Debate user BoxerShorts47 on "strawmans" and logical fallacies, definitions of ephebophilia, how to MAGA, religion, Sailor Moon and more

My Kiwi Presidential Platform is: Deport @BoxerShorts47 for bad faith representing the white man while being a Jew and a pedo.

That's it. That is all I'm doing, everything else will otherwise be the same and I will do absolutely nothing else for the next 4 years after I deport Boxy into shark infested waters.

Vote for Zeke Von Genbu 2022

I'm one of many many anime swordsman avatars from a video game and I have an eyepatch. That's how you know how capable I am.
 
Is this thread going to devolve to arguing about and quoting shit said almost two years ago? If so, this says two things about current society of Boxtopia.

Boxy's retardation is literally timeless.

2022 Boxy is boring as fuck, so much so that we need to pine for the golden years of 2020. Where are the bitchute videos you fucking lazy wetback jewish ladyboy nigger?
I've been here on this thread from the start, but I just found that quote....apposite....
 
The ethnostate has only been normalized
If you think that fringe views being espoused and endorsed by a couple of weirdos and their handful of retarded followers constitutes a "normalization", you're wrong. These aren't the first tender shoots of some great new counterculture - they're just grifters, grifting retards on the internet.
Remember, Boxy hates blowjobs and anal sex.
I can't get over the fact that he's against oral sex. I just can't. Of all the weird fringe views he holds, this might frankly be the most outlandish, one of the hardest to find anyone, even amongst the dregs of society, who'd support it. There's probably plenty of self-loathing mutt incel pedos, but even these complete degenerates would never think of opposing blowjobs.

Hey Boxer, is eating puss self-subjugation on the dude's part? What about 69ing? And if, in your view it is a submissive or self-subjugating act, why don't you like women doing it?
It's because you want a strong woman to violate you with a BBC strap on 24/7, I know, but I felt like asking anyway.
 
I can't get over the fact that he's against oral sex. I just can't. Of all the weird fringe views he holds, this might frankly be the most outlandish, one of the hardest to find anyone, even amongst the dregs of society, who'd support it. There's probably plenty of self-loathing mutt incel pedos, but even these complete degenerates would never think of opposing blowjobs.


When incel pedos find your stance retarded, it is time to admit the debate is lost.
 
You know I am on page 151 of this thread and I am damn sure there is nothing to add here that hasn’t been said but god damn /pol/ was a mistake if this is the ‘genius’ that they predicted for so long. I can only hope this retard does become the WN savior because that would be hilarious. Especially if clown world proves him to be Trump 2.0.

Spoiler me: did he ever release his manifesto?
 
Spoiler me: did he ever release his manifesto?
No he never has, and in case you haven't heard the reason why, his narrative for why he hasn't is because he keeps rewriting it every single time a major event occurs. Yes it is as if he mass deletes and retypes the entire thing all over again every time their is some BLM protest, an election, or any other major political event he just wipes out and rewrites everything all over again. He at most released a handful of pages of one draft as a preview about a year ago, which is just this thread's talking points spewed out again about all the same shit.

Efficiency is not a Boxtopia standard you see.
 
Last edited:
This is the link to the "Racism Debunked" section of the manifesto.
Next section will be, "Post Racial" is a lie.

That is one section.

No he never has, and in case you haven't heard the reason why, his narrative for why he hasn't is because he keeps rewriting it every single time a major event occurs. Yes it is as if he mass deletes and retypes the entire thing all over again every time their is some BLM protest, an election, or any other major political event he just wipes out and rewrites everything all over again. He at most released a handful of pages of one draft as a preview about a year ago, which is just this thread's talking points spewed out again about all the same shit.

Efficiency is not a Boxtopia standard you see.

He did type this, which is implied to be part of The Manifesto, if not all of it.
 
That is one section.



He did type this, which is implied to be part of The Manifesto, if not all of it.
This post is a certified "Rated Informative" sticker moment.

:informative:

For all newfags to this thread, Boxy went on a huge sperg out over stickers very early on in this thread's life cycle and demanded his posts be rated informative while he explained how AoC was made by feminism, everyone married 12-14 year olds 200 years ago, jews are actually huwite, or whatever other faggoty shit he tried to explain. He also got incredibly buttmad if you rated him dumb or MATI, and would threaten to leave the thread over it because he is a nigger ape.
 
