So where do those terms come from? Rationally, one might expect the website to spell out what they expect from you and under what conditions their services are provided. If you don't like those terms, don't use the service.
It seems like you're arguing that you should get to determine under what terms the services are offered, or perhaps alternatively that services offered should never have any terms attached whatsoever; both of those positions seem pretty indefensible to me.
Just because you don't get a chance to negotiate terms doesn't make them invalid. It's a take-it-or-leave it offer, and you always have the right to leave it. When a restaurant gives you a bill, do you pay less than the amount just because you didn't get to negotiate the price? Do you walk into a restaurant shirtless that explicitly asks you not to do that? Of course not: your ordering the item indicated your willingness to pay the associated charge, and likewise if you don't want to abide by their rules around appropriate dress, you just don't go in.
You don't get to make up your own rules and then apply them to someone else's services.
It's a different question if the TOS are deliberately obscured such that you don't actually know what you're agreeing to, but the argument that just because you can't negotiate the TOS they're somehow invalid and you're thus justified in still using the service in violation of them is absurd.