>>321166 You can read the chart, can't you? Florida is a shithole populated by carpetbagging Yankee boomers, niggers, spics, Disney goons, and kikes. Go elsewhere.

>>321166 >buying property that will fall into the ocean Don't worry, I'm sure those kikes at the insurance office will totally cover that.

>>321171 >buying property that will fall into the ocean Isn't New York currently doing that because all the buildings made the island too heavy?

>>321164 You can come up with any arbitrary definition. I can say that actively thinking about not getting married under any circumstance counts as resentment over women. You're just making shit up as you go. If someone personally identifies as a MGTOW they are definitionally someone that spends way too much time thinking about women. The only "true" idealistic MGTOW is someone that is accidentally so by nature of their character.

>>321134 >It's hilarous still how fucking downright reasonble they made him by sheer mistake. it’s a double fail if you count MCU stripped away Hydra's Nazi roots and MCU red skull founded Hydra because he was kicked out and almost assassinated by the Nazi party.

>>321172 Well you wouldn't want to live in either of those shit holes.

>>321150 >This movie is a giant marketing triumph for mattel Considering it’s WB who made it. That alone was accidental. WB thought firing Henry Cavill but publicly defending Ezra Miller will get the public to see the flash. WB made a blue beetle movie that pissed Mexicans and Batman fans with its marketing. >>321143 >It's not though. It's very obviously feminist propaganda and you only see it through that lens because you already don't like feminism. Female audiences adored Ken and discussion dominated by Kenergy memes. The message backfired hard. Most movie goers legit thought the Barbie was attacking radical feminism.

>>321143 >>321147 >>321150 Anon, thank you for this. Thank you for saying this. >>321151 Make-up and special effects that Welles plagiarized from Universal's monster movies and some frenchie, from nearly 10+ years before Kane came out but everyone, especially the journos and critics of the day, praised to no day as "a revolution in the industry**

>>321139 >Seth Rogan TMNT reboot Made LESS than it's budget despite opening 4 days earlier than the weekend >TMNT mutant Mayhem already has 36% drop in international markets >Black Twitter pissed because rise of TMNT black April O’Neil was cute and fit with a big ass >Mayhem black April O’Neil fat, black and a semi-flat ass for her weight

>>321161 I did too, the clussy must be invading my subconscious.

>>321178 >rise of TMNT black April O’Neil was cute and fit with a big ass American niggers really are a unique kind of dumb. That was supposed to be a big ass? Maybe they really should take a trip to Africa. >>321179 >The japanese has noticed this.

>>321181 Okay jew.

>>321173 >You can come up with any arbitrary definition. It's the actual fucking name. The words in that order are the definition. There's nothing arbitrary about it, unless you want to argue that words have arbitrary meanings and so should be ignored. In which case, nic blut clorny flando FLUUUEEE! >I can say that actively thinking about not getting married under any circumstance counts as resentment over women. I don't actively think about not sticking my foot into an armed bear trap. But at the same time, if I see an armed bear trap, I do know not to stick my foot in it. If a cellular service provider offered you a five year contract at $120 per year, but could cancel your contract at any time and immediately charge you half of the total $600 contract, $300, and divest themselves of the cost of providing you service, I'm not going to simmer over the bullshit terms. I'm just not going to sign the contract and continue on my merry. >You're just making shit up as you go. Literally, the fucking name.

>>321180 >>The japanese has noticed this. >purposely exploiting nearly all my weaknesses now Every time.

>>321180 >American niggers really are a unique kind of dumb. I think they hate the new black April O’Neil because she looks like a realistic black African American woman. Rise April O’Neil a nerdy black girl that fit. That’s more rare than a heterosexual furry. >That was supposed to be a big ass? Maybe they really should take a trip to Africa. Off subject. Black South Africans hate American black culture more than apartheid. South African nationalists call black American culture more cancerous to the black race than racism and apartheid.

>>321183 >It's the actual fucking name. The words in that order are the definition. There's nothing arbitrary about it, unless you want to argue that words have arbitrary meanings and so should be ignored. In which case, nic blut clorny flando FLUUUEEE! "Men going their own way" literally means nothing. That is not a descriptor of anything. It can mean virtually anything you want it to. Why does your definition of it preclude marriage but not being in a committed relationship? Nothing about the string of words "men going their own way" implies anything about whether or not one should be getting married. It is absolutely a fucking arbitrary concept you stupid nigger. "Men going their own way" could mean taking dick up the ass for the rest of your life. It could mean virtually anything I want it to because it's a meaningless throwaway phrase. >Literally, the fucking name. NOTHING ABOUT THE WORDS "MEN GOING THEIR OWN WAY" DEFINES ANY CONCEPT. YOU NEED TO INTUITION PUMP THE EVER LIVING FUCK OUT OF THAT CONCEPT TO GET ANYWHERE WITH IT. THAT SENTENCE IN A VACUUM MEANS NOTHING. "Squirrels going their own way." Describe what that sentence means to me right fucking now you ESL fucktard.

>>321151 No. You just don't like that movie. It's like how Top Gun was a propaganda film for the US military. >>321176 >Most movie goers legit thought the Barbie was attacking radical feminism. That is total bullshit.

>>321186 > because she looks like a realistic black African American woman That is sad on so many levels if it's true.

>>321161 >>321162 >>321163 >>321179

We're up to 720 posts. Do we have a baker?

>>321191 I hope not

>>321187 >Why does your definition of it preclude marriage but not being in a committed relationship? Because when you are legally bound to a person that is not you, it is no longer your way alone. It is your shared way. And it is not "Men Going Their Shared Way". You are, legally, with the power of the state to enforce it, not on YOUR OWN. It doesn't imply it, it flat out precludes legal bonds. >"Squirrels going their own way." Describe what that sentence means to me right fucking now you ESL fucktard. Well, it would refer to squirrels moving as autonomous individuals and not being legally, enforcibly, with possible jail time, beholden to someone else. Words not only mean things, they also DON'T mean other things.

