He makes a pretty good argument don't you think? Why judge

Well I think the obvious difference is that cereal isn't a fucking person. That, and nobody expects you to be monogamous with cereal.

This guy is probably a virgin.

Sexual past does matter, girls never forget their first dick.

Oreginald

File: 1498072156057.jpg (83KB, 478x720px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 478x720px

>>37869457
Is this /John Green Bait Thread General/?

>>37869457
He's absolutely right but robots don't exactly live in the real world

File: 1380787913337.jpg (264KB, 603x328px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 603x328px

>>37869457
i think that's what they call a false equivalence?

past behaviour is indicative of future behaviour, fuck off slut knight

>>37869509
I've had sex with more than a few virgins and I sincerely doubt that they think anything special about it. Girls remember good dick not the order it came in

>>37869457
>Comparing girls to cereal
>John def belongs on /r9k/

I wouldn't eat cheerios that have touched 47 dicks.

>>37869513
He looks like a beta Tom Brady with glasses

File: 1392825632140.jpg (34KB, 226x141px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 226x141px

>>37869457
Is he aware that HPV can be transmitted despite protection?
Is he aware that the people who fuck into the twenties and beyond probably forgot it or didn't care about it at least once?
Is he aware of all the nasty shit that sometimes doesn't show symptoms, or at least doesn't always show symptoms?

>>37869457
His argument is seriously literally unironically "stop liking what I don't like."

>>37869478
Is this objectifying and equating women as objects? Does this mean he is as sexist as r9k?

>In their youth, women love eating cereal
>not cheerios, though, they love sugary cereal
>frosted flakes, apple jacks, cocoa puffs
>they spend all their time going through unhealthy cereal
>They know it is bad for them, but they are young so they don't care
>one day, their metabolism and health catches up with them
>women realize they can't sustain a lifestyle of jacks and puffs forever
>they've had their share of cereals, but are now ready to settle down their diet
>they find Cheerios
>boring, plain, lacking in taste, but very safe and healthy
>women don't like Cheerios, but they will eat it anyways, knowing they have to
>every once in a while they decide to have a cheat day and go back to old cereals

>>37869457
He's right to an extent, however someone that can't stop having sex with people likely won't stop when they start dating you. He's probably referring to a normal amount of sexual partners like 10 or 15 and not thinking about the mega roast like 30+

John Green is a good guy but his wife probably cheated on him

>>37869721
Probably an important note; By twenties I mean number of partners, not age.

File: debuking jhon green.png (401KB, 1305x947px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1305x947px

>>37869457
already proven wrong. get in here for some red pill.

>>37869746

Fuckin hurts

>boring,plain,safe
>doesn't like it
>but will still eat it

Damn

>>37869722
It's even worse than that. It's "you eat a lot of food for energy so you should have a lot of sex with different people and no protection."

>>37869457
If you were to make a cereal comparison, the correct version would me you being forced to eat a cheerio that someone else already licked/had in their mouth.
I don't have an issue with being someone who already has sex with someone else but only if they had sex when they were in a relationship with the person. I can't stand people who sleep around with strangers.

>>37869815
Redpills are lies engineered to lead you further from the truth. The funny part is that robots brag about how "redpilled" they are

>>37869815
I've never understood the "scarcity = value" rule in this context. Surely, this means that a guy with no social skills and no friends is the most valuable friend for you to have and is constantly beset on all sides by people desperately wanting to hang out. This has not been my experience in life.

>>37869478
Robots don't think what they masturbate to isn't accounted against them, but it is.

>>37869880
Someone post the study that shows that hoes make terrible bitter wives. Again. The same study that I'm sure this person has seen but conveniently ignores. Just like every single time someone posts it.

>>37869942
I'm not saying that hoes don't make terribly bitter wives yo. I'm not arguing against anything. I was curious about the scarcity = value argument, as it doesn't really seem to necessarily logically apply. For the exact reason I pointed out.

>>37869942
You mean the study that took place in the 60's?

>>37869457
the only thing hes right about is how women shouldn't be held on a different standard on it than men, otherwise it's just bullshit comparing people to cereal. Cereal doesn't need to have standards and it doesn't catch diseases.

previous performance predicts future results

>>37870150
>m-muh equality!

please take a course in reproductive biology and mating strategies of hominids

>>37869942
Can you provide more context? I'd certainly like to find and see it for myself. In return I'll share this.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/11/all-the-single-ladies/308654/?single_page=true
It is about a post wall woman who recognizes the 80/20 rule. Very useful stuff.

