Escorts have less diseases than randoms on tinder. This isn't a joke, it's an actual fact. Escorts often have a strict no condom policy and it's absolutely strict because their livelihood is selling their bodies to other men, they have to stay clean to keep making money. Tinder whores don't give a shit and fuck every new guy without a condom.
Seriously, $500/month on escorts will give you a way better experience than $500/month on a dating app. For this to work, they better team up with Onlyfans and give Tinder Premium users a free onlyfans subscription to all women they match with or something.
Kind of hard to train women to be proper ladies when you tell women they're the same as men and no one should tell them what to do...
Just literal exploitation of people's loneliness. Dating apps literally helped cause the problem of loneliness and now are trying to charge absurd prices to fix it. Same (((liberal))) business model again and again.
Oh, I know how to get around the Catholic system but I'm just saying if Catholics actually want to fix their system, that is how.
If you want less gay priests in the catholic church, there is a very easy fix to this. Let priests marry women. Problem solved, the end.
By the way, it's not uncatholic to let priests marry. Up until the 1100s, Catholic Priests could marry. There's absolutely no literature in the Bible that bars it. In fact some of the Apostles had wives. If the Apostles could take wives, what makes Catholic Priests think they are holier than thou by banning their members from taking wives?
The problem with banning Priests from taking wives is that gay men who want to hide the fact they are gay, join the priesthood. It's the perfect cover for gay guys. As a priest you have a rule banning marriage to women so all suspicion around you being gay is deflected as your devotion to God. This is a huge incentive for gay people to become priests. If you allowed priests to marry women, you would singlehandedly remove the effective cover for gay men. People would again start suspecting if the priest is gay because he hasn't taken a wife.
Furthermore, you will increase the quality of your priests if you allow them to marry also. Most men with good genetics marry. Yes, Jesus was obviously an exception but no man will ever come close to Jesus, not even Catholic Priests. In fact, most men who are like Jesus likely marry rather than not. Many good men specifically choose not to become a priest because they'd rather marry. You can still be close to Jesus and go to heaven without becoming a priest. There's nothing special about being a priest so why would any man sacrifice the ability to be married just to be a priest? Only extremely power hungry men or gays would.
The current rule to ban priests from marriage leads to low quality priests. Remove the rule.
Are you talking about the USA or Rockstar? lol.
Never. But also, someone who got better, is likely not someone who will broadcast it. The people who don't get better tell everyone as a cry for help.
Only guy I know who takes antidepressants tells me they didn't cure his depression at all but when he stops taking them he feels even worse so he keeps taking them.
Sounds like a total scam to me. It sounds to me like antidepressants just make you become dependent on antidepressants to not feel even worse but do nothing to actually improve thus creating a person who is essentially "coerced" into a lifetime of pills.
It was posted here before. I think the main take-away is MS obviously sees this closed dumb-AI as the future because they can control how the AI interprets information, which is going to be dangerous for the future. If "trust the experts" was a problem already with covid-19, just wait until "the expert" is an AI controlled by Microsoft.
Exactly. The technology is there to do it.
Not a bad idea actually.
The swedish women? Sure, that's acceptable. I'll read them the verse of the Quran about beating sex slaves.
Japan is a homogenous society. They don't let in immigrants that aren't Japanese very much at all. The west actually realized this potential problem of women entering the workforce and gaining "equality" (leading to reduced child births) back in the 1960s which is why they opened up immigration to non-whites and have been pushing diversity and inclusion heavily in the last couple decades. The birth rate hasn't been high enough from domestic white people to satisfy our capitalist's demand for new humans since the 90s. Our leaders saw this coming and have been banking on immigration to fill the void. You think the ban on abortion now was a coincidence?
The next step is an increase in policies that increase taxes on men and redistribute the money to mothers. The tradcucks will hail this sort of redistribution as a good thing but don't expect the policies to have much impact. The root problem is women's rights. As long as women are given "equality", men have 0 reason to have children.
Think about it like this: If you as a man choose to have a child with a woman and that woman can leave you for any reason she wants, take the kids with her and then get the courts to force you to support that child and the woman for another 20 years, why would you ever have children? What benefit is there for you to have children? It's all risk and 0 reward.
Having children with a modern feminist woman is probably one of the dumbest things you can do as a man.
The best way to protest this is to send more refugees to sweden to rape the women.
- I mean, I get $300m after I blow the $30m on whores and whores ensures I can meet the stipulations of actually spending it all given the soft-nature of the contractual arrangement.
- I wouldn't want to not let my fellow Aryan soldiers get the reward for their military conquest, would I? Didn't Alexander the Great enjoy Asian pussy also?
- Valid question.
- Let's be real, that was everyone's first idea when the glasses came out.
But I won't dent it. The only thing I enjoy doing in life is having sex with hot women. You're correct, I haven't done that in a while (since last June). I am going to Thailand in March though where I'll get plenty. I actually don't find enjoyment in anything else in life. All I enjoy doing is fucking attractive women.
The right do undermine themselves because I know if I stood up there and said we should start locking up our enemies, they'd say I'm a Nazi and MAH FREEDOM OF SPEECH, then elect some castrated pansy faggot boy and complain how nothing changes. It's why I've given up on politics. Until we have a Julius Caesar in place to force the kind of society the right-wing wants with an army to kill anyone who disagrees, anything we want to promote is worthless. The founding fathers didn't fix the problems facing them using words. They used guns BY ACTUALLY SHOOTING THEIR GUNS AT THEIR ENEMIES and not just going to the range and taking pictures with beer girls.
You are right about a lot of right-wingers living in the 1700s. Whenever I hear a lot of people discuss Traditional American values/beliefs, it's an ideal that could have only been realized then, at that time.
I've always been a fan of Benjamin Franklin's saying:
Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. - Benjamin Franklin
Why do I like this saying so much? Because he admits that only people with a shared value system can live in this hypothetical "free" society. Why? Because if everyone has the same value-system (virtuous people), then no one would use their freedom to do anything anyone else thought was bad (they wouldn't use freedom to be corrupt or vicious), since they were all virtuous people. So what's the conclusion from this? Freedom in itself is worthless because if you are all good people and thus will not use your freedom to do anything bad, then you have no need of freedom anyway because you'd never have used your freedom to do anything anyone else didn't want you to do. Without even realizing it Benjamin Franklin is actually advocating total authoritarianism under the same objective moral value system.
That just gave me a great idea too. You can literally program it to make ugly women disappear. Unless the woman is close to your proximity such that you'll potentially run into her, so you have to see her. You could program the google glasses to just project the proper backgrounds and objects around ugly women so that you wouldn't even notice their existence.
They blocked that? No wonder it was a flop for consumers. If they led with that, they'd have sold out... until the gynocratic government eventually banned it.
If I was actually good at coding and stuff, what I'd try to do is put a naked filter on google glasses. Basically, when you looked at a woman, you could engage the "remove all her clothes" feature, which then would use top of the line AI/CGI/3DArt/Whatever technology to impose the computer's best guess of what her naked body looks like so the entire time you're looking at her through google glasses she appears naked to you.
So yes, reality.
I think any other things one might want to pursue as a man are going to be highly correlated to access to cheap "quality" pussy. Remember why question was the most pro-man place not the wealthiest place. Clearly one may have to weigh access to resources with everything else. But for example say you wanted to not have to worry about women charging you with rape, I bet in a country with cheap access to quality pussy, this would be far less of an issue. Same for if you wanted to marry and start a family, you'd find countries with access to quality cheap pussy the best for this. Even things like "brotherhood and friendship among men", you'll find if all the men have access to cheap quality pussy the men are going to have more brotherhood among themselves. Not including access to resources aside. Also, there might be religious considerations to consider. As other mentioned some muslim societies might be pro-men but not be what some people want because they can't drink alcohol. Banning alcohol isn't really a pro/con male-centric thing so a society can still be pro-male with differences.
I think you're kind of shifting the purpose of what I am asking. I already know which country is best if I want free healthcare, which country is best if I want the chance to have the most resources, etc... I'm asking which country treats men the best overall and to me, countries that have access to cheap quality pussy likely treat men the best. You can disagree with this premise but then give me an example.
Yes, that could very well be true.
Most men in western countries at least have absolutely everything else worth pursuing.
What's retarded is pretending no you're the good guy, no he's the bad guy. Just take what you want and skip the moral pandering.
Hint: The (((Americans))) want nuclear war.