- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, TXT, Maximum:11000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3323 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply[ Reply ]
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 424833
Am I supposed to know who these people are?
I realise that might sound like me trying to act aloof or too important to recognise (I assume) famous people, but I'm genuinely asking, as I'm worried that this is something I should know about.
|>>|| No. 424836
It's about R Kelly and his arrest for fucking kids. There's been rumours for years and there's said to be footage of him fucking a 14 year old. I have no idea why his lawyers thought that interview was a good idea.
He's a very strange individual. If you go beyond his penchant for teenage girls then he's said to have run a cult where he controlled and manipulated the lives of several women.
|>>|| No. 424840
It's the Michael Jackson shit all over again. Why are people acting like this wasn't a known factor of R Kelly? You know the random lyrics that get stuck in your head? I've got one that goes "don't tell R Kelly where my little sister at", that's from Tyler the Creator's Bastard and that came out in 2010/11.
I suppose folks are more willing to ignore a musician's wrongdoings because it's usually a totally passive artform that plugs straight into your emo-globuals, but as I've brought up here before I used to love Crystal Castles, but now I have murder fantasies about Ethan Kath. I don't want it to be this way, but I didn't have much say in the matter.
I don't know, people are stupid and this thread should probably have been in /news/ or /beat/.
|>>|| No. 424848
I bet that's because you think all black men look the same. You think all black men look the same because you're a filthy racist.
|>>|| No. 424858
I sort of like CC but get the impression I'd not really get along with them IRL. Artsy types tend to annoy me. What made you hate Ethan Kath so much?
Also I've a feeling R Kelly's fans will just ignore or make excuses for this, as other posters have said the allegations aren't new. Unlike all those girls who got Lostprophets tattoos back in the day and who will have had to get them lasered off.
|>>|| No. 424860
You kind of wonder how Bill Wyman got away with shagging a 14-year-old in the 80s and never had to answer for it. He was a good 20 years older than Mandy Smith.
Not so you'd notice though. This picture is from their wedding when she was 18. She looked twice that, didn't she.
|>>|| No. 424862
>Not so you'd notice though. This picture is from their wedding when she was 18. She looked twice that, didn't she.
The lass that Adam Johnson diddled could easily have passed for a girl in her mid-twenties rather than in Year 10. However, he made the mistake of asking how old she was and then Googling the age of consent before grooming her.
|>>|| No. 424863
>Googling the age of consent before grooming her.
How is the age of consent not common knowledge. Also, if you are grooming somebody under the age of consent, then check age of consent laws and then go back to grooming them regardless, you will have taken away any residual defence you may have had regarding not knowing what the age of consent is.
But again, due to the simplicity of age of consent laws, at least in the UK, it's difficult to imagine how you can not know about it.
|>>|| No. 424866
Wasn't his defence that she had lied about her age? As I recall, she approached him rather than the other way round.
|>>|| No. 424868
Not knowing somebody's real age is not normally a permissible defence as such. Taken to extremes, it would mean that you would have to ask for somebody's birth certificate to ensure they are old enough, but courts tend to argue that the burden was on you to establish beyond reasonable doubt that somebody was old enough. By whatever means necessary.
|>>|| No. 424870
>The lass that Adam Johnson diddled could easily have passed for a girl in her mid-twenties rather than in Year 10.
Anyone with even a faint amount of experience with females knows this is never the case. Yes, make-up can age people, but its blindingy obvious from speaking to someone how old they are. Peados gonna paedo.
|>>|| No. 424872
Most cases don't revolve around somebody being 16 and looking mid-20s, but they are about 14-year-olds pretending to be 16 so that somebody much older isn't immediately deterred from engaging with them. Are you sure you can tell a 16-year-old from a 14-year-old with enough certainty and beyond their own claims of how old they really are?
And girls actually do this now and then. When I was in my early to mid-20s, I once met a lass in an online chat room who said she was 18, she then travelled by train to see me and only after a few drinks together she then told me she was 16 and not 18. She said she was worried that I would not be interested in her if I knew that she was only 16 and thus almost eight years younger than me. But I would have believed her just the same if she had said she was actually 18.
|>>|| No. 424873
>Not knowing somebody's real age is not normally a permissible defence as such.
AIUI you need to have taken reasonable steps. "Reasonable" as usual refers to what a "reasonable person" would be expected to do, and I'd say that asking someone their age and getting a believable answer is reasonable, and asking them for ID is not reasonable. After all, you're not in the business of supplying age-restricted goods, where the burden is much higher.
I think we need to remember that we're talking about a 26 year old here, not a 56 year old. If a 56 year old is fucking teenagers, legal or not that just isn't on.
|>>|| No. 424876
>If a 56 year old is fucking teenagers, legal or not that just isn't on.
Why do I feel this different if it's a 56 year old gilf seducing lads. Not complaining about the double standard or saying a 56 year old should be shagging teens, I'm just trying to work out why. Is it just because I'm a bloke so I see it in a different light?
|>>|| No. 424878
I'm a man too but I think women see it this way too. It's just part of the dynamic of our genders that when it comes to sex, men are always seen as more predatory, or more capable of being predatory at least, so when it comes to stuff like an old person sleeping with a 16 year old, a bloke is a definite pedo, while a woman is weird, but rarely is she implied to be a criminal for it.
I think the other thing at play is the assumption (accurate or not) that men, and boys, just want to get their dick wet no matter what, so even if a crime has been committed, it's sort of fine because the lad got his end away, and we assume he wanted it. The other side of that coin is the implication that women don't enjoy sex as much, so any old woman sleeping with a toy boy probably does it for innocent emotional reasons, and any young girl sleeping with an old man has been tricked into it.
|>>|| No. 424879
It's that whole thing about power, innit. And fisherpersons saying that it's almost always men who are in positions of power over a woman, or girl, in a relationship with an age gap.
But you can't help arguing that it can be just as harmful to a vulnerable teenlad to be seduced by a 35-year-old woman. And women honestly can be just as manipulative, if not more so, than men.
But yeah, it is difficult to justify a 56-year-old shagging teenagers. Even teenagers who are above the age of consent and can therefore technically shag whoever they like. Even wizened 56-year-olds.
There is an argument in developmental psychology that you progress through psychological sexual stages as you grow up, and that in order to complete those stages, you continuously need to have sex pretty much with your peers, i.e. people of roughly the same age group. When a person then retains a strong sexual preference for a particular young age group even as they get much older, it is then taken as an indication that they did not complete that developmental stage. So the fact that a guy in his mid-50s wants to shag teenagers could stem from not having had enough opportunity to have sex with teenagers when he was a teenager himself.
