Women are fucking subhuman.

>>34733928
/r9k/ was right. Don"t know why I'm feeling this way, but you all are fucking right.

File: 1484113692921.png (142KB, 293x341px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 293x341px

>>34733928
I mean desu I'm a guy and if someone contacted me on Tinder just to say "Fuck you" I'd be impressed

File: 1298675299605.jpg (49KB, 500x533px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x533px

>be a normal average-looking dude with real interests and hobbies
>send her a nice message that shows you actually paid attention to her bio (lol at the concept of a "bio" on Tinder), you share similar interests and hobbies, and you would like to take her out sometime to get to know her
>no response

>be Chad Thundercock, Crusher of 10,000 Pussies
>"what's up, you fat ugly bitch? I'm coming over to fuck you, consider yourself lucky"
>"lol that's so interesting heres my address (emoji)"

>>34734061
You know most girls on tinder are just looking for sum fuk right? What's going to get that faster, some shmuck trying to kiss ass about similar hobbies for days before finally asking for her number, or someone who gets straight to the point from the start? You guys act like girls are unfair but it's perfectly reasonable

>>34734189
I know exactly what Tinder is for, and it makes sense...

You got the chicks that go straight to the point. Classics such as:

>"don't message me if ur hieght starts w/ a 5 LOL"
>"just looking to meet some new friends (leaf emoji, puff of air emoji, eggplant emoji, water drops emoji)"

On the other hand, you've got the two-faced some women are that actually go through all the trouble of setting up a "bio" with normal looking pictures of them like... rock climbing or hiking or some shit. Pretending they're nice girls just looking for a nice guy, but at the same time they don't give them a chance if they're not Chad.

Personally, I got bored of Tinder within the first week because I only matched with hamplanets. For simple one-and-done sex, I prefer Craigslist. Post dick pic, get results, same day.

>>34734542

>don't message me if ur hieght starts w/ a 5 LOL

I do that too (I'm gay). Stay mad manlets (seriously though you can't change who you're attracted to, and women can pick and choose)

>>34733928
LOL I am the one who screencapped this originally.
Posted it on here about an hour ago.

>>34734061
Going on Tinder to read profiles. =/
When I sent this chick the message I didn't even fill-in my own profile text. Just 3 chad pictures, no text.

File: o6snO1v.jpg (166KB, 1196x898px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1196x898px

>>34734679
You can have that right. I'm not against it at all, I wouldn't want a manlet either if I was a girl (or gay). But when a man says he doesn't want a hamplanet, he's ridiculed and shamed.

>>34734829
>When I sent this chick the message I didn't even fill-in my own profile text. Just 3 chad pictures, no text
>Just 3 chad pictures
And you got replies?
...Sounds about right. I don't think women even read the profiles, they only fill out theirs to make themselves seem interesting or unique. Not surprising that women just look at the pics and swipe.

Guilty of doing this myself, actually.

>>34734890
Got all sorts of replies.

In this case my first message was an exception, others we're just things like "Hello" or "Are you available tonight?". I did it because the girl is a coal-burner (look at her photo). Wasn't expecting to hear back necessarily, but hey.

Another one, should've screen-capped, I opened with, "The shekels, goyim. Hand 'em over!" That girl responded too.

Red Pill is real, guys.

>>34734839

It's definitely bad to state it harshly. If people are gonna put it the should put it in the least harmful way as possible

e.g.

Only tall guys please (6ft +)

at the end of their profiel

>>34734679
>seriously though you can't change who you're attracted to
You mean like how manlets can't change their height? Wow, really made me think

>>34733928
Are you sure that's not a bot?

>>34734978

It's not fair, but it doesn't matter. Same thing applies to ugly girls.

You would do the exact same thing if you were female and you know it

>>34734890
>they only fill out theirs to make themselves seem interesting or unique

They fill there's in to say, "not here for hook-ups." Just in-case someone they know sees them they have "plausible" deniability.

Imagine the feel if a beta orbiter tries Tinder and sees his orbitee on there -- after paying tons of money and wasting time dealing with her bullshit.

>>34734994
Totally sure. I did have a bit of a conversation with her later.
Another thing I noticed during this experiment is a lot of girls who are most interested are from out-of-town. Makes sense.

>>34735010
>Same thing applies to ugly girls.
Not really. Wow you really are role playing lmao

File: 1398926794596.jpg (42KB, 300x351px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 300x351px

>>34734934
>I opened with, "The shekels, goyim. Hand 'em over!" That girl responded too.
That would have been a good one to see.

>>34734952
I've seen maybe one or two out of dozens that put it in a decent, non-offensive way.

>>34734978
>>34735010
Maybe, but fat chicks can change their weight. The problem is that they won't. "Fat acceptance" or some bullshit. I don't think fat women get to be choosy, but society says otherwise.

A manlet could probably still have a good chance at finding someone shorter than them, but even still, he's not seen as tall ENOUGH to some.

>>34735010
I'll step in and say it's different because the threshold for what's "ugly" for a guy is a lot higher than the standards women hold for men.

Girls can get away with being a 3 or 4 at the most, but a guy who's sub 5'10 will get no attention UNLESS he's extremely attractive (~8.5-9 for women who already aren't into shorter guys)