Is watching porn against the categorical imperative?

Yes, 100%.
Pornography is worse for the mind than using hard drugs.

Attached: Autonomy+vs.+Heteronomy.jpg (960x720, 198K)

Kant was a faggot

yes
unfortunately, everyone watches porn, everybody masturbates to pornography
kant is rolling in his grave, his ghost is throwing a tantrum

You know he wrote a Critique of Practical Reason, right?

Kant is absolutely against sex, even more against masturbation (self-abuse, in Kantian terms), which, he thought, is worse than suicide.

Depends on what you want from life.
It‘s an easy solution to shortcut the male sexual instinct. It might be one of the best thing ever to happen to the bottom layers of the male hierarchy to deal with sexual frustration.
Just imagine the chaos that would ensue if that whole demographic suddenly had to deal with their sexual urges at face value with no way to sublimate.
Church could condemn it as long as it was able to uphold monogamy and the virtue of female virginity. Now that religious influences is rapidly decreasing, there needs to be a different system in place to ensure that men who don‘t get any don‘t go on a rape rampage. Masturbation does just that. And porn is one hell of a gateway to a full blown dopamine addiction related to masturbation.
So, just sitting in front of your pc, browsing porn for days and rubbing one out actually is a valid form of existence for those individuals who have lost the genetic lottery. I don‘t know why society tries to humiliate people for finding somewhat of a solution to an unsolvable issue.

Attached: C164E1B4-B7C3-49A3-BC2F-A6B01861FDB9.jpg (500x634, 33K)

Categorical imperatives never depend on anything other than the moral law. Your post is nonsense.

It's true.

Porn and sexual deviance will be the downfall of western society.

>Your post is nonsense
No, it isn‘t.
You want to find a moral law that holds true for everyone. And you want to find a law that fits those requirements related to porn.
You argue that the law should be „don‘t watch porn“. I assume you got that idea from kant. Which by the way really shouldn‘t be who you get your ideas about human sexuality from unless you‘re an antinatalist, which poses a whole new set of issues with your logic.
I argue that the law should be „find a way to deal with your sexual instincts that isn‘t destructive to society“. For someone higher on top of the reproduction hierarchy, that obviously means „fuck your wife“. But for someone on the lower levels, that might be interpreted as „keep yourself from raping (which would violate the law of your sexual needs not being a threat to society) by watching porn and masturbating“.

MOMMY MOMMY GIVE ME MILKIES MOMMY

>slave compelled by his insatiable drive for pleasure

A categorical imperative cannot be empirical, and any determination of my will that is mediated by the promise of pleasure is by definition empirical (even if the desired object is abstract). This has nothing to do with Kant's view on sexuality, it is a rational argument based on the nature of the determination of one's own will. You can find it in the first 20 pages of his second critique. Again, what you wrote was nonsense.
Also, how the hell are you going to talk about categorical imperatives outside of Kantian philosophy?

No, it won‘t.
Ofc it is not peak human performance to not reproduce and instead develop a masturbation addiction. But for a peak performance to exist, there needs to be something to distinguish it from. That sucks ass for those falling into the mass of those peak performance can distinguish itself from. But they are necessary and they need to get trough their existence too. So why not keep them content by providing addictive actions like eating, vidya, tv, masturbation/porn, and so on? Better be at the bottom of the barrel with some way to induce dopamine release at the tip of your finger than lying there on the cold hard floor, contemplating your failure to be born more fortunate.
You might argue that you can rise up. And you‘re right. To some degree. You can move inside a set range, but if you‘re at the bottom, the top is absolutely out of your range. Telling people at the bottom to use willpower to overcome their need for dopamine release and then promise them that that‘s their ticket to the top is a good way to increase suicide rates. Because most people will not be able to overcome their addictions. They can be inhumanly powerful. Trying to do that will do nothing but make them feel like utter and complete failures. The hand full of people who somehow manage to muster up that inhuman discipline to overcome it will crash and burn at the realization that their efforts can‘t ever buy them a ticket to the top.
Let them cum and let them enjoy it. Don‘t be so fucking heartless.

>But for someone on the lower levels, that might be interpreted as „keep yourself from raping (which would violate the law of your sexual needs not being a threat to society) by watching porn and masturbating“.
Tell me how are lower class men who masturbate and dont actually pass on their genes is not detrimental to a society? These are the same men whos ancestors survived harsh conditions of the past, fought nails and tooth against all adversity. They wouldnt be here today if they werent worthy, yet todays society is goverment by far left liberals, globalists and corporations and by todays society standards these men are worhless.

What‘s the point of morals if they can‘t be used empirical?
We might not operate in the same world user. In my world, the fruits of intellectual ideas must be beneficially applicable to reality or it‘s not worth investigating.

How many Melbourne bros have fucked the girl in OPs pic?

Just because someone‘s ancestors managed to reproduce doesn‘t grant them the entitlement to operate at the top. You want a society where every person born is perfection. And humanity is striving exactly for that by selective breeding. But that is a process that will likely take another few thousand years. Until then, we can‘t just eliminate everyone who‘s not fulfilling all the requirements. We need a lot of people to keep this world going. Nobody gives a shit about the butchers inferior genetics. We just need someone to deliver conveniently portioned dead animals. Maybe once we‘ve reached human peak performance as a society, even the butcher will be the perfect human specimen. Right now, the percentage of humans alive worth to be at the top would not suffice to keep the machinery working smoothly. So we need a way to keep the antagonist somewhat content whilst we let selective breeding run it‘s course. We‘re still in a transitional phase as a species.

Probably a lot given that fat women are sensualists, who hop on dick like the scarf down food.

>What‘s the point of morals if they can‘t be used empirical?
The term "empirical" was used in relation to the determination of one's own will, not to the practical use of a moral law. Categorical imperatives HAVE to be applied in practice, but they are not derived from empirical motives related to pleasure.
Basically, it means that you can say that a maxim is a moral law only because it brings you (or other people) some pleasure. It's pretty straightforward, denying this leads to absolute moral relativism

I used to think that way but not anymore. There is value in humans of lower class, Id argue there is more value than with the current elite. If nurtured and directed right their value and contribution to society could be increased hundred fold however the ruling elite dont want that, they dont want to share their power with anyone.

But my argument had nothing to do with the proposed law bringing pleasure. Given you don‘t count „not accelerating rape“ as a form of pleasure.

Masturbation was the worst habit I've had in life. Really wasted my productive years. Left me tired. Quit it or it'll just get worse.

>There is value in humans of lower class
I never denied that

>Id argue there is more value than with the current elite
>they don‘t want to share their power with anyone

I take it that you and i have a very different understanding of who qualifies as human elite

>. If nurtured and directed right their value and contribution to society could be increased hundred fold
Absolutely correct. But you can‘t really make someone become a better person. That has to happen with intrinsic efforts.
It‘s impossible to say where to draw the line between people who are developed enough to the point where intrinsic work would be beneficial and where it would just increase suffering. For those it would increase the suffering, my argument is to not stack on the pain and let them have the little joys in life - like porn.

Not him.
Brings temporary pleasure at the expense of long term happiness. They think it makes them happy. It doesn't.

That implies that if they wouldn‘t watch porn, they‘d be happier in 20 years from now, i argue that for some people that simply isn‘t true. And since op wanted a categorical imperative, not watching porn can‘t be one if you take this argument into consideration.

>Given you don‘t count „not accelerating rape“ as a form of pleasure.
It literally is, and so it is the law you've derived it from ("find a way to deal with your sexual instincts that isn‘t destructive to society“). A categorical imperative would instead be "don't rape", nothing more. Nor your pleasure nor the pleasure of other people is to be accounted when formulating a categorical imperative. If you account for pleasure (i.e. "find a way to deal with your sexual instincts that isn‘t destructive to society“) you get either a HYPOTHETICAL imperative or a maxim, which, in Kantian philosophy, are valid only if they are derived from a categorical imperative.
By the way "do not rape" is a categorical imperative according to Kant, not because of the pain it brings, but because it contradicts the very form over which categorical imperatives are built (mainly, rape would deny the autonomy of both the victim and the rapist).
Furthermore, masturbation cannot be compatible with any categorical imperative for similar reasons, since it obfuscates the practical reason of the moral agent who decides to indulge in these things.

