Congratulations on totally missing the point. I think. I'm not entirely certain how I'm "self-glorifying" anything. Ok, I lied, I'm not entirely certain how your response relates to my post in any way.Grampy_bone said:The difference between a real man and a tool is that a real man doesn't make a big fucking deal out of it, by say, writing self-glorifying articles on the internet in order to prove how progressive and enlightened they are.
If you take a girl out and constantly make a point out of how chivalrous and respectful you are, then yes you are a tool who is only doing it to get laid.
Also: there's nothing silly about saying women cook for a man to get into his pants. Women do that all the time. If a girl tells you to come over to her place so she can cook you dinner there is about a %99.9 chance you will get laid.
What exactly am I not making a big deal out of? Yes, I can read the "it" but since my post was specifically about not making a big deal out of women in video games you must be reading something someone else wrote. Or simply projecting so hard you're reading your wall instead of your computer screen.
No where did I say anything about myself being chivalrous. I simply said that being attracted to a woman doesn't automatically mean you're objectifying her. Should I feel objectified if a woman looks at me and is attracted to me? Perhaps I'm asking the wrong person.
Then again I suppose I shouldn't even bother arguing with a cynic, which is apparently the real reason you took offense to my post. Before you bother arguing your lack of cynicism please re-read your post around the "[sic]if a woman invites you over to her house for her cooking there is a .1% chance she doesn't just want to get you in bed."
/facepalm