>>26114992 >29 >Used to socialize and frequently go out in my early-mid 20s >Seemingly normie, except sex or any form of intimacy never entered the equation >4 years sober now, don't really go out anymore >Wasted my prime years for this sort of thing >Going to spend my Friday night working then playing Dark Souls 2.
>>26115160 Keys and humans are in no way comprable. I can make up an analogy like that too: a pencil that is sharpened many times is useless, but a pencil sharpener that sharpens many pencils is still useful.
>>26115398 You're right. That's called progress. The number of sexual partners a person has had in no way diminishes their value as a person, regardless of gender. The whole idea of a woman who had lots of sex being "damaged" is a sexist, patriarchal concept which has at its core the idea that women are property of men.
>>26115468 Nobody is "accountable" because having group sex is not something shameful, no matter who is involved. For every MMF threesome it requires two willing men but only one willing woman. Men are more likely and willing to engage in behavior that would be considered slutty but they aren't shamed for it like women.
>>26115449 >has at its core the idea that women are property of men. But you are, you always will be, imagine if all men woke up tomorrow to all women worldwide claiming they'd never had sex with any man ever again and they did just that, they just had lesbian sex, tbqh mass rapes would occur, men who'd usually protest against such things would be the first guys raping, what we have in society is the illusion of civility, men are only civil because we have systems set in place to have our needs met (dating, marriage, porn, prostitution, etc), remove all these outlets and women become what they always were, walking piles of fuck meat, you'd get thet shit fucked out of you in a week if that scenario happened, probably by male family members and friends to boot, don't ever forget your place and how shit works.
The only reason you aren't currently being raped and/or killed is because women as a collective aren't restricting collective males of sex, the same men who criticize people like George Sodini and Elliot Rodger would likely become just like those men if faced with the same problems for a few months or years.
>>26115678 Your argument is saying two things at its core. 1) women do not desire sex with men. That's false. Women do desire and enjoy sex with men. Women are not interested in restricting men from having sex, but they are interested in being held to the same sexual standards as men. A man who has lots of sex and is forward and open about this faces little to no social repercussions, whereas a woman who would do the same is considered damaged and tainted. 2) you're saying that at their core, men are vicious rape-crazy beasts who are unable to contain their sexual urges. This is an insult to men. Men are very capable of not sexually forcing themselves on people, but we live in a society that teaches women how not to be raped rather than teaching men not to rape. When a woman is raped, they are questioned about the circumstances. "What were you wearing, why were you out that late, why were you alone" etc. It says that men raping women is the fault of the woman and not the man who did the raping.
>>26115718 You have to look at the factors that come into play with marriages like that. That graph would have you believe that the people in those lasting marriages are the same as the people with multiple partners, when really the people with just one partner are more often than not religious and have been raised in an environment that heavily polices sex and actively shames both men and women for having natural sexual desires. Not to mention marriage is an outdated and deeply sexist institution. Monogamy works for some but not for everyone.
>>26114992 >Where did it all go wrong? When the english language became the lingua franca. you see I was born in a small village. I was still a child when we were raided by soldiers - foreign soldiers. Torn from my elders I was made to speak their language. With each new post my masters changed along with the words they made me speak. With each change - I changed too. My thoughts, personality, How I saw right and wrong... Words Can Kill. Time and again the country was ruled by a foreign tongue. When i was a young boy i lost my native language. The bedrock for any developing child. My country, family, face - MY identity. Everything was stolen from me. Since ancient times every civilizations ruler has had the same idea. When people unite under one will - they become stronger than the sums of their parts. And what do rulers use to bring people together? Language. This world will become one - I have found the way. Race, Tribal affiliations, National borders. Even our faces will be irrelevant. The world that The Boss envisioned will finally become a reality. And it will make mankind whole again... America is a country of liberty. A meeting of immigrants. Instead of simply assimilating its citizens live alongside others. So the major sought a system that used information: Words - To control the subconscious. In his eyes the greatest symbiotic parasite the worlds ever known isn't microbial - it's linguistic. Words are what keep civilization, our world - alive. Free the world, Not by taking mens lives. But by taking their tongues. With this i'll rid the world of infestation. Sans Lingua Franca - The world will be torn asunder, And then it shall be free.
>>26115449 >The whole idea of a woman who had lots of sex being "damaged" is a sexist, patriarchal concept which has at its core the idea that women are property of men. Is that so strange though? Women have evolved to find and stick to a man in order to survive, and this pattern is still inprinted in us as evolution works very slowly.
I'm not saying that it's right, I'm just saying that men can't help thinking that any more than women can help wanting to fuck Chad. It's in our genetical programming, which easily overrides what society have taught us.
>>26116163 Finding a man and sticking with him has nothing to do with evolution. That is entirely cultural. In some cultures Women have historically had multiple husbands. The idea of male and female monogamous pair bonding is in no way hardwired into us genitically. Evolutionary psychology in general is all pseudoscience that attempts to reaffirm the status quo. Humans have developed to a point where we can define our own reproductive and romantic desires, there is no overarching universal standard for human sexuality that everyone defaults to. It's all shaped by your own experiences. Which is why monogamy works for some, while other people have multiple partners, and other people are asexual. It's entirely subjective.
Also that picture shows us that men are raised to be resourceful and encouraged to be curious problem solvers, while taught from a young age that they need to be pretty and subservient. Women are taught that their most important function is to be attractive and find a man to make happy. of course women who have been raised that way aren't going to know what to do in a survival situation, they were veered away from or expressly denied the access to pursuing those interests when they were young.
Why are robots so horrible at visualizing statistics?
What do you mean by millions of women? Do you mean in the world? Do you mean, say, ten million? If ten million women, all over the world, were having sex tonight, that'd be about the equivalent of about 100 different women in the /entirety of New York City/ having sex. You may had that many women in your graduating class. It's not a lot of people.
Let's go another order of magnitude. 100 million women all over the world, having sex tonight.
That'd be equivalent to two female Stanford students. Just two.
Imagine an average, suburban, American neighborhood. Maybe 2-3 dozen homes. It's not too much to think that one couple is having sex there tonight, right? One woman taking dick from her husband. One in a neighborhood of a few dozen is equivalent to about 250 million, or a quarter billion women in the whole, wide world.
Did you ever take the time to really think about that?
>>26116100 >women do not desire sex with men. That's false Never said this, read again, I said IF women just decided they did not want to have sex with men they'd discover they actually had no choice, I never said women don't want to have sex with men.
>you're saying that at their core, men are vicious rape-crazy beasts who are unable to contain their sexual urges. We can contain our urges......... because there are outlets to those urges, but like I said IF all women just decided they don't want to have sex with men, most if not all men would resort to rape.
>Men are very capable of not sexually forcing themselves on people, but we live in a society that teaches women how not to be raped rather than teaching men not to rape Again what I call the illusion of civility, we have outlets to meet our urges e.g. porn, if we removed all these outlets from society all hell would break loose, there is strong evidence that links an increase in porn consumption to a decrease it rape:
>Monogamy works for some but not for everyone It works for too few for it to be seen as a legitimate thing to do, and women do actually lose value and their ability to stay monogamous the more sexual partners they have, thus justifying the lock and key analogy, men don't have this problem because we are easy to please, it isn't hard to make a man orgasm no matter how much sexual experience he has, women however will be able to feel differences in girth, length, etc since they are penetrated, for a woman to please a man she just needs to have a relatively tight hole, and seeing as the vagina has muscles that isn't hard to accomplish.
>>26116100 Not the anon that you are replying to, but your whole argument forgets each gender's biological role. Women are the ones that give birth, thus are supposed to be selective about whom they are to be impregnated by. With your femnazi agenda and all others like it, you forget this fundamental fact.
Also, I have a hypothetical situation for you. A man has sex with 3 women, and that man is the only man to have sex with the women. He is the father to all 3 children. A woman has sex with 3 men, the father is unknown, without a test, but not all the men might be reachable, for a woman to have sex with 3 men in quick succession requires a degree of usage on the man's part.
So you say women want to be held to the same sexual standard, but how can they, with what I've just said, with the mothering.
>>26114992 >26114992 Uhr probably when I gained a lot of weight... I'm fat as fuck. Probably 120kg Started college and lose all my party friends of high school finish college with no friends at all I wanna work out but I hate being surrounded by people staring at me I'm not a whale eating the world.. I'm just lazy and shy. When my parents get a house I'm gonna buy work out gym machines and start working out.. Ina year or 2 of discipline I'll be fit.
>>26116444 Women would never decide to stop having sex with men worldwide. It's an impossible scenario that has no bearing on reality. Also nobody except puritan religious types wants to remove sexual outlets like porn, being sex positive is about allowing people to be sexual without negative social backlash for doing so.
As for your second point, of course more sexual partners makes monogamy go down. If you have sex with more than one person you're going to desire sex with other people. Sex is different from person to person, no two people have sex in the exact same way. Desiring multiple partners applies to both men and women. The point I was making is that monogamy in the context of marriage is at its core is a cultural device intended to keep women subservient to men. Some people want to only have sex with one person forever, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Find another person who thinks the same way and enjoy each other. But marriage and monogamy as is generally accepted as the cultural norm has at its core the concept that desiring sex with multiple people is shameful and unnatural. The lock and key analogy reinforces this by trying to say humans are like machinery and that we are all the same. It doesn't hold up.
>>26116754 >Women would never decide to stop having sex with men worldwide. It's an impossible scenario that has no bearing on reality.
1. Yes, that's why its called a hypothetical, maybe I should have stated the obvious.
2. It does have a bearing on reality, that's the point of hypotheticals
>The lock and key analogy reinforces this by trying to say humans are like machinery and that we are all the same. It doesn't hold up. Not the lock and key analogy simply states the FACT that women have a "market value" based on sex and reproduction, and a woman who becomes a "used good" has lowered that market value. that's simply it.
>>26116525 You're looking at sex purely from a stance of procreation. Humans have sex for both procreation and pleasure. A woman who has lots of sex but no children is still considered a slut, but a man who has lots of sex and had no children is not.
Also why is being selective about who impregnates you a bad thing? It makes sense.
>>26116882 I never said that being selective is a bad thing, I think the opposite.
We have genitals for a reason, procreation. We did not randomly develop genitals so that we could sample other peoples genitals for pleasure.
Honestly I think it's just the day and age we live in. If contraception hasnt been invented, we wouldn't have this problem. If we didn't have medicine to cure some std's, this wouldn't be a problem. I can't help but feel all this technological advancement is, to be honest, enabling womens slutty behaviour.
Another thought. Lgbt has become a lot more common, could this have anything to do with rising sluttiness in women?
I understand that you're probably a girl, and if you're not, then you're pathetic, but you must understand. All this shit with women wanting a say in things, women wanting this and that, there being a quota that needs to be met for women in the workplace.. it's self destructive. The reason you live in such comfort is because of previous generations of mens work, whilst all women seem to do is worry about how many facebook likes they've got.
>Humans have sex for both procreation and pleasure
This is just an artifice allowed by modern science. Millions of years of evolution don't dissappear overnight. Sex is an inherently proreational activity and our psychology reflects that.
Men are not women, this is not a difficult concept. When women sleep around they feel like worthless sluts because in a world without contraception they would be as they are risking falling pregnant from a bunch of random males without vetting them properly thereby threatening their genetic legacy. Women can only have so many children in a lifetime and every sexual encounter risks being out of action for 9 months. Whereas men just need to disseminate as much genetic material as possible before they die and have a refractory period of like an hour.
>>26116754 >monogamy in the context of marriage is at its core is a cultural device intended to keep women subservient to men
Women can be kept subservient to men without monogamy. See the polygamous and patriarchal countries the middle east.
Monogamy is a tool for the upper classes to suppress the lower classes. It makes the lower classes feel satisfied, even blessed, to have just one partner while the rich and powerful are swimming in multiple wives, concubines, mistresses. It also restricts the sexual freedom of lower classes and discourages them from spending effort on pursuing more sexual partners, when they could instead be more productive workers who pay more taxes.
