Have read schopenhauer

yes YES

The World as Will and Representation.

Thank you

Or you can start with Kant, but Kant, however, is more complicated than Schopenhauer. Kant influenced him a lot.
,

>Have difficulties opening up to people
>Spend three years without being interested into getting with someone after my first relationship ended
>Try to give it a try again
>Things don't go well
>Become paranoid neet for some years due to a lot of shit going on in my life
>reintegrate into society
>become friends with girl I really connect with, but she has a boyfriend and I don't wanna cuck no one
>ignore her every time she flirts with me and never reciprocate
>almost let go of my convictions and cuck her boyfriend twice
>manage to contain myself
>we see each other after that once, treat her strictly as a freind
>she disappears
>during all this shit I got interested into another girl who was single
>she seems into me
>invite her out
>she immediately says yes
>ghosts me
>says we should go out
>I try again
>ghosts me
>rinse and repeat
>suffer some kind of mindbreak after one time she did it, partly influenced by reading camus
>hook up with some thot I don’t care about and try to fuck her
>timeskip
>think of hooking up with every attractive woman I am on friendly terms with
>same kind of feeling I used to have for these other girls, but ridiculously general
>it’s like every day I’m thinking on a different one and the girl in my mind at any given moment changes like the wind
>even girls whose personality is insufferable, or that I barely know
>spontaneously call one of them out
>says she’s busy
>Don’t feel anything
>when we see each other I don’t even recall it, and just think one of our mutual friends is kinda cute

Don't know if the mess above makes any sense, but I think something in my head broke. I got to the point where the girl in my mind is interchangeable, and only the notions of intimacy are constant. Such a ridiculous state.

old schopie would've had a cute girls folder too. he spent most of his life as a neet, banging hookers and being sad because his mommy was mean to him.
read nietzsche and mishima. those guys fucked.

Well it's none of those. Where did he write this by the way?

Fucked dudes.

What was the original context for that post? I wish I could've been there for it.

Literally the reverse of this is true.

okay we get it bro you have sex

Man, I'm a virgin. I hooked up with a few girls, but have never gone all the way. Never felt right using others for sex, which is why the thing with the thot was unusal. Sorry if it sounded like boasting, frankly, I have nothing to boast about.

Aphorisms can be read with out any prior knowledge about philosophy. He will mention the will a couple of times which may be confusing if you havent read his other work but you get it from context. I would recommend a version that goes heavy on the footnotes, he quotes some obscure people

What prerequisites would you recommend for understanding World as Will and Representation?

alright we get it bro you hook up with girls
just kidding; denigrating people who have physical contact is how we get by here

Kant.

this plus a bit of Plato (mainly just his concept of ideas)

>want a mommy-like gf to take care of me and say that everything's going to be fine.

How interesting, seems like we are on polar opposites. I desire a woman to take care of, to protect and provide for, to stroke her hair and kiss her forehead when she earns my appreciation, to hold doors for her not like some white knight but because she is smaller than me and weaker than me and more vulnerable. She is also the only legitimate means by which I may acquire offspring and so I believe it just seems natural that I would feel a great sense of stoic responsibility to my future wife once I obtain her.

Work hard, make sure that she and the kids are healthy and fed and have potable water to consume. I don't want my offspring indoctrinated with radical leftism in public schools where they fly leftist flags (I am bisexual but I do not consider the rainbow flag a representative of the LGBT peoples anymore) and so I will home-school them. My attention will particularly be on the boys, to encourage them to accept responsibility, to speak truth but to also know that there is evil in the world that will take advantage of them if they let them. So be strong, be forthright and courageous, don't allow yourself to be pushed around but also if they grow to obtain power, do not abuse the power. I do not believe it is the weak who will inherit the Earth, I believe it is the strong, but the strong who will keep their sword sheathed (as it were) unless it is absolutely the only possible answer left.

The wife will tend to the girls in terms of raising them to be ladies. Be polite, don't curse (and indeed I'd teach the boys to refrain from cursing as much as they can as well), maintain themselves so that they're presentable (it is the man's duty to get their hands dirty, if all goes right then the girls will be transferred from the care of their father to the care of their future husband, and ideally he will make it so that if they choose to be stay-at-home moms then they have the opportunity), and to adopt appropriate skills for a wife and mother. Cook, clean, show compassion and empathy, know to behave themselves in public, and show respect and appreciation and deference to their patriarch whether that be me or their future husband.

