[Rob Banks]

I hooked up with a girl I met on online (met her in the ROK comments section, believe it or not) last summer. Solid 9. I had been talking to her for several months before driving out to meet her. We hooked up but she would not let me go all the way (which honestly was my fault for not pressuring her enough).

For about a week after we hooked up, we would text back and forth until late at night, with her initiating the convo the first 3 or 4 times (she was into ROK and red-pill stuff). However, one morning she abruptly gets pissed at me for “keeping her up too late.” The next day she says she feels “weird” about hooking up and that she doesn’t want to talk anymore. I (stupidly) text her again a few days later, and she surprisingly responds well and stays up late talking to me again, only to get pissed again the next morning and block my number. I told her over facebook that I didn’t need this BS, and that I would leave her alone and maybe text her in a few months, to which she replied “you should do that.”

I fully admit that I failed to keep a good frame the last couple times we talked, due to me being confused by her sudden erratic behavior.

It’s been 3 months, and she kept me as a friend on facebook throughout the whole time. However, she abruptly deleted me at some point within the last week or so. Would it even be worth messaging her again at this point, or would I just end up looking stupid?

[Monxp]

No. In general, if you are thinking if you should message a girl or not, you shouldn't.

[sterling_archer]

So you met over Disqus? How did that work, there is no private messages there, all can see them?

[Rob Banks]

(10-25-2016 02:30 AM)sterling_archer Wrote:  

So you met over Disqus? How did that work, there is no private messages there, all can see them?

Met over disqus, switched to email after a little while.

[sterling_archer]

Interesting as you put your email in the comments section, anybody could see it and message you instead of her. Doesn't really matter as it clearly she was "real".

[XPQ22]

Quote:

she was into ROK and red-pill stuff

Quote:

It’s been 3 months, and she kept me as a friend on facebook throughout the whole time. However, she abruptly deleted me at some point within the last week or so. Would it even be worth messaging her again at this point, or would I just end up looking stupid?

So you didn't bang a certain girl. And you talked with her a lot on the Internet. From your description she sounds like a looney tune. And she got mad at you on the Internet for...something, with a response that just about any reasonable person would translate from womanese to English as "fuck the hell off, forever." And then she kept you in her friends bin for three months and then deleted you.



So what are you hoping for exactly

[Rob Banks]

(10-25-2016 03:02 AM)XPQ22 Wrote:  

Quote:

she was into ROK and red-pill stuff

Quote:

It’s been 3 months, and she kept me as a friend on facebook throughout the whole time. However, she abruptly deleted me at some point within the last week or so. Would it even be worth messaging her again at this point, or would I just end up looking stupid?

So you didn't bang a certain girl. And you talked with her a lot on the Internet. From your description she sounds like a looney tune. And she got mad at you on the Internet for...something, with a response that just about any reasonable person would translate from womanese to English as "fuck the hell off, forever." And then she kept you in her friends bin for three months and then deleted you.



So what are you hoping for exactly

First of all, a woman getting mad about stupid shit and then talking to you the next day does not necessarily mean "fuck off forever."

Second of all, I'm not "hoping" for anything. I could care less if I never hear from this girl again (which is why I haven't contacted her), but at the same time if there was an opportunity, I would want to take it. That is why I asked for people's interpretation and advice.

If that seems so retarded to you, why even bother responding to me?

[AneroidOcean]

(10-25-2016 04:03 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

First of all, a woman getting mad about stupid shit and then talking to you the next day does not necessarily mean "fuck off forever."

Second of all, I'm not "hoping" for anything. I could care less if I never hear from this girl again (which is why I haven't contacted her), but at the same time if there was an opportunity, I would want to take it. That is why I asked for people's interpretation and advice.

If that seems so retarded to you, why even bother responding to me?

You're a shitty troll.

Please explain to us how women work when you're posting in the Newbie Section (appropriately for such an inane question, might I add).

You ARE hoping for something and you do care by the very fact that you're posting to ask if you should bother messaging her again. Don't insult our intelligence by contradicting your very own premise.

We bother responding to you in order to point out your hypocrisy/trolling. Your defensive/whiny rebuttal makes all the more sense after checking your reputation.

Really, you met a 9 over ROK comments? I looked up your comments on ROK/Disqus in general and you have only these comments over a month. Perhaps another user can find the "9" who you must've commented to more than once. You registered here less than a month ago, you haven't commented on ROK or even on Disqus more than a month ago, and you want us to believe you're not a troll? Give it a rest:

Quote:

Discussion on Return Of Kings 317 comments
The Loser Mentality: Understanding Men Who Are A Lost Cause
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Bernd 3 days ago
Yeah, OBVIOUSLY it is more efficient to run a government where the people aren't violent and willingly submit to your rule.
But on the off chance that the people do revolt, the government isn't just going to give up and go away, like you claim. They very well may make some important concessions, but they're not just gonna give up and let someone new take power. It just ain't gonna happen. They would nuke their own people before they just surrender.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Bernd 3 days ago
I'm sure our military would kill its own people (those who they deem as "rebels") if the alternative was to be overthrown. Even if a large portion of the population rose up, the US government would not just fold and give up. If anything, they might offer to make certain concessions or to pay the rebels off in exchange for their surrender (like they recently tried to do in Colombia with the communist rebels), but if the rebels persisted, the US government 100% would kill them and bomb their strongholds rather than allowing themselves to be overthrown.
As far as recent US military operations in the Middle East, we did win in Iraq and Afghanistan. We overthrew Saddam Hussein pretty easily and we temporarily overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan. If there were certain failures, it was because of the rules of engagement imposed by our government (namely under Obama). The same is true for the Vietnam War. During Vietnam, our military was given very specific rules of engagement regarding combat when civilians were present, and being careful not to cross the border into neighboring countries. The North Vietnamese fighters were not bound by the same rules, which is a big reason why we lost. The same is true for current operations in the Middle East. If we wanted to, absent foreign intervention, we could conquer pretty much any country we wanted in the Middle East. Just the fact that we have nukes and they don't means we have the capacity to conquer them if we really wanted.
Lots of people know the politicians are controlled. In every democratic country, you hear people bitching about how corrupt the leaders are. The thing is, as long as 50% of the population is willing to vote for you, you stay in power. If Clinton, for example, can get enough uninformed people to vote for her, there's nothing the rest of the population can do about it. Democracy devolves into mob rule.
When the Americans revolted against Britain in the 18th century, what Britain had done to provoke the Americans was far less than what globalists have done to us recently. Back then, we went to war over far less than what is being done to us today. One reason for that is because people today are more complacent, but I would say the main reason is because in today's world, revolting is not even an option. Unless you can literally get a majority of the population to revolt with you, you will get crushed. And even with a literal majority, you can still potentially get nuked if the government gets pissed off enough. The best you can hope for is to get the government to make concessions. Also, anyone today who tries to revolt knows he is risking a lengthy prison sentence.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Bernd 4 days ago
I'm familiar with Stefan Molyneux but I hadn't seen that video yet.
I agree with everything you said. My argument is that modern technology (including, but not limited to, modern weaponry) makes this slavery possible.
Prussian schooling developed as a response to the Industrial Revolution, because they wanted to train children how to be good factory and corporation workers from an early age. I already went over how modern weaponry makes it basically impossible for people to revolt, which incentivizes government to disregard the will of the people (since they know they basically can't be overthrown).
Obviously, it's to the elites' advantage to keep themselves hidden, and for the public not to know who really runs things. I believe that is due to modern technology, and also democracy. Modern technology allows for private communication from a distance. This means that wealthy donors, for example, can communicate with politicians without having the public know that they're communicating. It is also due to democracy, because if we had monarchy, we would know who is in charge and who will be in charge in the future. There are no campaigns or political donations or anything like that. Also, monarchs have less of an incentive to be corrupt, but I won't go into that now, it would be too long.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks englishbob 4 days ago
Well if the entire military turned against its own government, then obviously they would win (absent foreign intervention), but in that case you end up with a military dictatorship.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Bernd 4 days ago
DISCLAIMER: The following is purely an intellectual thought experiment, and should not in any way be taken as a call to violence. I am proud to be an American and I oppose any and all violence against the American people or the American government.
.
.
.
So then why did it used to be far more common for governments to be overthrown? Do you really think something like the American Revolution could have happened if the British had had nukes and modern weaponry? I don't think so.
In the old days prior to the Industrial Revolution, kings would be overthrown if the population got tired of them and enough people organized against the king. That is essentially what happened during the American Revolution but was also very common in Europe.
Do you really think that the reason it isn't common anymore is because of some kind of "mental hold" that modern governments have over their people that was somehow absent in ancient kingdoms? If anything, people in ancient kingdoms felt more loyalty towards their government, not less. The reason it is so much harder (virtually impossible) for a dissatisfied population to overthrow its own government is because of the weaponry that governments have.
The only way to overthrow the government would be to get the military to turn against them, but in that case you end up with a military dictatorship.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Bernd 4 days ago
"if people in mass decided tomorrow that violence was acceptable there wouldn't be a damn thing government could do to stop it."
With modern weaponry, I'm not so sure about that. There is a reason why governments in the developed world don't get overthrown like they used to in the past. Kings would get overthrown if the people were dissatisfied enough, but in the modern first world, that doesn't really happen anymore.
Is this partly because people are better off economically and become complacent? Sure. But it is mainly because of modern weaponry. Even in countries where people aren't doing so well economically (like Greece), I doubt there's much the citizens could do to revolt against their government.
I understand that in the US, people are armed, but I'm not sure it's enough to overcome the government power and modern weaponry. If it got to a civil war, do you not think government would nuke the rebel-held areas if they had no other choice?
View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 1293 comments
Yahoo! Poll: Fans Not Watching NFL, Kaepernick Protests Primary Reason
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 4 days ago
So players dressing in pink in October in support of feminism was not enough? (If it was really about cancer awareness, they would talk about prostate cancer and other types of cancer as well. And they wouldn't wear pink of all colors).
Having to sit through endless feminist "domestic violence" commercials made by players is not enough?
Players basically getting kicked out of the league for ever because of "domestic violence" or "bullying a teammate" was not enough?
The pussifying of the game through all these new rules to "protect players from concussions" was not enough?
The total push towards political correctness by Roger Goodell over the last 10 years was not enough?
But a few players not standing up for the national anthem is the last straw that got people to stop watching? Don't get me wrong, I think Kaepernick is an idiot, but out of all the reasons to stop watching the NFL, this? Really?
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 2776 comments
Rasmussen Poll: Trump Leading by Two Points
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Real Talk 4 days ago
My dad is voting for Crooked Hillary. He basically just believes everything the MSM says, and doesn't believe anything that Breitbart or any other right-wing outlet says.
Sometimes I'll throw a statistic or fact at him, and he'll ask me "where did you read that?" If I say Breitbart, he'll claim that "everything you read on that site is totally made up and untrue." If only he would say that about the MSM. He listens to NPR, for god's sake. Not much hope for him.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 4700 comments
Caddell: Media Have ‘Selective Memory’ When It Comes to Democrats Accepting Election Results
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Anon - ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰ 4 days ago
It's PPS, not PSS.
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 381 comments
The Final Presidential Debate Shows That The 2016 Election Is The Battle Of The Century
Rob Banks
Rob Banks lolknee✓ᴺᶦʰˡᶦˢᵗ 5 days ago
Actually Trump is very smart, and he is not the type to stick to "talking points." That's why I was surprised he didn't call her out.
I think you've got Trump confused with Hillary.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Joseph Curwen 5 days ago
That's why they murdered Scalia. Wikileaks uncovered an email from Podesta 4 days before Scalia's death in which they discussed killing him.
They killed him because they want to steal the election, and they don't want another Bush v. Gore in 2000 situation, where Scalia was the deciding vote to deny Gore his "recount" to steal the election from Bush.
If Trump is cheated and he challenges in court, the Supreme Court will not rule in his favor with Scalia gone. That was the whole reason why they had him killed. As soon as it looked like Trump was going to win Republican nomination, that's when they decided Scalia had to go.
3 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 5 days ago
"Trump Owned Hillary on 2nd Amendment"
Hillary literally said the senate should confirm (anti-gun) Obama nominee Merrick Garland, and then claimed that she "supports the 2nd amendment." Garland, who was a federal judge at the time, voted against Heller in the 2008 DC v. Heller case.
Hillary also said she thought the Supreme Court got the 2008 Heller decision wrong, but that she still supports the 2nd Amendment. What she didn't mention was that the 4 dissenting justices in the Heller case LITERALLY said that the 2nd Amendment is NOT an individual right, and that the founding fathers "could not reasonably have thought citizens should have guns."
Trump did not call her out on any of this. He just let it slide. He did a fine job of outlining HIS vision for the Supreme Court, but did not call Hillary out on her obvious lies.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 430 comments
Listen: Eminem Disses ‘Kiss Ass Puppet’ Donald Trump in ‘Campaign Speech’ Rap
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 5 days ago
As an Eminem fan, this is very sad news.
In his song "White America," he describes himself as "a motherf**king spokesman...for white America."
Some f**kin' spokesman.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 976 comments
Watch Live: Trump in Grand Junction, CO
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 6 days ago
Make America Great Again!
3 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 303 comments
Why Cisgendered Straight Men Kill Themselves
Rob Banks
Rob Banks paddedummy 8 days ago
Obviously you don't tell anyone who you can't trust. That's the whole point.
View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 2514 comments
Exclusive–Breitbart/Gravis Poll: Clinton Up 4 Points over Trump in Florida
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DEPLORABLEMikey123 9 days ago
Why don't you look at my previous posts? Do they look like the posts of a Clinton troll?
Idiot.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 9 days ago
This is bad news. This is a BREITBART poll, not an MSM poll.
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 118 comments
How Feminists Sabotaged Baseball In My Town
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Libertas Victoria 10 days ago
I live in NY. Lol.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Libertas Victoria 11 days ago
Are you really from buenos aires? i've got lots of family in argentina.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 11 days ago
"How Feminists Sabotaged Baseball in my Town."
And then the article doesn't mention anything about feminism, just talks about how the view sucks at the new Birmingham minor league stadium.
5 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 303 comments
Why Cisgendered Straight Men Kill Themselves
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 11 days ago
I disagree about contacting authorities if things get really bad. Bringing the cops into a man's life can easily have unintended life-long consequences for the man.
In fact, in the context of a long term relationoship, the only thing a woman could do (besides cheating) that would be an automatic deal-breaker and would be reason for me to dump her immediately. In fact, for a woman to go behind her man's back, undermining his supposed authority, and reach out to government officials, who have never met him, to come take him away, is in many ways just as disrespectful as cheating.
It's one thing if a man is being abusive or suicidal and his woman talks to his family, her own family, friends of his, or people in his community that know him. These are people you trust and you know aren't going to fuck him over. With the cops, though, that's not true. The cops have no loyalty to the man in this situation. For a woman to call the cops on her man is literally treasonous.
When a woman calls the cops for domestic violence, for example, cops are REQUIRED to make an arrest, regardless of whether the woman has marks on her body or not. In the case of a man who is suicidal, in many cases the cops are required to hospitalize the man involuntarily.
Both having a domestic violence conviction (even if it is NOT a felony), and having been involuntarily hospitalized at ANY point in your life for ANY reason, are both grounds for a lifetime ban on firearm ownership. In fact, the recent court case Tyler v. Hillsdale County deals with this issue, and the decision is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court in 2017.
Think about that before calling the cops thinking they will help.
Sorry for the somewhat off-topic rant.
2 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 402 comments
How To Find A Girl For A Relationship
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 303summerwalk 12 days ago
The sluttier ones I'm sure do date 28 year old guys. But I feel like a girl who is a virgin at 18 (or younger) probably wouldn't. It's seen as weird by most people, so she is likely to go along with that and will most likely look for a boyfriend her own age.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 12 days ago
"Now, as a side note, if you’re a newbie I do NOT recommend that you get into a relationship."
I disagree with that. If you meet a good girl while young, it is NOT safe to assume you will continue to meet girls like that later in life. Especially if you want a virgin. Girls these days don't really stay virgins past 18 (at the very latest), and they usually aren't going to date guys much older than them.
