/lit/ - Literature

>>11182683
Houellebecq

>>11182683
Why do you think of it as decay and not transformation?

>>11182698
seconded

>>11182707
You know, I'm not entirely sure, to be honest. Any books coming from that perspective?

>>11182683

Douglas Murray - 'The Strange Death of Europe'

Peter Hitchens - Everything, but especially 'The Abolition of Britain'

Theodore Dalrymple - Everything, but especially 'Our Culture, What's Left Of It' & 'Life At The Bottom'

Pat Buchanan - 'The Death of the West'

>>11182683
Yuga: An Anatomy of Our Fate by Marty Glass

So does anyone have an optimistic view of the future of Western Society? Seems like it's hip to bet on failure. Sad.

>>11182782
to throw in some left-wing as well as right-wing social critique:

Guy Debord - The Society of the Spectacle
Mark Fisher- Capitalist Realism
Baudrillard - Simulacra and Simulation
Deleuze and Guattari - Capitalism and Schizophrenia

>>11182683
Sprengler, but his premise is that western society has already been on decline centuries ago.

>>11182808
I don't understand why everyone thinks society just going to implode on itself. The biggest treat to the world is a fat asian man and no one is really itching to go to war

>>11182683
Chartism - Thomas Carlyle

>>11182716
Thus Spoke Zarathustra

>>11182821
Decline of social values, dissolution of durable social units, a society whose sole unifying bond is essentially the pursuit of wealth, increasing political polarization, increasing wealth stratification, massive national debts, increasing levels of political tribalism. pic related is one example

>>11182844
>decline of social values
Ascendence of new values

>>11182856
being an irresponsible whore who spits welfare recipients out of her vagina isn't a "social value" anon

>>11182863
Who are you quoting?

>>11182870
Didn't quote anyone

>>11182844
That has never caused a society to fall though, the great depression was probably the closest there was to a self societal destruction but we survived that. The only times a civilization has fallen is when they went up against another civilization. The most we'll have is probably protests and maybe the odd riot but that has never lead to a civilization falling
>then there's the idea of a revolution but thats a whole other issue

>>11182877
Exactly you were just talking to yourself
gb2 kekistan

>>11182808
Unironically, the alt-right and reactionaries in general have an optimistic view of the future of Western society, they just have a pessimistic outlook for its short-term future.

If they didn't they wouldn't be reactionaries.

>>11182886
>That has never caused a society to fall though
"That" being? I named many different things, although some of those things are particularly unique to the modern era. So technically you aren't wrong to say that they "haven't" caused a society to fall, but whether or not they will is yet to be seen.

>>11182808
Only if the sexual revolution can be reversed. People have turned their reproductive systems into a source of unlimited fun, with no consequences. The end result is promiscuity, broken famlies, diseases and many bright minds, would be leaders and intellectuals and scientists, are reduced to addicts to their biological pleasure system. Bright young men should be thinking about maximizing their lot in life, setting goals to accomplish great things like going to medical school, not getting some pussy.
Seems it's only getting worse. Pornography is openly talked about on TV. Pornhub memes are on Facebook. Soon well see advertisements for this filth.
25% of men admit to masturbating at work. Zero self control. This number is only going to grow. The problem is getting worse. Society and the minds of individuals are hypersexualized beyond repair it seems.

>>11182886
>Thinking that living as the diseased walking corpse of a society is fine as long as we don't get directly conquered.

>>11182886
>The only times a civilization has fallen is when they went up against another civilization
Rome wasn't conquered, it collapsed.

>>11182903
If our distant ancestors had not fucked like beasts we would not be here

>>11182886
>It's a living standards are all that matter episode

>>11182863
lmao how is that a societal trend? I know whores and I know people on welfare but I dont know any whores on welfare. You complain about hyperpartisan politics then regurgitate hyperpartisan media myths. The West certainly has the appearance of declining because its hip to complain about the West declining and profitable (socially and economically) to report on it. Go meet some people, they are ALL complaining about some social decline or another. How about stop being an outrage media parrot in a responsibility free safe space of cynicism and bet on a better future. Either that or live in fear that anyone you meet is choking on dicks and tide pods and wiping their ass with the [your national identity here] flag.

>>11182922
What on earth do you mean by this?

>>11182922
Not him but conditions were obviously such that they had to to survive. That is, of course, not the case now.

>>11182808
Don't worry, comrade, we're going to see a revolution sooner or later, ushering in a new golden age for Europe and the world.

>>11182901
the social aspects, although the growing interest in politics is new. Also we survived worse financial situations
>>11182910
Look i might just be the last rat to jump ship but if everything is not on fire or rubble with people being executed in the street i consider that a functional society.
>>11182919
Yeah, after being decimated by the Germanic tribes, and then later the saxons
>>11182923
I didn't even say that, and it's not like that has never been a good measure of how fucked things were

>>11182903
incel detected
Sorry to use a buzzword, but fuck off with that conservative sexuality bullshit. It's hardly related to the state of Western Society. Try removing your lips from Jordan Peterson's knob.

>>11182939
>Communism
>Western society
Que?

>>11182946
it came from the west, so it's technically a western ideology

>>11182938
>that is not the case now
How do you even think this. Survival is always a desperate struggle..society is failing because you are convinced it is more complicated than that.

>>11182927
I didn't complain about political polarization, I mentioned it because it is relevant, and political polarization isn't an "opinion", it has been proven to be the case.
>How is that a societal trend
Did you even see the posted chart?
>bet on a better future
The man who is pumping the brakes is betting that there is a better future than the one in which he continues to push the gas pedal.
>They are ALL complaining about some social decline or another
Not exactly making a strong case that it isn't happening.

>>11182808
me tbqh
We've survived the threat of an atomic war, we've survived political terrorism in the 70s and 80s, we've survived ww2, I think we can manage a couple of broken sexual mores (because that's what declinists always complain about more or less) and the internet

>>11182955
Is it so strange to be of the opinion that women don't need to be pumping out dozens of babies at this point? If anything people ought to cool it, we've got plenty of mouths to feed, and many of them useless.

>>11182940
I suppose this might just be an "agree to disagree" situation, but I don't want to live in an intellectually and socially bankrupt society even if economically and politically we're okay. I also think that social decay may not lead to collapse in the short term but over time, it can weaken a society. For instance, the rise of tribalism will likely impact the political atmosphere of the US.

>>11182940
>after being decimated by the Germanic tribes, and then later the Saxons
opportunists. They didn't cause Rome to fall, Rome was already in the process of collapse. They were symptoms, not the disease.

>>11182809
God, those two lists really shed some light on the intellectual gap between the contemporary manifestations of Left and Right.

>>11182973
Mathematically speaking women need to be pumping out at least 2.1 babies each in order for the population to be stable.

>>11182973
Get rid of everything in your life that is "useless" and tell me how you feel.

>>11182982
How so?
>>11182967
Sexual liberation is unironically more destructive to a population than nuclear weaponry.

>tfw you read too much nick land
>neckbeard intensifies

accelerating technocapitalism is going to shred absolutely everything that stands in its path to dust. there are days in which i am unironically looking forward to the great purgation and the victory of cybermind 1%ers from the future on seasteads while the rest of this shit just melts into antiquity.

all the decadence, cynicism, and nihilism just gets wiped out in a self-inflicted great filter. barbarism becomes what it is and civilization an exception to the general rule of brutality and ignorance. hypercalvinism orthodoxy renders the bulk of the earth to supercomputers and gently reminds the rest to return to the trivium.

>All the stars in the sky will be dissolved and the heavens rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree.

feels good man. the return of technology to recolonize in fire and the sword the occidental fragment from which it sprung will be harsh but enlightening.

who knew old fashioned protestant other-guilting could be so much fun. i can see the appeal some days. all it needed was a case of marxist stockholm syndrome and a couple of douchebag neighbours

>>11182991
I'm obviously not calling for the slaughtering of all "useless" people, but some people's children are more valuable than others

>>11182940
>Yeah, after being decimated by the Germanic tribes, and then later the saxons
That's the point. The state was too inept and corrupt to defend the empire from nog barbarians. The same thing is happening right now with muslim refugees migrating into Europe by the hundreds of thousands. But hey, if restoring traditional values means instituting Sharia Law, then so be it.

>>11182973
People are having less children, not more. More sex but better sexual education and contraceptives. Anyway, how does this relate to social decline? Casual sex at decadent bath houses used to be high society.

>>11183004
>Sexual liberation is unironically more destructive to a population than nuclear weaponry.
No.
And declining fertility rates are a surviving mechanism of the species.

>>11183005
I think you've been huffing too much paint dog

>>11183008
>valuable
Depends on your measure of value. I will take 10 african children over 100 future chads and stacies

>>11183020
>declining fertility rates are a surviving mechanism of the species

>>11182991
I'm in the process of doing that right now. So far, I feel pretty good.

>>11182939
>that young Lenin in the bottom left corner
C-cute

>>11183039
>Let's have children at an exponential rate sure this won't cause the planet to exhaust its resources in a couple of decades
The same mechanisms that made it so we reached current levels of population are now working for reducing population.

À rebours

>>11183026
true

A D O R N O
D
O
R
N
O

>>11182683
*Just stolen a country*

>>11182808
Imminent ecological collapse prevents me from feeling optimistic about anything, let alone this "western tradition" nonsense that even its proponents hardly live up to and endlessly pervert for their own petty reactionary agendas.

>>11183060
Please explain to me how it's possible evolution selected for human beings to have a defense mechanism against global overpopulation. It has never happened before, so it could never have been selected against. Evolution doesn't "plan ahead".
Populations grow until they are consuming more food than the environment allows them to consume, then they starve. Starving women don't get pregnant. Birthrates decrease, population reaches equilibrium again.

