[ Rules ] [ ot / g ] [ pt / snow / int ] [ meta ] [ Discord ]

/sty/ - pigsty

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Youtube
Password (For post deletion)
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
| Catalog

New feature: Hide saged posts
Hellweek starts now. We're enforcing heavy moderation. Click here for more updates and future changes.

Read the rules and usage info before posting.
Both have been updated on 06/24/2017. You can discuss the update here.

No. 3856[Reply]

I wanted some harsh, brutally honest and likely hypocritical responses to this scenario from femanons, so while I'm sure I'm going to get hate heaped on me once what I'm actually proposing is said, please do give opinions.

Think of the man you find most attractive on Earth, who you would most like to be with, then think of the man you find least attractive and have absolutely no interest in.

The first is wealthy and in a shape pleasing to you. He'll shower you with affection and presents, keep you in the latest fashions and constantly want sex, the catch? He has three to five other wives you would be sharing him with. So essentially you'd be given autonomy to pursue whatever hobbies you like, whenever he returns home it will be with presents for you, he'll constantly want to cuddle and shower you with love, but he does the same to the other girls. He doesn't go out and sleep with random women, and he would consult with you before bringing another into the household, but it is altogether possible there may in the future be more.

Second option is the guy you have no interest or attraction to. He has a low-paying job and would expect you to work as well. He has no designs on other women, but he may cheat in the future.

Which of the two would you choose? I've been pondering this question ever since I watched this video. It's the bit in the middle about the 80/20 rule. Essentially the claim is that when men are in total control, the number is closer to 80/50. Men agree with one another to each only take one public wife and possibly a mistress. But after the sexual revolution the number switched to 80/20, which is to say 80% of women reproduce with only 20% of men, seemingly happy to share a fourth of the attention of one "top" guy as opposed to having a lower status male to herself. This makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint, better male means better children, but when I've discussed this with women the mere suggestion of it makes them angry.
142 posts and 26 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 4044

File: 1496722791401.jpeg (253.38 KB, 1484x988, imrs.php.jpeg)

>>4037
>You mentioned the countries, you need to be more specific.

Benin is an African country best known for being where Djimon Hounsou is from. The official language is French, it's currently a Republic and the largest religion is Catholic. 55% of the women are sisterwives in polygamist marriages. At a cursory glance there's little to suggest any gender politics one way or another, but I did notice pictures of girls attending school, so at the minimum they're afforded the same opportunity.

>You get you can't just name fallacies, right? That in itself is a fallacy, because you're dismissing my argument without addressing it.


Oh anon, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. You're just repeating back what I say to me and ignoring how little since it makes. Pointing out that you're using logical fallacies isn't a logical fallacy because the entire point is you're not making an argument, you're just saying "this is a tabloid/clickbait" I'm saying, address the specific claims within rather than attacking the sites publishing them. That's damning the well, guilt by association, etc.

>Oh, and insulting you is not ad hominem.

I was referring to you insulting the websites, but yes insulting someone in place of an argument is an ad hominem.

>You're moving the goalposts. In which western country is having two partners illegal? Not in which western country can you legally marry two people, but in what country is it illegal to date two people?


Oh my god, fuck you. I'm moving goal posts? Are you fucking serious? Let's revisit history.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

No. 4045

>>4044
>At a cursory glance there's little to suggest any gender politics one way or another, but I did notice pictures of girls attending school, so at the minimum they're afforded the same opportunity.

That's not at all a statement on the freedoms of women in the country.

>address the specific claims within rather than attacking the sites publishing them.


Which I did, by pointing out that one had absolutely no sources for the claims it was making that didn't link back to the site itself, and that the other was irrelevant to your claim.

I pointed out that they're dogshit sources that shouldn't be taken seriously and then went on to continue to explain why, that their claims were not supported by evidence.

>but yes insulting someone in place of an argument is an ad hominem.


No, it's not, it's an insult. An ad hom is when you use an insult as an argument.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

No. 4046

>>4045
>That's not at all a statement on the freedoms of women in the country.
Are you one of those "equal outcomes" people? Like I said, they're afforded the same opportunities. Considering where they're located I think it's fairly compelling the place is so much more stable, wealthy and -relatively speaking- modern when compared to so much of the rest of Africa, and seemingly the main difference seems to be legalized polygamy. It's almost like allowing the "top" most successful men with the biggest sense of commitment and responsibility to publicly spread their genes to multiple women results in more successful, productive children or something. It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison to any of the surrounding countries, Liberia for example. Maybe I'll do that.

