The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Pr0n
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Liberating or objectifying? The answer depends more on sex than on politics (or, overly generously, on constitutional interpretation). That’s probably one reason it doesn’t get talked about often in a political context:

My recommendation: Cut out the cranking. Irrespective of your particular situation, you’ll be better for it.

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Ideology • Tags: Polling, Pornography, Sex 
Hide 608 CommentsLeave a Comment
608 Comments to "Pr0n"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I wonder what the mainstream opinions on sex bots are.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Good question. I bet they mirror perceptions of porn but shifted towards disapproval for all groups.
    , @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

  2. My recommendation: Cut out the cranking. Irrespective of your particular situation, you’ll be better for it.

    Because there’s just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need…more.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    Because there’s just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need…more.
     
    Yeah....nope.

    Well, as an MGTOW I strongly support adult porn and sex bots.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    It's enervating on multiple levels though, isn't it?
  3. @L Woods

    My recommendation: Cut out the cranking. Irrespective of your particular situation, you’ll be better for it.
     
    Because there's just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need...more.

    Because there’s just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need…more.

    Yeah….nope.

    Well, as an MGTOW I strongly support adult porn and sex bots.

    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    You're cute.

    https://www.amazon.com/Jews-Moral-Subversion-Michael-Jones/dp/092989118X
    , @216
    In comparison to a low value man being cuckolded and destroyed by an ex-wife in divorce court, there is some logic to that thinking.

    It should still be viewed as negative, however, as it shows weakness of willpower.

    As the various "vice industries" go, the sex industry is quite unregulated and that should probably change.
  4. @EastKekistani
    I wonder what the mainstream opinions on sex bots are.

    Good question. I bet they mirror perceptions of porn but shifted towards disapproval for all groups.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    Probably. Do they have any rational reason for opposing sex bots? Women obviously oppose them because they take away their power over men. Some men may oppose it to signal that they aren't incel because incels are a low status group that tends to favor sex bots.
    , @216
    Female sexbots already exist, with minimal social condemnation.

    We just avoid calling them sexbots.
  5. @L Woods

    My recommendation: Cut out the cranking. Irrespective of your particular situation, you’ll be better for it.
     
    Because there's just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need...more.

    It’s enervating on multiple levels though, isn’t it?

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    It really depends on how you view it.

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I'm MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    , @L Woods
    Like social media, it’s probably a double edged sword. Like prostitutes and sexbots, I’m inclined to personally abstain while supporting its proliferation.
  6. @Audacious Epigone
    It's enervating on multiple levels though, isn't it?

    It really depends on how you view it.

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.
     
    What, you don't know how to move your body? Maybe you could, like, go for a walk or something? Good grief, you people are ridiculous. What, you think our incredibly masculine European ancestors settled this country by way of channeling their sexual urges - that is, energy - into porn?
    , @Anon
    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    Since the 70s, it's been said 80% of Japanese cinema consists of porn movies. Some study says 1/200 Japanese women are into porn business. That is not a healthy society. It's one thing to have some sex industry as Red Light district stuff. In Japan, it has taken over much of culture.
    In the 80s and 90s, Western commentators would disapprovingly of Japanese in their relation to erotica. For example, there were articles about how people in subway flip through porny magazines and manga(yes, porny cartoons). That became the Norm in Japan. And now, look at the spread of jungle fever in Japan. As a porny nation, Japan is about featuring Negro men and Japanese women, and as the message spreads, more Japanese women will have kids with black men, and these kids will take over sports and Japanese will worship blacks as Japanese heroes. That will set the psychological template for Japan going the way of London.
  7. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @EastKekistani
    I wonder what the mainstream opinions on sex bots are.

    Heartiste reckons they’ll change everything.

    I think they’ll change almost nothing.

    What’s the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you’re paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it’s not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won’t be any different. People just assume that they’ll change things, because they’re robots, and they’re from the future. They’ve imbibed the spirit of the age.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    In both cases you’re paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman.
     
    Well, I simply don't believe that most women love their partners and spouses in any society at all. Darwinism informs me about how precarious the situation both men and non-human males are in. History informs me that if you got murdered in an ancient war your wife was likely to willingly submit to your murderer and forgot about you no matter how much you did for her.

    "Romantic experience" means a dude sometimes loving and often pretending to love a lady for the sake of sex and a lady pretending to love a dude for the sake of his resources. That's it. If you chase a sexually attractive woman what you are after is essentially something that will go away in a couple of years for every pretty girl ends up as a smelly and ugly woman when she becomes sufficiently old.


    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes.
     
    Yes..for it is usually illegal and low status.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Differences: Not illegal, doesn't involve gross sharing, doesn't involve humiliating yourself in front of another human (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute, shame that the prostitute presumably picks up on).
    , @14wordstofreedom
    If the sexbot can cook, clean, and satisfy a man sexually, and make sandwiches; then the primary ways a woman could compete for a share of a man’s resources would be to demonstrate superior moral values and child rearing abilities. Total game changer. If not, then it’s just an expensive fleshlight, and not important.
    , @Curious Person
    By this logic, internet pornography wouldn't have been more popular than going to a porn cinema
    , @Oleaginous Outrager

    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes
     
    Really? Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down especially as "most men would feel a little ashamed", but the Feds didn't shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online "adult" hook-up sites because they were languishing unused.

    Sex bots won’t be any different
     
    If you try to "shut down" a prostitute and shove her in a closet when surprise guests show up, you'll likely end up in prison. So that at least will be different.
    , @AaronB
    In Asia, men regularly and avidly patronize prostitutes. Its huge, and there's no shame. And the "fantasy" element does not bother them at all. They know its not real, but culturally that's fine.

    The insistence on real affection and the sense of shame at visiting a prostitute is purely a Western cultural thing, and a fairly recent one at that.
  8. @Audacious Epigone
    Good question. I bet they mirror perceptions of porn but shifted towards disapproval for all groups.

    Probably. Do they have any rational reason for opposing sex bots? Women obviously oppose them because they take away their power over men. Some men may oppose it to signal that they aren’t incel because incels are a low status group that tends to favor sex bots.

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian

    Probably. Do they have any rational reason for opposing sex bots? Women obviously oppose them because they take away their power over men.
     
    Falling birthrates, breakdown of social connections (you have no in-laws or access to wife's social circle if you're married to a robot), growth of inequality (the upper classes will still have plenty of nepotistic connections to get ahead in life), personal hygiene failure. The latter is already a problem among anime waifu lovers, and a robot mistress also won't care if you bathe or how clean your clothes are.

    I don't see women upset about losing their power over men to waifus and their physical manifestations, the infamous dakimakura. The kind of guys who are into this stuff aren't regarded as desirable mates in the first place. 'You don't want to stick your d in crazy' is just as relevant when the sexes are reversed.

    http://www.thetbbs.com/upload/2018/11/29/top-5-weirdest-marriages-man-marries-anime-pillow-video-man-marries-pillow-l-fdb8985423149fcd.jpg
  9. @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

    In both cases you’re paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman.

    Well, I simply don’t believe that most women love their partners and spouses in any society at all. Darwinism informs me about how precarious the situation both men and non-human males are in. History informs me that if you got murdered in an ancient war your wife was likely to willingly submit to your murderer and forgot about you no matter how much you did for her.

    “Romantic experience” means a dude sometimes loving and often pretending to love a lady for the sake of sex and a lady pretending to love a dude for the sake of his resources. That’s it. If you chase a sexually attractive woman what you are after is essentially something that will go away in a couple of years for every pretty girl ends up as a smelly and ugly woman when she becomes sufficiently old.

    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes.

    Yes..for it is usually illegal and low status.

    • Replies: @anon

    [paying for sex] is usually illegal and low status.
     
    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren't enforced. But there aren't many places where using a prostitute isn't low status.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.
    , @Rosie

    History informs me that if you got murdered in an ancient war your wife was likely to willingly submit to your murderer and forgot about you no matter how much you did for her.
     
    Nonsense.
    , @Corvinus
    "Well, I simply don’t believe that most women love their partners and spouses in any society at all. "

    You must have really gotten burned in a relationship to have that sad sack attitude.
  10. @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

    Differences: Not illegal, doesn’t involve gross sharing, doesn’t involve humiliating yourself in front of another human (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute, shame that the prostitute presumably picks up on).

    • Replies: @anon
    I think those are only minor differences.

    Prostitution is often legal, de facto or otherwise. (See my other comment.) Plus, I doubt people who think sex bots will change the world think that banning them will make much difference, although I may be misrepresenting the position.

    Not sure what you mean by "gross sharing". If referring to STDs, fair enough, sex bots won't have AIDS. (But condoms exist.) If referring to weirdos with intimacy problems, yes, sex bots might be preferable for some of them.

    Humiliation is exactly my point: anybody capable of feeling shame in front of a prostitute, which is most men, would also feel shame in front of a sex bot, and for the same reason: you're settling for an ersatz romantic/sexual experience, because you aren't good enough to get a real one. The fact that the robot doesn't react to your shame is immaterial: you still feel it. (And many prostitutes are presumably good at pretending they don't notice.)

    Sex bots will appeal to some subset of:

    - Men who are presently using prostitutes

    - Men who would use prostitutes, but are afraid of disease

    - Men who would use prostitutes, but are too autistic or whatever to be intimate with any real human being

    - Trans-humanist, techno-futurist types - the kind who'd like an RFID chip implanted in their skin

    - Men with extremely perverse sexual urges who are presently confining themselves to porn - assuming they can find a sex bot manufacturer willing to meet their demand

    And that's it.

    Note re: evil perverts: across the entire population of such men, the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc after the sex bot revolution. For that reason alone, sex bots will be heavily regulated in most societies, and sex bots in the image of children, for instance, will be illegal.
    , @iffen
    (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute

    Only the ones that think that they are "better than" the prostitute.
  11. In the modern world especially in the West people do not tend to consider power as something legitimate. But since power exists anyway people tend to avoid it when discussing issues which obfuscates issues.

    Example 1: What’s the basis of male power?

    Ability to murder and injure. No, it is not about intelligence or contribution. In societies in Sub-Saharan Africa where men are economically very unproductive there is still male power. Why? Because men are better bullies and murderers. The trait that causes women to obey men is the same as the trait that causes many non-Negroids to fear and avoid Negroids.

    Example 2: What’s the basis of female power?

    Ability to provide a limited resource. No, that resource isn’t housework. It isn’t even sex. Instead it is the fact that they are essential to childbirth. A man can live a long and wonderful life without women. On the other hand a man can not reproduce without women. Hell, it’s not even that reproduction is something essential. It really isn’t. You don’t need to reproduce to remain alive. You really don’t. However the blind hand of evolution certainly selects against whatever traits that leads to less surviving offsprings, especially traits that cause childlessness… The irrational and powerful craze for sex of course evolved through this process…to the point that many male organisms such as praying mantises would rather die just for the sake of having sex once..

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    That was a great comment, E.K. It's hard for young people to understand that what you wrote is kind of what it's all about. When you're young it feels like LUVVV... don't you LUV to be IN-LUV?! (I think that last bit was a from comedy routine by some feminist, come to think of it, Bette Midler?? Anyone?)

    I've been in love, but sometimes what it's really all about comes through all that.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Don't put undue emphasis on personal consciousness. Survival is a means for allowing reproduction, but reproduction is the telos.
  12. This poll is quite funny. But I wonder what the average age of female respondents would be. I feel somewhat skeptical that most females who grew up with the internet would genuinely feel this way. But I think they would possibly be more likely to lie about it.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    I feel somewhat skeptical that most females who grew up with the internet would genuinely feel this way.
     
    Not really. That's how you would have felt if you were a lawyer and AI lawyers better than humans ones began to show up...or if you were a cab driver and Uber arrived at your town..

    It is really about restricting competition, not very different from cab drivers protesting Uber or high school students & parents in certain cities of China where it is easier to get into top universities not wanting people from the rest of the country to be able to take their gaokao exams there.

  13. Porn is for idiots. Anyone who is at all conversant with the 60s and its mentalities will know this implicitly.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    Not really. Porn is good for MGTOWs who don't want to be hijacked by their libido.
    , @Truth
    https://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html
  14. @songbird
    This poll is quite funny. But I wonder what the average age of female respondents would be. I feel somewhat skeptical that most females who grew up with the internet would genuinely feel this way. But I think they would possibly be more likely to lie about it.

    I feel somewhat skeptical that most females who grew up with the internet would genuinely feel this way.

    Not really. That’s how you would have felt if you were a lawyer and AI lawyers better than humans ones began to show up…or if you were a cab driver and Uber arrived at your town..

    It is really about restricting competition, not very different from cab drivers protesting Uber or high school students & parents in certain cities of China where it is easier to get into top universities not wanting people from the rest of the country to be able to take their gaokao exams there.

    • Replies: @songbird
    I wonder what the response would have been if they asked if pornography should be allowed. Going by originalism, they would probably be correct.
    , @L Woods
    Ditto with the current “sex trafficking” moral panic.
  15. @obwandiyag
    Porn is for idiots. Anyone who is at all conversant with the 60s and its mentalities will know this implicitly.

    Not really. Porn is good for MGTOWs who don’t want to be hijacked by their libido.

    • Replies: @216
    Pron still relates to a dependence on women, mediated through a digital format.

    MGTOW has the concept of the "anger phase" and pron might be considered part of that.

    While digitization has wrecked the profit margins and concentrated the industry into a monopoly, usage still provides enough ad dollars to keep it spinning.

    As a matter of social concern, individually we should do our part towards starving the beast by not consuming.
  16. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @EastKekistani

    In both cases you’re paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman.
     
    Well, I simply don't believe that most women love their partners and spouses in any society at all. Darwinism informs me about how precarious the situation both men and non-human males are in. History informs me that if you got murdered in an ancient war your wife was likely to willingly submit to your murderer and forgot about you no matter how much you did for her.

    "Romantic experience" means a dude sometimes loving and often pretending to love a lady for the sake of sex and a lady pretending to love a dude for the sake of his resources. That's it. If you chase a sexually attractive woman what you are after is essentially something that will go away in a couple of years for every pretty girl ends up as a smelly and ugly woman when she becomes sufficiently old.


    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes.
     
    Yes..for it is usually illegal and low status.

    [paying for sex] is usually illegal and low status.

    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren’t enforced. But there aren’t many places where using a prostitute isn’t low status.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.
     
    Sure.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren’t enforced. But there aren’t many places where using a prostitute isn’t low status.
     
    Yes. This does not have a lot to do with whether it is legal. Instead it is more about breaking social norms and in the case of the West sexual unattractiveness.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.
     
    I'm not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide? In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.
    , @AaronB
    Most high status men use prostitutes. That's why we have these scandals every now and then. And also mistresses.

    Using prostitutes is forbidden to the middle classes, who are always the guardians of social morality, and have stricter rules than other classes.

    The lower classes are outside the social pale, and the upper classes are free from any status concern and play by their own rules.

    The upper and lower classes are both free for different reasons, whereas the middle classes have to obey social rules.
  17. Hey, it’s getting fun again.

  18. @anon

    [paying for sex] is usually illegal and low status.
     
    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren't enforced. But there aren't many places where using a prostitute isn't low status.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.

    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.

    Sure.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren’t enforced. But there aren’t many places where using a prostitute isn’t low status.

    Yes. This does not have a lot to do with whether it is legal. Instead it is more about breaking social norms and in the case of the West sexual unattractiveness.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.

    I’m not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide? In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.

    • Replies: @anon


    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.
     
    I’m not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide?
     
    That may well be technically possible, but you're missing my point if you think it's relevant. A high-class prostitute is probably much better at giving sexual pleasure than a woman who doesn't do it for a living, and yet most men are chasing the latter, even though the former is easier to get. If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they'd be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they're not.

    Supermarkets exist, but men still go fishing.

    In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.
     
    I would believe this if every man secretly brought out an arsenal of sex toys and drugs when he watched porn, but this isn't the case.

    And the norm against prostitution is as old as prostitution is as old as humanity. It'll never become "impossible to enforce" because it's a facet of basic human nature. Men don't like buying it, women don't like selling it, and they certainly don't like other women selling it.
  19. One thing I was always mystified by is the profusion of sex on network TV. I don’t see how anyone could possibly find it titillating, so it seems very unnecessary and in bad taste.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  20. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @Audacious Epigone
    Differences: Not illegal, doesn't involve gross sharing, doesn't involve humiliating yourself in front of another human (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute, shame that the prostitute presumably picks up on).

    I think those are only minor differences.

    Prostitution is often legal, de facto or otherwise. (See my other comment.) Plus, I doubt people who think sex bots will change the world think that banning them will make much difference, although I may be misrepresenting the position.

    Not sure what you mean by “gross sharing”. If referring to STDs, fair enough, sex bots won’t have AIDS. (But condoms exist.) If referring to weirdos with intimacy problems, yes, sex bots might be preferable for some of them.

    Humiliation is exactly my point: anybody capable of feeling shame in front of a prostitute, which is most men, would also feel shame in front of a sex bot, and for the same reason: you’re settling for an ersatz romantic/sexual experience, because you aren’t good enough to get a real one. The fact that the robot doesn’t react to your shame is immaterial: you still feel it. (And many prostitutes are presumably good at pretending they don’t notice.)

    Sex bots will appeal to some subset of:

    – Men who are presently using prostitutes

    – Men who would use prostitutes, but are afraid of disease

    – Men who would use prostitutes, but are too autistic or whatever to be intimate with any real human being

    – Trans-humanist, techno-futurist types – the kind who’d like an RFID chip implanted in their skin

    – Men with extremely perverse sexual urges who are presently confining themselves to porn – assuming they can find a sex bot manufacturer willing to meet their demand

    And that’s it.

    Note re: evil perverts: across the entire population of such men, the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc after the sex bot revolution. For that reason alone, sex bots will be heavily regulated in most societies, and sex bots in the image of children, for instance, will be illegal.

    • Replies: @Michael S

    the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc
     
    This is like the "video games cause violence" and "porn causes rape" narratives, both literally opposite to the reality. If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don't really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.

    If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they’d be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they’re not.
     
    Also very wrong, or at least massively distorted. The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren't charging much for their services.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    A lot to think about there, thanks.
  21. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @EastKekistani

    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.
     
    Sure.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren’t enforced. But there aren’t many places where using a prostitute isn’t low status.
     
    Yes. This does not have a lot to do with whether it is legal. Instead it is more about breaking social norms and in the case of the West sexual unattractiveness.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.
     
    I'm not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide? In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.

    I’m not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide?

    That may well be technically possible, but you’re missing my point if you think it’s relevant. A high-class prostitute is probably much better at giving sexual pleasure than a woman who doesn’t do it for a living, and yet most men are chasing the latter, even though the former is easier to get. If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they’d be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they’re not.

    Supermarkets exist, but men still go fishing.

    In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.

    I would believe this if every man secretly brought out an arsenal of sex toys and drugs when he watched porn, but this isn’t the case.

    And the norm against prostitution is as old as prostitution is as old as humanity. It’ll never become “impossible to enforce” because it’s a facet of basic human nature. Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    ... women don’t like selling it... ... women don't like people understanding that they are selling it.
     
    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it's in their nature to sell it. That's what marriage or partnership is about.

    ... and they certainly don’t like other women selling it
     
    No, not a a steep rental discount they don't. If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before.
    , @Rosie

    Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.
     
    Women's opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself, not the rest of us. Women generally believe prostitution should be illegal, but oppose severe punitive measures against it.
  22. @EastKekistani

    I feel somewhat skeptical that most females who grew up with the internet would genuinely feel this way.
     
    Not really. That's how you would have felt if you were a lawyer and AI lawyers better than humans ones began to show up...or if you were a cab driver and Uber arrived at your town..

    It is really about restricting competition, not very different from cab drivers protesting Uber or high school students & parents in certain cities of China where it is easier to get into top universities not wanting people from the rest of the country to be able to take their gaokao exams there.

    I wonder what the response would have been if they asked if pornography should be allowed. Going by originalism, they would probably be correct.

    • Replies: @Anon
    At the very least, access to porn should be denied to kids. This should be done at all cost.

    But internet monopolies crack down on free speech while doing little to control access to porn.

    If it's illegal to sell porn to minors, why should it be so easily available on the net?

    It's like saying tobacco can't be sold to minors but making it super-easy for kids to get cigarettes.

    But then, today's media are like porn. Russia Collusion... hysteria porn.
    Iraq War: Neocon War Porn.
  23. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:

    It is an interesting data point and worth keeping in mind, but also inherent to the poll question that “pornography” as a term is so legally and culturally protean. Is sappy Twilight fan-fic not the kind of controlled-substance, capital-P porn of which you speak?

    Also, you’d have to be a space cadet not to observe the female shift toward abstemiousness and blue-haired-biddy kind of temperament in the U.S., with ersatz-domestic tics like getting into knitting/yarn crafts. It’s a cycle, of course: 1) build up the celebrities/prosititutes of the age (a sufficient supply of male dopes being essential to this formula); 2) get exhausted and depressed from doomed self-comparison to even the D-list tier of feminine icons comprising the bottom 1/2 of the 99th percentile of hotness and status; 3) start nagging any man in sight, merely for the distraction from worshipping the Kardashian or Markle literal betch goddess.

    I would be surprised by many women having deeply considered views on the morality of legal erotica but probably all have a general idea of unappealing “male behavior” they hate– not the same thing as a lonely dude whacking to porn, but related

    • Replies: @anon

    Is sappy Twilight fan-fic not the kind of controlled-substance, capital-P porn of which you speak?
     
    Excellent point. The publishing industry caters to female tastes for the same reason the porn industry caters to male.
  24. @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

    If the sexbot can cook, clean, and satisfy a man sexually, and make sandwiches; then the primary ways a woman could compete for a share of a man’s resources would be to demonstrate superior moral values and child rearing abilities. Total game changer. If not, then it’s just an expensive fleshlight, and not important.

    • Replies: @anon
    There's no reason that a sufficiently advanced robot couldn't do all those things, although it's worth bearing in mind that people have been waiting for robot butlers for a long time, and may be waiting even more.

    But my point remains: there's no reason a man couldn't pay a woman to do all those things today, but by and large they either don't, or they do, but still get married anyway, and usually to a woman who offers more (or less) than her moral compass and parenting skills, i.e. a good-looking woman, if they can.

    Donald Trump can afford maids, cooks, and prostitutes, but he still married a supermodel. Were there no homely-looking chicks of better character to be found?

    Even if they were more than an expensive fleshlight, sex bots would still be no big deal.
  25. @Anonymous
    It is an interesting data point and worth keeping in mind, but also inherent to the poll question that "pornography" as a term is so legally and culturally protean. Is sappy Twilight fan-fic not the kind of controlled-substance, capital-P porn of which you speak?

    Also, you'd have to be a space cadet not to observe the female shift toward abstemiousness and blue-haired-biddy kind of temperament in the U.S., with ersatz-domestic tics like getting into knitting/yarn crafts. It's a cycle, of course: 1) build up the celebrities/prosititutes of the age (a sufficient supply of male dopes being essential to this formula); 2) get exhausted and depressed from doomed self-comparison to even the D-list tier of feminine icons comprising the bottom 1/2 of the 99th percentile of hotness and status; 3) start nagging any man in sight, merely for the distraction from worshipping the Kardashian or Markle literal betch goddess.

    I would be surprised by many women having deeply considered views on the morality of legal erotica but probably all have a general idea of unappealing "male behavior" they hate-- not the same thing as a lonely dude whacking to porn, but related

    Is sappy Twilight fan-fic not the kind of controlled-substance, capital-P porn of which you speak?

    Excellent point. The publishing industry caters to female tastes for the same reason the porn industry caters to male.

  26. @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

    By this logic, internet pornography wouldn’t have been more popular than going to a porn cinema

    • Replies: @anon
    That is a fair point. But the analogy only goes so far.

    Why was internet porn more popular? Thinking out loud...

    No-one's going to see you going in to the theatre any more. But porn was able to keep the entire video rental industry afloat for years, and your neighbours might see you sneaking off into the adult section in the back. Were there that many people too embarrassed to use videotapes and DVDs, but willing to use the internet? Or is it just that it's easier for porn consumers to consume more porn now?

    (It occurs that a big growth market for internet porn, at least the free stuff, was teenage boys, who would've struggled to rent porn from video stores. But presumably they'll also struggle to buy sex bots, so it's moot.)

    Internet porn is much cheaper than the alternatives, so maybe it came down to price. If that's true, then maybe sex bots will take over once they're cheap enough - but I don't know. The price for actual prostitutes can go much lower than it is, right? They don't have much overhead; their price is mostly related to demand. Compare the transition from theatres to video to internet, where porn producers lowered their overheads each time. Theatres would inevitably lose out there, but flesh-and-blood hookers might not, if they can match the costs of the sex bot manufacturers.

    All interesting to think about, perhaps, but it occurs that it's not really germane to my initial point, which is that sex bots won't much change society, at least not to the extent that some people - e.g. Chateau Heartiste - say they will. Sex bots may well replace prostitutes, but they won't bring much more change than that.

    I suppose, though, that if an entire generation grows up banging sex bots as much as young men today watched porn, then I might be forced to eat my words.
  27. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @14wordstofreedom
    If the sexbot can cook, clean, and satisfy a man sexually, and make sandwiches; then the primary ways a woman could compete for a share of a man’s resources would be to demonstrate superior moral values and child rearing abilities. Total game changer. If not, then it’s just an expensive fleshlight, and not important.

    There’s no reason that a sufficiently advanced robot couldn’t do all those things, although it’s worth bearing in mind that people have been waiting for robot butlers for a long time, and may be waiting even more.

    But my point remains: there’s no reason a man couldn’t pay a woman to do all those things today, but by and large they either don’t, or they do, but still get married anyway, and usually to a woman who offers more (or less) than her moral compass and parenting skills, i.e. a good-looking woman, if they can.

    Donald Trump can afford maids, cooks, and prostitutes, but he still married a supermodel. Were there no homely-looking chicks of better character to be found?

    Even if they were more than an expensive fleshlight, sex bots would still be no big deal.

    • Replies: @Truth

    Donald Trump can afford maids, cooks, and prostitutes, but he still married a supermodel.
     
    All that glitters, grashopper...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80TkXp5pNk4
  28. anon[290]: “Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, …”

    Baloney.

    If that were true, there’d be no need to make laws against prostitution. It’s unnecessary to make laws against something nobody wants to do.

    anon[290]: “… and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.”

    True, which is probably why there are such laws. As usual, the popular wisdom is 100% an inversion of reality. We live not in a patriarchy, but under a totalitarian matriarchy. As the #metoo movement shows, a man can be ruined nowadays even for offenses that exist only in the woman’s mind. She was raped if she feels it was rape; assaulted if she felt assaulted.

    • Replies: @anon

    anon[290]: “Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, …”

    Baloney.
     
    Take it to mean "most men", "most women".

    There are laws against lots of things that most people don't want to do.
  29. @Dr. Robert Morgan
    anon[290]: "Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, ..."

    Baloney.

    If that were true, there'd be no need to make laws against prostitution. It's unnecessary to make laws against something nobody wants to do.

    anon[290]: "... and they certainly don’t like other women selling it."

    True, which is probably why there are such laws. As usual, the popular wisdom is 100% an inversion of reality. We live not in a patriarchy, but under a totalitarian matriarchy. As the #metoo movement shows, a man can be ruined nowadays even for offenses that exist only in the woman's mind. She was raped if she feels it was rape; assaulted if she felt assaulted.

    anon[290]: “Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, …”

    Baloney.

    Take it to mean “most men”, “most women”.

    There are laws against lots of things that most people don’t want to do.

    • Replies: @Michael S
    Dude, what do you think Tinder is?

    If you guessed anything other than "heavily discounted prostitution", then you guessed wrong. It's the expense, social stigma, and usual illegality that largely stops most men from soliciting prostitutes.
  30. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @Curious Person
    By this logic, internet pornography wouldn't have been more popular than going to a porn cinema

    That is a fair point. But the analogy only goes so far.

    Why was internet porn more popular? Thinking out loud…

    No-one’s going to see you going in to the theatre any more. But porn was able to keep the entire video rental industry afloat for years, and your neighbours might see you sneaking off into the adult section in the back. Were there that many people too embarrassed to use videotapes and DVDs, but willing to use the internet? Or is it just that it’s easier for porn consumers to consume more porn now?

    (It occurs that a big growth market for internet porn, at least the free stuff, was teenage boys, who would’ve struggled to rent porn from video stores. But presumably they’ll also struggle to buy sex bots, so it’s moot.)

    Internet porn is much cheaper than the alternatives, so maybe it came down to price. If that’s true, then maybe sex bots will take over once they’re cheap enough – but I don’t know. The price for actual prostitutes can go much lower than it is, right? They don’t have much overhead; their price is mostly related to demand. Compare the transition from theatres to video to internet, where porn producers lowered their overheads each time. Theatres would inevitably lose out there, but flesh-and-blood hookers might not, if they can match the costs of the sex bot manufacturers.

    All interesting to think about, perhaps, but it occurs that it’s not really germane to my initial point, which is that sex bots won’t much change society, at least not to the extent that some people – e.g. Chateau Heartiste – say they will. Sex bots may well replace prostitutes, but they won’t bring much more change than that.

    I suppose, though, that if an entire generation grows up banging sex bots as much as young men today watched porn, then I might be forced to eat my words.

    • Replies: @216
    Presumably when realistic sexbots are built, they will at first be too expensive for all but upper-class individuals. So instead there will be either brothels, or Uber-like rentals.

    Female sexbots, known to us as "vibrators" can be purchased online, and enable total privacy. Jeff Bezos did a lot to mainstream them.

    The male equivalent is more technologically difficult, because of "visual requirements", and it won't be as private. So that will reduce consumption, unless prices drop and there is a tolerance for "used models".

    Feminist reaction at the present has focused on the idea of "exploitation" and that this will "teach men how to rape". The more powerful narrative of social paternalism for the benefit of male psychology hasn't been engaged, because feminists hate beta males. It also raises uncomfortable ideas that women "owe men".

    If Prostitutes could be paid off with UBI, I doubt they will raise much concern with being displaced by robots. I speculate that the AI needed to make a sexbot will be a product of industrial automation in other sectors like healthcare.

    A lot of current feminist discourse is about policing male behavior, mainly through the use of public shaming. This will eventually reach the law of diminishing returns. The interesting question will be whether feminism moves in the direction of incentives for pro-female behavior, or towards chemical interdiction of "toxicity".
  31. @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes

    Really? Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down especially as “most men would feel a little ashamed”, but the Feds didn’t shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online “adult” hook-up sites because they were languishing unused.

    Sex bots won’t be any different

    If you try to “shut down” a prostitute and shove her in a closet when surprise guests show up, you’ll likely end up in prison. So that at least will be different.

    • Replies: @anon
    "Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down..."

    I doubt they're much less accurate than numbers re: masturbation, porn, etc. Perhaps this is a topic for our intrepid host and his powerful research skills?

    "...but the Feds didn’t shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online “adult” hook-up sites because they were languishing unused."

    Don't be silly. That there are enough men willing to fuck hookers as to keep the lights on at Craigslist doesn't rise to "most men". But again, perhaps someone ought to find some numbers. Just how many men fuck whores regularly, and how many have ever done so, and what's that as a proportion of all men?
    , @Feryl
    Stuff like gonorrhea and chlamydia is nowhere near as common now as it was in the 70's or 80's, so we can safely say that most hetero men are not using prostitutes these days(however, prostitutes and gay men, as usual, still suffer from high rates of STDs).

    In general, sex and interpersonal violence was a much bigger "problem" among normies in the mid 1970's-mid 1990's then it has been in the current era, or in say, the 1950's and 60's. STDs, serial killing, robberies, child abuse, etc. seem like cyclical phenomona that have very little to do with legislative policies, or political trends (after all, FDR's America with it's fairly mild controls on behavior experienced swiftly declining interpersonal violence, crime, and sex, while Reagan and George HW Bush's vengeful America was extremely violent and sexualized, more so than even Kennedy or LBJ's America). Gen X-ers, who were children and teenagers in the 70's and 80's, are of course well aware of how much more dangerous 1990 was in comparison to say, 1960. The 1960's were a tentative dip into a Dionysian cycle that didn't hit it's full stride until Carter was in office, and didn't fully end until George W was elected.

    Eventually Gen Z is going to ignore the warnings of the Boomers and X-ers who reached adulthood during the Dionysian cycle, and once we reach this generation critical mass Gen Z will begin another Dionysian cycle, and we won't realize the folly of this until we're 15-20 years into it (much like how society generally was accepting of Boomer decadence* in the 1970's, then swiftly turned against it under Reagan). Millennials will sometimes "try their hand" at wilder behavior in the 2030's and 2040's, but like the middle aged Silents of the 70's and 80's, are mostly going to be just too old to do that much partying or fighting.

    Boomers have higher partner counts, higher rates of divorce, and higher rates of alcoholism than Silents, X-ers, and Millennials. This suggests that having a young adulthood in the late 60's/1970's (when society gave the greenlight to decadence) left a residue that Boomers have never been able to remove. Interesting how it took two all time peaks in crime (in 1980 and 1991) to make Americans become so ashamed of sex, violence, and drugs during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton eras.
  32. anon[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @Oleaginous Outrager

    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes
     
    Really? Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down especially as "most men would feel a little ashamed", but the Feds didn't shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online "adult" hook-up sites because they were languishing unused.

    Sex bots won’t be any different
     
    If you try to "shut down" a prostitute and shove her in a closet when surprise guests show up, you'll likely end up in prison. So that at least will be different.

    “Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down…”

    I doubt they’re much less accurate than numbers re: masturbation, porn, etc. Perhaps this is a topic for our intrepid host and his powerful research skills?

    “…but the Feds didn’t shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online “adult” hook-up sites because they were languishing unused.”

    Don’t be silly. That there are enough men willing to fuck hookers as to keep the lights on at Craigslist doesn’t rise to “most men”. But again, perhaps someone ought to find some numbers. Just how many men fuck whores regularly, and how many have ever done so, and what’s that as a proportion of all men?

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    I don't remember the exact numbers but the number of men who have visited a prostitute was twice as high in Europe than the U.S. It was something like thirty percent and fifteen percent. It's mostly legal in Europe so that means that half the men in the U.S. who would normally do it aren't doing it just because of the illegality of it here.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    According to the GSS, 14% of men have "ever paid for sex". There isn't any question about frequency, though. One-in-seven isn't "most men", but it's not an insignificant number of men, either.
  33. @Audacious Epigone
    Differences: Not illegal, doesn't involve gross sharing, doesn't involve humiliating yourself in front of another human (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute, shame that the prostitute presumably picks up on).

    (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute

    Only the ones that think that they are “better than” the prostitute.

    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgKuseOEWik
  34. @iffen
    (I assume many men feel some shame as they use a prostitute

    Only the ones that think that they are "better than" the prostitute.

    • Replies: @iffen
    John Burns, if you could shake your Jewphobia, you might have prospects.
  35. @EastKekistani

    Because there’s just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need…more.
     
    Yeah....nope.

    Well, as an MGTOW I strongly support adult porn and sex bots.

    You’re cute.

  36. @Audacious Epigone
    It's enervating on multiple levels though, isn't it?

    Like social media, it’s probably a double edged sword. Like prostitutes and sexbots, I’m inclined to personally abstain while supporting its proliferation.

    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    This comment makes a lot more sense if your last name is actually "Woodstein."

    Tell me: where, exactly, in the Talmud can I find the elaborate moral justifications for supporting this "proliferation"?

  37. @EastKekistani

    I feel somewhat skeptical that most females who grew up with the internet would genuinely feel this way.
     
    Not really. That's how you would have felt if you were a lawyer and AI lawyers better than humans ones began to show up...or if you were a cab driver and Uber arrived at your town..

    It is really about restricting competition, not very different from cab drivers protesting Uber or high school students & parents in certain cities of China where it is easier to get into top universities not wanting people from the rest of the country to be able to take their gaokao exams there.

    Ditto with the current “sex trafficking” moral panic.

  38. @EastKekistani
    It really depends on how you view it.

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I'm MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    What, you don’t know how to move your body? Maybe you could, like, go for a walk or something? Good grief, you people are ridiculous. What, you think our incredibly masculine European ancestors settled this country by way of channeling their sexual urges – that is, energy – into porn?

    • LOL: Truth
    • Replies: @Talha
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5b/4c/11/5b4c1104d383db9300ffda13c5cbb4d9.jpg

    Peace.
  39. @L Woods
    Like social media, it’s probably a double edged sword. Like prostitutes and sexbots, I’m inclined to personally abstain while supporting its proliferation.

    This comment makes a lot more sense if your last name is actually “Woodstein.”

    Tell me: where, exactly, in the Talmud can I find the elaborate moral justifications for supporting this “proliferation”?

  40. anon[290]: “There are laws against lots of things that most people don’t want to do.”

    You’re missing the point. Virtually everybody wants to do illegal things, but fear of the law prevents it. That’s the reason the law exists.

    Laws against prostitution in the US are draconian, particularly for men who patronize or would like to patronize prostitutes, since as I said above, we live in an unacknowledged matriarchy. In many jurisdictions penalties for mere solicitation can include vehicle forfeiture, loss of job, fines, and having to register as a sex offender.

    Just as there’s no reason to make a law against something nobody wants to do, the severity of the penalty is an indication both of how badly people want to do it, and how much society wishes to discourage the behavior. For example, laws against murder until recently usually included the death penalty. You would no doubt reply that most people don’t want to commit murder, which might be true most of the time. But virtually everyone can think of occasions in their past in which they’ve been angry enough to want to kill someone, or at least could have gained considerable advantage by doing so; and likewise, virtually all men have been horny enough at some point to want to solicit a prostitute. The law, with its potential penalties, is what restrains them. The shame that you and others cite as a disincentive is just an internalization of the law. It’s more effect than cause.

    • Replies: @anon
    If the law is the only thing that stops you from murdering people, then I'm glad we're having this conversation over the internet.
  41. Real life reactions to a sexbot, prepare to cringe.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Triggered!
  42. ” … Cut out the cranking.”

    If by “cranking” you mean masturbation I’m afraid I must disagree, AE. If a man doesn’t have a partner with whom he can relieve himself on a daily basis then he should resort to masturbation. Guys need to expel the demon juice to keep the prostate healthy. If your imagination is insufficient to conjure erotic images and thoughts to make quick work of your daily needs, then turn to visual aids. We dudes are visual creatures. But while you’re cranking your yank in front of the digital screen, remember that the porn business profits from performers who usually come from a background of childhood sexual abuse.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    The succubus will take care of that.

    Though I'm no expert on the terminology, I think "cranking" refers not just to sexual release but also to an attempt at positive mood stimulation. Maybe it's healthier if it's on a schedule as opposed to just doing it whenever the urge to strikes.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Guys need to expel the demon juice to keep the prostate healthy.
     
    I thought that's what wet dreams were for.

    Tears clean the tear ducts. So you should torture yourself to bring them about?

    "Masturbation can make you blind" can be seen as quite true, in a spiritual sense. I remember Dr Fleming of the Rockford Institute quipping, "You can't ask a girl out for a date?"
    , @Curious Person
    Not really any evidence for this for younger men. A study found that men who masturbated frequently suffered from prostate cancer at an increased rate and another a decreased rate.


    https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319536.php

  43. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.
     
    What, you don't know how to move your body? Maybe you could, like, go for a walk or something? Good grief, you people are ridiculous. What, you think our incredibly masculine European ancestors settled this country by way of channeling their sexual urges - that is, energy - into porn?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @anon
    had me until "liberator" of jerusalem

    islam liberates no one

  44. o/t

    but just realized they seem to have dropped “religion of peace”

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  45. i think dropping sex dolls over the 3rd world could dramatically reduce immigration.

    • Replies: @216
    The spread of smartphones and wireless coverage has already occurred even in warzones like Somalia. If titillation was sapping energy levels, I'd think we'd already be seeing signs of it.

    The AI needed for a realistic sexbot could presumably affect the status of automation in other industries. A bot able to simulate sex acts might be a by-product of bots designed to work in nursing homes and hospitals.
  46. My recommendation: Cut out the cranking. Irrespective of your particular situation, you’ll be better for it.

    i’m practicing for when i get the real thing

    i’ll be ready

  47. @Talha
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5b/4c/11/5b4c1104d383db9300ffda13c5cbb4d9.jpg

    Peace.

    had me until “liberator” of jerusalem

    islam liberates no one

    • Replies: @Talha
    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master...
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3a/22/f7/3a22f7bb7fb567274e839e4489627ce2.jpg

    “Have you seen the one who takes his desires as his god?...” (25:43)

    As far as Jerusalem, well, we certainly think he liberated it; you are free to come for it again once we get it back - then you can say you liberated it! Fun times!

    Peace.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    He had me until I saw "CE" instead of "AD" on the poster... bunch of wankers ... oops... probably not the best term to use just now....
  48. @obwandiyag
    Porn is for idiots. Anyone who is at all conversant with the 60s and its mentalities will know this implicitly.
  49. @anon
    There's no reason that a sufficiently advanced robot couldn't do all those things, although it's worth bearing in mind that people have been waiting for robot butlers for a long time, and may be waiting even more.

    But my point remains: there's no reason a man couldn't pay a woman to do all those things today, but by and large they either don't, or they do, but still get married anyway, and usually to a woman who offers more (or less) than her moral compass and parenting skills, i.e. a good-looking woman, if they can.

    Donald Trump can afford maids, cooks, and prostitutes, but he still married a supermodel. Were there no homely-looking chicks of better character to be found?

    Even if they were more than an expensive fleshlight, sex bots would still be no big deal.

    Donald Trump can afford maids, cooks, and prostitutes, but he still married a supermodel.

    All that glitters, grashopper…

  50. @anon
    had me until "liberator" of jerusalem

    islam liberates no one

    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master…

    “Have you seen the one who takes his desires as his god?…” (25:43)

    As far as Jerusalem, well, we certainly think he liberated it; you are free to come for it again once we get it back – then you can say you liberated it! Fun times!

    Peace.

    • Replies: @anon

    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master…
     
    who taught you that your job was to "teach" me?

    you and your religion are just more authoritarians trying to shove their beliefs down others' throats at the point of a gun
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Don't take my donning of this tunic emblazoned with the cross of St. George across the front the wrong way, friend, but--on guard!
  51. 3173695

    LOL, I’m just messin’ with Keki, he’s pretty rude he can take it.

    • Replies: @iffen
    The comment section is an intellectual free-fire zone. God-damnit, I love it sometimes.

    Kek can take it as well as you and I, but the schoolmarm wants a dignified discussion space.

    Something that won't frighten the carriage horses while the owners are reading. I support it.
  52. I don’t think anyone has mentioned a potential downfall for the owner of a sexbot, and that is over-familiarity. One of the big drivers that set men looking for prostitutes (or massage “therapists”) is the simple urge for something besides the wife or gf. Plenty of men with beautiful wives will occasionally seek “professional” short-term encounters simply to satisfy the urge for something different- even if different is actually less attractive than their sanctioned mate. A girl I knew once described any non-wifely body a man sought as “strange”, i.e., a vagina “strange” as in previously unknown to that particular man.

    I think boredom drives a large part of the trade in prostitution; not desperation, not uncontrollably strong lust; just boredom and that irritating sense in the back of the head that says life holds more excitement than you are currently enjoying.

    Back to the bots: they will become unexciting even faster than flesh and blood gfs and wives, because the latter can at least be shocked occasionally by some new, offbeat sexual request.

    Bot manufacturers should probably consider a generous trade-in allowance on used models, to keep selling fresh product.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Rosie

    I think boredom drives a large part of the trade in prostitution; not desperation, not uncontrollably strong lust; just boredom and that irritating sense in the back of the head that says life holds more excitement than you are currently enjoying.
     
    This is also my impression. The solution is to crowd it out with hobbies. Chess, reading, a musical instrument, home improvement, whatever it takes.
    , @EH
    Combination with sufficiently good VR goggles displaying infinitely varied but impossibly beautiful computer-generated girls using AI body-model and image generation software will delay boredom considerably. Adjustments in the dolls could allow for some bone length adjustment, and skins, heads and nether parts could potentially be changed. The latter is especially desirable for sanitary reasons as most guys won't be buying their own, at least not the full-motion capable ones, which will not fall below several thousand dollars barring some technical revolution. The first full motion ones will cost 10 times that, and the tech won't be up to doing it at all for a few years.
  53. @anon
    "Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down..."

    I doubt they're much less accurate than numbers re: masturbation, porn, etc. Perhaps this is a topic for our intrepid host and his powerful research skills?

    "...but the Feds didn’t shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online “adult” hook-up sites because they were languishing unused."

    Don't be silly. That there are enough men willing to fuck hookers as to keep the lights on at Craigslist doesn't rise to "most men". But again, perhaps someone ought to find some numbers. Just how many men fuck whores regularly, and how many have ever done so, and what's that as a proportion of all men?

    I don’t remember the exact numbers but the number of men who have visited a prostitute was twice as high in Europe than the U.S. It was something like thirty percent and fifteen percent. It’s mostly legal in Europe so that means that half the men in the U.S. who would normally do it aren’t doing it just because of the illegality of it here.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Your recollection for the US is nearly exactly what the GSS shows.
  54. anon[188] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha
    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master...
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3a/22/f7/3a22f7bb7fb567274e839e4489627ce2.jpg

    “Have you seen the one who takes his desires as his god?...” (25:43)

    As far as Jerusalem, well, we certainly think he liberated it; you are free to come for it again once we get it back - then you can say you liberated it! Fun times!

    Peace.

    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master…

    who taught you that your job was to “teach” me?

    you and your religion are just more authoritarians trying to shove their beliefs down others’ throats at the point of a gun

    • Replies: @Talha

    who taught you that your job was to “teach” me?
     
    God did, whether you accept it or not is your business.

    you and your religion are just more authoritarians
     
    I get it, the growth of Islam might mean less access to on-demand porn and less "slut walks" in major metropolitan areas might even mean more difficult access to abortions. I feel your pain.

    I'm sure we can come up with a nice arrangement with an atheist collective to let you guys have your own millet where you can do these things undisturbed within your jurisdiction. Just pony up taxes and we won't care what you do; have pot-smoking orgies with your grandparents in the streets - no sweat off my back.

    shove their beliefs down others’ throats at the point of a gun
     
    This is how democracy works once you have a majority - it's built into the cake; if I try to marry another wife, I'll get thrown in jail by a bunch of guys carrying guns:
    "In Illinois, committing bigamy is a Class 4 felony. If a person is found guilty of this crime, he or she can be sentenced to up to three years in prison. In fact, a person found guilty of Class 4 in Illinois can be sentenced to no one less than one year, but not more than three."
    https://www.scomlaw.com/divorce-lawyer-dupage/2014/06/13/uncovering-bigamy-divorce/

    Why are secularists such authoritarians?

    Peace.
  55. @anon

    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master…
     
    who taught you that your job was to "teach" me?

    you and your religion are just more authoritarians trying to shove their beliefs down others' throats at the point of a gun

    who taught you that your job was to “teach” me?

    God did, whether you accept it or not is your business.

    you and your religion are just more authoritarians

    I get it, the growth of Islam might mean less access to on-demand porn and less “slut walks” in major metropolitan areas might even mean more difficult access to abortions. I feel your pain.

    I’m sure we can come up with a nice arrangement with an atheist collective to let you guys have your own millet where you can do these things undisturbed within your jurisdiction. Just pony up taxes and we won’t care what you do; have pot-smoking orgies with your grandparents in the streets – no sweat off my back.

    shove their beliefs down others’ throats at the point of a gun

    This is how democracy works once you have a majority – it’s built into the cake; if I try to marry another wife, I’ll get thrown in jail by a bunch of guys carrying guns:
    “In Illinois, committing bigamy is a Class 4 felony. If a person is found guilty of this crime, he or she can be sentenced to up to three years in prison. In fact, a person found guilty of Class 4 in Illinois can be sentenced to no one less than one year, but not more than three.”
    https://www.scomlaw.com/divorce-lawyer-dupage/2014/06/13/uncovering-bigamy-divorce/

    Why are secularists such authoritarians?

    Peace.

  56. @EastKekistani
    In the modern world especially in the West people do not tend to consider power as something legitimate. But since power exists anyway people tend to avoid it when discussing issues which obfuscates issues.

    Example 1: What's the basis of male power?

    Ability to murder and injure. No, it is not about intelligence or contribution. In societies in Sub-Saharan Africa where men are economically very unproductive there is still male power. Why? Because men are better bullies and murderers. The trait that causes women to obey men is the same as the trait that causes many non-Negroids to fear and avoid Negroids.

    Example 2: What's the basis of female power?

    Ability to provide a limited resource. No, that resource isn't housework. It isn't even sex. Instead it is the fact that they are essential to childbirth. A man can live a long and wonderful life without women. On the other hand a man can not reproduce without women. Hell, it's not even that reproduction is something essential. It really isn't. You don't need to reproduce to remain alive. You really don't. However the blind hand of evolution certainly selects against whatever traits that leads to less surviving offsprings, especially traits that cause childlessness... The irrational and powerful craze for sex of course evolved through this process...to the point that many male organisms such as praying mantises would rather die just for the sake of having sex once..

    That was a great comment, E.K. It’s hard for young people to understand that what you wrote is kind of what it’s all about. When you’re young it feels like LUVVV… don’t you LUV to be IN-LUV?! (I think that last bit was a from comedy routine by some feminist, come to think of it, Bette Midler?? Anyone?)

    I’ve been in love, but sometimes what it’s really all about comes through all that.

  57. @anon


    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.
     
    I’m not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide?
     
    That may well be technically possible, but you're missing my point if you think it's relevant. A high-class prostitute is probably much better at giving sexual pleasure than a woman who doesn't do it for a living, and yet most men are chasing the latter, even though the former is easier to get. If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they'd be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they're not.

    Supermarkets exist, but men still go fishing.

    In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.
     
    I would believe this if every man secretly brought out an arsenal of sex toys and drugs when he watched porn, but this isn't the case.

    And the norm against prostitution is as old as prostitution is as old as humanity. It'll never become "impossible to enforce" because it's a facet of basic human nature. Men don't like buying it, women don't like selling it, and they certainly don't like other women selling it.

    women don’t like selling it… … women don’t like people understanding that they are selling it.

    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it’s in their nature to sell it. That’s what marriage or partnership is about.

    … and they certainly don’t like other women selling it

    No, not a a steep rental discount they don’t. If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it’s in their nature to sell it. That’s what marriage or partnership is about.
     
    Because it's just inconceivable that men value their wives' companionship and nurturing services. As ever, I try to defend the essential goodness of mankind (in the narrow sense), and am foiled by the very men I try to defend, who appear to agree with feminists for the most part about the nature of Male humanity.
    , @iffen
    Alfred, I know that "opening up" is the thing these days, but don't go for it, keep a lot of this stuff to yourself.
    , @anon
    You might rephrase what you said as "women don't like to think of themselves as selling it". Which might be rephrased again as, "they don't like selling it".

    Of course, if you're going to reframe marriage as entirely transactional, men are selling something of themselves too, and I expect they don't much like that, in the same way as above.

    "If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before." - actually, I had to google it. TIL, as they also say on the internet
  58. @JRM
    I don't think anyone has mentioned a potential downfall for the owner of a sexbot, and that is over-familiarity. One of the big drivers that set men looking for prostitutes (or massage "therapists") is the simple urge for something besides the wife or gf. Plenty of men with beautiful wives will occasionally seek "professional" short-term encounters simply to satisfy the urge for something different- even if different is actually less attractive than their sanctioned mate. A girl I knew once described any non-wifely body a man sought as "strange", i.e., a vagina "strange" as in previously unknown to that particular man.


    I think boredom drives a large part of the trade in prostitution; not desperation, not uncontrollably strong lust; just boredom and that irritating sense in the back of the head that says life holds more excitement than you are currently enjoying.


    Back to the bots: they will become unexciting even faster than flesh and blood gfs and wives, because the latter can at least be shocked occasionally by some new, offbeat sexual request.


    Bot manufacturers should probably consider a generous trade-in allowance on used models, to keep selling fresh product.

    I think boredom drives a large part of the trade in prostitution; not desperation, not uncontrollably strong lust; just boredom and that irritating sense in the back of the head that says life holds more excitement than you are currently enjoying.

    This is also my impression. The solution is to crowd it out with hobbies. Chess, reading, a musical instrument, home improvement, whatever it takes.

    • LOL: iffen
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm not sure you have any ability to explain ANY of this without the same equipment, Rosie. I'm just saying. You are trying to understand, but without those parts you not only never will, but you CAN'T.

    It probably goes vice versa, I will admit. I don't have those hormones that make you all into nut-cases for significant chunks of the lunar month. It's very expensive. Help me understand ...

    .

    ... no, I kid. I don't want to know ....

  59. @anon


    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.
     
    I’m not exactly sure about that one. What if sex bots become so good that they are genuinely a lot better than humans in terms of the amount of sexual pleasure they can provide?
     
    That may well be technically possible, but you're missing my point if you think it's relevant. A high-class prostitute is probably much better at giving sexual pleasure than a woman who doesn't do it for a living, and yet most men are chasing the latter, even though the former is easier to get. If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they'd be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they're not.

    Supermarkets exist, but men still go fishing.

    In societies where people often live alone such as the West (and among younger people it also applies to NE Asia) people may treat sex bots like porn. They may use them all the time while denying that they actually use them at all until the norm against sex bots becomes impossible to enforce since almost everyone uses them anyway.
     
    I would believe this if every man secretly brought out an arsenal of sex toys and drugs when he watched porn, but this isn't the case.

    And the norm against prostitution is as old as prostitution is as old as humanity. It'll never become "impossible to enforce" because it's a facet of basic human nature. Men don't like buying it, women don't like selling it, and they certainly don't like other women selling it.

    Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.

    Women’s opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself, not the rest of us. Women generally believe prostitution should be illegal, but oppose severe punitive measures against it.

    • LOL: L Woods
    • Replies: @Rosie
    Survey cited in this article shows that only 20% (18% of men and 21% of women) think prostitution should be an incarcerable offense.

    https://reason.com/2016/03/11/american-prostitution-study

    For patrons, 19% of men and 20% of women think incarceration would be an appropriate punishment.

    , @Michael S

    Women’s opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself
     
    Feminists: Women who have sex for money are harming themselves.

    Also feminists: Women who hook up with dozens of men on Tinder, make thousands of dollars camwhoring on Instagram, or marry and then divorce rich men for their money are strong, empowered and courageous.

    Women are literally incapable of telling the truth on this subject. A woman with no sexual history who chooses to go into prostitution, including the soft prostitution of modeling/acting/etc., is harming herself. That's true. But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.

    Besides, if that were truly your objection, then you wouldn't have a problem with sexbots, as they have no humanity and therefore can't harm themselves. And yet you feel anger, or at least irritation about them, don't you? No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.
    , @216
    Regardless of how you phrase it, the logic of protectionism still remains. Revealed prefereneces are what matters.

    The average woman stands to benefit from a society where beta male sexuality is contained, and their only option for release is relentless labor to signal provider status. Much of the Islamic world is governed in this fashion.

    In the same visage, women tend to be more tolerant of polygamy and homosexuality. Polygamy offers a greater chance at an alpha male, and reduced sexual labor. Male homosexuality is thought to remove lower-value men from the mating market, and gays tend to be viewed as non-threatening. Western feminists have a tendency to taunt self-proclaimed incels to become gay, in an amazing doublethink against a long-standing narrative of "born this way".

    It is also true that women tend to engage in public slut-shaming, far more than men. This is also an action of protectionism or "mate guarding" as RedPillers call it.
    , @anon
    I doubt most people, male or female, are so pure.

    I think much of female opposition to prostitution is for the same reason as female opposition to sluttiness. Feminism has upended it, but women used to hate sluts. If "metoo" had happened pre-feminism, most of the women involved wouldn't have been considered victims.
  60. @Achmed E. Newman

    ... women don’t like selling it... ... women don't like people understanding that they are selling it.
     
    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it's in their nature to sell it. That's what marriage or partnership is about.

    ... and they certainly don’t like other women selling it
     
    No, not a a steep rental discount they don't. If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before.

    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it’s in their nature to sell it. That’s what marriage or partnership is about.

    Because it’s just inconceivable that men value their wives’ companionship and nurturing services. As ever, I try to defend the essential goodness of mankind (in the narrow sense), and am foiled by the very men I try to defend, who appear to agree with feminists for the most part about the nature of Male humanity.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    They do value that stuff, Rosie. That's why it's great "being just friends".

    Once you get married, you've put your money down, and made that gamble that those 2 other important parts you mentioned will hold out. If they don't, and there are kids involved, then you put up with it for those innocent kids or The State wins, one or the other.

    You can't deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal? It's not nice to fool Mother Nature!
    , @iffen
    and am foiled by the very men I try to defend

    I told you so, but you didn't listen to me. The Aryan right is not "good" for women.

    , @anon
    Speaking only of myself, but the "essentially good" are often doing something other than arguing with strangers on the internet in the middle of the day.
  61. @anon
    Heartiste reckons they'll change everything.

    I think they'll change almost nothing.

    What's the difference between a sex bot and a prostitute? In both cases you're paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman. (Well, maybe not all that romantic.) In both cases you know it's not really real, and in both cases, most men would feel a little ashamed.

    Because of that, most men today aren't availing themselves of prostitutes. Sex bots won't be any different. People just assume that they'll change things, because they're robots, and they're from the future. They've imbibed the spirit of the age.

    In Asia, men regularly and avidly patronize prostitutes. Its huge, and there’s no shame. And the “fantasy” element does not bother them at all. They know its not real, but culturally that’s fine.

    The insistence on real affection and the sense of shame at visiting a prostitute is purely a Western cultural thing, and a fairly recent one at that.

    • Replies: @iffen
    The insistence on real affection

    Only a moonbeam collector could think that people believe that they can pay for "real affection."
    , @Feryl
    The differences arise from Caucasians having a much greater sense of individual dignity than sub-Saharan blacks and Asians. It's interesting that in Europe and the MENA, sexual behavior is often regarded as highly personal, subject to heavy regulation, and something over which to feel great shame and embarrassment. Sex is idealized as being "only" acceptable between two life-long partners, and anything outside that context is shameful and degrading.

    It's not a "Western" thing, in the sense that Muslims are even more neurotic about sex than Europeans are (to the point that in some Muslim societies their is great pressure on women to not show their hair in public, lest it trigger lusting men).
    , @anon
    I'd feel more confident in this assessment of Asian men if it were coming from an Asian man, but judging by your name, it's not.

    A lot of Western men's experience of Asia is as a sex tourist, whether vicariously or otherwise. (Not that I'm accusing you...) This may lead them to think Asia is much more libertine than it is.

    I'd believe there was no shame in visiting a prostitute in Asia if (a) I knew nothing about human nature, or assumed it was fundamentally different in Asia, and (b) if Japanese porno didn't pixellate the giblets. Clearly they've got some kind of hang-up.

    As for such shame being only recent in the West, that must mean that it was unremarkable of Jesus to consort with prostitutes. I'm not well-versed in Christianity, but wouldn't that rather invert the point of that story?
    , @anon
    double-post
  62. @Rosie

    Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.
     
    Women's opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself, not the rest of us. Women generally believe prostitution should be illegal, but oppose severe punitive measures against it.

    Survey cited in this article shows that only 20% (18% of men and 21% of women) think prostitution should be an incarcerable offense.

    https://reason.com/2016/03/11/american-prostitution-study

    For patrons, 19% of men and 20% of women think incarceration would be an appropriate punishment.

  63. @anon

    [paying for sex] is usually illegal and low status.
     
    Exactly, as long as we understand that the latter does not follow from the former.

    There are lots of places in the world where prostitution is legal, or quasi-legal, or where the laws against it aren't enforced. But there aren't many places where using a prostitute isn't low status.

    Sex bots will be low status too, and for the same reason, and will therefore be no more popular than prostitutes.

    Most high status men use prostitutes. That’s why we have these scandals every now and then. And also mistresses.

    Using prostitutes is forbidden to the middle classes, who are always the guardians of social morality, and have stricter rules than other classes.

    The lower classes are outside the social pale, and the upper classes are free from any status concern and play by their own rules.

    The upper and lower classes are both free for different reasons, whereas the middle classes have to obey social rules.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @L Woods
    This is accurate. Given that the lower classes don't live poorly in an objective, material sense in today's America, there's a definitely a certain argument to be made for 'dropping out' and living amongst the proles.
    , @anon
    Most high status men use prostitutes.

    Openly?
  64. @Rosie

    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it’s in their nature to sell it. That’s what marriage or partnership is about.
     
    Because it's just inconceivable that men value their wives' companionship and nurturing services. As ever, I try to defend the essential goodness of mankind (in the narrow sense), and am foiled by the very men I try to defend, who appear to agree with feminists for the most part about the nature of Male humanity.

    They do value that stuff, Rosie. That’s why it’s great “being just friends”.

    Once you get married, you’ve put your money down, and made that gamble that those 2 other important parts you mentioned will hold out. If they don’t, and there are kids involved, then you put up with it for those innocent kids or The State wins, one or the other.

    You can’t deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal? It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature!

    • Replies: @Rosie

    You can’t deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal?
     
    Let me explain to you the difference between a wife and a prostitute since you seem to be confused.

    A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she's off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.

  65. “Cut out the cranking.”
    To paraphrase Grandmaster Melle Mel:

    Meat Beat
    Ya beatin’ ya meat
    I seen ya beatin’ that meat from across the street
    Meat Beat is a lesson, too
    Don’t let ya meat beat you

  66. @Rosie

    I think boredom drives a large part of the trade in prostitution; not desperation, not uncontrollably strong lust; just boredom and that irritating sense in the back of the head that says life holds more excitement than you are currently enjoying.
     
    This is also my impression. The solution is to crowd it out with hobbies. Chess, reading, a musical instrument, home improvement, whatever it takes.

    I’m not sure you have any ability to explain ANY of this without the same equipment, Rosie. I’m just saying. You are trying to understand, but without those parts you not only never will, but you CAN’T.

    It probably goes vice versa, I will admit. I don’t have those hormones that make you all into nut-cases for significant chunks of the lunar month. It’s very expensive. Help me understand …

    .

    … no, I kid. I don’t want to know ….

  67. 3174057

    No deal.

    And your husband hasn’t sue for breach of contract? Whaaaa??

    Wait a minute. You have 6 kids, right? So, yes, whatever BS you may say here, you made a good deal.

    • LOL: Rosie
  68. @Achmed E. Newman
    They do value that stuff, Rosie. That's why it's great "being just friends".

    Once you get married, you've put your money down, and made that gamble that those 2 other important parts you mentioned will hold out. If they don't, and there are kids involved, then you put up with it for those innocent kids or The State wins, one or the other.

    You can't deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal? It's not nice to fool Mother Nature!

    You can’t deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal?

    Let me explain to you the difference between a wife and a prostitute since you seem to be confused.

    A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she’s off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    " A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources."

    That's certainly the theory, and even the contract (unenforceable) made at marriage. For better, for worse. But there must be an awful lot of "not-real" wives out there, when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.

    Try losing your job or your business, the house goes, you're in some grotty "social housing" (aka 'project') 25 miles away, the kids either have to move school and lose their friends or you have a big school commute, and your wife's friends are all at once sorry for her and obscurely thrilled by the catastrophe.

    Still, some good women hang on in there and stick to their vows. But a lot won't.


    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled. It could give them mastery of the globe, if only by the enormous demographic hit on recipient countries as men drop out of the marriage market.
    , @Days of Broken Arrows
    "A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she’s off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.”

    A "real wife" chooses a mate on far more factors than "genuine regard and affection." There's looks, income, social status, height, family background, and education among other things. A lot of men don't measure up when it comes to those qualifications.

    Women don't see these "invisible" men because they block them on dating sites, where you can digitally adjust your qualifications for education, height, etc.

    So what do we do with these men who are "unqualified" for today's women? Considering women "marry up" and prefer men who are higher status then themselves, today's super-educated crop of women are leaving more of these men behind than ever. What becomes of the men?

    Well, for one thing, prostitutes won't dismiss them if they're under 6' or didn't go to a name university. So the guy who isn't Mr. Big but manages to save some money at least has access to a woman then.

    As for wives remaining with their husbands regardless of the man's financial status, this might have been true before the no-fault divorce era. But this isn't the case in a country where half of marriage end in divorce and the majority of those divorces are initiated by women.

    I've seen instances of women "branch swinging" from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 -- often with the kids in tow. And I've noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.

    To bring together both these issues, I would consider things like this to be a form of "soft prostitution." When a woman trades her looks for a place to live with one man followed by the next, that's essentially trading sex for resources. No-fault divorce has given us a society teeming with "soft prostitutes" in all classes, so it's disingenuous to complain about hookers when you might just have a woman living next door who is one in everything but name.

    It's not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of "surplus men" who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn't good for anyone.

  69. @anon
    I think those are only minor differences.

    Prostitution is often legal, de facto or otherwise. (See my other comment.) Plus, I doubt people who think sex bots will change the world think that banning them will make much difference, although I may be misrepresenting the position.

    Not sure what you mean by "gross sharing". If referring to STDs, fair enough, sex bots won't have AIDS. (But condoms exist.) If referring to weirdos with intimacy problems, yes, sex bots might be preferable for some of them.

    Humiliation is exactly my point: anybody capable of feeling shame in front of a prostitute, which is most men, would also feel shame in front of a sex bot, and for the same reason: you're settling for an ersatz romantic/sexual experience, because you aren't good enough to get a real one. The fact that the robot doesn't react to your shame is immaterial: you still feel it. (And many prostitutes are presumably good at pretending they don't notice.)

    Sex bots will appeal to some subset of:

    - Men who are presently using prostitutes

    - Men who would use prostitutes, but are afraid of disease

    - Men who would use prostitutes, but are too autistic or whatever to be intimate with any real human being

    - Trans-humanist, techno-futurist types - the kind who'd like an RFID chip implanted in their skin

    - Men with extremely perverse sexual urges who are presently confining themselves to porn - assuming they can find a sex bot manufacturer willing to meet their demand

    And that's it.

    Note re: evil perverts: across the entire population of such men, the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc after the sex bot revolution. For that reason alone, sex bots will be heavily regulated in most societies, and sex bots in the image of children, for instance, will be illegal.

    the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc

    This is like the “video games cause violence” and “porn causes rape” narratives, both literally opposite to the reality. If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don’t really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.

    If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they’d be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they’re not.

    Also very wrong, or at least massively distorted. The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren’t charging much for their services.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don’t really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.
     
    The upside: men who think sexbots are suitable substitutes for real women would fail to pollute future generations with the defective genes.

    The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren’t charging much for their services.
     
    That's a headscratcher.

    Actually, not really. Once again, the grievance is not that women are "whores," but rather precisely that we are not.

    , @anon
    I left out "albeit such a small increase in rape etc that it might not be noticed amongst various other effects", but perhaps I shouldn't've.

    Please note that I'm not saying "x causes y", but rather that someone with a predisposition towards y who was too afraid to try it might acclimate themselves to it via x.
  70. @Michael S

    the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc
     
    This is like the "video games cause violence" and "porn causes rape" narratives, both literally opposite to the reality. If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don't really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.

    If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they’d be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they’re not.
     
    Also very wrong, or at least massively distorted. The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren't charging much for their services.

    If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don’t really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.

    The upside: men who think sexbots are suitable substitutes for real women would fail to pollute future generations with the defective genes.

    The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren’t charging much for their services.

    That’s a headscratcher.

    Actually, not really. Once again, the grievance is not that women are “whores,” but rather precisely that we are not.

    • Replies: @Michael S

    Once again, the grievance is not that women are “whores,” but rather precisely that we are not.
     
    Ha! I think you have me confused with the MGTOW whiners. No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word's proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.

    If you could see past your silly paleo-feminist posturing for one minute and actually listen, you'd realize that men like myself are your only real allies in this fight. I don't think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it's women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen. If there are many rules for men and none for women, then a single man who breaks the rules can ruin a hundred women. If the rules (and social norms) are applied to women, then only the one woman who breaks the rules is ruined.

    You yourself claim that female prostitutes are harming themselves, so why are they allowed to do it? Is it logical that the only "crime" is when a man takes her up on her offer? That's like making drug trafficking legal, but possession illegal. Totally impractical and utterly absurd.
  71. Anon[170] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @EastKekistani
    It really depends on how you view it.

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I'm MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    Since the 70s, it’s been said 80% of Japanese cinema consists of porn movies. Some study says 1/200 Japanese women are into porn business. That is not a healthy society. It’s one thing to have some sex industry as Red Light district stuff. In Japan, it has taken over much of culture.
    In the 80s and 90s, Western commentators would disapprovingly of Japanese in their relation to erotica. For example, there were articles about how people in subway flip through porny magazines and manga(yes, porny cartoons). That became the Norm in Japan. And now, look at the spread of jungle fever in Japan. As a porny nation, Japan is about featuring Negro men and Japanese women, and as the message spreads, more Japanese women will have kids with black men, and these kids will take over sports and Japanese will worship blacks as Japanese heroes. That will set the psychological template for Japan going the way of London.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    That's a legitimate concern.

    Groids are already trying to sexually fuck up NE Asia. Their low numbers do restrict the damage. However the per capita harm caused by groids in NE Asia is very high.
  72. @anon

    anon[290]: “Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, …”

    Baloney.
     
    Take it to mean "most men", "most women".

    There are laws against lots of things that most people don't want to do.

    Dude, what do you think Tinder is?

    If you guessed anything other than “heavily discounted prostitution”, then you guessed wrong. It’s the expense, social stigma, and usual illegality that largely stops most men from soliciting prostitutes.

    • Replies: @anon

    It’s the expense, social stigma, and usual illegality that largely stops most men from soliciting prostitutes.
     
    Emphasis on the one that actually matters.

    What's the cost of a cheap hooker vs. the cost of several rounds of drinks, dinner, maybe some jewellery eventually?

    In those places that actually enforce their laws against prostitution, how much of a depressant effect does that really have?

    I understand your point about Tinder being "heavily discounted prostitution", except that very few people participating would feel comfortable characterising it as such. And why would they feel that why? The same reason there's a social stigma.
    , @Mark G.
    The expense, social stigma and illegality of prostitution do stop men from engaging in it. Also the possibility of a std is one reason men avoid it. A hooker might have sex with hundreds of men and those men are probably being promiscuous too. If you have sex with her, even with a condom, you are taking a risk. There is also a higher probability prostitutes are injecting drugs so they can pass on hepatitis or even AIDS to you. Part of the social stigma may be related to this fact that prostitutes and their johns spread disease. I never considered using a prostitute for your reasons and the health issues. I also enjoy the company of women. I like looking at them, talking to them and being with them. Prostitution would appeal to men who like sex but don't like women. Men who like both sex and women would usually prefer a wife or girlfriend.
  73. Anon[170] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @songbird
    I wonder what the response would have been if they asked if pornography should be allowed. Going by originalism, they would probably be correct.

    At the very least, access to porn should be denied to kids. This should be done at all cost.

    But internet monopolies crack down on free speech while doing little to control access to porn.

    If it’s illegal to sell porn to minors, why should it be so easily available on the net?

    It’s like saying tobacco can’t be sold to minors but making it super-easy for kids to get cigarettes.

    But then, today’s media are like porn. Russia Collusion… hysteria porn.
    Iraq War: Neocon War Porn.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Feryl
    They gave up on trying to "beat" internet porn because the truth is that most people use it, and it doesn't physically hurt people (whereas drugs, violence, and prostitution all do immediate damage to the bodies of those involved).

    Frankly, people "turning to" internet porn is vastly preferable to the old school method of desperately horny people: actually having causal sex with strangers, sometimes via the exchange of money for services rendered (e.g., prostitution).

    The late 18th and very early 19th century were also a period in which men often struggled to find stable romantic partners, but back then, there wasn't widespread porn, so men had little choice but to pay for sex in order to not be plagued by unresolved lust.

    You can't destroy the marriage prospects of 50-60% of younger men (many men born since the mid-1970's are flat out not getting married) and then try to extirpate prostitution (in the past) or porn (the present). We were able to largely crack down on vice in the 1940's and 50's precisely because most men got married at a young age, and could reasonably expect to have a wife who fulfilled his needs.

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what's damaging to "kids" is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn't allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn't keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn't punish corrupt elites, and so forth.
  74. Sex bots? But Jew bots on which you could practice your anti-semitic fantasies or acts that could be perceived as anti-semitic will be certainly outlawed.

    Children beat effigy of Judas in Poland, amid persistence of ‘medieval anti-Semitism’
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/04/23/children-beat-effigy-judas-poland-amid-persistence-medieval-anti-semitism/?utm_term=.21dd38d0057c

    • Replies: @Curious Person
    That does seem like a rather niche market.
  75. @Rosie

    Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.
     
    Women's opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself, not the rest of us. Women generally believe prostitution should be illegal, but oppose severe punitive measures against it.

    Women’s opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself

    Feminists: Women who have sex for money are harming themselves.

    Also feminists: Women who hook up with dozens of men on Tinder, make thousands of dollars camwhoring on Instagram, or marry and then divorce rich men for their money are strong, empowered and courageous.

    Women are literally incapable of telling the truth on this subject. A woman with no sexual history who chooses to go into prostitution, including the soft prostitution of modeling/acting/etc., is harming herself. That’s true. But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.

    Besides, if that were truly your objection, then you wouldn’t have a problem with sexbots, as they have no humanity and therefore can’t harm themselves. And yet you feel anger, or at least irritation about them, don’t you? No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.
     
    I wasn't aware that objecting to perversion required any "rationalization." If it came right down to it, I'd struggle to articulate a logical reason why consensual necrophilia is morally wrong.

    https://www.debate.org/debates/Consensual-Necrophilia/1/

    But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.
     

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can't be damaged any more than she already is.

    In any event, if you must resort to sex outside of regular marriage, using a secret rather than a human being is to be preferred, I suppose.

    , @Rosie

    Also feminists: Women who hook up with dozens of men on Tinder, make thousands of dollars camwhoring on Instagram, or marry and then divorce rich men for their money are strong, empowered and courageous.
     
    There is no feminist consensus on sex work.
  76. @utu
    Sex bots? But Jew bots on which you could practice your anti-semitic fantasies or acts that could be perceived as anti-semitic will be certainly outlawed.


    Children beat effigy of Judas in Poland, amid persistence of ‘medieval anti-Semitism’
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/04/23/children-beat-effigy-judas-poland-amid-persistence-medieval-anti-semitism/?utm_term=.21dd38d0057c

    That does seem like a rather niche market.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Heh!
  77. Political speech is the thing that is constitutionally protected, but in this upside-down world, they protect porn more than political speech.

  78. @Michael S

    Women’s opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself
     
    Feminists: Women who have sex for money are harming themselves.

    Also feminists: Women who hook up with dozens of men on Tinder, make thousands of dollars camwhoring on Instagram, or marry and then divorce rich men for their money are strong, empowered and courageous.

    Women are literally incapable of telling the truth on this subject. A woman with no sexual history who chooses to go into prostitution, including the soft prostitution of modeling/acting/etc., is harming herself. That's true. But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.

    Besides, if that were truly your objection, then you wouldn't have a problem with sexbots, as they have no humanity and therefore can't harm themselves. And yet you feel anger, or at least irritation about them, don't you? No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.

    No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.

    I wasn’t aware that objecting to perversion required any “rationalization.” If it came right down to it, I’d struggle to articulate a logical reason why consensual necrophilia is morally wrong.

    https://www.debate.org/debates/Consensual-Necrophilia/1/

    But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can’t be damaged any more than she already is.

    In any event, if you must resort to sex outside of regular marriage, using a secret rather than a human being is to be preferred, I suppose.

    • Replies: @Michael S

    I wasn’t aware that objecting to perversion required any “rationalization.”
     
    And there it is. Can you articulate a definition of sexual perversion, or is that also just a vague emotion?

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can’t be damaged any more than she already is.
     
    Yes. Realistically, scientifically, there isn't a huge difference between a hundred partners and a thousand partners. All of the attributes we know how to measure - happiness, chance of marriage, chance of divorce, fertility, etc. - they all fall off a cliff after about a dozen, and by the time a woman hits 20 or 30 partners, they've basically flatlined.
  79. @Rosie

    If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don’t really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.
     
    The upside: men who think sexbots are suitable substitutes for real women would fail to pollute future generations with the defective genes.

    The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren’t charging much for their services.
     
    That's a headscratcher.

    Actually, not really. Once again, the grievance is not that women are "whores," but rather precisely that we are not.

    Once again, the grievance is not that women are “whores,” but rather precisely that we are not.

    Ha! I think you have me confused with the MGTOW whiners. No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word’s proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.

    If you could see past your silly paleo-feminist posturing for one minute and actually listen, you’d realize that men like myself are your only real allies in this fight. I don’t think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it’s women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen. If there are many rules for men and none for women, then a single man who breaks the rules can ruin a hundred women. If the rules (and social norms) are applied to women, then only the one woman who breaks the rules is ruined.

    You yourself claim that female prostitutes are harming themselves, so why are they allowed to do it? Is it logical that the only “crime” is when a man takes her up on her offer? That’s like making drug trafficking legal, but possession illegal. Totally impractical and utterly absurd.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word’s proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.
     
    I don't consider money changing hands to be the defining characteristic of prostitution. Rather, it is sex for consideration, in cash or in kind.

    I don’t think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it’s women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen
     
    What sorts of "regulations" do you have in mind, and to what end?
    , @Rosie

    Ha! I think you have me confused with the MGTOW whiners. No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word’s proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.
     
    Michael, I wanted to add that I am particularly creeped out by modern whore-shaming precisely because the Biblical approach to the issue is now ignored.

    https://biblehub.com/john/8-11.htm

    The double standard has always existed, but the line between whore and non-whore is brighter among modern pseudotrads than it was among Medieval Christian's, who knew perfectly well that God didn't accept their double standards, and patrons would burn in hellfire just as hot as the prostitute herself.

    For this reason, I believe, the redeemed prostitute was a figure of veneration and great comfort to medieval sinners, all of whom knew they were equal in their sin.

    https://amedievalwomanscompanion.com/prostitute-saints/

  80. @AaronB
    Most high status men use prostitutes. That's why we have these scandals every now and then. And also mistresses.

    Using prostitutes is forbidden to the middle classes, who are always the guardians of social morality, and have stricter rules than other classes.

    The lower classes are outside the social pale, and the upper classes are free from any status concern and play by their own rules.

    The upper and lower classes are both free for different reasons, whereas the middle classes have to obey social rules.

    This is accurate. Given that the lower classes don’t live poorly in an objective, material sense in today’s America, there’s a definitely a certain argument to be made for ‘dropping out’ and living amongst the proles.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Oh yeah, there is definitely a certain temptation in that. Every couple of years I almost feel like doing it lol.

    In a way the middle classes are the least free of anyone. Taleb wrote recently that only the very wealthy and the extremely poor are truly free in a society - and of the two, the poor are actually freer. And that is certainly correct.

