The great debate of 2012

Niggers want to test us? Bring your #2 pencils. Get your webcam, a dry pair of panties, and let's get it the fuck on! Also we interview hos.
Post Reply
User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 10058
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

The great debate of 2012

Post by Professor » Sun Dec 16, 2012 2:19 pm

An angry feminist writes:

This site is riddled with ad hominems. You do realise that most of these arguments are far from scientifically sound? From what I can see the guiding principle here for men is "I was rejected and hurt by women, I am sad and lonely. So now to make myself feel better I beat the bitch, disrespect her, use her, trample her and tell her she is worthless that all she can be is my bitch." Because the only way bullies feel better about their low self-esteem and issues is by treating others like shit, it makes them feel powerful and in control. Any woman in a relationship adhering to the principles in place here has no self esteem and is in an abusive relationship. Also there are no statistics or figures proving such assertions as feminism causing divorce or single mums causing homosexuals. So incoming response to this would be "hahaha fucking cunt bitch what would you know you are just woman *insert retarded laugh here* (insert fallacy A. here) (fallacy B. here) bitch, cunt go wash some dishes bla bla bla *insert ad hominem here* end of response.
Of course, we gave this dumb bitch her last rites: :D3



Image

BTW, this was our FIRST debate and one of our many experiences with a feminist threatening legal action against us if we told the truth.

She original agreed to do the debate, then after she lost, she threatened legal action if we released it--you can't make this stuff up! :barfy:

This is just another example of the deceitful nature of feminists.

Image
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 10058
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: The great debate of 2012

Post by Professor » Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:57 pm

In the future, we will be very strict about making EVERY. SINGLE. DEBATE. PUBLIC.

Before we begin any debate, we will require our critics to grant us full permission to release the audio portion of the debate.

In every single case where information has been suppressed from the public record, it has always been the COWARDLY FEMINISTS who have reneged on their promise to make these debates public by threatening us with legal action.

That pretty much tells you which side is full of shit right off the bat. :giggle:

Never trust cowards that fear public scrutiny of their views!

Image
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

User avatar
Invictumentis
Small boy from Nigeria
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: The great debate of 2012

Post by Invictumentis » Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:16 am

I just listened to this podcast and I wanted to give a reaction, as well as provide some of my own criticism of what the stupid feminist was saying.

1. She claimed that men had the opportunity to become intelligent throughout history because of the authority and opportunity that was given to ALL men.

This is easily debunked by the fact that Scientists like Galileo first rose up under a system of extreme religious oppression and even DIED for their understanding. They were given NO authority on these topics and yet they persisted and eventually overthrew the oppressive system without any help from the authorities themselves. Nobody educated them in Science- in fact, they were indoctrinated AGAINST it... but that had no affect on those men with natural genius.

2. The walrus claimed that physical superiority alone resulted in man's long standing dominance over society.

This is SO easily debunked and I wish I heard one of you guys make this very simple argument because it would shut her up so easily. The argument is this: if physical superiority equals dominance, why do humans dominate the planet over lions, tigers, gorillas, bears, wolves, ect.?? If physical superiority means dominance, then how have men been able to conquer and dominate these other species who are CLEARLY physically superior to men? :think:

Anyway, it was an entertaining debate. One of the funniest I've heard so far. I think the debates against women are the only ones that turn into shit-slinging parties about which party is "meaner" and it's always rich with irony when the woman claims she is as smart as men at the same time as focusing on nothing more than the superficial aspects of how someone argues rather than the substantial content of the arguments.

Find more women to debate!
A.K.A. Ed Eucater

User avatar
Molandria
Small boy from Nigeria
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:19 pm

She Just Doesn't Get it

Post by Molandria » Thu Feb 12, 2015 12:48 pm

I feel the need to point out that I found it very funny when she brought up Charles Darwin, and you brought up Isaac Newton. Both brilliant people, however brilliance does not mean you know everything! This woman doesn't get it. >_< The Professor does, and he brought up a made up example about "The guy that invented Calculus" which while a point of debate, Isaac Newton is at least one of two people whom independently did that.... but he also believed IN THE PHILOSOPHERS STONE! >_<

This woman doesn't understand the academic logical fallacy, "Argument from Authority."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest