Getter

09/06/2026

Saving this here for illustration (guys).

03/06/2026

😂💔

Shocking 😮: In 1987, American Airlines made Steven Rothstein an offer that seemed impossible to refuse.

Pay $250,000 once and fly first-class anywhere in the world. Forever.

Rothstein was 37, a Chicago investment banker who practically lived on airplanes. He did the math. He wrote the check.

Two years later, he added a companion pass for another $150,000, allowing him to bring anyone he wanted along for the ride.

What followed was the stuff of legend.

Over the next 21 years, Rothstein took approximately 10,000 flights. That's 476 flights per year. More than one every single day.

He flew to London for dinner. Tokyo for sushi. Paris for a meeting. Sydney for a weekend. He logged 30 million miles.

His wife Nancy would later say he "got on a plane like most people get on a bus."

But here's where the story becomes extraordinary.

Rothstein didn't just use his golden ticket for himself. He turned it into something beautiful.

He would arrive at airports early, scan the waiting areas, and approach strangers who needed help.

A homeless man trying to reunite with family.
A stranded traveler with a cancelled flight.
A priest who dreamed of visiting Rome.
A policeman hoping to return home to Bosnia.
People who could never afford first-class, or sometimes any ticket at all.

He'd offer them his companion seat. Free.

His daughter Caroline would later recall how her father used the pass to help countless people, turning what could have been pure indulgence into random acts of extraordinary generosity.

For two decades, American Airlines accepted this.

The CEO even wrote Rothstein a personal letter in 1998, promising to "honor the deal, far into the future."

Then came December 13, 2008.

Just as he stepped toward the plane, an airline employee handed him a letter.

His AAirpass was terminated. Effective immediately. For "fraudulent usage."

The legal battle that followed was bitter. Rothstein sued for $7 million. American Airlines countersued.

The case dragged through courts for years before settling out of court with confidential terms.

He spent $400,000 and extracted over $20 million worth of first class flights for himself and others, before the airline realized the math was catastrophic.

15/05/2026

14/05/2026

girls don tire for toxic men. lol. wow! it's crazy to actually see it in an actual content experiment. wow 💔🔥👏🏽

22/04/2026

53?! What? 😳

22/04/2026

Women don't go for romance. They expect the men to go for it.
So their whole romantic plan is based on "showing signs".

There are 3 things women like to say about romance:
The 1st is for men to read signs
The 2nd is to 'take your chance' on them.
The 3rd pathetic thing women say is that men need to 'chase' them, to be "persistent" in their efforts.

But what if I read the signs wrong? Will you just tell me no.

Women expect men to "take their chance" on them, but they expect that it's the men they want that will take chances on them. They also expect that the men should knows how to take the chances correctly. But what if he gets it wrong? Will she spare him? What if she dislikes him? Will she just say no?

What's the risk of taking your chance on a girl?
The risk is not rejection. It's humiliation.

Women humiliate men for taking chances, reading signs wrong and persisting.
Do women expect men to know how to read them correctly?
Women are supposedly "better at communication" (and they are), but men have to 'figure it out'. And they keep giving vague signals and opposite responses–and you're supposed to know how to "figure it out" when her no means yes 🚯.

Funny how it's called "taking your chance" when all the risk is coming from the person you're taking your chance on.

Reading "signs" from women,
'Taking your chance' on women,
Chasing women.

These things are almost completely wrong, because men end up harassing women, trying to do these things (misreading signs, taking chances and persisting). And end up getting humiliated for it (normally women need to have the power to humiliate men for harassing them, bcos it's their strength against physical strength and the pathetic superiority mentality–a progress in a world where women are s*xually bullied consistently. Men's unhinged nature is only reducing because there is now a risk for them. But now, men also need to protect themselves from reading signs and taking pathetic chances).
It's pathetic because the pathetic advice feeds the pathetic circle.

(You can only take your chance on a girl in a context, you can only respond to signs with signs and you're not even supposed to keep chasing rejection–you're supposed to LEAVE at the FIRST SIGN of NO!)

Reading Signs, Taking Chances and Chasing.
Getter™ 2026 [slow, then smooth, then fast]

22/04/2026

You will understand women's reactions to s*x when you consider what men and women get from s*x (both positives and negatives).

First, women don't get satisfied from s*x as much as men (all men get or***ms and almost all women don't–imagine having urges and the most you get out of it is just urges, and no climax. Men cannot relate, and so they expect women to behave like them when it comes to s*x–wanting s*x for the sake of s*x. But men only want s*x for the sake of s*x because it's satisfying. For women, it's not satisfying 99% of the times–if it were, women will be as s*x-crazed as men. And the evidence of this is that women are s*x-crazed when they meet men that satisfy them, no matter how toxic the men are).

Secondly, men don't have ANY negative consequences of s*x (apart from STIs which are mutual consequences), but women bear ALL the consequences of it–pregnancy, childbearing, abortions, infertility and death (many women die everyday from pregnancy. I know one personally that died recently)! And we're not even talking about how the man that has s*x with a woman is a king (the more the mightier), and the woman that have s*x with a man is shameful (the more the shameful-er). Even the guy she has the s*x with can have less respect for her, especially if he can say he got her "easy".

What are women even getting out of s*x? Unsatisfied conji, risking your life, and disrespect (shame).

That is why it's easier for women to give s*x for money, because at least they get something for the risk they're taking.

And that's why it's easier for women to have s*x with people they're committed to, because the risk is shared between them (a little).

The culmination of men's selfishness is expecting women to remove money in their considerations of romance, when in reality, men are getting all the benefits of romance, and women are getting NOTHING–with all the consequences (which men are not getting).

Remove money, and WHAT ARE YOU BRINGING TO THE TABLE as a man (that's she's not bringing too).

S*x is a risk for women, and it's not for men.
Men are complaining online about how women are playing hard to get, but they're the slut-shamers ("that girl too cheap", "person wey all of us don chop, you use am do babe"). And it's men that want s*x without committements.

Funny how men can see the mole in women's eyes, but the log in our own. Only women can see it. (And they will tell you and you will still argue. "Women don't have sense".)

Men are selfish, agree with it or not. Men are wickedly selfish.

Women and s*x
Getter™ 2026 [slow, then smooth, then fast]

18/04/2026

All the problems in relationships are either one of two things;

1. Satisfaction
2. Peace of mind

Satisfaction problems
✓ Physical satisfaction (if you're in a relationship)
✓ Mental satisfaction
✓ Material satisfaction (if you're a woman)

Peace of mind problems
✓ Faithfulness (if you're in a relationship)
✓ Sincerity
✓ Respectfulness
✓ Acceptance

28/12/2025

The 4 horsemen of turn offs for girls
1. Flexing
2. Flexing on HER
3. Vulgar approach - grosses them out
4. S*xual approach - grosses them out