EyeBRollin
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2015
- Messages
- 10,536
- Reaction score
- 8,536
- Age
- 37
Dodge. Why do you think society should mandate out of wedlock births?It's not a duck.
She asks it casually, mid-sip. And you feel the floor open up, because the honest answer is work, gym, and a couple shows you're half-watching.
Women rarely say this out loud, but a man with a life is attractive before he says a word. The guy who spent Saturday deep-sea fishing and came back with photos and a story — he walks in already interesting.
The "22 Rules" pushed me to build a life worth talking about. Turns out the fastest way to be interesting to women is to be interested in your own life first.
Dodge. Why do you think society should mandate out of wedlock births?It's not a duck.
Next Monday you'll feel more confident. After the gym you'll feel more confident. After one more drink you'll feel more confident. After you get a better haircut, a better jacket, a better job.
You've been "getting ready" for two years.
She's standing ten feet away right now. She'll be gone in four minutes. No amount of preparation will manufacture the courage that only comes from moving your feet.
Walk over. Stumble through the first sentence. Let it be clumsy. Let it be imperfect. You will feel more alive in those ten seconds than you have all month.
It's not a dodge, you've asked that repeatedly. I said before, people should take responsibility. But they don't, so even wedlock isn't practical in our selfish society. Why do you think killing unborn children is such a great response? There's no ideal outcome in this, because of people's selfish behaviors. You're concerned about Covid killing the elderly and those in poor health, why no concern for the defenseless unborn?Dodge. Why do you think society should mandate out of wedlock births?
So your okay with women murdering babies just because you aren't the ones carrying them? That's extremely self centred. Don't you have any morals?It makes no sense to me. Men don’t carry children so why the fvck should we care?
This question has a false premise. Abortion is not murder.So your okay with women murdering babies just because you aren't the ones carrying them?
Don’t you care about babies born out of wedlock?That's extremely self centred. Don't you have any morals?
That is not a solution. You want abortion banned. What is your solution to the out of wedlock children that will be forced into society?It's not a dodge, you've asked that repeatedly. I said before, people should take responsibility.
You asked her if she wanted to grab coffee. Then you asked if the time worked. Then you asked if the place was okay. Then you asked if she'd prefer tea.
Four questions. Four chances for her to say no. Four signals that you're terrified of making a decision.
Plan it. Pick the place. Pick the time. Tell her where to meet you. She'll either show up or she won't.
Either way, you look like a man instead of a scared little boy.
Have to push on this as the premise is a mischaracterization. No one is “for” abortion. The pro-choice argument accepts that people are going to fvck no matter what and there will always be unplanned pregnancies. Banning abortion does not stop abortions from happening nor does it cause people to have safer sex. As for the abortion is murder camp, this has been litigated (and lost) in court in every Western country.The fundamental premise of the abortion argument, whether you’re for or against it, pretty much boils down to at which point you believe an accumulation of cells becomes a human being.
It should be obvious no sane person has an abortion (nor encourages one) just for kicks, nor did I imply that.No one is “for” abortion.
I think most people in the "pro-life" camp want to legally ban abortion more-so for ethical reasons, not practical ones. They believe an embryo is a human life and has the right to live, and to abort it is taking away the life of a human. Banning anything in general is largely ineffective.Banning abortion does not stop abortions from happening nor does it cause people to have safer sex. As for the abortion is murder camp, this has been litigated (and lost) in court in every Western country.
As I said, my objection is on moral grounds. Is killing all these unborn children more convenient for people, and society. Probably so. Doesn't make it right. Over 33% of children in the US are born out of wedlock now, and I imagine that number is rising. I don't see why dealing with these children should be any different. But I don't expect to ever see abortion made illegal in my lifetime, so it's not really a big concern of mine. I believe in self responsibility. If a person has a child, they should take care of it. Some have limited means, and there will always be poverty, but our society does have safety nets. They're not luxurious, nor should they be, but they're there.What is your solution to the out of wedlock children that will be forced into society?
