Hello /adv/, At the moment I'm obsessed with the idea of

Try suicide. Any fucking dog can kill another man. Few men can kill themselves.

>>17406571
>Any fucking dog can kill another man.

Completely untrue.

I'm right though aren't I? The only thing that matters is if you can physically beat other men. When you search your feelings you realise nothing else matters. And the REASON you need to be able to physically beat other men is so you can impregnate all of the desirable females.

You sound like a runt that will still be at a psychological and mechanical disadvantage regardless of what shape you get yourself into.

You're correct about one thing, people are self deluding and ultimately it is only the most base and natural of natural laws that matters: feed or be fed upon. Kill or be killed. The idea of being in decent shape isn't for some infantile notion of "the pride" of enforcing your will, physically, on another male, it's about having the means to have control of a situation and make the world, and your own life, better. If another machine (person) is able to beat you in a one on one physical altercation, this is an obvious indicator of the extent with which you can influence outcomes.

Anyway. You're being stupid, I could beat you up IRL, your problems stem from being trapped and feeling as though you have no control over your life, etc.

>>17406576
Tough guy talk over the internet. I could beat you in a fight mate. Now what?

>>17406589
No you. No I could beat you in a fight. IRL.
No you.

>>17406574
*tips fedora*

>>17406591
Prove it.

>>17406601
Not going to ask you for coordinates or an address, because if someone actually did go and hurt, or kill you, I could be blamed for it whether it was me or not.

You just can't do that.

>>17406610

In any case, explain why what I said was "stupid". You've basically endorsed what I said. If you're not big and strong and tough then you can't exert your influence on the world. So what I said is perfectly correct isn't it?

I think you're right, op. Just know that being big and strong is not the only trait you needin order to impregnatr the desireable females. Status is important Too. To stay within caveman talk, you might have gotten a nice girl with being a good hunter. But you got the best girl as the clan chief, which you could only be if you were the smartest and most skilled of all the strong guys in Your clan.

>>17406626
To put it concisely, it''s your underlying motivation framework. The angles you're basing this around. You're more or less embracing slavery to your environment by situating your mindset around what you seem to be focused on.

Yes, every male who hasn't been brainwashed thinks occasionally about beating the shit out of some prick, and that life would be more fun, and easier, to just solve problems by brute force. Or the notion of cumming inside / impregnating any given attractive female. In actuality, these things wouldn't pan out favorably. That's why beating up people typically remains fantasy and it's better to just prepare and develop the capacity to do something.

Also, your vaguely evolutionary argument is massively oversimplified. The formation of harem structures, or rape, are both possible breeding strategies. Your's is obviously more about quantity than quality, as you have no intention of investing resources into the offpspring. Anyway. Your own understanding of yourself and your desires is probably faulty. Your idea of human evolutionary history is certain wrong.

File: tony.jpg (26KB, 374x373px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 374x373px

>>17406641
>I think you're right, op. Just know that being big and strong is not the only trait you needin order to impregnatr the desireable females. Status is important Too. To stay within caveman talk, you might have gotten a nice girl with being a good hunter. But you got the best girl as the clan chief, which you could only be if you were the smartest and most skilled of all the strong guys in Your clan.
True status is important. Explain why I shouldn't try and become some criminal kingpin then. Surely that's the logical thing to aspire to be in life. It is the ultimate embodiment of masculinity. Because if you become just e.g. a CEO, you are always bound by societies rules, you are always bound by social rules which are becoming increasingly restrictive for men. If you're a criminal boss you escape these rules, but you still have proved your status in a hierarchy and ergo get access to females.

Even if you don't make it to being the boss, you'll probably fuck more women than a corporate stiff, and you don't have to play by corporate stiff rules.

b8

>>17406651
>You're more or less embracing slavery to your environment
...how

>In actuality, these things wouldn't pan out favorably.
Yes they would if you actually did them. As I said in the previous post, why shouldn't I aspire to be a criminal boss? It gives me the best chance of doing those things. And even if I don't make it to being a boss I'd probably have a better chance of doing those things than by being a corporate stiff.

>Also, your vaguely evolutionary argument is massively oversimplified. The formation of harem structures, or rape, are both possible breeding strategies. Your's is obviously more about quantity than quality, as you have no intention of investing resources into the offpspring.
Quantity probably is more important than quality. Say you have 10 kids and don't parent them. Yeah they'll probably be violent and anti-social but who cares, they'll probably still have more of their own kids than if you had only had 2 kids but raised them "well". Therefore quantity is better right? More of your progeny will result.