Unmarried Philosophers

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
ForgedinHell
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:26 am
Location: Pueblo West, CO

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by ForgedinHell »

Satyr wrote:
ForgedinHell wrote:
I already have debunked your views.
Of course you have, turd.
In your world you might even be intelligent.
ForgedinHell wrote: You don't have any.
Let me get this straight, you've "debunked views" I do not have?
Oh Turd, I bet you are one of those socialized supporters of feminism, aren't you boy?
ForgedinHell wrote: You resort to vulgarities to hide the fact you have nothing relevant to write about.
Was that an example of how you "debunk views"?

Here's one of my views:
You are a moron.

Let see if you can debunk that one.
ForgedinHell wrote:I'm merely pointing out that while you post nasty garbage here, hiding behind an avatar, you can never legitimately claim to be brave or a tough guy.
Never claimed to be a tough guy but I did claim to be your intellectual superior and most probably someone who can also kick your arse.
I do not tend to engage in fisticuffs, particularly when nothing of value is at risk...nor do I dirty my hands and risk jail terms for animals and imbeciles.
ForgedinHell wrote:Therefore, as a matter of logic, you should refrain from doing so. It just makes you look stupid.
I think the "looking stupid" part is one of your monopolies around here, turd.
I think some already know how stupid you are.
I just make you show it over and over and over again.

The thread topic is "Unmarried Philosophers" not your sexual frustrations and how lonely you are.

Methinks you have a little crush on the ****.
I already debunked the thread. I was the first to point out correlation is not causation, then, you'll see others picked up on the idea. So, if I am a moron, then why do people follow my lead?

Your opinion of me matters for nothing, and I have no interest in picking up on children over the net. You crossed the line, and I pointed that out. I have no crush on Kayla, but see in her the makings of a good trial lawyer. There are certain traits a trial lawyer needs that cannot be taught, and she has them. Therefore, I know she is more than a match for you on here, but that is besides the point. If I tolerated the presence of a scumbag like you, then I would be scum too. Not happening.

You really need to grow up. Try some real intellectual combat sometime in front of a jury where life and death really matter. See how many you impress with your childishness. I have work to do. Hopefully, you discover that it takes more courage to be real, than to hide your fears behind childish behavior.
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by Satyr »

ForgedinHell wrote:
I already debunked the thread. I was the first to point out correlation is not causation, then, you'll see others picked up on the idea. So, if I am a moron, then why do people follow my lead?
You are a gem amongst swine, ****.
ForgedinHell wrote:Your opinion of me matters for nothing, and I have no interest in picking up on children over the net. You crossed the line, and I pointed that out.
Why, ****, would your "lines" mean shit to me?

Make lines in the sand; makes lines on your face...who the fuck cares?
ForgedinHell wrote:I have no crush on Kayla, but see in her the makings of a good trial lawyer.
Ha!!!!

"All non-feminists men are sociopaths, yer honor. I rest my case."
Yeup,,,one more **** mean will fuck over for a lifetime.
ForgedinHell wrote:There are certain traits a trial lawyer needs that cannot be taught, and she has them. Therefore, I know she is more than a match for you on here, but that is besides the point. If I tolerated the presence of a scumbag like you, then I would be scum too. Not happening.
And your judgment is also formidable, by the way.
Will YOU be the judge and jury, ****?

Here's the thing, ****...any ****, like you and her, so totally drowning in popular culture must be a parrot who will have a fine carer squawking.
ForgedinHell wrote:You really need to grow up. Try some real intellectual combat sometime in front of a jury where life and death really matter. See how many you impress with your childishness. I have work to do. Hopefully, you discover that it takes more courage to be real, than to hide your fears behind childish behavior.
Do "intelligent" mature minds, like your ****, challenge a man they've never seen to a fight, threatening him with violence because they cannot deal with him with their mind?

****...schools are producing cookie-cutter professionals, reading off of recipe books for decades now.
Careers are built on cunts simply resiting, regurgitating and shaking their ass before they swallow.
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by mtmynd1 »

ForgedinHell wrote:Too bad Carl Jung didn't use his intellect.
Too bad you don't understand his quote, “Reason alone does not suffice.”

Your communications with "sadder" and his declaration of being intelligent should be proof that Jung was absolutely correct.

All things from the mind are fallible.
User avatar
Satyr
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:55 pm
Location: The Edge
Contact:

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by Satyr »

The moron wants to say that he feels insecure, intellectually, so the mind must be made fallible, so that mindlessness should be made more respectable.

Nature can be so cruel at times.
In the pits of hell is the metal forged.
User avatar
ForgedinHell
Posts: 762
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:26 am
Location: Pueblo West, CO

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by ForgedinHell »

mtmynd1 wrote:
ForgedinHell wrote:Too bad Carl Jung didn't use his intellect.
Too bad you don't understand his quote, “Reason alone does not suffice.”

Your communications with "sadder" and his declaration of being intelligent should be proof that Jung was absolutely correct.

All things from the mind are fallible.
Jung was a rube. Do you really take him seriously? What is the difference between him and David Icke? Not much.
chaz wyman
Posts: 5304
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by chaz wyman »

ForgedinHell wrote:
mtmynd1 wrote:
ForgedinHell wrote:Too bad Carl Jung didn't use his intellect.
Too bad you don't understand his quote, “Reason alone does not suffice.”

Your communications with "sadder" and his declaration of being intelligent should be proof that Jung was absolutely correct.

All things from the mind are fallible.
Jung was a rube. Do you really take him seriously? What is the difference between him and David Icke? Not much.
What the fuck is a rube?
User avatar
mtmynd1
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: TX, USA

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by mtmynd1 »

ForgedinHell wrote:Jung was a rube. Do you really take him seriously?


Given a choice between reading Jung and you, I'd pick Jung in a heartbeat. At least he was a thinking person and not a wannabee philosopher.
chaz wyman
Posts: 5304
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Unmarried Philosophers

Post by chaz wyman »

mtmynd1 wrote:
ForgedinHell wrote:Jung was a rube. Do you really take him seriously?


Given a choice between reading Jung and you, I'd pick Jung in a heartbeat. At least he was a thinking person and not a wannabee philosopher.
Given the choice between FiH and a dead slug, I'd choose the slug for a clear idea about psychology.
Post Reply