/dis/ - Discussion

Get help you fucking retard.

>>213
You're no fun
>>202
I don't hate women just to hate them, but snarky cunts that think they're better than everyone else are pretty hateable. When a woman acts like a little miss douchebag mcsmartypants, her grating girl voice just makes me want to chew on her labia and cave her face in until she looks like ET

Women (especially city women) will always turn into insufferable whores with no personality traits besides lying and being obsessed with trying to make people like them more with artificial or insignificant shit like makeup and they will always copy the people around them to get more attention which is way more common when the group is mostly men, when the women make up the majority in some place all day do is absolutely hate each other while pretending everything is fine and they are friends. Solution? 11 year old girls. They are like angels;nice to be around,interested in talking and curious about everything. They also have tight pussies :)

>>217
Dude, just because you can't get laid doesn't mean all women hate you.

Nor is it subsequentley okay to molest children, you nonce.

>>219
>watching women get brutally murdered/raped/tortured is fine but OH MY GOD DID YOU JUST FANTASIZE ABOUT A CHILD, YOU FUCKING MONSTER

I suppose the term "women" should mean femininity or stereotypical female traits that define a woman unless you refer to the whole group of women as some form of collective organization.
Hating any specific random woman makes no sense if you don't know her.

>>217
Yes, that's what even famous All Bundy said " "A real man loves girls and hates women" :)
Although I don't think that what you said is so relevant the biggest problem with women is that they are super passive and have no interests of any kind besides money and children.
Yes, 11-year-old or even younger girls are way better because, unlike old hags, those girls at least can be active enough to invite you to play with them rather than expecting that you will always take initiative and she will just complain about how horrible was your idea. The only time when she will be taking initiative is when she is nagging you to do something. The female initiative is pretty much always limited to making someone else to do the job for her.


>I don't hate women just to hate them, but snarky cunts that think they're better than everyone else are pretty hateable. When a woman acts like a little miss douchebag mcsmartypants,

You must be a real simp doormat if that is a problem for you.
I don't see anything wrong if a woman behaves like that because I can always outdouchebag her if necessary. If a woman is misbehaving this gives me a right to misbehave too and it is not a big deal to show her who is better after all. Good girls are actually much worse because you also have to restrict yourself a lot while being with them and think carefully about what you are doing because the consequences of the mistake will be much worse than with bad girls who will just try to hit you with a frying pan and the issue is resolved.

of course in that situation, you should not allow her to take over your place, or else she will make you her hostage you both must have your own separate places.

Johnny Bravo cartoon actually describes the situation with women the best of all
and here is an example of the perfect woman. may be one of a million
https://youtu.be/n1moM7ZTFlE?t=809
and this is the life with a typical woman
https://youtu.be/PqurCymcjm4?t=264
and lolis are also way better than grown-up women at least they are still capable of showing initiative and creativity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FA16zBrA9kI

>Dude, just because you can't get laid doesn't mean all women hate you.
By that logic, I should hate anime girls because I can't get laid with them LOL
And anyone can get laid with a real woman that's just a matter of how much you are willing to pay.

>11 year old girls. They are like angels :)

No, they are not angels. They are quite horrible little brats who are very likely to rape you before you even give them candy :) And this is why they are better than women. If you want an angel to go for 40-year-old or older.

>>217
>11 year old girls
Do you live in the US? If so, you'll have to go younger than that brodie. Most eleven year olds at this point are insufferable little tiktok piggies that have already adapted the instant gratification live style. They're only good for their untouched meat now. Cut their tits off and put them in the broth, and you'll be granted eternal life.

Like the man said in the remake of "Killer Elite", "Show me a beautiful woman and I'll show you a bloke who's sick of her shit." Well, I am sick unto death of the feminist, misandrist Hell that women have made out of our lives. I try hard to be an enlightened, tolerant guy, but when you have an endless horde of shrieking harpies squealing "Stop oppressing me!" every time you draw a breath, it becomes impossible. To state it bluntly, women HATE us for being born men...I'm long done trying to pretend that I don't hate them back.

I don’t hate women for any political or philosophical reason.

I hate women because I enjoy hating women. It just plain feels good.

What's the fun of watching real women tortured and killed? The reason I like guro specifically (i.e. 2D drawings usually done in a japanese visual style) is that it's harder to imagine the characters screeching over the counter of a mcdonalds to see the manager over a missing chicken nugget, or making vapid virtue-signalling facebook posts. There has to be some value to a life for snuffing it out to have any value. Finding an innocent soul to torture is all but impossible in the real world; why should I care about the revolting blobs called women enough to hate them?

Not today, CIA!