    Philosophers and mystics have been saying this for a long time.
  81. @Michael S

    Women’s opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself
     
    Feminists: Women who have sex for money are harming themselves.

    Also feminists: Women who hook up with dozens of men on Tinder, make thousands of dollars camwhoring on Instagram, or marry and then divorce rich men for their money are strong, empowered and courageous.

    Women are literally incapable of telling the truth on this subject. A woman with no sexual history who chooses to go into prostitution, including the soft prostitution of modeling/acting/etc., is harming herself. That's true. But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.

    Besides, if that were truly your objection, then you wouldn't have a problem with sexbots, as they have no humanity and therefore can't harm themselves. And yet you feel anger, or at least irritation about them, don't you? No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.

    Also feminists: Women who hook up with dozens of men on Tinder, make thousands of dollars camwhoring on Instagram, or marry and then divorce rich men for their money are strong, empowered and courageous.

    There is no feminist consensus on sex work.

  82. @Michael S

    Once again, the grievance is not that women are “whores,” but rather precisely that we are not.
     
    Ha! I think you have me confused with the MGTOW whiners. No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word's proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.

    If you could see past your silly paleo-feminist posturing for one minute and actually listen, you'd realize that men like myself are your only real allies in this fight. I don't think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it's women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen. If there are many rules for men and none for women, then a single man who breaks the rules can ruin a hundred women. If the rules (and social norms) are applied to women, then only the one woman who breaks the rules is ruined.

    You yourself claim that female prostitutes are harming themselves, so why are they allowed to do it? Is it logical that the only "crime" is when a man takes her up on her offer? That's like making drug trafficking legal, but possession illegal. Totally impractical and utterly absurd.

    No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word’s proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.

    I don’t consider money changing hands to be the defining characteristic of prostitution. Rather, it is sex for consideration, in cash or in kind.

    I don’t think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it’s women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen

    What sorts of “regulations” do you have in mind, and to what end?

    • Replies: @Michael S

    What sorts of “regulations” do you have in mind, and to what end?
     
    Pretty obvious, isn't it? The same regulations that kept the western sexual market in check for a thousand years. No premarital sex, and shotgun marriage for anyone caught breaking that rule.

    This necessarily requires removing many of the legal protections for single women that you've come to believe are "rights". Because as long as they're in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.
  83. @Rosie

    No matter, the hamster will spin some new rationalization for that anger.
     
    I wasn't aware that objecting to perversion required any "rationalization." If it came right down to it, I'd struggle to articulate a logical reason why consensual necrophilia is morally wrong.

    https://www.debate.org/debates/Consensual-Necrophilia/1/

    But a prostitute with 10 years and thousands of tricks under her belt is not further harming herself by continuing to ply her trade.
     

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can't be damaged any more than she already is.

    In any event, if you must resort to sex outside of regular marriage, using a secret rather than a human being is to be preferred, I suppose.

    I wasn’t aware that objecting to perversion required any “rationalization.”

    And there it is. Can you articulate a definition of sexual perversion, or is that also just a vague emotion?

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can’t be damaged any more than she already is.

    Yes. Realistically, scientifically, there isn’t a huge difference between a hundred partners and a thousand partners. All of the attributes we know how to measure – happiness, chance of marriage, chance of divorce, fertility, etc. – they all fall off a cliff after about a dozen, and by the time a woman hits 20 or 30 partners, they’ve basically flatlined.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Can you articulate a definition of sexual perversion, or is that also just a vague emotion?
     
    I'd call it a God-given intuition.


    they all fall off a cliff after about a dozen, and by the time a woman hits 20 or 30 partners, they’ve basically flatlined.
     
    My understanding is that this is not true, but I will have to find the data yet again.
    , @anon

    Realistically, scientifically, there isn’t a huge difference between a hundred partners and a thousand partners.
     
    I don't know about scientifically, but supposedly pimps have a concept called "mileage on a ho" which would suggest that there is a huge difference between a hundred and a thousand, at least if the ho's mileage occurs between the two. In other words, there is only "enough to cope with" and "too much to cope with".

    No idea how true that is, but they are the experts.
  84. @Rosie

    No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word’s proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.
     
    I don't consider money changing hands to be the defining characteristic of prostitution. Rather, it is sex for consideration, in cash or in kind.

    I don’t think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it’s women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen
     
    What sorts of "regulations" do you have in mind, and to what end?

    What sorts of “regulations” do you have in mind, and to what end?

    Pretty obvious, isn’t it? The same regulations that kept the western sexual market in check for a thousand years. No premarital sex, and shotgun marriage for anyone caught breaking that rule.

    This necessarily requires removing many of the legal protections for single women that you’ve come to believe are “rights”. Because as long as they’re in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.

    • Replies: @Talha

    The same regulations that kept the western sexual market in check for a thousand years.
     
    Return to a negotiated form of benevolent (not predatory) legalized patriarchy - this is good. Thumbs up!

    whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.
     
    Sex needs to have a high market value again (it is in women's interest):
    https://canavox.com/dear-katy/hope-for-35-and-single/

    Peace.
    , @Rosie

    Because as long as they’re in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.
     
    I don't see any such advantage, and I don't accept your division of women into "whores" and "nonwhores." Indeed, it looks suspiciously like a divide-and-rule ploy to me. I'll set that concern aside for now.

    All that said, I do think your proposal for shot-gun marriages is on the right track. Indeed, part of the reason that single mothers need protection is precisely because the fathers do not marry them and form a proper family. There appears to be some sort of assumption that I do not believe women should ever be held to any standards at all, but this is not true. As far as I'm concerned, if a woman has sex with a man, and then refuses to marry him, I would wonder why precisely she had sex with him if she didn't think he was good enough to marry.
  85. @EastKekistani

    Because there’s just not enough surplus thirst for women to profit from. We need…more.
     
    Yeah....nope.

    Well, as an MGTOW I strongly support adult porn and sex bots.

    In comparison to a low value man being cuckolded and destroyed by an ex-wife in divorce court, there is some logic to that thinking.

    It should still be viewed as negative, however, as it shows weakness of willpower.

    As the various “vice industries” go, the sex industry is quite unregulated and that should probably change.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "In comparison to a low value man being cuckolded and destroyed by an ex-wife in divorce court, there is some logic to that thinking."

    Over 95% of all divorces end up being settled equitably out of court. Assuredly, there are instances of a man--not a "low value man"--getting pillaged and plundered as a result of divorce. Perhaps their bitterness is well-founded or ill-conceived.

    "The average woman stands to benefit from a society where beta male sexuality is contained..."

    Assuming that the social-sexual hierarchy exists and operates in the manner that Heartiste and Vox Day prescribe.

    "In the same visage, women tend to be more tolerant of polygamy..."

    Not in the United States.

    "Western feminists have a tendency to taunt self-proclaimed incels to become gay..."

    Do you have specific examples?

  86. @Michael S

    What sorts of “regulations” do you have in mind, and to what end?
     
    Pretty obvious, isn't it? The same regulations that kept the western sexual market in check for a thousand years. No premarital sex, and shotgun marriage for anyone caught breaking that rule.

    This necessarily requires removing many of the legal protections for single women that you've come to believe are "rights". Because as long as they're in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.

    The same regulations that kept the western sexual market in check for a thousand years.

    Return to a negotiated form of benevolent (not predatory) legalized patriarchy – this is good. Thumbs up!

    whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.

    Sex needs to have a high market value again (it is in women’s interest):
    https://canavox.com/dear-katy/hope-for-35-and-single/

    Peace.

  87. 3174207

    If you want to sell this narrative, you have to voice it in the black female dialect, shaming black men for not showing tribal loyalty.

  88. @L Woods
    This is accurate. Given that the lower classes don't live poorly in an objective, material sense in today's America, there's a definitely a certain argument to be made for 'dropping out' and living amongst the proles.

    Oh yeah, there is definitely a certain temptation in that. Every couple of years I almost feel like doing it lol.

    In a way the middle classes are the least free of anyone. Taleb wrote recently that only the very wealthy and the extremely poor are truly free in a society – and of the two, the poor are actually freer. And that is certainly correct.

    Philosophers and mystics have been saying this for a long time.

  89. @Rosie

    You can’t deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal?
     
    Let me explain to you the difference between a wife and a prostitute since you seem to be confused.

    A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she's off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.

    ” A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.”

    That’s certainly the theory, and even the contract (unenforceable) made at marriage. For better, for worse. But there must be an awful lot of “not-real” wives out there, when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.

    Try losing your job or your business, the house goes, you’re in some grotty “social housing” (aka ‘project’) 25 miles away, the kids either have to move school and lose their friends or you have a big school commute, and your wife’s friends are all at once sorry for her and obscurely thrilled by the catastrophe.

    Still, some good women hang on in there and stick to their vows. But a lot won’t.

    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled. It could give them mastery of the globe, if only by the enormous demographic hit on recipient countries as men drop out of the marriage market.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Rosie

    when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.
     
    Initiating a divorce does not make one not a real wife. It only makes you not a real wife if you leave your husband because of a financial setback. It is true that women initiate most divorces, but it is also true that men are most likely to do things that lead to divorce: drugs, compulsive gambling, adultery, etc.

    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled.
     
    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.
  90. @Rosie

    Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.
     
    Women's opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself, not the rest of us. Women generally believe prostitution should be illegal, but oppose severe punitive measures against it.

    Regardless of how you phrase it, the logic of protectionism still remains. Revealed prefereneces are what matters.

    The average woman stands to benefit from a society where beta male sexuality is contained, and their only option for release is relentless labor to signal provider status. Much of the Islamic world is governed in this fashion.

    In the same visage, women tend to be more tolerant of polygamy and homosexuality. Polygamy offers a greater chance at an alpha male, and reduced sexual labor. Male homosexuality is thought to remove lower-value men from the mating market, and gays tend to be viewed as non-threatening. Western feminists have a tendency to taunt self-proclaimed incels to become gay, in an amazing doublethink against a long-standing narrative of “born this way”.

    It is also true that women tend to engage in public slut-shaming, far more than men. This is also an action of protectionism or “mate guarding” as RedPillers call it.

  91. @notanon
    i think dropping sex dolls over the 3rd world could dramatically reduce immigration.

    The spread of smartphones and wireless coverage has already occurred even in warzones like Somalia. If titillation was sapping energy levels, I’d think we’d already be seeing signs of it.

    The AI needed for a realistic sexbot could presumably affect the status of automation in other industries. A bot able to simulate sex acts might be a by-product of bots designed to work in nursing homes and hospitals.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    But the compulsion to want titillation, and act on one's impulses, is quite low right now. We are certainly far away from the 1970's, when Richard Dawson could host Family Feud and kiss all the women contestants. And the prevailing attitude (among Boomers) in the 70's was that STDs were a mere nuisance that would only temporarily stop you from sleeping around.

    The MeToo movement, as a moral imperative, only resonates with Millennials and the most conservative X-ers who regretted the Bacchanalian climate of the late 1960's-early 1990's or never experienced it as adults in the first place (The Boomer women complaining of mistreatment in the 70's and 80's are only going along with it as also rans who don't want to be seen as tolerating the worst abuses perpetrated by depraved sex maniacs who got their start in the 1960's-1980's).

    And of course, most of the biggest villains in the me-too era are late Silents, Boomers, and early Gen X-ers, with the vast majority of men born before 1940 and after 1970 doing a good job of not pawing and slobbering over whoever happens to be turning them on at the moment (and those born after 1970 who get busted stand out for being outliers within their generation). If you reached age 30 before 1970 or after 2000, odds are that you have a higher level of behavioral inhibition than people whose young adulthoods occurred mostly or entirely in 1970-2000.
  92. @Audacious Epigone
    Good question. I bet they mirror perceptions of porn but shifted towards disapproval for all groups.

    Female sexbots already exist, with minimal social condemnation.

    We just avoid calling them sexbots.

  93. @Rosie

    You can’t deny Mother Nature, though, sex for protection, deal or no deal?
     
    Let me explain to you the difference between a wife and a prostitute since you seem to be confused.

    A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she's off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.

    “A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she’s off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.”

    A “real wife” chooses a mate on far more factors than “genuine regard and affection.” There’s looks, income, social status, height, family background, and education among other things. A lot of men don’t measure up when it comes to those qualifications.

    Women don’t see these “invisible” men because they block them on dating sites, where you can digitally adjust your qualifications for education, height, etc.

    So what do we do with these men who are “unqualified” for today’s women? Considering women “marry up” and prefer men who are higher status then themselves, today’s super-educated crop of women are leaving more of these men behind than ever. What becomes of the men?

    Well, for one thing, prostitutes won’t dismiss them if they’re under 6′ or didn’t go to a name university. So the guy who isn’t Mr. Big but manages to save some money at least has access to a woman then.

    As for wives remaining with their husbands regardless of the man’s financial status, this might have been true before the no-fault divorce era. But this isn’t the case in a country where half of marriage end in divorce and the majority of those divorces are initiated by women.

    I’ve seen instances of women “branch swinging” from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 — often with the kids in tow. And I’ve noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.

    To bring together both these issues, I would consider things like this to be a form of “soft prostitution.” When a woman trades her looks for a place to live with one man followed by the next, that’s essentially trading sex for resources. No-fault divorce has given us a society teeming with “soft prostitutes” in all classes, so it’s disingenuous to complain about hookers when you might just have a woman living next door who is one in everything but name.

    It’s not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of “surplus men” who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.

    • Replies: @L Woods

    while men care about women
     
    Not this man. Like so much of modern America, they aren't deserving your consideration or loyalty.

    Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.
     
    It's good for women, who get off on their misery and unrequited desire, and it's (temporarily at least) good for Chad who gets to clean up the entirety of the spoils.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Hey, good comment there. I just used up my [AGREE] about 2 minutes ago.
    , @anon

    Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.
     
    Tell that to cults, revolutionary movements, porn producers, drug and videogame manufacturers, bloggers...
  94. @EastKekistani
    Not really. Porn is good for MGTOWs who don't want to be hijacked by their libido.

    Pron still relates to a dependence on women, mediated through a digital format.

    MGTOW has the concept of the “anger phase” and pron might be considered part of that.

    While digitization has wrecked the profit margins and concentrated the industry into a monopoly, usage still provides enough ad dollars to keep it spinning.

    As a matter of social concern, individually we should do our part towards starving the beast by not consuming.

  95. @anon
    That is a fair point. But the analogy only goes so far.

    Why was internet porn more popular? Thinking out loud...

    No-one's going to see you going in to the theatre any more. But porn was able to keep the entire video rental industry afloat for years, and your neighbours might see you sneaking off into the adult section in the back. Were there that many people too embarrassed to use videotapes and DVDs, but willing to use the internet? Or is it just that it's easier for porn consumers to consume more porn now?

    (It occurs that a big growth market for internet porn, at least the free stuff, was teenage boys, who would've struggled to rent porn from video stores. But presumably they'll also struggle to buy sex bots, so it's moot.)

    Internet porn is much cheaper than the alternatives, so maybe it came down to price. If that's true, then maybe sex bots will take over once they're cheap enough - but I don't know. The price for actual prostitutes can go much lower than it is, right? They don't have much overhead; their price is mostly related to demand. Compare the transition from theatres to video to internet, where porn producers lowered their overheads each time. Theatres would inevitably lose out there, but flesh-and-blood hookers might not, if they can match the costs of the sex bot manufacturers.

    All interesting to think about, perhaps, but it occurs that it's not really germane to my initial point, which is that sex bots won't much change society, at least not to the extent that some people - e.g. Chateau Heartiste - say they will. Sex bots may well replace prostitutes, but they won't bring much more change than that.

    I suppose, though, that if an entire generation grows up banging sex bots as much as young men today watched porn, then I might be forced to eat my words.

    Presumably when realistic sexbots are built, they will at first be too expensive for all but upper-class individuals. So instead there will be either brothels, or Uber-like rentals.

    Female sexbots, known to us as “vibrators” can be purchased online, and enable total privacy. Jeff Bezos did a lot to mainstream them.

    The male equivalent is more technologically difficult, because of “visual requirements”, and it won’t be as private. So that will reduce consumption, unless prices drop and there is a tolerance for “used models”.

    Feminist reaction at the present has focused on the idea of “exploitation” and that this will “teach men how to rape”. The more powerful narrative of social paternalism for the benefit of male psychology hasn’t been engaged, because feminists hate beta males. It also raises uncomfortable ideas that women “owe men”.

    If Prostitutes could be paid off with UBI, I doubt they will raise much concern with being displaced by robots. I speculate that the AI needed to make a sexbot will be a product of industrial automation in other sectors like healthcare.

    A lot of current feminist discourse is about policing male behavior, mainly through the use of public shaming. This will eventually reach the law of diminishing returns. The interesting question will be whether feminism moves in the direction of incentives for pro-female behavior, or towards chemical interdiction of “toxicity”.

  96. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgKuseOEWik

    John Burns, if you could shake your Jewphobia, you might have prospects.

  97. @Truth
    LOL, I'm just messin' with Keki, he's pretty rude he can take it.

    The comment section is an intellectual free-fire zone. God-damnit, I love it sometimes.

    Kek can take it as well as you and I, but the schoolmarm wants a dignified discussion space.

    Something that won’t frighten the carriage horses while the owners are reading. I support it.

  98. @Oleaginous Outrager

    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes
     
    Really? Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down especially as "most men would feel a little ashamed", but the Feds didn't shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online "adult" hook-up sites because they were languishing unused.

    Sex bots won’t be any different
     
    If you try to "shut down" a prostitute and shove her in a closet when surprise guests show up, you'll likely end up in prison. So that at least will be different.

    Stuff like gonorrhea and chlamydia is nowhere near as common now as it was in the 70’s or 80’s, so we can safely say that most hetero men are not using prostitutes these days(however, prostitutes and gay men, as usual, still suffer from high rates of STDs).

    In general, sex and interpersonal violence was a much bigger “problem” among normies in the mid 1970’s-mid 1990’s then it has been in the current era, or in say, the 1950’s and 60’s. STDs, serial killing, robberies, child abuse, etc. seem like cyclical phenomona that have very little to do with legislative policies, or political trends (after all, FDR’s America with it’s fairly mild controls on behavior experienced swiftly declining interpersonal violence, crime, and sex, while Reagan and George HW Bush’s vengeful America was extremely violent and sexualized, more so than even Kennedy or LBJ’s America). Gen X-ers, who were children and teenagers in the 70’s and 80’s, are of course well aware of how much more dangerous 1990 was in comparison to say, 1960. The 1960’s were a tentative dip into a Dionysian cycle that didn’t hit it’s full stride until Carter was in office, and didn’t fully end until George W was elected.

    Eventually Gen Z is going to ignore the warnings of the Boomers and X-ers who reached adulthood during the Dionysian cycle, and once we reach this generation critical mass Gen Z will begin another Dionysian cycle, and we won’t realize the folly of this until we’re 15-20 years into it (much like how society generally was accepting of Boomer decadence* in the 1970’s, then swiftly turned against it under Reagan). Millennials will sometimes “try their hand” at wilder behavior in the 2030’s and 2040’s, but like the middle aged Silents of the 70’s and 80’s, are mostly going to be just too old to do that much partying or fighting.

    Boomers have higher partner counts, higher rates of divorce, and higher rates of alcoholism than Silents, X-ers, and Millennials. This suggests that having a young adulthood in the late 60’s/1970’s (when society gave the greenlight to decadence) left a residue that Boomers have never been able to remove. Interesting how it took two all time peaks in crime (in 1980 and 1991) to make Americans become so ashamed of sex, violence, and drugs during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton eras.

  99. @Rosie

    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it’s in their nature to sell it. That’s what marriage or partnership is about.
     
    Because it's just inconceivable that men value their wives' companionship and nurturing services. As ever, I try to defend the essential goodness of mankind (in the narrow sense), and am foiled by the very men I try to defend, who appear to agree with feminists for the most part about the nature of Male humanity.

    and am foiled by the very men I try to defend

    I told you so, but you didn’t listen to me. The Aryan right is not “good” for women.

    • Replies: @Talha
    You ever see Bone Tomahawk - especially that scene where they are escaping the cave and they come across the pregnant "women"?

    I recommend the movie if you like Westerns. It's a weird one, but not bad in the Western/Horror genre.

    Anyway - yeah - that depicts a violently predatory patriarchy if I've ever seen one.

    Peace.
  100. @AaronB
    In Asia, men regularly and avidly patronize prostitutes. Its huge, and there's no shame. And the "fantasy" element does not bother them at all. They know its not real, but culturally that's fine.

    The insistence on real affection and the sense of shame at visiting a prostitute is purely a Western cultural thing, and a fairly recent one at that.

    The insistence on real affection

    Only a moonbeam collector could think that people believe that they can pay for “real affection.”

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Take it up with the Asians, not my culture.

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.
  101. @Achmed E. Newman

    ... women don’t like selling it... ... women don't like people understanding that they are selling it.
     
    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it's in their nature to sell it. That's what marriage or partnership is about.

    ... and they certainly don’t like other women selling it
     
    No, not a a steep rental discount they don't. If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before.

    Alfred, I know that “opening up” is the thing these days, but don’t go for it, keep a lot of this stuff to yourself.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I don't know what you mean, Iffen. This is stuff is not too personal for me right now. I just see the way things work, especially with the 5 decade-long experiment in feminism and matriarchy and call out things not working as planned (by whom, if anybody?)
  102. @iffen
    and am foiled by the very men I try to defend

    I told you so, but you didn't listen to me. The Aryan right is not "good" for women.

    You ever see Bone Tomahawk – especially that scene where they are escaping the cave and they come across the pregnant “women”?

    I recommend the movie if you like Westerns. It’s a weird one, but not bad in the Western/Horror genre.

    Anyway – yeah – that depicts a violently predatory patriarchy if I’ve ever seen one.

    Peace.

  103. @216
    The spread of smartphones and wireless coverage has already occurred even in warzones like Somalia. If titillation was sapping energy levels, I'd think we'd already be seeing signs of it.

    The AI needed for a realistic sexbot could presumably affect the status of automation in other industries. A bot able to simulate sex acts might be a by-product of bots designed to work in nursing homes and hospitals.

    But the compulsion to want titillation, and act on one’s impulses, is quite low right now. We are certainly far away from the 1970’s, when Richard Dawson could host Family Feud and kiss all the women contestants. And the prevailing attitude (among Boomers) in the 70’s was that STDs were a mere nuisance that would only temporarily stop you from sleeping around.

    The MeToo movement, as a moral imperative, only resonates with Millennials and the most conservative X-ers who regretted the Bacchanalian climate of the late 1960’s-early 1990’s or never experienced it as adults in the first place (The Boomer women complaining of mistreatment in the 70’s and 80’s are only going along with it as also rans who don’t want to be seen as tolerating the worst abuses perpetrated by depraved sex maniacs who got their start in the 1960’s-1980’s).

    And of course, most of the biggest villains in the me-too era are late Silents, Boomers, and early Gen X-ers, with the vast majority of men born before 1940 and after 1970 doing a good job of not pawing and slobbering over whoever happens to be turning them on at the moment (and those born after 1970 who get busted stand out for being outliers within their generation). If you reached age 30 before 1970 or after 2000, odds are that you have a higher level of behavioral inhibition than people whose young adulthoods occurred mostly or entirely in 1970-2000.

  104. @Anon
    At the very least, access to porn should be denied to kids. This should be done at all cost.

    But internet monopolies crack down on free speech while doing little to control access to porn.

    If it's illegal to sell porn to minors, why should it be so easily available on the net?

    It's like saying tobacco can't be sold to minors but making it super-easy for kids to get cigarettes.

    But then, today's media are like porn. Russia Collusion... hysteria porn.
    Iraq War: Neocon War Porn.

    They gave up on trying to “beat” internet porn because the truth is that most people use it, and it doesn’t physically hurt people (whereas drugs, violence, and prostitution all do immediate damage to the bodies of those involved).

    Frankly, people “turning to” internet porn is vastly preferable to the old school method of desperately horny people: actually having causal sex with strangers, sometimes via the exchange of money for services rendered (e.g., prostitution).

    The late 18th and very early 19th century were also a period in which men often struggled to find stable romantic partners, but back then, there wasn’t widespread porn, so men had little choice but to pay for sex in order to not be plagued by unresolved lust.

    You can’t destroy the marriage prospects of 50-60% of younger men (many men born since the mid-1970’s are flat out not getting married) and then try to extirpate prostitution (in the past) or porn (the present). We were able to largely crack down on vice in the 1940’s and 50’s precisely because most men got married at a young age, and could reasonably expect to have a wife who fulfilled his needs.

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what’s damaging to “kids” is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn’t allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn’t keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn’t punish corrupt elites, and so forth.

    • Replies: @216

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what’s damaging to “kids” is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn’t allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn’t keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn’t punish corrupt elites, and so forth.
     
    There are some good reasons why we should limit the screen time of minors. Where this fails is in the expectation that legislated virtue can displace parenting.

    The UK "age-gate pron" law will make an interesting case study. Will it be successful in curbing minor usage? Or will minors presumably work around the law by sharing images.

    Welfare statism and equal pay regulations make paternal involvement a "want" rather than a "need" for many women.
    , @Pericles

    They gave up on trying to “beat” internet porn because the truth is that most people use it, and it doesn’t physically hurt people (whereas drugs, violence, and prostitution all do immediate damage to the bodies of those involved).

     

    The porn performers do seem fairly damaged too, much like prostitutes. And the porn viewer can easily get into some very strange habits. I wonder if the millennial sexual oddness (increased preference for homo/bisexuality, anal sex, group sex, etc) is driven by porn viewing. It wouldn't surprise me.
  105. @EastKekistani
    In the modern world especially in the West people do not tend to consider power as something legitimate. But since power exists anyway people tend to avoid it when discussing issues which obfuscates issues.

    Example 1: What's the basis of male power?

    Ability to murder and injure. No, it is not about intelligence or contribution. In societies in Sub-Saharan Africa where men are economically very unproductive there is still male power. Why? Because men are better bullies and murderers. The trait that causes women to obey men is the same as the trait that causes many non-Negroids to fear and avoid Negroids.

    Example 2: What's the basis of female power?

    Ability to provide a limited resource. No, that resource isn't housework. It isn't even sex. Instead it is the fact that they are essential to childbirth. A man can live a long and wonderful life without women. On the other hand a man can not reproduce without women. Hell, it's not even that reproduction is something essential. It really isn't. You don't need to reproduce to remain alive. You really don't. However the blind hand of evolution certainly selects against whatever traits that leads to less surviving offsprings, especially traits that cause childlessness... The irrational and powerful craze for sex of course evolved through this process...to the point that many male organisms such as praying mantises would rather die just for the sake of having sex once..

    Don’t put undue emphasis on personal consciousness. Survival is a means for allowing reproduction, but reproduction is the telos.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    That's actually a claim that is both secular and very religion-like. Evolution which is a blind process does not inherently come with any value preference. You were not born with the duty that you must reproduce.
  106. The MeToo movement, as a moral imperative, only resonates with Millennials and the most conservative X-ers who regretted the Bacchanalian climate of the late 1960’s-early 1990’s or never experienced it as adults in the first place

    I welcolmed the exposure in Hollyweird, while regretting the electoral damage to the GOP.

    A lot of GenXers in the Dissident movements seem to loathe the left’s moralizing tendencies, dismissing it as “Neo-Victorianism”. I like that term, and wish that we unironically “respected women”.

    Declining female happiness is a defining feature of Gen Y/Z, the product of exaggerated expectations via the university system and the dating apps, when debt and alpha widowhood being the results. Chalk it up to failed/divorced Boomer parents, or to a rash of “toxic masculinity”; regardless of the cause, the mainstream Right tends to use ineffective shaming/bootstraps language on women. And it is worse for us in that the Right tends to promote women on physical appearance rather than on competence (see Maddow, Rachel).

    • Replies: @Feryl
    "A lot of GenXers in the Dissident movements seem to loathe the left’s moralizing tendencies, dismissing it as “Neo-Victorianism”. I like that term, and wish that we unironically “respected women”."

    Well, Gen X itself does it's own moralizing and preaching, as anyone who lived through the 1990's understands quite well (when Gen X developed it's own "call out culture" of complaining that Silents and Boomers were too hedonistic, selfish, and materialistic; Gen X-ers basically killed the culture of "rock and roll" by insisting that "real" artists have nothing in common with David Lee Roth prancing around. At the end of the day, though, X-ers were still doing more than their fair share of sleeping around, drugs, partying, etc. It's just that a lot of X-ers acted so depressive about it that they figured that what they did was "deeper" than all the highfalutin bullshit the Boomers did in the 60's and 70's. Of course, mistaking a depressive affect for intellectual and moral worth was probably the worst flaw of 1990's pop culture (granted, by 1997 most people had given up on trying to elevate Gen X culture as somehow smarter or cooler than Boomer culture).

    But, as I stated above, most mid-late period X-ers did feel legitimately grossed out by behavioral excess, which is why they along with Millennials completely destroyed "rock and roll" culture in the 2000's (thus, X-ers and Millennials have lower divorce rates and lower rates of alcohol use compared to late Boomers, who are the worst behaved cohort).
  107. @Michael S

    I wasn’t aware that objecting to perversion required any “rationalization.”
     
    And there it is. Can you articulate a definition of sexual perversion, or is that also just a vague emotion?

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can’t be damaged any more than she already is.
     
    Yes. Realistically, scientifically, there isn't a huge difference between a hundred partners and a thousand partners. All of the attributes we know how to measure - happiness, chance of marriage, chance of divorce, fertility, etc. - they all fall off a cliff after about a dozen, and by the time a woman hits 20 or 30 partners, they've basically flatlined.

    Can you articulate a definition of sexual perversion, or is that also just a vague emotion?

    I’d call it a God-given intuition.

    they all fall off a cliff after about a dozen, and by the time a woman hits 20 or 30 partners, they’ve basically flatlined.

    My understanding is that this is not true, but I will have to find the data yet again.

  108. @AaronB
    In Asia, men regularly and avidly patronize prostitutes. Its huge, and there's no shame. And the "fantasy" element does not bother them at all. They know its not real, but culturally that's fine.

    The insistence on real affection and the sense of shame at visiting a prostitute is purely a Western cultural thing, and a fairly recent one at that.

    The differences arise from Caucasians having a much greater sense of individual dignity than sub-Saharan blacks and Asians. It’s interesting that in Europe and the MENA, sexual behavior is often regarded as highly personal, subject to heavy regulation, and something over which to feel great shame and embarrassment. Sex is idealized as being “only” acceptable between two life-long partners, and anything outside that context is shameful and degrading.

    It’s not a “Western” thing, in the sense that Muslims are even more neurotic about sex than Europeans are (to the point that in some Muslim societies their is great pressure on women to not show their hair in public, lest it trigger lusting men).

    • Replies: @AaronB
    No, shame about sex really is most developed in the West. It doesn't have anything to do with dignity of the individual, either. It seems to have to do with the generally unbalanced nature of life in the West, with the suppression of the emotional and aesthetic side of man, as well as his instinctive and animal nature.

    Asian and Muslim countries in this respect are more balanced, and display a saner acceptance of the full human being. In these countries people are outwardly quite conservative - Japanese and Korean girl band members are often expected to stay single and not have sex before marriage, and if caught doing so, will face massive negative consequences socially.

    In this manner, the claims of social propriety are preserved, and a healthy sexual order is maintained for the purpose of forming stable families.

    On the other hand, outside the limelight and done in a discreet manner, all manner of prostitution, keeping of mistresses, and similar things are socially acceptable if not flaunted. In this way, the human being is not repressed and his full nature is catered to.

    Europeans chafing under the sexual repression of their homes started travelling to the Muslim Near East, where they found a similar arrangement of outward observance of the proprieties in order to maintain a healthy social order with a frank acceptance of discreet sex not found in Europe at the time.

    Freud was wrong about most things, but his basic idea that Europe was trying to disown an entire side of life - not just "dirty" sex, but everything supposedly primitive and instinctive, what Jung called the Shadow (and unlike Freud Jung developed this idea in genuinely fruitful ways) - and this attempt at repression was deeply unhealthy, was right.

    And aside from Asia and the Near East, European aristocratic sexual life was far more liberated and less ashamed of sex than that of the middle classes, the natural guardians of social morality.
    , @anon
    Correct. Devout Muslims may even insist on "marrying" a prostitute, and then divorcing her immediately afterwards, to provide a thin fig-leaf of legitimacy covering their shameful act. They wouldn't bother with the deception if they didn't, deep down, feel bad about knobbing a prostitute.
  109. There are a lot of replies here, and they look quite good. I hope to reply to every one of them, but it will take a bit of time.

  110. @anon
    I think those are only minor differences.

    Prostitution is often legal, de facto or otherwise. (See my other comment.) Plus, I doubt people who think sex bots will change the world think that banning them will make much difference, although I may be misrepresenting the position.

    Not sure what you mean by "gross sharing". If referring to STDs, fair enough, sex bots won't have AIDS. (But condoms exist.) If referring to weirdos with intimacy problems, yes, sex bots might be preferable for some of them.

    Humiliation is exactly my point: anybody capable of feeling shame in front of a prostitute, which is most men, would also feel shame in front of a sex bot, and for the same reason: you're settling for an ersatz romantic/sexual experience, because you aren't good enough to get a real one. The fact that the robot doesn't react to your shame is immaterial: you still feel it. (And many prostitutes are presumably good at pretending they don't notice.)

    Sex bots will appeal to some subset of:

    - Men who are presently using prostitutes

    - Men who would use prostitutes, but are afraid of disease

    - Men who would use prostitutes, but are too autistic or whatever to be intimate with any real human being

    - Trans-humanist, techno-futurist types - the kind who'd like an RFID chip implanted in their skin

    - Men with extremely perverse sexual urges who are presently confining themselves to porn - assuming they can find a sex bot manufacturer willing to meet their demand

    And that's it.

    Note re: evil perverts: across the entire population of such men, the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc after the sex bot revolution. For that reason alone, sex bots will be heavily regulated in most societies, and sex bots in the image of children, for instance, will be illegal.

    A lot to think about there, thanks.

    • Replies: @anon
    Ditto re: your blog
  111. @Feryl
    They gave up on trying to "beat" internet porn because the truth is that most people use it, and it doesn't physically hurt people (whereas drugs, violence, and prostitution all do immediate damage to the bodies of those involved).

    Frankly, people "turning to" internet porn is vastly preferable to the old school method of desperately horny people: actually having causal sex with strangers, sometimes via the exchange of money for services rendered (e.g., prostitution).

    The late 18th and very early 19th century were also a period in which men often struggled to find stable romantic partners, but back then, there wasn't widespread porn, so men had little choice but to pay for sex in order to not be plagued by unresolved lust.

    You can't destroy the marriage prospects of 50-60% of younger men (many men born since the mid-1970's are flat out not getting married) and then try to extirpate prostitution (in the past) or porn (the present). We were able to largely crack down on vice in the 1940's and 50's precisely because most men got married at a young age, and could reasonably expect to have a wife who fulfilled his needs.

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what's damaging to "kids" is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn't allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn't keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn't punish corrupt elites, and so forth.

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what’s damaging to “kids” is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn’t allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn’t keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn’t punish corrupt elites, and so forth.

    There are some good reasons why we should limit the screen time of minors. Where this fails is in the expectation that legislated virtue can displace parenting.

    The UK “age-gate pron” law will make an interesting case study. Will it be successful in curbing minor usage? Or will minors presumably work around the law by sharing images.

    Welfare statism and equal pay regulations make paternal involvement a “want” rather than a “need” for many women.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    Screen time and porno is a distinction with a difference. Autism rates have soared since the the early 90's, basically paralelling the rise of neurotic Boomer/X-er parents who don't want their kids to be roaming around outside. But in return for physical safety, we've evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.

    It can't be emphasized enough that Boomers and X-ers, who by gawd despise what society has become over the last 30-40 years (see: the massive rise in corruption, inept leadership, etc.), while also fearing that their kids will try and recreate the Dionysian atmosphere of circa 1970-1990, do not want their kids to have anything to do with the outside world.....A much different sentiment than the one that youngsters remember from the 1940's-1970's, when kids were supposed to play around, and fool around care free. Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about "crime being worse than ever before", but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a "scripted" childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation (and god forbid that someone "touches" your child, since "society" let so many monsters get away with it (meanwhile, mass incarceration, sparked by the Jimmy Carter era peak in crime, has been off and running since the later 80's, while actual abuse of children peaked in 1992 and has been declining ever since, what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).
  112. @Michael S

    What sorts of “regulations” do you have in mind, and to what end?
     
    Pretty obvious, isn't it? The same regulations that kept the western sexual market in check for a thousand years. No premarital sex, and shotgun marriage for anyone caught breaking that rule.

    This necessarily requires removing many of the legal protections for single women that you've come to believe are "rights". Because as long as they're in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.

    Because as long as they’re in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.

    I don’t see any such advantage, and I don’t accept your division of women into “whores” and “nonwhores.” Indeed, it looks suspiciously like a divide-and-rule ploy to me. I’ll set that concern aside for now.

    All that said, I do think your proposal for shot-gun marriages is on the right track. Indeed, part of the reason that single mothers need protection is precisely because the fathers do not marry them and form a proper family. There appears to be some sort of assumption that I do not believe women should ever be held to any standards at all, but this is not true. As far as I’m concerned, if a woman has sex with a man, and then refuses to marry him, I would wonder why precisely she had sex with him if she didn’t think he was good enough to marry.

    • Replies: @216
    AF/BB
  113. @anon
    "Numbers on this must be fiendishly difficult to pin down..."

    I doubt they're much less accurate than numbers re: masturbation, porn, etc. Perhaps this is a topic for our intrepid host and his powerful research skills?

    "...but the Feds didn’t shut down Redbook, Craigslist ads, and other online “adult” hook-up sites because they were languishing unused."

    Don't be silly. That there are enough men willing to fuck hookers as to keep the lights on at Craigslist doesn't rise to "most men". But again, perhaps someone ought to find some numbers. Just how many men fuck whores regularly, and how many have ever done so, and what's that as a proportion of all men?

    According to the GSS, 14% of men have “ever paid for sex”. There isn’t any question about frequency, though. One-in-seven isn’t “most men”, but it’s not an insignificant number of men, either.

    • Replies: @notanon
    i did it once just to see what it was like - never had any desire to do it again.
    , @anon
    Not insignificant at all, no. But in line with "most men haven't".

    I think it's like drugs: the majority don't ever, a lot have tried it once or twice, a few make it a habit, and a small number go hog-wild.

    (Although, with drugs, those first two categories might be closer in number.)

  114. @Days of Broken Arrows
    "A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she’s off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.”

    A "real wife" chooses a mate on far more factors than "genuine regard and affection." There's looks, income, social status, height, family background, and education among other things. A lot of men don't measure up when it comes to those qualifications.

    Women don't see these "invisible" men because they block them on dating sites, where you can digitally adjust your qualifications for education, height, etc.

    So what do we do with these men who are "unqualified" for today's women? Considering women "marry up" and prefer men who are higher status then themselves, today's super-educated crop of women are leaving more of these men behind than ever. What becomes of the men?

    Well, for one thing, prostitutes won't dismiss them if they're under 6' or didn't go to a name university. So the guy who isn't Mr. Big but manages to save some money at least has access to a woman then.

    As for wives remaining with their husbands regardless of the man's financial status, this might have been true before the no-fault divorce era. But this isn't the case in a country where half of marriage end in divorce and the majority of those divorces are initiated by women.

    I've seen instances of women "branch swinging" from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 -- often with the kids in tow. And I've noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.

