Can someone remind me why fighting against SJWs is important?

>>34980676
It's not

They barely exist, there are more important things to waste your pathetic worthless time on.

Because SJWs are basically the "fun police"

They bully people who are having fun

>>34980676
They are useful idiots, tools of inhuman corporations, aimed against themselves and ordinary people.
Like aids of civilizations.

>>34980689
Thanks, it's good to know.

>>34980676
An SJW is someone who cares less about issues and more about informing someone that he cares about said issues

An SJW would never fight or give his life for what he believes, just tweet about it

They devalue everything humanity stands for

>>34980689
Why is his time worthless and pathetic?

>>34980676
They're the weak men bringing down western civilization. Maybe you don't care now, but you will when the government can no longer afford your neetbux

File: IMG_9824.jpg (32KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 306x306px

>>34980695
>>34980705
>>34980710

Sure, keep up the good fight.

>>34980710
As someone who has actively put their body on the line against cops and security guards to stop environmental destruction and flagrant waste of taxpayer money, am I worthy?

File: Pride_31.jpg (82KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 480x640px

Don't fight them, laugh at them without interacting with them if you want to do something about them. Interacting with them just polarizes our politics because it pushed them further to the left and you further to the right. Extreme ideologies aren't good for society.

>>34980730
Did you forget where we are?

File: 1486003744101.png (36KB, 844x592px)

36KB, 844x592px

>>34980777
sad trips of truth

File: image.jpg (9KB, 228x221px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 228x221px

>>34980756
Explain what you stand for and why you did that. Your movement has been devalued a lot but I still wanna listen to you and accept your opinion with an open mind.

>>34980756
I always wondered why the evil government corporations hated mother nature.

>>34980676
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY

The "ESSJAYWEES" are a giant strawman. They are a very small group of unorganized individuals. Even if all that's said of them was true, it wouldn't be a problem. There are much bigger threats to free speech than them.

>>34980676
>hello I am silly cartoon strawman, and in my world there are only two factions of people and nothing ever is in between, if you aren't with me you're against me, no one could possibly find /pol/tards as annoying as SJWs

>They enable roasties
>They make it fashionable to denigrate white males, and you're probably a white male
>They want to interfere with our escapism media and hobbies
>They are ruining Western society
>They are doing all of this almost solely to virtue signal to their SJW circlejerk

>>34980676
Because they want you dead.

How many of you guys have actually been victimized by SJWs IRL instead of just arguing with them online, or even just watching youtubers tell you about SJWs?

Because they don't just disagree and try to fight for fag marriage or some shit. If you're against it, they'll try to destroy you. What happened with Mozilla is a prime example, or more recently their autistic chimpout at Berkeley. I'm also going to head off any claims of the black block shit, because there's a god damned reason they wave black and red flags while screeching about how he erases the trans identity.

>>34980802
>They are a very small group of unorganized individuals.
It's incredibly easy to organize people nowadays. They may not have an official group, but they frequently work together for common goals.

>>34980829
OP here, I actually posted that pic ironically. I vehemently hate that meme since it's used to mock anyone who slightly questions the anti-sjw movement and whether what they're doing is worthwhile.

>>34980870
SJWs infiltrated my social circle and I lost all of my friends because I didn't agree with various SJW topics.

>>34980870
That point is exactly why this whole anti-political correctness movement is dead to me.

File: Mortality clarified in a single strike.png (216KB, 1809x373px)

216KB, 1809x373px

>>34980870
Not victimized because I keep my views to myself. I was called racist once for talking about Italian-Americans as an Italian American, but that just gave me an excuse to fuck with him. But I have seen off the top of my head

>A kid harassed because of a MAGA hat, to the point people stepped in because they acting progressively more violent
>Had the library shut down because of some feather indians doing some autistic "singing" in the library for hours
>an entire day devoted to "disproving whiteness", funded by the college

File: 1481878312274.jpg (46KB, 599x332px)

46KB, 599x332px

>>34980870
>literally had to fucking deal with these cunts weekly on campus

Just because you don't go outside doesn't mean it's all make believe dipshit.

>>34980928
People have a right to freedom of speech and to disagree with you. Fighting against SJWs isn't going to help you magically get your friends back. Also I'm sorry about your predicament.

>>34980886
The people you speak of don't have a common set of beliefs. Sure, people organize for a single cause, but forming a group is impossible. The "SJWs" are actually very similar to the "alt-right". They are both strawman terms that only complete retards describe themselves with and you could point out a few peopke that belong to those """groups""", but there is no actual group.

>>34980973
What do you mean "deal with"?

>white genocide fag
Nevermind. Everything is a micro aggression against you guys.

>>34980966
>an entire day devoted to "disproving whiteness", funded by the college
And people wonder why I don't want university to be free. Mine has a decent amount of stuff like that as well as safe zones. The student council is trying to get us made into a sanctuary school.

>>34980676
Considering how much influence many of their backwards ideas have on governments/corporations, I'd say it isn't without necessity.
Actually, that's probably best said inversely.
There are governments and corporations that have uses for hordes of dumbshits swallowing nonsense, and regurgitation it outward onto others as of yet unaffectionate by it.
As another Anon already stated, they're useful idiots, living tools for others' interests.
It's sickening, but that's reality.

File: IMG_4283.jpg (239KB, 960x1440px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 960x1440px

>Yfw you realize that the alt-right is worse than the SJWs.

>>34981015
>regurgitating* it
Hate posting from phones.

File: IMG_1348.jpg (36KB, 394x458px)

36KB, 394x458px

>>34981017
>Let's fight sexism towards men with sexism against women
>Let's fight racism against whites with racism to every single other race
I don't what's wrong with that.

>>34980830
>>They want to interfere with our escapism media and hobbies

This.

They came for our vidya games and the way it's going soon we won't be able to set foot in a fictional universe without hearing how we're all predators who just want one thing and need to be held accountable for the actions of men 200 years ago because generalising is okay when it's us.

