/b/ - Random

>>17268
The ones who haven't bought fully into the MGTOW virgin4life consumer anti-natalist stuff.

I kind of like neckbeards. We like all the same web culture and anime, I think there are more things that connect us than divide us. All humans are just looking for someone to love them. Hopefully they'll realize their choices and lifestyle is what's making them miserable and take steps to change their ways for the better eventually.

>>17268
>/r9k/
>appreciating women
kek, what did we expect?

I have always wanted to hug a wojak

Is that weird?

>>17273
No. I guess not.

>>17270
that's how I feel about them too. I don't think I'd try to connect with anyone from there because you can't know who is savable and who will try to bitterly destroy you if you guys don't become friends or hit it off.

A couple of guys who regularly post in femdom threads seem surprisingly decent, but I've never gotten personal with them so who knows.

I think there's more hope for younger robots (18-21) since we all go through a weird hateful phase in our late teens.

Some of the people on /r9k/ are alright, but overall the site is full of horrible, misogynistic people. I wouldn't bother trying to change them. They seem to enjoy stewing in their misery.

>>17268
Do you think (some) of them can be saved?

Mentally ill people will stay mentally ill, there is no saving them.

>>17296
Castration?

There's a stubbornness to them that makes it so hard to break through. They seem to be younger/dumber now than when I was going there 2008-2012. It got so frustrating trying to reason or discuss with them and more frequently I wouldn't even get one of those dozen anti-women images, I'd straight up get

>you're a roastie/white knight and I won't listen to your lies

You can say they're just hurt, but the way they act by lashing out at others is cowardice and in my opinion they're bad people. A lot of people are dealt shit hands in life and manage to not become dysfunctional and irrational enough to blame an entire gender.

It used to be more actual misfits in my opinion who of course were redeemable, now it seems they vie to be the most special and miserable "robot" and set qualifiers so they feel they have the right to tell others to get out. I find it kind of funny that it's now become so cliqueish considering the origins.

>>17299
It was always like that. I could never bring myself to post on the place, because they were so sour. No advice, just suffering. Even worse is that their culture permeated the rest of the site. All of the rage turned to feels, and I hated it.

>giving a shit about incels
why

>>17307
robots aren't incels though

they are just batshit insane

>>17308
>not incels
>just insane
There's a bit of a crossover here

From my experience I guess incels are only worth trying to meet if they don't care about having the "incel" title. Does that make sense? Maybe not. Some incels seem weirdly proud of being incels while simultaneously hating themselves because of said title. If you can tell they are incels, but they are unaware of that or give it little importance, then they are fine.

ITT: r9k larping as miners

>>17310
I have talked with robots through skype/discord a couple of times and most of them have had sex/GFs in the past.

Those guys are just a little weird.

>>17313
the ones who seem angry, possibly, but lots of girls hate r9k because they have been attacked there.

>>17270
>>17269
>>17285
>>17286
sound like miners and >>17312 is me.

>>17268
>r9k fembot appreciation thread
>attacked and derailed into woman hate

They've been doing this since forever so…

>Is there anything redeeming about them?
As with any board, probably some individuals, but not all. What's redeemable about hateful people and people who tolerate the hate?

>Do you think some of them can be saved?
Not our jobs as women to save them.
Most do grow up when they realize they're not gonna lead satisfying lives or getting girlfriends by being dicks on the internet though. So there's that.




But seriously, why are fembots interacting with robots when you don't have a thick skin? At it's core it's still 4chan, they're edgy and shitposty by default.

>>17268
r9k is full of lonely, bitter, sexually frustrated boys and men. plenty of them will go on to have alright lives and alright views on women, it's not 90% made up of career misogynists who are 35 years old or something weird like that. 4chan is big and at any given time I bet most of the users of r9k are actually quite new and either trying to imitate the "culture" of the board or are at their own personal peak of misogyny which is just misguided anger. not to mention a vast minority of users make almost all the really awful threads. and because of the "culture" of the board you can't just make a bunch of "I actually like women just fine" threads because you'd be shit on for whiteknighting, with it implied that you'll inevitably attempt to contactfag some girl, and it's probably true too. And you see some of the same kinds of posts here as you do on there, whether they are the extremist ones or the "I'm so lonely I wish I had someone to hold and be with forever" ones. And when 4chan is mean and aggressive by default, is it a surprise that r9k leans the way it does?

ultimately it doesn't matter at all. if you are legit thinking to yourself "how do we fix these r9k bois" and stuff like that then it probably means you have nothing going on in your life, just like them. even worse, all that interest possibly means you consider them a dating prospect since they're the closest thing to your lame ass. either have some awful e-relationship with one of them (almost guaranteed to go awful because they're so lonely and/or sex hungry that they'll date you even if they don't genuinely like you, and then they'll drop you once they've used you) or never bother thinking about them ever again, there is no purpose.

>>17315
>lots of girls hate r9k
>lots of girls
go back there pig

>>17336
you're wrong and paranoid.

>>17298

Only really works for the violently mentally ill. Castration would passify someone by removing their body's ability to produce testosterone. What it won't do is fix their complete inability to communicate with people.

>>17268
any threads of this format are just bait for woman hate if they're made on /r9k/

> it quickly got derailed and of fucking course some of the robots started to hate on women.
Aren't these threads bait? I have always assumed that 90% fembot-related threads are created by other males.

>>17560
there are males on r9k who unironically worship women

>>17568
As long as I'm the only woman my robot worships I will be happy.

>>17569
you found a pet robot?

>>17569
>pet robot
Kek. No, I just want someone to love, not a slave.

>>17571
I am happy you have found a robot who loves and appreciates you

>>17573
I haven't, but thank you.

>>17574
my mistake, when you said "my robot" I thought that was meant by that tone.

Only thing I can say is to stay away from men into chan/meme stuff openly. Never understood why people pursued LDR over bonding over memes and shitposts.

>>17574
ROBOT APPLICATION

Grab yourself a kind one

>>17576
>robot
>kind
they're all evil.

>>17568
>>17578

where threads to find pet robots?

>>17580
I want a pet robot, too. I will love him and feed him and keep him on a leash.

>>17581
You cant love a pet/slave

>>17580
Announce your genital status, and sift through the replies. Don't give them any pics!

