Is this okay /int?

What's your opinion about this? Doesn't it destroy the family and our future? Do you want your wife to be a slut, do you want a wife?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w
economist.com/news/international/21734365-they-are-also-lonelier-and-more-isolated-teenagers-are-better-behaved-and-less
psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I was never going to have a gf anyway, sociosexual dynamics don't affect me one bit

>Do I want a wife
No. Marriage is bad mmkay.

I already gave up.
Have you have a hope yet?

>sexual revolution
educate me

The sexual revolution was meant to give power to women, but do they really want it as it has become now? What do they gain from fucking around not getting a partner, instead of getting a stable relationship early? It will it backfire once they pass 30, and they have to settle with a mediocre relationship that doesn't really gain them. This makes the average family unit weaker, and our generations will be worse of than the past ones.

That guy looks like the Merchant Meme

dumbass before sexual revolution, the richest and most educated would get all the girls.
if you ever have watched animal documentaries you'd know there is often fights between 2 male animals (like lions) on who gets to breed with the females. it's the same with humans so if you don't get to breed, it's probably for the best of the species

I will have a semi arranged marriage to a true virgin (no previous oral or anal either) and have 4-6 kids

Just convert to Islam white women are garbage

The image was edited to make more women seem "lonely", this is objectively wrong, women are never out of options when it comes to partners.

No, it went by class. There was a lot of nice fabric waifus you could get, but the best ones was of course as always taken by the best.

I've got a shit personality and I think I'm mentally challenged so it's okay. 3 of my younger brothers are the normal ones, they'll continue the lineage

In the "good old times", people got engaged / married when they were teenagers and in most instances because of an arrangement between their parents. If you grew up to hate each other there was no possibility of divorce, at least in Catholic countries - your first gf would be the last unless she died and you remarried. In other conservative societies like Protestantism or Islam, divorce was an option but it meant the end of your social life. If your marriage featured domestic abuse, cheating or boredom, you were stuck with that for your whole life. How is that a superior relationship?

>What's your opinion about this?
It's exaggerated

>Doesn't it destroy the family and our future?
If you mean the graphic you posted, no. If you mean the tendency we have developed in the West to seek instant gratification and perfection, probably yes.

>Do you want your wife to be a slut?
No

>do you want a wife?
Yes.

let the West rot

>Never Breeds
nobody breeds ever
abortion was a mistake
it's for the best anyways, you whites should all die

CLEAN YOUR ROOM

youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w

Eh, eventually we will have some kind of resurgence of morality after all this insanity has died down a bit.

In fact stats already shown that millennials are less degenerate than their parents.

That would be in natural environment. Single parenting is not a natural state for humans

>dumbass before sexual revolution, the richest and most educated would get all the girls.

No. That is not how it worked at all. Rich people would never even talk to poor people.

You have it all backwards. Before we lost all our morality we had rules that stratified society such that everyone had their role in it. Now we just have a Darwinian mess that you are talking about.

>millenials
You mean the generation after them. Gen X.
I can see it now, i just graduated and a lot of my friends were more reserved than their parents.

You are right.

economist.com/news/international/21734365-they-are-also-lonelier-and-more-isolated-teenagers-are-better-behaved-and-less

indeed

stupid meme. going around yelling hitler did nothing wrong for attention is not 'reservedd'

How are crazy feminists and weak soyboys a superior generation?

the same occurs in the animal world, only the strongest males get to reproduce, and we humans are animals too.

Females are "sluts" by nature. The difference is that you'll bend over backwards and pull all the possible mental gymnastic tricks to justify the belief that the one girl you are infatuated with is "pure". She isn't.
Before the "sexual revolution", women were the same. Worse, in fact. Unless your so called sexual revolution occurred thousands of years ago:
psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success
>Once upon a time, 4,000 to 8,000 years after humanity invented agriculture, something very strange happened to human reproduction. Across the globe, for every 17 women who were reproducing, passing on genes that are still around today—only one man did the same.

If you want an idea, buy a product which offers an ideal. Want the perfect pussy? By an onahole. Want an idea image of a female to cuddle with night after night? Buy a dakimakura. Do you want to be an educator/father figure of children? Become a sports coach/teacher. Want to pass on a biological legacy? Donate sperm. Do you want moments of human contact? Pay a whore/join a wrestling team. Whatever it is you are actually after, you're never going to find it in a woman because your ideals don't match up with the reality of female biology.
Humans haven't evolved to remain in life long opposite sex relationships and your dream marriage never existed. Divorce rates are skyrocketing all around the world, even in Islamic shitholes which have started to allow females to divorce. It has nothing to do with some retarded tradcon religious delusions being corrupted. Females are hypergamous and even if she decided to stay with a man for life, it isn't because she wants to but because she doesn't see any other option.

>Peterson
The guy is a tradcon talking head who while highly educated in other fields, hasn't the slightest fucking clue when it comes to human behaviour.
You also have no clue what you're talking about, Mr. Ideology-trumps-biology (it doesn't).

there is no reproduction though
we are performing an empty behavior, as there is no fruit unlike in nature. the strongest male has become sterile from so many steroids and chemical shit. the "cute boys" have become gay

>You also have no clue what you're talking about, Mr. Ideology-trumps-biology (it doesn't).

I'd sooner trust an accomplished doctor than a NEET.

Actually "the strongest men" are not breeding because they are too focused on their career and money. Same with succesful women. What's left is single mothers

So let us take the example of Norway. We are more fit, healthy and rich than we've ever been, so are the women. Tinder is widely accepted and both men and women have one-night stands regularly. We are also the country that is most lonely, having over 60% living alone, that's more than Japan. So the men and women are chasing a career, for what? Their own gain i would say, and not for providing for a family as originally was intended. So in the next generations we will have some that got lucky and managed to get a family they could provide for, their children will have much more success in the society with a strong family in the back. On the other hand, we'll see the single mothers, and of course the immigrants which have a lot more children than us. So it will be, in 20 years a divide between the very rich native population, the medium class immigrants, and the lower class poorer which doesn't have a strong family line in their back. They will be dependent on the state, be required to start all over again. I'm lucky to have a long family line, so i will probably come out of this good, but i care for you others that doesn't have this.

>I'd sooner trust an accomplished doctor
You can look up everything I'm claimed. Peterson, et al., have expertise in fields unrelated to this topic. The only reason you are using this silly appeal to authority is for emotional reasons, not rational ones.

It's called eugenics

The opposite actually, I don't value the opinions of bitter NEETs.

t. woman

You are aware that modernism also brought along a Sexual Revolution?
Because increased pressure on having few children, lead to more marriages, and even more so in wedlock. All the "Sexual Revolution" did, in the 60s and beyond, is just fewer marriages and more divorces.
And seeing how fertility rate rarely drops below 2.1, there is a lot of people in relationships with kids. Meaning its not that different.

So the real confusion is people taking about "Before the sexual revolution", which is a tiny period between the 1910s and somewhere after the 1950s.
People do not talk about Feudal Sexuality. Class Sexuality. Clan Sexuality. Tribe sexuality. Sea trade sexuality.