On the other hand, this does not address sexual opportunism, i.e. somebody who generally prefers sex with their peers but won't mind getting it on with a teenager, given the chance. And it also doesn't address the observation that adult men as they get older usually don't move past being most strongly attracted to women in their 20s to early 30s, even with a record of continuous sexual activity.
|>>|| No. 424880
> it can be just as harmful to a vulnerable teenlad to be seduced by a 35-year-old woman
It was a proper pissing match back in the day, being the first to wet your knob in the female depths.
Those who managed to do that with lasses older than themselves were almost revelled.
It was more like shagging a 17-19 year old whilst being 13-14 yourself. 35 on the other hand... off, indeed. Still would count, with all the bragging bonusses.
|>>|| No. 424881
There were a load of 16 (and even 15 I'm pretty sure) year old lasses at my school who were going out with 'lads with cars' in their mid twenties, and that was accepted for sure.
|>>|| No. 424882
When one of my friends was in school she wouldn't date boys her own age as she thought they were too immature; she'd invariably end up dating a chav somewhere around the age of 20. She's now married to a teacher she met online who's about ten years older than her.
|>>|| No. 424883
>It was a proper pissing match back in the day, being the first to wet your knob in the female depths.
>Those who managed to do that with lasses older than themselves were almost revelled.
As you implied, to a certain extent.
One of my mates at school was 14 when he started bragging about having been deflowered by a 20-year-old lass from his neighbourhood. He lived in a tower block on the bad side of town, so theoretically you were ready to accept that that was just what the unwashed masses got up to between having their beer and fags and watching TV all day on the dole. It was only a few years later when I happened to get to know said lass personally that the whole thing just fell apart and turned out to have been adolescent wishful thinking.
The other way round, there was a lad in year 12 at my school who was notorious for a whole string of underage girlfriends. Underage meaning, 14 or 15, and 13 in one unconfirmed case, which when you're 17 or 18 yourself isn't as bad, but we still called him a paedo. The funny thing was though, girls that age really did seem to have a keen interest in 17- or 18-year-old boys. On the other hand, that doesn't make it alright for you as the 18-year-old to shag a 13- or 14-year-old.
|>>|| No. 424884
Girls start maturing earlier. I keenly remember that myself - one case that I sperged out massively. I still cringe each time I re-call it.
|>>|| No. 424885
Same around here. I do remember one bloke telling me to 'wait a bit, then you'll have all this meat lined up, legs spread'.
|>>|| No. 424886
>I keenly remember that myself - one case that I sperged out massively. I still cringe each time I re-call it.
That sounds like a tale to be shared with us lot.
|>>|| No. 424887
> 'wait a bit, then you'll have all this meat lined up, legs spread'.
Well not necessarily. If you were a geeky socially awkward 14-year-old devoid of attention from girls your age, then you were likely to go on to be a geeky 20-year-old who couldn't get laid, possibly even an vegan, although the term mercifully didn't exist back then.
Your only chance was to straighten your act out and become a blokey bloke by age 20. And you saw that happen now and then. A car definitely helped, but I had a car from my 18th birthday and being the socially awkward geek that I was, it did absolutely zip for me in terms of getting girls to have sex with me.
But yeah, the fittest lasses at my school when they were 17 or 18 almost invariably had blokes who were in their early to mid 20s. Also, having even a bare minimum of your own money from gainful employment appeared to help loads, because it gave you the edge over a penniless pupil if you had a steady job and were able to buy your girlfriend nice thing such as perfume or earrings without having to ask your parents.
|>>|| No. 424889
Just a girl asking if I had a girlfriend.
Being the immature little piece of shite at the time, I said no and asked her back why would I need one. She didn't reply.
Looking back at it, I almost admire the lucidity of the answer and the lack of such to my question, as well as my apparent disinterest in romantic relationships later on, caving in to 'booze, cigs and bikes/cars' kind of fun instead.
The cringe value is the stark contrast between her development stage and mine. That one became visible to me only after I started maturing myself.
Not really surprising given the kind of low-life I was back then.
Not going to argue, you are mostly right mate.
|>>|| No. 424891
>If you were a geeky socially awkward 14-year-old devoid of attention from girls your age, then you were likely to go on to be a geeky 20-year-old who couldn't get laid
I've only really known two lads who used to target girls of a questionable age when they were in their twenties; they were both socially awkward types. I guess some of the kind of things that were seen as pathetic by lasses their own age doesn't bother young and impressionable teenagers who don't know any better.
|>>|| No. 424892
I do wish people would stop using that word. The only people who are really involuntarily celibate are religious ministers, sex offenders and the Chinese.
|>>|| No. 424893
Most people are aware of that. Only vegans themselves are implying anything else, everyone else is making fun of the very idea.
|>>|| No. 424895
>I've only really known two lads who used to target girls of a questionable age when they were in their twenties;
It's a grey area. A 23 year old dating an 18 year old is a big age gap at that age any way you look at it. But there are always mature 18 year olds that are on a similar level as a lad in his early to mid 20s. And in that case, it's not hugely questionable IMO.
I also don't think you should call it "targeting". It unfairly assumes that a lad that age will only have sinister motives. I had an 18 year old girlfriend at 23, and I didn't "target" her but we simply fell in love when we met. And our age difference, while substantial, never seemed to either of us like we were doing something wrong. Or to anybody else, for that matter.
|>>|| No. 424896
I'm on about lads in their twenties who would regularly hang around with girls aged 16 and possibly younger. Lads who watch anime. Lads who think it's acceptable to type things like O_o to express emotion amongst many other cringy pathetic things.
No need to get so defensive, you bloody child groomer.
|>>|| No. 424897
Involuntary celibates are a fucking joke because fundamentally they refuse to assume responsibility for their own actions. There are over seven billion people on the planet, all the result of two people shagging, and you are telling me you can't get laid even once?
The real problem of involuntary celibates is that the vast majority are self absorbed, narcissistic cry babies, many of whom were handed simply everything by their parents growing up, and who now find themselves thrown into adulthood where suddenly nothing is handed to them anymore and they have to fend all for themselves.
By some definition though, you could argue that getting yourself laid and getting a girlfriend is hard work, in that you have to have your shit together (unless you are one of those dole fiends who shag like rabbits because there just is nothing else to do all day), you have to have plans for your life, you need to be halfway educated and able to hold down a job and ideally have an attractive personality, whatever meaning you choose to fill that term with.
To an overgrown manchild like many involuntary celibates are, that is of course gut wrenching hard work, which they both refuse to do and probably aren't equipped to do due to their upbringing. So they like to see it as a secret code that they simply cannot fathom, but which some guys unfairly posess and thus are able to get all the girls which involuntary celibates feel they themselves would be morally entitled to.