>>17581
>Don't give them any pics!
that is the problem. they think you're a dude if you don't show them ~~proof~~. I can't really blame them tho, since r9k is full of traps now.

>>17595
>they think you're a dude if you don't show them ~~proof~~
Don't give them pics. The ones that worship won't doubt your sex for a minute. Do with them what you wish.

>>17603
if some anon is going to do this can she post updates? I would but I already have a boyfriend. (He's not a robot he just goes on /mu/)

Don't waste your time. Only people who want to change will change. This goes for any situation. Someone who is overweight, someone who is an addict, someone who despises women, someone who despises men. The desire for change is an internal motivation, not an external one. Some will bow to external pressure, but revert to their old ways if it is not something they are doing for themselves.

>>17595
I mean, to be fair /r9k/ is a place anyone could easily look at and think "yeah there's no way women would want to spend any time here".

>>17582
>you cant love a pet
wut

All in all, I'd say most robots are pretty decent people. But the worst always overshadows the best, as with anything. I'm pretty sure most of the really mean posts are made by the same sad bunch.

A bit off topic. There's another fembot feels thread up again and some dick is spamming it with papers and a champ is giving up their energy to refute the claims and point out the logical fallacies. I don't have the energy these days but the goading of them saying "nobody's replying because i'm right haha" always makes me want to, but I always devolve into insults because they're just SO fucking stupid and repetitive in the hope you'll break down.

Annoying thing is that if you show you're undisputably right, you'll either just be ignored as they quit the thread because they clearly lost or they'll just repeat their claim over as if you said nothing.

I'm posting this here because there's something fucky with the recapcha and I literally can't post that I appreciate them trying and that place is SO frustrating because they're trying hard and the only replies they're getting is from that retard. Nobody agreeing.

>>17733
There's no way to win with them, anon. They want to believe their nonsense even though it is just that.
I weaned myself off of visiting /r9k/ recently because it used to bother me so much. Perhaps it's mentally weak or whatever, but it's not worth it for me.

>>17733
>>17740
Why the hell do you still visit 4chan? That place is gas all around, no matter which way you look at it.

>>17733
What are they saying exactly.

>>17758
they said that boys rule and girls drool

>>17759
Those bastards.
Day of the /r9k/ purge when?

>>17760
How about a day of the we don't go to 4chan to make a fembot thread? There are way more accepting sites.

>>17770
It's men, anon. Robots make the threads to bait the naive fembots and find other misogynistic pigs.

>still going on /r9k/
shiggy

No one is asking you to put yourself in the spotlight, or make it to where you are the "bad guy". All that is being asked of you is to make your point with links to back up your research. That way the facts that you present can be studied and a conversation can be had on said facts.

Because the maleposter went AWOL as soon as he was asked to recap what he'd readily spammed to /r9k/, here is a comprehensive recap:

1/11
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19558447

It is remarkable that the strongest predictor of initial attraction in a speed-dating context was partner's physical attractiveness, and, most importantly, men and women showed an extremely similar pattern. This finding was highly consistent with the results reported in several other speed-dating studies we mentioned earlier

One may argue that speed-dating fits better a short-term context rather than a long-term mating context. It is important to note that some of the published speed-dating studies were not based on college student samples but on community adult samples. These participants actually paid to participate in the commercial speed-dating service with the hope to find a life partner. This should be considered as more like a long-term context. Nevertheless, they yielded a similar pattern as found in the college student based samples in Eastwick and Finkel and the current research. Moreover, Eastwick and Finkel did an excellent job ruling out several potential alternative explanations for this finding. For example, even when explicitly asked to consider long-term partners, both sexes continued to favor physical attractiveness. Thus, the lack of sex difference on preference of Speed-Dating Attraction physical attractiveness does not seem to be due to differences in the mating strategy people are taking.
Then how do we reconcile these findings? We consider a fundamental difference between mating preference research and attraction research - whereas mate preference or ideal partner research focuses on conscious, rational cognitions about an ideal partner, attraction research studies less conscious and more spontaneous feelings and behaviors. The difference in findings from these two fields indicates that human beings rational, conscious mind can be independent from their behaviors in real-life encounters.

2/11

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5519305/

Through a half-block quasi-experimental design, a large sample of young adults (i.e., responders; n = 335) viewed videos of opposite-sex persons (i.e., targets) talking about themselves and responders rated the targets' traits and their romantic interest in the target. We tested whether similarity, dissimilarity, or overall trait levels on mate value, physical attractiveness, life history strategy, and the Big-Five personality factors predicted romantic interest at zero acquaintance, and whether sex acted as a moderator.
Only the responders' perception of the targets' physical attractiveness predicted romantic interest; specifically, responders' who rated the targets' physical attractiveness as higher than themselves reported more romantic interest.

we found that of all of the traits and score types assessed, romantic interest was only predicted by the responders' perception of the targets' physical attractiveness, with no moderating effect of the responders' sex. Specifically, responders' were interested in targets' who they perceived to be higher than themselves on physical attractiveness.

We found no support for the first hypothesis (similarity predicts attraction), for the second hypothesis (dissimilarity predicts attraction), or for the fourth hypothesis (sex moderates what predicts attraction).

3/11

https://rd.springer.com/article/

Previous research has shown that adolescent bullying is associated with having a higher number of sexual partners. Bullying may thus represent an effective behavior for increasing the number of sexual partners. However, bullying may be an effective behavior primarily for adolescents who possess personality traits that make them willing and able to use bullying as a strategy for obtaining sexual partners. Therefore, we predicted that individuals with antisocial personality traits would be more willing and able to engage in bullying, which in turn may increase their sexual opportunities. We tested this hypothesis across the span of adolescence by using cross-sectional samples of 144 older adolescents (N_=_144; 111 women, M age_=_18.32, SD_=_0.63) and 396 younger adolescents (N_=_396; 230 girls, M age_=_14.64, SD_=_1.52) to test direct and indirect links between HEXACO personality traits, bullying, and sexual partners. Path analyses provided some support for our hypothesis. In both samples, Honesty-Humility personality trait scores had indirect effects on sexual partners through bullying and direct effects on sexual partners in the younger sample. However, in the older sample, Agreeableness had indirect effects through bullying and Extraversion had direct effects, whereas in the younger sample, Conscientiousness had indirect effects through bullying. Our results suggest that exploitative traits may be associated with bullying and sexual partners across adolescence. We also note how other personality traits may differentially relate to bullying in older versus younger adolescents.

