Sluthate.com

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A-№1 said:
If they are actually talking about the canthus, well I have known some (particularly shallow) women who had sex because of their partner's "dreamy eyes", but I have never even heard of any who avoided sex specifically because their potential partner's eyes weren't "dreamy" enough. I have no clue what makes eyes "dreamy" or not (except to know upon good authority that my eyes aren't - not that that's ever been a problem for me), but somehow I don't think something as obtuse as "canthal tilt" factors into it.
Click to expand...

I know I am a sucker for kind-looking eyes, but the examples used in the Sluthate thread were so extreme. I've not seen very many people with their eyes sloping at such a sharp angle, really.

This is all so strange and confusing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: José Mourinho
Pine Tar said:
I see these guys judging other men based on looks. Well, take a look at this guy, he should be able to get women to sleep with him right? Well, this is Exhibit A on why personality matters more than anything else.

George_Sodini.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Collier_Township_shooting
Click to expand...

Is this Elliot Rodger's cousin?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Randall Fragg, Bernard, Whatisgoingon and 2 others
In the outer corner of Chris-chan's eyes, her top eyelid droops well below her bottom lid, giving a sad and prematurely aged appearance. Sadly, this is made nothing but worse when she slathers on her Mimi Bobeck-style eyeshadow. So I can kinda, sorta, somewhat see this canthal tilt thing... but one person with unfortunate features does not a universal trend make.
 
  • Agree
  • Optimistic
Reactions: José Mourinho, Objection! and Meowthkip
Some people may dislike promiscuous people for having perceived loose morals or for religious reasons, but I'm guessing the people behind this site may hate them for the reasons already given above.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Johnny Bravo and José Mourinho
ChuckSlaughter said:
Yeah tell my how privileged you are as you run out the backdoor of the house you're paying rent on because your mentally unstable female roommate who has lost her job likes to do speed and scream outside your room until the fat dyke next door calls the cops to report you're beating your "girlfriend" again and another one of your friends told you about how she'd managed to get her actual boyfriend arrested just a block over for yelling at him too loud.


You seem like a sheltered kid. As far as MRAs nobody with any sense would identify as one because of all the redpill/bluepill/alpha/beta/pua types but yes men have issues and 3rd wave feminism is rife with radicals much like the MRA movement.... difference is a woman can still announce she's a feminist without being labeled as a socially, romantically, and professionally unsuccessful virgin loser... quite the opposite she's hip and progressive.


Yeah like when I was off fighting terrorists, smugglers, and pirates 19 or 20 hours a day for weeks on end while my sister was getting her college paid for?:twisted:
Click to expand...


Literally nobody on this entire forum cares about your personal life. One data point with regards to an issue as big as feminism or domestic violence law doesn't mean shit.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
  • Autistic
Reactions: fuzzyrodent85, fakeandgay, DuskEngine and 30 others
buster_kitten said:
You know, I wonder how many of these craniometrics weirdos are face-blind and struggling to figure out aspects of facial appearance that most people can perceive without effort don't give a fuck about.
Click to expand...
Fixed that for you.

Seriously, until this thread I didn't know canthus tilt was even a thing. For anyone.

But yeah, you bring up a very good point there. These sluthaters clearly don't grasp some basic concepts about human relationships. So like an Incel Rain Man, they each try to understand their problem by reducing it to a matter of easy to comprehend numbers. It's just their own bad judgment they've decided to try geometry (which has been insane since before the days of phrenology) instead of statistics and probability (which might actually work for them).
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Johnny Bravo, José Mourinho, Whatisgoingon and 2 others
Yaoi Huntress Earth said:
-If a woman has had a lot of men, but rejects you, it's a blow to the ego for them.
Click to expand...

This is the main one for these guys.

They also think the only reason a woman wouldn't have sex with a man is if he is completely repulsive, because that is basically their standards for women. That delusion, coupled with the idea that all women are extremely promiscuous, is the root of their misogyny
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Dumb
Reactions: Johnny Bravo, MACH-IV, José Mourinho and 4 others
P-Logic said:
This is the main one for these guys.

They also think the only reason a woman wouldn't have sex with a man is if he is completely repulsive, because that is basically their standards for women. That delusion, coupled with the idea that all women are extremely promiscuous, is the root of their misogyny
Click to expand...
That's probably why they have a huge obsession with women peeking at 20, going down when they hit 21, being more repulsive at 25 and worthless at 30.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Johnny Bravo, AtroposHeart, José Mourinho and 1 other person
Hellblazer said:
Literally nobody on this entire forum cares about your personal life. One data point with regards to an issue as big as feminism or domestic violence law doesn't mean shit.
Click to expand...
Sure sure ill refrain from going there again, it wasn't good for anyone. but at least it explains why I have a hard time listening to their shit.
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
  • Feels
Reactions: fuzzyrodent85, DuskEngine, diarrheabetes and 4 others
BEEP BOP BOOP
+++Run Program C: \AUTISM\SOCIALPARAMATERS\SEXUAL_CLASSIFICATION.EXE+++
+++TRANSMIT+++
male human beings=classified into one of four categories.
classification=immutable
classification=success in attraction of female human being mate
+++END TRANSMISSION+++
+++QUIT TO DESKTOP+++
BEEP BOP BOOP
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: mylorama, DuskEngine, Objection! and 9 others
Satan said:
The incels\sluthate crowd\PUAs\Loveshies\Wizards are back at it again... they are trying to have the Wikipedia article for "Involuntary Celibacy" restored, using the fact that Elliot Rodger 'popularized the term' as a reason. :roll:

Of course Wikipedia editors and moderators are quite tired of their bullshit. Sigh... not this again. They are super desperate to have their gay little terms become commonplace, it's pathetic. They think that having it added to the online encyclopedia will make it gain recognition. Can't let that happen, of course. They want it to be real, so bad, but it's not. They wish there was a condition like this, so they could use it as an excuse. People like this used to be called "losers", now it's a medical condition.
Click to expand...
Do they realise that if such an article was created, it wouldn't reflect well on them? Their entire justification for the article's existence is that a psycho killer with blue balls used the term. I don't think the article would exactly paint them as victims under the circumstances. Even if it did, what then? Are they hoping that women will read the article, be filled with pity and leap on the first greasy-haired neckbeard they see?
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Randall Fragg, Objection!, Meowthkip and 3 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back