Every time. No matter what the argument you talk about, they will always find a cope to counter it.
If you point out that you're ugly they will say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you show them studies and examples such as this or this they'll say that you're cherrypicking. For some reason, no matter what the study or the example, they are ALL cherrypicks.
In another case, if you say that you're ugly, they'll say "HoW cAn DaNnY dEvItO". In this example they counter their own lie which is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Because danny devito isn't really ugly right? It's us the ones who think he's ugly, right? (Danny Devito's wife left him at 2012, the same year Tinder came out, and they officially got divorced 4 years later)
And when we point out the heightpill by giving examples such as this or this they'll say that not all girls hate short men.
They call cope on AWALT because, as with any other observed evolutionary pattern, there is no proof that it exists. You'll have to swallow it raw by accepting that All Women Are Like That because foids have been behaving the same way for 300 million years (yes pre-human times count).
"Not All Women Are Like That, so not all girls prefer tall men!" "Not all women are like that so not all girls prefer handsome men!" .
And to the average man who's not yet blackpilled? They tell him to put himself rejection after rejection, without expecting anything in return, and if he expects some results by observing the Sexual MarketPlace they call him an entitled piece of shit.
Debating bluepillers is futile, as a wise man once said: the leaders of the debate don't care to change their mind and admit they are wrong, in actuality the real goal is to: 1. Make me miserable like them, 2. Make me a worker bee, 3. Make me consume, 4. Make me obey, 5. Keep the procreation machine going.
If you point out that you're ugly they will say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you show them studies and examples such as this or this they'll say that you're cherrypicking. For some reason, no matter what the study or the example, they are ALL cherrypicks.
In another case, if you say that you're ugly, they'll say "HoW cAn DaNnY dEvItO". In this example they counter their own lie which is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Because danny devito isn't really ugly right? It's us the ones who think he's ugly, right? (Danny Devito's wife left him at 2012, the same year Tinder came out, and they officially got divorced 4 years later)
And when we point out the heightpill by giving examples such as this or this they'll say that not all girls hate short men.
They call cope on AWALT because, as with any other observed evolutionary pattern, there is no proof that it exists. You'll have to swallow it raw by accepting that All Women Are Like That because foids have been behaving the same way for 300 million years (yes pre-human times count).
"Not All Women Are Like That, so not all girls prefer tall men!" "Not all women are like that so not all girls prefer handsome men!" .
And to the average man who's not yet blackpilled? They tell him to put himself rejection after rejection, without expecting anything in return, and if he expects some results by observing the Sexual MarketPlace they call him an entitled piece of shit.
Debating bluepillers is futile, as a wise man once said: the leaders of the debate don't care to change their mind and admit they are wrong, in actuality the real goal is to: 1. Make me miserable like them, 2. Make me a worker bee, 3. Make me consume, 4. Make me obey, 5. Keep the procreation machine going.
Last edited:
