@Zephyr Blackfish Oh! That's something I've been meaning to talk about for a long time.
Girls being attractive comes down to two things: Nice, and pretty. You can only have one. If she has both she's faking at least one of them.
Girls who are nice are attractive on that basis and their positive features are magnified, a happy plump girl is far more attractive than a skinny bitch. If a girl is nice her looks won't matter, you'll like her anyway and want to love her for that reason.
Girls who are pretty are attractive on that basis, but often will not have a developed personality to match. This is the inferior choice.
This also applies to men, with two different attributes: Handsome, and strong. You can only have one, if you have both you're faking.
Women love strong men, and their inner strength shines through and gives them what they need even if they are a bit of a pork belly.
Women love handsome men because they think they might have some strength within them, but often this is macho or fake and leads to skinny bitch behavior.

**This is why nice guys and strong women are not attractive. They are playing by the wrong rules.**

https://youtu.be/iAPaVD83Gcc

@Jake the Exile well F for me being nice.

You were asking what the difference was between arousal and attraction and that's it

Porn desensitizes you to the pretty aspect and lets you focus more on nice. How much you value nice will then determine how you value women.

By nice guy I mean Nice Guy, the ones who emulate female behavior to appeal to females and then are surprised and angered by them not being attracted to that.

Being caring and considerate and loving your woman is a welcome bonus, you just need to learn the difference between nice and kind, and not to forsake your strength. That's what women need.

That is often why things go in circles when you try to play by a woman's rules, they don't want someone exactly like them. They want someone better than them.

It becomes a recursive loop and that's the source of all relationship troubles, not being man enough.

Oh no, I meant nice as in, y'know, occasionally doing favours, being polite, all that shit.
Although maybe it's just a case of being used as a side-man. Wouldn't surprise me tbh.

A real man would not allow his woman to cheat, he would go out of his way to set boundaries and provide for her.

For most men, "manning up" fails them because their instinct is to leave, but that betrays all the kindness that the woman thought you had.

So it becomes a balance.

All the shit I've done in the past and would do again.

That's the issue.

Ah fuck it, I'll figure my way out.

https://youtu.be/eUoMlyllriI

https://voiceofeurope.com/2019/11/germany-antifa-extremists-brutally-assault-female-real-estate-employee-in-her-own-home/

@Flavius Stilicho And the left pretends nothing has happened on Biden's part.

It much like Trump getting called out for everything done since being elected (even before taking office, i.e responsible literally for that Obama did). And after taking office, blamed for what Obama did, because there's no point in blaming Obama as he was no longer in office (ignore the fact that same people never called out Obama during his term).

Trump apparently is not allowed to investigate any Dem politician because it could be portrayed as personal interest. Meanwhile was was OK for Obama to wiretap Trump tower during 2016 election. And it was OK for biden to literally quid pro quo, but it's not OK to investigate it because it might look like quid pro quo on Trump's part.

then they say thats whataboutism

literally had that conversation

'why does bidens thing exonerate trump'

Repeat after me: It's not an either-or.

Ask them straight up, if the Bidens were bought off by Ukraine, would they really wanna know? Would they still support them? Would they let him get the nomination? Do they care about truth or just playing teams sports? Ask them starkly and see what they say.

When asked about Russia, most Trump-supporters thought it was a witch-hunt, but we were confident enough in our guy that we said, "Bring it on, you got nothing." Same with his taxes.

Yeah this is some serious partisanism anyone ever hear of this happening before, this seems like a new downward slide or maybe we just never been able to hear or see stuff like this before.

To be fair, it's nothing new. People did it with Reagan, Obama, Bubba Bill, Bush Jr. and probably many others

@Boop / 브파 / C'thUwU
'why does bidens thing exonerate trump'
...and then they continue to attack Trump and ignore Biden (despite biden still in the race and thus politically relevant) even within the assumption that Biden committed a crime (which should justify him being investigated and exonerate Trump).

Even when they admit Biden being wrong, they want to ignore it. Even when they admit Trump wanting investigation on a criminal they admit is worthy of investigating, investigating him is impeachable (if Trump).

The idea of "whataboutism" is about as ridiculous as "mansplaining" or "sealioning".

According to the left, even **factual** objections are invalid.

i get it if its like 'trump should be impeached? but what about the rabbits in northern syria?'

but when its literally just switching the person, same act, same everything

itsp ointing out a double standard

How about the fact that him investigating corruption and protecting the integrity of the election is literally the President's job? They're impeaching him for doing his job.

I mean, "mansplaining" is just sexism against men (and blatant hypocrisy of "feminism is about equality"). But I think "sealioning" takes the cake. Do you remember when sealioning was a "gotcha"?

so basically its playing to get the last word

Basically, it's the feminist way of dismissing any critique against feminism from people they don't want to include in the conversation (MRAs or generally anti-feminists).

Feminists think they should get to tell lies, and not be called out for lies. That's "sealioning".

When the "sealioning" was brought up, I though it was a parody of feminism and leftism. It turned out they *actually* think it's an argument.

The counter to "mansplaining" is empathy. If someone accuses you of mansplaining, ask if they think you lack empathy to understand how a woman might feel and if they say yes, then point out their attempts to civilize you are futile; and if they say no, then ask how they feel about women who share your position?

For instance, abortion. Feminists say men shouldn't have an opinion on it, yet there are plenty of pro-life women who make the exact same arguments you're making.

almost like ideas arent exclusive to genders, sexualities, races, or whatever else....

almost like ideas are universal and belong to no one