Men must take on responsibility and do what they MUST do, not what they WANT to do.

Stop orbiting, it is immoral to do it since it further supports female empowerment and it is also bad for yourself because these women will see you as weak.

Attached: goToWorkSlave.png (613x521, 220K)

She will get used-up, her market-value will deteriorate with the aging process and her wasted youth will aid in that deterioration. By the time she's "ready to settle down", in all likelihood the best candidates for her will be uninterested and will seek someone better. So more months and years will tick by, she will look, but only people she considers 'beneath' her will be interested and so they will turn them away. The wrinkles will come, then the grays, and she will ask that inevitable question that so many uppity/feminist women end up asking after having wasted their most valuable years.

Where have all the good men gone?

You likely met several good men during your prime years between 18-21, but didn't want to settle down. You wanted to 'have fun', to 'get with' that cute guy, to lay with older men in exchange for free stuff (meals, jewelry, money, other gifts), and to my understanding statistics bear out that people with more sexual partners in the past are more likely to cheat. Even if some poor dope did end up marrying her before the wrinkles and grays, I anticipate her goal will be to have a kid, MAYBE two, divorce him, and sick the lawyers on him to take as much of his resources as possible. Then, more statistics; first marriages on average have a roughly 50% chance of long-term success (no divorce, "'til death do you part"), then the second marriage has a roughly 40% chance of long-term success, then the third is roughly 30%, and so on.

So, with her looks, and also her blatantly touted ability to manipulate, she IS likely to be wealthy if she seeks the most manipulation and theft that she can. BUT... how much money? Also, how quickly will she spend it? Will she be able to bounce into another marriage and quickly enough so that she can still have a kid or two and then divorce him for more money? How many men will fall into her trap? She might end up menopausal after the first marriage if she starts late enough and so if she can't have kids anymore, she must hope that she can gain alimony. Ultimately there is still a possibility that she will not be able to obtain alimony and of course child support is finite (though some countries allow for over 21 years of child support for children with disabilities) so it's possible that she'll waste all the money by the time she's in her 40s or 50s, by then her sexual market value is tanked, and so she must either fall back to welfare or 'settle' for a middle-class man at best, and probably one in his 60s at the youngest, likely not very attractive either. Possibly even a blatant beta.

So, I hope she enjoys her youth and riches while she can. There's the possibility that she will have a very sad life near the end, and indeed I've heard that the rate of suicide for women in the 50-65 age bracket is increasing. Marriage works, divorce doesn't.

youtube.com/watch?v=ilWc0cMsE4Q
No matter how old a woman always has a default SMV that is stronger than 95% of all men.

You can believe that 'The Wall' is a myth if you want, in fact if the definition of 'The Wall' is "a point at which, beyond it, women no longer possess sexual market value" then I would reject it too because it is not one fixed arbitrary point, not even the age of 30. It is a gradual process. In regards to the video, if all a woman wants to do is fuck then indeed she will be able to find no-strings-attached partners. There are even people who fetishize 80+ year old grandmothers, yes, and there are hedonistic men out there who will fuck any pair of legs that will open for them. The video, however, doesn't take into account long-term relationships and marriage. If the experiment was followed through, ideally with an actual hedonistic and moralless grandmother who would indeed fuck basically anyone, she could go out on these 'adventures' of sorts and see how things go. The likelihood of successfully snagging someone who is attractive and wealthy and an actual 'good man' who will be faithful... basically non-existent. Her best bet would be some old, lonely, and desperate old man near death who just doesn't want to die alone.

Make no mistake, though. A woman who wastes her best years are not setting herself up to be able to get the best possible partner later in life. Sexual market value does decline in women with age. Peak sexual market value for women is 25 at the oldest and it steadily declines from there. With menopause, it takes the option of children off the table and with that alone, MANY men are no longer interested in a long-term relationship. Sex? Sure, there's many young men who are into MILFs and would happily use them as 'practice', but a long-term relationship? No, not one like marriage. A long-term 'friendship' maybe, perhaps at 'best' he might cheat on the mother of his children if his wife ends up being a bit prudish and doesn't much like sex and so he continues to, I say again, USE her. She will never be the main woman in his life.

So, if you consider hedonistic and emotionless sex and sexual 'usage' at most any age as proof there is no 'wall' then fair enough, and seeing as women can indeed generally find sex at any age then technically the "SEXUAL market value" maintains, so I will be more specific in what I have been talking about. "Long-term relationship market value", however that said, SMV does decrease with age because the most handsome and wealthiest and richest men will generally not want old pussy. They will get young, thin, obedient, submissive... basically traits that are generally prescribed to being "lady-like" which is how I want my wife to raise my daughters so that they can earn a good husband early in life. A man who is responsible, considerate, intelligent, productive, basically someone like myself whom has a very bright future ahead. Hedonistic women would not have an opportunity with me, the hypothetical 86-year-old included.

If you're in love with some irrelevant side character, background character, or OC then you're ultra cringe
Also, he wrote it in his diary desu

I'll also add that a man's Sexual Market Value/SMV has a very different trend. While women are at their most valuable at 25 at the very oldest (offers a solid decade or so of fertility, maybe even more depending on genes), "men's" sexual market value at 18-25 is generally quite low. Women's market value is in their looks and fertility, I suppose also to a smaller degree, the tightness of their holes for pleasure. The value in men is primarily in their position on the socioeconomic hierarchy because women are generally hypergamist by nature. They want a man whom is ideally higher on that ladder than themselves, and the chances of break-up/divorce after a woman starts out-earning her man, increases. She will see herself as able to find a better partner, she will start to look elsewhere, and if she finds someone higher in that all-important hierarchy and he's available and he's into her, she's very likely to ditch the lower-earning man for the higher-earning one.

So, does an 18-25 year old man/boy make as much as a man in his 40s/50s? Generally not. They're also generally not as wise, not at knowledgeable, and indeed there's many women out there that are physically attracted to older men more than younger men. They like the fact they're more set in their ways, they like the wrinkles, the greys, and they're also far less likely to be beta white knights whom are really quite pathetic. I say this as someone still in their 20s, and I am fully aware that my own sexual/relationship market value is steadily increasing. Men typically peak in value at around 50 years old, which is quite a stark contrast from women who peak when they're late-teen girls or at the oldest, mid-20s women. The amount of money a woman makes has no impact on a man's outlook on how valuable she is, but interestingly enough, the amount a woman makes DIRECTLY affects her choice of men due to their hypergamist nature. I mean, can you imagine an early-30s millionaire CEO woman settling down with a manager of a few fast food restaurants who makes maybe 6-figures a year at best, and I doubt it would be as much as $200,000.

Your argument reminds me of the concept of "social constructionism".

>There are even people who fetishize 80+ year old grandmothers
Do you think these men prefers a half dead corpse over some young woman? The state of dating is so fucked up that they are forced to this.

Attached: maleVirginity.png (1128x858, 198K)

Lmao, most of those characters get less screentime than my wife.
Luna and Celestia are even less relevant than Lyra and BonBon

>During his Berlin years Schopenhauer occasionally mentioned his desire to marry and have a family.[118][119] For a while he was unsuccessfully courting 17-year-old Flora Weiss, who was 22 years younger than him.[120] His unpublished writings from that time show that he was already very critical of monogamy but still not advocating polygyny – instead musing about a polyamorous relationship he called tetragamy.[121] He had an on and off relationship with a young dancer Caroline Richter (she also used surname Medon after one of her ex-lovers).[122] They met when he was 33 and she was 19 and working at the Berlin Opera. She had already had numerous lovers and a son out-of-wedlock, and later gave birth to another son, this time to an unnamed foreign diplomat. (She soon had another pregnancy but the child was stillborn).[123] As Schopenhauer was preparing to escape Berlin in 1831, due to cholera epidemic, he offered to take her with him on the condition that she left behind her young son.[118] She refused and he went alone; in his will he left her a significant sum of money but insisted that it should not be in any way spent on her second son.[118]
bro what the fuck

No, I do not think that men generally prefer 80+ year old women over young women, but fetishes exist and fetishes give people particular sexual preferences, so yes, while men GENERALLY don't prefer women who are so old, SOME men do. A minority. Hell, tragically, some old women out there have been raped.

As for the trend of virginity that you point out, I hadn't considered it, but I am aware that the trend of simply 'having sex' is on the decline in the West, mostly for men but not so much for women. With the concept of 'casual sex', it does away with monogamy, which is in the Christian foundation of our great civilization, and I very much mean 'great'. The West is the greatest civilization in the history of the planet and off the top of my head, the only real contenders who come close are Japan, South Korea, and perhaps Israel though Israel very much holds the 'Judeo' part of 'Judeo-Christian Values' so it's understandable that they're doing so good. Ashkenazi Jews also have the highest racial IQ on the planet at 115, while the West is at about 100 and South Korea/Japan are closer to 105 (highest average national IQ... which is odd, you'd think it would be Israel, but I digress).

Modern Western women, while they're the most liberated and safe and free women in human history, are not doing well. Since 2nd wave feminism and the rise of Cultural Marxism, they have been 'sexually liberated', which was not a good idea. Monogamy works. Since the 1960s, the West seems to have sadly started going the way of Polygamy. What this has resulted in is that the top-tier men, the most value, the most handsome and richest and most socially successful ones are obtaining access to the 'best' women of those who have not settled down in marriage. So with more and more of the best women, say the top 10% of sexually hedonistic women gone to the top 5% of men, this basically leaves the next section of 10% (the 9/10s, let's say) to the next 5% of men, and then another 10% chunk to those at 8.5-9/10, and so on. Women are hypergamist, they aim UP, while men are perfectly fine with accepting women who are lower than them however they will still generally seek the best they can possibly get.

This leaves A LOT of the 'lesser' men without women because monogamy isn't being enforced. If it were, then the best women would get with the best men, and the middle-best women with their corresponding men, and the middle women with the middle men, and so it leaves the 'worst' women to 'settle' with the 'worst' men or otherwise to live a childless and sexless and loveless life. Now, though, with so much polygamy and 'casual sex' (horrible concept even though I admittedly hedonistically enjoyed it in my late teens and early-mid 20s) those 'worst' women can access mean who are lower-middle or even middle perhaps. This results in 'incels' who just cannot find a woman, and men who cannot gain access to women because better men than them are getting them... well... violent.

Truly, the studied collapse of the West seems to be directly attributable to 2nd/3rd wave feminism and, a bit more specifically, the Cultural Marxist roots from which such concepts have sprouted. Many of us have, collectively, turned from God, from the traditions from which our ancestors formed this spectacular and truly unbelievable civilization. Me, I have returned to God, to Christ, even to the Holy Spirit as well as to many of our traditions. As such I've in fact been told several times that "why aren't more men like you?" When I speak of my desire to get married, to remain faithful, to protect and provide, to love and hold and cherish my wife who births me beautiful little children to raise into upstanding and productive members of society whom will find good partners and bring them happiness just as their partners will bring my children great happiness. If I do my job right, then the world will be a better place thanks to each and every one of those kids having been born and raised. Considerate, respectable, productive, non-violence (unless in self-defence), articulate, honest with compliments and a refusal to let lies leave their lips.

Hedonism is not in the equation that leads to longterm success and a successful civilization, but it has been trickled into the equation that leads to the West, and so the West is slowly crumbling because of the left. Indeed, because of Cultural Marxism, they see the West as oppressive and awful and that it NEEDS to be burned down so that something 'better' can sprout from it. It doesn't work, because the Marxism at its foundation doesn't work. Marxism gives the Proletariat a sense of moral superiority in the face of the wealthy Bourgeoisie, and so there's been mass bloodshed. This bloodshed lead to the Soviet Union and Maoist China and Socialist Venezuela and indeed National SOCIALIST (Nazi) Germany, which in turn lead to MORE bloodshed, and in some cases FURTHER bloodshed was required to fix it.

I am hopeful that the New Zealand shooter is wrong, that there is STILL a democratic solution, and that bloodshed is NOT needed to pull Cultural Marxism from its clawed grasp onto my precious West, the civilization that my White ancestors have built with their blood, sweat, and tears. The left should hope that they haven't removed a possible democratic solution, because if there are, well... honestly, I'm no longer entirely convinced that there won't be a 'race war' or a huge Civil War in the West, like what happened during WWI and WWII with so many Western nations blowing one another up. I heard of a saying, "nobody wages war like the White man", and I'm most certainly inclined to believe it. Look at the history of interracial wars that involve Whites, we almost always come out on top, or if we don't, like with Vietnam, at minimum it results in RADICALLY higher casualties for the non-Whites than for the Whites.

>nature destroyed
>capitalism as totalitarianism
>impending climate apocalypse
>locked into unfree ideology of laissez-faire market economy
>death knell of privacy, cornerstone of democracy
>constant state of illusory culture war

yes must be cultural marxism and women creating all these problems for your virginity

Though, that said, I don't believe it would be a 'Race War', no... more of a 'West War'. Those who love and cherish the Christian West (people generally on the Political centre and right) versus those who hate and condemn the Christian West (typically radical leftists, 'Progressives' or more aptly called 'Regressives', only about 8% of the US population, and I am not American, by the way, though I hope to be in the future). There will be non-Whites fighting for the West, and I actually think that the bulk of not just Whites but also Asians in the West would primarily be fighting for the West too. Meanwhile, if the US is any indication, the VAST majority of Blacks in the West will be on the Anti-West side. Also all those onions-boy lefties whom won't stand up too well in the face of men on the right, and indeed to my understanding the bulk of Military Forces in the West are on the right. After all, they love their country so much that they're willing to die for it.

So, if this is how it ends up going, if bloodshed is indeed the only option... things aren't looking good for the left. Many will die, but far more lefties will die than centrists or my fellow right-wingers. Ultimately, as stated, I hope that a peaceful means can be utilized to fix the problem of Cultural Marxism in the West. The election of President Donald J Trump (and his coming re-election in 2020 which is set to be a landslide victory according to Politico which leans to the left) is definitely a sign that we can fix this. Then there's Brexit, the Yellow Vest protests in France, the successful election in Italy that brought about anti-EU leadership, Poland, Hungary, and if I recall correctly both the recent Swedish and Spanish Federal Elections resulted in a move closer to the centre. Canada's election is certainly on the way, either moving from the radical-left under Trudeau to the centrist Andrew Scheer of the Conservative Party, or, if a Donald Trump event occurs again, Maxime Bernier's right-wing "People's Party of Canada" will succeed. Yes, I know the party sounds Socialist/Communist, but I assure you it isn't. Bernier has many Libertarian values and part of his campaign is to scrap magazine restrictions (currently 10 rounds for a pistol and 5 rounds for a semi-auto centrefire rifle). It's very possible that this could happen, after all, Harper campaigned to scrap the long-gun registry, and he was successfully elected, and around 2011/12 or so he indeed scrapped that useless and costly registry.

I have already predicted that 2019 and 2020 will see a trend of elections across the West towards the right, I think I'll ease on that slightly and say "a trend towards the centre or right", and I do believe this will occur. We shall see, but the left have gone WAY too far and the reasonable centrists and right-wingers are bloody sick of it. If I am correct, then the beginning of Cultural Marxism's downfall began in 2016 with the election of Trump. We will see it continue.

>Nature destroyed
It is not, though it may indeed be suffering. The Oceans are in a sad state, but thankfully there's successful capitalist individuals working towards a solution that will be cost-effective, maybe even profitable. Most of the world's technological advancements took place in the Capitalist West, and well, as it so happens, mostly by men too. Women should show some gratefulness rather than hatred.

>Capitalism as totalitarianism
Capitalism is hierarchical and hierarchies tend towards tyranny, this is true, and it's why monogamy was such a valuable thing to have at the foundation of the West because it effectively stabilized the different Sexual Market Value hierarchies of men and women and the destabilizing affect that women's hypergamy has. I am a Capitalist, but, I do see the necessity of social programs to protect the most vulnerable in society though ideally if more people lived the Christian life, they would show generosity, and so the steady stream of donations to those who care for and house the most vulnerable in society (the disabled, the low-IQ, those who suffer terrible personal tragedies and find themselves thrown to vulnerability, etc.) and so taxation wouldn't be necessary at least in terms of providing welfare to those who NEED it, but I digress, with those social Governmental programs (or ideally a huge amount of voluntary generosity), the hierarchical trend to tyranny can potentially be routed so that society doesn't destabilize and fall though that's EXACTLY what radical leftists seem to want, thus want the poor to suffer more to make them angry.

>Impending climate apocalypse
As far as I'm concerned, that's in the same vein as "Russian collusion"; fake news, a nothingburger, to quote a high-ranking individual in CNN.

>Locked into unfree ideology of laissez-faire market economy
You'll have to elaborate.

>Death knell of privacy, cornerstone of democracy
Again, elaboration please.

>Constant state of illusory culture war
You can thank the left and Cultural Marxism.

>Cultural Marxism and women creating all these problems for your virginity
I actually regret having sex with so many women in my youth and I somewhat wish I still had my virginity to provide it to my future wife, but well, I've made my mistakes, and so I must carry that cross and hope that it doesn't negatively affect the love life of my future marriage. As for women creating the problems... well in terms of the move to polygamy, I specifically blame 2nd wave feminism which has indeed stemmed from Cultural Marxism. Ultimately, non-polygamous activity is both coming from men and women, though it's more the woman's responsibility to be more careful in choosing a partner than the man. Men are hardwired to desire sex from almost any woman who'll have them, it's how we are, and so it's A LOT harder for men to maintain monogamy than women. Women need to start shouldering responsibility too, and so, close their legs until they find the right man.

I'll also note that all the incredible advancements in nuclear technology (which is FAR safer and more stable now), wind turbines, solar panel technology, and other 'clean' sources of energy are steadily improving and also becoming more affordable thanks to the Capitalistic Christian West. Again, as a Capitalist, a Christian, and a White man who's ancestors built all this, you're welcome. Now stop trying to stifle progress and be happy that people aren't left to starve in the streets, in fact Capitalism is SO successful that right now in the West, obesity is a far greater problem than starvation. We have such excess and such an easy and convenient and non-physical way of life that people who aren't careful could end up becoming obese, which degrades their health and their sexual market value.

So, don't destroy the West, don't destroy Capitalism, and encourage people to return to our traditional Judeo-Christian values. I sincerely believe that our damage to the planet will steadily diminish as better technology is produced and made affordable. Hey, I myself recycle. It's a pain in the ass putting the waste paper into the paper bag and the cans/plastics/tetrapacks into the other bag, but it results in me producing FAR less waste so I accept this modest degree of added responsibility on my shoulders. Frankly it also feels kinda nice, my carbon footprint is smaller.

Try to get more people functioning like that on an individual basis, rather than pushing for more Government power to try and control people, though I'll say this, SOME regulation is needed because SOME companies will produce and dispose of waste in terrible ways to improve their bottom line, and such inconsiderate heads of those corporations need to be kept in check, but don't stifle them so much that they can no longer function. We need to continue to advance and progress, so do your part, and encourage others to do theirs, but do not seek authoritarianism. What are you, a fascist? Seriously, ask yourself that... because I am no authoritarian.

Literally kill yourself lmao

Literally, I think I'll soon write my third non-fiction book. Perhaps I'll tackle it over the summer. I'm busy with some Fiverr orders at present; a man's gotta make money.

Nietzsche definitely didn't fuck

Stay strong, friend. I know your feeling too well. I found a lovable gf that would do anything for me but that is no solution for you. I would say to either take a chance on some girl that isn't ideal but is willing to change like mine was or go hard on manipulation tactics. Stay strong dude.

He had a thing for a certain woman but she didn't reciprocate the love. Pretty sure they never fucked, but Nietzsche DID have sexual intercourse. He ended up with syphilis from a prostitute when he was in his 20s, so yes, unfortunately he did partake in non-monogamous sexual intercourse. Another victim of the hedonistic sexual desires of man... it is a curse.

If only you knew how good things could be.

Attached: 624583546.jpg (596x557, 55K)

Fuck you

I fucking hate this neoliberal conception of self, a self that is an object that i needs to be fix so it can better his integration to society. Fix it acordding to what?
How can you conceptualize self like that?! A self in which the metaphysical conception doesn't exist and the only thing that matters are its animalistic material status

There's literally nothing neoliberal about it

faggot

Cringe.

Are you autistic ? Stop obsessing over semantics user was just saying that if you behave like a weakling it wont attract women so he has to fix his behavior.

the atomization of the self away from the collective and the need for the correction of the self to integrate (into a new collective which is based around fealty to consumer trends)is pretty neoliberal.

It's ironic because this is literally on a freudian level the bare minimum psychological requirements for wanting a gf, I find it funny how people whinge on and on about how incels just have too high of standards.

Based and oedipuscomplexpilled

Based

You stop that extremist anti-american sentiment right now, if you want to change things you should pokemon go to the polls.

Attached: hillary-Clinton-Death-Stare.jpg (417x585, 46K)

I'm being nice right now, but you know what uncle Joe will do if he catches you slipping again.

Attached: Hillary-Clinton-smug.jpg (640x375, 35K)

I unironically would like to cum on hillary gilf face

Based if and only IF the purpose is to drown the bitch.

No, is just to teach her what is her place as a woman and how she must behave, the cunt bitch

the self is that which is its own relation

Women aren't human beings until they become mothers.