But if it needs to be applicable in real life, you‘d have to start ranking the laws. Don‘t rape then should be more important than don‘t masturbate. Because some people aren‘t strong willed enough to not rape if they can‘t instead masturbate. You might be able to put your name under such laws if it only needs to be applicable to a selected demographic. But by definition, a categorical imperative must be applicable universally.
Telling people who aren‘t strong willed enough to not rape in the absence of masturbation that they shouldn‘t masturbate is an issue. Ofc the goal for a human should be to be able to follow this law, but i think you underestimate or overestimate the humans that exist.
It makes absolute sense in theory, but in reality it is not applicable. Which makes it worthless.

>But if it needs to be applicable in real life, you‘d have to start ranking the laws.
Nope, that would go against the meaning of categorical imperative.
>Don‘t rape then should be more important than don‘t masturbate.
Not really. They're both categorical imperatives, which means that both options are ALWAYS barred (unless you want to disregard morality).
>Because some people aren‘t strong willed enough to not rape if they can‘t instead masturbate.
Kant would deem such a person mentally disabled, and he would be quite right. If such a person LITERALLY could not refrain themselves from raping someone or masturbating, we cannot consider him a moral agent, since he is incapable of exterting their own will rationally. If for such a person refraining from rape and masturbation is hard, but not impossible, then it is a non-problem: this person should simply follow the categorical imperatives.
>Telling people who aren‘t strong willed enough to not rape in the absence of masturbation that they shouldn‘t masturbate is an issue.
Only if they're mentally disabled.
>Ofc the goal for a human should be to be able to follow this law, but i think you underestimate or overestimate the humans that exist.
Kant is okay with people making mistakes (i.e. jacking off), since the concept of "sin" is not a foundation of his ethical theory, what he is not okay with is people designing a priori moral systems based on their own, contingent desires/pleasures.

Again, all of this is literally in the first 20 pages of his second critique
>It makes absolute sense in theory, but in reality it is not applicable. Which makes it worthless.
I don't see how could you posibly say this, since you clearly do not know what Kant said.

Didn't Kant brutally reject a woman and she actually killed herself, or was that Schopenhauer?

Attached: Louvre.jpg (1080x1350, 186K)

None of them

Kant proposed to his housekeeper and was rejected. Schopenhauer was the first spaghetti-dropper, at the age of 41 he walked up to a 17 year old girl on a boat party, handed her a bushel of grapes, and walked away. This was supposed to indicate his Dionysian feeling toward her, or something. He was bitter about it for years afterwards.

hell yes, milkies yes YESyes

kant told a woman that she should tell her (future?) husband that she wasn't a virgin, after which she got rejected and killed herself

sauce???

Yea Forumscels rise up

Then we would have to put a big portion of humanity into mental homes. Is that applicable to real life?
I‘ve actually worked in a mental ward, that‘s where my arguments stem from. We had 20 year old 2m guys with insatiable sexual urges who HAVE raped people (they were genuinely mentally disabled. The kind of disability you‘d expect in a bad horror movie.) despite being on heavy drugs designed to suppress sexual urges. I can not imagine how it used to be for people like that during the times masturbation was genuinely seen as a sin by the broad population. No wait, i can. They just killed them. Very morally superior indeed.

Now what? Do we just not apply any morality to such people because you don‘t deem them human? How would that look like in real life? Either lock them up, drug them into coma or let them run wild? Where do you draw the line between someone who‘s mentally disabled and someone who just needs to cultivate some self discipline? Does that mean if you fail at cultivating self discipline for a set amount of time that you‘re mentally disabled? Would that mean that we had to lock up every smoker who ever tried to quit and failed?

Based

Aphorism about philosophers are cool, but be careful, it's often false. That famous failed romance between Nietzsche and Salome actually never happened, it's just a thing philosophy teachers say to get attention.
I wonder if Schopenhauer really pushed a woman down the stairs for making too much noise.

>Then we would have to put a big portion of humanity into mental homes. Is that applicable to real life?
Pretty much, we put those (who are mentally incompetent) either in mental homes or jails. Saying "I just couldn't refrain myself from killing that person" won't do the trick.
>No wait, i can. They just killed them. Very morally superior indeed.
Not a Kantian stance btw, since masturbation violates only my autonomy. At no point Kant argued that masturbators had to be interned/imprisoned/tortured, at worst he will say that they are not virtuos.
>Do we just not apply any morality to such people because you don‘t deem them human?
What does this even mean? Do you treat children as objects only because they cannot exercise their reason? What I have said is that THEY could not apply their practical reason. Also I have not said this about every masturbator, only the ones in your example (who were people LITERALLY incapable of refraining themselves from raping and masturbating).
>How would that look like in real life?
Pretty straightforward: if you violate your autonomy you are not virtuos, if you violate someone else's autonomy you're a criminal. Ah, regarding the part about virtue: forcing people to be virtuos violates the categorical imperative, since that act of force would deny moral autonomy to the subject.
>Either lock them up, drug them into coma or let them run wild? Where do you draw the line between someone who‘s mentally disabled and someone who just needs to cultivate some self discipline?
See above
>Does that mean if you fail at cultivating self discipline for a set amount of time that you‘re mentally disabled?
What does this have to do with what we've discussed earlier? To reiterate what I've said, I've called mentally disabled people who literally cannot exercise their practical reason, i.e. if you literally cannot stop yourself from raping people. If you could POSSIBLY stop yourself then we are already out of the realm of mental disability (which means that you will be fully responsible for your actions)
>Would that mean that we had to lock up every smoker who ever tried to quit and failed?
Again, no.

>handed her a bushel of grapes, and walked away. This was supposed to indicate his Dionysian feeling toward her
hahahahah what a fucking dork lmao

I would not have had the balls to approach a 17 yr old girl when I was 14.

Right. I think i agree with you. My fault was to assume that you‘d think that it would be someone‘s job to make sure humanity as a whole becomes more virtuous.

But why would masturbation make you a vicious person? I‘d say that porn consumption isn‘t virtuous, but i would‘t say the same about masturbation. Why would sexuality, either shared with someone else or not, be something depraved? Isn‘t it humans who made it into something depraved? Because i sure as hell know that a little child exploring masturbation is not even a tiny percentage depraved.

>be 5 feet tall gremlin who can't get laid
>'haha, I don't care, s-sex is immoral anyway!'
Biggest cope in philosophy.

Maybe he gave that girl the grapes to indicate that she‘s the grapes he can‘t reach and thus concluded „whatever, i never wanted you anyways! I bet you taste sour!“

>But why would masturbation make you a vicious person?
Because in those moments you do not use your practical reason (since masturbation and non-recreational sex have nothing to do with the categorical imperative). When I deprive myself of practical reason I also deprive myself of my own autonomy, since my only claim to autonomy is my ability to give to my will determinations that are not derived from empirical motives. If I can only ascribe to my will empirical motives, then I am not that different from a beast, whose action are moved entirely by reactions to empirical stimuli.
The affirmation of our own autonomy through reason is essential to Kant, it's what makes us human. Without that every human affair is, to use Kant's words, an economy (or dynamics, in the physical sense) of contingent desires and pleasures.

But again, to Kant these are not mortal sins. To him, when we forsake virtue we are offending our own dignity, by negating to our dignity to ourselves. The point is that even if I fail in being virtuos (in the case of masturbation: even if I fail to exercise my practical reason), I can still improve and realize my mistake. This becomes absolutely impossible when one "moralizes" one's own desires and pleasures.

But don‘t you think that human sexuality is more than mere procreation? If masturbation was only about pleasure, then yes, indulging in it might not be virtuous. But what if physical pleasure is not all that is to it? What about the emotional aspects of sexuality? Does that mean you‘d have to also reject things like friendship or love? Because that also makes one feel good. It‘s also an indulging in positive emotions. Why is it virtuous to love but not to have sex with someone?

Neither Nietzche nor Kirkegaard really helped me with existentialism.

Sure Nietzche has a cool vision. But the absence remains.
And Kirkegaard didn't resonate all.

You are not understanding what he meant.

Schopenhauer was literally 41. It was a different time but it makes the story even more spaghetti worthy.

Attached: 1545899994179.jpg (620x465, 241K)

It's called marrying someone of equal attractiveness

Could you live with other people watching porn? Do you watch porn that's been produced by consenting parties?

Well then, you're in the clear. Perfectly ethical.

Not quite.
Morality comes before God and exists without him. However the practical end of morality, the highest good, requires both God and the immortal soul to achieve unity between the natural and moral world

Based

You make your own purpose in life. This absence is your to fill. It never belonged to a god or human ruler.

Oh man! Hahahahah

i havent read that one yet thoughz
i got this solely from the KrV.

I-I see

Attached: deathlarger.jpg (403x586, 32K)

This isn't about how ethical it is. It‘ about virtue.

In theory, yes. The issue is (and you‘ll agree with me on this if you ever went to /adv/, /pol/ or /r9k/) that humans don‘t work that way. Even the most disfigured orks want super models. If people go for equal attractiveness, they‘ll feel like they‘ve settled and will always secretly resent their partner for being a constant reminder of their inferiority.

more like monkey finds better places to fap in the wild

The categorical imperative (Kantian) is that one must treat every action as if all others were to do it, and thus measure its overall benefit or detriment.

Everyone watching porn is probably what's already happening, so watching porn seems hardly likely to violate the categorical imperative.

Even if your definition of porn is recorded images of people having sex, which is probably the most traditional of them - so what if everyone did that?

Would the world be a worse place? No.

Thus, I would conclude that watching porn is not against the categorical imperative unless your definition of porn requires the suffering of others.

If that's the case, well, then yeah, that's probably not okay.

Fags are the ones who can't control themselves and ejaculate and fuck every chance they get. Kant was the anti-fag.

Getting off porn is so hard for me lads.
Help.
My past as a degenerate, porn addict haunts me

First, you need to prevent any triggers.
Block all images on this website. All it takes is one thing to set the process off.

Second, if you do relapse:
#1 Resort to non-hardcore static images
#2 DO NOT SPEND TIME SEARCHING.

The advice to not use anything is bad advice. It strengthens your past memories of pornographic experiences. If you want to reduce the frequency of masturbation, this is the best strategy.

Godspeed. It's tougher to rid oneself of than opioid or cigarette addiction.

I don't get it. I've been watching porn for probably longer than you've been alive; nearly thirty years at this point.

I still don't get how this "slippery slope" argument of degeneracy works - like, do you imagine yourself having sex with the person in the porn that you're watching?

Because if you don't get off to them, then what you're watching isn't what might be called "porn" to most.

Maybe you have a niche or a kink that you're working out, but in the general sense, if "getting off to porn" is "hard" for you... then you're not looking at porn, by the literal definition of the term.

So go look at porn and get over your feelings of degeneracy. You didn't do anything to make it, otherwise it would be something that's not porn.

So what are you worried about?

That's why you marry a fat woman and get her to exercise. I've been trying to tell /r9k/ this for years.
Solid advice, however,
>Godspeed. It's tougher to rid oneself of than opioid or cigarette addiction.
Is bullshit. I've kicked all three (porn, opiates, and nicotine) and until porn has you puking in a ball or sitting outside of a pharmacy with a loaded gun then then opiates hold the crown.
lrn2read

Hey, there. This a newsflash: human beings are sexual creatures and have sexual urges.

Welcome to the species. You're not better than anyone else, but you're not any worse.

Unless you need to see people being abused or wounded to get off, in which case you might need to take a breather and figure out why.

Otherwise... stop guilting people about their porn.

Kthx.

And yet pornography urges are harder to resist and once arousal starts, you're in a counterproductive state of mind. Physical withdrawal is different from the urges and how one fights them. Pornography is the hardest of all three to resist because not only is the metaphorical cigarette/needle attached to the body but the moment one thing sets it off, it is lit or has already started delivering the drug. This means the only real way of combating it is to take steps to avoid the urges from occurring in the first place.

cringe

Attached: 1543543463213.jpg (416x552, 96K)

the best tip to avoid porn is actually to avoid Yea Forums of all places

Oh, there you go, calling something "cringe" like it's a magic fucking spell that will make people think it's wrong.

Wake the fuck up to reality, you moron: humans have genitals. This isn't fucking rocket science.

reddit spacing

Are you literally a fucking bot?

I swear to all that is whatever you might count as holy that I've had this conversation a thousand fucking times here.

It's like you're a retarded fighter who only knows two moves: call it cringe, then look for reddit spacing.

What the fuck is your problem with actually addressing anything being said by the motherfucking words that are being motherfucking typed on the motherfucking screen?

Though now I suppose you're gonna cite my overuse of profanity, to which I will issue a preemptive "fuck off."

>That's why you marry a fat woman and get her to exercise
Oh my sweet summer child. You obviously know nothing about relationships and addictions.

I'm not saying masturbating his wrong.
I'm saying that my addiction to it is.
I get that everyone does it, but I'm not fine with feeling the need to do it as often as three times a day.
That's frustrating, I waste too much time and feel like a rag afterwards.
Regarding the kind of porn, it usually depends on the day.
Maybe today this cute curly haired chick from uni was wearing some tight jeans, well lets look for something like that.
30 to 45 minutes wasted on looking for a look alike on pornhub.
You get the deal

Is*

>marry a fat woman and
>get her to exercise.
lol
Good luck with that pal.

>Hey, there. This a newsflash: human beings are sexual creatures and have sexual urges.
And these urges can be reinforced and lead to maladaptive sexual behaviors that undermine one's agency over life, exaggerating the sexual frequency well beyond that of practically any 'sexual creature' on this planet not endowed with reason or higher intellect.
>Welcome to the species. You're not better than anyone else, but you're not any worse.
Notions of total equality are fundamentally flawed; I am better than some, and worse than others. This is determined by a number of factors, eg, virtue, intellect.
In the same way reason separates us from the beasts, abandoning lowers oneself to the status as such makes one intrinsically inferior to those who haven't.
>Unless you need to see people being abused or wounded to get off, in which case you might need to take a breather and figure out why.
The harm of consuming pornography has nothing to do with the well-being of the wretched actors in question, but what it does to the consumer, and how it erodes his mind to be nothing more than a slave to the lower passions.
>Otherwise... stop guilting people about their porn.
Reason is not guilt. You feel guilt because you know if this is true you are throwing away your life.
Absolutely seething.

Attached: quote-lust-indulged-became-habit-and-habit-unresisted-became-necessity-saint-augustine-76-74-99.jpg (850x400, 55K)

>being this much of a lazy retard

Attached: 50237215_154026538931655_8830519970203566959_n.jpg (1080x1350, 169K)

I'm a different poster than that guy you're arguing with and haven't been in Yea Forums for months; saw this while skimming through the front page. There's no point in arguing with your type, and anyone who can identify what makes people who've internalized reddit culture annoying will understand what I'm saying. Get off the internet and stop using the time you reserve for entertainment to argue and exchange profanities with strangers. It's anger porn and a waste of your time. If you want to fling shit just make a shitpost, like I did, and move on, as I will do now. Goodbye.

