Monogamonists BTFO!

youtube.com/watch?v=t07cXwpGZWI
The entire concept of monogamy only exists to reduce std transmissions, nothing more; but as it turns out, the non-safe sexual practices of monogamous people could create STDS!

Not being in a relationship is good, because you'll have safe sex by using condoms vaginally and anally, compared to monogamous people who don't, and often end up with a child as the consequence.

Besides, coupled people cheat up to 57% of the time, and one in five actively seek a new partners - it's practically the norm!

Non-monogamous people are more functional, satisfied, committed, passionate, non-jealous and trusting.

TRADITIONALISTS ON SUICIDE WATCH!

>being a sodomite
Hell is forever!

>do you see these people are illiterated backwarded cave monkeys who had no understanding of anything?
>yeah! lets be like them! its progressive

anybody who doesn't understand the concept of a marriage between one man and one woman under an oath and faith should get executed asap

I love How they show the big burly Chad getting all the women. That's what all women want at the end of the day, they hate any male who isn't a turbo Chad and want to deny them their right to breed or be loved.

All sexual liberation amounts to is a war on Beta males and a return to primitive tribal life styles.

>memeflag
>retarded opinions
opinion discarded
>Besides, coupled people cheat up to 57% of the time, and one in five actively seek a new partners - it's practically the norm!
hang them both and be done with it

>only exists to reduce std transmissions, nothing more

man I feel sorry for you, you must have had a terrible childhood

How is the line "Back when were savages it was normal" good?

I thought we were supposed to distance ourselves as much as possible from the stone age as we progress.

>Faith
You had me up to that part

It was made to entice the men to stay to feel community so they would fight in armies and build cities. Also a better means of inheritance.

>The entire concept of monogamy only exists to reduce std transmissions
Wrong.
If beta men aren't invested in society they won't participate on it. Then you're stuck in an alpha with a harem living a a hunter-gatherer stone age pseudo-society.

You haven't been paying attention to the 78d chess my friend

They think that social constructs are inherently bad.
Not really, but that's the excuse they use to justify their positions.

institutional monogamy isn't to reduce STDs, it's to extract more labor out of the men in a society.

men with wives and kids will work drastically harder than lone men with no dependents, so civilizations that enforce monogamy have a MUCH large percentage of married men, get more shit done, and outcompete tribalist polygyny-practicing competitors.

>They think that social constructs are inherently bad.
Not entirely. What they recognize is that human behaviour tends to occur in fairly predictable patterns, and the progressives rule this as being a "social construct" - that it arises from morals and pressures we enforce on each other.

They are correct that it's a "construct", but it's a naturally occurring one, routed in our genes that manifests itself to create societies, and governs us through genes to propagate those societies and keep them tight nit.

Where they are incorrect is that they think they can create a parallel "social construct", to replace the natural one, and change human behaviour into what they want. The problem they have however, is that once humans are removed from an environment that brainwashes them with "progressive values", they'll always naturally default back to the natural social order, that's a consequence of their programming; that being heterosexuality, conservative believes and monogamy.

>this is what degenerate sodomites actually believe

faggot

Well put.

It's actually quite alarming, because ASAP science typically achieves close to a million views per video. I can't speak for their audience demographics, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it's mostly teenagers, who will likely swallow everything these gays tell them with question.

The real danger is, since these views are now mainstream and not publicly contested due to political correctness, this information will change and be carried by its viewers for a long time to come, perhaps until the end of their days, until conflicting opinions are presented to them to reflect upon.

Wait until the end and see the two """men""" who make the content.

>They are correct that it's a "construct", but it's a naturally occurring one, routed in our genes that manifests itself to create societies, and governs us through genes to propagate those societies and keep them tight nit.
Genes do not determine behaviour directly.

>Where they are incorrect is that they think they can create a parallel "social construct", to replace the natural one, and change human behaviour into what they want.
No the idea is that by revealing it as a social construct people will no longer feel forced to follow it and alternate lifestyles can be accepted

Its true but back to r9k for you.

Not really.
It's just a reproduction strategy, which relates with our biological strategies.
Men have a higher mortality rate than women now, and they always did, more so in the past.
Men going out to fight for their land and women is nothing new. When go send out, only some return, and we can't depend on monogamy to replace the numbers lost. And we can because we can ejaculate several times during one day, and women can ovulate only once per month, and it takes 9+ months more until they are ready to breed again.
In times of societal stress, behaviour changes from monogamy to polygamy
During the good times, society becomes monogamous because it's a better strategy in a stressless envionrnment.

We can see other species change their sexual behaviours too, depending on the levels of stress.

Of course (((they))) don't want you to relate monogamy or polygamy to biology or reproduction strategies anymore, since it's just a way of saying "I want to be a degenerate" and being a degenerate is not a reproduction strategy, therefore monogamy and polygamy should not be applied when describing the sexual degeneracy.

Or rather the betas will just slaughter the chad together and rape all the women.

thats not how hegemonic masculinity works. Typically betas try to assert dominance over other betas by trying to conform to the hegemonic masculinity and belittle others that are further away from it than they are, a thing known as hypermasculinity

Stop projecting, who said that?

Monogamy is bad because it causes conflicts, People will always cheat and, because we were not meant to be with a single person forever. And the stigma caused by cheating is also bad, just because someone cheats, doesn't mean they hate their other partner, everyone would win if we accept love.

Monogamy ensures that every person gets a mate. This creates many happy and well balanced people.

Polygamy just has Chad take all the women. This just leads to the bottom 90% of men being NEETs or spree shooters.

>Of course I wanna go back to the civilisational level of nomads, cattleherders and hunter gatherers a thousand generations of farmers are wrong!

fuck Bonobos, this is a world for chimps now.

>Genes do not determine behaviour directly.
and yet we rule seeking out a mate, providing for them, inseminating them and rearing their offspring as being ingrained in our genes; we rule Europeans incessant reductionism to form more abstract, convoluted yet precise models of reality as being ingrained in our genes; but everything else isn't?

Undoubtedly people will be reflexive to and a product of their environment, but the manner in which they do so is entirely predicated upon their construct, what makes them up, their programming.

There are predispositions to addictive behaviour, destructive and constructive behaviour, to sexual extroversion and introversion; it is true that who a human will ultimately become is greater than 80% determinate on their genome, and the remaining is left up to gamble on the environment. People are born to be runners, labourers, intellects; we are not blank slates.

>will no longer feel forced to follow it and alternate lifestyles can be accepted
>"lifestyles"
From an reproductive standpoint, all I see is the advocation for hedonistic ideologies that are ultimately not conducive to the reproduction of future generations, and are degenerative upon those that do come about.

Progressives, in their own nihilist abstractification, rationalized their own mortality as being best served gratifying themselves, since their is no perceivable greater order; the very irony being they created an order to live by, only it's composed of the least desirable traits of humanity
>no delayed gratification
>no long term planning
>nothing is sacred
>there shouldn't even be a standard

>thats not how hegemonic masculinity works
Yes, that's called a dominance hierarchy. Masculine traits can manifest themselves in many different forms, it doesn't just have to be brute violence.
>a thing known as hypermasculinity
Or as I call it, being the best in show.

Just because you make something happening, doesn't mean it's in my genes. If i decide to eat shit, cut my dick off and say it's a vagina. Doesn't mean it's our "Genetics" or "Human nature" or whatever fallacy you Anglos love saying

Yeah and ever further in the past we would exclusive mate through opportunistic rape. See a female? Pin it down and fuck it. So natural and progressive, right?

Or create something entirely new.

>Masculine traits can manifest themselves in many different forms, it doesn't just have to be brute violence.
No, thats kind of the point of masculinity. Its a set group of behaviours and actions, there is no variety of hegemonic masculinity, there is only one hegemonic masculinities and many other subservient masculinities

Who the fuck is talking the further down the past you moron?

Amen!

Every single polygamist I've ever met has been an emotional wreck of a human.

Just because you liberal beta fags enjoy watching "your" girl get destroyed by tyrone jamal and deshawntelius on a weekly basis doesn't mean it's the norm. You're just a fucking cuck

You need an entirely new societal frame for that and I dont see how the world is that different yet in comparison to the past. It is very different in certain highly industrial spots yes!
The best parts of europe, America and the whole of Japan come to my mind, albeit id only belief the latter would dare to try something like whatgrown state-raised babies (Or they force babys upon their hikkies and childless Neets to make them contribute as nannys and raise their state's sons..). But in most countries on earth people are still in a situation that makes the nuclear family the most stable option for a lifestyle in a stratified society with moderatly sized cities, towns and villages.

