/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11172900]

Any books on enforced monogamy?

[Anonymous No.11172911]

>Women will only go for the highest status men

That's not true, the majority of women don't have access to high status men.

[Anonymous No.11172917]

wouldn't it be easier to allow polygamy and force any man above 25 without a girlfriend to become a trap?

[Anonymous No.11172921]

concubines allowed though

[Anonymous No.11172935]

>>11172917
>and force any man above 25 without a girlfriend to become a trap?
This isen't something I will hate. Honestely, if other people will pay my hormonous and plastic surgeries, fuck, this will be my heaven.
In this world, I can LARP as a trap slave all I want without any bads in life.
The future is of the shemales silly's

[Anonymous No.11172942]

>>11172935
Tho I am already married, I will use this world welfare system to promote my own faggotry
No one will know who is the real woman of the relacionship

[Anonymous No.11172943]

>>11172900
This seems like some real strawmanning.

[Anonymous No.11172946]

wew

[Anonymous No.11172947]

>>11172917
>above 25
>effective trap

needs to be some kind of exam before they turn 16 desu

[Anonymous No.11172954]

>>11172943
Peterson is literally mentally insane, yes, he probably thought he was saying something smart, but he is too retarded to phrase it properly and has too many sycophants around that he thinks he is smarter than he is

[Anonymous No.11172960]

>>11172947
so force the incels above 25 to join the army and force the other young ones to become traps?

how would you do the test to catch them early? eye contact with a girl for 5 seconds, Blade Runner style?

[Anonymous No.11172966]

>>11172917
uhh not every virgin happens to be a mentally ill tranny, ya know?

[Anonymous No.11172973]

>no source
>no context

Anyway, I don't think he s

[Anonymous No.11172974]

>>11172966
how would you solve the issue then? just put them in camps?

[Anonymous No.11172976]

>>11172973
it's from the NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

[Anonymous No.11172978]

>>11172973
it's literally trending in twitter
https://twitter.com/search?q=%22Jordan%20Peterson%22&src=tren

it's some nytimes serious analysis piece or something
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html
>He says there’s a crisis in masculinity. Why won’t women — all these wives and witches — just behave?

[Anonymous No.11172981]

>>11172900

When did he go as crazy as that, or was he always like this? Even >>11172917 presents a better solution and that's fucking meme-worthy. For someone who ascribes to gender roles and such he is surely unaware of human biology.

[Anonymous No.11172986]

>>11172966
thats why he said "force" dummy.

[Anonymous No.11172988]

>>11172974
step one: legalize prostitution
step two: state-subsidised romantic training for incels with affiliated escorts

[Anonymous No.11172991]

>>11172900
With the rise of the incel and slut debate I have to ask, how many people are aware of this critique of feminism?

>Are rapists male conquerors chasing women through the streets, modern tarzans swinging from balcony to balcony prick in hand and a flower between their teeth? The most reliable statistics state that they are not. Immigrant worker or local family man, the typical rapist does not belong to that species. It is difficult to build them up into an expression of triumphant phallocracy, the image which so exasperates the feminists.
>Rape is basically the sad revenge of a victim, a poor man’s undertaking. It is not a result of bourgeois wealth or phallocratic arrogance, but their sub-product. If only rape could be proved to be above all the act of the privileged thirsting for proletarian flesh. How much easier it would be to latch the just struggle of women to the old class struggle...
...
>In the United States the average duration of coitus is two minutes. The accuracy of these measurements and records may be doubtful. But they fit in with other information and show what the degree of sexual poverty must be in the United States and not only there. Particularly with men, such behaviour reduces fucking in the first place to a release of tension, “having it off”, or simply scoring. A way of operating which is in fact nothing more than a reluctance to display a loving sensual attitude. The same behaviour which in rape goes with the conviction that there is no need to worry about the way that goal is reached.

[Anonymous No.11172992]

>>11172900
>condemns laws and regulations that enforce the inhibition of free speech
>encourages laws and regulations that forces women to marry the worst kinds of men against their will
Is this real? Why is this guy so well-revered? he has the cognitive dissonance of a lunatic

[Anonymous No.11172995]

>>11172974

>Remove incels
>A Dark Age begins in tech
>Why are our independent black women not building quantum computers?

[Anonymous No.11173000]

>>11172992
you can't even read, my dude

he's talking about enforced monogamy, not enforced marriage

[Anonymous No.11173002]

>>11172981
he is a naive boomer and thinks that if we just behave properly we can all live like boomers again

but that will never happen, boomers were the beginning of the end, not some sort of golden age

[Anonymous No.11173008]

>>11172991
More:
>To the chat-up we must oppose true encounter, to “voyeuristic” stares, the expression of desire and communication. The enemy is not men and their desires. The pickup is an immediate product of the city, anonymity, solitude, the destruction of the possibilities of encounter. The instigator himself uses defensive attitudes, false self-assurance and a false disdain of women.

>The predatory male, and in the extreme the rapist, is a nuisance or a danger. But embarrassment or injury are above all rooted in all the misery and solitude of the victims. They are provocations, injurious responses painfully felt because they cannot fulfill, a caricature of the hope of something else. If the rapist were Tarzan, perhaps he would be forgiven. But the kerb crawler rarely has the appearance or the manners of a Prince Charming. His “prey” sees her own misery reflected in his.
Probably the best critique of feminism ever written (and more relevant than any discussion today even though it's almost 50 years old):
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/dominique-karamazov-the-poverty-of-feminism

[Anonymous No.11173017]

>>11173002
t. 25 year old Silent gen.

[Anonymous No.11173021]

>>11172988
>step two: state-subsidised romantic training for incels with affiliated escorts
that won't work, some people will always be at the bottom, women have too much choice, you can't fight against that in a highly connected world full of choice, you can only do it in small communities where movement is limited and you have to marry some guy that lives no farther than 5 miles from you, now they can just take the bus somewhere else

[Anonymous No.11173030]

>>11172917
polygamy only benefits the sexual elite and you would have insurgency and extreme violent protest if you forced men to become girls it would also probably delegitimize the trans movement

[Anonymous No.11173032]

>>11172991
there aren't many rapists, there is a small percentage of hyper-violent men that do most of the raping

that's not convenient for social constructivists though, so they like to paint it as a general social malady of all men for social engineering purposes

[Anonymous No.11173034]

>>11173021
>highly connected
I knew the prims were right all along.

[Anonymous No.11173036]

>>11172900
Any books talking positively about monogamy and traditional life?

[Anonymous No.11173042]

>>11173000
that doesn't work when you can just take a bus and nobody knows how many people you fucked in the last stop though

unless the government starts installing sex counters on our genitals

[Anonymous No.11173043]

>>11172991
>Rape is basically the sad revenge of a victim, a poor man’s undertaking. It is not a result of bourgeois wealth or phallocratic arrogance, but their sub-product. If only rape could be proved to be above all the act of the privileged thirsting for proletarian flesh. How much easier it would be to latch the just struggle of women to the old class struggle...

This is an interesting thought, but it's a little dated in the age of #metoo and the ousting of powerful, iconic or cultural heavyweights. Rape is either a "sad revenge" or an abuse of power, but it can also be both. they both boil down to an attempt to reclaim control over the woman's body. Just look at Weinstein– he was both a sad little man (his indecent proposals are always pathetic and self-depricating), but he evidently got off on the power he possessed to make or break these women's career with nothing more than his cock

[Anonymous No.11173052]

He's saying enforced monogamy is the solution, not state-enforced arranged marriages. Some of you have the reading comprehension of an avacado.

Unfortunately it looks like the writer of the piece misunderstood him as well in this, or was intentionally trying to decide readers with that last line.

[Anonymous No.11173055]

>>11173052
What does "enforced monogamy" mean if not state-enforced marriages?

[Anonymous No.11173057]

>>11173030
>polygamy only benefits the sexual elite and you would have insurgency and extreme violent protest
that's why you need to turn them to traps of force them into the army so their violence can be productively channeled

>if you forced men to become girls it would also probably delegitimize the trans movement
why should i care about that? it's about societal health not about some group's pet project

[Anonymous No.11173066]

>>11173032
He discusses this, and you're wrong. Social constructions of asepsis, individualism, consumption, and hedonism are a major part of this sexual conflict.
And individual constructivists are just as likely to be corrupt, arguably moreso, as we see with 'ITZ DA JOOOZ!'

[Anonymous No.11173067]

>>11173034
what's prims precious?

>>11173036
the bible

[Anonymous No.11173074]

>>11173055
I think he is arguing that cheating on your spouse should be illegal. I think it should be more strongly socially enforced, but I am not sure I would bring the state into it. Technically "enforced" could mean either socially or legally, but I doubt he agrees with me.

[Anonymous No.11173076]

>>11173067
Primitivism. No buses= you have to marry the uncle down the dirt road.

[Anonymous No.11173077]

>>11173052
"enforced" has a clear meaning, if he is vague about who is doing the enforcing and why that just detracts from his argument and makes you think the worse

[Anonymous No.11173079]

>>11173055
>state-enforced marriages=state-enforced arranged marriages

You avocado

[Anonymous No.11173082]

there's no soft solution to the incel problem

you either wipe out all genetically inferior males (pro-tip: that would only solve the problem in the interim between the incelocaust and the ascension of a brand new, more optimized genetic elite) or revert back to good ol' patriarchy

[Anonymous No.11173086]

>>11173000
what the fuck does that even mean, though? How do you control people's sex lives without descending into a terrifying totalitarian regime? Why is Peterson perfectly okay to allow people the freedom of opinion, but not the freedom from biopolitics?

Is he saying all roasties should be executed? Is he saying we should have a hunger-games style lottery where every week a woman is chosen as tribute to satiate the incel monster?

Face it, the guy's a lunatic. He doesn't even realise just how contradictory his line of thinking has become

[Anonymous No.11173087]

>>11173076
Incel*

[Anonymous No.11173089]

>>11173066
>And individual constructivists are just as likely to be corrupt, arguably moreso, as we see with 'ITZ DA JOOOZ!'
social constructivism doesn't mean collectivism, it's opposite is not individualism. Ant colonies are natural, not socially constructed, that doesn't mean that the ants are individualists

[Anonymous No.11173091]

>>11172991
>Rape is basically the sad revenge of a victim, a poor man’s undertaking.
blocks your path

[Anonymous No.11173094]

>>11172900
>calls SJWs a bunch of lunatics for wanting the state to enforce social behaviours on the populace
>wants the state to enforce social behaviours on the populace

Reeeeeally makes you thonk

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173096]

>>11172900
He's right that in any society where monogamy isn't enforced a small minority of men have a disproportionate access to the mating opportunities. He's wrong that it can change now. We're not going back. All society can do is help those men cope, which it's doing a very poor job of right now.

[Anonymous No.11173098]

>>11173086
I think he's talking about socially-enforced monogamy, ie slutshaming, not some sort of authoritarian control over sexual dynamics

[Anonymous No.11173100]

>>11173074
to "socially" enforce something you first need a "social" of some sort, which doesn't currently exist and seems to be disintegrating faster and faster, so you should solve that issue first

also Peterson is a weird guy, after so much jerking off after individualism now it wants to force gfs for incels, wtf is he about

[Anonymous No.11173103]

>>11173086
>Is he saying all roasties should be executed? Is he saying we should have a hunger-games style lottery where every week a woman is chosen as tribute to satiate the incel monster?
No, he's not saying any of that.
>Face it, the guy's a lunatic. He doesn't even realise just how contradictory his line of thinking has become
Somebody saying the things you just attributed to him would fit this description, yes.

[Anonymous No.11173104]

>>11173057
your first retort makes no sense, there would only be more incels if polygamy and polygyny were allowed, violence goes up in societies where promiscuity or multiple simultaneous marriages are allowed, unless the idea is to mulch most men into mentally ill wards of the state funded health care industry then its ridiculous bordering on malicious negligence to assume this is a good idea
>i don’t care about that
if 5-10% of the population is willing to spill blood to protect their sovereignty and miniscule self-respect then you can bet other groups will coopt the rage and use it to attack the State’s authority to make those decisions, you’re also sponsoring homosexuality, and putting transsexualism in the spotlight of being a “failed male” activity, all of which will have serious socio-political consequences.

There’s also the question of whether you wouldn’t have to change the constitution to allow the state to modify people’s bodies for “public health” whatever that is supposed to mean (there are no studies that support incels being made into trannies, you people just think its appropriate because you implicitly respect violent male sexuality when hidden behind handsomeness) and this again would aggravate the already contentious situation that’s arisen from the GMO, mental health, euthanasia and other body sovereignty debates.

You’re basically a psychopathic know-nothing and honestly i hope you get AIDS you fucking faggot

[Anonymous No.11173107]

>>11173096
Not true. I'm on my second play through of Witcher 3 right now.

[Anonymous No.11173109]

>>11173087
i like uncle better, thanks

[Anonymous No.11173111]

>>11173082
>pro-tip
fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.11173113]

>>11173017
>not being a 25 year old from the belle epoch

[Anonymous No.11173114]

>>11173094
I think he just opposes leftism because of something something dragon.

The styate should enourage healthy behaviour, and discourage unhealthy behavior. Right Wing christfag conservatives are happier and richer than leftists ergo.

[Anonymous No.11173115]

>>11173043
I'd suggest reading the whole thing, it's not dated at all and I'd argue that it's your position that is dated because you are viewing this from a feminist perspective. I haven't seen anything discussing this nearly as in depth, but even if it were the writing discusses how we got here. 'Sexual misconduct' is just a popularisation of the radical feminist ideas of the 70s:
>So rape is everywhere. The chat-up is rape, domination is rape. Man is by nature rapist and woman his eternal, innocent victim.

>Some extreme feminists claim that penetration is an act of domination, a form of humiliation to be refused. Some of them even say that violence and exploitation are the acts of males alone and that this part of humanity must therefore be neutralised or eliminated by the arrival of a world of women where, thanks to the progress in biology, reproduction will be carried out without men.

[Anonymous No.11173117]

>>11173098
doesn't work in fast moving, changing, loosely connected societies, only of small close communities

nobody knows how many cocks you sucked 2 streets from where you live, heck even you neighbor probably doesn't know even your name

[Anonymous No.11173123]

>>11172900
>not posting the best part of the interview

[Anonymous No.11173124]

>>11173100
We have a social fabric, I will give you there is a divide, but really as long as people have friends and family at all it still exists.

>>11173117
But there is always a possiblity of finding out, and so the discouragement of everyone seeing it in a negative light means people are less likely to do this, even if they are likely to get away with it.

[Anonymous No.11173131]

>>11173123
I laught at them too, but that's because I'm not an amerimutt.

[Anonymous No.11173138]

>>11173123
>I laugh because it is absurd
Why is it absurd though? He's right that we have twice as many female as male ancestors

[Anonymous No.11173139]

>>11173124
i just don't see those kinds of values arising when there's no accountability and nobody cares about anything beyond their own immediate pleasure

i can only see it working in communities that decide to self-segregate from the bulk of society, something like is argued in the benedict option

[Anonymous No.11173140]

The reality is that incels or people who in general don't procreate isn't a new phenomenon. This has always been true, the only difference now is that people are so wealthy they can sit around whining about it, instead of toiling on a potato field.

[Anonymous No.11173142]

>>11173089
Wherever you're trying to go with that fallacy...
You claimed that it was just 'extremely violent males', thus reducing the problem into an individualism, biology, or some other societal anomaly. You're viewing it from a Left/Right dichotomy, thus clouding any possible answers you might get/allow.
Biological constructivism.
Anomaly constructivism.
Whatever. It's all bullshit for pseuds.

[Anonymous No.11173145]

>>11173123
the virgin peterson, the chad roastie

[Anonymous No.11173147]

>>11173140
In a sense yes, but in another it's more extreme now given the diminished expectations of monogamy. In a casual sex culture old polygamous mating patens reappear.

[Anonymous No.11173155]

>>11173104
I think you're taking this a bit too seriously bud

[Anonymous No.11173156]

>>11173138
Because she's a strong woman and men can't be oppressed.

[Anonymous No.11173158]

>>11173140
it was always a serious problem that caused instability, many societies put those kind of men into armies and sent them somewhere else to cause trouble and rape, as immoral as that sounds people didn't seem to care as long as it served to keep social stability here

[Anonymous No.11173159]

>>11173139
I actually agree with you there. I don't see it happening anytime soon, but I think that was his solution, not lining up people when they hit 25 and marrying them off.

[Anonymous No.11173164]

>>11173155
I don’t approve of being flippant in my discourse at any time besides when its blatantly obvious to others. Miscommunication is sinful.

If you genuinely believe 1/20 people should be castrated and made into fuck toys dosed up on hormones and psyche meds you deserve to suffer and be sent out of this world. Its not difficult to decide this regardless of jest or sincerity. Immoral psychopathic animals don’t deserve to be heard, they should be ostracized or annihilated. You are lucky that you don’t have the power to do such a self-debasing thing.

[Anonymous No.11173168]

>>11173158
Keep in mind that even fucking Saint Augustine supported prostitution on the basis that it kept unmarried men from causing too much trouble

[Anonymous No.11173169]

>>11173140
>BUH IH WUZ ALWUZ DIS WAY!
So stupid.

[Anonymous No.11173172]

>>11173164
Dude stop getting mad at peruvian basket weaving curriculum.

[Anonymous No.11173174]

>>11172946
Was he incel?

[Anonymous No.11173179]

>>11173169
Happens to be true.

[Anonymous No.11173180]

>>11173169
Damn, we truly live in a society...

[Anonymous No.11173182]

>>11172976
I keep reading his quotes in his kermit voice

[Anonymous No.11173183]

>>11173164
>If you genuinely believe 1/20 people should be castrated and made into fuck toys dosed up on hormones and psyche meds you deserve to suffer and be sent out of this world. Its not difficult to decide this regardless of jest or sincerity. Immoral psychopathic animals don’t deserve to be heard, they should be ostracized or annihilated. You are lucky that you don’t have the power to do such a self-debasing thing.
JBP just advocated exactly that, but for wymyn.

[Anonymous No.11173184]

>>11173158
This isn't true either. Societies, especially functioning ones, tried to give men an outlet and a purpose. And no sane society is going to send its weakest men to war, that's a recipe for disaster.

[Anonymous No.11173185]

i think the issue is that Peterson can't speak like a normal person, and has to force himself to sound intense and grandstand every single little thing

so instead of discussing the issues with social isolation, the breaking of bonds in modern society, low birth rates and unfulfilling casual relationships, he has to say something that sounds incredibly retarded and go directly to "enforced monogamy" to sound like he means business and end up sounding like a fucking lunatic, which he is

[Anonymous No.11173187]

>>11173123
Do you think that these loveless men deserve this kind of treatment of being shamed? I cringed reading that pic.

[Anonymous No.11173188]

>>11173183
He advocated for social pressure in favor of monogamy. i.e. pretty much marriage in the West up until very recently.

[Anonymous No.11173193]

>>11173184
unmarried doesn't mean weakest traditionally even though now it may

also a weak hand is better than no hand

[Anonymous No.11173196]

>>11173179
>>11173180
Can I get an ethnography of a primitive society with capeshit and iShit?
Fucking ultra-relativist pseuds...

[Anonymous No.11173199]

>>11173164
Calm down. It's a joke. Nobody is going to take it seriously.

>>11173183
>JBP just advocated exactly that, but for women
No he didn't, you Avacado

[Anonymous No.11173202]

>>11173115
It does certainly raise some interesting questions, I'll give it a read at some point. My gf is a passionate feminist and I have a lot of respect for the things she believes, but sometimes I think its necessary to challenge her, particularly on the idea of toxic masculinity, or whether masculinity is an inherently oppressive or dangerous power in the world. Because the question a man asks himself when addressing the toxic aspects of his nature is not: "is all masculinity toxic?", but rather "where does the tumour end and the body begin?". Attempting to salvage a pure, positive form of masculinity from classical ideals is impossible if one takes a feminist approach. Very few feminists will actually have any notion of a masculinity that isn't oppressive, violent or sexually dominating without deferring to discussions about the fluidity of gender, or why its okay for boys to cry. Why isn't it okay for boys just to be boys too?

[Anonymous No.11173204]

>>11173193
>more fallacies
Why do you retards even read if you just blindly accept what is happening in society? Fucking embarrassment to humanity.

[Anonymous No.11173209]

STATE-SPONSORED PLASTIC SURGERY FOR ALL THE COSMETICALLY HANDICAPPED

[Anonymous No.11173210]

>>11173204
who are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.11173213]

>>11173140
The only "difference" is that currently our society doesn't have a means of dealing with that. Every society eventually has this problem. In past societies these men would, willingly or by force, join the army where they'd either take up homosexual practices, die, or eventually kill a woman's family in a raid and take her as a wife; or, the local theocratic organization would round up single men and single women and force them to be together.

>>11173147
The problem isn't that 0.001% of chads are fucking 99.999% of women; the problem is that people AS A WHOLE are fucking less. They're dating less. "Dating" as a whole is going away. Dating is a means to find a spouse, but the institution of marriage as a whole is dissolving. This isn't specifically because of a lack of religion (religion isn't necessary for marriage, it only bolsters its usefulness) but rather because of societal breakdown as a whole. This larger phenomenon (Americans becoming increasingly asocial) is what Putnam discusses in Bowling Alone (which, coincidentally, is the book that makes people left of center classify Putnam as part of the "Alt-right" even though he doesn't want to be part of it). Simply put, people don't have TIME to "date" anymore.

I think this needs to be reiterated: The problem isn't a handful of elite men monopolizing all of the women, it's that both sexes aren't dating as much anymore.

[Anonymous No.11173218]

>>11173172
im not mad even a little bit, im digesting late breakfast and stretching in my living room
>>11173183
no he didn’t and im not JBP nor do I agree that there is a solution much less one that involves nebulously enforced monogamy (though the idea of fining people or shaming people for being whores is amusing to me as a thought experiment). again, making women stay with one man at a time and banning sex apps is not at all like cutting off someone’s balls and cock and forcing them to take estrogen and psyche meds.

The one is relatively invasive but non-violent, the other is permanent and extreme invasion of personal sovereignty and by definition violent as you’re being mutilated for an unscientific procedure (for inexplicable, humiliating ends).
>>11173185
you’re using memes to express yourself, you aren’t much more in contact with the Real than memerson

[Anonymous No.11173221]

>>11173209
your kids would still look stupid though

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173223]

>>11173202
Feminism is a female advocacy movement. It literally has nothing to say about any lived male experience. It doesn't want a society where women are equal, it wants a society where women are at least equal. Hence their silence on issues where boys are at an objective disadvantage at.

[Anonymous No.11173227]

>>11173196
Can I get an enthnography of a society where you aren't a whiney turd getting riled up over r/im14andthisisdeep tier images?

[Anonymous No.11173236]

>>11173213
>is that currently our society doesn't have a means of dealing with that.

Really? Society today has literally hundreds if not thousands of ways of dealing with it. There's several countries in Europe alone where prostitution is legal, not to mention all the entertainment that exists that can take your mind off the fact that you don't have female company.

[Anonymous No.11173239]

>>11173213
>I think this needs to be reiterated: The problem isn't a handful of elite men monopolizing all of the women, it's that both sexes aren't dating as much anymore.
In a society where people don't date, casual sex becomes the only viable means of coupling. And the average woman has much better access to casual sex than the average man.

[Anonymous No.11173263]

>>11173239
that graph was wrong, the author fixed it at some point after this, it was not as radical as that

[Anonymous No.11173266]

>>11173263
Somebody got the newer one?
I wouldn't think it would be around 20%

[Anonymous No.11173271]

>>11173263
I know, but the newer one still shows the same trend, which is that male celibacy has been on a sharp rise since the early 2000s, especially since the invention of tinder.

[Anonymous No.11173274]

>>11173086
He is just saying cheating should be punished by the law. This is expected from a tepid conservative since it had indeed been illegal for centuries. No fault divorce is a fairly recent thing.

[Anonymous No.11173275]

>>11173223
>Hence their silence on issues where boys are at an objective disadvantage at
They're not silent though, at least when it comes to protecting effeminate males. That's why there's been such a huge effort on their part to get men to talk about their problems, because they think that if men were to just open up, both sexes would benefit from it. Of course, they only want men to open up about certain things; no woman is going to defend a man who "opens up" about his desire to mercilessly rape and murder young women. Basically the feminist movement wants men to talk but only if it reveals a frailty that resembles the second sex, rather than a deeply repressed and masculine rage bubbling under the surface. Its the latter which needs a sublimated outlet, now more than ever.

[Anonymous No.11173276]

>>11173266
found it
https://twitter.com/lymanstoneky/status/992105680000749570

[Anonymous No.11173279]

>>11173202
But this is quite easy, is it not? She is clearly attracted to a man, so there has to be some element of masculinity which she finds attractive, even if it is simply connected to you being a Nice Guy.
What feminists are reacting to is actually a loss of masculinity. This occurs both structurally and in the spirit of men: we see this in the absence of men from the home and the family (which feminists originally reacted against); and the very terms women use, anxious masculinity being a perfect example. Even toxic masculinity implies a loss of true masculinity, and we must look to the actions of women to see what they really mean. Fact is that they have consistently attacked men who have become more feminine, and continue to pursue men who embody traditional masculine traits.
Otherwise, they are attempting to themselves take the place of traditional masculinity, which is clear in the pop culture segregation movement: women are replacing the masculine heroes and taking on their traits. One could also point to the different parenting methods of men and women, what is it that men excel at when raising a child? And what have women been neglecting which is now manifesting itself in the universities and job market? The consequences of toxic feminity are becoming all too apparent.

[Anonymous No.11173282]

>>11173276
If you're wondering what happened 2010-2012, online dating

[Anonymous No.11173283]

>>11172991
Rape is mostly just a reproductive strategy. Nothing more.

[Anonymous No.11173288]

>>11173227
>t. roastie

[Anonymous No.11173295]

>>11173236
All of which at best numb the pain and don't fix the problem. You're just repeating the old "well if you're depressed just stop doing things a depressed person does!" line; the problem isn't that incels are doing something wrong, it's that because they can't access any outlets to fix their problems they effectively have no outlets. Yes, an incel could in theory just "man up" and fix his life just like you and I could "smarten up" and suddenly become billionaires, but everyone who advocates that line of thought is forgetting that we're dealing with people who don't know how to interact with their fellow humans in a very real capacity. This isn't a problem that can be fixed by a bunch of people wagging their fingers and saying "tut-tut, man up!", anon. All that's going to make them do is shrivel back down.

>>11173239
Better access =/= getting railed by sixty chads every night.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessness-is-rising-but-not-for-the-reasons-incels-claim

[Anonymous No.11173297]

>>11173283
Nah, it's clearly more than that as people are less concerned with reproduction now, sex is everywhere, and contraceptives/abortion block such a strategy.

[Anonymous No.11173304]

>>11173282
i guess if it's just online dating or also social media making displays of self-worth and reputation much more overt and transparent, so that you don't get to easily wipe out and restart, or have separated spaces where you hold different reputations

[Anonymous No.11173307]

>>11173184
>And no sane society is going to send its weakest men to war

Many societies did just that with great success.

[Anonymous No.11173311]

>>11173304
Exactly!

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173315]

>>11173275
Feminists don't want men to open up. I'm sorry but the entire discussion surrounding "emotional labor" is women complaining that their men open up to them too often, but framed in a political way in order to disguise the fact that they're basically telling men to be more stoic. Women don't want to shoulder the burden of having to process male emotions. Just look at how male complaints are framed compared to female ones. Men complaining about the sexual and behavioral standards women apply to then are accused of entitlement, while there are entire social movements dedicated to dismantling the behavioral and sexual standards men apply to women. Women want men to grin and bear their pain in effect, if not necessarily in rhetoric.

[Anonymous No.11173325]

>>11173158
This. Notice how, during the end of the initial Muslim conquest, Muslims quickly shifted from polygyny to de facto monogamy for stability as it was no longer possible to just send superfluous men at war to get culled or abduct a wife.

The most obvious solution to the Incel problem is war.

[Anonymous No.11173340]

>>11173140
>The reality is that incels or people who in general don't procreate isn't a new phenomenon. This has always been true

No. It is a consequence of the development of civilization. Hunter-gatherer societies don't have this issue and mankind spent most of (pre)history as hunter-gatherers. So it's certainly not "always".

[Anonymous No.11173342]

>>11173295
>Better access =/= getting railed by sixty chads every night.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that even if in a casual sex environment women might have as much (or even less) sex as they would have if married, those few sexual experiences are shared with a smaller pool of men. Attractive men who would otherwise be limited to who they can come into direct physical contact with can now talk to a dozen girls at the same time. And even if they don't have sex with those dozen girls, those dozen girls wait in order to have sex with that one attractive man.

[Anonymous No.11173343]

>>11172946
>fashwave
Oops

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173350]

>>11173295
>https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessness-is-rising-but-not-for-the-reasons-incels-claim
Jordan Peterson's point about monogamy looking pretty good right now

[Anonymous No.11173362]

>>11173315
>I'm sorry but the entire discussion surrounding "emotional labor" is women complaining that their men open up to them too often, but framed in a political way in order to disguise the fact that they're basically telling men to be more stoic. Women don't want to shoulder the burden of having to process male emotions
like I said, they actually DO want men to open up though, but only if the issues they open up about are, at least, relatable to the plane of female emotional experience. Sexual abuse, the ridicule of their appearance/physical endowments, the difficulty of dealing with emotional trauma, etc, these are all the issues which face effeminate men just as much as women, but this gives them the impression of sharing common ground with us. The issue is they don't want men to open up about problems that are typical of the male experience only, which is where the problem arises. Your example of sexual and behavioural standards between men and women only proves this asymmetry.

[Anonymous No.11173376]

>>11173282
That would explain the rising rate for males but the female rate is also rising, albeit modestly. There must be something more.

[Anonymous No.11173383]

>>11172992
Free speech is necessary for the well-being of society as is the control of women. There's nothing wrong with holding both positions.

[Anonymous No.11173392]

>>11173376
The rising female rate (which is rising to a much smaller degree) is the result of the fact that many women want genuine long term relationships, and they consciously remove themselves from the meat market that is online dating when they realize that tinder isn't going to facilitate that. Sexless women tend to be volcels (not always, but more so than men)

[Anonymous No.11173396]

>>11173297
It's not a conscious strategy though. Also it takes millennia for this kind of human behavior to change if the selective pressure is even strong enough for that.

[Anonymous No.11173407]

>>11173383

[Anonymous No.11173411]

>>11173123
I can picture him saying this and the glare he probably gave her with the tone. It's comical in the absurdity. Peterson's Boomerism might just win more hearts and minds.

[Anonymous No.11173419]

>>11173295
>the problem isn't that incels are doing something wrong

They are doing something wrong. Instead of trying to change themselves they want society to change to suit them, which isn't going to happen.

[Anonymous No.11173420]

>>11173221
Bait

[Anonymous No.11173421]

>>11173383
>as is the control of women

I'd say the control of humans in general. Preferably by socio-cultural pressure rather than the state. Of course that implies rebuilding a common socio-cultural framework, which implies a lot of other things first.

[Anonymous No.11173425]

>>11173396
It takes millennia to recognise that trying to reproduce with something that doesn't reproduce is a bad strategy?
The absolute state of evolution cucks...

[Anonymous No.11173431]

>>11173307
Name two.

[Anonymous No.11173432]

>>11172960
Baseline test
>repeat after me
>have you ever had sex? sex
etc.

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173437]

>>11173362
I don't even buy the notion that women want men to open up about issues that they're able to relate to. How many women are genuinely sensitive to how they enforce male beauty standards? There's a serious empathy gap in pop-feminism between men and women; women can't imagine the lived experiences of most men, but only the successful men that they come into contact with. In academic feminism the problem is worse in a sense, because while they understand what it's like to be a man, they also understand that any alleviation of it would require some sort of control over female autonomy. So male alienation is a price that they're willing to pay.

[Anonymous No.11173440]

>>11173419
They are the product of their material conditions. They are unlikely to change themselves and more likely to violently attack society.

[Anonymous No.11173441]

>>11173283
I may be a reproductive strategy, but nowhere is only that. Modern societys (and dosen't even need to be very modern) also have a lot of cultural interpretations of rape. Rape can also be a display of power of one over another, and this dosen't need to be a man-woman relations. I would argue that homossexual rape is much less a reprodutive strategy as is a demonstration of power and one's fufilling his wish for a sexual partner by anymeans.
But this can be put in check. Maybe the instinct in homossexuals is just like in heretosexuals, only changing the target of the wish.
Of course, I am a complete brainlet in this topic of sexual psychology or reprodutive behavior, but from what you see on the animal kingdom, stuff is nasty

[Anonymous No.11173442]

>>11173419
>Pick yourself up by your genetic or familial wealth bootstraps!

[Anonymous No.11173454]

>>11173276
What happened after the 90's? Holy shit. This chart poses a lot of questions.

[Anonymous No.11173455]

>>11173431
China for all of its history.
Second empire France.

[Anonymous No.11173461]

>>11173441
Yeah i give you that. Animals also practice rape as a form of domination display in addition to a reproductive strategy.

[Anonymous No.11173468]

>>11173455
>Second empire France
So Empires that collapsed after losing major wars.
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.11173472]

>>11173276
>>11173282
it's clearly the combination of palin and obama put everyone off other people in 2008

[Anonymous No.11173473]

>>11173468
The French armed force of that time was actually very good for the purpose it was was designed for: colonial wars.

[Anonymous No.11173476]

https://www.advocate.com/transgender/2018/5/17/trump-supporter-broadcasts-live-she-chases-trans-woman-out-bathroom

[Anonymous No.11173478]

Ugly people are not entitled to reproduction and romance

[Anonymous No.11173480]

>>11173478
t. ugly person

[Anonymous No.11173481]

>>11173472
i liked Palin though

[Anonymous No.11173484]

>>11173478
Society isn't entitled to stability either.

[Anonymous No.11173488]

>enforced monogamy
people didn't listen when jesus said it, they aren't going to listen to it now because kermit did.

[Anonymous No.11173491]

>>11173481
your waifu makes me sick and my balls retract tbph

[Anonymous No.11173492]

>>11173488
i thought jesus was against sex

[Anonymous No.11173495]

>>11173492
no he just said he was going to divorce everyone in heaven so if they wanted sex they should have it in marriages now. it's kind of a dick move when you think about it, most people would want marriage in heaven.

[Anonymous No.11173519]

The problem is chad sleeping around with women out of his league and inflating these womens self worth

[Anonymous No.11173525]

>>11173492
That was Paul.

[Anonymous No.11173531]

>>11173525
what was his problem? and how did he manage to brainwash even chads like St Augustine?

[Anonymous No.11173537]

>>11173184
Is there any lit analyzing the impact the wars of the 20th century had on the current state of western men? Losing that many lives can’t be good from a cultural or genetic standpoint. Especially if we were losing our “strongest”

[Anonymous No.11173539]

>>11173461
Some societys also see rape as natural for of a couple to form.
In Ancient Greece, it was normal the practice of kidnapping women to be your wifes. It was also their weeding cerimonys during some time, where both familys made a fake kidnapping, by having the bride walking with their family in a very cerimonial way, while her husband, came and took her from the cerimony. All partys where doing this cerimony, and all were well aware that this was cerimonial, but it is very interesting how in this society, something that we see as rape, being so glorified that it was a the wedding ritual.
Also, this wasen't limited to the greeks, althought what each society taught of this actions may vary.
Many ancient civs taught of woman either products or second-class citizens, so, if you capture one in a raid or war, or buy as a slave, that okay. Majority of these civs had some degree of concubinage in them. This "one man one woman" stuff is way more recent than majority of people about it.
And is also a lie said by several, especily third wave feminists, on how this stuff was saw by woman. We today, fortunately, have a mindset that a girls at that time probably felt the same way one girl would feel today if such things happened to then. I will honestely disagree. First because, we have few if any records of woman by woman who were either captured or raped to know very well how they truly felt. Second that, they may well feel very bad (as expected) from such happenings, but, are they feeling bad because the fact happened, or they are feeling more bad because the implications of suffering such a act? If you live in a society where being victim of a rape is said to be the guilty, and there is no oposition to such idea, well, you will probably think that indeead, you are the guilty one, not your rapist.
And this is just in woman, we aren't talking about male rape with is very real and not only done by man-to-man relations. Woman also rape, tho our society (and there is no deny of that here) in general, see male rape with less care and/or something the victim should be proud of. And this isen't done only by man, like lots of people like to say. Woman can be (and often are) more perpetrators of such views than man.

[Anonymous No.11173556]

>>11173539
fuck all this rape shit, your post just gave me an idea. we should pitch the idea that herodotus describes of bride auctions where the pretty brides are paid for, and the ugly ones are dowered by the pretty ones prices.
you know he'd float it.

[Anonymous No.11173565]

>>11173276
The graph is good but the IFS academic has no clue.

"Some other incel claims: "20% of the men have 80% of the sex" NOPE. (More like 50-60%) "

"Many involuntary virgins may be men who formerly had or would have had voluntary, religious reasons for abstention, and simply lost the faith but not the habits. Note: losing faith but still being habitually abstemious is a pitiable and pitiful condition but also won I don't actually have a lot of sympathy for. Like if you're gonna apostatize SIN BOLDLY"

And is research paper is even worse than his tweeter.

[Anonymous No.11173571]

>>11173565
>incels are right, but we don't want to seem like we're lending credence to their ideology
The issue is too toxic for anyone in the mainstream to speak honestly about it right now

[Anonymous No.11173574]

>>11173556
>implying that this already dosen't happen today since, idk, ever
Of course, it may not be a official market, but when you check reality, pretty ones are more on demand and are way harder to get because they know they are pretty, they know they are wanted, and they know they can exploit everyone until they find someone they like to keep
Reproduction is way more cold-hearted than romantics or ideologes like to paint. Its all a question of how I can find the one who gives me more value with my "tools".
Of course, there also is feelings and stuff in formula, but the basic tenants are these: the most valuable one to me.

[Anonymous No.11173597]

Post yfw ideas exist

[Anonymous No.11173603]

>>11173574
>you can walk up to an uggo chick and get a dowry
your brain is broken and i don't know if you understand money

[Anonymous No.11173609]

>>11173067
>the bible
>talks about monogamy
The majority of it sings the praised of polygamy. Solomon had like 700 wives.

[Anonymous No.11173646]

>>11173597
wew sounds like he completely fucked up that interview. He comes off like a raving maniac.

[Anonymous No.11173656]

>>11173597
>metaphors describe something real
What's the controversy?

[Anonymous No.11173664]

>>11173609
He was a filthy polytheist though.

[Anonymous No.11173672]

>>11172992
Non sequitur

[Anonymous No.11173674]

>>11173123
I'm male and laugh at them too. If you can't get laid you're just fucking pathetic.

[Anonymous No.11173686]

>>11173239
Celibacy implies an intentional vow to abstain from sex and masturbation.
The term they are looking for is singleness.

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173692]

>>11173674
>If you can't get laid you're just fucking pathetic.
This attitude creates incels tbqh. If a guy is born ugly or autistic, he might feel bad that he can't get laid. But if people tell him that he's pathetic because he can't get laid, then that shame is going to turn into resentment. Shame is the cause of most random violence in the world.

[Anonymous No.11173693]

>>11173674
Which just proves Peterson's point. People have no empathy for "pathetic losers", who then end up becoming psychopaths.

[Anonymous No.11173702]

>brainlet SJW interviews an internet meme
what could possibly go wrong

America was a mistake.

[Anonymous No.11173705]

>>11173692
>>11173693

We should do something about pathetic losers then. We're never going to force some woman to have to put up with these pathetic uggos.

[Anonymous No.11173716]

>>11173702
So was Canada.

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173722]

>>11173705
Create a society where sex isn't worshiped and losers aren't shamed for things they have no control over. And create a society where marriages are encouraged. We're not going to go backwards to the 1950s, but our current culture is the exact opposite of a culture conducive to the psychological wellbeing of people who don't succeed.

[Anonymous No.11173724]

>>11172900
>Violent attacks are what happens when men don't have partners, says only first world nation where this regularly happens

[Anonymous No.11173730]

>>11173597
>witches live in swamp
why would a witch live in a swamp. normally witches live deceptively nice places because they have fucking magic.
50 bucks says Mr Bucko's MIL lives in Florida.

[Anonymous No.11173732]

>>11173724
>random violence committed by young men is completely unheard of in Europe
Did you just wake up from a 20 year coma yesterday?

[Anonymous No.11173738]

>>11173724
Well, yeah. He's talking about a specific cultural phenomenon. The rest of the world isn't nearly as retarded regarding sexuality as America. (Although the insanity is spreading through their influence.)

[Anonymous No.11173748]

>>11173724
>men
https://youtu.be/-Kobdb37Cwc
>>11173732
shooters like this are an American phenomenon, and are usually portrayed as one in Europe too. there are other forms of attack that are recognized by Europe, but they're recognized as terrorism, with very different goals and less gender focus. (they also tend to use other means because the European relationships to guns isn't the same as the US or homogeneous. in the UK for instance it would be very hard to commit such an attack compared to a bomb or machete attack, and most of their terrorists identify as sectarians of both genders.)

[Anonymous No.11173776]

>>11172900
>lobsterman talking about forced monogamy.
That's kinda ironic desu senpai.

[Anonymous No.11173788]

>>11173656
This. He loves Jung, that's why he seems to be rambling.

[Anonymous No.11173797]

Society doesn’t know how to deal with male failure.

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.11173807]

>>11173797
No, it's worse than that. Society doesn't want to deal with male failure.

[Anonymous No.11173816]

>>11173788
no, he seems to be rambling because he IS rambling
his retarded metaphors just make it even more obvious

[Anonymous No.11173843]

Not to defend memerson, but what a sad state of Western "journalism". Liberal society my ass.

[Anonymous No.11173846]

>>11173843
Snarky sarcasm is what (women) readers want. Fuck journalistic integrity or objective neutrality.

[Anonymous No.11173855]

>>11173843
The only people who can afford to be journalists today are trust fund kiddies who can live in NYC on the puny salaries that new hires get.

[Anonymous No.11173882]

>>11173843
to be fair, if i were any kind of journalist and some major pop icon gave me that stream of diarrhea, i'd not edit it out unless the management wanted it gone. shit like that is fucking gold if you're a print journalist, like the last words of dutch schultz.
i don't know how he keeps booking radio though. he does not have a voice for it, and he leaves a lot of dead air, especially when stumped by an argument he hasn't thought through.

[Anonymous No.11173898]

>>11173846
>objective neutrality
lol fuck off
every one of you retards who cry about "neutrality" reads shit that would make goebbels blush
there is no such thing as neutrality, you only think there is because the articles and writers you imagine to be "neutral" agree with you

and especially crying about intergrity when the subject is this dipshit who can't speak clearly even to save his life, who constantly says crazy shit and then pulls it back with "ooooh it was out of context" (it wasn't)

[Anonymous No.11173931]

>>11173898
Put away your autistic Peterson rage for 15 minutes, read that article again and try to say with a straight face that it was insightful, or well written, or even worth reading.

[Anonymous No.11173942]

>>11172974
>remove incels from silicon valley
Isn't that like 99% of their H1B workforce?

[Anonymous No.11173948]

>>11173931
put away your autistic peterson veneration for 15 minutes, stick your head into the oven and press ON

it was all of those things, you're just mad senpai got laughed at

[Anonymous No.11173968]

>>11173898
What's your problem with his message?

[Anonymous No.11173977]

>>11173898
>can't speak clearly even to save his life
what does this even mean?

[Anonymous No.11173996]

>>11173968
it's deeply conservative and very pro-capitalist

>>11173977
it means what it says - he doesn't speak clearly, which is why he constantly has to blather about him being "misinterpreted" "misconstrued" "mis-this" "mis-that"

[Anonymous No.11174001]

>>11173454
It's the swapping of two trends. TV killed a lot of social groups but the internet is destroying them.

[Anonymous No.11174010]

>>11173724
It's actually much more common in the third world. India comes to mind.

[Anonymous No.11174021]

>>11173816
Nah, you are looking with the wrong glasses

[Anonymous No.11174028]

All these incel retards think that in JBP's forced monogamy they'd get supermodels, but in reality their catch would be a purple-haired whale with Rick & Morty tattoos.

[Anonymous No.11174032]

>>11174021
no, you're the one looking with the wrong glasses
and we can go like this all day

[Anonymous No.11174037]

Marriage is enforced monogamy.

[Anonymous No.11174043]

>>11174032
>>11173996
why is this board infested with discord trannies?

[Anonymous No.11174044]

>>11174028
Forced monogamy is different from forced marriage. What JBP is saying is that people should only have one partner at a time, not that people should be forced into marriage.

[Anonymous No.11174047]

>>11174028
Read the thread again. It's enforced monogamy, not marriage. Basically just going back on no-fault divorce.

[Anonymous No.11174048]

>>11174043
>discord trannies
is this one person who is shilling this phrase all over /lit/? it has to be

[Anonymous No.11174049]

>>11173948
>stick your head into the oven and press ON

[Anonymous No.11174054]

LOL at retards misinterpreting JBP's idea of society encouraging monogamy (or, discouraging hypergamy and breaking trust) and thinking he meant the government should "provide" women to incels

we have become so subservient to the State that we dont know how to be ourselves and assume responsibility for our actions

[Anonymous No.11174057]

>>11174047
marriage is enforced monogamy

[Anonymous No.11174062]

>>11174048
It is somewhat of a stereotype

[Anonymous No.11174066]

>>11174044
>>11174047
so I'm wrong on the details, but still right on the retardation of his idea
you can't go wrong with the weepy psychiatrist, as long as you call him a retard you're golden

[Anonymous No.11174069]

>>11174054
This.

[Anonymous No.11174071]

>>11174054
>he was misinterpreted! I mean he did use a loaded word but he was still misinterpreted!
this is what I meant when I called him someone who can't speak clearly.

[Anonymous No.11174073]

>>11174066
Why the idea is retarded?

[Anonymous No.11174076]

nytimes finest fake news for sale today

[Anonymous No.11174081]

>>11174066
It's retarded because it's a half-backed measure by a semi-conservative. There is nothing to conserve or restore. Everything has to be destroyed to rebuild afresh.

>>11174057
It's not as there is no longer any penalty for not being monogamous in marriage.

[Anonymous No.11174087]

>>11174071
Peterson is using well-established anthropological language: “enforced monogamy” does not mean government-enforced monogamy. “Enforced monogamy” means socially-promoted, culturally-inculcated monogamy, as opposed to genetic monogamy – evolutionarily-dictated monogamy, which does exist in some species (but does not exist in humans). This distinction has been present in anthropological and scientific literature for decades.

[Anonymous No.11174092]

>>11174081
>there is nothing to conserve or restore. >everything has to be destroyed to rebuild afresh
Just because you can't fit any gender category, discord tranny?

[Anonymous No.11174103]

>>11174087
>This distinction has been present in anthropological and scientific literature for decades.
Do you seriously think that anyone who follows Peterson (either pro or anti) reads anthropological/scientific literature?

[Anonymous No.11174107]

>>11173732
>is completely unheard of in Europe
Hello retard, why are you strawmanning my post?
>>11173738
>The rest of the world isn't nearly as retarded regarding sexuality as America
You haven't been to Sweden and the Netherlands. But, allow me to digress for a second, maybe this widespread gun violence in America is a function of something else?
>>11174010
Yeah I didn't mean to imply that this stuff doesn't happen in the third world. Third worlders are actually more violent, which contradicts the Memerson narrative that men shoot up schools because of sexual unsatisfaction.

That aside, I still don't see how enforced monogamy is going to solve the incel predicament, since they still need to get a woman in the first place.

[Anonymous No.11174109]

>>11174073
for one thing, how would he enforce it?
>>11174087
lol thank you for proving my point, the great majority of people aren't anthropologists and don't read anthro magazines on the regular, and he knows this
you'd think that a psychiatrist and someone who thinks of themselves as an intelligent person would make his language clear in an NYT interview but that's apparently too muc for JBP, his genius can't be constrained by such bonds

[Anonymous No.11174125]

I'm still unsure as to how enforced monogamy will solve the problem of the radicalised/violent incel. These people aren't seeing themselves as victims because women are cheating on them, they're victimising themselves because women aren't sleeping with them period. Making polyamory or infidelity untenable won't stop them from being romantically disengaged and sexually inert

[Anonymous No.11174126]

>>11174107
>I still don't see how enforced monogamy is going to solve the incel predicament
Stacy will settle will make do with a sperg who spends hours and hours whining about roasties due to the shortage of Chads, of course.

[Anonymous No.11174133]

>>11174109
well, a lot of us in the humanities (phd program) like him, and we understand him well. sadly, we gotta discuss it on the down low bc of way too many sjw tards without critical thinking (youd be surprised at the groupthink and feelings-driven actions and debate in academia)

[Anonymous No.11174154]

>>11174107
>Yeah I didn't mean to imply that this stuff doesn't happen in the third world. Third worlders are actually more violent, which contradicts the Memerson narrative that men shoot up schools because of sexual unsatisfaction.

I meant that the world worlders are also violent and that it is also caused by sexual insatisfaction, most notably in India. It doesn't contradict Peterson at all. It's just that it's a somewhat new development in the West while it has been common in the third world for a long time.

[Anonymous No.11174155]

>>11174133
ah yes, the feelings-driven debate, something the crying professor is surely unfamiliar with
the whole point of humanities is to elaborate ethics/morals/call-it-what-you-will, not to recite numbers from a spreadsheet like a rain man parody while interspersing them with the occasional "LOL FACTS>FEELS"

[Anonymous No.11174157]

>>11173425
>Underestanding this little about evolution.

[Anonymous No.11174174]

>>11174125
Yeah there is no obvious solution. It's a tail-end problem of a series of developing problems we're struggling with. The only thing Peterson's enforced monogamy would achieve would be to make marriage legally less risky for men. This is nice but is irrelevant for people that have no chance to find themselves married in the first place. I think that, like the IFS guy here >>11173276 Peterson wrongly believes Incels just refuse to get married.

[Anonymous No.11174196]

>>11174174
lol no, you're trying to parse his words into something inoffensive and because he is very very good with words you're succeeding
he's sending out signals to his incel audience that he's with them, that he's for forced pairings of unattached women with incels etc. while giving himself enough leeway to say "aw shucks, that was just a term anthropologists use, you have misinterpreted me once again!"
incels = patreon bux

[Anonymous No.11174197]

>taxation is theft
>the state rests on a foundation of coercion
>"redistribution of wealth" is code for totalitarian labor camps
>the wealthy earned their share and the state should protect their private property, not steal and distribute it to the undeserving
>survival of the fittest, only the most fit should reproduce

>but sexual marxism is A OK

[Anonymous No.11174214]

>>11173724
>Minassien and lepine in canada

[Anonymous No.11174219]

>>11172900
Anyone who cant see through his art is incapable of philosophy. Incels aren’t the losers here. Only a fraction of men are incels and a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of them hurt anyone over it. The real problem here is women, who are the ones who gain from monogamy. Otherwise men would just pump and dump and then what happens? The state pays womens’ bills and raises their children, so you have a bunch of men raised my single mothers and female teachers, which along with the very loud queer left in turn make men gay af. The problem only gets worse over time. Men in society, become effeminate, one half-step away from becoming traps until muslims take over our political system and institute sharia law.

[Anonymous No.11174222]

>>11172900
How is he wrong though? Most non-patriarchal societies are bad. Only Western societies are matriarchal and they're running on fumes at this point. Enforced monogamy is a social good.

[Anonymous No.11174230]

>>11174197
You can revert this as well.

>institutional hierarchies are bad and man-made
>it's the job the state to ensure some degree of equitability when it comes to economics
>everyone should have access to healthcare, housing, and education
>beauty standards are illegitimate when applied to women
>in order to promote social cohesion it's the job of the state to ensure some degree of happiness to all of its citizens

>also sexual hierarchies are perfectly fine

[Anonymous No.11174234]

>>11174230
>institutional hierarchies are bad
>the state must fix
Leftism in a nutshell. inb4 "anarchists"

[Anonymous No.11174238]

>>11174234
>replies to a parody as if it was the real thing
rightism in a nutshell

[Anonymous No.11174243]

>>11174238
all leftist "thought" is on par with parody, though.

[Anonymous No.11174244]

why is this board so fucking buttflustered over jordan peterson?

contain yourselves, lads. calling someone names is no freaking argument

[Anonymous No.11174249]

>>11174244
>why is this board so fucking buttflustered over jordan peterson?
he's anticommunist

[Anonymous No.11174268]

I hate peterson so much. He's gone from a nice fellow that worries about freedom of speech into neil degrasse tyson levels of fucking pretentious know-it-all that spews diarrhea because they keep inviting him to talk about topics in the periphery of psychology that are way out of his depth (politics, philosophy, legislature), and yet, he loves the attention.

He keeps telling everyone to live his fucking boring christian life and have a family and settle down because he wants everybody to live like him. He's the embodiment of the sunken cost fallacy.
Fuck you petercuck, if your shit rules are so successful, why do you look so fucking miserable all the time? Eat shit.

[Anonymous No.11174279]

>>11174268
I'd be miserable too watching society JUST itself into oblivion through out-of-control liberalism. of course Memerson is a Liberal Individualist too, he isn't really willing to go full Reactionary.

[Anonymous No.11174296]

>>11174268
the man who breaks into tears while retelling the plot to PINOCCHIO is the guy who's gonna teach you how to be a man's man

the sad truth is that he went off his anti-depressants way back when and now he's flying free until he crashes, hard

[Anonymous No.11174318]

>>11174219
This is clearly bait, but if you're genuinely worried that the "loud queer left" is making you gay simply by existing then you were probably gay from the beginning.

Are you so weak-willed that when the muslims take over you'll take up islam too?

[Anonymous No.11174325]

>>11174044
That's still not going to help his legion of disgusting incels.

[Anonymous No.11174327]

>>11174219
This is clearly bait, but if you're genuinely worried that the "loud queer left" is making you gay simply by existing then you were probably gay from the beginning. Are you so weak-willed that when the muslims take over you'll take up islam too?

Your whole post just reeks of the spiralling-outward delusions of a complete paranoiac. Seriously dude, don't end up like Alexandre Bissonnette

[Anonymous No.11174335]

>>11174325
>That's still not going to help his legion of disgusting incels.
Most Memerson fans I've known were just average-to-above-average college guys in both looks and intelligence desu. Female sexual selection into soft harems is just out of control at the moment. In most cases, if males are incel or rarely able to get sex/a romantic partner, it's usually just because they aren't well above average in looks.

[Anonymous No.11174355]

>>11174335
being a memerson fan doesn't make someone unfuckable, those guys probably weren't incels
don't conflate the two

[Anonymous No.11174364]

>>11174355
nah, most were undersexed or incel desu. the dating market is brutal for a male who isn't well-above-average in looks.

[Anonymous No.11174366]

>>11174335
Nah. Most of the men that can't get laid have very serious social problems coupled with ridiculous expectations. They also put in basically no effort.

[Anonymous No.11174370]

>>11173169

[Anonymous No.11174374]

>>11174366
Maybe my university had more autists than usual, but pretty average guys didn't really have an easy time getting laid. Even if they do, they can't keep their partner for long.

[Anonymous No.11174375]

>>11172981

He was an academic who caught the faintest whiff of celebrity and is now chasing it at the expense of whatever self-respect he ever possessed.

Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have been doing the same thing for more than a decade. Fringe academics desperate for a platform to peddle neoconservative twaddle for a quick buck.

[Anonymous No.11174381]

>>11174364
be honest now, are you an incel or incel-adjacent
cause this is bullshit
either they're shit socially (personality, behavior, whatever) or they're aiming for the skies

[Anonymous No.11174382]

>>11174375
>dawkins
>fringe academic

wew lad

[Anonymous No.11174391]

>>11174381
Nah, like I said in >>11174374 my school might've had more autists than usual. Maybe it's different at Big State U. Also, plenty of people with shit personalities get laid fine, they're just better looking.

[Anonymous No.11174400]

>>11174381
>>11174366
People like you are so delusional it makes me wonder if you even leave your house. The social skills needed in order to get a girl are basically one step above from utter social retardation. You don't need to be a conversationalist or a Don Juan to get girls, you need things like looks or status or niche appeal (tattoos, blingy blings or whatever).

The social skills threshold for getting laid is so low it's basically irrelevant

[Anonymous No.11174403]

>>11174381
>either they're shit socially (personality, behavior, whatever) or they're aiming for the skies

It's usually both. Fatass uninteresting losers regularly think they should be dating the prom queen because of some misguided superiority complex. A lot of them eventually start working out and get somewhat in shape and get even angrier because they still fail horribly with women.

[Anonymous No.11174405]

>>11174400
>you need things like looks or status or niche appeal (tattoos, blingy blings or whatev
lol what
now I know you're aiming for the skies
find yourself a fatty

[Anonymous No.11174414]

>>11174327
You sound like someone who, having realized he’s been intellectually cucked for most of his life, pisses in his hat and proceeds to put it on.

Nothing you say is an argument but i’ll address some of your points. One, sexual orientation is malleable. Everyone is a bit gay and someone can become fully gay by being exposed to the right stimuli. It’s the same with pedophilia. People as they age get tired of the same old same old and start wanting younger partners. By the time a man or woman reaches 90, he/she is a full blowm pedophile, along with having half a dozen other perversions. You don’t need empirical evidence to prove this. It’s the human condition. Two, who the shit is alexandre bissonnette and why haven’t i heard of him if he’s so important.

[Anonymous No.11174415]

>>11174405
I'm not incel, I'll be a married man two months from now

[Anonymous No.11174419]

>>11174382

He has not been relevant in either popular culture or academia since 2008 my dude. The Ancestor's Tale was the last good thing he wrote and he's slowly fading away to little more than a punchline on Twitter.

[Anonymous No.11174422]

>>11174415
good, you followed my advice

[Anonymous No.11174442]

The problem is female hypergamy is always relative. Even if all males were 6'4" chiseled handsome "Chads", women would still only go for the top percentage of those men. It's not like male sexuality, were if every woman was a georgous 6'5" mommy everyone would be content and happy. Women's sexuality are innately relative, and they want males to compete and select the best ones.
The only solution is genetically engineering women to not be hypergamous somehow.

[Anonymous No.11174447]

>>11174442
>GM women
or read iceberg slim

[Anonymous No.11174451]

>>11174442
or just do what we used to do, which was have socially-enforced monogamy, discouragement of excessive promiscuity, and incentives for married couples to stay together and raise their kids properly.

[Anonymous No.11174454]

>>11174268
but he is the chosen one. the fool who came willingly, the virgin at heart, the impotent law, the one who will burn on the day of death and rebirth. it's all very jungian, he'll be down for it.
sumer is icumen in lad

[Anonymous No.11174463]

he's probably right (although the high status men getting all the women thing right is pretty silly and incel-tier fantasizing). The fact is less and less people are getting married and having children, which leads to less social cohesion and the associated problems. It doesn't matter though because the ship sailed long ago, neoliberalism and its values are part of a much bigger process with no driver at the wheel.

[Anonymous No.11174469]

>I don't understand why people think he's talking about the state "enforcing", he's clearly talking about this term from an anthropology textbook, as people usually do...

[Anonymous No.11174486]

>>11174447
Give me a quick rundown
>>11174451
First of all, the genius out of the bottle. Secondly, that's not an actual solution. Women would just be miserable and resentful of their non-Chad husbands, like they always were. Dude this is pretty much the reason feminism exists in the first place, why women hold massive slut pride marches, etc.

The ONLY solution is changing their nature. IF not, I fear this will boil over, and the Radfems who talk of exterminating males won't be kept on the fringes of the movement...

[Anonymous No.11174490]

>>11174486
>First of all, the genius out of the bottle. Secondly, that's not an actual solution. Women would just be miserable and resentful of their non-Chad husbands, like they always were. Dude this is pretty much the reason feminism exists in the first place, why women hold massive slut pride marches, etc.
Can't please everyone. Men are more valuable than women to society.

[Anonymous No.11174495]

>>11174486
>Women would just be miserable and resentful of their non-Chad husbands
counterpoint: lol who cares

[Anonymous No.11174506]

>>11174490
The incels aren't. We should just deal with them.

[Anonymous No.11174517]

>>11174490
But we COULD please everyone by genetically engineering them, sadly this simply isn't a possibility.
>>11174495
I do, and so should you.
>>11174506
Its not incels, this effects all men and women.

[Anonymous No.11174518]

Incels need some sort of assistance from friends or family before we start punishing women for their existence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHop9mSYdVY

[Anonymous No.11174520]

>>11174517
give me one good reason

[Anonymous No.11174523]

>>11174495
>>11174486
Most people will think what they're told to think by others, so if you control your universities, media outlets, etc. you can reverse this shit easily enough. Stalin of all people pretty much reversed women's liberation in Russia.

>IF not, I fear this will boil over, and the Radfems who talk of exterminating males won't be kept on the fringes of the movement...
Women won't actually exterminate anyone, they'll get the State to do it for them. It would be completely trivial for women to form, say a female only corporation and show how good they are. Except this has been tried and it didn't work out so well.

>>11174506
An incel with some incentive to invest in society is more valuable than most women. Also, lots of smart kids at top American schools are unironically incel.

[Anonymous No.11174524]

4chan usually: survival of the fittest! might makes right! eugenics lol!
4chan on incels: we have to spread the genes of these defectives by any means necessary!

[Anonymous No.11174525]

>>11174495
>who cares
Niggas who don't want their hos playing around

[Anonymous No.11174526]

>>11174463
the problem is that most people instinctively know that they should marry (and fuck) only people they would want to have children with, and most adults are infantilized. those that don't instinctively know to have sex with someone you can raise a child with wind up modelling this for the future, while trying to diminish the benefits of continuing the species in a sustainable manner, making for ever more infantilized adults who also won't want to raise children and those that still have the natural instinct to partner to continue the race won't want to partner with them.
what peterson's proposing is a further diminishing of adult roles- rather than it being someone's bad choice to partner with a slut, it becomes some bureaucratic nightmare of how to stop guys who say they don't want to date sluts from dating sluts or getting their slutty gf to stop sucking cock through some legal piece of paper. peterson cannot let these adults in adult relationships either take the fall for their shitty choices, or even tolerate them to make shitty choices, especially not when it involves children he's not going to even have. to give a level of how mad that is: freud and jung and various others throughout the 20th Century thought that is exactly how you create a schizophrenic grandchild, by trying to keep its mother a child and treat her offspring as near incestuous siblings of equal responsibility to the patriarch who simultaneously cannot handle his daughter had sex with anyone or that the child is not his if she did.

waaaait, i just remembered his daughter got knocked up by some chad and she'll probably be due or has already had the kid. peterson's deep in denial about what that means to him.

[Anonymous No.11174536]

>>11174486
iceberg slim wrote pimp which is probably one of the top 5 books in prose and psychological development to come out the US.

[Anonymous No.11174539]

>>11174526
>the problem is that most people instinctively know that they should marry (and fuck) only people they would want to have children with
simply no, this is wrong
maybe if you removed "(and fuck)" it would work but most people want to fuck people because they want to grind their genitals into their genitals or vice versa or any other act that includes the manipulation of genitals by another person
kids don't enter into fucking

[Anonymous No.11174542]

>>11174524
>4chan usually: survival of the fittest! might makes right! eugenics lol!
Right, but this typically is about increasing peoples' intelligence or curing genetic diseases, or having violent or insane people sterilized. These were respectable positions to hold before Hitler. Maybe long-term selection strong jawlines, height, and aggression isn't long-run beneficial for society,

[Anonymous No.11174579]

>>11174539
they do for most cultures. outside of that one tribe which was eating poisonous contraceptive yams since the ice age who didn't link fucking and babies as cause and effect, pretty much everyone on the planet knows fucking leads to babies. that's why we devise ways to try to sever that link from the pleasure aspects, but that just gives rise to all the pregnant from a toilet seat stories which are probably as rare and freakish as that tribe.
ffs the reason why it's pleasurable is so that we attempt to reproduce often enough that if our tribe is too dumb to work out when ovulation hits, we still have reasonable chances of a second generation.

[Anonymous No.11174595]

>>11174579
for fuck's sake, that's not what I meant and you know that's not what I meant
when you want to fuck another person you want to fuck them because they make you hard/wet not because you're imagining yourself rocking little jimmy to sleep in 9 months

[Anonymous No.11174604]

>>11174518
Interesting video. This guy has a lot of videos and now I'm curious what happens.

[Anonymous No.11174651]

>>11174595
>because i wasn't looking at the road it doesn't count as a car crash
no. the only people who don't consider that a child might be a consequence are idiots who probably shouldn't be considered to have the capacity to consent. or that tribe. otherwise, it's deeply culturally abnormal to not know sex makes babies even in repressive societies.

[Anonymous No.11174671]

I have happened upon the most spooked thread of all time

[Anonymous No.11174672]

>>11174518
poor guy is justed by suborbital volume deficiency and probably a weak jawline. too bad about the hair too

[Anonymous No.11174686]

>>11174651
don't know about the shithole where you come from but over here we have pills and condoms

[Anonymous No.11174692]

>>11174672
>too bad about the hair too
he can get some plugs like JBP

[Anonymous No.11174705]

>>11174686
both of which admit the chances of having a child, and try to avert those consequences. they both are legally required to point out that they're not 100% effective, because idiots like you think
>better not get her pregnant let's use a condom
isn't considering babies as a consequence of sex, and would probably sue any manufacturer who "lied" to them about sex being 100% baby free.
it's not. you know it's not. that's why you use those things to attempt to prevent an obvious consequence of sex which is having a child.

[Anonymous No.11174706]

>>11174671
This shitty meme is the biggest spook of all.

[Anonymous No.11174720]

>>11174469
what did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.11174724]

>>11174414
>poster hates muslims
>doesn't know who Bissonette is
what the fuck do you live in a cave

>Everyone is a bit gay and someone can become fully gay by being exposed to the right stimuli
and, by the same incredulously snowballing logic of your previous post, everyone is a little bit muslim until exposed to sharia law, at which point they start beheading sluts and raping prisoners of war? my problem with your original post was that it jumped from one paranoiac persecution complex to the next (the lefties are trying to turn me gay, the mussies are trying to impose sharia law, the women are trying to emasculate me), so I thought the comparison to a delusional mass muslim murderer was particularly apt. Clearly it went over your head because you've never even glanced at a newspaper

[Anonymous No.11174732]

>>11174414
>You don’t need empirical evidence to prove this.
Wtf I believe everything I read on the internet now

[Anonymous No.11174733]

>>11174705
no matter how much verbal diarrhea you spurt through your fingers it won't change the fact that generally speaking people fuck each other because they're attracted to each other and want to cum, not because they want to get pregnant/impregnate

[Anonymous No.11174745]

>>11174733
>we're totally exempt from instincts to procreate
no. mushrooms don't have to think to spore and procreate, and i'm beginning to think they think more than you.
everyone considers pregnancy as an outcome if they're not rolling drunk and probably beyond consent, or like you and too dumb to understand sex makes babies and in eternal child mode. people with healthy instincts won't want to fuck you if you don't know sex makes babies and can't appreciate the consequences of your choices around that.

[Anonymous No.11174757]

>>11174400
no this is absolutely untrue its not at all the bare minimum its exceeding the average or beig willing to fuck girls with recessed jawlines who smell and have no figure
>>11174325
most incels are normal looking and would have had a girlfriend 50 years ago, they’re not disgusting nor are they autistic. a huge number of guys college aged and young adult are incel, its probably 20% of male college students, they’re not ugly, they’re plain and don’t go to parties (because they’re not invited).
>>11174243
idiot
>>11174197
why are sexual hierarchies which kill off whole lineages and lock people into cycles of porn addiction, humiliation and eventually chemical castration (psyche meds, trans) ok? is it because you hate men?
>>11173276
this is a low estimate from a small sample size, its much closer to 20-25% of the young adult male population, probably 3-4x as many men can’t get laid as women. what would be interesting is comparing sexual encounter frequency across all groups separated by sex and age. guarantee 20-35, women have significantly longer periods of consistent sex, men have much longer dry spells. would be good to see attraciveness differentials. guarantee women have more frequent encounters with higher attractiveness males and middle/low level males typically fuck rarely, and when they do its down. So my prediction:

incels are 25% of young male pop; all men have less sex than all women save for the very bottom of females; everyone outside the top 20% has less sex than previous decades (autism, atomization); top 20% has more sex than all other groups combined and more than other decades (hyper slut economy); women fuck up, men fuck down (especially at lower levels); women have long periods of consistent hookups and “lovers”, men have long dry spells and more sexless relationships w/gf’s and less “lovers” more unsatisfying one night stands with uglier women.

almost positive this is the case from examining people’s social habits and looking at messaging rates on dating apps

[Anonymous No.11174782]

>>11174757
it's not just that women fuck up, it's that they prefer soft harems to monogamy.

[Anonymous No.11174789]

>>11174757
>most incels are normal looking
source?
>incels are 25% of young male pop
source?

[Anonymous No.11174813]

>>11174745
I think you're basing your dumb opinions on reading some evopsych book and sprinkling some of your innate retardation into it because this is ridiculous

[Anonymous No.11174856]

>>11174813
He's completely right though.

[Anonymous No.11174894]

>>11174789
Source is above and just from knowing a fuckton of de facto incels including some of my close friends from hs, all of whom have normal facial symmetry and are not fat or short (all avg height, white, not even virgins) and from feeling out how often my peers in uni go out, its really obvious a huge number of young men do npt get laid and have no luck online. my friend who has a typical anglo face, not ugly, not handsome, plain basically, and is 6’2 is basically incel. he had lots of friends in hs and is no virgin, but he gets laid like once a year to 16 months because girls don’t want to fuck him. Its partially he has nothing going on, we don’t go out a lot as a friend group, and partially he just doesn’t blow their socks off with personality, but isn’t a sperg, and partially he has no money to meet women and is competing with much better looking men at bars.

if these avg looking incels fucked recessed jawed smelly heffers then yeah they’d get laid. the reason they don’t is because they’re programmed by evolution to avoid diseased genetic lineages. i have turned down pussy from probably half a dozen 4/10 sluts on okcupid because i couldn’t get past how mentally ill and fat they were. then on tindr and at parties its much worse, the attractiveness disparities skew and you are competing with gangs of 8-9/10 males who are radiating out and altering the behavior of all the women at the party. its not at all a simple matchmaking algo that governs sexuality. all women fuck up, they are programmed to do so.

but i just think its a bit ridiculous to assume most men starved for sex are either severe autists or are ugly. none of the incels i know are ugly. ugly as in facial deformity or severe asymmetry. i however do know tons of ugly women who have sex regularly and a grotesque number of fat women who have boyfriends. i think again that if you have extremely low standards and do not care about mental illness or personality disorder, or smell/autism (you have no idea how insufferable the odor and stupidity of fat chicks is until you have one in ur living room) the. yeah its almost impossible to be incel without being a giant sperg. Elliot Rodgers could have fucked fat or ugly chicks, but he wasn’t ugly or fat. that’s the issue i brought up which i wanted to see above: do women consistently fuck up, do they have more frequent sex, do they have more lovers for longer periods (long term fuckbuddies) and do men fuck down typically (below the handsome threshhold which is 7/10, 8/10 being bonafide handsome)

[Anonymous No.11174899]

>>11173425
this is bait of excellent quality

[Anonymous No.11174957]

>>11172900
How many times has this happened? I feel like it's every other week I hear of some madman who has a retard fanbase latch on to them and then suddenly start adopting the idiotic ideas that fanbase brings. I don't think Peterson would have ever said some incel warrior shit like that had he not become an icon of the reddit-right.

[Anonymous No.11175054]

>>11173495
Hell no I want sex in heaven not marriage. Most marriages peter out within a decade, imagine being forced to know that one person forever.

[Anonymous No.11175070]

>>11175054
There won't be sex in heaven

[Anonymous No.11175073]

>>11172900
>Jordan "I collect communist art just for fun" Peterson

ugh why does it seem like he is back again, he faded for awhile and it was kind of nice

[Anonymous No.11175076]

>>11174894
>blah blah blah anectodes
I know a fuckton of ugly males that manage to get a gf. One my friends is a fatass and fucked a 8/10 high school. Another dude I met in my physics lab is also a fatass and has a 7/10 gf. Several normal looking males I know have/have had gfs. The more I think about this the more I realize that this may be all caused by shyness and autism

[Anonymous No.11175082]

>>11175070
Why would anyone want to go there then? Sounds more like an incel roundup then a heavenly place.

[Anonymous No.11175122]

>>11174813
i think the reason you can't come up with an argument against
>sex makes babies
is because it's patently true.

[Anonymous No.11175149]

>>11172900
this guy is nuts

[Anonymous No.11175163]

>>11175076
>Shyness
Agreed.
Autism is a meme word.
50% looks 50% personality

[Anonymous No.11175280]

>>11173169
Holy fuck I'm in this picture. What a strange feeling.

[Anonymous No.11175351]

>>11173169
this is at UT Austin's food court, i get Chick Fil a when theres no line (i.e. never) or Zen (the shitty chinese food place)

nice.

[Anonymous No.11175410]

>>11175280
me in the middle

[Anonymous No.11175611]

>>11173646
Author spent 2 days with him and this is what she picks up, in addition to telling everyone his room was dirty? obviously another jewish hit piece. There was a bunch of other trash in there

[Anonymous No.11175631]

>>11175611
the reporter is clearly the grug retard
pic related

[Anonymous No.11175648]

>>11174296
>the man who breaks into tears while retelling the plot to PINOCCHIO is the guy who's gonna teach you how to be a man's man
KEK I thought you were memeing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6LL4JAP0mM
Fuckin Peterson

[Anonymous No.11175662]

>>11174518
Proof that incels simply lack confidence and testosterone. I know guys who are worse looking than him but get laid all the time with decent looking girls.

[Anonymous No.11175707]

WHO FUCKING CARES
Women are the past
Traps are the future
#accelerate

[Anonymous No.11175869]

>>11173597
>>11173646
he always sounds like that, it's just more evident in writing and the Nytimes have been smart to quote him literally instead of editing him to make him sound good on text

[Anonymous No.11175881]

>>11173748
>shooters like this are an American phenomenon
because america is the only place where gun fetishism is a thing and being the cradle of mass culture makes mass phenomenons more popular

doesn't mean there's not plenty of young poor men butter knifing each other in europe

[Anonymous No.11175889]

>>11173942
i don't think asians count, it's complicated

[Anonymous No.11175895]

>>11174001
>>TV killed a lot of social groups but the internet is destroying them.
>Watch as Nigel Farage OBLITERATES Russell Brand on immigration ...

[Anonymous No.11175898]

>>11174048
it's a serious problem though

[Anonymous No.11175902]

>>11174087
>Peterson is using well-established anthropological language
he should still be able to explain himself like a normal person in an interview instead of a lunatic forcing girls to be gfs to people

[Anonymous No.11175919]

>>11174469
how crazy is that guy? forced speech = terrible, forcing women to marry basically monsters = good

[Anonymous No.11175926]

>>11174539
>kids don't enter into fucking
that's a very recent privilege though and society will have to adapt to it or perish if it can't

[Anonymous No.11175934]

>>11174518
>>11174604
what's it about? my religion forbids me from watching youtube videos recorded in a bedroom

[Anonymous No.11175944]

>>11174782
>it's not just that women fuck up, it's that they prefer soft harems to monogamy.
makes sense for genetic improvement reasons

[Anonymous No.11175953]

>>11174957
Peterson was retarded way before reddit, it's just that his retardation is now on the open, he also had this messianic complex when he was a university professor, you can watch his old classes on the youtube

[Anonymous No.11175961]

>>11173722
>marriages are encouraged
Just for their own sake? Why? Why should people who are bitter and incapable of good human interaction, deserve any relationships at all?

[Anonymous No.11175966]

>>11174757
>kill off whole lineages
How do they do that? The women are reproducing just fine.

[Anonymous No.11175969]

>>11175966
what? nobody is reproducing

[Anonymous No.11175983]

>>11175969
Any fertility rate over 2.1 is fine. But my point was, there's no reason to consider "lineages" to be patrilineal when the entire social structure which made that useful has broken down. If some men don't reproduce, that's fine.

[Anonymous No.11175998]

Does observing a problem and a tried and true solution mean you must advocate for it? This was the solution to an obvious problem in the past, what is our solution today within the current parameters of society?

[Anonymous No.11176004]

>>11175983
yes, that's why polygamy should be legalized and incels rounded up in camps

[Anonymous No.11176006]

>>11174782
>they prefer soft harems to monogamy.
Not really 'soft harems'. Even in matrilineal/matrilocal societies they prefer serial monogamy due to having a man loyal to them. But what we're talking about here is who they prefer to fuck - because there's no resources in question. The answer is, they just prefer the best men, and don't really care about his loyalty because they aren't asking him for a relationship.

Monogamy benefits both females and males but in different ways depending on social structure. In virilocal societies the men benefit from knowing their children's parentage and the women get resources. In matrilocal societies the woman's family gets a man to serve them in return for the privilege of having assured kids with one of their women.

My point is, it's not that women inherently prefer non-monogamy. It's that in our current social structure, woman's best sexual strategy isn't monogamous (and for that matter, neither is men's - if they can manage to have more than one sexual partner). One could always argue that such a society isn't good - I'd agree - but to think that it's just men who benefit from monogamy in all societies is a little wrong, and based largely on the virilocal patriarchal society model which most follow.

[Anonymous No.11176012]

>>11176006
>matrilineal/matrilocal societies
just because a society is patrilineal it doesn't follow that it would cater to the preferences of women, sometimes the biggest oppression is oppression from your own

Also the myth that all women have the same interests is a very recent development: the interests of young women and old women are diametrically opposed and they are in direct confrontation if not socially mediated somehow

[Anonymous No.11176026]

>>11176012
>just because a society is patrilineal it doesn't follow that it would cater to the preferences of women
True, patriarchal societies can be harmful to men just as matrifocal/etc. ones harmful to women. I worded things a little vaguely, it does seem like I was implying the contrary. You're going to have social control of behavior of both sexes in any sort of society, but the purpose of monogamy is different was all that I was trying to illustrate.

>sometimes the biggest oppression is oppression from your own
>the interests of young women and old women are diametrically opposed
Yes that's of course the case. I should have said more clearly - it's young women in western society who prefer what that other anon called 'soft harems'. I was just saying that depending on social structure they very well might not want that. But yes, typically in societies where women have more social power, it's the older women who keep everyone in their clan in line, which usually (though not always) means limiting promiscuity.

[Anonymous No.11176113]

>>11172974
What the fuck is with this bitch?

[Anonymous No.11176150]

>>11173942
Most Indians are sexually repressed but have close to certain chances of getting arranged marriages.

[Anonymous No.11176790]

>>11173376
#MeToo, obesity, low libido

[Anonymous No.11176821]

>>11173748
>imblying
Germany has had several shool shootings you fucking liar. There was also an Iranian NEET who shot up a McDonald's last year or the year before, similarly to the Toronto Azerbaijani. There are also minor attacks with blunt weapons and firebombs that have occured at the school level. They occur more often in the US, but Europe is not exempt, I am not familiar with other Western countries, but I'm sure there have been a few incidents.