Oh no... Well, I do appreciate the effort if it's any consolation. Overall this place benefits from your participation, so I hope you're not being discouraged.
Is it? I don't really see the analogue there... Female status is more about being attached to a high-status male, not in simply having sex. Is there really a similar level of peer pressure in female groups just to simply fuck? I would think 'womanhood' is more linked to bearing children and bodily 'development'.
>But most women find promiscuous men disgusting.
That's not what I've seen at all. Of course women generally don't want a man who'd be cheating on them, but typically women are attracted to sexually 'experienced' men because of the factors which allowed those men to become 'experienced' (social status, looks) and the confidence acquired as a result.
>This is just a cop out.
It is not. It seems you're very much interested in assigning blame and indulging a sense of 'fairness'. I don't believe in free will, and the universe is not fair nor egalitarian. From my perspective, the abstract notion of 'blame' (which is how most people perceive it) is merely a mirage. I only argue for what I think would effectively change social mores going forward, bearing no resentment towards women whatsoever. I do admire the aspiration to creating a 'fair' society, but I think such a state is a luxury... And looking at the current our trajectory (sparked by egalitarian philosophies), I'm not sure if it's fundamentally tenable (at least not without dynamic limitation).
>Those places turned out to be the best countries because they incentivized the most egalitarian behaviors
What places specifically are you talking about here? The West when it was still de facto controlled by men?
>The heart of the problem is male intrasexual competition ruck amok.
So then you have to ask what factors have led to this paradigm. Could it be because women are now 'in charge' of their own sexuality, and have diluted the ability of an average man to 'provide' by joining the workforce (which also delays/diverts women from settling down with a life mate)? The spectre of legal system being 'wielded' by women to dramatic effect in the event of break-ups? Again, I'm not 'blaming' women here... Certainly this current paradigm could not exist had men not also allowed society to evolve in this direction.
>it just means there is a more variable outcome among males.
Yes, I understand this. I think you're so used to arguing others around here that you're misunderstanding my perspective. I'm not in any way claiming those bottom 50% of males are uniquely virtuous. I'm simply saying that with women currently being the gatekeepers, they are not choosing monogamy (again no blame, no one has free will... we are all simply products of our genes + inputs).
>The guys that go there are not niggers.
Fair enough. I'll admit most of my friends are more 'cerebral' types and don't necessarily represent the majority of men.
The essence of all this is that I'm interested in variables and consequences, not blame.
You should copy long posts into buffer before submitting, as a matter of habit ;)
Well no one succeeds all the time, but plenty of people don't even try...
>why is there no shame being applied there?
There is, in the more wholesome WN circles (which this forum is certainly not restricted to). Of course there are many other complications here... Having sex is very much linked to proving one's masculinity and that's quite a primal thing. It's also part of a man's status... A promiscuous man tends to be more attractive to women for various reasons.
Mainly though, it's because women control access to sex in the modern West and so it's vastly more important that they exercise the restraint. They could also choose not to grant access to promiscuous men (but they won't).
>Why don’t men hold this 20% accountable? Is it because because most white men want to be in that 20% if they get a chance?
Aside from the factors above... Honestly, yes. Most men—especially young ones—would require the disposition of a saint to turn down that opportunity. It's just what it is—how we're built. If we're generous and say that women have a similar intensity of drive (which I doubt, but won't claim to know for sure), then it again comes down to who controls access... Which is women.
> White males would simply agree to only having sex with one woman and males who had more would be shamed by other males. If you believe in shaming, is that not pragmatic?
Frankly, no it isn't. Women are the 'gatekeepers'... The efforts should be focused there. The only way your suggestion would really make sense is if we revived a more patriarchal kind of society, but if that were to happen I think you'd find most of this would no longer be an issue very quickly. That said, I don't think it's a bad idea for men to frown upon male promiscuity, I just think that focusing on women has a lot more return-on-investment potential.
WW are not 90% fucking niggers; despite the propaganda, WW very much prefer WM. (If you meant WW being 'niggers' in terms of behaviour, it again comes down to access control. The average guys would be as bad or worse if they really had a choice in the matter).
I'm not going claim any certainty with the math, because I'm very much out of touch with dating scenes. What I'm hearing though, is that among younger generations 'average status' guys are either not having sex or barely any, while most 'average looking' women have had multiple partners by their early twenties. Also just hearsay, but all of the White fellas I know IRL would rather go without than stoop to paying a hooker. So nothing definitive here, but I will say that this lopsided activity does make sense in the context of women controlling access + having hypergamous drives (which is not propaganda, but fact).
I appreciate your posts, Helena. You're usually even-keel and realistic about things.