    To bring together both these issues, I would consider things like this to be a form of "soft prostitution." When a woman trades her looks for a place to live with one man followed by the next, that's essentially trading sex for resources. No-fault divorce has given us a society teeming with "soft prostitutes" in all classes, so it's disingenuous to complain about hookers when you might just have a woman living next door who is one in everything but name.

    It's not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of "surplus men" who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn't good for anyone.

    while men care about women

    Not this man. Like so much of modern America, they aren’t deserving your consideration or loyalty.

    Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.

    It’s good for women, who get off on their misery and unrequited desire, and it’s (temporarily at least) good for Chad who gets to clean up the entirety of the spoils.

  115. @Rosie

    Because as long as they’re in place, whores receive a temporary but significant advantage over women who exercise self-control.
     
    I don't see any such advantage, and I don't accept your division of women into "whores" and "nonwhores." Indeed, it looks suspiciously like a divide-and-rule ploy to me. I'll set that concern aside for now.

    All that said, I do think your proposal for shot-gun marriages is on the right track. Indeed, part of the reason that single mothers need protection is precisely because the fathers do not marry them and form a proper family. There appears to be some sort of assumption that I do not believe women should ever be held to any standards at all, but this is not true. As far as I'm concerned, if a woman has sex with a man, and then refuses to marry him, I would wonder why precisely she had sex with him if she didn't think he was good enough to marry.

    AF/BB

  116. @EastKekistani

    In both cases you’re paying to simulate a romantic experience with a woman.
     
    Well, I simply don't believe that most women love their partners and spouses in any society at all. Darwinism informs me about how precarious the situation both men and non-human males are in. History informs me that if you got murdered in an ancient war your wife was likely to willingly submit to your murderer and forgot about you no matter how much you did for her.

    "Romantic experience" means a dude sometimes loving and often pretending to love a lady for the sake of sex and a lady pretending to love a dude for the sake of his resources. That's it. If you chase a sexually attractive woman what you are after is essentially something that will go away in a couple of years for every pretty girl ends up as a smelly and ugly woman when she becomes sufficiently old.


    most men today aren’t availing themselves of prostitutes.
     
    Yes..for it is usually illegal and low status.

    History informs me that if you got murdered in an ancient war your wife was likely to willingly submit to your murderer and forgot about you no matter how much you did for her.

    Nonsense.

  117. @216

    The MeToo movement, as a moral imperative, only resonates with Millennials and the most conservative X-ers who regretted the Bacchanalian climate of the late 1960’s-early 1990’s or never experienced it as adults in the first place
     
    I welcolmed the exposure in Hollyweird, while regretting the electoral damage to the GOP.

    A lot of GenXers in the Dissident movements seem to loathe the left's moralizing tendencies, dismissing it as "Neo-Victorianism". I like that term, and wish that we unironically "respected women".

    Declining female happiness is a defining feature of Gen Y/Z, the product of exaggerated expectations via the university system and the dating apps, when debt and alpha widowhood being the results. Chalk it up to failed/divorced Boomer parents, or to a rash of "toxic masculinity"; regardless of the cause, the mainstream Right tends to use ineffective shaming/bootstraps language on women. And it is worse for us in that the Right tends to promote women on physical appearance rather than on competence (see Maddow, Rachel).

    “A lot of GenXers in the Dissident movements seem to loathe the left’s moralizing tendencies, dismissing it as “Neo-Victorianism”. I like that term, and wish that we unironically “respected women”.”

    Well, Gen X itself does it’s own moralizing and preaching, as anyone who lived through the 1990’s understands quite well (when Gen X developed it’s own “call out culture” of complaining that Silents and Boomers were too hedonistic, selfish, and materialistic; Gen X-ers basically killed the culture of “rock and roll” by insisting that “real” artists have nothing in common with David Lee Roth prancing around. At the end of the day, though, X-ers were still doing more than their fair share of sleeping around, drugs, partying, etc. It’s just that a lot of X-ers acted so depressive about it that they figured that what they did was “deeper” than all the highfalutin bullshit the Boomers did in the 60’s and 70’s. Of course, mistaking a depressive affect for intellectual and moral worth was probably the worst flaw of 1990’s pop culture (granted, by 1997 most people had given up on trying to elevate Gen X culture as somehow smarter or cooler than Boomer culture).

    But, as I stated above, most mid-late period X-ers did feel legitimately grossed out by behavioral excess, which is why they along with Millennials completely destroyed “rock and roll” culture in the 2000’s (thus, X-ers and Millennials have lower divorce rates and lower rates of alcohol use compared to late Boomers, who are the worst behaved cohort).

  118. @YetAnotherAnon
    " A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources."

    That's certainly the theory, and even the contract (unenforceable) made at marriage. For better, for worse. But there must be an awful lot of "not-real" wives out there, when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.

    Try losing your job or your business, the house goes, you're in some grotty "social housing" (aka 'project') 25 miles away, the kids either have to move school and lose their friends or you have a big school commute, and your wife's friends are all at once sorry for her and obscurely thrilled by the catastrophe.

    Still, some good women hang on in there and stick to their vows. But a lot won't.


    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled. It could give them mastery of the globe, if only by the enormous demographic hit on recipient countries as men drop out of the marriage market.

    when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.

    Initiating a divorce does not make one not a real wife. It only makes you not a real wife if you leave your husband because of a financial setback. It is true that women initiate most divorces, but it is also true that men are most likely to do things that lead to divorce: drugs, compulsive gambling, adultery, etc.

    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled.

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.

    • Replies: @216

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.
     
    https://blogs.sas.com/content/sastraining/files/2014/10/okc_rating_curve1.png

    I generally compliment men for being strict with their gatekeeping role for committment. That said, there are less social expectations in mainstream culture for a man to commit.

    Women at a certain age are willing to settle, because there is an internal female hierarchy around marriage. This hierarchy does not exist with men, but there is a tendency for married women to only want to socialize with other married couples, and push men away from their single peers.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    " they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down"

    With 70% of divorces initiated by women, they will need to get more particular still.

    Maybe it's just my social milieu, but I don't see many women leaving their husbands because of drugs/alcohol/gambling/adultery, though I did recently meet someone who'd been abandoned with three young kids. The splits seem to be just that the woman was no longer "happy" with her husband - and nearly all the women are still either single or "dating", where at least a couple of the husbands have remarried, in a triumph of hope over experience.

    One woman did remarry, having left a really nice guy husband. It lasted maybe two years.


    (And the edit function has returned, on this blog anyway, where I'm not moderated)

    , @Feryl
    Divorces became a lot more common in the 1970's, when society began to openly favor "minorities" (including women) at the expense of white men. "No fault" divorce was introduced on Jan 1, 1970 (no, I'm not kidding), supposedly to spare children the trauma of watching their parents bitterly argue about whether a divorce should be granted or not. In reality, it was pandering to women who, beginning in the 1970's, started to compete with men. The idea that women should conform to a traditional patriarchal structure was discarded on the grounds that it didn't give women the proper respect. Unfortunately, starting in the 70's, a lot of women became openly hostile toward and competitive with men, so it would seem that quite a few women are all too willing to say "in your face" to men, instead of trying to figure out how to live amicably together (as was the general goal during the 1930's-1960's). By 1980, female education attainment reached parity with men, indicating that a lot of women were simply not bothering to concern themselves with the traditional idea that finding a male provider/protector early in life was important.

    Women are the main instigators of divorce because they know that there's always other men out there. Whereas for guys, it's so difficult to win a women's trust and love, that they figure that after marriage, they might as well be happy with what they got.

    The Christian conception of marriage explicitly states that a marriage should endure through thick and thin. It's intended to ward off the impulsivity, boredom, pride, greed, etc. that both men and women can struggle to deal with during marriage, the things that spur divorces. But when Westerners rejected respect for tradition in the 1970's, well, whaddaya know, divorces became a lot more common. Funny thing is most people born after 1970 intuitively understand just why things like traditions happen in the first place: because many generations of people had to learn the hard way why you just shouldn't do certain things. A lot of people who were teenagers or young adults in the 1970's have ruined their lives by not being able to say "no" to base impulses.
  119. @Genericus
    https://youtu.be/AqokkXoa7uE
    Real life reactions to a sexbot, prepare to cringe.

    Triggered!

  120. @SunBakedSuburb
    " ... Cut out the cranking."

    If by "cranking" you mean masturbation I'm afraid I must disagree, AE. If a man doesn't have a partner with whom he can relieve himself on a daily basis then he should resort to masturbation. Guys need to expel the demon juice to keep the prostate healthy. If your imagination is insufficient to conjure erotic images and thoughts to make quick work of your daily needs, then turn to visual aids. We dudes are visual creatures. But while you're cranking your yank in front of the digital screen, remember that the porn business profits from performers who usually come from a background of childhood sexual abuse.

    The succubus will take care of that.

    Though I’m no expert on the terminology, I think “cranking” refers not just to sexual release but also to an attempt at positive mood stimulation. Maybe it’s healthier if it’s on a schedule as opposed to just doing it whenever the urge to strikes.

  121. I’ve seen instances of women “branch swinging” from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 — often with the kids in tow. And I’ve noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.

    I have never seen any such thing among conservative White women (the only kind I associate with).

    It’s not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of “surplus men” who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.

    I reject your view that women have no empathy for men, and I certainly think society should be concerned about men who can’t find mates. The problem, as I have detailed elsewhere, is that I am not convinced there are any such men. I understand they can’t find women they want, but that is not the same thing as not being able to find one at all. Half of men are below average, and will have to settle for a below average mate.

    I indicated the other day that women might be more acceptable to men if they had access to appetite suppressants to help them look more like porn stars. For that I was roundly ridiculed and dismissed as a “clown,” with nary a defender in sight.

    • Replies: @216

    I have never seen any such thing among conservative White women (the only kind I associate with).
     
    What Metropolitan Statistical Area do you reside in?

    As an aside: To all, whenever debating with a leftist on racial matter, always demand their census tract.
  122. @Rosie

    when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.
     
    Initiating a divorce does not make one not a real wife. It only makes you not a real wife if you leave your husband because of a financial setback. It is true that women initiate most divorces, but it is also true that men are most likely to do things that lead to divorce: drugs, compulsive gambling, adultery, etc.

    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled.
     
    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.

    I generally compliment men for being strict with their gatekeeping role for committment. That said, there are less social expectations in mainstream culture for a man to commit.

    Women at a certain age are willing to settle, because there is an internal female hierarchy around marriage. This hierarchy does not exist with men, but there is a tendency for married women to only want to socialize with other married couples, and push men away from their single peers.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    Sorry, but men are choosier than women when it comes to actual messaging:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcXX8meUQAAYQS8.png:large
  123. @216

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what’s damaging to “kids” is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn’t allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn’t keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn’t punish corrupt elites, and so forth.
     
    There are some good reasons why we should limit the screen time of minors. Where this fails is in the expectation that legislated virtue can displace parenting.

    The UK "age-gate pron" law will make an interesting case study. Will it be successful in curbing minor usage? Or will minors presumably work around the law by sharing images.

    Welfare statism and equal pay regulations make paternal involvement a "want" rather than a "need" for many women.

    Screen time and porno is a distinction with a difference. Autism rates have soared since the the early 90’s, basically paralelling the rise of neurotic Boomer/X-er parents who don’t want their kids to be roaming around outside. But in return for physical safety, we’ve evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.

    It can’t be emphasized enough that Boomers and X-ers, who by gawd despise what society has become over the last 30-40 years (see: the massive rise in corruption, inept leadership, etc.), while also fearing that their kids will try and recreate the Dionysian atmosphere of circa 1970-1990, do not want their kids to have anything to do with the outside world…..A much different sentiment than the one that youngsters remember from the 1940’s-1970’s, when kids were supposed to play around, and fool around care free. Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about “crime being worse than ever before”, but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a “scripted” childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation (and god forbid that someone “touches” your child, since “society” let so many monsters get away with it (meanwhile, mass incarceration, sparked by the Jimmy Carter era peak in crime, has been off and running since the later 80’s, while actual abuse of children peaked in 1992 and has been declining ever since, what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).

    • Replies: @216

    what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).
     
    The root of SJW culture is the anti-bullying programs in schools, which I encountered starting in primary school during the late '90s. Some conservatives embarass themselves by making unironic pro-bullying arguements as a way to argue that kids weren't toughened enough.

    Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about “crime being worse than ever before”, but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a “scripted” childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation
     
    Confirm, my Boomer father normally rode his bike with friends as a preteen across the West Side of Cleveland, during the objectively more dangerous late 1960s-early 1970s. I've never even heard of a mugging occuring in the exurban neighborhood we live in, but this would have never been accepted for me.

    One side effect of contained kids, is unlocked medicine cabinets being a source of prescription opiates.

    But in return for physical safety, we’ve evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.
     
    What are the causes of autism? The suspected vaccine preservatives were removed, ruling that out (unsure of how an immune injection could alter brain chemistry/shape). Autism is known to be common in males more than females, but this is normally not commented upon. I recall a link with births at a later age.
  124. @Rosie

    I’ve seen instances of women “branch swinging” from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 — often with the kids in tow. And I’ve noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.
     
    I have never seen any such thing among conservative White women (the only kind I associate with).

    It’s not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of “surplus men” who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.
     
    I reject your view that women have no empathy for men, and I certainly think society should be concerned about men who can't find mates. The problem, as I have detailed elsewhere, is that I am not convinced there are any such men. I understand they can't find women they want, but that is not the same thing as not being able to find one at all. Half of men are below average, and will have to settle for a below average mate.

    I indicated the other day that women might be more acceptable to men if they had access to appetite suppressants to help them look more like porn stars. For that I was roundly ridiculed and dismissed as a "clown," with nary a defender in sight.

    I have never seen any such thing among conservative White women (the only kind I associate with).

    What Metropolitan Statistical Area do you reside in?

    As an aside: To all, whenever debating with a leftist on racial matter, always demand their census tract.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    What Metropolitan Statistical Area do you reside in?
     
    I'm not about to tell you that.
  125. @Feryl
    The differences arise from Caucasians having a much greater sense of individual dignity than sub-Saharan blacks and Asians. It's interesting that in Europe and the MENA, sexual behavior is often regarded as highly personal, subject to heavy regulation, and something over which to feel great shame and embarrassment. Sex is idealized as being "only" acceptable between two life-long partners, and anything outside that context is shameful and degrading.

    It's not a "Western" thing, in the sense that Muslims are even more neurotic about sex than Europeans are (to the point that in some Muslim societies their is great pressure on women to not show their hair in public, lest it trigger lusting men).

    No, shame about sex really is most developed in the West. It doesn’t have anything to do with dignity of the individual, either. It seems to have to do with the generally unbalanced nature of life in the West, with the suppression of the emotional and aesthetic side of man, as well as his instinctive and animal nature.

    Asian and Muslim countries in this respect are more balanced, and display a saner acceptance of the full human being. In these countries people are outwardly quite conservative – Japanese and Korean girl band members are often expected to stay single and not have sex before marriage, and if caught doing so, will face massive negative consequences socially.

    In this manner, the claims of social propriety are preserved, and a healthy sexual order is maintained for the purpose of forming stable families.

    On the other hand, outside the limelight and done in a discreet manner, all manner of prostitution, keeping of mistresses, and similar things are socially acceptable if not flaunted. In this way, the human being is not repressed and his full nature is catered to.

    Europeans chafing under the sexual repression of their homes started travelling to the Muslim Near East, where they found a similar arrangement of outward observance of the proprieties in order to maintain a healthy social order with a frank acceptance of discreet sex not found in Europe at the time.

    Freud was wrong about most things, but his basic idea that Europe was trying to disown an entire side of life – not just “dirty” sex, but everything supposedly primitive and instinctive, what Jung called the Shadow (and unlike Freud Jung developed this idea in genuinely fruitful ways) – and this attempt at repression was deeply unhealthy, was right.

    And aside from Asia and the Near East, European aristocratic sexual life was far more liberated and less ashamed of sex than that of the middle classes, the natural guardians of social morality.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    ...European aristocratic sexual life was far more liberated and less ashamed of sex than that of the middle classes, the natural guardians of social morality.
     
    Sexual impropriety is most deleterious to the middle classes, who have to behave to get ahead. Or even to stay put. And I don't mean just outward appearances. Divorce is brutal.

    The real randiness is found at the top and the bottom, where they either have too much to lose, or nothing.
  126. Two questions:

    Are romance novels “pr0n”?

    And what about mainstream novels that are dirtier than the pornographic ones of 5o years ago they sold at the train station?

    In the late 1970s I found a copy of Her Bestial Dreams and gave it to a shipmate, who read it. (He said it was rather obvious that it changed writers about halfway through. They were the ultimate hacks.)

    But Googling the title doesn’t get me close to the real thing. Instead, it shows a whole lot of contemporary fiction.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    You can stumble on a lot of bizarre romance books on Amazon, and I don't even mean the dinosaur stuff. For example, I just typed "twins seals romance" into the search box and what do you know, there is at least half a dozen directly about that, such as "The SEAL’s Surprise Twin (Special Forces: Operation Alpha)" or "The Navy SEAL Brotherhood: A Navy SEAL Romance (The BWWM Romance Brotherhoods Book 4)". The most complicated related title, however, was "My Father's Best Friend's Secret Baby (His Secret Baby Book 1)".

    Anyone looking for "seal billionaire romance"? I think the best title was "Bad Boy SEALs: Menage Romance. Billionaire Romance. (British Romance Trilogy Book 2)". NB: just one billionaire SEAL is apparently not enough. And it looks like they have to be foreigners too.

    I've never really felt the need to buy these, but perhaps some enterprising journalist should bite the bullet and review ten or so of the best titles.

    , @anon
    "Are romance novels “pr0n”?"

    100%, but women won't admit it.
  127. @216

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.
     
    https://blogs.sas.com/content/sastraining/files/2014/10/okc_rating_curve1.png

    I generally compliment men for being strict with their gatekeeping role for committment. That said, there are less social expectations in mainstream culture for a man to commit.

    Women at a certain age are willing to settle, because there is an internal female hierarchy around marriage. This hierarchy does not exist with men, but there is a tendency for married women to only want to socialize with other married couples, and push men away from their single peers.

    Sorry, but men are choosier than women when it comes to actual messaging:

    • Replies: @Rosie
    It turns out the claim that women are all chasing the same 20% of men is mere projection. It is men who are all competing for the same women.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm
    , @216
    You posted data to counter me, that ends up confirming my narrative.

    The cost of messaging on OKC is free, which is a reason why the site went into decline. Women rated as 8 and 9 by men receive an avalanche of messaging, which annoys them and can be justifiably called harassment. The Tinder and Bumble apps require a match to have a conversation.

    Your graphs also don't show the number of messages, which is higher among men than women.

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.
     
    It is staring you in the face, but you refuse to see lest it undermine your People's Front of Judea White Nationalist Feminism.
  128. @216

    I have never seen any such thing among conservative White women (the only kind I associate with).
     
    What Metropolitan Statistical Area do you reside in?

    As an aside: To all, whenever debating with a leftist on racial matter, always demand their census tract.

    What Metropolitan Statistical Area do you reside in?

    I’m not about to tell you that.

    • Replies: @216
    I live in Cleveland–Elyria Metropolitan Statistical Area

    This isn't hard, and carries no risk of doxxing. But the answer is relevant, because if you live in Utah your lived experiences are abnormal and must be discounted as such.
  129. @AaronB
    No, shame about sex really is most developed in the West. It doesn't have anything to do with dignity of the individual, either. It seems to have to do with the generally unbalanced nature of life in the West, with the suppression of the emotional and aesthetic side of man, as well as his instinctive and animal nature.

    Asian and Muslim countries in this respect are more balanced, and display a saner acceptance of the full human being. In these countries people are outwardly quite conservative - Japanese and Korean girl band members are often expected to stay single and not have sex before marriage, and if caught doing so, will face massive negative consequences socially.

    In this manner, the claims of social propriety are preserved, and a healthy sexual order is maintained for the purpose of forming stable families.

    On the other hand, outside the limelight and done in a discreet manner, all manner of prostitution, keeping of mistresses, and similar things are socially acceptable if not flaunted. In this way, the human being is not repressed and his full nature is catered to.

    Europeans chafing under the sexual repression of their homes started travelling to the Muslim Near East, where they found a similar arrangement of outward observance of the proprieties in order to maintain a healthy social order with a frank acceptance of discreet sex not found in Europe at the time.

    Freud was wrong about most things, but his basic idea that Europe was trying to disown an entire side of life - not just "dirty" sex, but everything supposedly primitive and instinctive, what Jung called the Shadow (and unlike Freud Jung developed this idea in genuinely fruitful ways) - and this attempt at repression was deeply unhealthy, was right.

    And aside from Asia and the Near East, European aristocratic sexual life was far more liberated and less ashamed of sex than that of the middle classes, the natural guardians of social morality.

    …European aristocratic sexual life was far more liberated and less ashamed of sex than that of the middle classes, the natural guardians of social morality.

    Sexual impropriety is most deleterious to the middle classes, who have to behave to get ahead. Or even to stay put. And I don’t mean just outward appearances. Divorce is brutal.

    The real randiness is found at the top and the bottom, where they either have too much to lose, or nothing.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    I agree.

    It goes beyond sexual morality - the middle classes suffer terribly from status anxiety in general. They are the least free of the three classes.

    And the upper classes are not the merely wealthy. Money can be lost or taken from you anytime. The real upper classes are those that exist in a protective class network that spans generations - you lose money, a position will always be found for you. They take care if each other.
  130. @iffen
    The insistence on real affection

    Only a moonbeam collector could think that people believe that they can pay for "real affection."

    Take it up with the Asians, not my culture.

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.

    • Replies: @216

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.
     
    I agree. The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do. In contrast to the over-commented BMWF pairing, there is minimal questioning of the far more common WMAF pairing, which tends to be based in the illusion that AF is "more traditional".
    , @neutral
    Being a jew makes you Asian, unless you can show me a map that shows Israel being in Europe.
  131. When are you people going to learn not to feed women the attention they crave? This on a dissident right website, no less.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    When are you people going to learn not to feed women the attention they crave? This on a dissident right website, no less.
     
    I will renew my offer to go away and never come back so long as the lying about women on DR websites stops for good. I have better things to do, I assure you.
  132. @Audacious Epigone
    Don't put undue emphasis on personal consciousness. Survival is a means for allowing reproduction, but reproduction is the telos.

    That’s actually a claim that is both secular and very religion-like. Evolution which is a blind process does not inherently come with any value preference. You were not born with the duty that you must reproduce.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    You live in Asia, right? Tell us when is the last time you or someone you know went to a prostitute. Last week?

    You are MGTOW and don't have a girlfriend, but I'm sure you avail your self of your culture's resources for dealing with such a predicament.
    , @iffen
    a blind process does not inherently come with any value preference.

    There are no descendants among us of people who did not reproduce. I'd say that evolution "values" reproduction above all else.
  133. @Reg Cæsar

    ...European aristocratic sexual life was far more liberated and less ashamed of sex than that of the middle classes, the natural guardians of social morality.
     
    Sexual impropriety is most deleterious to the middle classes, who have to behave to get ahead. Or even to stay put. And I don't mean just outward appearances. Divorce is brutal.

    The real randiness is found at the top and the bottom, where they either have too much to lose, or nothing.

    I agree.

    It goes beyond sexual morality – the middle classes suffer terribly from status anxiety in general. They are the least free of the three classes.

    And the upper classes are not the merely wealthy. Money can be lost or taken from you anytime. The real upper classes are those that exist in a protective class network that spans generations – you lose money, a position will always be found for you. They take care if each other.

  134. @Rosie
    Sorry, but men are choosier than women when it comes to actual messaging:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcXX8meUQAAYQS8.png:large

    It turns out the claim that women are all chasing the same 20% of men is mere projection. It is men who are all competing for the same women.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

    • Replies: @216
    That data is pre-Tinder, and collected during a time when smartphones were still a novelty. It should be rejected on that basis alone.
    , @notanon
    the claim is that as the middle class shrinks 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of husband material

    husband material != physical attractiveness alone
  135. @SunBakedSuburb
    " ... Cut out the cranking."

    If by "cranking" you mean masturbation I'm afraid I must disagree, AE. If a man doesn't have a partner with whom he can relieve himself on a daily basis then he should resort to masturbation. Guys need to expel the demon juice to keep the prostate healthy. If your imagination is insufficient to conjure erotic images and thoughts to make quick work of your daily needs, then turn to visual aids. We dudes are visual creatures. But while you're cranking your yank in front of the digital screen, remember that the porn business profits from performers who usually come from a background of childhood sexual abuse.

    Guys need to expel the demon juice to keep the prostate healthy.

    I thought that’s what wet dreams were for.

    Tears clean the tear ducts. So you should torture yourself to bring them about?

    “Masturbation can make you blind” can be seen as quite true, in a spiritual sense. I remember Dr Fleming of the Rockford Institute quipping, “You can’t ask a girl out for a date?”

  136. @L Woods
    When are you people going to learn not to feed women the attention they crave? This on a dissident right website, no less.

    When are you people going to learn not to feed women the attention they crave? This on a dissident right website, no less.

    I will renew my offer to go away and never come back so long as the lying about women on DR websites stops for good. I have better things to do, I assure you.

  137. @EastKekistani
    That's actually a claim that is both secular and very religion-like. Evolution which is a blind process does not inherently come with any value preference. You were not born with the duty that you must reproduce.

    You live in Asia, right? Tell us when is the last time you or someone you know went to a prostitute. Last week?

    You are MGTOW and don’t have a girlfriend, but I’m sure you avail your self of your culture’s resources for dealing with such a predicament.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    I don't live in NE Asia now. Only one dude I know admits having visited a prostitute. Since most people are still married / dating they definitely will never admit having visited prostitutes because ladies definitely hate cheating a lot.

    MGTOW is growing in NE Asia but it is definitely not socially acceptable right now. Neither trads nor women like us.

  138. @Feryl
    Screen time and porno is a distinction with a difference. Autism rates have soared since the the early 90's, basically paralelling the rise of neurotic Boomer/X-er parents who don't want their kids to be roaming around outside. But in return for physical safety, we've evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.

    It can't be emphasized enough that Boomers and X-ers, who by gawd despise what society has become over the last 30-40 years (see: the massive rise in corruption, inept leadership, etc.), while also fearing that their kids will try and recreate the Dionysian atmosphere of circa 1970-1990, do not want their kids to have anything to do with the outside world.....A much different sentiment than the one that youngsters remember from the 1940's-1970's, when kids were supposed to play around, and fool around care free. Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about "crime being worse than ever before", but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a "scripted" childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation (and god forbid that someone "touches" your child, since "society" let so many monsters get away with it (meanwhile, mass incarceration, sparked by the Jimmy Carter era peak in crime, has been off and running since the later 80's, while actual abuse of children peaked in 1992 and has been declining ever since, what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).

    what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).

    The root of SJW culture is the anti-bullying programs in schools, which I encountered starting in primary school during the late ’90s. Some conservatives embarass themselves by making unironic pro-bullying arguements as a way to argue that kids weren’t toughened enough.

    Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about “crime being worse than ever before”, but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a “scripted” childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation

    Confirm, my Boomer father normally rode his bike with friends as a preteen across the West Side of Cleveland, during the objectively more dangerous late 1960s-early 1970s. I’ve never even heard of a mugging occuring in the exurban neighborhood we live in, but this would have never been accepted for me.

    One side effect of contained kids, is unlocked medicine cabinets being a source of prescription opiates.

    But in return for physical safety, we’ve evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.

    What are the causes of autism? The suspected vaccine preservatives were removed, ruling that out (unsure of how an immune injection could alter brain chemistry/shape). Autism is known to be common in males more than females, but this is normally not commented upon. I recall a link with births at a later age.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    Well, back in the 70's parents didn't spend every waking hour in terror that their kid would turn out to be a "loser". Seriously, Silent parents in the 60's and 70's spent a lot of time playing bridge, or whatever the hell it was they were doing with their ample free time, rather than worrying themselves sick that their kids weren't "making the grade".

    Boomer and especially Gen X parents are absolutely obsessed with having the "best" possible outcomes with their kids, e.g. they all become wealthy/respected professionals or at least marry into wealth/prestige. Naturally, your child's life being ended altogether by a bad driver or a sicko predator will completely obliterate the possiblity of one's ego being boosted by a successful son or daughter.

    I think that much as one could say the greatest failing of the GI generation was in being far too gentle with their bratty Boomer kids, the greatest failing of Gen X will be in psychologically disfiguring their children with absurdly over-sized expectations that they "stay safe" and "do well" in life. We also see that many X-ers were frauds all along; they care as much about status as Boomers do, but the difference is that Boomers were less likely to rely on their own kids for glory.
    , @Feryl
    Autism seems to be caused in large part by a lack of important socialization that children are supposed to experience at an early stage. Well, at least the milder forms of autism, anyway. In America, places with worse weather generally have higher levels of autism, suggesting that denying kids the opportunity to spend a lot of time outdoors, and experience a wide variety of situations and encounters, stunts social skills and psychological development. Of course, we can expect "free range" kids to have more frequent accidents and run-ins with unsavory characters, but trying too hard to remove kids from "dangerous" situations can backfire. Gen Z has major levels of depression and anxiety, because their parents often didn't allow them experience stressful situations on their own. Thus, they are hyper sensitive to anything that makes them feel hurt or uncomfortable. Interestingly, Gen X in the 90's started to buy into the narrative that experiencing pain/abuse as a youngster leads to PTSD, thus letting us understand just how Gen X would make the opposite mistake of never letting their own kids be traumatized. It's also interesting that while Silents and Boomers never questioned the idea that they were superiors to their kids, we see Gen X make the mistake that the GI Gen did: treating your children as equals, rather than subordinates. But for the Boomers, the 50's and 60's were a much better time in this country to be young. Whereas the 2010's have been hellish for Gen Z, who all feel pressure to "win".
  139. @Anon
    To me porn and erotica are useful since I can use them to get rid of sexual urges. I do not tend to seek them for other purposes. To me sexual urges are something useless since I’m MGTOW so I want to get rid of them as soon as they appear.

    Since the 70s, it's been said 80% of Japanese cinema consists of porn movies. Some study says 1/200 Japanese women are into porn business. That is not a healthy society. It's one thing to have some sex industry as Red Light district stuff. In Japan, it has taken over much of culture.
    In the 80s and 90s, Western commentators would disapprovingly of Japanese in their relation to erotica. For example, there were articles about how people in subway flip through porny magazines and manga(yes, porny cartoons). That became the Norm in Japan. And now, look at the spread of jungle fever in Japan. As a porny nation, Japan is about featuring Negro men and Japanese women, and as the message spreads, more Japanese women will have kids with black men, and these kids will take over sports and Japanese will worship blacks as Japanese heroes. That will set the psychological template for Japan going the way of London.

    That’s a legitimate concern.

    Groids are already trying to sexually fuck up NE Asia. Their low numbers do restrict the damage. However the per capita harm caused by groids in NE Asia is very high.

  140. @Rosie
    It turns out the claim that women are all chasing the same 20% of men is mere projection. It is men who are all competing for the same women.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

    That data is pre-Tinder, and collected during a time when smartphones were still a novelty. It should be rejected on that basis alone.

    • LOL: Rosie
  141. @AaronB
    You live in Asia, right? Tell us when is the last time you or someone you know went to a prostitute. Last week?

    You are MGTOW and don't have a girlfriend, but I'm sure you avail your self of your culture's resources for dealing with such a predicament.

    I don’t live in NE Asia now. Only one dude I know admits having visited a prostitute. Since most people are still married / dating they definitely will never admit having visited prostitutes because ladies definitely hate cheating a lot.

    MGTOW is growing in NE Asia but it is definitely not socially acceptable right now. Neither trads nor women like us.

  142. @Audacious Epigone
    According to the GSS, 14% of men have "ever paid for sex". There isn't any question about frequency, though. One-in-seven isn't "most men", but it's not an insignificant number of men, either.

    i did it once just to see what it was like – never had any desire to do it again.

  143. @iffen
    Alfred, I know that "opening up" is the thing these days, but don't go for it, keep a lot of this stuff to yourself.

    I don’t know what you mean, Iffen. This is stuff is not too personal for me right now. I just see the way things work, especially with the 5 decade-long experiment in feminism and matriarchy and call out things not working as planned (by whom, if anybody?)

  144. @Rosie

    What Metropolitan Statistical Area do you reside in?
     
    I'm not about to tell you that.

    I live in Cleveland–Elyria Metropolitan Statistical Area

    This isn’t hard, and carries no risk of doxxing. But the answer is relevant, because if you live in Utah your lived experiences are abnormal and must be discounted as such.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    This isn’t hard, and carries no risk of doxxing.
     
    Hell no.
  145. @216
    I live in Cleveland–Elyria Metropolitan Statistical Area

    This isn't hard, and carries no risk of doxxing. But the answer is relevant, because if you live in Utah your lived experiences are abnormal and must be discounted as such.

    This isn’t hard, and carries no risk of doxxing.

    Hell no.

    • Replies: @216
    Russian bot
  146. Haidt et al have said that Gen Z differs from those born before 1996, because they got an even more stifling childhood than Millennials did, if that’s possible. Once parenting became dominated by late Boomers and early X-ers, in the 2000’s, society became even more hostile to the idea of letting your kids roam free. It’s striking how much naivete there is within these generations, about their conception of what “quality” parenting is. Beginning with late Boomers, each Western generation has had fewer practical skills, and a more depressed attitude, than the preceding generation. While Gen X could make a legit argument that increased status striving meant that society was telling them that it would no longer be as necessary for the average person to be able to sew or do basic carpentry (since time was so precious that you’d just buy something new or pay someone else to do these things for you), at least Gen X had freedom to choose……Millennials and especially Gen Z could plausibly complain that their parents were flat out not letting them grow up like normal people are supposed to.

    Well gee whiz, when society (older adults) is telling you that only losers work with their hands, so get cracking on a professional career, while also drilling into their children that wandering off for a couple hours is sure to lead to a kidnapping, is it any wonder than Gen Z is so psychologically fucked up? Millennials at least had the GHW Bush and Clinton era, which was when things were actually dangerous to a large degree, so their parents didn’t seem like total lunatics to want their kids off the street. But Gen Z, on the other hand, has to feel as if their parents went on some psychotic break, since Gen Z has parents who consistently describe an outside world which doesn’t actually exist. Moreover, Gen Z has parents who didn’t give them the opportunity to even experience the outside world, in the first place.

  147. @Days of Broken Arrows
    "A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she’s off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.”

    A "real wife" chooses a mate on far more factors than "genuine regard and affection." There's looks, income, social status, height, family background, and education among other things. A lot of men don't measure up when it comes to those qualifications.

    Women don't see these "invisible" men because they block them on dating sites, where you can digitally adjust your qualifications for education, height, etc.

    So what do we do with these men who are "unqualified" for today's women? Considering women "marry up" and prefer men who are higher status then themselves, today's super-educated crop of women are leaving more of these men behind than ever. What becomes of the men?

    Well, for one thing, prostitutes won't dismiss them if they're under 6' or didn't go to a name university. So the guy who isn't Mr. Big but manages to save some money at least has access to a woman then.

    As for wives remaining with their husbands regardless of the man's financial status, this might have been true before the no-fault divorce era. But this isn't the case in a country where half of marriage end in divorce and the majority of those divorces are initiated by women.

    I've seen instances of women "branch swinging" from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 -- often with the kids in tow. And I've noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.

    To bring together both these issues, I would consider things like this to be a form of "soft prostitution." When a woman trades her looks for a place to live with one man followed by the next, that's essentially trading sex for resources. No-fault divorce has given us a society teeming with "soft prostitutes" in all classes, so it's disingenuous to complain about hookers when you might just have a woman living next door who is one in everything but name.

    It's not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of "surplus men" who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn't good for anyone.

    Hey, good comment there. I just used up my [AGREE] about 2 minutes ago.

  148. @AaronB
    Take it up with the Asians, not my culture.

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.

    I agree. The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do. In contrast to the over-commented BMWF pairing, there is minimal questioning of the far more common WMAF pairing, which tends to be based in the illusion that AF is “more traditional”.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Agree about the pro social deficit. Western countries however perform better economically than East Asian countries, although the Asians in the West perform somewhat better than whites in the cognitive middle, and worse than whites at the cognitive top (in non-academic settings). But they are a highly selected bunch.

    But whites definitely do have an ambition deficit, and that is a problem.
    , @EastKekistani

    The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do.
     
    Well, I consider it shameful that NE Asian people are still underrepresented in the highest levels of science, still aren't the richest countries in the world and does not have enough individualism.

    Yep we all get better over time when we are all racing to the top instead of the bottom.

  149. @Rosie

    This isn’t hard, and carries no risk of doxxing.
     
    Hell no.

    Russian bot

  150. @Curious Person
    That does seem like a rather niche market.

    Heh!

  151. @Rosie
    It turns out the claim that women are all chasing the same 20% of men is mere projection. It is men who are all competing for the same women.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

    the claim is that as the middle class shrinks 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of husband material

    husband material != physical attractiveness alone

    • Replies: @Rosie

    the claim is that as the middle class shrinks 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of husband material

    husband material != physical attractiveness alone
     
    Are you claiming that only 20% of men are considered "husband material" by women? If so, that is a more modest claim than others have made, but it is still not supported by the data.
  152. @Rosie
    Sorry, but men are choosier than women when it comes to actual messaging:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcXX8meUQAAYQS8.png:large

    You posted data to counter me, that ends up confirming my narrative.

    The cost of messaging on OKC is free, which is a reason why the site went into decline. Women rated as 8 and 9 by men receive an avalanche of messaging, which annoys them and can be justifiably called harassment. The Tinder and Bumble apps require a match to have a conversation.

    Your graphs also don’t show the number of messages, which is higher among men than women.

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.

    It is staring you in the face, but you refuse to see lest it undermine your People’s Front of Judea White Nationalist Feminism.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    You posted data to counter me, that ends up confirming my narrative.
     
    Liar.
  153. @216
    You posted data to counter me, that ends up confirming my narrative.

    The cost of messaging on OKC is free, which is a reason why the site went into decline. Women rated as 8 and 9 by men receive an avalanche of messaging, which annoys them and can be justifiably called harassment. The Tinder and Bumble apps require a match to have a conversation.

    Your graphs also don't show the number of messages, which is higher among men than women.

    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.
     
    It is staring you in the face, but you refuse to see lest it undermine your People's Front of Judea White Nationalist Feminism.

    You posted data to counter me, that ends up confirming my narrative.

    Liar.

    • Replies: @216
    You're running a narrative that men need to lower their standards.

    Something about the "beam in your eye"
  154. @216

    what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).
     
    The root of SJW culture is the anti-bullying programs in schools, which I encountered starting in primary school during the late '90s. Some conservatives embarass themselves by making unironic pro-bullying arguements as a way to argue that kids weren't toughened enough.

    Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about “crime being worse than ever before”, but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a “scripted” childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation
     
    Confirm, my Boomer father normally rode his bike with friends as a preteen across the West Side of Cleveland, during the objectively more dangerous late 1960s-early 1970s. I've never even heard of a mugging occuring in the exurban neighborhood we live in, but this would have never been accepted for me.

    One side effect of contained kids, is unlocked medicine cabinets being a source of prescription opiates.

    But in return for physical safety, we’ve evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.
     
    What are the causes of autism? The suspected vaccine preservatives were removed, ruling that out (unsure of how an immune injection could alter brain chemistry/shape). Autism is known to be common in males more than females, but this is normally not commented upon. I recall a link with births at a later age.

    Well, back in the 70’s parents didn’t spend every waking hour in terror that their kid would turn out to be a “loser”. Seriously, Silent parents in the 60’s and 70’s spent a lot of time playing bridge, or whatever the hell it was they were doing with their ample free time, rather than worrying themselves sick that their kids weren’t “making the grade”.

