When we get home, access to sex is strictly controlled by the woman. If the woman has additional preferences in terms of temperature, beverages, and whatnot, the man generally complies. If I fall in love and want to propose, I am expected to do so on my knees, to set the tone for the rest of the marriage.
Okay first off, I’m not big on criticizing someone’s “game” in a world where there is such a thing as PUAs, but good grief man, you need to up it. He is, perhaps unwittingly, revealing to anyone who can read that his idea of a fun romantic liaison involves being feckless at someone until they take pity on you and give you charity sex. Second, I think he might still be living in a fifties movie set in the forties or something: You get married to the girl next door and then she just turns into the ol’ ball and chain. I think I literally saw that movie in black and white. WTF.
Personally, I don’t go on dates.
I’m shocked I tell you. Shocked.
Women have made an issue of the fact that men talk over women in meetings. In my experience, that’s true. But for full context, I interrupt anyone who talks too long without adding enough value. If most of my victims turn out to be women, I am still assumed to be the problem in this situation, not the talkers. The alternative interpretation of the situation – that women are more verbal than men – is never discussed as a contributing factor to interruptions.
This guy just need to come out and say what he really thinks: That women don’t have much to say of any value. It boils down to, “Oh you know how women love to talk up a gale. You know how these broads are.” I’m actually struggling to mock him here, because it’s not even low-hanging fruit. That fruit has fallen to the ground, attracted flies, and is well on its way to becoming fertilizer.
The top-ranked men have multiple wives and the low-ranked men either have no access to women, or they have sex with captured slaves.
So wait, they do have access to sex, but they’re killers anyway? I think you failed to keep track of what little point you were trying to make. You’ve got a dimple where your point used to be. You have negative a point.
The photos show mostly men of fighting age. No one cares about adult men, so a 1% chance of a hidden terrorist in the group – who might someday kill women and children – is unacceptable.*
I see a lot of men who are part of a family, actually. But if you look at the numbers, this is manifestly incorrect. It’s pretty typical for certain kinds of conflict to generate mostly women and children as refugees. Also, a 1% chance is unacceptable? So you’re also going to expel every group in this country that has a 1% chance of one of its members perpetrating a terrorist attack? Yeah, that’s not going to happen. Fuck you and your desperate attempts to pass this off as logic.
I don’t recall anyone complaining about leaving millions of innocent adult males to horrible suffering.
Mainly because I was basically unaware of your existence until now, so yeah, fuck you.
If you kill infidels, you will be rewarded with virgins in heaven. But if you kill your own leaders today – the ones holding the leash on your balls – you can have access to women tomorrow. And tomorrow is sooner.
Ah, the ol’ 72 virgin meme. I think I’m starting to understand this doofus. I don’t know where this came from, because it’s not terribly prevalent in theocratic exhortations to violence that I’ve seen. There is a concept of everlasting paradise, in which the enjoyment of sex is a part, but this purported fixation on sex among jihadists as a rationale for sacrifice is vastly overstated. Growing up around people sympathetic to jihadists or otherwise having access to Wahhabist and Salafist religious materials, I never saw it. You want to know the first time I heard about 72 virgins? Watching a bit on Comedy Central. Maybe I just wasn’t exposed to the right reading material, but I feel pretty confident in saying that it’s really not a thing.
There is a reference to “kawa’iba atrabah” which could be interpreted as “voluptuous companions” up in heaven. I’ve heard of that, that is a thing- but not a terribly big one. No one is really harping on this. In places like Afghanistan and Iraq, it’s a lot easier to harp on things like the Haditha massacre, or drone strikes. With the Assad government having rolled out chemical weapons, there is an incredible diversity of causes that serve as great fodder for generating recruits. People do occasionally see past their own nose. Or dick, as the case may be.