@Scipio Americanus, notice how Boxy ignored your question about standards, about being white. You have him on the ropes, and he knows it.
He or she lost. The TERFs always lose when they're forced to admit that they want to segregate female spaces from transwomen and discrimination against transwomen by not allowing them open borders to female spaces. If they say, "discrimination against trans is valid for [insert reason]" then the logical slippery slope is discrimination against feminists or blacks can be justified.
Boxy, is masturbation allowed in Boxtopia?
Only to your nudes.

No he never has, and in case you haven't heard the reason why, his narrative for why he hasn't is because he keeps rewriting it every single time a major event occurs.
I rewrite because I don't like the flow or it's too complex or uninteresting. It's very hard to simply so many different ideas and also explain them in a non-ranty way.
Yes it is as if he mass deletes and retypes the entire thing all over again every time their is some BLM protest, an election, or any other major political event he just wipes out and rewrites everything all over again.
Sometimes new issues occur like Abortion and I must understand them.
He at most released a handful of pages of one draft as a preview about a year ago, which is just this thread's talking points spewed out again about all the same shit.

Efficiency is not a Boxtopia standard you see.
That's what a manifesto is.
 
Only to your nudes.

But I'm over 12, Boxy.

I rewrite because I don't like the flow or it's too complex or uninteresting. It's very hard to simply so many different ideas and also explain them in a non-ranty way.

"I rewrite because I don't grasp nuance, and without 4chan I have nothing to copy and paste. It's very hard because of my autism."
 
If you think that fringe views being espoused and endorsed by a couple of weirdos and their handful of retarded followers constitutes a "normalization", you're wrong. These aren't the first tender shoots of some great new counterculture - they're just grifters, grifting retards on the internet.

I can't get over the fact that he's against oral sex. I just can't. Of all the weird fringe views he holds, this might frankly be the most outlandish, one of the hardest to find anyone, even amongst the dregs of society, who'd support it. There's probably plenty of self-loathing mutt incel pedos, but even these complete degenerates would never think of opposing blowjobs.

Hey Boxer, is eating puss self-subjugation on the dude's part? What about 69ing? And if, in your view it is a submissive or self-subjugating act, why don't you like women doing it?
It's because you want a strong woman to violate you with a BBC strap on 24/7, I know, but I felt like asking anyway.
He is in denial about his love for sausage and meatballs, especially giving oral sex to men. Probably is into anime traps too but is super in denial about it.

Elliot Rodger was a mutt incel as well (Ashkenazi Jew and Malaysian Chinese) but at least he wasn't a pedophile, far as I know. Had a weird thing against pornography but I dunno how far that actually went.

Boxy's just pissed that women don't find him attractive so he tries to make up for it by going after men instead. Maybe it's illegal in his country or something?

And one more thing, fringe weirdos like Fuentes and ChapoTrapHouse types should be mocked relentlessly, but unfortunately people keep sending these losers money.
 
Boxy's just pissed that women don't find him attractive so he tries to make up for it by going after men instead. Maybe it's illegal in his country or something?


His dox reveals living in California. Boxy can't get gay sex in California; he's that much of a faggot to the gays. Let this sink in, like Boxy wishes Jamal's BBC would.
 
His dox reveals living in California. Boxy can't get gay sex in California; he's that much of a faggot to the gays. Let this sink in, like Boxy wishes Jamal's BBC would.
I always assumed he was in the Philippines or something because of the posts of a @BoxerShorts47 on Twitter but if you're sure you got the right guy, that makes it a hell of a lot funnier.

I do, however, feel sorry for anyone stuck in California of all places. Because they're not only stuck in a one party state, they're also stuck with a uniquely degenerate and mentally ill gay pedophile like him, the likes of whom can't even get the gayest, most AIDS ridden man-slut to top him and pound the shit out of his tight virgin asshole because he is such a disgusting perverted lunatic with retarded politics and religious beliefs that not even a Redditor would be stupid enough to endorse.

He can deny his desire to be with men all he wants, especially when he whines about how much oral sex disgusts him.

To be honest, I think he would like it.
 
