/lit/ - Literature

>>15275785
This is literally a synthesis

>>15275785
unironically I have had better, her face looks like a weasel

why does she dance so white. it's embarrassing to watch

>>15275785
How is she not rational

>>15275785
I honestly would not mind this bitch grinding on my dick for a night if it meant after the precum dried up I could talk to her about Hegelian dialectics and she could go over with me her knowledge of organic (and perhaps even our own) chemistry

>>15275785
Who fucking cares if a girl dances
get over yourselves

>>15275785
the world is unpredictably complex. The autism of science and statistics is mostly wrong in the long term. The autism of analytic philosophy CAN predict the future 3000 years ahead. Nevertheless nobody could have ever predicted this. Real life is the biggest circus there is. My absurdest dreams and nightmares dont even come close to the shit that happenend this year. Hegel couldnt either. 10 years from now something will happen that nobody would have thought possible. I dont know what but it will happen lol

>>15275856
based retard

>>15275856
Hey, fuck you

>>15275845
simp

>>15275856
based simp deliberately or unintentionally imposing an agenda on an otherwise innocuous post. I hope she sees this, you'll look good in her eyes

>>15275856
roast

>>15275785
The most terrible part is that instead of performing in a strip club she's in front of other girls.

Hegel couldn't predict...STEM being confirmed midwit tier?

>>15275785
nice ass tb h pham

You can literally be a lab tech with a high school diploma. It's not much different than if she were a fast food cashier/stripper.

the only thing holding female PhD candidates back from being whores was that they were told they couldn’t do it...they didn’t know it was possible to debase themselves before an audience of retards...now that this broad has shown the world it CAN be done, i expect a sharp uptick in cases of dead-eyed and syphilitic female PhD students. queen.

>snap with girl from tinder
>says she's a reader
>favorite author ends up being john green
>hour later she tells me the 7th guy she fucked had 9 or more inches and was "straight out of africa"

>>15275907
please don't use "broad" except in the mathematical measurement way. I know we're usually edgy here and I'm mostly all for it but I think we're past that as an insult now.

>>15275785
Good for her.

>>15275912
Based

>>15275930
hello arby’s? i’d like extra horseradish with this order, please

I could be more indifferent to the unequivocal worship of sex work and lascivious decomposition of the role women if it didn't require normalizing behavior that's so tacky.

Just read this post >>15275930 BTW. Goddamn it is seriously pathetic.

>>15275912
i almost ate out this art school chick once who refused to shave (anything) and was big into free bleeding and when i went down to stick my face in the area it smelled like a the strangest combination of rotting compost and "bodiliness" i've ever smelled, and i did a tactical withdrawal and didn't go down on her. luckily i am really good at that thing where you go down to a girl's pussy but maintain maximum ambiguity about whether you're going to do anything, like "haha am i eating this pussy or no? maybe i'm just going down for a visit or briefly skimming over the area? you won't find out until i get there!" so you can tell if she has assrot, and i don't think she noticed.

then we went to a nearby bench and i sat down and she wrapped her legs around my torso like a demon woman and started telling me how "weird" it is that i'm white and i said why? and she said, because she's exclusively fucked 400,000 black guys and she normally doesn't like white guys

>>15275952
holy fucking shit, 40,000 keks on this one. the imagery of her wrapping her legs around you is lovely in a grotesque and wondrous way. I've also had someone tell me how "lucky" she was to have a white guy in her life

>>15275856
ok simp

1. no one said you couldn't do both
2. people not (and will not be) obligated to respect you for making such a decision

>>15275867
>>15275869
>>15275870
>>15275874
>>15275875
No really honest to God I don't see why I should care. Everyone acts like it's such an obvious and concrete matter that there's a serious problem here, but I know there's no sophisticated thought behind that. I know this partly because of the nature of the assumptions that get made against a person who says things like what I said. As if it's inconceivable that I'm not defending a kind of morality or asserting an agenda, but genuinely unable to see why I should give the faintest fuck about this. Nooo - it must because I'm a simp, I am a psyop on behalf of the tranny legion, I am the Jews come to take from you your hopes and dreams.

No, I just don't see why I should care, and I don't see how caring about this doesn't trace back to sexual insecurity. Seriously, all of you, consider that fact: is it a coincidence that you take issue with this, and that you're sexually insecure or inexperienced?

The matters surrounding sex become way less significant once you're sexually active, and you can see more clearly when the stakes are lowered. There's no connection between what this girl does and any serious consequence.

>>15275808
>her face looks like a weasel

This is a bonus.

>>15275912
How and why the fuck did you end up at that conversation point

>>15275996
Post body and jawline

>>15275996
Do you happen to own a flag with a snake on it?

>>15275996
>I am the Jews come to take from you your hopes and dreams.
t. moshe

>>15275785
And it repenteth me I made man.

>>15275785
Thesis: PhD candidate isn't making money
Antithesis: strippers make money
>Synthesis: Stripping PhD candidate making money

>>15275999
It's insanely easy to get a tinder chick to divulge her sexual history. Literally just ask. Another one told me about being handcuffed and fucking so hard her head went through the drywall.

>>15275996
simp & bluepilled

>>15275785
>that nose
Hmmmmmmmmmm
dare I say
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

>>15275952
That girl sounds generally mentally ill

>>15275996
The society you live in is degenerating into lecherous debauchery. It does affect you.

>>15276027
do we have any idea if this originated with the OP? do we have information on him/her/them?

The only sex work that has some minimum level of dignity for women is pornography, it has contracts, well established companies, etc. I feel this is the type of thing that should hardly discouraged, psychological damage, rarely talked here in a real sense, is going to being rampant. People would argue about everything yet few will mention "will this, after years, made this person more prone to mental illness?" And academic literature seems to assure us of this, yet, porn does not seem to have that effect aside the social stigma. I'm open to seeing other literature.

>>15275996
There's plenty of research showing that a more lax attitute towards sexual relationship is correlated with less stable long-term relationships, and is clear that her night job is a highly sexualized one. Males across nearly all societies would consider her behaviour to be unattractive for a long-term mate, and I see no reason to doubt the insticts produced millions of years of evolution because some simp on 4chan tells me I cannot judge people by their behaviour.

>>15276049
Julius Evola

>>15276026
I know girls keep track on their sexual acts and love talking about it but as I man would never want to know about it.

I'm not deluded think these girls are fair maidens but it's a massive turn off when girls talk about other guys they have been with

>>15276051
The new version of porn seems to be women selling nude pictures of themselves to the dumbest men who have ever lived. I can't see how that could really be traumatizing to them.

>>15276051
What? Many porn stars are mentally ill. Plus they're always drugged up and often abused by their handlers.

>>15276059
but generally speaking heterosexual monogamous relationships have no basis for their existence other than to support existing hierarchical institutions owned by the Jews. I for one am fine with sexual liberation movements if it means moving into polyamorous and free-loving territory so as to subvert Jewish hegemony

>>15276051
You don't have to make concessions like this just to appeal more reasonable. Google up any of the private contract terms and conditions the average porn star agrees to. It's bascially a meat market for sex organs.

>>15275907
Dude, like a third of the female graduate students I've met have done sex work in some capacity. This is not atypical at all.

>>15276069
Good for you, cuck

This is the state of Western women. Even with education, they are still whores.

women are retards lol this is not how you make a happy life for yourself

>>15276090
Women are happy about it. It's the men who suffer.

Men promoted in every religion and culture sexual modesty. It turns out our 'misogynistic' ancestors were just trying to not open Pandora's box of women ruling the world through debauchery

>>15275785
>biology
oh no no NO NO NO AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA

Why are these whores so bad with money? I'm a GTA right now at a pretty large R1 university and I make more than enough money to live comfortably.

>>15276106
>Women are happy about it
Until they hit 30 and then it's an unstoppable decline. Frankly I don't give a shit how easy young women have it, I rather be a self-aware man in any time of life.

>>15276106
>Women are happy about it.
Suicide and mental illness in women is up over the last ten years or so. Intuitively, people know that this goes against nature.

>>15276070
Would you please provide a link to such contracts? A simple search does not seem to show the results you talked about. Also, you comment completely ignores feminist pornography, art pornography and that which is made in a relationship.

It has become mainstream after a jump when it became seeable in the media: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Feminist%20porn,Queer%20porn

Finally, if porn actors have bad contracts and such, the point is, in comparison to prostitution and stripping is it the same? Better?

>>15276142
Suicide and mental illness is far higher in men and is increasing faster than women

>>15276067
Indeed, it comes from a very desire to do so.

>>15276161
This is true, yes.

>>15275865
You would agree that there is an acceleration of the pace that reality keeps becoming more and more exponentially like a circus?

>>15276157
>and that which is made in a relationship
Most amateur porn is revenge porn

>>15276161
Yes, everyone is unhappy and it's only getting worse

>>15276082
I would like to see a research made on a group that did sex work and some that did not, comparing grades, general performance and such.

>>15276157
On my phone right now, but there's a documentary called Hot Girls Wanted that gets more into it.
Just a personal speculation but I have to think legally instituted prostitution wouldn't have the same psychological impact as pornography.

>>15276135
I've never being able to tell, from personal experience it comes from a desire of not having to endure any sort of hardship. I feel such situation is good as it gives a certain caracter. I don't know if you are getting my idea but graduate work shows that some parts of academia are not very good, the experience on the PhD prepares you for that.

Academia only allows for women and rich people. If the educated are by nature unintelligent or dull, you won't have any troublesome thinkers.

>>15276172
>>15276186

The point is that most women prefer this sexual liberation because they thrive off it. Men are mixed but we naturally come to a stoic or religious view point on sexuality which is why far more men react badly to this modern society

>>15276059

Who cares. And by the way: society will only move forward. There’s no stopping sexual freedom for women, no matter how much people rage against it.

What that Anon was probably trying to say it’s that there’s no use to get angry or triggered with something like OPs video. He might even choose for himself a way more shy and repressed girl, but that doesn’t change the fact that worrying about others and about lost causes is a waste of time.

By the way, how many of you are angry because of religion?

>>15275874
I hope she sees your post. She'll see she has been epicly owned by based anon and will automatically wear more clothes

>>15276196
Dude (or girl) I was actually going to cite that doc, I think I'm not getting myself well explained, my hypothesis is that is the least horrible sex work. Prostitution the worse of them all.

>>15275785
>calls herself dani_the_scientist
>not dani_the_whore
on some level even she knows to be ashamed of her actions
the psychological trauma will catch up to her eventually
probably in her mid 30s as the last of her eggs start drying up and she realizes her so called career is meaningless

a story as old as time
time being the last 50 years or so

>>15276216
Asking "who cares" in an argument with people who obviously care is retarded.

>>15276216
>And by the way: society will only move forward.
rather naive view isn't that

>>15276045
It all seems like a pleasant affair to me

>>15276059
>studies
I'm familiar with this narrative and most of the time strikes me as pseudoscientific, where it suffices for anyone to say "there's studies" without any concept of how studies work and how data should be interpreted. I
People like to lean heavily on "correlations". Ice cream is correlated with heat stroke, because both occur on hot days. There needs to be a logical account of what the correlation actually informs.
It can fairly be said that people who are sexually active are also more selective with relationships, people with convictions against sex are more likely to commit to what comes. I'd grant that it is easier to commit when it's the first person you're deeply involved with and there's merit to that, but as an exchange of pros and cons. Acting like there's ground to condemn the other lifestyle is what seems like an irrationally motivated leap to me.
I personally prefer the system in which we adventure around and develop ourselves through diverse encounters.
It's better to go deep and stable with one person to be sure, but that's what everyone wants in the end. An excess of promiscuity may be unhealthy, that's in virtue of being an excess of something. I don't think there's any problem with the mean case.

