If it was Jordan Peterson then his posts would be a lot more "thesaurusy" and "wordy" but also at the same time saying less. A lot more "satanic Marxism" lecturing.
5th option: Mommy divorced daddy. Daddy didn't give baby stunna any love, blamed mommy for him leaving. Baby stunna became a misogynistic piece of ****.
Basically you conservatives types are dumping your purses out on the table and admitting without their own DEI initiatives ( religion, Jim Crow, traditions, etc) men can't really compete.
I don't know if you believe in what you type but the ideology you represent (red pill incels) need women having limited options in what to do with their lives to compete. It's basically asking for handouts but by limiting the options of what half the population can do with their lives. The patriarchal hierarchy has to exist for some men to get women. I see this in very conservative religious communities with Islam and Christianity were dudes who would strike out in the dating scene get a shot at marriage because some poor girl gets forced into marriage by their conservative parents.
Ad hominem is a fallacy when it's used to distract from the discussion at hand. It doesn't work here because the discussion at hand is to make fun of you. So it's not an ad hominem. It's just a roast.
The first sentence can be understood as your view on what constitutes a baby. It's extreme, but whatever—you are entitled to your own perspective. That last sentence, blaming women, is why women are abandoning the Republican Party at a fast rate today. If I want to reduce abortion rate, Trump was a failure, and the 2022 Dobbs decision continues that failure. As this evangelical, 10/10 pro-life conservative pointed out, Trump is the first POTUS since Carter to see a rise in the abortion rate. The rate has gone up, and support for abortion has also increased since the 2022 Dobbs decision. As he said, "Trump is harming the pro-life movement in a profound way".
Equality and privilege are two opposing ideals. There is option limitation when the person who wants the privilege is also expecting equality. It's a weak roast if that's what you're calling it. Dispute the argument.
Huh what does this have to do with many men in the red pill community needing women constrained in what they can do with their lives to find a female partner?
The shaming of valuing a career over being a traditional housewife The desire to control women's reproductive systems. You need women to be constrained to be able to touch them sexually. That's why you people are weird. The more independent women are the more selective they can be in who they partner with. You don't like that.
You again?!! Again... should mothers be drinking/drugging while they're pregnant? Blaming is a strong word, but still applicable. It's not really blaming, it's more just making people accountable for their actions. That's not really something women are used to on a governmental prospective. Women are abandoning the Republican party because Dems kiss their ass more often.
My argument centers around belittling you. It centers around the premise that you have an inability to form a sexual relationship with a woman without women having strictly defined roles and constraints in what they ought to do in life. I'm making fun of your creepiness. Hat is the point of the discussion therefore it isn't an ad hominem as it isn't a distraction from the premise of the argument. The premise is you are a creep.
That's not what I said -- I said what I said and it's right there in plain English. Your bias make you too illogical to comprehend. Women can have abortions if they want. However, it IS killing a baby and should be called exactly what it is -- not using the typical Choiser talking points of the baby not really being a baby. Me personally? Women having their own money makes it easier to have sex without commitment or spending much of my own.[/QUOTE]