>one had absolutely no sources for the claims it was making that didn't link back to the site itself

You'd have to go through the chain of links, but you never said anything about the WashingtonPost or HuffingtonPost articles, I guess because you accept those as valid sources you just pretend they don't exist…?

>the other was irrelevant to your claim.

This isn't refutation, it's dismissal. "Hillary Clinton is president of the United States." "…But Donald Trump won the election." "DONALD TRUMP IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS CONVERSATION. I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON."

>pointed out that they're dogshit sources that shouldn't be taken seriously

Which is a logical fallacy. To put it in context, it would be like me going "Hitler was against polygamy! Yeah, that's right! No polygamists in Nazi Germany! How do you like that, Nazi? You side with Hitler!" Just saying the source is "dog shit" isn't refuting it's arguments. Who makes an argument has no effect on the argument itself. Does Chris-Chan's full-throated endorsement of "women's rights" and "lgbt rights" mean the issues themselves are retarded since the person advocating them is? This is why it's a fallacy.

>It's the difference between saying "You're stupid, and you are also wrong" and going "You're wrong because you're stupid".

Hence "This source is dog shit" as the entirety of your argument.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

No. 4359

>>4044
>>4045
>>4046
I have no idea what the fuck you people are talking about because I can't be bothered to read all that shit but I'm sure that whatever it is, it's not worth such long ass posts

No. 4416

File: 1499644970941.jpg (43.08 KB, 300x300, 300x300.jpg)

Jesus Christ OP if you're still around read Lacan, that domestication shit is hardcore jouissance.



File: 1497222794899.jpg (Spoiler Image, 245.33 KB, 2048x1536, rate-my-dog.jpg)

No. 4401[Reply]

Hello ladies, please r8 my dog

According to the rules of this website, this content is permitted on /sty/

To hide a thread, press the minus symbol "-" in the top left of the thread

No. 4414

why are u flashing ur crusty dog to ur pet

No. 4415

That's a nice dong friend.



File: 1492542561627.jpeg (17.61 KB, 299x168, fked up shit.jpeg)

No. 3293[Reply]

Some of you people really need Jesus/Buddha/etc, y'all are some evil, petty and disgusting individuals. Seriously the collective hate you people produce put Westboro Baptist Church to shame. There is trolling and riling someone up and then there attacking someone just because you can since you have a wall of anonymity to hide yourself with. If any of you were this vitriol and hate mongering in real life I can't imagine anyone loving you. If your mother/father/brother/sister were to see your posts what would they say? I hope at least some of you grow up and stop hating your fellow for their flaws when you yourself are no better. You all feed off of each other and just get more nasty and ugly. I sincerely hope some of you can sit back see what you're doing and move on from this god forsaken den of bullies.
3 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 3297

>>3293
So which cow are you? Or which one is your relative/friend/etc?

Calling people haters is just a lame excuse people hide behind because they can't accept that other people's criticism might be legitimate.

Most of the people we discuss here are actually pretty fucking bad people. One was arrested for hitting on underage girls at starbucks. One is being investigated by the police for faking cancer and stealing from charities. One tried to plan a mass shooting and was arrested for it. One is a serial groomer of teenage girls. This is just the people being discussed on the front page right now.

Like, you should probably look at yourself if you find people who mock paedophiles and scammers worse than paedophiles and scammers.

No. 3298

probably dasha, today must have been overwhelming

No. 3299

>>3297
what that anon said and also, this is just a place to discuss people

one of the big rules is no cow-tipping
most anons here respect that and we're free to discuss whoever we want, rarely do cows get interacted with if most people can help
and when they do it's often helpful, like PT, tons of people try to give her advice or genuinely help her out

No. 3300

File: 1492548049398.png (11 KB, 516x109, curiouscat.PNG)

>>3298
Yeah its probs her. She was told to look here a little while ago.

No. 4413

Lol



File: 1496546686334.jpg (76.56 KB, 1264x560, IMG_1077.JPG)

No. 4047[Reply]

Have you ever wished you were a different race?and why?
344 posts and 95 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 4404

File: 1497347211886.jpg (190.42 KB, 650x360, dwight-is-asian.jpg)

>>4140
but anon that's not the right Dwight for this thread

No. 4405

I wish I was 2D race.

No. 4406

>>4405
Finally, the only acceptable answer.
/thread

No. 4409

>>4402
basically when delusional guys fetishize another race it's like that "oh [none white race] girls are so hot, to prove it here's a picture of a girl that's whitened her skin and got surgery to look more western"

I find asian girls who are happy with their skin and natural features to be beautiful, the doll look is for dolls, not for humans

>>4403 agreed, basically people find whats a trend in their culture or community attractive, which is why no one can ever be perfect

in 00's mainstream, the tan skin, skinny, big tits, bleach blonde was hot, now plus sized curvy women with dark hair and big lips are now a thing, in the weeb community pale skin extremely thin bodys, unnatural face, etc are the standards, the average woman will never be perfect to any community unless she gets surgery or has perfect genetics, which is rare

No. 4410

>>4403
"y-you mean, kpop stars, pale azn waifus, get zits and wrinkles, just like most girls of every other race??? IMPOSSIBRU!"



File: 1497888547871.jpg (368.08 KB, 1366x768, room.jpg)

No. 4407[Reply]

What do girls do when they're hanging out?

No. 4408

they sploosh



File: 1495275588844.jpg (36.29 KB, 400x386, 1465286769108.jpg)

No. 3742[Reply]

>mfw all this low effort bait from males get more attention and sincere replies here than a female posting on /r9k/
You all should be ashamed of yourselves.

No. 3743

what did u expect from a site full of newfags, tumblrites and pulltards including the godawful moderators.

No. 3744

File: 1495303808304.jpg (48.6 KB, 608x720, vn.jpg)

REPORT thirsty gentlemen

DO NOT REPLY

No. 3755

>>3743
there is someone with brains still left in this hellhole, wow

No. 4394

Srs. I wish mods would do a mass clean-up of the site and delete all these dumbass robot threads. Catalog is full of MRA copypastas and stupid questions from incels desperate for actual women to prove their agendas.

No. 4400

File: 1497137785689.jpg (203.47 KB, 926x1280, PUTA.jpg)

>>3742
>>3743
>>3744
>>3755
>>4394

You know you want it.



File: 1490126761887.jpg (50.41 KB, 375x500, 51viGRPwmoL.jpg)

No. 2671[Reply]

I always see other girls saying that there's no such thing as a slut. Is that so? Because whenever shit happens said girls are the first to call other women sluts.
What do farmers think? Sluts are real or that is just relative? If sluts are def real, what makes a girl a slut? Is promiscuity necessary or just dressing 'slutty' is enough?

Thanks.

Share stories if you want.
83 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 3850

>>2673
>what is a womanizer

No. 3880

Sluts are people who have a lot of sex outside of a relationship and/or willingly take it up the ass.

I'd probably respect them less tbh.

No. 4392

For me "sluts" are men or women who will do morally reprehensible things involving sex, i.e. chasing or begging people who are married/in relationships, or using sex to get promoted at work. Sex in a direct business transaction (porn, prostitution, etc) doesn't count in this, as I think that's a whole different ballgame and therefore should have its own scoring system.

People who have lots of casual sex, or have many relationships, aren't "sluts" because it's not morally reprehensible for 2 consenting adults to choose to have casual sex, or have sex before being married. That's a personal choice, and it doesn't affect anyone else.

Special caveat for people who sleep around and never use condoms as well. Like, seriously? Way to be irresponsible.

No. 4393

>>2793
Can't believe you've called your ex a "slut", a name you know is intended to degrade women, when you know she was mentally ill and a CSA survivor. As well as calling her a nympho? Are you fucking serious? You're a scum asshole, I hope you catch herpes.

No. 4396

>>4393

go back to tumblr



File: 1493317176291.jpg (317.63 KB, 648x2090, tranny terrorist.jpg)

No. 3423[Reply]

Transmisogyny mental gymnastics edition
17 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 3591

>>3580
Is it now transphobic to understand sexual dimorphism and why transgirls (no matter how "legit") really don't have a place in women's sports competitions?

