Poetry BTFO lol

Anyone can get a hamburger, not everyone can get laid. Not sure what the point of your post is.

I don't want hamburger sloth. I want disney princess. I want goddess. I want Lucie Manette.

I want a lovely woman, but they just don't exist.

>Getting women in the 21st century is the easiest fucking thing one can do.

lolno

Because if there's one thing Veeky Forums needs more of it's more mindless shitposting threads.

Not him but the entire point of your first post was that yes, pretty much everyone can laid.

>pretty much everyone can laid.

Yeah, if they pay money for a prostitute, but not everyone has the looks or social skills to make women want to fuck them for free.

I'd rather talk to guys, and I'm not even gay. Never met a girl that didn't want to perform hedonistic rituals; guys want to perform virtuous rituals.

One time I talked to a girl, I thought we would just have intellectual discourse but then she started to play footsie with me and rubbed her leg onto mine. I don't care if you're a beautiful woman. Guys don't play footsie with other guys (except that one time in high school but I don't like thinking about it).

>Yeah, if they pay money for a prostitute
But that's not what you said though.
>Getting women in the 21st century is the easiest fucking thing one can do.
>When you are starting out it may be hard because you are socially awkward and it feels weird talking to girls. But as you get rolling, it's easy as fuck. To the point of becoming boring and repetitive.
So what's your point then? Getting women is easy as fuck if you have looks and social skills? We already established that.

>every one belongs to every on else

The point is nowadays 'consent' tends to be retrospective.

The whole point of "having fun" and recent trends is that of submersion in the unconscious: "parties", alcohol, drugs, sex, etc. demand you accept an half-conscious state where everything happens according to the "Vibrations of the Moment" and renders consent—a CONSCIOUS functor—obsolete, or even "crippling". So sex occurs by the hypnotic, "chemical" and surely impulsive moments of it "just happening" quite regardless of any planning—that would just spoil the fun.

So any evaluation of the experience is always retrospective. On the one hand, the hypnotic state allows for all kinds of opportunisms and atrocities. On the other hand, people who didn't like this or other experience may claim they didn't consent, blame every one else or ruin a specific person's life, and never even consciously acknowledge their share of responsibility.

>I engage in activity Z frivolously :P!
>Um I don't engage in activity Z frivolously :S

user, I said that not him.

For you bud, since you never tried, and probably never will try.

It's hard to tell with all the anonymity. Who would have thought.

>one edgy girl on twitter is representative of all western culture at the present moment

try getting out more instead of spending all your time on pornhub and /r9k/

I agree that free love has been a disaster for all the civilized world. But it hasn't touched everyone quite the same way. You have to remember that the internet isn't perfectly representative of the whole society: more traditional communities spend less time on the internet. Bored hedonists in cities and especially the suburbs are disproportionately represented by websites like twitter.

Keep in mind also that a lot of people who preach free love are, in practice, uncomfortable with it. People who say that there can be nothing wrong in theory with an open relationship are often unwilling to actually have one—many will speak up in defense of 'sluts' though they have no desire to whore themselves out. We ought to make some distinction between what people say they believe and what they evidently do believe.

All that said, it is still true that many women will have multiple sexual partners. This is not in every case the result of shameless hedonism. A lot of women think they have to have sex to keep men interested, and that it is 'unrealistic' to hold out until they have a guarantee of constancy. The myth that sex is a necessary part of dating has been responsible for a lot of fornication. The end goal for most people is still monogamy.

Of course, monogamy itself has been damaged badly by the widespread acceptance of divorce. But that's another matter. I only hope to point out that most people still have the gut feeling that they are meant for monogamy, they're just foiled in realizing their ideal by tangles of sophistry, bad customs, weak wills, etc.

Trying is not my problem. I've probably talked to close to 50 women this month alone, given that it's summer, and it's easier to talk to women in general since they are outside and in clubs, but no dice.

Seems like I am just naturally repulsive.

I don't see how that's a rebuttal of anything I said

do you not see how pointless it is to set out to kill your own pleasures by overindulging your appetite? your only defense when I point that out is to say that getting laid is something "not everyone" can do? well I suppose it's fine to sacrifice your joys so long as it pleases your vanity!

>implying free love has happened
Alain du Button would like to have a word with you
youtube.com/watch?v=ddKwb3Wzz0w
Being a cuck is intellectual

You see the problem with this post is that eating hamburgers will amount to absolutely nothing, unlike getting women.

It seems stupidly ironic, since you said "get fat" as an equivalent to "have sex".
Where sex is actually a very very good thing, and being fat is a very very bad thing.

Picking up women is a rite of passage. There many rites of passage, but this one is probably the easiest to achieve in the 21st century.

That is why I told you that it is the easiest thing to do.

Did you care about their reactions? If you did, you did it wrong. Their reactions don't matter. Women's reactions are boring and shallow.

You should be going out to have FUN. If you see a girl that you like, bring her into your fun. Don't look to her for fun. You are the fun.

let's make an important distinction

"free love" as an idea and as a movement has undeniably happened

"free love" as the ideal of that movement has not been achieved

>You should be going out to have FUN. If you see a girl that you like, bring her into your fun. Don't look to her for fun. You are the fun.
And they ruin the fun, or are not fun. Weird advice.

no ... just to ME

>And they ruin the fun

You say this based off what? Did you listen to what I said?

>Women's reactions are boring and shallow

If you let her ruin your fun, you cared about her reaction. Something SHE DID ruined your fun. You fucked up.

You must literally stop giving the slightest fuck what a women's reaction is.
What a women does does not fucking matter in the slightest.

IF YOU ARE HAVING FUN, SHE WILL HAVE FUN.

And if you're skeptical:
A women will usually try to "ruin the fun" as a test to see if you are truly the fun guy you claim to be.
If you bite her shitty test, you fail.
If you don't give a fuck, you pass.

>reading is just hedonistic fun! (source: Borges)
>no I don't want to read your stupid reddit genre shit

>She isn't wrong. She's figured life out.
she/you didn't even scratch the surface

>Where sex is actually a very very good thing, and being fat is a very very bad thing.

Over-indulgence in sex produces an effect on the soul very easily comparable to that of overeating—it deadens the joy in things that it sets out to enjoy. The philanderer is something worse than the fat man.

That it is a "rite of passage" in some savage tribes and in modern times I don't deny, but I deny that it should be one.

The reason big fat miserable people will walk into a McDonalds every day for lunch is that they are still enslaved by a misconception: that by indulging their appetite they will find joy. You say "eating hamburgers will amount to absolutely nothing"; not so. To a man who seldom eats fatty foods, a hamburger is delicious. But if he wants to enjoy the hamburger he must regulate his desire for it—he must practice self-denial. If he decides that the path to joy in life is to eat fatty foods and sweets all the time, he will become miserable, and he will cease to enjoy the food, and he will go on in misery so long as he still labours under the belief that he is seeking joy. The same can be said of alcoholics, of drug addicts, of chain smokers—but people have forgotten to say it about sex.

because it's boring you stupid pleb
who but a child is entertained by fantasy swordsmen and dragons

reading is hedonistic fun, and i find stimulating thought and unique aesthetic experiences fun

But you said to bring her into it. Which means there is an inherent implication that you do give a fuck.
Your last part is also some silly pua shit.

And now you will ask me to defend my position that the joy is sex is at all deadened, and I will refer you back to this:

>But as you get rolling, it's easy as fuck. To the point of becoming boring and repetitive.

What you said:
>Over-indulgence in sex produces an effect on the soul very easily comparable to that of overeating—it deadens the joy in things that it sets out to enjoy. The philanderer is something worse than the fat man.

What you mean:
>I'm to busy reading these philosophical tomes written by 50 year old virgins explaining why sex is a bad thing. I have never tried it and based off my studies, I never will. Instead, I will devote my life to being a hermit or a sage, and forever post garbage nobody will ever care about on an image board on the internet.

I was making the opposite argument.

I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

Have you eaten tomato?

I read books written by old monogamists, and books written by old philanderers. I can tell which ones speak from real gaiety.

I take it on the evidence that using heroin produces, in the long run, more misery than joy; in the same way I take it on evidence that engaging in frequent sex produces, in the long run, more misery than joy. I have not set out to try for myself whether hard drugs will ruin my life, as I have not set out to try for myself whether casual sex will ruin my immortal soul.

We call some of those fifty-year-old virgins saints, and I venerate them as you venerate nothing you have ever known.

>Which means there is an inherent implication that you do give a fuck.

You will never get a women user, sorry. Since clearly you do not see the experience of talking to one as a chance to increase the fun, and lead to sex or a relationship.

When you go to a store to buy a widescreen television, you do not go up to the first television and buy that one.
You walk by every television and pick the one you think is the best.

Same thing with women. If you do not even try to see what type of girl she is, you will never be able to pick her. You care about yourself, not her. You care about making a good choice.

It is a healthy way of giving a fuck. Where as caring about the women and her reaction, is an unhealthy way of giving a fuck.

i'm really glad my brain isn't as shitty as yours

the point isn't
>random guy : guy you want to fuck :: terrible book : great book
which is actually how it is!!

it's that according to these women, for whom sex is meaningless, it should be
>guy you like enough to date for weeks or months : guy you want to fuck :: book you're OK with checking out : great book

the person isn't saying "women should let all men fuck them", they're saying "women claim that the only criterion for sex is 'i want a little bit of hedonism right now', because sex is just a fun meaningless thing; but they still treat sex as something that has to be 'earned' and that has 'value' which is 'lost' if 'given away' to the 'wrong person'"

it's GOOD to be selective about who you fuck. but don't go claiming that you fucked just for the sake of fucking. you selected a guy, and he had to pass tests (handsome etc.). there's a big difference between a free love culture where people genuinely just enter into intimate relations whenever it's merely fun, and a "free" love culture where women are fucking whom they please but most men are not doing so because the vast majority of men don't meet the women's standards

sorry user I don't eat vegetables

or, you know, women aren't all the same in every way

What you said:
>We call some of those fifty-year-old virgins saints, and I venerate them as you venerate nothing you have ever known

What you mean:
>I give up on all the things I desire in my life, and here is the comfortable excuse I use to justify my giving up.

