25 Male Is it unusual that I rarely see a woman I find attractive?

>>18285158
Dunno, you woman hating/bitter/dejected/disillusioned in any way?

File: reignbow-pony-plugs-crystal-delights.jpg (34KB, 636x358px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 636x358px

>>18285158
we're living through the greatest porn boom in human history and your still looking at "real women", wow, are you internet deprived or something?

>>18285158

Is this a problem for you? I mean, what's the big deal? Attraction works different for different people. Yours is pretty tame. No biggie.

>>18285158
Do you get boners in the morning?
>yes
Then you are normal. Maybe stop fapping and see for yourself what it will be after one week.
>no
Improve your health life style. Get 20~25 bmi, start doing sport, get rid of stress, go see doctor for general checkup and start eating something else than fastfood and sweets.

Personally i see around me
>old people
>children
>dudes
>girls
>and qties
And only when i go for like 4 days of no fap, the qties start some reaction in my brain + pants.

26 here, I have a similar problem except mine is with arousal. I don't fap anymore, I just have sex with my Gf once a week. The thing is I don't get random boners when looking at cute girls, I can boner just fine when I'm about to bone my Gf. It's strange because I rarely think of sex and when I do I don't even get an erection. I do get boners in the morning.

I eat clean, not overweight and exercise three times a week.

Am I fucked or something?

>hey guys I'm not a teenager anymore and I don't act like a perpetually horny teenager
>IS THIS NORMAL OH FUCK OH GEEZ
ITT the market for testosterone supplements.

>>18285173
>we're living through the greatest porn boom in human history
Will the bubble burst?

>>18285638
It will get only bigger when VR will hit mainstream. Then robot waifus. Then artificial wombs and children on demand.

And then the females will be rendered obsolete.

>>18285702
It is laughably easier to replace the man than the woman in the process of procreation.

>>18285728
>males make females obsolete
>females make males obsolete
>humanity divides into two groups who have replaced the other with an idealized artificial version and eventually evolves into two species due to not interbreeding

The future's a weird place.

>>18285638
The value bubble? It already did burst, a long time ago. Porn was one of those thankless pioneers who helped forge the present era of consumer tech, then quietly took their place in the dustbin of history once we were done needing them for that purpose.

Will the production excess cease? No.

>>18285728
Artificial wombs are already being put to work in labs. Artificial sperm exists, but it won't be any time soon than it becomes less expensive to become pregnant through artificial means than by natural means.

Now, compare the cost of an artificial womb (once the tech is refined) to the cost of a divorce and child support settlement. Hell, the artificial womb is probably less expensive ALREADY. To a middle class professional man, being left by his wife and ordered to pay support is already about as expensive as buying a nice house.

>>18285728
It probably is (i have seen article how they made sperm from skin cells in some experiment), but no matter what feminists claims, the majority of brains and power are still in males hands.

Also look at children of single mothers vs single fathers.

>>18285734
I don't know, I think people will always desire real sex. You cannot replicate the dirtiness of having sex with a real human being, who has taken a shit earlier that day and will be a professional again the next day. Not to mention what it psychologically does to you to be chosen, for someone to bare themselves for you and no one else.

I rather think that more and more people who cannot compete will become addicted to VR.

>>18285749
>Not to mention what it psychologically does to you to be chosen, for someone to bare themselves for you and no one else.
The robot waifus are better at this than any human could ever be. They don't cheat and they know exactly how to romance you. They're even able to avoid being "too perfect" if they know you don't like that.

>>18285749
>cannot compete
It will be spiral anon.

The first one will be r9k robots. Then the super ugly obese girls will go to vr too since nobody desparate enough will try to hit on them. Then the average dudes will opt off and so on.

Maybe we will all end up like Japan where in few decades being virgin will be the norm.

>>18285743
Countless things already tested on some sort of animals. The step to create artificial semen to trigger a natural process is much less invasive than making the environment that the fetus first gets to know artificial. The pregnancy process is fairly complex and doesn't stay strictly limited to the mother taking care of the immune system etc. The baby also first experiences their mother's heart beat, voice and so on while still in the womb. There is now way to tell what it would do to a fetus to not be enveloped by another person until we've tried it.

>>18285747
The most notable difference between male and female IQ is the distribution that is more even among women. We live in a society where physical strength matters next to nothing. Not sure what it looks like in the US but I'm western European and within a few decades (if everything continues as it does now) women will have outnumbered men not just as college students and judges but also as dentists, vets, surgeons and so on.

>>18285749
>I rather think that more and more people who cannot compete will become addicted to VR.

I think your wording is out of order here. More and more people who become addicted to VR will think the competition is more trouble than it's worth. This is the same as what previous tech has already done, just more of it.

