You Are Completely Wrong, Jayne Part 2

Summary

  1. Repeating the propaganda that critics of misguided feminism “hate ALL women” doesn’t make it any less of a lie.  If, anything it is just further proof of the childish behaviour prevalent in those who support misguided feminism.
  2. You have contradicted your claim that these men “hate ALL women” by immediately stating that they want/need them (and by default, are not wanting them as a form of punishment to either party):  There is no greater indicator of insincerity than that.  If it wasn’t obvious before that you really have no case, but are only here to spew out hatred, it is now.
  3. If the men here are apparently so vacant, it says even less of those that can’t even present an argument, and instead resort to juvenile name-calling and insults.
  4. Your logic is specious and the absolute hostility in your posts betrays a lot of latent anger towards men.

If at first you don’t succeed, lie. Lie Again

Juliejayne1 Wrote:

“Sam, read my long post above to Ria. You are correct, these creatures hate all women. What they fail to realize is that they could be having some fun and making friends and being decent human beings.”

Answer:

It is clear to even those with rudimentary reading comprehension, critics of the arrogant attitudes of POF princesses (and their defenders here) object to those individuals, and, not of the entire female gender.  Additionally, it has been explicitly mentioned and carefully demonstrated that there is no such hatred for all women.

To repeat this false position is merely erecting the same straw man to beat with the ferocity reminiscent of a fundamentalist outraged at infidels for having the audacity to exist.

Being a critic of self-aggrandized and misguided feminists is hardly being one who hates “all women”.  Angry feminists don’t represent all women.  If anything, they represent a small sector of a small special interest group.  Critics don’t like you and the falsehoods you represent.  Hiding behind “all women” is equivalent to zealots that use the populace as a “human shield”.  It is cowardly act in either case.

Contrary to your fancy, your critics have lots of fun and make many friends.  I have made some by simply standing up to the bullying that zealots like you do on sites like this.  You realize this and attempt to discourage it with further name-calling and hurling of insults.  Please feel free to continue as it helps to support my case.

Pretzel Logic

Juliejayne1 Wrote:

“They also fail to realize that women like men who like women. Such irony, wouldn’t you say? They want/need women SO badly that they twist themselves into pretzels and lie to get with a woman who they deem disposable.”

Answer:

Excellent.  Contradiction is the best evidence of insincerity.

You begin by mentioning that these men “hate ALL women”.  A few sentences later, you claim that they “want/need” women.  You have made no mention of, or inference to, a conscious masochistic nature in these men, or, that the desire is to punish women by dating them, so this “want/need” is not a desire for punishment either way.  It stands to reason that you are now stating that these men long for women (and, by default, long for a mutually beneficial relationship with women).  As such, you have successfully contradicted your initial assertion.  Good job.

These men treat women like they are disposable?  No.

This is a projection of the way POF princesses treat men.  They hold out for “better models”, and will drop the current one for the next should he be closer to the idealized man.

Lying?  The embellishment happens only because of the inflation of needs by the Princesses.  As has been mentioned on numerous occasions (whether on this response thread or another) POF Princesses distort the truth far more and more often than any player does.  Ask yourself this:  What is the percentage difference of 2 inches in 69?  What is the percentage difference of 20 lbs in 110?  The truth is pretty ugly isn’t it?  Lol.

Valley of the Dullards

Juliejayne1 Wrote:

“And what does that make THEM? 😉 You can’t deal with this lot though, they’re not terribly bright. If they were, they’d have figured out a less cynical way to live their lives and not be compounding misery.”

Answer:

This “lot” have largely been able to see right through the false bravado of angry feminists and point out how well the strategy of embellishing as much as required to gain initial contact is.  In contrast, man-haters attempt to hide behind “ALL women”, offer no substance to their arguments and immediately slip into juvenile name-calling and insults.  If the men are supposedly “not terribly bright”, their adversaries are apparently much closer to being drooling cretins than they realize (then again, self-awareness does require some modicum of higher order thought process).

I suppose I could explain this with hand puppets if you need Juliejayne1, but I’ll need to borrow some from the kids.

Big Fat Lays

Juliejayne1 Wrote:

“And you’ll notice that the women who they supposedly game and have sex with (a very specious claim, I’m sure) are apparently all fat and ugly by their own admission since there’s no other kind on POF??! Ha!”

Answer:

There is no reason to believe that the claims of successful encounters are false.  Most here believe the methods work have likely applied them in the traditional venues.  They create an advantage there, so there is no reason to believe it doesn’t online.

If you have some viable proof, or in lieu of this, some reasonable logic as to how the claims are not legitimate, it would make more sense to simply provide these.  However, the consistent retreat to name-calling is far more indicative of a begrudging acceptance of their testimony.

All “fat and ugly”?

You are deducing this by conveniently ignoring the notion that the men are equally capable of selecting the best of the lot.  While many are the lower tail of the spectrum, some are marginally adequate.  As many noted, you may not find a lot of beauty queens on POF, but there are average types.

The inflation of one’s own worth is not restricted to only the seriously self-aggrandized.  Many will adopt this behaviour once they begin getting far more attention online than they receive in real world venues (that should be obvious even to those not so “terribly bright”).

The “game” is all about ways to get past that self-defeating attitude that infects women on POF.  Both parties can choose to continue the rendezvous beyond that point.  If either party elects to reduce the level of any subsequent relationship, it is a decision that both parties have influence on.

What feminists are angry about cannot be this increase in connection from the game.  Consider too, that practically every poster in opposition to the methods on the blog has a lot of latent hostility towards men in general.  It is they who feel somehow slighted by men and likely because they do not get the attention they feel they are somehow “owed”.  This is more the reason why they oppose these methods so vehemently.

The realization that they have less control over men than they like to fantasize that they do, is a rude awakening.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s