Almost nothing about involuntary celibacy is actually involuntary. You decide all for yourself just how unfucked you are going to remain in life.
|>>|| No. 424898
> A 23 year old dating an 18 year old is a big age gap
Big age gap? 5 fucking years? You're pulling my leg.
|>>|| No. 424903
It may not be irreconcilably huge, but it is definitely something that you notice with a lot of little things. In a way that you probably won't when a 33 year old dates a 28 year old. The older you get, the less significant a five--year age gap will become, but as I said, from my own experience, five years can be substantial at age 18 and 23.
|>>|| No. 424904
>Almost nothing about involuntary celibacy is actually involuntary. You decide all for yourself just how unfucked you are going to remain in life.
Again, nobody other than the people identifying themselves as involuntarily celibate actually thinks otherwise.
|>>|| No. 424905
I haven't gotten laid in years, but I'm happy with that. I haven't exactly been out on the pull, and it's not something I've actively been seeking. I'm reasonably happy with the single life, and I don't particularly feel the need to go fuck anything that moves. I don't feel like I'm any less of a man because of it, and it puzzles me that other people seem to find it a problem.
|>>|| No. 424906
It depends what you mean by involuntary. If you're trapped in a cage that requires a code you don't know, are you there voluntarily? A lot of vegans seem incapable of figuring out how to function normally, even when told how to some part of them refuses to accept it for one reason or another. A lot of them have tried very hard to get out of the cage using what they do know, and have failed.
Yes they're generally hateful people but saying "It's voluntary" and assigning them all full responsibility for agency in their lot is questionable. They don't know how to decide not to be unfucked for their whole lives.
|>>|| No. 424907
>If you're trapped in a cage that requires a code you don't know, are you there voluntarily?
That would make sense if you were entitled to not be trapped in a cage.
|>>|| No. 424908
"Entitled" is a loaded term but presumably nobody deserves to be trapped in a cage against their will their whole lives whilst everyone else is free. It's certainly not entirely fair to just blame them for it.
Spoiled children are the parent's fault, aren't they?
|>>|| No. 424909
virgin walk chad stride.png
> A lot of vegans seem incapable of figuring out how to function normally, even when told how to some part of them refuses to accept it for one reason or another
It can be done though. But what it requires is that you need to examine your whole way of thinking and functioning. Your focus must not be on what the cruel world out there has done to you by labelling you unfuckable, but how you can overcome that and be an attractive person in spite of the odds, at least attractive enough that somebody other than a prozzie will have sex with you. And even if you are unlucky enough to be profoundly inept at social interaction, perhaps because you've got kind of an Aspie thing going on to boot, even that can be overcome within your personal capabilities. If you take TV programmes like The Undateables to be realistic, that means even if you have as much as a full on learning disability, there is hope for you.
I can understand when people think their social awkwardness is a hindrance for them in trying to meet a sexual and/or romantic partner. And oftentimes it is. But what you then do with that realisation is what is so key. Do you see it as an obstacle that must be overcome and that you are willing to overcome and give it your all, or do you stylise and exaggerate that obstacle to be an unfair hand that was dealt to you by fate and that you have no way of changing.
What also really, really, really isn't healthy is to then immerse yourself in the online vegan filter bubble where you will not only meet people like yourself who blame everybody else but themselves for their misfortune, but it also opens the door to vast volumes of pseudo theory and pseudo terminology about the world and the state of being an vegan within it.
|>>|| No. 424910
Are we really doing the whole vegan debate again? It's been done to death, particularly in the thread about the alt-right on /news/. It seems like we're stuck in a loop of topics, retreading the same ground.
|>>|| No. 424911
>but presumably nobody deserves to be trapped in a cage against their will their whole lives whilst everyone else is free
Precisely, which is where the analogy falls down.
|>>|| No. 424914
I feel like a lot of them don't really try because they prematurely imagine they won't succeed. The kind of people who were rejected once in secondary school and never tried again. They also seem to severely overestimate how much normal people care about virginity or how often the subject comes up through cultural osmosis from films, tv, jokes, etc. (Similarly and with some crossover to how nerds have a chip on their shoulder about being oppressed.)
But then I am assuming my excessive time spent on imageboards offsets the limited insight i can have into the vegan condition given I'm (proper) autistic enough that having sex seems actively undesirable.
|>>|| No. 424915
>I feel like a lot of them don't really try because they prematurely imagine they won't succeed. The kind of people who were rejected once in secondary school and never tried again.
Absolutely. Are you aware of the Elephant and the Rope story?
|>>|| No. 424916
>I feel like a lot of them don't really try because they prematurely imagine they won't succeed. The kind of people who were rejected once in secondary school and never tried again.
As I said earlier, I think it often has to do with entitlement and the fact that everything was handed to a lot of them growing up. A lot of them had parents who always stepped in when problems arose, and maybe those parents even smothered their kids to the point that those kids then never had a chance to build their own character, and so now they find themselves in the field of romance and sex where no parent in the world, beyond heartfelt advice, can possibly make you get laid. And if up to that point you never had to build up frustration tolerance and accept that failure is an inherent and natural part of your way to success, then this deficit in personal development comes to bear.
And I think there is a great misconception when it comes to socially successful lads and their luck with women. Every ladies' man who has ever been has had to deal with failure, rejection and resistance at some point. The secret is that that didn't make them stop entirely, but that they took it as a chance to reexamine themselves and figure out how to
be smooth have more luck the next time.
But yeah, the vegan debates on .gs are getting a tad tiresome. Ideally, we should not be having more of them in the future because they inevitably always just go around in circles.
|>>|| No. 424917
>But yeah, the vegan debates on .gs are getting a tad tiresome. Ideally, we should not be having more of them in the future because they inevitably always just go around in circles.
Aren't we coming up to the time of year where companies release their gender pay gap?
|>>|| No. 424922
That's good to know, this being the day after International "When Is It International Men's Day?" Day.
|>>|| No. 424927
> this being the day after International "When Is It International Men's Day?" Day.
Careful. We don't want reddit sprining leaks again.
|>>|| No. 424955
It's pretty obvious people like >>424897 have a chip on their shoulder about something. The term originally came from an 80s academic description of the issues people who can't seem to have sex face but feel the feature is an important part of life - issues like a loss of self-confidence and frustration people suffer when they have physical and mental problems. I think that some lad in his early 20s having a bit of a teary on the internet because he has trouble with girls is not only a fair use of the term but also an issue only someone in the 10s could possibly give a shit about.