We get that shit enough with the media, the internet, the TV. We had video-games. We made the video games (so did the japs, but the japs were, and mostly still are, chill).

But nope. The very thought process that there exists somewhere out there some form of media that doesn't make all men look like rapists (unless it's rapefugees, everyone knows that "not all rapefugeed...") or that all whites owned slaves and become nazis (well, it's getting true now you agenda pushing kikes), triggers them.
The idea that they might have to chill on their agenda pushing and their hate... It oppresses them. Triggers them.

>>34980985
>but there is no actual group.
It does however refer to a specific type of person. Just as there is no official group for WASPs, you'd probably be called retarded if you tried to claim they don't exist. It refers to the kind of person that is afraid of an open dialogue, obsessed with microaggressions, and does little more than harass others rather than achieve something worthwhile.

Bill Maher? Not much of a SJW. A leftist definitely, but he is currently being castigated by people freaking out over him giving Milo a slot. We've reached a point where people refuse to refer to him by name, which is also hilarious considering all of the dumb Harry Potter analogies we saw when Trump was elected.

File: IMG_4522.jpg (63KB, 900x471px)

63KB, 900x471px

>>34981049
But I don't have a problem with women, the LGBT or ethnic minorities. So why should I have a problem with them being in my entertainment so long as it's entertaining.


Plus I think Daisy Ridley is cute. I'd pay good money to see Rey gang raped by a pack of Storm Troopers.

They need to be put down like the sexist racist hypocritical parasites they are, or at least laughed at for being those things.

>>34980676
its not none of it matters

>>34980689
What are you fucking talking about?

Universities all across the world have enforced state spaces, in New York you can be fined for accidently misgendering someone. Video games are being milded and watered down to the point were they are less exciting than the kid's games of 2000. At my school I had a mandatory assembly from a female member of staff every day about the latest advances in feminism and why its needed, at my university, I'm told by my friends doing humanities subjects that feminism is excessively shilled and integrated into every possible aspect of their work.

How the fuck could you possibly conclude that's it an overblown myth? The SJW have already won.

>>34980979
>People have a right to freedom of speech and to disagree with you.

Absolutely, but the topics we disagreed on were rarely ever spoken of before SJW bullshit became widespread.
One of the biggest arguments was over Halloween costumes being "cultural appropriation".

Was that ever a thing before SJWs took over popular culture?
Sure, you'd hear about people complaining about fucking blackface or some shit, but never as pedantic as it currently is, and it was never taken seriously.

If SJW-ism had never taken off to the extent it has, the very idea that Halloween costumes should turn into a lecture about "privilege" would have never entered anybody's mind.

People shouldn't have to smile and nod whenever some green-haired cunt is whining about how shit white men are and how we should respect "genderfluid" people's pronouns, just because they don't want to become a social outcast.

>>34980676
Because they want to erase any possibility that our suffering, us as males (they shame as m'lady, and fedora wearers) are suffering. they use sex and sexuality, and our lack of experience of it, to both vilify us and attack us while claiming we are somehow benefactors of the system.

they are the mean sister who pretends to be victimized by us so our parents would take their side.

>>34981017
How? Alt-right is absolutely awful but so far they haven't been destroying my videogames.

>>34981110
The fact that that safe spaces, razer being not being allowed to make edgy jokes and companies allowing these fuckers walk all over them is us losing, trump is the resistance.

>>34981144
Japanese video games are gay and I wanna stop them being made. I know my opinion is in the minority but I think we should stop them from coming to the US. Same with anime.

File: IMG_1777.jpg (220KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1920x1080px

>>34981098
But how? It sounds hypocritical. Like when Satgon started a petition to remove all social justice courses from all universities.

>I'm going to remove your freedom of speech because you might remove my freedom of speech

File: Smug Woman.jpg (283KB, 1139x1139px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1139x1139px

>the most pressing issue for anti-SJWs is video games
Really says a lot.

>>34981164
I'm talking about western videogames. SJW's destroyed my sequel to Mirror's Edge.

>>34981094
>so long as it's entertaining.

Because it often isn't.
It often seems like blatant shoehorning of women or minorities into roles, it's tokenism.
When they are given a role, it must paint them in a positive light, or there will be complaints.

The other problem is that often films and video games are criticised for "lacking diversity".
This results in the film makers or game developers changing the content of their future work to appease them, or risk losing money because of some stupid boycott thing.

File: IMG_4517.jpg (30KB, 626x291px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 626x291px

>>34981144
The alt-right have worse ideas but less power so they can't.

Remember Jack Thompson? If he was still around they'd probably defend him since he was trying to ban video games for traditional religious conservative reasons instead of liberal feminist ideals. Plus have tou seen Gavin Mcinnes rant in video games?

>>34981204
That game was shit because the first one sold poorly and EA just made a token sequel with a shitty budget and no marketing. They made it to fail.

>>34981046
>not giving women and racial minorities preferential treatment is sexism or racism

>>34981212
Yeah but everyone has different taste. Just because it doesn't appeal to you specifically doesn't mean that it's objectively bad.

>>34981218
Gavin McInnes is not alt-right though. Almost nobody of the alt-right are religious.

>>34981234
I think he was referring to the alt rightists who want to discriminate against women and non whites.

>>34981190
It fucking does.

I just want to be left the fuck alone.

My social life has become even more difficult because of this shit, every day at work I have to pretend to agree with some leftist crap so the office SJW won't try to get me fired, it's next to impossible to find a woman under 25 who doesn't have a chip on her shoulder about men thanks to feminism, as well as a bunch of other retarded political views.

You cunts have made the rest of my life shit, all I want to do is come home and play some god damn video games so I can forget about how fucking retarded the world I have to live in is, and you're trying to fuck with that.

Fuck you.

I feel like SJW's are just an easy scapegoat for intellectually lazy people. The average SJW doesn't have enough intelligence to really defend themselves, and they're just so easy to make fun of.

