Can we finally admit he was onto something?

>>34768680
having sex with MULTIPLE people is degenerate. i will never have sex with anybody but still

>>34768680
Myself I think anyone who wants control of anyone is kidding themselves. The cops don't really control the people, the just uphold and illusion. Same with prison guards. If a woman thinks she go on the internet and cry "muh freedom" and this will stop men from thinking she's gross if she's slept with many people, she's wrong. Also sage'd for potential bait, just felt like typing that out.

>>34768680
When semen enters a woman's body, regardless of the hole, she absorbs and and molds it to her DNA. It has the effect of unconsciously making herself more compatible with you. The more men she sleeps with, the more DNA her body takes in and the more insane she becomes, able to hold completely conflicting beliefs, ADMITTING their conflicting, but refusing to drop them.

Another side effect is that your child could carry the DNA of other men.

As far as the "different standard" bullshit, I held myself to the same standard I held women to. I always pretended that them sleeping with other men was no big deal, and even lied, saying I had done it, but I wouldn't stick around with any woman that had slept with anyone before me.

Been happily married for 6 years this June.

would you buy a spoon at a yard sale that said "48 previous owners" and cost as much as a regular spoon

no you'd think "why have 48 people had this spoon and gotten rid of it?"

I'm not going to begrudge a woman at my age for having fucked a few guys. A few long term but unsuccessful relationships can do that.

It's the ones who have fucked like 10+ by the time they're 19 I find kinda gross. Not that it stopped me fucking a roastie who must have fucked at least 50 guys

File: John Green cuckoldry.jpg (1MB, 3836x2584px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3836x2584px

John Green is just that slimy numale guy who tells roasties what they want to hear to make a buck, and to please his post-Chad wife.

>>34768782
People like him just want to tear down tradition for the sake of tearing it down. I fucking hate post-modernists, because whatever they tear down, they replace with something that is invariably and irrefutably inferior. Whether this is art, culture, film, or fucking society itself, it is ALWAYS inferior, and it always either returns to what it was (happening to the US right now), or collapses and dies on itself (like Art Schools).

>>34768819

I don't think he's some sort of hyper-liberal revolutionary, he's just an ideological feminist because of his bossy wife 'becky' or whoever, who he admits he liked in highschool but only married after she'd slept around with Chads through college.

His 'lectures' constantly inject feminist interpretations where they don't belong.

>>34768869
But modern feminism isn't about equality. It's a post-modern movement attempting to deconstruct society and rebuild it in a different way (regardless of whether society is better for it or not). So, for him to be a feminist in today's world (talking about patriarchy, despite the fact that if laws are anything, they are matriarchal - benefiting women more than men), he would be a post-modernist.

Rather than saying it's hypocritical to hold a female to a standard that you aren't willing to hold yourself, he's saying that its bad to have standards at all.

And, considering what semen does to the female body (there is no equivalent for men), its actually entirely reasonable to hold women to a different standard, just like you hold a businessman's behavior to a different standard than you do a literal retard (for example: if a businessman was caught in a girl's locker room, no matter the age of the girls in said locker room, his life would be over, but a literal retard would not be condemned nearly as badly).

Why even bother replying to this bait

>>34768945

>But modern feminism isn't about equality.

Opposition to marriage is at the core of all feminism, including much of first-wave feminism.

I won't judge him for his sexual fetishes, but I'm not into cannibalism myself.

>>34768680
Since fucking when is having sex akin to eating food?

FUCKING NORMIES
I MUST LOOK LIKE A STARVED AFRICAN CHILD TO THE FUCKS

>>34768738
>spoon

Just say a car and your shiity analogy will come together.

>>34768730
t. dumbass who know jackshit about how genetics works

pls tell me this is bait

>>34769138
I think he just ran with what he heard anon post about on here a few times.

http://time.com/3461485/how-previous-sexual-partners-affect-offspring/

>>34768680

Sure. I think it is fine if a girl has had five or six different partners over the course of her life. But I don't want a woman who fucks a different dude every week. I want someone who becomes committed to a relationship and then fucks. I think it is unattractive and could lead to STIs. Same if I was a grill. I don't want a guy that fucks everything he can and is unfaithful in a relationship.

