Culture Female sexuality and the necessity of Patriarchy

[Val the Moofia Boss]

What is going to happen is a war is going to happen and gender roles will come back to a somewhat normal, woth Women being allowed this time of course. It will bring true equality and have people realize just how hard one has it over the other for lost of known human history.

War between whom? As in overthrowing the government? The idea of an effective, violent rebellion against a government is fanciful. The government has a monopoly on military power and logistics, with drone strikes and aircraft carriers and supply lines. The bureaucracy is too large to decapitate, and it fills in positions quickly. It'd be impossible to violently remove the regime through force.

The best you can hope for is that the policies of these governments ends up being what destroys them: they run of money and popular support, and eventually are unable to enforce their rule as localities establish themselves (people paying their taxes not to the federal government, but to their new local state that actually aligns with their values).

 

[LifeisTiresome]

Why do you assume I believe in freedom of choice over everything? Do you think I don't believe in responsibility for those choices too? Why do you go right for the most extreme interpretation of a position? I haven't said freedom above all have I?
I believe in people being free to make their choices, it is their right. But do you think that means I'm cool with people choosing to murder? Do you think I'm one of those odd hyper libertarian types?
Instead of jumping to conclusions about my position shall I talk about responsibilities to society and the consequences that also come with freedom? I mean I shouldn't have to because its common sense but you know.

This is why you need to get your facts tight before you debate because you're walking on thin air here arguing a position I don't have.

I'm holding you to your position. You said freedom above all and when I push you on it you now say, no freedom over all. You are just moving from one position to another whenever it suits you which matches the below that you have no standards whatsoever and that its all arbitrary.

Which is fine but stop acting self-righteous about it as if everything that has ever happened is so that what happens matches your ideals like your claim that everybody in the past fought for the freedom! The WW2 vets who stormed the beaches on D-Day I'm sure didn't do it so that the Left would have the freedom to do what they are doing to society.

Yeah but you see your definition of political alignment doesn't match with any mainstream accepted source so it means nothing outside your brain. I absolutely admit I am more liberal than you, but I expect so was Pinochet.

And I can confirm I do only use arguments that suit my given position. Thats just how people debate, technique and method has no politics. Just whatever gets the point across. I mean if I wanted to end this debate I can just start talking burden of proof for those accusations of yours.

Funny you say this cause my desired position while agreeing with @Lord Invictus is fundamentally marriage is done and traditional family unit is done and its very unlikely we can fix this and instead we should have artificial wombs and companion bots for both men and women.

Feminists say no, men cannot have either as its misogyny.

I'm far more egalitarian then them.

And my posts have not me saying anything new than what has been posted in the Political forum before. I believe you have posted in their before which means you should have seen them.

How many SJW's are there?

The percentage is irrelevant...No percentage should exist and if it does, it should be met with the full extent of the law and all manner of Hoppe style civic pressure and ostracization until it exists no more, or else leaves and practices that monstrous insanity in the EU...Where murdering toddlers with depression under "End of life rights" is seen as virtuous.

Thats the funny thing about this argument "I didn't see them or they are few in number". So what? We see that they are affecting society, that they are trying to normalize their nonsense. Thats more then enough for them to be a problem.

 

[Harlock]

I'm holding you to your position. You said freedom above all and when I push you on it you now say, no freedom over all. You are just moving from one position to another whenever it suits you which matches the below that you have no standards whatsoever and that its all arbitrary.

Which is fine but stop acting self-righteous about it as if everything that has ever happened is so that what happens matches your ideals like your claim that everybody in the past fought for the freedom! The WW2 vets who stormed the beaches on D-Day I'm sure didn't do it so that the Left would have the freedom to do what they are doing to society.

My position hasn't changed since the first post in this thread, what has changed is only your assumption of my position. Did I say freedom above all? Freedom without consequence or responsibility? Go read my very first post again.
I say that freedom to choose is essential, and if you want to change how people choose you do not take away that right you instead educate them on their choice (That would be responsibility) or provide an Incentive (That would be consequence)

Freedom of choice is not freedom from consequence, and all freedom has a responsibility attached to use it wisely. That is my position, it was stated in the first post, here it is stated again.

Now I'm going to be charitable and say you probably are answering too quickly to read my stuff properly. If I was less charitable I'd say you were strawmanning to try and reduce my credibility.
Instead of debating what you assume I believe, debate what I wrote. Why don't you start by quoting where I said I believe in freedom over all?

And yes the idea of fighting for freedom is very Hollywood, but it has a lot of truth to it. Perhaps defence of freedoms is a better way of describing it given how happy the world would be if the Axis had won. That would not be a desirable outcome.

Funny you say this cause my desired position while agreeing with @Lord Invictus is fundamentally forget all this nonsense and just dump marriage and everything tied to it into the garbage bin and instead have artificial wombs and companion bots for both men and women.

Feminists say no, men cannot have either as its misogyny.

I'm far more egalitarian then them.

And my posts have not me saying anything new than what has been posted in the Political forum before. I believe you have posted in their before which means you should have seen them.

If thats your position then thats fair enough, I'm not going to argue against it because you probably have your reasons. I disagree of course but it is your choice to make, and you have the freedom to make that choice. You have the right to make that choice. Feels good to be able to do that doesn't it?
Which is what I argued in the first place.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

My position hasn't changed since the first post in this thread, what has changed is only your assumption of my position. Did I say freedom above all? Freedom without consequence or responsibility? Go read my very first post again.
I say that freedom to choose is essential, and if you want to change how people choose you do not take away that right you instead educate them on their choice (That would be responsibility) or provide an Incentive (That would be consequence)

Freedom of choice is not freedom from consequence, and all freedom has a responsibility attached to use it wisely. That is my position, it was stated in the first post, here it is stated again.

Now I'm going to be charitable and say you probably are answering too quickly to read my stuff properly. If I was less charitable I'd say you were strawmanning to try and reduce my credibility.
Instead of debating what you assume I believe, debate what I wrote. Why don't you start by quoting where I said I believe in freedom over all?

And yes the idea of fighting for freedom is very Hollywood, but it has a lot of truth to it. Perhaps defence of freedoms is a better way of describing it given how happy the world would be if the Axis had won. That would not be a desirable outcome.

Your post said muh freedom! cause people died for it. I mocked your post and rightly so cause I doubt all the people that died wanted what is going on but made the claim which is why I mocked it and then I simply said that education will go nowhere and we are stuck with the situation we are in and it will further degenerate only for you to go crazy all CAPS at me even though I never created this thread or have the OPs position.

If thats your position then thats fair enough, I'm not going to argue against it because you probably have your reasons. I disagree of course but it is your choice to make, and you have the freedom to make that choice. You have the right to make that choice. Feels good to be able to do that doesn't it?
Which is what I argued in the first place.

There is no choice to make dumbass. Nothing has happened. That is merely my position. Its just a dream anyway cause its likely not happening and if it does, it will be when I'm dead and if it happens, it will be under feminist control. So nothing basically.

My position follows your ideal society goals but allows people if they want to have companionship and children(this idea hopes that without the divorce courts and all related shit involved + allowing people who may want kids but can't have it cause no women for whatever reason or women don't want to be pregnant but want kids, birth rate may rise a bit) without infringing on other sex the way current society is where you have feminists want women to have it all while men just pay the bill and have nothing and thats when they are not encouraging no kids or family at all.

Unfortunately, it means that we basically have to give up on the traditional family or even the nuclear family and marriage and all of it but thats just the reality of society aka your ideal

 

[Harlock]

Your post said muh freedom! cause people died for it. I mocked your post and rightly so cause I doubt all the people that died wanted what is going on but made the claim which is why I mocked it and then I simply said that education will go nowhere and we are stuck with the situation we are in and it will further degenerate only for you to go crazy all CAPS at me even though I never created this thread or have the OPs position.

So you can't quote my text because I didn't say it. You are instead lying about my position, putting words into my mouth which I didn't say and then strawmanning the fuck out of me to try and undermine my credibility.

Not the only time either, want me to go grab a couple more examples of you trying to strawman and then calling me a flip flop?

It is fucking pathetic and blatant as hell, you have been sat here attacking strawmen all the way through because you can't beat my stated position. I'm not a fucking amateur at this lad, I'm very careful in what I say and precise in my statements exactly because it is a defence against this kind of technique.

You can rile against me all you want, my statements are consistent and precise, you on the other hand have been dishonest about my arguments and made wild unproven assumptions about just about everything I've stated.

And you are still fucking doing it.

I dunno, maybe this isn't a technique and you really are just that bad at debates. Either way all you've debated so far is a strawman and it wears thin.

There is no choice to make dumbass. Nothing has happened. That is merely my position. Its just a dream anyway cause its likely not happening and if it does, it will be when I'm dead and if it happens, it will be under feminist control. So nothing basically.

Wah wah doom doom
Like I said you want to believe it, then believe it

My position follows your ideal society goals but allows people if they want to have companionship and children without infringing on other sex the way current society is where you have feminists want women to have it all while men just pay the bill and have nothing. Unfortunately, it means that we basically have to give up on the traditional family or even the nuclear family and marriage and all of it but thats just the reality of society aka your ideal

Why do you think my ideal society involves destruction of the family?
Once again you are attributing to me a ridiculous position based on nothing I've said. Go and fucking quote where I said I wanted to see the family destroyed. Do it right the fuck now. Show me the text you shitbag. Now.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

So you can't quote my text because I didn't say it. You are instead lying about my position, putting words into my mouth which I didn't say and then strawmanning the fuck out of me to try and undermine my credibility.

Not the only time either, want me to go grab a couple more examples of you trying to strawman and then calling me a flip flop?

It is fucking pathetic and blatant as hell, you have been sat here attacking strawmen all the way through because you can't beat my stated position. I'm not a fucking amateur at this lad, I'm very careful in what I say and precise in my statements exactly because it is a defence against this kind of technique.

You can rile against me all you want, my statements are consistent and precise, you on the other hand have been dishonest about my arguments and made wild unproven assumptions about just about everything I've stated.

And you are still fucking doing it.

I dunno, maybe this isn't a technique and you really are just that bad at debates. Either way all you've debated so far is a strawman and it wears thin.

Your entire first post is already evidence. Its basically muh freedom cause people died for it and I then mocked it. Its why I mentioned what I did in what you just replied to.

We clearly don't understand each other at all.

Wah wah doom doom
Like I said you want to believe it, then believe it

Thats my position. You don't have to believe it. if you have evidence otherwise then please post the companion bots and artificial wombs already.

Why do you think my ideal society involves destruction of the family?
Once again you are attributing to me a ridiculous position based on nothing I've said. Go and fucking quote where I said I wanted to see the family destroyed. Do it right the fuck now. Show me the text you shitbag. Now.

Everything that is happening. Your position is basically maintain the status quo aside from lame proclamation of education that will not work hence I dismiss it. I at least realize that and realize that we cannot change it hence we need to find some alternative though again its unlikely to happen.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

@Harlock

The first hurdle with education is resting it from the control of Academia. Good luck with that and then having issues that what you are doing could well be called indoctrination and thus bad and cannot be allowed. So no go there.

You could create your own school but unless it affects the majority of the population of children, you are just affecting a small group and its not guaranteed that they will not just ignore you and do what they want cause hedonism is great. The trope of the Catholic schoolgirl exists after all.

Never mind that the family may not be into it and this is not unlikely seeing as we have apparently parents in Sweden pimping out their daughters to migrants for diversity + money I'm sure.

I'm not saying don't do it. Do it. I will support, I just don't think it will work or affect much of anything but hey if it works? Then great.

 

[Harlock]

You made some serious accusations about where I stand and what I support. You don't get to weasel out of that you little shit.

You lied about me so now you put up or shut up.

Post your fucking evidence right now.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

You made some serious accusations about where I stand and what I support. You don't get to weasel out of that you little shit.

You lied about me so now you put up or shut up.

Post your fucking evidence right now.

Which one? About the destruction of the family? I just said it:

Everything that is happening. Your position is basically maintain the status quo aside from lame proclamation of education that will not work hence I dismiss it. I at least realize that and realize that we cannot change it hence we need to find some alternative though again its unlikely to happen.

Your position is to maintain things as they are which inherently means destruction of the family. You may not mean it and thats fine but thats the reality.

You are getting so angry for just a discussion and opinion stating which is hilarious when you posted earlier about people not you being raving lunatics filled with outrage.