>someone gives a roadmap on how to quit porn
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE WTF REEEEEE WE'RE SEXUAL CREATURES WHY U WANT TO QUIT I CANT SEE WHY UNLESS ITS GUILT LMAO REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

porn is not the cause of the demise of the west, it's one of its effects

So, you have a personal problem with something you're compelled to do.

That's no reason to tell anyone else what to do, now is it?

If you have a problem with how much you jerk off to pornhub lookalikes to people you see in real life (which, let's face it, is sort of probably the driving factor for most people), then develop a strategy to stop.

But something about this topic makes everyone seem to think they have some moral high ground, and that's simply not the case.

Jerking off to porn has basically no effect on anything in the universe except whatever opportunity cost you might imagine accompanies it... and chances are that you'd probably be distracted by the urge to jerk off to porn if you did whatever other noble cause you might imagine doing, and even greater that you'll wind up eventually doing it again anyway after whatever great things you have in store, so maybe it's just best that you just focus on your own genitals.

I love porn. It can be sublime.
I'm an artist, emotions and passion drive me, incredible to see how much you Yea Forumseral faggots fell to the reason and philosophy meme.

>I am better than some, and worse than others.

No.

No, you're not. You live in a deluded state of anthropic Dunning-Kruger where you think you're better than other people because of some bullshit notions of "virtue" or "intellect."

If there was any reason I had to believe in God, it would be to see them dismantle such hubris through whatever supernatural means such an entity might have to accomplish such a task.

You are no worse than even the most debased cockroach of a human being that ever scurried like lobster-claws across the scuttling sea-floor of this planet, but you sure as fuck aren't any better.

Humans are humans, and we all have our own shit we're dealing with; do you get that?

>Jerking off to porn has basically no effect on anything
Patently false.
It makes you lazy, tired, and hypersexualized. It has a profound affect on neurotransmitters.

>There's no point in arguing with your type, and anyone who can identify what makes people who've internalized reddit culture

So, yes. You're a fucking bot the moment you literally ignore the words being said and chalk whatever retarded thing you think I'm saying to "reddit culture."

Thanks for answering the question.

Attached: 1538976411952.jpg (575x651, 65K)

I'm not whoever you were arguing with.
I consider masturbating 3+ times a day and spending this much time on looking for porn a degeneracy on my part.
I don't care what you believe.
If I can get to do it only every now and then for about 10-15 minutes I'm fine with it.
You can spend your time however you like if you enjoy what you're doing and aren't huting anybody.
Being addicted and thinking only about it all day long is not pleasant and very dehumanizing.

>It has a profound affect on neurotransmitters

Oh, LEtS UsE WoRDS LiKE NeUROTranSmiTTers to MaKe uS SouND LiKE SCiENTiSTs.

Do you even know what the fuck that means? Yeah, having an orgasm will release serotonin and dopamine, but it's also something that PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

You're trying to make masturbation into some designer drug, and it's just part of human existence, and casting moral judgement upon it is about as useful as trying to tell people what to eat.

Let people enjoy things, you puritan fuck.

>I don't care what you believe

Yes. You do. Otherwise you'd shut the fuck up about what is obviously logical truth instead of interjecting your own arbitrary moral judgment upon it, which I suspect is probably what you do instead of jerking off like normal people.

So I can't morally judge myself ?
Who the fuck do you think you are dude ?
Dispensing "objective truth"...
Get off your high horse and let people do what they believe is best for themselves .
Unless you're trying to validate your position obviously..

>jerking off

That includes people with clitorises.

Had to say it. I mean, it had to be said.

>I can't morally judge myself

Of course you can. You're the only one who can. But your own moral judgments about what you feel is right for your body are utterly fucking irrelevant to anyone else.

Try coming up with things that are common to every human being, and then talking about that stuff.

Wrestling with the impulse to touch yourself isn't exactly a universal problem, after all, and you'd probably be better off trying to solve cold fusion or zero-point energy, because those are things that every human has trouble with, not just the people who think that god is going to smite them for having a fap.

>Oh, LEtS UsE WoRDS LiKE NeUROTranSmiTTers to MaKe uS SouND LiKE SCiENTiSTs.
I am a scientist and neurotransmitter isn't even some jargon that would otherwise be obscurantist. To think it's profound shows that you really quite the brainlet.
>Yeah, having an orgasm will release serotonin and dopamine, but it's also something that PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
Non-sequitur. Your rationale does not logically follow the antecedent.
You're not very intelligent.
>You're trying to make masturbation into some designer drug,
In some respects, it's worse. A drug can be used for non-recreational ends. Masturbation is purely a hedonistic activity.
You're reinforcing evolution's foremost goal, what it thinks is procreation, something powerful enough to subdue prefrontal neurotransmission, with a virtually unlimited supply able to be conjured on a whim by passing stimuli or your own imagination. Soon enough, the entire brain becomes muddied, that great organ, once the source of great dreams, is reduced to a pathetic hypersexualized dick-for-a-brain state.
>Let people enjoy things, you puritan fuck.
This was never intended for the panem et circenses plebeians. They're free to go to their own demise, as are potentially great men free to heed the wise, age-old advice of semen retention, something practiced from great men from Pythagoras to Newton To Kant to Tesla. You'll never join their ranks. You're too busy following the examples of beasts and men who imitate them.

Attached: k8A0Ez0LaDDSbQ6FwowNcy6urRRgIVMtgVSBHPEKeS0.jpg (591x768, 168K)

There's always some user willing to help.
You are the one being an asshole

>I am a scientist and neurotransmitter isn't even some jargon that would otherwise be obscurantist. To think it's profound shows that you really quite the brainlet.

No, you're not. Your objection is obscurantist, you obviating blowhard. The fact is that "neurotransmitters" is a term that describes molecular structures that are capable of bridging the synapses of the electrified jelly that we barely understand as a cerebral structure.

The microbes in your duodenum have as much effect upon your behavior as your cerebral cortex, and you have merely fetishized the idea of being some disembodied head that answers to no body.

Look up Jeremy Bentham if if you want to see where that leads. If you think that's a noble goal of humanity, then you can have it.

Call me unintelligent again. I sort of like it. It's actually making me want to jerk off... uh-oh; does this mean you're some kind of secret cock-tease sent to distract me from the devil?

No. I'll jerk off when I want to, and for what reason, and literally nobody gives a fuck.

youtu.be/SV4Y_ensniY

That clip was supposed to be satire from 1964, but I see people literally espouse the idea as truth over 50 years later, and it fucking kills me.

People have been espousing this idea for thousands of years.
The rest of your post is such pseud tier that it's not even worth addressing. I have an awful suspicion that you are the butterfly poster. Stop posting.

Attached: [science discovers the physiological value of continence].png (838x793, 300K)

>willing to help

HELP WITH WHAT?!

Nobody needs any help here.

People masturbate, and there's literally nothing morally questionable about it unless you're causing someone else distress in order to do so.

What the ever-living fuck is so hard to figure out about that?

I'm being rational, and if that means I'm an asshole, then I guess I have to accept it.

>People masturbate
People have a masturbation habit
>'s literally nothing morally questionable
It causes adverse side effects for most people, impairing motivation, causing tiredness and hypersexualization of the mind.
>I'm being rational
You're not being rational. You're a slave to pleasure and are using your faculty of reason to justify your slavery to it.

I seem to have misunderstood what you meant by "hardest to kick". As far as relapse goes, you are correct, porn is the easiest to relapse into, even years after the fact. You have to go to the store to buy cigarettes at least.
More than you ever will. Women are not hard to steer, especially if you're encouraging.
My wife weighed 215 when we met and weighs ~135 now. We've been together 6 years.

>"I didn't want them. I felt revolted because old schopenhauer had touched them, so I let them slide, quiet gently, into the water behid me."

