Manosphere Marijan Šiklić (ThatIncelBlogger)

[Marjan Šiklić]

All of them are skanks? Even the female users here?

There are some sane US women. Amish and Hasidic women, for example. But no other.

Gosh who would have guessed smart people would recognize the value in treating other human beings with decency.

I am guessing you're a complete idiot, then? Not that it wasn't known before.

 

[Ca Ira]

WOMEN HATE ME BECAUSE I AM NOT A RAPIST

Would you agree that there are many men who are not rapists who are also not particularly hated by women?

 

[Saney]

There are some sane US women. Amish and Hasidic women, for example. But no other.

Because of course, you know literally very woman in the US personally.

 

[MerriedManJr]

There are some sane US women. Amish and Hasidic women, for example. But no other.

Hi Holden! Have you been to the US? Do you travel much? You claim to know an awful lot about foreign countries.

 

[Cuck Norris]

I am guessing you're a complete idiot, then? Not that it wasn't known before.

A complete idiot that doesn't have to rape women to get laid you're correct.

And you never answer us: how's your mom, faggot?

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

Hi Holden! Have you been to the US? Do you travel much? You claim to know an awful lot about foreign countries.

I have been to US, but as a schoolboy. Most of what I know about it comes from stories told to me by other Americans I find sane, as well as behavior from Americans themselves.

 

[MerriedManJr]

I have been to US, but as a schoolboy. Most of what I know about it comes from stories told to me by other Americans I find sane, as well as behavior from Americans themselves.

Do you talk to these Americans on the internet? Internet people can be pretty unreliable.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

Do you talk to these Americans on the internet? Internet people can be pretty unreliable.

I do mostly talk to them on the Internet, though I've met one or two irl as well. Why does that matter? I've known them for years and spoken to a good number via Skype. They're pretty reliable. I mean, it's kinda hard to expect that I can be in a constant rl contact with people from another continent, right?

It's pretty obvious that all the sane men are disgusted with American culture and women while scumbags like those here like it. Is all of that a coincidence?

Also, I'd like to ask you why you said that the graph posted on LS wiki is some virgin manipulating the data. That person doesn't even consider himself to be incel at all, nor does he have an agenda.

also, note that most of these i've known for years

A complete idiot that doesn't have to rape women to get laid you're correct.

You're even worse. You need seduction. On the other hand, please note that I haven't raped anybody ever.

 

[Cuck Norris]

I do mostly talk to them on the Internet, though I've met one or two irl as well. Why does that matter? I've known them for years and spoken to a good number via Skype. They're pretty reliable. I mean, it's kinda hard to expect that I can be in a constant rl contact with people from another continent, right?

It's pretty obvious that all the sane men are disgusted with American culture and women while scumbags like those here like it. Is all of that a coincidence?

Also, I'd like to ask you why you said that the graph posted on LS wiki is some virgin manipulating the data. That person doesn't even consider himself to be incel at all, nor does he have an agenda.

And by "sane men" you mean "other losers that are too scared to talk to women IRL."

You're even worse. You need seduction. On the other hand, please note that I haven't raped anybody ever.

You admit to posting pictures and information on a woman to your blog then removing them in exchange for sex. That is, by definition, rape. Also, seduction as you describe it isn't seduction. What you call seduction is actually "being oneself". True seduction has to do with motive. The only people that "seduce" are the pick-up artist types, and they have way more in common with loveshy pussies and incel faggots.

 

[autism420]

@Holden

KILL YOURSELF

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

You admit to posting pictures and information on a woman to your blog then removing them in exchange for sex. That is, by definition, rape.

bwahahaahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

It's not even blackmail. She offered sex herself.

 

[MerriedManJr]

Also, I'd like to ask you why you said that the graph posted on LS wiki is some virgin manipulating the data. That person doesn't even consider himself to be incel at all, nor does he have an agenda.

When judging the credibility of a scholar I usually consider whether or not that person would consider evidence contrary to their original hypothesis and adjust their hypothesis accordingly. The guy who wrote that article had very few sources and they were all raw data or simple historical fact from unreliable sites like wikipedia. He took these pieces of evidence and formulated a biased conclusion which had no basis even in his dubious evidence.

His question: Why are men "dateless" these days?
His research: In days when men were not "dateless" (as defined by the author) there were a few wars. Lots of men died, and there were more women then men (all this according to infoplease and wikipedia)
His conclusion: Men are "dateless" because there are too many men these days.

But he did not prove this. He established dubious coorelation between "lack of dates" and the number of men in the population. He then made the logical leap that the lack of dates is caused by men not dying in wars, etc. This conclusion also perfectly matches the "loveshy" ideology about "datelessness" in the modern world, which strongly indicates bias on the part of the author.

Tl;dr: biased author, bad scholarship. loveshy wiki is not a reliable source of information.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

When judging the credibility of a scholar I usually consider whether or not that person would consider evidence contrary to their original hypothesis and adjust their hypothesis accordingly. The guy who wrote that article had very few sources and they were all raw data or simple historical fact from unreliable sites like wikipedia. He took these pieces of evidence and formulated a biased conclusion which had no basis even in his dubious evidence.

His question: Why are men "dateless" these days?
His research: In days when men were not "dateless" (as defined by the author) there were a few wars. Lots of men died, and there were more women then men (all this according to infoplease and wikipedia)
His conclusion: Men are "dateless" because there are too many men these days.

But he did not prove this. He established dubious coorelation between "lack of dates" and the number of men in the population. He then made the logical leap that the lack of dates is caused by men not dying in wars, etc. This conclusion also perfectly matches the "loveshy" ideology about "datelessness" in the modern world, which strongly indicates bias on the part of the author.