>used to work retail >left because better job >still have friends who tell me about all the drama >Big chested blond chick that works in jewelry >Literally a fucking valley girl, probably one of the dumbest people I've ever met >find out that shes been sucking off half of the front end >worst story was her sucking a dudes dick for a McDonald's milkshake
>different girl >works at the fitting room counter >kinda hipster, slender, and blonde >really cakes on the makeup >wants to study psychology >two dudes from the back of house are smoking weed in their truck >she wants to buy some >shes $5 dollars short >Sucks then both off to pay off the difference >$2.50 a head
>>26115449 >progress no this is called degeneration, and the reason why our current society will become a slave state or will die out, the core of societies are families, and when families are missing everyone is lead astray by all the bullshit malevolent people spread for their profit.
>>26117074 With the advent of contraception, people can have sex as much and as often as they want. This does definitely enable people to have more sex. The only reason this is seen as bad is because of patriarchal tradition. In the past, having sex for any reason other than procreation was seen as sinful or degeneracy. You talk about enabling "slutty" behavior, but why is anything considered slutty? The whole concept of "slut" is a cultural device to keep women from having sex for pleasure. Also being LGBT is not becoming more common, it's just that not being killed or ostracized for it is becoming less common. LGBT people have always been there, but only recently have they been able to be who they are without the fear of being lynched (and even then there are still people who invite violence against LGBT people).
You assume that because I'm advocating for women I must be a woman, why is that? You say a man who thinks that women should be treated as equals is pathetic, which means you think men are inherently superior and naturally capable of more than women. This is a learned behavior that you have been indoctrinated to believe. I think women should be treated exactly the same as boys, and should have exactly the same access and opportunities. I am not in favor of workplace diversity quotas, as I think that's favoratism which is what leads to discrimination. You talk about previous generations of "men's work", as if women have contributed nothing. Women have historically been denied a voice in just about any matter. It's circular reasoning of "women aren't as capable as men, so we won't allow women the same opportunities as men". Women live in "comfort" because that's how they're raised. From a young age women are coddled and not allowed to try and fail and try again in the same way boys are.
I honestly think it's a evolutionary/societal thing. Men who pull mad pussy are seen as the superior specimen since they get to pass on their genes with such ease. Women who attract mad dick are seen as too frivolous and indecisive on a mate, so they are deemed slutty or low-tier specimens.
I don't know. It is what it is. If you're a chick that likes getting slammed frequently, so be it.
>>26117520 >With the advent of contraception, people can have sex as much and as often as they want this takes away responsibility from the act, something missing from today's people >This does definitely enable people to have more sex quantity won't equal quality, that's why sluts are usually horrible people, what you do defines what you become, and promisquity is disgusting. >The only reason this is seen as bad is because of patriarchal tradition. In the past, having sex for any reason other than procreation was seen as sinful or degeneracy There are already two good reasons why it's bad, but if they aren't enough, just think how these sluts will grow their children, also think the kind of men will settle with this rubbish of girls; this is the best way to throw healthy genetics into the bin like the world wars did, whatever is left is whores and cucks. >You assume that because I'm advocating for women I must be a woman You're not advocating for women, women don't even know what the hell they want, they just follow their feelings, like the one to fuck, the problem is they will never be satisfied with the current state of affairs as they are constanctly offered unlimited validation from everyone (due to cucks like you). A married woman loving his man is hundreds time happier than a slut, and sluts cannot settle, they lost that ability when their first lover dumped them. >You say a man who thinks that women should be treated as equals is pathetic Women are cleary not equal to men, they both have differences and flaws, the point is recognizing women's flaws, something that today is demonized like a fucking devil(like emotional stability and objective rational thinking ability and planning).
>blah blagh blarghh I seriously hope you're trolling and spouting memes, if you're serious, jesus christ FUCKOFF TO TUMBLR.
>>26114992 >>26115028 Tbh, I wouldn't give a shit about pics related. What kills me is that she has moved on, she's with someone else, just one person who probably means more to her than I do, she's not thinking of me anymore, and she's sucking his dick. It drives me crazy, I think I'm just slowly dying from sadness.
Thread replies: 66 Thread images: 11
Thread DB ID: 476548
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.