Also...
>Tumblr image
>comparing sexual interactions to cheerios
>7/10 b8 made me reply

>>34768680
If somone ate some cereal and then regurgitated it i sure as fuck wouldnt eat it

>>34769802
Exactly, works both ways. I don't get the NEED to have a virgin woman...I've never met a woman who wants a virgin man, but each to their own I suppose. Anyone who fucks anything is just automatically less appealing, and we've only got biology to account for that

>>34768782
was that the fag who shocked himself whenever he got the answer wrong?

lmao i bet his wife punishes him with 1 month in chastity when he does something she doesn't agree with too

>>34768680
Why would I want to eat a bowl of cheerioes when 63 guys have stuck their dicks in it first.
I don't care if you washed it out it's still gross, and it's not a double standard because women and men are fundamentally different.

>>34768730
I love when ignorant anons make up their own science

>>34768680
no

origami commento

>>34768782
What's the source video for this?

If I had to guess he goes on to say that it was only women were punished, and that men were fine to sleep around.

>>34768680
I don't know how he thinks what he said excuses promiscuity whatsoever.

>>34768730
Take a fuckin biology class

like jesus dude

>>34769001
Yeah.. I don't like 10 thousand dick cereal for breakfasts either.

File: 1486381127141.jpg (32KB, 640x350px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 640x350px

>>34768730
>t. Burger education

What the fuck are you talking about. I hate roasties but this is next level retardation.

>>34768945
Ok your trolling can stop anytime, there are kids on this board and we don't want them thinking you're serious

>>34768680
>high trust
>low T
>whiteknighting

I fucking hate numales kissing up to sluts. I get that females are biologically infinitely more useful than us, but it still pisses me off.

File: tumor head.jpg (49KB, 620x466px)

49KB, 620x466px

>>34768680
>John Green meets a girl in High School but she never dates him
>He runs into her years later when she is living with a different guy
>Over the next two years she goes through 4 more boyfriends and another live-in BF
>He finally starts dating her after he becomes a successful writer
>She marries him after 10+ years and 10+ other men
>John Green now thinks partner count doesn't matter
It is how he fucks his wife without vomiting.

You can eat your own cereal for your whole life

Eating cereal that 48 people have spit out before you is disgusting and diseased

>>34771889
I have to originally agree

>>34768680
nice food analogy

>>34768680
anyone has a counter arguement picture that makes a valid point?
also video link please?

>>34768869
Isn't his wife a landwhale tumblard too?

>>34768680
>"i've had sex with 50 people, how dare you slut shame me, i'm a free woman!!"
>"you're a virgin? hahahahaha you subhuman pathetic loser"

His PA is a fucking slut desu.

>>34768680
Anyone is free to reject any sexual partner based on any arbitrary reason.
You can think its dumb all you want but can't tell people it's wrong>>34768711

>>34769138
What do you think about transgenders anon?

>>34769138
>>34771235
>>34771676
There's literally research coming out that indicates this stuff is true. But It's only been in the last couple years we found it out.

File: Cereal Sluts.png (371KB, 525x709px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 525x709px

>>34768680

Let's stick our dicks in his cereal and see if he still wants to eat it.

File: IMG_20170211_084954.jpg (44KB, 364x206px)

44KB, 364x206px

Is he /ourguy/?
Originally of course

File: 1475309020245.jpg (96KB, 1200x675px)

96KB, 1200x675px

My cheerios didn't have 48 dicks inserted into them

>>34768738
>spoons and cars are bad analogies
>cheerios are good analogies

>>34777146
Meant to quote this faggot v
>>34769124

Whether I agree with the guy or not, that analogy is fucking god awful. How many different types of cereal a person has tried doesn't give a representation of their promiscuity and potential faithfulness to a partner. How many different people they've had sex with does. And promiscuity and faithfulness are absolutely factors that people would care about in a partner.

All that analogy does is serve to make the view sound silly without actually targeting what the flaw of the view is. Which is the sign of someone incapable of arguing their point fucking properly.

I really don't give a shit how many people someone has slept with personally, but don't make arguments based on making the other person sound absurd. It's a dick move and weakens your actual point.