If I had a vagina and tits, and even if I didn't have tits, I could get a boyfriend in 10 minutes. Don't believe me?

Not true, I've been trying for a while

If you had a feminine body, tits and a soft dick you'd have be same powers as those of a girl.

What have you tried? Tinder? Dating sites? Bars? Events?

You are wrong. When you guys deduce I'm a girl 20 guys call me a roastie whore, 20 guys wished I had a dick and 2 guys want to swap contact information. The 20 guys calling me a roastie whore and the 20 guys that wished I had a dick then attack the 2 guys that were being civil.

>You are wrong
So you ignore the 20 guys calling you a roastie whore and the 20 guys that wished you had a dick, and swap contact information with the other 2 guys.
Boom, bf in 10 minutes. Now try the same as a dude and see if you can even find a girl willing to talk to you in 10 minutes

the first two 123456

Post more smurfette porn

>You are wrong.
be my gf right now or he was right.

I never swap contact info, knowing the 2 aren't sincere and were probably one of the 20 on another thread.

Now, if all you guys were more civil and didn't want to rape me, I bet you'd have a girl willing to talk in less than 10 minutes

How will you know if they are sincere or not? It doesn't hurt to quickly swap shaklasers just in case there is actual mutual interest.

wow, you need to work on your approach. I read this as fuck me or I'll rape you

online I learned the hard way to err on the side of caution. Got a nasty scar above my eyebrow as a reminder after meeting a guy I started talking to on line. Thankfully nothing worse happened

What happened? Did you go to his home or something? First meet in a public place for drinks or something.

>I read this as fuck me or I'll rape you
Do you need new glasses or are you just so cock-starved that you hallucinate, because I didn't bring sex up at all.

This, is this board filled with guys having mommy issues?

I disagree with your framing, as it suggests that relationships are as simple as 'who wants to be with me?'. In reality, the guy's who'd jump at such an offer are probably not the sort that would make a good partner. Similarly, if you found a group of women who'd jump at the offer of companionship without knowing the person at all they'd probably be single for a reason.
Simply getting someone to accept going out with you is not how you find a meaningful relationship, it's how you find needy and emotionally starved people.

>In reality, the guy's who'd jump at such an offer are probably not the sort that would make a good partner.
[citation needed]

>Similarly, if you found a group of women who'd jump at the offer of companionship without knowing the person at all they'd probably be single for a reason.
There is no such group.

>Simply getting someone to accept going out with you is not how you find a meaningful relationship, it's how you find needy and emotionally starved people.
Finding someone that would go out with you is the first step to a good relationship every time.
Just because roasties don't have to approach doesn't mean this step doesn't happen at all.

I can get an e-gf in 10 minutes.

I'm an old user so fembots leave your contact info.

I don't need to cite anything because we're talking informally and anecdotally. I didn't ask you to source your claims, though they are just as speculative as mine.
>Finding someone that would go out with you is the first step to a good relationship every time.
And it's also the first step to a bad relationship that makes you more lonely and unhappy, so I don't think this means much.

>I don't need to cite anything because we're talking informally and anecdotally. I didn't ask you to source your claims, though they are just as speculative as mine.
OP can provide proof though while you can't.
Hell, he doesn't even need to since we can observe his claim beeing true even in this thread.

>And it's also the first step to a bad relationship that makes you more lonely and unhappy, so I don't think this means much.
It's always the first step, if there is nobody who would accept to go out with you, you couldn't have a relationship.

The only way I could provide proof would be to enter into a relationship disingenuously though, and that's a shitty thing to do. This is an informal natter not a thesis, I think my point holds merit and if you disagree you're welcome to refute it.

We hate women for a very good reason. They live life on easy mode and act as net drains on society and yet they pretend theyre oppressed and demand more and more gibsmedats from society, most often at the expense of men

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim I can also disregard it without any evidence.

>The only way I could provide proof would be to enter into a relationship disingenuously though, and that's a shitty thing to do.
One relationship wouldn't be a good samplesize anyway.

You can, I'm asking why you would. Do you always take that approach with informal, anecdotal conversations? What a limited and boring way of understanding the world.
>One relationship wouldn't be a good samplesize anyway.
So on top of your unreasonable cries for proof, you tell me I wouldn't be able to prove it anyway?
Thinking maybe you don't want me to prove my point, you just want an easy way of telling me I'm wrong without arguing you are right.

Because you're saying it's objectively truth even though you can't provide evidence whatsoever.
>In reality...
If you had used a more subjective stance on this topic I wouldn't have replied.

>So on top of your unreasonable cries for proof, you tell me I wouldn't be able to prove it anyway?
If you're making a broad claim about many people then obviously you can't proof it easily.
If you'd end up in a abusive relationship with a NEET does that mean all NEETs are abusive in your logic?

>Thinking maybe you don't want me to prove my point, you just want an easy way of telling me I'm wrong without arguing you are right.
Go ahead and give some argument then, I don't really care.