4/11

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886915001002

https://www.fpa.org.uk/sites/default/files/orgasms-in-women-an-online-survey.pdf (???)

Women's copulatory orgasm may function to retain sperm from men with "good genes" , one indicator of which is attractiveness, and one benefit of which is pathogen resistance. Women who perceive their partner to be more (vs. less) attractive are more likely to report orgasm at last copulation.

The results indicate that women mated to more (vs. less) attractive men are more likely to report orgasm at last copulation, and this relationship is mediated by women's perceptions of other women's assessments of their partner's attractiveness.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3936-fake-lie-detector-reveals-womens-sex-lies/

Women are more likely than men to lie about their sex lives, reveals a new study. Women's coyness about their sexual behaviour was unveiled by a US study involving a fake lie detector test.

In surveys since the 1960s, men typically report having more sexual partners and than do women - a statistically impossible feat. For example, British men boast an average of 13 partners over a lifetime compared with an average of nine partners for women.

Scientists previously explained this anomaly by suggesting men were exaggerating their tally, while women were understating their total. But now Terri Fisher at Ohio State University and Michele Alexander at the University of Maine suggest that men are in fact more truthful in such surveys.

Women change their answers depending on whether or not they believe they will be caught out not telling the truth, the researchers found. The number of sexual partners a woman reported nearly doubled when women thought they were hooked up to a lie detector machine.

"Women are more sensitive to social expectations for their sexual behaviour and may be less than honest when asked about their behaviour in some survey conditions," says Fisher, a psychologist. She says women appeared to feel under pressure to meet expectations of being more relationship-orientated and not promiscuous.

5/11

[No Source]

Fisher and Alexander surveyed over 200 unmarried, heterosexual college students aged 18 to 25.

One group filled in questionnaires having been told the researcher might view their responses. A second group filled in the survey completely anonymously, alone in a room.

A third group had electrodes placed on their hand, forearms and neck and were told they were being attached to a polygraph or lie detector machine - although there was in fact no working machine.

Women who thought their responses might be read said they had had an average of 2.6 sexual partners, compared with 3.4 partners for those who thought their answers were anonymous. But those who thought they would be caught out by the polygraph reported an average of 4.4 partners.

In contrast, men's answers did not vary significantly. Those attached to the lie-detector reported an average of 4.0 partners compared with 3.7 for men who thought their answers would be read.

The researchers think the results explain the previously reported differences in men and women's sexual behaviour, with women being afraid of getting labelled as "whores".

"We live in a culture that really does expect a different pattern of sexual behaviour from women than it does from men," says Fisher.

6/11

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11324580_Sexual_motivation_and_duration_of_partnership

The variation of sexual motivation with duration of partnership is analyzed in data from a survey of German students. The sample of 1865 includes only students aged 19-32 who reported to be heterosexual and to live in a steady partnership. Main results are (1) sexual activity and sexual satisfaction decline in women and men as the duration of partnership increases; (2) sexual desire only declines in women; and (3) desire for tenderness declines in men and rises in women. Because these results are based on cross-sectional data, a longitudinal explanation is precarious. Individual differences in mating strategy associated with the probability of having a partnership of shorter or longer duration at the time of the survey may account for some part of the findings. This possibility set aside, post hoc explanations for the results as reflecting a modal time course of partnership are evaluated with regard to habituation, routine, gender role prescriptions, and polarization of roles. In addition, an explanation from evolutionary psychology is offered, entailing the following ideas: the psychological mechanisms of attachment in an adult pair bond have evolved from the parent-child bond. Due to this nonsexual origin, a stable pair-bond does not require high levels of sexual desire, after an initial phase of infatuation has passed. Nevertheless, male sexual desire should stay at a high level because it was selected for in evolutionary history as a precaution against the risk of sperm competition. The course of female sexual desire is assumed to reflect an adaptive function: to boost attachment in order to establish the bond.

(PDF) Sexual motivation and duration of partnership. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11324580_Sexual_motivation_and_duration_of_partnership [accessed Jul 16 2018].

7/11

https://googleweblight.com/i?u=https://www.studyfinds.org/unattractive-men-dating-material-study/&hl=pt-BR

Additional trait profiles were explained for each of the three dispositions. Men labeled "respectful" included the traits 'respectful, trustworthy, and honest;' the 'friendly' men were labeled 'friendly, dependable, and mature;' and the 'pleasing" profile meant that the man was 'of a pleasing disposition, ambitious, and intelligent.'
The women were then asked to assess how attractive they found each man photographed, along with whether they found the man suitable to date, either themselves or for their daughters.
Simply put, men viewed as unattractive were not viewed as potential suitors, no matter the level of other redeeming qualities that accompanied their photos. Those with favorable personality traits that were ranked highly were at least moderately attractive.
"We conclude that a minimum level of physical attractiveness is a necessity for both women and their mothers," says lead researcher Madeleine Fugere in a journal news release.
Mothers, however, didn't shut the door on their offspring dating a relatively unattractive guy if he outperformed in other departments. But the younger participants wouldn't budge.
"This may signal that unattractiveness is less acceptable to women than to their mothers," says Fugere. "It might also mean that women and their mothers may have different notions of what constitutes a minimally acceptable level of physical attractiveness, with mothers employing a less stringent standard than their daughters."
Although women will go on record to say that they prioritize personality characteristics over handsomeness in a partner, "they [still] assume that the potential mates at least meet a minimally acceptable standard of physical attractiveness," Fugere adds.
The study was published in the journal Evolutionary Psychological Science.

8/11

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563218302917

We examined the extent to which gender of sext message sender and type of sext message affects people's perceptions of sext messages. As part of a 2___2 between-subjects design, 122 undergraduates (61 women, 61 men) at a predominantly White liberal arts university in Texas read a vignette in which either a female or a male target sent a solicited or unsolicited sext message to an opposite-sex acquaintance; participants then reported their perceptions of the situation and the sender of the sext message. As predicted, women who sent unsolicited sext messages were rated as more appropriate than were men who sent unsolicited sext messages; by contrast, women and men who sent solicited sext messages were perceived as equally appropriate. These findings suggest that hypermasculinity in the form of a man sending an unsolicited sext message to a woman may be more likely to be judged as a form of sexual harassment that makes the female receiver feel uncomfortable or threatened. By contrast, cultural ideals of hegemonic masculinity seem to dictate that men should react positively to sexual advances from women, regardless of whether such advances are solicited or not.