The real threat to me as a white male comes from the state and society as a whole. It's not SJW's on the street who have the power to arrest me because a woman accuses me of domestic violence - it's the state and police, empowered by the passive willingness of the average non-SJW woman, and the average ignorant, cuckolded male who doesn't even know this system exists. In fact in most cases the cuck-mentality alt-right males are the first to empower the very system that is most likely to hurt me. They're the first to rant about "rapefugees" and to call for banning immigrants - especially male immigrants - based on arguments that are almost identical to those of feminists.

These same alt-right type cuck-mentality males were the ones who got Prohibition passed in the US by teaming up with feminists. The feminists were arguing males needed to be controlled, and the alt-right types were arguing that German immigrants were protypical rapists\woman-bashers\alcoholics.

I don't these alt-right cuck-mentality types are even entirely oblivious... they're the type of guy who tries to ACT like "one of the bros", like he cares about men... but he's actually just attempting to use anti-feminist ideology as a way to cut out male competition for women, and elevate himself on a hierarchy, from which he can beat up other lower status males.

Hence "cuck" being appropriated by them... they're trying to bring other men's malehood into question to elevate themselves. I've seen these guys a lot on right-wing IRC channels, they act exactly like "nu-males", they'll act tough towards women and feminism but attack you just to get some attention from a single female wandering into the group.

>>34981240
I didn't claim it was objectively bad, but I do feel there is definitely a problem with these people putting pressure on media creators to change their content to suit their political messages.

>>34981167
B-but they started it, but to the non normie thinker collage is fucking cancer seriously America is fucking when these sjws reach 30 I mean they a coddled at college they won't be able to contribute shit to the country.

>>34981290
>it's next to impossible to find a woman under 25 who doesn't have a chip on her shoulder about men thanks to feminism, as well as a bunch of other retarded political views.
Most white women voted for Trump though. Conservative women seriously aren't that hard to find.

File: IMG_4523.jpg (315KB, 1008x1496px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1008x1496px

>>34981317
>media creators to change their content to suit their political messages.

But so many franchises like pic related wouldn't exist.

>>34981240
>Just because it doesn't appeal to you specifically doesn't mean that it's objectively bad.
Trying to censor content creators by pressuring them into changing the views of their products isn't bad?

>>34981363
>But so many franchises like pic related wouldn't exist.
Why?

>>34981360
there's a huge inter-generational change there though, millennials voted 70-30 for Clinton, given women are more likely to vote left white millennial girls were probably around ~70% for the Dems

Fighting against SJWs is NOT important.

Tumblr hoes post dumb stuff that is SJW-ish and easy to dismantle. A lot of 4channers think they've "won" the "battle" since they were able to out-argue some dumb tumblr.

However, if you look into academic writings on topics (that seem repulsive) such as intersectional feminism, you'll find well-though-out, interesting concepts.

Most "anti-SJW" stuff you find online is really just anti-idiocy.

>>34981453
> if you look into academic writings on topics (that seem repulsive) such as intersectional feminism, you'll find well-though-out, interesting concepts.


no you won't, not our fault you unironically spent $30k on a sociology degree anon. ah well, I'm sure your luck will turn in the next life

File: consider the following.png (334KB, 880x720px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 880x720px

>>34981144
This. I don't care about any of this on a philosophical level at all. I only care that its the left thats trying to make me unhappy now. The right was trying to make me unhappy a decade ago and I hated it then too.

>>34981360
>Most white women voted for Trump though.

Not in my age group they didn't.
I'm not looking to date middle aged women.

>Conservative women seriously aren't that hard to find.

I also don't live in the US, we do not have as strong a conservative tradition in my country.

>>34981144
>alt-right is absolutely awful

What's wrong with wanting white countries to remain white? Fuck off /leftypol/

>>34981453
no, you'll just find the same dumb concepts expressed more eloquently. where do you think the SJWs got their ideology from?

>>34981453
>concern trolls

lmfao

>>34981531
When the Europeans migrated to America it was ok but if anyone does it they're trying to destroy the white race?

File: Screenshot 2017-02-19 at 6.34.09 AM.png (133KB, 646x1198px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 646x1198px

>>34981440
> millennials voted 70-30 for Clinton
Because whites are barely 50% of that demographic. Young whites still went for Trump. I can't find data for young white women alone, but given that young whites went for Trump, the gap between young white men and women can't be that big.

>>34981601
because there was no civilization in North America, no people who had any concept of private property rights that we have. The United States has literally always been a white settler colony, built around anglo cultural norms. The left wants to destroy that for no good reason. It's pure cancer

>>34981453
>Tumblr hoes post dumb stuff that is SJW-ish and easy to dismantle. A lot of 4channers think they've "won" the "battle" since they were able to out-argue some dumb tumblr.

But it's important to do that, because people who would have otherwise seen the tumblr SJW's bullshit and agreed with it without giving it much thought, and then further spread it themselves, are more likely to dismiss it as the bullshit it is if they see somebody tearing the shit out of it.

>>34981513
>Not in my age group they didn't.
Where is the data for this? I couldn't find data the put young white women in their own category, just young whites and young women.

>>34981604
Didn't Trump lose the popular vote though? Isn't his approval rating already below 50?

>>34981633
>o people who had any concept of private property rights that we have
But that's bullshit. The colonists actually noted that the natives in New England were pretty autistic about borders between people's property.

File: 1486939979954.png (629KB, 960x943px) Image search: [Google]

629KB, 960x943px

because of how cartoonishly obnoxious and imbecilic they are.

of course there are people on this board right now, who share their core value without the obvious stupidty, and these people are in my opinion even worse.

>>34981637
>I couldn't find data the put young white women in their own category, just young whites and young women.

Can't you make an educated assumption from those two statistics?

Then you need to take into account the women who didn't vote, who are apathetic, and therefore vulnerable to SJW indoctrination.

>>34980689
this, thank you. Everything boils down to the fact that they're fucking retards.

