Hooligan Harry says,
No, retard, you assumed that I took the position that you cant be successful with women unless you make 100k a year. No where did I say that?
Well, in backbreaker's thread, you made a couple comments:
http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=165550&page=2&highlight=money
Hooligan Harry says,
So money, looks and notoriety/fame are not important when it comes to landing the hotties? Keep telling yourself that fellas. Game is a facade used to create the social status money, looks and notoriety/fame would normally give you. If you cant accept that fact, then continue to be shocked when the average chump earning 70k a year working hard to keep the spare tyre at bay only ever normally lands the average fat american women.
Unless a guy is making over 70k - 100k a year, he's not getting the quality women and is only worthy of fat and non-attractive women. THAT'S what you said. Did you not?
In that same thread you continued:
Hooligan Harry says,
70k a year is not money. 200k a year is starting to get somewhere.
So if a guy is not in the top 3% of the income population he can't get no quality girls, the only girls he can get are fat/non-attractive ones?
:yawn:
Hooligan Harry says,
It seems as if you were the only testosterone in the house?
You were basically beaten into the ground by estrogen to the point where you have the mentality of a fvcking eunuch.
You are the perfect example of WHY we need the traditional family unit (something you said you were glad is dead) Without it, we produce potential sociopaths with no understanding of who they are or where they are going. You are the prefect example of why boys need strong fathers in their lives and why gender roles are crucial to the development of well adjusted children. Or they end up saying **** like this too
Blah, blah, blah, you and Trent can continue to post links to my "childhood issues" thread all you want. The bottom line is, when it comes to the actual TOPIC we are discussing right now, YOUR AGRUMENTS are wrong.
You are wrong that women have no value and should stay in the kitchen. I've posted COUNTLESS links to women successes and inventors that you seem to scroll over.
I've posted COUNTLESS links to women providing value in other areas BESIDES just baring children and cooking.
You have YET, in ANY thread that we debate in to counter my agruments. Instead you and Trent post links to my "childhood issues" thread as IF that's going to make YOUR POINTS in this DEBATE about women valid?
What does posting links to my thread have ANYTHING to do with this debate?? Of course,
NOTHING, and the only reason you and Trent post links to it is to try and hide the fact that you are getting SLAUGHTERED in this debate.
You have no real comebacks to ANYTHING I post. No facts, no statistics, no nothing. Just more theory and ideology and calling everyone a "mangina" when they posts FACTS that show your agrument to be wrong.
You and Trent are whiners, period.
IF you have been having bad experiences with women CHECK YOURSELF, don't disqualify over 200 million women in our country.