Manosphere Marijan Šiklić (ThatIncelBlogger)

Who is Smarter, TJ Church or Marjan Šiklić?


  • Total voters
    342
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Couldn't I...you know....not be in a position of sexual servitude?

This may just be me being a dumb slut, but I somehow get the impression that this proposed society of yours would treat women as lesser beings than men...
What are you asking? Could you be a slut who sleeps with whomever she wants to? Or celibate?

sonichu - omg
 
what do you mean by polygroups?

It's a bit like a combined polygyny/polyandry (or just polygamy) approach. Basically: You have sex with people within the group, but not outside the group. The concubine thing essentially seems to reduce to that.
 
It's a bit like a combined polygyny/polyandry approach. Basically: You have sex with people within the group, but not outside the group. The concubine thing essentially seems to reduce to that.
I am not sure what you mean... Anyway, wives wouldn't be able to have sex with others but husbands could use concubines and prostitutes.
 
I am not sure what you mean... Anyway, wives wouldn't be able to have sex with others but husbands could use concubines and prostitutes.


What about when you inevitably marry a dude?
 
What are you asking? Could you be a slut who sleeps with whomever she wants to? Or celibate?
Well, let's just take a hypothetical here. Suppose I'm dating a guy, and we really hit it off. He tells me all about how great it would be if women were kept in sexual bondage, and I swoon head over heels for him. We have a wild night of lights on, missionary position sex. He uses a condom, I'm on the pill. No STD's are passed, no 'rape ape' child is produced, no nothing. Just a night of sex, and we move on from there.

How exactly does that contribute to the fall of society?

And I still don't understand why women would need to be kept as virgins, concubines, or prostitutes. That seems to be objectifying women by placing our sole value in the condition of our hoo-haw.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Coral Apples
sonichu, you moron, i said that real bravery would be some nigger doing that in 1820. rosa parks was just a dumb spoiled bitch.


Would you want your gay lover calling you his bitch?
 
Well, let's just take a hypothetical here. Suppose I'm dating a guy, and we really hit it off. He tells me all about how great it would be if women were kept in sexual bondage, and I swoon head over heels for him. We have a wild night of lights on, missionary position sex. He uses a condom, I'm on the pill. No STD's are passed, no 'rape ape' child is produced, no nothing. Just a night of sex, and we move on from there.

How exactly does that contribute to the fall of society?

And I still don't understand why women would need to be kept as virgins, concubines, or prostitutes. That seems to be objectifying women by placing our sole value in the condition of our hoo-haw.
That event alone doesn't contribute to the fall of society. But if that guy is so good at seduction he'll eventually impregnate some women and create feral children. the rest i've already explained or c/p franklin.
 
That event alone doesn't contribute to the fall of society. But if that guy is so good at seduction he'll eventually impregnate some women and create feral children. the rest i've already explained or c/p franklin.
If your biggest concern is men impregnating women and producing feral children, why not implement a system of vasectomies on men? We could get tons of sperm for artificial insemination, and then snip all your tubes.

I know it sounds painful, and I know you'd think men would hate it. But I can guarantee you, all men would love it. I mean, you're an expert on women, right? What says I can't be an expert on men?
 
If your biggest concern is men impregnating women and producing feral children, why not implement a system of vasectomies on men? We could get tons of sperm for artificial insemination, and then snip all your tubes.

I know it sounds painful, and I know you'd think men would hate it. But I can guarantee you, all men would love it. I mean, you're an expert on women, right? What says I can't be an expert on men?
The ideas above are from some radfem fantasy. They're too silly to even reply to.
 
@Holden, because your fuck up with a very basic formatting syntax made it harder for me to quote you, I'll just paste what you said point by point.

again, they're not forced into it but succumb to social pressures. when women have "rights" they succumb to other pressures - to be shameless sluts. you think they don't pressure each other to be like that?
You love throwing the word "social pressures" around, only speaking from a narrow worldview based on limited experience with women. Not all women pressure each other to be shameless sluts, some women even shame said sluts. Now why aren't the slut shaming women all over your cock? Oh wait because they don't even notice it inside them. :lol:

where do you live?
Alaska. I've seen more women from around the world who shame sluts or just don't give a damn, than those who outright encourage or pressure them into being sluts. I know you're gonna blame it on western media and/or throw the "social pressure" card at me again. Due to my powers over autism, I can kinda tell what kind of things you'll say.

why would i get more sex if they were? sluts want apes, not me.
In your Incel Dictionary, "apes" means "any man that a woman wants because he has at least two more redeeming qualities then you". I've used the term "ape" to describe a man who was threatening to gouge my eyes out in a public Internet forum about video games, not men who supposedly make it so women won't have sex with me just by being decent men. If you can't even format a forum post correctly, and turn off the "I need sex or I'm a victim" part of your brain, how do you expect to bed someone?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: namazuros
I am not sure what you mean... Anyway, wives wouldn't be able to have sex with others but husbands could use concubines and prostitutes.

If I understand your system correctly, you distinguish between wives, concubines and prostitutes. Wives are exclusive to husbands (that's sort of the point). Prostitutes, meanwhile, aren't exclusive to a partner all (also sort of the point). Presumably, that means concubines aren't exclusive to one man, because otherwise they wouldn't be meaningfully distinct from wives, but they aren't indiscriminate either, because otherwise they wouldn't be meaningfully distinct from prostitutes. Since husbands can have concubines, that means husbands aren't exclusive to one partner either. So what this boils down to is an N:M relationship within a chosen group of men and women. So your system comes down to, well, a complicated type of polygamy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back