To be honest all this contemporary shit about pills is just an offshoot of PUA stuff that has been going on since time immemorial. Human relationships are fucked in general and the cultural status attached to a man of conquest will inevitably cause problems. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
It inevitably comes up whenever men's issues are brought up. Although, when you look at it that way, I think this thread may have unintentionally concluded that awkward lads should go out and shag someone underage.
|>>|| No. 424957
>It inevitably comes up whenever men's issues are brought up
I read a few interesting articles the other day on gender equality. It's been found that in Nordic countries where there is much greater emphasis on equality of opportunity men and women are noticeably more likely to opt for traditionally gendered jobs. In particular, women are far less likely to study STEM subjects at university or run their own businesses; it's been speculated that this is because of their generous social security system meaning there is less of a need to get a high paying job than in poorer/less equal nations and women being more likely to be happier letting their career take a backseat to raising a family.
|>>|| No. 424959
Most vegans don't want to face facts - they're nearly always monumentally unattractive people, who don't have the self-awareness or motivation to make changes to themselves. They're nearly always uninterested in others in a genuine way and hide behind intellectual narcissism.
I do agree though that this has been going on since time immemorial though - like many things, it's always been there, its just the interweb gives people ways to express it and find each other.
|>>|| No. 424960
(Also, as the original dietary vegan-in-the-village, this latest word filter upsets me a lot).
|>>|| No. 424962
Some lads wanted to give their opinion on încels. You know, in case they missed their chance in the other 5,000 threads we've had discussing them
|>>|| No. 424968
I think this is something that is often missed in debates on equal opportunity, boardroom parity, and women in STEM. Women should have all these opportunities, but you are approaching it from the wrong direction if your end goal is to get as many woman engineers as possible and have as many women as possible in boardrooms. There are a lot of women who simply care more about family and domestic life than they do about achieving an 80-hour-a-week executive career.
I'm economicslad, I studied economics and the vast majority of fellow students had very definite career goals and aspirations about what they were going to do with their degree. But you also had those who simply wanted a solid education, but said that they would happily stay home and raise their kids when that day would come.
It kind of reminds me of a seminar we did on "junior entrepreneurs in STEM", where the topic of debate was how more STEM graduates could be encouraged to start their own business/company after uni. Some lads were giving a presentation to the class, and I threw them completely off their game when I asked if more STEM entrepreneurs were really needed, and if maybe a lot of people simply did not want to start their own business, and if there would be any point in dragging them into entrepreneurship by their ears.
|>>|| No. 424969
It's almost as if all those decades of gendered socialisation has a deeply-ingrained effect on society.
|>>|| No. 424971
This would be the Nordic countries which have historically been more egalitarian than other nations, with the Vikings notable for it, having fewer women going into STEM than nations with a far more ingrained patriarchal society.
Your snark doesn't also explain why the proportion of men and women going into traditionally gendered careers has gone up in Nordic countries since they've made even greater efforts for equal opportunities.
|>>|| No. 424974
Iran has a higher proportion of female engineers than any other country. I don't know what the answer is, but none of the common explanations for why there are so few women in engineering are compatible with the facts.
|>>|| No. 424975
>Your snark doesn't also explain why the proportion of men and women going into traditionally gendered careers has gone up in Nordic countries since they've made even greater efforts for equal opportunities.
It does, but you're just choosing to ignore that.
|>>|| No. 424980
this is inadequate.jpg
This isn't one of your better wordfilters, modlads.
We actually discuss veganism quite a bit here. Getting it mixed up with ïncels will only lead to confusion, and not of the funny kind. You should've made it 'fanny-magnet' or summat else ironic.
|>>|| No. 424982
>they're nearly always monumentally unattractive people, who don't have the self-awareness or motivation to make changes to themselves. They're nearly always uninterested in others in a genuine way and hide behind intellectual narcissism.
Yeah, but I'm like that and I didn't even order the falafel! I think the issue is more that they suffer from a multitude of interrelated issues that make it hard or even impossible to escape from the hole they've found themselves in. We are talking about boys who have become detached from society after all, your dehumanising stereotypes are hardly helpful while the suicide rate grows in people who are little more than kids and have to deal with the nightmare of young girls.
This is why I don't mind Peterson because for all the criticism thrown at him he does seem like someone trying to help lads who have gotten lost.
|>>|| No. 424983
>I didn't even order the falafel!
These word filters have well and truly gotten out of hand.
|>>|| No. 424988
I get the feeling that all men are fanny magnets, but some of them have their polarity the wrong way round.
|>>|| No. 424996
I have always found it kind of perplexing how these lads are somehow an acceptable target for mockery and criticism, when all manner of other unpleasant people (Are Shamima for example) are protected by their victim status.
I suppose it's because they are largely white and male, but god forbid we open the can of worms on why that's a problem, or indeed that it is even a problem. It's a nasty old world we live in.
|>>|| No. 424997
Don't worry, I'm sure they'll be another outpouring of care whenever a youtuber visits a suicide forest again.
|>>|| No. 424998
>I have always found it kind of perplexing how these lads are somehow an acceptable target for mockery and criticism, when all manner of other unpleasant people (Are Shamima for example) are protected by their victim status.
They've decided that they're entitled to sex and that it's the rest of the world's fault for denying it to them. They're not victims, they're fair game.
|>>|| No. 425000
How many chronic masturbators find themselves pregnant and stuck in a refugee camp again? And most of posters here, and the less important people in the real world, seem to agree she ought to face if not outright prosecution, the close and beady eye of the security services for a very long while.
Oh, and you're often, just about, closeted racists who shoehorn ethnicity into everything and anything.
|>>|| No. 425002
When that rifle range in Birkenhead used Begum-shaped targets for a laugh, the outrage brigade were out in force. There really isn't anyone willing to stick up for neckbeard virgins. The NUS aren't going to start a campaign on their behalf, no wing of Momentum is going to rally in support of unfuckable weirdos. They're only slightly above carpet-baggers in the pecking order.
|>>|| No. 425003
>decided that they're entitled to sex
I'm glad that I'm not the only one that views them in that way - it's the intellectual narcissism (BUT I'M SO CLEVER AND NICE UNLIKE CHAD) that I find weird.
|>>|| No. 425004
Literally anyone defining themselves as 'involuntarily celibate' is someone who believes they're entitled to sex, otherwise they wouldn't use those words, or want anything to do with that group of people.
|>>|| No. 425006
This is basically Sun/Mail reader logic, and I know most of you lads consider yourself above that.
