-
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
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2015
He chipmunks the audio because he's a dumb fuck PHAGGOT YOUTUBE WARRIOR and thinks it's funny.
Last edited:
Like I've said before, he offers training for FREE. How can he be a con man if his services are free? That's nonsense. You just vaguely say its self evident but you can't even give reasons why that's the case. This is, again, why you lost the debate.
Btw again you don't understand how debate topics work. A subject and criteria are set in advance and then elaborated on. What happened in that chatroom was Gellman's need to reinforce his position as head cuck in your forum orgy. When we finally got to talk, we weren't told what we were even supposed to be talking about.
You must see how broken that format is?
But the burden was on you as the challengers to bring up your contentions with MHA philosophies, not him. You were fighting from the blue corner in other words. Why did you come to debate him if you evidently aren't even familiar with his rhetoric and had no contentions to put forward?
- Joined
- May 21, 2015
I'll answer your questions once you show us your dick.
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2015
HE DOES IT FOR FREE!
I don't think you realise what this place is really about do you?
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2015
You must be too dumb to read then. This whole forum is about laughing at dickless chucklefucks like you.
- Joined
- May 21, 2015
Exposed for what?
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2015
show us ur penis big man
Well firstly, a long-time Kiwi Farms member has no business telling other people about how they are wasting their time. Second, listening to debates lets me see how MHA's ideas stand against scrutiny in the form of a live debate. If an idea holds up strong against public scrutiny, it shows the merits of that idea.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2015
What public scrutiny? Literally no one outside of manchild101 and kiwi farms gives a fuck about your debates
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2015
Didn't you mute half of the people proposing alternative ideas?
Doesn't your forum intentionally remove ideas contrary to what is taught and replace it with the image of a crying baby?
It's hard for there to be public scrutiny if the opposing ideas have the limelight for all of 5 minutes.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2015
Yep. They did.
Totally do.
What can you expect from a bunch of redpillers?
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2015
Hypocrisy, ineptitude, misogyny, and a severe case of overcompensation to make up for their insecurities.
The Loveshy Therapy Center never fails to disappoint.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2013
FFS, that wasn't a debate and stop calling it that. It was Chuck the Cuck yelling over everybody and his posse of cucked followers braying like jackasses.
A debate has rules. A debate has structure. A debate has a format. There's none of that in any of these confrontations that Chuck the Cuck enters into. He talks over people. Calls them faggots over and over and never actually presents or defends a point. His style is a constant attack and attempt to fluster his opponent. Then when the other person rage quits, and who in their right mind wouldn't, he claims victory and his beta as fuck followers clap like retarded seals as he cums all over them.
None of that is a debate. It's what goes on in the schoolyard and most people grow up out of that phase but not Chuck, he's found a way to make money off of gullible losers like yourself. Sure, he might give it up for free but so does a pusher or somebody with an agenda.
Now I would think, considering how sure Charles Gellman of Manhood101.com is of himself, that he wouldn't be adverse to an actual debate on neutral ground. You know, a place where he isn't able to mute his opponent's microphone and during the time his opponent is speaking, he shuts up like a good little boy. It would be a place where there would be a topic of discussion, like "is Charles Gellman of Manhood101.com full of shit?". Each side would give an opening statement, one of them would then speak for an allotted amount of time, the other would then have a chance to speak and then each would have the chance to challenge the other's statements, there would be a rebuttal and time permitting questions from the audience.
There would be a need for a neutral moderator of course. And then once all that is done, if he's as awesome as you claim he is, it should be apparent to everybody.
Or you can just show your dick. I really don't care either way.
AVFM figure heads John Hemling, Paul Elam and Janet Bloomfield, the Voat community and a few dozen academic feminists and wild MGTOWs seemed to give a shit.
He gave plenty of opportunity to speak. Go back and listen to the Kiwi Farmers who spoke, they couldn't rebut when he challenged them on their accusations. You don't deserve time to speak if you can't back up your claims in my book.
Kiwi Farms also came off neurotic and nervous as hell. I know how a neurotic person speaks when I hear them, being one myself. It just reeked of social incompetence.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2015
Because giving people a free taste is how you can get people to be receptive to further contact, and possibly sales. If you aren't Charles, then I'll give you an example. If you go to a big box store like CostCo, they tend to have tasting stations scattered through out the store. There might be candy, crackers, etc. and like almost everyone, they just decide to take a free sample. The point of giving free samples is to try and push product. Charles wants to push his product and this is how people with low self-worth get sucked in. It's a very old marketing tactic, like everything else that Charles does.
Another tactic is getting the consumer to hold or have the product in their possession, making it more likely they'll feel pressured into buy it because the sales person is being pleasant. Anyone who has worked in sales or retail could tell you this. These guys Charles preys on are easy marks just ripe for him to manipulate... And I dislike seeing people get duped this way.
Now dick pics, or GTFO.
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2015
That is some heavy shit there mate. lol
Considering that he doctored the audio parts that we do have unedited version of I do not trust the segements that happened after he kicked most Kiwis to be anything other than farcical either.
Charles was up all night editing the audio and not spending time with his family. How very sad!
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2013
Wrong asshole. He came in here and challenged us to debate him. When several of the people in this thread accepted his challenge and came to his forum, (myself not included) he turned right around and censored most of the debate. clearly you haven't read all 71 pages of this thread you ignorant little pissant.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2015
Everyone you just mentioned is a joke