Manosphere Marijan Šiklić (ThatIncelBlogger) 2: The Revenge

[Saint]

Here you go @flossman
↑
So women can't rape men.

Sigh. Must I, again? If anyone wants to copy/paste it so he can see this, I'd appreciate it.

Latin rapere was used for "sexually violate," but only very rarely; the usual Latin word being stuprare "to defile, ravish, violate," related to stuprum (n.), literally "disgrace." Meaning "to abduct (a woman), ravish;" also "seduce (a man)" is from early 15c. in English.
What Fuckbot fails to see is that "sexually violate" applies when someone is in a sexual situation against their will. No matter the sex or gender.

 

[supdup]

And you do know that this is just confirming what I say about you? Swingers are lunatics and no sane society would tolerate them. When somebody fucks your wife in front of you a sane man feels extreme pain, for various strong reasons, like the fact that he subconsciously fears she might remain pregnant (our brains developed before effective contraception) or emotional closeness.

You are not man and a wife. You are animals with wedding certificates.

Says the man who does not understand how complex inference is what separates human's from most animals. Because we can make complex inferences (i.e. comfortable with wife having sex with other men) we are not bound to animal behavior.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

Our brains also evolved before the concept of wives

A wife the way you see it is irrelevant. That's not the point of my post. World didn't begin in 1960. Offspring is what matters in this post, a point you miss.

 

[Saint]

So show me those posts and I'll explain why they absolutely did not show me wrong.

I don't have to show you the posts jerkass, you took the part about my wife from one of them and ignored everything else in it. If you had something to say about it, you would have done it then, but instead you just decided to insult my wife. You really are stupid aren't you?

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

Here you go @flossman
↑
So women can't rape men.

Sigh. Must I, again? If anyone wants to copy/paste it so he can see this, I'd appreciate it.

Latin rapere was used for "sexually violate," but only very rarely; the usual Latin word being stuprare "to defile, ravish, violate," related to stuprum (n.), literally "disgrace." Meaning "to abduct (a woman), ravish;" also "seduce (a man)" is from early 15c. in English.
"sexually violate" applies when someone is in a sexual situation against their will. No matter the sex or gender.

Except that when this is done to a man against his will by a woman it is a blessing. You disregard this fact, simply present these words and expect I am dumb like most cretins you encounter to just take it for granted that it is also bad for men, which it can't be. Seduction is wrong for women too, yes, but for reasons that have nothing to do with any rape.

 

[Chuggernaut]

A wife the way you see it is irrelevant. That's not the point of my post. World didn't begin in 1960. Offspring is what matters in this post, a point you miss.

Yeah, and people used to fuck all the time, because they lived in a semi-nomadic tribal state. That's why descent was tracked matrilinearly in primitive societies; you didn't know who the father was but you knew which woman it came from. Hence why your ideas about what a "sane man" feels have no root in reality. They're just based on shit you've made up about something you've never experienced.

 

[supdup]

I had two other posts that completely showed you wrong and instead of facing them, you ignored them and only instead resulted to insults about my wife. So because of you ignoring the actual debate, you DID NOT give any actual fact or argument of why you were correct. That just shows that you had no way to defend against what I said.

You've probably already noticed, he does not understand what an argument is. He constantly fails to support his conclusions with valid premises. When called-out he just does his insult thing and never addresses what an argument should look like.

BTW, you're doing a good job. We should start a pool to see how long it takes for him to block you. It took me a good couple months.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

I don't have to show you the posts jerkass, you took the part about my wife from one of them and ignored everything else in it.

This alone was more than enough. If you think there's something else in your posts that disproves my views go ahead and repost it.

Yeah, and people used to fuck all the time, because they lived in a semi-nomadic tribal state.

In fact, more evidence shows that only a limited number of males had access. So again, just a nonsense from a fat, backwards cap wearing idiot somewhere in America.

