it's friday friday gotta get down on friday

[fuzzyroes]

You know what, I found this essay from a guy posted in a baseball forum, and he was just spot on. It was to a guy who behaves just like you. I'm gonna try and find it. I think it's something you need to read.

You make it sound like sexism is being attracted to women... Sorry man, that's not the case... But the truth is that beautiful women are always going to obtain more attention from men than some fat slob... That's just human nature... You have a problem with that? Take it up with evolution.

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by fuzzyroes

You know what, I found this essay from a guy posted in a baseball forum, and he was just spot on. It was to a guy who behaves just like you. I'm gonna try and find it. I think it's something you need to read.

You make it sound like sexism is being attracted to women... Sorry man, that's not the case... But the truth is that beautiful women are always going to obtain more attention from men than some fat slob... That's just human nature... You have a problem with that? Take it up with evolution.

you are a sexist, and it has nothing to do with being attracted to women. thanks for proving my point you mentally disabled knuckle dragger

[redbreegull]

it's like you literally can't help yourself. "I'm not racist. Speaking of which, Indian women are hairy." "I'm not sexist and don't creep on underage girls. But while we're on the topic, look at this photo of a teenager I still jerk off to even though I am in my mid 30s. It's not weird, it's natural."

[redbreegull]

SHE IS ALL WOMAN

[redbreegull]

WHAT A PIECE OF EYE CANDY

[fuzzyroes]

No, you are 100% wrong. Any psychologist worth anything knows that there are clear gender-differences in behaviour which ultimately play a giant role in occupational interest, hence why despite massive environmental intervention in Western nations to "push females into STEM", the number of females who are willing to do that type of systemic-based work barely fluctuates. No society proves this more than the Scandinavian nations who are ahead of everyone else in "workplace equality" (and have been for decades) and yet somehow possess the greatest ratio of female to male nurses, and male to female engineers on the planet (its like 20 to 1 or 25 to 1 for each). You see, in these first-world nations where there is little poverty, when you give people the option to do anything they want (ie: you downplay environmental factors), you naturally empower biological factors which drive females to jobs that revolve around compassion, caring, nurturing, etc....ie: nursing, teaching, pediatrics, etc. You see far greater female participation in STEM fields in developing nations like India, Southeast Asia, China, etc. which practice far stronger forms of "patriarchy", why? Because there is a giant environmental factor which pushes females to those higher paying fields in those countries: the economic need to provide for your family which may be a bunch of farmers or other poor rural peasants. Girls in these nations aren't "taught" to be IT professionals or engineers, you are talking about societies wherein females are still expected to do nothing but take care of the family, yet alas the economic factor of the environment they belong to gives them a reason to strive for those jobs. That doesn't exist in Canada, or Sweden, or Norway, etc, etc, (or at least it exists at a far less significant rate).

We have entered a dark-age in academia wherein biology supposedly no longer exists, all driven by this bullshit notion of post-modernist egalitarianism. The idea that everyone, regardless of gender, is some sort of "blank slate" is absurd and utter bullshit. They have found behavioural differences in infants that are barely weeks old. They've also found significant links between testosterone and behaviour. They know that children with higher levels of testosterone will develop communication and social sense at a slower pace. The reason why males dominate STEM is because the male brain is wired towards interest in those tasks; just like females dominate nursing, primary education, psychiatry, PSW work, etc, etc. Anyone with a working brain should understand why the sex that is tasked with birthing and raising children would have a natural biological preference towards working with kids, for instance.

[redbreegull]

fuzzyroes SHUT THE FUCK UP

[fuzzyroes]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

WHAT A PIECE OF EYE CANDY

She was hot. I used to fawn over her. I still think she was gorgeous, but I haven't watched the show in like 7 years. When I did, it was still hilarious as ever though. It would piss off a lot of snowflakes though. Saved By The Bell criticized people for being nerdy or fat and ugly or whatever, all the shit that is "bullying" now.

Jesus man, Toughen the fuck up.

[teh b0lly!!1]

ok great thread everyone thanks for participating

[fuzzyroes]

Only on a Billy Corgan forum can a guy get ripped for saying that Kelly Kapowski was hot... Good lord...

[fuzzyroes]

grown man googling this kinda shit

https://media1.tenor.com/images/cb9d...itemid=5529431

The fuck is wrong with you RBG?

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by fuzzyroes

She was hot. I used to fawn over her. I still think she was gorgeous, but I haven't watched the show in like 7 years. When I did, it was still hilarious as ever though. It would piss off a lot of snowflakes though. Saved By The Bell criticized people for being nerdy and ugly or whatever, all the shit that is "bullying" now.

Jesus man, Toughen the fuck up.

why don't you try sticking to one position for more than 10 seconds you spineless coward

you don't even know what you are arguing about probably, you are just spewing whatever worthless shit stupidly floats through your vacuous, vacant skull cavity

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by fuzzyroes

Only on a Billy Corgan forum can a guy get ripped for saying that Kelly Kapowski was hot... Good lord...

you just purposely always misinterpret why people find you offensive so you never have to change

[fuzzyroes]

I'm just having a little fun man. I don't mean it personally. But I am a little concerned about what I perceive is your interest in young girls.

