A strong majority of US millenials are unpartnered

Feminism has been around for fourty years and it's been worse in the second wave. People were blaming feminism for having too much sex, now people are blaming feminism for not enough sex

Maybe

It has something material going on. Like inability to provide, and inability to rely on someone to provide. It's too much of a gamble for most people.

Stop acting like a cry baby

reddit spacing

I'm a mid20s khv

…when was this not the case

How many people who get mad at feminism hated Ed, Ed, and Eddy when they grew up because these privileged fucking girls who fuck all the time were getting misandrist pink belly slaps left and right and not letting them win

You didn't address anything he wrote, instead appealing to the different criticism reactionaries have had in the past

People are material. Complex, but material, and now commodities. If it was 100% non-people material things, Africa would be a land of celibacy.

It has to do with the *expectations* of material wealth *by* sexual selectors. If the sexual selectors are all ok with people that aren't financially independent, they mate, if not they go WTGOW (not MGTOW)

So if economic conditions go South and people can't adjust their expectations, you have something like Japan where you have a bunch of career-women going WGTOW leaving men behind, and as people say in Japan sometimes "it's hard to teach the Japanese a new dance"

This has always been the case.

Do you not know what "material" means. Why are you using the term reactionary

That's both sexes and the same sexes. You can't be in a relationship if you cannot pay bills. This is called "material consequence." Not whatever nonsense I don't have to read to understand what you're saying, you're really not as complex a thinker as you believe you are. If you cannot sustain more than one person, relationships are off the table for everyone. I have a strong suspicion you're the random incel poster, who might also be the baboon poster.

35 is early Millenials, Millenials are around 30
TJ Kirk is a good example

People fuck when they have the resources to afford it constantly. Nobody does one night stands as often as you think they do. Nobody has a special fuck buddy without material resources. Live and learn.

objectively wrong

also objectively wrong
Have you seen the amount of women out there who want no kids? Have you seen the amount of women out there making dough? Using a pill timer correctly + using condom is 99.9999% effective. If poor people having babies was impossible they would have the most babies.

Then the poorest countries would have the least fucking when that's not the case.

I never said they did, I'm not MGTOW

It's fucking obvious why people can't stay in relationships when they can't afford to live away from their parents or travel to meet people.

No it's objectively right. Given most of these people are in college, struggling to get in college, paying bills, having a job, trying to get a job, being in a trade school

Do you honestly wonder why they're fucking less than the baby boomers? What was that nonsense about Africa? What does Afrifca have to do with this? What are you even suggesting? Feminism is the source of all your grief?

You are the incel poster, and the baboon poster. I know the way you post, it's the same person. And it's you.

Except that's wrong you retard because there's less consequences for poverty in impoverished areas. There are more in areas where there is not poverty.

Mind = Fuckin blown. It's the first time you'll be blown too lol.

Why do you keep talking about fucking when OP was about partnerships. People are in less parterships than the greatest generation, not just the boomers.

Wrong, I know that guy too

Boomers were an abnormal trend and it makes sense afterwards there would be a decline even without the economic consequences the youth today face in the United States

flesh that out, that's because of societal expectations, see this guy

Go do what you probably tell women to do, go get dicked down so you can feel better

lol you are the one obssessed about fucking like a Redpill idiot

Let me flesh this out. The price of living in a first world nation where the expectation on the youth is unusually high means less sex. When these expectations are not met, either in poverty or affluence, there is more sex.

Stress turns everyone off. It turns vertebrates off.

What? You're talking about fucking too? What is this?

People are not commodities because people are making the choice not to have sex. Learn basic economics, read Marx

Is there any evidence that people are less horny right now? I'd say it's the opposite.

then if that is true, why are you saying it like it's unavoidable, obviously it isn't because we've had periods of high partnership during incredible societal wealth

That is not what I am saying. Reread my post.

Then re read it again. Keep rereading it for an hour. So you don't post.

That's not at all what user said and you know it. The point is going right over your head

Cool let's fix those dumb expectations

Do you think stress is a social problem

The only social spaces in my city require money to either access or enjoy.

Because rent and other necessities take up most of my wages, I can't afford to attend these spaces with the frequency necessary to meet someone.

Since I have to save money, I usually spend time not working at home, which isn't exactly conducive to meeting people.

The only social space I frequent in which socialization is possible is community college, but that isn't very helpful either, because it's full of working people that take classes in between jobs, so the unstructured time necessary to meet and interact with people is curtailed by people immediately leaving as soon as the period ends instead of lingering on campus.

As for other millennials, it's incredibly difficult to meet people when you're living in your parents' home, particularly because "living with your parents" carries severely negative social connotations, but it also hinders finding a partner because you have no place to bring them home to even if you do meet someone. It's hard to be romantic in that kind of situation.

Unrealistic expectation from men by women is a social problem. Unrealistic expectation on youth (go to school for 20 years and get a super good job in a horrible economy then you can have a relationship) is a toxic unrealistic expectation

See

Also, read

Go do what you probably tell women to do, go get dicked down so you can feel better

ah the old vaginal sex with two people that like each other is sodomy line

God, it's so toxic right. I'm going to tell tumblr about this

Go do what you probably tell women to do, go get dicked down so you can feel better

Unrealistic expectation on youth is also a social problem yes, make your point lol

...

see

And every post in this thread. Finish your GED.

Read this post too.

No wonder you aren't getting laid you're fucking unbearable

You read every other post in this thread too, you aren't making any arguments, you are trying to separate stress with social problems

t. aspiring professional class bourgie

OP here
63% of millenials don't have partners,
one night stands aren't that common

Incedom is extremely common for men depending on the timeframe used to define inceldom

I have, you're repeating yourself and mischaracterizing like, four people telling you that it's stress. Stress is not just a social issue. You cannot fix capitalism by getting rid of "toxic mindsets" you tumblr sounding fuck.

see

And every post in this thread. Finish your GED.
Read this post too.
(You)

Also OP here, that doesn't mean /r/incels had a correct narrative or weren't horrible people

I'm glad you came to #IncelDefenseSquad

social expectations are a thing, why do you keep denying saying they are and then denying it?

"removing stress" isn't a solution because that's the Tumblr answer of therapy culture solving everyhing. "removing causes of the societal causes of the expectations that cause that stress" is something closer to a solution

millenial defense squad

How do you explain the fact that countries that never went through a similar sexual revolution still have these problems? This phenomenon is probably worse in Japan than any other place, but gender roles there are fairly rigid and chastity is expected from Women. It's clearly has more to do with late stage capitalism rather than feminism. Though perhaps both play a role.

Japan never got contraception and career-women and more lenient divorce laws. Sure they aren't a country with self-identified feminists, but almost every first world country got the effects of 1st and 2nd wave feminism

Capitalism plays a role in human expendability yes, but if you look at when the problem started, it amped up just right after the 60s

Japan never got contraception and career-women and more lenient divorce laws?

Add a question mark there

It ramped up when women joined the work force

old gender roles disintegrated as you require both man and women to work to support a family creating additional stress in relationship for everyone who isn't bourgeois (wealthy enough to keep traditional gender roles). Also marriage is a financial contract, which becomes increasingly unattractive with stagnant wages and the prospect of divorce around the corner

There is actual evidence that people in many poor countries actually fuck less often. Don't confuse birth rate with the frequency of intercourse.

Nobody said you remove stress you fucking idiot. The fact is the stress among people in that age group is non stop so they are less likely to fuck

Don’t ever call me tumblr when your argument amounts to what you said it was

“This is like uh, so toxic for men, liiike uggh”

Traditional gender roles don’t matter to sex and they aren’t why the current generation is struggling in America

Go

Back

You can’t even spell right.

That is norm for humanity for literally hundreds of thousands of years.

t. NSA perv

What nonsense. People don't need porn to masturbate.

We lack the time and space for meeting people. When you consider how much work time people have today compared with back then, it doesn't look much different. However, commuting has increased. It used to be much more common that people who work at the same place also tend to live very close to each other.

I hope it's because we realize none of us deserve anyone.

by that logic no one deserves health care because it's not a right etched into stone

there are no fundamental right, only social consensus

That is actually not what he's saying at all.

If you want to die where thousands of millions before you were celibate that's your own fault.

there's more evidence it's just a reflection of social mores

tribes in Botswana have 75% of youth engaging in frequent premarital sex, and other tribes are in single digits
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7973840

what? lol

Health care is a right, sex is not.

5. relationships are actually undesirable, imposing and unnecessary. people only want them because they're still shown as desirable, or because they are lacking in other more desirable and necessary (non-romantic) relationships.

like I said, nothing is a fundamental right

All decisions about rights are made by societal consensus and/or government

E.g. housing atm is not a right, but it should be

Get fucking lost nerd

that's your argument dude, what makes housing and relationships mutually exclusive?

houses are socdem relationships are neoliberal

"shut up nerd"
says a guy who looks like this at best

tbh obsession with white picket fence isolated houses are pretty damn neoliberal
relationships are the opposite of individualism

Well, for one, housing keeps you warm, it gives you a place to sleep. It's

Housing. Housing. /ˈhouziNG/. Noun.

