Lurker > KhanJohnny

1. Don't do treadmill

Asherlee10 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

For starters, let's learn who your main account is.

Nice job immediately moving away from the arguments i put forward lmao

You think you'd get off that easy? I just like to know who I'm engaging first. Why are you hiding behind an alt?

I've already wasted enough time with your foolishness.

Asherlee10 posted...

For starters, let's learn who your main account is.

Nice job immediately moving away from the arguments i put forward lmao

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

eston posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

She shouldnt get anything for being pregnant.

He has no say in whether she has the baby or not.

Imagine hating women so much that you object to using a dead man's money to support his own child just because you don't think the mom should get anything out of it

I don't hate women. I think the notion that men should be required to support children they don't want born became incoherent when men no longer have a choice in whether their children are born

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

It doesn't make sense that women have the freedom to enslave men or kill their children according to their own will.

The guy is dead and to my knowledge didnt object to the kid. Shut the fuck up

It's about the principle. You can't assume he wanted the kid either. He was gunned down. We won't hear his side of the story.

Lmao. Fuck this kid and his family. His dad was murdered. The kid deserves nothing because I hate women

It has nothing to do with women. It's about the power dynamics.

Asherlee10 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Good argument

There's nothing worth arguing. You have a misconstrued view of the world and have displayed unfounded opinions.

Prove those unfounded opinions wrong then.

Oh wait, it's Asherlee10. I'd rather be spared your childish sophistries.

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

eston posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

She shouldnt get anything for being pregnant.

He has no say in whether she has the baby or not.

Imagine hating women so much that you object to using a dead man's money to support his own child just because you don't think the mom should get anything out of it

I don't hate women. I think the notion that men should be required to support children they don't want born became incoherent when men no longer have a choice in whether their children are born

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

It doesn't make sense that women have the freedom to enslave men or kill their children according to their own will.

The guy is dead and to my knowledge didnt object to the kid. Shut the fuck up

It's about the principle. You can't assume he wanted the kid either. He was gunned down. We won't hear his side of the story.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

DarkTransient posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

ITP: penis-vaginal sex is the only way to have sex.

Theres also things such as the pill, condoms, spermicide, IUDs, etc that can all be used together, to help make sure you dont reproduce.

Face the facts; shut the fuck up.

Penis-vaginal is the only real sex tbh

Lmao at this dude who thinks abstinence only is ridiculous, but men that don't want kids should go around only doing oral and using like 5 birth control methods at a time.

Yeah that's realistic

It would be easier not to fuck at all.

It's almost as if he's saying "you can do it, but you have to accept the risks that come with it".

Except that only applies to men.

Women get an easy way out. They can abort the child, or they can enslave the man.

Men can be enslaved, or if they want the kid, sit back and watch it get murdered.

Holy shit. Your gimmicked worldview is fucking trash rofl.

Good argument

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Abstinence only has shown to not work. Same with shit like DARE.

And yeah, implying that means to use all at once. Typically, IUDs work by themselves and the rest can all be paired with 1 other things and it should be about 0% chance you wont have a baby.

Yep every couple is going to start using iuds now lmao

DarkTransient posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

ITP: penis-vaginal sex is the only way to have sex.

Theres also things such as the pill, condoms, spermicide, IUDs, etc that can all be used together, to help make sure you dont reproduce.

Face the facts; shut the fuck up.

Penis-vaginal is the only real sex tbh

Lmao at this dude who thinks abstinence only is ridiculous, but men that don't want kids should go around only doing oral and using like 5 birth control methods at a time.

Yeah that's realistic

It would be easier not to fuck at all.

It's almost as if he's saying "you can do it, but you have to accept the risks that come with it".

Except that only applies to men.

Women get an easy way out. They can abort the child, or they can enslave the man.

Men can be enslaved, or if they want the kid, sit back and watch it get murdered.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

ITP: penis-vaginal sex is the only way to have sex.

Theres also things such as the pill, condoms, spermicide, IUDs, etc that can all be used together, to help make sure you dont reproduce.

Face the facts; shut the fuck up.

Penis-vaginal is the only real sex tbh

Lmao at this dude who thinks abstinence only is ridiculous, but men that don't want kids should go around only doing oral and using like 5 birth control methods at a time.

Yeah that's realistic

It would be easier not to fuck at all.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

I don't hate women at all, and really this has nothing to do with women, as such.

This is about an unequal distribution of rights and privileges within the relationship of reproductive partners.

In normal liberal logic, we attack wide disparities in power. However, when it comes to reproduction, women have all the power, such that a man can be forced to support a child he doesn't want, which happened purely accidentally (ie birth control failed), over his objections for nearly two decades. Alternatively, he may want the child and may believe that it is an inviolable human being and the woman, over his objection, can have that life utterly destroyed.

So men are hugely disadvantaged financially and emotionally under our reproductive laws.

Its like women have a thing living inside them for 9-10 months that fucks up their body for a year or something while all men do is stick their dick inside and release.

9-10 month commitment is nothing compared to almost 20 years of economic support.

ROFL

Dude, your gimmick is bad. Suggest you get a new one. Maybe one with a little bit less of a MRA opinion.

Good argument

If a guy sticks his dick into a vagina, he best be prepared for any situation that happens. Theres multiple other ways for guys to get off that dont have a chance at pregnancy.

Oh so we should be practicing abstinence only, if we don't want to risk a kid?

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

I don't hate women at all, and really this has nothing to do with women, as such.

This is about an unequal distribution of rights and privileges within the relationship of reproductive partners.

In normal liberal logic, we attack wide disparities in power. However, when it comes to reproduction, women have all the power, such that a man can be forced to support a child he doesn't want, which happened purely accidentally (ie birth control failed), over his objections for nearly two decades. Alternatively, he may want the child and may believe that it is an inviolable human being and the woman, over his objection, can have that life utterly destroyed.

So men are hugely disadvantaged financially and emotionally under our reproductive laws.

Its like women have a thing living inside them for 9-10 months that fucks up their body for a year or something while all men do is stick their dick inside and release.

9-10 month commitment is nothing compared to almost 20 years of economic support.

ROFL

Dude, your gimmick is bad. Suggest you get a new one. Maybe one with a little bit less of a MRA opinion.

Good argument

sktgamer_13dude posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

I don't hate women at all, and really this has nothing to do with women, as such.

This is about an unequal distribution of rights and privileges within the relationship of reproductive partners.

In normal liberal logic, we attack wide disparities in power. However, when it comes to reproduction, women have all the power, such that a man can be forced to support a child he doesn't want, which happened purely accidentally (ie birth control failed), over his objections for nearly two decades. Alternatively, he may want the child and may believe that it is an inviolable human being and the woman, over his objection, can have that life utterly destroyed.

So men are hugely disadvantaged financially and emotionally under our reproductive laws.

Its like women have a thing living inside them for 9-10 months that fucks up their body for a year or something while all men do is stick their dick inside and release.

9-10 month commitment is nothing compared to almost 20 years of economic support.

I don't hate women at all, and really this has nothing to do with women, as such.

This is about an unequal distribution of rights and privileges within the relationship of reproductive partners.

In normal liberal logic, we attack wide disparities in power. However, when it comes to reproduction, women have all the power, such that a man can be forced to support a child he doesn't want, which happened purely accidentally (ie birth control failed), over his objections for nearly two decades. Alternatively, he may want the child and may believe that it is an inviolable human being and the woman, over his objection, can have that life utterly destroyed.

So men are hugely disadvantaged financially and emotionally under our reproductive laws.

Questionmarktarius posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

there's a ton of emotional and physical pain involved

Also it's not at all inexpensive.

Not as expensive as 18 years of child support.

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

s0nicfan posted...

I'm all for abortion, but I wouldn't exactly call it "responsible".

you do know that women can't just go to a clinic and painlessly have the child removed

there's a ton of emotional and physical pain involved

so you can shut the fuck up

None of that compares to being the slave to a woman's whims for 18 years.

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Liberal logic:

Abstinence only is regressive and will never work. Kids are going to have sex regardless!!! Stop being prudes! They need to know how to avoid pregnancy and STDs!!!

