(June 27, 2016 at 8:27 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote:

(June 27, 2016 at 8:25 am)MJ the Skeptical Wrote: Well if you're not funny to me then why would you get credit for any humor? retard. Also, humor is also SUBJECTIVE. It all comes full circle huh... mate?

There's no way you're married.

There's no way you got more pussy from being married then. I guess were even on ad hominems huh dipshit?

(June 27, 2016 at 8:25 am)paulpablo Wrote:

(June 27, 2016 at 8:06 am)MJ the Skeptical Wrote: 1) Yes you did say it was easy if you have the internet, you said it wasn't hard to find non-monogamous people if you had that, which is beyond retarded and generalized.

2) Yes I did say non-monogamy is unattractive to most women, even not being into relationships, which is also non-monogamy, retard x2.

3) You generalized all people who couldn't find what they want as being bad at using the internet when there are more factors there, retard x3.

4) No, you don't have to be in the proximity of two vaginas to be non-monogamous, because like I said you autistic empty vessel, that you could not be into relationships which would also put you in the non-monogamy category.

Oh, if only I knew how to use the internet, I could find what I want in the middle of nowhere huh? Did you miss all of the reasons I gave? I guess so. Just an intellectually bankrupt tool.

If you have access to the Internet and live in the middle of nowhere then you can still find non monogamous women online.

If you can't have physical access to those women because you're someone who lives in the middle of nowhere with presumably little or no means of transport then that's a separate issue to finding the women.

1) You can, but it is easy like you state? Fuck no, that's anecdotal shit and the fact that you can't even concede that is pathetic. Plus location wasn't the only factor I brought up, try again sweetheart.

2) It's not only about location...fucking shit...You completely jumped the shark, go argue with someone your own intellectual caliber, perhaps a fire hydrant or a feminist.

psdd?

(June 27, 2016 at 8:31 am)Little lunch Wrote: psdd?

What does that have to do with finding someone in a minority group? And finding someone who is not only into you but matches a myriad of factors like you.

Just like how it's not easy to find other groups of people out there in extreme minority groups like non-monogamy.

Just merely suggesting that with your warpath attitude you might possibly be on your rags.

Is serial monogamy with about 30 women over a life time still monogamy ? Or does that make me a long distance marathon slut?

(June 27, 2016 at 9:01 am)chimp3 Wrote: Is serial monogamy with about 30 women over a life time still monogamy ? Or does that make me a long distance marathon slut?

Those are both great descriptors.  Why choose? So long as you avoid threesomes I think you can still claim the mono- title.

(June 27, 2016 at 8:28 am)MJ the Skeptical Wrote:

(June 27, 2016 at 8:27 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote: There's no way you're married.

There's no way you got more pussy from being married then. I guess were even on ad hominems huh dipshit?

I didn't say there was, I was merely commenting on there being no way someone who would use the type of language you do could be married.

You're really bad at this.

Jesus Avatar number 1 V.S Jesus Avatar number 2.

Fight fight fight!

(without breaking the rules)

Fight fight fight!

(June 27, 2016 at 9:05 am)Whateverist the White Wrote:

(June 27, 2016 at 9:01 am)chimp3 Wrote: Is serial monogamy with about 30 women over a life time still monogamy ? Or does that make me a long distance marathon slut?

Those are both great descriptors.  Why choose?  So long as you avoid threesomes I think you can still claim the mono- title.

I would not say I avoided threesomes. Just did not have the diplomatic skills to make those alliances. Does that still count?