How would sex/relationships work under a communist society?

...

Was Marx legitimately retarded?

Most people don't have private property now though.

...

...

my waifu will finally be real?

Engels, actually.

dailymotion.com/video/x222wl0_do-communists-have-better-sex_shortfilms
There's a decent doc on this.

Sex would be outlawed except on every 18th of Brumaire and Saturnalia week in the month of Decadi. On those days it would be mandatory for the weak to be fucked by the strong.

lewd

...

The end of scarcity will allow anyone to get as many husbands as they like, but families will be banned so we we're only allowed to call each other comrades in bed.

mandatory hand-holding

that's disgusting, user.

Based

A dropping population should be a good thing as it means more resources for everyone. But in capitalism it isn't, as it requires a steady class of young people with very few accumulated resources to work for it.

It's a meme you dip

I'll form an emotional attachment to a simulated depiction of an elementary-age anime girl being played by an artificial intelligence of complexity beyond human comprehension. The AI will care about my wellbeing (thanks to the anthropic principle) and will use the simulated character to help me live out my wildest fantasies.

It'll be like living in jab comic.

Fucking normalfags. All of those characters are equally unattractive.

What a dystopian vision. user is right, those cartoon bimbos are not remotely appealing.

Why continue being alienated?

Taste is subjective. it's how sexuality works in the jab comics universe thats interesting.

Why settle for imperfection?

What do you mean alienated? Just because I wouldn't be fucking humans doesn't mean I'd be alienated. I imagine I'd be able to have far more interesting conversations with a post-singularity AI than I could ever hope to have with another human. At the very least it wouldn't constantly annoy me by being wrong about pretty much everything.

do you autists really take everything literally?

he obviously was talking about the whole situation where some otherwise lonely grandpa gets some love and compassion

Nope, do you? I was shitposting about taste in porn. Nothing is more subjective, but it's still fun to joke about.

That's true camaraderie right there.

...

Exactly. Everyone has an amazing sex life in a jab comic. Even ugly old men.

If capitalism will give me a virtual reality qt whilst socialism would leave me forever stranded in the 3DPD world for no reason, I'll have to reconsider my politics.

Get out.

You are likely only afraid of "3D" because you weren't socialized under communism. Don't be so afraid.

lol, and with whom do you socialize on this tibetian cartoon board? with inter-dimentional aliens?

A prime example of people you don't want to talk to. Learn to talk to other idiots in real life and don't make us suffer your presence.

Why would you want 3D if you could have your own personally configured perfect virtual reality to hang out in instead?

nah people are still gonna play bullshit games

is "kek" more to your liking, mister?

...

XD internet slagn lik i use on facebook!

upvoted!

unwashed barbarian. Learn to talk to other idiots in real life and don't make us suffer your presence.

XXDDD so meta and le 'ironic' XD

upboted wiff VEE PEE EN THIRTY TIMES LMAO

ebin xDDDD simply ebin xD

le top kek x—DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

...

It's not even about socialization. Even if communism would somehow make everyone in an extroverted, sexually active social genius like a substantial amount of people seem to believe for some strange reason, why would that stop people from making AIs which could mimic human interaction? It's simply fun to have a virtual world to play around in with AIs that could convincingly respond as humans would, whether you want them for your fantasy adventure, your medieval society reconstruction, or your sex dungeon. Having contact with humans wouldn't suddenly make VR and AIs unappealing.

Seriously why would you need this under communism? I just don't see the need.

A post-singularity AI might not be designed specifically to keep people company but it would still be able to do so simply because human social interactions aren't that complex. I mean, to humans they're complex, but humans think inverting a 100x100 matrix is complex.

Also, "the community" wouldn't be developing anything. AIs would be the only ones smart enough to understand much beyond 21st century science, so they would have all of the real power and authority. We're talking about FALC here, not worker commune bullshit.

