I'm kind of pissed off these faggots keep complaining about how ronery they are because they are ugly. You, sir or ma'am, are not important. What is important is how we move forward.
So to start, we must start from a place of perspective in that case, we must ask a less general question than simple "wut happens to my sex life under communism?" We must instead ask what can we definitely rule out?
Well first, we must rule out state-appointed partners. This will simply not do if we are to have a free society.
Second, we must not prohibit either sex in doing as they please. We cannot tell men not to have more than one girl friend, and we can't tell women they can't leave a relationship they've started.
We cannot treat either sex as lower than the other. We must treat them equally under the law.
So with that in mind, we must wonder about what we can do given what we know now about human relationships and our current society.
So first, we must acknowledged that we no longer live in the age where dating needs to be complicated by time or such things. Communication can happen any time of the day, anywhere in the world. And we must pair this with travel under communism being far freer and easier to do, as well as picking up and moving to another part of the world, since we will have no borders under communism.
Given that we have vast amount of information, not only about humans, but about ourselves and others, on hand, could we build a system that matches people up based on behavior, what porn they seem to watch, and other such things? Yes, and we can do it in a de-centralized manner that respects your privacy. Your local computer would be the only thing that has to know, and it only has to look for other people looking to score. In fact, this might even prevent infidelity in those that are afraid of this happening to them, because the algorithm will be able to judge people who might become unfaithful and place them outside of the user's preferences all by itself. Without revealing identities, of course. This means that people likely to want to be in open relationships will be paired up with each other, and people looking for faithful ones will also be paired up with each other.
But we need not limit it to this. Socialization can start at an earlier age. Using similar computer algorithms, we can predict who is likely to suffer from lack of emotional growth and lack of socialization. This way, teachers, parents, and the state can focus on helping these young boys and girls through their problems. Of course, virtual training can also help, but I do not yet have a good image of what this might look like, as I haven't really worked it out yet. Maybe in a future thread.
A serious thread about sexuality in communism
2/2
But this will not completely solve the problem of loneliness. So what can be done? Well, with the increasing pace in AI and other programs that can, at the very least, fool the user, along with robotics and other such things. I'm confident that much before any communist revolution, we will already have sexbots. Now, yes, this sounds insane, but sexual release is a necessary thing in humans, but that is not enough, so silicone sex dolls cannot do the job. A sort of AI must be built and this robot will, of course, have the personality that the user desires. It will not be self-aware, but by analyzing each interaction with the user, it will likely become more perfect in their eyes than any person could ever be, especially since they might be emotionally stunted, or simply disabled or some other such undesirable trait.
I think this is the best solution going forward. Now remains the problem of extreme promiscuity. If humans, for some reason or another, prove to be naturally promiscuous to their own detriment (highly unlikely, you would have to stop eating for sex to be a problem), what should be done about this? Well, simply, if society needs child rearing, then the AI that must inevitably be used to calculate the economy must have a cultural counterpart that guides culture in a way best suited to society. The responsible thing one century may be a nuclear family, and rampant sex the next. Either way, the pressure this system would exert would have to be soft and leave those who don't conform alone, instead of hurling criticism at them. Maybe it could default to "quaint" instead of labeling "barbarism". We don't, for example, judge the tribes that practice scarification or even cannibalism because to us, that's simply anthropology. In this way, non-conformists (likely the more independent or intelligent of the society), would not be seen as savages or monsters, but as different people who just live among the rest.
Anyway, this was me thinking while working on some shitty code. It got me thinking about how much we could do with the right info and what would be the best way forward. Hope this gives a bit of hope for those that can't find their gf/bf. The fact is that they may be locked away in their basement posting memes instead of looking for you, just as you are doing now. And maybe the computer should do it instead. That might be a far easier way to go forward.
Please throw some questions or thoughts about this. I might seriously consider devoting my life to this. I'm lonely too now.
The matching programme sounds like a great idea, I've spent like the last month chatting to dozens of people online and I only got to the stage of meeting up with one of them, like right before she went to America for 6 months. It's such a waste of time, it would be so great if we could skip all that nonsense.
I hate how most critiques of the sexual market conclude that we need to return to feudal times.
It's funny, isn't it? We already have the data, and instead of being used to solve human loneliness, it's used to sell you shit.
It's a desire to return to a "simpler" time, when in reality, it's a rejection of choice. In the past, it was "love the one you're with", but now you're free to do as you wish. Since nobody seems to love these people given the choice, it seems only natural to them that things must be returned to an earlier state, one where they are the default choice. I think this is counterproductive, as I believe that humans are actually quite predictable. For all we know, a program like this will match people from the very start with the love of their life and there will be no "sexual market" to be had. Of course, I don't think that is likely, but it is one of many possibilities.
I wonder if someone would love them if they weren't loathsome, racist, culturally incompetent, hateful, emotionally and socially stunted people.
Most lonely people are not like that. You're thinking of a caricature that exists few and far between. There are reasons people are the way they are. These reasons won't exist under communism. Of course, I think disabled people, those with some type of autism, or simply social incompetence will exist. That doesn't mean they don't deserve to have their sexual and emotional needs met. We wouldn't starve them just because they are unlikable either.
Yes
No, you autist
The data we have of Russian sex life pre-and-post 1991 and of East Germany pre-and post unification indicates that under 'Real, existing socialist' regimes people were more accepting of non-ideal behaviours, body types etc. I have no doubt it is because there was no advertising industry to undermine people's confidence in themselves and less creation of unattainable ideals. Regular, sociable East Germans also had far more fulfilling sex lives due to this. There was less pressure for choosing an 'acceptable' partner too - less chance of ostracision or mockery due to picking a strange or nonconformist partner.
The fact that you want an algorithmic partner selection betrays your backwards mindset of remedying the effect instead of tackling the cause. If unsociable wierdos stopped demanding 'prince charmings' and '16-yo-Japanese-big-titted-nymphos' and just got to meet their counterparts so much of this /r9k/ nonsense could be done away with. For this modern technological solutions could be useful, but they aren't really the fundamental answer to the problem itself.
Robots don't find themselves attractive as people, so they can't imagine anyone else finding them attractive as people. For a small minority this is true, they are truly unattractive and unpleasant as people. But for the vast majority it is a question of having a realistic self-image and goals.
...
The delusion of robots about the chads fucking almost all the women is retarded. Chad has a refractory period and of given the choice would prefer to pump his seed into the best mate, not spread it around every female without taking a break. That's not even getting into how some choose partners based on things other than physical appearance, differing tastes, or how most women wouldn't want to be in a harem.
Under socialism I'd wager we'd see couples being the norm, rich guys losing theor edge in hookup culture, and more sex because more free time. I'd also be able to find a lefty gf and stop fucking liberals which would be nice.
You don't live in east Germany. You live in the age of mass information and fucking instagram. People love attention. This seems to be true no matter where you go. If this continues to be the case in the future, then you still won't need advertisers for you to find the most beautiful people in the planet and feel like shit because you don't look like that. They are all, after all, a couple of keystrokes away.
People want beauty. This is not a question. Of course the fat autist wants a 15 y/o Japanese waifu, but he will certainly settle for another fat autist who seems to genuinely click with him and shares his interests. This is what this algorithm would do, not get you a waifu, unless you are so damaged that the bot is the only option.
Yes, but that would be far easier done if you already have people brought together, even as friends with the predisposition to find you likeable.
I don't really think racism will have much use under a communist system, and being hateable and such things are symptoms of being raised like an animal or neglected. I think we can do things different going forward.
I agree with the first post but the second post is pretty retarded
I disagree with this.
Sounds like a terrible idea.
We do and we should.
Sacrificing humans is a breach of human agency and cannibalism has a very high health risk to it.
To expand on why i agree with the first part
Me and my friends always jokes about how google knows more about you than anyone. So when you google directions to shops or book holidays, they should put you in the vicinity of people you are compatible with, secretly.
Explain
Why?
Why? I'm not settled on the idea. So please respond.
Scarification != sacrificing people
Cannibalism != killing then eating people
And yes, it has a health risk, and these people have been told about it, but we wouldn't ostracize someone who privately ate human flesh or tattooed his face. They're just a bit weird with unhealthy habits, kind of like smoking.
Not relevant. Eating of deseased people who died of natural causes still carries massive healthrisks.
Much more than just smoking.
I dont think people are "extremely promiscuous"
Cultural engineering has generally not really turned out well and its pretty much impossible to predict what kind of social change is necessary to fit the new material conditions.
Yeah, but that's a personal choice, really. I mean car racing and eating like shit also is a health risk, but we treat it as a health problem, not a moral one. See what I'm getting at?
Well, smoking is much more common, so given that, I don't see why the emphasis on some outlandish behaviors should be given much thought.
Neither do I. I said in the event that it should prove to be the case.
It's impossible for you and I to predict. Maybe it will not be for a sufficiently advanced network of AIs, and I think that is going to be the real marvel of communist society. More than the space race, more than the internet, or the industrial revolution. I think data is the answer, and many computer scientists who are also leftists seem to share my opinion.
Ah, then i misunderstood.
I dont agree that we should just let destructive behaviour go ignored.
This is techno-fetishism, and I say that as someone who has written his own AI's. Pattern recognition such as compatibility of people has proven to work with AI, making future predictions for culture based on unseen situations has not.
Neither do I, but I don't think we should treat it as a moral issue. We can go to the doctor and be told, "Stop smoking/consuming the flesh of the dead." Maybe a PSA: "Don't smoke or you'll get cancer/Chewing on uncle Joe's corpse might rot your brain." But not, "Eating this or smoking this means you're a piece of shit savage."
A shitty neural net is not what we're talking about, but even that can have its own uses.
No, not yet. I'm obviously not talking about the present.
Reimari is OTP.
Yet "shitty" neuralnets is the best shit we have at the moment.
Im not building any plans on technology that has no indication of existing in the future.
Well there is no obvious alternative. You can't just socialize the means of production as you would for other markets.
Man, you should have deleted this thread and made another with double spacing between paragraphs.
That said, I like you're idea and I've had a similar one for some time, but it's hard to sell because it makes you look horribly pathetic.
Then it's a good thing we're talking about the future instead of the moment.
I don't think the idea of more advanced AIs and other such things have no indication of existing. This is undoubtedly what all the tech companies are trying to work toward now for more reasons than one, mainly being the further devaluation of labor, starting with managerial labor. Also, I wouldn't worry about building any plans. No matter how young you are, I don't think either of us is going to see communism realized.
I'm alone because I live with my parents and I am 30.
I don't try. Change my housing situation and I would at least be trying. So Gommunism would probably indirectly net me a gf.
it's called base-superstructure, love life under communism would function differently
I dont believe that making plans for things that dont eixst in anything but fiction is usefull. Its like those people who made picture related.
All tech companies researching AI doesnt mean we have a guarantee that there will be AI that can predict the future. And even if we have, that is the far future, singularity even, therefore its pretty much meaningless for us to make serious plans for them.
Your first part about partner matchup and the part about detecting problem children is within the realm of possibilities, an AI capable of predicting which cultural trends are the "best" which is subjective as fuck and shaped by culture anyway is not even close to being possible.
To a degree probably, but it's still a market. The sexual market is part of the base, not the superstructure, even if more than other markets it is highly influenced by culture. If you keep it mostly unregulated, as it is now, you're still going to have extreme levels of inequality even if all other markets have been taken over by communism.
What -is- the sexual market?
Googling it just gives me /r/redpill tier garbage
Its the place you buy your wife and sell your daughters, obviously.
It is the only alternative right now.
It quite litteraly used to be in some places and times (Even now. Say Yezidi brides sold in Mossul).
I don't know about that. Even without an AI, i don't see how a communist society couldn't run a plain old global matchmaking service with skilled human psychologists to profile people.
Brb moving to mossul and buying myself a gf.
cumrade plox
If you do not regulate monogamy you will end up with sexual capitalism no matter how much effort you put into dressing it up as some form of "sexual liberation"
Pimps?
Good point, i'm buying 2 of gf and 4 of wife.
Would there be a bachelor tax/stigma in a communist society? I wouldn't mind, personally I enjoy being alone.
in its most base form
How can we possibly know?
fucking hell
Giving power to non-scientists like physiologists is no different form empowering the priesthood to take those decisions.
I don't think we should be using this with children. Users should have to explicitly opt in, and children wont understand what its about. There needs to be consent and an age of consent.
And for the love of god don't let Zuckerberg get his disgusting fingers on this.
This is under communism. Big data is already being collected through even just accident. We might as well use it for good rather than evil. Also Zuckerberg is going to be hanged if he's still alive at the time. Don't worry about Cuckerbrerg.
That's not what i said.
Technofetishists think all technology is inherently neutral and objective and all personal individualised human solutions are inherently flawed. Basically they want the machines to free them from themselves.
...
Science is based on realities so no.
This is your logic.
Subjective realities are still realities. An 'objective' 'scientific' technocracy that attempts to snuff out all subjectivity would only lead to totalitarianism. Science is not reality itself , but a series of practical models used to make predictions about reality. Communism is not about creating a more perfect form of slavery, now with AI God kings, but about creating an environment in which humans can shape their own destiny.