Also it's sad how people talk of them as if they were "THE LEFT". They aren't leftists at all politically speaking, they're liberal and individualistic, which is very, very far from any historic definition of leftism

>>34980676
Nothing is important.

>>34981733
>they're liberal and individualistic

They're literally neither of those things.

>>34980870
not even once. Met a few whose positions are SJW-like, but more often than not they were open to dialogue, and if they weren't they never "bullied" or "ostracized" me

>>34981724
>Can't you make an educated assumption from those two statistics?
No, because young women includes almost half non whites. The only way to guess is to look at the gender gap in general, and apply it to young whites. Say young white men were 5% more likely to vote for Trump, and young white women were 5% less likely. That would put young white women at basically a 50/50 split between Trump and Clinton.

>Then you need to take into account the women who didn't vote, who are apathetic, and therefore vulnerable to SJW indoctrination.
No, SJWs are the most vocal and therefore the most likely to vote. Those that are apathetic are less likely to hold SJW opinions.

>>34981633
>built around anglo cultural norms.
don't forget the French, Germans and Dutch

>>34980689
I would've agreed with this 100% a year or two ago but SJW non-issues, left wing politics and anti Trump shit is literally all you fucking hear about these days from the media and from most normies.

File: 1479645563009.png (261KB, 357x326px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 357x326px

>>34981046
>Let's fight SJW's by imitating and playing by their rules
I don't get what's supposed to be your endgame.
I'm sure it results in a lot of lulz but if you actually want to address the issue, that's just shooting yourselves into foot.

>>34981144
I hate both but alt-right folk do more harm than good with every move they make, it's not an intentional thing though, and /pol/ singlehandedly may be the reason why left wing morons think that nazism and racism outside of BLM shit (literally the only time racism is an actual issue in 2017) is some sort of serious and relevant issue. God I miss when people were fucking normal and didn't live just to bitch about politics.

>>34981248
they may not be religious themselves, but they push religious values nonetheless because "muh tradion", which is even worse.

I prefer the good old christian mom who spouts bullshit but at least actually believes in it than greasy autists who follow a fad despite not believing in it

>>34981807
>Those that are apathetic are less likely to hold SJW opinions.

And they also don't hold the opposing views that are necessary to be able to dismiss SJW opinions.

With SJWs being the loudest voice, both socially and within the media, and their views seeming nice when taken at face value, most people hold light versions of their beliefs.

Most women believe in things like the wage gap.
They may not be full on SJW, but they lack the desire or ability to identify bullshit.

The girls who are politically apathetic, and therefore SJW-lite, usually have at least one pretty hardcore SJW friend or classmate, and when combined with the bombardment of SJW media, it is only a matter of time before they go full retard.

>>34982000
Literally
>if you're not with us you're against us

Because they're fucking communists.

>>34981799
they literally are, that's what identity politics is all about: everyone can be their own gender/whatever because everyone is special.

they don't want to democratize the company like and old school leftist, they want a black woman in charge of it and that's all

>>34981996
You are missing the point. It is not about muh tradition, it is about recognizing that humans are animals and implementing ultra liberal policies may have some unforeseen consequences. For instance, the sexual revolution/liberation has lead to the creation of the incel caste, as a thing seperate from the rest of society.

>>34981942
>>Let's fight SJW's by imitating and playing by their rules

>"Sir, every time we march into the battlefield like this, the Germans mow us down with their machine guns from their trenches!"
>"I know, but it's more important that we do this "war" thing properly! Now come on everybody, march out there, rank and file! Don't sink to their level!"

>>34982032
But they rallied behind Hillary, one of the most right wing Democrats out there. She started her political career campaigning for Barry Goldwater ffs.

>>34982019
Because that's pretty much the way it is.

Most young women lean left, and if they were to become extremists, which our current culture and political climate encourages them to do, they are far more likely to go further left.

>>34982060
That's what alt-right does.
March into MG fire back straight and in good order, wearing clown costumes.

>>34982056
>For instance, the sexual revolution/liberation has lead to the creation of the incel caste
But that just shows how traditionalism is unstable. The problems that it generates once something else takes place are that big.

>>34982101
this problem was not created by traditions, it was held in check by them. it is a problem of human nature.

File: figure_1_diversity_growing-02.png (301KB, 1200x981px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1200x981px

>>34982097
>Most young women lean left,
Because most young women aren't white.

>and if they were to become extremists, which our current culture and political climate encourages them to do, they are far more likely to go further left.
Nobody outside of a few lone wolf shooters are going to pick up guns and try to overthrow the government anytime soon.

>>34982130
There wouldn't be as many incels today if traditionalism wasn't rewarding any beta male with a wife just because he was economically productive.

>>34980676
Epic strawman OP! Can I post it on el redd it for le epic upvotes?

>>34982162
>70% white population
>70% white death rate
gee, who woulda thought

>>34982175
There would never have arisen any human civlization without these traditions.

Another example is the immgration policies of the West. They are based on the liberal principle of all humans being equal before the law, but this principle does not take into account human nature.

Whereever there is immigration, there is a lowering of social cohesion and trust. This is because people, despite what they may think of immigration, have subconcious reactions to seeing a bunch of foreigners suddenly in their country.

>>34982223
>There would never have arisen any human civlization without these traditions.
Only your prefered paradigm of civilization but even if so we don't need those values anymore. Incels have all the media and escapism they need to live without sex for the rest of their lives and they won't breed unnatractive people like them into the gene pool anymore.

>does not take into account human nature
Conservatives are just like communists you all rationalize the removal of freedoms from people using human nature and placing yourself above others because somehow your ideology makes you enlightened and those who disagree stupid.

>>34982056
I'm the guy you responded to.
I am not a chad by any means, but I think the sexual revolution was a good thing, because I think people should have the right to choose with whom to have something as private and intimate as sex. Does this cause Staceys and Chads to abuse that? Yes, but that is not the point.

The whole concept of "sexual justice" that permeates the right wing incel posts is arbitrary and artificial. Chads were always there since the dawn of mankind, and no amount of bitching about it on the internet is going to change that fact.