I agree that there's too much WW bashing around here, when we of all people should appreciate that women have been lied to and inculcated with poison since birth—just like us men. On the other hand, shame culture can be a very pragmatic way of fighting that programming... Even if it's 'unfair' in some cosmic sense.
Another thing to consider here is that is unlikely to be the 'average' White man running through women so much as the top 20% or so, which has as much to do with women's hypergamous instincts as it does those men's lack of restraint. My understanding is that an average woman's bodycount these days dwarfs that of the average man.
Unfortunately the christians who are wise enough to oppose jews won't go as far as to admit their religion is a poisoned well (I get it, it's a pretty devastating thing to face up to).
Maybe. Or maybe just some random hacker or automated exploit. No matter who you are, there are bots constantly probing the web looking for exposed systems. Or maybe you just bought a piece of shit and it died.
Your writing style is kind of schizo, so the government would probably rather you kept posting and discrediting establishment narrative skepticism by association.
P.S. Typical consumer grade routers are dog shit. Get yourself something that can run one of the popular FreeBSD-based solutions.
anrach 9 points 4 months ago
uh oh the goyim know
/v/Jews viewpost?postid=67702d07949ac
anrach 3 points 4 months ago
never satisfied
perfect is the enemy
duck tales ooo000ooo
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=676fefc6855e7
anrach 5 points 4 months ago
Admiral Cartwright did nothing wrong
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=676f368edff01
anrach 4 points 4 months ago
I'll assume the child is White and say: Congratulations, sir. Good health to you and your family.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=676ecfb746d36
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
oy vey
/v/VoatFmRadio viewpost?postid=676e5b684fa11
anrach 0 points 4 months ago
Never interrupt me when I'm talking to myself
/v/VIBE viewpost?postid=676dd0003415a
anrach 0 points 4 months ago
It's gone, they shut it down
/v/videos viewpost?postid=676c630c8d848
anrach 3 points 4 months ago
Yes, and likely has a high-paying but completely bullshit DIE job to pay for it all.
/v/videos viewpost?postid=676c105104aea
anrach 2 points 4 months ago
all the actors in that movie clip are jewish, but I guess that was your point?
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=676bf9fcc590d
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
Merry heebmas GD
/v/BestOfVoat viewpost?postid=676ba25e1e5ed
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
HuWhite
/v/Christmas viewpost?postid=676b9eaeadb95
anrach 0 points 4 months ago
you've been rama rama and this is punishment for your sins
/v/Australia viewpost?postid=676ba4d9ed711
anrach 0 points 4 months ago
Oh no... Well, I do appreciate the effort if it's any consolation. Overall this place benefits from your participation, so I hope you're not being discouraged.
Merry Christmas Helena!
/v/4Chan viewpost?postid=6768429477614
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
>Of course this is all true of women as well.
Is it? I don't really see the analogue there... Female status is more about being attached to a high-status male, not in simply having sex. Is there really a similar level of peer pressure in female groups just to simply fuck? I would think 'womanhood' is more linked to bearing children and bodily 'development'.
>But most women find promiscuous men disgusting.
That's not what I've seen at all. Of course women generally don't want a man who'd be cheating on them, but typically women are attracted to sexually 'experienced' men because of the factors which allowed those men to become 'experienced' (social status, looks) and the confidence acquired as a result.
>This is just a cop out.
It is not. It seems you're very much interested in assigning blame and indulging a sense of 'fairness'. I don't believe in free will, and the universe is not fair nor egalitarian. From my perspective, the abstract notion of 'blame' (which is how most people perceive it) is merely a mirage. I only argue for what I think would effectively change social mores going forward, bearing no resentment towards women whatsoever. I do admire the aspiration to creating a 'fair' society, but I think such a state is a luxury... And looking at the current our trajectory (sparked by egalitarian philosophies), I'm not sure if it's fundamentally tenable (at least not without dynamic limitation).
>Those places turned out to be the best countries because they incentivized the most egalitarian behaviors
What places specifically are you talking about here? The West when it was still de facto controlled by men?
>The heart of the problem is male intrasexual competition ruck amok.
So then you have to ask what factors have led to this paradigm. Could it be because women are now 'in charge' of their own sexuality, and have diluted the ability of an average man to 'provide' by joining the workforce (which also delays/diverts women from settling down with a life mate)? The spectre of legal system being 'wielded' by women to dramatic effect in the event of break-ups? Again, I'm not 'blaming' women here... Certainly this current paradigm could not exist had men not also allowed society to evolve in this direction.
>it just means there is a more variable outcome among males.
Yes, I understand this. I think you're so used to arguing others around here that you're misunderstanding my perspective. I'm not in any way claiming those bottom 50% of males are uniquely virtuous. I'm simply saying that with women currently being the gatekeepers, they are not choosing monogamy (again no blame, no one has free will... we are all simply products of our genes + inputs).
