Books that talk about the hypersexualization of society and how sexual liberation slowly degenerated the self?

Attached: 1556307707385.png (1000x1000, 67K)

Read simulacra and simulation.

Capitalism causes dissolution of all boundaries, sexualization is just capitalism trying to magnify itself. Sexualization is a symptom.

It causes its own problems but it is not the main enemy, it is a means.

I say this as a person fully endorsing of capitalism.

have gender

Pic related.

Excerpt:

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

Disagree. The family unit is the building block of society and hypersexualization is bad for the family, society, the self.

this is interesting and cool. do you have any more, or what sources can i go to read about this? and is there some more hard science and chemistry to back it up?

Attached: Bruja.gif (349x350, 11K)

>there is yet to be recorded one individual who freely expended seminal fluid who ever amounted to anything
the delusion, my god... I'm not even going to bother listing the countless names

That is like saying the tribe is the building block of the society. It's more accurate to say it was a transitory manifestation in the process that led to the state, but not something that was meant to endure

while "traditionally" the "family" (whatever this ill-defined term might mean) served the function of, as you say, providing a certain stability on which things could be built. but the environment has changed. that stability is intrinsic in the state/government itself now and predicated on technologies that allow for newer modes of living. being single was social suicide just a century ago. now it is not only viable but a highly sagacious method of existing.

"hypersexualization", which would be better off being called "sexuality fully realized" allows people to explore various ways of living and interacting with one another previous denied to them. more people are allowed to feel intimacy. more people are able to engage in what had previously been only allowable to husband and wife (an absurd circumstance).

I think you should examine the more positive elements that are involved rather than turtling with /pol/ and neoreactionary memes like

this is biased as fuck and wrong, dolphins rape, otters rape, lions may kill their offspring to mate with the lioness once worried about her cubs, etc

>being a leftypol retard

Imagine being so beta that there's a part of the female body that you cannot appreciate.

his pic is literally pseudo-science and hell no there is not any hard science to even remotely back up nofap

Not really. We're primates and primates like to fuck. They come from the equator so the don't have exaggerated seasonal mating systems like you see in colder climates. Dolphins, Bonobos, both examples of mammals that fuck for reasons other than reproduction.

Science discovers the physiological value of continence is the name of the book

>Implaying the tribe is not a better alternative the current state of the state

>We're primates and primates like to fuck therefore sex is good!

Attached: 15482869583232.jpg (399x404, 45K)

>Wild animals in a state of nature practice copulation only at certain mating seasons for the purpose of reproduction.
Primates don't really do this. A book claiming that science supports anything, and then makes amazingly false claims like this, is garbage. It is not in pursuit of the truth and is seeking to trick readers.

these
VERY based & redpilled materials

Amazing to consider. Will definitely be reading it.

Seems like you're seeking to trick readers by pointing to primates yet ignoring the fact that they fuck and masturbate much more often in cages than they do in the wild. Your reasoning and hostility is that of a reddit-tard brainlet

Please list some names, about ten, maybe? I'm not provoking you, I'm genuinely curious.

Unironically henry fords book. Talks about how casual sex is a low effort dopamine game designed to numb you to other stimuli and keep you a mindless debtor for life

>animals with free access to females and no need to expend energy hunting or fighting off parasites will fuck more
Somebody stop the presses, we have to let people know about this! Oh wait, it's basic ecology.
>reddit-tard
Don't even bother replying, all words are wasted on you.

And people in the excesses of civilization will have a higher sexual frequency which brings us back to precisely the point that was in the fucking quote which you denied.

>Foot fetishism
You faggots are just as bad as furries KYS.

Marquis de Sade, the list goes on...

>certain mating seasons for the purpose of reproduction
Can you show me the mating seasons of dolphins or primates? The actual part I denied? Or are you too stupid to read?

>contradicts himself and admits the original point that he refuted
wew lad

Attached: C7BA3CEF-2CD5-412C-9791-CFA51BEBA247.png (652x764, 670K)

Which book? He authored several.

All the greatest minds and artists always had a fetish for something, if you don't have any perhaps you're uncreative or unimaginative.

Attached: 15073276.jpg (480x664, 54K)

The original point I refuted was that only humans were without mating seasons and that only humans mated for purposes beyond reproduction. If you're going to use science to justify your stupid ideology at least use it well.

Nearly all mammals have set mating seasons. You picked out a few exceptions and dismissed the larger point as pseudoscience which you asserted yourself sometimes later. Face it, you're an imbecile.

Dostoievsky, Hugo, Baudelaire, Adorno and probably a good deal of the Ancien Greeks despite the memes.

Wilhelm Reich

Fetishes are classically conditioned perversions. The greatest of men had no fetishes.

Check out the Agony of Eros. Hyper-sexualized individuals suffer mentally, physically, and spiritually. Sex is not dirty or evil; it's sacred and individuals who fail to recognize this will suffer in this life and in the one after.

>a universal rule with exceptions
>those exceptions turn out to be the closest and most relevant to humans

Not him, but you're not really helping your case here.

>child might see someone naked in a safe, obviously lighthearted environment with parents present
>quick! vote a dictator who promises to genocide the Jews into power!

not trying to sound edgy or anything right now but footfags are such irredeemable degenerates that each and every one of you should be dragged into the street and shot. i would unironically wholeheartedly support death squads that hunted you absolute fucking reprobates down and mercilessly executed you and your families. i would fucking smile as i watch you get a bullet between the eyes and i would fucking sleep like a baby knowing the world is a better place without you. just my opinion tho

>Nearly all mammals have set mating seasons
Our closest relatives do not. They are promiscuous and females come into estrus every five weeks like humans. This let's them mate year round, very important when a baby gestates for 8 months. Dolphins have similarly high levels of intelligence and have sex for fun. You don't know shit about mating systems. We're not herbivorous pack mammals.

Re read what ya wrote and kys for saying that based on a meme

sex can be without intimacy retard, which is the majority of meet and fuck orgy porgy tinder escapades that are reduced to base, ritualistic mechanical actions entirely devoid of intimacy or any meaningful human interaction.

it's also fucking downright appalling that your argument against the very notion of a family has something to do with the function of the state. like, HELLLOOOOO retard, what about child rearing? or is that the state's job too in a thoroughly technologically centralized society? where the fuck do bugbrains like you even come from? are you made in an amazon factory or something?

Based high IQ post. Im sick of these toids projecting

this is Yea Forums so why not writers:
1. Joyce - bloomsday marks the day Nora first jerked him off
2. Hemingway - married four times, just read him
3. Philip K. Dick - married five times, relationships and sex factor into most of his novels
4. Fitzgerald - wrote his novels before, during, and after his marriage with Zelda
5. Camus - two marriages and numerous affairs
6. Oscar Wilde - “The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.”
7. Steinbeck - Married three times
8. Bukowski
9. Marquis de Sade
10. Giacomo Casanova

Why is the state more legitimate than the tribe?

None of those are any good.

what?

Stay mad I guess. I think it's stupid to feel hatred for people who enjoy something you cannot. I feel deep joy when I suck my girlfriend's feet and she smiles.

>comparing sexual relationships with chronic masturbation

Retard

They are tho

Nice numbers, but other than that, your reply sucks.
Legit replies. I don't think all of these are good, but they are influential and important. Thanks for the names.
Disregard this faggot.

da vinci was literally just gay lol

like he had multiple relationships w younger men.

Read the original post I responded too, the author literally alludes to Milton not having sex as being the cause of the quality of his work

It wasn't about chronic masturbation you illiterate faggot, did you even read the posts here? The gist is "Can a man make something of value if he's promiscuous, if he's not monogamous or celibate?".

I recommend that you read Metaphysics of sex by Evola, it (ironically) supports a lot of what you say. For example, see Evola's view that the highest potential of a woman being that of a role as, not wife. It simply situates it within a framework of the Self instead of the Individual.

role as *lover

t. walter isaacson of CNN
This is a baseless claim.

I don't think so.
raises a solid point about child rearing. The nature of humans is such that they require a lot of attention and resources, love, affection, etc. etc. to become functional well rounded adults.

There is absolutely NO evidence that the state can serve these needs. I also don't feel that there has been an increase of intimacy with the adoption of a more permissive sexual culture.

I think we have a fundamentally different perspective of the world. You seem to look at it top down, where the state is fundamental. I think the state is an invention of people to enhance their quality of life.

Also, what makes you say that the family is a transitory manifestation that led to the state? Perhaps the state is itself a transitory manifestation that leads to ????

>It's more accurate to say it was a transitory manifestation in the process that led to the state, but not something that was meant to endure
Historical materialism is so 19th century. Please take a break from your autism for awhile , okay pal? No, the family unit is not something that evolved through a purely economic process and stop conflating sex as the peak of intimacy you miserable degenerate.

Sex is a secondary characteristic of a healthy relationship.

All shit tier.

actually he's right, you know. graves said on why so many modern writers aren't any good 'any slight mania or differentiating oddness which they should guard as jealously as a savage guards the stone or tree that houses his soul, they now take along to the National Health psychiatrist, pleading to be de-thinged.'

If they exist, they can probably be found in the fiction section.

No, this is just yet another whining incel thread.

there are billions of people on this planet and they don't need to abstain from sex to achieve success, what kind of logic is that

Attached: nealjustin_1556991722_ck2.jpg (525x350, 9K)

Any books on how to not mix up cause and effect? I think OP really needs it.

>t. npc

this is what mental illness looks like

ITT: Roasties getting absolutely assblasted that some men have woken up to the evil ways of the vaginal Jew.
We will no longer be enslaved to your tricks, harlot.

Oh no won't somebody please think of the children!!!

Fucking is mad overrated, Ive done it all the flings, the passionate relationship, hookers. It sucks after the act sex loses all meaning. Its primal monkey brain shit that we will never overcome because its way to easy to pander to.

another sign of mental illness

Imagine actually trying to defending a child being taught to give money to a stripper.
Seek help and never adopt a child with your boyfriend.

Kek

>Libido Dominandi is the first draft of a great work. As it is, it is a failure, suffering from shoddy writing, poor research, and a wandering and inconsistent thesis. What should be an erudite and compelling polemic against the the sexual revolution—Western culture’s death knell—is an inconsistent and often unreadable mess.
[...]
>First and foremost, his writing is very, very poor. The overall structure of the book—jumping from year to year, place to place, vignette to vignette—makes it hard to follow intellectual rather than a thematic elements. Given the fact that the book’s thesis is nebulous and has a tendency to change as Jones goes along (more on that below), reading the book is a major slog.
>A inquiring reader can jump to any given page to witness Jones’s lame writing. More shocking is his plain sloppiness and failure to edit himself. Just one of many many examples: On page 88, the author quotes Abbe Barruel, ending with “for men may be turned into any thing by him who knows how to take advantage of their ruling passion.” ONE PARAGRAPH LATER Jones uses the SAME EXACT QUOTE, except he finishes with the word “passions”—not “passion.” In other words, Jones repeats the exact same argument by using the same quote in succeeding paragraphs—and cannot even get the quoted material right! To call this a first draft is too kind—it is a first draft seemingly written the night before it was due! This is simply unforgivable.
[...]
>Let’s start here: Jones has habit of noting tacit connections between his characters rather than connecting the intellectual undercurrents which united them. This method moves along more like a conspiracy theory or a six-degrees-of-Kevin-Bacon game than scholarship. For example, in the early chapters, Jones repeatedly tries to unite the Marquis de Sade, William Godwin, Abbe Barruel. It really does not work; Jones is forced to use lame narrative devices such as speculating what Mary Wollstonecraft must have been thinking while she trudged through the blood-drenched Paris streets; speculations over how affected Percy and Mary Shelley were by Sade; huge leaps of faith over the effect the good priest Barruel had on later sex perverts. With regards to the English liberals, it is clear that Jones simply does not respect their work enough to learn it and refute it—Paglia's work would serve him well here. More than this, the idea that later sex-mongers were inspired by the Jesuit reactionary Barruel’s is largely speculation; even if it were true, who cares? There are countless secret societies; the question is why the secret societies promoting sexual perversion ended up so popular. Instead of adequately defining the relevant intellectual undercurrents, Jones is reliant on his vignettes and weak editorializing.
goodreads.com/review/show/1906990944

Attached: famous-footfags.jpg (1420x1200, 409K)

Attached: boobsandassfags.png (1000x1000, 234K)

Attached: image.png (2048x1536, 110K)

Yikes.

Attached: ..jpg (534x394, 20K)

No, I think this actually supports it. Or i dont even know anymore, maybe its parody

name of book?

they never post sources. because the chap who wrote it also wrote about ufo's and hollow earth

Attached: rain & wind in gubbio at 9 30.jpg (1388x780, 84K)

>everyone is successful
Maybe define success as like top 1% or .1% in a category

>Literal who's and people who are trash
Sounds about right.

((()))

Anything by Michel "incel fuel" Houellebecq

Greatness != success
The billions of masses fucking are just that, masses. Successful or otherwise, they're all mediocre.

All shit.

Go back to discoed tranny

Attached: uploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F32510%2Felon_musk_wife.jpg%2F950x534__filters%3Aquality%2890%29.jpg (950x534, 90K)

WHY THE FUCK CAN I NOT HAVE SEX
FUCK ME FUCK ME
WE LIVE IN A TIME WHEN PEOPLE ARE HAVING UNBELIEVABLE AMOUNTS OF SEX AND IM STILL A VIRGIN AAAAAAHHHHH

Not that great.
Also, he's more productive when he's single. Also is losing less hair whenever he is single. Sexual excesses make a man pusillanimous, mediocre, drained, tired, and pathetic.

dolphins and bonobos are fucking retards, name me one dolphin or bonobo who wrote a book with any literary merit whatsoever
you can't because dolphins and bonobos spend all their time in hedonistic pleasure seeking

Why is having sex important? Did you come to that conclusion on your own?

Even retards like you are having more sex than ever with your hand. Both of you are animals compared to people who have climbed above and conquered this instinct.

Attached: 15563153970580.jpg (808x453, 81K)

So many anaemic anti-life computer-priests in this thread. Sorry sweetie, but your pseudo-asceticism is a decadent and perverse sexual neuroticism.

notice he doesn't mention shakespeare (very possibly our greatest man)

>he's never read the deep sea scrolls

Attached: dolphin talk.png (668x145, 19K)

>Not that great.
why don't you get to his level then using your secret non-masturbatory sauce

Attached: acquired tastes.jpg (680x1020, 114K)

are there any books that go full foot fetish

Gravity's Rainbow

Kawabata's 'The Lake'. Pushkin's 'Eugene Onegin' has several verses devoted to the subject, pic related.

Attached: eugene-onegin.jpg (688x2517, 354K)

Oh, also some of Tanizaki's books and stories.

The only problem I see with sexual liberation is overpopulation

birth rates are dropping in sexually liberated countries

He came to that conclusion through biological urges i presume.

Sex can be a good and sacred thing, the hypersexualization of society removes that aspect from sex

this but unironically

Oh wow you seem to be right, that's an interesting trend.

>sex can be a good and sacred thing
Stop putting sex on a pedestal, it's just two naked apes rubbing genitals until fluids are exchanged. Stop pretending that there's something spiritual to such a physical act

Cumbrains with fried out dopamine receptors detected.

Everything can be sacred and spiritual

I do not know that free sexual license is a fundamentally bad thing however I do know that in a society such as ours, the freeing of such passions will necessarily primarily be to the benefit of the commodity form and the dulling of men's reason.

boogie Nights

>Hemingway is bad
end your life at your earliest convenience

I'm gonna say it

Attached: ahem.jpg (250x250, 10K)

hey guys, I've been in a relationship for 5 years now (living together for 3) and I've refused to have sex with her (I let her go down on me and I'll finger her but thats it). She is starting to get a little irritated and is pressuring me to have sex, is it time to drop her or should I give in?

just fuck her already, dude.

is this some kind of short form copy pasta?

Gonna marry her retard? What's your purpose for not having sex with her? If it's religious you're a retard for posturing about being a moralfag while cohabiting and having oral sex.

Why do you choose to think this way?

I'm 100% serious, I'm not even religious, and I do plan to start having kids in about 2 years. I had one previous gf who was a train wreck and the best thing about that relationship was I never went all the way with her, so it just feels natural not to

Are you just some kind of low libido asexual or something

Because it's the truth

Get off Yea Forums and go fuck her right now

I am solely interested in oral sex if thats what you are asking. Probably due to the fact that I have been viewing that kind of porn since I was roughly 11 years old

Explain how you know that to be true

>The nuclear family was invented in the 1950s
>"liberated" sexuality has never been tried
>more sex = better than
>anyone who disagrees is a right wing extremist
>didn't even have any book recs

This is your brain on hormonal birth control

she cried a bunch last night when we talked about it and is mad at me today so probably wouldn't even happen if I pursued it at the moment

lol you won't be once you stick it in her pussy

The nuclear family is a degenerated form of atomised social existence. Sorry fake "traditionalist"

I don't know man, she can get me off with only her mouth, no hands, plus shes a bit chubby which doesn't do much for me

Relationships involve compromises and doing things for your partner to make them happy. She wants to be fucked. Every inch of her body is crying out to be FUCKED. You haven't fucked her in YEARS. Do it faggot.

Ok, next time she tries let her seduce you. It'll make her feel confident if anything. No seriously, imagine being a girl and your boyfriend doesn't want to slap your ass and fuck you hard. That shit probably drives girls crazy. Go ahead and fuck your girlfriend at the first available opportunity.

I compromise a lot dude, you ever live with a woman before? I ask her to accommodate me in this one way and she makes a big fuss and tells all her friends and family about it

well two things, she finds my physical affection annoying or irritating because she doesn't feel sexy, so her "seducing" would probably be just star fishing on the bed. secondly, this would be the main topic of conversation for her with all her friends and family and there is something distinctly repulsive to me about that

SHE DOESN'T FEEL SEXY BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T FUCKED HER

SHE FINDS YOUR PHYSICAL AFFECTION IRRITATING BECAUSE IT LEADS TO NOTHING

All of you retards whining about the Libido Dominandi rec are butthurt degenerates. Sorry, he's right.

I mostly disagree with this, but Jones was pretty careful about the connections he drew with Barruel-Shelley era influences and doesn't come off as a "conspiracy theorist" at all. He does fail to develop his thesis that "sexual liberation is a [deliberate] form of political control" by "oligarchs" IMO.

The real meat of Libido Dominandi, I think, is the Freud->Reich->Bolshevism->1960s connection anyway.

Fortunately for you, sexual liberation is associated now and historically with lower birth rates.

*mostly agree, especially the "first draft of a great work" quip.

I just wanted to say I'm above all of you, that is all.

>she doesn't feel sexy
>this would be the main topic of conversation for her with all her friends and family and there is something distinctly repulsive to me about that

Sounds like those are two dources of your problem. Talk about them and work in them.