The other is a relationship reliant on trust and resources.

Imagine thinking the problem with material inequality is more survival in first world countries than social inequality

imagine not being populist

lol I'm a chick but it do be like that though

The fuck do you think housing means Suburban living

Did you know apartments are considered housing.

: O

DON'T LISTEN TO HER, HOUSING ISN'T PART OF SOCIALISM, IT'S ABOUT FREE GFS

ok all women are lower in social status than nerds… soo…. what's the point of pretending you are higher in social status?

...

he thinks he's both a woman and a soviet LARPer

Where did I say that. Oh was it when I called someone a nerd for saying "you have as much of a right to a house as a wife"

Because that can go either way bud, I don't think you're ready for that. Ergo, calling you a dork. A nerd. A pretend sophisticated person who does not think things through, says stupid shit to appear profound like "What's the difference between housing and girlfriends?" "What's the deal with airplane food?"

to be honest though he is right, the problem with inequality, fundamentally is social inequality, this is something Democrats don't understand

No, the problem is liberals who think collectively owned relationships will function like "I GET TO CHOOSE THE HOT ONE :>>>>" that will not work out that way

lol

Shit meant to spoiler that. Oh well.

romantic relationships are narcissism.
we have comrades, not spouses.

a right to housing is good
a right to a relationship is bad

Yup. No surprise there.

Oh, and those weird fucking incel groups.

I used to consider myself an incel until I realised the issue was my fucking anxiety and nothing else, so I worked on my confidence and lo and behold; had sex within a few weeks of University.

Seriously, those groups fucking spread propaganda across social media to the effect of; "women only date [insert specific physical trait here] men", and vulnerable self conscious young people (usually males) believe them.

I've been "working on my anxiety" for over a decde, been to countless therapy session and over a dozen psych drugs

it's not helping my confidence

Just being sexually validated ONCE would send my confidence through the roof

psychiatry has destroyed me, my nervous system is fucked and hypersenstive from all the drugging, Im in benzo withdrawal and can hardly function

Do you socialise at all? Have you in the past?

in the past yes,
but during the last decade only in IRL political activism

hopefully this becomes a global trend, so the population can start to diminish

here's my refining of the points spit-balled here:
1. yes, absolutely.
2. people are neurotic because they think more. they think more because, more and more, sociality is mediated by one-way interactions through social and non-social media, and people have to make meaning themselves between the superstructure and their own lives. on one hand, people's realities differentiate from each other in less communicatable ways, so that they find it harder to work things out. on the other hand, they learn to respect themselves more as individuals. on the third hand, maybe when people do find a way to work things out, their unity is stronger in an absurd world, leading to a pareto-style distribution in relationship strength.
3. porn is also a one-way communication, especially abstracted through conscious performance. sex is also performance though, or ritual and imitation interrupted by ironic response, or something.
4. appropriate. i only think that the "unrealistic standards" line has to be examined as a cliche having already gone through the weathering machine of the superstructure. people who engage with the media should already expect that relationships don't have to be perfect to work out, and that any standard of perfection is just a symbol. maybe the desire for a standard, rather than a standard, is what the media is passing to these millenial singles. we should also think about how this applies with an increasingly schizoid media, the mainstream, the counter-mainstream, and the social.

I only ask because I don't know how bad things are for you, but for me I'd spent about two years basically silent everywhere but at home. Totally friendless and hopeless.

Where does one even socialize? I can't drink because of the psych med I'm on. My workplace is all dudes in their 60s. Meetup groups are all people in their 40s

What is your anxiety centred around? If it's everything (which is was for me), does it extend to the social sphere too?

I don't know your situation or whatever, and I'm not some "sort yourself out" Peterson type loser, but I'll just say that for me the only way I managed to overcome it was with a radical restructuring of my thought patterns and gradual exposure to perceived threats.

Similar experience here user.

Yeah, that's kind of shit, but have you thought about joining clubs or going on some kind of adult education course? Those are places to meet people.

The prospect of State issued gfs are why I'm a communist

Even bars/nightclubs aren't much of a place to socialize. Everyone is already in their preestablished cliques.

Yeah pretty much. I don't get why people say you should meet girls at clubs or concerts. The music's too fucking loud to talk to anyone and they're usually there with friends and huddled in circles.

I sometimes just join in anyway, offer to buy a round and get chatting. I love meeting new people.

Capitalism commodifies, like everything, people and in turn sexual behavior.

Read Infinite Jest

Then they all order Johnny Blue or some shit.

60 years ago, the ideia that one must get married sooner rather than later was very widely spread. For a lot of young adults back then, marriage at a young age was a natural "life-progressing" step. In addition, it was a freeing way of escaping the harsh authority of their parents and of having sex liberally.

So older generations were all keen on getting married (or simply settling down). Many did, and many are still today, hence their lower rates of singledom. The younger generations, felt no pressure to do so, hence the higher rates of singledom.

It´s really difficult to take strong conclusions from just one chart, but from the way you pose the question, you seem to assume that people are single because of capitalism therefore capitalism is bad. And then you ask "in which of these ways do you guys think capitalism has ruined relationships."
Is it a bad thing that more people are single? You haven´t proven that.

On the feminism point, why can´t you see pols point of view? I´m not advocating for less women rights, but one could see the logic as to why that would generate more "stable" relationships. Maybe stable relationships are not so great after all!

This what you get when you liberate women and tear down the patriarchy. Society haremizes.

Less people get married because it's a lot harder to support a family on a young person's salary, especially if you go to college. Buying a house and car in America almost always requires you to go into debt, along with paying back a student loan with high interest rates for at least a few years. If you want to get married and have kids, both parents would inevitably have to work and choose their job in order to both pay off their debts and support their children.

Not everybody goes to college though. You can always do trade

Yes of course if everyone would just get trades the inherent contradictions of capitalism would be solved.

This is very much true. In my country, the sport "korfbal" was strongly connected to the socialist movement and the labour party. Working class youth could meet partners through korfbal. I'd like to see a revival of this (not necessarily korfbal as I don't like the sport). A socialist party which is linked to a socialist union and organizes its own sports events.

Not at all, but it's an option if you're concerned about student debt. I'm an electrician.

Hey that's great for you, but that doesn't make "you can always do trade" any less of an idiotically easy answer to a complex problem.

Birth control was legalized till the 90s but sbortions were allowed and condoms prevailed

Is this something leftists should worry and try to fix though? Been thinking about this. On the one hand I do not want what my parents had, the nuclear family is terribly dysfunctional, no matter how much trads whine about it its desaparition I think overall is for the better… on the other, it is clear we have nothing to replace it with… this is one of these "the old hasn't died yet the new struggles to be born" scenarios (this is the time of incels)

Regardless of if there are harems here are there, if you actually look at the stats, there's a similar and very high number of celibate women that is the same as men

So basically you have a bunch of spinsters who don't want to fuck average guys so they stay spinsters.

Im convinced we are going through a WGTOW phase

women are going their own way

These soon to br spinsters are hoping from chad to chad while all non chads are not having any sex whatsoever. 80/20 rule? More like 90/10.

End the sexual free market reinstate sexual socialism now! Say it loud, say it proud, ONE MAN, ONE WIFE.

The one night stand statistics suggest that no one except a tiny sliver of the popultion is cock hopping or pussy hopping, we just aren't like that as a society yet

A tiny sliver of men are fucking the majority of the women, friendo.

We were encouraged not necesarilly by our families but the popular culture around us to be unaffectionate and think of it as an appropriate way to go about things. There is also all this social justicing going on that is probably even worse now where children are taught winking at someone is a form of sexual harassment. All this impedance on natural sexual interaction is taking a toll on people and it shows. Let men cat call and grope and if the women don't appreciate it let them be slapped or kicked in the balls but don't let it go farther than that and don't involve the state.
Literally both genders are on a gtow trend perhaps driven by the moniker of "freedumb". Even women are starting to look more hunchbacked from being on computers all time and when you go outside you can see them treading about heedlessly perhaps from some notion impressed on them at school during some private all girl meetings and from the general media about female empowerment which gets out of hand and ends up bringing us to the situation we're in now.

20% of men are basically incel in the US according to statistics (probably higher for millenials), that's not the majority but it's still high, so that means women are fucking 80% of the men

"No"

That's not the way it works. 90% of the women are sharing 10% of the men. Society is haremized. There is an elite of men constantly getting laid, a majority of men getting laid super rarely (less than twice a year) and a significant chunk of men completely out of the game. The sexual free market cannot stand.

Once again, Torah BTFOs conventional leftism:
youtu.be/SlTDEJFTFZQ?t=2m45s

Since we, as radical leftists, are obligated to set the moral example for "the masses", and since we feel the need to dedicate every aspect of our lives towards the socialist revolution, we ought to take a note from Yidn in regards to love and relationships. Sex, love, etc. aren't about emotion or desire, but about fulfilling the communist end-goal. We don't want to match up with people just for a quick orgasm, but out of shared values and aspirations.

This is why I propose every communist party, anarchist collective, etc. ought to have a shadchan who arranges relationships between comrades (note: "arranged" does not imply "coerced"). I'm not being ironic, I'm being dead serious.

Post khazar milkers plz

This and the "state issued gf" meme are what troubles me. It is clear leftist and right wing solutions are equally appalling (and dysgenic)

Want a gf that badly? You can always sort yourself out

1. Tznius.

2. My tits are rather small, lime-shaped in case you need a visual description. Either way, I would never post my body for a bunch of porn-sick crakcer goyishe brocialists to fawn over.

*Yawnnnn*

Why should I date or "partner" myself to the average western slut who fucked several basketball teams worth of niggers throughout college? If I'm going to "partner" myself with anyone it's going to be a lithe 18 year old Philippino mail order bride who knows how to cook. Feminists made their bed I hope their cats consume their disgusting menopausal bodies.

You got a citation for that

(you, a neoliberal) one man one wife
(me, a god how can you kill a god what a grand and intoxicating innocence) no men, no wives, ashblight for everyone.

people wanting a gf is something the state should solve, but they should solve it by removing that desire by any means available, be they social, cultural, technological or metallurgical. (the ol' guillotine)

I am a wizard fam, what does that say about me, according to you?

Still I would never demand the State coerce someone into marrying me, how full of resentment do you have to be to demand big nanny state to fix your fuckups in life at gunpoint? That's a slippery slope to gulags and nazi book burnings.

Pick one and only one

Or maybe just, you know, realize wanting things you cannot attain is part of the human condition and moving on?

Statists gotta state huh?

some EU states like the netherlands subsidize prostitutes for disabled men and women no one wants to fuck (aka incels)

so dont act like this is unheard of in the current year

I was bitter, now I've just transcended lmao

it is easier for a rich man to enter the kingdom of god then it is for a non-virgin to.

other people will never realise (1) that and (2) their desire itself is the problem, not the inability to meet that desire, so some spooks have got to crack their skulls open so that the spook desires within that skull can escape back to the aether from whence they came.

the market will never deliver that and only the state has the power to legislate it. (or the church, but that's part of the kingdom of god, and they're not doing so good since the war with the hatmakers.)

You're not fooling anyone breh. But vehemently defending the status quo which is working against your interests is especially pathetic. The patriarchy is needed so badly in our societies we import it from the middle east just so we can stay afloat and solvent. Ergo, the patriarchy and sexual socialism is coming back whether you like it or not. The sexual free market is literally destroying society.

Good. All is chaos under heaven, the situation is excellent.

Again, "arranged" =/= coerced. The Party pairing you up with someone doesn't mean you two are tied together for life; one partner can always say no.

you defend the status quo by upholding the structure of relationships as a whole instead of demanding abolition, you are a liberal, and a neoliberal at that. you seek to elevate everyone up the pyramid rather than blow the whole thing off the face of the planet.

As a socialist, your priority concerning love, relationships, and reproduction of children should be the fulfillment of communism, not your own emotional satisfaction. Emotional satisfaction is a biproduct of you and your partner sharing similar values and goals, not the other way around.

Ummmmm noooo lol

Distinction without a difference tbh

um yes sweaty x

Damn Chaya that's pretty cold. Remember Jesus still loves you and despite your previous experiences there's still a guy out there who'll be good for you.

How's that cold. Those are very similar to my thoughts as someone who may well never fuck again. I'm socially fucked. I would be miserable in a communist society. Communism isn't a magical society that will solve all of my social problems. I don't support it because it makes me happy or gives me hope.

On what basis would a principled revolutionary forfeit long-term goals for short-term, bourgeois-constructed pleasures?

you have a right to a relationship with a doctor
some people have a right to a relationship with state subsidized prostitutes
you have the right to a relationship with a parent in many modern countries
you have the right to a relationship with your cell mate when you break the law
you have the right to a lot of relationships

You have an option, not a right, to other human beings emotional and physical labor.

At the rate you're going Chaya, you'll end up like that female Japanese Maoist that killed her male comrades for looking at the females on their group the wrong way. And that's pretty hot

noooo, you don't have an option, when you are sent to a hospital in many countries, the doctor is obligated to provide the emotional and physical labor required

same with parents and other relationships

Forgot link

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Red_Army

I've no problem with that at all. Maybe in a generation or two the left will have a more coherent message…

Yes, you do have an option. Go back through sex ed and learn the difference.

Inb4 you tell me sex ed is anti-incel propaganda

Hopefully by then the left won't exist.

Americans are usually red liberals though.

nigga what are you smoking?!

It's not about pleasure. Let me put it this way: what happens if your kid(s) don't want to be communist? Are you going to disown them, kick them out of the house, or murder them just because they chose differently?

what? My point is there's many *relationships* in the social contract and government that require emotional and physical labor from one or both people in said relationship

implicit contextually was the right to a romantic relationship.

based maoists

you have a right to healthcare, the doctors action is an implicit contingent as opposed to a direct relationship, i.e. you have no right to a doctor even if a doctor is implicitly required by merit of the right to healthcare, and it is via redress to the right of healthcare that one should be drawn instead of focusing on the intervening functionary.

why would you have kids

Personally I just consider them 'might as well be right wingers' since at best they help the right wings pr and at worst they openly sabotage the left.

...

Wait. So.. Im not sure I am understanding your position.

(I agree with this for cases that do not warrant the care of a doctor)

Oh I think I understand you. You have the right to healthcare but the right to see a doctor is not something that can be guaranteed, you have the right to see whoever is on staff at the time, if your illness warrants it, because:
1) there are a limited amount of doctors and if everyone is granted the undeniable right to a doctor at the same time there would be huge shortage problems
2) There may come times where doctors refuse a to work because of greed or work slowdowns, we can send him to the gulags but you can not quite force someone to perform surgery he could simply say 'shoot me I wont do it'

t.anarkid

You do the best you can as a parent and community member. Of course, you resort to hyperbole (i.e. "murder them") because you're reluctant to take in what I'm trying to convey.

What would you do if your children decided they no longer want to be Xtian and decide to become Hindu? What if your kids decide Yeshu and Paul were assholes and toss out their teachings in favour of a completely different epistemology?

The right wing will always slander the left no matter how "centrist" it is. Anarchists got a taste of this with the whole "nun rape" meme that reactionaries still peddle to this day. Once America turns on R*java completely you will start to hear all kinds of bullshit about them too. Mark my words.

a prostitute isn't a gf so i'm not entirely sure where we're going with this. you don't get romantic with a prostitute.
furthermore the primary labour performed by doctors is mechanical or analytical, not emotional. state assigned emotional labour is a dubious concept with the closest reasonable analogy being a therapist, and even then we don't expect therapists to go to the extent of fucking people.

it's an insane and sick society that artificially forces pseudoromantic social relationships on people rather than questioning the root necessity of those relationships at all. (i.e. abolishing the constant advertising for and advocation of an outmoded form of romantic relationship to sell cans of soda and unappealing aroma in a compressed can.) it's an utterly insane society that considers resorting to such a functionary approach and then demands state issued pseudoromantic partners before friends, a much more necessary component of social wellbeing.
but then this is an insane and sick society that has long abandoned the idea of using the powers available to it to build a better world, or to believe that humanity can be improved. much better to just meet present desires as though they were innate, than to look at the real process of formation and control and to improve it. muh Isaiah Berlin.

in practical terms essentially that, but there's also a sort of philosophical root where things may change with technology - i.e. where once you may have required a doctor due to sickness, you now only require a prescription, making the right the core need - i.e. restoration of health - instead of the contingent, i.e. a doctor, means that when technology changes the right itself doesn't have to be altered. it also avoids requiring the action of anyone else in the wording of the right itself - i.e. the right to healthcare can be met by a robot in some hypothetical scenarios or future, but the right to a doctor requires an overt imposition on a human being. (linguistic argument over a "robot doctor" aside.) instead of just the general provision of a service.

I wouldn't be able to stop them lmao. That's the point with Christianity, everyone has free will. Coercion doesn't work and doesn't make sense. The way you put it it was like you wanted to train antifa super soldiers from birth and I just wanted to question whether your commitment to the cause outweighed love for your own blood.

...

...

...

Except your children will ultimately be brought up with *someone's* values. No one is truly raised in a "neutral" fashion; you are born into a certain context and socialized as such.

I take it you are Amerikan and Protestant at that, which I can tell given your lax "muh belief" attitude. Xtianity in other parts of the world is not understood in this manner at all, children are still very immersed in Xtian religious rituals. Unless you're going to defend the idea that "true Xtianity" started only with Kierkegård and Tolstoy - and every Xtian theologian prior to them was entirely wrong - don't even bother trying to make your case.

Once again, you're picking the most absurd example possible in order to make me look like I don't know what I'm talking about.

Also, I take it you would try to raise your children so that they *don't* turn into fascists, neocons, apologists for capitalism, and so on, right? See what I mean?

Says you.

I didn't say I wouldn't try to raise them Christian; just that if they chose not to accept it I would not be able to do anything about it. But I wouldn't put "The Cause" above everything.

Ritual is just that - ritual. I knew an alter boy going to an Orthodox church, far more stricter and ritualized than my (as you rightly assumed) protestant background. However he was a fascist who was open about wanting to sleep around with girls and harbored many other anti-Christian attitudes. Just because someone has been brought up in the faith and participates in ritual doesn't mean they take it any more seriously than an atheist would. I really don't care about Kierkegaard, who was a monarchist, and Tolstoy, who was a heretic.

At least I hope I won't. I don't know how to do anything other than work. I'm mostly a socialist because it's seems like a good way to make fewer people like me.

Says the prostitute. She's not there to be your friend moron, they hate that shit.

I've never read a post that meant less than this post has.

If you're not willing to put your principles above everything else, then your dedication should be questioned.

Ritual has an impact on the mind and worldview. In Judaism, every single one of our rituals has exoteric and esoteric meanings. There is no "saved by grace alone" in Judaism; in fact, trying to paint a dichotomy of faith vs. works is completely unheard of (not to mention pointless: your emunah is what inspires your mitzvot and your mitzvot inspires emunah).

This still doesn't make the passivity of Xtian theology correct, or beneficial for that matter.

Doesn't stop a niqqah from trying. We all get lonely.

Ok so you would disown your son/daughter/etc. if they stray and refuse to be good little communists? Like I said Chaya, cold.

yeah and i'm a god there's no escape

If they leave, they leave. The point is to do *your* best as a parent, self-criticize when necessary, etc. Once again, you are presenting the most extreme example possible in an attempt to disregard my point concerning responsibility.

Do realize that, in the case of religious Jews like myself, our communities are strongly close-knit. We don't have the bourgeois nuclear family model where the children are entirely dependent on their parents, but an "extended" or community-family model whereby children and their upbringing is influenced almost as much by others in the community as they are by their parents. So why can't comrades essentially do the same? Why are comrades unable to live in the same neighborhood, independently educate their children together, etc.?

leftists should focus more on combatting loneliness, which is one of the most powerful weapons of the system. It encourages people to act as rational utility maximising units and prevents opposition from forming. Holla Forumslacks and the Far Right are notoriously lonely and afraid. I'm not talking about state mandated gfs, but promoting social interaction amongst young people will lead to lots of relationships eventually. What's more important is giving people a chance to make friends.

They want you to leave

we do need to transcend the model of atomised liberalism, communism won't be brought about by atomised individualists.

And I want to stay for the HOUR I fucking booked, I don't give a fucking shit If I'm making them uncomfotable. Sometimes I deliberalety withold my cum just so I can't rant on about women and the dating scene. I derive joy from their discomfort.

Be polite and go.

hahahaha what the fuck do you think you are, Pinhead? Get the fuck out of here

Which is why I'm sympathetic to the Third Worldist argument, not so much Roo's geographist approach but a more culturist one. Amerikans, in particular, have zero sense of commitment to others. Every leftist circle - be it ML, anarchist, Trot, Maoist, "queer subculture", succdem - is a complete toiletbowl of ego clashes.

To be honest, I'd rather live in Kiryas Tosh than live with members of my local RCP for this reason.

And this is the part where the pimp/madam kneecaps you for scaring them off and ruining everything, and possibly getting the police involved by prostitutes who don't want to fuck with you anymore because you freak them out and think you're one of those people.

Something's not adding up here.

Every aspect of our society is designed to drive people apart

You best believe I'm one of "those" people motherfucker. A woman is my property for an hour if I pay for their body for an hour, it's not rocket science. I give them an extra £50 to spit on them too.

They want you gone because you're acting like a fucking murderer or abuser going for an easy target.

Like I said, this is the part where the pimp/madam kneecaps you or shoots you for scaring them off and ruining everything

an hour is used in the metaphorical sense rather than the chronological sense, if you bore the prostitute so much that 5 minutes feels like an hour then that's your hour up.

Why should I value a literal whore's life? The whore herself sure doesn't, she's already a murderer of potential babies through her abortions. Vis a vis.

Gee. All this violence, maybe forcing people to stay together so suddenly isn't such a very good idea

That's disgusting

Is it because they're first worldists, or because they're leftists?

Yes, it seems as if only the truly righteous can rise above the bullshit.

Prostitution is paid rape. Johns literally deserve the wall.

And then the whore and the pimp go to prison where they can rot with the other lowlife scum.

If I wanted to be jester and entertain some cunt then I'd go on a fucking date, I'm expecting the whore to entertain ME.

Why should I value your feelings when you act like a pig, and demand respect from everyone, then make it a socialist issue. It's a triumverant of ways nobody will ever respect you.

So you've hit rock bottom and want to abuse women in poverty.

Congratulations, you deserve everything you have been getting.

Nobody knows or cares about you enough to file a report, you've said yourself everyone hates you.

True responsibility is looking out for them regardless of their political views, not just writing them off once they no longer fulfill a purpose for "The Cause".

And the reason Communists can't make close knit communities is due to A) Lack of communists B) Lack of capital needed to make it work. Maybe C) Laziness as well due to all the radical small-scale anarchist commune and projects that have failed.

Well as long as the current pecking order exists then I shall exploit it by going after people lower than me. Leftism is dead, it's now a bastardized brand for profit.

But you don't do that, because everyone despises you because you either got some personality disorder, or, you have autism. Whatever happened, maybe the empathy that makes humanity so special left you when women slapped your skeletal head so hard it gave you whiplash too many times.

I'm a different person you mug.

The pecking order exists for you because you're a piece of shit lol

Might as well be the same

...

I'm actually at work as a concierge.

...

...

No one is talking about "writing them off". I'm talking about what happens before the kids get to the point where such a thing would occur. YOU are responsible for the reproduction of ideology, YOU have to do your part in ensuring the next generation shares your values as much as possible.

And yes, shared values should determine who wins your love. You wouldn't give your mind, body, and soul to a fascist or neocon, would you? "Neither Jew nor Greek" only gets you so far…

Prostitutes are some of the most class aware people I've ever met in my life. They're more aware than most people who still post here and haven't left

Most people who are incel probably deserve it.

They're just retards who need to pay off debt.

And what are you to them? Nothing much either.

You can lie about it however you like, though, I expect it. Tell me how successful you are

You don't need many people to make a "community".

Pooling resources solves this. Most frum Jews are not rich yet we ensure that the bulk of the money and resources we have goes directly to building shuls, schools, kosher fooderies, etc.

Which is a huge cultural problem, and furthers my case that Amerikan "comrades" are uncommitted.

Communism is just a hobby for you. If it was something you had truly dedicated your life to, you'd take heed of Chaya's advice and rear your children according to egalitarian principles. When I have children, I'm going to enroll them into an Islamic school, teach them to observe as-salaat, or the five daily prayers, and the first name they shall learn will be that of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). They will also learn of the egalitarian trends in Sufism and in Islam in general. If they choose to commit apostasy, abandon Islam and turn away from almighty Allah (SWT), I won't financially support them. This is why secular ideologies like Marxism will ultimately fail unless they root themselves in theology.

Prophet Isa (PBUH) was not God, nor was he the son of God, but was a messenger of Allah (SWT). We Muslims and Jews do not recognize Prophet Isa as God because that would be shirk, or idolatry. God is not a man, and God is not divisible. He doesn't need to sacrifice His "son" to save humanity from an "original sin" that he had originally implanted in man. We are born innocent, but the fleshly and material world propels us towards sin.

You are not a Christian. Christianity is not a nihilistic doctrine. At the core of all the Abrahamic religions is submission to the one and only God of Abraham, and the God of Abraham is not always loving or forgiving, especially of idol worship.

"You shall have no other gods before Me.
You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything."

How sorely I envy being the 1% spreading 99% of sexually transmitted diseases.

That's a failure of medical science and local and state government unable to fund what Cuba has been able to research for quite a while now.

Stop with this individualism nonsense and fun nonsense.

Meanwhile Cuba and DPRK have no such problem with alienated single people. Really makes one ponder.

I never said I was a communist. I think it's pretty impossible to be a marxist and christian at the same time without severely compromising the latter in favor of the former. I just use the flag since it's the closest ideologically to where I would be compared to everything else.

I find it funny that you check every stereotype of Muslims in my head.

Submission > Love check

Apostasy being severely punished by parents check

Emphasis on rituals like five daily prayers check

Some nonsensical argument about worshiping Jesus actually being idolatry check

This dichotomy is non-existent in Judaism. You submit to HaShem because you LOVE HaShem and vice-versa, you love Him because you submit. Which was my point all along: love is not the end-all-be-all, rather love is just one component of the greater whole; this also applies to human relationships, my entire reason for posting in this cesspool of a thread.

You have yet to demonstrate the problems of rituals and works being central to a religious system. The mere fact that you, again, propose that works and faith are somehow opposed shows your lack of understanding of any religious system outside of Amerikan Protestantism.

Nobody in the Soviet Union loved, and submission in bed is bad unless you're a man, because that's gay hahaha you're not gay right. Insightful theory from what I can only assume is a midwest protestant, or someone just as fucking awful.

Prayers aren't good works Chaya. C'mon. I am not proposing that works and faith are opposed. I merely want to point out that the emphasis on specifically five prayers is ridiculous. How is that number arrived at? Why is six too many? Why is four too few? There is literally z e r o reason for it.

Stopped reading there. .

I'm not Sunni Muslim so I can't answer that. Shias pray three times a day, identical to how us Jews do.

Can you not tell sarcasm aimed at you. Jesus you are stupid

Please quote where I said that people in the USSR did not love. Please quote where I made any reference to submission being related to sex. Being sarcastic only works if you understand what the conversation is about and are responding to a point.

The reason is fucking obvious, and it's that it costs money to engage in dating and courtship. You are expected to invest in yourself to be presentable and in things to do with a partner. When people are strapped for cash, they are less able to buy nice clothes or dinner or whatever. And because of America's bootstraps mentality, people see it as a temporary phase that they'll get past. They think that at some point they'll be in a better position and be more attractive to potential partners.

That's the materialist analysis - relationships like everything else in capitalism cost money.

If you really wanted to be a Marxist or a Communist and be a Christian, you'd be a Gnostic. Prophet Isa (PBUH) did emphasize egalitarian and communalistic principles, but they had their roots in Jewish messianism. Prophet Isa (PBUH) also said to follow the law, and the law prohibits idolatry. It was Paul who said that the law was null. We emphsize observing the prayers and the like because religion is a lived practice for us. Christianity, or your perversion of it, is nothing more than a fluffy pastime for you.

We pray five times a day because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was instructed to pray fifty times a day by Allah (SWT) during the night journey, but negotiated with Him until it was lowered to five times a day, since praying fifty times a day would be an unattainable model for most. Shi'ites also pray three times a day. There are numerological reasons for the number five, as it signifies the Five Pillars of Islam (Shahadah, Salah, Sawm, Zakat and Hajj).

Still ridiculous. Elijah for instance prayed much more than three times a day.

lmao away from me Satan

Too bad Muhammad never bothered to question why 50 times specifically was so special to Allah. The answer probably would have been hilarious.

Well shit, it didn't take long for this thread to decay into reactionary religious motherfuckery. Where are the fucking mods?

Are you implying that reactionaries believe in arranged marriage? Myself, personally, am a NutSac/fascist and, while women should have sway over sexual partners they choose, there should definitely be repercussions from the state as a result.

For example, if you give tax incentives for people to get married and have children, but they only get those tax incentives if they are together, they will have an incentive to get together and stay together. There does still need to be some freedom within the reproductive marketplace for prime partner selection, but we can marginally affect these outcomes by incentivizing people with high intelligence, no criminal record, and other possible characteristics, and make their reproductive incentives even higher so that future generations are of a genetically better stock, much like the harsh winters Europeans and Northeast Asians were exposed to that killed off anyone with a time preference that was too high and unable to plan around harsh winters, which also affected the intelligence of that population.

*natsoc*

WATCH, IN JUST 5 DAYS, THIS MAN HAS ALIENATED ALL WOMEN AND HIS CHANCE AT PERVERSE, DIFFICULT CHILDHOOD INSPIRED IDEOLOGY

EXPERTS BAFFLED

but religion is better than sex

there's something hilarious about fascists, who really ought to be spooked mystic types, falling into neoliberal marginalist thinking.

that's what hitler said, you know, he said "the marginal utility of a pure aryan race is greatest, leading to a potential 0.5% increase in quarterly GDP growth using a standard AS/AD model with adaptive microfoundations."

Okay, blue-hair, keep telling yourself that. I'll be over here making white children with my 3D waifu.

Whats the meme here of the “nuclear family is destroying society”. The nuclear family has existed since 14th century England and more generally north western europe since the medieval period. It is a HIGHLY flexible instution and to assume theres a universal form of nuclear fsmoloes is preposterous. Instead of falling for these tired cliches we need to think outside the box.

i honestly will. Nobody is stupid enough to hand over their medical rights to a bunch of mentally ill perpetually virgin neets who screech about how they demand "ONLY THE FINEST GENETICALLY PURE PUSSY TO IMPREGNATE"

Most people are going to look at you as if you were the tranny you're accusing me of being

There goes enough of a chunk of your voting population

As a former catholic I can tell you this is absolutely false. I'll take pleasure over delusion any day.

delusion is pleasure

There's a difference between arranged marriage and coerced marriage.

Again, nothing wrong with the Party having its own designated matchmaker to hook up comrades to ensure the reproduction of communism.

The nuclear family is a meme that was created to sell more houses instead of having people live in larger family groups as people have done since feudalism.

What do you even mean? As many disagreements as I may have with the Hitler Administration, I really don't know if Hitler said that to such a specific number.

...

seize the means of reproduction

I think I'm much more level headed and reasonable to the public eye in making my case than an anti-tranny like yourself, who is more than likely isolated in a very small urban community of rootless cosmopolitans.

Mhm

Seize the means of production to secure the existence of our people! NAZBOL!

Now before you die Chad
Freak out
It's happening bro

It doesn't matter who you are. It matters who you represent want to take away their medical rights. Outlook grim.

Dude, you're using skinheads. The epitome of prison cultured white trash. They go in the oven right after you.

Most of you look like you sleep on totinos pizza rolls

"you aren't eligible for a relationship just by being human, you have to swim accross the gator infested lake in front of my Disney castle to reach me in my high tower, cuz that's how I learned relationships are so supposed to be" "only after that are you considered ELIGBLE"

Oh sorry my mistake, they'll definitely know the difference between you…and well

this is the new way for social liberals to hate blue collar workers

What medical rights does tax incentives to keep couples together create? This is something the first comment on here accused me of, and still hasn't actually been rationalized as any sort of fact.

You aren't eligible to win someone's heart just by existing. This is correct. I'm sorry that life is socially difficult.

okay mate here's the deal, just by merit of being human i'm entitled to a relationship, and i pika-choose you. give me your address, me and my collection of pointy objects are moving in.

So why the fuck are you attached to this woman as man's judge narrative? And no women don't need to pursue men like men need to pursue women in your mindset.

Those civnats go in the oven as well. It isn't lost on me that the bottom 20% needs to be gassed or face the Day of the Rope. Those degenerates tend to be social liberals.

Reproductive rights? This "state mandated girlfriend" shit is actually a fantastic way to explode sexually transmitted diseases

But you didn't think of that while everyone else sane has. You're desperate, I know. But you have to see how insane you are.

you completely missed the gendered aspect of it. The fact of life is that women don't need to do jack shit and you know it.

Sex is highly overrated you must have not had genuine religious faith at all. Religious righteousness purpose and zeal is a fabtastic feeling

And likewise, you vice versa? There is nothing material to your needs.

Home. Healthcare. Shelter. Food. Motivation.

These are all you are entitled.

You will be too.

You still have to find your waifu, she still has to consent to having children with you. You do understand that, right?

Listen to yourself, you sound like tumblr

you literally just defended a princess narrative
don't pretend like you aren't attached to the woman as man's judge narrative, where the man needs to swim shark infested lakes and the woman lies down

to

No I actually didn't. I said women don't have to date you, and men don't have to date women. Simple as can be. Don't make it too complicated now.

i like the narrative where the man goes to the moon and he doesn't say anything about women at all because he's in a big rocket doing a cool thing.
anyway give me your address.