>The guys that go there are not niggers.
Fair enough. I'll admit most of my friends are more 'cerebral' types and don't necessarily represent the majority of men.
The essence of all this is that I'm interested in variables and consequences, not blame.
You should copy long posts into buffer before submitting, as a matter of habit ;)
/v/4Chan viewpost?postid=6768429477614
anrach 2 points 4 months ago*
Well no one succeeds all the time, but plenty of people don't even try...
>why is there no shame being applied there?
There is, in the more wholesome WN circles (which this forum is certainly not restricted to). Of course there are many other complications here... Having sex is very much linked to proving one's masculinity and that's quite a primal thing. It's also part of a man's status... A promiscuous man tends to be more attractive to women for various reasons.
Mainly though, it's because women control access to sex in the modern West and so it's vastly more important that they exercise the restraint. They could also choose not to grant access to promiscuous men (but they won't).
>Why don’t men hold this 20% accountable? Is it because because most white men want to be in that 20% if they get a chance?
Aside from the factors above... Honestly, yes. Most men—especially young ones—would require the disposition of a saint to turn down that opportunity. It's just what it is—how we're built. If we're generous and say that women have a similar intensity of drive (which I doubt, but won't claim to know for sure), then it again comes down to who controls access... Which is women.
> White males would simply agree to only having sex with one woman and males who had more would be shamed by other males. If you believe in shaming, is that not pragmatic?
Frankly, no it isn't. Women are the 'gatekeepers'... The efforts should be focused there. The only way your suggestion would really make sense is if we revived a more patriarchal kind of society, but if that were to happen I think you'd find most of this would no longer be an issue very quickly. That said, I don't think it's a bad idea for men to frown upon male promiscuity, I just think that focusing on women has a lot more return-on-investment potential.
WW are not 90% fucking niggers; despite the propaganda, WW very much prefer WM. (If you meant WW being 'niggers' in terms of behaviour, it again comes down to access control. The average guys would be as bad or worse if they really had a choice in the matter).
I'm not going claim any certainty with the math, because I'm very much out of touch with dating scenes. What I'm hearing though, is that among younger generations 'average status' guys are either not having sex or barely any, while most 'average looking' women have had multiple partners by their early twenties. Also just hearsay, but all of the White fellas I know IRL would rather go without than stoop to paying a hooker. So nothing definitive here, but I will say that this lopsided activity does make sense in the context of women controlling access + having hypergamous drives (which is not propaganda, but fact).
/v/4Chan viewpost?postid=6768429477614
anrach 9 points 4 months ago
It really is a travesty seeing this majestic land overrun by these goofy subhumans. Like...It's insulting to the land itself.
/v/news viewpost?postid=6769a45448392
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
waste of tendie REEEEEEEEEEEEE
/v/funny viewpost?postid=67694e2a6c784
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
I appreciate your posts, Helena. You're usually even-keel and realistic about things.
I agree that there's too much WW bashing around here, when we of all people should appreciate that women have been lied to and inculcated with poison since birth—just like us men. On the other hand, shame culture can be a very pragmatic way of fighting that programming... Even if it's 'unfair' in some cosmic sense.
Another thing to consider here is that is unlikely to be the 'average' White man running through women so much as the top 20% or so, which has as much to do with women's hypergamous instincts as it does those men's lack of restraint. My understanding is that an average woman's bodycount these days dwarfs that of the average man.
/v/4Chan viewpost?postid=6768429477614
anrach 0 points 4 months ago
box life best life
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=67655c998dbec
anrach 1 point 4 months ago
In typical chick fashion, it's really all about herself.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=6761435dae4b8
anrach 1 point 4 months ago*
This is correct.
Unfortunately the christians who are wise enough to oppose jews won't go as far as to admit their religion is a poisoned well (I get it, it's a pretty devastating thing to face up to).
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=675f905ee944b
anrach 5 points 4 months ago
Some in the bottom right row are suspect, but overall looks sane.
Dibs on yellow.
/v/WhiteBeauty viewpost?postid=675f4d1e6873c
anrach 8 points 4 months ago
Maybe. Or maybe just some random hacker or automated exploit. No matter who you are, there are bots constantly probing the web looking for exposed systems. Or maybe you just bought a piece of shit and it died.
Your writing style is kind of schizo, so the government would probably rather you kept posting and discrediting establishment narrative skepticism by association.
P.S. Typical consumer grade routers are dog shit. Get yourself something that can run one of the popular FreeBSD-based solutions.
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=675e5f9af1020
anrach 2 points 4 months ago
\Ω
/v/Cats viewpost?postid=675e54c0a601d
anrach 4 points 4 months ago
The biscuits used to be much better, way back when most of their locations were staffed with White people.
/v/pics viewpost?postid=675df0147d554