Also liberal logic:

Oh, you knocked up that girl when your condom failed? Oh, you don't want the kid and she does? Oh, sorry you should have kept it in your pants! Enjoy being her slave for 18 years.

wow it's almost like teaching RESPONSIBILITY over ABSTINENCE is the right thing to do
wow it's almost like conservatives want to take away the possibility that she could even get rid of the fetus if she wanted

So only men have responsibility then?

Woman can get pregnant and shrug off responsibility by killing the child, and we applaud them. The man has responsibility forced on him by the woman against his will.

Liberal logic:

Abstinence only is regressive and will never work. Kids are going to have sex regardless!!! Stop being prudes! They need to know how to avoid pregnancy and STDs!!!

Also liberal logic:

Oh, you knocked up that girl when your condom failed? Oh, you don't want the kid and she does? Oh, sorry you should have kept it in your pants! Enjoy being her slave for 18 years.

Good times

chrono625 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

chrono625 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

There is not ONE form of contraceptive that 100%.

So, again, when you want to get your dick wet, just know there is always a chance that you can somehow get a healthy woman pregnant.

And you're responsible for it as well.

So why should a woman be able to enslave a male for 18 years, while he gets no say at all over his own fate? Meanwhile the woman gets to rip his child to shreds if she gets pissed at him.

They do have it.

It's called a vasectomy. At a 99.999% effective rate.

So if you're that set on not having a kid. Get snipped.

Otherwise man the fuck up and do your job.

Good liberals dont believe in "manning up" or that men have particular "jobs" or roles.

And let's say I want the kid with all my heart. Why are my options to either allow the woman to murder my child with no input, or wait for her to enslave me?

Tyranthraxus posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Gafemage posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

chrono625 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

There is not ONE form of contraceptive that 100%.

So, again, when you want to get your dick wet, just know there is always a chance that you can somehow get a healthy woman pregnant.

And you're responsible for it as well.

So why should a woman be able to enslave a male for 18 years, while he gets no say at all over his own fate? Meanwhile the woman gets to rip his child to shreds if she gets pissed at him.

Uhhhhhhh...

Do you know what abortions involve? In one method, the fetus is basically vacuumed out and ripped to pieces by the force.

Just so you're aware this is only done to non viable fetuses (congenital defect or other problem) that have a formed head.

It's not something you just do.

Up to 15 weeks' gestation, suction-aspiration or vacuum aspiration are the most common surgical methods of induced abortion.[57] Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) consists of removing the fetus or embryo, placenta, and membranes by suction using a manual syringe, while electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) uses an electric pump. These techniques differ in the mechanism used to apply suction, in how early in pregnancy they can be used, and in whether cervical dilation is necessary.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion

Am I misunderstanding?

Gafemage posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

chrono625 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

There is not ONE form of contraceptive that 100%.

So, again, when you want to get your dick wet, just know there is always a chance that you can somehow get a healthy woman pregnant.

And you're responsible for it as well.

So why should a woman be able to enslave a male for 18 years, while he gets no say at all over his own fate? Meanwhile the woman gets to rip his child to shreds if she gets pissed at him.

Uhhhhhhh...

Do you know what abortions involve? In one method, the fetus is basically vacuumed out and ripped to pieces by the force.

DuranOfForcena posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Thats such a strawman lol

nope. i don't think you even know what that word means, because it is absolutely inapplicable in this context.

KhanJohnny posted...

There are very few religious people that say because they believe in God, scientists should not explore the origins of the universe.

wtf is this shit? are you even consciously aware of the ridiculous word salad that is spewing out of your brain?

KhanJohnny posted...

The truth is that science is never going to answer these questions, because these are questions beyond empiricism.

the "truth", eh? lmfao that's fucking rich. some random ignorant armchair preacher thinks he knows the objective and immutable endpoint of science. where the fuck do you get off making such a fucking stupid and backwards-ass claim as this?

You must be a child to have to resort to inflammatory language to argue your points.

Not worth my time. Bye bye, grasshopper!

chrono625 posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

There is not ONE form of contraceptive that 100%.

So, again, when you want to get your dick wet, just know there is always a chance that you can somehow get a healthy woman pregnant.

And you're responsible for it as well.

So why should a woman be able to enslave a male for 18 years, while he gets no say at all over his own fate? Meanwhile the woman gets to rip his child to shreds if she gets pissed at him.

DuranOfForcena posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

iHuman posted...

Bishop9800 posted...

So far, you are not doing a good job convincing me.

Everything in the universe can be explained without God, and nearly every explanation is observable.

What does God have that compares? Religion? Why are there thousands of different ones? Morality? We've seen man develop laws on its own.

Many of the operations of the universe can be explained by science, but science says nothing about why any of it exists or the ultimate origins for how it came to be, let alone offering any guidance about the nature of humankind or morality.

you do understand that no one is trying to claim that science has all the answers right now, right? of course there are things that our current understanding of science says nothing about. 2000 years ago, our understanding of science said nothing about planetary and stellar movement, composition or formation. that's why people thought the planets were gods. but hey, guess what, over centuries, the human race deepened our collective understanding of the world and universe around us through science, and now we know that the planets aren't gods. that's how science works. as our understanding of it deepens, more of the mysteries of the universe are revealed. how religion works is that anything we don't understand is because of god, and everyone accepts that and remains ignorant and never tries to actually find a real answer.

Thats such a strawman lol

There are very few religious people that say because they believe in God, scientists should not explore the origins of the universe.

The truth is that science is never going to answer these questions, because these are questions beyond empiricism.

eston posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

She shouldnt get anything for being pregnant.

He has no say in whether she has the baby or not.

Imagine hating women so much that you object to using a dead man's money to support his own child just because you don't think the mom should get anything out of it

I don't hate women. I think the notion that men should be required to support children they don't want born became incoherent when men no longer have a choice in whether their children are born

As it stands now you can have the pill or a condom fail, and be forced to support a child because the woman wants it, or if you want it and she doesn't, she can kill your child.

It doesn't make sense that women have the freedom to enslave men or kill their children according to their own will.

iHuman posted...

Bishop9800 posted...

So far, you are not doing a good job convincing me.

Everything in the universe can be explained without God, and nearly every explanation is observable.

What does God have that compares? Religion? Why are there thousands of different ones? Morality? We've seen man develop laws on its own.

Many of the operations of the universe can be explained by science, but science says nothing about why any of it exists or the ultimate origins for how it came to be, let alone offering any guidance about the nature of humankind or morality.

EnragedSlith posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Meh we still have a commitment to each other, and try to visit as often as we can.

Being in a relationship is way more than sex lol

Are there some people who can make it work? Sure. But sex and emotional connections often go hand-in-hand if theres chemistry, so good luck with that.

We'll see. I won't fall in love with anyone else at least.

But who knows, if we didnt do this, maybe we'd break up from sexual frustration anyway.

Muffinz0rz posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

Assuming this happened, why does everyone keep saying TC is "not in a relationship?"

They can stay emotionally connected but go bang other people, it's not a big deal.

Hell I'd be ripping TC if he was in a long-distance relationship and didn't work out some kind of arrangement where extracurricular sex was on the table.

Y'all should be congratulating him

They're just mad because it sounds like an awesome lifestyle, when it really isn't that great.

I mean it is nice having a girl I can always rely on and still go out to meet other women. But it's not like I'm having a ton of sex either way. I still have to spend a ton of time on tinder or whatever app grinding for matches like every other guy, and then court these women. I get much less overall now, than when I lived with my gf.

I actually think the lifestyle does not sound awesome, but you're still getting occasional sex which means you're better off than 95% of CE

Axe the whole "long-distance girlfriend with whom I have to speak all the time" part and yes it becomes awesome again.

But I like the girlfriend, so that's a bonus lol

I could have casual sex without a girlfriend if I wanted to. Best of both worlds lol

She shouldnt get anything for being pregnant.

He has no say in whether she has the baby or not.

Abyssea posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

No she cant have another boyfriend lolI mean, yeah, there's a risk she has really good sex with someone else, but she also faces the same risk that I bang some girl with huge tits and a tight ass, that she doesn't measure up to.So far at least, she still seems to really want my D.

But what if she wants another boyfriend after having sex with Tyrone? :v Do you love her enough to live with Tyrone too?

Nah

Muffinz0rz posted...

Assuming this happened, why does everyone keep saying TC is "not in a relationship?"