*vatgrown
Silly me.
Maybe China too. But thats not a direction a westener wants to look at.

in the past
>chads would have many women while betas were very violent and raging with test, war was predominant
now
>peaceful monogamy, chads fuck most and betas take care of the kids
well atleast in the past chads too care of their fucking brat kids

*vatgrown
Silly me.
Maybe China too. But thats not a direction a westener wants to look at as theyd probably pull of Lord Shangs idea of "family" planning 2.0

Don't let this place blackpill you. Western women are fucked, yes, but that's because they're raised in a culture that has abandoned spirituality, where promiscuity is seen as a virtue. I read an article about women in their Mid-30's and how they start panicking about their lack of family and stability and I can only feel pity for them because of how culture has led them astray.

This actually is a pretty good thing even for less than chad individuals.

Let me tell you what i've done.

My wife is a 4/10 at best but she's very charismatic. She friends all these "model" suicide girl rejects and invites them into our home. So we fuck 7/10 to 9/10 girls on the regular. I've had a live in girlfriend for 2 years now actually.

>I just hurt the person im supposed to love
>this doesn't mean i hate them just that i enjoy hurting them

this is you

The one man who got 85% of the women, personally killed 85% of the men. Imagine if you had to kill 10 men just to get a chance to fuck.

Who cares about ~societal frames~ rofl, just go ahead and do it. You Germans really are autistic rofl.

condoms are for faggots.

Oh look. Gay propaganda. Kys.

>right to breed or be loved
You sound like those socialists who say "Everybody has a right not to be homeless/hungry"

Biologyguy here.

The reason polygamous mating doesn't work for humans is that in conjunction with the long gestation and time to sexual maturity genetic defects accumulate rapidly in any population that incorporates into it's social structures.

The societies that had 85% of their children born of around 20% of their men went extinct immediately due to inbreeding.

How am i supposed to resist my sexual urges, my emotional needs? It's not good for your health, if there is no ill-intention, there is no offense. Period.

This.

>what is Tacitus - Germania
Even hunter-gatherers were monogamous. Why? Because even the most beta man was not going to provide for anyone if he couldn't breed. Think about it, why the fuck would 85 men just watch by as 15 chads would plow all the women in the tribe? The 85 men could easily overpower and kill those chads. It doesn't matter who you are, you get a boulder smashed on your head during night and you're dead.

A man that can't get a wife has no reason to be a productive member of a tribe.

THIS IS A POST FOR A GOD! THE GOLDEN GOD!

I'm here to stay

Tough luck.

>Who cares about ~societal frames~
You could say that as a childless guy in afghanistan too and then wonder why there is no rent or people to take care of you as you get old.
Its not like we function independently from society, or do you happen to be a selfreliant farmer in some hillybilly landstrip you bought so you can life with a community of hippies were everyone fucks everyone and raises the children that happen to come from it as a group, while making cash doing online jobs?

Nobody has any rights, but you can't expect the 85% men just continue providing to society with skin in the game if they are not getting children.

The only time polygamy works is at times of war or famine, if the gender demographics get badly distorted.

But Germania doesnt talks of hunter gatheres but mudhutdwelling farmers. You guys had nomads for the longes time, you know anything about the traditional family practizes of Saami people before they got made more equal to the rest of the scandis?

>See, its what our ancestors did thousands of years ago
>Just ignore modern data showing how monogamous relationships are healthier for use and don't consider that our ancestors evolved to become monogamous.

They also do not seem to understand the fact that without monogamy, most men lose the chance of reproduction thus stripping them of most of the incentive to care or work for the good of their communities. Why would they, when they have no personal investment in the community?

cause dignity of the human soul and sanctity of comitted bond of respect between man and woman

Spoiler: Polygamous communities have only worked in communities where it was expected that the majority of adult men would die in open warfare or during hunting accidents.

>thats kind of the point of masculinity. Its a set group of behaviours and actions
Yes, that is the male brain you are describing. It's the very architecture of neural networks, and various compartmentalized sizes and connections (a product of their genes), which will ultimately predict how an organism is capable of reacting to stimuli in its environment; but the consequence is usually the same: devision of a plan to surmount an obstacle for personal gain, the modality taken for short or long term benefits, the method devised contingent upon the intelligence, physical capacity and experience of the organism.
This is also why so many survival skill-sets (or careers and hobbies as we call them today) are heavily dominated by males.

It's also worth noting hormones play a massive role in the development of neural pathways, and it's the testicles that are largely to thank for secreting testosterone for why hyper masculine and submissive men behave the way they do.

