MARRIAGE & WOMEN in Politics

youtube.com/watch?v=w6CCePrJlaU

DAILY REMINDER

That there is nothing wrong with sluts, and there is nothing wrong with dating or marrying one.

Just is just as good as any other 'pure' woman.

Sup Forums cannot refute this!

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=6q_7YljktTE
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>t. slag

Slam poetry is fucking awful.

Inb4 chart of marriage stability by sexual partner count.

They fuck up relationships because MEN judge them.

Fucking 2000 men doesn't make you bad.

What's the difference betweeen protected casual sex and masturbation?

Nothing

She an be as much of a slut as she wants, I don't care.
She just has to accept that some men don't like her or would not want a relationship with her.

No one can force her not to be a slut, but no one can force me to like sluts.
These people, disliking someone as a individual is equal with "institutionalized" oppression.

Also, this poem was full of strawmen, loaded questions and projections.

The more partners you have, the less special sex becomes and the more likely you are to fall back into that lifestyle if you're in a relationship.

Counts for men and women both, btw.

>She just has to accept that some men don't like her or would not want a relationship with her.

So why is it okey for males to sleep with many women?

ACTUALLY NO!

Why is it the males that bed bed lotd of women, have a higher sexual value?

How come they are't called sluts, but are instead call alphas?

Double standard much?

So if you have 1 sexual partner in your life, and have sex with them literally everyday, you're going to end up breaking up due to devalued sex?

>The more partners you have
>So if you have 1 sexual partner in your life
Fuck off, teacunt.

Are you just baiting?

One has to work for it and be better than its competitors. The other just goes along with it.

refute what? That Sup Forums doesn't want to settle with slags that will most likely cheat on your ass? Begone cuck

How does having different partner devalue sex? How is it different to a woman getting fucked the same amount with 1 guy?

this honestly isn't an argument

ow does ''earning'' it make any difference?

>Counts for men and women both, btw.
Less so for men. It's still kind of bad generally I think, but it doesn't seem to affect the psyche of men and women the same way.

Plus it's mostly women who value players so much.

see

Have fun when you find your slut wife fucking Ahmed

>Plus it's mostly women who value players so much.

You see, this is something we need to stop.

So many young girls grow up thinking that '''players''' are something great. Whereas boys are told by their old fashioned fathers that women who are around lots of men, are whores.

it's brainwashing, and it's double standards

this is why sexism is a huge issue within the western world

feminist blame ''patriarchy'', but this is exactly why

>and myths like this is what males believe

males like to stop women from going out and enjoying themselves while the men seem to have the right to fuck whoever they want

males slut shame, which causes women who like to enjoy themselves, feeel insecure

It has to do with pair bonding.

A woman who goes out and sleeps with 100 guys has something change in her that doesn't happen if she sleeps 100 times with her boyfriend she cares about.

It's very simple: For the average women It's a lot easier to have lots of sexual partners than it is for the average man.

Why do you think that prostitution exists since thousands of years, men paying their last dime for a hooker, because they can't get laid?

For some men it's easy, but you have to be the cream of the crop to get as many women as you'd like.

>How come they are't called sluts, but are instead call alphas?

You have to understand that these men are a very tiny minority among men. Some insecure men cheer for these guys and call them "alphas", but the vast majority of men either dislikes them, because they are often very rude, douchebags, or just does not care about them.

What I noticed in your posts and the video: You and the woman proceed to generalize lots of people. Why? Aren't it feminists, and leftists in general, who state that generalization is wrong?

Refer to the lock- key analogy.

Sex isn't just physical. Sex creates a psychological bnd to your partner that gets better the more often you have sex
>have sex with lots of people
>your hormones create lots of different bonds
>since there are amyn different people, individual bonds are weaker
>less loyalty, more cheating

Not even difficult to figure this out.

Who said sex was anything to do with ''caring''?

Sex is just a form of physical pleasure. It's no different to masturbating.

Does a woman have to be in love with her dildo? no

It's like you have been deluded from some 200 year old bible written by a man who basically thought womens only role in society was being a mother.

A bible book that put womens confidence down for centuries.

please read

>What I noticed in your posts and the video: You and the woman proceed to generalize lots of people. Why? Aren't it feminists, and leftists in general, who state that generalization is wrong?

But it's right. People do generalise ''sluts''.

You mean the 'I don't understand the difference between correlation and causation' chart?

Religious people have fewer partners, and get divorced less. Which is a pretty good argument against religion.

>Why is it the males that bed bed lotd of women, have a higher sexual value?
>How come they are't called sluts, but are instead call alphas?
>Double standard much?

Those are the standards created by women.

Sex is not the same as masturbating.

Science has shown there are actual chemicals involved in pair bonding that are released during sex. Nobody falls in love with their dildo.

Commodity model of sex has way more effects than 'patriarchy'. Solve that, 90% of feminist issues get solved.

YASSS QUEEEN SLAAAAAAY!!!

Actually no - it's men's interpretation of women's standards.

Women don't like neediness. Nobody does, but to men it's not always a dealbreaker. Men who sleep with lots of women tend to not be needy to an individual woman.

It's the same reason men in relationships often are more attractive to women.

>slam poetry

...

>thought womens only role in society was being a mother
Because it it just like that. Brain of woman is too simple to be a creator and preserver of civilization, and so it is completely obsolete except for procreation. When society gives women other roles, it not only makes no good, but often inflicts severe harm, such as modern women voting for letting swarms of kebab invaders into their countries.

>it's brainwashing, and it's double standards
A lot of it is biology. There are evolutionary explanations for why women are attracted to alphas, and why betas don't trust promiscuous women. You're pretty much fighting nature. Telling people they should act differently probably isn't gonna be enough.

I don't even think sluts are bad. Per se it doesn't matter. But it very often comes with other problems (reduced pair-bonding ability, unfaithfulness). Not always, but often. People eventually realize that as they deal with them. Denying it doesn't help (it's already backfiring).

You could argue that it wouldn't cause any issues if everyone was more mature about it and both men and women respected and loved each others more without objectifying each others so much and all that. That may be true, but it won't happen because there's zero pressure for things like this to happen. Overall women have the most power in this regard, the situation is too unbalanced to over be healthy.

The Brave New World only works with lots of drugs, genetic engineering and a completely dehumanized society.

In the meantime, people will still judge each others based on what would make them suitable long-term partners in practice.

Women have their standards and men have theirs.
I don't see why would men need to follow women standards.

Also, what is Sup Forumstards problem with women casual sex buddies with black males?

Maybe she might like him? Not everyone like th same thing as you do you know.

So do you fall in love with some random plastic caked up woman at a bar, minutes before you have a one night stand?

Zasto ne? Understanding the standards makes you better with women though. Half of the idiots on Sup Forums are here because they can't get laid, get angry, and go down the stupid hole.

Wrong.
A dildo is not a person. My Hand is not a person.
having sex is never purely physical, unless your heart is dead.

Nothing. They are free to fuck whoever they want, and I am free to fuck whoever I want.
Freedom of choice for everyone.

But is't because women have been put down, so they can only be mothers?

when women enter the male world, they get demonised, and are judged. sometimes not even taken seriously

That's a pretty good argument for religion.

It negatively affects my ability to pair bond in the future to engage in activities like that yes.

I'd say more so with females, but it is not healthy for males either. If you have ever talked to a guy that sleeps with 4 or 5 different women every week, they often talk about their inability to feel deep love.

But do you not think that males and bibles have forced women to think otherwise?

There's one animal kingdom that has women in charge. Black widows

Because religions have tried to separate gender.

In fact, Africa and South East Asia were once advanced civilisations ahead of their time, and they were matriarchal.

That was until Europeans and Anglos went over and ruined it.

>If you have ever talked to a guy that sleeps with 4 or 5 different women every week
Nope, I hate males like that. They treat women like shit, and it's not just 1% of males. It's the 10%.

If you're a beta fuck that can't get laid and has to trade a house for sex, sure. Religion has always been a means for the weak and stupid to make their piece with being weak and stupid.

Woman cant enter "male world". Male and female brains is vastly different, and woman's brain biologically lacks what it takes to pe a part of "male world" - responsibility, sense of identity, imagination, empathy, humor and million other things. Thoroughly analyze female behavior, both in modern daily life and through history, and you will come to conclusion that woman is something less than human.
Or did your (((white professor))) told you that biology has nothing to do with behavior?

youtube.com/watch?v=6q_7YljktTE

Face it Sup Forums, if you had a choice between this absolute munter and the slag you would choose the slag in a heartbeat

...

