If you are ugly you do not deserve to be loved or liked by people

>accept, change, or die
Fuck you, I'll change the world instead. If somethings got to change to make room for the other, it'll be this society and not me.

Bumps for the Lord Supreme.

>>39358335
>These axioms are something Elliot failed to understand.
I bet you're either an SJW, feminist, cop or a Starbucks worker to put up this nonsense to prevent the following. As these axioms NEVER have to be understood. IT IS A CRIME that people are socially rejecting other people on the basis of their STATUS, caused by looks, sexual or other success or wealth, and we need to work to make it punishable. You should choose your friends on the basis of their interests and life's views, NOT on the basis of STATUS.

>>39358335
>Don't be like Elliot, if you can't hack it in this rat race then bottle up all your pain so it doesn't inconvenience me.

>>39359100
That`s something normies will always fail to understand,regardless of how much we try and tell them.

what does being ugly have to do with friends? if you care about how your male friends look youre gay

>>39359163
They do not even WANT to understand, as they want to have their little excuse to pick and reject people, on the basis of their status. Normies are crooked beings.

>>39358335
no fucking shit dude
guess we're all fucked
things changed: 0

>>39359263
True shit, I met a few faggot ass niggas now that I think of it. Why the FUCC were they so concerned with my face??

>>39359314
how were they concerned with your face?

>>39359271
Too fucking true. Then they try and make US out to be the fucked-up ones.

>>39359100
It's not a crime to choose not to associate with people. Freedom of association exists for a reason

>>39360085
You are though and that's why people don't want to hang around you. If you want to be accepted you must act in a way that encourages others to accept you. Pretty simple stuff

>>39361263
Freedom of association should be limited, just like freedom of hiring someone to have a job. You can not discriminate anyone on the basis of race, gender, social status, or looks when you are hiring people to work for you. Similarly, you can't discriminate people on the basis of these aspects when you're serving customers in your shop or some other enterprise. Same should go for forming up social relationships, esp. today, as EVERY FUCKING THING is dependent on social networks,

>>39360085
Yeah, they are the fucked-up ones, almost to the point of being sociopaths.

BTW, have you people already found out about these? It's going to be magasmashing, if we get to see all of these documents before YouTube shuts down his channel.

https://youtu.be/cCNXEHIcHOs

>>39361473
I laughed hard at this. To prevent discrimination you're going to encourage discrimination. No wonder nobody wants anything to do with you.

>>39361473
Forgot to ask: do you also want state-issued girlfriends? lmao

>>39358335
Society should just stop miseducating people. The mindset you have is that of the average female nowadays. What you say is correct, the world doesn't owe you anything and most people have your deranged view on relationships. Doesn't make it true or right however.
I still think men should collectively abandon women. They won't learn otherwise and they will never be grateful.

>>39361533
I did not encourage anyone into discrimination. You're pulling that out of your ass, as a pathetic attempt to invalidate what I said. Try something else. It is not discrimination to expect that people form up their social relationships according to something else than status. Nor it is discrimination to state the truth about normies.

I do not need a state-issued gilrfriend or any other state-issued friends for that matter. I'm a solitary person.

>>39361613
It's exactly discrimination. You're now advocating for "positive" discrimination instead of "negative" discrimination. It's like affirmative action.

>I'm a solitary person.
>B-BUT YOU CAN'T CHOOSE NOT BE FRIENDS BECAUSE I'M A LOSER IF I WANT TO BE FRIENDS WITH YOU
lol

>>39361609
>person is boring, uninteresting and horrible to look at and be around
>choose not to be around them
>THIS IS DERANGED
Also how many girlfriends have you had? Women are more grateful than men. Every girl I've been with has been super grateful for some of the small things I've done. Men don't tend to care.

>>39358335
You reading this from my mother's personal handbook or something?

Nice bait.
10/10

File: 4-Rodger-AP.jpg (235KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 2048x1536px

>>39361650
>You're now advocating for "positive" discrimination instead of "negative" discrimination.
Nice try, but does not work. It is NOT "positive discrimination" to choose someone as your friend on the basis of something else than their social status, for instance on the basis of their interests or life's views. It would be "positive discrimination" to deliberately choose the ones with lower status, as your friends, no matter what are their other qualities such as their interests or life's views.