Never heard this story before, but damn poor schop. Best thread on Yea Forums in a while.

You are absolutely not being rational. You've taken personal offence to something that was directed at someone else. Go take a smoke break you sperg.

Monkeys wank all the fucking time if they can't find a mate. The only problem is that monkeys in captivity get alienated from the group killing their social skills.

user you are in denial or just completely deluded.
I have a problem. Other people recognize it as a problem, suffered from it as well and understand me. Give advice and support each other.

You come around, sreech like an autist that for you it's not a problem and it shouldn't be one for us either.

Will you stop already ? Masturbate your life away if that's your goal.
I don't care and you'll do it anyways.

Only if you decide it to be. There is not one categorical imperative as set out by Kant. That being said Kant would say that wanking is always bad.

>you are the butterfly

What the literal fuck does that mean? I'm telling you that human beings masturbate, and you're calling me a butterfly?!

Jesus, you are fucked. Please, for the love of fuck, just jerk off to something.

> impairing motivation, causing tiredness and hypersexualization of the mind.

That sounds horrible. If that's what jerking off does to you, then by all means, stop. That's not how everyone else deals with it, though, so maybe don't wrap us up in your neurosis, thanks. I feel bad for you, though.

Oh, god, there are cohorts. Please, somebody else make sense around here.

I think it's a fairly rational stance to take that human beings have genitals that they stimulate to orgasm.

It's not exactly a headline story.

The fact that you can't see that is distressing.

Attached: 1556395340889.gif (500x493, 631K)

>Of all members of the mammalian family, civilized man alone is a victim of an exaggerated and morbid sexual urge, a condition which he has inflicted, to a certain extent, on the animals which he has domesticated and which have adopted his diet, especially the dog. Wild animals in a state of nature practice copulation only at certain mating seasons for the purpose of reproduction. Civilized man practices this act at all times, and in most cases without intention to conceive. On the other hand, so-called savages and primitive races leading more natural lives and who follow their natural instincts to a greater extent are far chaste in their sexual behavior, as noted by Havelock Ellis. Such considerations must lead one to the conclusion that the sex life of civilized men is unnatural and that the excessive manifestation of the sex urge among them is due to certain aphrodisiacal stimuli rather than to natural instinct; among such stimuli are a high-protein meat diet (accompanied by physical inactivity), the use of tobacco, alcohol and coffee, sexually stimulating literature, dramas, motion pictures, conversation, etc. For these reasons civilized man has departed from the natural law, obeyed by animal and primitive races, which requires the separation of the sexes during pregnancy and lactation, for the benefit of both mother and child. Violation of this law may account for the large number of physically and mentally defective offspring produced by civilized races as compared with animals and primitive peoples.

Attached: 1556315397058.jpg (640x539, 45K)

>I have a problem. Other people recognize it as a problem, suffered from it as well and understand me. Give advice and support each other.

That's called a club.

You're in a club of people who hate that they fap.

It's really the proselytizing that people find offensive.

You think you're better than other people because you don't jerk off. Good. That's great. I don't really like sweets, but I'm not walking around telling other people not to have them.

It's so basic, user. So very simple of a premise, and yet you can't shut the fuck up about how morally superior you think you are because you refrain from one of the most basic human functions.

Nobody gives a fuck, and you're not any better than anyone else.

Can you not handle that?

You're not worse, after all. We're all human, after all.

But seriously, what the literal fuck does anyone care how often you masturbate?

Boy I'm trying to make it easy for you .
Masturbation=okay
Masturbating excessively to the point I wears you down and you become an unproductive, demoralized rag= not okay

With me at least and anyone willing to agree.
You don't agree. Shut the fuck up about it.

why is this chronic masturbator so butthurt
dude, go jerk off. that always calms me down

>unproductive, demoralized rag

So let's talk unproductive.

You didn't think I was ready for this obvious and tired tangent?

What are you producing, and for whom, and why is your ability to produce whatever the fuck it is you're talking about dampened by your proclivity to masturbate?

Do you have to call in sick days so you can jerk off? I mean, maybe if that's the case (and I mean maybe), then I might see that you should look into the reasons for your need to stroke your genitals, but I'm pretty sure not many people are in that position.

If you seriously are, though, I will BTFO and let you deal with your shit, because you got a thing you need to deal with.

Otherwise... you either have a Malthusian delusion of what "productive" means or or you have an inflated sense of what you think you produce, and you could probably jerk off all you want on bathroom breaks and nobody would give a shit.

That's the realtalk that nobody else is going to tell you, I can promise.

You are actually retarded.

Attached: 1555936451011.jpg (830x1024, 92K)

Bullshit.

Fair claim to make. I'm lovin' it.

Care to say a goddam fucking lick about why, you shill, or will you hide behind your fucking clown makeup and hurl insults in the hopes of discrediting what basically any rational human being would have to see as a reasonable statement?

Just asking, you know, because I'm curious.

>must feel good must feel good

Attached: npcbrainlet.png (324x362, 45K)

Ancient men conquered cities put them to the sword and fire, meanwhile you go to WINE BAR with "gf" and enjoy tasteful banter..YOU ARE GAYII

all of this is untrue. Wolves mount and hump to assert dominance, not for copulation.

This was written by someone that knows fuck all about animals. I'm a biologist btw.

There's tons of animals that get themselves off. The more intelligent the more common it is.

And as far as "morbid sexual urge" There's nothing more morbid than male spiders that risk death to mate with females that eat them if they notice them.

>BE NORMAL! JERK OFF LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE!!!

Attached: npcangry.jpg (234x264, 4K)

But wouldn't Marky also say that since it is in my nature to be a fuck hungry beast I shouldn't deny me as a human and therefore get up out of bed and chase after roasties?

>This was written by someone that knows fuck all about animals. I'm a biologist btw.
Argumentum ab auctoritate.
>There's tons of animals that get themselves off. The more intelligent the more common it is.
[uncited] and appeal to nature
>And as far as "morbid sexual urge" There's nothing more morbid than male spiders that risk death to mate with females that eat them if they notice them.
Non-sequitur tangent.

No, this doesn't feel good, you harpy.

Your attempt to characterize me as some kind of hedonist is noted, though, and your willing aversion to pleasure doesn't make you any judge.

This self-righteous discourse is fucking disgusting, and the idea that anybody - literally anybody - is an NPC should strike you to the core of your being, if you had a fucking soul.

Who isn't important? Tell me. Now. Right the fuck now - who would you let die if you had to choose?

I hope you can't answer. Fuckhead.

You finger your own asshole thinking about your daddy Trump you fucking incel autistic whore

>“When you have savouries and fine dishes set before you, you will gain an idea of their nature if you tell yourself that this is the corpse of a fish, and that the corpse of a bird or a pig; or again, that fine Falernian wine is merely grape-juice, and this purple robe some sheep’s wool dipped in the blood of a shellfish; and as for sexual intercourse, it is the friction of a piece of gut and, following a sort of convulsion, the expulsion of some mucus. Thoughts such as these reach through to the things themselves and strike to the heart of them, allowing us to see them as they truly are. So follow this practice throughout your life, and where things seem most worthy of your approval, lay them naked, and see how cheap they are, and strip them of the pretences of which they are so vain.” - 6:13

Attached: c98rhqx8zyj21.jpg (500x484, 64K)

I wish it was possible to redistribute tits and take from women like pic-related and give some to women with 10/10 faces. It’s always the ogre-faced ones with giant knockers, like their attractiveness points all went into their boobs and they had none left for face stats.

>I don't really like sweets, but I'm not walking around telling other people not to have them.
You have literally wasted over 10 posts being a masturbation evangelist. Oh, the hypocrisy.
>Nobody gives a fuck, and you're not any better than anyone else.
You obviously care a whole lot. It's amazing. You are so much of a slave to primal pleasures that you have adopted it into your sense of self and feel personally attacked by people who are against masturbation.