>nearly all societies would consider her behaviour to be unattractive for a long-term mate, and I see no reason to doubt the insticts produced millions of years of evolution
Brazen pseudoscience.
First of all, no one should design their behavior over what is attractive to the opposite sex. Compromise at best. Second of all, what instinct, and to what extent are instincts a measure of what should be? Humans have existed for 200,000 years(not "millions") civilization has existed for less than one percent of that time. Evolution happens slowly, and in all likelihood our "instincts" are answers to a different state of affairs. Regardless, we can identify all sorts of impractical instincts surrounding attraction.
I don't feel any instincts at this girl. I think you're suffering something more abstract than instinct.
As for what society thinks... Yes, traditional societies cared deeply about their structure. I don't see what I should make of that. Societies evolve, if you're going to appeal to evolution as a justification for a present state of affairs (your instincts and the feelings of society) then you suffer the consequence of justifying the prevailing trends as a consequence of evolution. Here we have an ever-growing culture of sexual freedom and it is both normalized and moralized. Distinguish this from the "debauchery" of people who simply don't care about morality - no, here we have people making a morally motivated effort to develop society in a certain way, however misguided they may be. This post being evidence to the point, this woman is expressing a moral conviction. Again, it may be a wrong conviction, that's certainly a matter for discussion.

>>15276106
I'd genuinely like to know what male has killed themselves because women are "more" sexual.

No no, men don't kill themselves because of consumer capitalism, endless bills, debt filled health industry, finance culture, unable to raise and care for families, urbanization, endless metropolitan destruction of nature

no dude it's because girl take off clothe

>>15276227
Well prostitution should've been legalized in the states decades ago. It's so overdue so much as mentioning it is basically a fool's errand, but then again everything in this country is basically a psyop so lol

>>15276216
>Who cares. And by the way: society will only move forward. There’s no stopping sexual freedom for women, no matter how much people rage against it.
The west is currently in the process of dying and being replaced, all demographic evidence is against you.

>>15276261
>No no, men don't kill themselves because of consumer capitalism, endless bills, debt filled health industry, finance culture, unable to raise and care for families, urbanization, endless metropolitan destruction of nature
>no dude it's because girl take off clothe

My friend, it's all the same devil

>>15276290
>read Submission
>become Muslim
anyone else?

>>15276216
Oh, anon. Nothing ever ends. Round and round humanity will go, until moksha is achieved.

>>15276311

I hope poetic drama becomes a thing again.

>>15276255
There's so much wrong here that it would take way more effort to unpack it all than anyone here should be willing to put forward.

>>15276261
sexual liberation is a function of capitalism, don't pretend to be le ebic anti-capitalist smart man when you're just picking and choosing what parts of capitalism you don't like at will.

>>15275996
I seriously wish ignorant people who don’t really care would just shut the fuck up. All you people ever have to say is “hurrr but why do you even like care” unwittingly dealing massive damage in what is either apathy or an over compensation for the impulse of wanting to contribute intellectually while being incapable of doing so meaningfully. It’s probably too far gone for anything to be done, and from that angle you have a point to the futility of caring, but at least let us sink in one of the final floating bastions of reason in peace, free from the incessant chirping of “but like how does it even effect you???” As we all go down

>>15276347
Ultimately this

>>15276302
No, it's really not. Unless you find evidence of men killing themselves explicitly because of sexual liberation, you're wrong. Male suicide rates are particularly high among the poor and elderly, for a reason. At best you can say the decline of the church has been traumatizing for men because it correlates with loss of control over females, but then again, that's capitalism rendering churches and their institutions obsolete, because it blocks potential markets. The constant commercialization of society and the needs for the rich to commercialize everything in existence, has rendered the elderly to be a burden. Men actually kill themselves primarily because they're just flat out lonely, or financial reasons, and more often a combination of both. girl take off le cloth is not the reason men kill themselves. By the way, suicide is extremely high in China and across East Asia, where gender hierarchy is still relatively strong.

>>15276234
Unfortunately this is false.
She will perhaps at best feel a slight gloom at the thought of lost purity.
As she starts to age she'll find a beta provider or sperm bank. She'll get pregnant. The child will have issues.
Women are the de facto oligarchs of the renewing world. Their interests are commercial. Niggers and lipgloss are the things that appeal to the 21st centuries' female brain.

It's OVER for me and you.

>>15276347
I'm not. That's what's funny about it. Idiots love to say Marxists or whatever the fuck caused degeneracy (whatever that even means), but the reality is >>15276356

>>15276330
Lol what, like human society not having existed for "millions of years"?
You would've been better off not responding

>>15276183
Yes. I go crazy thinking about futurists who make claims about transhumanism etc. The wavelength of dialectics will be shorter and shorter and with greater and greater amplitudes the further we stray into the future. First it was centuries until small progress occured, then decades for great progress and if it continues it will be nanoseconds until incrompehensible progress. Transhumanists claim that we will merge with machines and explore space time as pure information or in classical terms "ideas" in the far future. If that was ever to happen reality would collapse in a resonance catastrophy. I dont buy it...but human reality does accelerate. Reverse entropy- humanity organising into more complex spirit and matter. When will this anti-natural madness implode?

>>15276255
You're the guy who's wife convinces him to fuck other people inside a marriage and then you can't rationalize why she won't fuck you anymore. You cannot rationalize or justify biology. There are set rules, period. You will find them out for yourself; remember this post friend.

>>15276365
I’m as cynical as the next guy but go outside buddy

>>15275814
Sorry she wasn't twerking, nigger

>>15275996
Right. If we're gonna go the way of "Does it really affect you?" you might not like where we end up

>>15276374
>ranshumanists claim that we will merge with machines
This is maybe the dumbest of all the dumb things they think. Any such merger would be like 1 trillion parts machine, 1 part human, if it even bothered keeping around the human part at all(i cant see why it would).

>sex bad!
ever think its just you?

>>15275785
>The fuckin' schnoz on this bitch
Clearly jewish subversion

>>15276366
You're complaining about capitalism and commercialization through one side of your mouth and then defending sexual liberation with the other. sexual liberation is a part of capitalism, don't complain about capitalism if you're going to defend sexual liberation because it's logically inconsistent.

>>15276365
you're just as mind pozzed as those you accuse

>>15276371
No I was more referring to all of your bullshit social commentary where you basically just handwave away any evidence you don't like so that your worldview can remain safe and happy.

>>15276365
This is an incredible level of demoralization. Schlomo really got in your head. And I don't even mean that in some polack conspiratorial sense, the Jewish idea on 4chan is just a good way to capture the essence of this kind of psychological undermining.

>>15276398
Quiet, roast.

>>15275785
>phd candidate
>doesn't pay well
why is america so shit?

>>15276398
>me (clearly): sex is bad
>you (wokely): no, sex is good
You have enlightened me. Imagine the kind of person that saves this file onto their computer and uses it to make this post.

>>15276442
It does pay well
>stipend
>room and board
>food
>can pilfer the loan system

>>15276413
No, post clearly said that men kill themselves for financial and commercial reasons, and not women stripping. I should rephrase that sexual commercialization is a result of capitalism, and not so much sexual liberation. If men and women were sexually liberated and quit placing so much value into a commercially constructed understanding of the other gender, that would be sexual liberation. You're reading what you want to read though, I know. You want to own the leftards epic ben shapiro styles. I get it. I'd like to think that I was relatively unbiased in my description though.

>>15276398
>autonomic response good because +pleasure

>>15276442
>do something that doesn't contribute to society
>society doesn't compensate you for your wasted efforts
Sounds OK to me.

>>15276350
>unwittingly dealing massive damage in what is either apathy
That's an understandable perspective and up for discussion. I'm not grounded in apathy, I express apathy to counter an irrational excess of feeling in a certain place. I have a feeling for the opposite case, but there is no one here who is willing or able to hear such a thing without the same bullshit you're describing. You know damn well I can't utter the slightest defense of this sort of thing without being buried by accusations of being a simp or a transexual.

>for the impulse of wanting to contribute intellectually while being incapable of doing so meaningfully.
That's easy to say, isn't it? I feel like I've provided a reasonable and consistent case, and I'm open to correction. But you've chosen to sweep it aside. I can't control how you perceive me but I have a hard time stepping into your perspective and seeing how your take on this is justified. Rather, I'm skeptical of your suggestion that I really seem all that unreasonable, and I think you're speaking out of a deeper objection to what you take me to stand for as opposed to anything I said.

>but at least let us sink in one of the final floating bastions of reason in peace, free from the incessant chirping
If you can't defend it, it's not much of a bastion.
I can imagine respectable cases being made for the conservative perspectives implied in this thread, but no one here seems actually willing or able to make them. That's why I "chirp" that it's a bunch of bitchy bullshit with no serious grounding. Because I see no serious grounding, just a bunch of people pretending that it all goes without saying and isn't worth explaining. It's not the politics that are at issue for me here, it's the intellectual form. I see these people as irrational and I don't see why I shouldn't.

>>15275785
Considering that I wanted to become a psychologist but I couldn't do it because university debts are fucked, this shit isn't really that bad. Still wouldn't date her though.

>>15276434
I didn't handwave anything, I respectfully explained how it seems to me and if there's any gaps or errors or anything that could be corrected in what I said you can point it out. But you won't, of course, just know that everything you're doing looks to me like bluffing to obscure your inability to actually argue your case.

>>15276216
>Who cares.
Men who can actually be selective when it comes to their partners. Low value men like you can keep the leftovers.

>>15276378
You don't know me or my occupation.
>>15276436
Men in cultural spheres have resigned themselves to the pro-feminist narrative. Men in scientific spheres are perpetually impotent because of their dead fields and are walking on egg shells amidst affirmative action. Businesses by old boys are the only domain where women suffer real repression, for the rest the vaginal jew has completely kiked us out of prominence.

Male parameters and maxims don't hold up to that of the female. These organisms are narcissistic and consumerist and no matter or amount of pleading will convince them otherwise.

>>15276465
I'm not the guy who said that men are killing themselves because of sexual liberation and I'd consider myself a Marxist. You said
>No, it's really not.
when someone told you
>My friend, it's all the same devil
sexual liberation is indefensible
so I don't know what you're trying to say anymore because you're going in like 5 different directions.

>>15276371
Hominids have certainly existed for millions of years, and if you're trying to argue homo sapiens are the first on their line to care about not being cuckolded you're retarded.

>>15275785
It's no coincidence that everyone who objects to this is full of spite
Call me what you will, I'll never take spiteful voices seriously. You people are lost

What a surprise, most philosophers and cultured men are misogynist or homosexual.

Perhaps because he who goes down the rabbit hole invariably realises the inherent infantile nature of these consumerist sows.

I saw Irreversible yesterday.
What I took from it, regarding social commentary is:
- frustrated men will lash out in depravity and violence
- women are complacent and remain subordinate to men
- partners 'chosen' by women are childish and forceful
- intellectual men are alienated but nevertheless possess substantial power potential

>>15276255
>There needs to be a logical account of what the correlation actually informs.
The logical account is variance in personality types and reproductive strategies. Those that seek sexual relationships with many different partners are clearly less interested and geared for long-term monogamous relationships. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

>It can fairly be said that people who are sexually active are also more selective with relationships, people with convictions against sex are more likely to commit to what comes.
Empirically false.

>>15276542
You're making several steps here and none take you closer to being taken seriously.
Yes, hominids have existed for billions of years, life has existed for billions, so on and so forth. But that's not what you originally meant. You just didn't know anything about the actual human timeline and now you're trying to hide it.
What the fuck any of this has to do with cuckoldry is beyond me.

>>15275814
nigger detected

>>15276594
>But that's not what you originally meant. You just didn't know anything about the actual human timeline and now you're trying to hide it.
Based retard. Imagine thinking you're special for knowing homo sapiens are between 100,000-200,000 years old. That's common knowledge, you imbecile.
>What the fuck any of this has to do with cuckoldry is beyond me.
Caring about past sexual behaviour arises from sexual jealously, which is a way males of a species can reduce their chances of being cuckolded. Policing sexual behaviour of your partner has a clear evolutionary reason behind it, you're just blind to it.

>>15276594
u being srs m8. The literal only reason men care about their women being chaste is so they dont cucked, which is evolutionarily like simply dying.

>>15276508
I normally wouldn't have any problem going through your post sentence-by-sentence to call out the bullshit but my "s" key is broken so I have to ctrl-v to type "s" and every time I want to quote one of your bullshit sentences I'd have to copy it and then recopy an "s" to reply to it, too much work.

Now, the most egregious thing you said was
>It can fairly be said that people who are sexually active are also more selective with relationships, people with convictions against sex are more likely to commit to what comes.
which just makes absolutely 0 sense. In fact it makes less than 0 sense, because the opposite seems to be the most logical way of looking at things. People who are more sexually active are self-evidently not more selective, that's why they're more sexually active. I don't understand how you came to your conclusion at all you just say "it seems fair to say" and then say something that's intuitively the opposite of true. The rest of your post is handwaving inconvenient evidence as psuedoscience or expounding your cartoonish "this porridge is just right" view of the world.

>>15275996
nigga it's not a personal matter it's about societal trends and having a pool of good mates.

>>15276588
>Those that seek sexual relationships with many different partners are clearly less interested and geared for long-term monogamous relationships. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.
Sure. It's a question of to what degree and to what end. Again, an excess of anything is bad, but a moderate amount of sexual liberality is inconsequential.
The logical trickery lies in construing this as evidence of a problem. It's an assumption made on the basis that a long term monogamous relationship is good, therefore what does not conduce to that end is bad. But that invites a lot of absurdities.

>Empirically false
I have no regard for bluffs

>>15275814
Why did this become such a big meme in America? It's as if you forgot that all of the formal dances, basically everything above twerking, have been created by continental Euros lmao.

>>15276065
which book? or is it just OP copying his style?

>>15275996
Imagine if that was your sister. I say this to everyone who tells me about how it's ok for women to eat men's asses, etc. basically do anything besides missionary sex for the sole purpose of reproduction or passionate tender sex with a long-term monogamous partner at the very least. Think about it if you have a good relationship with your sister, mom, whatever female you're close to in your family in a not sexual way. Imagine them sucking the cum out of some guy's dick as he slaps them. Imagine them getting abused by some guy who spunks on their face and grabs their tits. Are you ok with this? Could you look them in the face when thinking about this and not cringe? That is the heart of the matter. If not, you are a hypocrite. Cope all you want.

the funny thing is that she seems more happy and successful in life than all the dumb puritan incels itt

>>15276609
>That's common knowledge, you imbecile.
I KNOW RIGHT?
THAT'S WHY ITS HILARIOUS THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW THIS

>Caring about past sexual behaviour arises from sexual jealously, which is a way males of a species can reduce their chances of being cuckolded
Rather, the fear of cuckoldry is natural, and it gets abstracted in various ways by various individuals to varying degrees of rationality. Feeling this fear in response to something does not validate a negative interpretation of the object of fear. You could feel jealous over a woman saying "thank you" to a cashier if you want, that means nothing about the interaction or the people involved, it is not nature speaking wisdom through your emotions, it's you being insecure.
I don't feel any jealousy about a woman dancing on a stage. I would feel jealousy over things that I would personally relate to being cheated on or the likelihood of being cheated in. I assume you mean to suggest that this woman is more likely to cheat in virtue of the principle which disposes her to dance on a stage. I see why you'd think such a thing, but I don't think the reasoning is thorough.

>>15276466
yes.

Marx must be happy since she is not getting paid enough for her real job. Instead she is alienated by working extra as a dancing whore at night.

>>15276641
>Again, an excess of anything is bad, but a moderate amount of sexual liberality is inconsequential.
Most men (and women) would not call what the woman in the OP is doing "moderate" or "inconsequiantial".

>The logical trickery lies in construing this as evidence of a problem. It's an assumption made on the basis that a long term monogamous relationship is good, therefore what does not conduce to that end is bad.
It does not matter to me what is "good" or "bad" according to some external moral standard, what matters is what is good for my interests, and seeking a long-term relationship with a loose woman certainly is not.

>I have no regard for bluffs
We both know well you've absolutely no evidence for your delusional hypothesis.

>>15276657
You have to understand that niggers in American maintain cultural supremacy by shaming any competitors as acting too white. White people generally let them get away with this because most white people have it drilled in their heads that defending white cultural norms is indicative of white supremacy>fascism>nazis>holocaust>evil. Black people can get away with xenophobicly defending their cultural norms because they're shielded by the media complex with the history of slavery.

Hegel couldn't.

But Spengler could.

>>15276529
Has it over occurred to you that women were allowed into the political and academic spheres precisely because they no longer hold any real power? Don't mistake the trappings of significance with the actual thing.

>>15275785
She looks like a typical rat faced raver

>>15275865
Real life is basically ran by magic not science

>>15276684
>THAT'S WHY ITS HILARIOUS THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW THIS
What the fuck made you believe that, you imbecile? Do you think homo sapiens simply popped into existence 200,000 years ago? Our nature, including our sexual behavior, is shaped by millions of years of hominid evolution, you troglodyte.

>I don't feel any jealousy about a woman dancing on a stage.
I don't either, because she has no relationship to me, but I would certainly not accept this sort of behavior if she were my wife. I don't I need to explain this.

>>15276676
>Are you ok with this?
I've done worse desu

>>15276694
this
it's spreading here in Australia too. I pull my friends up on it whenever they say some self-hatred cuck shit

>>15276694
Cope, wh*toid

>>15276623
Simple misunderstanding. I mean selectiveness as regards a serious relationship. Obviously, sexual promiscuity consists in more selections.
My point was that someone with less relationship experience is more likely to commit to a relationship for better or for worse, and the more active person understands the variety of opportunities in the world and thinks less of each prospect - in other words, it takes more to stand out to such a person. So on the one hand we have a long term relationship obtained through a rigorous trial and error process, on the other, we have a relationship obtained with a small frame of reference as to its relative value. That is what I mean, and I think it's a rather nonthreatening point. Nothing to be so caustic about.

> handwaving inconvenient evidence as psuedoscience or expounding your cartoonish "this porridge is just right" view of the world.
Calling it handwaving doesn't make it so, that's just rhetoric. YOU'RE handwaving my case. I recall giving a three point explanation of what I thought about the SUGGESTION of evidence (you seem to be neglecting the fact that none was actually there, only suggested).
So I think anything short of agreement on my end would have been called "handwaving" by you. If what I said was unsatisfactory to an extent that deserves such a labeling you could've explained how, I would've done so in your place. I don't care for your excuse about your broken keyboard. Use your phone, was I've been doing this while time.

>>15275785
who exactly said she couldn't do both?
part time jobs are extremely common in college

>>15275856
A people is made by its countries, and its countries by its communities, and its communities by its families, and its families by its members. Degeneracy in the individuals of a people leads to the degeneracy of that people. I care about what she does because it affects my people and my people's future generations, and thus myself and my families future generations.
>The matters surround sex become way less significant once you're sexually active, and you can see more clearly when the stakes are lowered
Yes, just as the high surrounding heroin becomes duller the more you consume, and the risk involving it seems moreso distant the more one indulges.
>>15275814
This is not dancing "white". This is dancing like a nigger.
>>15276694
Don't mistake this for just America. This is happening across much of Europe and Europe's counterparts; America, Australia, Canada, etc. Germany, Sweden, Britain, Greece, they're all falling to this degeneracy. We need to stand as a collective if we want to fight off the hoards.

>>15276676
>Imagine if that was your sister.
Ok. I feel nothing.
I've known a couple of dancer girls, I thought it was good for them. They were actually kind of shy and low key, they did it as an empowerment thing (in reference to the pressure of performance and being exposed before an audience, less about sex itself).

>basically do anything besides missionary sex for the sole purpose of reproduction or passionate tender sex with a long-term monogamous partner at the very least
Insanity

>Imagine them sucking the cum out of some guy's dick as he slaps them. Imagine them getting abused by some guy who spunks on their face and grabs their tits. Are you ok with this? Could you look them in the face when thinking about this and not cringe? That is the heart of the matter. If not, you are a hypocrite. Cope all you want.
The only part I'd care about is getting slapped because it's violent, I'd question whether there's a healthy dynamic there.
Apart from that... I can't see what cringe I'd feel apart from sex inherently being gross when it's other people. Same principle behind not wanting to watch people chew their food or shit.

>>15276800
Nigger/jewish dance styles (hip hop, twerking, lap dance, striptease) are disgusting. Not cute, sweet or feminine, but disgusting and gross.

>>15276824
you sound like a faggot

>>15276824
If a woman danced like that to you in private you would say otherwise, or maybe not you faggot.

>>15275785
People said I couldnt become a slave to the state to fill its quota of ILOVESCIENCE parasitism AND dance for losers who need the stiulus of an ass in their face to keep on with their day to day grind of slave labor.
>WOW BASED
>YOUGOGIRLLLL
>FEMIJEWDRONE CUMMING THROUGH!!!
Jesus I feel sorry for these plebs who think theyre rebelling by doing everything the state wants you to do.

>>15276255
>I personally prefer the system in which we adventure around and develop ourselves through diverse encounters.
funny way of describing your future wife getting bukakked by niggers while you pump out autistic self-indulgent effortposts

>>15276839
>>15276848
low IQ samefag

>>15276882
kek I'm not the other anon but you got our point.

>>15276477
The society we live in wouldn't be the way it is if men haven't all been listening for some time, you truly couldn't utter a defense in the middle east. You did not provide a good case at all, you asked how it affected any of us and invited us to reflect on our own sexual potency, please correct me if that is wrong. There is nothing to sweep aside. It is infantile and not worth dignifying because 1.culture affects us all in a massive way especially that of young people. I am not overtly puritanical, I don't think this lifestyle needs to be outright banned or punished, but like everyone here the forward -glorification- and deliberate marketing towards young people is supremely disappointing and low (and should be thought of as such). Young women dancing with their bodies on sexual display for all to see, sure go for it, like you say I really don't care. I won't deny anyone of their right to it. But its silly, a brief moment of pointless ecstasy ( I dont dare say happiness). To place such value on that is genuinely sad. Now, value on the freedom to do so is very respectable, but on the act itself, not so much. Its just filthy and low culture. Plus 2. the ideas have nothing to do with the thinkers, that is the ultimate sweep aside. Real quick I feel I should say i'm not super passionate about this topic specifically, but I am about our culture being absurdly out of whack in a short amount of time. That said I'm far from an incel, or "sexually insecure or inexperienced" as you put it. These ideas are not ones that only someone who is an incel, just to make it simple, can hold. I feel your argument is more about socially ostracizing the type of people who hold these views rather than any argument at all. This is an easily defensible bastion considering both the destructive precedence for this sort of thing in history and following that, the desire to preserve the fruits of our great civilization. That is something that the educated realize quite intimately. Also I find your complaint unjustified, because it does go without saying. Hence, "lurk more" and "board culture". This website has a long history and ongoing general discourse. It isn't about writing a self contained essay in every post.Just how this website so happens to go

>>15276741
>What the fuck made you believe that, you imbecile? Do you think homo sapiens simply popped into existence 200,000 years ago? Our nature, including our sexual behavior, is shaped by millions of years of hominid evolution, you troglodyte.
You chose to say "millions of years". Life has existed for billions, humans have existed for thousands. I'd understand if you didn't want to limit the range to human existence, or even life itself as a whole. Indeed there is a continuity of evolution, our current state ultimately informing of the earliest states. But it's utterly unconvincing for you to reframe this to be about "hominids". It's an arbitrary framing and an obvious escape from your original error. Why draw the line at hominids, and not mammals? Why draw the line at vertebrates?

What does this even do for the discussion anyways? Are you suggesting a continual, consistent progress in the sophistication of sexual instinct specifically, as something that culminates in your feelings of jealousy but not the sexual liberality that marks the general tendency of humans across most of recorded history?
I'll spare you the consequences of the premise you're asserting, and say instead that evolution doesn't actually work in a Hegelian style. Evolution is not necessarily an advancement towards a special end so much as it is a competition against a changing environment. If this world becomes flooded with ocean water, life will evolve to be marine, not because marine life is superior in any isolated sense but because it's appropriate to the environment. Hominids have explored a variety of divergent paths, as far as we know, and contrary to your apparent beliefs we don't actually know much in detail about their sexual habits and what we've retained or developed from them.
So the amount of years of evolution only mean so much in terms of conferring value upon your instinct. And again, not enough time has elapsed since the advent of civilization for humans to adapt to it in such a thorough and perfected way as you want it to be (assuming that civilized life offers a different set of demands than prehistoric life).

In short, there's no path this discussion can take that will be to your advantage. Just stop

>>15276066
I enjoy it with random sluts I fuck on the side. It helps depersonalize the situation, pick up on sexual interests, judge likelihood of resorting back to this person on a more regular basis, and overall sparks interesting banter.
If serious relationship I would rather know nothing firsthand, find details myself on the low and decide from there whether she is worth my time and pride publicly declaring interest.
Sounds harsh but in practice is very reasonable.

>>15276824
>>15276800
>>15276381
>>15276600
>>15276657
Only cumskins can seethe this much

>>15276694
White supremacists cannot understand this because they don't have it in them to realize that blacks have cultural supremacy at the moment.

>>15276971
>You did not provide a good case at all, you asked how it affected any of us and invited us to reflect on our own sexual potency, please correct me if that is wrong.
You are correct, but I offered key points which have been neglected, which is what I mean by the sweeping aside.

Now you've gone on to more elaborately declare how bad you find things and in what areas, but you haven't made a case as to how or why. This is an expression of your sentiments, not an argument to a point.

>Young women dancing with their bodies on sexual display for all to see, sure go for it, like you say I really don't care. I won't deny anyone of their right to it. But its silly, a brief moment of pointless ecstasy ( I dont dare say happiness). To place such value on that is genuinely sad. Now, value on the freedom to do so is very respectable, but on the act itself, not so much.
This is more about frivolousness than sexuality or anything severely moral, and the same argument applies to most entertainment. Why not condemn jugglers in the street?
You call it filthy and low, you're at liberty to say such things, but it obviously doesn't carry any force in a logical exchange.

>I feel your argument is more about socially ostracizing the type of people who hold these views rather than any argument at all
Incels do get unfairly ostracized, but a lot of that is a RESPONSE TO THEIR BEHAVIOR. This attitude is powerfully coordinated with this demographic. I mean to discourage people manifesting sexual insecurities as spite and social/philosophical judgments.

>This is an easily defensible bastion considering both the destructive precedence for this sort of thing in history
I'm familiar with this perspective and I don't agree with it

>>15276873
What's wrong with making an effort? I have a view, I'm explaining it to the best of my ability. I don't think it's a coincidence that no one on the conservative end here is willing to make a reasonable response.
And that's one hell of a slippery slope. Can't I have my casual sex without dooming myself to a bukkake wife?

>>15276984
>You chose to say "millions of years".
It’s a common way of saying it for fuck’s sake. You sound autistic.

>all that other shit
Literally nothing you’ve posted has provided any reason to anyone here to ignore their instincts regarding female promiscuity. It literally doesn’t matter that evolution does not have a final goal or that it doesn’t follow a moral standard, what a fucking waste of bandwidth.

>>15277069
>blacks
>cultural supremacy
>ever

You're buttressed by every institution under the Sun and negro culture STILL can only barely take over the actively suppressed white culture against which your (((overlords))) use you as a living weapon. Just some food for thought.

>>15276692
Gee anon I'm looking really hard for a point in your post but I can't find any. I'm really sorry

>>15277125
Ok retard

>>15277097
It's a wrong way of saying it, fucko

>Literally nothing you’ve posted has provided any reason to anyone here to ignore their instincts regarding female promiscuity
You failed to answer to anything in that line of argument and then changed the subject. don't bullshit me.

>>15277100
I'm not black -- and I'm with you. It's artificial. But that doesn't mean that blacks don't have cultural supremacy. It just means they've achieved such a position through the political institutions and media.

Why should I care enough to discuss this topic?

>>15277138
What is your damn argument, anyways?
That instincts have no “value” because things change?

>they said

Who? Who said?

>>15277154
My argument was that none of your arguments work, and if anything could be used to indicate the opposite of what you mean to defend

*TING* *TING* *TING*

Gentlemen, gentlemen! Lend me your ears! All this bickering about negros. I have an announcement that I think will settle the matter once and for all! Now, by show of hands, who is present and accounted for?

>>15277166
Who let you out of the attic

>>15275785
Schopenhauer predicted this

>>15277096
No you cant becauase incels are deranged cumbrains who are constantly acting out degenerate fetishes in their mind and projecting said fetishes onto other posters

She probably works for a huge corporation and then dances for a club chain. She is just another cog. She isn't "smart" nor is she interesting.

>>15277165
How so?
My arguments are simple:
First, sexual promiscuity is correlated with less funcional long-term relationships, thus men looking for long-term relationships are rationally justified in selectIng against such behaviors.
Second, human males (and females too) have a natural aversion to female promiscuity, which makes accepting such traits even less compelling.

Nothing you’ve posted challenges the main premises in any substantial way.

>>15277166
Actually interested. Can everyone chill for a second? I think he has something worthwhile to say. Let's listen.

>>15276255
>I personally prefer the system in which we adventure around and develop ourselves through diverse encounters.
>It's better to go deep and stable with one person to be sure, but that's what everyone wants in the end.
???

>>15277077
>but I offered key points which have been neglected
Like what, how you would only care if you were sexually impotent and thus affected by this issue (as you perceive it)? Please explain if its different.
>This is more about frivolousness....
Its not the same as juggling at all. You are trying to tell me that achieving a degree in medicine and drunkenly showing your butthole to a bunch of people are things to be equally proud of? That it "doesn't carry any force in a logical exchange" to say that the -glorification- and value of this sort of thing, as opposed to the hard studious work in medicine that this same women actually went out and did, is filthy and low? It carries a lot of force, especially in the eyes of women considering the pride they have for serving alongside men in the work force and the fight they put up to get that for themselves.
>Incels do get unfairly ostracized, but a lot of that is a RESPONSE TO THEIR BEHAVIOR. This attitude is powerfully coordinated with this demographic. I mean to discourage people manifesting sexual insecurities as spite and social/philosophical judgments.
You didn't even have much of an argument to begin with, that is why I tried to get you to give it rather than spew nonsense about incels. maybe its because it doesn't apply to me but I think your "mission" here really bizarre and a stupid waste of time. A scarecrow that doesn't need fighting, not in this board of 4chan compared to the rest of them at least. I'm probably going to stop this conversation knowing this
>I'm familiar with this perspective and I don't agree with it
Then you are simply innocently naive of the massive amounts of manpower, mental energy, resources, cohesion, and luck it takes to maintain a western 1st world globally dominant superpower nation on a day to day basis forever

>>15275930
I'm gonna start using this tone for bait posts. Thanks anon, really nicely done.

>>15277187
>>15277235
A small audience tonight, but we shall proceed nonetheless!

*AHEM*

Fuck jews
Fuck jannies
Fuck stacies
Fuck thots
Fuck liberals
Fuck commies
Fuck pro choicers
Fuck non christians
Fuck trannies
Fuck fags
Fuck queers
Fuck non binaries
Fuck statists
Fuck corporations
Fuck taxes
Fuck gun control
And last, but not least
Fuck niggers

>>15277289
He based

>>15277289
Umm...based department? Hello?

It just shows phd 2020 is a joke

>>15275996
>but I know there's no sophisticated thought behind that. I know this partly because of the nature of the assumptions that get made against a person who says things like what I said
The fact that someone decided to insult you instead of presenting an argument does not mean that there is no argument to be made for their position. The trouble is that you didn't ask for an argument. You posted the same kind of illogical, mouth-breathing garbage that people who are capable of neither using nor responding to reason use and then got surprised when people responded to you in kind.
>As if it's inconceivable that I'm not defending a kind of morality or asserting an agenda
You are in fact defending a kind of morality. You might be incapable of articulating it, but you clearly believe in a sort of atomized individual freedom. You believe that right and wrong hinge on a vague, unintelligible definition of "harm," and that nobody has the "right" to criticize others for behavior that does not in a blunt and direct way "affect them." You might not be aware, but it was immediately obvious what kind of person you are from the moment you posted.
>Seriously, all of you, consider that fact: is it a coincidence that you take issue with this, and that you're sexually insecure or inexperienced?
How did you draw that conclusion? A lot of anons who post here are either riding the tiger or are in stable long-term relationships. My girlfriend is sleeping next to me as I write this.
>The matters surrounding sex become way less significant once you're sexually active,
That's not true.
>There's no connection between what this girl does and any serious consequence.
1. What she does has consequences for herself and her community. This woman is no longer a good candidate for marriage and childbearing, but she will likely have children and get divorced anyway, so that's one more broken family we can look forward to.
2. This woman does not exist in a vacuum. She is one of many whores who are dragging our society down. The more common women like her become, the less interested men will be in marriage. The less interested men are in marriage, the more common single mothers and, in general, singlehood will become. The end result will be a country in which the family structure has collapsed and children are raised in the most dysfunctional manner possible. Such a country is fated to become poor, weak, dysfunctional, and unstable, and that is exactly the direction in which America is headed.

It's not about her as an individual. It's about what she represents.

Mods please ban this posters. He posts the same easy bait shit on /tv/ and /pop/

Confine him there for the love of God. This isn't fucking related to books. Reeee

>>15277368
>This woman is no longer a good candidate for marriage and childbearing, but she will likely have children and get divorced anyway, so that's one more broken family we can look forward to.
Not him, but she seems to be quite intelligent considering she is a PhD Candidate and probably worked hard to get there. At night she's a performer, I looked up her Instagram, besides the dresses I can't really say there is anything erroneous with her lifestyle. From a moral position I would agree with you in terms of the sexual display and the dances, but I wouldn't denounce the person as a whole.

>>15276255
>It can fairly be said that people who are sexually active are also more selective with relationships, people with convictions against sex are more likely to commit to what comes.
That's completely wrong, though.
> I'd grant that it is easier to commit when it's the first person you're deeply involved with and there's merit to that, but as an exchange of pros and cons. Acting like there's ground to condemn the other lifestyle is what seems like an irrationally motivated leap to me.
Not a single person here is suggesting such a thing. I'm not sure if you're aware, but it is possible to be deeply emotionally involved with, and court multiple women without having sex with any except the one you're sure you want to commit to. This is what courting is about.
>I personally prefer the system in which we adventure around and develop ourselves through diverse encounters.
We can do so without the sex. The sex is what's getting in the way of properly developing ourselves. It's hard to see another person clearly when you're thinking of the possibility of having sex with them, rather than what it might be like to live in a confined space with such a person for fifty years.
>Brazen pseudoscience.
I'm not the guy you're responding to in the second half of the post, and he didn't fully explain myself, but I think this is his point.
We developed monogamous pairing because it turned out to be advantageous both for maximizing the likelihood of a man getting a woman pregnant and for the woman's ability to raise her child to maturity. In this context, conflict emerges around fidelity, i.e. the likelihood that the man will actually care for the woman's child, and the likelihood that the woman will actually bear his child. A woman who is free with her sexuality is less likely than one who is not to be faithful, and therefore more likely to secretly bear another man's child. This is the "instinct" that the other anon was talking about. As far as we're concerned, the form of relations that that instinct helps preserve is the only way to properly raise children and run a society.
>Societies evolve, if you're going to appeal to evolution as a justification for a present state of affairs (your instincts and the feelings of society) then you suffer the consequence of justifying the prevailing trends as a consequence of evolution.
I think that there is a misunderstanding here. The other guy spoke of the biological evolution of our species. You are speaking of the simple fact that societies change. These two things are not the same, and one is clearly more consequential than the other. Also, consider the fact that your argument applies with equal validity to North Korea, Saudi Arabia, and Nazi Germany.

>>15276356
>primarily because they're just flat out lonely
Would a man with a loyal wife and loving children be lonely enough to kill himself?
>By the way, suicide is extremely high in China and across East Asia, where gender hierarchy is still relatively strong.
I don't think you've ever talked to anyone from these places about this issue. The fact that nobody is complaining about men running the country and that a huge number of women see it as completely normal to get married and stop working does not mean that they do not suffer from the same problems we do. Take a look at the percentage of men who are completely sexless, for instance, and you'll realize that they suffer from the same problems we do, just in a slightly more functional manner.