Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - TheDude

Main / Re: PUA forum?/Discussion
Oct 27, 2010, 02:07 PM
This time I'm not going to engage in insults. Dr e will just lock the thread.

If you want to insult me further, I'll just quit posting.

If you want to explain yourself, I really want to hear it.
Main / Re: PUA forum?/Discussion
Oct 27, 2010, 02:05 PM

Doodie-head, is it that time of the month again?

Is the glass half-full or half empty? Is that water or vodka in it? Does it have poison in it or is it safe to drink? Any choice that YOU decide is always the correct one, isn't it? Gee, you must be an impotent, bomb-throwing, psychic attention whore.

For a male in his fifties, you un-erringly write like a woman with a chip on her shoulder.

OK, you want to insult me first, and not write any content.

That's checked off.

So now down to the content.

You realize that if you simply write further insults you are only making yourself look stupid.

I'm really curious what makes people like you tick.
Main / Re: PUA forum?/Discussion
Oct 27, 2010, 01:37 PM
And I'd like to repeat my statement on the first page here:

PUAs are interested in what REALLY attracts women. Not the bullshit you read from women and the woman and magina-dominated media.

But let's suppress it. Because our sense of chivalry doesn't allow us to realize that the chump buying her a drink is getting used for a drink, whereas the person who knows how to attract her is ... attracting her.

And that applies to the chumps who are getting used via the vehicle of marriage. And judging by this Web site and others, they are not few.

Intelligent people can recognize what's happening. Stupid people are posting on Web sites that they got used.
Main / Re: PUA forum?/Discussion
Oct 27, 2010, 01:33 PM

PUA's are the 21st-Century equivalent of Casanovas, Lotharios, etc.

It sounds like you're pissed about men having sex. Or maybe more than you.

I'd really like to hear your description of what's WRONG with 21st-century equivalents of Casanovas, Lotharios etc.

Like, specifically.

I'll bet they also drank alcohol and listened to Rock&Roll Music. The devil's work.
The problem today is that you have feminists saying in one breath that "everything has to be equal" - and no one dare deny that - but in the next breath, or even without taking a breath, they demand that men "man up" and "step up to the plate" and do their male duties.

In fact, you get this dichotomy from most women - I've found that "traditional women" are even worse in many cases. They just flat out want to be supported while they sit on their fat, useless asses, and they also just accept all of the "equality stuff".

Edited to add: I guess the only difference is the sequence. Feminist women demand exact equality of the sexes; after that, they know that they can get a man to pay for them (as they smirk about what suckers men are). Traditional women demand that men fulfill their traditional duties, mostly paying for them and taking over the heavy thinking about problems in life; after that, they know full well they can count on "equality" statements of their more radical sisters and men will just bow to it out of chilvarly.

The end result is the same. "Equality", except that men have to do their traditional duties.

Even men who have been used, exploited and hammered by women in life don't seem to see this. Really weird.

How many times have we seen a woman who became a wife and decides unilaterally to take some easier job that pays far less and the husband is helpless - and then he gets screwed in a divorce.


And no matter what really happened in the marriage, the wife will claim in the divorce that 1) the husband "didn't want her to work" (in a lot of cases he knew she was incapable of earning anything beyond minimum wage, so she might as well pick up a little around the house; sometimes she just makes that up) or 2) he "chose" that situation (see above; in addition to just being an irritating statement from a controlling sit-at-home, it implies he can never ever ever change his mind no matter how much circumstances change; what a fucking bitch).
Main / Re: Ugly feud fought on Facebook
Oct 22, 2010, 03:44 PM
Why are men regularly forced to pay massive legal bills for the woman?

I guess because they are stupid enough to enter into a marriage with a woman who is never going to work or produce anything.

I used to be outraged by these things, and used to be a staunch MRA, but I just can't overlook the stupidity of men anymore. The laws are moronic, but men who agree to this with a woman who will never produce jack shit are even more moronic.

It's like the man who can tolerate the most alcohol, or the most punches in the face without going down ... or the biggest spending, non-productive woman. They are the true alphas.

Then pay for it bitch. And that's the end of the story.
Jesus Christ, every argument here seems to be about qualifications.

NO WONDER health care costs so much. If you get an actual physician here, you are going to have to pay him and pay him for his intellectual comments. And his commands will be followed with holy reverence. He is a God.

Holy crap.

All these people who hate anyone with post secondary education.


I don't give a friggin' rip how someone got his knowledge, but if I hear from a lot of neighbors that his guy was good at unclogging their drain, I may call him to unclog my drain. I assume he is going to use a snake, and I am going to watch him like a hawk.

So the "school of hard knocks" applies there, but not really with regard to lawyers. You have to meet a minimum criterion today ("the bar exam" + [usually] a degree from a law school]) and their incompetence is a completely different topic.

He's just being an idiot.

Nothing has changed for decades. If you go to a big-name law school and you have good grades (and maybe if your dad is a partner in a BIGLAW firm), you will probably get into BIGLAW, otherwise you probably won't. By the way, almost all of the real learning about law is done in heavy-duty law firms; anyone can read up about torts and contracts and whatever.

So you still have an edge over a lot of people who are dumb. LOL You can go into business or handle little cases as a lawyer.
Main / Re: PUA forum?/Discussion
Oct 21, 2010, 04:48 PM
I think the major focus of the PUA people is: How to be attractive to the opposite sex.

I know that there is the extreme fringe that is going to HYPMOTIZE them into sex and all the rest, but if she wants to have sex for whatever reason (i.e. it's not rape), I have no chivalry left in me to worry about it. I just don't think the extreme fringe is going to be very effective.

Aside from the fringe people, getting back to what I said, it's all about how to be attractive to the opposite sex.

Women grow up with this. There is "17" and Cosmo and all the other magazines oriented towards manipulating boys and later men. Men are usually going through their macho phase and then later learning how to do something useful in the world. They have to. Women don't necessarily have to. Learning how to manipulate men COULD well be their bread and butter, and they could well get more money off it that anyone here will ever have.

So what's the problem with telling other men what really works as far as being attractive to the opposite sex? I dunno.

I guess chivalry says that you can't get any advantage. You just have to beat up the other men and make more money than them and then your beloved will finally love you. Forever and ever and she will never look at another man again for the rest of her life.

Maybe PUAs are just teaching men not to be utter morons.
Oct 19, 2010, 02:50 PM
Something to think about: You didn't make any kind of decision as to which body you were going to be born into.

That sounds stupid and trivial, but it's not. It's key to getting empathy for other people.
Oct 19, 2010, 02:48 PM
I think that men who murder - if they are not complete psychopaths - also have pangs of conscience and regret.

It may even be - if men and women are different, and I think they are - that women are more capable of "playing the role" of distraught mother when need be. I think we can picture that, as well as picturing a chivalrous judge buying it hook, line and sinker.

Ehh, it's the world. I'm glad I wasn't her son.

Biscuit Queen is one of the most level headed / fair minded posters on this site, and it seems that she gets more than her fair share
of crap... why is that? Maybe because She is a She? Let's not be little like the feminist

I thought that I would bring a complaint against any comment like that. And maybe you've missed my missives against the men on this board. In comparison, it was pretty harmless.

But THANK GOD you were there to rescue her.

Frankly, I'm embarrassed FOR her that chivalry had to rear its ugly head once again. She can't do anything about people like you.