...

All I'm saying is, is that do you not think that women have been put down by patriarchal males to make them like this? Even to this day, upbringing even?

As for empathy, isn't that a hing women have? Women tend to feel more than men, don't they?

depends on what their bodies look like. I'd bet one of them is a roastie

I would choose neither.

And women who sleep with four or five men every week behave the same way treating men like shit. If you devalue sex and treat it the same as masturbating it becomes exactly that, a shallow meaningless exercise to fill animalistic urges. If men or women want to sleep with hundreds of partners that's fine for them, But i wouldn't want to be in a committed relationship with someone has because of their reduced ability to form a close emotional bond and the mental instability they likely have that caused them to want to fuck hundreds of different people.

That's not true, women don't lack any of it, and there's no brain part they lack. They're just predisposed both hormonally and socially to not use these notions.

Just compare some people that went to religion in adultery. See how some of them change? How they suddenly realized that there's an honour, there is a moral, so on. It didn't require any brain surgery.

I think OP is a Muslim slut who cant find a man

She is one of those sluts that is a virgin

>Just is just
fuck off, roast T

>implying anyone wants to fuck your NEET ass, much less be in a relationship

>marrying a woman you can't trust
I don't know if your hiding your poor values behind a semi-ironic shitpost but I'm about 90% sure you want an excuse to go for anything you can get so your trying to justify your degeneracy.
That said I'd bone someone of any race but when it came to a relationship (that lasts more than say a weekend) I'd actually have standards.

It's completely natural for women to flock to the most desirable men and share them. There's no way around it. The most betas could try to better themselves, but they'd just displace some other poor sap to the bottom who would then wonder WTH happened. Women establish a hierarchy (it doesn't really matter what it's based on) and there are always those at the top and those at the bottom. They serve an evolutionary purpose in this way. They select the most fit. And since they don't mind sharing those at the top, those at the bottom are always unwanted.

And women absolutely have a right to behave this way. Lots of guys are frustrated and it's unavoidable. The situation with men and women is very different in this regard and feminists keep trying to deny or obfuscate it. I think it's better for people to be clearly aware of it.

The situation also makes men work and compete harder. The lower birth rates is good for globalization. It suits the elite just fine. It doesn't allow our culture to survive though.

This a thousand times. Just as men are given the choice to not women who have had many sexual partners, so are women. So if we are all allowed to have choices and be individuals than we can all choose what types of people we choose to date. That said, that means if women choose to bang experienced men and to laud them, that is their choice. Women respect sexual prowess. Men only want experience if they are going into a situation just for sex, which many women only want. So lets behave like adults and accept the consequences of our choices.

Evolution of human made them like this. "Patriarchy" is a consequence of it and natural order of homo sapiens species that worked just fine until some subversive kikes (whose society still have strong traditional gender roles) convinced white men that they should give equal power in control of society to a gender that is completely incapable of it, and white man who have strongest empathy and benevolent intentions of all races trusted them. And their women started to destroying civilization, without understanding that they are doing it because their brain cant predict consequences of their actions and grasp a scale, and simply was following its basic urges.

It's not just women - NOBODY wants to fuck the bottom 25%. Hell, the permavirgins here aren't going out to fuck the illiterate 300lb land whales. It's just not publicized as much IMHO.

But yeah, if you're scared of sluts, it's probably because you're aware you're not in the top 25%. So go make yourself better - self-improvement is much more effective that deciding the way the world works should change.

>Understanding the standards makes you better with women though.

That is a ridiculous statement, as your two examples to support your view of female standards, were the following:

1. Men who sleep with many women - who as such could care less for a woman's thoughts or opinions beyond the sex he is engaging in.

2. Men who are in a relationship - which means if they step outside their relationship, they do not care for the woman they are with or the woman they are cheating with.

So essentially, female standards cluster around men who treat women as sex objects to be dominated. The more successful they are the better.

