Lookism/low SMV-shaming within leftism

thats an interesting topic for feminism, but the real one, not the tumblr one

fuck yeah!!

The future of sexual free market will NECESSARILY be regulated after the revolution.

The problem is OP that our society encourages us to be incredibly vain and self important. To obsess over what he consume, how we look etc. We reduce ourselves and our relationships to commodity relationships. The more marketable we are as people the more successful we are socially. The problem really can only be addressed by fundamentally changing what our society values and worships, because as it stands it worships only that which it deems a better commodity.

What is SMV? Do I want to know? This seems like one of those r9k-style rabbit holes.

More to do with confidence and demeanour than straight-up attractiveness I feel. Sociability can make up for unattractiveness to a large extent. I know pleasant, confident, interesting ugly people who consistently get social and sexual attention.

But I broadly agree, especially in professional life only merit should count. Things like depersonalised, objective CVs and job-seeking processes would help here as with other discrimination.

I'd love to regulate the quantity of air that gets to your brain using my hands.

t. OP who made this thread as an excuse to post this shit again

SMV was a dumb term to use. It means "sexual market value" and I basically used it unconsciously. This whole post is basically an /r9k/-Holla Forums crossover

You're a pathetic slave who accepts his lot in life and doesn't dare to demand more. Stop telling young men to just masthrbate more on this board while implying they don't deserve a partner and that they should just move on. You're a disgusting contemptible worm.

Yeah? Well you're a terrible poster, and that's much worse.

see
You don't need some kind of Orwellian breeding system

imo the socdem gang should rosa that fucking sexual market regulation guy
lately there have been some quality roseposters but this guy brings the average down a lot

The sexual free market is a reactionary and is a return to the days of complete haremization.

were you the guy who asked for a fascist flag

No

I think a general culture of cruelty and lack of empathy has developed, it's particularly noticeable online.
It's not a partisan left/right issue, it's a broader social one.
It's been generally encouraged over the years for economic reasons, without concern for the wider repercussions.
TL,DR; don't take it personally, people are just shitty in general.

While I agree with you that I don't want to create some authoritarian breeding model, I don't know how much that will work. While I a full traditional socialist society might lower vain self-importance, lookism will still be there.

Best solution seems to be mental health research, specifically finding what the fuck actually causes mental illness, since right now, no one actually knows what is going on inside the brain causing things like depression, autism, etc. The current method is throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, which has lead to things like SSRIs which help a lot of people but don't work on a huge segment of the population. Besides that, more immediate solutions include improving cosmetic surgery and increasing awareness of lookism. On a broader scale, there are a bunch of meme sci-fi tier things possible like extensive gene editing

sh-shinji… not so hard…

A simple retreat of consumerism would help - what we know of Soviet and DDR sexual relations is that the atmosphere was more permissive and allowing of different body types etc. There was less need to pick social status enhancing partners.

In the leftist mind all bad acts by non-Europeans are caused by poverty and racism and thus the individuals are actually victims.

Shockingly, ugly guys often also aren't great at socializing. Telling them to become great actors doesn't solve shit.

ahahahahaha shut up four eyes

How is this in any way relevant to the topic of this thread? Stop shilling your ideology at places not even vaguely related to it.

Not really. If SJWs talk about bodyshaming, they almost always mean discrimination of fat people. I never saw this applied to people not percieved as attractive for some reason other than their weight.

You're using the wrong flag, foreign invader.

I've found a flag worse than anfem

truuu

Sitting on your bed with your shoes still on? Disgusting!

This is the best post here by the way, and also the correct analysis of what OP calls "lookism".

This, so much of what is capitalism considered attractive is rooted in class.

While women have liberated themselves from much of the old patriarchal expectations (being a virgin, submissive, maternal etc) but actively enforce patriarchal standards on men because it gives them a competitive advantage when selling their labor and sexuality **making as much or more than the woman, being assertive, tall, muscular, socially well adjusted)

*so much of what is considered attractive is rooted in class.

You bitch more about women then you bitch about capitalism titoflag

Hey Tito Boy, what's up

*citation needed

I don't see how women are 'liberated' from the need of being attractive in any way. Women are still expected to look good if they want to engage in a relationship. They are sexualized to a much larger extent than men are. While men can often overcome being unattractive with assets like money, a good personality or humor, women are always expected to be at least considered cute.
Be honest, you would very likely not engage in a relationship with an ugly woman yourself.

...

Genetic engineering will ensure that all future generations are beautiful. People who are ugly now are screwed, though.

I've actually dated a lot of women that many would consider unattractive. My mother grew up on a farm and my father grew up dirty poor and extremely cynical of capitalism so much of the consumerist culture was not instilled in me.

To give you an example to prom I took my friend who walk with one foot at a right angle to the other and a heavy speech impediment. The relationship was platonic because she was not interested.

Also I've never treated unattractive women that flirted with me with distain or made them feel as though they have violated me in some way. I'm actually pretty attractive, fit and handsome, but on the short side (5'6"), but I have women practically call the cops on me for approaching them sometimes.

I've also dated a lot of black women. Real talk, simply being black knocked down most women a good 30 % on the attractiveness scale for most men, including no gfs, so yes no gfs are going to have to abandon some of their spooks to get laid. But avoiding minorities has material basis. I've dated a lot of black women and they do tend to come with a lot more baggage than white women. I'm resilient enough to handle it but most no gfs are overwhelmed with their own baggage and can't take on someone else's.

This is beared out in objective statistics, black women by in large are poorer, less educated and more persecuted by the state then white women, this manifests itself in an abrasive "attitude" that they are known for.

It's not easy to date someone that carries such deep scars from racism and capitalism.

I've dated Native American women too, one in particular that was a nyphomaniac. She was penetrated by an older cousin as a toddler and was never told by her parents. It was only after I convinced her to tell her parents about her lifestyle that they revealed this to her. She actually stopped being a nympho after that since she knew that her compulsive need for sex wasn't because of some internal person failing but borne from trauma that would have most likely screwed anyone up.

Have I shown sufficient provenance to have an opinion on women and how they compound capitalist alienation? Something that effects me directly and has done so throughout my life.

Before you answer please list all the marginalized men you've nursed back to a semblance of mental health. I can't be sure that you are arguing in good faith unless you've been through the trenches.

SOMETHING SOMETHING HIERARCHY, SOMETHIG SOMETHING AAHNAAHRCHISM.

Interesting, elaborate please.

Imagine being this spooked when it comes to "race" as if it was this tangible thing that's real, or can be quantified.

Are you really believing what you say ?
How can't you understand that most of the differences you describe are the fact of genetic difference.

Hey, stop being assmad in this thread and go finish off the thread you started.

Real enough for race centric medicine.

How can you not see that if you don't educate some one and violently oppress them that wind up ignorant and angry.

You have no scientific basis to race other than white skin. You guys argue over what is a white person endlessly.

Not really true, but whatever makes you feel better about denying millennia of divergent evolution.

Also it's way easier to deal with black people than Nazis, since they don't feel entitled to the world because of their skin.

Non peer reviewed studies are meaningless. Also causality does not equal causation.

When i hear the left start getting into absurd shit like lookism, and smart muh privilege. Im reminded of the story harrison bergeron

*corralation doesn't equal causation

There are literal race specific blood pressure medicines you moron.
Empty phrase. Sometimes it does.

Asians are more educated than white people though, shouldn't they be the ubermench.

That reminded me of this crazy meme article
theestablishment.co/my-husbands-unconscious-racism-nearly-destroyed-our-marriage-6eaeec301161?gi=a7ab33597d2f

It litterally doesn't. Do you think the rooster crowing causes the sun to rise.

What does that have to do anything? Are you conceding race exists now?

And no, asians are generally dainty and unoriginal. Soulless ant people. Good at being the sweatshop of the planet but not much else.

What scientific tests are there for race? What genes or lack thereof show race? Please name them. Never heard of race based medinces but certainly different races are treated differently based on race. Hispanics and blacks tend to be lactose intolerant.

How do you know illness suffered aren't different aren't due to the environment rather than genetics. You just conveniently jump to that conclusion

for fuck sakes can't you fuck off into

It was to show how hypocritical your raced based advocacy is. If you really believed race was some marker of human potential and not just simply an attempt to promote white supremacy you'd be advocating for Asians being in charge, since they regularly get the best grades in the US.

Lactose intolerance has a genetic basis. Race is wholly genetic racial attributes are not randomly distributed across the entire planet from the great random number generator in the sky. a person's race can be determined with 100% accuracy via autosomal and mitochondrial DNA tests. You're a shit for brains I'm not even going to waste my time with you.

There is no hypocrisy at all. I'm not asian therefore I do not wish to be in the presence or under the rule of asians, even if hypothetically they are superior. No hypocrisy whatsoever really.

Well, we can hold the belief of racial genetic inequalities without being contradictory. I'm personnally married to an Est Asian and if, in real capitalism, East Asians were to rule over whites, that would mean they are indeed superior to whites. And that would be enough to justify this new state of affairs.

"Obese" is a size-ist term. And I won't date men under 6 feet.

Race doesn't have to be tangible for racism to have tangible effects you colossal fucking pseud.

attractive master race checking in
you jelly bro?

This doesn't just affect males. Right now plastic surgery rate among women is at epidemic levels in places like South Korea, Brazil, California, Greece, etc. One thing Hitler did right was ban cosmetics, though for the wrong reason.

This is why I support Sharia law

Truly the superior race.

what's up fellow master racer
checkin in as well

Lmao u can look at another person and see their race you idiot. What do you think youve even proved?

The woman would be attractive from any angle, women wear makeup all the time, and those are some mild-ass filters. The man is not on fucking roids. His physique is 100% achievable natty. If he was on roids his torso would be bigger because roids make your guts grow.

What can de determined by DNA are phenotypes. What you classify as race is simple a collection of phenotypes. Phenotypes that can significantly shift around, which is why Nazis are constantly arguing about what is white.

The "He Will Not Divide Us" protest showed how bankrupt the idea of a white race is with pol fans that were clearly brown and black showing up. I lived in Germany for several years, most of those guys don't consider Americans "white" since so many Americans clearly have at least some muted Semitic features to them.

If you've spent any time in an Anglo country it's pretty there's a lot of truth to this.

*its pretty clear there is a lot of truth to this

you dumbasses, the phrase master race is a meme. Its not Holla Forums unironic master race shit, that girl is jewish for fuck sake.

There's exceptions to every rule but he's most likely on roids. I workout and it takes an extraordinary amount of effort just to get wings. Much less this ridiculous amount of definition. If you want to see what is humanly possible with regards to physique see Bruce Lee. Bruce Lees muscles aren't nearly as big but I'd bet money he's actually stronger, also see Jackie Chan during his prime.

I'm not arguing she's not attractive, but I bet a candid picture of her wouldn't even look like the same woman.

Was that socialism? If so socialism will fix most of the worlds problems

I'm sorry a couple drinks deep
p-pls forgive me, comrade-kun

You obviously don't know whit about the subject. Definition comes from low body fat. Having developed muscles is necessary, but the bottleneck on the look is BF%, which is 85% diet, 10% genetics, and 5% exercise.

Bruce Lee was a fighter. He got his body by training for speed and strength. The guy you posted trains for size and aesthetics/balance. There is no one peak the human body can reach; different goals have different peaks. You really fucking do not know shit about fitness.

wat

Just stop caring about this shit, seriously. You don't need a girlfriend.

"Sexual Market Value" I think the phrase kinda speaks for itself.

Which is why I will never have a six-pack.

I like eating. Well maybe I can do it and then immediately lose it.

That is HGH, not steroids.

not sure I agree

Body fat levels are primarily calories in vs. calories out. Exercise will just offset your diet, which is a more directly controlling influence. Also, the rate at which calories get taken up from food depends on the food - simple sugars get take up very quickly vs. polyunsaturated fats. The faster calories get taken up, the less gets used immediately and the more just gets stored in fat (which will burn slowly once you stop eating i.e. while yous sleep) so your diet will affect the (relatively minor) variation in bf% throughout the day. Genetics determines how your body stores fat, particularly how much goes where. Some people can't get a six-pack without dangeously low bf% because that's where they store more fat. But aside from an aberration like that, if you get low in fat you will look good.

i would unironically rather bang Cletus here than the bloke in . Not only does the dude look barely human (and a body like that doesn't feel nearly as good to touch as I once naively thought it would), but having been with both kinds of guys multiple times when I was young, typical ripped Chads are shit lays too. 5 minutes and they're done and expecting you to be grateful for the chance. At least Cletus will eat your ass and make an effort to see that you cum too even after he's done.

I do know about body fat, you still need big muscles to get the definition of the guy in the picture. Also that Mr. Universe style of working out is bougus anyway. It's a style of workout to get big muscles by pooling blood into them, not by actually making them stronger.

The undocumented immigrants that work the fields are 10 times stronger that the male diva in the picture.

That's right, strength. Big muscles aren't natural and don't signify strength. That why Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan don't look like what you've pictured. Even most Olympians did not look like that, except maybe swimmers.

That kind of muscle comes from roids and working out in a specific way. I know plenty about fitness.

No fucking shit. You need some size to be strong but not much. Lifting for strength is about strengthening the muscle fibers (which are fixed in number) while lifting for aesthetics is about hypertrophy, growing the size of the tissue.

