svgmn1
Fat link fanboy
★★★★★
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2021
- Posts
- 10,669
As we know, Typically when you follow a set of values or a certain way of thinking that others like you do or other mindsets, you subconsciously begin to form psychological entanglements with individuals of that group, this is a direct result of your ego and it's bias: bias to points that your ego likes, and bias against the ones that your ego doesn't.
without going much into detail on the psychological aspect of things, I have been working on recognizing a pattern that soy cucks and foid sluts (specifically) follow when arguing against others.
[UWSL]for example i'll show you some of the similar phrases that normies use:[/UWSL]
yikes
sweetie you're having a mental breakdown.
why are you lashing out on everyone?
who hurt you?
you really need some help.
And many other phrases
note that I am not saying that incels or other people don't have catchphrases or buzzwords to smear at the faces of normies, totally not. I am merely pointing at the normie side of things and how we all experienced similar, patternal activity when dealing with them.
I have also recognized a very unique pattern anong normies and concluded that people among them who can't debate, typically bait you to insult them by directly or indirectly mocking you. it is such a psychopathic behavior that amazes me. it starts a provoking behavior or phrase that is bound to intiate a backlash. from this point, you have two options: either to subliminally mock and deride, eventually picking the exact same route they're following, or to insult them. and d[UWSL]espite libcucks and normies crying about ad hominem, they -unironically- seem like the most avid practitioners of such a fallacy according to my analysis. normies will have no problem attacking you based on your sex life, looks, mental state etc. and they will quickly jump to pointing out your weaknesses, instead of civil debating and conversate. while also -contradictorily- shaming you for doing the same, only in a more direct manner instead of playing mental gymnastics. based on the previous sentence, a one mighty conclusion is drawn: that there is no way to talk with normies but to insult them. [/UWSL]
from this point and after, the upcoming respond to an insult against them (which was full knowingly prompted by them) will be met with outcries and witchhunt.
it's really a proof of work method of argument. there is no knowledge involved in this, why need knowledge in an argument you are bound to "win" anyways? in the end, the other side you're debating with will either get banned, get his post removed or witchhunted on social media.
On the social media of things, Elon Musk recently bought twitter. and despite him being a cuck, he's a cuck who provokes libcucks and they both have history. based on this I'm sure some rules will change. let's see how this will play out for these people and their internet arguments
without going much into detail on the psychological aspect of things, I have been working on recognizing a pattern that soy cucks and foid sluts (specifically) follow when arguing against others.
[UWSL]for example i'll show you some of the similar phrases that normies use:[/UWSL]
yikes
sweetie you're having a mental breakdown.
why are you lashing out on everyone?
who hurt you?
you really need some help.
And many other phrases
note that I am not saying that incels or other people don't have catchphrases or buzzwords to smear at the faces of normies, totally not. I am merely pointing at the normie side of things and how we all experienced similar, patternal activity when dealing with them.
I have also recognized a very unique pattern anong normies and concluded that people among them who can't debate, typically bait you to insult them by directly or indirectly mocking you. it is such a psychopathic behavior that amazes me. it starts a provoking behavior or phrase that is bound to intiate a backlash. from this point, you have two options: either to subliminally mock and deride, eventually picking the exact same route they're following, or to insult them. and d[UWSL]espite libcucks and normies crying about ad hominem, they -unironically- seem like the most avid practitioners of such a fallacy according to my analysis. normies will have no problem attacking you based on your sex life, looks, mental state etc. and they will quickly jump to pointing out your weaknesses, instead of civil debating and conversate. while also -contradictorily- shaming you for doing the same, only in a more direct manner instead of playing mental gymnastics. based on the previous sentence, a one mighty conclusion is drawn: that there is no way to talk with normies but to insult them. [/UWSL]
from this point and after, the upcoming respond to an insult against them (which was full knowingly prompted by them) will be met with outcries and witchhunt.
it's really a proof of work method of argument. there is no knowledge involved in this, why need knowledge in an argument you are bound to "win" anyways? in the end, the other side you're debating with will either get banned, get his post removed or witchhunted on social media.
On the social media of things, Elon Musk recently bought twitter. and despite him being a cuck, he's a cuck who provokes libcucks and they both have history. based on this I'm sure some rules will change. let's see how this will play out for these people and their internet arguments
Last edited: