❄️ Snowflake shoe0nhead / June Lapine / June La Porta & Armoured Skeptic / Gregory "Greg" Fluhrer - A poor man's Boxxy: rejected by Vaush, disowned by /pol/ for burning coal, sleeps in a dog's bed surrounded by trash, and her ex-boyfriend.

  • Thread starter Thread starter HG 400
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Mr Cuddles said:
I think you have this backwards (and wrong to boot) if women need to be submissive to their man then they should be really calculating where they invest. If they fuck up, then they've fucked up good and proper, whilst in a rapidly shifting and hypergamous world they can write it off as a bad relationship. The poster referenced trad and modern relationships and I think that was a good distinction to make.

In a trad relationship the women wasn't a slave to the man. Yea he would earn all the money but she would be mostly responsible for spending it. It's why women were schooled in home economics as they would be in charge of running the household. For me divvying up responsibility for tasks and then having the more competent partner discharging it is more sensible than "oh we just share responsibility for everything". The former generally runs slickly and the latter is a recipe for arguing over who's turn it is to cook dinner tonight or who should take on the extra shifts to make rent (and then ultimately divorce)

Don't know whether this what you were looking forward to but it's probably what you needed to hear.
Click to expand...
No I really don't think I do. You're largely digressing from any point I've actually made like the other guy to pretend at insight into a question never asked.
Because you're not getting it: Shoe was too submissive to Greg's whims and should have pushed him earlier in a calculating move to save her herself some time. And saying "lol guess she chose poorly" isn't factually disputed, it's disputed an excuse to not grant her any sympathy when Greg was selfish enough to propose without meaning it. This doesn't affect him, it does her.
Also calculating women are usually seen as bad or insincere yet that's being offered as the correct path for June. I just don't actually believe this is said for any reason other than it's a convenient way to judge her.

You guys are both ascribing to me hardline positions I don't hold (I usually make fun of internet trads who dishonestly dichotomize everything, and also clearly can't handle any remotely egalitarian arrangements with a woman ). It's really just not clever. You're being more ideological than I am, which I guess I invited by referencing the political baggage people are bringing to this discussion, when I am just saying a lot of people would still be blaming June for the relationship failing if she had stood up for herself in the wrong way as well.
The debate is really just about image and feeling. June is the loser and annoying so everything she does is wrong and justified with hasty political pandering.
 
Last edited:
Berrakh said:
No I really don't think I do. Because you're not getting it: calculating women are usually seen as bad or insincere yet that's being offered as the correct path for June. I just don't actually believe this is said for any reason other than it's a convenient way to judge her.

You guys are both ascribing to me hardline positions I don't hold (I usually make fun of internet trads who dishonestly dichotomize everything, and also clearly can't handle any remotely egalitarian arrangements with a woman ). It's really just not clever. You're being more ideological than I am, which I guess I invited by referencing the political baggage people are bringing to this discussion, when I am just saying a lot of people would still be blaming June for the relationship failing if she had stood up for herself in the wrong way as well.
The debate is really just about image and feeling. June is the loser and annoying so everything she does is wrong and justified with hasty political pandering.
Click to expand...
If multiple people arent getting what you are meaning to say maybe the problem isn't theirs? :thinking:
 
KateHikes14 said:
If multiple people arent getting what you are meaning to say maybe the problem isn't theirs? :thinking:
Click to expand...
Two people is not multiple. And I'm sorry, you really can't show where I said what you claimed I said.
You both jumped to a conclusion, which I admitted makes some sense because of how I phrased one particular part.
I don't dichotomize relationships like that. I usually have to argue against people who do because it's unhelpful and does nothing to clarify.
At this point it's clear I don't hold that position anyway, and Mr Cuddles just reiterated boilerplate I've stated before on this very topic about how June was submissive without ever getting a guarantee of commitment from Greg. Again, I just need to say it, it's not a smart response.
 
Last edited:
Berrakh said:
Two people is not multiple. And I'm sorry, you really can't show where I said what you claimed I said. You both jumped to a conclusion, which I admitted makes some sense because of how I phrased one particular part.
I don't dichotomize relationships like that. I usually have to argue against people who do because it's unhelpful and does nothing to clarify.
At this point it's clear I don't hold that position anyway, and Mr Cuddles just reiterated boilerplate I've stated before on this very topic about how June was submissive without ever getting a guarantee of commitment from Greg. Again, I just need to say it, it's not a smart response.
Click to expand...
Fascinating, would you say you see yourself a lot in her?
 
KateHikes14 said:
Fascinating, would you say you see yourself a lot in her?
Click to expand...
Okay so now this is about me because I don't agree with you. Which is pristine "I don't have a good answer so I'm gonna lower the discussion so I can finally be above it" territory.
And you've ducked the challenge of showing where I said what you assumed.
At least the argument ends on a transparent note and doesn't derail the thread further.

Anyway, my saying more or less the provenance of what Cuddles' rejoinder tried to teach me as if I needed to know it. https://kiwifarms.net/threads/shoe0...gory-greg-fluhrer.22394/page-190#post-6276038

Isn't trying to socially otherize someone who disagrees extremely feminine behavior? I'm not a girl, like is being implied. I just do feel some sympathy for her situation while agreeing she makes extremely bad decisions.
 
Last edited:
Berrakh said:
Okay so now this is about me because I don't agree with you. Which is pristine "I don't have a good answer so I'm gonna lower the discussion so I can finally be above it" territory.
And you've ducked the challenge of showing where I said what you assumed.
At least the argument ends on a transparent note and doesn't derail the thread further.
Anyway, my saying more or less the provenance of what Cuddles' rejoinder tried to teach me as if I needed to know it. https://kiwifarms.net/threads/shoe0...gory-greg-fluhrer.22394/page-190#post-6276038

Isn't trying to socially otherize someone who disagrees extremely feminine behavior? I'm not a girl, like is being implied. I just do feel some sympathy for her situation while agreeing she makes extremely bad decisions.
Click to expand...
If you want your reddit-tier discussion on "the nature of hypergamy" or whatever the fuck with citations why not make a thread rather than trying to make this thread about yourself and your (continually edited) posts?
 
KateHikes14 said:
If you want your reddit-tier discussion on "the nature of hypergamy" or whatever the fuck with citations why not make a thread rather than trying to make this thread about yourself and your (continually edited) posts?
Click to expand...
Look I didn't say what you claimed, I probably know your own meme belief system better than you because all you could do is regurgitate inoffensive pablum at me like it was an adequate response to what I said.
I'm editing to clarify for your sake but I agree it's probably not doing the job. I'm not a miracle worker. I'm not retracting anything I say or mean. regardless.

Anyway, debate's over. You're the one who wanted it and continued it so don't call me Reddit lol.
You can DM me if you genuinely need closure.
Neko GF said:
Original:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6dGbn2MOEX8Archive (480p):
y2mate.com - Reading Your INSANE Comments High AF_480p.mp4
Click to expand...
The Weed Girl. The final stage of trying to look cool and approachable. If this continues she's gonna be getting real fat I imagine.
 
Last edited:
Berrakh said:
if you're genuinely arguing that women need to be more selective and reticent about relationships with men (which is what you're arguing if you're saying June should have held out for more certain commitment) during an age where hypergamy is at an all time high you're delusional in my honest opinion. You really can't have it both ways. Either women need to be submissive to their man or they need to be calculating about where they invest. These two states are frequently pitted against one another when talking about e-celeb relationships.
Click to expand...
I agree with the majority of your post but I take issue with this in particular. Being submissive in a relationship is not mutually exclusive to being pragmatic about one. And I don't mean "save yourself for marriage" kind of pragmatism, I mean "stop wasting your precious time with this man" pragmatism. That's good advice for anyone and it really has nothing to do with her behaving submissively. It's like some deadbeat job. Sure, do what your boss tells you at the time. But when you start seeing blood in the water the onus is on you to get out of the pool. Lest you get AIDs.
 
Berrakh said:
The Weed Girl. The final stage of trying to look cool and approachable. If this continues she's gonna be getting real fat I imagine.
Click to expand...
If it makes you feel any better... I don't think she was high. She just left in her gigglier outtakes. She sounds the same as normal with zero eye redness.

Which makes her a poseur doing a Weed Girl video without actually getting baked.

Also according to this (remember, she said "legal" weed in NY): article dated April 18, 2021
Public officials suggest it could take 18 months before recreational marijuana is available in stores but some companies believe sales won’t start before December 2022.
Click to expand...
 
Neko GF said:
Original:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6dGbn2MOEX8Archive (480p):
y2mate.com - Reading Your INSANE Comments High AF_480p.mp4
Click to expand...
Wow a thumbnail where she isn't looking to the left or the right with a weird pensive look (anyone else noticed she does that? Just makes her face look 10x more punchable imo). She still looks like an uncanny valley skinwalker though. Those crazy eyes lookin like she's gonna come out of the screen, shape shift to her true form and kill me like a 2010's Creepypasta.
 
