Sick Of Seeing Idiots Claiming Nw2s Don't Have A Right To Complain

[blackg]

Its true. I couldn't feel a thing when we were f*****g. I've never had that before and I've been with plenty of women.

Okay, fair call.

 

[Dench57]

Even someone like Daniel Day Lewis - he's not conventionally handsome

For the last time YES HE IS

 

[hairblues]

For the last time YES HE IS

I mean for fucks sake....gorgeous

 

[hairblues]

Who then? s.

My whole conversation started with my post about Harvey weinstein and his independently younger beautiful wife.

Do you even read for context? or do you just jump in randomly with no context?

 

[sunchyme1]

For the last time YES HE IS

f*** U DENCH!

 

[hairblues]

Anyway, how many men can reach that level of success?
.
.

I said this....clearly. several times.

that is where the context comes from for fucks sake.

 

[blackg]

I mean for fucks sake....gorgeous

View attachment 54124

That photo is 40 years old! He is now borderline sub-human.

 

[hairblues]

[QUOTE="WhitePolarBear, post: 1489963, member: 16776"
And even when it happens, it's often dumb luck: being at the right place at the right time.

The bottom line is: a rich below average guy will never make a woman wet in the same way a poor good-looking guy will.
s.[/QUOTE]

I gave you a great example

James Gandolfinni, wet my panties.

Jason Lewis from Sex in The City -left me dry no matter how hard he tried to flirt and get attention.

 

[hairblues]

Just googled him: he looks disgusting and his wife is a glorified prostitute.
.

how is she a prostitute she owns Marchesa? A fashion house very successful.
Way before she met him.

 

[blackg]

Just googled him: he looks disgusting and his wife is a glorified prostitute.
No way she is genuinely attracted to him.

Another stupid community befitting a teenage boy.
Stop being so absolutely certain about situations you really have no idea about.

 

[hairblues]

Just googled him: he looks disgusting and his wife is a glorified prostitute.

No way she is genuinely attracted to him.

No need for much context here, you have my reply above and there's no other way to look at it.

"But but!" No. You give me a disgustingly fat woman who'd be the equivalent of that guy, no way I can ever get it up.

You're coping, and trying to deceive the men of this forum.

Let me be clear i said before NO MAN from this forum is going to achieve that level of success.

SO not deceiving them--again you don't read for context before you just chime in.

I also stated clearly there is no female equivalent for this..which is why men cant seem to understand it.

IT is tedious that you don't really read or pay attention before commenting.

You don't own a vagina so you don't know how our bodies work.

 

[blackg]

I gave you a great example
James Gandolfinni, wet my panties.[/QUOTE]
Too much information

 

[hairblues]

Its not his photo that is attractive it's his level of success and his power that radiates in person.
You can post his photo a 1000 times. Not going to make a difference.

 

[hairblues]

I gave you a great example
James Gandolfinni, wet my panties.

Too much information
[/QUOTE]

Holy f*** you are getting really annoying lately.

Are you the moral police of HairLossTalk.com?

 

[blackg]

I gave you a great example
James Gandolfinni, wet my panties.
[/QUOTE]
Too much information.

 

[hairblues]

Then why are we talking about this guy? What's your point?

Different women are ready to make different kinds of concessions.

Some women will let disgusting slobs like him bend them over for whatever perceived benefits.

Your average woman wants a good-looking guy.

We are talking about this because as usual you have to jump in on my posts and pollute the original context.

The point was some rare really accomplished men are sexually appealing to women.

Ie make panties wet.

Panties wet is a biological function.

that is the f*****g point.

IS it going to be the men on this forum ? Most likely NOT so.

 

[blackg]

We are talking about this because as usual you have to jump in on my posts and pollute the original context.

The point was some rare really accomplished men are sexually appealing to women.

Ie make panties wet.

Panties wet is a biological function.

that is the f*****g point.

IS it going to be the men on this forum ? Most likely NOT so.

I don't wanna hear anymore about you wetting your panties.
This is a family website.

 

[hairblues]

Prostitutes get wet from sucking off and f*****g their ugly clients, I guess it means they automatically become attracted to them.

Arousal is different from attraction.

Ugly successful rich guys don't make women's panties wet.

Sorry.

If a man is 'ugly' and his unique success arouses women? Why is that a bad thing to you?

It is still seeing that man and wanting him desiring him.

If its his face or what he actually accomplished what is the difference?

I would find his mind and experiences more attractive then your face from what I can see of your pics.

I am sure a lot of women feel that way.


You are using prostitutes again prostitutes its not about the person or his accomplishments its about the money.

Money is not unique to a person and what they accomplished or experienced in life or their mind.

 

[hairblues]

Seriously, you just need to go out in the evenings to see it for yourself, unless you're clueless and bluepilled or plain blind, your realize how things work pretty quickly.

Correct. MOST ugly or unattractive men are not going to get hot women.
Not saying this.

 

[hairblues]

Still, I don't see how it makes women genuinely want to f*** you.

How can being crushed by a disgustingly fat, bald, hairy Danny DeVito look-alike be appealing to any woman? Again unless they have some weird fucked-up fetish?

You're delusional if you believe that.

@EvilLocks , @Pasbrillantebrunette , would you ever consider f*****g some ugly (and I mean truly ugly, not 'Benedict Cumberbatch ugly') just because he's super-successful or extremely rich? Would his wealth and status turn you on somehow and trigger some genuine lust in you?

Again Danny Devito???


You are losing the debate and now have to pull extreme examples.

I did not say ALL men or ALL women.

You get so boring when you feel proven wrong.

I bet @Pasbrillantebrunette can name some deep thinkers or writers she finds attractive in spite of looks.

@EvilLocks probably not she probably prefers looks (just going form their postings over months).

Not all women are going to work this way.

I never said that.

Its not a mark on character of women IF she would or would not its just about what they find more appealing in men,