>race shitstrawman argument. i didn't say shit about race>stop treating every conversation as a debatetell that to feminists and women the second you say something they disagree with?>set a boundary and walk awayhard to walk away from all the toxic women you have to come in to contact with, anon. lots of threads pop up about HR being out of control these days. i have a friend who's wife is HR, and she's abusive to him.
>>543524781>ermagerd she's child!meanwhile, in the "justice" system
>>543520435Huh? More women go to college and get high paying jobs nowadays
>>543524689You are misinformed on this. Consider what a logical fallacy even is in the first place. A fallacy is a flaw, so it's a flaw in logic. Your logic is something like "points A, B, and C, therefore D." An argument can contain logical fallacies, such as ad hominem. The ad hominem is "to the person", but more specifically because it is a logical fallacy, it occurs when the logic is flawed, because it is an attack to the person.The core of the issue that not everything communicated within the same fragment of time is fully related. You can make an argument, and also insult the person you are talking to, and the insult does not have to be part of the argument. And because it's not part of the argument, terms like ad hominem become meaningless in application. If anything, they become a form of ad hominem themselves. "You insulted me, therefore the argument which the insult is not a part of is not logically sound".
>>543520282This is what Jews set up for goys. Most men are not ready to have a wife until 30+ so it's ideal to let inexperienced losers ruin hearts and expectations of young women who should be transferred seamlessly from successful dad to successful husband they love. Age gap exists so that women don' waste their fertile years with losers and end up like failure hags who are worthless as human beings in society. Age gap solves this for women.
>>543524695>based, anon. I actually like your points about physical separation and empathy. You're right that the rich isolating themselves breeds contempt. But you're missing the materialist core of the problem.>you say constrain cross-class relationships worsens the divide. ML says the divide is already there, and it's not fixed by dating. It's fixed by organizing the working class as a class. Individual romance doesn't scale. A vanguard party does.>you say get some of the bourgeoisie on our side. Agreed. But they don't join because we date them. They join when the proletariat is strong enough to make defection rational. That requires a disciplined party, not just good vibes.>you say leftism is ideology, not reading old farts. Fine. But ML isn't about reading. It's about understanding the state as a weapon. You want to abolish government? So do we. But you can't just smash it and hope. The capitalist class will use the lumpen proletariat, the cops, the military, and foreign intervention to crush you. That's why you need a workers' state, a dictatorship of the proletariat, to suppress them until they're gone.>anarchism says no hierarchies ever. Nice. But hierarchy isn't abolished by declaring it gone. It's abolished by destroying the material basis that creates it. That means seizing the means of production, not just killing anyone who tries to set up a state. Who decides who's trying? You? That's a hierarchy.>we both want the same end: a stateless, classless, moneyless world. ML just says you need a transitional state to get there. Anarchism skips the hard part and calls it victory. That's idealism. We're materialists.>respectfully, anon. Read Lenin. Or don't. But don't pretend anarchism is the only way.>>543525071To be honest we are both partially correct. Opinion is one of those things where it depends on your point of view and is not necessarily hard fact like gravity etc.
Being an incel has it's perks. Imagine being a 30+ normal knowing that 10 years ago you could have dated a 18 years old, but because you were born 10 fucking years too late out of all of human history, 10 years dictated you can no longer date a 18 years old and you're stuck with a 30+ roastie.Genuinely one decade ago it was still socially acceptable I would be FUMING, luckily no 18 yo bitch ever wanted me so this shit doesn't affect me.
>>543523570>no sources>cant look it upidk glownigger or actual nigger>who the fuck asked you to look everything up?glownigger it is. suck my arsehole
>>543525362you seem upset about something
>>543520435>Men structurally hold more systemic, financial, and physical dominance in patriarchal systems.You live in a Matriarchy...thats where Pedo Islands come from, female led societies...female ENERGY led. Women promote it because it puts them in the masculine position.Say hello to your transgendered prophet, comrade...
>>543520435Bait used to be believable
>>543520755body that freak
>>543520282Part of the reason why the West is in terminal decline. I am dating a younger woman and there are people who hate it.
>>543520282>htsm meme>on 4chan
>>543523865>But here's the thing: pointing out a fallacy doesn't mean I'm saying his conclusion is automatically false. I'm saying his reasoning is bad.tsmt, they never even paid attention to the fact that you were simply asserting that they were using bad argumentation
