>he uses the "a lock that opens to any key is a bad lock but a key that opens many locks is a master key" analogy often
>he uses the analogy but doesn't accept that logically a male virgin past a certain age must be as valuable as a key that can't open any locks
and what is wrong with it?
a man in order to have lots of sex must have a dominant stance, be assertive, rich, pretty
a woman in order to have lots of sex literally just have to be receptive
Really there are endless examples it's just common sense
I signal that can broadcasts to a lot of radios is a strong signal
A radio that can pick up different radio stations isn't that impressive.
Any woman can spread her legs and get dick at any time.
A man can spread his legs and get raped by any gay guy at any time, true, bu he's not getting any pussy without effort.
They are, though. Women are incapable of independence.
An all-female organization accomplishes nothing.
An all-male organization kicks ass.
Women ARE annoying children in many ways and it's really shitty how males have to pretend they aren't.
>inb4 "look who's talking /r9k/ loser!!!"
All of /r9k/ knows we're losers. We are very aware we don't measure up. EVERY fucking woman thinks she's Queen Bee. And no, your made up insecurities over not having a personal Christian Grey.
both sides of the analogy are accurate models of the situation being considered.
women who are promiscuous are seen as less desirable as long term partners by males because they want ot minimise risk of raising a child that is not their without them knowing due to her infidelity
men who are not desired by any woman , as evidenced by them being adult virgins, are undesirable to women because women want to avoid the possibility that any son they have be unsuccessful with women and unsuccessful at passing on his genes.
so yes, the lock and key analogy works very well.
>he makes analogies instead of just saying what he thinks