Yeah, you're swimming through a shark infested lake, ok lol

My 135 Autism Level and lack of a criminal record highly doubts that.

no you responded to a princess narrative saying that yea tough shit that's how things should be

I'm done responding to your autism

yeah well my dad could beat up your dad

We both know you have autism
So do most of these people

By the way that guy looks like the fucking doofus goblin men I've been posting

no guys are so now we have 63% of millenial women as pathetic spinsters, they are waiting for their prince, but men aren't down for that shit, so their WGTOW women-going-their-own-way stuff is dragging everyone down

That's not a princess narrative. That was life for a majority of the time of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and it is not ending next year because you're sexually frustrated and going through your mid life crisis early

Do you know who /r9k/ are, as well?

Pathetic spinsters

Imagine being this fatalist on a left forum

And im telling you that is wrong and historically illiterate. To repeat, the generation household (aka niclear family) were the norm in england, northern france netherlands and parts of german speaking lands for a millennium at least. It is a historic pattern as much as it is a recent one. The only reason is became pervasive is because anglos took over the world abd the nuclear family is the unit of anglo family organization as opposed, say, to the celtic peoples in the scottish highlands and ireland who indeed lived in multigenerational clans as you conceive so-called “feudal” (an extremely vague and imprecise word thst somehow describes a huge variegated geography over a thousand tears) used to live.

women are the sexual selectors, men follow where women are at, if women go WGTOW because they want to earn a bunch of money and then complain there are "no good men left" after they have more degrees and money, that's their problem

No lol

No lmao

Two generation household* aka nuclear family

/r/redpill is for sexual fatalism
go there

Both people are sexual selectors to all but the most desperate spinsters /r9k/ can spit up

At least we can have a laugh at that.

You're on Holla Forums, don't pretend you don't have that tism as well.

Ok. Sexual reproduction usually involves what people say, material resources, cost-benefit analaysis, and right now people in this age group don't have that

Less sex happens.

There is no Woman Conspiracy you absolute desperate retard

Just invest in a fucking real doll hahaha

If women approached men like men approach women now, and men basically never approached women, MEN would be the sexual selectors

telling me I'm a righty and and pointing out that r9k is degenerate is not an argument

Thanks for admitting you have autism. It explains a lot.

Do you not understand biology? Females are biologically programmed to find an optimal mate whilst males are programmed to inseminate as many females as possible, this is true of any species in which there is a lengthy gestation period.

…That's how it';s been going and failing for the past 8 years? Don't tell me you know otherwise, the extent of your social knowledge begins and ends at high school and maybe some community college if I'm being generous

objectively wrong, read the thread

Less sex happens when women's expectations aren't met, they need to lower their expectations until the economy gets better or we're going to be in this same stupid place

...

As do you, my opponent, as do you. But you know as well as I do that it takes a special kind of autism to think that tax incentives are denial of medical rights.

objectively wrong, read the thread

No I don't actually have autism.

This is the first time I've ever seen "I HAVE AUTISM" used as an argument

Well done user

men are biologically programmed to spread our seed everywhere, does that stop us from being constrained by social mores? No

THat's the whole point of societal institutions and the state, to restrict freedom and intervene where the market is retarded

Neither do I, that was supposed to say Autism Level, if it says autism this time, it's more than likely some mod on your board.

Nothing gets me more wet than tax incentives

Talk to me about tax code and the irs baby

I'm not a fatalist and I don't think that these are ultimate universal truths or any nonsense like that. I'm just pointing out that there is a biological foundation for our society's gendered sexual behaviors, without making any normative judgement whatsoever.

You just said you did.
This implies you have autism

You have autism.

*Intelligence Quotient*

Yawn

I like autism level better, it suits you. Since you've never been here before and don't even know the fucking filter

come on bro

If there's one thing you're right about, it's the filter you have. I also hate neoconfederates, btw. Lincoln was right, send the slaves back to Africa. Too bad JWB put an end to that.

i've yet to meet biology that can stand up to a shock collar
though for ethical reasons i've only performed tests on humans.

Shut up autist

E D G Y

These…

Will one day face this, once again.

Alright lol

...

And get slaughtered as God intended.

f to all that don't get laid

Guy on the far left is pretty cute

Quivering in my boots at the American Suburban Right who just figured out what fucking haplogroups are lmao

You are gross

Too bad he wasted his best years posting about video game conspiracies on Holla Forums.

These….

This x has more sex than x talk in here is retarded when OP is all about millennials broadly not having partners

Will one day face this, once again.

Idk I like the idea of making a qt polboy my bf and making him swallow the real redpill.

I dunno those guys are low Autism Level uneducated morons, how this thread got derailed is proof we need depopulation and eugenics.

Hopefully the triumph of technocapital will take care of that.

Silicon Valley won't withstand a North Korean ICBM.

get a vr gf in vrchat, problem solved.

Lmao

Good, those progresivists are annoying.

Hopefully China doesn't give a fuck.

Can't even keep on message lol

Suck Peter Thiel's cock when you get back from the hell whole you came from

Serene female AI Stay At Home Wife Home System Breathy Sex Bot Voice Developed by Amazon That Records Your Sex For The NSA Because /r9k/ Holla Forumseddit Made it a Market: Welcome home, user. How was your day?

/r9k/: NOt now, i shit my pants

ALEXA

CALL BEN

You think Capital needs Silicon Valley progressive values, how cute.

You think nuclear war just hits Silicon Valley how cute

Now I understand why they're so concerned about anuddah shoah

See

The DPRK launches a couple nukes, gets wrecked in retaliation, not a fuck is given.

That's definitely what happens when they involve Australia and Japan

Nuclear War Detterence isn't flimsy, I'll be OK

Like the brutal autumn sun
It dawns on me, what have I done?

Saying sorry ain't as good as saying why

But it buys me a little more time

Lost in the moment for a second time
I'm just pathetic, that's the reason why
In desperation, all that you can do is ask me

"Why?"

Cause I'm a man, woman
Don't always think before I do
Cause I'm a man, woman
That's the only answer I've got

Once again, as it takes a hold
I am aware I'm not in control
You see, I have a conscience and it's never fooled
But it's prone to be overruled

My weakness is the source of all my pride, I'll tell you why

Cause I'm a man, woman
Don't always think before I do
Cause I'm a man, woman
That's the only answer I've got

...

get this petite-bourgie trash OUT OF HERE

Holy shit this thread was a mess

In my opinion, the trend can be attributed both to the decreasing amount of free time people can allocate to relationships as well the commodification of the idea of relationships as a whole. Relationships take commitment and time and when free time is short, such time either does not exist or has to be pigeonholed into short-lived off and on encounters. As such, relationships as a whole become viewed as short term and non-lasting and given the amount of investment it takes to be in one, a lot of the time people just look at the opportunity cost and walk out. That, or simply regress into on-off encounters for the benefit of short term sexual fulfillment. Lets put it this way, say you work 8 hours a day every day. Lets also say you sleep the average of about 7 hours a day. You have 9 hours left in your day, a portion of which will be responding or doing work outside of you work which could occur at any time, but lets say that takes 2 hours. That leaves about 7 hours of your day to decide what to do. Now for the bare minimum of an actual "lasting" relationship you have to:
1. Find someone who is free when you are free
2. Take the chance and investment of going on a set of dates which carry the risk of ending with either of you not liking each other and having the whole thing become both a time sink and possible emotional burden
3. Have the both time and energy to deal with the needs of your partner, while not ignoring your own, at any given moment.
All while dealing with the consumptive nature of capitalism which you also want to indulge in, whatever that commodity may be. And on that, we come to the idea of relationships being viewed as commodities. If I as a consumer begin to view a "relationship" as merely a commodity to indulge in, then the idea of one becomes easily outweighed by whatever else I could spend my time on, doubly so in the alienated world we live in, triply so if I view them in a purely sexual manner as hook-up apps and pornography have made such things more "accessible" to us. In such a commodity view of relationships, we become almost forced to weigh one to its alternatives. To us, the relationship would only be worth it commodity wise if it came without the risk, which in turn removes any sentiment of "love" from such a relationship. Love is an event filled with risk, not some sanitized commodity all wrapped up and presented clean and prepared for us. Yet, we live in a world in which we expect such things to be immediately pleasing, to be ready for consumption. I could go on, but I think on this point Zizek explains such things better
youtube.com/watch?v=LXqPlYWJSII
youtube.com/watch?v=LXqPlYWJSII
As a side note as well, I think Marx in a way alludes to this kind of reduction of the worker and when you compile how such animal needs can be fulfilled today its easy to see how relationships could disappear:

Also, Chaya, Fatimah, and the Prot need to get a room. Your making religious anons look worse then we're already viewed

Kek. Religious types always say this about anyone who abandons faith, no matter how absolutely we believed it. You're also making the mistake of assuming that hedonism was the reason, when in reality it was just a matter of realising what a load of contradictory bullshit it was.

Yes, manic delusions do feel awesome, I've experienced those too (they were often connected). Unfortunately insane thoughts have a habit of making you do insane things.

Let me bring this up from the start of the thread.

Let's keep in mind the OP's data consists of only 2 surveys conducted a decade apart. That's nowhere near enough to conclude whether this is symptomatic of late stage capitalism or industrialization or anything else. Without this, ultimately we're just playing pop psychologists. We would need far more data from decade or even centuries past in order to try to find a cause. Or maybe the data from country(ies) which industrialized recently and/or rapidly.

it was about only 20% unpartnered for this same age group in the 50s in the US. It rose after the spike in divorce after the sexual revolution, you can check the stats

Yeah this is the most pernicious myth they spread. Looks are certainly important for attracting Women but I would say they are probably secondary to personality. If have a large social circle and can come off as confident and not-needy that is worth much more than being tall or handsome. I feel like everyone who has a large group of male friends sees that peoples success with Women often does not correlate with attractiveness and in fact seems to relate to social status more than anything.

There are many factors at play. Unsurprisingly, individuals have different preferences for different things. Incel brainlets don't seem to get that.

And? What's your point?

I have a feeling this is going to get a lot worse.

Not really. Most people are statistically nonviolent so i cant fathom what you neab by “insane” especislly since all action is inherently “insane” and irrational depending on the perspective

Also i myself have lost faith so im just wondering how you could genuinely not have felt as i did. I suppose its subjective

Sure but the prime factor is social status.Today millenials are mental and physical wrecks which doesn't help the sexability, but it's the loss of social status (which touch men harder due to the current job market) that is creating incels in droves. And the left talking heads only response is "Fuck you, I'm popular and connected enough, bootstraps brah".

Source?

Most crazy people aren't violent fam. That doesn't mean mania is harmless. Though the harm is more at a social level.

If Marx is right then we have been in "late-stage Capitalism" for 170 years at least. When does it end? Because to me this seems like a leftist version of CBTS.

Marx is pretty clear: when we make it end.

No, people are waiting longer but it doesn't explain the rise in singledom. The singledom rates have increased also for 35-65 year olds. Women have a hard time bearing children after 35.

Gen X also had high singledom rates and it's getting too late for most of them to find their long term baby-producing partners

Also Gen X

Truly I am quaking in my boots

Daily reminder: Nazism is anuddah shoah

Forgot about the filter
Anuddah shoah = Wh*te genocide

That's only true for Tinder. If it weren't for the fact that most people enter into romantic relationships through friends/family, then yea we'd get a situation where 90% of the women mate with 10% of the men. We've been there before in human history, even worse actually. I doesn't even require harems, you can still have a lot of spinsters.

Then just make it clear that you want the full hour beforehand by requesting GFE or relted and don't start sexytime until 40 minutes in. Also how horrible are the hookers where you are where they tell you to pack up after you cum?

Leftism is literally about removing the pecking order. That's all it means. It doesn't necessarily mean socialism or communism or any particular ideology.

Imagine thinking leftism is only about material things

Imagine being this elitist

Imagine thinking men have to earn women when women don't have to earn men (to any meaningful extent)

What does that image even mean, a celebration of extortion?

lol, there won't be a sequel to this. things will get interesting, but not in a way you will like.

Well where do I check the stats? Trying to google for this only brings up this later study, as well as some about how millenials are getting much less poon than previous generations: washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/americans-having-less-sex-than-they-once-did/2017/03/06/e367ce58-0298-11e7-b9fa-ed727b644a0b_story.html

At the risk of inching the thread closer to incel faggotry, it seems that these numbers on decreased partnered people and sexual activity don't account for distribution. I have a sneaking suspicion of a polarization occuring, with more people enjoying life less thanks to LSC and a small minority of lifestylers whose lives revolve more and more around dissoluteness. This is, and presumably has been for a while, the reality with male homos. I'll never forget this bit from the OKCupid blog:
Incidentally, while at that page, do a ctrl+f for "opiate".

Ever notice how certain leftist behave exactly like the conservatives they hate when it comes to sex? I propose that conservatism is merely the mentality of the haves, and the left mentality the mentality of the have nots.

The left has the power to arbitrate sexuality and jealously guards it against the "incels" and "PUAs". In doing so it deploys many of the same arguments, manners and behaviors capitalists use against poor people. The more the incel question is discussed, the more the mask slips. Feminism is an ideology of sexual control, the castration of men for the liberation of women. There is no other way to explain the utterly disgusting petite bourg hatred towards the sexual underclass.

the right defends the reactionary practice of sexuality, while the ideal left understands that benevolent science and patrician cultural organisation can liberate mankind from such arbitrary temptations, given only the resources and the mandate to do so.

the incel is metaphorically the bitcoin gambler, the insufferable who must be cured or eliminated since not only are his desires crude and immoral but his analysis of the situation is facile. he has not only the wrong desires, but the wrong path of achieving those desires, and like a virus he seeks to spread the corrosive ideology underlying these. only the left can promote an alternative path.

Really only the patriarchy believing leftists do this. And most internet leftists fall into that camp. Some people can't have anything that makes women *seem* like an oppressor class.

Reactionary thought incoming.

I'm incel, I also think this is a good thing. Men have too much sex and demand too much sex from women.

Women are the sexual underclass. Only women do prostitution and only men buy prostitution. (inb4 but this one gay guy I know)

Come on, really? Women are, in general, the gatekeepers of sex. Fewer people are "partnered" because a growing percentage of women are in "unpartnered" soft-harem relationships with the top 10-20% of men. It's not like no one is having sex, not sure where you're getting that from. It can't be from the OP image, since it specifically says "without a partner present". A Tinder hookup does not count as having a partner present in most peoples' eyes.

Spooked cucks like you don't belong on this leftist board. Embrace your self interest and put the femails in their place.

This.

Holla Forums recruits because leftoids are incapable of admitting the real cause of the problem, which is, has been, and always will be femails. Femail mating strategies and male mating strategies are diametrically opposed, which is why the struggle between the sexes is a recurring theme in human society. Gender equality is impossible, it is dominate or be dominated.

There's also the simple fact that liberal feminism has bastardized the notion of "liberation" for women.

That is, they're supposed to be happy that they get to work a corporate job for shit pay and long hours, often for less credit than a man would get doing the same tasks. This is something the right loves to bring up as a talking point for why feminism is "evil," but they then go the other route of insisting women need to be "guided by men" or something. I think there is a much more coherent leftist response to this than just muh traditionalism.

Maybe somebody can flesh this out, but I think the criticism on this subject is correct from the right, they are just using the wrong terminology and attributing 'cause' to the wrong things.

And ofc its not just women that do this, its all across the board. Somehow the puritan work ethic has invaded the "liberation" jargon so that people literally believe "work sets you free."

It is strangely fascist, in a way, when I really think about it in that light.

inverse.com/article/8386-study-confirms-that-teens-who-bully-have-more-sex

Same. Im 26 and dunno if that is a red flag (pun intended) or not. Either way i just am not willing to spend time and money on dating trying to get someone to care about me. I am amazed honestly at how people manage to marry, fuck, and have kids. None of it seems real to me or like an activity like I could legit participate in my lifetime. It just seems so out of reach given where I'm at in life and how I am socialized.

So how many more "supreme gentlemen" will we see in the coming years?

...

i agree with you though that incel prop is bad, i believed it too at one point when i was younger

but some people were abused as kids or molested and are just fucked. i think i'm in that category and i just don't think i can function in a normal relationship. everything to me is sexualized and a lot of things i think about are sexual when i don't even try to think about it and i think part of that is my upbringing.

i'm getting to an age where it feels like i'm bringing baggage to other people and i doubt anyone would even want it. it is a weird dilemma to want sex really bad, but also not be sure if you will have a nervous breakdown the moment someone tries to touch you because of past trauma and shit

i kind of agree with you actually. i don't know why the traditional family is so important to save. people get offended because they take it personally and assume it means their parents shouldn't have had them as a kid or w/e… but idk, just growing up in a nuclear family there is often some form of abuse that takes place, even if its psychological. so much of that has an effect on a kid that it is shocking that there's such a strong reinforcement of the whole "father knows best" trope.

...

tfw tfw no gf is what finally unites the left and right

Source? Particularly for the 10%-20% claim

It is simple, i am unpartnered because i don't deserve to be loved, only a christian culture really sees love as some kind of a "right" or a must for all when in fact billions live and die alone unloved and not cared for.
Join us in the hopelessness comrades.

archive.fo/Yr83M

Will you people please stop falling for awful sensationalist fake articles?

The rise of 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧facebook🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 and '08 recession lead to social retardation of this group

Will the sexual bourgeoisie ever admit they are wrong?

ah yes elleuk that famous journal of rational thought
you are the sexual petit-bourgeoisie, your liquidation will not be metaphorical but actual. you are to be fed into a woodchipper legs first.