If this is true than why would men want to date women who for most of their youth sought men like this? You were not ever interested in a relationship but wanted to just be another number. I think what is really necessary is women need to understand men's standards for relationships, which is primarily based in loyalty. A woman who has no problem being apart of a veritable carousel of sex with men, does not really reflect the capacity for loyalty. Nor would any man taking part in the carousel believe he could be loyal to any of those women.

>NOBODY wants to fuck the bottom 25%.
That is *completely* false. They may have trouble finding commitment though (or even just being taken out on dates) and they often don't get treated all that nicely (and it must suck desu, they often develop a very negative opinion of men too), but they can fuck alright, and they have options to work on for relationships.
>So go make yourself better
It doesn't change the overall situation though. You're just taking someone else's place, who then also has to become even better to try to displace someone else. There's only so much room at the top.
Sometimes women overall can become confused and not sure who the alphas are anymore because everyone start mimicking them too well, and they effectively become more interested in more men overall. But the hierarchy eventually readjusts itself. It's always been an important evolutionary mechanism.

Okay people, so I think I can say that sexual reproduction is gross and doesn't work. We have the power to make things better. Why don't more people be more responsible in bringing new human life into the world and choose a sperm/egg donor and raise their own children?

Buw why do you generalize people who don#t share your opinion?
Why do you generalize men?

I'm not going to tell you who you ought to like or dislike. But I'm not going to marry some overused slag just because you think they're "just as good" as any other woman.

Feel free to marry whoever you would like to marry. I'll go ahead and do the same. This belief that every man on earth has to have identical standards when it comes to women is the absolute peak of absurdity.

Don't date women like this with daddy issues.

Problem solved.

This argument might've been valid, had it been your own. This is not a new argument, nor is it an original thread. I'm pretty sure I've seen this exact thread a few months back. Research shows it, history shows it, and hell, all of my grandparents who married their first love, have been enough to show that those who don't sleep around are happier. There is science behind it, but as it has been presented to you multiple times and instead of addressing it you talk around it. If you truly believe that sex holds no value then by all means, live on unaffected and unconvinced that sex, one of the most sacred forms of human bonding, is worthless. Sluts are sluts, they are and always will be, and I'm not going to change that, nor will anyone. But the idea that humans should just fuck around because sex is a meaningless form of pleasure is just ignorant.

Per example, Ardipithecus, the earliest ancestor of humanity that can be considered a human ancestor and nothing else, has been proven to have been monogamous. ONE PARTNER. FOR LIFE. And they rarely ever left their partners. Since the very beginning of the history of our species, humans have been monogamous. We're not supposed to just fuck and go. That's something that chimps do. And by all means if you think that humans are nothing more than animals, then I'd gladly stick you in a zoo like the subhuman ape that you are.

Being a slut as a girl is the psychological equivalent of getting pegged as a man
>t. 200 IQ sexologist

It's pretty simple. A key that can open any lock is a master key. But a lock that can be opened by any key is a pretty shitty lock.

YOOOOOOOOO *air horns*

Is it empathy when a woman listens to her friend than slanders her or keeps her secrets for the right moment to destroy her. Is it empathy when a woman can go out of her way to crush a man spirit, just because she does not want to be with him, but also does not want him to be with others. Is it empathy when a woman demands retribution for every injustice, imagined or other against, themselves without reflecting how the other got to this place. Women capacity for empathy seems more like self indulgence and social manipulation.

Whereas men have had to both master the minds of women and men. You will of course say we men never mastered your minds, yet so much of the most beautiful paintings, sonnets, architectures, songs, and simple delicate words whispered into a woman's ear has caused them to swoon, to awe, and to cry.

Empathy put simply is the capacity to understand another's perspective and feelings, to in a sense experience the other. Men understand what women feel, what they find beautiful, what makes them cry. That said, men are poorer at this now because ironically, women wanted men to think as they do and empathize as they do, which means being needy, sensitive without purpose, and self serving. A man who is allowed to be a man and who recognizes women as they are will always make them happy but will also know he can never be like them because empathy means also looking out for the good of others. That means looking out for the good of the family, friends, ones country, and ones world.

> Understanding the standards makes you better with women though. Half of the idiots on Sup Forums are here because they can't get laid, get angry, and go down the stupid hole.