What male incels can do is either try to compete in the game if they desire to do so, or detach themselves, but to think that women should be forced to have sex with them is juvenile and foolish, also since love (the thing robots want the most) can't be forced

>>34982282
>Only your prefered paradigm of civilization

There are no different paradigms of civilization. This is gibberish.

>somehow your ideology makes you enlightened and those who disagree stupid.

It has been demonstrated scientifically. It is not a matter of ideology. Your refusla to accept it, is however a display of faith in the liberal ideology.

>>34982162
So if I want to date a white woman, which as a white man, I would prefer, I am already cutting in half the amount of women available to me.
Then if the statistics for white female voters apply to the young white women as well, it's then cut in half again.
And that's not even taking into account the women who did not vote, who are only barely better than the SJWs.

So drastically reducing the amount of women who are available as partners is a problem.

And God hep a man who lives in some leftist stronghold like California.

>>34982220
>>70% white population
Someone doesn't visit /int/.

>>34982305
>I think people should have the right to choose with whom to have something as private and intimate as sex

The sexual revolution wasn't about getting rid of arranged marriages or anything.

Don't over-romanticise that it was about people freely fucking like animals.

>>34982056
and by the way, people romanticize earlier, more traditional, times, but that's because the grass is always greener on the other side.

I'd really rather not get dirty hypocritical looks from society just because I chose to have sex the way I wanted to (that implies I am able to, which is not the case but it is also beyond the point)

>>34982319
That's just how living in a free society is. People have different opinions. They've always had different opinions. Why should this be a serious problem? You're supposed to eliminate 99.999999% of women and end up with one that's right for you.

>>34982305
There have always been men who were more attractive. This is not really the issue. The issue is that we haven't evolved since primitive pre-society. Without the traditions that society was built on, we will regress back to the primitive state of a chimpanzee like social struture, where the most attractive male has a harem of females and constantly has to defend his position against challengers.

It is hard to imagine this social structure to be compatible with our civilization.

Nothing matters. remember that.

>>34982348
>Don't over-romanticise that it was about people freely fucking like animals.
There's nothing romantic about it but it's actually this. Instead of letting the state or institutions pick partners for us and enforcing monogamy for life, people are now free to have sex with who they find more attractive, just like animals.

>>34982349
>people romanticize earlier, more traditional, times

More glib, one-liners from people who refuse to acknowledge the problem.

>I'd really rather not get dirty hypocritical looks from society

Honestly, who gives a shit? Do you? I certainly don't.

>>34981942
I was being sarcastic. But that's exactly what the alt-right/anti-sjws do.

>>34982348
for the sake of argument, why shouldn't people who want to fuck like animals do it?

also it was about getting rid of the earlier sexual "morality", which was hypocritical, and caused more problems than it solved, aside from being oppressive

>>34982370
>Without the traditions that society was built on, we will regress back to the primitive state of a chimpanzee like social struture, where the most attractive male has a harem of females and constantly has to defend his position against challengers
Then we better get back to that primitiv state and let humanity evolved through natural selection instead of enforcing failed institutions that will always produce hordes of incels and suffering. Yet the primitive human being didn't had all the technology and knowledge we have gathered thus far to better handle a more primitive sexual situation. You're simply reducing civilization to sex, while it is a very important factor of humanity it's obviously not all there is to it.

>>34982032
Isn't that exactly what that idiot Jontron said? Thats no better than them calling their opposition nazis.

>>34982389
>who gives a shit?

that's like saying to a robot "who gives a shit if people judge you because you're beta?"
some people care, some don't. it's not up to you to decide whether they should or shouldn't

>>34982416
Evolution will not fix the problem. It is not a problem of 'ugly' people being 'ugly', it is a problem because relative to the attractive people, they are unattractive.

There will always be those who are most attractive, and so the only thing natural selection would do, would be to make the incels of the future, look good when compared to the incels of today.

>>34982435
I'm sorry it is just a stupid, childish argument you made.

>someone looked at me the wrong way

I cannot respond in depth to such nonsense.

>>34982370
I seriously doubt sexual freedom will be the downfall of human society, and people on /r9k/ focus on that just because they are rightfully obsessed by sex

File: IMG_4516.png (435KB, 719x548px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 719x548px

>>34982162
Well shit, white really did fuck shit up for native Americans. They can no right to bitch about multiculturalism.

People fucking like animals is a good thing desu. When people let other factors than raw fitness decide who they fuck, it creates situations where people with bad genes reproduce. I'm fairly confident that thousands of years of arranged marriages and other social pressures has caused "robot" genes to build up over the generations, and now that those social pressures are gone, we've been left shit out of luck. It would be better if the "robot" genes were never passed on in the first place.

But none of this matters now. We're on the cusp of having genetic engineering in humans so in a few generations everyone will be attractive and smart and healthy

>>34982448
>it is a problem because relative to the attractive people, they are unattractive.
Attraction is not relative. It is based on many objective factors that indicate genetic quality and health. There is only so much health you can have and even if the bar goes up in the long-term, in the short-term society will have a lowering in the numbers of incels which is only a good thing.

>>34982470
Maybe in the future we will have some chimpanzee like common society, over-looked and regulated by a caste of technocratic rulers.

>>34982461
it is obviously not about a literal "wrong look", but if you insist on dragging down the level of dialogue just because you want to argue whatever

>>34982472
>When people let other factors than raw fitness decide who they fuck, it creates situations where people with bad genes reproduce. I'm fairly confident that thousands of years of arranged marriages and other social pressures has caused "robot" genes to build up over the generations, and now that those social pressures are gone, we've been left shit out of luck. It would be better if the "robot" genes were never passed on in the first place.
Pretty much this. Nice post.

>>34982368
>That's just how living in a free society is. People have different opinions. They've always had different opinions.

Yes, and when there is a shitty set of opinions being pushed by a group of loud extremists, which has gained influence in many different facets of people's lives, is pushed in the media, and defined the discussion around the recent presidential election, it is important to speak out against it, to hopefully reduce the influence it has.