As a lefty, I largely believe that people end up in the state that they are in because of factors mostly out of their control. Black men commit more crime because their communities are fractures and left behind. Women are at a disadvantage to men in a lot of areas because of years of inherited social and cultural bias. British asian lads join SCIS because they need a community to feel accepted into, and recruiters prey on that insecurity. The alt right and its various subfactions operate in much the same cult-like fashion.
I firmly believe a pasty lad who plays World of Warcraft all day and is bitter because he can't get his end away is a victim of circumstance in much the same manner- He didn't have the right role models, he was probably bullied through school, he's socially stunted... it's really no wonder he ended up this way. Any of us could have done.
It pisses me off when people don't apply the same standards they would to other groups.
|>>|| No. 425007
>It depends what you mean by involuntary. If you're trapped in a cage that requires a code you don't know, are you there voluntarily?
Yes, because in my experience, you can sit there and tell them the code all day, write it down on a piece of paper and hand it to them, and they will come up with excuses for why the code won't work or how they couldn't possibly type the code in themselves.
|>>|| No. 425008
>How many chronic masturbators find themselves pregnant and stuck in a refugee camp again?
Why do you keep picking on me, lad. I've told you before that I don't subscribe to Quinoa but now I can't even have a wank after work without being labelled a vegan. The guy you're talking to ain't even me but I'm still getting shit for it.
|>>|| No. 425009
>I firmly believe a pasty lad who plays World of Warcraft all day and is bitter because he can't get his end away is a victim of circumstance in much the same manner- He didn't have the right role models, he was probably bullied through school, he's socially stunted... it's really no wonder he ended up this way. Any of us could have done.
>It pisses me off when people don't apply the same standards they would to other groups.
Think about the site that you're on. There's a reason we mock these lads - we're all pasty nerds here, but most of us have managed to work out how to act normal enough to get our knobs wet. And we constantly advice these virginlads on how to do the same, but they refuse to listen, because it's easier for them to believe it's impossible, because they're too much of a wet fart to even try. From speaking to these lads here, from trying to patiently explain to them exactly what they need to do, only to read paragraphs and paragraphs of excuses or "well you must be a chad then if you can do that" type rhetoric, I have lost all sympathy for them.
The magic formula for fanny is out there and extremely well known. I learned it, most of the shed-dwelling weirdos here learned it, and I am done having sympathy for those who can't. It might sound harsh, but it's only because I see myself in these lads, and I'm frustrated that they have no interest in actually listening to advice, they only want to complain about how they have a bad hand, when in reality they probably don't, they're just unwilling to work on their personality defects.
|>>|| No. 425011
Oh, I guess the DPRK isn't a totalitarian hellscape after all; look, it says right in the name.
|>>|| No. 425012
I don't understand your point - are you saying that involcels are labelled as such by a dictator?
(A good day to you Sir!)
|>>|| No. 425013
Now try reading an article in the Graun and replacing every time you mentioned a pasty virgin with a black woman who's not earning as much as her white male counterparts.
Congratulations- You've just mindfucked yourself conservative. "I managed to do it so there's no reason you can't do the same!"
I'm very obviously being at least a bit facetious, but still. I can't be arsed to articulate this properly but I think I have the basis of a valid point to make.
|>>|| No. 425014
Not really though, as I self identified as a pasty virgin (at least I was the latter for a while, still very much a pasty nerd), so it's more like you reading an article where a black woman complains about other black women - how do you feel about that? Is she allowed to?
|>>|| No. 425016
That's my point- You wouldn't get that. A black woman would support her black sisters against the obvious social boundaries that she has been fortunate enough to overcome, but that her sisters may not.
What you've got here, lad, is some of that internalised over-fishing. You've seen one too many videogames with big buff space marines in them objectifying your gender role, and you subconsciously propagate it.
|>>|| No. 425017
>This is basically Sun/Mail reader logic, and I know most of you lads consider yourself above that.
What a load of nonsense. Your examples aren't even remotely comparable. The pressures on women and black men and Asians are real. The pressures on the sex-deprived are not. Their problem is entirely self-inflicted. They can't get laid because they believe they're entitled to it, and act accordingly.
|>>|| No. 425018
So what I should really be doing is campaigning for women to shag people they don't find attractive?
|>>|| No. 425019
>I firmly believe a pasty lad who plays World of Warcraft all day and is bitter because he can't get his end away is a victim of circumstance in much the same manner- He didn't have the right role models, he was probably bullied through school, he's socially stunted... it's really no wonder he ended up this way.
I realise I'm being trolled to tears here, but this is fucking offensive. There is an ocean of difference between the structural, historical discrimination that women and black people face, compared to the minor inconvenience of not getting laid that your average internet virgin complains about. The former are suffering from white, male privilege; the latter are explicit arguing for that privilege to be granted and extended further to them to fuck whoever they like.
>don't apply the same standards they would to other groups
There is simply no comparison between those groups. Internet sadfucks deserve all the derision they get from sites like this, because many of us have "suffered" in the same way from playing too many video games, a lack of role models, were probably bullied at school, are socially stunted, but have the humility to realise that a shag isn't some god-given right and involves self-awareness, an ability to listen and empathise with others, and most of all, have a wash and be interesting - now and again. Taking the piss out of them is fair game and always will be.
|>>|| No. 425020
You've got it lad, just like you're supposed to accept 20 stone munters as beautiful normal bodies.
|>>|| No. 425021
I wish you'd been more obvious about your trolling earlier, it would have saved us all some time.
|>>|| No. 425022
I'm not trolling, I'm using irony to subtly highlight discrepancies of thought amongst people who don't realise they're so near the end of the horseshoe curve they could touch the other side with their bollock hairs.
|>>|| No. 425023
This is total balls. Women have very low standards because of how awful most men are. We, largely, look scruffy, smell off and act atrociously. I know a lad who smells like weed more often than not and longboards to his bar job, but he's in a long term relationship with an attractive home owner. We absolutely should improve as a gender, but not too much, we've got a nice thing going here.
Recent .gs advice for virginlads that stuck with me personally was "get a haircut that costs twenty quid rather than ten quid", that's the bar, it's a cattle grid, not a hurdle.
|>>|| No. 425030
And you knobheads thought I was being paranoid when I started talking about the creep of the alt-right on here. Fucking hell, lads. Sort yourselves out.
|>>|| No. 425041
>I realise I'm being trolled to tears here, but this is fucking offensive. There is an ocean of difference between the structural, historical discrimination that women and black people face, compared to the minor inconvenience of not getting laid that your average internet virgin complains about. The former are suffering from white, male privilege; the latter are explicit arguing for that privilege to be granted and extended further to them to fuck whoever they like.