No. 3596

>>3591
They unironically think that way. There was so much trans reeeing during the Olympics some months ago.

No. 3811

The real question is how they ended up this way. What causes them to be like this? Childhood Conditioning? Trends? I'm curious on your thoughts.

No. 4386

I don't hate transgender people or transgenderism, I just think the true meaning of it has been distorted AF by Tumblrinas (much like racism, but that's another thread).

When transgenderism comes as a precursor to being transsexual, then I don't see the problem with that. I think it's just difficult to separate those people who genuinely have brain chemistry that is mismatched to their physical body (as has been proven by brain scans done by researchers) from people who have been conditioned by society to believe they're in the wrong body. Even then, I don't personally see a problem with that - it's not me who lives in their body and so it's their choice to act or not.

It's the "transgender" people who have absolutely no intention ever of transitioning that annoy me. Like, cutting your hair short, wearing "boy's clothes", not acting in a "feminine" way, or anything like that is not that big a deal. Changing your pronouns when you have no plans to be the other sex is frankly attention-seeking, because calling yourself "he" or any of the above bullsh*t doesn't make you fucking male? Getting yourself a cock would? (And vice versa. Long hair, makeup and skirts don't make you female. Lop your cock off then you're a "she".)

They don't seem to realise how "problematic" this way of thinking actually is. It massively reinforces the gender roles they supposedly hate so much, and it actually increases sexist hate towards people who continue to stay in their "assigned gender" but also don't conform to hyper-feminine/hyper-masculine gender roles (so women who call themselves she but have short hair/no makeup/etc).

I've actually seen a few people insinuating that biological males/females freely existing and talking about their existence as a bio whatever is somehow damaging to trans people. Sorry, but it's no one else's problem that a lot of transgender people seem to have the emotional constitution of a wet tissue, and if being a bio female/male is somehow contributing towards the genuine violence & discrimination that trans people suffer then they're not going to last very long. Without bio people, trans people wouldn't be alive, so getting angry about the existence of vaginas that bleed is pretty wild.

/rant over

No. 4387

Samefag

>>3510
I'm sorry this thread is called "transgender hate", it's a fucking dumbass name. I have the utmost respect for you, your identity and your choices, as a human being! It must be difficult being part of a group alongside so many gender police (that I imagine actually make your life as a post-op harder).



File: 1495101640230.jpg (24.17 KB, 640x426, strange object.jpg)

No. 3717[Reply]

What is this?
12 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 3748

>>3717
You.

No. 3751

File: 1495353166439.png (21.8 KB, 300x300, air_horn.png)


No. 3774

>no removable nozzle
I want a bidet so much

No. 3937

File: 1496525658863.jpg (66.66 KB, 630x841, rodzinna_umywalka_vitra_100214…)

Actually, it's a child-sized sink. As a small child, my daycare had these, along with smaller toilets.

No. 4028

>>3717 its for washing your feet, indoor swimming pools in Germany have this kind of thing



File: 1451757864202.jpg (130.58 KB, 1280x780, d.jpg)

No. 1148[Reply]

Previous thread >>>/b/21625
629 posts and 74 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

No. 3847

ITT: Frustrated cat ladies who couldn't get Chad to cheat on his girlfriend

No. 3848

>>1353
it's like teasing someone just to blueball them, you don't go start the engine in a car and don't drive it

No. 4005

File: 1496639679257.jpg (189.66 KB, 720x1130, male feminist.jpg)

I'm severely disappointed that this thread was moved to /sty/. What the fuck is with this new admin?

No. 4006

I thought this was going to be a thread where we could talk about hating men. WTF happened?

No. 4031

>>4005
It's genuinely pretty hard to stop looking at porn. You may believe sexual desire is distributed independently of biological sex, but at least for me it's very difficult. From firsthand experience, cocaine is easier to quit than pornography. It seems strange for anybody to say porn is good, though.

>>4006
Male attention whoring, trolling, and defensiveness.



Delete Post [ ]
Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
| Catalog | Search
[ Rules ] [ ot / g ] [ pt / snow / int ] [ meta ] [ Discord ]