 

[Harlock]

That isn't my stated position, you are making it up again! Where did I say I support the status quo?
How fucking hard is this?

 

[LifeisTiresome]

That isn't my stated position, you are making it up again! Where did I say I support the status quo?
How fucking hard is this?

Your position as I understand is modern society and freedom is yes and good and we just need to educate people to be better. Is this correct or no?

 

[Harlock]

My stated position is that freedom is good, but that freedom comes with a responsibility to use it well and that freedom of choice does not mean freedom from consequence. That position hasn't changed or modified since the first post in this thread.

All the other shit you accuse me of standing for and supporting is shit you are making up. So you either prove it or you retract those statements

 

[LifeisTiresome]

My stated position is that freedom is good, but that freedom comes with a responsibility to use it well and that freedom of choice does not mean freedom from consequence. That position hasn't changed or modified since the first post in this thread.

All the other shit you accuse me of standing for and supporting is shit you are making up. So you either prove it or you retract those statements

Which one? Cause I have already explained my pov. And making up? For the family one? Thas just what is happening and is the result of education, freedom and modern society. It is what it is.

 

[Harlock]

Look at it this way, if what you say is true then those groups are removing freedom of choice when it comes to having a family. They are authoritarians who want to tell you what to do and remove your ability to make your own rational choice.
That is the opposite of what I have said I support, your statement that I want an ideal where those things are destroyed is the opposite of where I actually stand.
It is removing freedom of choice, I do not support stripping people of that freedom.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

Look at it this way, if what you say is true then those groups are removing freedom of choice when it comes to having a family. They are authoritarians who want to tell you what to do and remove your ability to make your own rational choice.
That is the opposite of what I have said I support, your statement that I want an ideal where those things are destroyed is the opposite of where I actually stand.
It is removing freedom of choice, I do not support stripping people of that freedom.

I said specifically that the society you are for which is what we have and used to have (cause all of the censorship though I just see this as them putting into active measure what they used to do without anyone noticing before) is going down the route I'm saying. Thats just the reality. You are taking this personal and thinking I'm saying you are for the destruction. I'm not. I'm saying that that will happen regardless of your intentions cause that is what is happening. Simple. Not everything is about you.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

Lets take some of the British Nationalists for example, we see some comments about kicking the muslims out and you point out that it will eventually go the route of kicking all undesirables out. Maybe the intention of said persons is just the muslims but as you pointed out, it will go down the route of everyone kicked out. This is regardless of their intentions. It is what it is.

Does it mean that this will always happen? Maybe, maybe not. But the road is there.

 

[Harlock]

What I take personal is not what you think is happening in the world, that's your business, your interpretation. What I take personal is you making up stuff I didn't say and lying about what I believe in based on that. Because that is, in fact, personal.

Don't make stuff up based on your prejudices, don't make assumptions, don't strawman. You still haven't acknowledged that that stuff is false, and if it isn't false then prove it.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

America won't balkanize, what will likely happen if it goes to hell is that the Federal Governments authority won't extend beyond the New England region.

You're gonna see local state Judges make rulings like "its okay to shoot FBI agents as their grotesque conduct since 2016 has nullified their legitimacy".

And a bunch of states declaring the democrat and republican party terrorist organizations etc.

When payment professors like Mastercard start having their corporate HQs bombed and governors put out bounties on Mark Zuckerberg is where you need to start worrying about that.

War between whom? As in overthrowing the government? The idea of an effective, violent rebellion against a government is fanciful. The government has a monopoly on military power and logistics, with drone strikes and aircraft carriers and supply lines. The bureaucracy is too large to decapitate, and it fills in positions quickly. It'd be impossible to violently remove the regime through force.

The best you can hope for is that the policies of these governments ends up being what destroys them: they run of money and popular support, and eventually are unable to enforce their rule as localities establish themselves (people paying their taxes not to the federal government, but to their new local state that actually aligns with their values)..

Thats not quite true. It would be disturbingly easy to overthrow the US government.

The problem isn't the tanks and the drones and the aircraft carriers because none of that means a damn thing against America's own people.

The Federal government won't be blowing its own dams and drone striking its own power plants and bombing its own boroughs.