9/11

https://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(05)00093-0/fulltext)

Because ancestral women faced trade-offs in choosing mates, they may have evolved to pursue a dual-mating strategy in which they secured investment through one partner and obtained good genes through others. The dual-mating theory predicts that women will display greater interest in extra-pair sex near ovulation, especially if they are mated to a primary male partner who is low in sexual attractiveness. Forty-three normally ovulating women rated their partner's sexual attractiveness and separately reported their own desires and their partner's mate retention behaviors at high and low fertility (confirmed using luteinizing hormone tests). In the high-fertility session relative to the low, women who assessed their partners as being lower in sexual attractiveness reported greater extra-pair desires and more expressed love and attention from their male partners. Women's desire for their own partners did not differ significantly between high and low-fertility sessions.

10/11

http://pauleastwick.com/s/HuntEastwickFinkel2015PSci.pdf

To examine whether the length of acquaintance before couples began dating would moderate the size of the assortative-mating correlation, we first examined whether length of acquaintance before dating interacted with the man's attractiveness to predict the woman's attractiveness. This interaction was significant for both the joint assessment of physical attractiveness, _ = _0.21, t(163) = _3.15, p = .002, and the separate assessment of physical attractiveness, _ = _0.16, t(163) = _2.53, p = .012. The negative sign of the interaction indicates that the longer couple members had known each other before they started dating, the less likely they were to be matched for attractiveness. Predicted values derived from these two regressions are plotted in Figure 1. For both measures of attractiveness, predicted values for the assortative-mating correlation were quite strong for couple members who began dating within a month of meeting each other (r = .72 and r = .53 for the joint assessment and the separate assessment, respectively, at length of acquaintance before dating = 0). However, as length of acquaintance before dating increased, the size of the assortative-mating correlation for physical attractiveness decreased. The Johnson-Neyman significance region (provided by the PROCESS macro for SPSS; Hayes, 2013) ended at 9.9 months and 8.8 months for the joint assessment and separate assessment, respectively. In other words, if couple members knew each other for about 9 months or more before they started dating (while still remaining in the typical range of predating acquaintanceship duration), assortative mating based on physical attractiveness was modest in magnitude and not significantly different from zero.

Wow I never realized how fast you can post with no cooldown.

It's nuts

accidentally included two of the posts in >>18043 so 11/11

Such speed.

>>18054
Rule 2, my friend.

>>18056
Sorry it was just funny after being used to every other site in the world limiting the time between posts. Won't abuse it.

>>18041
>>18040
>>18042
>>18043
>>18044
>>18045
>>18046
>>18047
>>18048
>>18049

What a smegsie. You have your own boards and they are 100 times faster, but you have to come here to spam your cringe. You screech "REEEE WOMYN GO AWAY", but when we do you come here after us? I guess you like the attention.

Maybe this is some garbage coming from a non-intellectual, but although I respect that these studies show how the majority of people function I believe it's silly to apply it to every individual on Earth.
Anecdotal evidence is seen as understandably lesser, but with personal issues such as this it can at least prove that these rules are not absolute.

But I could just be T R I G G E R E D because typical attraction rules don't always apply to me. So I take it on as a person trying to tell me how I feel about things and being completely wrong.
How emotion-based and female of me.

>>18064
>You screech "REEEE WOMYN GO AWAY", but when we do you come here after us?

This is what I don’t get. They hate women so much and love to talk about it so a lot of us finally fucked off to our own board where we can just chill with each other and they constantly come here to once again bitch about how horrible and worthless we are.

If you hate something that much you probably want to avoid it as much as possible. So why do males come here?

>>18072
Women fascinate them, so they can't stay away. I'd rather deal with the ones who make "pls I need a gf" threads than the latest sperg. At least they are endearing.

Pic related is probably the guy above crying on /r9k/ and trying to get some pity points. Guess he really wants some attention.

>>18072
He explained his reasons in >>18026.

>>18075
>'i have no horse in this race'
>specifies he's a robot in the first post and literally only came here to keep an argument going because nobody would play with him in the /r9k/ thread

yeah, his reason is that he's a self-deluded attention whore who refuses to believe that anyone couldn't look at ~muh academic research~ and abruptly turn into a misogynistic robot like himself

>>18072
They love to hate women, if women were really as horrible as they claim, they'd stay away from them, any logical person would stay away from people who they think are "entitled, narcissistic, gold-digging, chad cock craving, attention whoring, manipulative, lying roasties who hit the wall!!", meanwhile, despite us saying similar things to them about men, we are actually avoiding them (at least most of us anyway)


Like damn, with how they act, you'd think all women are these god damn monsters, meanwhile they have absolutely no self awareness, I'd take a million "roasties" over 1 mgtow/incel/mra/bot anyday

Also in b4 people start crying about what bot means, I don't care since everyone knows what it means

>>18083
No. He's definitely a robot. I wouldn't believe otherwise. Probably in his thirties.

>>18075
I wasn’t necessarily referring to him specifically, just the general pattern of a man showing up every once in a while of his own accord to tell us we’re all worthless whores. That’s what I don’t understand. It must just be spite. They can’t contain their hatred to their own board with other men to relate to, they have to seek out women so that we never forget how much they hate us I guess?

>>18091
Well, it's either that, or they read here long enough to try and get a gf.

>>18092
>they read here long enough to try and get a gf
that's a fucking terrible idea

>>18092
only if you are submissive and attractive, remember

>>18094
im submissive but not attractive. fuck everything

>>18093
Very. It's so stupid how they fall in love so quickly.
>>18094
No, I mean the other guys. "plz be my gf i just wanna cuddle and feed you"
>>18095
It's not so bad being homely. Just means people can't feel like they don't belong near you, because they think they're ugly.

>>18096
>plz be my gf i just want to cuddle and feed you

so basically they want a pet that they can also fuck

>>18096
>Very. It's so stupid how they fall in love so quickly.

Robots actually falling in love… Pff… HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>>18097
Don't be so harsh. It's all they think someone wants out of them. They're practically bargaining.
>>18098
All it takes is a cursory read of a thread, and they're melting. Very predictable, for the socially stunted.