I hate women because my mom was an abusive cunt and my father molested me. She pretty much has took up for Him since day one and she is proof women are like black people. Parasitical, loyal only to themselves, and a fucking burden amongst humanity. Only reason we have women alive is to keep them as brood mares and humanoid punching bags. The only good women are the elderly women because they’re not fucking sluts who have sex with everything and everyone, and they thankfully aren’t fertile. Can’t stand a cunt who menstruates and thinks she’s badass for shitting a human turd out her front ass she calls a pussy.

you glow pavement ape though to the point i hate women because they are degenerates they drink they smoke they do drugs they dont save their virginity they dont show affection they wear slutty clothing they arent comforting and they are usurious they are called the vaginal jew for a reason

Fuck you. You. Are a piece, of shit.
I don't think women are any better than men, mostly,monsters yeah. Still. Damn you for hating anyone for,them being what they never chose, you disgusting cancer of a thing.

>>323
On top of being a whiny twat, you're tripfagging when you don't even draw/make animations. :/

>>323

Simp. Women are truly the niggers of humanity.

>>335
Oh fuck off. You just made everyone else in this thread discussing their fantasizes look like a toolbag dipshit by association, all because you have to use your 4cunt lingo.

>>217
Yes 11yo girls are the best because they offer unconditional love.In fact all children until the age of 12 will offer you warm confort even boys around 8(if you are into that BL stuff).All sexualy developed children are eager to learn about and discover their sexuality playing with themselves and also looking for a mentor!
After they become teens, girls discover they can pleasure themselves and they take greater satisfaction from the admiration they get from boys and men and they also discover that for males it is difficult to find sexual relief without a partner so teenage girls become bitches and later turn into vain monsters.They don't need to learn or study much because their only goal later in life becomes marriage(to be translated in finding a slave to do their bidding).A few non desireable or frustrated women isolate themselves frp, society but they are rare.And a few exception prove the fact that women are vain monsters and the current society gives them all the tools to prey upon men! But hey when men try to find human confort in children they become predators! What is fair?

>>356
So you're a nonce

>>358
>nonce
Wait, are you a britfag? Why would you of all people get offended by pedophilia? The AOC is sixteen in crumpetland. Is being an ephebophile okay, but not being a pedo? This is why being a moralfag about age makes no sense, every country is different and has their own laws. Rape is rape. Statutory rape is retarded and not a real thing.

>>363
Well said m8! Gr8 minds think alike!^^

This thread sucks.

I don't hate women, because there's no legitimate reason to hate an entire gender. Also, ngl, hating particular women for being awful people is fine, but when you get all misogynistic about how you go about it, you kind of start to look like the one in the wrong.

>>219

I agree with this sentiment and would like to add, I generally think your interactions with women will become more positive for you if you don't view the majority of your interactions with one though the lens of getting her to have sex with you.

>>363

>Rape is rape. Statutory rape is retarded and not a real thing.

Rape is rape, sure. Statutory rape is a thing because of the power dynamic in play. If we're talking middle teenagers who actually have a concept of sex and sexuality and could in theory consent to having sex (and not like actual children who may have a dubious concept of what sex even is) there's still the fact that they might not have the option to say no due to being dependent on the person making the request, or the person doing it may be an otherwise powerful or trusted member of the community and coming out that they were coerced into sex could get them punished and/or ostracized and/or forced to keep silent to prevent causing a stir.

They're more vulnerable so it makes sense to just flat out criminalize that kind of stuff in order to give them a fighting chance.

It's kind of like how there's a taboo against student teacher relationships regardless of age. One party holds power over the other that can be used to coerce them if they're unwilling.

>>242

>Well, I am sick unto death of the feminist, misandrist Hell that women have made out of our lives. I try hard to be an enlightened, tolerant guy, but when you have an endless horde of shrieking harpies squealing "Stop oppressing me!" every time you draw a breath, it becomes impossible.

I can agree that people like that are frustrating but it's really not a majority, and most of those people do have a reasonable side that can be appealed to (just not throught online interactions on twitter/tumblr). Lashing back just feeds into a sense of justification. Something I find that helps it to give yourself some emotional distance from it. When they complain about men they're not attacking you personally, they're usually just venting anger similar to how you are or lashing out from frustration. Not interacting and getting away from places, especially websites, that aggravates you goes a long way towards peace of mind.

>>390
die feminist i rape kids 24/7 cuz staturtaanry rape aint real

>>390

>I don't hate women, because there's no legitimate reason to hate an entire gender.
I think it is impossible to hate women because no such thing exist everyone is different.
You can only hate some abstract stereotypical woman or femininity.


>and not like actual children who may have a dubious concept of what sex even is

Well, the thing here is that nobody will know what sex is until someone explains it to them and looks like that what society is most concerned about is to hide that information from them in any way possible as long as possible.

And from the fact that so much effort is made to prevent children from having sex I think they may actually have way higher sex drive than most would expect. :)
I wonder if there is anyone who don't know that US went as far as performing genital mutilation for boys which is still ongoing with the main purpose to prevent them from masturbating. And enormous effort was made to keep girls and boys separate at the time when literally raping them was non issue and chidden were freely sold as sex slaves.

>Statutory rape is a thing because of the power dynamic in play.

This is not exactly the problem here because legally even if chidden decide to have sex with each other that will count as if they raped each other.
The issue is not power dynamic but the idea that chidden are forbidden to experience sexual pleasure at all.

