How would an anarchist society deal with female sexuality?

for example, lets say we achieve a free, prosperous anarchist society. Resources are provided for and abundant,female sexuality is fully liberated, technology helps people live easy lives,but wouldn't women still only will go for the chads and ignore the betas? she wont even need a beta provider after 20 years of riding the carousel because the society will be so free and abundant. would dating apps exist in a free society? what do you guys think of mgtow?

fixed

and the answer is it won't

How does a current society deal with children who do not mature into adults?

wew lad
i'm no anarchist cuz it's dumb but the problem here isn't anarchy it's still believing in the beta/alpha spook. pls don't tell me you unironically fell for the mgtow meme (also sage)

r9k pls go

as women have gained more and more sexual freedom, they basically seek after the best looking men with the most resources, they either go for a man who has very good looks or lots of resources. I dont see how this would change in an anarchist society. women would simply be mating with the biggest bulls and ignoring the producer beta males. Kind of like how women now have husbands who provide a really nice life for them, and they dump them for a chad type guy who shoots up drugs.

How are you not a problem if held to the standards /r9k/ told you to believe so you feel politically important in counter intuitive contradictory strength/weakness old turn of the century ideas

Because you are

You are more of "the problem"

I know this triggers you guys but NAWALT

i think chronic isolation causes this kind of thing in people

i have never met anyone i'd even call chad, he doesn't exist he's an amalgamation of all your insecurities

It's an obsession that's even observed by people who first documented the contradictions of fascism.

Worship of individuality, and all the insecurity that comes with it, molded into whoeever or whatever opposes the regime the most.

But in such a way that it is both extremely strong and potent but also pathetically weak. "Jews are rule the world and our women, but they are pathetically weak and will fail where we are strong and control!" "Women rule the world, but are pathetically weak and will fail, we are strong and in control!"

This was documented as a phenomenon within Fascist ideology in general terms, decades ago.

Tying politics to personality. It always ends this way. Contradictions.

Without alienation we will reverse the atomisation of society caused by liberalism and fulfilling relationships with no more material inequalities of power will be formed.
Also reproduction will be outlawed

This is where Transhumanism comes into the game…

We would already have 3D printed waifus, no need for used up 3DPD

Another thinly veiled "guys if we give women too much freedom they'll destroy us" meme.

Don't act like if men had the choice we wouldn't all go for the most resource-laden women we could find because surprise! historically that's the best fucking way of surviving.

Your weaponized alienation would be a gulaging

men don't go after women for resources, they go after women for fertility (good genes). women go after men for resources and genetics.

The end of beta providers would be an improvement to the current situation we have, where it's permanent cuckoldry since women shit out kids with white men in their 30s. At least then we could have true "survival of the fittest" since people want it so badly. However, civilization would basically die out and whats left would resemble a favela, but there is of course other nations in the world such as Iran and KSA that wouldn't give embrace anarchism so easily and would simply knock over the zombie of what's left of europe and NA like a rotten door.

"The followers must feel both humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies(…)However the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm and outperform whoever their enemies are. Thus by a continual shift of rhetorical focus, the enemies of Fascism become both too strong and too weak for it to take on. Fascist governments are condemned to lose all wars they ever fight from a strategic standpoint because their generals are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating force."

Ur-Fascism, Umberto Eco

incels get the wall, liberated women get god-tier men

Absolute bullshit based on fantasizing about 17th century agrarian society. Why is it then that wealthy men tend to pick wealthy women over attractive lower class women? Surely the most attractive/fertile women in the world aren't necessarily the ones with the most resources as you claim. Also, intra-class relationships continue to be exceedingly rare in all cases.

What you're describing is an ahistorical fantasy based on the delusional ravings of incels, nothing more.

Because the refractory period after ejaculation and most women aren't cool with being in a harem. Do you know anything about sex besides what you read on /r9k/?

That's how we were before civilization and that's how we are now.

Let's assume what you present really is the case with female sexuality. And to that I say, who cares? That hinges entirely on you. You'll have FALC and an abundance of time and probably gene enhancement by the era it would happen.

Get jacked, become an alpha and so on.

However, you're spooked and the "redpill" they offered you was in fact a placebo. Read Lacan and see how far the rabbit hole goes.

>300 replies guaranteed

Go outside

When you use the words "alphas" and "betas", you reify hierarchy as though it is something natural, you absolute ecocuck.

"In fact, a genetic strategy that makes the behavior of the “social insects” comprehensible actually renders human society incomprehensible. So-called primate “hierarchies” (a completely libelous term) yield strictly individual dominance-submission relationships (another libelous term) on the basis of largely physical attributes – notably, strength, hormonal fortitude, and possibly even intelligence, although the visible distinctions between a “smart” ape and a “dumb” one are barely noticeable in a primate community. It is quixotic ethologists like Jane Goodall-Lawick, rather than apes themselves, who make these uniquely anthropomorphic distinctions. The myth of an intragroup “hierarchy” dissolves completely once we recognize that an “alpha” male chimpanzee is an individual creature, not an institution. His “dominant status” (whatever these words means) lives or dies with the fortunes of the ape, not with the fortunes of the group. Hence, “hierarchy” in the most “caste-like” apedoms or monkeydoms more closely resembles the links in a chain than layers and consciously empowered community structures.

The difference is a crucial one. A weak, enfeebled, unnerved, and sick ape is hardly likely to become an “alpha” male, much less retain this highly ephemeral “status.” By contrast, the most physically and mentally pathological human rulers have exercised authority with devastating effect in the course of history and altered its destiny profoundly. The cry “The King is Dead! Long Live the King!” expresses a power of hierarchical institutions over persons that is completely reversed in so-called “animal hierarchies,” where the absence of institutions is precisely the only intelligible way of talking about “alpha males” or “queen bees.” Sociobiology, with its definitional reductionism, totally dissolves these crucial distinctions. “Hierarchy,” to Wilson, is a “system of two or more levels of units, the higher level controlling the least to some extent the activities of the lower levels in order to integrate the group as a whole.” One is tempted to observe that this “integrative” function must be hot news to an ape or termite. In any case, the terms “system,” “levels,” “units,” and “controlling”—so widely disparate throughout the animal world—are precisely the concepts and categories that Wilson is obliged to explain if the notion of “animal hierarchy” is to have meaning. These explanations are all the more necessary because “castes” of “worker bees” (another group of juicy terms) are in no way comparable to the “alpha males” among primates. Wilson’s fast-and-loose interchanging of “levels” and “units” allows him to recklessly pirouette around every part of animal ethology, from beehives to baboon troops. The genetic origins of beehive differentiation are blissfully transferred to less instinct-governed primate groups and then, almost joyously, to strictly contrived human social and political institutions." - Bookchin

Yo, reddit newfags you put sage in the email field when you see a shit thread. It's the second box down

Nobody is ever going to support the regulation of female sexuality in the west now that the sexual liberation happened in the 60s. Cats out of the bag now, so rather than REEEing about feeeeemales not fucking you get off your ass and go to the gym,learn to talk to people and stop being such a faggot. 51% of the population is female, chances are one of them will fuck you if you just ask

REPORT ALL /R9K/ THREADS