>>39361859
But that's what you're encouraging if you make it illegal to not be friends with certain people. People will be "friends" with them just to be safe from said law.

And as the OP said, you have to cultivate interests and hobbies that make you appealing to others when you're ugly. So in effect you're agreeing with the central premise of the OP.

>>39361650
>>I'm a solitary person.
>>B-BUT YOU CAN'T CHOOSE NOT BE FRIENDS BECAUSE I'M A LOSER IF I WANT TO BE FRIENDS WITH YOU
>lol
Lol, you really are a complete idiot are you not. You're acting so stupidly you can't be but an SJW or a feminist, not finding any other arguments against Elliot or his people than your nonsense. I am a solitary person, but I can STILL find it an injustice, if people choose their friends according to other people's status. It is wrong, generally speaking, as ALL OF US need SOCIAL NETWORKS to survive in the present world. I too, do have a need for such networks, even if I am a solitary person, just like EVERY OTHER solitary person there is.

>>39361981
So explain why you're entitled to socialisation which isn't actually a need if you aren't entitled to food and shelter which is a need.

File: 1503055878102.jpg (27KB, 534x401px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 534x401px

>>39361933
Do you say the same about it being illegal to not hire people on the basis of them being of different race than your own? That it is "positive discrimination" if people will hire people solely ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SKILLS AND TALENTS, dismissing their race. It should be illegal to socially reject people who have lower status, in cases you have other things in common with them, such as interests or life's view. That does not lead anyone to pick someone as their friend on the basis of them having lower status, it only teaches them to focus on something else and dismiss the status.

No need to say, that in communities such as work places or schools, social discrimination in all forms and for any reason should be SEVERELY PUNISHED. You do not need to be everyone's best friend, but you need to include everyone in your community, not discriminating them to the point you won't talk to them or do not accept them to sit in the same lunch table etc.

File: 1502657662569.png (57KB, 500x382px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x382px

>>39358335
His only mistake was a weak kill count. Just 6. If he went to some crowded chad stacy party it would be much better.
RIP Supreme Gentleman. At least you tried.

>>39362015
I can believe it that you do not know that SOCIAL BELONGING is one of humans' BASIC NEEDS. Also it's vital in the modern world where everything comes via social networks as I explained.

I already got really tired of this conversation. That is what discussing with normies does to you. Makes you feel exhausted.

I'll go do some nice things now.

>>39362232
>I can'T believe
Sorry, typo.

>>39362197
>That it is "positive discrimination" if people will hire people solely ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SKILLS AND TALENTS
That's not what positive discrimination means in this context.

>social discrimination in all forms and for any reason should be SEVERELY PUNISHED
Yet you haven't explained why. You just keep reiterating your position.

>>39362232
>I can believe it that you do not know that SOCIAL BELONGING is one of humans' BASIC NEEDS
It's not. You will not die without social interaction. Criminals are placed in solitary confinement for years on end. They don't die.

>Also it's vital in the modern world where everything comes via social networks as I explained.
You didn't explain anything, brainlet. You merely stated your opinion and claimed it is true. You can get jobs without social contacts therefore it is not a need.

>when people disagree with me I get exhausted
This is why you should be alone. It's better for everyone

>>39362293
>That's not what positive discrimination means in this context.
The person I replied to, claimed that I am encouraging "positive discrimination" through wanting it made illegal to not be friends with someone of lower status. So I clarified what I meant by presenting a question whether he thinks it is "positive discrimination" if people will hire people solely ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SKILLS AND TALENTS, dismissing their race. That is comparable to choosing you friends on the basis of their interests and life's view, dismissing their social status.