>>18099
i'd rather be realistic and harsh than entertain their fantasies of what a relationship is supposed to be like. even if they did find someone who just wanted to cuddle and feed them, they'll both become rapidly bored if that's all their relationship consists of. and it's not going to make anyone feel better if the only reason your partner is with you is 'well you're a warm body who tolerates my presence'.

>>18040
>men and women showed an extremely similar pattern

>>18041
the responses of men and women are not differentiated between in this study, basically all it amounts to is 'people are romantically attracted to people who are physically attractive'
shocker

>>18042
again, study does not differentiate between male/female results

>>18043
one of these studies is literally just 'women have orgasms', the other is that 'women have better sex with men they are attracted to'

second article is just 'women are less likely to come forth about the # of sexual partners they have for fear of being judged'.
>posted on /r9k/ where men will literally call you a filthy whore and used goods for having had sex once in your lifetime
gee i wonder why
also why is it okay for men to lie about having had an average of 13 partners over their lifetime but it's not okay for women to lie about having and average of one less like in >>18044?

>>18046
>simply put, men viewed as unattractive were not viewed as potential suitors
you don't need a study to prove this, all you have to do is download tinder. if you're not actually interacting with the person of fucking course all you're going to judge them on are their superficial qualities/presentation.

>>18047
>men love getting sexted, women don't like being sent random dick pics
what the hell was this even included for

>>18048
this is literally the only study that could be seen as supporting the 'all women are whores' narrative but it's invalid without knowing what % of the women who are ovulating actually approach another male with sexual intentions instead of just being like 'wow they're cute'.

>>18049
>the longer couple members had known each other before they started dating, the less likely they were to be matched for attractiveness

oh, huh, weird. it's almost like the more you get to know your prospective partner, the more you care about their personality and the less you care about their looks.

>>18045
missed this one initially but it's one of my favorites because
>(1) sexual activity and sexual satisfaction decline in women and men as the duration of partnership increases; (2) sexual desire only declines in women; and (3) desire for tenderness declines in men and rises in women.

>Nevertheless, male sexual desire should stay at a high level because it was selected for in evolutionary history as a precaution against the risk of sperm competition. The course of female sexual desire is assumed to reflect an adaptive function: to boost attachment in order to establish the bond.

so men stick around for sex and women stick around because they actually desire emotional fulfillment in a relationship. nice one, /r9k/.

>>18100
What should they want out of each other?

>>18103
It's up to individual preference. People should try to find a partner whose desires and goals align with their own. So saying that all they want is a girl to cuddle, feed and fuck is like saying that they have literally no goals to share with a partner, and nothing to offer the world aside from being a lazy cuddly blob. Don't you want to participate in activities with your partner? Discuss topics that you're interested in with them? Cheer them on when they're getting discouraged? Help them out when they're making bad decisions, or have them argue with you when you're making bad decisions? And if not, why?

No relationship is as simple as 'cuddling and feeding' and expecting it to be like that is for one, childish, and for two, setting yourself up for disappointment.

>>18104
I thought all that other stuff would just come on its own?

>>18105
there has to be some commonality between a couple for the relationship to even get off the ground in the first place in my experience.

>>18099
i doubt even normal men can love. a robot def doesnt

>>18109
I don't at all think men are incapable of love, but I do think they can only love other men, pets, their children, etc. That's it. They simply tolerate women to have sex/have children if they desire them. Other than that they hate us and most will admit to it if you really ask.

This is a terrible thing to say but I'm consistently surprised that more women aren't being murdered on a daily basis with how much the average man hates us. The rate is already too high, obviously. Just shocked it's not higher.

>>18113
>tfw know several men irl who love their gfs/wives and wk women pretty regularly

Maybe I'm just fortunate, since I do live in a pretty liberal country. I agree that most men dislike women, though.

>>18114
Yeah, but do they JUST love their gfs & wives? Talk to them a lot more and you'll find that usually men like that still hate women but regard their wife or girlfriend as the 'exception', so that's why the appear to love them. It doesn't mean they don't hate women, it just means that they consider their girlfriend "one of the good ones." For now, anyway.

>>18116
Did you miss the
>whiteknighting women regularly
One won't talk smack about any woman, even if she's genuinely awful. Another is extremely easygoing and doesn't seem to have it in him to hate anyone.

My stepfather is also very nice about women and had close female friends in the past (now he just spends all his time with my mom because they're basically best friends hehe). Although he does have some issues with associating feminine things with himself (clothes, etc.), which I believe is both part of a generation gap and bullying in his childhood. Not to excuse it too much, of course.

I'm sorry if you've been surrounded entirely by shit men. I admit they are plentiful (my own bio father was a fucking monster), but literally hashtagNotAllMen. I've talked myself into that hole before, it's a nightmarish place to be in. I hope you can find some hope in the future.

>>18118
I'm not trying to discredit you or attack you personally, but I just don't believe there are any men that don't hate women. For example, think about all the men that post misogynistic rants about women on the internet. After hitting post, all those men go to school and work and appear perfectly normal. Men are very good at appearing like they don't hate women. But they all reveal it eventually. For instance I grew up with a father like this, I never thought he hated me or didn't love me as much as my brother, however around the time I was 20 he told me what he really thought of women, as if he were talking to another man. Telling me how all women are whores and the perfect woman is one who is hot and can't speak english so he wouldn't have to communicate with her. This is a man who appeared normal and has been married to my mom for twenty years, and raised me. And I never knew until he finally let the mask fall and he told me straight up. Like I said, they know how to hide it.

Thanks for the well wishes and good luck, but it's just too late for me. I've seen and heard too much to ever believe a man if he says he doesn't hate women. I will never be able to believe they aren't fucking lying and then laughing about how women are dumb fucking whores who fall for it all.

>>18121
Eh, maybe it is just naivete on my part.
Admittedly I have posted on multiple places online about wanting to rape/murder/shoot up men and no one I know irl would be the wiser. I'd just like to believe most people are not like this, but perhaps they are. It is the sort of thing that doesn't come up in conversation enough to catch someone making shifty eyes, and even so if you know your opinion/fantasies are forbidden you train yourself to be a good liar.
It's sadly true that you can never truly know anyone, which is why intimate relationships are such a big chance.

>>18121
>But they all reveal it eventually.