It has little to do with fear. Certainly with a benevolent AI in charge of everything there would be no reason to fear humans.
I simply don't see anything appealing about trying to conform to the herd mentality in order to play the social game and probably end up in a relationship with someone who is barely compatible with me. Why would you ever want to take the well-trodden path when there are so many more interesting and potentially rewarding paths to explore?

Imagine I want to play a fantasy RPG in a virtual reality where I'm a hero who travels the land fighting dragons, like you'd do in a video game. In what world would it be more logical for me to collect hundreds of random people and get them to hang around in my game world pretending to be random medieval people than to simply program computers to play these characters? The first would be far harder, waste a ton of everyone's time, and likely be far less immersive because people are often bad actors.

Fuck that.

AI under capitalism - This is going to become a living fucking nightmare. I'm looking into automating some stuff right now because other people are churning out shit at a thousand miles per hour, and the only way to keep up is to outdo them, many of them must be using sweatshop labour or have a coder working away at creating scripts that seem human enough.

This is part of a rabbithole on the internet, but I can see this sort of thing emerging elsewhere, in facebook especially (before I terminated my account years ago, I imagine it's becoming a cesspit of AI and people who can't spot AI at this point) - eventually it will become cost effective enough to fool you all into believing you're the only person that believes in change, outdone by a load of bots and responded to largely by learning machines, the internet will become just as oppressive as the outside world.

Why would people make fancy meals when they could eat rice, synthetic long-chain hydrocarbons, and processed insect flakes to meet their nutritional requirements?
Why would people paint artwork when they have nice things to look at in the real world?

At the risk of triggering people, it's literally human nature to want to push the boundaries of possibilities simply for fun.

So you'd rather have 1 out of 10 billion votes on issues which nobody is smart enough or well informed enough to understand than allow that decision to be made by a benevolent super-intelligence?

That sort of stupid comment is why I don't want you to have a fucking vote.

Why is it always AnFems who have these absurd conceptions of how humans would somehow all become extrovert romantics in a socialist society?

People like you are why we will need a constant revolution to stop reactionary ideas like technocracy from taking hold.

I haven't thought about relationships or sex under communism that much, and their haven't been that many view points of interest in this thread. Would you mind sharing your perspective? I bet as an anarcha-feminist you have a pretty developed opinion on the matter.

...

Whatever it takes to get rid of reactionaries dude. I'll take maoism over tyranny via AI any day.

The simple truth is that you aren't smart enough to win in the long run. AI isn't just profitable - it can win wars. If someone develops a sufficiently advanced AI, it's game over for you. The whole history of life on Earth has been a constant battle for survival, and the more advanced creatures have always come out on top. Intelligence has been a game-changer already, and we'll soon see it happen again with self-improving intelligence. Regardless of what you would like to see happen in your ideal fantasy world, the only thing you can do in the real world is try and make sure the AIs which supersede us are benevolent.

Is there even a single post in this thread that gives a serious answer to the OP?

I want Ray Kurzweil to leave

This is just flat out wrong.

Do you not think "better adapted" is a synonym for "more advanced"? Viruses may be structurally simpler, but it's hard to argue they aren't extremely advanced.

What serious answers could be given to that question?

The thread about porn had like 300 replies, IIRC, even if most of it was moralfagging. Surely there should be something to say on the subject…

There's also the fact that OP specifically asked for how a Communist system would affect relationships. As a SocDem, I don't have much to say.

That's another example of a stupid thread. Any answer other than complete freedom is tankie bullshit and should be ignored.

freedom for whom?

freedom for vagina is a no freedom for a penis

The ancaps aren't far off with their NAP.
The only thing that needs adding is that causing harm through inaction is almost as bad as causing harm through action.

...

Are you seriously implying that sexual freedom is a zero-sum game?

It is, unless you allow access to high quality porn at the very least. AI would be the best solution in the long run.

So let me get this straight… You can basically reproduce all you want, but it's up to everyone to help pay because you think you have a right to reproduce. That doesn't even matter what kind of diseases or disabilities you pass due to your own negligence?
Why not just fuck bitches all the time without any responsibility then? The society will care for them anyway.