>>321193 >Because when you are legally bound to a person that is not you, it is no longer your way alone. It is your shared way. And it is not "Men Going Their Shared Way". You are, legally, with the power of the state to enforce it, not on YOUR OWN. So are MGTOW's definitionally not allowed to sign contracts?

>>321126 That reminds me of that incident during whores/women's day in France a few years ago, in which men and trannies joined forces to beast up women who were demanding feminist laws to be approved. It turns out that, like it or not, trannies and all else who hate women were right all along. To the point that men are finding women to be the most evil and insufferable being, even worse than trannjies. Movies like that Barbie one are probably written by faggots and trannies, and they are spot on when talking about how women are essentially evil incarnate.

>>321194 They can sign a contract for assisted suicide if they're canadian.

>>321195 >joined forces to BEAT up women Fixed.

>>321171 >oy vey goyim, global warming exists It's not 1989. No real human actually believes that shit, moron.

>>321194 >So are MGTOW's definitionally not allowed to sign contracts? No marriage or co-habitation in states that recognize common law marriages. And if you're somewhere where divorce isn't at-will, no-fault, take-half-plus-alimony, that's somewhat negotiable. It's mostly just recognition that in the West, a man gets absolutely nothing from a marriage but puts himself at immense financial risk with no legal defenses. Pre-nups are usually worth less than you paid the lawyer to draft them, and if there's a kid involved - even if you can legally prove it's not your kid - the pre-nup goes out the window for mandatory child support, because Tender Years doctrine says mothers are irreplaceable for children and dad's are surplus to requirements. Children of single fathers make far better life choices than the children of single mothers, but that statistic is misleading because unless dad is incredibly high functioning and mom's a crackwhore, mom's getting the kid(s). So the children of single moms get a wide average, while the single dads tend to be superdads. It's just a damn fool thing to do. >>321198 Global warming does exist. We're on our way out of a cool period, or "ice age", and not yet into the warm period. Shit's gonna get slowly warmer for, oh, the next five, six centuries. But given that our ancestors survived warm periods just fine, and hadn't even invented air conditioning, it's not anything anyone should worry about.

>>321199 >Global warming does exist… We're on our way out of a cool period, or "ice age" So… it doesn't exist. Milankovich cycles aren't "global warming," anon. No one means "natural cycles" when they say AGW. Global warming is "humans are destroying the world." It's not happening. Sea level is not rising. Glaciers are not melting. Temperatures are not higher. Monsoons are not worse. Deserts are not growing. Storms are not more severe. NOTHING they've said is actually happening.

>>321200 >Deserts are not growing. Quite the opposite, actually. The Sahara's shrinking, for the first time in recorded history, I believe. NASA published a nice article a while back about the world actually GREENING, based upong decades of satellite photography, which were also published. Like the mild rise over centuries I mentioned, there's a bit more liquid water in the ecosystem which means a bit more rainfall and in some marginal areas, namely tundra, taiga, and heathlands, bits are moving more toward arable. You can probably find the article just by searching "NASA" and "greening", but if you want I can try to track it down. >Storms are not more severe. Nope. Just a bit more rain, and anywhere that rain's normal, you'll probably never notice the increase. It's that small. But in the marginal bits, a bit more water dumping a few more minerals or whatever you get with rain adds up. Slowly.

>>321199 That's cool. I'll ask the question again. Are MGTOW's definitionally not allowed to sign contracts?

>>321203 Are you looking for a yes or a no, because for someone who bitches about others being inadequate with English, you've phrased your question so that it cannot be answered definitively with a simple yes or no. Yes, MGTOW's are definitionally not allowed to sign contracts. No, MGTOW's definitionally not allowed to sign contracts. Obviously, they can sign other contracts, yes. And equally obviously, any other contract that unilaterally empowers the other party to break the contract for any reason while recieving massive compensation for breaking the contract, you should avoid. However, no standard contract in the West is like that, except marriage, and any other contarct can be legally negotiated, except marriage. As I pointed out: <Pre-nups are usually worth less than you paid the lawyer to draft them, and if there's a kid involved - even if you can legally prove it's not your kid - the pre-nup goes out the window for mandatory child support, because Tender Years doctrine says mothers are irreplaceable for children and dad's are surplus to requirements. And so, the one notable contract, which is always, in every case, a bad decision, is marriage. And so that is the one that got into the title.

>>321139 Logic destroys any of the left's narratives. >>321140 Which shows that they are demented subhumans that guide their lives through fiction instead of real people and their actions.

>>321204 >Are you looking for a yes or a no Yes. >because for someone who bitches about others being inadequate with English, you've phrased your question so that it cannot be answered definitively with a simple yes or no. No I haven't. >Obviously, they can sign other contracts, yes. Why? >And equally obviously, any other contract that unilaterally empowers the other party to break the contract for any reason while recieving massive compensation for breaking the contract, you should avoid. But are they are allowed to sign them and still be definitionally MGTOW? Am I allowed to sign a non-compete contract with a company and still be MGTOW? >Obviously, they can sign other contracts, yes. And equally obviously, any other contract that unilaterally empowers the other party to break the contract for any reason while recieving massive compensation for breaking the contract, you should avoid. So you can live your life worshiping a woman, giving her all your money, and being completely pussy whipped. But as long as you weren't contractually obligated to do so you're still definitionally a MGTOW. Sounds like a really robust definition you've pigeon holed yourself into there.

>>321150 >triumph for mattel Keep being delusional.

Thread Limit Reached NEW BREAD! >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 >>868638 NEW BREAD!