I used to believe otherwise but you're right. Most guys I've been close to (family, friends, colleagues etc.) have revealed at one point or another that they look down on women, think badly of women and respect men as a whole more than us. My biggest disappointment was finding out that even my little brother who has never said anything remotely bad about girls before had a slight misogynistic streak in him. Nothing can surprise or disappoint me anymore. Oh well. That's just how it is.

>>18124
Yeah exactly. And it's sad because I wasted so much time beating myself up wondering what I did to deserve this, or what I did to deserve being born a woman and what I could possibly do to make society and half the population hate me less.

But it doesn't matter. I still don't understand their pure hatred for women. And I probably never will. Regardless of the reason, it can't be changed. They hate women regardless of what we do or say and there is no point in trying to 'repent' for something you haven't even done. They literally hate us because we weren't born like them and that's it. You can't change that, you just have to live with it no matter how much it hurts.

>>18108
I guess boring people are just destined to die alone.

>>18126
even people who consider themselves 'boring' have hobbies and interests
if you are literally a vegetable who does nothing except come home from work and stare at the ceiling until you pass out, then yes, there may be no hope for you. but few people are like that.

>>18129
>if you are literally a vegetable who does nothing except come home from work and stare at the ceiling until you pass out
>then yes
>there may be no hope for you
>but few people are like that
Ma'am, I don't think I like your attitude.

>>18130
I don't know anybody who is like that (and few of us would, because if they do nothing except zone out/sleep and work then they would not be out socializing) but i'm willing to postulate that people like that may exist.
and anybody who's on an imageboard like, 'oh but i really am that kind of stare-at-the-wall boring' is proving that they're not by the very fact that they're on the internet instead of staring at their wall incessantly.

>>18137
What do you think I'm doing, when I don't have anything to reply to?

>>18138
NTA, but you must do that a lot since the board is slow.

>>18141
Better than being some subculture bitch.

>>18142
>I have no interests or hobbies of my own but I'm going to look down on people who do because that means they are 'subculture bitches'
what

>>18138
Ask yourself whether you actually have anything that you're interested in learning about or any hobbies that you would like to pursue in lieu of staring at the wall. If the answer is 'no, there's nothing' then I would suggest seeking treatment for depression. But if there is anything that you get excited about, why not invest time in developing that into a hobby? If all you're doing is staring at a wall otherwise, you have nothing to lose.

>>18144
You know what. I can only look at you from up here. Don't complain about it.
>>18145
>I would suggest seeking treatment for depression
Jesus, is that what you think of people who don't identify as anyone but themselves? A prescription for being human? I don't think so.

>>18147
'Depression' is what we call it when people have zero passion for any activity outside of zoning out.

>>18148
>boring is depression means prescription for pills
I'm really glad you're not a doctor.

>>18148
Depression is a disease just as much diabetes is a disease.

Maybe you need it in the words of a world-renowned professor in order to be convinced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOAgplgTxfc

>>18150
>seeking treatment for depression = getting on pills

just go to therapy for starters and then see what a licensed professional recommends ffs
and yes, having zero interest in any activity outside of staring at your wall is abnormal and should be addressed instead of just being like 'well i guess i'm boring and there's nothing i can do about it'

>>18153
like when i think of a boring person

i think of the individual who tells you about their coin collection for 45 minutes in a monotone without being asked about it, and also without ever giving the other person in that conversation an opportunity to talk about what they're enthusiastic about.

also tweed suits for some reason

when i think of someone who's got some serious depression, i think of staring-at-wall-chan.

>>18152
I'm not getting screwed over by some doc, and pigeonholed into second-class citizenry. Fuck off.
>>18153
>zero interest in any activity outside of staring at your wall
>staring at a wall means I have interest in it
>>18154
>staring-at-wall-chan
Nanes? I think I'm reading the post of a psychopath.

>>18155
staring at a wall means you have a lack of interest in any activity other than doing nothing, because otherwise you'd be doing it.
which is usually a sign of depression

serious question, why are you so defensive about this? tons of people have depression and it doesn't make them 2nd-class citizens. nobody looks down on it. tbh i'm impressed when i find someone in this day and age who doesn't suffer from depression or some other kind of mental condition. + being treated for depression doesn't = 'getting screwed over by some doc'. That 'some doc' is someone who's gone through years of training in order to be able to be qualified to diagnose a person's mental condition and recommend treatment to improve it. they're not trying to screw you over, these people are there to help you however they can.

>>18072
>>18083
I think lots of people go out of their way to interact with things they hate just to indulge in the hatred actually.

>>17268
Here is the altar the goddess-worshipping robots have built in honour

http://boards.4chan.org/r9k/thread/46947440

>>18228
Do you think the robots who post in those threads are the same as the ones who post in the woman hate threads? I don't think they are tbh

Oh hi there ladies i heard you browse /r9k/.I just came from there if any of you beautiful femanons would like to talk just email me! :) [email protected](YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)

>>18270
Go attention whore somewhere else.

>>18270
will you be my bf?

>>18270
>a man
>on the internet
Yeah right. Dick or GTFO.

>>18270
Go drown in Stacy's pussy, asshole.

>>18277
You're not allowed to post yourself, here. Also, he's banned.

He is a troll from /r9k/…He spams his email in every thread.

Probably learned about this place because robots keep mentioning it like it's a new meme.

"Waaahh roastie go to crystal.cafe!"

Aren't a lot of guys from /r9k/ serial cheaters? I mean it's not just Oscar, I know three or four girls who have been burned because they dated some robot who ended up getting his confidence up and meeting other girls online, and even IRL, while pretending he was just for her.

I met a robot who told me women who "really love their bf/husband should forgive cheating" and that women who leave them are "heartless and cruel" lol…

>>18829
Don't agree with cheating at all but it's fucked up when a woman destroys a family with kids because of her injured pride over her hubby having another woman.

>>18835
is it the woman's fault that her husband cheated? if he was so concerned with keeping the family together then why's he sleeping around while knowing that doing so is grounds for his wife to divorce him and take his children with him? men are selfish af.

>>18835
>injured pride
meanwhile men kill women who cheat because of their pride

I don't understand where people like >>18113 get their ideas from. Isn't white-knighting a thing precisely because women are so much easier to love for males? Average men hate you? No average man rapes or kills, or even beats people up. It's just some minority of criminals who also beat and rape men in prisons. Most men are taught that you should never even touch women against their will, or god forbid beat them. Most violence happens between men. I've never been in a fight for my entire life. I am not really much stronger than an average woman, I am pretty physically weak.Women are much more likely to be helped in case of assault compared to a man. I am not here to talk about this to make you feel like you're not worth help or something, just saying that men have it probably worse than you do in this respect.