>>37869880
The less partners you've had, the more you value each individual one. Some lonely homeless guy would likely appreciate a hug a ton more than someone who hugs all the time. You connect less and less with people the more you spread yourself around past a point.
Like, if you're a virgin and you get with a girl who's had 50 other partners, it's just going to be mundane sex to her. It'd just be an activity people do together. To the guy, it'd obviously mean a whole lot more. Many partners really fucks up your ability for pair bonding, look it up.

Your example is missing demand there pal. There's infinite demand for all women from most men, they're always wanted, either for relationships or solely for sex. Men don't exactly get that unless you're in a special class of them, the genders are valued for different reasons.

>>37870261
That's irrelevant, a human child needs to be brought up by both the male and female parent and that can't be done if the male parent has 40 kids with 40 different women so using the reproductive argument is retarded because you aren't even doing it for reproductive purposes just lust. The human male isn't supposed to spread his seed with as many females as possible only a select female. And diseases are not just limited to women.

>>37870329
>The human male isn't supposed to spread his seed with as many females as possible
Not him but are you stupid? Why wouldn't the guy want to spread his seed? That's why there is millions of sperm when you ejaculate. For inseminating multiple women. That's why we don't send women to war. One man can impregnate multiple women but a woman can not be pregnant by multiple men. Again I ask, are you stupid?

>>37870322
>Some lonely homeless guy would likely appreciate a hug a ton more than someone who hugs all the time

I'm not at all convinced of this. I can easily imagine loneliness creating bitterness and anger, making the homeless person incapable of enjoying a hug. Meanwhile, the person that gets hugs every day might be REALLY into hugging, so much so that they are now a hugging expert and can tell every intimate detail apart from every individual hug, thereby appreciating it even more.

It is important to mention (so please read this carefully) that I do not think what I just described is a fact, backed up by any kind of science or even true. I just think that it is another way of looking at this that is at least somewhat plausible. I wonder what you think about it.

>>37869457
>Implying he'd be fine with being dude number 48

Left = cuck

>>37870386
Or... there's million of sperms to compete against another man's millions of sperm. So i ask, are you stupid? Because you already know children need both male and female parents so how is that supposed to happen when it's impossible for the father to take care of so many children of different mothers? Obviously he is supposed to impregnate a single female.

>>37870329
Maternity is a matter of fact, whereas paternity is a matter of opinion.

Just because you have a dad doesn't mean you're biologically related.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOY3QH_jOtE

>telling the person behind the camera to ask you a question so you can go on a rant about how much you respect women
How desperate is this guy? Also he literally looks like the stereotypical white cuck they use in porn.

File: close_enough.jpg (89KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 633x758px

>>37869457
>23 year old femanon me has had sex with 5 different guys
>figured it's not a big number because guys are the same
>future boyfriend will understand
>turns out he has only had sex with one other girl

oh dear. well either way he wanted to date me, i t accidentally slipped out on one of our dates and he could have chose not to see me again.

>>37870398
>I can easily imagine loneliness creating bitterness and anger, making the homeless person incapable of enjoying a hug.
That's a very easy thing to think on /r9k/, but I assure you, there are many people who'd still appreciate it. Sticking to here, I'd wager a lot of the bitterness is sour grapes and fronting to try to fight their feelings, whether they recognize it or not. They'd likely probably break down receiving an honest loving hug.

>so much so that they are now a hugging expert
I get what you're saying, and that's true, but you're bunching the physical aspect with the emotional. You don't need skill for the emotional side, and that's what fills the need for bonding and closeness, something that gets lost when it becomes all about the physical.

>>37870610
Um no it's not, your father is the man who impregnated your mother. You can claim or not claim him all you want but he is your biological father, the "Not biologically related" shit applies to the mother as well who can give birth to a child, abandon it and allow it to be raised by another woman. What even is your argument here?