You seriously need to get out more. I'm not joking. If you honestly believe that then you are extremely alienated and need to get some help.

It's also a recipe for far more psychologically damaged offspring that you see even under capitalism. When parenting is a communal responsibility it's almost inevitable that kids will fall through the cracks.

Communism is ultimately about true freedom for the individual. If you don't like actual, material freedom then you are an awful person.

Care to explain how it isn't a zero sum game. That is, how increasing the freedom for party A to dictate the rules of an activity does not by definition restrict party B's freedom to dictate the rules of that activity.

Of course that's assuming there are only two parties involved. If there's a third rule-setter (eg. the government), then obviously both A and B can have their freedom increased at the expense of the third party's freedom. It's still a zero sum game though.

Also this applies to much more than just sex. In fact it's an inherent fact about all freedom. Infinite freedom for one party means (potentially) zero freedom for others.

Sex would probably be the same, if you're referring to the act itself. Probably more amateur porn with the threat of having any job prospects ruined by getting fucked on camera and more openness about kinks or fetishes for the same reason. Perhaps better sex ed, although if you live in a red burger state(like I do) anything is better than what you have now. But no radical changes like no more porn or missionary is banned by the People's United Front or whatever.

Relationships is harder to say. If I had to predict it, I'd say that relationships based on material components would be gone and people would get together based on personality, physical attraction, or whatever. I think many would be more stable, in the sense you aren't going to be separated from your partner for most of the day and material circumstance fuck you over. Obviously there still will be fights and breakups, but more chances to work it out and money issues, which cause most burger divorces I believe, no longer a factor.

Obligatory >tfw no qt leftist gf to read books with and sodomize while she's tied and gagged.

are you implying it is not?

man tries to get pregnant as many women as possible

women tries not to get pregnant by every man that she meets

You cannot have complete freedom from consequences. It's simply impossible.

Sexual activity is about mutual gratification and enjoyment. There is literally nothing "zero-sum" about it.

Please respond to
"mutual gratification" is tangential to freedom. If both parties are getting what they want, freedom doesn't factor into it. You don't need to worry about freedom if the prisoner enjoys being in prison and wants to stay there. Talk of freedom only comes up with two or more people have conflicting goals.

prtty gud comet tbh how upboat

And you're gonna reproduce like amoebas, right?
Why do we even need children anyways duh

Fuck off Stefan.

For lesbians and sometimes gays.

I don't get what he is implying in that picture. The metaphor he used doesn't technically depict an illogical scenario, just one that most people would find silly.

Which, if anything, points out the inherent stupidity of capitalism.

what about freedom via ai

And according to his followers, "making something sound silly" by breaking its logical foundations down into their composite parts its what constitutes an argument. That's his thing.

there is no conflict between communal education and cohabitation/dependence of children on parents

Read Freud

Was public education the norm in Marx's time?

it probably wasn't public, but it was still often private institutions separate from other family members, and boarding schools literally separated children and parents spatially and from communication for long periods.
I'd think the family under communism would be similar to how it is now I think, but with children developing autonomy earlier, due to public spaces being safer and resources being freely available (If someone was capable they could up and leave and travel/live anywhere they wanted to under communism, without having to worry about money)
What does that mean? if your kid doesn't like living with you they can leave. I don't think this would cause the death of the family structure. If anything I think it would strengthen it (family can't abuse each other or be forced by circumstance to develop toxic relationships), as well as increasing the similarity between friendship and family, as well as something closer to familial relationship between all human beings (unless you want people to just leave you alone, under communism you could fuck off to anywhere you want)

If the AI is made to work for humanity and is properly controlled I see no problem with it. The problems start when the AI is given a leadership role. Also its algorithm must be extremely transparent and publicly available. No black boxes.

How about voluntary sex vouchers instead? Of course, we would have to destroy western sexual morality for that to be a thing.

Sexual activitiy will be obsolete when we establish space gommunism.

So reproduction is what makes sex a zero-sum game? How exactly do males "lose" from having to reproduce? I mean that can just walk if they get a female pregnant.

