What have I stumbled across.
>>534599087>stop your chidren from trying to be Chad, and turn them into javascript monkeysAnd I am saying this as a non-Chad who knows enough to make websites
>>534599087NPR is absolute hyper-intersectional filthThey cherry-pick some uber niche perceived self-labeled victim and do pic related for the entire segment and conclude that unrestricted immigration is a God-given right
>>534599087>instead of looksmaxxing guide your adolescent child toward the internet machine that introduced them to the world of looksmaxxing in the first placelmao
Looksmaxxing is gay but women have always had this weird revulsion to male self improvement. My theory is that they instinctively dislike it because it's really just masking your genetic profile, which means they have to spend more time and effort shit-testing you to determine your true worth. If a woman determines you aren't worth an immediate sperm dump as a Chad, they want you weak and submissive to extract resources from you, there is no benefit to them if you "improve" synthetically, in fact it's detrimental to the leverage they hold over you.
>>534599572So many women believe it is a man's world while they are constantly working with other women to have the world changed to the way they (many women) want it to be (loll).
>>534599087>learn to codeKek
>>534599572Men in general feel the same towards women who get surgical implants and excessive use of makeup.
>>534599087>encouraging kids to explore a variety of activities rather than obsess over their appearanceseems reasonable. just pushing them onto electronics looks odd but the paragraph looks truncated
>>534599087>we destroyed all the third spaces>uhh... have them make their own!>bootstraps!
>>534599946Only if its truly excessive and obvious. Moderate makeup and non-comical implants still works in attracting more male attention. Men say they don't like it, but they still fall for it.
>>534600113The same with women towards "looksmaxxing" if you're not obsessively improving. If both a subtle and not overly stated the other sex doesn't have an issue.
>>534599974There is more to the article, but that was the end of the paragraph.
>>534599266>stop your chidren from trying to be Chad, and turn them into javascript monkeysWomen have encountered men's problem with cosmetics (the simulation of genetic desirability) and their reaction to it is not to demand and accept a natural outlook, but to socially engineer, redirect the stimuli, isolate, exclude, control and contain the undesired.
>>534600215The difference is, women want to see ambition out of man as a character trait, so the improved appearances are just a symptom of your deeper personality. What they really are threatened by is if you are just running a social mask like 2000s style pickup game and have none of the natural traits that actually entail a successful man. Men on the other hand don't give shit about the underlying traits of woman that improves her looks, they just see someone that's more lustful to throw on the bed and stick your dick into.