>>37869875
>this is what bluepilled faggots believe
fuckin lol

>>37869457
his point was that women loook down on virgin men but then if someone looks down on them for eating out chads shit pipe they get mad and say they're being oppressed. and that chads shitpipe liberated and empowered them

>>37870744
you're so clueless any attempt at discussion would be inappropriate, sorry

>>37870764
Funny how you say that yet I have a well paying job, a girlfriend, a house, a car, and a social life while all you have are tfw no gf and autism

>>37869590
Good comment , (You)

>>37870734
>You don't need skill for the emotional side

That's one of the craziest things I've read in my life. Our subjective emotional response is something that we need to develop through training or practice. No one is born good at "emotion", it's actually a very complex cognitive process that needs a lot of work.

I'm not saying this to disagree with you on your point! I didn't mean the guy is super good at GIVING hugs (the physical side), but rather he's insanely good at experiencing and appreciating hugs (the emotional side), the way that listening to a lot of music can help you understand and appreciate music itself better. I feel personally (no science to back me up, I wouldn't claim that) that my emotional experience of music now is far deeper and nuanced than it was when I first started listening to music. What do you think about this?

>>37870790
M8 you literally just said someone can be your dad and not be related, why wouldn't the same apply to women. You're delusional and obviously know i'm right hence why you retreated to the typical "uh your too dumb to argue with byee".

>>37869457
This man is probably a pedophile

>>37869513
>the le ebin "stupid masses" meme
Everyone says the masses are stupid (don't get me wrong, they fucking are) but no one thinks they're part of the retarded people
Also he needs a fucking haircut in that pic

>>37870853
>That's one of the craziest things I've read in my life.
Whaaaaatt? C'monnnnn.

You're comparing technical appreciation to a base emotional reaction. I don't think most people need to develop their feelings in order to feel bad being neglected or to watch a sad movie, just like they don't need to develop them to feel loved or appreciated from someone else.

When you get into appreciation like you're talking about, then I think it gets more into appreciating it like an art, with skill involved.
We're entering opinion territory with this here now, but I think that comes from removing the emotional aspect from it. You're analysing it and thinking "this is what they're going for", "this is what they're saying I should feel from it", "this album blows, this other dude did a way better take on this, but that one touch there is nice"
Someone with a lot of music experience wouldn't appreciate a shit album, but someone with 0 experience might feel it's AOTYAY.
Reading that again it sounds like my thing up there was still about the physical part of appreciation, but whatev lol. I just can't see someone growing their emotional response to things from practice to be honest.

>>37871347
>Someone with a lot of music experience wouldn't appreciate a shit album, but someone with 0 experience might feel it's AOTYAY.

I honestly worry sometimes that a lot of opinions on this board derive from something like that, where the robot worries that their sex will be "a shit album" and they need the other person to be a virgin to stand a chance at AOTYAY. I'm not saying this goes for you or anyone in particular, but this is an insecurity I feel is at the base of a lot of the vitriol.

and I'm not sure the insecurity is actually warranted

Also, thank you for acknowledging this is "opinion territory" for both of us. Neither of us has any hard evidence to back our claims up. I really appreciate the fact that we can both be open about it. I'm off to bed now, thanks for the conversation, it was helpful to me.

File: 1461199992397.jpg (106KB, 976x650px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 976x650px

>>37869457

Why assume an accelerating objects past flight trajectory has any bearing on its on the question of its future trajectory?

Don't warn your kids to stay away from the sex offender neighbor, not like his past has any bearing on his possible future actions.

Don't be the asshole who hides his valuables when a known thief is coming to the party at your place.

Don't be the cis gendered misogynist nazi who gauges a womans loyalty on her history as an impulsive penis vacuum.

What kind of moron doesn't consider the past behavioral patterns of an individual when attempting to assess their future behaviors?

>cheerios
>sex

Yeah that's an awful analogy

>>37869551
>Stacy
Kekoriginal

>>37869457
What if I put my dick in the cereal first and then I cum on cereals face? Would he eat it then?

I agree that men should be held to the same standard but the rest is bullshit. Premarital sex is an insult to whoever you end up marrying.

