[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 26 KB, 274x300, Nietzsche-274x300.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3876523 No.3876523 [Reply] [Original]

What is your ethical objection against trying to get every woman pregnant you happen to have sex with?

>> No.3876526

>>3876523
If you are open about it I have no qualms with it, but if you're secretly trying to impregnate them against their will(such as puncturing the condom like my crazy ex) I'd be opposed to it.

>> No.3876525

Mandatory child support

>> No.3876538

>>3876526
I'm trying to understand exactly what you implied, but in this case you are a female and your ex is male, right?

>> No.3876552

>>3876538
Yes. When I went to throw away his used condoms in the trash can, I noticed small holes in them. I didn't say anything and started taking morning after pills and kept a watchful eye on the condoms. I saw it two more times and kicked his sweet ass out.

>> No.3876557

>>3876552

wow that's crazy. :/

>> No.3876561

I've actually legitimately been thinking about this, since it's the only thing I stand a chance of accomplishing in this world.

>> No.3876565

>>3876557
It's fucking insane. Are you OP? I'd like to hear a rebuttal to my initial statement since I gathered he thinks, or rather could make a case for, that it's ethical to impregnate all the women he has sex with.

>> No.3876566

>>3876552

That is the creepiest thing ever, holy shit... did he ever explain to you why he did that? Was it a fetish or something? Gross.

>> No.3876576

>>3876566
Don't know, severed all contact with him after that point. We had no friends in common so it wasn't hard at all. I don't really talk about it, all of my friends got the "I just wasn't in love with him anymore" story. I don't want to dwell on what could've happened if I hadn't noticed it.

>> No.3876578

>>3876523
overpopulation

>> No.3876586

>>3876561
You are seriously fucking deluded if you think thats the only thing you can accomplish in the world.

>> No.3876650

>>3876565 - Yes, I'm (>>3876557) & OP, not >>3876538 tho.

As you said, and I agree with your moral stance, that one should be open about his or her actions and intentions in this case.

My original question was born out the moral scepticist idea of creating your own values instead of inheriting state and or christian values. For the sake of a long story short - if you're not an general 'asshole', 'jerk' per se and could financially support your children one could make a case it's of benefit to 'everyone', or at least to myself and the children to - have these children. Would the possible downside of growing up without a father really outweigh the upside of these children's existence itself? Plus, I like this idea of having different little me's spontaneously very much.

And I'm just throwing ideas as food for thinking, not commited to any view I must say. It's hard to really make complex arguments on such narrow paragraphs either, so as said I'm just throwing out the general idea.

>> No.3876666

>>3876523
STD's and baby moms would form an organization to assassinate you

>> No.3876668

>>3876650

and actually, the real problem is, once you want to settle down with your chosen maiden.. your true love so to speak, I'm afraid it would be too much trouble convincing your spouse of the good-willness of your past actions. It's hard to be taken seriously after going down that road, because of how set-in-stone the status quo (general, well-accepted, 'the norm') values are. And maybe rightfully so, but then again maybe not.

>> No.3876675

>>3876586
How would you know? The only thing I've ever consistently good at is getting women.

>> No.3876678

this thread is such an unfathomable sophomoric abomination that if 4chan had a virtual trash-bag -- straight into the trash-bag this thread would go.

leave.

>> No.3876681

The more I realize that the only reason I'm here is to spread my genes, the more I realize that spreading my seed is imperative.

>> No.3876682

>>3876650
> I like this idea of having different little me's spontaneously very much.

It sounds like you are very self-centered and egotic.

>> No.3876686

>>3876682
Nah, sounds like he's gotten over his ego and embraced his nature.

>> No.3876729
File: 52 KB, 528x223, 3_528_poster.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3876729

>not following OP's advice
>not leaving all the weak souls to fight on their own
>not only tutoring the brightest and strongest

why is soft-eugenicism bad again?

>> No.3876860

>>3876650
this already happens with sperm banks. read some interviews with prolific donors.

>> No.3876894

Our sexual and relationship norms are completely retarded. A lot of people pretend they are crazy nihilists open to opposing those norms but when it comes to sexual behaviour they might as well be living in the 19c.

>> No.3877037

>>3876666
You mean the government? That already exists to kill bachelors or shackle them under servitude.

>> No.3877209

>>3876523
I want my children to have a father to raise them.

>> No.3877405

>>3876678
>putting a trash-bag inside a trash-bag

>> No.3877414

I wonder how Bob Marley's lesser known kids are doing?

>> No.3877417

>>3876894
the stupidity in this post is astounding

>> No.3877425

Population control

>> No.3877537
File: 61 KB, 675x502, 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3877537

If I could impregnate people's wives and get away with them fathering my children free of all obligation on my part then I would do it.

picture related

>> No.3877542

>>3877405
What if the first trash bag has a hole in it?

>> No.3877544

>>3876578
/thread

>> No.3877562

SPREAD MY GENSE SPEAD MY GENSE SPRED MY GENSE

>> No.3877582

My genes are whatever, and most ladies wouldn't consent to being knocked up in most circumstances. Also it's usually easier to do good in the world if you don't treat people shitty unless absolutely necessary.

>> No.3877591
File: 36 KB, 351x344, 1304987529438.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3877591

>>3876523
I believe in Kant's categorical imperative. If we all acted like you wish to, OP, then civilization would surely collapse, and 4chan with it. Good day!

>> No.3877651
File: 312 KB, 777x1063, dawg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3877651

>>3877537
This is the opposite of what you were supposed to get out of the film, you might actually be dumber than a dog.

The only real reason people had so many children in the past was to work on farms (and support you in your old age) and ultimately to have a strong lineage to be remembered by. Neither are particularly relevant these days if you're an "ubermensch" or whatever. People who believe in any genetic/biological "imperative" about "propagating seed" would be better off as spore-people.

also this is just a personal thing but it really peeves me when people say "spreading your wild oats" as if it's just a sexual thing; it was modeled after ignorant farmers coming home from war and planting useless wild oats

>> No.3878217

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

>> No.3878229

>>3877591
>2013
>believing in kant's categorical imperative

to be crass, kant was wrong about human reason.

see: the entire discipline of anthropology; esp. foucault

>> No.3878256
File: 18 KB, 220x286, 220px-William_Blake_by_Thomas_Phillips.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878256

>>3878229

Man, like I need a Reason, nigga.

>> No.3878258

>>3877651
>The only real reason people had so many children in the past was to work on farms (and support you in your old age) and ultimately to have a strong lineage to be remembered by.

No. We're biologically programmed to spread our seed. Please stop spreading nonsense.

>> No.3878266

>>3878258

We're biologically programmed to fuck. Whether you're especially inclined to 'spread your seed' or not seems to depend on whether you live in a Third World country or not.

>> No.3878271

>>3878266
We're programmed to spread our seed, which is why we feel compelled to fuck.

>> No.3878276

>>3877405
That's how I store trash bags

>> No.3878277

>>3878271

You're confusing cause with effect there. It feels good to fuck, there isn't any other spooky genetic imperative (unless you have evidence for one.)

>> No.3878292

>>3876650
>existence
>upside

>> No.3878295

>>3878271
You guys are arguing around each other like jackasses. You're clearly using different criteria for "biologically programmed."

>> No.3878302

Overpopulation limits the wellbeing of fellow agents. Additionally, pregnancy has longterm negative cosmetic effects on females, and as such this will indirectly decrease the wellbeing of the women you impregnate, particularly if one of their ends is the acquisition of future partners, which is the case in almost all circumstances.

>> No.3878309 [DELETED] 

>>3878277
Of course there's genetic instruction to reproduce, and there's nothing spooky about it. The only reason sex continues to be selected is because it furthers the survival of the species.

>> No.3878314

>>3878302

Correction: Pregnancy has long term cosmetic effects when held to the general standard of attractiveness in most, if not all, western societies. I suppose that if the negative cosmetic effects of a pregnancy so distress a woman, she could, say, try and find a Subsaharan African society that considers women cosmetically effected by pregnancy to be more sexually desirable, but this introduces so many complications that wellbeing would be decreased regardless. There is no way around it: By haphazardly impregnating every possible woman, you have dramatically negatively affected the wellbeing of a particular set of agents (specifically the aforementioned women) and contributed slightly to a very general decline of wellbeing among all known agents, by means of overpopulation. This is unacceptable.

>> No.3878325

>>3878302
>>3878314
You guys are confusing noticing a banal factor's influence in life with obsessing over it. The financial and psychological burden, and the amount of exhaustion that goes into raising a child, is fucking Jovian compared to "negative cosmetic effects." It's tempting to talk about what ladies look like when you discover big boy words, but Jesus Christ.

>> No.3878330

>>3878325

Psychological effects are rendered null if there is no effect on the agent's capability of achieving ends, but this is a technicality - I thought the psychological effects were implicit.

>> No.3878347

>>3878330

Come to think of it, the psychological effects are not implicit - they are rendered null if the woman chooses to get an abortion, or if OP's attempt to impregnate the woman fail. I'm just talking about the ethical consequences of the isolated will or action of impregnation. I say will or action because it's debatable as to whether or not, from OP's perspective, the action of impregnation took place, even if, say, the woman took a morning after pill, or simply failed to conceive. OP perceives that the event took place, but the woman perceives it did not, and empirical science agrees with the woman. But again this is a technicality. Also I'm using these "big boy words" because I think they're the most clear in expressing what I want to express.

>> No.3878631

overpopulation

>> No.3878676

That child support is expensive nigga

>> No.3878711

as a member of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement and violently crazy, i don't feel passing my genes on to be a beneficial thing

>> No.3878766

>>3878631
>>3878676
Those.

I also don't see it fit to have my actions dictated by evolutionism.

>> No.3878792

argument: overpopulation

rebuttal: having 10 children instead of 2 will not make a difference in human population of 7 billion people. overpopulation argument could be brought up if others would follow my lead (which they won't) or if I'd run a cursade campaign to promote the idea (which I wont). You may argue against the ethics of having more children comperative to others and the ethics of not respecting the social norms and common good, but not for overpopulation. (Yet still, the common good is not harmed, as others won't follow my lead)

check

>> No.3878795

>>3878766

You have planned to die a virgin just to entertain rebellion?

embrace your true nature and get on with it

>> No.3878837

>>3876523

YOU MIGHT GIVE BIRTH TO RETARDS AND AUTISTS.

THERE, THAT'S AN ETHICAL OBJECTION

THERE'S ALSO THE CHILD'S WELFARE. WHO FUCK IS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF IT? THE STATE? IF SO, THEN THAT'S A PROBLEM.

>> No.3878849

>>3878795
Who said anything about dying a virgin? The OP was about getting every single women PREGNANT.

>> No.3878865

Now that you don't have to be strong to survive and therefore be alive to impregnate women, how can you be sure that you're worthy to reproduce?

>> No.3878926
File: 76 KB, 326x451, william_blake.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878926

>>3878865

>implying God doesnt provide for the Lion

>> No.3878931

>>3878926

Aww, he finally worked out how to trip. So cute.

>> No.3878932

>>3878865
I'd rather be in a coffin than in a cunt.

>> No.3878935
File: 9 KB, 200x266, william_blake_biography.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878935

>>3878931

Fuck of horse.

>> No.3878937

>>3878935

*fuck off

>> No.3878939

>>3878935
>>3878937

Aww, he finally worked out how to spell. So cute.

>> No.3878940

>>3876523
Well, breeding goes against my morality.
Also:
>>3876525

>> No.3878942
File: 602 KB, 1423x1848, William_Blake (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878942

>>3878939

>implying I am enslaved by your system
>implying I don't create my own

>> No.3878947

>>3878865
Do you even get how natural selection works? Your comment makes no fucking sense.

>> No.3878949

>>3878947

He didn't mention natural selection, fool.

>not having ruddy limbs and flaming hair
>being this much of a Newton

>> No.3878951
File: 24 KB, 255x358, william_blake_engraving.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878951

>>3878949

Oops, forgot pic.

>> No.3878955

>>3878951
Are you that cancerous on purpose?

>> No.3878957
File: 82 KB, 620x801, william_blake_-_the_great_red_dragon_and_the_woman_clothed_in_sun.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878957

>>3878955

>implying your scorn isn't a kingly title

>> No.3878962

>>3876552
fucking feminism...

>> No.3878979
File: 169 KB, 543x486, 1372066538553.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3878979

>actually paying child support

>> No.3878989

>>3876566
Creepy?

Gosh, you will not be happy dating girls 28 age and older. You take out the condoms, you put it on, you take them off and you flush them down.

>> No.3879004

>>3878949
>Now that you don't have to be strong to survive
Being strong isn't necessary to survive. Only being properly adapted to your environment (this is something you understand once you get what natural selection is)
>how can you be sure that you're worthy to reproduce?
Being worthy to reproduce? What does this even mean? What species/individuals are worthy to reproduce?
Also, you're a fag. I mean, not just "a fag", your faggotry is noticeable even in a place where you're surrounded by flaming faggots.

>> No.3879486
File: 86 KB, 834x600, 1370796713725.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3879486

If I had a billion dollars, I would have a thousand kids.

>> No.3879490

>>3877405
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_comprehension, seriously

>> No.3879517

Fertility fetishes activated!

>> No.3879522

I don't want to

>> No.3879530
File: 1.72 MB, 3538x3424, 1344961866988.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3879530

>sex

>> No.3879535

I already did and now I'm fleeing the law but running out of aliases.

>> No.3879564

>>3879535
>running out of aliases.
Whoa, poor guy... This must be tough.

>> No.3879621
File: 246 KB, 620x349, public.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3879621

I consider the question raised by >>3876523 to be irresponsible, and would not recommend it under any circumstances.

>> No.3879645

because men can't get pregnant
thank you based god