So angry son. Why is the sanctity of some random rape slut so important to you? Personally, I think you are the real misogynist, because you are unable to give a woman agency for her obvious desires.

...

don't presume my views, dickie.
anyone who desires sex is a flawed individual.

Cope. A slut who fucks 100 guys before she is 20 will never be wife material. She will never let go of her past and will cheat on you whenever she sees the opportunity to recapture it. The world sucks and it is understandable that you try to shield yourself from it, but lets face it, you are definitely screwed. Take the blackpill and embrace reality.

...

I'm 27 and would love to have kids, but the thought of having to support a little helpless off-spring of mine on my pitiful salary sends waves of anxiety through me.

I can barely even afford to maintain a relationship with a woman (because like it or not, going out and doing things costs money) much less having to fully support a child.

I'm just hoping I can get lucky and get married in my early 30s/before 35.

I'm 29 and my blessing through all this bull shit in my life without I don't have no kids. Everybody I know who has kids at my job and around me are all on drugs or some other shit just to cope so they can get by.

you have kids so they can make Porky richer and they can keep the cycle going.

You ever try fetish dating? Fetlife.com collarspace.com there's a freak out there for you bro.

I'm not reading this big ass thread but I'll just do a little drive by shitting in it.

Are people just constantly dating new people, but never consider themselves "partnered"? There is such a huge dating culture with dating apps etc. that would be the first thing I think.

probably, but leftypol would rather whine about "no waifu, no laifu" because they're all closet conservatives.

Why is this a bad thing? It's not like the Earth is want for people. Maybe people are just popping out kids less because it's been 70 years since the last war/conflict on the imperial's homeland.

3DPD was a mistake. Waifu gang when?

Go outside?

Correct, if by dating you mean hooking up.

enjoy your antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea and 20+ strains of HPV

there's nothing wrong about being conservative. lots of leftists are conservatives.
left=anti-capitalism not left=let's all smoke weed and change gender shit

...

...

...

Friendly reminder that Weinstein did literally nothing wrong. It is femoid nature to date up and fuck men for money and status, so Weinstein was simply giving them what they always wanted. They only ditched him because women, being creatures lacking any sense of loyalty, saw the chance to make even more money and social capital off of his demise. Think about that the next time you are watching Chad rail the girl you like, leftypol.

I'd bet my trust fund that that kid did literally nothing to improve himself the whole time. If you let yourself waste away into a cuck, you'll inevitably become one. Only a faggot would adhere to some abstract concept like love to justify their pathetic existence. Same goes for the cows, no fat chicks brah.

Dating culture is completely fucking garbage. I'd much rather meet women through friends and friends of friends than hitting up completely random women online and hoping she is who she says she is/isn't crazy/has nothing in common with me

Millennials are are collectively unable to deal with the trauma inflicted by social media and contemporary spectacles obscene forms precipitated by late stage capitalism. The social media spectacle has effectively eroded the remaining fragments of communal engagement.
The common affect being intensely self conscious, depressive and isolated.
Peer group structures either withdraw into the real life equivalent of an echo chamber or further fragment. The aestheticization of everyday life serves to constrain communication.

So of course this is happening.
Sure women naturally might have more luck on tinder but passionless anxiety fueled sex - which it is - seems like a pretty crappy deal too.

tl:dr its systemic. We're all fucked. If you've allowed yourself to turn women into the other then it's probably too late for you. Girls didn't commoditize your identity.

incels are the product of 2 material changes in th capitalist MoP.
#1) Women earning as much and or more then men. The only material incentive for women to marry a man is if that man makes more or otherwise provides some social mobility (being tall, handsome etc). This leave the mostly NEET incels with zero romantic prospects with eligible bachelorettes.
#2.) The welfare state. These guys have are having their basic needs being met either by their parents or the welfare state or both. So they have plenty of time to create a superstructure revolving around their material circumstances. Honestly if any of you could read a history book and learn about the havoc that large groups of hungry, unsexed alienated men did in the past you'd kiss the feet of incels. They're completely harmless.
Finally we've always had this cultural bias against men as being disposable and not inherently valuable unless they have power or status.

No way, sexual promiscuity is so high right it's creating super STD's. We're not seeing WGTOW, were seeing women that are holding out for man that can raise their social status. Then do a panicked scramble when their fertility window starts to close. There's no WGTOW because the state doesn't punish women for entering marriage and parenthood like it does for men with divorce rape, alimony, child support and bias child custody.
The idea of WGTOW is laughable on its face.

If he was good enough to date from a personality stand point before, why wasn't he good enough to date when she got hot. Hmmm it's almost like women are hyperagmous and don't value the character of a man the most, but instead value his power and status the most. Nah, must have been because he didn't lift bra.

wtf I'm an adult virgin now

Ahh, I'd missed our weekly incel threads.

Realtalk though: I feel like incels could benefit enormously if they stopped obsessing over women and instead focused on making friends and being satisfied with themselves first.

Are you for real? Furthermore you're making wild assumptions based on your thinly-veiled feelings. For all we know, glasses dude might've become an insufferable lolbert, or he might've broken it off after he found the chick wasn't right for him.

The only way I will solve my own Inceldom is if I can find a job that will move me out of my parents house. Friends and lying to myself won't help a thing.

I got laid as a heroin addict and im not even very good looking. Not all women are idpol obsessives. There are plenty who are more interested in what you have to say and so forth.

That or im living on another planet.

Nice, starting off with a dismissive tone regarding these material phenomenons I see.
>Realtalk though: I feel like incels could benefit enormously if they stopped obsessing over women and instead focused on making friends and being satisfied with themselves first.
We were talking about the rise of unpartnered young men and women in general. Nice way of painting them as all incels. Great way for a brainlet like you to dismiss the entire point and claim victory.
So you think the rise in unpartnered men and women is due to the character failings of men? You're the type of crypto reactonary that probably thinks the crack epidemic was due to "black culture" too LMAO.

She's wearing makeup and a pushup bra. You've obviously not slept with a white woman if you can't recognize that.
Lol, the old, you're just jealous. And "let me argue in bad faith narrow the argument to the circumstances of this exact breakup and ignore the fact that is was intended to represent the wider real social current going on right now i.e hypergamy.
You haven't produced one materialist arguement.

...

Reposting because of poor formatting

Nice, starting off with a dismissive tone regarding these material phenomenons I see.

We were talking about the rise of unpartnered young men and women in general. Nice way of painting them as all incels. Great way for a brainlet like you to dismiss the entire point and claim victory.

So you think the rise in unpartnered men and women is due to the character failings of men? You're the type of crypto reactonary that probably thinks the crack epidemic was due to "black culture" too LMAO.

She's wearing makeup and a pushup bra. You've obviously not slept with a white woman if you can't recognize that.

Lol, the old, you're just jealous. And "let me argue in bad faith narrow the argument to the circumstances of this exact breakup and ignore the fact that is was intended to represent the wider real social current going on right now i.e hypergamy.

You haven't produced one materialist arguement.

That's still a better deal then men get though. It's still sexual intimacy even if it doesn't lead to a committed relationship. And women still get to exercise agency in these circumstances. While the neglect and abandonment men face is imposed on them.

nah i already did that now im just .. observing some very important opinions

My nigga, I don't just want to move out just because I want to get laid. I also want to live on my own terms.

really made me thonk

You really think sex is that good most of the time? It's highly contingent. Emotionally void sex is hardly intimate.

I guess the proletariat should just improve themselves and get better jobs in
THE FREE MARKET
instead of violently taking shit from their bosses . Nice job proving my point by sounding like a leftist version of Peterson L E L.

Openly conservative. It's funny you mention gender change because Holla Forums conservatives seem to be the ones into Trad-traps.

so what if women has had many partners? only virgin incels would think this has any effect on society at large. Lmaoing at you pathetic incels. It's 2018 you can't tell people how to live their lives.

It's strategic mistake. I feel like whoever finds a way to connect these frustrated man and arm them has upper hand in the future.

So, a might makes right kind of thing then. Why even bother with a political pretense? Why not just ride into town on horseback grab some wives and head back to your cave?

This is the correct analysis, everyone else is chasing ghosts.

yeah no thanks.

See

Are you ready for the NazBol beta uprising?

Is horseshoe theory real?

Allot of what im hearing in this thread is no different from those reactionary dipshits on 4 pol and /r9k/

Yep

Actually, he was referring to the fact that leftypol basically argues like any random boomer conservative when it comes to preserving female sexual privilege. Muh bootstraps, muh your are not entitled to this, muh self improvement, these are all the defenses of someone afraid of the deprived masses taking what is theirs. Get your facts straight and your head checked, buddy boi.

well, fug.

Was this ironic? The link you postes literally says that it's about "muh personality":

This

This

sex is for gays and losers