A low IQ promiscuous, attention-hungry girl. She used her 5 minutes of fame to create something interesting, from what people are talking about. So, I support her.
Your support depends upon the number of sexual partners a person has had? Do you apply this arbitrary standard to men as well or is it a flexible standard? The two other podcasts with higher viewership are operated by knuckledragging troglodytes and nobody seems to care how they got so famous.
Hey, I pointed out that I'm pleasantly surprised that a podcaster is different, and it suddenly turned into the Spanish inquisition because a lady felt like fighting since "women" were being "attacked." They weren't. My opinion on them is what I've said that it is, and no, you're not going to change it. In fact, I have zero respect for their "values" and expectations, and no, I'm not going to respect them just because they're women. I'm more interested in what kind of human beings they are. Hope I made it clear.
No, no. Bring out that comment you made, and we can talk about your crusade against imaginary incels, who got stuck on whose comment, and who's the really insufferable one.
Just continue on the warpath, you paladin, you! You'll certainly change opinions in a well-argumented manner as you usually do.
Read that comment again. I was praising her for being different. But hey, I apologize for pointing it out by describing "the others" when I WAS ASKED TO.
Seriously, what are these freaks in this thread. The 'femanist' who's looking for a fight seems to frequent TJRE sub, so I'm guessing they have nothing better to do with their life than cry about being persecuted.
You respond to a direct question and it gets copied over like it was a direct comment to something above, with no context....
I'd give this fight up. Was worth a try, but these people just want to be angry at someone.
Simple. They're people who will defend women, however nasty, worthless, horrible human beings they are, or the idiotic entitled shit that they're staining humanity with, just because they're women. That is the most important thing in their mind instead of what they represent and do.
I have a lot of respect for actual feminists but these are not that. This is a bitter, misandristic, feminazi bunch that actually discriminates against people for being male. And yet, they have the audacity to attempt to lecture people on anything.
Therefore, you're completely right. It's absolutely not worth it.
I have a lot of respect for actual feminists but these are not that. This is a bitter, misandristic, feminazi bunch that actually discriminates against people for being male. And yet, they have the audacity to attempt to lecture people on anything.
You never answered my question on whether or not your dumbass standard is universal because you and I both know the answer. Anyone who uses words like "feminazi" or "misandristic" are surely supporters of women, right? What a joke. You gauge your respect for a woman based on how many people they've had sex with. You're a shallow ape afraid of being compared to other men because you are insecure. You only "supported" her when you found out she wasn't promiscuous. It says a lot.
Okay. Hey everyone. If you want to see a conversation where two people build a strawman of the worst version of who they perceive the other to be so they can receive the dopamine boost of arguing with a perceived flawed person, read their entire conversation.
I just figured most would read between the lines, but I gotchu!
You're both likely normal reasonable people. But you both refused to see it through the caricatures you've each drawn up. I should have said "you're both being lame" I'm sorry for the original words I chose, it wasn't very thoughtful.
And here you are, hours after the fact, feigning superiority over two people so you can feel a little better about yourself. At least he and I were arguing about something relevant to the conversation. You, on the other hand, contributed nothing at all besides an upturned nose. Get over yourself. Also, my "strawman" was enough to get him to convey his true feelings regarding women, which is exactly what I was implying/suspecting with my original question.
I really don't care what you think, or do I have a shred of intention of explaining myself to you about anything. What I did was politely ask you to take your strawmanny arguments to another comment and continue your Don Quixotesque fight there. I have no intention of entertaining you further on.
however nasty, worthless, horrible human beings they are, or the idiotic entitled shit that they're staining humanity with, just because they're women.
Are these "nasty, worthless, horrible" women in the room with us right now?
You’re doing that strawman thing you’re accusing the other guy of doing again. It’s okay to be wrong on the internet dude. The fact you are incapable of rereading this conversation and seeing nothing wrong with it on your end says a lot about who you are.
They don’t have to be a feminazi and you don’t have to be an incel, but maybe they have a point about your double standard with a lady having multiple partners being a little shitty. Jesus Christ everyone has gone crazy.