I heard someone talking about this the other day. That one argument in favor of abortion is that it will happen anyway. He was saying that's a pretty lousy argument. Because everything that is illegal happens anyway. Murder is illegal, but it happens all too often. Does that mean we should legalize it?Banning abortion does not stop abortions from happening nor does it cause people to have safer sex.
By 5 or 6 months if they are born they'll survive. At two weeks it has all human organs and appendages.Abortion is not murder. That is a faulty premise. Secondly, how does it benefit society to mandate out of wedlock child birth?
You asked her if she wanted to grab coffee. Then you asked if the time worked. Then you asked if the place was okay. Then you asked if she'd prefer tea.
Four questions. Four chances for her to say no. Four signals that you're terrified of making a decision.
Plan it. Pick the place. Pick the time. Tell her where to meet you. She'll either show up or she won't.
Either way, you look like a man instead of a scared little boy.
some places in the world do exactly that. the massage therapist has special training on how to do the punch in the right place. when it fails the baby is born with terrible facial defects.By 5 or 6 months if they are born they'll survive. At two weeks it has all human organs and appendages.
If its not murder then they should have someone punch them in stomach and pass the baby into the toilet.
seriously, one of the ways this was dealt with in history is to ban out of wedlock sex. with very harsh punishment for breaking that law. probably the punishment has to be to the woman... as she is the gate.That is not a solution. You want abortion banned. What is your solution to the out of wedlock children that will be forced into society?
I’m against government having such a role in its citizens bedroom. At least this is a solution answer though.seriously, one of the ways this was dealt with in history is to ban out of wedlock sex. with very harsh punishment for breaking that law. probably the punishment has to be to the woman... as she is the gate.
Not the government, the family clan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan. Just like on other topics the elders look after the younger until they are mature enough to do it themself and also to guide and protect. The result, of course, is younger marriages again. Sex is the initial driving force to create a new family. By removing the requirement for marriage before sex and loyalty to the same we break the foundations of much of the cultures we actually like.I’m against government having such a role in its citizens bedroom. At least this is a solution answer though.
She calls you when her car breaks down. When she needs help moving. When some guy she's actually dating treats her badly.
You're the listener. The reliable one. The guy who would treat her so much better, if she'd just open her eyes.
She won't. You trained her to see you as the low-effort option — the friend who requires zero risk and zero investment. Every favor dug the hole deeper.
The "22 Rules" break the pattern. You'll stop auditioning for a role she already cast and become the man she chases instead. It starts with Rule 1.
That's true, but that's from a legal standpoint. Courts in the West all push the feminist agenda, and abortion is a big part of that. A good deal of this forum has been about how courts favor women.As for the abortion is murder camp, this has been litigated (and lost) in court in every Western country.
en.wikipedia.org
No. For one it’s not a baby. But you’ll be brought up on enough other charges.So if we go around hitting pregnant women in the belly with a baseball bat and her baby dies we didn't commit a murder?
Yup. This is the point all of you are missing. The manosphere is typically against abortion because it further destroys the already nonexistent self-agency of women. They simply become more irresponsible because of it, and men are the fall guys as usual. If we don’t pay for it in the direct via child support payments for 18 years, then we’ll deal with it indirectly when we’re trying to prevent the collapse of civilization due to the decline in population growth (and thus, the population as a whole) thanks to women’s standards being blown out of proportion since they confuse being desired as a woman/wife with being fu¢kable.Why just not get pregnant in the first place? Versus killing babies?
Attraction runs on a clock.
She flirted for weeks. Touched your arm. Found reasons to be alone with you. And you were careful. Respectful. Waiting for the right moment.
The moment had a shelf life. It expired around month two, and by the time you asked her out, she'd quietly filed you under "little brother."
One of the hardest lessons inside the 22 Rules: women rarely wait. Interest either grows or it decays, and nothing decays it faster than a man who never moves.
Make the move while she's still inventing reasons to be near you.