>>34982181
This is what I really meant anon.
>>34980927

>>34982495
maybe we will anon
maybe we will

>>34982411
>which was hypocritical, and caused more problems than it solved, aside from being oppressive

You're going to have to elaborate on that.

>>34982475
Attraction is very much relative. Do you think a male buffalo is less attracted to a female buffalo? Do you think a male buffalo is even slightly attracted to a human female?

>There is only so much health

I think you need to retake highschool biology, because you have apparently not understood what natural selection is.

An animal has no way of knowing how healthy another really is. They have simply evolved to find certain things attractive, because these things have happened to, in the past, go along with succesful and presumably healthy mates.

>>34982529
A bunch of posts above about that, man.

>>34982472
>it creates situations where people with bad genes reproduce.

Those genes are bad in the context of OOGA BOOGA tier civilisations.

>>34982549
>Do you think a male buffalo is even slightly attracted to a human female?
How does an interspecies argument even matters?
>An animal has no way of knowing how healthy another really is. They have simply evolved to find certain things attractive, because these things have happened to, in the past, go along with succesful and presumably healthy mates.
See? And there's probably some unmesureable average of those characteristics that stands for what a mate can be the most attractive to the majority of mates from the opposite sex.

>>34982553
So your problem is that in return for stable civilisation, some ugly people were born?

>>34982585
>OOGA BOOGA tier civilisations.
Not always a sexually liberated civilization equals a primitive civilization.

>>34982611
>How does an interspecies argument even matters?

I am trying to illustrate you the point that there is no end goal of attraction. It won't be that everyone ends up looking like Greek Statues and then that's that.

>And there's probably some unmesureable average of those characteristics that stands for what a mate can be the most attractive to the majority of mates from the opposite sex.

What is attractive is constantly changing.

>>34982629
Yeah and when those fragile, not stable, because if they were stable they would be up and running until today, sexual paradigms break down we have hordes of purposeless people that won't breed and will need to suffer because of their natural urges.

>>34982633
No, but to get to the stage we have, it was important to restrict sexuality.

Having a large portion of men knowing they aren't going to get a chance to reproduce is detrimental to society.

File: IMG_4444.jpg (64KB, 587x580px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 587x580px

>Mfw I realize I don't really hate feminism and I'm just unhappy because I can't get laid

>>34982652
>there is no end goal of attraction
Of course there is: Reproduction.
>It won't be that everyone ends up looking like Greek Statues and then that's that.
Why not?
>What is attractive is constantly changing.
It's definetly not. What is your argument? The art of some renaiscence guys depicting chubby girls?

>>34980792
Different guy here, but also a leftist environmental activist whose taken riot shields and ribber bullets to the face.

Just wanted to say it's really nice to see someone open to having a conversation.

For me it's so so motivated by my deep Christian faith and by the need to fulfil the social justice mission of biblical prophets like Amos and Isaiah and of course Christ.

Makes me a little unusual on the left but I like the idiosyncrasy.

Where do you fit on the political spectrum man? What kind of things really get your gears going? :)

>>34981300

>The average SJW doesn't have enough intelligence to really defend themselves

Indeed they don't but we're not talking about the averages here. The leadership of that movement is incredibly media-savvy and has managed to worm their way into positions of power like for example google ideas which is where all the bullshit thats happening on youtube (from the heroes thing to shadow-censoring and disappearing subs) is coming from

>The real threat to me as a white male comes from the state and society as a whole

Let me stop you right there: do you realize how stupid you're right now? that statement is like saying the problem isn't people killing people or guns killing people because is not the people or the gun who kills you but the bullet coming out of a gun. Who controls the gun dumbass? a gun can't fire itself, and dumb normalfags didn't come up with this bullshit on their own

Neither did the policymakers who passed these laws out of political pressure

>These same alt-right type cuck-mentality males were the ones who got Prohibition passed in the US by teaming up with feminists

And now you are talking shit about stuff you know nothing about, stopped reading right there retard

>>34982683
>Having a large portion of men knowing they aren't going to get a chance to reproduce is detrimental to society.
Now we have all technology necessary to counteract that and there's an outlet for incels' sexuality.

>>34982658
>Yeah and when those fragile, not stable, because if they were stable they would be up and running until today

>"This building is perfectly stable, it could withstand an earthquake!"
>"Haha, it isn't stable at all, because I undermined the foundations!"

When you directly subvert a stable construct, overthrowing it with a "sexual REVOLUTION", it doesn't mean it wasn't stable in the first place.

>>34982700
>Of course there is: Reproduction.

Purposeful misinterpretation, or pure stupidity on your part.

There is no end goal of what IS ATTRACTIVE.

>Why not?

Why do you think that we did not stop changing appearance when we were still early hominids? It is simple natural selection. Genetic variation causes people to be attracted to different things and fate sorts out which of these people get to pass on their genes and with it, what they think is attractive.

>It's definetly not.

Again I must tell you to retake high school biology.

>>34982727
If it was overthrown by human nature itself it wasn't stable. The same force you tried to contain was its ruin. Not something else.

>>34982757
It was not the case of something unnatural being replaced by something natural. It was a case of something natural being replaced with something else natural.

>>34982529

I am not >>34982553
>>34982658
>>34982757

I meant that the sexual morality was more of a decency coating that hid sexual freedom, which was unhealthily released in secret

can't elaborate much more because I have to go, but that's the general direction of my reasoning

>>34982748
>what IS ATTRACTIVE
What is attractive is the supposedly fittest to survival genes and that is obviously closely correlated to health.

>Genetic variation causes people to be attracted to different things and fate sorts out which of these people get to pass on their genes and with it, what they think is attractive.
Nope. The ones who previously passed their genes over a long while become attractive. Genetic mutations produces new characteristics that only if fit for the environment will be passed on. It's the environment that sorts out what is attractive in the newer generation, it's not genetic variance that dictates what is attractive.