In my opinion, entitled, attention-hungry, gold digging whores who try to persuade everyone that the world owes them something are tiresome by now. But let's support them, just because they're women, right? Is that the point you're trying to make? Or is it wrong from me to support Hailey just cause she isn't selling her ass on a podcast?! Are the first ones that I mentioned more valuable in your eyes than her?! Are those the values you support?! Or is the sex of a person the determining factor for your support?!
See? Two can play at that game.
As for the other two conspiracy theorists paid by Moscow, my maximum interest in them is replying to your needless misandristic feminazi comment. I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire.
There. Hope that settles it.
Now, please take your pointless windmill fight elsewhere.
Just because I value people based on what they choose to do, "I have a chip on my shoulder?" Well, that's new. Also, it was not women as a whole in question. It was a particular type of woman that somehow got way more attention than they deserve, and the same goes for idiots like Andrew Tate, Joe Rogan, Putin's new little minion, etc.
You know, all of you should think about what you're doing right in this comment section. It really seems that you're defending women just because they're women, instead of thinking about what they represent and if there's any value in that.
Rather than assume we’re defending someone nobody here really knows or gives a shit about, what if you paid attention to your tone and rhetoric and considered why others might look down on you for it? You created a strawman of women you don’t like to refer to as “entitled, attention hungry, gold-digging whores”. That’s just not how happy people talk about other people. How many of these gold digging whores do you know in your life? How did you manage to demonstrably prove they’re gold digging whores? What is a whore? Do you call men whores? I’m guessing you don’t, because people who use this language the way you do generally reserve a one sided judgement exclusively for women.
For what it’s worth I don’t necessarily think you’re an incel- although that word really seems to rile you up too, which I find ironic given your own choice of words. I do think you were raised with a terrible view on women and you never grew past that like most other people do when they grow up. A person of integrity who’s willing to change might look at their words and say “shit you know what? Maybe I shouldn’t prop up strawman on the internet so I can call them attention seeking entitled whores. I don’t like that about myself, maybe I should figure out why that’s where my head goes when I get angry and start talking about women”.
But it looks to me like you’d rather double down and throw a tantrum and assume everyone around you is wrong. What you’re more likely to do is keep deflecting, take this conversation to the most agreeable person you know in real life, and seek validation from them on this. And you’ll probably get it either because a.) they were raised with similarly pathetic views they never grew past or b.)they realize this is just who you are and they find it easier or more convenient to capitulate on your views for the sake of your relationship with them.
I'll give you a little background since you made a long argument and I actually want you to know where I'm coming from. I'm not going to say that you're wrong or anything similar, I'll just give you the opportunity to draw your own conclusion.
I grew up only with my mom. She's still a loving, supporting, and magnificent human being who has two college degrees and also had a great career (she's a pensioner now). She was always there for me and still is, so I wasn't attention-starved, or was I brought up in a patriarchal surroundings. In fact, quite the opposite.
Next, I have a loving wife who's highly educated and has a great career. She has my full support. I have a great job as well and we have two children. We do everything together. There are no "men's and women's" chores and it has been that way since the beginning mostly in part of my upbringing. We have two kids who we love to death and find all the time in the world for them. One of them is quite the little lady, in fact, but stubborn as hell.
Recently, I read about the amazing Bridgit Mendler who is a Disney actress, singer, Harvard JD, as well as a Space startup CEO.
These, women like these, and women who battle through life day by day, who focus on their family, or their career, or both, women who contribute to society are the women that warrant respect and I'll fight for that respect until my dying breath. As for the "body count" that the lady previously mentioned, taking the conversation in a horrifyingly wrong direction, I have huge respect for women in the adult industry because they have inexplicably difficult lives. They rarely form personal relationships and suffer from depression most of the time. So, that's really not the issue, as you can see.
What I can't stand is young women being entitled for absolutely no reason. Women asking for a guy that makes 401K, that is young, that is ripped, that has a house like this and a car like that, while she herself offers nothing, not even emotional support, no ambition, like, literally nothing. I won't comment on the looks, but you can safely add that as a deterrent too.
So, no. I don't consider myself a woman hater. I just value people for their actual values or better said - for what they value. If some of them don't have any or are detrimental to youth development and they happen to be women? I don't care. I'll speak my mind.
It sounds like you have a diligent family and
I wish you all continued success.
I wasn’t aware of this Manifestelle person before you pointed them out, but a lot of what they’re saying does remind me of FDS content. I think that while it’s good to be aware that a small minority of women exist in that vacuum and ought not to be engaged with the same way you’d want to avoid someone in the red pill community, these folks aren’t representative of normal or healthy people.
I look at it like this: if I ask a woman on a date, (because it sounds like I don’t have to worry about this from my friends if this person considers that such a mortal sin) what are the odds they’re going to be the kind of person that would treat me that way?
Women who actually do hate men in the way that person does are so few and chronically online that I just don’t put that much thought toward them personally.
Your wife, mother, and daughters have all known good men in their lives and understand that people aren’t a commodity I presume, and I think actions speak loudly in that regard.
I also just don’t see the FDS movement gripping young women the same way I see red pill ideology gripping young men as a guy myself. Probably because I spend more time in places where red pill recruitment tactics are employed, but still. I know that red pill men are out there and that they make the world less safe for the women I love in my life and I’d rather those people weren’t around, but I also take care not to let it color my perspective of people outside that group too darkly.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that at the end of the day we are constantly bombarded with the furthest extremes on social media. The absolute worst of the worst or the “best of the best” of people that don’t paint an honest picture of reality and that it’s important we try to remind ourselves of that. I mean shit, look at all the conclusions I was willing to jump to about you before we’d even had a conversation!
And I may have jumped to a few conclusions, not really innocent myself. Glad we had this discussion. Thanks for the wishes and I wish you all the best myself.
Please don't try to convert other people's words to your argumentative narrative. It's pretty clear they are insinuating the relief that this girl's personality isn't "sex" because that's nothing new.
They complimented her success on being a normal person and you can't just let that go? Why are you so hungry to argue with someone? No one brought up any X amount of sexual partners.
Promiscuous means having multiple sexual partners. He also called other women "whores" and said he was glad she wasn't one. People who talk like that generally aren't known for their respect for women
He didn't call anyone specific a whore. Nor did he generalize any amount of women are whores. He is describing the characteristics of someone he's not interested in giving attention to. In response to a question YOU asked.
The general consensus is that we're praising this girl for her ambition and being a seemingly average person despite being thrown into fame.
Why are you arguing like that's not good enough? We're on the same side and we're trying to be rational, but it seems like all you want to do is bash men for voicing an opinion.
All I was asking was, are his standards universal or only applied to women? Does he stop watching male entertainers who are known to be promiscuous? Probably not and it matters because anyone who uses a woman's amount of prior sexual partners as a way to gage how much respect they should have for her is shallow as fuck and their opinion is useless. Asking how many sexual partners a person has had is really just putting your own insecurities on display for everyone to see.
Didn't he say he supports her because she's promiscuous?
Also why are you more offended at his use of "promiscuous" than "low IQ"?
Lol we're living in a world where dumbos like yourself get more triggered by perceived "slut shaming" (of a girl famous LITERALLY for talking about blow jobs nonetheless...) than you do about people insulting the IQ of others ...
You literally hopped on different comments I made in other threads when you lurked through my profile. You're obviously triggered. That's so pathetic. Lol
I know the word "projection" has entered the zeitgeist relatively recently but I don't think you know what it means. Calling out someone's insecurities and shallow behavior doesn't come from a place of insecurity, it comes from a place of disgust. I hope that helps.
14
u/[deleted] Oct 01 '24
Thanks for the response! I really appreciate it. Tbh, I liked her from the start, when she turned up to be a regular girl instead of... you know.
Anyway, maybe I'll give her a shot.
Again, I appreciate your response.