People on the other hand will do that.

and thats the true horrors of how the rest of the America's fought civil wars.

We didn't line up like polite soldiers and fight each other across battlefields.

We turned our neighborhoods into mass grave yards. Our gyms and movie theaters into torture chambers and our old high-school into literal rape camps.

Thats why the idea of a second American Civil War should be so horrifying to you guys. Not because of some silly notion of the government having a monopoly on force. At the end of the day it really doesn't.

Naw, but because if a civil war happens again the first casualty is going to be Federal government.

And then shits gonna get ugly.

Edit- INB4 "zomg watchdog has advocated overthrow! Reeee"

Grow the fuck up, im not endorsing this.

 

[LifeisTiresome]

What I take personal is not what you think is happening in the world, that's your business, your interpretation. What I take personal is you making up stuff I didn't say and lying about what I believe in based on that. Because that is, in fact, personal.

Don't make stuff up based on your prejudices, don't make assumptions, don't strawman. You still haven't acknowledged that that stuff is false, and if it isn't false then prove it.

I have already explained my pov of what I took your posts as. I stand by it and I don't care if you are so angry about it. Be angry. Not my problem. I never said you wanted to destroy the family. I said that the society you want which has education, freedom and modernity is going down that route regardless of your intentions and how you want it to be. If you wish to take this personal? Be my guest.

Anyway, I'm just going to ignore all your posts from this point onwards as we don't have any worthwhile discussion other then you getting angry and taking what I say personally.

America won't balkanize, what will likely happen if it goes to hell is that the Federal Governments authority won't extend beyond the New England region.

You're gonna see local state Judges make rulings like "its okay to shoot FBI agents as their grotesque conduct since 2016 has nullified their legitimacy".

And a bunch of states declaring the democrat and republican party terrorist organizations etc.

When payment professors like Mastercard start having their corporate HQs bombed and governors put out bounties on Mark Zuckerberg is where you need to start worrying about that.




Thats not quite true. It would be disturbingly easy to overthrow the US government.

The problem isn't the tanks and the drones and the aircraft carriers because none of that means a damn thing against America's own people.

The Federal government won't be blowing its own dams and drone striking its own power plants and bombing its own boroughs.

People on the other hand will do that.

and thats the true horrors of how the rest of the America's fought civil wars.

We didn't line up like polite soldiers and fight each other across battlefields.

We turned our neighborhoods into mass grave yards. Our gyms and movie theaters into torture chambers and our old high-school into literal rape camps.

Thats why the idea of a second American Civil War should be so horrifying to you guys. Not because of some silly notion of the government having a monopoly on force. At the end of the day it really doesn't.

Naw, but because if a civil war happens again the first casualty is going to be Federal government.

And then shits gonna get ugly.

Edit- INB4 "zomg watchdog has advocated overthrow! Reeee"

Grow the fuck up, im not endorsing this.

I find all the talk of civil war to be cope myself. I will believe it when it happens.

 

[Deleted member 88]

A few things I think should be worth noting.

Male and Female misbehavior feed into each other, female promiscuity feeds into the player/game culture with things like "pump and dump" being celebrated as manly acts. I do not think the Rooshv/PUA lifestyle is either admirable or desirable, its degenerate in its own way and gives men something empty and ultimately futile to waste their best years pursuing.

Secondly I do not recommend using the law to punish "loose women". I do believe that external social pressure and strong families can mitigate it though, and I would be open to bringing back arranged marriage-for boys and girls alike.

More than any law or social custom, what I think will really be productive is a transvaluation of social norms and ideals. We are a gynocracy, if not in the strict literal sense, definitely so in the cultural sense.

That said, harsh social penalties can not work on their own. A promiscuous party girl would face shame and social ostracism, an adulteress would lose in court by default-home, car, children, etc... If adultery can be proven. Perhaps a policy of marking adulteresses, with some sort of social credit penalty-might be worth looking into. This would be something tied to their name and something any prospective employer, new boyfriend, etc... would have access too.

These policies would not undue all the damage of the last sixty years, but it would reverse the worst trends and allow for a re-assertion of patriarchy culturally and legally which could if the momentum shifts be further entrenched in the law with broader and more specific laws.