They can stay emotionally connected but go bang other people, it's not a big deal.

Hell I'd be ripping TC if he was in a long-distance relationship and didn't work out some kind of arrangement where extracurricular sex was on the table.

Y'all should be congratulating him

They're just mad because it sounds like an awesome lifestyle, when it really isn't that great.

I mean it is nice having a girl I can always rely on and still go out to meet other women. But it's not like I'm having a ton of sex either way. I still have to spend a ton of time on tinder or whatever app grinding for matches like every other guy, and then court these women. I get much less overall now, than when I lived with my gf.

Abyssea posted...

what happens if she sleeps with a guy that knocks her socks off and you can't compare anymore? What if she decides she'd rather date Tyrone instead?

Would you be okay with her having two boyfriends? Like, you'd all live in the same house together and you'd take turns.

No she cant have another boyfriend lol

I mean, yeah, there's a risk she has really good sex with someone else, but she also faces the same risk that I bang some girl with huge tits and a tight ass, that she doesn't measure up to.

So far at least, she still seems to really want my D.

SoundNetwork posted...

Lmao you get to see each other weekly but still dont have enough self control to not stick dick in every hole you get

We dont see each other weekly. Did you read the topic at all? We see each other a few days like every two months lol

AlabamaLove posted...

So assuming y'all stay together and reunite, will you still sex other people?

The plan is that we wouldn't, but who really knows. We never would have thought we'd be doing this.

But practically speaking, having a gf is just so much easier for getting sex, and she knows what I like lol. I don't have to waste time or money buying drinks for a girl that's not going to give it up until like the fourth date or some nonsense.

PoopPotato posted...

Back in my day, we called this friend's with benefits

Nah. FWB is entirely different. There's no commitment there. I have a full commitment with this girl and once we get in place I'll probably marry her.

I do have FWBs on the side now though lol

Abyssea posted...

so you're both sloots.

We are now. srs.

AlabamaLove posted...

Is this your first open relationship? Is it hers?

Yes and yes

We also had very limited sexual partners before this, since we dated pretty much all through college purely monogamously. So we both kinda felt like we missed out on the wild college experience too.

ALIEN_WORK2HOP posted...

aren't you afraid of falling in love with other people, since you are getting intimate with others.

Nah. I can stay pretty detached easily. It's my default state, really.

I trust her to not fall in love with anyone. But she's a really emotional person, and has invested a lot of that in me. More likely than not, my natural detachment would ruin our relationship if it came to that, not having sex with other people.

Th3_Butt3rfly posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

eston posted...

I mean it really sounds like you guys are pen pals tbqh

Naw. We regularly schedule visits like anyone in a long distance relationship, which is usually every few weeks, skype all the time, etc

If you see her once a month or so I'd think you guys could remain monagomous. Lots of people manage to go a week or two without sex and as far as I know they are fine.

At least right now we usually see each other closer to every two months, although that might change soon. It's unclear.

Th3_Butt3rfly posted...

KhanJohnny posted...

Flockaveli posted...

Is she Asian?

Why would that matter?

For his fetishes.

But what difference does it make to him lol

Flockaveli posted...

Is she Asian?

Why would that matter?

PoopPotato posted...

Does she tell you about the hot, throbbing cock she took last night with a big ol smile on her face while you guys Skype?

We share stories. Hers haven't seemed to be great tbh.

But yeah, you can easily get jealous, but once you realize she's going through the same thing it isn't so bad

eston posted...

I mean it really sounds like you guys are pen pals tbqh

Naw. We regularly schedule visits like anyone in a long distance relationship, which is usually every few weeks, skype all the time, etc

Meh we still have a commitment to each other, and try to visit as often as we can.

Being in a relationship is way more than sex lol

To make a long story short, me and the gf have been together for a few years, but because we're both pursuing graduate degrees in different cities we won't be together physically for at least a few mlre years.

However, we both have pretty high sex drives and decided to have sex with other people at least until we're back together full time.

AMA

Lmao at Boston being better than Rome

PanzerElite posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

but muh religion

I'm not religious but how does this discredit religion?

Angstheism doesn't need explanations

I like Jesse, but the showrunners really hate him given all the bullshit they throw at him by the time the show ends