>You will never get a women user, sorry. Since clearly you do not see the experience of talking to one as a chance to increase the fun, and lead to sex or a relationship.

>When you go to a store to buy a widescreen television, you do not go up to the first television and buy that one. You walk by every television and pick the one you think is the best.

This is poetry. Got it: girls are like the things you buy

>girls are like the things you buy
They are.
YOU are the one who matters. NOT them.
Fourth time I repeat this.
Women don't matter as thinking beings. Literally nothing she does matters. Everything a women does is bullshit.

If you come from a buyer perspective, and pick the girl based off how you judge her, your success with women will increase massively.

>But what if I judge all women badly
You cared about their reactions, they offended you. Repeat this in your head: women's reactions DONT MATTER. Just like a TV's reaction doesn't matter as you walk buy it in the store. You are judging the TV's QUALITIES. You are not judging whether the TV frowned or smiled at you.

>You will never get a women user, sorry. Since clearly you do not see the experience of talking to one as a chance to increase the fun, and lead to sex or a relationship.
No. I don't think you even understand what you're trying to say. You keep contradicting yourself. I've had women, don't be a ponce. You change your stance on things in every new sentence.

>You change your stance on things in every new sentence.
And you don't give any instances of me doing this, this argument is null.

There is literally nothing wrong with any of that.

Confirmed bitter handholdless 30+ year old virgin

>the art of virginity: 1001 arguments for never getting laid

this thread

OP here. I regret making this thread. I'm so sorry Veeky Forums.

Reading this thread combined with my personal experience of the US saddens me. Why are gender relations in America so bad? Why do American men and women hate each other so much?

kys

American men are terrible entitled manchildren.

This is what I'm afraid of. What if when I start having sex I will lose the meaning, thirst, and taste of it? What if as a desperate virgin now I'm relishing the concept of sex much more than Leo DiCaprio? What if only when you don't have sex you really have it. Sex means everything to me now. Why would I want to become an alpha hustler who fucks supermodels all day and lose the value of it, making it an automatic subconsious process like digestion?

Forever a virgin

>>Ew no you can't touch my boobs until you court me for six months first :S

Since fucking when?

that user has never courted someone for six month
that user has never touched boobs
QED

Holy shit user.

That's the most retarded thing I have ever heard.

wew lad, you've gone so virgin you've literally cucked yourself

love is dead

>this thread
>these people probably post in other threads on Veeky Forums all the time

why bring hamburgers up?

>Shannon

Jewess detected

>Why do American men and women hate each other so much?
sexual revolution

you're cute, user. And your doubts are on point: sex without intimacy ends up destroying your fucking soul.

t. girl lurking this thread for a laugh.

please fuck me

>girl
Oh yes, finally someone who knows what it's like to get plowed by seven different dudes in one week.
Glad to have your perspective.

Proof? Please, I'll go to sleep very happy knowing a girl replied to my and said I'm cute.

SMEDJEBACKEN

Hey. Are you really a girl?
I posted this . Am I noble enough? It was satire.
Please respond

I would have posted proof if you asked in a less pathetic way.

>"btw I'm a sexxy girl hehe"
>20 replies

every single time

Fucking whore. AWALT. Treat them like dogs.

Feminism

there's always one of these every single time
so you're participating in the cliché...just as we are; at least we know it

"It's OK as long as you know what you're doing"—morality 2016-101

Friendly reminder that women over 20 years old aren't worth 10 minutes of effort

this was not me.
I'll go away now so you can continue with your male fantasies.

you're okay lads.

>you're okay
top kek

Why is even one getting mad at this? She saying nice guys are better than bad guys, unless she typed it wrong.

I wasn't the guy you're responding to, but not everyone is willing or able to do what he wrote, even though they'd want to.

>Just go out, have fun, talk to girls, and be physical.
This is exactly the same as saying
>Just go out, run across no-man's land, dodge the bullets, and destroy the entire German army
No shit it's fine if you can do all that, but most of us (as autistic retards) can't.

It doesn't work the way he says anyway. They're not going to just want you because you're aloof or whatever. That is just a serious misconception.

>who but a child is entertained by fantasy swordsmen and dragons
Do you want to know how I know you're a pseud?

>false justified belief
>know

>No shit it's fine if you can do all that, but most of us (as autistic retards) can't.
QFT

Are you retarded? She says: bad guys > nice guys

crocodile eats greater thing because it hungers

wtf I hate women now

Women are filthy creatures

Happened here (Ireland) too and relations are good. There must be some other explanation.

Fucked around and got a triple double

They aren't. You're just a tard.

This. Hell I've actually had women hit on me. It's nerve racking at first, but if you speak to women as ya'know...people rather than glorified object of desire its so much easier.