Your point wasn't that the guy's not strong, it's that he's on roids. The point of muscles like that isn't to be strong, it's to be attractive/aesthetic. It's a form of art using the body as a canvas, like tattoos.

He's probably on roids sorry. A very select amount of men can naturally grow muscles like that but they are rare.

Look at pictures as late as the 1960s, there are no men even within bodybuilding circles that look like him. What changed? The availability of steroids starting around the 1970s.

but I mean, there are differences that dictate how much of certain calorie types are burnt. For instance, switching of the liver from glycolysis to beta oxidation, and the composition of specific calories makes a difference as well. For instance, sugars typically enter into the glycolytic pathway quite readily, and are the master regulators of metabolism in the body. However, the polyunsaturated fats you mention can shuttle more fat into beta oxidation, increasing overall fat burning.
IMO its more like 25% genetics, 25% diet, and 50% exercise. Even people that eat well don't necessarily get fit. Especially when you consider the type of exercise and how exactly you tailor that exercise to your body type, as that IME makes a huge difference

IDK if you are a chick or what (its the internet so probably not) but I really can't comment. Not really into men, being a cis straight white scum and all

yea really showing you're true colors here man

What am i reading
Never mind i'd rather not know

…how is that not another example of diet controlling body composition?

You won't get fit just by eating well, but you will drop your body fat. I wasn't saying that physique is 85% diet, 10% genetics, 5% exercise, just bf%. If you're talking about fitness in general then yes 1 part genetics, 1 part diet, 2 parts exercise sounds about right.

Is it your first day on the internet?

Honestly, yeah, discrimination on looks is one of those inevitable issues. Same for discrimination on some personality traits, I guess. God knows being an introvert has brought me no advantages but a lot of problems.

Anyway, looks will become a moot point anyway, as will race, eugenics and some other bunch of crap, once mankind has full human genetic engineering.

I am on the liquor and shitposting

thank you comrade

because a lot of it is under transcriptional or enzymatic control, and not all of us respond in exactly the same ways. some store fat quite easily by switching their metabolism to catabolism, others don't and instead switch to fat generation quite easily.
Obviously ancedotal but I am one of those people that needs to eat like 3 or 4 thousand calories a day to be at a healthy weight and maintain it. That's despite doing a power lifting routine and eating like shit. Diet has some effect but "if it fits my macros" type mentalities don't work for people with crazy metabolisms like me, which suggests a massive genetic contributor in regard to calorie allocation by my body.

lol just b mor confident bro

the liquor. I fucked that up, meant anabolism, specifically in regard to the generation of fatty acids

This is another part of the 10%. If your body is different from the average you have to take that into account and follow different rules. Once you know what you're working with you still are dealing mostly with diet when it comes to fat levels. That said, with the 85/10/5 thing I'm talking specifically about body fat, not fitness as a whole.

No it doesn't, the only one who would fall in this category would be Elliot. And he wasn't even unattractive just a literal sperg.
I have heard of this meme, do you have a single fact to back that up?

Kissless virgin here.

This discussion is outside the scope of socialism. No socio-economic system is going to improve your social life. Socialism might give you more doors to do that and remove the alienating forces of capitalism, but at the end of the day, the ability of any political or economic system to address this issue is highly limited.

I support socialism so I'll stop getting fucked in the ass by Porky.

lol i'm not and women do generally have different tastes in men than gayfags like me, so take that as you will. That is - and this is from experience being the non-threatening gay friend (read: fashion accessory) on girls nights many, many times - most women don't really like men that much. At least they don't like men just for being men anywhere near as much as men like women just for being women. Guys like Chad McRoid up there get those bodies to impress other guys - at least I hope they're that self-aware - because women IME don't really give a shit. When the girls I used to hang out with picked out "hot guys" based on appearance alone, they'd pretty much all pick guys that (to me at least) looked like women. When there was other information available, appearance didn't even really come into at all except as a bonus. As much as it still feels weird to say it, redpillers and guys like them are mostly right - nothing gets women wet like power, wealth and status or, in the absence of reality, the appearance of power, wealth and status. It's just gauche to point it out. You can take the physically hottest guy you can imagine, but take a picture of him in a McDonald's uniform holding a cheque for minimum wage and most women won't give him a second look. The maybe 1/3 of women who actually enjoy sex might fuck him provided it was no-strings-attached but as far as LTR goes, he's not even in the running.