No, it's the traditional family structure in NW Europe.

There was a nuclear family "push" in the 1950s, but it was a mostly an attempt by the existing establishment to assimilate early-20th century immigrants to pre-existing Anglo social norms, not a whole-cloth manufacturing of novel social forms.

The combination of the nuclear family and *suburbia* might be toxic, but again that's a perversion of existing functional structures.

Attached: family types.jpg (903x1716, 210K)

I have expressed my displeasure with her discussing details of our sex life and my issues with her friends and she says it's unreasonable to expect her not to talk to her best friend and mom about her sex life. The sexy stuff may be due to depression or some other psychological/physiological problem and she may seek help on those grounds.

We actually have a very healthy relationship in all other ways, we get very sappy, we communicate about our feelings and other issues, but on this we aren't making any headway. Mainly because when I do feel open to it she does things like bring it up during a game of King's Cup at a friends place in front of literal acquaintances and so I then feel even less inclined to go all the way with her

This

You seem lost
go back to /gif/

I remember when I came to Yea Forums to escape ideologues, not indulge in them :)

The people stuck on the notion of the family unit being vital for society are stuck in the pitfall of viewing what they are familar or more comfortable with as being ideal.

Although I don't care much about that I disagree with you, familial structure seems pivotal to the general shape and motion of a society.

Submission

Pushkin

you have no evidence for your position

it's kinda reminded me of paraphore if you ever read that

imagine the smell

too bad

what but a family can properly raise a child?

>being a reichfag in 2019
fine
>not arguing for or showing the plausibility of reichfaggotry, just going UHHH SEX IS GOOD THo?
boring

guess which one you are

social programs and institutions that are medically and scientifically informed.

I know it might sound rather absurd, but if you think that you just don't have a comprehensive understanding of modern day AI and algorithms. despite what neoreactionaries and just plain brainlets would want you to believe, the human is very easily reducible to certain stimuli and mechanistic behaviors/systems. we are basically gene-machines and if you understand how genetics/evolution disciplines work, it will be easy as hell to engineer the proper environment for the maximum potential of propitious conditions for a child

actually, it will be infinitely superior to all of the morons currently raising children now. do you have any idea how outdated the idea of the family is? just how unqualified 99% of parents are? it will be a relief to have these new programs put into place that will be able to maximize the development of humanity.

to me it's really exciting to see how close we are to these kinds of things being a reality. we will progress more in the next few decades then we have in the past few centuries. really exciting stuff. we just can't cling to these sentimentally based systems that are fundamentally inadequate.

traditional families are exceedingly inadequate, and just plain inefficient in its design.

Attached: 4356475647475.png (807x805, 147K)

HAHAHA OH NOOO. NO NO NO. HAHA NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OH NO

Attached: 1481857430532.jpg (225x126, 4K)

Attached: 235425345535.png (722x777, 138K)

Attached: 2341242424.png (722x603, 127K)

Yeah, that's gonna be a yikes from me.
Why would you possibly trust a (presumably) government-run AI to raise a child with the child's best interests a heart? Literally why not simply replace all humans (except for the hyper elite technoaristocrats) with organic robots, bioengineer them to be subservient. Sounds good! Thanks daddy government! This is the future I spent my free time advocating for on 4channel.org/lit

>Literally why not simply replace all humans (except for the hyper elite technoaristocrats) with organic robots, bioengineer them to be subservient
this is what's going to happen

why do you think it is a bad thing? think of how utter disgusting and evil most people are. there are no rational arguments against the transhumanizing of humanity.

you might want to look into the actual track record of "social programs and institutions that are medically and scientifically informed" have at raising children

p.s. if you come for my kids I will kill you

> think of how utter disgusting and evil most people are
Most people besides you, right? Or are you included?

I wonder, in this utopia, is there a self? Do these hyper-moral robots of the common good ever self-examine? If they do, what do they want, and why do they want it? What happens if their desires are at odds with each other? If their desires can never be at odds with one another, then what makes them desires?

If there is no self, then why have the robots at all? What is the purpose of an extinction of the self where a non-self lives on?

Because I'm human and it's not in my interests to be subsumed by the borg.
Life is an end to itself. People should have the right to self determination even if they often misuse that right.

I'm not strictly against transhumanization, but I explicitly and fervently denounce the framework you have proposed.

There's a good book which talks about the family as a revolutionary institution, one that naturally resists the power of church and state, and how the erosion of the family is a dangerous loss of a crucial bulwark against the domination of higher power structures. I can't remember what it was called now, but its thesis seems particularly relevant in the face of your psycho technocrat fantasy. You have a sentimentalism of your own. These proto-glass palaces of insomniac rationality and sterile order were already tried out and demolished in the 20th century.

>I wonder, in this utopia, is there a self?
why would you cling to a dull concept like "self" when it is quite literally nothing but the momentary mechanism by which certain evolutionary needs found their expression?

life moves on. evolution never ceases. old forms and systems are left behind. this is an example of that.

>If there is no self, then why have the robots at all? What is the purpose of an extinction of the self where a non-self lives on?
these are teleological queries. there is no teleology in nature.

>you might want to look into the actual track record of "social programs and institutions that are medically and scientifically informed" have at raising children
have you? and you can't compare them to old 1960s models. you have to understand how sophisticated AI and algorithmic systems have become. it is truly a a beautiful thing. takes my breath away sometimes.

>p.s. if you come for my kids I will kill you
yeah, real great solution you've got there, grug. but let's be honest you will never reproduce in your life so we're all good

>Life is an end to itself.
another teleological claim, albeit autoteleological

>People should have the right to self determination even if they often misuse that right.
this is a normative claim based on emotional demands. i.e. inadequate.

your insistence on "assisting" the process of evolution is itself normative and teleological and emotional

Make a rational argument for transhumanization.

*as you've proposed it, featuring bioslaves and technofeudalism

We are talking with Chairman Shenji-yang here bros
youtube.com/watch?v=7gXLO_HiuLc

go ahead and believe all that. we shall see what plays out, but when eternity arrives, remember my post.