Ur pathetic

I'd probably let you die if I had to choose.

>lay them naked, and see how cheap they are, and strip them of the pretences of which they are so vain.
That is jsut gonna make me want it more if I am in a horny state.

I was incredibly underwhelmed reading the meditations.

I can't quote like you jsut did, but one goes along the line:

>Why can't I jsut lay in my comfortable bed; like an animal would stay comfortably in bed. Well because you are a man and man does things; so get up and act.

Where is the distinction between action of things "higher" in reason and wanting to rub your dick between some cuties thighs?

>because I'm curious.
Nah you're just mad lol

Attached: 1555207475893.png (402x420, 169K)

>Who isn't important? Tell me. Now. Right the fuck now - who would you let die if you had to choose?
Without a doubt, you.

Attached: 1552431759407.jpg (667x750, 177K)

So, you think that sitting back and taking rhetorical potshots by playing the logical-fallacy game is going to prove any point?

What user is trying to say is that sex is literally part of all known life, ranging from human to arthropod, and you're gonna be a little bitch and claim that they're appealing to nature?

No shit.

Because nature will kill you.

And maybe it's time for us all to just die.

Seriously, this shit makes me so done with life, the way some people have to spark their little asshole comments about whatever religious belief they have that makes them think that humans aren't fucking animals.

You don't want to be an animal? Great. You can identify as an attack-helicopter, for all I care.

Don't tell me I have to be, though.

Herp-a-derp-derp a herp. Derp. Herp a derp? Derp-a-herp.

>primal pleasures

You actually think that you have some kind of moral superiority by abstaining from masturbation, though, and that's that saddest part.

You might be right. I don't actually know, because I've only probably ever gone a week without fapping, and I was a teenager.

But what makes you think that you have it all figured out?

What fucking mystical powers do you have that would prove your position?

Oh, literally fucking none?

Great, then. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.

Are your arms not tired from fighting that strawman for so long?

Yeah. I am mad. This entire idea of framing human sexuality as a source of shame should probably make everyone pretty mad, but I guess most people just quietly ignore it, and it's probably far easier to do.

You should practice what you preach retard.

Ooh, sick burn.

That was so predictable, yet I suspect you think it was somehow a clever retort.

Why are you talking to the dead, user?

This thread is hilarious

I'm showing that you are a lunatic who is not able to make logically coherent statements. At the very best you're some pompous brainlet, at worst, you are severely mentally ill with little grasp on reality. Every single one of your posts has reasoning that is incredibly fallacious. Not a line that you have endeavored write cogently backs the case you are trying to make. This paired with the obvious seething, makes me believe that you are mentally ill, and I do not mean that as an insult and hope that you visit a psychiatrist for an evaluation at the very least.

Attached: -.jpg (574x565, 102K)

Actions have consequences. Even sex. Nothing we do is a biological free lunch.

Those who claim that denying one of the most basic components of human existence confers upon them some kind of moral superiority would be the ones who are constructing a position that might be called a strawman.

See, like, these words have meanings, and you have to know them before you use them, otherwise you sound like someone who read a logic book and only remembered the words to say that make you sound like you know what the fuck you're talking about.

I mean, it really is.

That's because you're the biggest joke here.

i like them big tiddy ogre face girls

Attached: 1549555490968.png (760x540, 413K)

>Not a line that you have endeavored write cogently backs the case you are trying to make

I fucking dare you to restate that sentence.

You are literally trying to flex on me with bullshit article citations (which, by the way, are longer than abstracts), and you're very obviously overplaying the claim of calling me "mentally ill."

Like, do you have fucking genitals, you asshole?

If not, that's totally cool; just tell me, and we can work from there. I'm very friendly to the idea of conscious artificial intelligence that has no understanding of having a body.

Otherwise, you are on the Kinsey scale.

This is fucking science, you idiot.

Perhaps I am ignoring the possibility of asexuality.

The funny thing about that, though, is that asexuality wouldn't care who masturbated to what or how often, because sexuality wouldn't be part of their thought process.

So that's why I'm not really that worried about calling you an asshole.

I see mastrubation as a bodily function along the lines of taking a piss. However pornography is fucking gay and those who watch it are of lower moral fortitude. What kinda idiot are you if you cant think of something to jerk your pp to by yourself.

If you give a shit about sex at all, you're on the Kinsey scale, though.

good bait

>What kinda idiot are you if you cant think of something to jerk your pp to by yourself

Well, according to pornhub.com/insights/2018-year-in-review, if we assume that people are visiting the site to assist with such onanistic endeavors, about 92 million people every day.

But you know, I guess they all just lack your imagination, so we should call them idiots of a lower moral fortitude.

Maybe if you didn't treat masturbation like some kind of chore, you'd appreciate it more, though.

what an absolute autist
who would seriously listen to this guy who spent half his life freezing to death abroad fighting wars he didn't care about

>My wife weighed 215 when we met and weighs ~135 now.
And that‘s because you (((made))) her lose weight?

>I fucking dare you to restate that sentence.
Not a line that you have endeavored write cogently backs the case you are trying to make.
>You are literally trying to flex on me with bullshit article citations (which, by the way, are longer than abstracts), and you're very obviously overplaying the claim of calling me "mentally ill."
The picture has nothing to do with the argument therein. That's a separate issue that you've managed to intertwine into your nonsensical fallacious patchwork that you somehow think constitutes a cogent argument.
>Like, do you have fucking genitals, you asshole?
Indeed, I do.
>Otherwise, you are on the Kinsey scale.
I reject Kinsey and his body of work, the man was a sexual deviant and slapdash researcher with poor methodology.
This being said, indeed too, I am heterosexual and would be on the scale. However, the condition of heterosexuality does not presuppose a necessity of release, and you should know it is very well possible to remain continent, chaste and celibate indefinitely without the slightest detriment, only benefit.

Attached: good.jpg (592x431, 109K)

>who would seriously listen to this guy who spent half his life freezing to death abroad fighting wars he didn't care about

Attached: helen_sloan_-_hbo_photo_43_-_h_2017.jpg (768x433, 81K)

>Not a line that you have endeavored write cogently backs the case you are trying to make.

LOLOLOLOL - touche. You did restate the shit out of that sentence.

If that was a joke, then I have underestimated you.

>The picture has nothing to do with the argument therein

I'm sorry, but does anyone believe that? It's literally called "Emission not Necessary to Health" and talks about "overloaded seminal vesicles" (which, commonly referred to as "blue balls," is absolutely mythical in terms of human biology), so don't fucking pull that bullshit with me. You're just trying to piss me off, and I guess it's working, because holy shit fuck you.

Attached: 15437482002481.jpg (620x297, 69K)

>.But you know, I guess they all just lack your imagination, so we should call them idiots of a lower moral fortitude.

i dont think they lack a imagination but that they choose the easy way, instead of using their imagination. Porn is fucking addicting as shit, its basically the same as prostitution except there is a camera in the room, and that is just the top of the iceberg when it comes to the reasons for not watching porn.

>Maybe if you didn't treat masturbation like some kind of chore, you'd appreciate it more, though.

I didnt say that i treated it like a choir, which i don't. I dont treat taking a shit like a choir either, even though that is one of the most basic bodily functions.

I can guarantee you, without even the faintest shadow of whatever might exist as the merest concept of doubt, that if I were Tesla, and someone wanted to fuck me because I was Tesla... we'd fuck.

So I don't really know what you're trying to say, there, pardner.

I mean, Edison would probably try to take credit for it somehow, but I've never seen sex that way, so I'd pretty much leave that to be her call.

Is that sexist? It's probably sexist. I don't even know anymore, y'all have me so fucked up.

That was the ultimate goal. I didn't "make" her do anything, shes a grown woman, I just helped guide is all. She feels better, looks better, has less pain, and is overall healthier. It's great. You're misusing (((this))) by the way. It means Jew or ZOG or whatever else the /pol/lacks say.

