Women, especially those that are a 6+ on the attractive scale have the world at their feet when they’re in their late teens to mid 20s. Their value peaks early and then steadily declines until their mid 30s when almost all of them bottom out. Modern society tells them this peak period will last indefinitely and their narcissism from receiving so much attention and feeling like a queen reinforces this. The amount of attention they receive at ANY point in their life until probably their 50s is magnitudes greater than what any non-chad guy will EVER get. I don’t feel any sympathy for them when they stop receiving as much attention as they used to and their ego can’t take it, they abuse the shit out of it when they’re young and aren’t truly remorseful for all the guys they played or their toxic behaviors, they just miss being on top. And yes this is politically incorrect to say so it’s on topic
>>543118009
>>543118009>feetIt's another foot freak thread.
>>543118009I treat all women the same
>>543118009Women older than 30 are a waste of time
>>543118009>>543118077>>543118089incel thread>>543118098the only other normal person itt
>>543119121
>>543118009Zoomettes hit the wall at 22. Have to seen how bogged they all are. No wonder so many zoomer males stay virgins.
>>543119148>>>Allegedly
>>543118009Ever read the sticky for /pol/? Picrel.Let us break down your argument:>AnecdotalThe entire argument is based on personal observations and generalizations about women. It uses isolated experiences to make a universal claim about all women 6+.>False causeAssumes that modern society's messages cause narcissism, and that narcissism causes toxic behavior. No evidence for causation is given.>Appeal to emotion“I don’t feel any sympathy for them” and the angry tone replace logical argument. Emotion is used instead of evidence.>Black-or-whiteWomen are either at the top with the world at their feet, or they bottom out. Non-chad guys get nothing. Extreme dichotomy with no middle ground.>Special pleading“And yes this is politically incorrect to say so it’s on topic” tries to exempt the claim from criticism by labeling it politically incorrect, as if that makes it true or immune to logic.>Burden of proofThe claim that women peak early and decline, that they are narcissistic, toxic, and unremorseful, is asserted without evidence. The burden of proof is on the speaker.>Hasty generalizationDraws a sweeping conclusion about all attractive women based on a few examples or stereotypes. Not a valid sample.>Ad hominemAttacks women as a group (narcissistic, toxic, unremorseful) rather than addressing any actual argument. It is a personal attack on a demographic.>ConclusionThis is not an argument. It is a collection of fallacies, stereotypes, and emotional venting. Being politically incorrect does not make it logically valid.
>>543119348Shut up fag
>>543120703Hey, faggot you are the retard who cannot argue.
>>543119348>The claim that women peak early and decline, that they are narcissistic, toxic, and unremorseful, is asserted without evidence.Common knowledge doesn't require citation.
>>543119127You’re a lying fag saying you treat anyone the sameHahahahaha You are completely full of SHIT!! Hahahahaha what a liar!
>>543119348ad hominem doesn't apply because the central argument is "women are bad"something like "shut up stupid roastie" in response to your rebuttal would be an ad hominem, but in this case it's the underlying point
>>543122006arguing is a waste of time and is only done by those with no power to change anything including themsleves.
>>543118009I gave up on women long agoThere is nothing wrong with a QT trad trans women. I date one myself. I am not gay. Hear me out. My fellow incels, it's important To have standards as you know. All we wanted was virgin pussy. Which is why we never settle for Tyrone or chads sloppy seconds. We don't do roasties.Simple as
>>543120703most quintessential american retard response
>>543122664Or you could just be alone and not a faggot.that's an option.