Tl;dr: biased author, bad scholarship. loveshy wiki is not a reliable source of information.

Except that you are wrong. He merely asserted that gender ratios plus the fact that most men would go for females 18-35, has to mathematically mean that some men MUST be single (I'd just say sexless because I don't think modern monsters understand relationships). Math doesn't lie, nor does it have an agenda. If you think that the claim that men like women of fertile age is dubious I am virtually too shocked to say anything.

Also, what are you rambling about? "Ideology about datelessness"? There are many dateless men in this culture. They even have their websites, which you have threads about here. These sites would not have existed even 50 years ago since anybody could find a wife at that time. For example, almost all my friends are not married or even in a relationship at our age (mid 20s). Needless to say, our fathers and grandfathers all had wives and children by now.

 

[Bucharest]

@Holden -

Just keep rambling to yourself, Fuckbot5000. We've got more important things at the moment.

 

[MerriedManJr]

Except that you are wrong. He merely asserted that gender ratios plus the fact that most men would go for females 18-35, has to mathematically mean that some men MUST be single (I'd just say sexless because I don't think modern monsters understand relationships). Math doesn't lie, nor does it have an agenda. If you think that the claim that men like women of fertile age is dubious I am virtually too shocked to say anything.

Also, what are you rambling about? "Ideology about datelessness"? There are many dateless men in this culture. They even have their websites, which you have threads about here. These sites would not have existed even 50 years ago since anybody could find a wife at that time. For example, almost all my friends are not married or even in a relationship at our age (mid 20s). Needless to say, our fathers and grandfathers all had wives and children by now.

Math doesn't have an agenda. People who interpret it do. "Datelessness" is a term only used by loveshys. There are, and always have been men who are not in a relationship. Sometimes for a few years. Sometimes their whole lives. Marcus Tullius Cicero wasn't married until he was 27. My father and grandfather were around 30. Read an encyclopedia other than the loveshy wiki. Read a news source other than Return of Kings.

 

[Count groudon]

I have been to US, but as a schoolboy. Most of what I know about it comes from stories told to me by other Americans I find sane, as well as behavior from Americans themselves.

"That I find sane"
So you basically just admitted that you only listen to people who agree with you and use that to support your claims about America.

 

[Holy wait what?]

i'd have gotten married at the age of 18 because i would want it so.

Yep... just snap your fingers and you get a girlfriend... anyone who thinks that way is fucking insane. Before you claim you don't think that, you are not considering that the women can turn you down... it's not like you can just walk up to them and declare them your girlfriend. (no matter how much you wish, it doesn't make it so...)

So, no... you STILL would need to find someone who would be with you in a committed relationship... and given your poor track record on stable relationships, your claim is nothing more than wishful thinking.

of course i can't provide my talks with women i want to keep anonymous.

Convenient... but since you declare people who do not provide evidence to be liars, I guess you consider yourself a liar.

but it's funny how you never ask proof for things you see as "bad". that you just take for granted.

Except I did require evidence that you blackmailed a girl into having sex... and your blog provided that evidence. Doesn't matter how much you keep on insisting you didn't, it's there on your blog. Or did you lie when you posted that shit?

and, yes, of course my mind can be changed by evidence. it's just that those like you never provide any, since you can't even grasp basic facts.

Given how you keep on making assertions that have nothing to back them up, claiming that people here are not providing evidence is a bit rich... though I note that when I provided evidence of what you said, you declared that you hadn't said it, even when the quote AND THE LINK TO THE SOURCE WHERE YOU ORIGINALLY POSTED IT was right there. I assume your own words are not evidence of your own words now...?

Oh, and Holden? Unless you lied on your blog, you blackmailed a women into having sex with you... that fits the definition of rape. Doesn't matter if the victim says they were raped or not... it's rape, so when you bring up your assertion that she bought you chocolate, it means nothing at all. If only you were intelligent enough to understand that...

holy - didn't you say you were less successful than me lol?

Only in numbers... but only someone who didn't understand what a relationship was, or who didn't want one, would be stupid enough to think that more partners means anything...

Remember, 20+ years of committed relationship... don't that just burn?

:edit: Please define sane... without circular logic...

bwahahaahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

It's not even blackmail. She offered sex herself.

Right, so your blog post where you detailed how you demanded sex from her in exchange for you removing the pictures and personal information is all a lie then... something I'm sure you are perfectly happy to admit to, given that nearly everything you've attempted to claim has been backed up by your blog only...

Next you're going to say it doesn't say that at all, at which point screenshots will be provided... which you will then ignore. Again, your own words appear to be insufficient evidence of your own words now... and if that doesn't indicate that you will not accept the possibility of being wrong, I don't know what does...

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

So you basically just admitted that you only listen to people who agree with you

People I find sane don't agree with me on anything.

and use that to support your claims about America.

In fact, lunatics like you help me form my opinion of it a lot more.

Right, so your blog post where you detailed how you demanded sex from her in exchange for you removing the pictures and personal information is all a lie then...

It isn't a lie. It doesn't exist. I said she offered sex and that there was no personal info, just a pic. Anybody can go on my blog and check the Feb 2013 post. You're an insane 40 year-old virgin who keeps pulling stuff out of his diarrhea encrusted ass.

 

[Handsome Pete]

People I find sane don't agree with me on anything.

Everything you say is inside-out.

How's your coffee?

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

So basically, you're too autistic to seduce a woman, and your brain can't figure out why.

I don't know what autism has to do with seduction, except that autistic people (which I'm not) could be expected to be less able to seduce.

But seduction was always used by worst scumbags and men who used it were seen as losers and morons by women in sane cultures. I constantly proudly say I can't use seduction, since it means I am not a moron.