This is why I can't really get into discussions about what socialism would look like for your average tfw no gf guy. I have no idea what women would actually find compulsively attractive if power was distributed and personal wealth accumulation wasn't possible. Maybe physical appearance would start to really become a factor? Maybe just prestige? Maybe 2/3 would fuck off into women's only communes and the 1/3 third remaining would get all the cock they could possibly desire? Fuck knows. I'd love to be able to give some hope to the grody kissless nerds out there (because you guys are WAY better and more interesting in bed than over-engineered gymrats most of the time), but I really don't know and, if my own experience is anything to go by, neither do most women.

"Sexual market value" is a patriarchal, petit bourgeois account of sexuality, read some psychoanalysis. Self-identified nerds, incels, et al have no place in any emancipatory movement and must be smashed without mercy.

That is all I need. I will take care of the rest.

Beyond psychoanalysis, your post reeks of academic liberalism with post-modern characteristics.

Those doors being closed and alienating capitalist forces or reason why the vast majority of these guys can't find partners.

By speaking about these alienating forces it brings said alienation out of the shadows. When this subject was first broached it was partically unanimously reviled. Now it at least isn't reflexively shouted down

People reflexively hate talking about alienation that des effect them because they still subconsciously compete with proles for resources and opportunities to sell their wage labor.

Be it women, ethnic minorities, indigenous people, homosexuals, handicapping people etc, if the superstructure is changed to address their grievances or even do as little as recognize them as legitimate, it makes other proles mad because they have emotionally internalized the capitalist logic of zero sum gaming.

If emotional soiliarity, even with zero material support behind it, is extended to a group you do not identify, then that leaves less charity for yourself and your struggles.

Leftists especially have a duty to fight this within themselves and within those around them since they have the theoretical insight to see it.

*alienation that does not effect them

That's literally the equivalent to saying "Well if god isn't real, then why has the Bible had such an effect of the world, huh?", and yet you call me the pseud?
>>>/reddit/

if you are going to be a petty turd over your ugly mug maybe this movement isn't for you.

m8 I am ugly myself but I don't make it a big problem. I may not be Brad Stormphallus but I still do decently with people in general. Even about sexual life, it's not a big deal, it's okay to be a virgin, and if you feel tense, try to discharge that tension somewhere else. Most of the time being taught to be polite at a young age is enough; apparently most people forgot about politeness and now there's all these kinds of "discrimination" when all it took back in the day was courtesy.

Tour penis mustn't have enjoyed it: I used to do it too, a blood vessel popped and my skin abraded. Not good at all.

If you refuse freedom, why do you object to being a slave?

You could litterally say this about anything where you are in a better position then others.

I came from a working poor family, I was taught education was important but that debt was bad. I never borrowed to go to school and only completed an AA. I worked hard and started off at an IT help desk and climbed my way up to computer security, back when computer security wasn't a 100th as hot as it is today, but I knew sooner or later it would.

I have tons of savings now, have never been unemployed for more than a month and have no debt.

If I wanted to be an asshole I'd tell anyone struggling to find work or broke that they should have just done what I had done. That they can't complain because my own experience is proof that bootstraps work and that anyone can escape poverty since I am not especially smart or gifted.

But I'm not dumb enough to believe that, I got into computer security when it was still a niche field, I happen to live near a base that was willing to hire anyone with a pulse and train them due to their isolation. My father warned me never to do drugs not because they were bad but because I might not be able to get a security clearance with a possession charge. He was experienced with this since he had held the highest security clearance ther is Top Secret SCI with polygraph and lifestyle.

If anyone of these pieces was missing I wouldn't have escaped the cycle of poverty.

The problem with telling no gf to just improve themselves is two fold.

One they most likely are missing crucial socializing experience, like having a parent that is nurturing, or a home environment that is secure.

And 2 if every no gf guy did I pit would simple raise the baseline of what is expected from men. No gf guys do need to get rid of some inexcusable spooks they have though.

I am virgin myself, I have very few friends and I am in a similar situation. I don't know if I will make it, but regardless, my point is not being yourself, or self-improvement. The point is simply that, as you said, the nogf guys are spooked, and overthinking their problems makes things only more painful. I might be single, but I do not stand to gain anything by gloating about my condition nor blaming others as I will still be alone; therefore the only approach is avoiding seeing is as an issue alltogether by finding other fullfillments (that can't be done about poverty, I know, but it's another issue).

My argument with courtesy and politeness is that reciprocal respect in most social settings alone helps making relations more acceptable for everyone.
I do not believe we can make everyone happy and satisfied, but rather that things can be made bearable through surrogates and other kinds of support, as sad as it sounds.