>>34982798
>It was a case of something natural being replaced with something else natural.
Sexual freedom is only natural and instinctual. We are always urging to breed with fitter mates. Traditionalism tryed to contain it and then failed when people urged for it again.

>>34982839
>What is attractive is the supposedly fittest to survival genes and that is obviously closely correlated to health.

I didn't ask you a question. You cut off part of my sentence and apparently interpretted it as me asking what is attractive.

>The ones who previously passed their genes over a long while become attractive.

No. Genes code for what you find attractive. They do not code it so you are attracted to what you yourself look like.

>Genetic mutations produces new characteristics that only if fit for the environment will be passed on.

Circular reasoning on your part. If they are passed on they are by definition fit for the environment.

>It's the environment that sorts out what is attractive in the newer generation

No, it is genes that code for what you find attractive.

>it's not genetic variance that dictates what is attractive.

That is not what I said. I said that genetic variance cause people to find different things attractive.

I must for the third time insist, that you retake high school biology.

File: thatfeel.gif (14KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 633x758px

This thread makes me want to kill myself.

I shouldn't have read it this late at night.
I've got work tomorrow, and I know I'm barely going to sleep.
I'm just going to lay there all night, thinking about how empty and meaningless my life is.

Then I'm going to struggle through another day at work, tired as hell, suppressing the urge to scream at people to just shut up for ten god damn minutes.

Then I'll come home to my empty house and think about killing myself some more, but I'm never going to do it.
So I'm just going to repeat this cycle for another 40 years until I die.

>>34982875
The distinction you make between natural and tradition is based on your flawed concept of nature as something seperate from humans.

Humans are a part of nature, and so are their invetions.

>>34982910
>I said that genetic variance cause people to find different things attractive.
It directly doesn't. Genetic variance only produce new sets of genes. The environment sorts them and the ones that were fit for the environment become attractive over time.

>>34982923
>Humans are a part of nature, and so are their invetions.
Yes. Yet our imperfect inventions suppress our instincts to the point where it produces systemic suffering that could be avoided with appropriate balance.

>>34982687

>this reductio ad absurdum

'ello tumblr, got enough pretty princess points today? how's your vag infection going?

>>34982984
>It directly doesn't

Genes determine what you are attracted to. Variation in these genes among a group of people will cause these people to attracted to different things.

>Genetic variance only produce new sets of genes.

Genetic variation means quite simply the differences between the genes of two or more members of a species.

>The environment sorts them and the ones that were fit for the environment become attractive over time.

You clearly do not have even a rudimentary understanding of natural selection.

Fit for the environment means only 1 things. That they were able to have children.

>>34982723

>Now we have all technology necessary to counteract that

The fuck are you talking about?

>>34983013
An invention is neither perfect or imperfect.

The thing that cause our suffering is precisely our instincts. Our instincts yearn to take us back to the world of unconscious struggle, to the world of never-ending and meaning suffering of the animals.

>>34983070
>meaning

meaningless*

>>34982921

You are 40?

>>34983052
>Variation in these genes among a group of people will cause these people to attracted to different things.
Yet if those things are not fit for survival these genes that code for attraction to them will not be passed on. The environment is what determines attraction in the end.

>Fit for the environment means only 1 things. That they were able to have children
Nope. Means that they were also healthy enough to survive until they passed on their genes and that they were also considered attractive by their mates. All of which depend on the environment.

>>34983065
>The fuck are you talking about?
Incels won't rebel or try to set tradionalism up again because they had escapism at their fingertips.

>>34983070
>
The thing that cause our suffering is precisely our instincts. Our instincts yearn to take us back to the world of unconscious struggle, to the world of never-ending and meaning suffering of the animals.
If we can't fully suppress our instincts, dettached from all other emotions, it's clear that the invention is imperfect for the time being because its intended goal is not being reached.

>>34983082
I'm 25, I worded that poorly.

I can't imagine being 40.
It feels like I've aged so much in the last 5 years, it's going to be hell going through this after another 15 years.

>>34983120
>Yet if those things are not fit for survival these genes that code for attraction to them will not be passed on.

Fit for survival means that they got passed on. It means NOTHING ELSE.

The environment is what determines attraction in the end.

>The environment is what determines attraction in the end.

You are just repeating yourself, despite me having repeatedly explained why you are wrong.

>Means that they were also healthy enough to survive until they passed on their genes

That is the same thing. It is simply adding another generation to it.

Do you have anything remotely intelligent to say?

>All of which depend on the environment.

It depends on chance. 1 beetle got crushed by a falling rock, another didn't. Maybe some genes cause a beetle to survive a similar incident and succesfully pass on those genes.

At the end of the day what decides the organism is the GENES.

>>34983120
>If we can't fully suppress our instincts, dettached from all other emotions, it's clear that the invention is imperfect for the time being because its intended goal is not being reached.

Culture does not change our instincts. Culture evolved much the same as did our genes, through necessity and natural selection. Tearing down culture to appease your liberal religion, may have some consequences that you did not anticipate.

This thread is why abandoning religion was a mistake.

>>34983210
>Fit for survival means that they got passed on. It means NOTHING ELSE.
Again. Fit for survival means that the being is capable of enduring the environment until it reaches reproductive maturity. Why are you not accounting for the environment when I'm showing to you with clarity that it matters?

>It depends on chance.
Last time. The chance is shaped by the environment too not only genes.

>Culture evolved much the same as did our genes, through necessity and natural selection.
Genes did not evolve through necessity and natural selection.
Mutations are simply random and the environment selects the fittest. Bad comparison of your part.

>Tearing down culture to appease your liberal religion, may have some consequences that you did not anticipate.
Like what?

>>34981633
>because there was no civilization in North America, no people who had any concept of private property rights that we have.

If immigrants had ulterior motives to wipe out my race and take my land using their constructs, I'd be confused too.

>>34983285
>Again. Fit for survival means that the being is capable of enduring the environment until it reaches reproductive maturity.