Yes the difference being one is personal and one is societal. Psychology recognises the need to form intimate relationships as a basic and fundamental, whereas the needs of fishing in the west appear towards the top of the pyramid for most individuals.
>There is an ocean of difference between the structural, historical discrimination that women and black people face, compared to the minor inconvenience of not getting laid that your average internet virgin complains about.
If someone kicked the shit out of you every day I'd presume it would be of little comfort that no one kicked the shit out of your parents.
No matter how you slice it these are people who are deeply unhappy, who need help to function in society to achieve their needs, and kicking them whilst they are down and blaming them for their failing is hardly productive. When these people try to fix their social skills themselves by learning how to pick up girls that is demonised too and treated as abhorrent, all you want is them to accept their fate as second class citizens who will never achieve the basic desire to have a family.
|>>|| No. 425043
How dare you express empathy and understanding towards an untouchable caste!? What are you, some sort of neo-Nazi?
|>>|| No. 425044
>Why are people still starving in Africa if we've been giving them aid for decades?
Because, clearly, the help either isn't getting through or, while well meaning, isn't the right sort of help.
You know how a good teacher won't just keep telling a student who's struggling to understand a problem the same information over and over but instead finds a different way to teach them?
I don't have a realistic* solution to offer but treating them increasingly as subhumans isn't helpful and is just cruel.
*I'd feed them all psychedelics and see how that goes but that's not likely to happen any time soon.
|>>|| No. 425045
> They also seem to severely overestimate how much normal people care about virginity
It takes just one remark 'he'd obviously never been with someone since 19, sex with him was profoundly awkward', even if it comes from a complete slag.
Sage for partially confirming your point.
|>>|| No. 425046
>When these people try to fix their social skills themselves by learning how to pick up girls that is demonised too and treated as abhorrent
lol, half of the replies you gotten have been people pointing out this site regularly offers advice to people like the ones you're claiming to champion, just because it's not "The Game" inspired sexist guff doesn't mean it isn't good advice.
They aren't having the shit kicked out of them, none of them are, ever. People who specifically call themselves "chronic masturbators" are being mocked for having a deeply unpleasant, self-absorbed and anti-feeeemaaale outlook and then wondering why they can't get their leg over. The "chronic masturbator" movement has many of its origins in the ramblings, both in film and on print, of Elliot Rogers, a deeply unsympathetic man even before he started stabbing his roommates and shooting strangers. Indeed, as the archetypal "chronic masturbator" Rogers is everything wrong with them; he wasn't really pig ugly, he wasn't treated like a pariah and he blamed everyone else for his problems while doing nothing about them himself. It's this golden triangle of delusion, entitlement and ego that make "chronic masturbators" so disliked, and their not-really-but-kind-of ironic veneration of the afore mentioned twat doesn't help any.
Pasty nerds aren't an oppressed group, they aren't bound by dodgy trade deals that force them to sell their nation's natural resources before adding wealth to them like a lot of African countries, nor are they impacted by rampant corruption or civil strife. Your metaphors don't track.
Well you do bring it up all the time, and "chronic masturbator" Twitter crosses over in a hot-second to far-right Twitter, so yeah, often you are.
|>>|| No. 425048
>and he blamed everyone else for his problems while doing nothing about them himself.
You often have this with sheltered rich kids who had everything shoved up their arse growing up. They never had to fend for themselves, everything was handed to them. And it is this kind of entitlement that makes them expect that women, as it were, will simply be handed to them as well without a significant effort of their own.
Now, there are rich kids who do have women queueing up for them. But usually, that breed of rich kids aren't self absorbed virginal nacissists who blame the world for not continuing to hand everything to them, but they are achievers who go out into that world to make it their own. I am not saying that they then don't have that sense of entitlement, but the difference seems to be that they tend to know that entitlement and privilege alone get them nowhere without their own ambition.
|>>|| No. 425049
>Well you do bring it up all the time, and "chronic masturbator" Twitter crosses over in a hot-second to far-right Twitter, so yeah, often you are.
It's definitely a problem. It's hard to reach out to a lot of these people without being ostracised simply for being associated with them over attitudes like that.
I'm not trying to defend their beliefs but it is evidently a systemic problem of people whose parents or communities have neglected to teach them important social skills and now they're both suffering for it and being demonised on top of that. It's going to keep happening and it's going to get worse the more you dehumanise them for it.
|>>|| No. 425051
I think it's more an undercurrent in a lot of male social circles and the chronic masturbator cadre just lean more into the actual hard right.
Anyway I used to be an 'chronic masturbator' but I never bought into any toxic ideologies. I was just very sad.
I have some sympathy for the lads, but I'm one of those unfashionable cunts that believes people have the ability to overcome circumstance and recognise when they're engaging in poor behaviour.
|>>|| No. 425052
>I'm not trying to defend their beliefs but it is evidently a systemic problem of people whose parents or communities have neglected to teach them important social skills and now they're both suffering for it and being demonised on top of that. It's going to keep happening and it's going to get worse the more you dehumanise them for it.
Nobody is dehumanising them. That said, even if you accept that they have problems of social interaction that they can't overcome on their own, then they are still adults by a loose definition of the term who need to work on those problems and better themselves. There is help for people with social anxiety, and other resources that are open to them.
But a lot of them are going to have to get out of their "mean world" echo chambers first and realise that being whatever flavour of involuntary celibate you define yourself as is a lonely place for you to be. One where you couldn't be further from getting the kind of women that you, wrongly, feel you should be entitled to.
|>>|| No. 425053
>Why are people still starving in Africa if we've been giving them aid for decades?
Have a word with yourself, lad.
|>>|| No. 425054
Have you read the thread. There are enough people on the other side of the fence invalidating their needs that the 'mean world' is proven.
|>>|| No. 425055
Are you thick? Nobody is saying that they don't have the same basic human needs as everybody, including but not limited to getting laid and having a romantic partner.
It is just the way they are being immature whiny entitled cunts about it that pisses everybody off. But even that does not make it a mean world, real or imagined.
|>>|| No. 425056
>It is just the way they are being immature whiny entitled cunts about it that pisses everybody off
This reminds me of all the anti-suffragette posters that portray them as nagging harpies.
|>>|| No. 425058
Sex is easy and if you can't get any either you're a wrong un or your standards are too high. Get over yourselves and read a couple of books.
|>>|| No. 425063
>This reminds me of all the anti-suffragette posters that portray them as nagging harpies.
Although it seems like kind of an appealing thought when you look at some chronic masturbators, when were they ever not allowed to vote as a whole section of the population? When was it accepted practice that they should earn less money than (other) men? When did they need the permission of their husband (stay with me here for argument's sake) to take up gainful employment out of the house?