>there is no variety of hegemonic masculinity
> there is only one hegemonic masculinities and many other subservient masculinities
The inference from these statements is the memetic beta and alpha male dichotomy. Whilst useful for drawing lines in the sand, this isn't entirely true, as a better concept is the superior and inferior male, but only in certain contexts.
A "beta" can become an "alpha" simply by training and exercising ability for long enough to become the best one around; the inferior has become the "superior". This can be a gymbro to professional bodybuilder, a student to a professor, a wagecuck nobody slaving to get to higher management, a market merchant to a nationalized franchise.

"Alphaness" exists on a continuum, it isn't its own category. Again though, there is a proclivity for some individuals to be naturally better at certain skills than others, for previously outlined reasons.

Agreed!

Uniform distribution of the genders is the foundation of society you fucking whore cunts.

Wtf I love Islam now.

going full retard there, pal

Well, i could just adopt some homeless kid and have them raise me, or i could live by myself, dying is not a big deal either way, young people should of go live their lives happily and intensely and look out for opportunities. It's better than being in some nursery home being treated like some piece of meat.

I could careless about this whole mumbo jumbo, we should live simpler lives anyway, with artisanal goods and community trading, some people in italy already live like this, the rest is just bad faith.

It doesn't work anymore because you can't have as bunch of angry virgins roaming aroiund causing trouble. What we are seeing now is a result of the jews destroying the ability of the average man to get a decent mate and have a family. Women working and voting as well as the Jewish marriage laws that have been enacted in the last 2 decades is a huge factor in why we will win in the end. Marriage is no longer beneficial to men and women are less likely to marry someone of who is their equal due to all this feminist bullshit.

Women shouldn't work and shouldn't have the Same rights as men.

Historically people also didn't shit into porcelain bowls.

Why? :S

Take your fucking Ukulele-science somewhere else

Then you should get executed.

Was he not clear?

>A Homosexual degenerate talking about STI >numbers.

>tumblr cartoon

It's just bs all of it. What are the proofs that polygamy was the norm 10.000 BC? (((Anthropologists)))

>Roasties trying to convince betas to end monogamy so they can share chad

polygamy is the definition of degeneracy! Fucking Jewish cuck

This garbage is made by two fags and they have 7.3M subs. It terrifies me how the future will look if this garbage is what young people are watching to get "educated".

If something like wealth can be so evenly distributed in our society, surely so can chances of reproduction if enough gradual changes are made. Half the guys here would probably take a sterile sexbot over a real woman (provided she's a 10/10 who also cooks and shit). Additionally, automation of a lot of low-skill jobs would mean society wouldn't require as many makes to function

I see signs of this already in modern-day MGTOWs and social dropouts who forgo relationships for playing video games all day. Neither seem interested in propagating their genes but they'll still do the barely minimum amount of work to afford their own luxuries

*tips*

>if there is no ill-intention, there is no offense

Friendly reminder that artificial wombs will finally free us of the eternal woman once and for all

>faggot flag
>attempting to destroy the traditional family
Yep.

>The entire concept of monogamy only exists to reduce std transmissions,

And to make every man participate in society by giving them a woman. It's kinda the basics of civilization.

Also, people with more sexual partners have more STDs than monogamous people, for reasons that should be obvious

Monogamy is a distinctly European value that goes back into prehistory. Its an expression of the European trends of individualism, nuclear family units, and exogamy. These traits make sense in a place like Europe with scarce resources and harsh environment. Europeans, like all people, are the way they are because of the environment they evolved in. Its fundemental to the European way of thinking and understanding of the world. Unsurprisingly, the attack on monogamy is yet another jewish ploy to undermine white people.

Of course the creators of this shit video are fucking faggots. Gays don't understand monogamy because they are inhuman heretic filth. Burn them.

You ugly, useless, smelly fags are a mistake and the reason I cannot get a gf.

>i didn't mean to make you mad baby i just enjoy Tyrone's cock more than yours
>why don't you play your switch in the shed while tyrone and i play in bed?

Adoption while sometimes working out (when you are good at handling people.) cant be the norm for society though as there are surely not as many adoptees around as general offspring or people able to make some even if everyone would be as selfless to adopt.
Except you'd specialise a society with an AA+ skill in pedagogy on adopting from poor shitholes with surplus populations which turns really interesting once it turns full circle and you have third generation adoptees adopting people.

Because we need to talk about collectives here, as your individual choice will be drowned out by people who life by the established norm.
>Dying is not a big deal
As im from a very overaged country whose sparse-breeding boomers had a good full life and are generally rather individualistic it will be hard to convince them of mass euthanasation (they vote afterall and our current government forming up-suprise suprise-goes all out on rental planning.) even if it would help us younger ones a lot.
Again, it would need a society that sees death in another way as a whole. Syrian jihadees send their old ones to blow themselves up, that be a modern example that works. Siberian asians sending their old ones to die alone in the wilderness as a honourable act is historic example. Both relie on tradition, a rigid societal frame.
>treated like some piece of meat
I blame modernity. My grandpa who made three children gets visited everyday and gets cared for in his own house. This is exceptional for my country and me as a singlechild will probably not be able to help my dad like that as im alone.
>simpler lifes
So now you dont seek something new at all as I first thought from your first post and medieval village-economies with their millenial old mating patterns are your ideal?

They dont; bring on the raider culture again I suppose.

/r9k/ the relationship Sup Forums? It keeps proving itself right

That's true, I assumed Germans still had partly hunter-gatherer lifestyle alongside farming.

I'm under the impression that Sámis have been reindeer herders since forever? I've heard so many origin stories for them I can't remember the current ''correct'' one. I'd assume they were monogamous, since why the hell would anyone work if they didn't get a chance of reproducing?

>Half the guys here would probably take a sterile sexbot over a real woman
I would take a 1/5 women capable of giving birth over an infertile 5/5. I think most Sup Forumsacks would too, but for the regular normie dudes, I've no idea.

It is true that we are going to have tons of people useless due to automation soon, but it's going to hit both genders.

" From a purely economic point of view, then, the solution to the problem of overpopulation should be immediately apparent. Th e ownership of children or more correctly the trusteeship over children must be privatized. Rather than considering children as collectively owned by or entrusted to “society” or viewing childbirths as some uncontrolled and uncontrollable natural event and accordingly considering children as owned by or entrusted to no one (as mere favorable or unfavorable “environmental changes”), children must instead be regarded as entities which are privately produced and entrusted into private care. As Thomas Malthus first perceptively noted, this, essentially, is what is accomplished with the institution of a family. Moreover and finally: with the formation of monogamous
or polygamous families came another decisive innovation.
Earlier on, the members of a tribe formed a single, unifi ed
household, and the intratribal division of labor was essentially an intra-household division of labor. With the formation of families came the breakup of a unified household into several, independent households and with that also the formation of “several” — or private ownership of land. Th at is, the previously described appropriation of land was not simply a transition from a situation where something that was earlier on unowned became now owned, but more precisely something previously unowned was turned into something owned by separate households (thus allowing also for the emergence of interhousehold division of labor)."

While butter-europe of course pales in comparison to the mediterran highcultures people tend to forget that it was utterly dominated by interconnected farmerssocieties before germanics safe for some protopopulation around denmark was a thing.
The Urnfield culture superceded even older farming cultures around 1300 bc and entertained vast trading networks between farming walled villages. Hell, looking at some of the astronomic achievments of that time you could even say that germanics were culturally degenerated in comparison to their forebears before being able to catch up again by interaction with roman culture.

Yeah it also used to be completely fine to marry and fuck your sister but no thanks faggot
>Bu-But in the past you could rape who you wanted and not have to worry about it! This world is unfair WHERE is milky?
Eat aquarium rocks you cave dweller

So you're telling me women should surround sucessful men and that men should have more sexual freedom than women?

Cool, we agree then fag.

>and often end up with a child as the consequence.
>The point of having sex is to not reproduce but rather purely pleasure.
You are the stupidest fucking faggot in the whole universe.
Oh yea dude, lets just destroy the basis of western civilization just because its inconvenient, the pagans fucked like rabbits and look how great their empire was.
Hey man just ignore the declining birth rate, we can just bring in a bunch of shitskins to do all the work and pay for our social security, it will be great!

Fuck banning abortion, we should just ban adultery and premarital sex to save the west.

We are sinners in the hands of an angry God. Preach!

>monogamy doesn't serve the child by providing a stable household with a rolemodel for each gender
Of course, meme flag.

Cant wait how children end up who get raised by corporate tribes. Life for Aldi. Work for Aldi. Fight for Aldi. Die for Aldi.

The concept of monogomy is required for civilization not human existence. Want to go back 10k years?

I think harems are the natural state of men and women. A few alpha men have their own personal harems filled with 3 - 8 women, while the average man gets table scraps. It sounds brutal but we're returning to that today. Now that women don't need a man financially because they work, they will only settle for a mate that is ideal.

Muslims would be born under the flag of IKEA