If you're 18, your chances of finding a virgin girl are far greater than they will be when you're 25. By the time you're 25 or 30, you'll be meeting girls in their 20s and saying to yourself "this girl only has 5 previous partners. That's probably the best I can do," and regretting the fact that you broke up with your high school sweetheart (whose virginity you took).
Aaron Clarey had a good article about this topic a few years back:
http://www.returnofkings.com/4...
PS: I am not saying don't bang a lot of girls. I'm just saying if you meet a "good girl" when you're young and you turn her down because "adventure" and "variety," you're going to regret it later on.
Speaking of "variety," a good, traditional girl will not leave you if you cheat every now and then. Traditionally, a man would leave a woman if she cuckolded him, but a woman would NOT leave a man for the same reason, because if she did, she would become a single mother that no other man would marry. Any girl who says "I will leave you if you EVER cheat" is doing so because she believes in feminist "equality," and therefore is not very traditional.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Roosh V 10 comments
“Victory Against Overwhelming Odds”
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 12 days ago
When I read the title, I thought this article was gonna be about Trump.
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 352 comments
Donald Trump Indisputably Throttles Hillary Clinton In The Second Presidential Debate
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DirtyHarold 12 days ago
I was actually making fun of the Muslim woman, you idiot.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DirtyHarold 14 days ago
Lol what?
What does that have to do with what I said?
Dumbass.
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 188 comments
The Lewdness of Clinton’s Disinformation Campaign
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Unabashed 12 days ago
Wrong. White people will shift right (like they already have been doing), but Hillary will more than make up for it with all the immigrants she brings in, plus amnesty for the ones already here.
4 View in discussion
Discussion on Crooks and Liars 14 comments
Judge Napolitano And Megyn Kelly Defend Clintons Against Former Accusers
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 13 days ago
"...to deflect from his sex tape..."
SEX tape??? Really, you're reporting his tape as a SEX tape?
Damn dishonest media.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Roosh V 90 comments
What If Everything They Told You Is A Lie?
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Cecil J 13 days ago
Anyone who has followed Roosh for even 2 seconds would know the LAST thing he would EVER do is to get married and then stay married to a cheating wife.
You must be new here or something.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Cecil J 14 days ago
No, you idiot. Roosh is not married to a cheating wife, that was a metaphor (assuming that's what you're referring to).
His "lying, cheating wife" is the mainstream media and government.
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 455 comments
Firestorm Erupts Over Trump’s Grab Them By The Pussy Tape
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Jesus Tarazon 14 days ago
Good answer! You really proved me wrong!
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Jesus Tarazon 14 days ago
So let's go over this. He decided last year that he's going to run for president. That was 2015. How exactly is he supposed to go back in time to 2005 in order to "keep his mouth shut" ?
How is he supposed to "keep his mouth shut" when he had already said the words 10 years ago? What's he supposed to do, not run for president out of fear that someone would release that tape? He didn't even know it had been recorded, for fuck's sake!
You really didn't think that comment through, did you?
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 217 comments
Cucklican Establishment Turns on Trump in a Bid to Maintain Power
Rob Banks
Rob Banks spicynujac 14 days ago
I am disappointed by some of Pence's recent behavior, but I certainly don't think he was such a terrible choice. In addition to guaranteeing Indiana, he will also probably help Trump in Ohio and Pennsylvania, in addition to other Midwestern states. Also, Pence's experience as governor (but not in Washington) and his calm, easygoing Midwestern personality provides a good counterweight to Trump's boisterous style and newcomer status.
Many Christian conservatives who were a little uncomfortable with Trump's style and his history of supporting Democrats may be reassured by Pence's presence on the ticket.
I personally wouldn't have minded a military veteran as vice president, but I feel like it would have come off to a lot of people as Trump being a war hawk, which is not the image he wants to give off. He certainly want's a strong military, but nominating a general who served under Bush or Obama, even if they did disagree with Obama's policies (did Flynn disagree with Bush's policies or just Obama's?), would come off as an endorsement of Bush's policies. Many people want a candidate who is "anti-war," because Bush's wars were so unpopular.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Curtis Axel 14 days ago
LOL you mean Rudy Giuliani? I guess he would make a good VP personality-wise, but a lot of libertarian-leaning conservatives (including myself) would be turned off by him. I hate black lives matter with a passion, but that doesn't mean I support Giuliani' police state tactics in New York.
By the way, "stop-and-frisk" police tactics should actually be called "stop-and-search" because they don't just frisk you, they do a full search. Clearly against 4th amendment. Has nothing to do with race. I'm a white guy and have been searched this way by NYPD.
At the time Trump picked Pence, I thought he was a good choice. And he's not as bad as most of the cucks on the mainstream right. I'm just disappointed in how he condemned Trump after the audiotapes. You don't have to defend him, but at least keep your mouth shut, Pence. I was also upset by his decision during his otherwise flawless debate performance Tuesday to contradict Trump on foreign policy, saying we should go after Assad in Syria instead of going after ISIS. I'm glad Trump had the balls to call out his running mate when questioned about it last night.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks spicynujac 16 days ago
In Trump's defense, the other names that were thrown out there as VP choices were worse. Newt Gingrich? Kasich? Rubio? Chris Christie?
At first, I was hoping he'd pick Cruz (and he even implied during a debate that he was considering him) but then Cruz turned on him and sided with the cucks, so he was out. The only choice who was truly anti-establishment was Alabama senator Jeff Sessions, but his way of speaking and thick southern accent don't exactly make him sound smart to low-information voters and moderate northerners.
When Trump picked pence back in July, I actually thought he was a pretty good choice. I bet Trump didn't expect Pence to turn on him like this, or to go against his views on foreign policy in the debate.
3 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks spicynujac 16 days ago
Yeah, but we announced when we were leaving, and ISIS took over right after we left. Even if we hadn't announced it, the fact that we went in, destroyed the Saddam Hussein government, and didn't replace it with anything created a power vacuum that was immediately filled by ISIS, who we had armed to overthrow Assad in neighboring Syria.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Love Kraft 16 days ago
No, the fact that he wouldn't defend Trump confirms what I already suspected about Pence. Remember how he contradicted Trump at the debate, bashing Putin and implying that the US should have stopped him from taking Crimea fro Ukraine. He also said the US shouldn't have gotten out of Iraq so soon (which is true), but didn't say anything about how the US shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place (Trump was recently questioned for supposedly supporting the Iraq war even though he was actually against it).
He was a good VP choice by Trump in the sense that he appears calm and collected and is a respected governor, but he was a bad choice in the sense that he's really just a mainstream Republican with mainstream neocon views.
5 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 16 days ago
Pence won't even defend him? I suspected Pence was a cuck during the debate when he started bashing Putin.
He repeatedly called Putin "the small and bullying leader of Russia," totally contradicting Trump's comments about him.
16 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 8487 comments
The Art of the Comeback: Donald Trump’s Debate Win Propels Him Toward White House
Rob Banks
Rob Banks ThemistØcles 14 days ago
That's not exactly true. While it is manufactured outrage, some people, including women, were offended. And some "men" were also offended, tweeting about it.
One "man" even tweeted that his wife threatened to leave him if he didn't get rid of the Trump sign in the front lawn, and that "the sign is now in the trash."
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 352 comments
Donald Trump Indisputably Throttles Hillary Clinton In The Second Presidential Debate
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Eon56 15 days ago
Holy shit, you beat me to it. Check out my response to the same comment.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 15 days ago
There was the "Muslim" fat woman (who clearly was not an observing Muslim because she had no burka. In fact, her hair was DYED PINK or something), who asked "how can I, as a Muslim, be safe with Islamophobia on the rise and if everyone think's I'm a threat to the country?"
Yeah, I'm suuuuure she was really an undecided voter.
11 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 455 comments
Firestorm Erupts Over Trump’s Grab Them By The Pussy Tape
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Tom Arrow 15 days ago
His supporters chose him over the other Republican candidates, expecting him to do everything in power to defeat Hillary. Every move Trump makes and everything he says is closely analyzed and has the capacity to affect the outcome of the election. Trump's number one priority right now, and what his supporters expected when they nominated him, is to win the election and ensure that Hillary doesn't fuck up the country. That's far more important than any abstract sense of "honor" or "pride."
If you think Trump apologizing was a strategic mistake that will hurt him in the election, that's debatable. But if not, then he absolutely has a responsibility to his supporters, and to the nation as a whole, to do what he thinks will give him the best chance to win.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Tom Arrow 16 days ago
"He does not carry a responsibility towards anyone."
Actually, at this point, he does carry a huge responsibility towards his supporters and towards the nation to do everything in his power to keep Clinton out of the white house. If he prioritized "personal integrity" or pride over winning the election, that would be a problem.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks La'darell Luthor 16 days ago
This is an actual comment from a New York Times article on the Trump tapes:
Will New York, NY 16 minutes ago
My aunt gave my uncle (her husband of over 50 years and a Trump supporter) an ultimatum. Either the Trump yard sign goes are she goes.
The sign is in the trash. Probably much to the neighbors' relief.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Tom Arrow 16 days ago
If you're trying not to get fired, that is a personal decision. If someone like Trump is trying to get elected, that is a decision that affects everyone. If Trump does the "honorable" thing and refuses to apologize, and it hurts his poll numbers, he's letting America down by making it more likely that Hillary wins.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Rob 16 days ago
During the primaries, the polls were generally accurate. Not perfect, but not totally useless either.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Tom Arrow 16 days ago
He apologized because he's trying to get elected. Plus, what he said (not just the "pussy" comment, but also him hitting on married women)...let's just say it's not what Jesus would do. I'm not offended and I think the whole thing is stupid, but it's not dishonorable to apologize for something you truly regret.
Stop looking for bullshit reasons to hate on Trump.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks RedMoonJournal 16 days ago
The actual scientific polls, including ones conducted by Breitbart, showed Clinton winning narrowly.
His general election poll numbers dropped slightly after the debate as well.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Gundog 16 days ago
Are you kidding me?
It's fine if you criticize Trump, but you want him to lose? So you want Hillary a president?
LEFTIST ALERT.
6 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 06believin 16 days ago
The problem is the "men" who are controlled by their wives. If this election ends up being close, it might very well be decided in favor of Hillary because of men who want to vote for Trump but are told by their wives "if you vote for Trump, you're sleeping on the couch."
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks jammyjaybird 16 days ago
Bro, you're talking about what the "undecided female voter" thinks, but in a previous comment you defended Hillary Clinton and said she should not be blamed for Bill's sex scandal (which she enabled).
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 3014 comments
Republican Senate Candidate Booed, Jeered for Dropping Support for Trump
Rob Banks
Rob Banks CindyLynnB 16 days ago
What? LOL your whole comment was incoherent, not the "you guys" part. You're retarded.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks BanBait 16 days ago
I don't understand your comment. Of course Chuck Schumer and Hillary are huge threats to the country. I was just commenting on the video.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks CindyLynnB 16 days ago
What? Your comment is incoherent. Learn English.
"You guys" ?? So I'm a Hillary/George Soros supporter nwow?
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 16 days ago
One woman booed him. Many people clapped.
I'm a Trump supporter and I think this guy is a traitor, but let's not get all happy and say he wa "booed" when many people clapped.
View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 3919 comments
Profile in Cowardice: Republican Establishment Flees Trump over 2005 Comments
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 16 days ago
"the choice on the Democratic side is not Pope Francis, but the Clintons."
Pope Francis would't be a whole lot better.
3 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 6398 comments
‘Step Aside. Step Down.’ Mike Lee Asks Donald Trump To Quit Republican Race
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Bytor 16 days ago
Except when he does that, the media won't report it, or they will report it as "desperate Trump attacks Bill Clinton to cover up his own indiscretions."
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Deplorable_Paul 17 days ago
Oh I certainly will vote Trump.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 17 days ago
I can't believe they're finally sinking Trump. I'm all for Trump, and this is disappointing. He really is starting to look stupid to a lot of people because the damn media is starting to beat him down. We might lose this one.
Time to start making plans for armed resistance against gun confiscation.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 455 comments