The difference between 19th century women and today's involuntary celibates is that there were actual written laws that barred women from enjoying basic rights as citizens and human beings that we now consider elemental. Nobody but the chronic masturbators themselves thinks that society does not want them to get laid.
It's again all about entitlement. Call it a secret code, call it a mean world that they think keeps them from having sex, in the end, those are all pseudo obstacles.
|>>|| No. 425064
>Get over yourselves and read a couple of books.
Always a foolproof way out of any predicament.
|>>|| No. 425066
Uhuh. And all those poor people who you told to "just make money", it's their fault they're still poor. It's just a pseudo obstacle.
(A good day to you Sir!)
|>>|| No. 425068
>it's their fault they're still poor. It's just a pseudo obstacle.
Have a fucking word with yourself, m2t. Really now.
|>>|| No. 425070
Does it? These lads feel entitled to pulling a 10/10 stunner with no effort on their part, instead of having reasonable expectations about their pulling ability. I'm a solid 7/10. I'm reasonably tall, I'm charismatic and I'm gay and because I care about my appearance and speak to women like human beings rather than raffle prizes, I'm turning down fanny on a weekly basis.
I don't say that to boast, it is simply a fact. A reasonable adjustment to these people's expectations and, as already stated, "a decent haircut" at the very least is all that is needed to cure their celibacy problems. The problem is their unwillingness to follow advice. They think because they can't use that advice to pull "Stacey" the advice is bollocks, which isn't accurate.
|>>|| No. 425073
Nah. These people don't exist in a vacuum and just whinging about how you don't like them doesn't help. All the reasons being raised against actually thinking about it rationally as a problem seem to strangely echo other irrational objections raised against other groups in the past. Including feeble attempts at censorship, apparently.
Nobody here is arguing that they should be set up with attractive women, just that shitting on them isn't helpful.
|>>|| No. 425075
Or as one of my mates in school used to say, you can't be wanting caviar if you're only pizza yourself.
I think some of those unrealistic expectations stem from the abundant availability of online porn which is more or less the only chance for sexual release for many involuntary celibates. Naturally, nobody really watches "ugly porn", more often than not, you gravitate towards porn with solid 8/10 to 10/10 women in it, which then skews your perception both of what the average woman in the real world looks like, and the perception of what type of woman would actually be interested in meeting you, the way you are now. That way, whether you want it or not, your standards of women you will have an interest in are indeed inflated in an unhealthy way, and in a way that just isn't going to get you laid.
Competition for real-world 8/10 women (disregarding for a moment how ridiculous these scale ratings really are) is fierce, and that is what then trips up all the chronic masturbators who think getting with somebody like that is going to be easy peasy, and who cry foul when they realise that it just isn't. For them anyway. Moreover, most women like that are aware of their high attractiveness and know that they can do many times better than your sorry chronic masturbator arse. They will have plenty of men chasing them all day long, and they get to pick and choose as it suits them. And that really isn't even their fault; any person, male or female, would do the same if they were lucky enough that they could.
|>>|| No. 425078
Those are two books that slightly contradict each other.
How To Make Friends is essentially about how to develop an attractive, likeable personality, whereas No More Mr. Nice Guy is more about looking out for #1, by all accounts. Not saying that you can't do both, but having read most of How To Make Friends, I would say it will get you further in life. Never liked the second half of the title "and influence people", because it insinuates that you should be making friends to suit your own egotistical needs, which the book itself then thankfully does not follow through as such.
|>>|| No. 425084
>How To Make Friends is essentially about how to develop an attractive, likeable personality, whereas No More Mr. Nice Guy is more about looking out for #1, by all accounts
This is true, at least to a certain extent. I'd argue that if you read Nice Guy and turn into a selfish arsehole you've read the book wrong, though, the idea is to work on yourself and think about your own needs to a point where you're no longer lashing out or expecting other to fulfill those needs. Its about being selfish, but self sufficiently selfish, if that makes sense. I don't think the intention is ever to send you out into the world no longer wanting to please others, just simply with a more healthy idea of what that actually entails.
Another less 'man' focused book with a lot of similar ideas is The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck. It's a bit pop-pysch, but if you read it as such it's still very useful, or at least it was to me. It's basically just Meditations for modern people. (I'd recommend Meditations too, but I only found one translation even remotely appealing, and I can't remember which one)
|>>|| No. 425085
Part of it is that it is a book for management and sales people and it never really tries to hide that. It actually does very little in the way of manipulation in that sense. The logic is if you are kind in the face of unreasonableness most people are willing to listen to you and meet you half way. Essentially it teaches you how to get people to respect you rather than influence them directly.
|>>|| No. 425086
> Another less 'man' focused book with a lot of similar ideas is The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck
I read that last year but I don't remember it offering any practical, tangible advice. Or maybe it was because the advice given was badly paraphrased from legitimate books on CBT techniques and then wrapped up in the author's tedious anecdotes.
|>>|| No. 425089
>Part of it is that it is a book for management and sales people and it never really tries to hide that.
In that respect, it also can't deny its American origin. Even more so than in Dale Carnegie's day, an entire industry, and not just a cottage industry, exists centered around how to draw personal (including financial) gain from being nice to people. The idea that maybe being a nice likeable person can have simple intrinsic value all of its own is often missed in American self help literature.
On the other hand, his book How to Stop Worrying and Start Living is indeed much more focused on how to get you to shed all the little and big worries that hold you down and keep you from being a happy person and, well, actualising, even if he doesn't use that exact word. Then again, it, too, can't conceal its rootedness in American culture. Which is obvious not just by the chummy writing style, but by the equally American concept of trying to be the best that you can be.
|>>|| No. 425090
> I'd argue that if you read Nice Guy and turn into a selfish arsehole you've read the book wrong, though, the idea is to work on yourself and think about your own needs to a point where you're no longer lashing out or expecting other to fulfill those needs.
As you rightly say, the real message can very easily be missed. It's reasonable to want to know how you can keep people from just walking over you and taking your for granted and not respecting you. Most people will turn into cunts though receiving that knowledge. Because not all the lack of respect you feel you are getting from other people is actually real, and some of it can simply be the result of having exaggerated expectations about the whole world having to kiss your arse.
|>>|| No. 425092
> How To Make Friends and Influence People
I'd say, read it once and forget the most of it. It's pretty superficial and folks are surely going to spot 'yet another friendly cunt' if you follow it too religiously.
For other criticism refer to search engines, way more smarter people than me have written articles as to what might be wrong with it. I remember just one - Man the Manipulator by Everett Shostrom.