-VR/AR artist, worried about own dreams shitting up the planet for everybody

>none can understand my inner conflict

>>18285758
I don't doubt that all these things will be possible some day but I don't agree with your outlook. A robot doing something doesn't mean anything. A human being kind to you only gets its worth from said human being able to choose otherwise.

Another point is whether a person could perceive robot affection as different, or that they would be tricked into convincing themselves that the robot does love them. But if this doesn't happen (and if it does, we have a bunch of other issues) then a robot can never in the same way reassure that you're a worthwhile person as another person who chooses to spend time with you they could've spent with someone else. And to be intimate with you while rejecting others in the process.

>>18285759
Maybe, I just don't think sex in the flesh will ever really disappear. If anything you'd probably be left with a bunch of minority fanatics.

>>18285774
Fair enough, that's a good point, but they don't exclude each other. I think it's already a pretty big issue now that it's mostly the introverted boys getting lost in the rabbit hole of technology and porn and not compensating for their natural lack of social skills, confidence or anything else. Which I assume is also what you are (partly) thinking of.

>>18285759
Being virgin isn't the norm in Japan; 'herbivore' does not mean the same thing as 'fasting.' Japan's problem is that women have to initiate now, or else the horniest 20% of males will father the entire next generation.

If you view Darwin's works as anything other than heresy, then you've probably heard his mention of sexual selection - which is much more powerful than selection by death of the weak. Selecting the horniest part of the population means a hornier future, moreso with each generation, which means our present atmosphere of universally enforced degeneracy will look like puritanism by comparison.

>>18285774
I'm also involved in VR, but I don't worry as much. Instead, we should work on ways to remind people the real world exists, even if it's not as nice. There's a lot of room for research on that.

>>18285776
>A robot doing something doesn't mean anything
Humans are just fleshy machines. You don't actually think you have free will, right?

People will definitely be "tricked" into feeling emotions from artificial beings. A lot of people are already, see the guy in Japan who "married" a dating sim character, or the guys who have dinner with their waifu. I wouldn't even say it's "tricking" you. They may have AI on the level where there actually is some degree of "emotion" back, and they'd definitely learn what you like.

>>18285790
>our present atmosphere of universally enforced degeneracy
Actually it is media etc that make it look like people are more sexually active than ever. This is not the case. If you were young in the sixties or seventies your peers would have been more experienced on average than now.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/

>>18285770
>women outnumbered men
I admit i expressed myself poorly.

I meant that more in an economical sence like this anon told it
>>18285743
We have capitalism, the demand to replace both male and female is already here. Females have sperm bank already, but we males has only divorce court which gives our children away in 90% in failt free divorce. And that is the sad fact.

>want babies? Find female, make her happy, toss a coin and if tails, you lose children, money and basically will to live.
And dont make mistake, i am more than willing to toss my coin, but i am still scared about the possible outcome as well.

>>18285790
Maybe the next generation of japanese will have higher T levels than the past one full of herbivores, but you ignore the society part. Simply being horny will reault in greater use of porn and vr, not directly seeking woman to impregnate.

>>18285793
>You don't actually think you have free will, right?
Compared to a robot, yeah, absolutely. You can argue about whether an impulse reached our brain before we became aware of it, or our environment completely shapes what we want etc, but people will leave or think about leaving if they find someone's company boring or otherwise unpleasant. They don't have to make do with the given situation.

>I wouldn't even say it's "tricking" you.
I do because once people develop affection for something that can't feel, they WILL convince themselves it can. Even regardless of AI, it's a pretty dangerous predicament for people to have a vulnerability (in the form of empathy and lust and what not) for machines that are 1000% indifferent towards us.

>>18285802
>I do because once people develop affection for something that can't feel, they WILL convince themselves it can
Can you prove anyone else feels? Can you prove that you do? This just gets down to philosophy.

>>18285794
Shit, can't copy paste the precise link. Here's another piece that talks about the same subject matter though.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/there-isnt-really-anything-magical-about-it-why-more-millennials-are-putting-off-sex/2016/08/02/e7b73d6e-37f4-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html?utm_term=.7756b251fc41

>>18285810
Why would you have to prove that other people have feelings when you grow up experiencing them as feeling, when we have the entire psychological discourse in case there's doubt about whether emotions are universal? Literal centuries of stories detailing loss, humiliation, pride, forgiveness...?

>>18285823
If everyone else was a robot programmed to do exactly what they would do normally, would there be a difference?

>>18285843
I guess not, if they were programmed to react to their circumstances as humans and act and feel accordingly. But in that case I would argue that they were made human and are no longer robots. And it would be impossible to do because we still don't even know how humans work and how the body and mind are linked.