    Boomer and especially Gen X parents are absolutely obsessed with having the “best” possible outcomes with their kids, e.g. they all become wealthy/respected professionals or at least marry into wealth/prestige. Naturally, your child’s life being ended altogether by a bad driver or a sicko predator will completely obliterate the possiblity of one’s ego being boosted by a successful son or daughter.

    I think that much as one could say the greatest failing of the GI generation was in being far too gentle with their bratty Boomer kids, the greatest failing of Gen X will be in psychologically disfiguring their children with absurdly over-sized expectations that they “stay safe” and “do well” in life. We also see that many X-ers were frauds all along; they care as much about status as Boomers do, but the difference is that Boomers were less likely to rely on their own kids for glory.

  155. @216

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.
     
    I agree. The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do. In contrast to the over-commented BMWF pairing, there is minimal questioning of the far more common WMAF pairing, which tends to be based in the illusion that AF is "more traditional".

    Agree about the pro social deficit. Western countries however perform better economically than East Asian countries, although the Asians in the West perform somewhat better than whites in the cognitive middle, and worse than whites at the cognitive top (in non-academic settings). But they are a highly selected bunch.

    But whites definitely do have an ambition deficit, and that is a problem.

    • Replies: @216
    Wrt, the ambition deficit, there's a lot of truth to that. The presence of high-achieving Asian peers may demotivate white students who feel either culturally alienated, or unwilling to put their nose to the grindstone in the Tiger Mother style. But I think we see this unmotivated nature with US whites writ large, a multifacted cause.

    I encountered some lower-standards East Asians in high school, who were presumably the descendants of wealthier parents back home that valued a Western private school. Without domineering parents, they weren't at the top, with the exception of one brilliant guy that was the only member of the class to be admitted to an Ivy.

    One difference may be that white parents place rather large emphasis on athletics, which is nearly absent among East/South Asians. I'm not sure if there is data collected on time spent on youth sports (which might clash with youth obesity data), but it was less present for my early-Millennial older cousins than it was for me. The athletics difference might go a way into explaining why whites do better in non-academic settings, with the additional impart that East/South Asians are unfamiliar with certain social norms, or possibly hold those norms in contempt.
  156. @Rosie

    You posted data to counter me, that ends up confirming my narrative.
     
    Liar.

    You’re running a narrative that men need to lower their standards.

    Something about the “beam in your eye”

    • Replies: @Rosie

    You’re running a narrative that men need to lower their standards.
     
    They don't have to, but then if they choose to chase women out of their league, their loneliness is not my problem.
  157. @notanon
    the claim is that as the middle class shrinks 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of husband material

    husband material != physical attractiveness alone

    the claim is that as the middle class shrinks 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of husband material

    husband material != physical attractiveness alone

    Are you claiming that only 20% of men are considered “husband material” by women? If so, that is a more modest claim than others have made, but it is still not supported by the data.

    • Replies: @notanon
    it's just a random number to illustrate the point.

    the divergence will have started back when the economic squeeze first started so for the sake of argument say in 1965 it was 80% men could provide a middle class lifestyle (at some level) making the balance 80% women chasing 80% men and then over time it became
    - 80% chasing 75%
    - 80% chasing 70%
    etc
    as the middle class got progressively squeezed.
  158. a big part of what’s gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.

    in particular we now have a situation where a majority of women are competing for the minority of men who can still provide a middle class lifestyle leading to the thot-roastie pipeline on the one hand and bitter incels and feminists on the other.

    the solution is political – we need a polity where affordable family formation is a priority, which requires replacing the current ruling class.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    a big part of what’s gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.
     
    Yes, this is what I thought you meant, and there may be some truth to this. In a more immediate sense, I'm not sure women are generally aware of just how bad the job market is for men right now. Some may be wrongly assuming that men are unmotivated when in fact they are just lost.

    As for me, my husband didn't have anything when we got married. I assumed we would build a life together and that's what we did.
    , @L Woods
    Women aren't competing for middle class providers -- those are a dime a dozen even now, and they can be sure that one or (many) more dopes will offer them cash and prizes for their vaunted accomplishment of being born with a uterus. What they're really out for are the minority of retrograde social parasites the commonly referred to as "alphas."
    , @Feryl
    Actually, it's people born after about 1972 who have had it really tough. Wages didn't really start to plummet until the 1990's (just ask your typical Gen X-er). Living expenses didn't really start to soar until the later 90's. On various attitudinal and ideological measures, the key cohort"split" seems to occur in the early to mid 70's. Look at any workplace, or in any political discussion, and you generally find that people born in the 1960's generally side with older generations, those born in the Carter era or thereafter tend to side with younger people, while those born from 1970-1976 are a cross between older and younger generations. To put it another way, which decades do you remember? People who have a strong memory of the 70's are "old-school", those whose memory doesn't go back before 1980 are the "new school". People who have slight memory of the 1970's (e..g, those born during the decade) are cross between the two main groups.

    All this is to say that 1980 appears to be the key year. Not 1945, or 1960, or 1968, or 1972, or 1976. The 1980's was the decade when most Americans agreed that signs of corruption/greed/inequality/shallowness, etc. were becoming noticeably worse, and Reagan's tax cuts for the wealthy were the catalyst for a new era of elite arrogance. Going by cycle theory, we'd expect a similar generational divide tracing back to the 1880's (notably, the Lost Generation grew up during our descent into the first Gilded Age, and they were notoriously melancholy and nihilistic; I suspect that many Millennials will also share these traits, since they too were born during our descent into a new Gilded Age).
  159. @216
    You're running a narrative that men need to lower their standards.

    Something about the "beam in your eye"

    You’re running a narrative that men need to lower their standards.

    They don’t have to, but then if they choose to chase women out of their league, their loneliness is not my problem.

  160. @notanon
    a big part of what's gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.

    in particular we now have a situation where a majority of women are competing for the minority of men who can still provide a middle class lifestyle leading to the thot-roastie pipeline on the one hand and bitter incels and feminists on the other.

    the solution is political - we need a polity where affordable family formation is a priority, which requires replacing the current ruling class.

    a big part of what’s gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.

    Yes, this is what I thought you meant, and there may be some truth to this. In a more immediate sense, I’m not sure women are generally aware of just how bad the job market is for men right now. Some may be wrongly assuming that men are unmotivated when in fact they are just lost.

    As for me, my husband didn’t have anything when we got married. I assumed we would build a life together and that’s what we did.

    • Replies: @notanon

    I’m not sure women are generally aware of just how bad the job market is for men right now. Some may be wrongly assuming that men are unmotivated when in fact they are just lost.
     
    yes

    As for me, my husband didn’t have anything when we got married. I assumed we would build a life together and that’s what we did.
     
    same for me and wife but in our case when we started out there were more jobs than people and cheap, plentiful housing.

    and even then we eventually got into a situation where "good schools" made us buy a place beyond our means just to make sure the kids were safe and the financial burden of that almost led to us splitting up.
  161. @Rosie

    the claim is that as the middle class shrinks 80% of women are chasing the top 20% of husband material

    husband material != physical attractiveness alone
     
    Are you claiming that only 20% of men are considered "husband material" by women? If so, that is a more modest claim than others have made, but it is still not supported by the data.

    it’s just a random number to illustrate the point.

    the divergence will have started back when the economic squeeze first started so for the sake of argument say in 1965 it was 80% men could provide a middle class lifestyle (at some level) making the balance 80% women chasing 80% men and then over time it became
    – 80% chasing 75%
    – 80% chasing 70%
    etc
    as the middle class got progressively squeezed.

  162. @216

    what with society erecting thick layers of bubble wrap around Millennials and Gen Z ever since Clinton took office).
     
    The root of SJW culture is the anti-bullying programs in schools, which I encountered starting in primary school during the late '90s. Some conservatives embarass themselves by making unironic pro-bullying arguements as a way to argue that kids weren't toughened enough.

    Naturally, a lot of Boomers will make airheaded claims about “crime being worse than ever before”, but truth be told, parents for the last 30 years generally assume that their kids will be much better off getting a “scripted” childhood, free of unwanted intrusions or improvisation
     
    Confirm, my Boomer father normally rode his bike with friends as a preteen across the West Side of Cleveland, during the objectively more dangerous late 1960s-early 1970s. I've never even heard of a mugging occuring in the exurban neighborhood we live in, but this would have never been accepted for me.

    One side effect of contained kids, is unlocked medicine cabinets being a source of prescription opiates.

    But in return for physical safety, we’ve evidently traded the traditional path of development which prevents autism.
     
    What are the causes of autism? The suspected vaccine preservatives were removed, ruling that out (unsure of how an immune injection could alter brain chemistry/shape). Autism is known to be common in males more than females, but this is normally not commented upon. I recall a link with births at a later age.

    Autism seems to be caused in large part by a lack of important socialization that children are supposed to experience at an early stage. Well, at least the milder forms of autism, anyway. In America, places with worse weather generally have higher levels of autism, suggesting that denying kids the opportunity to spend a lot of time outdoors, and experience a wide variety of situations and encounters, stunts social skills and psychological development. Of course, we can expect “free range” kids to have more frequent accidents and run-ins with unsavory characters, but trying too hard to remove kids from “dangerous” situations can backfire. Gen Z has major levels of depression and anxiety, because their parents often didn’t allow them experience stressful situations on their own. Thus, they are hyper sensitive to anything that makes them feel hurt or uncomfortable. Interestingly, Gen X in the 90’s started to buy into the narrative that experiencing pain/abuse as a youngster leads to PTSD, thus letting us understand just how Gen X would make the opposite mistake of never letting their own kids be traumatized. It’s also interesting that while Silents and Boomers never questioned the idea that they were superiors to their kids, we see Gen X make the mistake that the GI Gen did: treating your children as equals, rather than subordinates. But for the Boomers, the 50’s and 60’s were a much better time in this country to be young. Whereas the 2010’s have been hellish for Gen Z, who all feel pressure to “win”.

  163. @Rosie

    a big part of what’s gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.
     
    Yes, this is what I thought you meant, and there may be some truth to this. In a more immediate sense, I'm not sure women are generally aware of just how bad the job market is for men right now. Some may be wrongly assuming that men are unmotivated when in fact they are just lost.

    As for me, my husband didn't have anything when we got married. I assumed we would build a life together and that's what we did.

    I’m not sure women are generally aware of just how bad the job market is for men right now. Some may be wrongly assuming that men are unmotivated when in fact they are just lost.

    yes

    As for me, my husband didn’t have anything when we got married. I assumed we would build a life together and that’s what we did.

    same for me and wife but in our case when we started out there were more jobs than people and cheap, plentiful housing.

    and even then we eventually got into a situation where “good schools” made us buy a place beyond our means just to make sure the kids were safe and the financial burden of that almost led to us splitting up.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    Has trying to give "our" kids the best possible situation really been the brightest idea, in hindsight?
  164. @notanon
    a big part of what's gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.

    in particular we now have a situation where a majority of women are competing for the minority of men who can still provide a middle class lifestyle leading to the thot-roastie pipeline on the one hand and bitter incels and feminists on the other.

    the solution is political - we need a polity where affordable family formation is a priority, which requires replacing the current ruling class.

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers — those are a dime a dozen even now, and they can be sure that one or (many) more dopes will offer them cash and prizes for their vaunted accomplishment of being born with a uterus. What they’re really out for are the minority of retrograde social parasites the commonly referred to as “alphas.”

    • Replies: @notanon

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers
     
    intelligent women who want children are
    , @Rosie

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers — those are a dime a dozen even now
     
    Are you quite serious? Home price inflation is outpacing wage growth in the only markets that are creating any jobs.

    https://www.attomdata.com/news/market-trends/home-sales-prices/q3-2018-home-affordability-report/
    , @216
    No

    Income inequality has been on a steady rise, and women are specially burdened with 2/3rds of the student loan debt, while being 3/5th of students and 1/2 the population.

    There are men in skilled blue-collar positions earning well, but the reason these positions pay well has to do with their undesirability, and the virtual absence of immigrant populations working in them. (The US has no equivalent to the UK Polish Plumber, Mexican illegals can't do the licensed trades). The number of men in dead-end jobs probably outnumbers the amount in skilled blue-collar occupations.

    Your notion of alphas doesn't fit with the manosphere norm. "Parasite" is not usually used to describe them, the alpha archetype is a leader of men which is amoral in nature dependent on the individual.

    When women "hit the wall", they do become friendlier to lower-value beta males, which will benefit a surprising number of alleged Millennial incel in the 2020s. But I agree with you in cautioning men against pairing with these women.
  165. @L Woods
    Women aren't competing for middle class providers -- those are a dime a dozen even now, and they can be sure that one or (many) more dopes will offer them cash and prizes for their vaunted accomplishment of being born with a uterus. What they're really out for are the minority of retrograde social parasites the commonly referred to as "alphas."

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers

    intelligent women who want children are

    • Replies: @L Woods
    *rimshot*
    , @Curious Person
    I.e. 37 year old women dedicated to their careers, who could resist that?
  166. @notanon
    a big part of what's gone wrong between the sexes is the result of the economic squeeze that has taken place over the last 50 years.

    in particular we now have a situation where a majority of women are competing for the minority of men who can still provide a middle class lifestyle leading to the thot-roastie pipeline on the one hand and bitter incels and feminists on the other.

    the solution is political - we need a polity where affordable family formation is a priority, which requires replacing the current ruling class.

    Actually, it’s people born after about 1972 who have had it really tough. Wages didn’t really start to plummet until the 1990’s (just ask your typical Gen X-er). Living expenses didn’t really start to soar until the later 90’s. On various attitudinal and ideological measures, the key cohort”split” seems to occur in the early to mid 70’s. Look at any workplace, or in any political discussion, and you generally find that people born in the 1960’s generally side with older generations, those born in the Carter era or thereafter tend to side with younger people, while those born from 1970-1976 are a cross between older and younger generations. To put it another way, which decades do you remember? People who have a strong memory of the 70’s are “old-school”, those whose memory doesn’t go back before 1980 are the “new school”. People who have slight memory of the 1970’s (e..g, those born during the decade) are cross between the two main groups.

    All this is to say that 1980 appears to be the key year. Not 1945, or 1960, or 1968, or 1972, or 1976. The 1980’s was the decade when most Americans agreed that signs of corruption/greed/inequality/shallowness, etc. were becoming noticeably worse, and Reagan’s tax cuts for the wealthy were the catalyst for a new era of elite arrogance. Going by cycle theory, we’d expect a similar generational divide tracing back to the 1880’s (notably, the Lost Generation grew up during our descent into the first Gilded Age, and they were notoriously melancholy and nihilistic; I suspect that many Millennials will also share these traits, since they too were born during our descent into a new Gilded Age).

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @notanon

    Actually, it’s people born after about 1972 who have had it really tough
     
    i pick 1965 as a nod to what i think the root cause was but yes you're right it took some years for wages to flat-line.
  167. @notanon

    I’m not sure women are generally aware of just how bad the job market is for men right now. Some may be wrongly assuming that men are unmotivated when in fact they are just lost.
     
    yes

    As for me, my husband didn’t have anything when we got married. I assumed we would build a life together and that’s what we did.
     
    same for me and wife but in our case when we started out there were more jobs than people and cheap, plentiful housing.

    and even then we eventually got into a situation where "good schools" made us buy a place beyond our means just to make sure the kids were safe and the financial burden of that almost led to us splitting up.

    Has trying to give “our” kids the best possible situation really been the brightest idea, in hindsight?

    • Replies: @notanon
    as an overall aim i'd say yes but the method we chose was all wrong because we didn't realize we had a hostile elite who were betraying us.

    instead of trying to run ahead of the chasing monster we should have turned round and dealt with it.
  168. @Feryl
    Actually, it's people born after about 1972 who have had it really tough. Wages didn't really start to plummet until the 1990's (just ask your typical Gen X-er). Living expenses didn't really start to soar until the later 90's. On various attitudinal and ideological measures, the key cohort"split" seems to occur in the early to mid 70's. Look at any workplace, or in any political discussion, and you generally find that people born in the 1960's generally side with older generations, those born in the Carter era or thereafter tend to side with younger people, while those born from 1970-1976 are a cross between older and younger generations. To put it another way, which decades do you remember? People who have a strong memory of the 70's are "old-school", those whose memory doesn't go back before 1980 are the "new school". People who have slight memory of the 1970's (e..g, those born during the decade) are cross between the two main groups.

    All this is to say that 1980 appears to be the key year. Not 1945, or 1960, or 1968, or 1972, or 1976. The 1980's was the decade when most Americans agreed that signs of corruption/greed/inequality/shallowness, etc. were becoming noticeably worse, and Reagan's tax cuts for the wealthy were the catalyst for a new era of elite arrogance. Going by cycle theory, we'd expect a similar generational divide tracing back to the 1880's (notably, the Lost Generation grew up during our descent into the first Gilded Age, and they were notoriously melancholy and nihilistic; I suspect that many Millennials will also share these traits, since they too were born during our descent into a new Gilded Age).

    Actually, it’s people born after about 1972 who have had it really tough

    i pick 1965 as a nod to what i think the root cause was but yes you’re right it took some years for wages to flat-line.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    If you understand the cultural cycle theory, 1964-1984 was the "consciousness revolution", with 1967-1975 being the most intense phase. Reactionary politics began to creep in by the '76 bicentennial, with Carter de-regulating the airline and trucking industry and the wealthy beginning to hoard more of the wealth (thereby stimulating an impulse that would lead to Reagan's outrageous tax cuts in 1981). But the consciousness revolution didn't fully fade away until around 1985, when people stopped joining cults, started going to re-hab, divorce rates declined modestly, and we had the PMRC in the US and the Video Nasty censorship flap in the UK. Indoor smoking bans also began to really go into effect around 1985.

    After 1984, the Unraveling fully commenced. Immigration levels exploded, paranoia about crime and strangers began to run rampant, and all generations neither expected nor wanted sweeping ideological campaigns (whereas in the 1940's and 50's, everyone wanted to stop fascism and communism, while in the 60's and 70's there was widespread agreement on expanding rights for "minorities", greater environmental protections, and encouraging creativity.)

    The Unraveling began to peter out in the late 90's (when crime declined, rock music became more upbeat, theaters began barring minors from attending R-rated movies, hysteria over drugs and child abuse diminished compared to how the public felt in the late 80's and early 90's). 9/11 and the Patriot Act killed off the Reagan-Clinton Unraveling, with resurgent nativism and Islamophobia making another 1986 immigration amnesty impossible, while criminal suspects and prisoners lost many of the rights that they had gained in the 1950's-1970's.

    Since late 2001 we've been in a "Crisis" phase, where there is much earnest and often heated debate about how to tackle the issues facing us. This a much different mood from the Awakening (when most people agree to loosen up), and even the Unraveling (when there is widespread apathy toward civic and political issues).

    Each phase generally lasts about 20-25 years (roughly the time it takes for a generation to reach adulthood). Boomer were born during the High phase of about 1945-1963. Gen X-ers were born during the Awakening phase of about 1964-1981. Millennials were born during the Unraveling phase of about 1982-1996. Of course, the precise boundaries of these cultural eras, and the boundaries of generations, are open to debate and are typically fuzzy. A good rule of thumb when it comes to generations is: what is the earliest era that an entire generation, from first to latest born, can relate to? For Boomers, it's the 1950's. For X-ers, it's the 1970's. For Millennials, it's the 1990's. X-ers can't possibly understand the mood of the 50's. Millennials can't possibly understand the 1970's. Gen Z can't possibly understand the 1990's.
  169. @L Woods
    Women aren't competing for middle class providers -- those are a dime a dozen even now, and they can be sure that one or (many) more dopes will offer them cash and prizes for their vaunted accomplishment of being born with a uterus. What they're really out for are the minority of retrograde social parasites the commonly referred to as "alphas."

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers — those are a dime a dozen even now

    Are you quite serious? Home price inflation is outpacing wage growth in the only markets that are creating any jobs.

    https://www.attomdata.com/news/market-trends/home-sales-prices/q3-2018-home-affordability-report/

  170. @AaronB
    Agree about the pro social deficit. Western countries however perform better economically than East Asian countries, although the Asians in the West perform somewhat better than whites in the cognitive middle, and worse than whites at the cognitive top (in non-academic settings). But they are a highly selected bunch.

    But whites definitely do have an ambition deficit, and that is a problem.

    Wrt, the ambition deficit, there’s a lot of truth to that. The presence of high-achieving Asian peers may demotivate white students who feel either culturally alienated, or unwilling to put their nose to the grindstone in the Tiger Mother style. But I think we see this unmotivated nature with US whites writ large, a multifacted cause.

    I encountered some lower-standards East Asians in high school, who were presumably the descendants of wealthier parents back home that valued a Western private school. Without domineering parents, they weren’t at the top, with the exception of one brilliant guy that was the only member of the class to be admitted to an Ivy.

    One difference may be that white parents place rather large emphasis on athletics, which is nearly absent among East/South Asians. I’m not sure if there is data collected on time spent on youth sports (which might clash with youth obesity data), but it was less present for my early-Millennial older cousins than it was for me. The athletics difference might go a way into explaining why whites do better in non-academic settings, with the additional impart that East/South Asians are unfamiliar with certain social norms, or possibly hold those norms in contempt.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Definitely, Asian academic excellence is driven by Tiger Momming. That is a tremendous amount of pressure and generates incredible effort, and there is nothing comparable among whites at the moment. Although previous generations of whites may have had something similar.

    Asians also place greater importance on "formal" status signifiers and the appearance of status. I was reading an article recently about how Asians who are weak academically are more likely to prefer attending an elite school where they will be on the bottom and struggle, than one more matched to their level. Whites reported opposite preferences. The Asians candidly admitted that there is more status being at the bottom of an elite school, and that's the priority.

    All that being said, whites shouldn't celebrate their apathy - whites will have to start working hard again. The period after WW2, where whites could goof off and still be effortlessly dominant, is over. And a more normal competitive environment is replacing it. This is hardly tragic, and pre WW2 whites were more accustomed to work hard.

    We can find joy again in striving and performing, but for that our culture as a whole has to believe in itself again. And that will inevitably happen.
  171. @Feryl
    Has trying to give "our" kids the best possible situation really been the brightest idea, in hindsight?

    as an overall aim i’d say yes but the method we chose was all wrong because we didn’t realize we had a hostile elite who were betraying us.

    instead of trying to run ahead of the chasing monster we should have turned round and dealt with it.

  172. @L Woods
    Women aren't competing for middle class providers -- those are a dime a dozen even now, and they can be sure that one or (many) more dopes will offer them cash and prizes for their vaunted accomplishment of being born with a uterus. What they're really out for are the minority of retrograde social parasites the commonly referred to as "alphas."

    No

    Income inequality has been on a steady rise, and women are specially burdened with 2/3rds of the student loan debt, while being 3/5th of students and 1/2 the population.

    There are men in skilled blue-collar positions earning well, but the reason these positions pay well has to do with their undesirability, and the virtual absence of immigrant populations working in them. (The US has no equivalent to the UK Polish Plumber, Mexican illegals can’t do the licensed trades). The number of men in dead-end jobs probably outnumbers the amount in skilled blue-collar occupations.

    Your notion of alphas doesn’t fit with the manosphere norm. “Parasite” is not usually used to describe them, the alpha archetype is a leader of men which is amoral in nature dependent on the individual.

    When women “hit the wall”, they do become friendlier to lower-value beta males, which will benefit a surprising number of alleged Millennial incel in the 2020s. But I agree with you in cautioning men against pairing with these women.

    • Replies: @L Woods
    I’m aware of the income issue, but it’s largely chimerical when women only begin to value it when they are expired goods themselves, and can simply steal it through divorce or other dishonest means anyway. Even if wage growth remained healthy, few could be said to have any real stake in the present order.
  173. @216
    Wrt, the ambition deficit, there's a lot of truth to that. The presence of high-achieving Asian peers may demotivate white students who feel either culturally alienated, or unwilling to put their nose to the grindstone in the Tiger Mother style. But I think we see this unmotivated nature with US whites writ large, a multifacted cause.

    I encountered some lower-standards East Asians in high school, who were presumably the descendants of wealthier parents back home that valued a Western private school. Without domineering parents, they weren't at the top, with the exception of one brilliant guy that was the only member of the class to be admitted to an Ivy.

    One difference may be that white parents place rather large emphasis on athletics, which is nearly absent among East/South Asians. I'm not sure if there is data collected on time spent on youth sports (which might clash with youth obesity data), but it was less present for my early-Millennial older cousins than it was for me. The athletics difference might go a way into explaining why whites do better in non-academic settings, with the additional impart that East/South Asians are unfamiliar with certain social norms, or possibly hold those norms in contempt.

    Definitely, Asian academic excellence is driven by Tiger Momming. That is a tremendous amount of pressure and generates incredible effort, and there is nothing comparable among whites at the moment. Although previous generations of whites may have had something similar.

    Asians also place greater importance on “formal” status signifiers and the appearance of status. I was reading an article recently about how Asians who are weak academically are more likely to prefer attending an elite school where they will be on the bottom and struggle, than one more matched to their level. Whites reported opposite preferences. The Asians candidly admitted that there is more status being at the bottom of an elite school, and that’s the priority.

    All that being said, whites shouldn’t celebrate their apathy – whites will have to start working hard again. The period after WW2, where whites could goof off and still be effortlessly dominant, is over. And a more normal competitive environment is replacing it. This is hardly tragic, and pre WW2 whites were more accustomed to work hard.

    We can find joy again in striving and performing, but for that our culture as a whole has to believe in itself again. And that will inevitably happen.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    We can find joy again in striving and performing, but for that our culture as a whole has to believe in itself again. And that will inevitably happen.
     
    Good luck. I wish you guys the best.

    This is how the world improves. Stiff competition causes everyone to improve because everyone wants to be the best. This is just like how multipolar Europe got better and better over time in the past... Britain wanted to be better than France and Prussia. France wanted to be better than Britain and Prussia. Prussia wanted to be better than Britain and France. Everyone benefited not because everyone got to be #1 but because everyone improved faster as a result of competition.

    On the other hand without competition stagnancy is common. Imperial China was one the best examples of this phenomenon. When one person or group doesn't have to do much to be #1 standards fall and everyone suffer in the long run.

    , @Feryl
    How old are you? Whites don't need to be "pressured" to succeed. We've already destroyed one generation mentally (Gen Z), because they came of age feeling so much pressure to be "winners". The dog-eat-dog mentality of Gilded Ages inflicts a lot of psychological damage on people.

    "Hard work"? Only when it makes sense, and not to destructive excess. Boomers, who came of age with very little pressure to succeed in the 1950's-1970's, opted to place a lot of their energy into "hard work". And for what? Look, Gen X hasn't been right about everything, but they were correct in their resentment of Boomer workaholism.

    What we really need to do is create social and legal pressures on elites to better spread the wealth, and stop gratuitously investing so much of it into themselves and further money making schemes.

    As someone born in 1985, I never thought I'd look back on the 90's as being a fairly relaxed and happy time, but, here we are. The 2010's have been the worst decade for Western culture in a long, long time. It's hard to say when we last experienced a decade so dreadful, although the 1970's and 1920's are strong contenders (the 70's had Boomers pushing car crash rates to record levels and..... Polyester, while the 1920's were a decade of much interpersonal and political violence, with the deservedly named Lost Generation treating the decade as the last big bash before the modest GI Gen gave us our greatest period ever, the late 1930's-early 1960's).
  174. @216

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.
     
    I agree. The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do. In contrast to the over-commented BMWF pairing, there is minimal questioning of the far more common WMAF pairing, which tends to be based in the illusion that AF is "more traditional".

    The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do.

    Well, I consider it shameful that NE Asian people are still underrepresented in the highest levels of science, still aren’t the richest countries in the world and does not have enough individualism.

    Yep we all get better over time when we are all racing to the top instead of the bottom.

    • Replies: @216
    Every NE Asian country has a nuclear power plant, and all except North Korea have far superior passenger rail versus the US and arguably the EU as well.

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.

    Hard to say why we'd want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership. Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates. More individualism might mean more single mothers.
  175. @AaronB
    Definitely, Asian academic excellence is driven by Tiger Momming. That is a tremendous amount of pressure and generates incredible effort, and there is nothing comparable among whites at the moment. Although previous generations of whites may have had something similar.

    Asians also place greater importance on "formal" status signifiers and the appearance of status. I was reading an article recently about how Asians who are weak academically are more likely to prefer attending an elite school where they will be on the bottom and struggle, than one more matched to their level. Whites reported opposite preferences. The Asians candidly admitted that there is more status being at the bottom of an elite school, and that's the priority.

    All that being said, whites shouldn't celebrate their apathy - whites will have to start working hard again. The period after WW2, where whites could goof off and still be effortlessly dominant, is over. And a more normal competitive environment is replacing it. This is hardly tragic, and pre WW2 whites were more accustomed to work hard.

    We can find joy again in striving and performing, but for that our culture as a whole has to believe in itself again. And that will inevitably happen.

    We can find joy again in striving and performing, but for that our culture as a whole has to believe in itself again. And that will inevitably happen.

    Good luck. I wish you guys the best.

    This is how the world improves. Stiff competition causes everyone to improve because everyone wants to be the best. This is just like how multipolar Europe got better and better over time in the past… Britain wanted to be better than France and Prussia. France wanted to be better than Britain and Prussia. Prussia wanted to be better than Britain and France. Everyone benefited not because everyone got to be #1 but because everyone improved faster as a result of competition.

    On the other hand without competition stagnancy is common. Imperial China was one the best examples of this phenomenon. When one person or group doesn’t have to do much to be #1 standards fall and everyone suffer in the long run.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Well, the world does seem to work this way, and there is no use fighting it. Rather we have to accept it laughingly, with a good grace, and roll up your sleeves and get to it.

    As I told you on another thread and you disagreed, at bottom all is one, and opposites unite - to reject the competitive aspect of the world out of some dream of peace (as I once did) is to be too one-sided, and at bottom is not necessary.
  176. @Feryl
    The differences arise from Caucasians having a much greater sense of individual dignity than sub-Saharan blacks and Asians. It's interesting that in Europe and the MENA, sexual behavior is often regarded as highly personal, subject to heavy regulation, and something over which to feel great shame and embarrassment. Sex is idealized as being "only" acceptable between two life-long partners, and anything outside that context is shameful and degrading.

    It's not a "Western" thing, in the sense that Muslims are even more neurotic about sex than Europeans are (to the point that in some Muslim societies their is great pressure on women to not show their hair in public, lest it trigger lusting men).

    Correct. Devout Muslims may even insist on “marrying” a prostitute, and then divorcing her immediately afterwards, to provide a thin fig-leaf of legitimacy covering their shameful act. They wouldn’t bother with the deception if they didn’t, deep down, feel bad about knobbing a prostitute.

  177. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB
    In Asia, men regularly and avidly patronize prostitutes. Its huge, and there's no shame. And the "fantasy" element does not bother them at all. They know its not real, but culturally that's fine.

    The insistence on real affection and the sense of shame at visiting a prostitute is purely a Western cultural thing, and a fairly recent one at that.

    I’d feel more confident in this assessment of Asian men if it were coming from an Asian man, but judging by your name, it’s not.

    A lot of Western men’s experience of Asia is as a sex tourist, whether vicariously or otherwise. (Not that I’m accusing you…) This may lead them to think Asia is much more libertine than it is.

    I’d believe there was no shame in visiting a prostitute in Asia if (a) I knew nothing about human nature, or assumed it was fundamentally different in Asia, and (b) if Japanese porno didn’t pixellate the giblets. Clearly they’ve got some kind of hang-up.

    As for such shame being only recent in the West, that must mean that it was unremarkable of Jesus to consort with prostitutes. I’m not well-versed in Christianity, but wouldn’t that rather invert the point of that story?

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Well, consider it coming from Asian friends indirectly through me. You can also find videos on YouTube asking Japanese people what they think of prostitution. They admit its ubiquity, and even some of the women think it's pretty much ok.

    The point is, its not flaunted. Its discreet private activity, at most with a bunch of friends. Social propriety - the promotion of stable families - has to be preserved. But a release valve for excess pressure is provided. But it's a totally accepted activity with a long history - Japan has always had a "floating world", a twilight demi-monde where temporary escape can be found from the harsh pressures of conscious daily life. And in that they are wiser than us.

    So that's why Japanese poem pixelates the giblets. It is a nod to social propriety, and a rather amusing one in a country with such a large and varied porn industry.

    As for Jesus, consorting openly with prostitutes would be considered scandalous behavior in Asia today. Everything has its place, and is socially acceptable in its place. Violating this order is scandalous, but does mean said behavior is rejected in toto.

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys. This crops up amusingly in Japanese dramas, and there are some interesting documentaries on YouTube and other places.
    , @216
    The scandal of Jesus associating with prostitutes may have been linked to them not undergoing the ritual purification via the corrupt Temple priesthood. Prostitutes also may have been serving the occupying Roman Army. There was also an element of hypocrisy where customers of the prostitutes would engage in ritual killings of them.

    The theme is around forgiveness in place of ritual. It is often interpreted by moderns in the visage that bad behavior is to be excused instead of admonished, that Jesus was against the Pharisee class because they were "judgemental". The element that the Pharisees went onto author the Talmud is downplayed or ignored altogether.

    ---

    The shame is rather recent in the US, perhaps not the wider West. Prior to the 60s Sexual Revolution, prostitutes were more common than today, and they were even more common in the 19th century and prior. (Trump's grandfather managed a brothel in Alaska, which he euphemistically calls a restaurant). Medieval authors tended to view prostitution as a "necessary evil". Making it illegal has its roots in Victorian Temperance movements.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_Americas
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_South_America

    In areas where Victorian-era Methodism had minimal impact, the prior patterns continued uninterrupted.
  178. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB
    In Asia, men regularly and avidly patronize prostitutes. Its huge, and there's no shame. And the "fantasy" element does not bother them at all. They know its not real, but culturally that's fine.

    The insistence on real affection and the sense of shame at visiting a prostitute is purely a Western cultural thing, and a fairly recent one at that.

    double-post

  179. On the other hand instead of participating in the global competition for excellence Negroids tend to attempt to simply ruin the competition by shaming and penalizing competence. Since they perform really poorly in it in order to preserve their social status they simply discredit the legitimacy of the competition itself. It is not that much of a problem to not do well. After all one can improve over time especially in this age since genetic engineering is gradually becoming available. On the other hand attempting to ruin the competition should be discouraged because it harms everyone in the long run.

  180. @Michael S

    Once again, the grievance is not that women are “whores,” but rather precisely that we are not.
     
    Ha! I think you have me confused with the MGTOW whiners. No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word's proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.

    If you could see past your silly paleo-feminist posturing for one minute and actually listen, you'd realize that men like myself are your only real allies in this fight. I don't think porn or prostitution should be destigmatized or legalized, but the problem with our system is that it's women who need to be regulated in order to make that happen. If there are many rules for men and none for women, then a single man who breaks the rules can ruin a hundred women. If the rules (and social norms) are applied to women, then only the one woman who breaks the rules is ruined.

    You yourself claim that female prostitutes are harming themselves, so why are they allowed to do it? Is it logical that the only "crime" is when a man takes her up on her offer? That's like making drug trafficking legal, but possession illegal. Totally impractical and utterly absurd.

    Ha! I think you have me confused with the MGTOW whiners. No shortage of whores here; you just refuse to abide by the word’s proper, biblical definition, and instead insist on one that involves a formal transaction with money changing hands.

    Michael, I wanted to add that I am particularly creeped out by modern whore-shaming precisely because the Biblical approach to the issue is now ignored.

    https://biblehub.com/john/8-11.htm

    The double standard has always existed, but the line between whore and non-whore is brighter among modern pseudotrads than it was among Medieval Christian’s, who knew perfectly well that God didn’t accept their double standards, and patrons would burn in hellfire just as hot as the prostitute herself.

    For this reason, I believe, the redeemed prostitute was a figure of veneration and great comfort to medieval sinners, all of whom knew they were equal in their sin.

    https://amedievalwomanscompanion.com/prostitute-saints/

  181. @AaronB
    Most high status men use prostitutes. That's why we have these scandals every now and then. And also mistresses.

    Using prostitutes is forbidden to the middle classes, who are always the guardians of social morality, and have stricter rules than other classes.

    The lower classes are outside the social pale, and the upper classes are free from any status concern and play by their own rules.

    The upper and lower classes are both free for different reasons, whereas the middle classes have to obey social rules.

    Most high status men use prostitutes.

    Openly?

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Discreetly.

    But acceptably, totally.
  182. @EastKekistani

    The Dissident Right should consider it shameful that Asians display more pro-social behavior and economic attainment in data indicators than whites do.
     
    Well, I consider it shameful that NE Asian people are still underrepresented in the highest levels of science, still aren't the richest countries in the world and does not have enough individualism.

    Yep we all get better over time when we are all racing to the top instead of the bottom.

    Every NE Asian country has a nuclear power plant, and all except North Korea have far superior passenger rail versus the US and arguably the EU as well.

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.

    Hard to say why we’d want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership. Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates. More individualism might mean more single mothers.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.
     
    Well, it is still too slow. The actual situation is better than the Nobel Prize info because it usually takes decades for the latest scientific progress to be awarded a Nobel Prize. But it is still really awful compared to Germanics per capita.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.
     
    Maybe..especially in economics, literature and peace?

    Hard to say why we’d want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership.
     
    I do like personal firearms ownership for two reasons:

    1. It keeps tyranny and potential tyranny in check.
    2. It helps NE Asian people survive and thrive in the Third World (e.g. Sub-Saharan Africa).


    Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates.
     
    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.

    More individualism might mean more single mothers.
     
    That's true. But we will get more innovation and space exploration too. In an age of space exploration you want at least some people to be Columbuses and Pizarros. In an age of rapid scientific progress you want at least some people to be weird and nonconformist techies. If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don't understand. In particular I definitely don't want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.
  183. Truth,

    I very much respect your intellect. Please respect my schoolmarmery–no racial slurs. Thanks!

  184. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Michael S

    the escalation that sex bots will enable will push a few over the edge into indulging their urges for real, i.e. there will be a small increase in rape, pederasty, bestiality, etc
     
    This is like the "video games cause violence" and "porn causes rape" narratives, both literally opposite to the reality. If anything, sexbots would reduce sex crime, but of course women don't really care about that, they only care about eliminating competition, as others have already pointed out.

    If sexual pleasure was all men were after, they’d be saving themselves a lot of time and money by banging whores, but they’re not.
     
    Also very wrong, or at least massively distorted. The reality is that we have a superabundance of whores who just aren't charging much for their services.

    I left out “albeit such a small increase in rape etc that it might not be noticed amongst various other effects”, but perhaps I shouldn’t’ve.

    Please note that I’m not saying “x causes y”, but rather that someone with a predisposition towards y who was too afraid to try it might acclimate themselves to it via x.

  185. @anon
    I'd feel more confident in this assessment of Asian men if it were coming from an Asian man, but judging by your name, it's not.

    A lot of Western men's experience of Asia is as a sex tourist, whether vicariously or otherwise. (Not that I'm accusing you...) This may lead them to think Asia is much more libertine than it is.

    I'd believe there was no shame in visiting a prostitute in Asia if (a) I knew nothing about human nature, or assumed it was fundamentally different in Asia, and (b) if Japanese porno didn't pixellate the giblets. Clearly they've got some kind of hang-up.

    As for such shame being only recent in the West, that must mean that it was unremarkable of Jesus to consort with prostitutes. I'm not well-versed in Christianity, but wouldn't that rather invert the point of that story?

