Most sex is non reproductive !!
If you assume as stats estimate… About 10 billion humans total through history …
That’s 10 billion fucks for reproduction.
Estimate is an average of 20,000 fucks per person…
Most Fucks have absolutely nothing to do with reproduction!!!
What’s really hilarious is how women try to argue their point!!!
They claim they need resources for reproduction when guys mention these problems…
Like the resources of the state, when Ted Bundy fucked His wife, that he proposed to on the stand, during conjugal visits … Its easier for Ted Bundy to get consensual sex than me!!
I have the intelligence to be a billion times the serial killer he was, but whatever, because I’m not a douche… No sexy-sexy for me!!
HaHaHa wrote:
What have you got to offer a woman.
woosh…
That’s what this whole thread is about!!!
You know what’s really funny hahaha, after that epic fail by shieldmaiden ???
A guy would never say that to a woman !!
Just like there’s no such thing as nice girl syndrome or such a thing as pity sex to a male!!!
Men don’t call women sluts (there’s actually a scientific study on this!!!)
I mean, really sit down and think about this …
As men are becoming more vocal about what would cause a billion male suicides in ten years…
Females have this stupid shit
- we need resources to raise children … That’s why 30,000 of us fucked a basketball player they didn’t want to have children with or money from???
Nice guy syndrome !!! What the fuck!!!
If there was anything resembling “nice girl syndrome” it would not be so fucking insane!!!
Nice girls get fucked whenever they want!!!
Pity sex!! What the fuck?? As a guy do you even know what that means???
You’re right, it’s a farce!!!
You know what’s NEVER happened…
A group of guys talking…
“Yeah she’s super nice !! But what a shame, that would be pity sex, I wish she was meaner!!”
Ecmandu wrote;
What Epic fail?
It is all in your empty head.
Wow! It still went over your head !
The whole thread is about the transactionsry prostitutive nature of women , and your reply was …
“What do you have to offer a woman ?”
Quite a bit actually and my current girlfriend who very much is a rare breed of woman understands all that.
My respect, admiration, love, loyalty, friendship, and companionship for starters. I also protect those that I care about where there is that as well.
With most women and I would figuratively say about 97% of them they only see money or a monetary transaction of a socio economic means which this thread touches upon.
It’s really quite funny.
I agree with you once again, HaHaHa.
The four “tactical virtues" strength, courage, mastery, and honour.
“The virtues associated specifically with being a man outline a rugged philosophy of living—a way to be that is also a strategy for prevailing in dire and dangerous times. The Way of Men is a tactical ethos.” –Jack Donovan, The Way of Men
Perhaps I was so bored with all the inane answers that were being put forth, I decided to look at it from another perspective.
You are so boring, follow the yellow brick road dummy.
To be fair I will explain it in more detail.
What this thread is insinuating is that women, all women, have a materialistic agenda.
I was asking HaHaHa from a man’s point of view, (as it would be pointless asking the other two), if a woman has a criteria, would it not be unreasonable to assume that a man has one too.
In the role of procreator it takes two to tango, in the role of providing, men and women can easily share this responsibility, so what it left that is distinctly masculine. To protect. This role involves defending and conquering and this has been almost exclusively male and continues to prevail almost unchanged today and from HaHaHa’s response it seems to agree with this.
This is the most important ability a man can bring to a woman and if this is transitionary and prostitutive then I would like to know why.
Yes, of course men have a criteria for women however often enough the criteria for men by women is much more demanding, judgemental, and in many ways disgusting.
[b]The criteria for men with women primarily is physical attraction as it is the same for women with men. Of course even with that concerning men it varies between individuals.
Men are less concerned if at all with a woman’s job, occupation, income, influence, power, property, class, education, and so on.
This is not so with women’s criteria towards men and why the criteria by women towards men is a disgusting one especially when they go around touting words like sexual equality everywhere.
As I said earlier, sexual competition and selection on the part of females towards men is a place feminists dare not venture into as it exposes the whole fraud of sexual equality. There is no sexual equality in sexual competition or selection. Sexual equality doesn’t exist and every woman knows this even on a subconscious level. Very few are openly honest about it. Interestingly enough women themselves have most of the power or influence over this sexual competition and selection dynamic as men merely react towards it.[/b]
HaHaHa wrote:
Indeed. This is so often ignored, hardly every discussed or even criticised by any on this Forum, the sole fixation is on women.
For all the little boys here on this Forum.
youtube.com/watch?v=jErJimwom94
HaHaHa wrote
I do not think any man or woman would choose a partner that was abhorrent to them.
BTW I know of plenty of guys who would not date a woman who was not well heeled.
If you have your own business, apartment, there are b[/b] shortage of dates with Mr Wannabes. In many ways this is disgusting also and there is no effort by them to hide the fact.
Edit in bold
The criteria by men for women is not ignored it’s just compared to the criteria women have for men it is rather minimum by comparison. It’s obvious that both sexes judge by physical attraction. Well heeled? Not familiar with that.
Mr. Wannabes? I am not following where you’re going with all of that. Can you be more specific?
You’re beginning to sound like Ecmandu.