>>11183060
>We
Yes, WE are reducing in population, the rest of the world isn't, anon. That's the problem with your whole pie in the sky progressive utopia: The rest of the world laughs at it and thinks it's a crock of shit and is just taking advantage of us. The CCP is dumping liquid metal mercury into rivers, continues to increase its usage of coal, and is currently engaging in genocide, anon. You're a bagholder.

my diary desu

>>11182821
can’t insgine being this much of a goy desu

>>11183104
>Yes, WE are reducing in population, the rest of the world isn't, anon.
Because the rest of the world has yet to ecomically develop.
> That's the problem with your whole pie in the sky progressive utopia
Your? I'm just stating how population increase and decline works in function of economic development. Look, China is already following the same trend that the West has already followed during the last century
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-19/chinas-birth-rate-drops-despite-end-of-one-child-policy/9344634
>The rest of the world laughs at it and thinks it's a crock of shit and is just taking advantage of us
pretty sure that it's we that are taking advantage of the rest of the world
>continues to increase its usage of coal
Source? Because as far as I know they're decreasing it.
>You're a bagholder.
Are you seriously trying to blame me for the CCP's actions you fucking retard

>>11182922
Strawman
This point is irrelevant; procreation would still ensue even if we do not "fuck like beasts".

You also are wrong to imply that our ancestors had the same sexual frequency.
Sexual stimuli and superstimuli abound and are just a mere click away. The subject participating in it is polished and made to look nearly impeccable with every sign of super health -- white teeth, cosmetics. Endless variety, exists so that frequency is at an unnatural levels.
Moreover, we also have no concern with acute survival like animals trying to get us or having to seek shelter. This causes even more time to go toward sexual pursuits.The products of this enviroment naturally are going to have a higher sexual frequency. Neuroscience is revealing that the sex drive is subject to conditioning---- someone that starts masturbates three times daily will soon be doing it three times daily.

Relevant material:
>Of all members of the mammalian family, civilized man alone is a victim of an exaggerated and morbid sexual urge, a condition which he has inflicted, to a certain extent, on the animals which he has domesticated and which have adopted his diet, especially the dog. Wild animals in a state of nature practice copulation only at certain mating seasons for the purpose of reproduction. Civilized man practices this act at all times, and in most cases without intention to conceive. On the other hand, so-called savages and primitive races leading more natural lives and who follow their natural instincts to a greater extent are far chaste in their sexual behavior, as noted by Havelock Ellis. Such considerations must lead one to the conclusion that the sex life of civilized men is unnatural and that the excessive manifestation of the sex urge among them is due to certain aphrodisiacal stimuli rather than to natural instinct; among such stimuli are a high-protein meat diet (accompanied by physical inactivity), the use of tobacco, alcohol and coffee, sexually stimulating literature, dramas, motion pictures, conversation, etc. For these reasons civilized man has departed from the natural law, obeyed by animal and primitive races, which requires the separation of the sexes during pregnancy and lactation, for the benefit of both mother and child. Violation of this law may account for the large number of physically and mentally defective offspring produced by civilized races as compared with animals and primitive peoples.
>Westermarck writes: "Among a great number of simple peoples, monogamy requires of a man continence for periods of considerable length. He has to abstain from his wife not only for a certain time each month, but during pregnancy or at least during the later stage of it, since pregnant woman is regarded as unclean, and after childbirth until the child is weaned; and the latter injection is the more severe as the suckling time lasts for two or three and occasionally even five or six years."

>>11183195
>>someone that starts masturbates three times daily will soon be doing it three times daily.
What?

>>11183096
I never mentioned "evolution", what I'm getting at is that the same mechanisms that caused us to reach current levels of population, such as technology, liberalism, scientific progress, abundace of space create the condition that make birthrates decline. There were 978,000,000 humans at the beggining of 1800 and there are 7 billions now.
>Populations grow until they are consuming more food than the environment allows them to consume, then they starve. Starving women don't get pregnant. Birthrates decrease, population reaches equilibrium again.
how is this malthusian garbage relevant? food is far from being the only factor

>>11182944
>incel detected
I'm not an "incel".
I voluntarily elect not to pursue recreational sex. I've had casual relationships with a few women before and it brought me nothing. It's all vanity.
An incel, would obviously be one that 1) wants sex and 2) cannot get it. They are the architects of their own demise because they obsess over sexual pursuits, and fail to get it. Rather than improve themselves, they turn to pornography, which only worsens their unquenchable thirst, at the expense of actually doing stuff with their lives.
>but fuck off with that conservative sexuality bullshit
Not an argument.
>It's hardly related to the state of Western Society.
It's extremely relevant.
Society is more lascivious than ever. Sexual stimuli and material is everywhere and it shapes people's daily routines and activities. It undermines their focus in life and directs it to their base instincts. Interpersonal relationships are reduced to mere sexual urges, and the end result is senseless promiscuity.
>Try removing your lips from Jordan Peterson's knob.
Your entire post is just "REEEEEing". You're incredibly emotional and have only offered ad hominems.
It really is pathetic. It's like a junky trying to rationalize that his drug addiction isn't a problem.

>>11183195
please, this is the second time I ask you this, use a fucking trip so I can filter your post

>>11183232
When one begins to engage in a pleasurable and accessible activity several times a day then eventually performing this activity several times daily will become a nearly unbreakable habit

>>11182944
>It's hardly related to the state of Western Society
Where the fuck do you even live?

>>11183278
Why?
Why can't you just ignore it and move on?
Or even better, ask yourself why do my posts bother you so much?
Surely, something deep within them is rings true and this terrifies you. Something that you don't even want to consider, let alone address for it will disrupt your previously unashamed sexual indulgences. You want to have your cake and eat it too—you don't want to be told that obesity, diabetes, cavities, and death come along with it. You know ignorance is bliss and want to go on vainly ejaculating carefree unaware of any potential harm you may be doing because it's all you have in life. The premise of not being an autonomous man in full control of himself, but a slave subject to the heteronomy of a primitive drive scares you.

>>11182808
short-run bad, long-run good. We need to get out of liberal modes of thought. Fortunately we are in for a huge economic shock in the next few years, which, coupled with American retreat from the world, will hopefully jolt people out of their delusions. We've recovered from worse.

>>11183404
>Surely, something deep within them is rings true and this terrifies you. Something that you don't even want to consider, let alone address for it will disrupt your previously unashamed sexual indulgences.
no, you're just painfully retarded
and I touch my dick maybe once a week, stop projecting you fucking fat pervert

>>11182707
because all biosocial stats show signs of decay of negentropic systems that uphold human life
>>11182808
yes, you can watch TV
>>11182886
yes it has and will you dumb fucking humanities major
>>11183170
https://www.brookings.edu/2018/01/22/chinas-coal-consumption-has-peaked/amp/

its rebounded, the thing you don’t understand is thus:

mutational load is increasing, educational attainment and high g alleles are disappearing, low ED and g alleles are proliferating, white families are being replaced by hispanic and black families, asia has a sex crisis w/too many males by tens of millions (soon to be hundreds), the arab states do not have enough water already and are overbreeding (also have too many boys w/not enough fertile women, extremely high rates of congenital illness and cosanguinity), we are running out of real estate for farm land outside of just clearing forests (which we need for oxygen) or killing nogs for their land in afreaka, bioweapons research will make nuclear and chemical weapons look like box cutters by comparison in just 20 years, you can hack exchanges and data centers easily which can crash electric grids in these mega slums, the security states realize how powerful they are and will leverage this power more with time as populations become more unbreakable hordes than captive coethnics.

This is it.

>>11183494
>"hurr ur dumb"
>"projection durr"
Still not a single argument. Fuck off

>The West is falling because women won't have sex with me.

>>11183481
>big daddy and his friends are going to cause a crash
good to know, thanks shill

>>11183567
There's no big daddy involved here, European banks are in a lot of trouble and new growth cannot happen with TFR 1.3.

>>11183585
I know about Deutsche Bank and Barclays and have known for the last 5 years like everyone else on the far right economically, what i said was your big daddy big dick man tamer you idiots elected is going to help cause a crash with his cronies so he can socially restructure america around isolationist nationalism. that’s all, shill

>>11183604
No, the US itself will be the best-off place in this scenario. Europe doesn't need any help from America to collapse under its own weight, or in some sense lack thereof because >TFR 1.3.

>>11183241
Unfortunately for technologically advanced societies two things that seem to frequently come with that advancement is lower birth rates coupled with increased global empathy.
A seemingly innocuous pair of traits that inevitably leads to destruction or, in the best circumstances, supplantation.

I just don't get this "decay" theme that people project unto the world.

I feel like these people who tout this pessimism and say others need to turn off the TV need to turn off the TV themselves. Most of this negativity is coming from the media.

>>11183631
The empathy thing is just marketing/gaslighting by elites. What is actually happening is that people in power do not want to be the ones to take the blame when TFR 1.3 takes its toll on the economy, so they are incentivized to pump migrants in so that sufficient consumers exist to keep things limping along.

>>11183551
what arguments? I don't want to argue with you, I want you to pertually disappear out of my eyesight

>>11182808
Sure it's hip, but there is a more metaphysical dimension to it, I believe.
I am not as versed in theory of politics, history, or philosophy, but am in poetry, and from a relatively more nationalist poetry, so, poetry in my mother tongue.
What I see happening, is the complete reform of a seeming tradition. The modernism in France, which popularized the sonnet and other forms from the Middle Ages (i.e. French Ballads) is now seemingly falling apart -- no one writes sonnets, and if they do, they're rarely "perfect sonnets" -- the form (tradition) exists only as memory; the smallest unit of the poem (the word) is un-understandable, and has many different meanings. The poem now exists as itself, free of the tradition and men who wrote it.

So does the society. The seeming idea of a Western society -- it really doesn't exist anymore, now it stands as memory. The smallest unit, the family, is now alienated, that even an Individual (the word) has "no meaning." Family, or, a societal unit of some equivalence to the sonnet (or form) is crashing upon itself until new forms that will replace it (as is happening in poetry) will emerge.

The truth here is that this change is nothing bad, it's just change. Those that fear it, fear also the changing trend from epic to lyric poetry; from pastoral poetry, to more of a modernist poetry.

>>11183566
What redeeming quality do women have that makes it worthwhile to sleep with them in the first place?

>>11183647
Then leave the thread you massive faggot

>>11183647
then close your eyes faggot

>>11183060
>The same mechanisms that made it so we reached current levels of population are now working for reducing population.
This is an ENORMOUSLY stupid claim.
Our population is still rising at an enormous rate, just not in the "good" countries, what the fuck is your reasoning for assuming that this mechanisms are applying in the west, but not in Africa, where the population increase is coming from.
The west is NOT over populated, the mechanism makes sense IF AND ONLY IF the current resources make an increase in population a detriment for the rest of society, which obviously is false, since there is no food shortage in the west.
You are correct in asserting that there is a mechanism to prevent over population, that mechanism prevented the enormous population growth in Africa before they could feed themselves, but that mechanism CAN NOT apply in the west.