    Well, consider it coming from Asian friends indirectly through me. You can also find videos on YouTube asking Japanese people what they think of prostitution. They admit its ubiquity, and even some of the women think it’s pretty much ok.

    The point is, its not flaunted. Its discreet private activity, at most with a bunch of friends. Social propriety – the promotion of stable families – has to be preserved. But a release valve for excess pressure is provided. But it’s a totally accepted activity with a long history – Japan has always had a “floating world”, a twilight demi-monde where temporary escape can be found from the harsh pressures of conscious daily life. And in that they are wiser than us.

    So that’s why Japanese poem pixelates the giblets. It is a nod to social propriety, and a rather amusing one in a country with such a large and varied porn industry.

    As for Jesus, consorting openly with prostitutes would be considered scandalous behavior in Asia today. Everything has its place, and is socially acceptable in its place. Violating this order is scandalous, but does mean said behavior is rejected in toto.

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys. This crops up amusingly in Japanese dramas, and there are some interesting documentaries on YouTube and other places.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys.
     
    Yeah, some women go down to SEA to fuck SEA bad boys. At least for now there aren't a lot of NE Asian women flying to Africa for this purpose...thankfully.
  186. @Audacious Epigone
    A lot to think about there, thanks.

    Ditto re: your blog

  187. @EastKekistani

    We can find joy again in striving and performing, but for that our culture as a whole has to believe in itself again. And that will inevitably happen.
     
    Good luck. I wish you guys the best.

    This is how the world improves. Stiff competition causes everyone to improve because everyone wants to be the best. This is just like how multipolar Europe got better and better over time in the past... Britain wanted to be better than France and Prussia. France wanted to be better than Britain and Prussia. Prussia wanted to be better than Britain and France. Everyone benefited not because everyone got to be #1 but because everyone improved faster as a result of competition.

    On the other hand without competition stagnancy is common. Imperial China was one the best examples of this phenomenon. When one person or group doesn't have to do much to be #1 standards fall and everyone suffer in the long run.

    Well, the world does seem to work this way, and there is no use fighting it. Rather we have to accept it laughingly, with a good grace, and roll up your sleeves and get to it.

    As I told you on another thread and you disagreed, at bottom all is one, and opposites unite – to reject the competitive aspect of the world out of some dream of peace (as I once did) is to be too one-sided, and at bottom is not necessary.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    Well, the world does seem to work this way, and there is no use fighting it. Rather we have to accept it laughingly, with a good grace, and roll up your sleeves and get to it.
     
    Yep.

    As I told you on another thread and you disagreed, at bottom all is one, and opposites unite – to reject the competitive aspect of the world out of some dream of peace (as I once did) is to be too one-sided, and at bottom is not necessary.
     
    Well, peace is actually earned through strength. Competition on this planet helps humanity in any future struggle against aliens. Better compete more with other humans in a fairly benevolent environment instead of losing the competition with aliens in a Hobbesian environment.
  188. @Talha
    Thanks. Who taught you that “liberation” is the end purpose of life?

    Why? So that one can serve the wrong master...
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3a/22/f7/3a22f7bb7fb567274e839e4489627ce2.jpg

    “Have you seen the one who takes his desires as his god?...” (25:43)

    As far as Jerusalem, well, we certainly think he liberated it; you are free to come for it again once we get it back - then you can say you liberated it! Fun times!

    Peace.

    Don’t take my donning of this tunic emblazoned with the cross of St. George across the front the wrong way, friend, but–on guard!

    • LOL: Talha
  189. @anon
    Most high status men use prostitutes.

    Openly?

    Discreetly.

    But acceptably, totally.

    • Replies: @anon
    Obviously there are gradations of "acceptable", but if it were at all acceptable, they wouldn't need to be discreet.
  190. @Mark G.
    I don't remember the exact numbers but the number of men who have visited a prostitute was twice as high in Europe than the U.S. It was something like thirty percent and fifteen percent. It's mostly legal in Europe so that means that half the men in the U.S. who would normally do it aren't doing it just because of the illegality of it here.

    Your recollection for the US is nearly exactly what the GSS shows.

  191. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    ... women don’t like selling it... ... women don't like people understanding that they are selling it.
     
    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it's in their nature to sell it. That's what marriage or partnership is about.

    ... and they certainly don’t like other women selling it
     
    No, not a a steep rental discount they don't. If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before.

    You might rephrase what you said as “women don’t like to think of themselves as selling it”. Which might be rephrased again as, “they don’t like selling it”.

    Of course, if you’re going to reframe marriage as entirely transactional, men are selling something of themselves too, and I expect they don’t much like that, in the same way as above.

    “If it flies, floats, or _____, well you all have heard that before.” – actually, I had to google it. TIL, as they also say on the internet

  192. @Days of Broken Arrows
    "A prostitute will only consider men of means, and if they become unable to provide for her, she’s off. A real wife chooses her husband out of genuine regard and affection, and remains with him irrespective of his economic resources.”

    A "real wife" chooses a mate on far more factors than "genuine regard and affection." There's looks, income, social status, height, family background, and education among other things. A lot of men don't measure up when it comes to those qualifications.

    Women don't see these "invisible" men because they block them on dating sites, where you can digitally adjust your qualifications for education, height, etc.

    So what do we do with these men who are "unqualified" for today's women? Considering women "marry up" and prefer men who are higher status then themselves, today's super-educated crop of women are leaving more of these men behind than ever. What becomes of the men?

    Well, for one thing, prostitutes won't dismiss them if they're under 6' or didn't go to a name university. So the guy who isn't Mr. Big but manages to save some money at least has access to a woman then.

    As for wives remaining with their husbands regardless of the man's financial status, this might have been true before the no-fault divorce era. But this isn't the case in a country where half of marriage end in divorce and the majority of those divorces are initiated by women.

    I've seen instances of women "branch swinging" from one high-status man to the next. When Man #1 is deemed disposable because of health or job problems, she jumps to Man #2 -- often with the kids in tow. And I've noticed conservative white women tend to be pretty good at this.

    To bring together both these issues, I would consider things like this to be a form of "soft prostitution." When a woman trades her looks for a place to live with one man followed by the next, that's essentially trading sex for resources. No-fault divorce has given us a society teeming with "soft prostitutes" in all classes, so it's disingenuous to complain about hookers when you might just have a woman living next door who is one in everything but name.

    It's not in the nature of most women to have empathy for men. Women tend to care about children, while men care about women. Because of this, the law should consider the fates of "surplus men" who have been left behind. Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn't good for anyone.

    Having a high amount of frustrated, alienated men with no families and no stake in society isn’t good for anyone.

    Tell that to cults, revolutionary movements, porn producers, drug and videogame manufacturers, bloggers…

  193. Anon[170]:

    Apologies for deleting your rather long comment, but no dehumanizing racial slurs (ie “muds”).

  194. @anon
    I'd feel more confident in this assessment of Asian men if it were coming from an Asian man, but judging by your name, it's not.

    A lot of Western men's experience of Asia is as a sex tourist, whether vicariously or otherwise. (Not that I'm accusing you...) This may lead them to think Asia is much more libertine than it is.

    I'd believe there was no shame in visiting a prostitute in Asia if (a) I knew nothing about human nature, or assumed it was fundamentally different in Asia, and (b) if Japanese porno didn't pixellate the giblets. Clearly they've got some kind of hang-up.

    As for such shame being only recent in the West, that must mean that it was unremarkable of Jesus to consort with prostitutes. I'm not well-versed in Christianity, but wouldn't that rather invert the point of that story?

    The scandal of Jesus associating with prostitutes may have been linked to them not undergoing the ritual purification via the corrupt Temple priesthood. Prostitutes also may have been serving the occupying Roman Army. There was also an element of hypocrisy where customers of the prostitutes would engage in ritual killings of them.

    The theme is around forgiveness in place of ritual. It is often interpreted by moderns in the visage that bad behavior is to be excused instead of admonished, that Jesus was against the Pharisee class because they were “judgemental”. The element that the Pharisees went onto author the Talmud is downplayed or ignored altogether.

    The shame is rather recent in the US, perhaps not the wider West. Prior to the 60s Sexual Revolution, prostitutes were more common than today, and they were even more common in the 19th century and prior. (Trump’s grandfather managed a brothel in Alaska, which he euphemistically calls a restaurant). Medieval authors tended to view prostitution as a “necessary evil”. Making it illegal has its roots in Victorian Temperance movements.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_Americas
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_South_America

    In areas where Victorian-era Methodism had minimal impact, the prior patterns continued uninterrupted.

  195. @Rosie

    FIFY, as they say on the internet. Women not only ARE selling it (ever known a man who just likes to pay double for auto insurance and maintenance, triple for food, and quintuple for clothes, and put his house and other assets up for a 20-year gamble just for the extra fun of working harder and longer?), but it’s in their nature to sell it. That’s what marriage or partnership is about.
     
    Because it's just inconceivable that men value their wives' companionship and nurturing services. As ever, I try to defend the essential goodness of mankind (in the narrow sense), and am foiled by the very men I try to defend, who appear to agree with feminists for the most part about the nature of Male humanity.

    Speaking only of myself, but the “essentially good” are often doing something other than arguing with strangers on the internet in the middle of the day.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Nah, Rosie os no stranger. She is familiar from iSteve threads, and it's generally pretty friendly as the Commies have left it alone for now - too much thinking and truth-telling going on - they can't handle all that. Shhhhh!
  196. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Michael S

    I wasn’t aware that objecting to perversion required any “rationalization.”
     
    And there it is. Can you articulate a definition of sexual perversion, or is that also just a vague emotion?

    You think so because you consider her damaged goods that can’t be damaged any more than she already is.
     
    Yes. Realistically, scientifically, there isn't a huge difference between a hundred partners and a thousand partners. All of the attributes we know how to measure - happiness, chance of marriage, chance of divorce, fertility, etc. - they all fall off a cliff after about a dozen, and by the time a woman hits 20 or 30 partners, they've basically flatlined.

    Realistically, scientifically, there isn’t a huge difference between a hundred partners and a thousand partners.

    I don’t know about scientifically, but supposedly pimps have a concept called “mileage on a ho” which would suggest that there is a huge difference between a hundred and a thousand, at least if the ho’s mileage occurs between the two. In other words, there is only “enough to cope with” and “too much to cope with”.

    No idea how true that is, but they are the experts.

  197. @AaronB
    Well, the world does seem to work this way, and there is no use fighting it. Rather we have to accept it laughingly, with a good grace, and roll up your sleeves and get to it.

    As I told you on another thread and you disagreed, at bottom all is one, and opposites unite - to reject the competitive aspect of the world out of some dream of peace (as I once did) is to be too one-sided, and at bottom is not necessary.

    Well, the world does seem to work this way, and there is no use fighting it. Rather we have to accept it laughingly, with a good grace, and roll up your sleeves and get to it.

    Yep.

    As I told you on another thread and you disagreed, at bottom all is one, and opposites unite – to reject the competitive aspect of the world out of some dream of peace (as I once did) is to be too one-sided, and at bottom is not necessary.

    Well, peace is actually earned through strength. Competition on this planet helps humanity in any future struggle against aliens. Better compete more with other humans in a fairly benevolent environment instead of losing the competition with aliens in a Hobbesian environment.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Peace being earned through strength is a good example of the unity of opposites, in a way, although I usually mean it more metaphysically.

    I agree - the aliens, when they come, as they will, we must give them a run for their money.

    But in all seriousness - if you wish to promote harmony between whites and Asians and all the races, as you say, perhaps the only way to do so is to press the danger of alien invasions. As I said in the Karlin thread on aggression, human societies discourage interpersonal violence in order to better direct it at outsiders.

    So the alien invasion aspect of your philosophy actually fits rather nicely with your project for racial harmony.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    If aliens are able to get here, I suspect bacteria and viruses are our only chance.
  198. @AaronB
    Well, consider it coming from Asian friends indirectly through me. You can also find videos on YouTube asking Japanese people what they think of prostitution. They admit its ubiquity, and even some of the women think it's pretty much ok.

    The point is, its not flaunted. Its discreet private activity, at most with a bunch of friends. Social propriety - the promotion of stable families - has to be preserved. But a release valve for excess pressure is provided. But it's a totally accepted activity with a long history - Japan has always had a "floating world", a twilight demi-monde where temporary escape can be found from the harsh pressures of conscious daily life. And in that they are wiser than us.

    So that's why Japanese poem pixelates the giblets. It is a nod to social propriety, and a rather amusing one in a country with such a large and varied porn industry.

    As for Jesus, consorting openly with prostitutes would be considered scandalous behavior in Asia today. Everything has its place, and is socially acceptable in its place. Violating this order is scandalous, but does mean said behavior is rejected in toto.

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys. This crops up amusingly in Japanese dramas, and there are some interesting documentaries on YouTube and other places.

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys.

    Yeah, some women go down to SEA to fuck SEA bad boys. At least for now there aren’t a lot of NE Asian women flying to Africa for this purpose…thankfully.

    • Replies: @216
    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2011/05/pawlenty-for-president.html
    , @AaronB
    In Japan, the local women use local men. There is actually a huge male industry in Japan.

    There was an interesting documentary on Netflix a while back about female Japanese hostessess who use all their hard earned money on....male hosts.

    The whole thing was very sad. Each group clearly wanted genuine affection, in that instance.
  199. @EastKekistani

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys.
     
    Yeah, some women go down to SEA to fuck SEA bad boys. At least for now there aren't a lot of NE Asian women flying to Africa for this purpose...thankfully.
  200. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Men don’t like buying it, women don’t like selling it, and they certainly don’t like other women selling it.
     
    Women's opposition to prostitution is not about market control. We oppose prostitution because we believe the prostitute is harming herself, not the rest of us. Women generally believe prostitution should be illegal, but oppose severe punitive measures against it.

    I doubt most people, male or female, are so pure.

    I think much of female opposition to prostitution is for the same reason as female opposition to sluttiness. Feminism has upended it, but women used to hate sluts. If “metoo” had happened pre-feminism, most of the women involved wouldn’t have been considered victims.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    I doubt most people, male or female, are so pure.
     
    Why? People often tend to support paternalistic laws that prevent people from hurting themselves. There is no appetite for legalizing heroine, for example.

    I think much of female opposition to prostitution is for the same reason as female opposition to sluttiness. Feminism has upended it, but women used to hate sluts. If “metoo” had happened pre-feminism, most of the women involved wouldn’t have been considered victims.
     
    Women's judgements of other women depend primarily on a kind of empathy. If we can see ourselves doing a thing, we are less likely to judge it harshly. I would imagine it's the same for men. Men hate child molesters because they are doing something atypical and abhorrent to the average man. Adultery, on the other hand, is likely to be seen as much more forgivable, because it is the sort of mistake any man might make.
  201. @216
    No

    Income inequality has been on a steady rise, and women are specially burdened with 2/3rds of the student loan debt, while being 3/5th of students and 1/2 the population.

    There are men in skilled blue-collar positions earning well, but the reason these positions pay well has to do with their undesirability, and the virtual absence of immigrant populations working in them. (The US has no equivalent to the UK Polish Plumber, Mexican illegals can't do the licensed trades). The number of men in dead-end jobs probably outnumbers the amount in skilled blue-collar occupations.

    Your notion of alphas doesn't fit with the manosphere norm. "Parasite" is not usually used to describe them, the alpha archetype is a leader of men which is amoral in nature dependent on the individual.

    When women "hit the wall", they do become friendlier to lower-value beta males, which will benefit a surprising number of alleged Millennial incel in the 2020s. But I agree with you in cautioning men against pairing with these women.

    I’m aware of the income issue, but it’s largely chimerical when women only begin to value it when they are expired goods themselves, and can simply steal it through divorce or other dishonest means anyway. Even if wage growth remained healthy, few could be said to have any real stake in the present order.

    • Replies: @216
    Contra manosphere tropes, women tend to benefit from staying married vis-à-vis divorce. Divorce settlements are consumed with legal fees, and the expense of reverting to two households. The experience also tends to be emotionally toxic due to the adversarial common law system, an administrative or inquisitorial system would probably be better.

    It's somewhat common for a woman to simply marginalize a husband within a marriage, given that they already make most household spending decisions. This usually keeps around the benefits of both incomes, and male domestic labor. Female social hierarchies also grant higher status to married women versus divorced women, but divorced tend to rate higher than spinsters.

    Women in Western cultures rarely aspire to more than 3 children, so a marriage age at 30 doesn't look outrageous to them, and if there are only two births they usually aren't that disappointed.

    Female hypergamy clashes with fempowerment demands for equal pay. Some female anger is rooted in a disgust that men tend to "lean back".
  202. @EastKekistani

    By the way, in Asia women use male prostitutes just as much as men, and rich older women are just as likely to have young male boy toys.
     
    Yeah, some women go down to SEA to fuck SEA bad boys. At least for now there aren't a lot of NE Asian women flying to Africa for this purpose...thankfully.

    In Japan, the local women use local men. There is actually a huge male industry in Japan.

    There was an interesting documentary on Netflix a while back about female Japanese hostessess who use all their hard earned money on….male hosts.

    The whole thing was very sad. Each group clearly wanted genuine affection, in that instance.

  203. @notanon

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers
     
    intelligent women who want children are

    *rimshot*

  204. @EastKekistani

    Well, the world does seem to work this way, and there is no use fighting it. Rather we have to accept it laughingly, with a good grace, and roll up your sleeves and get to it.
     
    Yep.

    As I told you on another thread and you disagreed, at bottom all is one, and opposites unite – to reject the competitive aspect of the world out of some dream of peace (as I once did) is to be too one-sided, and at bottom is not necessary.
     
    Well, peace is actually earned through strength. Competition on this planet helps humanity in any future struggle against aliens. Better compete more with other humans in a fairly benevolent environment instead of losing the competition with aliens in a Hobbesian environment.

    Peace being earned through strength is a good example of the unity of opposites, in a way, although I usually mean it more metaphysically.

    I agree – the aliens, when they come, as they will, we must give them a run for their money.

    But in all seriousness – if you wish to promote harmony between whites and Asians and all the races, as you say, perhaps the only way to do so is to press the danger of alien invasions. As I said in the Karlin thread on aggression, human societies discourage interpersonal violence in order to better direct it at outsiders.

    So the alien invasion aspect of your philosophy actually fits rather nicely with your project for racial harmony.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    But in all seriousness – if you wish to promote harmony between whites and Asians and all the races, as you say, perhaps the only way to do so is to press the danger of alien invasions.
     
    Yes. Alien invasion, AI and Negroids.

    So the alien invasion aspect of your philosophy actually fits rather nicely with your project for racial harmony.

     

    Yep. In this precarious age humans need to get along so that we can take care of our problems. There is this internal problem, namely our good old outlier, I mean Negroids, who aren't really helping in the efforts to strengthen humanity..mostly due to incompetence and negligence instead of malice and there is this external problem, namely aliens who may be trying to exterminate humans. In order to take care of the external problem we first need to be able to utilize as many resources on this planet as possible which requires us to take care of the internal problem...
  205. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Michael S
    Dude, what do you think Tinder is?

    If you guessed anything other than "heavily discounted prostitution", then you guessed wrong. It's the expense, social stigma, and usual illegality that largely stops most men from soliciting prostitutes.

    It’s the expense, social stigma, and usual illegality that largely stops most men from soliciting prostitutes.

    Emphasis on the one that actually matters.

    What’s the cost of a cheap hooker vs. the cost of several rounds of drinks, dinner, maybe some jewellery eventually?

    In those places that actually enforce their laws against prostitution, how much of a depressant effect does that really have?

    I understand your point about Tinder being “heavily discounted prostitution”, except that very few people participating would feel comfortable characterising it as such. And why would they feel that why? The same reason there’s a social stigma.

  206. @216
    Every NE Asian country has a nuclear power plant, and all except North Korea have far superior passenger rail versus the US and arguably the EU as well.

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.

    Hard to say why we'd want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership. Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates. More individualism might mean more single mothers.

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.

    Well, it is still too slow. The actual situation is better than the Nobel Prize info because it usually takes decades for the latest scientific progress to be awarded a Nobel Prize. But it is still really awful compared to Germanics per capita.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.

    Maybe..especially in economics, literature and peace?

    Hard to say why we’d want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership.

    I do like personal firearms ownership for two reasons:

    1. It keeps tyranny and potential tyranny in check.
    2. It helps NE Asian people survive and thrive in the Third World (e.g. Sub-Saharan Africa).

    Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates.

    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.

    More individualism might mean more single mothers.

    That’s true. But we will get more innovation and space exploration too. In an age of space exploration you want at least some people to be Columbuses and Pizarros. In an age of rapid scientific progress you want at least some people to be weird and nonconformist techies. If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don’t understand. In particular I definitely don’t want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Asians need to be more individualistic, and whites need to be more communal.

    Each culture needs to correct its excesses. Balance is health.
    , @216

    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.
     
    Can you describe how this works? In the US there is a a historic expectation that the bride's family pays for the wedding, not the groom. Weddings have become increasingly lavish, despite (because?) a decline in religious observance.

    If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don’t understand. In particular I definitely don’t want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.
     
    Here we speak in two different directions. I envision an authoritarian, insular West where deference to elders is restored as a cultural value, up to the point of "arranged marriages". Traditionalists within the Western socieites will only perservere, IMO, in deliberately counter-cultural communities where the wings of feminism are clipped. Our views are treated with less respect and representation among the elite than the views of blacks.

    Contra space exploration, I think the global warming gambit is a more serious concern. AGW and multikult will lead to a growing police state regardless of what anyone here wants. The Right is better off accepting this truth and acting accordingly, along the lines of Singaporean "constitutional fascism".
  207. @Audacious Epigone
    According to the GSS, 14% of men have "ever paid for sex". There isn't any question about frequency, though. One-in-seven isn't "most men", but it's not an insignificant number of men, either.

    Not insignificant at all, no. But in line with “most men haven’t”.

    I think it’s like drugs: the majority don’t ever, a lot have tried it once or twice, a few make it a habit, and a small number go hog-wild.

    (Although, with drugs, those first two categories might be closer in number.)

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  208. @L Woods
    I’m aware of the income issue, but it’s largely chimerical when women only begin to value it when they are expired goods themselves, and can simply steal it through divorce or other dishonest means anyway. Even if wage growth remained healthy, few could be said to have any real stake in the present order.

    Contra manosphere tropes, women tend to benefit from staying married vis-à-vis divorce. Divorce settlements are consumed with legal fees, and the expense of reverting to two households. The experience also tends to be emotionally toxic due to the adversarial common law system, an administrative or inquisitorial system would probably be better.

    It’s somewhat common for a woman to simply marginalize a husband within a marriage, given that they already make most household spending decisions. This usually keeps around the benefits of both incomes, and male domestic labor. Female social hierarchies also grant higher status to married women versus divorced women, but divorced tend to rate higher than spinsters.

    Women in Western cultures rarely aspire to more than 3 children, so a marriage age at 30 doesn’t look outrageous to them, and if there are only two births they usually aren’t that disappointed.

    Female hypergamy clashes with fempowerment demands for equal pay. Some female anger is rooted in a disgust that men tend to “lean back”.

  209. @EastKekistani

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.
     
    Well, it is still too slow. The actual situation is better than the Nobel Prize info because it usually takes decades for the latest scientific progress to be awarded a Nobel Prize. But it is still really awful compared to Germanics per capita.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.
     
    Maybe..especially in economics, literature and peace?

    Hard to say why we’d want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership.
     
    I do like personal firearms ownership for two reasons:

    1. It keeps tyranny and potential tyranny in check.
    2. It helps NE Asian people survive and thrive in the Third World (e.g. Sub-Saharan Africa).


    Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates.
     
    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.

    More individualism might mean more single mothers.
     
    That's true. But we will get more innovation and space exploration too. In an age of space exploration you want at least some people to be Columbuses and Pizarros. In an age of rapid scientific progress you want at least some people to be weird and nonconformist techies. If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don't understand. In particular I definitely don't want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.

    Asians need to be more individualistic, and whites need to be more communal.

    Each culture needs to correct its excesses. Balance is health.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    Exactly.
  210. @Dr. Robert Morgan
    anon[290]: "There are laws against lots of things that most people don’t want to do."

    You're missing the point. Virtually everybody wants to do illegal things, but fear of the law prevents it. That's the reason the law exists.

    Laws against prostitution in the US are draconian, particularly for men who patronize or would like to patronize prostitutes, since as I said above, we live in an unacknowledged matriarchy. In many jurisdictions penalties for mere solicitation can include vehicle forfeiture, loss of job, fines, and having to register as a sex offender.

    Just as there's no reason to make a law against something nobody wants to do, the severity of the penalty is an indication both of how badly people want to do it, and how much society wishes to discourage the behavior. For example, laws against murder until recently usually included the death penalty. You would no doubt reply that most people don't want to commit murder, which might be true most of the time. But virtually everyone can think of occasions in their past in which they've been angry enough to want to kill someone, or at least could have gained considerable advantage by doing so; and likewise, virtually all men have been horny enough at some point to want to solicit a prostitute. The law, with its potential penalties, is what restrains them. The shame that you and others cite as a disincentive is just an internalization of the law. It's more effect than cause.

    If the law is the only thing that stops you from murdering people, then I’m glad we’re having this conversation over the internet.

  211. @anon
    I doubt most people, male or female, are so pure.

    I think much of female opposition to prostitution is for the same reason as female opposition to sluttiness. Feminism has upended it, but women used to hate sluts. If "metoo" had happened pre-feminism, most of the women involved wouldn't have been considered victims.

    I doubt most people, male or female, are so pure.

    Why? People often tend to support paternalistic laws that prevent people from hurting themselves. There is no appetite for legalizing heroine, for example.

    I think much of female opposition to prostitution is for the same reason as female opposition to sluttiness. Feminism has upended it, but women used to hate sluts. If “metoo” had happened pre-feminism, most of the women involved wouldn’t have been considered victims.

    Women’s judgements of other women depend primarily on a kind of empathy. If we can see ourselves doing a thing, we are less likely to judge it harshly. I would imagine it’s the same for men. Men hate child molesters because they are doing something atypical and abhorrent to the average man. Adultery, on the other hand, is likely to be seen as much more forgivable, because it is the sort of mistake any man might make.

    • Replies: @anon
    One can oppose something for the best of reasons whilst also opposing it, even more, for other reasons. Take heroin: people may not want heroin addicts to hurt themselves, but I think the main reason they support its banning is because they don't want those goddamn junkie animals roaming the streets mugging their grandmothers. The purported causal link between drugs and crime is gospel as far as most people are concerned. (Not to derail things even further, but I think people have that one backwards.) In other words, they're concerned with themselves, not with the junkies.

    Re: empathy... are you saying most women can see themselves as prostitutes?

    I confess I find your point very difficult to understand there. Well, it's not that I don't understand it, but that it's an alien perspective. We really are from different planets!

    Still: I can't let go of my own explanation - perhaps I didn't articulate it sufficiently. Women are competing against each other for men in the sexual marketplace; the market has rules that regulate the competition; sluts are breaking those rules to achieve an advantage over their competitors, i.e. they're cheating; "slut-shaming" is an attempt to enforce those rules.

    Men have similar methods of policing male behaviour. I don't see why women shouldn't be subject to the same pressures and evolve the same solutions.
  212. @AaronB
    Peace being earned through strength is a good example of the unity of opposites, in a way, although I usually mean it more metaphysically.

    I agree - the aliens, when they come, as they will, we must give them a run for their money.

    But in all seriousness - if you wish to promote harmony between whites and Asians and all the races, as you say, perhaps the only way to do so is to press the danger of alien invasions. As I said in the Karlin thread on aggression, human societies discourage interpersonal violence in order to better direct it at outsiders.

    So the alien invasion aspect of your philosophy actually fits rather nicely with your project for racial harmony.

    But in all seriousness – if you wish to promote harmony between whites and Asians and all the races, as you say, perhaps the only way to do so is to press the danger of alien invasions.

    Yes. Alien invasion, AI and Negroids.

    So the alien invasion aspect of your philosophy actually fits rather nicely with your project for racial harmony.

    Yep. In this precarious age humans need to get along so that we can take care of our problems. There is this internal problem, namely our good old outlier, I mean Negroids, who aren’t really helping in the efforts to strengthen humanity..mostly due to incompetence and negligence instead of malice and there is this external problem, namely aliens who may be trying to exterminate humans. In order to take care of the external problem we first need to be able to utilize as many resources on this planet as possible which requires us to take care of the internal problem…

    • Replies: @AaronB
    On the other hand, I reverse this calculation of yours, and see the primary value of the external problem as its ability to help solve the internal problem.

    So it isn't that we must cooperate in order to fright aliens, but that we need aliens to make us cooperate.

    But perhaps it is the same thing, and certainly my formulation can't be "admitted" if it is to be effective.

    As for Africans, they are fine. Some problems now, but things change. And I would not be so surprised if in several hundred years Africans became the next race to make major advances.

    But I know you disagree.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Snuffing out Africans to better prepare the rest of humanity against the alien onslaught?

    Do not insinuate genocide as a desirable thing here. Schoolmarm hates it and so do I.
  213. @AaronB
    Asians need to be more individualistic, and whites need to be more communal.

    Each culture needs to correct its excesses. Balance is health.

    Exactly.

  214. @AaronB
    Discreetly.

    But acceptably, totally.

    Obviously there are gradations of “acceptable”, but if it were at all acceptable, they wouldn’t need to be discreet.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Umm, there are lots of activities - typically physical - that are socially acceptable but must be done in a discreet fashion. And lots of things its ok to reveal to some people in some contexts but not others.

    You have too much of a black and white view. Society is more complex than that.
  215. @EastKekistani

    Science achievement is a product of excess wealth to be spent on research. Japan has started winning Nobels, and S. Korea should soon follow, it takes time to train the cadre of scientists and then make discoveries.
     
    Well, it is still too slow. The actual situation is better than the Nobel Prize info because it usually takes decades for the latest scientific progress to be awarded a Nobel Prize. But it is still really awful compared to Germanics per capita.

    The supposed Verban IQ difference in favor of S. Asians will probably lead to India hustling a larger share of future Nobels than might be expected.
     
    Maybe..especially in economics, literature and peace?

    Hard to say why we’d want to see a more individualistic NE Asia, unless you really like personal firearms ownership.
     
    I do like personal firearms ownership for two reasons:

    1. It keeps tyranny and potential tyranny in check.
    2. It helps NE Asian people survive and thrive in the Third World (e.g. Sub-Saharan Africa).


    Sky-high female material expectations, in defiance of the wishes of elder generations, seem to be a root cause for low fertility rates.
     
    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.

    More individualism might mean more single mothers.
     
    That's true. But we will get more innovation and space exploration too. In an age of space exploration you want at least some people to be Columbuses and Pizarros. In an age of rapid scientific progress you want at least some people to be weird and nonconformist techies. If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don't understand. In particular I definitely don't want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.

    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.

    Can you describe how this works? In the US there is a a historic expectation that the bride’s family pays for the wedding, not the groom. Weddings have become increasingly lavish, despite (because?) a decline in religious observance.

    If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don’t understand. In particular I definitely don’t want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.

    Here we speak in two different directions. I envision an authoritarian, insular West where deference to elders is restored as a cultural value, up to the point of “arranged marriages”. Traditionalists within the Western socieites will only perservere, IMO, in deliberately counter-cultural communities where the wings of feminism are clipped. Our views are treated with less respect and representation among the elite than the views of blacks.

    Contra space exploration, I think the global warming gambit is a more serious concern. AGW and multikult will lead to a growing police state regardless of what anyone here wants. The Right is better off accepting this truth and acting accordingly, along the lines of Singaporean “constitutional fascism”.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    “arranged marriages”
     
    Forced prostitution.
  216. @anon
    Obviously there are gradations of "acceptable", but if it were at all acceptable, they wouldn't need to be discreet.

    Umm, there are lots of activities – typically physical – that are socially acceptable but must be done in a discreet fashion. And lots of things its ok to reveal to some people in some contexts but not others.

    You have too much of a black and white view. Society is more complex than that.

    • Replies: @anon
    Hence "gradations of acceptable". But some things are so far into the black that "unacceptable" is accurate enough, and banging prostitutes is one of them.

    Take Trump and Stormy Daniels (allegedly): their affair ended up costing him $130,000. I don't know how much Stormy Daniels (or some other pornstar) charges for a "personal appearance", but it is surely much less. (And presumably comes with a non-disclosure agreement.)

    Trump did a bad thing that is nonetheless somewhat acceptable - adultery. But if all he wanted was sex, he could've got it much cheaper and more discreetly.

    Why?

    The same reason that he wouldn't mind bragging about fucking a pornstar to his mates, but he would probably be ashamed to admit to paying to fuck a pornstar.

    It's all about how much of a man you are.
  217. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    I doubt most people, male or female, are so pure.
     
    Why? People often tend to support paternalistic laws that prevent people from hurting themselves. There is no appetite for legalizing heroine, for example.

    I think much of female opposition to prostitution is for the same reason as female opposition to sluttiness. Feminism has upended it, but women used to hate sluts. If “metoo” had happened pre-feminism, most of the women involved wouldn’t have been considered victims.
     
    Women's judgements of other women depend primarily on a kind of empathy. If we can see ourselves doing a thing, we are less likely to judge it harshly. I would imagine it's the same for men. Men hate child molesters because they are doing something atypical and abhorrent to the average man. Adultery, on the other hand, is likely to be seen as much more forgivable, because it is the sort of mistake any man might make.

    One can oppose something for the best of reasons whilst also opposing it, even more, for other reasons. Take heroin: people may not want heroin addicts to hurt themselves, but I think the main reason they support its banning is because they don’t want those goddamn junkie animals roaming the streets mugging their grandmothers. The purported causal link between drugs and crime is gospel as far as most people are concerned. (Not to derail things even further, but I think people have that one backwards.) In other words, they’re concerned with themselves, not with the junkies.

    Re: empathy… are you saying most women can see themselves as prostitutes?

    I confess I find your point very difficult to understand there. Well, it’s not that I don’t understand it, but that it’s an alien perspective. We really are from different planets!

    Still: I can’t let go of my own explanation – perhaps I didn’t articulate it sufficiently. Women are competing against each other for men in the sexual marketplace; the market has rules that regulate the competition; sluts are breaking those rules to achieve an advantage over their competitors, i.e. they’re cheating; “slut-shaming” is an attempt to enforce those rules.

    Men have similar methods of policing male behaviour. I don’t see why women shouldn’t be subject to the same pressures and evolve the same solutions.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Re: empathy… are you saying most women can see themselves as prostitutes?
     
    Sure. We generally assume that prostitution is an act of desperation and not freely chosen. I realize this is not always the case. Women who choose prostitution are extreme psychological outliers, generally sociopathic in nature. They believe they are the exploiters, not the exploited, and in their case, I assume they are half right.


    Still: I can’t let go of my own explanation – perhaps I didn’t articulate it sufficiently. Women are competing against each other for men in the sexual marketplace; the market has rules that regulate the competition; sluts are breaking those rules to achieve an advantage over their competitors, i.e. they’re cheating; “slut-shaming” is an attempt to enforce those rules.
     
    We don't see it that way. We see it as a girl who got made a fool of because she believed a man saying he loved her and would always be there, blah, blah, blah....
    , @Feryl
    "One can oppose something for the best of reasons whilst also opposing it, even more, for other reasons. Take heroin: people may not want heroin addicts to hurt themselves, but I think the main reason they support its banning is because they don’t want those goddamn junkie animals roaming the streets mugging their grandmothers. The purported causal link between drugs and crime is gospel as far as most people are concerned. (Not to derail things even further, but I think people have that one backwards.) In other words, they’re concerned with themselves, not with the junkies."

    Um, I'm not sure what you mean by "backwards". It seems to me that both drug abuse and crime are linked to poor impulse control and a lack of conscientiousness. In other words, the same kinds of assholes are likely to be crazy, drunk, high, violent, and so forth.

    Yeah, drug abusing idiots who crash cars, let dangerous dogs run loose, steal to support their habit, and so forth are the reason that most drugs are taboo.
  218. @216

    Well, in NE Asia a large part of female material expectations is from the parents of a young woman.
     
    Can you describe how this works? In the US there is a a historic expectation that the bride's family pays for the wedding, not the groom. Weddings have become increasingly lavish, despite (because?) a decline in religious observance.

    If everyone has to be a good Confucian and obey his/her parents then almost nobody is going to do the important work elders don’t understand. In particular I definitely don’t want people to be discouraged from leaving this planet due to families.
     
    Here we speak in two different directions. I envision an authoritarian, insular West where deference to elders is restored as a cultural value, up to the point of "arranged marriages". Traditionalists within the Western socieites will only perservere, IMO, in deliberately counter-cultural communities where the wings of feminism are clipped. Our views are treated with less respect and representation among the elite than the views of blacks.

    Contra space exploration, I think the global warming gambit is a more serious concern. AGW and multikult will lead to a growing police state regardless of what anyone here wants. The Right is better off accepting this truth and acting accordingly, along the lines of Singaporean "constitutional fascism".

    “arranged marriages”

    Forced prostitution.

    • Replies: @Talha
    If I may - I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community - often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.

    Maybe it was different in European cultures, but simply equating all variations of arranged marriage as forced prostitution is not a serious argument. I already have a couple of families and their daughters in mind for my sons, but it will obviously need sign off from all parents and potential spouses.

    Peace.
  219. @EastKekistani

    But in all seriousness – if you wish to promote harmony between whites and Asians and all the races, as you say, perhaps the only way to do so is to press the danger of alien invasions.
     
    Yes. Alien invasion, AI and Negroids.

    So the alien invasion aspect of your philosophy actually fits rather nicely with your project for racial harmony.

     

    Yep. In this precarious age humans need to get along so that we can take care of our problems. There is this internal problem, namely our good old outlier, I mean Negroids, who aren't really helping in the efforts to strengthen humanity..mostly due to incompetence and negligence instead of malice and there is this external problem, namely aliens who may be trying to exterminate humans. In order to take care of the external problem we first need to be able to utilize as many resources on this planet as possible which requires us to take care of the internal problem...

    On the other hand, I reverse this calculation of yours, and see the primary value of the external problem as its ability to help solve the internal problem.

    So it isn’t that we must cooperate in order to fright aliens, but that we need aliens to make us cooperate.

    But perhaps it is the same thing, and certainly my formulation can’t be “admitted” if it is to be effective.

    As for Africans, they are fine. Some problems now, but things change. And I would not be so surprised if in several hundred years Africans became the next race to make major advances.

    But I know you disagree.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    I can see your point on the external problem even though I'm very reluctant to introduce pro-social myths. So we can agree to disagree because it is likely to be an issue of personal preferences caused by personality differences.

    You are indeed right that it is possible for Negroids to make major advances several hundred years later. To me it is still very implausible unless genetic engineering can be widespread and the UN, the Catholic Church or some other entity impose mandatory genetic engineering on Negroids. Without genetic engineering this is also possible. However it may take at least 1,000-2,000 years. Probably more.

    However they are currently not exactly contributing to improvement of human civilization right now. Due to the global disparity in fertility rates if the world economy is going to continue to grow Negroids need to be able to do a lot of jobs currently done by non-Negroids unless these jobs are eliminated by automation. If Negroids are indeed sufficiently capable then this is not really that much of an issue. But what if HBD is right and they really can't? Are we only going to admit that we have a serious problem when global economy enters long-term secular decline as BOTH production AND consumption decline (because Negroids aren't consuming a lot of goods either)? In such an economy there may not be enough money to properly fund research in genetic engineering..and then who are going to make your hypothesis about Negroids happen?

