That your high school was probably disgusting if you think having had sex 5 different times by senior year is normal. And while that's a specific definition, it's not odd by any means. The best students win math olympiads.
I don't think you understand what "academic dominance" really is. I'm talking about acing math olympiads or being selected for IOIs. Getting your homework done on time doesn't count.
I mean yeah why would I believe one person over dozens to potentially hundreds of comments + thousands of upvotes agreeing with them? That doesn't mean I think every woman is like that. And gish-galloping and bullshitting around an argument (only to later on admit to at least part of it when cornered) isn't "nuance" it's just being deliberately obtuse and playing coy, an extremely notorious tactic (particularly on women's part, but men often do this too) whenever this topic comes around. All of …
They don't, so that means I don't need to listen to you if you disagree because random reddit women opinion = worthless right? It's so funny how you all act like people on reddit, hundreds of people who comment this stuff and the thousands of upvotes they receive, are some separate species of humans that aren't present in real life or people you won't interact with in real life at a time when almost everyone is chronically online these days. Clown behavior. Who are you trying to fool?
I'm well aware lol. Anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid. Men and women, we're all equally as horrible, stupid, exploitative and terrible as human beings. To pretend otherwise is not only foolish but also arrogant. No man or woman gets to act high and mighty.
It's also disingenuous because it's a tactic frequently employed by women. We're not saying "all women" lol, but that it's enough women to make it statistically significant (and trust me, this is underrepresented too because many women would not want to say it out loud in order to not upset their partners, that manifests in the form of silent upvotes).
Not sure I understand what you mean there, besides are you pretending that there isn't a massive body of online (and even offline) hatred against guys (and even girls) who want partners with "no body count"? It's literally a meme at this point, and given that young women are by far the more sexually active group (can look it up right now), that's WAY easier said than done too. Let's not be obtuse here.
False. It's A LOT harder to be sexually/physically attractive than it is to develop traits to be a good partner, so no the bar for the former is almost categorically much higher than the latter's.
Evidence I don't like = cherrypicking Evidence I like = undisputable, undeniable proof!!! You don't even have to try very hard to be a clown, you're a natural at this. Especially when I never claimed that this itself proves that all women think or act this way, just that it's more evidence to support the idea that it's not some conspiracy theory nor an isolated incident.
And I assume by "genuine" you mean someone who basically bends over backwards to meet whatever demands you've had meanwhile the "sex guy" could simply get away with being attractive? You're literally proving OP's point here.
And that last sentence is exactly why relationships fail. Misaligned values. And that is precisely why women (broadly speaking, this isn't true for every woman) usually tend to settle or look for guys who are okay with this (this is where the complaint from women about guys in their 30s-40s not wanting to commit originate from, at least in part) and are simply looking to settle down finally.
Which is precisely NOT the point here. The point is that the "sex guy" just has to be really attractive, nothing more. The "date guy" however has to go through a whole host of things and processes to even hope to have the same level of intimacy that the "sex guy" was able to get just because he had better genetics (broadly speaking, looks can be more than that though).
It proves exactly the point here, but I'm not surprised to see you (and many other women here too) active deliberately obtuse over it. It's a well-known dishonesty tactic, I'd have expected nothing less.
Usually they pass the bare minimum attraction threshold. You're not the hottest of the hot. Its you're available, I'm kinda in the mood. Many (most?) women explicitly disagree with that.
A lot of women disagree with that. https://imgur.com/a/womens-casual-partners-are-way-more-physically-attractive-sexually-superior-to-long-term-partners-husbands-latter-are-inferior-arent-attractive-enough-recreational-as-evidenced-from-responses-TViyiCJ
Lmfao what? Not giving you a relationship./commitment isn't "punishment". No man owes a woman a relationship especially if and when he finds out she's not actually sexually/physically attracted to him. Women's idea of "commitment" is stupid for this very reason. It's parasitic, actually.
Missed the point. I'm not saying I don't have an issue with the way animals are treated, I'm saying I'd rather not have anyone try to police and shame me for what I eat, which vegans often do unfortunately, while I've had no atheist or leftist do that to me (nor do they need to, I'm already leftist). And as childish as this sounds, I really struggle to eat vegetables and other greens (I know, I know, veganism isn't vegetarianism) due to their texture since I have ASD. Meat on the other hand is o…
"Never judge a book by its cover" they say, unfortunately that's what most people do. I don't doubt for a second that the book you're referring to is excellent at dissecting the dangers and flaws of the patriarchal institution.... but what good is it when you just turned away a large portion of potential readers that could've read it and done some introspection and self-reflection, with a ragebait title? The title is provocative, but not in the way you think. It's damaging to our cause, not help…