It is also ENORMOUSLY stupid to suggest that Japan was over populated when their fertility dipped, THEY JUST HAD MILLIONS OF DEAD IN A WAR, that seems like exactly the point at which you would WANT to increase fertility to replace the gone population.
You can't tell me that it just happened by random chance that "too much people" and "war with millions dead" fell in the same decade.

>modern world
>modern social decay
nigga you mean contemporary

>>11183698
The primordial force, the primordial tradition which generated your nation's tradition still lives and will manifest again.

>>11183004
>fertility drops as a country develops economically and women enter the workforce
Reminder if you're against this you're against capitalism

>>11183633
>I feel like these people who tout this pessimism and say others need to turn off the TV need to turn off the TV themselves. Most of this negativity is coming from the media.
well that's the point though, most people's (especially people under a certain age) reality is filtered through a media lens. What happens on television and online and the media spectacle in general control all aspects of contemporary political and social life. This applies to all subcultures and countercultures. There's no escaping it, not enough people could ever unplug at this point. Besides one can't really unplug if they want to integrate and have a professional future, I've experienced this firsthand in my professional sector with linkedin being pretty much a requirement. I'm not a pessimist like most people are ITT concerned with the decay of social mores, but I'm definitely a techno-pessimist.

>>11182698
where do I start

>>11183811
So be it. Capitalism is a horse, break it and make it serve you, let it run wild, or kill it and eat it. I know which of those options I would prefer.

>>11183060

>>11183811
If you love capitalism so much that you would let it ruin your society there is something wrong with you.

>>11183806
Such a thing doesn't exist. You could argue that a verse is such a force, but even this is pure nonsense when you regard poems in prose. You're wrong. Tradition is vague and has no basis when it comes to humans. It serves as memory and idea of the non-existing time before ours.

>>11183834
Read some Traditionalist literature before you make up your mind about that.

>>11183811
Then I'm against capitalism

>>11183842
It is on my list, after I'm done with some anarchy.

>>11183848
Godspeed.

>>11183806
>the primordial tradition which generated your nation's tradition
*blocks your path*

>>11182903
Go buy a hooker of your flavor and get laid will you?

>>11183811
You say that like capitalism is a good thing.

>>11183863
“Violence is not necessary to destroy a civilization. Each civilization dies from
indifference toward the unique values which created it.” - Nicolás Gómez Dávila

>>11183873
Anderson is not against nationalism lol

"But is it true love, in the rectum? That’s what bothers me sometimes." - Samuel Beckett

>>11183863
>>11183876
this kills the thread

>>11183825
atomised

following up on this >>11182982 is there actually any intellectual weight behind the contemporary Right these days or is it mostly platitudes garnered from Sowell textbooks, Molyneux podcasts and JBP videos?

>>11183941
>Sowell
>Molyneux
>Peterson
All neocon shills. They are too dumb to realize capitalism is responsible for all the social problems they bitch about.

The people who think the West is decaying need to stop browsing /pol/ and stop watching nihilists on Youtube.

>>11182844
Marriage is 100% a social construct
People don't get married that much these days because there isn't much of a point

>>11184030
People do get married a lot still, they just don't stay married for longer than 10 years.

>>11184030
>Marriage is 100% a social construct
Agreed.
>People don't get married that much these days because there isn't much of a point
So make marriage have a point again.

Do you guys feel envious of old people, sometimes? LIke someone born furing the 19th century, living simpler lives and not having to deal with all the current bullshit.
Dead before all this mess

>>11183404
>that image
Top pseud

The Foundation for Exploration

>>11184066
Witnessing the birth of industrialization sounds like a fucking nightmare

>>11184093
Yes, but I feel you still could rely on community, and the church, and you had better functioning families... Everything seems to be falling apart now
Perharps everyone deals with doomsday feelings during their lifetimes, and I'm just being a pussy.

>>11184093
This t bh, if you were a kid in the late 19th century you'd be working 16 hours a day and get your arm chewed off by machines before you learned how to read, if you even had time to attend school

>>11184066
No, because this is literally the best time to be alive for any reason.

>>11183984
the Red pill is the real redpill

>>11184120
You live in an era with many unique and particular qualities, the more you study history the more strange you understand modernity to be. And yet much remains the same.
>>11184129
Not the best time to be a married man. Far from it.

>>11184093
>>11184066
also no, my family has been a family of farmers since the beginning of times and only recently we've managed to become middle class and now I'm getting my physics PhD so I feel fairly privileged

>>11182782
>Peter Hitchens 'The Abolition of Britain'

Seconded. This is good for a political perspective on this issue, but 'The Rage Against God' is just as good, but instead of being political, it is a spiritual/social take on atheism and the eradication of Christian values.

>>11184120
Bible confirms we are living at the end of times, 4 horsemen.

Conquest; colonialism
Horsemen with the great sword; first and second world war
Horseman with the blance; globalisation.

Then comes the horseman on the pale horse and his name is death.

>>11184138
>Not the best time to be a married man. Far from it.

Well nobody is forcing you to get married.

>>11183262
>>11183291
>Sexual stimuli and material is everywhere and it shapes people's daily routines and activities
jesus christ, I dont know anyone whose routines are shaped by their need for sex. Do you really think the whole world is club-goers and Chads and Stacys following their reptilian urge to nut and nothing more? Being sexually promiscuous is safe in the modern era (if you dont live in an evangelical shithole) and people do it sometimes. And they do it without reducing themselves to mindless fuckapes. What aspect of that in particular is bringing Western society down?

Materialism is an entirely separate subject and you might have a point there but you are a serious brainlet if you think sexuality is what is killing the West. Would be convenient though since its a perfect boogeyman for unlikable Portuguese anime bulletin board shitposters.

>>11182944
It's funny you call him conservative, as if regulations were popular with capitalists nowadays. Anti-sexualisation feminists say something similar. Young women self-objectify and everyone are being influenced by pornography and advertisements.

>>11184227
Irrelevant.
>this is literally the best time ever
isn't a true statement. Some things are better, some things are worse.

>>11184305
I would argue most things are better.

>>11184243
Sexuality is one of the fundamental building blocks of a society. To trivialize it as a fun game is completely ignorant of human history and biology. Either for good or bad, how can you think that a society can make a complete 180 on sexual policy without a massive ripple effect?

>jesus christ, I dont know anyone whose routines are shaped by their need for sex.
Really? You think that all of the finery, primping and preening, accumulation of objects, and constant personal advertising has NOTHING to do with sex? You think that our basest biological drive has no shaping effect on our daily lives?

The "problem" with promiscuity is that it transitions sex from a very structured distribution (one man gets one woman) to natural free distributions (one man gets as many women as possible). As with the free market this will create a lot of big winners, Chads who can assemble a harem on his phone, but it creates an even bigger number of losers. See /r9k/, /pol/, /lit/, etc. Sex is increasingly distributed by the pareto principle. With increasing numbers of incels, herbivore men, hikkis, betas, call them whatever you have whole chunks of society that decide to just drop out. Sex is the carrot dangled in front of men to get them to work and grow up. No sex, no work. Monogamy was likely created specifically to get all of the beta males to work, since in pre-history most men didn't get to reproduce. Civilization itself could be a product of strict limits on sex.

God only knows what will come of all these men giving up, but it probably isn't good. When you have men who have zero access to sex they start down a very destructive path. Elliot Rodger is the clearest example of this, many of the jihadists raised in Europe are from the same lot. Men who have nothing to lose are incredibly dangerous.

>>11184341
That's fair and a defensible position. Have you considered that things have gotten worse socially, politically, spiritually, but material progress has managed to "mask the decline" in these areas?

>>11184066
Yeah, having your world shattered by one of the myriad wars that happened in that era sounds like fun. Same goes for the rising of communism and scientific positivism in intellectual circles. Baudelaire and Flaubert were sued over a collection of poetry and a novel. Pushkin and Lermontov were literally killed. Nationalism and the rise of the middle class were undermining the traditional monarchy and culture. USA waged a violent civil war over slavery. Children were working in coal mines. My nation was struggling to piece together its identity and culture and resist aggressive foreign influence. Today our most pressing issues seem to be about where we put our dicks and being too nice to the foreign cultures. It's far from perfect but I'll take it.

>>11183494
>maybe once a week
If this was the case, I don't see why you would be this upset with what has been said. I described how hypersexuality impacts societies and individuals. Surely someone doing it "just" once a week, would realize that many are indeed caught up in it and obviously see it exerts a negative influence on behavior and social relations.
In light of this, I doubt the claim of once a week is correct. Unless you are on psychotropic or hormonal drugs, any unabashed defender of masturbation in this widespread pornography era, would naturally increase in frequency to at least daily.
I don't see how pointing out the harms of hypersexuality, both for society and the individual, would make me a pervert either. A pervert, much less one on an anonymous message board would be reveling in their degeneracy, promoting it and justifying it. One ashamed of the state of 'being a pervert', would most likely be appealing to moral arguments as opposed to the health/societal implications that I have described if they were to project.
>>11183647
>you
>implying that guy was me
>tilting at windmills this hard
It wasn't even me who wrote that in the first place. Suddenly now, everyone who has views contrary to the narratives since the sexual revolution the, is that "that damned guy on /lit/ who must be tripcoded"?

I've got bad news for you--we've reached peak sexual revolution and the reaction to it is only just beginning.
Even if I quit using 4chan entirely, people are starting to wake up from their 'wet dream' and realize the harms that it has inflicted on both them firsthand and society at large.

>>11184367
Not really, because I don't view these things as fundamentally exclusive from one another. Countries that have material wealth or economic growth in general are usually stable in all areas, whereas poverty and economic inequality almost invariably causes social and political problems.

>>11184399
my god kill yourself you long-winded pretentious moron

>>11184243
>I dont know anyone whose routines are shaped by their need for sex.
Have you wver read Freud?
>>11184358
Pareto Distribution
Fuck off, and go back to watching JBP shill more neoliberal booner nonsense.

>>11184417

>>11183915
No. From the beginning. Although Atomised is good

>>11184358
You really need to get out more.

Either way to play your game. If Chads are assembling harams it just means in a generation or two we will be rid of betas.
Which sounds like a good development, last thing we need are more autists. We might lose a few Chads and Stacy's in the prosses but eventually the incels will all be dead or at least harmless.

>>11184426
nice self portrait

>>11184426
BTFO

>>11183085
As long as ecological communities maintain their supple vitality we can weather the storm and adapt, unfortunately that is seriously threatened with apocalyptic biodiversty loss around every corner (in it's broadest sense including loss of language culture and traditional knowledge)
Things are bad but looking up in that people are aware of the problem on a large scale for the first time since the enlightenment. It's obvious that the state and private power which dominate our lives can't handle the problem but that doesn't mean that nothing can be done.

>>11184426
GOTTEM
YOU FUCKING
GOTTEM

>>11184435
It won't be just a few betas going on killing sprees. The next time society goes tits up all of the men hanging on by a thread will roll together into extremist groups of all stripes. Nazis, communists, islamists, etc. Then they'll start an absolute killing frenzy. The rivers of blood will be so deep you can't see the bottom, and with our massive destructive power as a species civilization itself might not survive it.

And it's not like the problem would die off with the betas either. Alpha and beta are relative positions. If Chad is the new normal women would flock to Adonisian demigods, and the teeming mass of vengeful, rejected betas remains. Huge swaths of male labor and potential completely unutilized.

The faster eugenic path for society would to put these smart betas to work sequencing genes instead of having them play videogames or orchestrate truck attacks.

>https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success

People talk about financial inequality as if it's some massive asteroid on course for Earth, but are completely and utterly silent on the problem of sexual inequality, even though it's far greater. Men can live with very little monetary and material resources, we've done it for thousands of years, but no sex? That will drive men to murder (or worse)

>>11182683
Otto Seeck, it's only in German that I know of but was the main influence for spengler. When my german gets better I'm gonna translate it complete into English

>>11182927
Where I live everyone who isn't employed is basically entitled to welfare, so yes, whores are on welfare.

>>11184243
> I dont know anyone whose routines are shaped by their need for sex.
Sexual activity is the single most biologically rewarding activity someone can engage in.
If someone does something that pleasurable, they are going to repeat it more often. If practiced enough--- habituation ensues. So of course routine is going to be affected. In fact, most people are masturbating or having sex daily if not more frequently. Even the "need for sex", is shaping and affecting someone's daily routine---if postponed for a day or two or a week, they will still be plagued by the perceived "need for sex". The "need for sex" you mention isn't a "need" but a conditioned urge, the result of ΔFosB induction to a pleasurable activity.
>Being sexually promiscuous is safe in the modern era (if you dont live in an evangelical shithole) and people do it sometimes.
It has consequences, even if you don't catch any diseases--- time wasted, mental vigor decreased due to the physiological consequences of the act, habituation instilled so you are compelled to again repeat it. It further affects and pollutes the subconscious minds.
If it didn't shape someone's routine or actions, then why would anyone engage in it? This is a contradiction, the impetus for it is purely a "reptilian urge to nut and nothing more".

You could obtain new syringes, new needles for them, pure heroin, and bacteriostatic saline, proceed research the dose for their approximate weight and then inject it "safely".
Just because it's "safe" doesn't make it a good idea, or logical to engage in.
>And they do it without reducing themselves to mindless fuckapes.
This is a contradiction. There is no benefit to it, and the only impetus for this promiscuity is sexual gratification.

How many times do you think people are having masturbating and having sex daily in addition to the constant bombardment of sexual stimuli? It is profoundly affecting their minds, and undermining other efforts in their life. This alters their time-preference to favor short term instant gratifications at the expense of long term goals. People are less productive, and anesthetized to society's problems, let alone their very own, ones staring them right in the face. The consequence is mediocrity and apathy.
Brilliant minds are wasted and ruined because of fools advocating your "no strings attached!" nonsense. People are lured to pornography and casual sex, as a fish is to bait. Not only is a string attached but a hook also, one that seizes their will and hijacks their instinctual brain.

>>11184243
>Ultimately one loves one's desires and not that which is desired.

>The degree and kind of a man's sexuality reaches up into the topmost summit of his spirit.

>Sensuality often makes love grow too quickly, so that the root remains weak and is easy to pull out.

>>11184030
it's a social construct built on a foundation of physiological reality

>>11184030
Money is a social construct. Can I have all yours?

>>11184066
im envious of paleolithic hunter gatherers, Minoan Warrior-Hunters and steppe maniacs

>>11184243
>I dont know anyone whose routines are shaped by their need for sex.
are you fucking retarded? Do you live in a nursing home or something? Do have no friends at all?

>>11182959
The posted chart has fuck all to do with welfare recipients.
I'm not on welfare and I was born out of wedlock.

>>11184742
Being entitled to it doesn't mean you're on it.
You brought in unemployment when nobody was talking about it.

>>11182683
modern social commentators have not been able to surpass the ancients

>>11184880
What are some of the best books about or by the ancients?

>if you are in any way critical of our oversexualized culture its because youre a nerd virgin.

Gets pretty old. This is like the go to roastie argument. And if youre a man saying this than yikes.

>>11182683
The Dialectic of Enlightenment by Adorno and Horkheimer is your only reasonable choice

>>11184885
the republic by plato is generally regarded as the best of the ancients in social commentaries

>>11184885
the trial and death of socrates

>>11184885
The greeks, the Hindus, and the Daoists.

>>11182683
Herman Hesse, especially Demian is considered to be pretty good. Some say Siddhartha too

>>11184892
This

>>11184816
Dude that's a shitty apology because you need money to progress in life. It's inconsequential if you're married or not to most people.

>>11184892
I think there's tons if problems with oversexualization such as porn addiction, but it's not going to cause the downfall of civilization any time soon

>>11184988
Bread and circuses destroyed rome. Hypersexuality is a circus on steroids. What could go wrong.

>>11184760
>ΔFosB
what

>>11182808
I do.

>>11184979
>need money to progress in life
Exactly. That's how insane modern life is.

>>11182939
you killed europe and with it communism, you think niggers and sandniggers will care about communism?

>>11183170
We aren't taking advantage of anything, certain class of people at the upper crust of global society are taking advantage of things, but average dickheads who /lit/ post are a safe bet for outside of that upper layer.

>>11185234
please you fucking retard economical growth and exploitation of third world countries via corporations and wars in the middle east have benefitted anyone including you
>le shady evil man in le upper society
why do you retards always have this mentality

>>11184612
This is true. The great leveling is coming. We are standing at the burning gates of Adrianople. Soon the fire will engulf all of the west and it will be the disaffected man who set the flames. We are the nihilists that Dostoevsky predicted, with an empty heart and empty head, bent on annihilation of existence. They thought the Nazis were bad, they were nothing compared to what's coming next.

>>11185270
please, elaborate

>>11182821
idiot

>>11182782
>>11182809
Best order to engage those books?

>>11185328
The Islamic terrorists, the Incels, the Alt Right faggots, every anon on this board, even the the basedboys, to a lesser extent, are all cut from the same cloth of pure listless frustration and degeneracy, trying to find meaning and goals in a world falling apart. Soon this individual ennui will morph into mass consciousness and all these groups will coalesce into one mighty nihilistic cult, hellbent on killing everyone.

BAZICALLY, frustrated losers will burn rise up and with the help of global warming, societal degeneracy and financial collapse, bring down western civilization.

>>11185270
Bring it on.

>>11182821
It's climate collapse anon. Irreversible, planet-wide climate collapse.

https://weather.com/news/climate/news/2018-05-17-earth-third-warmest-april-2018-cool-united-states

How long until we get some good books on the epidemic of mass-shootings in America that doesn't just end the discussion at 'ban guns so bad people can't do had thing' and instead actually looks into the causes behind these young men turning to insane acts of violence?

>>11185392
The NEET will ruin the earth.

>>11185476
Its all to do with sex.

All violence is born out of misaligned sexual impulses.

i used to think the fake shooting people were nuts until this weekend it leaks that obama did put an fbi informant in the trump campaign, and right as this story breaks, whadyakno a shooting, and the kid is captured alive but never seen in public again, but he did "confess", did he really need to confess i mean surely the school cameras have the whole thing? after all even columbine school in 1999 had cameras recording it all...oh this school happened to have no cameras, i see, starting to get a little PARANOID rn

>>11185491
Read more than just the headlines anon

>>11185482
Dang, you seem pretty obsessed with sex

>>11185428

I believe that climate change is devastating, but the article you posted is not proof of anything.

Céline. He hates chinks and negro-judeo-saxon music.

>>11185482
>men kill people if they don't get their peepee wet
Pathetic.

>>11185509
>Read more than just the headlines anon

i did thats the problem, obama had spies in the trump campaign trying to set them up, meanwhile the plebs are like zomg a shooting better tear up the constitution

funny how the nytimes has all these stories about how shooting are a daily trauma for students since it could happen at any moment, but when there is a terrorist attack they spend gallons of ink on statistics showing how terror attacks are less deadly than lightning or something, meanwhile school shooting are also the same, but for some strange reason they dont do it

>>11182863
>muh welfare queen meme
you have a lot to learn kiddo
https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-26-the-welfare-dog

https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-32-attack-of-the-pc-college-kids

>>11185491
yep they're all psyops anon

The Roman historian Polybius was one of the first to postulate the view that civilizations will inevitably decline. Gibbons was greatly influenced by his work, so I would reccomend his decline and fall of the Roman Empire. I would also recommend Mircea Eliade's work "the myth of eternal return" for a more traditional perspective on history, Similar to Evola's.

>>11182683
The Wasteland
T.S. Eliot

>>11183647
Holy fuck and you call that guy a retard. Go take a walk outside you typical fag, breathe in some fresh air, maybe climb some things. Get off of here for a bit.

>>11184358
Putting Betas in their place is not a Chad's fault
If anything it should inspire them to compete and better themselves

>>11183004
Gee are you sure this isn't because of postwar capitalism running rampant and crazed working conditions

>>11182683
Crisis of modernity by del Noce
Man and technics by Spengler
And basically any decent book on ethics is a book that inevitably points out the decadence of the contemporary world. You can pretty much read Cicero and find out what is wrong with the modern world.

>>11182821
imagine being this politically tonedeaf

>>11186049
>Gee are you sure this isn't because of postwar capitalism running rampant and crazed working conditions
The 19th century saw a far more rampant and crazier capitalism/working conditions, yet you didn't see that kind of lowering in fertility because things like the pill didn't exist and religion and the like were still exerting a lot of pressure on society.
Stop saying that it's all because of the economy. It makes you seem really dumb.

>>11185538
>it's another podcast made up of oblivious leftists
jesus christ do you guys do anything aside from podcasting and cutting off your genitals?

>>11184859
"I'm a tall Chinese man, therefore the Chinese aren't short!"
"I'm a fast fat person, therefore fat people aren't bad at sprinting!"
Bastards are far more likely to be on welfare than legitimate children, among other things. It's not a personal attack on you, it's just the way it is.

>>11182808
The West has become too decadent and naive. It can't and shouldn't survive in its current state. At this point I don't care where the change comes from, be it fascism, communism or Islam, but society has to start believing in something past sating biological impulses.

>>11186291
>you didn't see that kind of lowering in fertility because things like...
because things like legal equality of women didn't exist. Legal equality of women is a bigger obstacle to family formation than war, poverty, natural disaster. Boom or bust, people couple and have a lot of children, unless men are forced to treat women are equals. It is the most powerful fertility-depressing force in the world.

>>11185530
Perhaps but that's how it works

>>11186402
>because things like legal equality of women didn't exist
Legal equality of women existed in the 50s, they still had decent fertility rates.

>>11186501
Except that violent criminals tend to have an above average number of sexual partners so you're completely wrong.

>>11184030
no, marriage is real

>>11183842
>Traditionalist literature
God, what a stupid concept. To idolize tradition itself... you can't see the forest for the trees, buddy

>>11183005
it would make mediocre poetry if it didn't pretend to be the truth

>>11186528
Yet the more sexually liberated women are, the more violent the society.

Violent criminals have more partners because they are more likely to coerce and rape, as well as exaggerate claims of their sexual prowess.

>>11186526
the 50s were one of the only instances in which feminism went into recession in the last 200 years. De jure equality existed, but in practice people understood that husbands are authorities over their wives and that women are subordinates of their husbands. Spanking of wives by husbands and other corporal punishment was seen as normal and benign.

>>11186596
Violent criminals have more partners because women are attracted to violent men. You're making it more complicated than it has to be.

>>11186596
>Yet the more sexually liberated women are, the more violent the society.

Spurious correlation.

>>11186630
It is a bit obtuse to phrase it the way that anon did, but the amount of single mothers in a society is the single greatest predictor of criminality.

>>11186616
No they are not.

>>11186596
>Violent criminals have more partners because they are more likely to coerce and rape
Excluding rape, they still have more partners
>as well as exaggerate claims of their sexual prowess
You're just trying to make your hypothesis unfalsifiable.
Criminals tend to have more sexual partners than MIT students. MIT students rarely if ever kill anyone.
This is the opposite of what we'd expect to see if the "murderers murder because of sexual frustration" theory was correct.
Just accept that you're wrong and your theory is shit.

>>11186630
hoc dicitur stultus est. hoc non est argumentum

>>11186650
>answering people in Latin in a discussion

Cringe.

>>11186643
lol. Why are violent criminals so successful with women then?
>>11186645
Boko Haram and ISIS are literally just a bunch of beta males who decided to kill people until they got wives. It's actually working.

>>11186663
>Boko Haram and ISIS are literally just a bunch of beta males who decided to kill people until they got wives
That some people may kill other people for, among other reasons, sexual frustrations is a completely different thing from saying "men kill people because they're not getting laid".

>>11186638
And how exactly, does single motherhood correlate with sexual liberation precisely?

>>11186663
That some people kill other people for, among other reasons, sexual frustration is completely different from saying that men kill people because they don't get laid.

>>11186672
When women make decisions about who they have sex with and when they have sex with them they make bad decisions with bad consequences. When society has strictly enforced rules about marriage, sex, dating etc. it helps to protect women from their shitty decision-making.

>>11186676
Sometimes men kill people because they're not getting laid. Elliot Rogers for example.

>>11186672
>And how exactly, does single motherhood correlate with sexual liberation precisely?
Well first of all, it does so in a matter of fact way, as in, if you plot sexual liberation a single motherhood on a chart you'll see the two phenomena rising together.
As for why, relaxation of sexual mores and attitudes/expectations towards marriage clearly helps the rise of single motherhood.
>>11186684
Never denied this. I deny that there exist a general trends providing evidence for the truth of that statement as a general rule.

>>11186658
>he uses the word 'cringe' unironically
inconcinnus

>>11186677
>When women make decisions about who they have sex with and when they have sex with them they make bad decisions with bad consequences.

Perhaps many of them do, but what right do you have to control their vices with state power?

Are you going to do the same thing with deadbeat dads, who are alcoholic with 100k in gambling debt? It's not like women are the only ones who make bad decisions in life, and yet you want to hold them collectively responsible as if that makes sense at all.

>>11186693
Not the guy you're talking to but
>Perhaps many of them do, but what right do you have to control their vices with state power?
The same right we have to regulate all other things.
>Are you going to do the same thing with deadbeat dads, who are alcoholic with 100k in gambling debt?
Yes.

>>11186693
Men are already held responsible. Child support, Alimony, hell, welfare in general is a way in which men are collectively held responsible for women's shitty decision-making. The vast majority of welfare recipients are women.
>what right do you have to control their vices with state power
State power isn't the solution, it's the problem. State power prevents men from enforcing monogamy on the women near them. I don't want a "department of sexual morality", I want cops to stop throwing men in jail because they take the measures necessary to stop their wives/daughters/sisters from acting like bitches in heat.

>>11186645
>Excluding rape, they still have more partners
Incorrect

>trying to make your hypothesis unfalsifiable.
I'm not trying to do that, it's just true.

>MIT students rarely if ever kill anyone.

This is because MIT students have be raised to be docile and not act on their impulses, being further placated by promises of intellectual superiority and financial gain later on in life, in the hope that they will have their lack of sexual success backdated. This sometimes turns out to be the case, which ceases the impulse towards annihilation

Also the sexual assault in major colleges in the United States is through the roof.

>>11184760
interesting

>>11186707
>I want cops to stop throwing men in jail because they take the measures necessary to stop their wives/daughters/sisters from acting like bitches in heat.

Sure, but don't lie and say it's because you actually care about the crime rate in your country. I sincerely doubt you do. I think it's more likely that you simply want to control women's sexuality.

Which is fine, but it's never going to happen.

>>11182683
Decline of the West - Spengler

>>11186715
>Incorrect
correct
>This is because MIT students have
ad hoc hypothesis
Your theories are freud-tier. They're shit and have been falsified time and time again. Vast majority of the time criminality isn't about not getting laid.

>>11186727
If by
>control women's sexuality
you mean have a wife who doesn't cheat on me, daughters who aren't sluts and a sister who isn't an embarrassment, then yes, yes I do want that.
>I doubt you actually care about the crime rate in your country
They aren't mutually exclusive. You can care about both.
>never going to happen
It's already happening. The question is how soon the West will return to operating the way it used to, the way most of the world currently does.

>>11186526
The pill wasn't invented until the 60's.

>>11186754
That's my point.
Legal equality was there and the pill was not.
Fertility rates were perfectly fine.
Therefore, the pill is more of a problem.

>>11186745
>you mean have a wife who doesn't cheat on me, daughters who aren't sluts and a sister who isn't an embarrassment, then yes, yes I do want that.

The fact that you actually believe you have the power to control them is some seriously narcissistic delusion m8, and you should see a doctor.

Normal people leave when someone cheats on them, they don't double down on sadistic psychopathy.

>>11186763
refer to this chart
>>11183004

The US already broke, during the Civil War. Face it, America is just one big experiment in how to delay collapse for as long as possible.

>>11183830
>implying all Africans are "dirt poor" (poor and poverty arent the same thing)
>implying all Africans have HIV
>implying all Africans live in mudhuts
>implying the reason why Africans aren't having fucktons of kids isn't because of a massive increase in the amount of food
>implying ever African nation is in a civil war
>implying this picture wasn't made by some middle class white teenager unable to cope with the fact that his post-industrial lifestyle is the most economically damaging on the planet and so he turns to racist memes to feel better about himself

Fuck I hate the internet

>>11186765
>narcissistic delusion see a doctor sadistic psychopathy
Your forefathers saw things the same way I do. Were they narcissistic delusional sadistic psychopaths too?

>>11186779
>ecologically*

>>11186780
>Your forefathers saw things the same way I do.

Didn't make them right, faggot.

>>11186779
#notallniggers

>>11186737
>correct
Prove it.


>They're shit and have been falsified time and time again.
Why are you lying to win an argument on the internet? I'm not sure what you're gaining here.


>criminality isn't about not getting laid.

No, but violence is.

>>11186790
And a very brief period of women being allowed to run amok in the name of "equality" doesn't make them wrong.

>>11186630
>>11186528

The absolute retardation of this board. The link between violence and sex has been very well documented for ages in both animals and in humans. Literally a fucking google search would tell you that but the pseuds here are stupid to manage it.

>>11186765
>Normal people leave when someone cheats on them, they don't double down on sadistic psychopathy.
I say honor killings were a better option.

>>11186791
When "niggers" all start having the same levels of consumption as your average Westerner, then you get back to me. Until then, work on cutting down on your Big Mac and SUV lifestyle.

>>11186797
You have a choice dude. Live in a country where women "run amok" or move to a country like Saudi-Arabia where women are essentially male property.

Judging by our discussion, Saudi-Arabia sounds like your version of utopia, and yet you probably don't want to move there don't you?

>>11186765
It's about incentives, my dude. The modern woman has absolutely zero incentive to be faithful or not to be a total whore.

Are you one of those faggots that thinks prison is the cause of crime?
Oy vey, stop controlling people with the threat of punishment!

>>11186810
Do Westerners send food to help Africa, or do Africans send food to help Westerners?

>>11186779
>post-industrial lifestyle is the most economically damaging
When did that anon implied that?

>>11186815
>The modern woman has absolutely zero incentive to be faithful or not to be a total whore.

Men have no incentives to be faithful or to not cheat either, especially considering the fact that they can simply pay taxes to never see their children.

>>11182844
>Decline of social values
>dissolution of durable social units
Back to >>>/pol/
>a society whose sole unifying bond is essentially the pursuit of wealth
Weren't the years when the west was in it's best shape built around the same bond?
>increasing political polarization
As happened in various times like late 1910-s and late 1960-s (also notice the ±50 years gap), nothing happened
>increasing wealth stratification
Genuinely the biggest threat, but there are ways to deal with it. Read Capital in XXI century
>massive national debts
Not a problem. Debts are good when taken for proper reasons since national governments usually have much better investment opportunities than people who offer them loans
>increasing levels of political tribalism
What exactly do you mean by that? IF you are talking about polarization, but inside different movements like the Dem Party, then, 1st), they've never been monolithic, and second, see my answer about polarization above
>pic related is one example
Go back to >>>/pol/

>>11186813
I'm not Arabian and I'm not a Muslim. If there were a country for White Christians where women are essentially male property I unironically would move there.

>>11182939
Shut up faggot

>>11186815
>Not supporting the return of the weregild

>>11184760
based Nixon

>>11186813
Why would you want to live with arabs?

>>11186826
So? Whether men are or aren't incentivized to do the right thing is irrelevant to whether or not women are incentivized to do the right thing.

Men should be incentivized to do the right thing, but it's a different issue. Part of the reason it's so easy for men to cheat is because monogamy isn't enforced.

>>11186832
>I'm not Arabian and I'm not a Muslim.

So what? You basically agree with them on gender relations. It has to be better than a society where women "run amok".

Or maybe, just maybe, a society that treats women shit, almost invariably is shit in other domains.

>>11186848
They aren't my people. You want to live with your people, don't you?

>>11186813
This argument is as retarded as telling socialists/communists to move to venezuela.

>>11186829
>pseud objections
>tells you to read piketty
pottery

>>11186792
>No, but violence is.
Nope. There is no empirical evidence supporting this. Feel free to show otherwise.

>>11186848
But he might not agree with other things, like alcohol and halal slaughter. And besides, controlling sexuality was and is a norm for many religions, to the point that it probably stems not from religion itself.

>>11186848
>islam is gender relations, that's it!
Liberals and their "understanding" of religion never fail to amaze me.

>>11186850
Nobody has a people.

>>11186868
You literally just COULDN'T read the next line could you?

>>11186876
I read it, it was as dumb as what I cited.

>>11186848
>Or maybe, just maybe, a society that treats women shit,
What is not treating women like shit, letting them be cumdumpsters?

>>11186878
It's not dumb at all. Literally all the countries in the world that have legal equality between the sexes are vastly superior in every way to countries that don't.

If you expect me to take your argument seriously that the West is going to be destroyed because you aren't able to tell your sister she's being a slut without social condemnation, you're absolutely retarded.

>>11186869
Certainly looks like ethnic clustering to me. Almost like people prefer to live near people like them. Gee.

>>11185392
All that projection and wishful thinking. I think we know which group you are in...

>>11186881
>Literally all the countries in the world that have legal equality between the sexes are vastly superior in every way to countries that don't.
Setting aside that what you're citing is just a correlation, when have I said we should abolish legal equality?

>>11186745
>embarrassment
What is embarrassing about it if no one actually thinks being promiscuous is embarrassing anymore? For the sake of argument.
>The question is how soon the West will return to operating the way it used to, the way most of the world currently does.
Most of the world is Westernised, except for Islamic nations and some undeveloped nations in Africa. It sounds like you want the Islamification of Western values. If so, at least have the audacity to say it.

>>11186868
>"damn I'd like to shit on the streets without getting charged for indecency"
>"huehuehuehue move to india :DD it would be an utopia to you, don't mind the culture shock, hundreds of different customs and laws that you don't care about, hierarchies, poverty rates, criminality and others things :DDD this one thing which you have in common should make you feel right at home, street-shitter.
he's pretty damn funny
>>11186876
the european culture (which turned into a bunch of the most prosperous states on earth) was strongly influenced by christianity, therefore it made these nations great and should come back, see you at the church buddy :*
it's fucking stupid, unless you're willing to explain how non-slut shaming is contributing to our greatness.
>If you expect me to take your argument seriously that the West is going to be destroyed because you aren't able to tell your sister she's being a slut
along with multitude of other things, nobody said that it's the sole reason

>>11186892
>when have I said we should abolish legal equality?

It's pretty much implied in the whole "waahhh wahhh society won't let me control women's sexuality boo hoo"- shtick.

>>11186893
>What is embarassing about it if no one actually thinks being promiscuous is embarassing anymore?
The idea that if my ancestors saw her they would be ashamed of her, and ashamed of me for allowing her to degrade herself.
>It sounds like you want the Islamification of Western values.
I want the Christification of Enlightenment values.

>>11186897
>waahhh wahh men don't think it's okay for me to fuck everything with a pulse

>>11186596
Violent crimes have been steadily going down in the West in the past 30 years

>>11186893
>no one actually thinks being promiscuous is embarrassing anymore
Plenty people still do.

>>11184399
Bases anon, you've helped convince I'm not crazy and that our society is way, WAY too over-sexuazlied.

May God have mercy on us.

>>11186905
They're higher than they were in the 50s, and part of the reason why murders have been "decreasing" is the development of medical technology which saves murder victim's lives, thus rendering the charge "aggravated assault" instead of "murder".[

>>11186897
>It's pretty much implied
No it isn't, you're just too dumb and/or too much of a zealot to think of other ways to do that that don't have anything to do with removing legal equality.
If there's someone doing the "waaaah waaaah" stick it's you with your "waaaah waaah people don't want me to behave in really dumb ways that hurt myself and society". Your progressivism is nothing but childish morality.

>>11186901
>What was wrong about treating your wife as property when everyone thought that it's ok?
Also>>11186909

>>11186917
Meant to reply to>>11186893

>>11185476
How long till americans actually stop being brainwashed by the NRA and pass decent gun laws like the rest of the civilized world?

This whole thing about "women as property" is ridiculous, women had their own methods to get back at their husbands, and they were also coddled property since husbands had to take care of them. Biggest issue I see here is not about enforcing limitations on their sexuality but violence on women in such marriage dynamic. You could say that parents should help her in such cases but that doesn't always happen.

>>11186933
I doubt that this will help considerably, there are other countries with relatively lax gun laws and they don't experience school shootings. I wonder why is that the case.

>>11186933
Compare the budgets of leftist media outlets to the budget of the NRA and then reconsider who is doing the brainwashing.

>>11186912
>They're higher than they were in the 50s
Yes, they have gone up up until the 90s and then they started decreasing
>and part of the reason why murders have been "decreasing" is the development of medical technology which saves murder victim's lives, thus rendering the charge "aggravated assault" instead of "murder".[
Irrelevant, I'm speaking of violent crimes as a whole.

>>11186942
Why do you think violent crime was lower in the 50s than it has been since?

>>11186938
If you're talking about Switzerland, it's a completely different situation, but they do have stricter gun laws than America.
>>11186939
Fox News alone equates th "leftist media". NRA literally made the republican party abolish founding on gun violence studies because they know they'd be fucked if they didn't.

>>11186882
It's somewhat disingenuous to exclude the factor of poverty from that pic.

>>11186967
So "Black poverty" is at a certain level that forces them into a particular area, "Asian Poverty" is at another level that forces them into their corresponding area, and "Hispanic Poverty" is yet another level that forces them into their corresponding area as well? Get real. Poverty affects where people can live, but an impoverished Mexican choosing between an impoverished Hispanic neighborhood and an impoverished Black neighborhood will choose the Hispanic neighborhood. Stop being a retard.

>>11186957
>If you're talking about Switzerland, it's a completely different situation, but they do have stricter gun laws than America.
I know they do, as do other European countries. I do agree that stricter gun laws might help somewhat, but I doubt it will be that big of an impact. I wonder why is it that American schools have this problem to begin with. Also, not sure how true it is, but some burger anons told me that school shooting statistics are somewhat inflated by the fact that shootings might happen in or around school premises but it might have nothing to do with students themselves. Any truth to that?

>>11184760
>>11184760
>People are lured to pornography and casual sex, as a fish is to bait. Not only is a string attached but a hook also, one that seizes their will and hijacks their instinctual brain.
Too much of anything is bad for you. Too much jacking off is bad. Too many sexual partners is bad. Ya, people should make sure it doesn't consume their lives. But you admit its a base instinct. What is wrong with satisfying it in a quick way (jacking off) and continuing on? Why do you shill for nofap?

>>11186947
Eh, I'm not sure. I'd say the 50s were still a relatively calm period compared to what happened in the next years. The hippy movement, may 68, the threat of nuclear annihilation, the vietnam war, civil rights movements, the economic boom, society underwent a fuckton of changes that completely transformed it and with transformation comes chaos.

>>11186977
It's amazing how they keep pushing this SES shit even though it was debunked decades ago.

>>11186981
The problem is that your standards for what is "too much" have been hyperinflated by this hedonistic society.

>>11186984
They aren't thinkers, they're "goodthinkers", and goodthinkers will think anything as long as it isn't thoughtcrime.

If you really are upset about how women are behaving you should start practicing malicious compliance.

>>11186992
I'm not "upset" about how women are behaving, I think they're behaving poorly and some of their privileges should be taken away for their sake, for children's sake, and for the greater culture's sake.

>>11186977
I think you misinterpreted what I was trying to say. In NYC, neighborhoods were historically built by poverty because minorities couldn't afford to go anywhere else. They were institutionally locked into certain areas.

This has partially carried over into modern times because that poverty has stayed. What I'm saying is that "people wanting to be with similar people" isn't as dominating of a reason behind the setup of these neighborhoods as you think.

>>11187001
Jesus christ, this isn't just seen in NYC, it's seen literally everywhere.

>>11187005
Did I say it was only NYC? You're gonna see this in most cities because city populations are heavily determined by income.

>>11187001
I don't think the history lesson about NYC is particularly pertinent to any of the subject matter of the thread. Either you're trying to minimize the quality peoples possess, that they prefer to live among their own kind, or you're sperging about poverty in the history of NYC.

>>11186999
Well people here are clearly upset, or this thread wouldn't have 300 replies. It's pretty clear that this discussion delves deep into male psychology.

>>11187009
The point is that ethnic clustering is a) a thing b) it's not a thing just because of wealth or income or whatever else "muh economy" reason you can conjure.

>>11187001
>>11187009
>muh poverty
poverty exists, it affects people's options and it affects their decisions. Stop attempting to minimize the fact that, all other things being equal, people instinctively self-segregate. I've watched people do it my entire life. Did the Black kids hang out with each other while the White kids hung out with each other during recess because of poverty? No. It's just how people are.

>>11187012
You're a woman. You know how it's so easy to tell? You reduce everything to >muh feels

>>11187010
Not at all, I'm completely aware that people tend to live with those who are similar to them. I'm just saying that income is a much bigger reason behind how many communities are set up.

People looking to buy a house don't think "Oh I hope there are lots of other Hispanics here."

They mostly think "Is this affordable ?"

>>11187026
Are you sure?

>>11187021
I'm not a woman, but conversely, you cloak your feels in supposed rationality. The reality is that it's just arbitrary rationalizations for your own resentment and bitterness.

>>11187026
>They mostly think "Is this affordable ?"
It's amazing how affordable houses tend to segregate by race.
It's also amazing how "affordable houses" start being abandoned when certain people move in the neighborhood.

>>11187030
Let's say hypothetically a black person within that poor community in Brooklyn suddenly finds a lot of success and a much higher income. It's quite likely that they would pursue a nicer neighborhood to live in, regardless of the fact that it will have less black people.

Income and quality of life can override one's desire to live with similar people.

>>11187037
>I'm not a woman
>also you're just pretending that it isn't about feels
>it's about feels
I'm not convinced.

>>11187037
>I'm not a woman
You might as well be since you write like one.

>>11187026
>People looking to buy a house don't think "Oh I hope there are lots of other Hispanics here."
Yeah, they hope that there are no blacks there. Or instead of blacks insert another race or ethnicity.

>>11187044
Yes, but given two choices otherwise equal, that black person will choose a high-income Black neighborhood over a high-income "anything-else" neighborhood.

>>11187038
Affordability is determined through personal perspective. The poor can only buy what they can afford. Most poor people are minorities. This results in neighborhoods having a grouping of both race and income. Income is a driving force behind it.

>>11187046
>I'm not convinced

It's not my job to convince you of anything. I couldn't give two shits really if you enjoy being this bitter at the world for your own shortcomings.

>>11187054
Nobody is saying income is not a driving force.
Someone (you) is saying ethnicity isn't a driving force. Which is demonstrably false.

>>11187055
>I don't care about your feels
oh gosh what ever will I do

>>11187055
>it's not my job to
>it's REALLY about feels
>not a woman
uh-uh

>>11187037
The main characteristic of the zealot is thinking that reasonable disagreement with his ideas is impossible.
If someone disagrees it must because they're either dumb or irrational or both.

>>11187070
Pot calling the kettle black.

>>11187058
I already accepted in a previous post that people do prefer to live with the same ethnicity. I just think income is a bigger force.

>>11187074
Okay dude, with all due respect, you made your point. It was never really a great contribution to the thread anyway.

>>11187073
>The reality is that it's just arbitrary rationalizations for your own resentment and bitterness.
In other words, disagreement with you on this topic can not be rational and informed, it must be either dumb or emotional.
You're a zealot.

>>11182808
I think that at this point outright chaos is innevitable in the west. Racial tensions, the sexual revolution, and class divisions have made sure of it. I doubt there’ll be a clear cut civil war, but there may be a summer or two where riots just break out everywhere.

I think that a lot of what right wing reactionaries deem “post-modernism” is in truth society struggling to find a new order to fall under and doing the equivalent of throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

I don’t think society will regress, though it depends what you mean by “progress”. Outright civilization wide collapse is unlikely, but there will be a winner in the culture wars, no doubt about it. Two Truths cannot and willnot coexist in a globalized culture.

>>11187082
Disagreement on this topic can be rational and informed, I'm just saying yours aren't. And I'm pretty sure I'm right.

You incelposters are like blacks whining about being oppressed and you expect people like me to take you seriously when you live in the richest and freest time in the history of humanity.

>>11187090
>I'm pretty sure I'm right
Which is why you wade into the thread with "muh feels" and pop psychology instead of engaging with a rational argument at any point.
>the richest and freest time in the history of humanity
Freedom is a means, not an end. Every Incel has forefathers, and 100% of their forefathers had sex repeatedly, and yet a substantial portion of men are unable to have any sex at all.

Incels aren't complaining that they're losing, they're complaining that the game is unfair.

>>11187090
>You incelposters
Wait what?
>when you live in the richest and freest time in the history of humanity
Your analogy would be apt if not for the fact that I'm complaining about stuff that has never been this bad in recent history like single motherhood, divorce rates, hedonism and its general approval by the people.

>>11187102
>you incelposters
every time

Whenever I'm fucking some cunt (including my girlfriend), I get the strangest urge to smash her face in.

>>11187114
Good for her

>>11187114
Don't do that, slap her ass instead. Grab her neck and pull her arms or hair too. Also, don't cheat.

>>11187124
Based

>>11187124
But that wouldn't hurt her. That wouldn't do anything. She needs to be broken down and crushed.

>>11186663
>>11186616
>>11186528

Fucking incels.

There is no proof that violent criminals have more sex. Stop being faggots and provide a citation.

>>11187151
Then tie her up or get dog collar and leash and then whip her, you masochist fuck.

>>11187191
>masochist

You're a retard

>>11187200
I meant sadist.

>>11187191
You're not getting me. She needs to have her sense of self and security annihilated utterly. Genuine fear, genuine abasement. She needs to beaten. It's not masochism brainlet. Nor is it sadism. It's evening out the score.

>>11187219
Why

>>11186832
Women are humans, not property

>>11187322
They can be both and more.

>>11187322
"Property" doesn't mean that something is an object. Children are property and children are humans.

>>11187107
OH NO NO NO
HE POSTED IT AGAIN

>>11187219
What did she do to you to make you so unreasonably angry

>>11187345
If that's the case, men should be treated as female property as well, don't you think?

>>11187362
Kek they can try if they really want to.

>>11187362
>parents should be treated as property of children then too
this is your brain on equality

>>11187345
Children aren't property, you ancap subhuman.

>>11187411
I never said or implied that

>>11187228
>>11187355

Dunno. Just the feeling that I get when I'm horny.

She just seems so pathetic, lying there, moaning and gurning like a wretch, like a mewling child. Women have no self respect. They're just waste paper baskets for our rage and pleasure and they know this but allow for it anyway, under the delusion that they are empowered, that they are equal partners. They are not.

>>11186981
It naturally escalates in frequency and once pornography instills a masturbation habit, further indulgence in it, is only going to make the problem worse. People who do this daily or more frequently need to stop entirely if they want to be free of it. They are habituated to frequent sexual release.

You act like the concept of "NOFAP" is absurd because most people don't practice it. Hearing this is like being a physician in a psychiatric hospital. Just because the lunatics are the majority, it doesn't make their views or practices correct. We lived in perverted degenerate times where masturbation and all sexual excesses under the sun are justified. Ancient wisdom from the Brahmans of the Indus River Valley to perhaps the most accomplished man in all antiquity, Pythagoras of Samos, all recognized the harms of sexual excesses, particularly on the mind. The rise of medicine in the West took this a step further, and for over 300 years, from Tissot until the 1930s, it was recognized that masturbation and sexual excesses were harmful. Although crude, because they were ignorant of the severe endocrinal-neurochemical consequences, they were right to lay the cause in its proper place. The evidence they provided for their theories is more substantive than anything Freud and other sexologists have come up with to this very day ("lmao, negatives side effects are just guilt!"). Sexology was and is filled with people who are trained in the social sciences, totally ignorant of physiology and medicine. It's akin to an SJW opining on advanced nuclear physics.

I tell you, if you want to plow through books daily, accomplish great things in life and have a clear mind you can put to any task, have creativity (subconscious isn't wasting limited resources on doing the bidding of "muh dick"), and work undistracted in a state of absolute flow, abstinence is required.
I am trying to help people here realize their best possible selves. The tepid response that most offer like "dude, just stop watching porn, keep on whacking" and other nonsense is not helping people and is only going to screw them up more in the long run. This convinces them to allow themselves to be aroused, ruin their mind with fantasy. The same old pathways instilled by pornography are in use each and every time you engage in masturbation They are still doomed to a life of mediocrity. They need to know how ruinous this is to their intellectual brain and that the more they reinforce it, the harder it is to quit.
So many young minds, would be scientists, writers, and so on are ruined because of this. The anti-sexual revolution is coming.

Read Mann's Buddenbrooks.


The decline of a family.

>>11187454
>She just seems so pathetic, lying there, moaning and gurning like a wretch, like a mewling child.
You on the other hand are pumping her with a focused, contemplative expression, silent as a stone.

>>11187461

>>11187183
>https://qz.com/678186/theres-a-neurological-explanation-for-the-link-between-sex-and-violence/
“animals with sexual experience are more aggressive than those without sexual experience,” says Anderson. He suggests that this tension could relate to maladaptive aggression in humans.

>>11183712
So then..... You wanna fuck guys or something?

>>11187553
Willful ignorance, the post.
These theories against masturbation and sexual excess predate the existence of "NOFAP". By alleging "NOFAP" is some conspiracy, you set up a straw man that has nothing to do with what has been said. Needless to say, it isn't even a cogent argument in itself.
NOFAP is a community that approximately 90% wants to replace masturbation and porn with sex.
90% of people there do not see a problem with fantasy or arousal.
They do not care about the detriments associated with sexual losses. They aren't doing it to be more productive.
Most on "NOFAP" are doing it for "confidence" and to "get sum pussy", a mindset that invariably leads to more masturbation. You are setting yourself up for defeat if you go there. In fact, many people there don't even have a problem with masturbation habit, so long as it does not involve pornography. You can tell if someone isn't practicing mental continence if they say "dude, yeah so much hornier! random boners dude!" This is not the case if one takes it seriously and does not allow even a thought; in fact, sexual behavior is a feedback mechanism, the more you do it, the more you want to do it. The fact that they are reveling in it, shows they still dwell on sexual thoughts and allow themselves to be aroused by them and any stimuli they come across.

If you are extrapolating this meme to any argument against masturbation, you're a fool. It's equivalent to saying:
>Let's make a website against obesity and see how many fall for it.

It's plain to see, that you lack the self-control to even consider stopping masturbation and sex.
You assume everyone else must be the same way and think that someone has to either be a fool to engage in abstinence or that anyone advocating it is being dishonest. It goes to show how stuck you are in your pathetic habit.

>>11187644
Are there any negative effects of abstinence? Not in social terms, but generally negative effects on your health, immune system, psychosis etc..

>>11187527
Pretty much. I try to maintain my dignity, at least.

>>11187682
Not him, but nah. I think it's different for women. I remember seeing some studies linking mild forms of psychosis to abstinence. Maybe someone could help me out with a reference.

>>11187598
>I ask about violent criminals
> (You) start talking about angry mice

Hmm.

>>11187644
In a thread couple of days ago:
you post some research from before ww2 and spout your dogma; attributing the genius of old authors to sexual purity, you keep arguing until:
>you wank over da vinci being pure
>anon points out that he was a homo and he was fucking his teenage assistants
>another points out that goethe was a sexual maniac and he's still one of the best-known german authors and romantics
>you say that if your nipples arouse you then you are perverted
>other anons prove that it's a normal erogenous zone for men and that you don't know what you're talking about
>another ones laugh at that """research""" and points out that it's pseudo scientific
then you conveniently dissappear, and start spreading your drivel in other threads.
You are no different from a /pol/-poster with his shitty graphs, charts, and research pulled out of some dark corners of the earth, and equally fanatical about silly bullshit, just with the small difference that you are going to call people sex addicts instead of jews or cucks when they don't agree with your silly bullshit. Consider getting away from the internet, it shall greatly improve your productivity and clean your mind from all the nonsense and memes.
I know that you are going to respond with some more strawmen but you don't need to bother, I'm not going to reply

>>11187718
Frustration/wet dreams

>>11187762
>he takes 4chan this seriously.

>>11187682
No.
Some will allege that it causes prostate cancer but that is a canard, from a a poorly designed study which failed to correct for other contributing factors. Usually if someone isn't masturbating in this day and age, it is because of a health problem rather than a conscious decision, and this is dishonestly overlooked. That study is widely popular because the pornography industry heavily promoted it as did the media.

In fact, better studies show the total opposite result.
>Whereas frequent overall sexual activity in younger life (20s) increased the disease risk, it appeared to be protective against the disease when older (50s). Alone, frequent masturbation activity was a marker for increased risk in the 20s and 30.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08030.x/full

Celibate priests (an older study so less chance of hipcracy about their celibacy) had less instances of prostate cancer mortality than the general population.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7242091

To quote an old book:
>Forel, the eminent Swiss authority on sex, says: "Abstinence, or sexual continence, is by no means impractical for a normal young man of average constitution, assiduous in intellectual and physical work and abstaining from artificial excitants", adding, "The idea is current among young people that abstinence is something abnormal and impossible, and yet the many who observe it prove that chastity can be practiced without prejudice to health". Dr. Perier points out the falsity of the notion of the imaginary dangers of sexual continence, and considers it a "physical, moral and mental safeguard to young men". Rohleder considers as unscrupulous the advice of physicians who recommend sexual intercourse to young men. Chassaignac claims that the healthier the individual, the easier to practice complete abstinence; it is only the diseased and neurotic person who finds it difficult to do so. Professor Oesterling of Tubingen says, "one cannot repeat too often that abstinence and the most absolute purity are perfectly compatible with the laws of physiology and morality, and that sexual indulgence is not more justified by physiology and psychology than by morality and religion. Professor Beale of the Royal College of London says that "sexual abstinence has never yet hurt any man when it has been observed." The gynecologist, Ribbing, says that he has known many young men who have lived in total continence without difficulty or injury. Clarke says that continence increases health and energy, while incontinence does the reverse. According to Surbled, "the evils of incontinence are well known and undisputed; those produced by continence are imaginary." The great authority, Acton, says that the popular idea that abstinence causes the genital organs to atrophy and produces impotence is a grave error. "Chastity no more injures the body than the soul," he says. The gynecologist Hegar, considers the "sexual necessity" myth an illusion

>>11184358
Going by your analogy to economic systems you're basically saying we need communism when it comes to sex .... Can't argue with that logic

>>11187785
How do you deal with nocturnal emissions that are a direct result from quitting masturbation or sex? Are they a threat to intellectual vigor or not?

Thank you for your contribution ;)

>>11187424
Children are property, but they aren't property in the same way that a toaster is property. Your dog is your property, but it isn't property in the same way as a toaster or a child. They're qualitatively different forms of ownership, but they are all ownership.
>>11187428
The reason that parents should not be in the charge of children is the same reason that husbands should not be in the charge of wives. The greater should not answer to the lesser.

>>11187762
My research has sources from before and after WWII. I simply point to old evidence to show that, despite its age, it's still more tangible than anything offered up by "muh its harmless" retards.
You are the one setting up a straw man by your "le current year" nonsense right off the bat. This straw man is totally untrue by the way as I have cited recent neuroscience and endocrinology journals.
>you wank over da vinci being pure
I posted a quote that noted massive achievement associated with individuals leading chaste lives. Typically, the more chaste the individual, the greater the accomplishment.
Leonardo Da Vinci happened to be on that list, and in an attempt to discredit it, someone sets up a straw man regarding his sexuality (your next point)
>anon points out that he was a homo and he was fucking his teenage assistants
Leonardo da Vinci was not a homosexual. No reasonable person assume, in the absence of evidence, that he was.
This is a baseless claim by revisionist historians to justify the modern prevalence of homosexuality, popularized by the Dan Brown Novel and again reignited by the conjecture of the "pop biographer", Walter Isaacson, a Jew.
>you say that if your nipples arouse you then you are perverted
To pervert means "To turn from truth, propriety, or from its proper purpose".
The nipples do not serve a function in the male reproductive process. To have them suddenly aroused as a male, to the point where putting on your shirt gets you 'horny', fits the definition of "perversion". It is self-defeating if putting on a turns you on.
Men can lactate too, but it does not mean they should. It usually is indicative of some underlying condition (hyperprolactinemia).
Hyperestrogenism may be to blame for sexual sensitivity in the male nipple.
>other anons prove that it's a normal erogenous zone for men
They proved nothing.
They failed to offer any proof from medical journals by physicians. The only evidence supporting this claim is drivel by a PhD sexologists and surveys asking this (not hard studies seeing the neurological response in healthy subjects).
Any opinion suggesting this is purely speculative and resorts to surveys rather than neurological testing.
>another ones laugh at that """research""" and points out that it's pseudo scientific
Nothing was pointed out; Criticism was unsubstantiated.
>then you conveniently dissappear, and start spreading your drivel in other threads.
I went to bed or went out, sorry I'm not here all the time.
>You are no different from a /pol/-poster with his shitty graphs, charts, and research pulled out of some dark corners of the earth, and equally fanatical about silly bullshit, just with the small difference that you are going to call people sex addicts instead of jews or cucks when they don't agree with your silly bullshit
False equivalence & straw man
>I know that you are going to respond with some more strawmen but you don't need to bother, I'm not going to reply
The irony.

>>11188166
>a Jew
Hoo boi

>>11187859
>How do you deal with nocturnal emissions that are a direct result from quitting masturbation or sex?
Laying on my side, sleeping with less covers on, and a lower ambient room temperature helps considerably. Eating protein in the morning and afternoon and abstaining from it for dinner also helps.

Too realize, that nocturnal emissions occur as the result of excess accumulation of Cowper's Fluid, which is produced in response to sex arousal. It may initially occur subconsciously throughout the day or while dreaming. If you have ever awoken during or after a nocturnal emission. is why the consistency of the fluid is different than a voluntary emission.
Many incorrectly will tell you that a nocturnal emission is regular semen because they are are so ignorant of physiology they think the scrotum stores it and needs to be evacuated like urine in the bladder. Absolutely laughable! When in fact, sperm is continually being recycled within the testes and semen is being recycled in the vesicles via internal secretion. The bulk of semen ejaculated during a voluntary emission is actually produced during the physical stimulation of the organ.

As you train your body to unlearn the subconscious arousal processes, the wet dreams will become less and less frequent. After several months of abstinence, they are unlikely to occur more than once a month, if that. Many say "use it or lose it" but this is false too. Animals can still mate despite years of sexual inactivity. The body still supplies blood flow and if needed, will engage nocturnal penile tumescence routinely. There is no need to even contemplate "checking" to see if it still works.
>Are they a threat to intellectual vigor or not?
The hormonal penalty does not occur, so you will not experience any rises in prolactin or alterations in dopamine motivational circuits to further compel you to seek it again.
I suggest keeping your mind busy the next day. There seems to be a subconscious draw to dream activity that may cause you to recall sexual thoughts which will lead you to engage in old habits if you are not careful.

>Thank you for your contribution ;)
You are welcome, I am happy if at least one person can benefit from it. It turned my life around and enabled me to enroll in a graduate program. I read volumes of books now. Life is infinitely better being free of this.

>>11188184
A relevant point, many Jews hold animus against Western civilization for millennia of perceived persecution.
"Who controls the past, controls the future"
Rewriting history to fit one's personal beliefs ("see they've always done it!", "Not a big deal!" ) and defiling exceptional individuals serves validate his narratives about the modern world. This is not unprecedented, historical revision has occurred at the hands of the Roman, Soviet and authors of nearly every nationality.

The fact that he is a Jew, is not an ad hominem but a relevant point for assessing his partiality. The fact that he just decided to write a book on Da Vinci despite having no scholarly research in the field is very suspicious.

Isaacson was the literal CEO and Chairman of CNN... He seamlessly transitioned from making fake news into writing fake history.