  220. @anon
    One can oppose something for the best of reasons whilst also opposing it, even more, for other reasons. Take heroin: people may not want heroin addicts to hurt themselves, but I think the main reason they support its banning is because they don't want those goddamn junkie animals roaming the streets mugging their grandmothers. The purported causal link between drugs and crime is gospel as far as most people are concerned. (Not to derail things even further, but I think people have that one backwards.) In other words, they're concerned with themselves, not with the junkies.

    Re: empathy... are you saying most women can see themselves as prostitutes?

    I confess I find your point very difficult to understand there. Well, it's not that I don't understand it, but that it's an alien perspective. We really are from different planets!

    Still: I can't let go of my own explanation - perhaps I didn't articulate it sufficiently. Women are competing against each other for men in the sexual marketplace; the market has rules that regulate the competition; sluts are breaking those rules to achieve an advantage over their competitors, i.e. they're cheating; "slut-shaming" is an attempt to enforce those rules.

    Men have similar methods of policing male behaviour. I don't see why women shouldn't be subject to the same pressures and evolve the same solutions.

    Re: empathy… are you saying most women can see themselves as prostitutes?

    Sure. We generally assume that prostitution is an act of desperation and not freely chosen. I realize this is not always the case. Women who choose prostitution are extreme psychological outliers, generally sociopathic in nature. They believe they are the exploiters, not the exploited, and in their case, I assume they are half right.

    Still: I can’t let go of my own explanation – perhaps I didn’t articulate it sufficiently. Women are competing against each other for men in the sexual marketplace; the market has rules that regulate the competition; sluts are breaking those rules to achieve an advantage over their competitors, i.e. they’re cheating; “slut-shaming” is an attempt to enforce those rules.

    We don’t see it that way. We see it as a girl who got made a fool of because she believed a man saying he loved her and would always be there, blah, blah, blah….

    • Replies: @anon

    We see it as a girl who got made a fool of because she believed a man saying he loved her and would always be there, blah, blah, blah….
     
    You might see it that way the first time. But if this girl was made a fool of several times, with several men - particularly married men - are you seriously suggesting that women (especially pre-feminism) wouldn't have looked askance?
  221. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB
    Umm, there are lots of activities - typically physical - that are socially acceptable but must be done in a discreet fashion. And lots of things its ok to reveal to some people in some contexts but not others.

    You have too much of a black and white view. Society is more complex than that.

    Hence “gradations of acceptable”. But some things are so far into the black that “unacceptable” is accurate enough, and banging prostitutes is one of them.

    Take Trump and Stormy Daniels (allegedly): their affair ended up costing him $130,000. I don’t know how much Stormy Daniels (or some other pornstar) charges for a “personal appearance”, but it is surely much less. (And presumably comes with a non-disclosure agreement.)

    Trump did a bad thing that is nonetheless somewhat acceptable – adultery. But if all he wanted was sex, he could’ve got it much cheaper and more discreetly.

    Why?

    The same reason that he wouldn’t mind bragging about fucking a pornstar to his mates, but he would probably be ashamed to admit to paying to fuck a pornstar.

    It’s all about how much of a man you are.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    That's primarily a middle class perspective. The need to prove oneself.

    Upper class men don't really take that seriously.

    What if one's manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?

    And it's more an American perspective. Less common even in Europe, and non-existent in Asia.

    Look, I personally don't care one way or another. I'm just reporting on facts, that social attitudes vary by culture and class. Its rather easily verifiable by YouTube videos and historical literature even if you don't have personal access to those cultures or classes.

    And I'm not suggesting you personally should change your values system with regard to this - if you find prostitution intrinsically unacceptable, and the need to prove manhood an insuperable obstacle, then that's a perfectly legitimate opinion.

    I too, as a young naive American, was quite shocked at the attitudes towards this subject that existed in other countries and among men of certain classes. It was an eye opener. But live and learn.
  222. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Re: empathy… are you saying most women can see themselves as prostitutes?
     
    Sure. We generally assume that prostitution is an act of desperation and not freely chosen. I realize this is not always the case. Women who choose prostitution are extreme psychological outliers, generally sociopathic in nature. They believe they are the exploiters, not the exploited, and in their case, I assume they are half right.


    Still: I can’t let go of my own explanation – perhaps I didn’t articulate it sufficiently. Women are competing against each other for men in the sexual marketplace; the market has rules that regulate the competition; sluts are breaking those rules to achieve an advantage over their competitors, i.e. they’re cheating; “slut-shaming” is an attempt to enforce those rules.
     
    We don't see it that way. We see it as a girl who got made a fool of because she believed a man saying he loved her and would always be there, blah, blah, blah....

    We see it as a girl who got made a fool of because she believed a man saying he loved her and would always be there, blah, blah, blah….

    You might see it that way the first time. But if this girl was made a fool of several times, with several men – particularly married men – are you seriously suggesting that women (especially pre-feminism) wouldn’t have looked askance?

    • Replies: @Rosie

    You might see it that way the first time. But if this girl was made a fool of several times, with several men – particularly married men – are you seriously suggesting that women (especially pre-feminism) wouldn’t have looked askance?
     
    We still look askance at serial homewreckers, feminism notwithstanding.

    Assuming she is not sleeping with married men, I would be more likely to feel sorry for her than angry or punitive towards her. I would see her as desperate for attention/affection that she rightly or wrongly believes she cannot get any other way.

  223. @anon
    had me until "liberator" of jerusalem

    islam liberates no one

    He had me until I saw “CE” instead of “AD” on the poster… bunch of wankers … oops… probably not the best term to use just now….

  224. @anon
    Speaking only of myself, but the "essentially good" are often doing something other than arguing with strangers on the internet in the middle of the day.

    Nah, Rosie os no stranger. She is familiar from iSteve threads, and it’s generally pretty friendly as the Commies have left it alone for now – too much thinking and truth-telling going on – they can’t handle all that. Shhhhh!

  225. @anon

    We see it as a girl who got made a fool of because she believed a man saying he loved her and would always be there, blah, blah, blah….
     
    You might see it that way the first time. But if this girl was made a fool of several times, with several men - particularly married men - are you seriously suggesting that women (especially pre-feminism) wouldn't have looked askance?

    You might see it that way the first time. But if this girl was made a fool of several times, with several men – particularly married men – are you seriously suggesting that women (especially pre-feminism) wouldn’t have looked askance?

    We still look askance at serial homewreckers, feminism notwithstanding.

    Assuming she is not sleeping with married men, I would be more likely to feel sorry for her than angry or punitive towards her. I would see her as desperate for attention/affection that she rightly or wrongly believes she cannot get any other way.

    • Replies: @anon
    And if you were single, and might have liked the man she was using her sluttiness to entice, in violation of the rules?
  226. @Rosie

    “arranged marriages”
     
    Forced prostitution.

    If I may – I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community – often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.

    Maybe it was different in European cultures, but simply equating all variations of arranged marriage as forced prostitution is not a serious argument. I already have a couple of families and their daughters in mind for my sons, but it will obviously need sign off from all parents and potential spouses.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    If I may – I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community – often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.
     
    So defined, I have no objection whatsoever to the practice. My experience with 216 leads me to believe that he has something far less benevolent in mind.
    , @RSDB
    Well, I can relate to this topic too. There's a real difference, always, where fallen humanity is concerned, between what is and what should be.

    Arranged marriage (which every subcontinental Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist will be familiar with) gets a bad rap in the modern West, and in the West in general, because it really isn't understood here. In cultures where marriage arrangement is common it's not the only common thing which in the West today would be regarded as sheer parental oppression; children in these places don't "leave the nest" but rather live their lives in a sort of partnership with their parents and a less direct partnership with the rest of their family.

    Now it's also the case that Christianity regards marriage as a holy thing, not to be unduly tampered with. And while nobody thinks marriage ought to be taken lightly, it often is, and that is deadly whether the marriage is principally arranged by the parents or the spouses. And in either case, but especially in the case of arrangement, there are two things which I see around me which seem specially important, if marriage is not to become an evil mockery: 1) a deeply grounded attitude of self-sacrifice on the part of the spouses and 2) a general attitude of chastity, preferably a society-wide one.

    Do you have marriage-brokers, too? In Ceylon they seem to have gone out of fashion, as they have with Jews in the US. I would add that (in my very fallible opinion) one reason for in-family marriages, cross-cousins and such, is that they are much easier to arrange than marriages at some remove.

    I don't make it my life's mission to recommend Hindi films, but a good movie having to do with this topic, and which makes one think, if a little arty for many viewers, is Duvidha, which I believe has been remade as Paheli.

    I replied to your last comment on SL but UR seems to have eaten it. In fact since I've been on here recently the site seems generally clunkier than before-- I wonder if it's under more attack. I may try to rewrite the lost comment.

    Anyway I wanted to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and express my belief, always a given in SL anyway, that there's something fishy about what the government is telling us. At any rate the least kind of a warning to the hotel managers of Colombo or to the Cardinal Archbishop, and a few other people, could have drastically reduced the scale of the crime. We in Sri Lanka (well, I'm not, but never mind) may not know much but the one thing we are familiar with by now is suicide bombing-- that, and tea, are the local areas of expertise.

    The kind of alertness that there was at the Cinnamon Grand, for instance, when I was there during the war, would have made the murders much more difficult.

    Sorry to ramble on about this but it does strike hard, especially as I must watch from here, when so many others are on the front lines, so to speak.

    Many of the victims have been buried; the fellow who gave land for that purpose in Negombo is known to my grandmother.

    May God grant --and I ask the holy martyrs recently made to intercede to that effect-- that the evil in our hearts be buried as quickly! Our Blessed Lord said something about camels and needles which seems to apply to the rich and well-connected people who, it seems, have made themselves murderers. May their hearts be converted. I fear that these wealthy fools have done nothing but endanger their poor and innocent fellows. Before this Catholics were the only major group on the island not bearing a grudge against Muslims. During disturbances Muslims were always safe in Christian areas (and vice versa; some of my relatives were sheltered by Muslim neighbors in '83). Now … I don't know. People are angry. Muslims are mad as hell, too, at the perpetrators, who have put them in an awful position.

    We require the prayers of the holy innocents, as the blood of the Martyrs of Mannar was the seed of the Church in the North, and the conversion of their persecutors. St. Anthony's was already a holy and miraculous site, dating from the Dutch persecutions-- how much holier it will be now! And how much multiplied will be such places.
  227. @AaronB
    On the other hand, I reverse this calculation of yours, and see the primary value of the external problem as its ability to help solve the internal problem.

    So it isn't that we must cooperate in order to fright aliens, but that we need aliens to make us cooperate.

    But perhaps it is the same thing, and certainly my formulation can't be "admitted" if it is to be effective.

    As for Africans, they are fine. Some problems now, but things change. And I would not be so surprised if in several hundred years Africans became the next race to make major advances.

    But I know you disagree.

    I can see your point on the external problem even though I’m very reluctant to introduce pro-social myths. So we can agree to disagree because it is likely to be an issue of personal preferences caused by personality differences.

    You are indeed right that it is possible for Negroids to make major advances several hundred years later. To me it is still very implausible unless genetic engineering can be widespread and the UN, the Catholic Church or some other entity impose mandatory genetic engineering on Negroids. Without genetic engineering this is also possible. However it may take at least 1,000-2,000 years. Probably more.

    However they are currently not exactly contributing to improvement of human civilization right now. Due to the global disparity in fertility rates if the world economy is going to continue to grow Negroids need to be able to do a lot of jobs currently done by non-Negroids unless these jobs are eliminated by automation. If Negroids are indeed sufficiently capable then this is not really that much of an issue. But what if HBD is right and they really can’t? Are we only going to admit that we have a serious problem when global economy enters long-term secular decline as BOTH production AND consumption decline (because Negroids aren’t consuming a lot of goods either)? In such an economy there may not be enough money to properly fund research in genetic engineering..and then who are going to make your hypothesis about Negroids happen?

  228. @anon
    Hence "gradations of acceptable". But some things are so far into the black that "unacceptable" is accurate enough, and banging prostitutes is one of them.

    Take Trump and Stormy Daniels (allegedly): their affair ended up costing him $130,000. I don't know how much Stormy Daniels (or some other pornstar) charges for a "personal appearance", but it is surely much less. (And presumably comes with a non-disclosure agreement.)

    Trump did a bad thing that is nonetheless somewhat acceptable - adultery. But if all he wanted was sex, he could've got it much cheaper and more discreetly.

    Why?

    The same reason that he wouldn't mind bragging about fucking a pornstar to his mates, but he would probably be ashamed to admit to paying to fuck a pornstar.

    It's all about how much of a man you are.

    That’s primarily a middle class perspective. The need to prove oneself.

    Upper class men don’t really take that seriously.

    What if one’s manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?

    And it’s more an American perspective. Less common even in Europe, and non-existent in Asia.

    Look, I personally don’t care one way or another. I’m just reporting on facts, that social attitudes vary by culture and class. Its rather easily verifiable by YouTube videos and historical literature even if you don’t have personal access to those cultures or classes.

    And I’m not suggesting you personally should change your values system with regard to this – if you find prostitution intrinsically unacceptable, and the need to prove manhood an insuperable obstacle, then that’s a perfectly legitimate opinion.

    I too, as a young naive American, was quite shocked at the attitudes towards this subject that existed in other countries and among men of certain classes. It was an eye opener. But live and learn.

    • Replies: @Rosie

    What if one’s manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?
     
    Seriously. If you're going to use a woman for sex, hiring a prostitute is probably the most fair and honest way to go about it, though of course that's not saying much.
    , @anon
    You're acting like people of different classes or cultures are from different species.

    The man with no need to prove himself is rare indeed, and what few of him there are can be found in any class.

    Staying with Trump - admittedly an extreme example - he has surely "proved himself" long ago, and yet still felt the need to make more money, build more buildings with his name on it, become president... even to rock that ridiculous combover or work on his golf swing.

    Or take Donald Sterling, another billionaire who felt the need to engage in the pretense that some young girl was attracted to him and not his money. Why did we hear about his pathetic story? Ultimately, because he was worried that the other billionaires would make fun of him when the pretense couldn't be maintained.

    Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don't drive, etc, etc... The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men and only ends with extraordinary spiritual enlightenment or death. Guess which one is most common.
    , @L Woods
    The idea of “manhood” as defined by one’s ability or inclination to please women is repulsive.
  229. @Talha
    If I may - I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community - often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.

    Maybe it was different in European cultures, but simply equating all variations of arranged marriage as forced prostitution is not a serious argument. I already have a couple of families and their daughters in mind for my sons, but it will obviously need sign off from all parents and potential spouses.

    Peace.

    If I may – I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community – often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.

    So defined, I have no objection whatsoever to the practice. My experience with 216 leads me to believe that he has something far less benevolent in mind.

    • Replies: @Talha
    It is kind of cute at times; often it will be two older ladies that are grandmothers that arrange for their one or more pairs of grandchildren to marry each other. If they are sisters, then it will be a cousin marriage obviously else, if they aren’t related, it is simply an extension and expression of their life long friendship. The fact that these elders have a stake in the union often means they are also invested in making sure problems and issues are resolved and the marriage doesn’t fall apart. Again, there are of course instances where abuses of the institution occur, but most family situations are normal and care for the benefit of their children.

    Peace.
    , @216
    No, I generally agree with the description that Talha made.
  230. @EastKekistani
    Probably. Do they have any rational reason for opposing sex bots? Women obviously oppose them because they take away their power over men. Some men may oppose it to signal that they aren't incel because incels are a low status group that tends to favor sex bots.

    Probably. Do they have any rational reason for opposing sex bots? Women obviously oppose them because they take away their power over men.

    Falling birthrates, breakdown of social connections (you have no in-laws or access to wife’s social circle if you’re married to a robot), growth of inequality (the upper classes will still have plenty of nepotistic connections to get ahead in life), personal hygiene failure. The latter is already a problem among anime waifu lovers, and a robot mistress also won’t care if you bathe or how clean your clothes are.

    I don’t see women upset about losing their power over men to waifus and their physical manifestations, the infamous dakimakura. The kind of guys who are into this stuff aren’t regarded as desirable mates in the first place. ‘You don’t want to stick your d in crazy’ is just as relevant when the sexes are reversed.

    • Replies: @Wency
    Extremely correct.

    I swear, anyone pushing that angle has no clue how women think. Women are mostly normies, even more so than men. They don't like sexbots because they're gross and weird and eww. They don't frame such topics intellectually in terms of how it affects the balance of power between the sexes. Few are capable of thinking explicitly about this issue.

    I'd compare this to one of the most powerful instincts women do have regarding power balance of the sexes, and that's slut-shaming. I've only ever once heard a woman defend slut-shaming explicitly: "Thanks to sluts, men feel they don't have to romance you anymore." She was pretty intelligent.

    If a woman has any intellectual opinion about slut-shaming, it's almost invariably that it's a tool of the patriarchy from which she should refrain -- a thought she's just parroting uncritically after hearing it somewhere. Though sometimes even these women can't help themselves. A "sex-positive" feminist once told me in private, "That whore has been with like 50 guys!" about a girl she was quarreling with.

    Women have no evolutionary instincts regarding sexbots per se, except to view them like a man having a romantic relationship with a cow, or possibly a shovel. "Weird pathetic pervert loser, stay away".

  231. @Rosie

    You might see it that way the first time. But if this girl was made a fool of several times, with several men – particularly married men – are you seriously suggesting that women (especially pre-feminism) wouldn’t have looked askance?
     
    We still look askance at serial homewreckers, feminism notwithstanding.

    Assuming she is not sleeping with married men, I would be more likely to feel sorry for her than angry or punitive towards her. I would see her as desperate for attention/affection that she rightly or wrongly believes she cannot get any other way.

    And if you were single, and might have liked the man she was using her sluttiness to entice, in violation of the rules?

    • Replies: @Rosie

    And if you were single, and might have liked the man she was using her sluttiness to entice, in violation of the rules?
     
    His abuse of her will have saved me the trouble of investing any time or effort in a man without honor.
  232. @AaronB
    That's primarily a middle class perspective. The need to prove oneself.

    Upper class men don't really take that seriously.

    What if one's manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?

    And it's more an American perspective. Less common even in Europe, and non-existent in Asia.

    Look, I personally don't care one way or another. I'm just reporting on facts, that social attitudes vary by culture and class. Its rather easily verifiable by YouTube videos and historical literature even if you don't have personal access to those cultures or classes.

    And I'm not suggesting you personally should change your values system with regard to this - if you find prostitution intrinsically unacceptable, and the need to prove manhood an insuperable obstacle, then that's a perfectly legitimate opinion.

    I too, as a young naive American, was quite shocked at the attitudes towards this subject that existed in other countries and among men of certain classes. It was an eye opener. But live and learn.

    What if one’s manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?

    Seriously. If you’re going to use a woman for sex, hiring a prostitute is probably the most fair and honest way to go about it, though of course that’s not saying much.

    • Agree: AaronB
  233. @anon
    And if you were single, and might have liked the man she was using her sluttiness to entice, in violation of the rules?

    And if you were single, and might have liked the man she was using her sluttiness to entice, in violation of the rules?

    His abuse of her will have saved me the trouble of investing any time or effort in a man without honor.

    • Replies: @anon
    His violation of the marketplace rules marks him as an abuser without honour, whereas the exact same sin makes her a victim to be pitied.

    Meanwhile, open eyes are all that's necessary to see that empathy and pity isn't the only thing going through women's minds when they see a slut, at least without decades of feminist brainwashing that being a slut is empowering and awesome. (And even still.)
  234. @Rosie

    If I may – I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community – often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.
     
    So defined, I have no objection whatsoever to the practice. My experience with 216 leads me to believe that he has something far less benevolent in mind.

    It is kind of cute at times; often it will be two older ladies that are grandmothers that arrange for their one or more pairs of grandchildren to marry each other. If they are sisters, then it will be a cousin marriage obviously else, if they aren’t related, it is simply an extension and expression of their life long friendship. The fact that these elders have a stake in the union often means they are also invested in making sure problems and issues are resolved and the marriage doesn’t fall apart. Again, there are of course instances where abuses of the institution occur, but most family situations are normal and care for the benefit of their children.

    Peace.

  235. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    And if you were single, and might have liked the man she was using her sluttiness to entice, in violation of the rules?
     
    His abuse of her will have saved me the trouble of investing any time or effort in a man without honor.

    His violation of the marketplace rules marks him as an abuser without honour, whereas the exact same sin makes her a victim to be pitied.

    Meanwhile, open eyes are all that’s necessary to see that empathy and pity isn’t the only thing going through women’s minds when they see a slut, at least without decades of feminist brainwashing that being a slut is empowering and awesome. (And even still.)

    • Replies: @Rosie

    His violation of the marketplace rules marks him as an abuser without honour, whereas the exact same sin makes her a victim to be pitied
     
    And here I thought we were just having a friendly exchange of thoughts about this matter.

    I've been over this elsewhere. I don't accept your premise that it's "the exact same sin." The reluctant accomplice is not as culpable as the enthusiastic one.
  236. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB
    That's primarily a middle class perspective. The need to prove oneself.

    Upper class men don't really take that seriously.

    What if one's manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?

    And it's more an American perspective. Less common even in Europe, and non-existent in Asia.

    Look, I personally don't care one way or another. I'm just reporting on facts, that social attitudes vary by culture and class. Its rather easily verifiable by YouTube videos and historical literature even if you don't have personal access to those cultures or classes.

    And I'm not suggesting you personally should change your values system with regard to this - if you find prostitution intrinsically unacceptable, and the need to prove manhood an insuperable obstacle, then that's a perfectly legitimate opinion.

    I too, as a young naive American, was quite shocked at the attitudes towards this subject that existed in other countries and among men of certain classes. It was an eye opener. But live and learn.

    You’re acting like people of different classes or cultures are from different species.

    The man with no need to prove himself is rare indeed, and what few of him there are can be found in any class.

    Staying with Trump – admittedly an extreme example – he has surely “proved himself” long ago, and yet still felt the need to make more money, build more buildings with his name on it, become president… even to rock that ridiculous combover or work on his golf swing.

    Or take Donald Sterling, another billionaire who felt the need to engage in the pretense that some young girl was attracted to him and not his money. Why did we hear about his pathetic story? Ultimately, because he was worried that the other billionaires would make fun of him when the pretense couldn’t be maintained.

    Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don’t drive, etc, etc… The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men and only ends with extraordinary spiritual enlightenment or death. Guess which one is most common.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don’t drive, etc, etc… The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men "

    Somerset Maugham was a homosexual, but had a certain witty detachment about affairs of the heart and other organs.

    https://www.fadedpage.com/books/20180433/html.php#p170


    He went on with his interrupted breakfast. Lisette did not speak and there was silence between them. But his appetite satisfied, his mood changed; he began to feel sorry for himself rather than angry with her, and with a strange ignorance of woman’s heart he thought to arouse Lisette’s remorse by exhibiting himself as an object of pity.

    “It is hard to break a habit to which one has grown accustomed. It was a relief and a solace to me to come here when I could snatch a moment from my many occupations. Will you regret me a little, Lisette?”

    “Of course.”

    He gave a deep sigh.

    “I should never have thought you capable of so much deception.”

    “It is the deception that rankles,” she murmured thoughtfully. “Men are funny in that way. They cannot forgive being made fools of. It is because they are so vain. They attach importance to things that are of no consequence.”

    “Do you call it a matter of no consequence that I should find you having breakfast with a young man wearing my pyjamas?”

    “If he were my husband and you were my lover you would think it perfectly natural.”

    “Obviously. For then I should be deceiving him and my honour would be secure.”

    “In short, I have only to marry him to make the situation perfectly regular.”

    For a moment he did not understand. Then her meaning flashed across his clever brain and he gave her a quick look. Her lovely eyes had the twinkle he always found so alluring and on her large red mouth was the suspicion of a roguish smile.

    “Do not forget that as a member of the Senate I am by all the traditions of the Republic the authorised mainstay of morality and good behaviour.”

    “Does that weigh very heavily with you?”

    He stroked his handsome square beard with a composed and dignified gesture.

    “Not a row of beans,” he replied, but the expression he used had a Gallic breadth that would perhaps have given his more conservative supporters something of a shock.
     

    , @AaronB
    Good point. I don't really know why the upper class don't see prostitution as shameful. Maybe they get enough validation from their money and status. Maybe they see it as validation of their money and status (they can "buy" people). Maybe they get lots of female attention anyways.Its not that they don't also need validation, but they get differently than the other classes. It takes other forms. Maybe they get pleasure of feeling they are above middle class norms. Maybe they feel a sense of impunity.

    But if we take the broad and comprehensive view, we will see that prostitution was an accepted part of all historical societs, and sometimes even a respected proffession, although that more rarely (in ancient India and in certain places that had temple prostitution, and Percilean Athens). And that the upper classes have always had a much more lax attitude towards sexual matters than the prim middle class. There were prostitutes who were educated and refined and considred suitable companions for the nobility and were highly sought after (Pericles got political advice from his courtesan)

    So it would seem that shame at prositution is rather a unique feature of modern Western societies, and particularly Anglo societies (Continental Europe legalizes it for the most part.) Seen from this perspective, it probably has to do with Puritanism, and the Anglo desire to channel all available energy into hard work and conquest etc (this is why Anglo societies are generally hostile to pleasure, so that people can channel their frustration into work and conquest).

    I think its important to look at history and other cultures and societies to get the greast possible breadth and depth of view on sucbject, and see it from the most comprehensive angle. Otherwise one risks being parochial, and assuming the local prejudices are universal.
  237. EH says:
    @JRM
    I don't think anyone has mentioned a potential downfall for the owner of a sexbot, and that is over-familiarity. One of the big drivers that set men looking for prostitutes (or massage "therapists") is the simple urge for something besides the wife or gf. Plenty of men with beautiful wives will occasionally seek "professional" short-term encounters simply to satisfy the urge for something different- even if different is actually less attractive than their sanctioned mate. A girl I knew once described any non-wifely body a man sought as "strange", i.e., a vagina "strange" as in previously unknown to that particular man.


    I think boredom drives a large part of the trade in prostitution; not desperation, not uncontrollably strong lust; just boredom and that irritating sense in the back of the head that says life holds more excitement than you are currently enjoying.


    Back to the bots: they will become unexciting even faster than flesh and blood gfs and wives, because the latter can at least be shocked occasionally by some new, offbeat sexual request.


    Bot manufacturers should probably consider a generous trade-in allowance on used models, to keep selling fresh product.

    Combination with sufficiently good VR goggles displaying infinitely varied but impossibly beautiful computer-generated girls using AI body-model and image generation software will delay boredom considerably. Adjustments in the dolls could allow for some bone length adjustment, and skins, heads and nether parts could potentially be changed. The latter is especially desirable for sanitary reasons as most guys won’t be buying their own, at least not the full-motion capable ones, which will not fall below several thousand dollars barring some technical revolution. The first full motion ones will cost 10 times that, and the tech won’t be up to doing it at all for a few years.

  238. @Talha
    If I may - I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community - often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.

    Maybe it was different in European cultures, but simply equating all variations of arranged marriage as forced prostitution is not a serious argument. I already have a couple of families and their daughters in mind for my sons, but it will obviously need sign off from all parents and potential spouses.

    Peace.

    Well, I can relate to this topic too. There’s a real difference, always, where fallen humanity is concerned, between what is and what should be.

    Arranged marriage (which every subcontinental Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist will be familiar with) gets a bad rap in the modern West, and in the West in general, because it really isn’t understood here. In cultures where marriage arrangement is common it’s not the only common thing which in the West today would be regarded as sheer parental oppression; children in these places don’t “leave the nest” but rather live their lives in a sort of partnership with their parents and a less direct partnership with the rest of their family.

    Now it’s also the case that Christianity regards marriage as a holy thing, not to be unduly tampered with. And while nobody thinks marriage ought to be taken lightly, it often is, and that is deadly whether the marriage is principally arranged by the parents or the spouses. And in either case, but especially in the case of arrangement, there are two things which I see around me which seem specially important, if marriage is not to become an evil mockery: 1) a deeply grounded attitude of self-sacrifice on the part of the spouses and 2) a general attitude of chastity, preferably a society-wide one.

    Do you have marriage-brokers, too? In Ceylon they seem to have gone out of fashion, as they have with Jews in the US. I would add that (in my very fallible opinion) one reason for in-family marriages, cross-cousins and such, is that they are much easier to arrange than marriages at some remove.

    I don’t make it my life’s mission to recommend Hindi films, but a good movie having to do with this topic, and which makes one think, if a little arty for many viewers, is Duvidha, which I believe has been remade as Paheli.

    I replied to your last comment on SL but UR seems to have eaten it. In fact since I’ve been on here recently the site seems generally clunkier than before– I wonder if it’s under more attack. I may try to rewrite the lost comment.

    Anyway I wanted to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and express my belief, always a given in SL anyway, that there’s something fishy about what the government is telling us. At any rate the least kind of a warning to the hotel managers of Colombo or to the Cardinal Archbishop, and a few other people, could have drastically reduced the scale of the crime. We in Sri Lanka (well, I’m not, but never mind) may not know much but the one thing we are familiar with by now is suicide bombing– that, and tea, are the local areas of expertise.

    The kind of alertness that there was at the Cinnamon Grand, for instance, when I was there during the war, would have made the murders much more difficult.

    Sorry to ramble on about this but it does strike hard, especially as I must watch from here, when so many others are on the front lines, so to speak.

    Many of the victims have been buried; the fellow who gave land for that purpose in Negombo is known to my grandmother.

    May God grant –and I ask the holy martyrs recently made to intercede to that effect– that the evil in our hearts be buried as quickly! Our Blessed Lord said something about camels and needles which seems to apply to the rich and well-connected people who, it seems, have made themselves murderers. May their hearts be converted. I fear that these wealthy fools have done nothing but endanger their poor and innocent fellows. Before this Catholics were the only major group on the island not bearing a grudge against Muslims. During disturbances Muslims were always safe in Christian areas (and vice versa; some of my relatives were sheltered by Muslim neighbors in ’83). Now … I don’t know. People are angry. Muslims are mad as hell, too, at the perpetrators, who have put them in an awful position.

    We require the prayers of the holy innocents, as the blood of the Martyrs of Mannar was the seed of the Church in the North, and the conversion of their persecutors. St. Anthony’s was already a holy and miraculous site, dating from the Dutch persecutions– how much holier it will be now! And how much multiplied will be such places.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @RSDB
    Sorry for the hyperbolic post; my excuse is that it's late at night here.

    Anyway, I think I expressed the thoughts I wanted to convey, if in a strained manner.

    My principal purpose, again, in case it got lost, was to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and wish the same blessings on you and yours.
    , @EastKekistani
    Lack of neolocal residence is actually a huge problem. The West mostly got rid of patrilocal systems during the feudal period through the bipartite manor which helped the West transition from good old familism that ancient Rome had to individualism & civil society.

    The main problems with familism are:

    1. It is almost impossible for anyone to make novel decisions that may turn out to be useful simply because elders tend to dislike them. Hence less innovations.

    2. Lack of cooperation in a society between non-kin.

    3. Important decisions are only made by really old people who are already as competent as they were in their prime years.

    In particular a familist system is very unlikely to be able to handle a world with many new technologies.

    In the West this problem did not exist because married men were allowed to be free and made their own decisions. Almost everywhere else there was no such freedom.

    , @Talha

    in the West in general, because it really isn’t understood here.
     
    Yup. And the cases of abuse that end up having news articles written about them makes it sound like all situations are gross violations of a person's rights (my dad is forcing my to marry my ugly cousin and will kick me out of the house if I don't), but the majority of cases go along fairly well - of course, those don't make the headlines.

    children in these places don’t “leave the nest” but rather live their lives in a sort of partnership with their parents and a less direct partnership with the rest of their family.
     
    Agreed. They tend to live in the same areas (relatively close proximity) have plenty of get-togethers, etc. On my dad's side, three of my uncles basically just built a new floor on top of the original existing house of my grandparents.

    Do you have marriage-brokers, too?
     
    Well, it really depends on the culture you are talking about. Since I come from a Desi background, I don't know of any charge for this kind of thing. It seems to be a hobby of the "aunties". Some, like the mother of a good friend of mine, are known to have a knack for this and have set up multiple successful marriages; the more success, the more one's reputation grows and the more people are willing to come to you for help/advice. Now this is more along the match-making spectrum than the arranged marriage spectrum, but there is a lot of overlap.

    Anyway I wanted to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family
     
    Most welcome, I hope the Christian community recovers and is stronger and safer than before this horrific event.

    there’s something fishy about what the government is telling us.
     
    Seems that way too, but I've also read that they are asking some top security and police officials to resign so it may have been just a very, very bad case of incompetence.

    People are angry. Muslims are mad as hell, too, at the perpetrators, who have put them in an awful position.
     
    Indeed, which is often the goal of these kinds of extremists - to cause chaos, they are nihilists are their core. I highly recommend this read by Olivier Roy, who is an expert on Muslim radicals and profiled 100 cases in France and Beligum:
    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/apr/13/who-are-the-new-jihadis

    They really don't care a whit about anybody (not even the community the are supposedly doing all this for) except for their delusional pipe-dream. If the accounts are to be believed, one of them was a pregnant woman and she blew herself up with her three children. Someone that has this kind of mentality hardly cares if this means other Muslims will be under scrutiny or mosques will be attacked and thus set off a bloody cycle of back-and-forth reprisals.

    as the blood of the Martyrs of Mannar was the seed of the Church in the North, and the conversion of their persecutors
     
    Indeed, this has often been the case that Christianity historically arises from this kind of blind persecution. If there is a silver lining, I hope the authorities in Sri Lanka will take the security of their minority Christian community much more seriously.

    Sorry for the hyperbolic post
     
    I found it to be emotional, not hyperbolic.

    Peace.
  239. @RSDB
    Well, I can relate to this topic too. There's a real difference, always, where fallen humanity is concerned, between what is and what should be.

    Arranged marriage (which every subcontinental Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist will be familiar with) gets a bad rap in the modern West, and in the West in general, because it really isn't understood here. In cultures where marriage arrangement is common it's not the only common thing which in the West today would be regarded as sheer parental oppression; children in these places don't "leave the nest" but rather live their lives in a sort of partnership with their parents and a less direct partnership with the rest of their family.

    Now it's also the case that Christianity regards marriage as a holy thing, not to be unduly tampered with. And while nobody thinks marriage ought to be taken lightly, it often is, and that is deadly whether the marriage is principally arranged by the parents or the spouses. And in either case, but especially in the case of arrangement, there are two things which I see around me which seem specially important, if marriage is not to become an evil mockery: 1) a deeply grounded attitude of self-sacrifice on the part of the spouses and 2) a general attitude of chastity, preferably a society-wide one.

    Do you have marriage-brokers, too? In Ceylon they seem to have gone out of fashion, as they have with Jews in the US. I would add that (in my very fallible opinion) one reason for in-family marriages, cross-cousins and such, is that they are much easier to arrange than marriages at some remove.

    I don't make it my life's mission to recommend Hindi films, but a good movie having to do with this topic, and which makes one think, if a little arty for many viewers, is Duvidha, which I believe has been remade as Paheli.

    I replied to your last comment on SL but UR seems to have eaten it. In fact since I've been on here recently the site seems generally clunkier than before-- I wonder if it's under more attack. I may try to rewrite the lost comment.

    Anyway I wanted to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and express my belief, always a given in SL anyway, that there's something fishy about what the government is telling us. At any rate the least kind of a warning to the hotel managers of Colombo or to the Cardinal Archbishop, and a few other people, could have drastically reduced the scale of the crime. We in Sri Lanka (well, I'm not, but never mind) may not know much but the one thing we are familiar with by now is suicide bombing-- that, and tea, are the local areas of expertise.

    The kind of alertness that there was at the Cinnamon Grand, for instance, when I was there during the war, would have made the murders much more difficult.

    Sorry to ramble on about this but it does strike hard, especially as I must watch from here, when so many others are on the front lines, so to speak.

    Many of the victims have been buried; the fellow who gave land for that purpose in Negombo is known to my grandmother.

    May God grant --and I ask the holy martyrs recently made to intercede to that effect-- that the evil in our hearts be buried as quickly! Our Blessed Lord said something about camels and needles which seems to apply to the rich and well-connected people who, it seems, have made themselves murderers. May their hearts be converted. I fear that these wealthy fools have done nothing but endanger their poor and innocent fellows. Before this Catholics were the only major group on the island not bearing a grudge against Muslims. During disturbances Muslims were always safe in Christian areas (and vice versa; some of my relatives were sheltered by Muslim neighbors in '83). Now … I don't know. People are angry. Muslims are mad as hell, too, at the perpetrators, who have put them in an awful position.

    We require the prayers of the holy innocents, as the blood of the Martyrs of Mannar was the seed of the Church in the North, and the conversion of their persecutors. St. Anthony's was already a holy and miraculous site, dating from the Dutch persecutions-- how much holier it will be now! And how much multiplied will be such places.

    Sorry for the hyperbolic post; my excuse is that it’s late at night here.

    Anyway, I think I expressed the thoughts I wanted to convey, if in a strained manner.

    My principal purpose, again, in case it got lost, was to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and wish the same blessings on you and yours.

  240. @anon
    His violation of the marketplace rules marks him as an abuser without honour, whereas the exact same sin makes her a victim to be pitied.

    Meanwhile, open eyes are all that's necessary to see that empathy and pity isn't the only thing going through women's minds when they see a slut, at least without decades of feminist brainwashing that being a slut is empowering and awesome. (And even still.)

    His violation of the marketplace rules marks him as an abuser without honour, whereas the exact same sin makes her a victim to be pitied

    And here I thought we were just having a friendly exchange of thoughts about this matter.

    I’ve been over this elsewhere. I don’t accept your premise that it’s “the exact same sin.” The reluctant accomplice is not as culpable as the enthusiastic one.

    • Replies: @anon
    "And here I thought we were just having a friendly exchange of thoughts about this matter."

    Aren't we?

    "The reluctant accomplice is not as culpable as the enthusiastic one."

    I don't know where you're getting enthusiasm/reluctance from. I didn't mention it.

    Assuming they're both equally enthusiastic participants in their sexual dalliance, and with all the other shit I stipulated still in place, do you still think other women wouldn't frown on this woman's behaviour?
  241. @Rosie

    when 70% of divorce is initiated by women.
     
    Initiating a divorce does not make one not a real wife. It only makes you not a real wife if you leave your husband because of a financial setback. It is true that women initiate most divorces, but it is also true that men are most likely to do things that lead to divorce: drugs, compulsive gambling, adultery, etc.

    Back on topic, I think the chaps are going to have to wait until the Chinese, who like to play with real DNA, develop the Stepford 2030 human/computer hybrid- warm, living, with all the attributes which pull the male evolutionary mating triggers, but with the female evolutionary mating strategy/psychology (which looks and tests for the best she can get) disabled.
     
    Still waiting to see evidence that women are choosier about marriage partners than men. It seems to me that they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down.

    ” they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down”

    With 70% of divorces initiated by women, they will need to get more particular still.

    Maybe it’s just my social milieu, but I don’t see many women leaving their husbands because of drugs/alcohol/gambling/adultery, though I did recently meet someone who’d been abandoned with three young kids. The splits seem to be just that the woman was no longer “happy” with her husband – and nearly all the women are still either single or “dating”, where at least a couple of the husbands have remarried, in a triumph of hope over experience.

    One woman did remarry, having left a really nice guy husband. It lasted maybe two years.

    (And the edit function has returned, on this blog anyway, where I’m not moderated)

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian

    With 70% of divorces initiated by women, they will need to get more particular still.

    Maybe it’s just my social milieu, but I don’t see many women leaving their husbands because of drugs/alcohol/gambling/adultery, though I did recently meet someone who’d been abandoned with three young kids. The splits seem to be just that the woman was no longer “happy” with her husband – and nearly all the women are still either single or “dating”, where at least a couple of the husbands have remarried, in a triumph of hope over experience.
     
    Here's the American underclass. 80% of women married to 'Henry' initiated the divorce, but does it make him a nice innocent person screwed up by evil gold-diggers? Nope, in his own words. And he's likely not paid a single cent of alimony to any of them.

    – I had a patient, let’s call him ‘Henry’ for reasons that are to become clear, who came to hospital after being picked up for police for beating up his fifth wife.

    So I asked the obvious question: “What happened to your first four wives?”

    “Oh,” said the patient, “Domestic violence issues. Two of them left me. One of them I got put in jail, and she’d moved on once I got out. One I just grew tired of.”

    “You’ve beaten up all five of your wives?” I asked in disbelief.

    “Yeah,” he said, without sounding very apologetic.

    “And why, exactly, were you beating your wife this time?” I asked.

    “She was yelling at me, because I was cheating on her with one of my exes.”

    “With your ex-wife? One of the ones you beat up?”

    “Yeah.”

    “So you beat up your wife, she left you, you married someone else, and then she came back and had an affair on the side with you?” I asked him.

    “Yeah,” said Henry.

    I wish, I wish I wish, that Henry was an isolated case. But he’s interesting more for his anomalously high number of victims than for the particular pattern.

    https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-romanceless/
     
  242. “Liberating or objectifying? ”

    It’s neither. Both represent the positive and negative of feminist framing, and that premise is false.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  243. @SunBakedSuburb
    " ... Cut out the cranking."

    If by "cranking" you mean masturbation I'm afraid I must disagree, AE. If a man doesn't have a partner with whom he can relieve himself on a daily basis then he should resort to masturbation. Guys need to expel the demon juice to keep the prostate healthy. If your imagination is insufficient to conjure erotic images and thoughts to make quick work of your daily needs, then turn to visual aids. We dudes are visual creatures. But while you're cranking your yank in front of the digital screen, remember that the porn business profits from performers who usually come from a background of childhood sexual abuse.

    Not really any evidence for this for younger men. A study found that men who masturbated frequently suffered from prostate cancer at an increased rate and another a decreased rate.

    https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319536.php

  244. @anon
    You're acting like people of different classes or cultures are from different species.

    The man with no need to prove himself is rare indeed, and what few of him there are can be found in any class.

    Staying with Trump - admittedly an extreme example - he has surely "proved himself" long ago, and yet still felt the need to make more money, build more buildings with his name on it, become president... even to rock that ridiculous combover or work on his golf swing.

    Or take Donald Sterling, another billionaire who felt the need to engage in the pretense that some young girl was attracted to him and not his money. Why did we hear about his pathetic story? Ultimately, because he was worried that the other billionaires would make fun of him when the pretense couldn't be maintained.

    Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don't drive, etc, etc... The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men and only ends with extraordinary spiritual enlightenment or death. Guess which one is most common.

    “Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don’t drive, etc, etc… The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men “

    Somerset Maugham was a homosexual, but had a certain witty detachment about affairs of the heart and other organs.

    https://www.fadedpage.com/books/20180433/html.php#p170

    He went on with his interrupted breakfast. Lisette did not speak and there was silence between them. But his appetite satisfied, his mood changed; he began to feel sorry for himself rather than angry with her, and with a strange ignorance of woman’s heart he thought to arouse Lisette’s remorse by exhibiting himself as an object of pity.

    “It is hard to break a habit to which one has grown accustomed. It was a relief and a solace to me to come here when I could snatch a moment from my many occupations. Will you regret me a little, Lisette?”

    “Of course.”

    He gave a deep sigh.

    “I should never have thought you capable of so much deception.”

    “It is the deception that rankles,” she murmured thoughtfully. “Men are funny in that way. They cannot forgive being made fools of. It is because they are so vain. They attach importance to things that are of no consequence.”

    “Do you call it a matter of no consequence that I should find you having breakfast with a young man wearing my pyjamas?”

    “If he were my husband and you were my lover you would think it perfectly natural.”

    “Obviously. For then I should be deceiving him and my honour would be secure.”

    “In short, I have only to marry him to make the situation perfectly regular.”

    For a moment he did not understand. Then her meaning flashed across his clever brain and he gave her a quick look. Her lovely eyes had the twinkle he always found so alluring and on her large red mouth was the suspicion of a roguish smile.

    “Do not forget that as a member of the Senate I am by all the traditions of the Republic the authorised mainstay of morality and good behaviour.”

    “Does that weigh very heavily with you?”

    He stroked his handsome square beard with a composed and dignified gesture.

    “Not a row of beans,” he replied, but the expression he used had a Gallic breadth that would perhaps have given his more conservative supporters something of a shock.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Somerset Maugham was a homosexual, but had a certain witty detachment about affairs of the heart and other organs.
     
    Only 3/4, by his own admission.
  245. @notanon

    Women aren’t competing for middle class providers
     
    intelligent women who want children are

    I.e. 37 year old women dedicated to their careers, who could resist that?

  246. anon[283] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    His violation of the marketplace rules marks him as an abuser without honour, whereas the exact same sin makes her a victim to be pitied
     
    And here I thought we were just having a friendly exchange of thoughts about this matter.

    I've been over this elsewhere. I don't accept your premise that it's "the exact same sin." The reluctant accomplice is not as culpable as the enthusiastic one.

    “And here I thought we were just having a friendly exchange of thoughts about this matter.”

    Aren’t we?

    “The reluctant accomplice is not as culpable as the enthusiastic one.”

    I don’t know where you’re getting enthusiasm/reluctance from. I didn’t mention it.

    Assuming they’re both equally enthusiastic participants in their sexual dalliance, and with all the other shit I stipulated still in place, do you still think other women wouldn’t frown on this woman’s behaviour?

    • Replies: @Rosie

    Assuming they’re both equally enthusiastic participants in their sexual dalliance, and with all the other shit I stipulated still in place, do you still think other women wouldn’t frown on this woman’s behaviour?
     
    I think they would, but not for the calculated reasons you suppose, i.e. to punish cheaters. We would mostly just think it's wierd. We don't get the idea of casual sex for its own sake. It literally doesn't compute.
  247. @EastKekistani
    That's actually a claim that is both secular and very religion-like. Evolution which is a blind process does not inherently come with any value preference. You were not born with the duty that you must reproduce.

    a blind process does not inherently come with any value preference.

    There are no descendants among us of people who did not reproduce. I’d say that evolution “values” reproduction above all else.

  248. @Rosie

    If I may – I come from a culture that has arranged marriages and, though there are always certain excesses and abuses of power, in the vast majority of arrangements, the woman’s consent is a must. Arranging a marriage is not forcing two people to marry; rather it is facilitating the union by outsourcing the matching-up process to elders in the family and community – often it is exclusively the womenfolk who do all the arranging and the menfolk simply sign off on it.
     
    So defined, I have no objection whatsoever to the practice. My experience with 216 leads me to believe that he has something far less benevolent in mind.

    No, I generally agree with the description that Talha made.

    • Replies: @notanon
    Europeans overtook the rest of the world after adopting pretty much the exact opposite of the arranged marriage model found in the rest of the world.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    mutual voluntary marriages based on fully mature adult characteristics (combined with harsh sanctions on reproduction outside this model).

    we don't need to copy outside models. we just need to get back to how we were before the poz.
  249. @RSDB
    Well, I can relate to this topic too. There's a real difference, always, where fallen humanity is concerned, between what is and what should be.

    Arranged marriage (which every subcontinental Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist will be familiar with) gets a bad rap in the modern West, and in the West in general, because it really isn't understood here. In cultures where marriage arrangement is common it's not the only common thing which in the West today would be regarded as sheer parental oppression; children in these places don't "leave the nest" but rather live their lives in a sort of partnership with their parents and a less direct partnership with the rest of their family.

    Now it's also the case that Christianity regards marriage as a holy thing, not to be unduly tampered with. And while nobody thinks marriage ought to be taken lightly, it often is, and that is deadly whether the marriage is principally arranged by the parents or the spouses. And in either case, but especially in the case of arrangement, there are two things which I see around me which seem specially important, if marriage is not to become an evil mockery: 1) a deeply grounded attitude of self-sacrifice on the part of the spouses and 2) a general attitude of chastity, preferably a society-wide one.

    Do you have marriage-brokers, too? In Ceylon they seem to have gone out of fashion, as they have with Jews in the US. I would add that (in my very fallible opinion) one reason for in-family marriages, cross-cousins and such, is that they are much easier to arrange than marriages at some remove.

    I don't make it my life's mission to recommend Hindi films, but a good movie having to do with this topic, and which makes one think, if a little arty for many viewers, is Duvidha, which I believe has been remade as Paheli.

    I replied to your last comment on SL but UR seems to have eaten it. In fact since I've been on here recently the site seems generally clunkier than before-- I wonder if it's under more attack. I may try to rewrite the lost comment.

    Anyway I wanted to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and express my belief, always a given in SL anyway, that there's something fishy about what the government is telling us. At any rate the least kind of a warning to the hotel managers of Colombo or to the Cardinal Archbishop, and a few other people, could have drastically reduced the scale of the crime. We in Sri Lanka (well, I'm not, but never mind) may not know much but the one thing we are familiar with by now is suicide bombing-- that, and tea, are the local areas of expertise.

    The kind of alertness that there was at the Cinnamon Grand, for instance, when I was there during the war, would have made the murders much more difficult.

    Sorry to ramble on about this but it does strike hard, especially as I must watch from here, when so many others are on the front lines, so to speak.

    Many of the victims have been buried; the fellow who gave land for that purpose in Negombo is known to my grandmother.

    May God grant --and I ask the holy martyrs recently made to intercede to that effect-- that the evil in our hearts be buried as quickly! Our Blessed Lord said something about camels and needles which seems to apply to the rich and well-connected people who, it seems, have made themselves murderers. May their hearts be converted. I fear that these wealthy fools have done nothing but endanger their poor and innocent fellows. Before this Catholics were the only major group on the island not bearing a grudge against Muslims. During disturbances Muslims were always safe in Christian areas (and vice versa; some of my relatives were sheltered by Muslim neighbors in '83). Now … I don't know. People are angry. Muslims are mad as hell, too, at the perpetrators, who have put them in an awful position.

    We require the prayers of the holy innocents, as the blood of the Martyrs of Mannar was the seed of the Church in the North, and the conversion of their persecutors. St. Anthony's was already a holy and miraculous site, dating from the Dutch persecutions-- how much holier it will be now! And how much multiplied will be such places.

    Lack of neolocal residence is actually a huge problem. The West mostly got rid of patrilocal systems during the feudal period through the bipartite manor which helped the West transition from good old familism that ancient Rome had to individualism & civil society.

    The main problems with familism are:

    1. It is almost impossible for anyone to make novel decisions that may turn out to be useful simply because elders tend to dislike them. Hence less innovations.

    2. Lack of cooperation in a society between non-kin.

    3. Important decisions are only made by really old people who are already as competent as they were in their prime years.

    In particular a familist system is very unlikely to be able to handle a world with many new technologies.

    In the West this problem did not exist because married men were allowed to be free and made their own decisions. Almost everywhere else there was no such freedom.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    Well, you certainly make some interesting points, but that really wasn't quite what I was getting at. It's actually not really necessary to this idea of partnership that people live under the same roof; I know it's the practice in some places, but it really depends as much on attitude towards land as towards marriage.

    As for your specific claims about it, OK. Clannishness certainly has drawbacks, but I tend to misdoubt extreme claims about it. Assuming colonization, for instance, which you mention, is something you actually want, it seems to have been carried out, historically, extremely successfully by Arabs and Romans, not to mention Chinese, not societies particularly distinguished by a lack of respect for elders. And not to forget Britain, it's interesting if you read much about the East India Company just how often young men were set up in it by their relatives.

    I haven't noticed people in love marriages, all things being equal, to be more at home with new technology or more innovative than people in arranged marriages (noting there's always a spectrum between the two). But that's just personal observation.

    I'm not trying to put down the idea of love marriage. As a matter of fact I think the Western idea of romanticism, not limited to sexual matters, is a very good thing.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    After this absurdly financialized false economy bubble bursts, the resulting impoverishment, unemployment, and dollar depreciation is going to send even more millennials back into their parents' houses while keeping Gen Zs from ever leaving. This will increase tribalism within the US, accentuating the demographic fault lines that are already growing.
  250. @AaronB
    Take it up with the Asians, not my culture.

    I do not support emulating Asian culture, although I do think there are lessons to be learned there, and intelligently adapted.

    Being a jew makes you Asian, unless you can show me a map that shows Israel being in Europe.

  251. @YetAnotherAnon
    " they are willing to have sex with lots of women, but get awfully particular when asked to pick one mate and settle down"

    With 70% of divorces initiated by women, they will need to get more particular still.

    Maybe it's just my social milieu, but I don't see many women leaving their husbands because of drugs/alcohol/gambling/adultery, though I did recently meet someone who'd been abandoned with three young kids. The splits seem to be just that the woman was no longer "happy" with her husband - and nearly all the women are still either single or "dating", where at least a couple of the husbands have remarried, in a triumph of hope over experience.

    One woman did remarry, having left a really nice guy husband. It lasted maybe two years.


    (And the edit function has returned, on this blog anyway, where I'm not moderated)

    With 70% of divorces initiated by women, they will need to get more particular still.

    Maybe it’s just my social milieu, but I don’t see many women leaving their husbands because of drugs/alcohol/gambling/adultery, though I did recently meet someone who’d been abandoned with three young kids. The splits seem to be just that the woman was no longer “happy” with her husband – and nearly all the women are still either single or “dating”, where at least a couple of the husbands have remarried, in a triumph of hope over experience.

    Here’s the American underclass. 80% of women married to ‘Henry’ initiated the divorce, but does it make him a nice innocent person screwed up by evil gold-diggers? Nope, in his own words. And he’s likely not paid a single cent of alimony to any of them.

    – I had a patient, let’s call him ‘Henry’ for reasons that are to become clear, who came to hospital after being picked up for police for beating up his fifth wife.

    So I asked the obvious question: “What happened to your first four wives?”

    “Oh,” said the patient, “Domestic violence issues. Two of them left me. One of them I got put in jail, and she’d moved on once I got out. One I just grew tired of.”

    “You’ve beaten up all five of your wives?” I asked in disbelief.

    “Yeah,” he said, without sounding very apologetic.

    “And why, exactly, were you beating your wife this time?” I asked.

    “She was yelling at me, because I was cheating on her with one of my exes.”

    “With your ex-wife? One of the ones you beat up?”

    “Yeah.”

    “So you beat up your wife, she left you, you married someone else, and then she came back and had an affair on the side with you?” I asked him.

    “Yeah,” said Henry.

    I wish, I wish I wish, that Henry was an isolated case. But he’s interesting more for his anomalously high number of victims than for the particular pattern.

    https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-romanceless/

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    Yes, I knew the odd Henry in my youth (and I remember Scott's lament that you linked to), including a chap who not only beat his girlfriend, but moved a second girl into their council flat. There are good evolutionary reasons why a violent chap doesn't go short of female attention.

    But these days, how many of the underclass get married? And the underclass is still a minority, although a much bigger one than 60 years ago. Most women and men don't belong to it. They are I'd have thought a smallish minority of divorces.

    , @Rosie

    Here’s the American underclass. 80% of women married to ‘Henry’ initiated the divorce, but does it make him a nice innocent person screwed up by evil gold-diggers? Nope, in his own words. And he’s likely not paid a single cent of alimony to any of them.
     
    There seems to be a common belief around here that women are up and leaving their husbands for no reason. I have literally never seen that happen, ever. What I see is just the opposite: women sticking around and putting up with crap they really shouldn't have to.
  252. @216
    No, I generally agree with the description that Talha made.

    Europeans overtook the rest of the world after adopting pretty much the exact opposite of the arranged marriage model found in the rest of the world.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    mutual voluntary marriages based on fully mature adult characteristics (combined with harsh sanctions on reproduction outside this model).

    we don’t need to copy outside models. we just need to get back to how we were before the poz.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani
    Exactly. You guys actually have what I desperately want to import. Don't throw that away.

    mutual voluntary marriages based on fully mature adult characteristics (combined with harsh sanctions on reproduction outside this model).
     
    Yeppo.

    we don’t need to copy outside models. we just need to get back to how we were before the poz.
     
    That is, patriarchy within a nuclear family only. Married men are sovereign and not subject to their parents and extended family. This is a family structure that helps with colonization, exploration and innovation.
    , @Feryl
    Yes it was freedom from "excessive" extended family obligations which freed up time and energy for Western Europeans so that they could pursue various intellectual, technical, and artistic pursuits. Now that most white Western European countries have imported a lot of clannish non-Europeans, we're seeing collapsing levels of happiness, confidence, trust, etc. within the traditional (e.g., white) population. Rising China, it would seem, is actually becoming more hostile toward ethnic minorities as a way to insure that China remains China, culturally and demographically. Whereas your typical white Western country has, since the end of World War 2, gone to greater and greater lengths to downplay the accomplishments of whites and elevate non-whites.
  253. @Toronto Russian

    With 70% of divorces initiated by women, they will need to get more particular still.

    Maybe it’s just my social milieu, but I don’t see many women leaving their husbands because of drugs/alcohol/gambling/adultery, though I did recently meet someone who’d been abandoned with three young kids. The splits seem to be just that the woman was no longer “happy” with her husband – and nearly all the women are still either single or “dating”, where at least a couple of the husbands have remarried, in a triumph of hope over experience.
     
    Here's the American underclass. 80% of women married to 'Henry' initiated the divorce, but does it make him a nice innocent person screwed up by evil gold-diggers? Nope, in his own words. And he's likely not paid a single cent of alimony to any of them.

    – I had a patient, let’s call him ‘Henry’ for reasons that are to become clear, who came to hospital after being picked up for police for beating up his fifth wife.

    So I asked the obvious question: “What happened to your first four wives?”

    “Oh,” said the patient, “Domestic violence issues. Two of them left me. One of them I got put in jail, and she’d moved on once I got out. One I just grew tired of.”

    “You’ve beaten up all five of your wives?” I asked in disbelief.

    “Yeah,” he said, without sounding very apologetic.

    “And why, exactly, were you beating your wife this time?” I asked.

    “She was yelling at me, because I was cheating on her with one of my exes.”

    “With your ex-wife? One of the ones you beat up?”

    “Yeah.”

    “So you beat up your wife, she left you, you married someone else, and then she came back and had an affair on the side with you?” I asked him.

    “Yeah,” said Henry.

    I wish, I wish I wish, that Henry was an isolated case. But he’s interesting more for his anomalously high number of victims than for the particular pattern.

    https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-romanceless/
     

    Yes, I knew the odd Henry in my youth (and I remember Scott’s lament that you linked to), including a chap who not only beat his girlfriend, but moved a second girl into their council flat. There are good evolutionary reasons why a violent chap doesn’t go short of female attention.

    But these days, how many of the underclass get married? And the underclass is still a minority, although a much bigger one than 60 years ago. Most women and men don’t belong to it. They are I’d have thought a smallish minority of divorces.

    • Replies: @Toronto Russian

    But these days, how many of the underclass get married? And the underclass is still a minority, although a much bigger one than 60 years ago. Most women and men don’t belong to it. They are I’d have thought a smallish minority of divorces.
     
    Sure, I don't contradict it and don't absolve women of responsibility. The last divorce in my Toronto (diaspora) social circle was when a rich old businessman's younger wife, who had left her previous husband for him, cheated on him with a computer repair guy. Who said nerds can't get chicks? I just say there are other parts of human experience than the one the MRA present as the universal truth. And that's just in America. In other cultures, for example, a marriage may be broken up by fighting between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law, with husband remaining a passive figure, or by any kind of other weird stuff.
  254. @notanon
    Europeans overtook the rest of the world after adopting pretty much the exact opposite of the arranged marriage model found in the rest of the world.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line

    mutual voluntary marriages based on fully mature adult characteristics (combined with harsh sanctions on reproduction outside this model).

    we don't need to copy outside models. we just need to get back to how we were before the poz.

    Exactly. You guys actually have what I desperately want to import. Don’t throw that away.

    mutual voluntary marriages based on fully mature adult characteristics (combined with harsh sanctions on reproduction outside this model).

    Yeppo.

    we don’t need to copy outside models. we just need to get back to how we were before the poz.

    That is, patriarchy within a nuclear family only. Married men are sovereign and not subject to their parents and extended family. This is a family structure that helps with colonization, exploration and innovation.

    • Replies: @notanon
    yes, imo it creates a kind of lattice structure which is optimal for large scale cooperation.

    imo it's almost materials science applied to human group dynamics.
  255. @EastKekistani
    Exactly. You guys actually have what I desperately want to import. Don't throw that away.

    mutual voluntary marriages based on fully mature adult characteristics (combined with harsh sanctions on reproduction outside this model).
     
    Yeppo.

    we don’t need to copy outside models. we just need to get back to how we were before the poz.
     
    That is, patriarchy within a nuclear family only. Married men are sovereign and not subject to their parents and extended family. This is a family structure that helps with colonization, exploration and innovation.

    yes, imo it creates a kind of lattice structure which is optimal for large scale cooperation.

    imo it’s almost materials science applied to human group dynamics.

    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    yes, imo it creates a kind of lattice structure which is optimal for large scale cooperation.
     
    Yep. Thankfully parental power over adults in NE Asia has already weakened significantly partly due to urbanization and the fact that in cities apartments and condos can not house entire extended families. These days people also have mobile phones and sometimes their own rooms even if they live with their parents. Parents can't kill their children and get away with that and honor killings are unheard of after modernization. Moreover people tend to leave their parents for work or school at least at some point in their lives. After having ever tasted freedom nobody is going to actually obey their parents in all matters. Of course people still take care of their parents which is good. You can take care of people without being subject to their rule. However seniors are no longer controlling middle-aged and younger people any more. More interesting things get done as a result.
  256. @Feryl
    They gave up on trying to "beat" internet porn because the truth is that most people use it, and it doesn't physically hurt people (whereas drugs, violence, and prostitution all do immediate damage to the bodies of those involved).

    Frankly, people "turning to" internet porn is vastly preferable to the old school method of desperately horny people: actually having causal sex with strangers, sometimes via the exchange of money for services rendered (e.g., prostitution).

    The late 18th and very early 19th century were also a period in which men often struggled to find stable romantic partners, but back then, there wasn't widespread porn, so men had little choice but to pay for sex in order to not be plagued by unresolved lust.

    You can't destroy the marriage prospects of 50-60% of younger men (many men born since the mid-1970's are flat out not getting married) and then try to extirpate prostitution (in the past) or porn (the present). We were able to largely crack down on vice in the 1940's and 50's precisely because most men got married at a young age, and could reasonably expect to have a wife who fulfilled his needs.

    Porn is damaging to kids? No, what's damaging to "kids" is allowing them to grow up in a society that doesn't allow most young men to develop well-paid careers, doesn't keep the mentally ill off of streets, doesn't punish corrupt elites, and so forth.

    They gave up on trying to “beat” internet porn because the truth is that most people use it, and it doesn’t physically hurt people (whereas drugs, violence, and prostitution all do immediate damage to the bodies of those involved).

    The porn performers do seem fairly damaged too, much like prostitutes. And the porn viewer can easily get into some very strange habits. I wonder if the millennial sexual oddness (increased preference for homo/bisexuality, anal sex, group sex, etc) is driven by porn viewing. It wouldn’t surprise me.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    Do we really need, for the 10,000 time, to recite statistics about promiscuity and STDs being substantially worse in the 1970's-early 1990's than they are now? Some forms of cancer (of the type associated with bodily orifices and the reproductive system) have been shown to be worse in people with a large number of lifetime partners. Oral sex in particular went "under the radar" for a long, long time, but Boomers and early Gen X-ers are going to pay a serious price for all the blow jobs (and muff dives) they gave to each other.

    Group sex? Really? That's always been pretty niche, but it was far more common in the 70's and 80's than it is now. And as a matter of fact, "swinging" is aging along with the people who popularized it in the 70's.

    I'll give you that today's young women are far more accepting of lesbian sex, but you also have to realize that we live in a society that socializes girls to be repulsed by most males.

    Also, porn performers are obviously going to be marginal figures, since having sex with lots of people is emotionally ravaging to most people, women especially. But, porn viewers aren't going to get diseases from what they watch. It definitely is preferable to say, the 1920's, when a lot of men were desperate and had to risk contracting a disease in order to sate their lust.
  257. @anon
    You're acting like people of different classes or cultures are from different species.

    The man with no need to prove himself is rare indeed, and what few of him there are can be found in any class.

    Staying with Trump - admittedly an extreme example - he has surely "proved himself" long ago, and yet still felt the need to make more money, build more buildings with his name on it, become president... even to rock that ridiculous combover or work on his golf swing.

    Or take Donald Sterling, another billionaire who felt the need to engage in the pretense that some young girl was attracted to him and not his money. Why did we hear about his pathetic story? Ultimately, because he was worried that the other billionaires would make fun of him when the pretense couldn't be maintained.

    Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don't drive, etc, etc... The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men and only ends with extraordinary spiritual enlightenment or death. Guess which one is most common.

    Good point. I don’t really know why the upper class don’t see prostitution as shameful. Maybe they get enough validation from their money and status. Maybe they see it as validation of their money and status (they can “buy” people). Maybe they get lots of female attention anyways.Its not that they don’t also need validation, but they get differently than the other classes. It takes other forms. Maybe they get pleasure of feeling they are above middle class norms. Maybe they feel a sense of impunity.

    But if we take the broad and comprehensive view, we will see that prostitution was an accepted part of all historical societs, and sometimes even a respected proffession, although that more rarely (in ancient India and in certain places that had temple prostitution, and Percilean Athens). And that the upper classes have always had a much more lax attitude towards sexual matters than the prim middle class. There were prostitutes who were educated and refined and considred suitable companions for the nobility and were highly sought after (Pericles got political advice from his courtesan)

    So it would seem that shame at prositution is rather a unique feature of modern Western societies, and particularly Anglo societies (Continental Europe legalizes it for the most part.) Seen from this perspective, it probably has to do with Puritanism, and the Anglo desire to channel all available energy into hard work and conquest etc (this is why Anglo societies are generally hostile to pleasure, so that people can channel their frustration into work and conquest).

    I think its important to look at history and other cultures and societies to get the greast possible breadth and depth of view on sucbject, and see it from the most comprehensive angle. Otherwise one risks being parochial, and assuming the local prejudices are universal.

    • Replies: @anon
    "Good point. I don’t really know why the upper class don’t see prostitution as shameful."

    But my point was that the upper class sees prostitution as shameful. I'm confused.

    ------------------------

    I will agree that "the upper classes have always had a much more lax attitude towards sexual matters than the prim middle class", as long as we understand "always" to mean "for the last few centuries in the west". I don't know that the middle class is always and everywhere more prim than the upper; ironically, you might be being parochial here.

    -----------------------------

    Also: "There were prostitutes who were educated and refined and considred suitable companions for the nobility and were highly sought after (Pericles got political advice from his courtesan)". I'm reminded of Theodora of Byzantium, a prostitute who became empress. But that was probably a huge scandal at the time, and we just don't think of it as such because Theodora's faction won the civil war.

    Note that, even if Theodora wasn't really a whore, but that this was a lie made up by her enemies, then it's still the case that being a prostitute wasn't high status in Byzantium - and that therefore we should express a similar skepticism about other cases of high-falutin' whores. We may be reading history as written by dishonest political enemies, or we may be reading history as written by the victors, who write out a widespread public distaste for their flouting of sexual mores.

    ------------------------

    I'll agree that "prostitution was an accepted part of all historical societs", but I think you're failing to distinguish between acceptance-as-fatalism and acceptance-as-respect. (That might not be the best word.)

    Let's make a modern comparison: drugs. A great many people "accept" drug use, insofar as they don't think it's a big deal, it's somewhat inevitable, the cure is worse than the disease, etc. But these same great many people wouldn't want their kids taking drugs, nor their leaders, etc. They "accepted" Obama's youthful cocaine use, but if they found out he was still doing it as president, they'd be disturbed.

    This follows for those societies that legalise prostitution, too. Maybe the frogs or Italians wouldn't frown on hearing about some respected figure banging the whoo-ers, but the Germans certainly would. (Probably. What do I know?)

    Again: "accepted" but not respected, i.e. still shameful.

    ----------------------------------

    And why is it still shameful? For the reasons I outlined before.

    I agree that a broad view is important, and that the world is pretty weird and wonderful.

    But there are certain verities, things that are broadly true across most cultures. They might vary in intensity across space and time - you're correct that Anglo-puritan culture frowns on sex more than other cultures, and frowned on it even more in the Victorian era - but with these verities, they almost never vary to the point that the universal truth isn't true.

    Taboos against stealing, for instance: I can't think of any culture that permits stealing. (Although there are those, e.g. gypsies, that permit stealing from outsiders.)
  258. @Reg Cæsar
    Two questions:

    Are romance novels "pr0n"?

    And what about mainstream novels that are dirtier than the pornographic ones of 5o years ago they sold at the train station?

    In the late 1970s I found a copy of Her Bestial Dreams and gave it to a shipmate, who read it. (He said it was rather obvious that it changed writers about halfway through. They were the ultimate hacks.)

    But Googling the title doesn't get me close to the real thing. Instead, it shows a whole lot of contemporary fiction.

    You can stumble on a lot of bizarre romance books on Amazon, and I don’t even mean the dinosaur stuff. For example, I just typed “twins seals romance” into the search box and what do you know, there is at least half a dozen directly about that, such as “The SEAL’s Surprise Twin (Special Forces: Operation Alpha)” or “The Navy SEAL Brotherhood: A Navy SEAL Romance (The BWWM Romance Brotherhoods Book 4)”. The most complicated related title, however, was “My Father’s Best Friend’s Secret Baby (His Secret Baby Book 1)”.

    Anyone looking for “seal billionaire romance”? I think the best title was “Bad Boy SEALs: Menage Romance. Billionaire Romance. (British Romance Trilogy Book 2)”. NB: just one billionaire SEAL is apparently not enough. And it looks like they have to be foreigners too.

    I’ve never really felt the need to buy these, but perhaps some enterprising journalist should bite the bullet and review ten or so of the best titles.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    When love congeals
    It soon reveals
    The faint aroma of performing SEALs
    The double-crossing of a pair of heels
    I wish I were in love again!


    -- Lorenz Hart
  259. @AaronB
    That's primarily a middle class perspective. The need to prove oneself.

    Upper class men don't really take that seriously.

    What if one's manhood is already proved, and one has a history of success with women, and prostitution is simply about convenience and not toying with the emotions of a girl you have no intention of marrying?

    And it's more an American perspective. Less common even in Europe, and non-existent in Asia.

    Look, I personally don't care one way or another. I'm just reporting on facts, that social attitudes vary by culture and class. Its rather easily verifiable by YouTube videos and historical literature even if you don't have personal access to those cultures or classes.

    And I'm not suggesting you personally should change your values system with regard to this - if you find prostitution intrinsically unacceptable, and the need to prove manhood an insuperable obstacle, then that's a perfectly legitimate opinion.

    I too, as a young naive American, was quite shocked at the attitudes towards this subject that existed in other countries and among men of certain classes. It was an eye opener. But live and learn.

    The idea of “manhood” as defined by one’s ability or inclination to please women is repulsive.

    • Agree: AaronB
    • Replies: @EastKekistani

    The idea of “manhood” as defined by one’s ability or inclination to please women is repulsive.
     
    Of course this is a weird definition. But what about the oldest (and Sub-Saharan African) definition of manhood, I mean one's ability to physically harm people? That's not very nice either.

    What you may like the most is the northern Malthusian definition of manhood, namely one's ability to provide for his family. Am I right?

    , @anon
    Nonetheless, that's how a lot of men think.

    They also define manhood by one's ability to win a fight, or to lift heavy things, or to catch a particularly large fish, or to consume large quantities of alcohol, or to withstand especially spicy food...

    I don't see the sense in getting all worked up about it.
  260. @notanon
    yes, imo it creates a kind of lattice structure which is optimal for large scale cooperation.

    imo it's almost materials science applied to human group dynamics.

    yes, imo it creates a kind of lattice structure which is optimal for large scale cooperation.

    Yep. Thankfully parental power over adults in NE Asia has already weakened significantly partly due to urbanization and the fact that in cities apartments and condos can not house entire extended families. These days people also have mobile phones and sometimes their own rooms even if they live with their parents. Parents can’t kill their children and get away with that and honor killings are unheard of after modernization. Moreover people tend to leave their parents for work or school at least at some point in their lives. After having ever tasted freedom nobody is going to actually obey their parents in all matters. Of course people still take care of their parents which is good. You can take care of people without being subject to their rule. However seniors are no longer controlling middle-aged and younger people any more. More interesting things get done as a result.

    • Replies: @216
    Honestly, I revile that as atomization and anomie. Where the cleric and the extended family fall away, the welfare state and the corporation take its place.
  261. @L Woods
    The idea of “manhood” as defined by one’s ability or inclination to please women is repulsive.

    The idea of “manhood” as defined by one’s ability or inclination to please women is repulsive.

    Of course this is a weird definition. But what about the oldest (and Sub-Saharan African) definition of manhood, I mean one’s ability to physically harm people? That’s not very nice either.

    What you may like the most is the northern Malthusian definition of manhood, namely one’s ability to provide for his family. Am I right?

    • Replies: @L Woods
    No, because that still casts the man as a means rather than an end. Between the three, I’d sooner subscribe to the supposed African model.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Yes you are!
  262. @Pericles
    You can stumble on a lot of bizarre romance books on Amazon, and I don't even mean the dinosaur stuff. For example, I just typed "twins seals romance" into the search box and what do you know, there is at least half a dozen directly about that, such as "The SEAL’s Surprise Twin (Special Forces: Operation Alpha)" or "The Navy SEAL Brotherhood: A Navy SEAL Romance (The BWWM Romance Brotherhoods Book 4)". The most complicated related title, however, was "My Father's Best Friend's Secret Baby (His Secret Baby Book 1)".

    Anyone looking for "seal billionaire romance"? I think the best title was "Bad Boy SEALs: Menage Romance. Billionaire Romance. (British Romance Trilogy Book 2)". NB: just one billionaire SEAL is apparently not enough. And it looks like they have to be foreigners too.

    I've never really felt the need to buy these, but perhaps some enterprising journalist should bite the bullet and review ten or so of the best titles.

    When love congeals
    It soon reveals
    The faint aroma of performing SEALs
    The double-crossing of a pair of heels
    I wish I were in love again!

    — Lorenz Hart

  263. @YetAnotherAnon
    "Why do old rich men get hair plugs, face lifts, fancy cars they don’t drive, etc, etc… The desire to prove oneself a man is universal to men "

    Somerset Maugham was a homosexual, but had a certain witty detachment about affairs of the heart and other organs.

    https://www.fadedpage.com/books/20180433/html.php#p170


    He went on with his interrupted breakfast. Lisette did not speak and there was silence between them. But his appetite satisfied, his mood changed; he began to feel sorry for himself rather than angry with her, and with a strange ignorance of woman’s heart he thought to arouse Lisette’s remorse by exhibiting himself as an object of pity.

    “It is hard to break a habit to which one has grown accustomed. It was a relief and a solace to me to come here when I could snatch a moment from my many occupations. Will you regret me a little, Lisette?”

    “Of course.”

    He gave a deep sigh.

    “I should never have thought you capable of so much deception.”

    “It is the deception that rankles,” she murmured thoughtfully. “Men are funny in that way. They cannot forgive being made fools of. It is because they are so vain. They attach importance to things that are of no consequence.”

    “Do you call it a matter of no consequence that I should find you having breakfast with a young man wearing my pyjamas?”

    “If he were my husband and you were my lover you would think it perfectly natural.”

    “Obviously. For then I should be deceiving him and my honour would be secure.”

    “In short, I have only to marry him to make the situation perfectly regular.”

    For a moment he did not understand. Then her meaning flashed across his clever brain and he gave her a quick look. Her lovely eyes had the twinkle he always found so alluring and on her large red mouth was the suspicion of a roguish smile.

    “Do not forget that as a member of the Senate I am by all the traditions of the Republic the authorised mainstay of morality and good behaviour.”

    “Does that weigh very heavily with you?”

    He stroked his handsome square beard with a composed and dignified gesture.

    “Not a row of beans,” he replied, but the expression he used had a Gallic breadth that would perhaps have given his more conservative supporters something of a shock.
     

    Somerset Maugham was a homosexual, but had a certain witty detachment about affairs of the heart and other organs.

    Only 3/4, by his own admission.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    So he only ever made it to 3rd base?
  264. @RSDB
    Well, I can relate to this topic too. There's a real difference, always, where fallen humanity is concerned, between what is and what should be.

    Arranged marriage (which every subcontinental Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist will be familiar with) gets a bad rap in the modern West, and in the West in general, because it really isn't understood here. In cultures where marriage arrangement is common it's not the only common thing which in the West today would be regarded as sheer parental oppression; children in these places don't "leave the nest" but rather live their lives in a sort of partnership with their parents and a less direct partnership with the rest of their family.

    Now it's also the case that Christianity regards marriage as a holy thing, not to be unduly tampered with. And while nobody thinks marriage ought to be taken lightly, it often is, and that is deadly whether the marriage is principally arranged by the parents or the spouses. And in either case, but especially in the case of arrangement, there are two things which I see around me which seem specially important, if marriage is not to become an evil mockery: 1) a deeply grounded attitude of self-sacrifice on the part of the spouses and 2) a general attitude of chastity, preferably a society-wide one.

    Do you have marriage-brokers, too? In Ceylon they seem to have gone out of fashion, as they have with Jews in the US. I would add that (in my very fallible opinion) one reason for in-family marriages, cross-cousins and such, is that they are much easier to arrange than marriages at some remove.

    I don't make it my life's mission to recommend Hindi films, but a good movie having to do with this topic, and which makes one think, if a little arty for many viewers, is Duvidha, which I believe has been remade as Paheli.

    I replied to your last comment on SL but UR seems to have eaten it. In fact since I've been on here recently the site seems generally clunkier than before-- I wonder if it's under more attack. I may try to rewrite the lost comment.

    Anyway I wanted to thank you for the concern you expressed for my family and express my belief, always a given in SL anyway, that there's something fishy about what the government is telling us. At any rate the least kind of a warning to the hotel managers of Colombo or to the Cardinal Archbishop, and a few other people, could have drastically reduced the scale of the crime. We in Sri Lanka (well, I'm not, but never mind) may not know much but the one thing we are familiar with by now is suicide bombing-- that, and tea, are the local areas of expertise.

    The kind of alertness that there was at the Cinnamon Grand, for instance, when I was there during the war, would have made the murders much more difficult.

    Sorry to ramble on about this but it does strike hard, especially as I must watch from here, when so many others are on the front lines, so to speak.

    Many of the victims have been buried; the fellow who gave land for that purpose in Negombo is known to my grandmother.

    May God grant --and I ask the holy martyrs recently made to intercede to that effect-- that the evil in our hearts be buried as quickly! Our Blessed Lord said something about camels and needles which seems to apply to the rich and well-connected people who, it seems, have made themselves murderers. May their hearts be converted. I fear that these wealthy fools have done nothing but endanger their poor and innocent fellows. Before this Catholics were the only major group on the island not bearing a grudge against Muslims. During disturbances Muslims were always safe in Christian areas (and vice versa; some of my relatives were sheltered by Muslim neighbors in '83). Now … I don't know. People are angry. Muslims are mad as hell, too, at the perpetrators, who have put them in an awful position.

    We require the prayers