>Yet you haven't explained why. You just keep reiterating your position.
Why the fuck should I even explain that? It is pretty OBVIOUS, how much suffering social ostracism causes both at work places and schools. It not only shuts you out of social networks that are CRUCIAL for the SURVIVAL in the modern society, where ALL things come via social networks or are at least impacted by them. It also makes you a target of CONSTANT MENTAL ABUSE, as people usually try to make the target of social rejection look guilty, acting hostile towards that person as if he had done something wrong, so that the ones who rejected him do not get accused of social rejection. These things are very OBVIOUS to ANYONE, but in the lack of ANY counter argument to what I have said, you pathetically tried to invalidate my points by pointing out the lack of explanation.

To be continued.

File: elliot-rodger.jpg (43KB, 641x436px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 641x436px

>>39362293
>It's not. You will not die without social interaction. Criminals are placed in solitary confinement for years on end. They don't die.
BASIC NEEDS do not only consist of those that are needed for physical survival. That part has been changing lately.

>You didn't explain anything, brainlet. You merely stated your opinion and claimed it is true. You can get jobs without social contacts therefore it is not a need.
Maybe I did not EXPLAIN, but I mentioned the fact. Try to find some other IRRELEVANT points to invalidate what I say, in you screaming lack of any proper counter arguments. Anyone knows it, that A LOT of jobs come via social networks these days, and that at least you need to have a SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT and sufficient amount of followers there, to appear an acceptable worker to the majority of the employers. There has even been made studies on this topic.

>This is why you should be alone. It's better for everyone
I got exhausted for having to explain what is OBVIOUS, not having someone disagreeing with me. Besides, I am operating with a foreign language, that English is to me.

I do not really know what you are. Either your brain does not work well, or you are not using it properly, to be able to object someone who seems to admire a mass murderer, presenting totally irrelevant points.

Sorry, no more time for this. You can now safely verbally slaughter me, as I won't be replying.

>>39358335
>If you are ugly you do not deserve to be loved or liked by people around you.
True, if you're ugly you're probably from a genetically inferior bloodline so it's better if it dies out.

>>39362875
>>39362925
You're saying the same thing over and over.

>That is comparable to choosing you friends on the basis of their interests and life's view, dismissing their social status.
It's not.

>It not only shuts you out of social networks that are CRUCIAL for the SURVIVAL in the modern society
It isn't.

>acting hostile towards that person as if he had done something wrong
Which is generally the reason why people get rejected socially.

>you pathetically tried to invalidate my points by pointing out the lack of explanation
This is valid grounds to dismiss something.

>BASIC NEEDS do not only consist of those that are needed for physical survival
You're redefining "need" in order to suit your position. This isn't an argument.

>Try to find some other IRRELEVANT points to invalidate what I say
By failing to explain anything you haven't actually made a point. Saying you need social contacts in modern society isn't a point if you don't explain why you think it is so.

>that A LOT of jobs come via social networks these days
While I don't doubt that social networks help they aren't a necessity. I also doubt the amount of jobs you say require a social network.

>There has even been made studies on this topic.
Then you should be able to post some.

>I got exhausted for having to explain what is OBVIOUS
But you haven't explained anything. You've just begged the question the entire time. Perhaps you're exhausted because you've been trying to explain your position but are unable to do so adequately.

>Either your brain does not work well, or you are not using it properly
This is projection

>to be able to object someone who seems to admire a mass murderer
And this statement is emblematic of your failure to understand. The OP criticises Elliot and those like him. How you got the idea that someone admires him is beyond me especially when I'm arguing against you and your line of reasoning seems quite similar to his.

>>39361677
Very few people actually hit all these adjectives at once. Very few people even here hit all these adjectives. Most people who don't get laid in the real world are just normal dudes who are a bit shy, which society blows out of proportion for no reason.
The fault here is partially with the individuals, everyone can make an effort to be better, surely, but society as a whole tends to be unforgiving on many minor character traits, especially in men.
Also this elliot guy wasn't even remotely ugly. He did make an effort however not in the right way.
If you were to correctly rephrase the OPs statement it would be:
If you're a normal looking fellow with no outstanding hobbies/ career prospects and lacking in social skills, meaning not being the life of the party most of the time, hide in your basement and don't demand anything.