It's a good thing we don't rely on them to think objectively, but an endless process of critique and use of empirical evidence instead, then huh?
If we are talking about human affairs, that means dialectics and participatory democracy, not a priestly caste of men in white coats lording over everyone else
Absolutely not.
I sincerely hope that you`re not follower of determinism.
I don't think that's been suggested in this thread. However, science can inform descisions about what to do, for example global warming. Should we do something about CO2 emissions? Well, how does it affect the climate? What can we do about it? Such things are answereable with science. It is up to the public and the politicians to decide if they want to go through with these solutions or how to implement them, but science informs them nontheless. Marxism is popular specifically because of its adherence to scientific principles and the seeking of empirical evidence to support its claims. If we agree on that, then what is it with people always complaining about men in lab coats as if all scientists wore lab coats. This comes from a set of people that do not have a working knowledge of science nor do they have an interest in it. These people should not speak on matters that they are uneducated in.
pic related, anti-science bitches
...
My dude Dialectical Materialism is inherently deterministic.
So do fit non-autists.
I think the ai should have consciousness, lust can be waited by porn, loneliness only by companionship
The idea of the matching programme is pretty good, send a email to the japanese communist party, maybe this can be part of their political proposals.
sorry fam faustian spirit can't do it, gotta breed with better looking partner and know that I am her favorite partner she's had. Anything less is selling myself short. This isn't being autistic this is being self-aware and in touch with biology. Robust genetics, which are compatible and a good, easy-going temperament, loyal are basically pre-requisites. You don't simply settle for some person you meet who doesn't make a weird face when you approach. you strive or you at least rise above your own value and expectations. Otherwise you are just a fucking copy of a copy of copy, your kids will be as unremarkable as you and your grandchildren and show on
Having instead of being
Accumulating instead of becoming
Genetic instead of memetic immortality
You are already a copy of a copy, friend, though I would describe this post as the product of the mind of a vacuous basic bitch.
Emancipate yourself.
tired
wired
fired
inspired
Make sundresses mandatory
the connection between your 'self' and your genetic offspring is weak at best
containing little to nothing of the conscious 'self' you have, much less any expressions thereof
might as well wank in the water supply and feel satisfied that everyone has a bit of your genes
be glad if they even remember to put your name in the family book, meat
But user what are they supposed to wear during winter time?
that's why you have all the same mental problems and vices as your parents? that's why you gravitate towards similar partners as they did and why you are prone to the same outbursts and terrors they are? Really? Physiognomy and genetics are the Self within and the Ego is the expressed self without, the Face of the Self which is worn as a mask. It has no real value and its wishes and whims are a device for transmitting genetic information at worst and at best for bringing about the end of Time
the conscious self is an abstraction which is generated by self-referential neural activity I don't see any reason why it is to be the whole self and why the rest of the mental and neural activities and structures along with the cell behavior and biology aren't the "Self" and these are again inherited by the offspring
pointless
at least I'm happy to be meat I doubt anyone is happy to be a "conscious self"
You are an idiot, no matter how many words you waste.
2 sundresses.
The state should not have any influence over who mates with who and neither should AI, people need to stop allowing corporate fascist advertising and educational systems along with the atomization process of the strip-mall gentrified, apartment complex Americana to destroy their humanity and sanity. Its imperative that we address the main problem which is the poisoning of the consciousness of the species
this
sweaters and scarves
the fact that people derive some sort of deeper meaning from purposeless and apersonal genetic replication is absurd to me
because the totality of the human experience is within the conscious self. the reactive, imaginative, creative consciousness. even experience of the subconscious is within the conscious
just like keeping the chain of purposeless replication going
and this is why I uncharitably but seemingly accurately called you a 'basic bitch'
Got some self image problems there buddy.
jesus fuck lmao all that text is so spooky
just find an attractive person you like, become attractive and attract. Sometimes you win sometimes you lose.
This thread reeks of faggotry.
Why does everyone and their mother abuse biology so much? That field was a mistake.
I know this because I lost a bet and I had to do this so
Literally the 8th girl agreed to sleep with me ushering these words.
Girls are so easy these days, you just have to knock at enough doors until someone opens.
Also girls can't punch for shit. I dunno why, but only the 4th actually knew how to give me a lasting sting.
Step 1. Be attractive
Step 2. Don't be unattractive
I'm not even that good looking. My face looks like it got repeatedly smashed against a window.