Attached: 1552701283510.jpg (720x548, 35K)

Just admit that you've just now realized that you got memed on and move on, dont try to deflect. I just want you to remember that you TYPED this shit, it didn't come flying out of your mouth. There's really no excuse.

>Tesla
Not him, but Tesla is mostly a joke overhyped by fanboys.

>its basically the same as prostitution except there is a camera in the room

No. You are quite wrong. If you were to hire a prostitute, then you'd be in control of how you treated her.

Porn requires you to either watch someone who is alone and masturbating (which is awesome) or someone else fuck this person who you might decide should be treated totally differently than they're being treated, but there's nothing you can do about it, so you just focus on the fact that they seem to like it.

What kind of weird robotic vision of women do you have to think that porn and prostitutes are even remotely similar? Like, prostitutes are people, user. Porn is a recorded image.

Fuck.

Seriously.

Butterfly is thicc in the right places lol

:3 she also is very smart tho, and understands my use of the word ‘thicc’ to be quasi-ironic (but also pretty damn serious).

It’s complicated. Basically she’s attractive and smart and has my phone number everyone! She has my phone number!!! WOOOOOO :3

>There's really no excuse

For what?

What meme how?

If someone told you "hey, you are [insert your name here], and I'm going to fuck you," would you really abstain from it because of some stupid idea of not being able to think in a scientific manner?

No. I highly doubt it. And Tesla shouldn't have, either, because I'm sure he'd have been just has brilliant after throwing someone a dick.

This is madness, and probably the result of his being a closeted homosexual.

I mean, Edison reamed him a good one after all, didn't he?

Bazinga.

What, too soon?

Did you marry her with the intentions to get her to slim down?
Do you think it was actually you who got her to lose weight?

Listen, Jews wanted dogs and cats to be the main pets we own. It should've could've would've been chimps. It's also why they invented aids, to deter chimp-owning. Chimps are not exactly humans ancesters but they're close enough. If we domesticated them they'd eventually become like us. Not exactly like us but still smarter then dogs. ALL WE HAD TO DO; TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO, just feed them cooked meats and breed the smartest ones. But NOOOOO` FUCK YOU. No chimp buddies THIS lifetime.
Yeah, I'm mad.

who the fuck cares categorical imperative is one of the stupidest ideas of all times
(yes im willing to debate on that)

Domestication removes evolutionary pressures and makes intelligence atrophy.

Its sex or sexual acts in exchange for money. How is that not prostitution?

>What kind of weird robotic vision of women do you have to think that porn and prostitutes are even remotely similar? Like, prostitutes are people, user. Porn is a recorded image.

I see women as human beings not an object made for me to jerk my pp to.

The pornography industry sees women as products to sell to the masses and make profit off of their bodies.

I think your the one with the weird vision of women user.

Wait - he could have been asexual.

I keep having to remember that this is technically an option, but it's possible that Tesla had literally no sexual expression of any type.

But I also would have to contend that this kind of outlook is something that literally any human would see as alien to themselves, because basically anyone with a human body is somewhere on the Kinsey scale (I don't care who repudiates it; if you have any attraction to anyone at all, you're on it, so like what would mean to not be? If Tesla had no attractions, though (so many electrical puns), then I won't argue... but Occam's razor would suggest that the dude was way homo if he refused that many women.

I guess I could be projecting, though.

I wanted chimp training camps. Where are they? If you don't hand em over, I'm gonna sit here and do nothing. What do you think of them apples, user? WHAT? Huh?

You're right, though. Domestication does have some long term negative effects. Damn, I just really want hyper-intelligent chimps. Or even fucking gorillas or orangatangs.
TRIPS. Nice.

Attached: The Old Man And The Meme.png (500x775, 254K)

>It should've could've would've been chimps. It's also why they invented aids, to deter chimp-owning

That's... like, I sometimes think I'm crazy, but then I see shit like this, and I'm like "naw; I think I still have a grasp on reality."

So... thanks?

>How is that not prostitution

I mean, technically I get it: if you paid someone a bunch of money to be an "actor" in their "film," then you'd still be hiring a prostitute, even if they broadcast your fucking her, and therefore it's at the very least a lateral step from prostitution.

But the thing is, you'd still have to decide how you sexually engaged with this person, so it's not like you're just hiring a fuck-bot, unless you think of women who are willing to be coerced into sex for money (which, if you were a woman, would probably be a way bigger think than it is for someone who isn't, unless you are, in which case I guess tell me more about how it is) as some sort of fuck-bots.

I don't know what you think, but I'm incontrovertibly convinced that women are people, so it's not like there's anything you can say that would disprove that to me.

>I mean, technically I get it: if you paid someone a bunch of money to be an "actor" in their "film," then you'd still be hiring a prostitute, even if they broadcast your fucking her, and therefore it's at the very least a lateral step from prostitution.

i didn't understand any of that, could you clarify please?

>The pornography industry sees women as products to sell to the masses and make profit off of their bodies

Well... so, like that's actually pretty much most industries, when you look at how they treat women.

It's an ugly truth, but it's one that you won't be able to look away from when you start exploring it.

I did not. I encouraged her to because she was not happy with her size. I love my wife very deeply and have since the first time we met. I know that sounds melodramatic and cheesy, but it's the truth. What I did was show her the positive benefits of regular exercise and, when she became curious, made it something that we did together to keep both of us motivated. I wanted to get stronger and faster, she wanted to slim down and tone up. She has helped me become my ideal self as much as I have helped her.

I think I helped spark the motivation to. I showed her that it wasn't impossible and all it took was willpower, which she has in spades. Like many women she was simply ignorant in the extreme on the topic of exercise. She was also massively insecure, so building her up was key. Exercise and dieting helped us both to become more confident and, especially in her case, more sexually active with one another. Something about watching sweat roll from exertion is incredibly tantalizing. Plus, I mean, it doesn't get much better than "spotting" your waifu while she does squats, if you know what I'm saying.

Noice

Attached: 5333A0D9-895C-4E40-AEC6-79B38CB6B9E5.jpg (800x450, 31K)

Sounds like the last decades of neurological research have thrown that entire philosophy onto the garbage heap, even if you have delusions about human exceptionalism.

So you’re Australian, alright, and you like Nietzsche, alright alright

the only problem with porn is when you watch too much and it loses its charm

Attached: bataille.jpg (480x360, 9K)

Well then, more power to you.
How did you find time to exercise together? Do you have kids?

Every industry creates profit of the back of its workers, the pornography industry creates profit of the reproductive organs of its workers which i feel is a tiny bit worse.

Attached: Pepe marx..png (500x481, 210K)

No, not really.

I know, those poor men whose dicks are sucked and fucked. It's such a travesty.

It’s akin to acting. They like it, till they don’t.
What’s a tiny bit worse is Aquinas’ necessary evil, prostitution.

You clearly have a deep understanding of pornography that includes women.

>your fucking her

its gibberish tho, im sure you have a point in there somewhere

I hate these fucking bullshit platitudes. Just because you word something nicely and in a circular fashion doesnt make it an axiom.

source of those mammaries?

Well, maybe. I guess I mean to say that the fact that we only see pornography as a male-dominant market effaces the concept of female sexual pleasure, which is actually the reason why it's an extension of the phallologocentric patriarchy, and what we need is more female-dominant porn figures who subjugate men.

Again.
Someone receives money in exchange for performing sex or sexual acts.
How is that not prostitution? In my mind the fact that its being filmed doesn't change anything

Yeah. You do. Unless you've never had sex with anyone.

I mean, it's fine if you haven't, but I have, and I can imagine that if I ever hired a prostitute, it would be something that was between her and me.

Putting your shit out there on camera means exposing your fucking to the entire world, you nit.