Firestorm Erupts Over Trump’s Grab Them By The Pussy Tape
Rob Banks
Rob Banks jammyjaybird 16 days ago
His wife is running, though. You don't get to completely separate her from him, especially since his presidency is THE WHOLE REASON SHE EVEN BECAME A POLITICIAN.
She would be NOTHING without him. Apparently, according to people like you, she can accept all the benefits of being married to him, but as soon as something negative comes out about him, she's her own person and separate from him.
Also, what people are mad about is that she ENABLED his behavior by threatening the women who accused him.
Fuck off, Hillary-loving troll. How does Hillary's oversized clit taste in your mouth?
4 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks RockOn✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 16 days ago
If by "internet polling" you mean online polls where you just click a button and vote, those are not accurate at all. First of all, there are a lot of old people who vote for Hillary who don't vote in those online polls. Second of all, you can vote as many times as you want in an online poll. Also, if the poll was done on a conservative website, there will be a conservative bias.
After the fist debate, for example, every online poll showed Trump winning the debate, but the real polls (including one done by Breitbart) showed Hillary winning.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks jammyjaybird 16 days ago
You're really an idiot, man.
Trump already tried option 1 in the first debate, sticking to policy and passing up opportunities to attack Hillary Clinton for her scandals (including the way she treated Bill's rape accusers). And what happened? It was spun as "Trump doesn't know anything about policy and he proved that today," "Trump failed to attack Hillary," and "Hillary really did a good job attacking Trump. She got under his skin and he wasn't able to attack back."
Did ANYONE in the media say Trump looked "presidential" after the first debate when he stuck to policy and declined to attack Hillary over Bill's affairs? No.
All these people saying Trump should not attack Hillary and go after her weaknesses (because it's not "presidential") are people who are actually trying to bring down Trump. They know if he doesn't attack Hillary but she attacks him, he will look bad.
10 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 203 comments
The Rising Tide Of Anarcho-Tyranny
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 18 days ago
What about arresting people for simple drug possession (not selling) and making them into felons?
The so-called "red states" are far worse about this than the blue ones.
Een drug dealers are not violet criminals, and the government is making plenty of more money off drug busts than they would through legalization and taxation. The drug cartels are also getting rich off of probibiton, while the drug user and street pusher are being sent to prison and stripped of their rights.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 587 comments
What To Do If Hillary Wins
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Miss Bunny 18 days ago
What if you shoot him but he gets away? What if there is a witness?
I'm hoping GhostOfJefferson is right and there would be massive disobedience and armed protest if this were to happen, but if there was not massive disobedience, then the only rational choices for law-abiding citizens would either be to hide your guns and never use them (even for self-defense), or to voluntarily give them up. Kind of like if you were a felon today, those would be your only two reasonable choices, unless you wanted to risk a long prison sentence.
Sure, if all felons today bought guns and engaged in massive civil disobedience, there would be no way to arrest them all, but that simply isn't going to happen. They aren't organized enough.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
The vast majority of non-military people don't have all those weapons, just guns.
Anyway, my only point is that it is far more difficult to overthrow a government today than it was 250 years ago. Technology gives the government more control over us, period. And I'm not just talking about military technology, I'm talking about all technology.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Luke Stranahan 19 days ago
The times were waaaaay different. Weaponry is waaaay more advanced nowadays. That's why first world governments don't really have to worry about being overthrown anymore.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
So a felon in Wyoming can own a gun and not go to prison? Or a person can walk into a gun shop and buy without a background check? Or gun shops can sell fully automatic weapons?
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
How are Wyoming and Montana opting out of federal gun control? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm actually curious to know, since I never heard of that before.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
I sure hope you're right.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Américain Déplorable 19 days ago
What would you do if congress simply makes a law that anyone caught with a gun for any reason goes to prison? Confiscation would not be necessary in that scenario. If your house was robbed and defended yourself with a gun, you would go to prison for gun possession. If you were pulled over for speeding and they found a gun in your car, you would go to prison for gun possession.
They would not confiscate door to door, but they would essentially turn all gun owners into criminals overnight. It would be pointless to keep owning a gun because you are risking prison if you ever use the gun for self defense or any other reason.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
Now that I think about it, this is kind of a moot point. Even if the military and police would not disarm the public, it is not necessary. Government could simply outlaw guns, and they would not need to go door to door confiscating them.
They could simply make a law that if anyone is caught with a gun for any reason, they go to prison for a long time. That means that if your house is broken into by armed robbers and you defend yourself with a gun, you would be arrested for gun possession (just like in England). Door to door confiscation is not necessary.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Américain Déplorable 19 days ago
If you had a wife and kids, I don't think you'd be so willing to sacrifice your life.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks consumateconsumer 19 days ago
I hope you're right and they're telling the truth. Just remember, though, it's a lot different what they will say to your face when you ask them "would you disarm the public?" and what they would actually do when their jobs and their family's safety and prosperity is on the line.
Also, it's not necessary for them to disarm the public. Congress could simply pass a law banning guns, but only enforce it if you are caught doing something else. The army and police would not go door to door disarming people, but if you are pulled over for speeding and they find a gun on you, you would go to prison for gun possession. If your house is broken into by armed robbers, and you use a gun to defend yourself and your family, you would be arrested and put in jail for gun possession, regardless if it was self-defense or not.
If that happens, the military won't need to go door to door disarming people. Keep your gun hidden at home and don't ever use it for any reason, that's fine. But if you're ever caught using or carrying the gun (even for legitimate self-defense purposes) you will go to prison. Is that really any better than gun confiscation?
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 587 comments
What To Do If Hillary Wins
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
Ok, don't get me wrong, I am NOT on the left. I also admitted I am not a military expert. I am 100% in favor of gun ownership, carrying, and everything else, and I absolutely do not want to live in a country with any type of gun control. I am afraid if they take the guns, I will not be able to protect my family and I will have to rely on government and police to protect me. That is not something I'm down with.
I am just thinking, and I could be wrong, that if the government really wanted to enact stricter gun control, they probably could. You're probably right that there would not be an all-out civil war, and they probably would not get away will all-out confiscation without lots of casualties, and lots of bad PR for turning on their own citizens.
My fear is that once Hillary gets liberal justices to overrule the 2008 DC v. Heller decision (ruling that the 2nd amendment does not apply to private citizens), the government will take small steps towards more gun control. The public will not fight back against these small steps, just like they didn't in the past when small steps were passed. If the government passed a law tomorrow saying requiring a federal license in all states for open & concealed carry, would there be blood in the streets? I don't think so. People would just apply for their licenses and accept the law. Now, what would happen when an increasingly liberal government over the years (due to more and more immigration and amnesty) slowly makes it harder and harder to get a carry license, eventually ceasing to give out licenses?
They will take baby steps like that until achieving their end goal of total confiscation, and even if they don't achieve that end goal, just having them eliminate open and concealed carry (for example) is enough for me to consider the 2nd amendment dead. And there will be no war against the government because it will be done in baby steps, just like every other leftist agenda has been achieved.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Américain Déplorable 19 days ago
You can't just go and take on the US army by yourself (or even with a bunch of friends) and have faith that God will let you win. It doesn't work that way. Faith in God does not negate the physical reality that the US military and police have superior weapons and are far better organized than the vast majority of citizens today, and that, barring a true civil war (states formally seceding) or a military coup, the military and police will most likely follow orders to disarm the public if that is what they are ordered to do.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Américain Déplorable 19 days ago
Ok, and I'm not saying you shouldn't fight. I'm just saying you have to be realistic about what the result would be. If that's a hill you're willing to die on, that's admirable and very respectable.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks GhostOfJefferson ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ 19 days ago
They could easily take out the whole Iraqi army when authorized to do so (under Bush). The reason they "can't" take out the Afghanis or ISIS today is because they are not authorized to use their full potential. Are you seriously arguing that the US military is not the strongest military in the world?
I'm no military expert, but it seems fairly obvious that our organized military with state-of-the-art weaponry could easily take out the small percentage of American gun owners who choose to fight back.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Américain Déplorable 19 days ago
I'm glad to hear you're willing to fight the government rather than give up your guns, don't get me wrong. But you should ask yourself, is this really the hill you're willing to die on? And you WILL die. You will NOT win a war against the US military. I don't care how many citizens you have on your side.
Unless a civil war truly breaks out, with half the military turning on its government (unlikely), or with certain states formally seceding (slightly more likely, but still very unlikely) you will lose, and that means being killed or going to prison for life.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Américain Déplorable 19 days ago
They will follow orders. They're not going to risk losing THEIR jobs (and their guns, and possible prison time) to help YOUR ass not be disarmed. Plus, they are a lot more organized than the citizens and they have far more powerful weapons, so the fact that they are outnumbered won't matter.
Plus, will they really be outnumbered? Out of the 100 million gun owners, do you really think more than 5% of them will be willing to fight it out with the army rather than turning in their guns? Look what happened in Australia when they confiscated guns back in 1996. No one fought back.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 19 days ago
Consider, realistically, what you will do if the court rules that the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to citizens, and gun confiscation is enacted (eventually). Will you realistically fight and make them take the guns from your "cold, dead hands" as many of us like to say? Who will fight with you? Are you seriously willing to risk death or jail time to not give up your guns? Do you realize that even if you are armed and have a group of armed men willing to resist, that the US Army and police will kick your ass if they so choose? Is that a hill you're willing to die (or go to prison) on?
What about the men here who are married with children? Can you realistically say you will not give up your guns if the alternative is going to jail and leaving your family to fend for themselves (and losing your guns anyway)?
View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 484 comments
Gay Group Promotes ‘Gender Ideology’ For Children
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DeplorableTopper 19 days ago
The article (and the comment I was originally responding to) specifically mention transgender children. Even if a kid is 13 or 14 (not really a "child" in the strictest sense), and mentally ill, I certainly do not think they are mature enough to make an irreversible decision that will sterilize them for life.
Many of these "transgender children" are not mentally ill. They have just been led to believe by their parents that they can truly change their gender, and would likely grow out of it if not encouraged by their parents.
When I was 5 or 6, if I remember correctly, I once put on a dress and told my parents "look, I'm a girl" or something like that. I was not "gender confused" or anything like that, I was just a little kid playing around and being silly. If my parents had told me "well, you CAN be a girl if you want," at that age, I probably would have believed them, and who knows, if they encouraged me enough, I might have continued to believe it. Kids that age are not able to understand that they can't REALLY become the opposite sex, and that they will be mutilated and sterile for life. And by the time they reach an age where they're able to understand it, they're already so committed to being "transgender" at that point that they're not going to change their minds.
It's sickening how some liberal parents would put their kids through medical "treatment" that will make them sterile for life, and likely drive them to suicide later on, just to virtue-signal how "tolerant" they are because they have a transgender kid. Truly sickening.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DeplorableTopper 19 days ago
To little kids? If you really think that, then you're the one who's mentally ill.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Ordinary American 2014 19 days ago
ELEMENTARY school? ELEMENTARY SCHOOL?????!!!???!!!
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks CommonSenseIMO 19 days ago
Yeah, and they can have medical treatments which render them sterile for life.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 19 days ago
Every time the article mentioned "HRC" I would read it as "Hillary Rodham Clinton."