Yo Soy is right. You're like the new Duovamp.

[fuzzyroes]

I reckon you think you're being "ironic", but when there's such a constant pattern of you doing it, It's hard to decipher if it's actually a joke or not. At some point it becomes a little odd at best.

[fuzzyroes]

Like have you dug deep and considered the reason why you have such a fascination with the early Taylor Swift? Because I reckon if she was a 45 year old woman making identical music that it wouldn't appeal to you.

[Disco King]

Did this thread get Fuzzfaced? I'll have to catch up when I get home.

[Disco King]

Sure, Fuzzy's smart in a 13-year-old sort of way, but he's not very sexy.

[Shallowed]

Originally Posted by fuzzyroes

grown man googling this kinda shit

The fuck is wrong with you RBG?

How's the tinned TMNT pasta collection going

[redbreegull]

fuzzyroes you are such a weak fucking tiny dicked fucker

[pinetree]

Originally Posted by Shallowed

How's the tinned TMNT pasta collection going

april o'neil: another one I wanked off to...big animated tits in tight yellow jump suit....fuck

[Shallowed]

ok

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by fuzzyroes

Like have you dug deep and considered the reason why you have such a fascination with the early Taylor Swift? Because I reckon if she was a 45 year old woman making identical music that it wouldn't appeal to you.

I'm going to have to see some evidence of me having an affinity for underage women. Go ahead, please show me some posts where I expressed a specific interest in girls much younger than myself? I'll just wait here for you to pull up something. It shouldn't take so long since I apparently do this all the time.

btw like I already said I didn't even like Taylor Swift until we were both grown drinking-age adults. My preference is definitely for her later music. This is the thing where you tell a lie and just repeat it over and over hoping people will forget it's a lie. You are pathetic.

[smashingjj]

Originally Posted by fuzzyroes

No, you are 100% wrong. Any psychologist worth anything knows that there are clear gender-differences in behaviour which ultimately play a giant role in occupational interest, hence why despite massive environmental intervention in Western nations to "push females into STEM", the number of females who are willing to do that type of systemic-based work barely fluctuates. No society proves this more than the Scandinavian nations who are ahead of everyone else in "workplace equality" (and have been for decades) and yet somehow possess the greatest ratio of female to male nurses, and male to female engineers on the planet (its like 20 to 1 or 25 to 1 for each). You see, in these first-world nations where there is little poverty, when you give people the option to do anything they want (ie: you downplay environmental factors), you naturally empower biological factors which drive females to jobs that revolve around compassion, caring, nurturing, etc....ie: nursing, teaching, pediatrics, etc. You see far greater female participation in STEM fields in developing nations like India, Southeast Asia, China, etc. which practice far stronger forms of "patriarchy", why? Because there is a giant environmental factor which pushes females to those higher paying fields in those countries: the economic need to provide for your family which may be a bunch of farmers or other poor rural peasants. Girls in these nations aren't "taught" to be IT professionals or engineers, you are talking about societies wherein females are still expected to do nothing but take care of the family, yet alas the economic factor of the environment they belong to gives them a reason to strive for those jobs. That doesn't exist in Canada, or Sweden, or Norway, etc, etc, (or at least it exists at a far less significant rate).

We have entered a dark-age in academia wherein biology supposedly no longer exists, all driven by this bullshit notion of post-modernist egalitarianism. The idea that everyone, regardless of gender, is some sort of "blank slate" is absurd and utter bullshit. They have found behavioural differences in infants that are barely weeks old. They've also found significant links between testosterone and behaviour. They know that children with higher levels of testosterone will develop communication and social sense at a slower pace. The reason why males dominate STEM is because the male brain is wired towards interest in those tasks; just like females dominate nursing, primary education, psychiatry, PSW work, etc, etc. Anyone with a working brain should understand why the sex that is tasked with birthing and raising children would have a natural biological preference towards working with kids, for instance.

lol you copied this from a baseball forum?

http://www.bluejaysmessageboard.com/...l-2018/page130

[Shallowed]

lol

[Sonic Johnny]

This place makes my twitter feed look like fucken mensa

[smashingjj]

you should check out the pumpkins forum, it's exploring exciting new levels in retardedness

[Sonic Johnny]

JJ i found some corners of facebook that would blow your mind hey

[FoolofaTook]

Originally Posted by yo soy el mejor

people like jonny and ryan think they're not like "other men" just cause they play guitar or went to college and are beta males. but beta male misogynists are like those moderate/casual racists- the least self-aware of the bunch.

i am an omega male. and no i'm not like 'other men.' I'm WORSE. Waaay worse.

[smashingjj]

Originally Posted by smashingjj

lol you copied this from a baseball forum?

http://www.bluejaysmessageboard.com/...l-2018/page130

it also had very little to do with this discussion in the first place, you just saw some republicans high-fiving each other on that forum after that post was made and thought you'd leave the same impression here?

i'm impressed