MediocreMilt said:
If it makes you feel any better... I don't think she was high. She just left in her gigglier outtakes. She sounds the same as normal with zero eye redness.

Which makes her a poseur doing a Weed Girl video without actually getting baked.

Also according to this (remember, she said "legal" weed in NY): article dated April 18, 2021
Click to expand...
She definitely wasn't high. Bitch would have chinky eyes and be way dumber on camera. It's just a gimmick because she's lazy.
 
I don't care if she's really high or not, that's a cheap ass trick. It's Current Year +6, no one cares.

El Sátiro Sordo said:
What a sad excuse of a man.
Click to expand...

To be fair, that's what they say, we don't know if it's true or how accurate it is. One thing is have a wife that's a tyrant who won't let you spend your own well earned money on stuff like hobbies or going out and another one, "my wife doesn't let me spend our money for food and services on toys and games, what a bitch". I actually think it' the latter, but we really can't tell who speaks the truth and Shoe isn't precisely very objective.
 
Tasty Tatty said:
I don't care if she's really high or not, that's a cheap ass trick. It's Current Year +6, no one cares.



To be fair, that's what they say, we don't know if it's true or how accurate it is. One thing is have a wife that's a tyrant who won't let you spend your own well earned money on stuff like hobbies or going out and another one, "my wife doesn't let me spend our money for food and services on toys and games, what a bitch". I actually think it' the latter, but we really can't tell who speaks the truth and Shoe isn't precisely very objective.
Click to expand...
No way that closeted sword swallower isn't in the second group. He larped as euphoric knight for far too long to be reasonable with money.
 
Shoe loves the comments from retards labelling her a nazi for the same reason that she loves throwing around Pepe memes in inappropriate context when they make zero sense. She spends every waking hour of her life online and is more than familiar with the overwhelming amount of her audience who are literal drooling retards. Shoe hates ID Pol right? At least she says she does. While her fanbase will oftentimes say the same in order to fit in with the crowd or whatever, they are textbook radlibs who in any other circumstance would be reporting those same Pepe memes to the ADL. Her fans for the most part are literal trannie jannie BLM protesting faggots who have zero idea what they're talking about and don't understand the same watered down talking points they get from their le based breadtube channels are also being made on MSNBC.

As seen in her new vid (I tapped out after minutes), she couldn't be more gleeful shouting down the comments who are calling her a nazbol or nazi adjacent or whatever. It makes her laugh because being grouped in with the trannie jannies has to kill her inside when she's also trying to maintain the aura of the "cool kid" contrarian. But money talks, and the grift is absolutely real, I don't see her hanging out with any Lauren Southern types anytime soon. This all reminds me of a Tweet Frank Hassle replied to of hers a few months ago.

1619849154949.png
 
I just find it a bit surprising she hasn't caved in and stopped using memes like Pepe and apologized. I guess she's still gonna try grifting right wingers until the end even when they want nothing to do with her. If I were more naive I would say she has some conviction and for once she's standing for something she believes in, that being "edgy memes don't make me a Nazi stfu". But is she just really stupid and can't read her audience? I'm convinced she'd be making far more bank than she is now if she made a big wall of text apologising for saying the nigger word and for using Pepe and blah blah blah instead of trying to defend points that no one in her audience except the people she shunned and kicked out years ago would stand with her on.
 
4chan was edgy left wingers because it used to be atheist until Hitchens died. Then it followed its own trajectory.
It's also gay to try and pretend 4chan is in your favor. It's like pretending you're big on a bunch of cringe forums.
 
Berrakh said:
4chan was edgy left wingers because it used to be atheist until Hitchens died. Then it followed its own trajectory.
It's also gay to try and pretend 4chan is in your favor. It's like pretending you're big on a bunch of cringe forums.
Click to expand...
4chan is inhabited by children. /lit/ is full of breadtube types, but edgier (including euphoric atheists). /his/ is full of people pretending to understand history and genetics; /sci/ is full of insecure nerds that talk about IQ 24/7.
I understand if you are very young and want to feel you are part of some kind of "counterculture". But there is no way you are a mature adult and you still take seriously what 4chan has to say. 4chan is as "spiritually" castrated as reddit; they just don't know it yet because they are too childish; too blinded by the hubris of youth to notice. This can be applied to chan culture in general.
Let's be honest, a big chunk of channers are there because of muh secret club, not because they enjoy being there. It's just a bunch of insecure mentally ill children.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom