rafacanto01 said: ik u probably dont care, but that is pretty lgbtphibic. Im a bisexual girl, and one thing that is very annoying and offensive is when ppl, mostly boys ofc, keep making our sexual orientation into fetish. U saying u want a lot of girls having sex w each other to make u an yuri show is pretty stupid and sexist. Ofc, u can fantasize about whatever u want, but as a bi girl i cannot see something offensive like that and not reply. Maybe that makes u think about it from our point of view. Nothing is stopping you from enjoying a yuri show either. Stupid reply. I don't think I have to spell out that I think everyone should be able to have multiple partners, which is not limited to all male for a woman or all female for a man. Someone's sexuality is 100% irrelevant to being able to enjoy a sex show. |
 |
Bernrika said: Ryuk9428 said: Monogamy was designed to reduce sexual competition and it has been the most successful civilizing force in our history. Thank God for Christianity because without Christianity we’d probably still be sticking each other with swords in gladiator combat. Did you miss the 2000 years of infighting between every European country, and all the violent crimes Christianity caused? Did you think things were better before Christianity? Read up on how unbelievably fucked up most societies on Earth were back in Ancient Times. I have read a tremendous amount of history. The Assyrians would literally skin alive hundreds of people and drap their skins over the walls. If a city rebeled against the ruling emperor, the entire city would be massacred, every child, infant, and even the goats would be slaughtered. Ancient rulers were willing to commit genocide on a scale unthinkable to people in the modern age. The An Lushan rebellion resulted in nearly 40 million people being slaughtered in seven-eight years. That's two thirds of the entire population of China at that time. The Ancient Romans, on two occasions, slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people in a single city when they destroyed Carthage after the end of the Third Punic War and Jerusalem in the First Jewish Revolt. With Jerusalem, the commander didn't even order the soldiers to do it, they did it completely on their own. Julius Caesar bragged in his journals about slaughtering 1.2 million Gauls in a scorched Earth strategy. Humanity was starting from such a terrible place that it naturally took an incredible amount of time to improve things but even by 1,300 AD things were already a lot better than they were in 800 AD. Waging war against other Christian nations without having a valid reason for war was prohibited by the Catholic church. The feudal system was set up in a way that limited the power of kings so that Medieval kings couldn't abuse their citizens to anywhere near the same extent as Ancient kings could. In Ancient Times, the king could literally just order an entire city to be slaughtered if they rebelled. In the High Middle Ages, such an action could result in numerous lords with their own private armies ousting the king from power. Battles were nowhere near the same kind of bloodbath that they were in Ancient Times where there are several examples of tens of thousands of people being killed in a single day. During the Medieval era, battles that killed more than 10,000 people were actually very rare. The economy improved as well. In Ancient Times, just about everyone was poor. In Medieval Times, although a large minority of people lived in poverty, there was actually a decent sized middle class who lived in homes like the one below... https://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/features/peasant-houses-in-midland-england-how-the-black-death-prompted-a-building-boom.htm https://i1.wp.com/www.archaeology.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/11_1STO_F728ed.jpg?resize=300%2C201&ssl=1 https://www.archaeology.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/7_2_Dene_recreated.jpg Medieval morals look terrible and barbaric compared to today, but compared to Ancient societies, Medieval Times was a huge improvement. Practically the same level of improvement that our current day societies are over the Medieval era. Nearly every major moral development in history has come from Christian society. The idea that civilians should not be killed during warfare came from Christians, the idea that prisoners of war shouldn't be killed was from Christians. Eliminating slavery was by Christians. Ironically, the idea that church and state should be separated and that extremist religious authorities were not above the law came from Christians too. Jesus Christ himself was unbelievably advanced in morality for his day in age. He stood in front of a prostitute and prevented her from being stoned to death. People at that time literally thought it was immoral to prevent such things from happening. He told the religious extremists of his day not to be judgmental hypocrites. He said that love is more important than faith. Basically being a good person matters more than being religious. He was a pacifist, and refused to commit violent acts under any circumstances. None of these ideas had ever existed in the area he lived in at that point in history. And now, as we are moving away from Christian values, surprise surprise, the moral values of our society is in rapid decline. People are moving towards more "might makes right" philosophies and think they are acceptable. People justify sadistic acts when performed during sex and say anybody who has a problem with it is "kink-shaming." Being a good person is not valued the way it once was. @FreeThought Read what I said to Bernriko. |
Ryuk9428Sep 16, 2020 1:06 AM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: Read up on how unbelievably fucked up most societies on Earth were back in Ancient Times. The holocaust isn't even 100 years old and it's one of the most fucked up things humanity ever did. In fact, we only got better at killing ourselves if anything. |
You actually got that trolling going for quite a while, not gonna lie. For me, monogamy too. I can see why someone would want to be with two or more people at the same time, but I think you just have to choose. At least it seems better for me to be in a 1-1 situation. |
Ryuk9428 said: I think everyone who is not physically repulsive or a violent/dangerous criminal has a right to a partner because its too important to human happiness to strip people of unless their behavior is simply unreasonable (such as committing crimes or eating so much they become 300 pounds). Sex should not be something enjoyed only by a small group of super confident people. If you are average looking and not a criminal, then I think you do have a right to a partner in life and you shouldn't have to approach hundreds upon hundreds of girls to find one. The freedom of a small group of people to fuck 100 or 200 people is not more important than the right of people who have no one to have someone. We are literally at the point in society where most people think super confident people have more of a right to have orgies with one another, indulge in disgusting fetishes, and have a revolving door of sexual partners than people who are a little shy or have mediocre social skills have a right to one loving, devoted marriage partner. Now that... Is fucked up. The fact that so many people are okay with this is profoundly disturbing. Not only are they okay with it, they've been brainwashed to think anybody who criticizes this system is the immoral one. I remember as recently as the 2000s, lots of people used to say "everybody deserves love." You used to see it in movies and TV shows. Now people think love only belongs to those who have high levels of superficial charisma that literally helps society in no way whatsoever. Meanwhile, the really smart, kind of autistic guy who can fix anyone's computer is forced into celibacy for years. EDIT: Reading your response in the other thread. What right-winger bashes Christianity the way you do? I can accept you as centre-right at the very most but you're really not that right-wing at all. You don't have a right to a partner. Rights are negative not positive. You can't force women to date you? You're not entitled to a relationship nobody owes you anything. If you want relationship you have to work for it just like everybody else. The best way to get a GF is to focus on the career and self improvement. Improving your social skills, game and soft skills will go long way. Have realistic standards. Getting a GF is a numbers game. Say that you have 1% chances to get 10/10 GF. That means if you ask 100 girls 1 will say yes and you would have 10/10 GF. If you follow those advices you shouldn't have a trouble getting GFs. What are you proposing a legally enforced monogamy? This is not best for biology it's also unenforceable without going into 1984 world. You say that worlds in unfair, but from biological standpoint it is perfectly fair. Here is the thing, here is the difference you have ability to move up because it's not just defined by genetics you're given, your facial structure even your body. There are a lot of things that you can do that're going to move you up. Yes maybe you're not going to have a perfect model genetics and you're not going to be 10 for a guy as far as the looks department that's fine that's socially acceptable because you can still move up to like 8 or 9 and based on status you can get a lot of money. And you can use that money to get even plastic surgery if you want to and fix your teeth and fix your face there is a lot of cosmetic things that you can do. You can develop social skills and that can move you way way up. There are plenty of guys that would be 5 on the looks that end up being 7, 8, 9 because of your social skills. The reason why you have a victim mindset is because you're looking for magical fair solution that somehow make everything fair instead of facing reality. That's not what's necessary. Most people are not going to go through the length that you will go through. Like if you want something bad enough you can do what other people are not willing to do. If you want to be in 1% of the dating market you need to put in effort ok. Make some money, get some surgery if you want, go to the gym. Can you not reach 7, are you honestly going to tell me that you can't reach 7. It's ridiculous, you're full of doodoo you want to be a victim, you want to tell yourself that's not possible. Some ridiculous solution like forced monogamy is not a solution, it's not even a good solution for you. Because you don't recognize what your upwards mobility is. If you did and you capitalize on your upward mobility you would realize that except for way down a scale like 1 or 2 but even then it's not gonna make sense because it's not gonna work like forced monogamy in that situation is not gonna be fun for anyone. Saying things are not fair, people need to change, society need to change no your need to change mf you need to change. A lot of people want to tell you that your screwed, sorry you're not chad your incel, the world is fucked up, women are messed up. They want to tell you all of this bad things. The reason why they want to tell you all of this bad things it's because they want solidarity. they want you with them in the bucket. They don't want you crawling out of the bucket. Because if you do it they're gonna feel like shit. Because they want to stay victim they don't work they don't want to move, they don't want it to be their fault they want to stay victim. As long as they're convincing you that you're being oppressed, that you're being victimized that's not your fault either and that you're with them then they feel better. They feel like it really isn't their fault. This is dangerous dangerous group think. This is bad because it hold you back from achieving a full potential. But if you believe the lie than you wont. What could you become if you let yourself if you push yourself, if you drove yourself the best you can and optimize everything that's under your control. What could you become? So choice is yours, you can say this is bs, you can identify with incel groups or you can man the fuck up and say look whatever this is the hand I was dealt I'm gonna make the best of it and make as many points as I can before lights turn off on the field. EDIT: Reading your response in the other thread. What right-winger bashes Christianity the way you do? I can accept you as centre-right at the very most but you're really not that right-wing at all. What right winger believes in oppression narrative and has a victim mentality? You're no different from leftists and feminist in this regard. You want a nanny state to fix your problems instead of fixing them yourself. And you have audacity to claim that I'm not a right wing because I don't want to be part of your oppression olympics narrative that's totally different from social justice oppression olympics narrative somehow. Being a right or left wing has noting to do with Christianity and everything to do with economics. There are plenty of democrats that are christian, you can be a socialist and be a christian. I'm not a conservative I'm a libertarian. I'm more right wing then republicans and conservatives. You're Christian in the name only. Do you believe that people should be celibate until they get married and that dating should be only done for the purpose of getting married and to only have sex for reproduction in missionary pose if not f off. You talk a lot of about going to strip clubs and hiring hooker yeah those are definitely Judeo-Christian values lol. The only reason you're LARPing as a Christian is because you're under the false impression that some how Christianity is going to give you a free GF. If communist promised you a free GF you would become a communist. Can you find me singe prominent right wing figure that support incel narrative. Here is a video of Lauren Chan a conservative and she is agreeing with my position. Here is a video of Ben Shapiro another conservative and surprise surprise he also agrees with my position. Are they fake right wingers too. Show me the real right wingers please enlighten me. |
FreeThoughtSep 16, 2020 6:46 AM
 “There is great satisfaction in fighting for the sake of gaining power, but it’s joyless to fight for the sake of maintaining it.” – Reinhard Von Lohengramm |
FreeThought said: Ryuk9428 said: I think everyone who is not physically repulsive or a violent/dangerous criminal has a right to a partner because its too important to human happiness to strip people of unless their behavior is simply unreasonable (such as committing crimes or eating so much they become 300 pounds). Sex should not be something enjoyed only by a small group of super confident people. If you are average looking and not a criminal, then I think you do have a right to a partner in life and you shouldn't have to approach hundreds upon hundreds of girls to find one. The freedom of a small group of people to fuck 100 or 200 people is not more important than the right of people who have no one to have someone. We are literally at the point in society where most people think super confident people have more of a right to have orgies with one another, indulge in disgusting fetishes, and have a revolving door of sexual partners than people who are a little shy or have mediocre social skills have a right to one loving, devoted marriage partner. Now that... Is fucked up. The fact that so many people are okay with this is profoundly disturbing. Not only are they okay with it, they've been brainwashed to think anybody who criticizes this system is the immoral one. I remember as recently as the 2000s, lots of people used to say "everybody deserves love." You used to see it in movies and TV shows. Now people think love only belongs to those who have high levels of superficial charisma that literally helps society in no way whatsoever. Meanwhile, the really smart, kind of autistic guy who can fix anyone's computer is forced into celibacy for years. EDIT: Reading your response in the other thread. What right-winger bashes Christianity the way you do? I can accept you as centre-right at the very most but you're really not that right-wing at all. You don't have a right to a partner. Rights are negative not positive. You can't force women to date you? You're not entitled to a relationship nobody owes you anything. If you want relationship you have to work for it just like everybody else. The best way to get a GF is to focus on the career and self improvement. Improving your social skills, game and soft skills will go long way. Have realistic standards. Getting a GF is a numbers game. Say that you have 1% chances to get 10/10 GF. That means if you ask 100 girls 1 will say yes and you would have 10/10 GF. If you follow those advices you shouldn't have a trouble getting GFs. What are you proposing a legally enforced monogamy? This is not best for biology it's also unenforceable without going into 1984 world. You say that worlds in unfair, but from biological standpoint it is perfectly fair. Here is the thing, here is the difference you have ability to move up because it's not just defined by genetics you're given, your facial structure even your body. There are a lot of things that you can do that're going to move you up. Yes maybe you're not going to have a perfect model genetics and you're not going to be 10 for a guy as far as the looks department that's fine that's socially acceptable because you can still move up to like 8 or 9 and based on status you can get a lot of money. And you can use that money to get even plastic surgery if you want to and fix your teeth and fix your face there is a lot of cosmetic things that you can do. You can develop social skills and that can move you way way up. There are plenty of guys that would be 5 on the looks that end up being 7, 8, 9 because of your social skills. The reason why you have a victim mindset is because you're looking for magical fair solution that somehow make everything fair instead of facing reality. That's not what's necessary. Most people are not going to go through the length that you will go through. Like if you want something bad enough you can do what other people are not willing to do. If you want to be in 1% of the dating market you need to put in effort ok. Make some money, get some surgery if you want, go to the gym. Can you not reach 7, are you honestly going to tell me that you can't reach 7. It's ridiculous, you're full of doodoo you want to be a victim, you want to tell yourself that's not possible. Some ridiculous solution like forced monogamy is not a solution, it's not even a good solution for you. Because you don't recognize what your upwards mobility is. If you did and you capitalize on your upward mobility you would realize that except for way down a scale like 1 or 2 but even then it's not gonna make sense because it's not gonna work like forced monogamy in that situation is not gonna be fun for anyone. Saying things are not fair, people need to change, society need to change no your need to change mf you need to change. A lot of people want to tell you that your screwed, sorry you're not chad your incel, the world is fucked up, women are messed up. They want to tell you all of this bad things. The reason why they want to tell you all of this bad things it's because they want solidarity. they want you with them in the bucket. They don't want you crawling out of the bucket. Because if you do it they're gonna feel like shit. Because they want to stay victim they don't work they don't want to move, they don't want it to be their fault they want to stay victim. As long as they're convincing you that you're being oppressed, that you're being victimized that's not your fault either and that you're with them then they feel better. They feel like it really isn't their fault. This is dangerous dangerous group think. This is bad because it hold you back from achieving a full potential. But if you believe the lie than you wont. What could you become if you let yourself if you push yourself, if you drove yourself the best you can and optimize everything that's under your control. What could you become? So choice is yours, you can say this is bs, you can identify with incel groups or you can man the fuck up and say look whatever this is the hand I was dealt I'm gonna make the best of it and make as many points as I can before lights turn off on the field. EDIT: Reading your response in the other thread. What right-winger bashes Christianity the way you do? I can accept you as centre-right at the very most but you're really not that right-wing at all. What right winger believes in oppression narrative and has a victim mentality? You're no different from leftists and feminist in this regard. You want a nanny state to fix your problems instead of fixing them yourself. And you have audacity to claim that I'm not a right wing because I don't want to be part of your oppression olympics narrative that's totally different from social justice oppression olympics narrative somehow. Being a right or left wing has noting to do with Christianity and everything to do with economics. There are plenty of democrats that are christian, you can be a socialist and be a christian. I'm not a conservative I'm a libertarian. I'm more right wing then republicans and conservatives. You're Christian in the name only. Do you believe that people should be celibate until they get married and that dating should be only done for the purpose of getting married and to only have sex for reproduction in missionary pose if not f off. You talk a lot of about going to strip clubs and hiring hooker yeah those are definitely Judeo-Christian values lol. The only reason you're LARPing as a Christian is because you're under the false impression that some how Christianity is going to give you a free GF. If communist promised you a free GF you would become a communist. Can you find me singe prominent right wing figure that support incel narrative. Here is a video of Lauren Chan a conservative and she is agreeing with my position. Here is a video of Ben Shapiro another conservative and surprise surprise he also agrees with my position. Are they fake right wingers too. Show me the real right wingers please enlighten me. Please there's a reason why Lauren Chen's video has such a high dislike ratio and the comments are all roasting her. Women should get to sleep around because "muh free market, competition is good!" No actual right-wing society thinks sexual competition is good. The whole "let people sleep around as much as they want with no restrictions" is a liberal idea. Ben Shapiro is mainstream right. The US is so leftist that the mainstream right basically are nothing but moderating voices to the left. They are basically there to be like "woah you guys are batshit crazy" but they don't seem to have any ideals or are fighting for anything. If you tell a lot of mainstream cuckservatives that Japan is the best country on Earth they literally turn into a SJW in the blink of an eye, talking about how racist and sexist Japan is. I am far right, I believe in the efficiency and morality of traditional norms. Most traditional societies do allow prostitution. Look at just about every Catholic majority country existing right now, practically every single one of them has legal prostitution. The Catholic Church has had a long history of legalized prostitution. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Catholic_Majority_Countries.PNG/800px-Catholic_Majority_Countries.PNG https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redditmedia.com%2FmCMfSJFw3vptfge_QZxI_benZ7vpABxBd57CZHsquug.jpg%3Fw%3D1024%26s%3D3462a10dd0784053233026924962a675&f=1&nofb=1 You need to spend more time in solid to far right circles. You are centre-right at most, maybe even centrist person who thinks he is right-wing because you've grown up with that old myth that being right-wing is all about limited government and individualism. Being right wing is about conserving tradition, its not about rugged individualism. That's a centre-right libertarian view and you guys think just because you hate taxes so much that you own the narrative on right-wing discourse. That's one of the biggest reasons why this guy claimed to leave the right-wing was because he realized he didn't actually understand what it meant to be right-wing for pretty much the exact same reasons. https://youtu.be/Oh4yyxtNkPk?t=1223 I didn't actually claim to be Christian. I am a deist. But the effectiveness of their values system is undeniable. You are a simp and you don't even realize it because you're too busy kissing Western women's asses and selling out in order to attract them. "Manning up," "improving yourself," these are just ways that men are manipulated into continuing to do whatever women want them to do even when they have nothing to gain from it and continue to boost women's already inflated egos by catering to their high expectations. All you are doing with your "I don't like feminism" crap is passing a shit test essentially in hopes that it'll be enough for them to sleep with you. If you really supported your fellow man and were a true anti-feminist you'd be speaking out against dating culture and the absurdly high expectations women have for men and equally low standards they have for themselves to meet men's desires. |
Ryuk9428Sep 16, 2020 2:52 PM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: FreeThought said: You don't have a right to a partner. Rights are negative not positive. You can't force women to date you? You're not entitled to a relationship nobody owes you anything. If you want relationship you have to work for it just like everybody else. The best way to get a GF is to focus on the career and self improvement. Improving your social skills, game and soft skills will go long way. Have realistic standards. Getting a GF is a numbers game. Say that you have 1% chances to get 10/10 GF. That means if you ask 100 girls 1 will say yes and you would have 10/10 GF. If you follow those advices you shouldn't have a trouble getting GFs. What are you proposing a legally enforced monogamy? This is not best for biology it's also unenforceable without going into 1984 world. You say that worlds in unfair, but from biological standpoint it is perfectly fair. Here is the thing, here is the difference you have ability to move up because it's not just defined by genetics you're given, your facial structure even your body. There are a lot of things that you can do that're going to move you up. Yes maybe you're not going to have a perfect model genetics and you're not going to be 10 for a guy as far as the looks department that's fine that's socially acceptable because you can still move up to like 8 or 9 and based on status you can get a lot of money. And you can use that money to get even plastic surgery if you want to and fix your teeth and fix your face there is a lot of cosmetic things that you can do. You can develop social skills and that can move you way way up. There are plenty of guys that would be 5 on the looks that end up being 7, 8, 9 because of your social skills. The reason why you have a victim mindset is because you're looking for magical fair solution that somehow make everything fair instead of facing reality. That's not what's necessary. Most people are not going to go through the length that you will go through. Like if you want something bad enough you can do what other people are not willing to do. If you want to be in 1% of the dating market you need to put in effort ok. Make some money, get some surgery if you want, go to the gym. Can you not reach 7, are you honestly going to tell me that you can't reach 7. It's ridiculous, you're full of doodoo you want to be a victim, you want to tell yourself that's not possible. Some ridiculous solution like forced monogamy is not a solution, it's not even a good solution for you. Because you don't recognize what your upwards mobility is. If you did and you capitalize on your upward mobility you would realize that except for way down a scale like 1 or 2 but even then it's not gonna make sense because it's not gonna work like forced monogamy in that situation is not gonna be fun for anyone. Saying things are not fair, people need to change, society need to change no your need to change mf you need to change. A lot of people want to tell you that your screwed, sorry you're not chad your incel, the world is fucked up, women are messed up. They want to tell you all of this bad things. The reason why they want to tell you all of this bad things it's because they want solidarity. they want you with them in the bucket. They don't want you crawling out of the bucket. Because if you do it they're gonna feel like shit. Because they want to stay victim they don't work they don't want to move, they don't want it to be their fault they want to stay victim. As long as they're convincing you that you're being oppressed, that you're being victimized that's not your fault either and that you're with them then they feel better. They feel like it really isn't their fault. This is dangerous dangerous group think. This is bad because it hold you back from achieving a full potential. But if you believe the lie than you wont. What could you become if you let yourself if you push yourself, if you drove yourself the best you can and optimize everything that's under your control. What could you become? So choice is yours, you can say this is bs, you can identify with incel groups or you can man the fuck up and say look whatever this is the hand I was dealt I'm gonna make the best of it and make as many points as I can before lights turn off on the field. What right winger believes in oppression narrative and has a victim mentality? You're no different from leftists and feminist in this regard. You want a nanny state to fix your problems instead of fixing them yourself. And you have audacity to claim that I'm not a right wing because I don't want to be part of your oppression olympics narrative that's totally different from social justice oppression olympics narrative somehow. Being a right or left wing has noting to do with Christianity and everything to do with economics. There are plenty of democrats that are christian, you can be a socialist and be a christian. I'm not a conservative I'm a libertarian. I'm more right wing then republicans and conservatives. You're Christian in the name only. Do you believe that people should be celibate until they get married and that dating should be only done for the purpose of getting married and to only have sex for reproduction in missionary pose if not f off. You talk a lot of about going to strip clubs and hiring hooker yeah those are definitely Judeo-Christian values lol. The only reason you're LARPing as a Christian is because you're under the false impression that some how Christianity is going to give you a free GF. If communist promised you a free GF you would become a communist. Can you find me singe prominent right wing figure that support incel narrative. Here is a video of Lauren Chan a conservative and she is agreeing with my position. Here is a video of Ben Shapiro another conservative and surprise surprise he also agrees with my position. Are they fake right wingers too. Show me the real right wingers please enlighten me. Please there's a reason why Lauren Chen's video has such a high dislike ratio and the comments are all roasting her. Women should get to sleep around because "muh free market, competition is good!" No actual right-wing society thinks sexual competition is good. The whole "let people sleep around as much as they want with no restrictions" is a liberal idea. Ben Shapiro is mainstream right. The US is so leftist that the mainstream right basically are nothing but moderating voices to the left. They are basically there to be like "woah you guys are batshit crazy" but they don't seem to have any ideals or are fighting for anything. If you tell a lot of mainstream cuckservatives that Japan is the best country on Earth they literally turn into a SJW in the blink of an eye, talking about how racist and sexist Japan is. I am far right, I believe in the efficiency and morality of traditional norms. Most traditional societies do allow prostitution. Look at just about every Catholic majority country existing right now, practically every single one of them has legal prostitution. The Catholic Church has had a long history of legalized prostitution. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Catholic_Majority_Countries.PNG/800px-Catholic_Majority_Countries.PNG https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redditmedia.com%2FmCMfSJFw3vptfge_QZxI_benZ7vpABxBd57CZHsquug.jpg%3Fw%3D1024%26s%3D3462a10dd0784053233026924962a675&f=1&nofb=1 You need to spend more time in solid to far right circles. You are centre-right at most, maybe even centrist person who thinks he is right-wing because you've grown up with that old myth that being right-wing is all about limited government and individualism. Being right wing is about conserving tradition, its not about rugged individualism. That's a centre-right libertarian view and you guys think just because you hate taxes so much that you own the narrative on right-wing discourse. That's one of the biggest reasons why this guy claimed to leave the right-wing was because he realized he didn't actually understand what it meant to be right-wing for pretty much the exact same reasons. https://youtu.be/Oh4yyxtNkPk?t=1223 I didn't actually claim to be Christian. I am a deist. But the effectiveness of their values system is undeniable. You are a simp and you don't even realize it because you're too busy kissing Western women's asses and selling out in order to attract them. "Manning up," "improving yourself," these are just ways that men are manipulated into continuing to do whatever women want them to do even when they have nothing to gain from it and continue to boost women's already inflated egos by catering to their high expectations. All you are doing with your "I don't like feminism" crap is passing a shit test essentially in hopes that it'll be enough for them to sleep with you. If you really supported your fellow man and were a true anti-feminist you'd be speaking out against dating culture and the absurdly high expectations women have for men and equally low standards they have for themselves to meet men's desires. The amount of dislikes doesn't invalidate someones opinion. That video still has more likes than dislikes. The reason it has dislikes is because incels can't face reality and would rather live in a fantasy land. Ryuk9428 said: The whole "let people sleep around as much as they want with no restrictions" is a liberal idea. No that's called a freedom of association. It existed long before liberals existed it's basic freedom and liberals are against that very freedom. Let me get this straight you support prostitution but you're against sleeping around? How the fuck does this making any sense? Ryuk9428 said: Ben Shapiro is mainstream right. The US is so leftist that the mainstream right basically are nothing but moderating voices to the left. They are basically there to be like "woah you guys are batshit crazy" but they don't seem to have any ideals or are fighting for anything. If you tell a lot of mainstream cuckservatives that Japan is the best country on Earth they literally turn into a SJW in the blink of an eye, talking about how racist and sexist Japan is. I am far right, I believe in the efficiency and morality of traditional norms. Are you actually trying to tell me that Ben Shapiro is a leftist🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 What conservatives are talking about how racist and sexist Japan is? This is some kind of strawman that you made up? I'm calling bs on this unless you can provide real life examples. Define far right? The term far right is used in derogatory context to by leftists to describe anyone who doesn't agree with them. Do right values test since it's very accurate so we can where you actually stand https://rightvaluestest.github.io/ Ryuk9428 said: I am far right, I believe in the efficiency and morality of traditional norms. What do you mean by efficiency? What traditional norms? Did you get overdose on God pills? Are you in favor of Christian nationalism? Do you believe that government should force traditional norms onto people, or do you believe that everyone should follow norms that they like? Ryuk9428 said: Most traditional societies do allow prostitution. Look at just about every Catholic majority country existing right now, practically every single one of them has legal prostitution. The Catholic Church has had a long history of legalized prostitution No Catholic Church is against prostitution. Lust is one of the seven deadly sins afterall. Prostitutes were never seen in high regards, and most traditional conservatives are against prostitution and would call those who engage in it degenerates. Prostitution was always considered immoral and a sinful. https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2018/03/pope-says-prostitution-tortures-women-apologizes-for-catholic-clients/ https://www.ncronline.org/news/justice/pope-prostitution-disgusting-vice-tortures-defenseless-women The Catechism of the Catholic Church has a paragraph on each of pornography and prostitution. I've emphasised a couple of passages which indicate an opinion that neither should be legalised: 2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials. 2355 Prostitution does injury to the dignity of the person who engages in it, reducing the person to an instrument of sexual pleasure. the one who pays sins gravely against himself: he violates the chastity to which his Baptism pledged him and defiles his body, the temple of the Holy Spirit. Prostitution is a social scourge. It usually involves women, but also men, children, and adolescents (The latter two cases involve the added sin of scandal.). While it is always gravely sinful to engage in prostitution, the imputability of the offense can be attenuated by destitution, blackmail, or social pressure. This is part of the theology of the body which was particularly beloved of Pope St John Paul II, who wrote in Evangelium vitae (my emphases again): The Second Vatican Council, in a passage which retains all its relevance today, forcefully condemned a number of crimes and attacks against human life. Thirty years later, taking up the words of the Council and with the same forcefulness I repeat that condemnation in the name of the whole Church, certain that I am interpreting the genuine sentiment of every upright conscience: "Whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or wilful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where people are treated as mere instruments of gain rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others like them are infamies indeed. They poison human society, and they do more harm to those who practise them than to those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are a supreme dishonour to the Creator". It is not difficult to add pornography to the list as insulting human dignity. The quote contained in this excerpt is from the Council's Apostolic Constitution Gaudium et Spes 27. However, in saying that prostitution is a social scourge and an act of violence, the Church also recognises that it has causes which are not simply and easily dealt with in making it illegal. Compassion needs to be shown to those who are forced into it by circumstance; equally, those circumstances need be fixed. If it were not illegal, then it would be easy or easier, perhaps to argue that none of its causation is unjust according to church. 1. Prostitution is a form of modern day slavery It is important to recognize that sexual exploitation, prostitution and trafficking of human beings are all acts of violence against women and as such constitute an offence to the dignity of women and are a grave violation of basic human rights. The number of women of the street has increased dramatically throughout the world for a variety of complex economic, social and cultural reasons. In some cases the women involved have experienced pathological violence or sexual abuse since childhood. Others have been driven into prostitution in order to have sufficient means of living for themselves or their families. Some search for a father figure or a loving relationship with a man. Others are trying to pay off unreasonable debts. Some leave situations of poverty in their country of origin, believing that the job being offered overseas will change their lives. It is clear that the sexual exploitation of women that pervades the world’s social fabric is a consequence of many unjust systems. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/migrants/documents_1/rc_pc_migrants_doc_20210605_Iinc-past-don-strada-findoc_en.html Ryuk9428 said: You need to spend more time in solid to far right circles. You are centre-right at most, maybe even centrist person who thinks he is right-wing because you've grown up with that old myth that being right-wing is all about limited government and individualism. Being right wing is about conserving tradition, its not about rugged individualism. That's a centre-right libertarian view and you guys think just because you hate taxes so much that you own the narrative on right-wing discourse. That's one of the biggest reasons why this guy claimed to leave the right-wing was because he realized he didn't actually understand what it meant to be right-wing for pretty much the exact same reasons. I'm in a lot of right wing circles. What are those sold right circles that you're talking about? I asked you last time to show me prominent right wingers that agree with incel ideas you still haven't showed me any? Could it be because they don't exist. I want to conserve and go back to America that was created by Founding Fathers and not some neocon bs version of America that boomers like PragerU want. Are you going to make a bold claim that Founding Fathers weren't right wing either? Right wing was always about individualism while left was always about collectivism if you can't comprehend that than you are not right wing. I take it that you are familiar with this words. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." That is as individualistic as it gets. Hunter Avalon wasn't a libertarian he was tradcon grifter. Ryuk9428 said: You are a simp and you don't even realize it because you're too busy kissing Western women's asses and selling out in order to attract them. "Manning up," "improving yourself," these are just ways that men are manipulated into continuing to do whatever women want them to do even when they have nothing to gain from it and continue to boost women's already inflated egos by catering to their high expectations. All you are doing with your "I don't like feminism" crap is passing a shit test essentially in hopes that it'll be enough for them to sleep with you. If you really supported your fellow man and were a true anti-feminist you'd be speaking out against dating culture and the absurdly high expectations women have for men and equally low standards they have for themselves to meet men's desires. Did you just a called me a simp lol? That's rich coming from you. I'm not the one who wastes money on hookers. Do you want to be part of 1% of dating market? Do yo want a hot GF? If yes then follow advices that I gave you. If you are unwilling to put in the effort and instead would rather spend your time blaming all of your inadequacies and shortcomings on feminist, sjw and other boogeyman then don't complain that you can't find a GF. Incels and Feminist are two sides of the same coin. They blame patriarchy and misogyny for their lack of success while you blame them and misandry for lack of your success. Complaining all day long how unfair the world is and having oppression and victim mentality is what leftist do. |
“There is great satisfaction in fighting for the sake of gaining power, but it’s joyless to fight for the sake of maintaining it.” – Reinhard Von Lohengramm |
| @FreeThought You are looking too much at what Christian theologists say and not what actually happens when their norms permeate and they are in charge of running a country. This is the exact problem that leftists have, they fall for what people say and don't look at what actually happens when they run a country. I don't care what people say, I care about the results of their values and hardly any catholic country has actually banned it whereas pretty much every country run by feminists does eventually ban it. In the 16th century, most of the brothels were literally run by priests. They called it a necessary evil, but hey, its still legal. No I don't want to be a part of the 1% of the dating market. I think our dating system is fundamentally going to lead to a criminalized society where people prioritize and follow their base instincts instead of taking their genetic/reproductive responsibility seriously. I don't want to feed this system by attempting to succeed within it, I want it to be eliminated and replace it with a matchmaking system set up by either parents or computers/robots who are better at figuring out what a person's actual value is by disregarding human beings' destructive short term emotions and prioritizing long term interests. Individualism vs collectivism isn't an inherently conservative or liberal idea. 1950s society was a lot more collectivist than 1970s society was. Japan is a lot more collectivist than the US or the UK is. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fgeerthofstede.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F07%2FIDV-world-map-50.png&f=1&nofb=1 I'm not saying Ben Shapiro is a leftist. I'm saying that the US is so socially liberal that by international standards Ben Shapiro is more of a centrist and that all mainstream American conservatives would be centrists when you use international standards because US conservatives typically don't push for traditional norms or values. Mainstream conservatives are more hands off and libertarian. By international standards, I'd be centre-right or solid right. By US standards, I am far right because I explicitly support the return of traditional society with just a few tweaks. I'm not going to link you to the discussions I've had with mainstream conservatives on other forums, but a few of them absolutely do essentially turn into SJWs if you claim that Japan's values are better than the West's. Think of the following sentence "It is a woman's duty to provide physical and emotional intimacy to her man." Does this sound like a progressive statement? What kind of society do you think might tolerate sentences like that and wouldn't find them especially controversial? Also, most people on the right such as Jordan Peterson, Sargon of Akkad, and Ross Douthat have said that a return to traditional values probably would help incels a lot. Obviously they are not 100% on board since a lot of them criticize incels as well but like incels, they blame the breakdown of traditional norms and morality for the incel phenomenon. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Ryuk9428 said: I'm not saying Ben Shapiro is a leftist. I'm saying that the US is so socially liberal that by international standards Ben Shapiro is more of a centrist and that all mainstream American conservatives would be centrists when you use international standards because US conservatives typically don't push for traditional norms or values. Mainstream conservatives are more hands off and libertarian. By international standards, I'd be centre-right or solid right. By US standards, I am far right because I explicitly support the return of traditional society with just a few tweaks. I'm not going to link you to the discussions I've had with mainstream conservatives on other forums, but a few of them absolutely do essentially turn into SJWs if you claim that Japan's values are better than the West's. Think of the following sentence "It is a woman's duty to provide physical and emotional intimacy to her man." Does this sound like a progressive statement? What kind of society do you think might tolerate sentences like that and wouldn't find them especially controversial? Also, most people on the right such as Jordan Peterson, Sargon of Akkad, and Ross Douthat have said that a return to traditional values probably would help incels a lot. Obviously they are not 100% on board since a lot of them criticize incels as well but like incels, they blame the breakdown of traditional norms and morality for the incel phenomenon. You want to return to a traditionalist society where women are submissive things owned by their husbands because you're an incel? ... Did you consider IS? I'm not joking, they're super trad and give you submissive wives. |
 |
Ryuk9428 said: @FreeThought You are looking too much at what Christian theologists say and not what actually happens when their norms permeate and they are in charge of running a country. This is the exact problem that leftists have, they fall for what people say and don't look at what actually happens when they run a country. I don't care what people say, I care about the results of their values and hardly any catholic country has actually banned it whereas pretty much every country run by feminists does eventually ban it. In the 16th century, most of the brothels were literally run by priests. They called it a necessary evil, but hey, its still legal. No I don't want to be a part of the 1% of the dating market. I think our dating system is fundamentally going to lead to a criminalized society where people prioritize and follow their base instincts instead of taking their genetic/reproductive responsibility seriously. I don't want to feed this system by attempting to succeed within it, I want it to be eliminated and replace it with a matchmaking system set up by either parents or computers/robots who are better at figuring out what a person's actual value is by disregarding human beings' destructive short term emotions and prioritizing long term interests. Individualism vs collectivism isn't an inherently conservative or liberal idea. 1950s society was a lot more collectivist than 1970s society was. Japan is a lot more collectivist than the US or the UK is. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fgeerthofstede.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F07%2FIDV-world-map-50.png&f=1&nofb=1 I'm not saying Ben Shapiro is a leftist. I'm saying that the US is so socially liberal that by international standards Ben Shapiro is more of a centrist and that all mainstream American conservatives would be centrists when you use international standards because US conservatives typically don't push for traditional norms or values. Mainstream conservatives are more hands off and libertarian. By international standards, I'd be centre-right or solid right. By US standards, I am far right because I explicitly support the return of traditional society with just a few tweaks. I'm not going to link you to the discussions I've had with mainstream conservatives on other forums, but a few of them absolutely do essentially turn into SJWs if you claim that Japan's values are better than the West's. Think of the following sentence "It is a woman's duty to provide physical and emotional intimacy to her man." Does this sound like a progressive statement? What kind of society do you think might tolerate sentences like that and wouldn't find them especially controversial? Also, most people on the right such as Jordan Peterson, Sargon of Akkad, and Ross Douthat have said that a return to traditional values probably would help incels a lot. Obviously they are not 100% on board since a lot of them criticize incels as well but like incels, they blame the breakdown of traditional norms and morality for the incel phenomenon. Ryuk9428 said: You are looking too much at what Christian theologists say and not what actually happens when their norms permeate and they are in charge of running a country. This is the exact problem that leftists have, they fall for what people say and don't look at what actually happens when they run a country. I don't care what people say, I care about the results of their values and hardly any catholic country has actually banned it whereas pretty much every country run by feminists does eventually ban it. In the 16th century, most of the brothels were literally run by priests. They called it a necessary evil, but hey, its still legal. Facts don't care about your feelings. If you don't follow teachings of catholic church you're not catholic period. Ryuk9428 said: No I don't want to be a part of the 1% of the dating market. I think our dating system is fundamentally going to lead to a criminalized society where people prioritize and follow their base instincts instead of taking their genetic/reproductive responsibility seriously. I don't want to feed this system by attempting to succeed within it, I want it to be eliminated and replace it with a matchmaking system set up by either parents or computers/robots who are better at figuring out what a person's actual value is by disregarding human beings' destructive short term emotions and prioritizing long term interests. Sure thing comrade let's seize the means of reproduction and end incel proletariat oppression by chad bourgeoisie and create centrally planned pussy economy and redistribute stacy's and becky's to all oppressed incels ☭✊  Ryuk9428 said: Individualism vs collectivism isn't an inherently conservative or liberal idea. 1950s society was a lot more collectivist than 1970s society was. Japan is a lot more collectivist than the US or the UK is. I'm not talking about conservative vs liberal idea I'm talking about right wing vs left wing idea. Traditionalism isn't inherently right wing you could have a traditionalist socialist country. North Korea is for example a traditionalist socialist country. There is also Christian socialism, Jewish socialism, Buddhist socialism etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_left https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism There is also national socialism so nationalism isn't right wing either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_nationalism Left wing vs right wing isn't about traditionalism vs progressivism it's about capitalism vs socialism. On the far right are ancaps while modern republicans are more solid right with neocons being closer to center right. There is a reason why modern republicans are moving away from classical traditionalism ever since Reagan days. Ryuk9428 said: I'm not saying Ben Shapiro is a leftist. I'm saying that the US is so socially liberal that by international standards Ben Shapiro is more of a centrist and that all mainstream American conservatives would be centrists when you use international standards because US conservatives typically don't push for traditional norms or values. Mainstream conservatives are more hands off and libertarian. By international standards, I'd be centre-right or solid right. By US standards, I am far right because I explicitly support the return of traditional society with just a few tweaks. Ben Shapiro is textbook traditional right. Ryuk9428 said: Think of the following sentence "It is a woman's duty to provide physical and emotional intimacy to her man."  >wants a tradwife >doesn't make enough money to rent without a roommate >has $200 in savings, $300 in checking after bills before groceries >only vaguely knows how to change oil in car, has to hire a real man to perform manly duties >shit work ethic >doesn't exercise >high cortisol >has to google "cortisol" >plays video games 20+ hours a week >jacks off 8+ times a week >only goes outside to walk to and from poorly maintained car >complains about life problems anonymously to anonymous people online >makes no attempt to meet women outside of very limited friend group >wants women who crave confident men, acts like a simp around them Ryuk9428 said: Does this sound like a progressive statement? What kind of society do you think might tolerate sentences like that and wouldn't find them especially controversial? Also, most people on the right such as Jordan Peterson, Sargon of Akkad, and Ross Douthat have said that a return to traditional values probably would help incels a lot. Obviously they are not 100% on board since a lot of them criticize incels as well but like incels, they blame the breakdown of traditional norms and morality for the incel phenomenon. Maybe ISIS society would tolerate that but none of the civilized societies would. And almost certainly none of the western societies would go along with that. Jordan Peterson is notorious for being taken out of context, when he talks about monogamy he talks about encouraging monogamy not enforcing it by the state. Sargon of Akkad isn't even right wing he is a liberal. He literally call him self liberalist lol. I really doubt he would be in favor of traditional society and almost certainly he wouldn't be in favor of sexual redistribution. One look at his video advice for incels and it's clear that he doesn't even agrees with you lol. This just further proves that you have no idea what right wing is. Now I'm half expecting you tell me that Quartering, Shoe on Head and Armored Sceptic are right wing too. Being against SJWs doesn't make you right wing. Incels existed since the dawn of time it's just that now we hear more about them because of social media. "[Historically] more of the women were reproducing than the men," study researcher Mark Stoneking, a professor of biological anthropology at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, told Live Science in an email. "This often happens in human societies, because not all men are able to afford wives, or sometimes a few men will have many wives." https://www.livescience.com/47976-more-mothers-in-human-history.html It's natural for women to seek the most successful men, that way nature ensures that only the best genes are being passed down. Reproduction isn't a human right it's a PRIVILEGE. If you want to reproduce you have to prove that you're worthy by attracting a mate. PS If you ever decide to run for office with your pussy redistribution scheme make sure to check out Sargon of Akkads guide to election to ensure flawless victory. |
“There is great satisfaction in fighting for the sake of gaining power, but it’s joyless to fight for the sake of maintaining it.” – Reinhard Von Lohengramm |
Ghemotoc said: I think its due to where the user is placing themselves in their own orientation. They said having a want for the traditional society makes them "far right" in the US, when even left-leaning groups have similar demands. Why would returning society to where men are rewarded for being men (incentivized) and subserviate women cause they give birth to children (some of the time) not benefit incels and self-serve the user lol. Judgments on biological-potential seems to be the limit of US freedoms. Fuck merit, or deciding things for yourself-- baffled by these rationales Ryuk9428 said: I'm not saying Ben Shapiro is a leftist. I'm saying that the US is so socially liberal that by international standards Ben Shapiro is more of a centrist and that all mainstream American conservatives would be centrists when you use international standards because US conservatives typically don't push for traditional norms or values. Mainstream conservatives are more hands off and libertarian. By international standards, I'd be centre-right or solid right. By US standards, I am far right because I explicitly support the return of traditional society with just a few tweaks. I'm not going to link you to the discussions I've had with mainstream conservatives on other forums, but a few of them absolutely do essentially turn into SJWs if you claim that Japan's values are better than the West's. Think of the following sentence "It is a woman's duty to provide physical and emotional intimacy to her man." Does this sound like a progressive statement? What kind of society do you think might tolerate sentences like that and wouldn't find them especially controversial? Also, most people on the right such as Jordan Peterson, Sargon of Akkad, and Ross Douthat have said that a return to traditional values probably would help incels a lot. Obviously they are not 100% on board since a lot of them criticize incels as well but like incels, they blame the breakdown of traditional norms and morality for the incel phenomenon. You want to return to a traditionalist society where women are submissive things owned by their husbands because you're an incel? ... Did you consider IS? I'm not joking, they're super trad and give you submissive wives. |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
| I don't see a problem with either it just depends on the type of relationship that couples are more comfortable with. Ryuk9428 said: I don't want to feed this system by attempting to succeed within it, I want it to be eliminated and replace it with a matchmaking system set up by either parents or computers/robots who are better at figuring out what a person's actual value is by disregarding human beings' destructive short term emotions and prioritizing long term interests. This is a really bad idea just think about consequences of what you're proposing. Imagine a loving couple that can't be together because some souless machine has decided that they have to be with people they don't have feelings for. Imagine being stuck in abusive relationship with someone who you hate it's a nightmare. This type of system is basically a slavery. Ryuk9428 said: Think of the following sentence "It is a woman's duty to provide physical and emotional intimacy to her man." Sexism aside you make it sound like a job. Emotional and physical affection is something that should be natural not forced or a duty. You can't force yourself to love someone you either do or don't. Do you want a girlfriend that loves you or a concubine? @Murrin That was a very insightful post I wish more people were openminded like you. |
  Never explain, Never retract, Never apologize Just get the thing done And let them howl |
| Man's spiritual nature tends to prefer monogamy happiness while his animal nature tends to prefer polygamy pleasures. There is no consonance between these two natures, which is why, through the ages, man has been obligated to choose between one or the other. Monogamy is not only supported for theological reasons, but also for legal and social reasons. If a man has many wives, other men who wish to marry cannot have any. This damages society, as it leads to increase in prostitution, adultery, violence, fraud, kidnapping and rape. It is not for nothing that long before the appearance of Christianity, the ancient Greeks and Romans had forbidden polygamy for reasons of nature, friendship, domestic efficacy, political coexistence, etc .. The polygamists of ancient Greece had the same painful experiences with polygamy as the polygamists of ancient Israel. In both cases the wives hated each other and sought preeminence for themselves and their sons; stepbrothers, rivals, also hated each other. But above all, stepmothers and step-sons. hated each other. These bitter experiences led Athens and Jerusalem to the same conclusion. Too often, in polygamous households, wives were treated like objects, exploited and abused; children were abandoned, uneducated, and encouraged to rival each other; the men were too busy in the lustful and legal search for other wives as to be able to attend to their domestic duties or to provide their children with a healthy model of a good moral life. Non Religious arguments have always been the basis of Western rejection of polygamy. It was not the religious courts, but the civil authorities who spoke out firmly and decisively against it It is a fact that polygyny cannot satisfy the natural desire that women have to feel predilect themselves, while polyandry (historically rare) cannot satisfy the natural desire of men to feel unique, hence jealousy and discord are inevitable in this type of relationships, since, unlike friendly appreciation, erotic love demands exclusivity. No matter how I look at it, monogamy is far superior to polygamy |
_Nemrod_Oct 14, 2020 5:41 PM
 |
| Not sure how special your "special someone" would feel if they had to share the role with 3-4 other people. Just think about that for a bit. |
 |
| Too many Mormons on MAL... |
| www.vaticancatholic.com Scientific evidence for God: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiMqzN_YSXU |
Luchse said: Woah! I love myself... I truly do. My olden posts are always a sight to behold.Miss me with acting like a dog in heat all the time. |
  “The most shameless thing in the world is political power that can be inherited regardless of ability or talent!” |
| Whatever fills your plate, neither monogamy of polygamy is wrong |
| "If I get reincarnated… I wanna become a clam.” – Monkey D Luffy |
| Monogamy. If the right woman came my way I wouldn't exactly turn her down, but I'm not trying to go out and create a harem of bitches. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
| I think humans are more so polygamous based on divorce rates and a lot of human genetics. Neither model fits my ideal though. I think a lot of media overglorifies monogamy when most relationships end in 1 side being destroyed by divorce. Polygamy is also a false ideal in which handling that many people would be a nuisance. I guess the baby daddy strategy is the best if you are just looking to reproduce and "have fun." Got to know when to leave relationships afterall. |
 |
| The statistic says that women are much more than men so that means that if everyone marry in this world than the leftovers would probably be prostitute so I'll choose polygamy for the sake of humanity |
| "Rating are for Casul" "While masterpiece are for Pleb" "But shit taste is enlightenment" "Go watch School Days you Weebs" |
| Look, this really is a personal preference issue. It depends on whether you can find someone who shares the ideal of monogamy. God knows, even as a 50 year old man, I have been alone for the last 15 years and never found anyone neither male or female who wants to base a solid relationship on monogamy. It is simply a commodity these days. I am always open to it, and even if I apply the age rule for men, half your age + 7 = 25+7=32 I still cannot find anyone who would want a solid marriage based on monogamy, cannot find a single person who even wants or would dare even attempt to trust someone else to love and care for them. This leaves me with the only real answer to leave it open to either. I think we have regressed so much in society we cannot even trust each other and cannot form the most simple connections. I really wish I was born 50 years earlier. In 1920. |
| idk about you but the closer a girl gets to looking like ronald mcdonald, the more aroused i become. CAV where can we cast our eyes to @PoruMairu who thinks of himself a member of the true church. Helion. |
| Basically men want polygamy and women want monogamy. |
| "You misunderstood from the very beginning. You just believed what you wanted to believe." Rei Ayanami |
More topics from this board
» 2023-2024 NBA Season Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Jun 18, 2023 |
679 |
by Hitagi__Furude
»»
27 minutes ago |
|
» What sort of education did you get?removed-user - Dec 23, 2019 |
47 |
by beazy12
»»
37 minutes ago |
|
» What are some of your favorite animals?DoisacChopper - Feb 10 |
48 |
by perfectlyquiet
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Do you care about your native culture?Kamikaze_404 - Apr 9 |
45 |
by Bruh69XD
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Are you mentally ill?Ejrodiew - Apr 24 |
45 |
by MasterTasuke
»»
2 hours ago |