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 1038 comments
Mother Sues Hospital for Discrimination for Calling Transgender Son a Girl
Rob Banks
Rob Banks cirgeorgio 19 days ago
Well, at least you're honest with yourself and you don't buy into all the leftist bullshit, which is more than I can say for most gay people. At this point, I don't think most people on the right care if you're gay or not, as long as you're not pushing the gay ideology on children. Russia, for example, has a law that prohibits pushing homosexuality on children, or having public displays of homosexuality (like gay pride parades) in public areas where children might be present. The west made a huge deal about this, calling Russia "anti-gay" and even threatening to move the 2014 winter olympics out of Russia.
I don't support throwing gay people off roofs, or throwing them in jail. I don't want to have a police force busting down people's bedroom doors. But at the same time, I don't disagree with the Russians' law. I think it is totally unhealthy to spread the idea that "homosexuality is okay" to children.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks cirgeorgio 21 days ago
Well as far as your personal experiences, I can't speak to that, and it's none of my business. If you say you've always been gay, I have no reason not to believe you. However, I think if you knew growing up that being gay was not an option, and that you had to get over your feeling and get married to a woman (or face being ostracized from your community), I'm not so sure you wouldn't have at least tried to be with a woman. I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion.
And as far as the "it would be selected against" argument. If you are saying it is "debunked," does that mean you're saying that being gay is, in fact, genetic and is not selected against? I would continue to argue that it is not genetic, in which case my argument that IF IT WERE genetic, it would be selected against, remains valid.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks cirgeorgio 21 days ago
There very well may male animals that hump other males every once in a while (especially if they are in a captive environment with no females), but I bet you can't find any examples of a male animal who is only attracted to other males, and not to females. It just doesn't exist.
The idea that there were just as many gays in the past, but they were just so horribly oppressed that they had to hide it, is a liberal lie. I'm sure there were men who grew up having homosexual thoughts, but since they knew this was not acceptable, they grew out of it and ended up marrying women, which I think is ultimately the healthiest option.
If homosexuality were a normal trait that some people are just born with, doesn't it seem like it would be so heavily selected against that it would die out soon enough? I mean it's pretty obvious that homosexuals don't reproduce. If it is not genetic, then that means it is acquired as a result of life experiences and influences, and therefore not normal.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks dw 21 days ago
BUT BUT BUT...YOU CAN'T SAY THAT! Gender is a social construct! There's non such thing as gender! That's why this girl wanted to change her gender which didn't exist to begin with! Confused yet?
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks disqus_nzTitq5wqD 21 days ago
Good question. Probably got divorce-raped by the mother and not given custody.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks John Sullivan 21 days ago
So "penis" is equal to "boy no penis girl"?
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Jubal Early 21 days ago
I think you're giving the mother too much credit. The mother was likely a liberal who was all too happy to have a transgender child to show off to her liberal friends.
Most likely, her daughter said to her once or twice, at 5 or 6 years old, "I want to be a boy," and the mother from that point on encouraged it, telling her "you CAN be a boy if you want." The child was obviously too young to know she couldn't really be a boy.
2 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Jack Smythe 21 days ago
They can scissor each other.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DixieRocker94 21 days ago
In order to avoid puberty, you have to start treatment at 11 or 12 years old (or earlier). And that treatment makes it certain that you will not reproduce. Ever.
I think 12 years old is a bit young to be allowed to make a decision to sterilize yourself for life. Don't you think?
2 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Farfel 21 days ago
"Adadicktomy" LOL
View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 698 comments
Why Are So Many Women Sluts?
Rob Banks
Rob Banks I'mInDC 19 days ago
I'm trying to figure out if you're a feminist troll or not.
Assuming you're a man, I would ask you this: If you were dating a young, attractive woman and you found out she had slept with 60 guys in her past, would you still consider her for a serious relationship? Now what if you found out that, although she slept with 60 guys in her past, she hadn't slept with any in the last 3 years because she had found Jesus and decided to change her slutty ways. Would that make you any more open to seriously dating her?
If it were me, I would say hell no. I would be happy for her that she decided to change, but it wouldn't be enough for me. I would not be able to get over the fact that she took 60 dicks before me. In my mind, she would forever be a slut, and I assume most guys on this site would agree with me.
As far as the alpha females, there are many women who are more masculine and athletic than most women. Female MMA fighters, for example. Or Serena Williams. But are they truly alpha females? In a primitive tribal world, would they be higher up on the hierarchy than the smaller, weaker woman who was married to the king? No, she wouldn't. The woman who was married to the king would be considered the queen, and therefore the tribe's "alpha female," just based on the fact that she was married to the king, even if she was not the strongest or most dominant woman in the tribe.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Titan000 22 days ago
Ever hear of sacrasm, buddy?
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks DeCode 22 days ago
I get what you're saying. I agree that I don't think we should use the word "slut" to refer to men. For that matter, I don't think we should use the word "virgin" to refer to men either (a man doesn't have a "virginity" to save for marriage the way a woman does, and the word "virgin" traditionally was only used to refer to women).
However, I personally don't think there really is a male equivalent to a slut. Male-female relationships are asymmetrical, which means there won't always be a "male equivalent" or "female equivalent" to every trait a woman or man can have. To say that the male equivalent of a slut is a simp, a loser, or a beta orbiter is to imply that a slut can stop being a slut if she changes her ways. A simp or a loser can always become an alpha, but a slut can never become pure.
By the same token, there is no female equivalent to an alpha male. There is no such thing as an "alpha female" (except when defined as the alpha male's wife or girlfriend).
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks l'Bains 22 days ago
I heard Kratom didn't get made illegal after all. I hope it's true.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks david 23 days ago
Thanks for the biology 101, Capt. Obvious.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Ravi Subba 23 days ago
I'm 24, and I've been told by friends (back when i was 22) that I'm weird if I find a 16 or 17 year old girl attractive. Not even going after them, just finding them attractive is weird, supposedly.
I was arguing with a friend about this last year, and I asked this guy we were with what he thought, if he thought being attracted to a 16 year old girl was weird, and his immediate response was "why, do you have a guilty conscience about something? anything you want to confess?" I never brought up the subject again with people I didn't know super well.
2 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks david 24 days ago
Well, I wouldn't go as far as to say a woman "should" date a man so old. If a woman dates a man the same age or just a few years older, I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with that, as long as the man has his shit together. Also, if the man is 15 years older, the woman is gonna be spending some long years alone at the end of her life, given that women already live longer than men to begin with. I think anything from the same age to 10 years apart is a good age difference.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Cardtheorist 25 days ago
The reason "age of consent" laws are taken so seriously is precisely this. It is to make sure the vast majority of girls will not remain virgins until marriage, and at the same time get conservatives to support this by acting like they are "protecting children from sexual predators."
If a 15 year old girl gets marries to a 25 year old man (like they used to throughout 99% of human history), that's CHILD ABUSE I TELL YOU!! Don't you know, a 15 year old girl should be experimenting sexually with boys her own age! And if you object to this as a father, then you're an abuser and are possibly even sexually abusing your daughter yourself!
7 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 333 comments
What Would Happen If Hillary Clinton Wins?
Rob Banks
Rob Banks rockfish153 20 days ago
Well in that case, the question is, how many people do you think will (realistically) fight with you, and how many will just submit and give up their guns?
Australia confiscated guns back in 1996, and no one fought back. I would probably fight if there were other gun owners fighting alongside me, but if everyone else was cooperating and turning in their guns, I can't realistically say I would accept my own death in order to accomplish nothing.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Michael McLaughlin 21 days ago
Merrick Garland is anti-2nd amendment, so the result will be the same. Don't buy it when people try to say Garland is "conservative" just because he ruled in favor of the Bush administration a few times.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks zocli michael 22 days ago
So let's send our soldiers to die, and destabilize entire world regions, so that our government (and certain special interests) can get richer, even though it benefits none of us regular people. Just like we did under Bush and Obama.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Southern Man 22 days ago
So if guns are made illegal, what are you going to do? Your guns not being registered doesn't mean you won't be arrested if you ever get caught using one of them. That would mean no concealed carry, no going to the range, no keeping guns in your car, etc. And if a burglar ever broke into your house and you shot them (or even threatened them with a gun) you would go to prison for firearm possession. And not to mention the possibility that one of your neighbors tells the cops you own guns, and they come raid your house.
So basically, you would have to keep your guns hidden inside your house at all times and never use them, even in a self-defense situation. And even if you do that, there's still a small chance you'll get caught, if the cops ever search your house. Is it really worth it to have a gun in that situation? You might as well give them up at that point.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Guest 22 days ago
I don't necessarily agree that we need to colonize the middle east in order to stop the "refugee" problem. We could just not let them in to our countries, and just let them deal with their own bullshit in their own countries. I do agree, though, that if we are going to invade, we better go all out and colonize their asses. Doing what Bush did in Iraq, going in and removing Saddam and then eventually leaving, is pointless. Even if we put in a puppet dictator of our choosing, or even if we persuade them to adopt democracy, it will only last as long as we keep troops in the area. As soon as we forget about them, they will go back to whatever fucked up system they had prior to us invading (or possibly worse, like we're seeing with ISIS taking over the areas we previously invaded).
And it's good to see that you realize Russia is our natural ally. I was a bit confused as to why you were promoting war with Russia. I was gonna tell you to go vote for Hillary Clinton if that's what you wanted.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Guest 24 days ago
You clearly know nothing about how foreign policy actually works. You're far too reckless. Unless you actually want to take over Russia and the middle east and keep them as part of an empire, then you would just be sending our people to die for nothing.
"LET'S TAKE OVER THE WORLD!! WHO'S WITH ME? ANYONE WHO IS NOT WITH ME IS A PUSSY AND A BITCH!!"
And no, I'm not a humanist. I despise humanists. And while I've never fought in a war (although I would like to), I bet I've been in more fights than you have.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Guest 24 days ago
You clearly know nothing about the way foreign policy actually works.
"LET'S TAKE OVER THE WORLD!! WHO'S WITH ME? ANYONE WHO ISN'T WITH ME IS A PUSSY AND A BITCH!!!"
And no. I'm not even close to being a humanist. While I've never fought in a war (although I would like to), I've probably been in more fights than you.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks 24 days ago
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks AMD_Afficionado 24 days ago
I'm half Argentinian and I've lived there before. You're totally wrong. The vast majority of Argentinians are either of Spanish or Italian descent. There are some Native Americans (who the white Argentines refer to as "negros"), but not nearly as many natives as there are in other South American nations. And there are literally NO black Africans. None at all.
You're thinking of Brazil.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Straightalpha 24 days ago
You're an idiot.
I hope you're being sarcastic. If you're being serious and you would make my wife, younger sister, and future daughter(s) go to war because you're angry at the dumb feminists, then I only have two words for you: FUCK YOU.
View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 1038 comments
Mother Sues Hospital for Discrimination for Calling Transgender Son a Girl
Rob Banks
Rob Banks cirgeorgio 21 days ago
I hate to break it to you, but homosexuality isn't normal either.
And it was not considered normal for 99% of human history.
2 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Sam Smith 21 days ago
So is homosexuality, though.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks EOD 21 days ago
It's her daughter. "Transgender son" means FTM. Confusing, I know.
View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 667 comments
Female Chess Players Told To Wear Hijab at Championship In Iran
Rob Banks
Rob Banks jlai 23 days ago
Repeating over and over that my views are "extreme" is not an argument.
Did you or did you not claim that women were oppressed by men for most of human history? Would this not imply that men were evil?
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks jlai 23 days ago
So we need to have "balance" between one "extreme" idea that was the norm for the vast, vast majority of human history and another idea which has only been around for a century or so.
Even first wave feminism (right to vote, etc.) would have been considered "extreme" for the vast majority of civilized human history. Our society survived and prospered for all that time without it.
And when you claim "women were oppressed" that implies that men are evil. Otherwise, are you saying oppression is not evil?
View in discussion
Rob Banks

[AneroidOcean]

And part 2 of your ROK/Disqus posts which don't back up your story as far as I can tell (maybe others will find it so I post it in it's entirety):

Quote:

ourselves in order to preserve our most valuable memories for generations. Also allows us to catch criminals easier through surveillance cameras. However, cameras make it a hundred times easier to invade someone's privacy, They enable things like revenge porn. More importantly, cameras are yet another tool for government to control us. Surveillance cameras are everywhere. Big brother is watching you.
Computers: Allows us to communicate over long distances and to store and/or transmit large amounts of information. This is good for national security as large amounts of intelligence can be stored easily and accessed at a later time. The internet is a great place to share information on sites like ROK. However, computers contribute greatly to societal decline, as you can see with women who are addicted to their smartphones. Also, just like any other technology, computers are used by government to better control its citizens. You might like the fact that you can run a background check on a potential tenant or employee to make sure he isn't a murderer, but you're not going to like it when you are denied work, denied the right to buy a gun, or denied entry into the military, or whatever, due to a minor non-violent criminal violation from over a decade ago. Also, government uses computers to spy on and store information about people who have done nothing wrong, as revealed in the NSA spying scandal a couple of years ago.
Firearms: They allow you to protect yourself against attackers. But if they didn't exist, then your enemies would not have them either, and you wouldn't need them. Also, governments are always going to have bigger, badder guns than you, so once again, this is a technology that works to increase government power over you.
Modern Medicine: Positives are obvious. Cures disease and helps us live longer. Negatives are that modern medicine is dysgenic. People who nature would have killed off before they reproduced are now reproducing, and it is making us into a weaker species. The amount of vaccines that the entire population is required to get will continue to increase. We have likely not yet seen the full extent of the consequences of this, since modern medicine is still relatively new. (I am not a fan of eugenics or anything like that. I think meddling in nature and playing god will have negative consequences no matter which way you do it).
Hard Drugs: Most people wouldn't consider them a "technology," but modern recreational drugs like cocaine and heroin are relatively recent inventions. In this case, the good and the bad are far more obvious than with other technologies (the good being how you feel when you take the drug, and the bad being addiction, destitution, and all the other negatives that drugs can cause in your life). The reason I include this example in my comment is that the fact that the negatives or hard drug use outweigh the positives is obvious to most people. There are very few people who would claim that the good feelings you get while you're high on drugs outweigh the negative consequences. However, people don't seem to get that this logic is applicable to every technology that exists. It might not be as obvious as it is with drugs, but every technological invention has negative consequences that at least cancel out, if not outweigh, the positives. Every technology is a trade-off. No technology can be a universal good.
9 View in discussion
Discussion on Roosh V 44 comments
Game Will Never Die
Rob Banks
Rob Banks fatherofthree a month ago
Clinton will appoint justices that will take away our guns. Trump won't. That alone should make you vote Trump.
1 View in discussion
Discussion on Return Of Kings 427 comments
Hillary Clinton Pulls Out The Lie Book To Try And Stump The Trump At The First Presidential Debate
Rob Banks
Rob Banks Red Hood's Assault a month ago
Nobody seems to understand, "stop and frisk" is a misnomer. It should be called "stop and search." Trust me, I'm from New York and I have first hand experience with this. They don't just stop you and frisk you for weapons, they empty out your pockets and search your bag, looking for drugs, weapons, or anything else they can arrest you for. I don't think it is racist, but I do think it is a clear violation of the 4th amendment for cops to search people without probable cause. I agree that it helps prevent crime, but following the constitution and bill of rights should not be optional.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks ConservativeAtheistRedPiller a month ago
Trust me, these billionaires backing Clinton are not just "stupid liberals" who value progressive causes over their own wealth. "They just care so much about the poor that they are willing to pay higher taxes and lose money." Uh...no.
View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks ConservativeAtheistRedPiller a month ago
Because what they gain from donating and making deals with her FAR outweighs the extra taxes they will pay.
1 View in discussion
Rob Banks
Rob Banks a month ago
Actually, Trump did say that women should only make as much as men if they do as good of a job, (not that there's anything wrong with that). It was in response to a girl in a town hall, during the beginning of his campaign, asking him "as president, how will you make sure I make as much as a man?" and Trump responded "you will if you do as good of a job." Great response by the way.
2 View in discussion
Discussion on Breitbart News Network 3497 comments
Tulsa Police Officer Charged in Terence Crutcher’s Death
Rob Banks
Rob Banks a month ago
This is what happens when you put a little a$$ woman to do a man's job.
I understand you need to have female officers in case you need to search a woman (not appropriate for a man to stick his hands in a woman's pockets), but she shouldn't be put in a dangerous situation like this. Not only will situations like this happen, she will also put her male partner in danger. I once saw male and female partners trying to arrest a big guy who was resisting, and the woman didn't (couldn't) do anything to stop him, the male cop was doing all the work. The male cop ended up getting in trouble for using "excessive force" because he punched the suspect, even though he had no help whatsoever.