And most importantly, I can't love? It's funny because in a place similar to this that is male-only (no, I am not going to tell you, no, it's not wizchan, it's not even in English) we say that women can't love. They literally say everything the same way you do, just with flipped genders and ideas which makes it quite hilarious, really. Most common ones are probably "women can only temporarily love chad, their children and maybe closest family" etc.

I'd gladly have someone to love and be loved back. Women however find me being 5'8" and ugly repulsive, and being lied my entire life that it doesn't matter how I looked as a male as long as "I took care of myself" didn't exactly help. Most women look at me with disdain when I try to talk to them. And even when they don't, I don't even know how to talk to them at this point. Doesn't surprise me, I'd never want to be with myself either.
If men were truly incapable of love, they wouldn't put systems in place to protect you, they wouldn't go to wars for most of human history to die for you…(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)

>>18125
If men hated women they'd have long time imprisoned you and kept you in cages and treated you like dogs. And yet, they gave you rights and privileges which equalized you and now even exceed that of male's in some countries. Where is the logic in that?

Why is it, I wonder, that women never see a fault of their own in anything, but instead blame someone's hate on them on males. Maybe it's because you ever only look at the handsomest, richest, best men there are meanwhile having little to nothing to offer yourself? Maybe those nerds on the internet get annoyed and frustrated that a girl on the same looks level similar to them would rather go for the best of the best than him? Maybe because 70+% divorces are started by women? Maybe because as a man you can never take your eyes off your SO unless you want to be cheated on? Why do women almost always marry up or equal? Why never marry down? Yet, men do that quite frequently. Men hate you because you're hypergamous. Because you have no sense of honor or values(unless it's for Chad ofc). You're moldable and will always try to be whoever your perceived Chad (high-value male) will want you to be. Most of you don't even have personalities, even if you will claim to have them. I've seen women change their interests and behaviours just so they can be with a perceived high value men. I've seen my own mother cheat on my father because the other guy was taller and handsomer. How can anyone in the right mind respect someone like that? Any girl I'd message online with a fake sharp-jawed good looking male I'd get amazing responses, she'd want to meet me, she'd praise me, message me everyday and be the sweetest person. But then I change picture to mine. I'd be the same person in personality. I'd be working the same job, doing the same exact things, I'd not change anything. Just picture. And the behavior would always change 180°. They'd treat me a cold shoulder, not be interested, or just plain disconnect after seeing me. It was repeatable on every fucking girl, and I've done this with at least 20 of them. No male I've ever known was this shallow. Usually men want someone who shares interest and loves them genuinely. All you want is someone handsome. I am not surprised handsome men pump and dump and cheat women, because they must truly see your nature. You will probably deny this, but you don't understand your own nature. I have yet to meet a woman with any self-awareness.

You will never understand the male perspective because you're not a male.
You have no idea how much privilege in today's society you bear. No matter how many times we tell you, you ignore it.
You have value in society just because you exist. As a man, you either fight very hard, or you're considered subhuman not worth living.

With all that taken into account, are you really surprised some men hate women?
Probably not because in your female mind it's "how it should be". Civilization should be based on your natural instinctual whims, but instead of fairness. But you want Jungle where you can make harems with high value males because you just can't stand a thought of some ugly male liking you. You should be happy men they don't all group together, take guns and take all your rights away. That they themselves granted you. That's what they would truly do if they hated you, and yet look, you're living in some comfortable first world country having all the rights and privileges you can imagine.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)

>>19032
another man pig bites the dust :3

>>19032
>If men were truly incapable of love, they wouldn't put systems in place to protect you, they wouldn't go to wars for most of human history to die for you…
>die for you
>you
Me?

>>19032
May you find love. Goodbye, smegsie.

>>19046
>No male I've ever known was this shallow.
Yeah, I bet my ass you were messaging all the ugly girls too. Stop buying the "omg women are all the same, they want to fuck Chad and Chad only! whores!" because as you probably know yourself, not men are the same, and the same goes for women, too. Women are not the same. If you've lurked enough here you will see that clearly. Now fuck right off.

cringe

>>19078
I understand why you'd feel this way but trust me, I never went for any pretty girls solely because I am so aware of how good they are treated by everybody around them.
The only criteria I had was BMI in a normal range for a girl. That's it. Is that really a lot to ask for given I have a normal BMI as well? I never expected anything I don't have myself.

Could I woo an absolute fattest, laziest, piece of shit girl to exist on Earth? I don't know, maybe. Thing is, any girl who is not fat in 2018 thinks they are some kind of a a fucking deity even if her face resembles more of a man than a girl. Do you know what it takes me for have a "perfect male body"? Years of hard work on the gym, strict diets, it's really hard to have that. For a woman it's just not eating a lot. That's it. And even if I could woo one of those girls that are uglier than me, what's the point? After seeing how they treat handsome men it's just ridiculous. They'd put up for him the moment they met him. When I had a handsome man in my avatar I was hailed almost as god. How can I even compete? I'd probably have to spend months worshiping her feet just so I can kiss her, probably, and she'd never truly love me. How is it, that a good looking man gets so much love and affection almost right from the start, but I'd get treated like I am below trash and all the difference would be simply in how I look and nothing else?

Let me repeat myself. I never did go for any pretty girls. My looks level or below only. Maybe that's why they worshiped me with a good looking avatar, they felt like they struck gold. I am not even mad, such is nature, my problem is I've been lied my entire life that it doesn't really matter how I look as a male. While truth is, looks matter to women first. You could say the same about men but I completely disagree due to my personal experience. Although it's true statistically, I just happened to know men who don't.

Also, if what you say was true, there'd be no
>tfw no bf
threads. You can get a boyfriend anytime you want. You just want someone better than you, not someone like you, or god forbid the biggest nightmare of every female, worse than you. Somehow marrying down for men or dating poorer girls isn't a problem. No woman would be with a guy that's poorer and uglier than her no matter what kind of a person he was. Personality might as well not exist, it's just a rationalization of your primitive instincts.

(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)

>>19086
God, you're delusional. It's always about appearance for you men when women who are ugly are invisible for you unless you want to make fun of them. I'd rather be a lonely witch than get with "any man" that shows up in front of me. Some of us have respect for ourselves and don't want to be cumrags and mistreated, that's why we stay alone. I don't hate you or anything, but your sob story is old and you're blind to our situation, but of course I wouldn't expect anything else from a male on the internet.

>>19091
>good person who would actually love you and do romantic stuff together gets fucked over in past relationships
>ends up not being that good anymore, just bitter and more interested in having sex first before deciding to get serious again
>or ends up just not being interested in anything serious for a while anymore because they feel like it would just go badly again and they'd waste time
i mean than happens to both us and guys, can't point the finger just like that at whatever without knowing what might be the cause for it

why do miners defend men much more than robots defend women? That isn't to say r9k is a echo chamber of misogyny, and when someone posts a opposing reply to some misogynistic post it usually just some post that makes fun of OP as opposed to defending women. Meanwhile in the mines you see plenty of "owo not all men are like that you just hope to find a better one" not in a dismissive tone per say but in a tone sympathetic. There's also more posts expressing some hope in attaining a meaningful companionship too, as opposed to the irony posts/memes on r9k.

>>19271
I don't think so, I think it's pretty balanced out tbh (I'm one of the people who tells them to gtfo btw)

>>19271
Uh, to speak in generalities, I guess, I think women are more likely to seek out relationships/socialize more and therefore have actual life experience to attest to that not all men are terrible.
On the other hand, with 4chan, a predominately male dominated forum, they're more extreme in their behavior as far as being antisocial, disgruntled, and don't have much life experience and just draw conclusions from extreme cases of women hurting (finances/fidelity/whatever) men.
I don't know, though, I can't really speak on behalf of two separate groups of people.

>>19271
>There's also more posts expressing some hope in attaining a meaningful companionship too
Maybe because miners actually DO have more hope.

Sorry if this is one of those "unpopular opinions", but it's pretty undeniable that in our culture men are expected to do the approaching and initiating of relationships, and for the most part that's what they do. Thus the average woman will have a much better chance of someone just coming into their life and saying "Hey want a relationship?" than the average man, for whom that will probably not ever happened. And it's even less likely for robots who tend to be shyer, more shut-in, and probably not as good looking. So it really is hopeless for most of them, especially compared to miners. And a lifetime a hopelessness will distort their personalities and behavior accordingly and push them to more extremist views.

>>19271
Because men do not care about women. So even if a man is not personally spouting /r9k/ tier level bullshit, he either laughs when other men do it or just smiles and nods along because he agrees with it on some level. It doesn't bother men at all to hear things like that because they all on some level dislike women, some of them are just more cruel about it than others. Honestly I used to be a hopeless romantic too and have hope but it's clear that men don't even like women. Their feelings about women range from outright hate, indifference, or annoyance and that's it. So expecting men to push back against misogyny or care about it at all is a waste of time because they don't and never will.

>>19313
You sure you should be here and not on lolcow farms?
So you can be laughed at like a lolcow you are

You're no different from neckbeards sperging out about all women being whores. You're the same people, just on another side of the spectrum.

>>19316
Sure, maybe. But in my experience this is true. I never see men pushing back against misogyny or trying to promote a better treatment or view of women because those things don't bother them. Like I said, not all men are outright hateful. But most of them if probed would tell you what they really thought about women and it is nothing positive.

I'm not saying men are bad people, or evil, or worthless or anything that 'neckbeards' say about women. However, I do stand by my opinion that men dislike and even hate women. I don't really see any evidence to the contrary.

I had been posting on KC when it was still around. Over the years I had become a recognizable person and they roasted me not because of my womanness, but because of my life decisions, what I consider fair game.

I'm sad it's gone and I can't be recognizable any more. :(

why did this thread fall so low when the last post was only a day ago?

Why is everything so boring? You're all so boring.

>>19831
Yeah? So entertain us.

>>19833
What does the normie find entertaining?

>>19842
>Calling me a normie
Fuck anon, i wish you were right kek

>>19831
stop attacking my friends on cyral coffee

GENDER WAR WHEN?!

>>19848
Sounds like a bad idea.

>>19848
Literal gender war? We'd lose. Men are aggressive asf.

>>19887
I mean we could always use other tactics like spies and shit too, it doesn’t all have to be physical kek

>>19893
Okay, count me in.

>>17268
Going on r9k and posting fembot threads is like men coming here and posting their threads.
So like, idk stop going there lol

>>17268
Most of them are not really robots but frustrated kids who haven't had sex when all their friends already had. 90% of them are either underage, under 25 or are not that successful as their friends.

even in the molten trash heap that is current day society and culture, there are still some genuinely good people on all sides, it's just that there's an enormous surplus of people that spew bullshit and anger and negativity all day. you'll be hard pressed to find good guys on R9K that's for sure, but some people are legitimately able to pick themselves up and redeem themselves with slight amounts of appreciation, but don't mistake that for giving them affection.
TL;DR
Good people are out there, but you have to look pretty closely to find them

>>22816
the thing about the 'but there are nice guys on there!' argument
i don't understand why if you were a genuinely good and nice guy that you would want to go on /r9k/ and spend time engaging in what seems to mostly be bitter discourse or spiteful banter.
and even if a 'good guy' does venture in there, i guarantee that if he immerses himself in that culture, it will alter his personality for the worse. i used to read /r9k/ several years ago, around 2009~2010, and it made me a way more suspicious and cynical person even when i wasn't actively engaging in the conversation that was happening. every time i encountered a man irl then i had to wonder if they were the type that was secretly thinking the same things as the posters on /r9k/, but just blending in with the normie population like i was.

their memes aren't even good.

>>22817
you do have a very valid point. I spent a little while there too and it made me depressive and cynical, something about it is innately damaging to the psyche. I will say though, there are occasional good memes I go there to salvage, and genuinely good threads that last until they're ruined. Otherwise it isn't really worth going there unless you want to be sad or yell at others for no reason. what I'm trying to say is that good guys exist and can let the board culture flow through them, but they're fucking miracles of nature, or have mental health issues.

Zapan from battle angel alita is the quintessential moid.Read that thing one day.
Also I know one(one)guy I find redeemable.If I can find one,then you can,too.It'll take you a while though…