 

[DrChristianTroy]

Except that when this is done to a man against his will by a woman it is a blessing. You disregard this fact, simply present these words and expect I am dumb like most cretins you encounter to just take it for granted that it is also bad for men, which it can't be. Seduction is wrong for women too, yes, but for reasons that have nothing to do with any rape.

But if it has a woman's blessing then it isn't rape.

In fact, more evidence shows that only a limited number of males had access. So again, just a nonsense from a fat, backwards cap wearing idiot somewhere in America.

The fuck? So what does Holden have against hats? Did a hat kill his dog or something?

EDIT- Saying it now. My theory is that dude is just jealous he can't pull off a New Era fitted.

 

[Chuggernaut]

In fact, more evidence shows that only a limited number of males had access. So again, just a nonsense from a fat, backwards cap wearing idiot somewhere in America.

Let's see this evidence. Is it peer-reviewed? You'd know what that is if your history degree wasn't made up.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

So basically, you ran an image search for...whatever and picked something from the dregs of the internet hoping it would disappear soon, but broke this pattern for a single photo.

Yes, over 5 years later. You claim you can't believe it. So, once again, why would I read your screeds if you can't fucking believe that?

chuggernaut - nothing given to an idiot who makes a claim he can't prove is anything but a waste of time.

 

[DrChristianTroy]

chuggernaut - nothing given to an idiot who makes a claim he can't prove is anything but a waste of time.

So you can't prove him wrong? That would give you way more credibility than going "I COULD but I won't.."

 

[Chuggernaut]

So, no, you have nothing and were just making it up. Things don't become true because you wish they do, you failure.

 

[Saint]

You've probably already noticed, he does not understand what an argument is. He constantly fails to support his conclusions with valid premises. When called-out he just does his insult thing and never addresses what an argument should look like.

BTW, you're doing a good job. We should start a pool to see how long it takes for him to block you. It took me a good couple months.

@supdup get the bets rolling I want to see how it goes.

This alone was more than enough. If you think there's something else in your posts that disproves my views go ahead and repost it.

Why should I repost it, just because you are too damn lazy to address something you have already been called out on once? Why don't you be a man and go back and look at it and then give me a straight answer instead of using insults and avoiding it? You know what, you should probably just block me now because you are obviously too childish to actually hold a debate without using insults and being an ass.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

So, no, you have nothing

No, I just know it wouldn't make any difference in your case, just like nothing I previously posted did. If it could, you wouldn't be obsessively making a nonsensical claim you do.

 

[DrChristianTroy]

No, I just know it wouldn't make any difference in your case, just like nothing I previously posted did. If it could, you wouldn't be obsessively making a nonsensical claim you do.

But if it's proof then it would prove their claim wrong. You really aren't good at debating.

 

[Marjan Šiklić]

Why should I repost it, just because you are too damn lazy to address something you have already been called out on once?

I am not too lazy. I just want to see if there's anything you have that won't backfire as spectacularly as the "wife" thing. If not, why would I even look?

But if it's proof then it would prove their claim wrong.

Yes, it would, but it would make no difference to this person, since the person is both insane and an idiot.

 

[deductionotaku]

Yes, over 5 years later. You claim you can't believe it.

Predominantly because it defies the laws of the internet. The rest is you've offered no valuable reason into why you suddenly changed your MO.

So, once again, why would I read your screeds if you can't fucking believe that?

Once again, I could say the same about you. And once again, I've answered this in a less biting manner, but you chose to completely hang civility and prove you only struggle at getting sex and friends because you have no sense of common courtesy.

 

[DrChristianTroy]

Yes, it would, but it would make no difference to this person, since the person is both insane and an idiot.

But then you would have the majority opinion and you would be proven right. At this point you need a win.

Still wondering why you have a seething hatred for hats.

 

[supdup]

Yes, it would, but it would make no difference to this person, since the person is both insane and an idiot.

The soapy water is the arguments from Kiwi members.