This board has really gone to shit.

not assisting, just letting it run its course and recognizing its previous manifestations for what they are: transitory phenomena

the family is an interesting artifact of certain historical circumstances and conditions, but to insist on its perpetuity is decidedly closed-thinking and will very soon (I would argue is already) be butting up against the actual reality of things.

it's fear that keeps most people clamoring to continue clinging to these outdated and inadequate systems/modes of existing. it's familiarity too I guess.

one has to be brave and fearless. something something Nietzsche.

from a purely rational point of view the elimination of the inaccuracy and abuse of the human element is quantifiably and qualitatively superior to the current state of existence. raw computing of the data more than justifies it let alone the actual natural processes that are imposing it regardless of the irrational resistance it encounters from certain human agents (i.e. /pol/ types, ideologues of all types, neoreactionaries, nationalists, etc)

eternity is always present. it is the now. there's nothing "after".

or maybe it doesn't exist at all. I find some neopythagorean stuff kind of interesting. erroneous but engaging to contemplate.

There is no such thing as "raw computing of the data". Even "AI" are designed by "irrational" humans.

i too am excited for mass eugenics at the hands of the scientifically informed elites that gave us profit oriented ecocide and endless wars in the middle east

>from a purely rational point of view the elimination of the inaccuracy and abuse of the human element is quantifiably and qualitatively superior to the current state of existence
Qualitatively according to what values? Quantitatively according to what metrics? You've denounced my claim of freedom and right to self determination as normative emotional claims, but you go on to say that 'raw computing of data' is preferable. How is that not a normative emotional claim?
>raw computing of the data more than justifies
Again, how is that any different? It sounds to me like your rejecting my values, replacing them with the values of your choice and claiming your values are the only rational ones, an indefensible claim.

You're fucking autistic, user. Just fuck her, you idiot

Intimacy is one of the foundations of a healthy relationships, and it doesn't get much more intimate than proper sex. How have you compromised when you haven't even done the bare minimum?

>appealing to an ideal of progress predicated on the very lifeworld you're out to destroy

tech lemming fuck boy

I would argue that it can be qualitatively measured by, again, referral to the pure statistics of the data. this isn't an emotional or traditionally normative claim because I am not invoking the domain of morality, rather, the unbiased, inhuman mathematics of the numbers involved.

I criticized your claim as emotional because you referred to concepts like "self determination" and justified it in the face of the misuse that would arise from the necessary freedom to pursue this idea. putting aside the whole idea of "self" as being rather ridiculous in the face of modern understandings of existence, the idea that you are willing to "put up with misuses" solely to preserve an imperfect system is highly emotional in nature. how is it anything else?

it is a reflexive urge. you can't admit that there might be a better way (which doesn't involve you or I or any of the context with which we are familiar) because of fear or misplaced emotions/values

it's not an ideal it's a fact. things are progressing.

you cannot keep up with them.

you know how in "the wild" the slower animals get eaten by predators and eventually go extinct because they couldn't evolve at the rate of the others? well, welcome to that pov.

you're antithetical attitude towards those capable of keeping up with modern advancements in the STEM fields of studies is nothing but the pure, impotent rage of the prey as the predator snaps its jaws around its inadequate neck. it's a boring mechanism, btw. you'd save yourself a lot of stress if you just accepted you have been pre-selected to die out before the others

>rather, the unbiased, inhuman mathematics of the numbers involved.
You're still applying value to certain kinds of quantities. Mathematical conclusions are inert without a human mind to impose judgement on whether they're desirable or undesirable. You are deriving an ought from an is.

Loads of shit right there.

Hyper-sexualization is actually a regression. There is nothing progressive about it.

Less people are having sex, but those who have, have it more.

fake news, people are having less sex now than ever
reminder to look for sources beyond nu4chan brainwashing and your precious feefees

Precisely. You're imposing value judgements without acknowledging them.
By what measure are your qualitative measurements better? More efficient? Are you saying efficiency is preferable to inefficiency? That's a value judgment. And so on and so on.

>Mathematical conclusions are inert without a human mind to impose judgement on whether they're desirable or undesirable
no mathematics are just a way for *us* to understand certain processes "out there". these events or elements or what have you exist without us and outside of us and mathematics is just out method of articulating them in a way that can be used by us. a model that refers to a real reality but *the model itself* which, as you say, is inert without a human mind to interpret is not the actuality itself. just an arbitrary articulation of it.

this is what algorithms and AI do: they function using the arbitrary models that humans have devised *but they do it without the subjective condition that we humans have* and therefore encounter the genuine reality in far superior way than we would. existence examined and determined by these systems (AIs, algorithms) can be assessed far more efficiently then.

btw, 99% of all culture is already predicated by purely algorithmic processes. algorithms communicating with algorithms and churning out algorithmically deduced conclusions/contents for xyz. that's why there is so much apparent turmoil atm: the human element is coming into contact with the transhuman element and buckling. it's cataclysmic and pretty cool, honestly.

Just a question to all these "sex is good" fags: don't you ever feel lonely?

Care to respond?

ghengis khan.

>Are you saying efficiency is preferable to inefficiency? That's a value judgment.
this is what nature declares, immune to any human opinion or feeling on the matter. it is also the law of mechanism: the maximum amount of profit with the least amount of effort. in other words, efficiency > inefficiency.

this is not a declarative claim or a moral claim but an observation of a law of reality; of the history of evolution and the deterministic universe. the problem is things can get confusing since whatever we as subjects interact with we inevitably entangle ourselves in. the idea is to abstract the reality from the subjective perception of it, and the manifestation of this process finds its highest efficiency (for now) in AI and algorithms. which is why humans are now being phased out

it is inevitable that humanity would be transcended, otherwise you'd be positing that humanity is some ultimate apotheosis that was intentionally designed for some specific purpose; i.e. theism.

the work of today is to reassess all history and current events with the keen insight of the actuality of the transcendence of humanity in light of the fact that humanity is not and never was the apex, the end. this idea has found many different versions of expression throughout the years; isn't it exactly what Nietzsche said? of course everyone on Yea Forums will cream themselves and uphold the idea of the ubermensch, but when faced with its reality they flinch. if Nietzsche had had access to the vocabulary of our times, he would undoubtedly be using the exact same terms that I and others use. Nietzsche just couldn't have foreseen "Tech" as we now know it

a cool and clear head is what's needed. everything is being reoriented, redefined. the game is to keep on your feet for as long as you can

>this is what nature declares, immune to any human opinion or feeling on the matter. it is also the law of mechanism: the maximum amount of profit with the least amount of effort. in other words, efficiency > inefficiency.
embarrassing. a human theatrical reading of nature. these only mean anything to you because of your human values. you might just as well venerate entropy.

ah, I left out a sentence meant for this section

>the problem is things can get confusing since whatever we as subjects (...)
I meant to add: thus, what is a value judgment to a subject is also pure, plain, unbiased reality for existence. there can be value judgments that correspond and express (almost as if by mistranslation) an element of real, and there are value judgments that have no correspondence whatsoever.

it is very tricky because it is very intricate. you say something that is in subjective systems a value judgment while simultaneously nothing of the kind in actuality. AIs are all about circumventing this inefficiency.

sorry about that

>there's nothing wrong with sex. sex is good and everyone having more of it is also a good

Right that's why promiscuous people get STDs, all of which would be more common and several of which would be much more dangerous without modern medicine. 1 million sub Saharan Africans die of AIDS every year, but remember, those old fuddy duddy people in the bygone days with their stigma of promiscuity, they were just stupid jerks with "arbitrary" morality. What rubes.