Understanding men's standards also helps women get better men. It goes both ways.

You are asking for something unreasonable; for men to give up their standards and conform to women's. You are part of the problem that is the feminine imperative. The same imperative that brought forth feminism.

Men have standards too, and ignoring them is harmful to everyone.

its true desu

she does have good blowjob eyes


lol wtf does that even mean. blowjob eyes. some crusty old fart makes a lewd comment and it changes the whole course of your life.... oh whats that you say... no person actually said that its just something you imagined.... oooooohhhh ok honey. get help retard.

>As for empathy, isn't that a hing women have?

No. Women are solipsistic.

>Women tend to feel more than men, don't they?

Yes, they certainly do, but only solipsistic emotions. Emotions that center around their self, as if their needs are the only ones that matter, how they feel are all that matter. They are incapable of loyalty or a sense of honor for this very reason.

That's faggotry, man. Women just started working in their own interest and to their own pleasure. And that often contradicts your / society's interest. There's literally no sign of them "suffering from freedom" they now have. It's all in your own mind.

my face

>>Daily reminder of bullshit.
God should have sunk Britain instead of Atlantis.

You're assuming that men who sleep with lots of women don't care about their thoughts or opinions. That's simply not true, anymore than people with lots of friends don't care about their friends thoughts and opinions.

Your standards for a relationship might be based on loyalty - to me that's just being with someone because you're scared you won't find anyone else. YMMV though.

Meh - 'alpha' just means not in the bottom, really. The rest is just a numbers game. Fucking internets can't get anything right, evolutionary psych included.

And no, nobody wants to fuck pic attached. Especially since the bottom 25% don't want to fuck the bottom 25% either.

to have many sexual partners is a sin, God created man and women to be married and have a family, anything outside of this is a lie

And vaginas aren't locks. They just don't open for you.

No, I think women should know men's (and also how they vary!). I'm a man though, as is 95% of Sup Forums, so my comments are addressed that way.

Actually no - even in your fairy tale Bible, woman was created to be a companion. The punishment of childbirth was given after the fall, remember?

We wuz queens

Shut the fuck up teabag.

Than what is the purpose of a relationship? Sharing resources? Than why would I waste resources on someone who does not appreciate my contributions? Because on loneliness? That seems like a rather depressing way to be with another. Of course men on the carousel care about what women thing, so much as it gain them pussy. When they find another woman who is slightly more entertaining the jump onto the next horse.

So ultimately, based on how you seem to understand relationships, specifically the fear you cannot find someone else, then what is its purpose other than a temporary, transient exchange of fluids and niceties. To me this reflects a lack of appreciation for the benefits of stability, without of which none of what humanity has accomplished would be possible. Anarchist relationships, aren't relationships their self indulgent games. Nothing is created, no effort is necessary. As such, if you feel this is how you wish to live, that is fine, but expect to never have stability. To move on or have someone move on from you, until one day you really have no choices and you are alone.

A friend of mine who killed herself at 43, was very much a victim of that mentality. The mentality of women just always looking for what is better. Every girlfriend she had, ever trans boyfriend she had, always moved on and left her behind, when all she wanted was stability. Stability after being beaten as a child, raped multiple time as a teen and adult, being homeless, a drug addict, and a prostitute. Having a family who did not care she existed. Yes, she herself was transient at times, but she became an adult and wanted stability and never had it. Her dog was all she had left and she was dying. So she killed her dog and herself.

1 Corinthians 6:18-20 - Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

Hebrews 13:4 - Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

Now let me contrast my female friends story this with men I know. Two friends of mine who have been a couple since the marines, settled down together and have good life. These were two men who understood loyalty and have been happy ever since. They both dated alot but never could find stability. One of the men was even married to a woman at one time, and he told me he prefer to be with a man. He told me stories about how erratic, self indulgent, and irrational his wife was. He enjoys the logic, empathy, and kindness of his husband to be far more rewarding because a man values loyalty and stability.

So these values are not simply my own, these are values of men, gay or otherwise. Adults want stability and there is no stability in multiple partners. There is just a lonely death.

Ya, because if it did it would not be a very good lock. I don't think you understand the metaphor. Locks need to be selective both in what can enter them and what truly unlocks them.