He or she lost. The TERFs always lose when they're forced to admit that they want to segregate female spaces from transwomen and discrimination against transwomen by not allowing them open borders to female spaces. If they say, "discrimination against trans is valid for [insert reason]" then the logical slippery slope is discrimination against feminists or blacks can be justified.

Only to your nudes.


I rewrite because I don't like the flow or it's too complex or uninteresting. It's very hard to simply so many different ideas and also explain them in a non-ranty way.

Sometimes new issues occur like Abortion and I must understand them.

That's what a manifesto is.
You disgrace the white man's holy English language every time your fingers hit the keyboard. Stop rewriting. Learn to write in the first place.

I'm also interested in how retarded your 'any discrimination being justified means all discrimination - or at least the discrimination I support - is justified' stance is. Please expoond upon this idea.
 
I'm also interested in how retarded your 'any discrimination being justified means all discrimination - or at least the discrimination I support - is justified' stance is. Please expoond upon this idea.
Must I spell this for you?

The 1964 civil rights act bans discrimination based on protected classes. Allowing transwomen into women's spaces is completely in-line with civil rights. It's the same concept as allowing blacks into white spaces or feminists into male spaces like the boardroom. Civil rights means no discrimination. If you don't like that then too bad, you're a bigot, equal rights.

So if someone says, "Actually, I think we should be allowed to discriminate for these reasons," then someone else can say, "okay well I think we should be allowed to discriminate against blacks in housing or women in employment." If the argument is trans-women hurt women in sports then that's the same argument as blacks hurt whites through disproportionate crime or women hurt people their combat teams in the military.

Once discrimination against transwomen is normalized, those people won't have the moral high ground to prevent discrimination based on race or sex. The new paradigm will be discriminations (borders) are justified.
 
Must I spell this for you?

The 1964 civil rights act bans discrimination based on protected classes. Allowing transwomen into women's spaces is completely in-line with civil rights. It's the same concept as allowing blacks into white spaces or feminists into male spaces like the boardroom. Civil rights means no discrimination. If you don't like that then too bad, you're a bigot, equal rights.

So if someone says, "Actually, I think we should be allowed to discriminate for these reasons," then someone else can say, "okay well I think we should be allowed to discriminate against blacks in housing or women in employment." If the argument is trans-women hurt women in sports then that's the same argument as blacks hurt whites through disproportionate crime or women hurt people their combat teams in the military.

Once discrimination against transwomen is normalized, those people won't have the moral high ground to prevent discrimination based on race or sex. The new paradigm will be discriminations (borders) are justified.
It's almost impressive, the way you find new levels of stupid and black/white oversimplification to sink to. Not just a retarded would-be kiddy-fiddler, but autistic and dumber than a glass hammer, to boot. If you want to improve the human race as a whole, Emil, just neck yourself. Think about it, man; humanity on average would be slightly whiter, slightly smarter, and slightly more likely to have consensual sex with other adults, if your retarded, dusky, chomo ass was swinging from a light fitting.
 
Last edited:
Must I spell this for you?

The 1964 civil rights act bans discrimination based on protected classes. Allowing transwomen into women's spaces is completely in-line with civil rights. It's the same concept as allowing blacks into white spaces or feminists into male spaces like the boardroom. Civil rights means no discrimination. If you don't like that then too bad, you're a bigot, equal rights.

So if someone says, "Actually, I think we should be allowed to discriminate for these reasons," then someone else can say, "okay well I think we should be allowed to discriminate against blacks in housing or women in employment." If the argument is trans-women hurt women in sports then that's the same argument as blacks hurt whites through disproportionate crime or women hurt people their combat teams in the military.

Once discrimination against transwomen is normalized, those people won't have the moral high ground to prevent discrimination based on race or sex. The new paradigm will be discriminations (borders) are justified.
I told you learn to write, you dumb shine, and what do you do in your first sentence? Disgrace the white man's language again.

The rest of your spew is retarded as usual. Strawmen, gaps in your chain of logic, oversimplification, lack of discernment, the works.

Men hurt women disproportionately, we should separate men and women right? Use discrimination to keep men from hurting women. Segregation perhaps. Never shall the male and female meet. Remember this is justified according to you. Your homo agenda exposed once again, BoxerSniffer.
 
Back