[Rob Banks]

It is not under "rob banks" it is under "dick johnson."

PS did you seriously post all my disqus posts on here? can you get rid of that?

[Rob Banks]

(10-25-2016 04:20 AM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  

You're a shitty troll.

I'm not a fucking troll.

Here is proof, word for word. The only thing I edited out is my email address.

Can you edit your post and get rid of all my disqus posts now?

Quote:

Dick Johnson Alexandra 6 months ago
Hey, sorry for the late response. You can email me at (my email address)@gmail.com if you'd like, but I don't think you need to worry about posting on ROK. Women are not banned from posting, just discouraged, and I'm sure they'd make an exception for you, given your views.
Anybody who gives you shit for being too "conservative"or "prudish" is either a man who has (obvious) ulterior motives or a woman trying to drag you down to her level.
Women in traditional societies used to shun and ostracize promiscuous women, and try to raise their daughters to be pure. Promiscuity was greatly punished on a social level. If a girl had pre-marital sex just once (even if it was legit rape), she would be deemed un-marriagable by any respectful man. In modern society, however, instead of raising each other up, women tend to drag each other down, encouraging their female "friends" to be sluts so that they won't feel as bad about their own sluttiness.
I was raised in a non-religious house with pretty liberal views. I was encouraged to go to college and get career, never be violent, be respectful to women, virginity doesn't matter, etc. By the time I became familiar with "red-pill" ideas, I was a libertarian and had thought everyone should be free to have all the sex they want. This led me to handle some personal situations in ways that I now deeply regret. I now realize the same things you realized seeing your college "hook-up" throughout college, which is that female sexuality is irreversible. Every sexual encounter a woman is involved in produces irreversible psychological (and if it is her first time, physical) changes in the woman. Men are also hard-wired to find used-up women less attractive for long-term relationships.
All of this is hurting men and women alike. Men in the '60s thought they could "share" their women and therefore enjoy sex more, and boy were they wrong. Even the top guys who bang all the sluts will eventually get tired of the lifestyle and want to settle down and have a family, and their will be no good women with whom to settle down with. The lower-value "beta" males and the women don't benefit either, so in the end no one really benefits. It's good that you're able to see through all the bullshit, most women that grow up in mainstream, non-ultra-religious, environments never do, and go on to lead miserable lives.
Edit View in discussion
Dick Johnson
Dick Johnson Alexandra 6 months ago
I guess when you say something like "rap made me more sexual" most guys on here assume you had sex with guys and regretted it. If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry for misunderstanding.
I know what you mean about the rap that's out there these days. I don't really fuck with Lil Wayne, Chris Brown, Drake, Meek Mill, and especially Nicki Minaj. And Kanye I only fuck with his early shit.
By the way, how did you find out about ROK and "red-pill" ideas. I assume from your previous posts that your family didn't raise you super-traditional and that when you were younger you may not have been familiar with these Ideas. Most girls who are not taught traditional values from a young age tend to just go along with the feminists. What caused you to realize the other side (the left, feminism) is full of shit and to take our ideas over here seriously?
Edit View in discussion
Dick Johnson
Dick Johnson Alexandra 6 months ago
(delete)

Here is one of her responses to me (Her responses are scattered throughout my disqus profile and I'm not gonna take the time to locate them all)

Quote:

Alexandra replied to you on 5 Reasons Atlanta Is A Good City For Men 6 months ago
Dick Johnson 6 months ago
I guess when you say something like "rap made me more sexual" most guys on here assume you had sex with guys and regretted it. If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry for misunderstanding.I know what you mean about the rap that's out there these days. I don't really fuck with Lil Wayne, Chris Brown, Drake, Meek Mill, and especially Nicki Minaj. And Kanye I only fuck with his early shit.By the way, how did you find out about ROK and "red-pill" ideas. I assume from your previous posts that your family didn't raise you super-traditional and that when you were younger you may not have been familiar with these Ideas. Most girls who are not taught traditional values from a young age tend to just go along with the feminists. What caused you to realize the other side (the left, feminism) is full of shit and to take our ideas over here seriously?
Alexandra
Alexandra 6 months ago
Hey, I appreciate your response. I recently found out women aren't supposed to comment on ROK, so I feel like a bit of an idiot now. If there's some way I can message you about this outside of here, please let me know.
Anyway, I also only "fuck with" Kanye's early stuff. Loved College Dropout and Graduation...apparently his style changed once his mom died. It's so disgustingly sexual now...even my dad made a comment once when he was in the car with me and Kanye was on the radio. He's like you guys (doesn't think music influences people much), and even he said, "What the hell is this garbage? This is what they sing about these days?"
I found out about ROK from Googling certain very non-PC things . I came across it a couple times beginning a month ago or so. Then I started sort of frequenting it after a few unfortunate events occurred in my life which gave me much more free time.
My family never talked to me about politics or social issues growing up. I kind of started having these thoughts beginning in college...they really developed while I was in law school, for various reasons. I'm done with school now.
I went to a very liberal college in a very liberal town. Law school was of course filled with liberals...lots of affirmative action BS, too. I started to really resent liberals beginning my freshman year of college - a few things factored into this (studying journalism, it being an election year, dealing with idiot 18-year-olds who replicated the beliefs of their professors, etc.). Also, I used to frequent women's websites like Betches Love This and Buzzfeed, but I started to get really fed up with the leftist bullshit they constantly spewed. Furthermore, during college and law school I witnessed the effect "hookup culture" had on my female friends, and I found it very strange that they thought acting like men made them feminists/pro-women. It is easy to see that men and women view sex differently, and encouraging women to be sexually promiscuous has few benefits for women. It's actually very anti-women.
People give me crap for being too conservative and prudish, and it bugs me. ROK is sort of an escape where I can see people voice views I agree with. ROK also has made me much more confident in my beliefs on sex, and now I feel much happier with myself when I say "no" knowing I'm not the only one who thinks this way. It's nice to hear that men themselves don't like slutty girls. Funny how liberals claim they're so pro-women, when the reality is that, because of them, women are becoming more afraid to say "no."
Reply View in discussion
Alexandra followed you 6 months ago
Alexandra
Alexandra

[sterling_archer]

Jesus, why copy all that here

[AneroidOcean]

(10-25-2016 04:33 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 04:20 AM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  

You're a shitty troll.

I'm not a fucking troll.

Here is proof, word for word. The only thing I edited out is my email address.

Can you edit your post and get rid of all my disqus posts now?

