Namtriz912
Show no mercy for foidscum!
★★★★★
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2022
- Posts
- 5,918
A rare admission of truth this would save some youngcels from wasting their time.
This, they are the same genetic trash as us yet they brag about options.Most women are genetic garbage like most men but they get to soil the genepool with their cursed lineage and brag about their options while we rotThe Y chromosone pill is absolutely brutal
![]()
The remark is "he's attractive"Notice how the whore uses "remarkable" to avoid saying attractive![]()
Western societies can somehow palate that criminals must be denied the choice to go outside of prison, but can't palate that women must be denied choices for society to function. Then again, I'm not so sure, they're starting to have trouble with the former nowadays, talking about letting criminals vote while in prison.This is actually why any sane society restricts whores (females) from working since if these whores want remarkable men, it is best to lower their sta dards so that they become financially dependent on a man. Remarkable-ness according to women is merely the ability to provide for her,so we can make subpar men seem remarkable to them by giving men leverage over finances
I can even speak of this personally. My dad is a dentist and my mom is a SAHM. They are still married, and I would definitely say part of it is due to my mom's lack of money, since there have been multiple instances where she has subtley hinted at being dissatisfied with my dad being a manlet.
Meanwhile, I have a few aunts who are doctors, and 1 of them never even got married while the other 2 ended up divorced JFL.
Revoke foid rights
exactly, why are the walking meat holes given the right to speak?who decides who is remarkable? holes?![]()
I'm afraid I'm not sure about thiseven a cute female horse treat human males better than how human females treat us
To test the behavior that the chickens had learned, the researchers counted the times the chicken picked at a given face within a certain time interval. Interestingly, it was discovered that human and chicken preferences for opposite sex faces were very highly correlated when varying the degree of sexual dimorphism of the presented faces (r² = 0.98); that is to say nearly identical. That means the chickens were nearly equally as likely to peck at the highly dimorphic faces as the human subjects were to prefer them as potential romantic partners. This result even generalized to when the researchers added faces with even more exaggerated dimorphism not present during training, i.e. both humans and chickens agreed on the more exaggerated faces being more attractive.





