something_else

Your posts here are evidence to the contrary. Almost all of them are negatively framed, many of them threatening violence or aggression.

according to tate* As far as I can tell that figure of $355m came from him. Kanye West's net worth is around $400m for comparison. Connor McGregor, the world's highest paid MMA athlete is worth $200m. The idea that Tate would be anywhere close to those celebrities' worth from a webcam business, some low level casinos, and a course where he pays millionaires extraordinary amounts of money to pedal you his propaganda seems very unlikely. His $50/month courses probably made him the most money. Assume they make $5m per month in revenue with 100,000 members (listed on their website, which again is self-reported and is very likely BS), he has to pay 10+ millionaires stupid amounts of money to build his courses and to tutor, he has to pay for server costs, developers, marketing, and then split the remaining profits 50/50 with his brother. And then pay tax on that. I'd be very surprised if he saw anywhere even close to $1m/month of that money at the end.

What is your reason for believing this?

Women are generally attracted to men who lead, men who know what they want, and men who aren't pushovers. You don't need to be a psychopathic violent criminal in order to have these traits. Being nice/considerate superficially in order to get sex as a reward is repulsive to women because it shows a lack of authenticity, lack of confidence and lack of strength. She intuitively knows that you will stop being nice to her once you get what you want. Genuine niceness is actually very attractive to women if it's paired with stability, confidence, strength, humour and other masculine traits. If you are struggling with women you should try developing those traits. Move towards becoming a stable, confident and interesting man rather than becoming a violent and aggressive criminal.

I remember reading somewhere that he was estimated to be making around $5m per year from hustlers university at his peak. Assuming that's even after tax, it would be pretty unlikely that he'd be so rich from that kind of income that he can afford to donate $25m to charity. Even if he had another $5-10m/year on top of that from his illicit activities in the past like the cam business it still seems unrealistic he'd have so much money that he could afford to donate $25m. Especially with how lavish and expensive his lifestyle is. The Romanian police put his net worth at around $10 million.

Whenever he talks about wanting to save men, how much he cares about men, how his life goal is to help men etc. just remember that he ran a business scamming men out of millions for many years. Actions speak louder than words.

"25 million WILL be donated this year" So, he hasn't donated it yet. And likely never will. I notice in your title you wrote 'donated' implying it's already been done which is very misleading. That's either intentional or you misunderstood his tweet. As far as I know 25m is more than his entire net worth. Tate is known as a chronic liar, I don't know why you believe him on this. AND Even if he does donate to charity, it doesn't absolve him of his crimes.

I’d rather work for minimum wage than be in a Romanian prison for 20 years

I can understand why you feel the way you do now. That's a pretty bad night. But it is just one night. It also sounds like these were people who weren't really that great, who you didn't feel particularly comfortable around, which can create a bad experience. If you're with good people in good clubs when you're feeling good in life, most of the issues you experienced there are quite rare. It took me maybe 4 visits to a club before I really started to enjoy myself. If it's a foreign environment so your body panics the first few times and makes you feel quite uncomfortable. But pushing through that is where the growth comes from if you're not someone who naturally parties.

I also had quite bad anxiety about dancing. One thing I noticed helped me learn to relax and move with the music at clubs was to close my eyes and almost pretend I was the only one there. It also makes it easier to get deeply intune with the music which helps too.

It's somewhat counterintuitive. If you are pumping out trained and rehearsed dance moves at a night club or party, you actually look more like a tryhard, it can be quite cringy. You don't look cool. Clubs and parties aren't about dancing skill as much as they are about letting lose and having fun. If you're doing some rehearsed dancing on a club dance floor it better be eyewateringly impressive or you will just look like you're trying too hard to impress people. That said, I would imagine many of those who have learnt to dance would be better at letting loose and moving with the music at a club than someone who hasn't, so I do agree with you that dancing classes could help. Just not by teaching you specific moves. To be honest, any kind of physical activity helps you. I notice doing martial arts helped me a lot, not because it taught be specific moves but because it taught me how to feel into my body better and to physically relax.

Out of curiosity, have you ever been to a party and if you have, what was your experience there like?

Yea, if all you do is party you’re fucked Having a stick up your ass is not good either however. As with everything balance is key I think that being able to relax into your body, let loose, and have fun with others is a deeply human experience which for most people is unhealthy to be completely deprived of.

How? And that's not entirely related to the main point of discussion anyway, the point I am making is that it seems unfair to claim confidently that progressive states create a worse homeless situation when the issue is very hard to quantify accurately because so many factors play into it.

So homeless people in right leaning states migrate to left leaning states because they get treated better? That easily could contribute to the stat that progressive states have more homeless people, but it doesn't mean that those progressive states are actually creating more homeless people. This is actually a pretty good example of what I said in my last post:

That's something you need to back up. Just because left leaning states have higher homeless population doesn't mean much. Correlation is not causation. In this case, most big cities in the US are left leaning, and located in left leaning states. Lots of things play into this that don't make it a simple relationship between 'more progressive = more homeless'.

Look up the CallMeCarson story if you want another example of this. Dude was absolutely crucified as a pedophile for talking sexually online to (or as media stories put it “grooming”) a 17 year old fan when he was 19. A lot of comments I read about his case were people who genuinely thought he was pure evil for what he did. I almost thought I was going insane reading how angry people were at him for that.

Your argument for “a man’s morality not being a defining factor in his attractiveness because criminals have a love life” could be analogous to saying that “a woman’s weight is not a defining factor in her attractiveness because there are overweight girls who have a love life.” Just because some woman are happy to overlook a man’s morality does not prove that all, or even most, are willing to. To me, the rest of your post sounds quite baseless and speculative. What actual experiences and proof do you have that morality/comfort/trustworthiness are not important traits for a man’s attractiveness? I’m not saying whether they are or aren’t, I’m undecided on it. I can see both sides. But you sound very confident so I’m curious to know what you are basing that confidence on.

Out of curiosity, what is your reason for believing this?

It's a shame you had to deal with this. Are there any particular experiences as a result that you feel caused you to feel like there is a war on men?

Can you be more specific? What experiences have you had in your life that make you feel this way?

A good middle ground between asking and just doing is to say “I really wanna kiss you right now” or “You’re really making me wanna make out with you right now” and judge her reaction. You’re still leading but also giving her a really easy opportunity to show whether she is comfortable going further or not. I really like this line and I find it works well if you say it with playful energy at the right time.

The statistic I have seen commonly referenced is that around 1/3 of the world's forests have been cut down in the past few hundred years. And about 1/5 of the amazon has been cut down over the past 50 years. I believe the sun was also significantly dimmer when this was the case. No probably not. Though the calculation of: 'more CO2' => 'more heat' => 'bad for human life in a variety of ways' is simple. It's worsened if it happens quickly because we (and all life) don't have time to adapt to sudden changes very well.

We are also chopping down a significant portion of the trees and plants that would actually make use of the rising CO2 levels, so the planet isn't really becoming greener as a whole. The Amazon Rainforest is the best example of that. Yea life on earth would survive the rising CO2 levels, the question isn't really whether life will survive. I don't think many people are seriously suggesting rising CO2 will kill everything on earth. The question is just whether humanity can survive in any meaningful way.