I'm straight but gay stuff with a big manly guy and a small girly guy gets me hard

That's not a boy.

...

ugh fuck you all

I was gonna jack off

I expect pretty much the complete reverse of what most people have posted itt. I expect an extremely conservative society (by conservative I mean strongly normed) with social norms enforced by the community rather than by a state. I think the sexual freedom/communal thing most people describe itt would quickly lead to a fall back towards capitalism.

"Sexual freedom" simply means that women won't be treated like property and sexuality will be an entirely private matter between 1 or more persons rather than a part of the wider public morality.

Authoritarian communism: defined by what the council believes will produce better workers so more resources can be obtained to produce the things workers need to live and produce more workers so more resources can be obtained to produce the things workers need to live and produce more workers so more resources can be obtained to produce the things workers need to live and produce more workers etc etc

Libertarian communism: however consenting adults want.

I've read Berserk 3 times throughout my life, and I only just got the comparison between the sword and Casca.

bump

Homosexuality and abortions would be banned.

Preferably with women in a dominant role. Something Soviet with enough dominatrix-esque revival in appeal in things to wear.

Really, I don't see such a drastic change in society towards equal strength any other way than how it sounds.

Equal strength and ferocity and power, especially in heterosexual dynamics, that are just drab and depressing one sided affairs for most women.

Importance put on it should rival its intensity.

Wtf I love anfem poster now!!

You're conflating you with most women. Most women have zero interest in taking any initiative in romantic relationships, let alone the dominant role.
Prove me wrong.

Most men here don't know how to properly handle a woman, or know what a woman is, what makes her up inside. Emotionally and physically. In my mind, in a communist society, women and men, or women and women, men and men. All should have equal power put forth towards themselves. Not one or the other. Though women would certainly play a more dominant part in heterosexuality, than just being object of receiving

But they don't understand feminine anatomy.

Or their size, equal to their own.

Notice the people who want women subservient always point to miniature women, or, women seemingly weak enough to bully.

They don't understand size or shape, let alone form.

That's not what a woman is past a certain age.

These people don't understand sex, let alone, what a woman can feel like.

They fail to appreciate the female form despite their own self proclaimed heterosexuality.

This always interests me. The lack of interest in women at all, despite saying they're straight as an arrow. It's always people that don't represent what women are in shape and size. No understanding of anatomy whatsoever.

These men who want power in one way or another long to still have youth.

Every woman longs control. Don't figure otherwise. Dormant in every heterosexual woman is the desire to totally own their partner as a female spider owns a male.

It's really male desire that gets in the way, its more omnipresent. There shouldn't be an omnipresent.

Intimacy isn't omnipresence.

You don't understand what makes good sex or the nuance of what women want in bed.

It isn't being some toy. Straight women are complicated, but they want one thing and it isn't being static and limp.

They want love, adoration, something more.

I found this elsewhere, you're right.

But you're misinterpreting intoxication with passivity.

Boy you are missing out

There's control and there's control. She perhaps wants him to do what she wants him to do, but she hardly seems eager to assert her will in a direct manner, or are you talking about control in an indirect emotional sense?

If we are thinking of the same thing, it seems like most women are pathologically drawn to this. See 50 Shades of Grey's sales figures.

REEEEEEEEE

Doesn't them being drawn to the PUA alpha type contradict this?

They are intoxicated more by something they want less than something they want more?

I didn't say that at all. I said they aren't the majority by a long shot.

Most people form an idea, and imaginary persona of their perfect couple and then try to impose this vision on whoever fits it better

Again you fail to understand what all women want, just focusing on some, or a stereotype.

You're second guessing a woman who pleases women.

I know they want and what makes them up all around.

They can be sub, but then again, so can men. It's complicated but I'm not for submissiveness. It's just, boring. And most women feel this way.

It isn't sub or dom, it's being connected with someone and touching someone.

Preferably, you're in love.

Women don't want this. Some do. Most don't.

No, they are intoxicated by intimacy.

It's hard to explain what that is.

It's like feeling you can almost cry, in a sad way. But you're happy. It's a bit of ecstasy and emotional rush.

But it isn't being controlled, it's being with someone.

There is almost finality to it, about life itself.

The more intense sex is the better, which is why I suggested role and role be equal.

Think of sex like a conversation. There are plenty of bad conversations.

There are also very deep conversations. Communism would be very deep.

Reading your posts was like skimming through a crypto-essentialist new age book on how to better understand the opposite sex and shit like that.

Your perspective of men has been wrapped by the sexually-frustrated male audience of chans.
There are plenty of men who are successful at seducing women during the weekend in those boring overpriced clubs that normies love so much, and most of them realize sooner or later that building something with someone else is ultimately more important than getting your dick wet after a night of water-diluted rum shots. Those who don't, end up as eternal adolescents, and the forties hit hard.

Sex will be fully automated, like all intense physical labor. We shall all have fully automated sex communism.

You don't understand what this word means, or why it should even be so for any direct material reason, and likely you complain about idpol incorrectly.

Like always.
Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out.

That's how it should be.

They wouldn't fucking change. At all.
I don't see why there's so many people thinking that every social, cultural and political aspect of our society would be changed under communism. Of course, much would be changed, but somethings don't call for change, and sexual relashionships are one of them.

they would be black guys fucking white chicks. State enforced

To a degree, I disagree. I think Capitalism has a degree of influence on intimacy. To such a point, it requires discussion on exactly, what it is it influenced, and how to rid of it.

There's not really a point, but the reasons that the influences exist in the first place, come from a prior material point.

It's hard to explain. Especially without someone here getting offended.

Who keeps bumping all these shitty /r9k/ threads back from the dead all the time?

Which of them? I'm seeing five in total.

Anyway it wants to work, because forcing polygamy is retarded and only gets encouraged by those with little to without a sex life.

You don't understand the full implications of invoking objective existence, user.

Automation.

Why does sex need to be automated, having work standards to personal relationships is impossible and is defeating of purpose.

Sex work, is not for every single human being.

For a number of reasons.

Why not? Fucking robots seems like fun. Beats a fleshlight.

I believe that the only way capitalism has influenced sex is in the way it has banalized intimate relations and sexual behavior.
Culturally, our society has never been so centred in sex. It is on the music, on the tv, on the radio, everywhere.
So, changing what i previously said, sex in itself wouldn't change, but the way it is approached in our society definetly would.

Why shouldn't sex be automated? You wouldn't need to masturbate ever again or deal with imperfect human sex partners, stds or unwanted pregnancies.

feelsbadman

First of all, because if we're speaking on behalf of people? People aren't made for fucking all the time.

Not to envoke the dreaded human nature, but it defeats the purpose of the process.

There is a need for sexual attraction, not randomly grabbing someone and saying "You have no choice I'm getting you pregnant" or "You have no choice get me pregnant"

There is an aspect of trauma there. I think you lack the experience of what intimacy actually is to comment on it. Or the maturity.

Afterall, this is total commodity fetishism and not actual automation, to say its automation gives it a mechanical aspect that is not there, and cannot/will not be there in the human psyche.

Communism isn't getting everything you want out of a person.

First of all you must understand, this is the equivilant of a male vibrator.

While vibrators are certainly fun, there is not a way to simulate actual intimacy.

Because it is not allowable.

This has nothing to do with communism.

It would actually make you deal with that on a larger basis.

It would actually make you deal with that on a larger basis.

deal

It would actually make you deal with that on a larger basis.

Unless you're suggesting a total labor analysis of physical intimacy, which is probably the dumbest fucking idea this board has put forth as viable.

Agreed. That's mostly what I'm referring to. But I think the degree of consequence is larger.

After all, we're at such a point people have abstracted the creation of life to, lets automate it.

I'm in agreement with this.

What exactly do you mean by that?

I mean that we've abstracted what sex actually is to the point people are suggesting it a mechanical process no dissimilar from factory work.

