Morals

Fine then Holla Forums, you don't have to answer my question, but at least check my digits.

...

No-one is this dumb.

I'm not replying for real until you type up a 1000 word essay outline your proofs.

It has less to do with them having giant orgies and more of them feeling extremely content with their civilization and arrogance that they're unstoppable. All that wealth and power went to their head which distance themselves from reality about their Empire slowly crumbling from the growing strength of their enemies both inside and outside their borders. Not to mention the amount of power hungry opportunist that wanted to rule Rome.

No, come on. All I've received were cunts laughing at the question, and I even posted a couple of related images. Explain to me how sexual morality affects a civilization (if at all) and if it should be of concern.

...

...

Fall of WRE (Western Roman Empire) was a lack of men to support their army, due to the rise of serfdom. Also, Romans were sexually depraved since the time of Hadrian.

I'm religious and I don't even care. If I did I'd be a hypocrite. I ain't taking no vows of celibacy.

I'll take the bait. Romans were christian when they fell and before that Augustus had laws against sexual depravity. All the emperors were getting cucked so they passed laws against that shit.

I'm no expert on the Ottomans but I assume they had similar laws on sex to Christians unless you consider muslim polygamy sexual depravity.

Anyway no nation ever fell because people were having sex and jerking off unless that was a distraction from the massive army at the gates.

I guess that sort of makes sense. But, my close friends all jerk off about three times a week (yes, I asked), and they act mentally slow, look a bit unattractive, constantly make sexual remarks/no control, had "fetishes" and acted like "betas". Once I had them stop for a little more than 7 days, they were attracted to normal things (male/female vaginal was all), didn't speak as much/had more control and when they did speak it was about something worthwhile, their minds were quicker, looked better. and acted a bit like "alphas".

Can you read? I wrote "part of their downfall".

This is the first time I've made a thread about this subject.

nice story

It's not just one thing though—it never is.
Right, but I'm speaking of before (and besides, wasn't Tacitus disgusted by the way Romans acted, that they acted in an "un-Roman" way?).

you casually ignored the greeks (my ancestors) who were faggy degenerates from the beginning. Alexander the Great fucked dudes in the ass. You don't really seem to have a solid grasp on cause and effect. If I fuck a dude in the ass and it starts raining, my penis in his anus may not necessarily be what's causing the sudden change in weather.

That's only because people got sick of all the threads with that image and the same arguments you posted every month for most of a year. You were like this site's period.

fun/10 if all participants are having fun. I'm more into cuddles though.

You mean like, sex for the purposes of reproduction?

White on white sex?

But enough about the U.S., let's talk about Ancient Rome.

You a cheeky cunt, SocDem, I'll give you that!

Neoliberalism is God's revenge against the sexual revolution. Prove me wrong protip you can't.

Christianity is the Judaic brand version of Buddhism, God doesn't exist

Really made me think…

Z was a statement unrelated to Y

Rape is bad

If it's of a physically mature age and can consent, it's all good. This isn't hard.

My sickiest fetish is to have vaginal sex in the missionary position for the sole purpose of procreation in the holy confines of matrimony. Whats yours?

Holla Forums is full of autistic fedora tipping degenerates, that should be obvious immediately.

Ghost

this game is fun

I think this glass of water theory is completely un-Marxist, and, moreover, anti-social. […] Of course, thirst must be satisfied. But will the normal person in normal circumstances lie down in the gutter and drink out of a puddle, or out of a glass with a rim greasy from many lips? But the social aspect is most important of all. Drinking water is, of course, an individual affair. But in love two lives are concerned, and a third, a new life, arises, it is that which gives it its social interest, which gives rise to a duty towards the community.

As a communist I have not the least sympathy for the glass of water theory, although it bears the fine title ‘satisfaction of love’. In any case, this liberation of love is neither new, nor communist. You will remember that about the middle of the last century it was preached as the ‘emancipation of the heart’ in romantic literature. In bourgeois practice it became the emancipation of the flesh. At that time the preaching was more talented than it is today, and as for the practice, I cannot judge. I don’t mean to preach asceticism by my criticism. Not in the least. Communism will not bring asceticism, but joy of life, power of life, and a satisfied love life will help to do that. But in my opinion the present widespread hypertrophy in sexual matters does not give joy and force to life, but takes it away. In the age of revolution that is bad, very bad.

[…]

Dissoluteness in sexual life is bourgeois, is a phenomenon of decay. The proletariat is a rising class. It doesn’t need intoxication as a narcotic or a stimulus. Intoxication as little by sexual exaggeration as by alcohol. It must not and shall not forget, forget the shame, the filth, the savagery of capitalism. It receives the strongest urge to fight from a class situation, from the communist ideal. It needs clarity, clarity and again clarity. And so I repeat, no weakening, no waste, no destruction of forces. Self-control, self-discipline is not slavery, not even in love.