/lit/ - Literature

The Time Machine

Essentially the rich people become qt lolis and the poors become ugly cave goblins

Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy and Ian M. Banks' Culture books are the only sci-fi stories I've read that put effort into imagining a future society, rather than just using it as a backdrop for whatever drama the author wants to have unfold.

>>18187817
Probably The Turner Diaries and Camp of the Saints are the most accurate.

>>18187817
I want to fuck a big dominant gf

>>18187858
I want to dominate a big dominant gf

>>18187858
>>18187876
Both of you can have what you want. Individual sexual interests will still exist when humanity becomes the amazon female small male master race

Literotica

Also I know you spam this thread every week or so but I’m into it too so I won’t complain

>>18187817

>>18187817

>>18187858
*get fucked

>>18187817
Ohnonononono

>>18187881
There's no way this will happen. Women don't want manlets and manlets don't want tall women who make them feel even shorter. We are being genetically selected for giants and smurfettes.

>>18188401
Large men are energy inefficient and obsolete.
Large women have exponentially greater fecundity.
The amazon female small male master race is exponentially superior to a race of overgrown dudes with bad knees and small women who need C-sections to have babies.

Sadly, it may not exist in English.

It's a satire of post-war Japan trying to address the disilusions of the defeat through a sci-fi story that makes dom Blond germanic superior women from the future enslave and transform Japanese males for their pleasure.

A book that really impressed Mishima-senpai

Based Amazon posters

>>18187817
>what the human race will be like in the future?

>>18188417
>Large men are energy inefficient and obsolete.
Doesn't matter if women want to breed with them.
>Large women have exponentially greater fecundity.
Doesn't matter if men don't want to breed with them.
>The amazon female small male master race is exponentially superior to a race of overgrown dudes with bad knees and small women who need C-sections to have babies.
That's not how evolution works. Whoever breeds passes on their genes, and those genes dominate the future.

>>18188456
No, genetic modification is the future.
Humanity will be genetically optimized within the next 10-15 years en masse. Sexual selection isn't relevant anymore.
We're not going to waste resources making men big and women small. We're going to make men small and women big, that is far more efficient.

>>18188462
This just accelerates the process. No one will want short sons or tall daughters, as everyone wants their children to be sexually successful. They will select the genes that appeal to our existing instincts.
>inb4 people won't control it, corporations and governments will
They will not want humans at all. They will breed a subhuman race (see Stalin's humanzee project). The few humans needed to maintain technology will be bred for peak aesthetics as explained above.

>>18188462
>No, genetic modification is the future.
yeah and men wil make themselves 6'0, women won't
>We're going to make men small and women big
No one but your cock wants that.

>>18188455
Despite all my rage

>>18188609
>>18188615
You don't understand. Any nation that doesn't do what I'm talking about will render themselves noncompetitive. There are genes that control for women's preference in size, you can just edit those genes into the females and then the future amazon women will not care about being physically large. They will like being large and they will be attracted to the small males. So that isn't actually an argument.
The efficient in terms of food/resource expenditure, cost of healthcare, and military efficiency makes large males and small females completely uncompetitive in technocratic environments. There is no future for them. The amazon female small male master race will expand exponentially faster and they will control superior military efficiency.
Even if people do what you are saying, they will only be rendering their children to be inferior and noncompetitive. It's not a meme, the amazon female small male master race is objectively materially superior to large males and small females, and they will outcompete and dominate them.

>>18187832
Based, also
>Zardoz
Based
>>18187858
My dream is a enormous amazon gf that is at least 1.5x taller than me. Fuck...

>>18188687
What a bunch of words completely detached from reality

>>18188717
Nothing written is detached from reality. All of that is true.
Basically, imagine a nation of 6'5" women that superovulate and give birth in litters, and small males that cost nothing in terms of food or resources that control a military industrial complex.
They can expand themselves exponentially faster while using LESS resources, food, energy, and lower health care costs. They are completely superior. "Aesthetics" aren't an argument because they will see themselves as aesthetic and superior.

>>18188462
>Genetic modification is the future
Well someone didnt start with the bible it seems. If you change too much dna you break God's seal and disembodied nephilim demons can inhabit your body.
Basicly souls and bodies have a sacred link and if you accidently break it by enhancing penis size x30 AGATTCGA you might open a portal to hell inside the laboratory fetusses you are growing in your hell-lab.
Basicly where the origin of pan and minotaurs and other halfmanhalf animal creatures came from; previous cycles of hybrids without holy dna seal so nephilim could enter.
Its quite simple, really

>>18188723
Morals impose that none of that should ever happen. Giving way to possibilities just because they exist is a mistake.

>>18188745
This, but unironically.

>>18188745
i know you probably just made this up to sound funny but i unironically believe this 100%

>>18188745
Top schizoid

Whats the name of the book thats full of drawings of giant women sitting on tiny mens faces

>>18188781
>Morals impose that none of that should ever happen. Giving way to possibilities just because they exist is a mistake.
What do you mean, why do morals impose that none of it should happen? Genuinely asking, I don't see why the amazon female small male master race is morally wrong.

>>18188842
>Genuinely asking, I don't see why the amazon female small male master race is morally wrong
It's morally wrong for men to not dominate their environment and so to be weak. Inversion of God's creation's harmony is wrong.

Anyway, why not just in vitro babies like in "brave new world" ? Also how will (((they))) try to subjugate all men into submission ?
Also do you have factual reasons to think they would do what you say ?

>>18188942
But that's the point. The small males are better at dominating other people because they can more efficiently run a military industrial complex.
We don't fight with fists anymore we fight by dropping bombs on each other and destroying eachothers crops and shooting rifles at each other. There is no advantage that being large gives in these situations, it is in fact a disadvantage because you need more food and you have to invest more energy into a smaller military. The small males will not be submissive to other members of our species. They will drop boms and gun them down and slaughter them in mass and they will be and they will be able to do it for a fraction of the energy investment.
No matter how tough or competent or skilled or brave you THINK a 6'5" man is, he is still just a large target that can just as easily be desposed of by shooting him. There is no advantage to investing that much resources into a male like that. For the FEMALE it makes sense, because the amazon female has a larger women and larger hips and actually does gain an advantage being tall and thick and fecund, she can gestate litters of babies for greater ease and less pain than a small woman. But the male gains an advantage being small and energy efficient and sly. This is the future of technocracy. If you care about men dominating their environment, then you should want to make males as small and energy efficient as possible and should hand out as many rifles and weapons to them as you can.

The amazon female small male master race are a race of Lions with the dimorphism of birds of prey who control a military industrial complex.

>>18189002
Men will be more dependant on technology, women less. So men will be more feminine.
Technology itself exploit and spoils lots of ressources. Modernity is not about the good use of ressources.

>>18188417
>Large women have exponentially greater fecundity.
I don't see why this would be the case.

>>18187817
>standing cunnilingus
Bruh, I have to work all night because I slacked off all week "working form home". I'm already procrastinating on /lit/ and now I'll have to masturbate.
Unfortunately >>18187832 is more realistic than amazon wives.

>>18187881
>becomes the amazon female small male master race
I've noticed you posting about this theme for some time now. Do you want to expand on this? I think I would like to join your cult.

>>18189723
I wrote some stuff already itt but there's spelling and grammar mistakes. Basically amazon females and small males are more efficient in technocratic environments. The efficiency can't be ignored.

Tall women have easier pregnancies and fewer birth complications. There was a study done back in '88 that showed this and I don't think it's ever been contradicted. It also just makes logical sense - the volume of an object increases cubically with a square increase in the surface area (the square-cube law), so taller women have larger wombs and larger birth canals which means if everything else is equal she'll be able to more easily get the baby out, and she's bigger and stronger so she can walk around and has an easier time during the pregnancy and such. However I'm looking for an even greater level of superiority. An amazon woman, with huge hips and a giant supple womb, can be engineered to superovulate and literally produce litters of offspring for greater ease and less pain than a small woman. She can carry the children of several males at a time and make 2-5 babies PER PREGNANCY, who can go on to do the same, and the population growth potential has a much larger bottleneck.

The large women cost more energy though, but that's okay because of the increase in the ability to make litters of babies. The small males become energy efficient - there is no advantage to being large for a male in a technocratic environment. So the small males and large females, for the same amount of food/energy as a "normal" population, can support a larger population size with a significantly greater rate of population growth and a higher degree of efficiency running a technocratic military industrial complex. Smaller males also have an advantage in spaceflight. There's also the idea of attaching the SRY gene to another chromosome other than the Y which increases the amount of males in your population, which is OK because the amazon females are already superior at gestating offspring.

All of that is just for competitiveness against other groups of humans. When it comes to how they will act towards each other, well obviously there can't be violence against women because the males are too small. The women can pursue any interest and career passion that they want without the males being mean to them. They can gestate half siblings that come from different fathers at the same time, which reduces interpersonal competition between members of your own society. Like lions they will have great orgies where multiple males impregnate multiple females at the same time and the litters are all mixed up and related, which increases interpersonal relationships.

I can keep going but basically they are literally superior in every way. The only "problem" is the aesthetic arguments that are, to be fair, a problem. People, especially women, don't like what I'm talking about. So that's what we need to focus on.

continued...

last and first men

>>18189723
>>18189946
When it comes to the males the sexual preference doesn't matter at all. You don't need to train males to be attracted to thick amazon mommies they're going to want to hump the shit out of them anyway so I don't concern myself with that. The women is the problem here.

About 6% of women show no size preference whatsoever. Whatever causes these women to have no preference can be identified. I think that it's completely socialized. I don't think that there is some innate thing that causes women to have size preferences in males, I think they're taught to need to feel small and protected and this turns into a height fetish. What this means is that the women who grow up in environments where they do not have a male taller norm are not going to care about being big like that. We already know of societies that have no male taller norm where the women universally have no size preference in males. So the amazon women will think it's normal to be big. They won't be taught that they need to be small or take up less space. They will feel GOOD about being tall and heavy and thick and fecund.

However, if there is a set of genes that code for this, they most likely would be polygenetic and hard to find. I must admit that this is the most difficult part about this whole thing. If you want to join the cult then help figure out whatever it is that causes size preference in females so it can be removed. If it's cultural than we don't actually have to worry about this and it most likely is cultural.

>>18187817
Childhood's end

>>18188745
based schizo. don't take your meds.

>>18189996
I remember posting that chart to btfo some height-pill denialist and you came up replying just after.
So you're refining your shitposting with new info over time. You've been going at it for more than a month.
Don't take the meds.

>>18189946
>>18189996
I like this a lot. A very Crumbian society.

>>18188436
Ew. When will you eventually realise that what you want is a man?

>>18187817
bro... you ought to stop this... when i saw your first shitposts, now many months ago, i laughed.
now i've quit porn, found a loving gf, and became a crypto millionaire. what did you do with your life in that timeframe? you kept shitposting about your fetish, are you sure you're happy and proud of yourself? are you sure you want to keep living this way

>>18190241
Yup I keep refining based on things. A person who I believe was a woman got really mad at me on /sci/ the other day and posted a link showing that the increase in metabolic rate increases by M^(2/3) where M is the mass of the organism. However I found another source that showed that within a species the rate does increase by M^(3/4). Either way it's not super important because the difference is substantial enough that we're talking a difference of like hundreds of millions of more males for the same amount of food.
>>18190667
What's a crumbian society?

>>18190967
I don't really post this that much though. I am in school so I spend my time doing schoolwork and I do this sometimes. I find it fun and I like when people try to argue against it because it makes me need to strengthen the argument. I also argue this with my friends and I don't hide my interests irl. My ex gf was super into this because he feared men and thought it was a good idea for future women to not be abused by males.
Congratulations on the crypto and the loving gf.

>>18188687
>There are genes that control for women's preference in size, you can just edit those genes into the females and then the future amazon women will not care about being physically large. They will like being large and they will be attracted to the small males.
If your biotechnology is sophisticated enough to edit the genome at this level of precision, you'd might as well develop an artificial womb and relieve women from the burden of pregnancy altogether. If you still want amazons for fetish reasons, fine, but it's not more efficient in any objective sense.

>>18190999
If there are genes. I don't think there are I think it's cultural. The male taller norm is seems to vary too much between societies for it to be genetic. Also in my experience women who grow up in houses where their mom is taller than there dad do not have preference for men taller than them.
Artificial wombs and genetic engineering are different technologies. I don't think they're connected, like developing an artificial womb that mimics the placenta and everything is different from knock-in/knock-out genes in a zygote or modifying the germline of a person.
Why do you consider pregnancy a "burden"? I am not a woman so I don't know obviously, but don't women like being pregnant? I assume you are a woman who does not want to get pregnant? I need to hear your perspective if that is the case.

>>18191034
Pregnancy is objectively a burden in the bioenergetic sense. The same way that, as you pointed out, excessive size is a burden. Pregnancy requires a member of your society to consume extra food, move slowly, suffer sickness, take time off work and experience mood swings. In many cases there will be some amount of cognitive impairment for some time after birth, most commonly characterized by memory loss.
You might be able to remove some or all of these problems with genetic engineering or advanced medication. Again, why would you bother? Just build an artificial womb and be done with it.
You don't actually have to mimic the placenta, as one will grow from the blastocyst. All you have to do is provide oxygen and nutrients to the placental blood, while removing waste products. If your understanding of the genetic code is sufficient to do polygenic editing, then you should have no trouble discovering the optimum biochemical input/output for a developing fetus.

Living proof that femdom fetishes literally drive men insane. That anyone would listen to reproductive "wisdom" from a blazing incel is laughable.

>>18190979
>crumbian
look up R. Crumb

>>18188708
my dream is a /lit/ tomboy gf who can lift as much as me and we could mostly act like friends who occasionally fuck each other. what i wouldnt give to go to the gym 6 times a week with a girl who is entirely focused on getting stronger for that 45 minutes and then cuddling while we're still sweaty and reading poetry to each other afterwords.

>>18191536
That makes sense. I just don't think artificial wombs are as simple as a lot of anons seem to think they are. I don't think it's happening for a long time, but it could be who knows.
What I fail to understand is why you're connecting genetic engineering with artificial wombs. They're different things. We already can modify the genome of organisms and they already do so for GMO plants and stuff. We can't even come close to building an artificial womb. You probably know more about this than I do. Do you research artificial wombs?
>>18191580
I've had several girlfriends in my life.
What specifically about what I'm saying do you disagree with?
>>18191593
I'm not loving his art to be honest, but thanks for telling me about him.

>>18191705
>we will engineer people to like specific things
The fact that you throw this out to support your fetish, unaware of the horrific Pandora's box that it opens, indicates that you're too stupid or too blind to be taken seriously.
>several girlfriends
No doubt. Kindly girls with motherhood issues that move on once they realize that you're not going to grow up into a man.

>>18191705
>I'm not loving his art to be honest, but thanks for telling me about him.
Try Namio, then.

>>18187817
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

>>18188687
Women will need larger hips in the future but there is no reason for them to be tall. You sound like a short guy with a giant fetish attempting to pass of his disposition as some sort of scientific enlightenment meant for all

>>18191829
>The fact that you throw this out to support your fetish, unaware of the horrific Pandora's box that it opens, indicates that you're too stupid or too blind to be taken seriously.
As I said though, I think it's most likely cultural. The variations between cultures and even just the preferences of women within a culture leads me to think it's socialized. I brought up the possibility of a genetic component solely to eliminate that preference for the sake of the efficiency of the dimorphism. I don't want to engineer specific desires into people, the point was to REMOVE the obsolete and inefficient desire of that women have for large males, if it actually is genetic (which again, I don't think it is). I don't think my preference/fetish/whatever for amazon women is genetic, and I don't think that women's preference/fetish/whatever for large men is genetic either.

The reason it is important though is because women selecting for men that are large so they can have large sons and small daughters will only be selling their children into being noncompetitive, because as much as you or they may not like to hear it, small males genuinely are superior in technocratic environments and when in control of military industrial complex. They expand themselves faster, there are more of them, they can output more labor and destruction and they do so for lower energy and resource cost. They are superior astronauts, superior laborers, soldiers, etc. Large males have no advantage on an individual level and on a civilization level they are significantly disadvantaged. This can not be allowed, we must evolve and remain competitive.
>No doubt. Kindly girls with motherhood issues that move on once they realize that you're not going to grow up into a man.
I don't consider being a sexually dominant male or a large male to be a "real man". I take care of my responsibilities, I don't live with my parents, I work hard. What do you mean by "grow up into a man"?
>>18191835
I knew about him already lol he's okay but I actually like gentle stuff more than domination stuff.

>>18191923
Tall women have easier pregnancies and they can be modeled to superovulate. Small women simply do not have as easy of a time doing this.
My fetish is in fact a scientific enlightenment meant for all. It is not an attempt it is the reality.

I understand why the sheer depravity of man and the seriousness of the seven deadly sins was hard to recognize for some people, but in the 21st century it's all become so clear what these things lead to. The sheer insanity that lust causes, the addiction of gluttony, the alure of pride, etc. I wasn't even sure gluttony could be that big of a sin till I saw my 600 pound life. Insanity.

>>18191950
The amazon female small male master race will be full of Price and Lust and they will dominate and slaughter all other populations.

All the guys I knew who were into "muscle girls" turned out to be homosexuals.

>>18187817
What kind of heights and height ratios do you predict OP?

>>18191924
You're saying they you're too stupid to notice the immediate difference in people's reactions based on height? Men and women? Your fantasy begins just like every other would-be internet dictator who thinks he'll engineer a utopia by correcting the defects in people. Naturally you attribute these things to a phantom culture that can be unverifiably assumed to be behind everything you'd like to rip out of humanity. Which you'll be happy to correct with whatever mix of brainwashing, sterilization, and executions that you deem necessary in increasing desperation.

This is built on a pile of untested assumptions about size, the best of which are supported by extrapolations that would make a stock pumper blush.

Beyond any of that, the most embarrassing thing is your sheer lack of imagination. You talk about engineering human genes and minds for greater efficiency, and the best you can come up with is flipped sexual dimorphism. Your fantasy freaks are easily BTFO'd by cybernetic technologies that are emerging *right now*, to say nothing what might happen with reliable alterations to human genes.

Fortunately, you and everyone like you are entirely impotent, so this can be considered as an exercise in comedy at your expense, rather than a looming disaster of mismanagement.

>>18188068
Where is this Boxxy babe even at these days?
Would calling the number on those Dorito’s bags help?

>>18187817
Why are there so many people who cant just accept things the way they are? Why do they have to deny obvious reality?

Tall men win. Short men loose. You lost this life. Get over it.

>>18192172
However small the male can be while still being proportionate and athletic. The women will be probably around 6'5".

>>18192177
It's about the sexual preference for the traits. Obviously size is noticeable. The point is the preference for size. We know it's not universal because not all women have it, and the fact that the extent various between different societies lends me to think it's socialized (there are also scientists who think this). You don't need to brainwash anyone, just the people growing up in a society where men are small and women are big would naturally cause them to have that preference because that's what they'd be used to.
Flipped sexual dimorphism remains more efficient even with things like neurolink or whatever other cybernetic technologies you're talking about. That's the whole point. And I also include things like increasing bone density, increasing pain tolerance, etc. I don't ignore any of that, but that doesn't somehow eliminate the increased efficiency the large females and small males. You can look at these genes to see some traits that can be given to people:
https://arep.med.harvard.edu/gmc/protect.html

Why are you so angry about the idea though? This is what I have a problem with. Are you specifically against genetic engineering of humans in general or are you only against the reversed sexual dimorphism?

>>18192225
I haven't lost anything.

>>18192254
You spend time trying to cope with being short and unwanted. Your genetic line dies with you. You have lost.

>>18192274
I am not unwanted, I am actually quite handsome.
I don't care about my genetic line in terms of impregnating a woman because, if you haven't been paying attention to this thread, impregnating women is obsolete as a method of expanding your influence. I am far too large to allow my genes to pass on to the next generation. I am more concerned with controlling laboratories so that I can research and eventually modify human beings.
Your children will not be able to compete with mine. They will be inferior to mine. You aren't paying attention.

>>18191705
Genetics provide the blueprint for all biochemical processes. If you understood them well enough to edit entire groups of genes with complex interactions, then you should by extension be able to discover all the biochemical processes that are required to maintain a healthy fetus. Building an artificial womb would actually be trivial at this level of technology.
Again, I'm not making a moral judgement. If a breakaway society wants to become manlets and amazons for fetish reasons, I fully support them. It's just not as efficient as artificial wombs.

>>18192248
>you don't need to brainwash people, just bring them up in a society of people that have been brainwashed or whatever because I have no fucking idea about how to get from point A to point B
Short men are unsuccessful in life. With brutal preference. You won't run a lab or have kids or a giant girlfriend. You're just going to touch yourself and grow more bitter as you realize your fantasies will never materialize. I can understand your desperation. I think if I were denied my fundamental desires, I'd go crazy too. Fortunately, I am not a broken human being, and women are all too happy to give me the things I want without genetically engineering them.

>>18192299
>I am not unwanted, I am actually quite handsome.
Your mom is a super lady.

Not actually, because she produced you, but I'm sure she thinks she's nice.

>>18192180
>Where is this Boxxy babe even at these days?
There will only ever be one Boxxy. Pic related.
>Would calling the number on those Dorito’s bags help?
No, but my autism will:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/mel-capperino-garcia-19767259
https://twitter.com/Riotswimbananas
https://www.instagram.com/swimbananas_/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Swimbananas/

>>18192364
You sound very angry. I have not struggled to find girlfriends in my life, anon. That is not a problem I have.

I don't know why you are upset at what I'm talking about. It's irrational. Were your feelings hurt when I said that large males are inefficient and not competitive? You don't need to feel that way, all of us are inferior to the future master race, don't take it personally. And saying that short men are unsuccessful at life doesn't change the superiority of what I'm talking about, and it also doesn't make sense when many of the richest men in the world are short dudes. It's just an attempt at shaming and insulting rather than giving an actual argument. That isn't going to work with me.

I just don't understand your hatred of what I'm talking about. If you actually cared primarily about superiority and advancement of humanity, you wouldn't reject what I'm talking about. The fact that the catalyst that led me to this idea was a fetish doesn't make a difference. Maybe you're a big guy who does not like being told that small guys are superior to you, It hurts your ego? Maybe you're a woman pretending to be a man, and you got angry at the notion that the future is full of small guys and big girls? In any case, there is no reason to be personally offended, or to attempt personal insults, when I have not insulted you.

My "fantasies" are inevitable. The superiority is real and because of that, it is inevitable. I will have access to a lab next year when I go to graduate school.

There will only be small males and large females in the future.

>>18192311
We will probably be capable of reversing dimorphism and increasing bone density and pain tolerance and everything in like ~5 years. I don't think artificial wombs are only 5 years away but you're right that they have a place in the future society as well. I don't think that they'd completely replace women pregnancy even when they are perfected though, but that might be because of personal desires. Some women like getting pregnant and want to. Others don't and that's completely fine too.

>>18192445
>they're going to let me run the machines at midnight, so I'm just about ready to start mass-engineering humans
Holy shit, the lack of self-awareness here is genuinely hilarious.

Every bit of "superiority" you've put forward is surrounded both by deep walls of local minima as well as higher and closer global maxima. Your malign arrangement is strictly inferior to genderless cyborgs that reproduce using immotile meat sacks. After all, why limit genetic exchange between sexes? Or try to meet the constraints of reproduction and action with the same genome? The one true man-machine is inevitable, and your ugly, fantasy progeny will be swept aside by it.

>>18192478
I'm sure you'll be making those changes in five years in your fusion-powered gene lab.

>>18192496
I have no interest in sci fi fantasies about runaway superintelligences or "genderless cyborgs". Those are not real and will not be actualized for several hundred years if at all. There is no "exponential increase in computer intelligence". There is no singularity that is coming this century.
Genetic modification is real. Biology is real. Humanity is real.

>>18192409
Oh I love Boxxy.
Mel, now? Wow.
Thank you

>>18192523
Then the future is women that are sessile breeding pods, not tall. After all, why waste all those calories in long legs and arms? A few adjustments to their pelvises will make the enlarged crania of their sons pass quite easily, though it'll likely render them unable to walk. All in the name of progress I say!

>>18192478
As I already tried to explain to you, doing all of those things inevitably leads to artificial wombs. You can't separate the timelines, because the knowledge required for one enables the other. If you want to do it for fetish reasons, do it, but this is not efficient.

>>18192523
How convenient that we're only five years away from the unknown breakthroughs that serve your fetish, and a century away from that that don't. Despite massive social movements against human genetic engineering and active products on the market linking human minds to computers.

Btw, you're going to get kicked out of school for an ethics violation when you actually try this shit.

>>18187817
The future of humanity will look like Africa.

>>18192536
You really hate the idea of reversed sexual dimorphism huh?

I don't want women to be unable to walk, that's horrible. Why would you render half your population immobile? Why do you hate the idea of women being bigger than you so much that you'd rather women be unable to walk?

>>18192597
Because it's efficient. My idea will allow those women to reach sexual maturity with fewer calories, and therefore outperform those that waste them. They might very well mass more than the large-brained, lemur-like men that inseminate them at will, but all of that flesh will be put to work birthing babies, since machines in a technocratic society will outperform wasteful human muscles.

>>18192527
You're welcome. Happy schlicking.

>>18192618
You're trying to exaggerate my position or do some form of reductio ad absurdum to me and say I think of women as nothing but birthing factories. That's not true. I don't want women to be reduced to that any more than I want men to be reduced to just being penises that do nothing but produce sperm. I do not deny humanity just because I want reversed sexual dimorphism.
If anything women being bigger than us is good because they can't be raped or beaten anymore. My position is the opposite of eliminating female agency.
It's 1 o'clock and I am going to sleep. If the thread is up tomorrow I'll continue with you or if not I'll just make a new thread.

>>18192669
I'm not exaggerating your position to imply you're a fool. I'm using the value systems and assumptions you make to posit a superior alternative, by your own definitions, to prove that you are.

>>18192679
But it's not superior because women who can't walk are inferior to those that can. So the implication is a non sequitur.
You also are exaggerating robots. Boston Dynamics is ass. Biological tissues are vastly more complex and superior to silicon and steel. Human labor isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

>>18192692
Why are they inferior? Can't a carriage take them everywhere they need to go? Isn't your whole thesis that muscle power is irrelevant in current society?

I'm going to bed now, I'll see in the morning if the thread is up. I'll make a new one if not

>>18192698
Heh. C’mon man

>>18189996
>I don't think there's any historical evolutionary explanation for why women prefer taller men
You had to make this retarded take because without it your hypothesis falls apart.

>>18192701
LOL butters is coom posting instead of leading the revolution!!!!!

>>18187832
>black people bad white people good books
Go back to /pol/

Camp of the saints

You people have far too much hope for humanity.

>>18188307
this is terrible

>>18192696
No, it's that small males and large females are superior in all traits that matter in technologically advanced societies. You don't need to be stronger than another male to kill him. Investing too much into the male is stupid because their function is done more efficiently being small. The female's function is done better being large. Small males are more than strong enough to perform all the tasks they need to. Larger females need to be stronger if they're carrying multiple babies.
It's odd that you'd claim women being unable to walk is a good thing.

>>18192708
Then you have to explain why it varies so much between cultures and why women within a culture have such varied preferences for it. There's no reason to think that women and men growing up in an environment where men are small and women are big wouldn't develop that preference. If you grow up in an environment where in all media and most couples you see big dudes and small women, then that's what you'll think is normal and that's what you'll develop.
It could be genetic and it could be the case that some combination/lack of combination of genes causes a lack of the preference to be expressed in some women. It's just less likely than it being socialized, because you'd have to explain why the preference varies so much between societies where the norm isn't as strong.
But once the large women like the smaller males, they will make billions and billions of them. They will send their boys out to slaughter and demolish the people and cities and civilizations of other women, and take their land and resources.
They're not going to be sitting around thinking >"oh nooo our boys are so small I feel like a giant cow wahh I need a big alpha to make me feel feminine and fuck me :(".
They will see themselves and their men as superior and the master race, and they will laugh as they take over the species.

>>18193970
The female's function is not done better by being large; it's done better by having a larger womb and wider hips. You've let it slip that your belief is the their function is to reproduce. Therefore, for optimal performance, they should be stripped of anything unrelated to that function. Big ugly legs are inefficient. Fortunately, the men filling them will be engineered for a preference for their swollen bodies.

Name some of these cultures where there are different perceptions of male height.

It's also amusing how you assume the women will be in control because they're larger. Again slipping your subconscious belief that height equals authority.

And of course, you demonstrate the classic frustration of the submissive male, claiming that the brutish ideas of masculinity are awful, then gleefully describing how the tallfolk will be slaughtered by the billions. Please see a therapist, preferably a female one, so she can have you committed once you let this stuff slip.

>>18187817
mad max the novelization

>>18192778
Must be nice living in an all White neighborhood.

>>18194276
Larger women have an easier time with pregnancy and larger wombs and bigger hips, they're bigger people. They can superovulate and have litters more easily than women who are smaller. You can just look this up, you will find sources and forums of women talking about how taller women have easier pregnancies.
>Name some of these cultures where there are different perceptions of male height.
Just look up "male taller norm" and again you'll find many sources that talk about the variance between different cultures. You can also look up the male taller norm through time and you'll see that it's actually the lowest in the modern era that it's ever been. As a percentage of the total population, there are more couples where the guy is shorter/smaller than the girl than ever before in America. This is strong indication that it's mostly a social norm.
Obviously it could be genetic which is why I also talk about that too. But in any case, we know that there exist many women who have preference for being larger than males, and many women who don't care either way.

Both men and women will have about equal control over society, women may have slightly more but so what.

>And of course, you demonstrate the classic frustration of the submissive male, claiming that the brutish ideas of masculinity are awful, then gleefully describing how the tallfolk will be slaughtered by the billions.
I never said that the brutish ideas of domination of other people are awful. I just don't ascribe that to what you would call "masculinity" or somehow being the sole domain of large guys. The point that I'm talking about is that the small males are more effective than large males in the modern world and when it comes to civilization levels of domination. I am not saying that tall height is inferior, I'm saying that tall MEN are inferior, because they are. Tall women are superior. I have said in other threads "small males are better than large ones, and large females are better than small ones".

Tall women and small men are equal to each other, and superior to large men and small women.

>>18194276
I also don't understand why you keep making insults at me and saying that I should be committed or whatever when I haven't insulted you. I could be wrong but what makes the most sense to me is that you're a person with the direct opposite sexual interest that I have and you are personally offended or threatened by what I'm talking about? That you're either a large guy who likes small girls or a woman who likes large guys so the nature of what I'm talking about is inherently offensive to you?
I just would like to know.