>The thing Alaska did next scared and shocked and surprised me in a way nothing had ever ever scared or shocked or surprised me until that moment, a moment which lasted no longer than one sharp intake of breath but one I have no doubt will last my entire life. She said 'I love you'. Not 'You're cool' or 'I had a really fun time' or 'Do you always kiss like that?' I love you. As in 'I, Alaska Young, love you, Miles Halter'. As in 'I Alaska Young have not only noticed that you Miles Halter exist but I positively adore the fact that you do'. I exhaled. Alaska did too and for the first time I realized she was as scared as I was of admitting the way she felt. I stepped forward and held her hips. 'Are you sure?' I asked. 'I think so!' she replied, smiling. I must have pushed her backwards because just then her body nudged the lightswitch and the room became as dark as my life was without Alaska in it. Laughing, she slipped out of my grasp and disappeared somewhere inside the room. I reached out like a blind man searching for the object that might grant him sight. Truly, I was Looking for Alaska.

>>37869590
But you are wrong also fuck off

He's right enough but he's a smug cunt and that's a shit analogy and I fucking hate him

File: Bonobo biting sticks.jpg (34KB, 403x600px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 403x600px

>>37869880
Men are not valued higher when scarce in the way women are.

Example:
A tribe is nearly destroyed by disease. 30 women and 1 man are left. They can repopulate just fine as you can have 30 pregnant women going all at once. He's only of value till they are pregnant. The man can die off in the next year and still you have 30 new adults, all biologically separated enough to not fuck up the gene pool in the realistic long run. One year = 30 kids.
This tribe is fine.

Example 2:
The tribe is nearly destroyed. Only 1 woman and 30 men are left. One year = 1 kid.
This tribe dies.

Men are and have always been expendable unless they fight through the dominance hierarchy of men to attain a position of value.

Women have no need to struggle for position of worth. They are all valued regardless of attractiveness. But more so with it. Even barren they can still provide milk to suckling babes and companionship to other men.

>>37869457
Until women stop judging me for my (lack of) sexual past i think its fair game. If theyre turned off by virgins because its creepy, i think being a slut is digsuting being run through more than 6 feet worth of dick

>>37869721
All you had to say was that you're statistically more likely to be divorced or dumped the more dicks you take

>>37870806
You're probably right about him. But bragging about what you do have to robots is fucking tragic. Even more than pretending

>>37869757
10 to 15 partners is average?

I must have missed to the memo

>>37869757
>10-15
>normal
1-3 in a lifetime is normal.
If you are below the age of 25 no hymen no diamond.

>>37872775
By the time you realize how right I am, it will be far too late for you

It doesn't matter what anyone says. I'd rather be alone then date a girl who's not a virgin, it's that simple.

>>37869509
They don't forget. But losing your virginity is likely the most awkward painful worst sex of your life. It's a means to an end of your sexual its journey. even when they care about the guy it really isn't some momentous event. I forget more details of mine every day and it was only 3 years ago.

People can and will be attracted to whoever they want, not much you can do about it

>>37870806
And yet you're here bragging on /r9k/. That's pretty much as pathetic.

>>37872867
A lifetime is a long time. I'm only on 2 but I have friends who by my reckoning are hardly turbosluts but they at the age of 25 have definitely had more than 3 partners.

Robots have some weird fucking ideas about things

>hurr durr having sex is the same as eating cereal it's totally not an incredibly intimate act that has a strong affect on a person's psyche
DUDE, can someone tell me why it's wrong to fuck 13 year olds????? It's just cereal after all bro, are you telling me they can't handle some cereal, brah?????

>>37869844

Lad come on

>>37870806
Yet you still come here because deep in your heart you know you are worthless.

Also it didn't matter what you have. Truth is truth.
If a man in a lab coat said gravity didn't exist and a homeless man said it did and proved it with an example, who would you believe?
Fuck off blue pilled fag

>>37873012
You're projecting a little too hard, anon. Just remember that someone cared enough about you to try to help and you rebuffed them

Sexual past indicates their sexual future

>>37871657
> start listening to music
>wow rock is really good
>listen to jazz
> start listening to every genre
>never stick to a single genre for more than a month
>never get anything but a very basic appreciation of each genre you go through
> start listening to shit because its easy
>you settle for shitty pop becuase its easy and the only genre you haven't fucked yet

You don't know shit

>>37871657
Also just fuck off already. Stop posting.
Why went reddit just fuck off already?

>>37869815
I agree his argument is retarded, but this anon completely misinterpreted it. Green was saying it would be irrational if his breakfast cereal got angry at him for have different types of breakfast cereal before them. Of course, this argument is fucking retarded, but the anons "refutation" is a misrepresentation at best and a strawman at worst. Definitely not worth saving.