Maybe our enlightened friends in the gay district of San Francisco or New York can pioneer an anti-biotic resistant superbug for us.

>this is what nature declares

Attached: 1549824165859.jpg (251x242, 13K)

>people are having less sex now than ever
Cope. You mean sub 6/10 men. Everyone else is fucking constantly. While the less desirableness consume an absurd amount of porn and fall into increasingly degenerate fetishes.

>yeah i dont want to teach my children what is valuable, let them hear what the government wants them to believe
literal beta stance, i really hope you'll never start a family

Attached: 1556417499492.jpg (400x507, 27K)

>why would you cling to a dull concept like "self" when it is quite literally nothing but the momentary mechanism by which certain evolutionary needs found their expression?
lol you're going to get memed into killing yourself

>life moves on. evolution never ceases. old forms and systems are left behind. this is an example of that.
Is that what we're seeing? That these "new systems" have greater evolutionary (i.e. reproductive) fitness? Because it doesn't look like it to me.

>these are teleological queries. there is no teleology in nature.
even if I grant this premise, you're still imposing your own telos.

>you can't compare them to old models
Newtonian materialism is truly a thing of beauty!
>French revolution

Historical materialism is truly a thing of beauty!
>communism

Materialism + computers is truly a thing of beauty!
>fill in the blank

>let's be honest you will never reproduce in your life so we're all good
too late

>this is a normative claim based on emotional demands. i.e. inadequate.
literally all you're doing is substituting "things I don't like/want" for "teleology" and then axiomatically defining it as incorrect.

ok this is bait, no one is this stupid

>all these cumbrains in this thread who cannot imagine a life free of their carnal shackles

Attached: cumbrain.png (982x717, 185K)

This is what happens when you build your worldview around edgy anime. I guess it beats being a school shooter.

sex aint everything

but its somethigng and sometihngs make a whole thgn

Everyone gets lonely

>have gf
>don't have sex with her
lmao what

Fornication is a sin.

Not everything is about sex buddy. :3

Speaking of which, though, Butterfly if you happen to be up this late I will let you post and tell me if you masturbated to me yesterday. Be honest.

it's still morally preferable to masturbation. immanuel kant viewed masturbation as more immoral than suicide. maybe you're just gay?

i know, i don't think that everything is about sex. sex is just a basic human need, like eating or defecation. it can be spiritual though, and sacred under marriage

Cmon Butterfly just say yes or no if you masturbated to me yesterday. Time to be honest :3

definitely not gay. I fuck my gf's tits and mouth, just not her puss

ok well it sounds like you have some weird fetish going on that you need to sort out. i'm a circumcised jew myself and we're all about pussy and coming in the pussy. freud and judaism would consider only fucking your girlfriend's mouth and tits as a perversion, just saying. it's a fetish. do you suffer from mental illness at all?

Lets go butterfly respond to this and only this. Otherwise you are not allowed to post :3

>more people are allowed to feel intimacy. more people are able to engage in what had previously been only allowable to husband and wife
This actually isn't true.

>I just want an AI ti raise my children
That a yaiks from me daug even worse than brave new world .
If you want to see the horror of government taking children because they belong to the state watch a documentary about Norway's child care.

>megal boyle
>source: Yea Forums

HAHAHAHA

>WE LIVE IN A TIME WHEN PEOPLE ARE HAVING UNBELIEVABLE AMOUNTS OF SEX
No, we live in a time when people are having less and less of it. That's the paradox of hypersexualization.

>the spermposter has gotten so impotent and barren that he doesn't even bother posting his handful of images anymore

Sad.

>this is what nature declares, immune to any human opinion or feeling on the matter. it is also the law of mechanism: the maximum amount of profit with the least amount of effort. in other words, efficiency > inefficiency.
Nature is not really that efficient and making a class that it's all about efficiency is baseless.

Pornography by Andrea Dworkin
Lazy by Peter Sotos
Reflections of Violence by Georges Sorel
Soviet Literature by Gorky
Complete works of Bataille

Sex and masturbation just feel better when they're an occasional thing. I don't need any other justification than that, although they do exist.

Attached: 1546394436643.png (640x480, 6K)

Oh I'm sorry. You thought just because this board is more lefty we're going to go along with your liberal bourgeois idiocy? I hate fags like you the most. You just pretend to be a leftist to signal, it's fucking infuriating. If you had even the slightest understanding of Marxian theory you'd literally kill yourself.

>you'd save yourself a lot of stress if you just accepted you have been pre-selected to die out before the others

>the game is to keep on your feet for as long as you can

Which is it? Face it, you want to be a self. You might find human nonexistence more efficient, but look at you pouring the fruits of your existence into the task of explaining your own efficiency. You, sitting here, arguing that a more efficient existence will come along and replace you is essentially, according to "the pure statistics of the data," inefficient. What machine could replace such an argument?

Efficiency is natural law, but inefficiency is human law. The war between the two remains unsettled.

Aren't people actually not having that much sex?

Not if you include the hand. People are having more releases than any time ever.

Crime and Punishment.

youtube

been watching porn since I was 11 years old. probably just perverted in the technical sense

interesting... have you seen the movie don john? maybe you're not interested in sex because you'd rather masturbate to pornography or something. i bet that if you stopped watching porn, you'd want to have sex

I want to have oral sex, and when I do it is extremely pleasurable and satisfying

i went through a phase where i only wanted oral sex too, but i think it's because i was afraid to have sex, afraid of where it'd take me, the weapon i'd become... i'd suggest reading freud's three essays on the theory of sexuality and growing up a bit user. i'm not one of those "have sex" guys but i think what you're going through is perverse and a little wrong...

Attached: 81iN+xN-T5L.jpg (1650x2475, 403K)

in what sense? I can't think of anything in particular other than Sonya ofc but her soul didn't really degenerate as such

I think part of the trouble is no one has a based theory of sexuality. Because it is rooted in the lizard brain and is one of the oldest functions of our species, it is difficult to form a coherent way to integrate it into a highly cultured setting like a long term monogamous relationship in the modern day. I do like Freud and will look more into his theory of sexuality, but I think the main hurtle for me is the fact that I feel deeply that this should be a private matter between a single man and a single woman, so my gf's insistence on speaking of these matters (in detail) to others (one of which being my best friend's gf who then tells him) is very troubling

bluepilled degenerate

Old bad
New good
This is the only rationalization for blatant depravity

reading this just tells me men only love to rape and women cant think logically besides always wanting to have sex

>this is what nature declares, immune to any human opinion or feeling on the matter
Fucking Christ, user.

Attached: 1541596196609.gif (257x200, 1.24M)

Hey, how do I stop jacking off? I don't like it.

>bluepilled degenerate
Only an incel would say something like this, why don't you just go outside?

Christ do you ever just imagine what the sexual market of a typical US college campus is like and then realise how utterly alien it is to 99% of humanity? Not just current humanity but all of human history. It's absurd.

Attached: 464px-Self-Portrait_with_Lace_Collar_c1929_Rembrandt.jpg (464x600, 39K)

*SNIIIIIIFFFFF*

Aah so good.

Who is the spermposter?

Attached: 1553608957009.jpg (5152x3438, 984K)

>typical US college campus
There's greater variance than you seem to let on.

post more feet please

Many men aren't

it's 2019 brah everyone knows everything about everyone, it's obscene. grow a pair and fuck your girlfriend you little faggot ass bitch. i'd saw off a leg for a girlfriend goddamnit

>I'd saw off a leg for a girlfriend
It is not hard. You go outside and you talk to women.

You could do it from your computer as well, but it isn't as fun unless you're part of an insular culture or something :3

>talk to women
in 2019? what are you, crazy?

shouldn't you be asking for scientific studies, not books

You can take my high protein meat diet from my cold dead hands veganus

>the arbitrary systems set up in say the 1950s when the myth of the nuclear family was being sold to everyone
I agree, let's go back to traditional family. Think about it. Traditional families - fertility over 4, nuclear families - fertility slightly over 2, post-nuclear families - fertility dropping below 1.

...

so quirky!!

You take back what you said about The King, now.

>sub 6/10 men
..so most men..

Based

Fuck man, people can't just stand someone being sex active and still being an intellectual...

It's almost like the women's discussing meme (if he disagrees with me, he's a incel, faggot), but at large scale (he has lot of sex, must be degenerate, depraved)

the bait

The thing about sex as thermometer/conditional of a relationship is that it's a value of different relevance to the mates.

I mean, typically, men value more sex in a relationship than women. That's come from both a social bias as a biological bias (testosterone is ahell of a drug - just remember that women in menopause use test to increase their libido)

So in the end, it have to be used with other conditions to calculate how stable/happy the relationship is

>I came to Yea Forums to escape ideologues
cringe

Finally a brother of mine

Yes you bootlicker

>escape ideologues
Lmfao what? Yea Forums is full of far right ideologues. It's literally a white nationalist website

Please stay away from children.

t. redditor who came here post-2016

I'm not a redditor you fucking fag. Are you seriously denying Yea Forums is white nationalist?

this except the endorsement of capitalism (fuck off)

Yes. Just because you reddit /pol/tard cancer spread everywhere recently doesn't mean the site is white nationalist

lmao such cope

>Perhaps the state is itself a transitory manifestation that leads to ????
Yeah you are not actually wrong about that.
"The practice of monogamy distinguished the Greeks and Romans from other ancient civilizations, in which elite males typically had multiple wives. Greco-Roman monogamy may have arisen from the egalitarianism of the democratic and republican political systems of the city-states."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_ancient_Rome
Essentially the state led to the manifestation of the family due to egalitarian ideology the Romans held onto, in which everyone deserves to be equal from one to another.
Like another user said, or I believe many of them have suggested, it truly is a regression.

about 80 percent if we follow that one math rule

There's no doubt that /pol/, Yea Forums, and all the other major boards are far right but even more left leaning boards like Yea Forums are dominated by far right users. I can't tell you how many times I've seen traditionalist thinkers shilled here. Any thread discussing minority issues will invariably be bombarded by IQ and crime stats. The word nigger is commonplace. The one black poster always gets attacked for being black because people "can't believe that a nigger reads". Misogyny is prevalent.
If you don't see these things then you're literally unaware of your surroundings.

That only works if you're attractive.

The poltard cries out for mods as he shitposts

Allow me to repeat myself: Just because you reddit /pol/tard cancer spread everywhere recently doesn't mean the site is white nationalist

The nuclear family is just a pretended to take women voting rights away from me

>just because you infected me with a cold does not mean I have a cold

Tabbing and scrolling through macro spreadsheets
Us wagies work hard for AOC's feet
One of her toes, for the senses a feast
Her fans click cash by keyboards very greased
Alexandria ascendant, on their quest
Fueled by craved femdom, taboo, unaddressed
Soaking her peds in citrus, soft and dainty
Her heels emit orange and lime, faintly
Even Heaven favors her feet by a thread
AOC's tootsies reek with dank street cred
Leading to Interns and pages to boast
Spied in her gym shoe locker, Seth Rich's ghost
Mouthfuls of socks, a mask of her Asics
Seth's ghost lurked in that sweaty oasis
Living on AOCs feet puff by puff
Heavesent there to balance an end so rough
Her sole's odors linger long, like fromage
Hence her Bikram nickname, a "Cheesey" homage
Titsguys, Assmen oughta get the drone
Footsexuals tug their fastest while prone
AOC's feet forge dark shops and stores
Vending her shavings, sebum from pores
A dash of her dried skin into my latte
Brews her flavors strong with nary decay
Daydreaming all throughout brunch
About AOCs milky tea soles' scrunch
Her tootsies so hot, she's never to gloat
Often overhead to fight 'Rican bloat
Her yoga feet flex with supple finesse
Then AOC dons Chuiquita Headdress
Above her LGBT serape
Footsexual oaths sing woke agape
Enduring all abuse, every henpeck
Even cock mileage measured by Parsec
Dutifully reminded without pain
The universe dispenses such scarce gain

Attached: kino tootsies.jpg (3456x5184, 2.61M)

pol and b are satire

Look at you try to taxonomize a Cambrian fisheries enthusiast seminar, you shithead!

/thread

This is just one big cope thread.

Replace it with Thighs and we're good

Eroticism is a release and this can have, albeit brief, deleterious effects on other higher faculties. I think in many cases, "good sex," may do the opposite, invigorating rather than draining. But modern society really pushes sex as entertainment, sex as status, even sex as an app. Tinder, Pornography and brightly patterned yoga pants taunting you in every check-out line, these all cohere into a fabric of raunchy in your face sexuality from which it can be a challenge to depart in an urban setting. If sex isn't your highest priority, this can be at least distracting if not draining. There is a kind of numbness or boredom that sets in when the only salient sexuality are these anemic modern versions, "fapping," "hooking up," "poly." In truth, sex is a holistic exercise at its best, but this requires the participants keep their receptivity to sex primed and not so jaded that they miss out on this fundamental part of being human. But I don't think "sexual liberation," is truly the problem. I think we have deep, convulsant economic problems that affect what we invest in, how we see the future, what we fear, what we pour our faith into, cumulatively all of these act as inputs to not only wanting sex but how we want "sex." Many degraded modern people have been sold that "sex" is something they acquire by clicking and scrolling and fondling themselves. In Western countries, for instance, masturbation is celebrated as part of rugged individualism, when in reality its a salve for the wounds of capital inflicted upon men's psyches, obliterating their abilities to provide, their capacities for contribution, replacing them with calliopes or illiterate indigenous and with great fanfare. In such a context, sex becomes an absurd situation. And to have that ever present sexual feather boa tickling your face whenever you go outside, turn on a device or even close your eyes and let your highly conditioned mind wander, I think there its easy to grasp how exhausting and seemingly pointless all sexual energies appear.

>being conservatively minded and suspicious of the hypersexualized reification of culture and life
>must be sexually inadequate and resentful lmao

Have you ever begun to consider that there might be things more meaningful in life than chasing the sexual marketplace for the vision of happiness / ‘new horizons’ you’ve been sold by the modern cultural-capitalist sexcult? I am not rejecting your worldview out of slave-ish ressentiment, but of a wish to transcend it. Might be hard to comprehend that others don’t find nihilist hedonism satisfying in the long run and it’s not because they hate women or can’t get sex. I do believe in love by the way, but it has a narrow place for survival in our world today.

that pic is true. volcel spend time judging sexual people and only pretend to read

lol at all these responses. It's not something I would do with my kid, but you're not really wrong.

Feynman

yikes

Attached: 1479233074273.jpg (1594x2578, 312K)

>2016: guillotines lmao!!!
>2019: this

trash book. don't read if you're not an anglo
lmao, I don't even know where to start, it's so fucking whack holy shit

reminder that fetishits are maladaptive bugmen, bugmen in the most literal sense; oversocialized urbanites

cf. the whole part of freud that has been consciously forgotten

Stop being concerned with how morons ruin their lives and yours will be much better for it.

>tfw dont even like sex anymore and just do it now because its "expected"

Accompanied by physical inactivity.
Protein is great if you're active. Stimulates you. If you're lazy though, you'll just jack more.

I have jerked off several times today. A couple of times to porn, once to an instagram photo and the rest to my imagination. I have become a slave to sensation. I caught in a hedonist trap. All I do is eat, shit, sleep, jerk off and browse Youtube and this shithole website. I constantly crave crass stimulation - I have ceased to be a personality anymore and am now merely an accumulation of nerve endings

I've been thinking about taking anti-androgens for a while now. Not because of any moral or religious apprehension about sex; I just don't think I'll ever be able to attract a mate. Why subject myself to miserable yearning for women when I can just kill my sex drive altogether and focus on more edifying activities like reading or learning languages? I've also thought about getting my dick cut off entirely but I'm not sure of the procedure or, honestly, the effect that that entails (I don't want to be an invalid.) There's gotta be some way to become asexual that doesn't come with deleterious side-effects.
One worry I do have about this is that I'm not sure whether I should believe all the malarkey about the wonders of sex. 'Have sex' is a meme here, but it does emanate from the wider cultural discourse about sex, which presents it as a magical and life-changing experience that will assuage your anger and still your sardonic soul. One wonders whether this anger stems from libido itself, in which case sex would be palliative.
I'm 22 now and still a virgin, unbelievably ugly, incomprehensibly inept; and as such my chances with women are negligible. I have to think of a solution soon lest I end up raping somebody.

this

It's overrated. In fact society WANTS you to believe that sex is some life-changing, spiritually awakening experience. It's not, it's just two naked apes rubbing genitals until fluids are exchanged. However, the powers that be want you to crave it, to focus entirely in its pursuit, and to make you feel miserable if you can't get it, hence virgin-shaming. It's all a ploy to make you miserable, distracted and ineffectual.

Attached: aquamarine of maldives.jpg (1680x1050, 314K)

Alright lemme post once more

DO NOT READ LIBIDO DOMINANDI

literal trash. the author can't write for shit, it's painful. might be good enough for anglos

Or do, download a pdf and check out the first few chapters lmfao.

Name one thing wrong with other than "It's hard to read."

Sex, like anything else, is what you make of it. So it could very well be "just two naked apes rubbing genitals until fluids are exchanged" if you want it to be. It could also be a "life-changing, spiritually awakening experience" if you want it to be. Or, it could be a number of other things, depending on your perspective. A recreational pastime, a hobby, a kind of art that can be mastered, a kind of game that can be played, a duty, a necessity, a way to connect with someone on a unique level, etc. It can be any of these things. It all depends on your perspective and how you choose to interpret it.

Mein Kampf.

fuck you, now everytime i want to browse Yea Forums i have to see a fucking stinky girls foot in my face. why cant you act like a normal person and stop making me feel like a monkey rubbing shit all over itself.

r u me

You know, there's this thing called 'prostitution'.

>among such stimuli are a high-protein meat diet (accompanied by physical inactivity)
>(accompanied by physical inactivity)
>(accompanied by physical inactivity)
>(accompanied by physical inactivity)
>(accompanied by physical inactivity)
>(accompanied by physical inactivity)
>(accompanied by physical inactivity)

>mnnf uuuh i want cummies uhhh give me cummies please aaaa
nice argument retard