You are simply adding another generation.

>Why are you not accounting for the environment

The environment is not some magical force. If 2 humans have a baby, their baby is not going to be different whether it is born on the north pole or on the moon.

>Last time. The chance is shaped by the environment too not only genes.

See above.

>Mutations are simply random and the environment selects the fittest. Bad comparison of your part.

Since you refuse to acknowledge your need for a high school biology cause, allow me to bring the high school biology cause to you:

Natural selection: The process by which genetic variation is created. Random mutations and the random selection of genes at conception cause organisms to differ genetically. Some of these organisms may be able to survive and have children, some of them may not. Those that do, have proven themselves fit. Sometimes genetic variation will give one organism an obvious advantage in a certain environment and this may cause the genes of this organism to become more widespread.

>Like what?

Besides the two examples I have already given you?

>>34983392
>their baby is not going to be different whether it is born on the north pole or on the moon.
Only the baby born on the north pole will have a chance at breeding after reproductive maturity. The one on the moon dies because his genes were not fit for that environment.

>Natural selection: The process by which genetic variation is created. Random mutations and the random selection of genes at conception cause organisms to differ genetically. Some of these organisms may be able to survive and have children, some of them may not. Those that do, have proven themselves fit. Sometimes genetic variation will give one organism an obvious advantage in a certain environment and this may cause the genes of this organism to become more widespread.

Exactly what I said. The paragraph you printed here accounts for the environmental factor. You're just contradicting yourself with it.

>Besides the two examples I have already given you?
Yes.

There's no point to life any more, is there?

>>34980676
They are fascists

>>34983463
>The one on the moon dies because his genes were not fit for that environment.

Not necessarily.

>The paragraph you printed here accounts for the environmental factor.

Are you a woman? I have a strong feeling that I am argueing with someone who just says things that they do not really understand.

Do you think there is such a thing as a static environment? Do you think organisms will stop competing ones they are sufficiently adapted to this static environment you have imagined?

>Yes.

Universal education has created types like you, who mistakenly considers themselves intelligent.

>>34981110
That's cherry picked bullshit.

I attend a university of 50,000 people and my university specifically said that safe spaces are antithetical to university itself. The same goes for all of the universities that my friends attend. SJWs are CLEARLY in the minority here and are even ridiculed to certain extents.

If you left your room once in a while and stopped taking topical news stories and Alex Jones as your definitive connection to what you believe to be the outside world, you'd realize you're being a fucking retard.

>>34983543
>Not necessarily.
What are you talking about? Technology only skews natural selection. Same applies to your traditionalism.

>Do you think organisms will stop competing ones they are sufficiently adapted to this static environment you have imagined?
Nope but there are known characteristics to each of earth's biome and those are the environmental limiting factors that the life forms adapted to and became what they are so far. They will never stop competing and evolving. Traditional societies do that to humanity by limiting sexual freedom.

>who mistakenly considers themselves intelligent
That should be you.

>>34983637
>What are you talking about?

If the parents could survive long enough to give birth on the moon, then the child might survive too.

>Technology only skews natural selection.

Not really. Technology is an artificial changing of the environment. It doesn't stop natural selection from occuring.

>Nope but there are known characteristics to each of earth's biome and those are the environmental limiting factors that the life forms adapted to and became what they are so far

We don't live at the mercy of the jungle anymore.

>They will never stop competing and evolving.

Which is exactly what I have been saying. There will always be winners and losers of this competion. The incel caste is a direct and unavoidable result of it.

>Traditional societies do that to humanity by limiting sexual freedom.

We have just been over this. Competition is a biological imperative. It has not been caused by civilization. It has been halted for a few thousand years if anything.

>That should be you.

No you, missy.

>>34983752
>If the parents could survive long enough to give birth on the moon, then the child might survive too.
Yeah. I'm glad you agree that the environment matters in natural selection.
>Technology is an artificial changing of the environment. It doesn't stop natural selection from occuring.
That's what traditional societies did and stopped natural selection.
>We don't live at the mercy of the jungle anymore.
How is that an argument?
>The incel caste is a direct and unavoidable result of it.
The incel caste proportions of today are a result of of tradition that rewarded productive males with wives when they wouldn't be able to reproduce otherwise in a sexually liberated environment. The baseline for reproduction becomes much lower when the female part of it is excluded from the equation and any male that can screw a pork gets rewarded with breeding producing a new generation of low quality males like him.
>It has been halted for a few thousand years if anything.
Yes. And this halt gave opportunity for unfit males to skew the gene pool that was previously only ruled by natural selection.

>>34983867
>Yeah. I'm glad you agree that the environment matters in natural selection.

Given that the environment is pretty much an umbrella term for all external factors, then of course it matters. It is however secondary to genes.

>That's what traditional societies did and stopped natural selection.

They didn't stop natural selection. Natural selection always occurs. It may have slowed the pace of natural selection, but only because it stabilized society.

You seem to imply in your post that natural selection is a a force of good, which would be a simplistic and flawed understanding. It simply is, neither good or bad.

>How is that an argument?

It is a part of the argument that I am making.

>The incel caste proportions of today are a result of of tradition that rewarded productive males with wives when they wouldn't be able to reproduce otherwise in a sexually liberated environment.

Here you go again, repeating yourself with no consideration of what you are saying.

You have no way of knowing if a lack of civilization woud have lead to a race of Chad looking men. It could have resulted in something completely different, as is the case with many other species.

>breeding producing a new generation of low quality males like him.

There is no such thing as low quality in evolution. Quality is a subjective concept.

>unfit males to skew the gene pool that was previously only ruled by natural selection.

They are fit on virtue of having produced healthy offspring.

The core of your argument is a just world fallacy. You are the kind of person who would think that schoolyard bullies were some kind of immune system and that their bullying was a self-less defense mechanism of a mega organism aimed a eradicating 'weak' genes. In other words you are a woman, and you haven't the slightest clue at what you are saying.