Quote:

Dick Johnson Alexandra 6 months ago
Hey, sorry for the late response. You can email me at (my email address)@gmail.com if you'd like, but I don't think you need to worry about posting on ROK. Women are not banned from posting, just discouraged, and I'm sure they'd make an exception for you, given your views.
Anybody who gives you shit for being too "conservative"or "prudish" is either a man who has (obvious) ulterior motives or a woman trying to drag you down to her level.
Women in traditional societies used to shun and ostracize promiscuous women, and try to raise their daughters to be pure. Promiscuity was greatly punished on a social level. If a girl had pre-marital sex just once (even if it was legit rape), she would be deemed un-marriagable by any respectful man. In modern society, however, instead of raising each other up, women tend to drag each other down, encouraging their female "friends" to be sluts so that they won't feel as bad about their own sluttiness.
I was raised in a non-religious house with pretty liberal views. I was encouraged to go to college and get career, never be violent, be respectful to women, virginity doesn't matter, etc. By the time I became familiar with "red-pill" ideas, I was a libertarian and had thought everyone should be free to have all the sex they want. This led me to handle some personal situations in ways that I now deeply regret. I now realize the same things you realized seeing your college "hook-up" throughout college, which is that female sexuality is irreversible. Every sexual encounter a woman is involved in produces irreversible psychological (and if it is her first time, physical) changes in the woman. Men are also hard-wired to find used-up women less attractive for long-term relationships.
All of this is hurting men and women alike. Men in the '60s thought they could "share" their women and therefore enjoy sex more, and boy were they wrong. Even the top guys who bang all the sluts will eventually get tired of the lifestyle and want to settle down and have a family, and their will be no good women with whom to settle down with. The lower-value "beta" males and the women don't benefit either, so in the end no one really benefits. It's good that you're able to see through all the bullshit, most women that grow up in mainstream, non-ultra-religious, environments never do, and go on to lead miserable lives.
Edit View in discussion
Dick Johnson
Dick Johnson Alexandra 6 months ago
I guess when you say something like "rap made me more sexual" most guys on here assume you had sex with guys and regretted it. If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry for misunderstanding.
I know what you mean about the rap that's out there these days. I don't really fuck with Lil Wayne, Chris Brown, Drake, Meek Mill, and especially Nicki Minaj. And Kanye I only fuck with his early shit.
By the way, how did you find out about ROK and "red-pill" ideas. I assume from your previous posts that your family didn't raise you super-traditional and that when you were younger you may not have been familiar with these Ideas. Most girls who are not taught traditional values from a young age tend to just go along with the feminists. What caused you to realize the other side (the left, feminism) is full of shit and to take our ideas over here seriously?
Edit View in discussion
Dick Johnson
Dick Johnson Alexandra 6 months ago
(delete)

Here is one of her responses to me (Her responses are scattered throughout my disqus profile and I'm not gonna take the time to locate them all)

Quote:

Alexandra replied to you on 5 Reasons Atlanta Is A Good City For Men 6 months ago
Dick Johnson 6 months ago
I guess when you say something like "rap made me more sexual" most guys on here assume you had sex with guys and regretted it. If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry for misunderstanding.I know what you mean about the rap that's out there these days. I don't really fuck with Lil Wayne, Chris Brown, Drake, Meek Mill, and especially Nicki Minaj. And Kanye I only fuck with his early shit.By the way, how did you find out about ROK and "red-pill" ideas. I assume from your previous posts that your family didn't raise you super-traditional and that when you were younger you may not have been familiar with these Ideas. Most girls who are not taught traditional values from a young age tend to just go along with the feminists. What caused you to realize the other side (the left, feminism) is full of shit and to take our ideas over here seriously?
Alexandra
Alexandra 6 months ago
Hey, I appreciate your response. I recently found out women aren't supposed to comment on ROK, so I feel like a bit of an idiot now. If there's some way I can message you about this outside of here, please let me know.
Anyway, I also only "fuck with" Kanye's early stuff. Loved College Dropout and Graduation...apparently his style changed once his mom died. It's so disgustingly sexual now...even my dad made a comment once when he was in the car with me and Kanye was on the radio. He's like you guys (doesn't think music influences people much), and even he said, "What the hell is this garbage? This is what they sing about these days?"
I found out about ROK from Googling certain very non-PC things . I came across it a couple times beginning a month ago or so. Then I started sort of frequenting it after a few unfortunate events occurred in my life which gave me much more free time.
My family never talked to me about politics or social issues growing up. I kind of started having these thoughts beginning in college...they really developed while I was in law school, for various reasons. I'm done with school now.
I went to a very liberal college in a very liberal town. Law school was of course filled with liberals...lots of affirmative action BS, too. I started to really resent liberals beginning my freshman year of college - a few things factored into this (studying journalism, it being an election year, dealing with idiot 18-year-olds who replicated the beliefs of their professors, etc.). Also, I used to frequent women's websites like Betches Love This and Buzzfeed, but I started to get really fed up with the leftist bullshit they constantly spewed. Furthermore, during college and law school I witnessed the effect "hookup culture" had on my female friends, and I found it very strange that they thought acting like men made them feminists/pro-women. It is easy to see that men and women view sex differently, and encouraging women to be sexually promiscuous has few benefits for women. It's actually very anti-women.
People give me crap for being too conservative and prudish, and it bugs me. ROK is sort of an escape where I can see people voice views I agree with. ROK also has made me much more confident in my beliefs on sex, and now I feel much happier with myself when I say "no" knowing I'm not the only one who thinks this way. It's nice to hear that men themselves don't like slutty girls. Funny how liberals claim they're so pro-women, when the reality is that, because of them, women are becoming more afraid to say "no."
Reply View in discussion
Alexandra followed you 6 months ago
Alexandra
Alexandra

No, I won't edit my posts with your Disqus history. By your OWN response "proof" you were interacting with Alexandra on ROK 6 months ago (who I looked up and while her posts are "private" like your "Dick Johnson" posts), her avatar is attached below. Google image search shows it's from Kendra Spears who happens to have been married 3 years and 6 months ago.

Is that your "9" that you got to 3rd base with?

Her avatar:
[attachment=34114]

Kendra Spears Images

Kendra Spears Wikipedia

Now, if this "9" you dated somehow just happened to use this other ladies avatar, that's very possible, but suspicious considering your story nonetheless. Happy to be proven wrong, but your "can you edit your post" commentary is suspicious in and of itself. Your Disqus profile was public and I used a simple search to find them. It's publicly available information directly from your own chosen username here. It's not exactly anything you didn't put out there yourself.

ALSO, the original image search on her avatar:

Original search

[Rob Banks]

That picture is OBVIOUSLY not her. That picture is obviously shot by a professional photographer.

I would post a picture of her, but I'm not trying to have people from here do a reverse image look-up, find this girl's facebook, and start messaging her saying that some RVF guy is talking about her. Plus, I don't exactly want to look at her face right now.

You want to think I'm a troll? Go right ahead. I literally just proved that my story adds up, and you're still looking to poke holes in it by pointing out that her fucking disqus avatar is a famous model.

You really think I was talking to some supermodel in the comments section of an ROK article, and then just decided to lie and say I hooked up with her?

I'm gonna be pissed if I get banned over this shit. I'm not fucking trolling and I just proved it.

[Rob Banks]

I would appreciate if you would at least take down the image with the girl's disqus handle and avatar. I really don't want people from here going and messaging her on disqus about this thread.

[Euphoria]

Hmm.

She heard Roosh through media, then found ROK. She started reading articles, and wanted to take a bite of '' red pill guy(s) ''. She wondered what would the outcome with these ''Red pill guy(s)''. So wanted to meet one of them(?) through comment section. And you, become her plaything easily. Failied all of her shit-test. Even specially designed shit-test. She then ghosted with the huge confidence boost comes from playing with ''red pill guy(s) '' like cat does with mouse.


TL;DR

She wanted to try ''red pillage guy(s)'' , found you, disliked you, ghosted. Then your further efforts convinced her to make you one of her orbiters.

[AneroidOcean]

(10-25-2016 05:38 AM)Rob Banks Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 04:57 AM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  

I would appreciate if you would at least take down the image with the girl's disqus handle and avatar. I really don't want people from here going and messaging her on disqus about this thread.

OP messaged me and asked me to take down the image, so I did. Agree with him that nobody should be messaging her even if I think his story is still suspect. Sometimes the truth is stranger than lies though and in any case this was in the Newbie section I should've made a more productive post.

[Latan]

OP, you spent time texting her late at night, instead of only arranging meetings.
Texts are not usefull to seduce, you must do that in person.
To me, you put yourself into the "best gay friend" role.

After that, she blocked your number and you continued talking to her on Facebook.
Bad combinaison of scarcity mentality and pedestralisation.

She has lost all attraction towards you, at this point.
Move on to the next prospect, don't repeat the same mistakes.

[brick tamland]

OP, it was all the way downhill after meeting in person. As another poster said, what do you think can happen now? A bang? Get real.
You should have tried to meet her sooner. After not getting the bang, you should have pulled back and reassessed. Since it took so long for the first meeting to happen, what were the prospects of seeing her again anytime soon? The long text exchanges were never a good idea. Later she she told you she wasn't keen on texting anymore and then BOOM! she blocks your number (were you paying attention?), then later deletes you on Facebook. Too much disrespect from one chick.
You are nothing in her eyes at this point - that's just how chicks see the world.
You should have moved on after her first tantrum.

[Phoenix]

Eagerly awaiting OP's datasheet on Discus Game.

[Svoboda]

OP "by hooked up", did you mean you banged her or didn't bang her?

If you banged her, plus the rest of the story (talking a lot for a week) it kinda sounds like she might have some feelings and came to the conclusion you didn't have feelings.