> No More Mr. Nice Guy
Re-read this from time to time, specifically if you tend to be that kind of person the MRA call 'beta'. You probably are, why would you read the bloody book otherwise.
> I'd argue that if you read Nice Guy and turn into a selfish arsehole you've read the book wrong
It's normal to swing too far to the other side for some time, more so for niceguys. Glover himself notes that, even calling it 'turning into a sonofabitch' facetiously.
At least partially, the 'sissify movement', if viewed with a pinch of compassion, are rather a bunch of ex-niceguys fresh off the nice boat.
And given the involcel context and having mentioned Mark Manson, do mention the other book of his - Models.
|>>|| No. 425093
> It's pretty superficial and folks are surely going to spot 'yet another friendly cunt' if you follow it too religiously.
In Britain probably, where we are suspicious of all too exuberant friendliness, but not in the home country of "fake it till you make it".
|>>|| No. 425116
>when were they ever not allowed to vote as a whole section of the population
All the way up until 1918 actually lad. That was only ten years before women were allowed it.
|>>|| No. 425117
Can you show us the section of the relevant legislation that bars virgins from voting?
|>>|| No. 425128
>There is an argument in developmental psychology that you progress through psychological sexual stages as you grow up, and that in order to complete those stages, you continuously need to have sex pretty much with your peers, i.e. people of roughly the same age group. When a person then retains a strong sexual preference for a particular young age group even as they get much older, it is then taken as an indication that they did not complete that developmental stage. So the fact that a guy in his mid-50s wants to shag teenagers could stem from not having had enough opportunity to have sex with teenagers when he was a teenager himself.
What biologically ignorant crap. Do they really teach this in psychology degrees?
|>>|| No. 425131
Men in the Yanomamo tribe call girls in their most attractive years the "Moko Dudei". They are girls that have started menstruating but not yet had a baby. The average ages of menarche and first pregnancy for Yanomamo girls are about 13 and 17.
Are all these men suffering from failed psychological development? Or is it just that it makes biological sense to try and monopolise a girl's reproductive lifespan by getting her just before she starts reproducing?
(A good day to you Sir!)
|>>|| No. 425132
>The Yanomami are the largest relatively isolated tribe in South America.
>Are all these men suffering from failed psychological development?
I'd say that looks like a sound bet.
|>>|| No. 425134
Paedolad is like a cosmic traveller, venturing from imageboard to imageboard to post about the fertility of girls in their early teens. Every few months he completes his cycle and starts again; he'll be back around the time of the summer solstice with the latest scientific research he's found.
|>>|| No. 425142
That is a remarkably interesting plot twist if it's true.
With celebrity scandals though I feel like we'll never see the true story, because their fans have such an investment in pushing one or the other side of the story.
|>>|| No. 425143
There are witness testimonies of her fabricating being abused by Depp as well as surveillance footage backing this up, she has abused previous partners and she has admitted under oath to abusing him.
I don't believe he's a Saint, he's certainly had issues with substance abuse, but she's absolutely fucked. He's sat quietly for about two and a half years before going public with a dossier of evidence, now that she's had a decent payday after Aquaman and it'll be worthwhile suing her.
|>>|| No. 425144
Well then. He's been a clever boy about it at least hasn't he.
I hope this gets more publicity, there was a good post in the twitter thread about the double standard of men "letting women get away with it".
We should all club together to send him a card, and on the inside say "Consider if you are truly mentally and emotionally capable of supporting a partner with their own mental health issues. Love from all three of us, .gs"
|>>|| No. 425149
> How To Make Friends and Influence People
>I'd say, read it once and forget the most of it. It's pretty superficial and folks are surely going to spot 'yet another friendly cunt' if you follow it too religiously.
I think a lot of the criticism of 'How to win friends' here is from people who didn't read it properly or the behaviour of people who didn't read it properly, Dale Carnegie is very clear on the point that you shouldn't fake complements or interest, they should come from a position of sincerity, the logic being if you take a real interest in the wellbeing of others, they will return the favour. I'd say it actually about making you a better person before anything else, if you skim read and apply only the 'executive summary' you sound like a cunt, because you were to begin with and you weren't willing to actually change you just wanted a quick fix to grab power.
|>>|| No. 425190
I think I might pore through my bookcase and re-read it, I surely still have a copy somewhere. Just to find out.
|>>|| No. 425193
I actually found this one of the more difficult topics to follow because people are generally dismissive and outright suspicious if you lack any authority. The one about the bloke talking about sailing just seems off if you reverse the roles. I mean, I get that conversation shouldn't be boorish but you'll have to catch me with my defences down if you want something.
There's also some sections that are clearly about getting your own way; exploiting the love people have for their own name is an obvious example.
This is one of those books where I heartily recommend picking up in audio format if you haven't already. Carnegie has a lovely folk wisdom voice.
Natch pick up 'How to Stop Worrying and Start Living' while you're there. There's been plenty of times where his advice has really helped me deal with anxiety.
|>>|| No. 425196
> exploiting the love people have for their own name
Except when they don't. Also, this is one of my primary 'Carneghie cunt' spotters.
From the days on tech support sometimes I really wanted to respond 'just tell me what your bloody problem is m8, no need to grease it that much' to that kind of treatment.
I never understood the appeal of audiobooks, I'd rather read my paper variant.
|>>|| No. 425297
I repeat call centre jockies' names back to them when I greet them - semi-sincerely because I know they are only instructed to tell us their name, but I bet hardly anyone else remembers what it is when they are told it so what's the point otherwise.
|>>|| No. 425300
If you have a problem, it's good to know the name of the person you spoke to, so I make a note, and acknowledge their name. At the end of the call, I thank them by name for their time. If it's a complaint, I remind them that it's not personal. It also helps me remember that behind the script there's an actual person, and the poor sod has probably had to put up with all kinds of bullshit from other callers. I'm not naive or self-centred enough to think it'll be the highlight of their day, but I would like to think I haven't made their day any worse.
|>>|| No. 425302
When I have to ring another company at work I always take a note of the name of the other person at the other end of the line; often you can tell they're pleased you remembered their name if use it later on in the conversation. I mainly do it because I'm primarily ringing life companies like Prudential so I'm talking to young Scottish lasses and their accent seriously gives me the horn.
|>>|| No. 425303
This is probably the right way about it, but there are some absolute Carnegie Cunts as t'otherlad puts it, the sort of person who'll try to crowbar your name into every other sentence. That sort of shit makes me rapidly dislike someone, it's obvious they're just trying to be manipulative.
What Carnegie said about using people's names in terms of naming projects or whatever after them to make them more motivated to do the work relating to them well sounds like decent advice however.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]