So, there's a difference.

Quit pulling the straw man because you can't think of a proper argument.

>You do
*understand that its being filmed changes something*

That was a lot of edit.

In pornyou have sex with your coworkers
In prostitution you have sex with clients.
It’s subtle, but there’s a huge difference.
All exploitation of course. I don’t think sex should be commodified. Like everything else

How do you know ?
Were you part of the business ?

Don’t even suggest it

:3 so pure

I still dont see the fucking difference rigth then and there when the thing is happening, except the fact that there is a camera in the room. and lets clarify i dont mean a man paying a women im talking about people both men and women being paid for sex.

that makes a little more sense but that would just mean that your coworker is also a prostitute.

Go ahead and post your number, just know I’m not calling it, ever.

You will save it though. I think we both know you’ll save it :3

Attached: CDE40D56-2F13-4069-ACBF-A6B224A49419.jpg (686x386, 34K)

>I don’t think sex should be commodified

I don't think physical labor should be commidified.

I don't think philosophical labor should be commodified.

I don't think existential labor should be commodified.

>I don't think labor should be commodified

Absolutely based. May your erections be eternally hard and strong.

Attached: 1555945030129.png (500x466, 138K)

Here I’ll post it piece by piece. Here’s the first part : (443) :3

Pretty easily, we both work days. We have a 1 year old, which had made everything a little tricky, but our very nice neighbor lady has a granddaughter the same age so she watches our kid for an hour or so 3 days a week. It's a comfy life.

Pray the rosary.

Fuck it, how do I quit this shit.
Give me some tips anti-porn bros. I want to be free.

Attached: its legal relax.jpg (562x1000, 194K)

This is why we can't have nice things.

just realize that porn is fucking gay and stop watching it, its not fucking hard.

BUT MY DOODLE HARD AND WANTS TO CUME

No, the imperative is against holy porn.

>porn is fucking gay

Um, there's literally a section for that, and it's called "gay porn."

Attached: themoreyouknow.jpg (1280x720, 47K)

Clarification when i say gay my meaning is: thing bad.

You need transcendence. Being a materialist soulet won't lead you anywhere.
This is my advice

Didn't the CIA distribute porn in Cuba or something? I may be mistaken, but consider its purpose in that scenario and imagine why free access to pornography is so encouraged.

So, you're stupid. Thanks for clarifying that.

No he’s correct. Being gay, homosexual, lesbian, etc. is a stupid fucking choice :3

>So, you're stupid. Thanks for clarifying that.

Oh yeah i really got him with that one.

Attached: tard.jpg (474x492, 25K)

Yes, it is. As a straight person who clearly chose to be attracted to the people I am, I must wonder what on earth those other people were thinking who didn't choose the same thing, which is clearly so wonderful and sing-songey happy go lucky starshine fun-dance that I want to fucking die every day because I'm so lonely.

Obviously the right way of doing things.

Choices about your sexuality. They're so something you can control, like ebola.

lol faggot

Tell me about the abuse you received as a child that turned you into a fruit

Well, it was a process of severe cutting. The blade was harsh, but eventually, I was formed into a pomegranate.

Is having sex with your gf against the CI?

we live in a society

>having a gf
take the incel pill

Why? I love to love user

because im single now and this is how i cope

Attached: sad_chad.jpg (1280x720, 54K)

Yes.
Incels by definition involuntarily are single.

>Yes
Why?

happy for you user

courses.edx.org/c4x/HarvardX/ER22.1x/asset/Chapter_5_-_Immanuel_Kant__129-139_.pdf

Well thank you user. I've come a long way from the drug addict Yea Forumstard I used to be. Y'all fuckers helped me tremendously, believe it or not.

>I see women as human beings not an object made for me to jerk my pp to.
lmao what a faggot

They can be both.

Monkey see monkey do

Yes.

With age, you will lose interest

lol

Attached: WORST_POSTER_OF_ALL_TIME.png (486x427, 79K)

except mental, obviously

>Just imagine the chaos that would ensue if that whole demographic suddenly had to deal with their sexual urges at face value with no way to sublimate.
This is only an issue because of women, unirionically. There were less incels in the past (and not because they simply died or some other shit).

False. It's more behavioral than hormonal. It only grows stronger with age for most men until their hormones drop, which is quite aways off. Not until the 60s at least. The only way of attenuating it is to decrease frequency and disrupt the habit.

imagine a world before mirrors

Some of us are old enough to remember.

It's hilarious how the spermposter winds down once he's posted his handful of images.

>spermposter
?

It‘s because religious morals have forcefully kept biological breeding tendencies at bay. I‘m not sure that‘s preferable.

Underrated

>privatepylesmile.png

If you suppose women are of the same consciousness as men, yes. If you suppose women are of lesser consciousness as backwardly reasoned from your pornographic proclivity, yes. If you suppose women are of lesser consciousness as per your own Reason first and foremost, no.

>Makes the naturalistic fallacy
>Gets assmad at a cringe response
>Demands agreement, refuses proper consideration of opponent's viewpoint

Pathetic. Go to /his/ or /pol/.

Attached: Eternal Anglo.jpg (1063x1340, 597K)

>*Hits blunt
>*Rolls head over
>Dude, what if like, the cause is actually the effect

Attached: Are Spaniads.png (1268x530, 89K)

Reminder that Mosley did literally nothing wrong and was the rightful leader of the British Empire.

>tfw the term Myspace Angle outlived Myspace itsel

If we wanted to breed smartness, chimps are not the way. Small super efficient brains that easily put them in top 10, paired with an incredibly short maturation period, low food cost, low gestation period make crows and other corvids the ideal choice. Give a madman a billion dollars and a team of experts and he'll have bred and spliced for hyper intelligence in no time. If they pick ravens they could even learn to speak, removing the need for indians, paying them literal seeds on the dollar. Bonus: the increased brain to body ratio will make them unable to fly away from whatever telecommunications or programming sweatshop you put them in.
Replacing our chinese outsourcing with superintelligent corvids is the only way the western civilization wins

Attached: 1555300876245.jpg (724x1086, 127K)

(human) (((society)))

Just take hormones and get ahead of nature.

How can psychology disprove virtue my man

both Nietzsche and Jesus are saying the same thing. this should be enough

Attached: 1549105972813.png (1064x542, 62K)

>Nietzsche wasn't a nutjob.
Okay buddy.

The top may be out of your range but you can climb as high as possible and prepare your children for greater heights

You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.
Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

every ideology,religion or philosophy that achieved something says the same thing:; stop watching porn

Attached: 1543764996381.jpg (1242x1337, 658K)

Based

Pathetic addict Cope LMAO

Porn is a relatively new phenomenom, I have a bit of trouble imagining that for example Confucius or Aristotle had comments on porn.

Very big cringe cope

There are different ethical and mortal frameworks. Some accept a hierarchy of virtue. Within those frameworks some are better than others. You keep having the same arguments over and over because you won't absorb anything new or accept that other people are unreceptive to your ideas, either from a similar stubbornness or because they have examined your ideas and found them to be lacking.

I need help

Consensual sex between a husband and wife in holy matrimony, blessed by God, is not shameful.

>I'm sure he'd be just as brilliant after throwing someone dick

He didn't think so. Why are you telling other people what to do with your body? Why are you incapable of having moral or intellectual integrity?

>no real enjoyment through psychology desensitization to sex
>become completely unable to pair bond or experience intimacy with people
doesn't matter had sex

>Porn is a relatively new phenomenom
You could literally watch women get fucked by animals in Ancient Rome. Our porn is nothing in comparison to the ancients.

Not that guy but porn is much worse in the sense that it's much more readily available and has profound effects on the brain/reward loop systems etc because of this. From that perspective it is a new phenomenon.

>has profound effects on the brain/reward loop systems etc because of this.
You got that from a "study" isn't?