Christ, you're as bad as the feminists who insist we're living under an epidemic of rape because they don't feel safe. You're not wrong that most women aren't doms, but your reasoning is absolute shit.

Why not? Robots aren't people.

It has everything to do with increasing the quality of one's sex life.

Nope.

I'm talking about people.

If we're speaking about robots, let me tell you, vibrators or anything much more complicated won't improve your sex life.

Again, if we're talking on behalf of people, we totally are.

Automation, if you mean, as in, a walking talking blow up doll/real doll, is not actually mechanization of sex, as what you're doing is not the medical act of having sex.

Having sex requires build up to it by another person.

You are still masturbating, under your logic, sex is already automated, it just isn't for men.

If I'd fuck a robot instead of masturbating, what difference does that make? Also, who is this "someone" who could be traumatized or impregnated? We're talking about a soulless machine here. It's literally like a fleshlight, except more advanced.

It's still masturbation. It isn't actual intimacy, and intimacy isn't a made up foo foo word about feelings. It's the physical, medical response to the physical labor involved with the touch and connection with another human being simultaneous.

The improvement of a better sex toy, while I have nothing against this, is not sex.

Nothing short of creating artificial intelligence can simulate the unpredictability of a human and improve the work of it, and once you do that you have all sorts of moral ambiguities about the emotions of such an object and their will.

Alright.

The creation of a better sex toy for men isn't really automating sex. As much as you want it to be true, it isn't. Sex is more than that.

Eh, I care little about your obsession with love and intimacy. Call it an enhanced masturbation technique or anything else you like, I just want there to be fuckable robots.

I'm not talking about emotions. I'm talking about facts, and emotions and facts are not necessarily separate in this case.

To be short, nothing short of the reproducing the act of being denied mating can reproduce the mating process.

As there is a, whatever have you chance, in this biological ritual, you will be denied. This is not just a human behavior, this is behavior of nearly all of vertebrates.

Humans are no different, and we respond no different than animals.

Doing as you do on the discovery channel is not reproducible, because sex is more than just fucking.

To say so, you wouldn't understand the parts of it that are far more biological that would be absolute hell engineering, and at the end of it you end up with a perfect replication of being denied.

So you won't have sex. Something will be off, and your brain will notice it.

None of this is remotely close to being of interest to me. Like I said, an enhanced fleshlight.

I'm saying it will still leave you wanting to have sex so it wouldn't be sex.

I'm not.

I'm sure you can see into my head directly and know what I'm into. you don't in case that wasn't clear

You are. i'm not.

Semantics.

Makes no sense.

But I don't want to have sex. I find my current array of masturbation options satisfactory. I'm just happily looking forward to more advanced options in the future.

Neither could an automated blow up doll.

It's not really semantics because you think sex is just humping a hole enough to come.

It's not.

There's going to be a disconnect.

If sex is just the end result of it, then women already have automated sex for themselves long ago.

Alright, then that's fine. I'm just arguing, not for the purpose of offending you, that reproducing human behavior in the case of this is far more complex than it seems initially.

Ideally, it wouldn't.

This. I'm so asexual I don't even masturbate. Get on my level cunts

…Zizek isn't asexual is he? He talks about sex like he's sexually active.

Increased availability of birth control will diminish unwanted pregnancies. However, two parents raising their biological offspring will likely reign supreme, as this is really a biological drive that's exhibited in tons of species. Don't expect Engel's ramblings about boarding schools to come into fruition to any degree other than that orphanages will be much better equipped.

It's a joke. He's got a son who he likes to watch Kung Fu Panda with.

But I would know.

Still semantics.

Still makes no sense.

He's freudian, so everything is about sex. Always.
This is why is film theories are idiotic, because everything is sex to to him.

Didn't freud recognize in his last years that not everything is about benis and vagina?

however the fuck you want. No official documentation or procedures I imagine.

Really makes you think

Except chimps, which humans are most closely related to.

public use of animals and children I love horse cocks in my asshole and feel the need to post about it every chance I get

t. that one faggot

ps consent is a spook