>I generally think your interactions with women will become more positive for you if you don't view the majority of your interactions with one though the lens of getting her to have sex with you.

Yes that is absolutely true and this is the actual reason to hate women. because they are sex hating frigid ice queens with zero sex drive at the absolute majority (with few exceptions), who see sex as some chore and something what they have to give to those nasty horny men who want sex rather than being proper corporate slaves and properly paying consumers of corporate trash.

A typical woman is pretty much stereotypical supervisor for men who will say "enough fun now back to work! There are things that have to be done!"

But I think sex/and fun is kind of the top priority in life and another top priority is to minimize amount of work and responsibilities. So what is the point to interact with a woman if she is not does not want sex/fun but want me to work more and take responsibilities?
I do not have much of desire to waste time with women who don't find me sexually attractive as that time could be spent more productively. And I wonder why any man should waste their valuable time with a women who is not interested in the most important thing that we have in life?

Fuck you

>>451
Fuck you right back!

>>451
Fuck all those kisses, they didn't mean jack
Fuck you, you ho, I don't want you back
Fuck what I said, it don't mean shit now
Fuck the presents, might as well throw 'em out
Fuck all those kisses, they didn't mean jack
Fuck you, you ho, I don't want you back!

>>464
>>465
Hey! make your own name.

Fuck you all only EVMC understand me! EVMC>gurchan!

I hate women because my mother was an abusive manhating cunt and my father molested me. Tried to come out to my mother as trans since I saw men were the superior gender. She can’t accept men >>> women and that is fact.

>>516
Behold, the negaterf

>>516
Maybe being Apache attack helicopter would make better choice as becoming a superior being LOL

Tbh I don’t blame anyone for disliking women, in the last few decades, they’ve became a burden. Do I blame anyone for wanting disassociation from them? No. My recommendation would be giving women a cutoff age. Once they hit their twenties, they are no longer useful and considered grandmother age/old. Only men would never have a cutoff age.

>>202
>>217

Man, this is just GuroChan at it's 'finest'.
You guys cant imagine how fun it is to be here.
Since I quit TV many years ago due to its unuseful nature,
I'm missing out on a lot of hilariously trashy bullshit;
But MAN, do I get some better shit here :))

I don't know about the most oy you guys,
But Isn't it obvious that the first post
and the title of the thread are just pure BAIT
to lure people in to slit each others throats verbally?

I mean... nothing wrong about that, go on it's a fun read.
Not a very fruitbearing topic but a fun one.

And I'm gonna participate.
Watch me:

I don't hate women,
because they are fun to play with, somewhat USE-ful if you know
what I mean
And (now comes the best part)
They are an enormous expense to other men who aren't aware what
women are and especially what they're NOT.
And this fact ladies and gentlemen,
being stupid/uneducated Men falling for possibly
manipulative, certainly seductive, definitively attractive
women is the most satisfying value them bitches can bring to the
table.

If you want to get rid of a competitor in your job-life
or
If you want to ruin a mens life beyond repair
just
INTRODUCE HIM TO THE RIGHT GIRL.

It's so freaking easy, very counterintuitive, nobody suspects
you being an asshole.
I have done it, I will do it again.
The results are reliable 10/10.

Just try it yourself, it's fun to watch.

>>560
Electric vibrators is what women really need, fact!
Voodoo is what they like to do to men!
Mining gold is their primary occupation!
Squad and squat on your dick like a giant suckion pump!
Care to pump em but not too hard cause they fart, use an ass plug!
>
gurochan is a great site!
Of women and men philosophy is hard, but what about the tauren?
Put your dick inside your mama's hole and be happy!

>>563
Electric vibrators is what women really need, fact!
Voodoo is what they like to do to men!
Mining gold is their primary occupation!
Care to pump em but not too hard cause they fart, use an ass plug!
>
gurochan is a great site!
Of women and men philosophy is hard, but what about the tauren?
Put your dick inside your mama's hole and be happy!

Lite version, the truth behind the veil of shadows await like a hard shit piercing your foot when you step on it! Thread carefully cause you thread on my shit! The meaning of life is in a rotten egg floting on the cosmos like a tauren shitting freely on the open plains! And then you must look deep inside yourself and ask urself the question! It's the question that drives us Neo! Are you a shit or are you a turd? Roaming free and careless like a tauren upon the open plains you find the meaning of life! What is? Life is full of shit and you are full of life!

For me it's the opposite, I empathise more with women so guro, the terrible things happening that can't be undone, means more when the victim is female.

>>598
I feel u man! Besides why hate something you can use?

>>564
The hidden meaning of your wise words escapes me!

>>598

I lack empathy towards females and have no desire to show it to them.

>>610
With the exception of the comments made by the guy named Onix this thread looks like a gathering place for mentally unstable people some of them high on some really strong stuff!
Btw nothing wrong with this I feel like in the glory days of the internet!:)

>>564

Proof that hard drugs can unlock the secrets of the cosmos!:P

God I'm starting to hate women so fucking much.
It really seems their only way to feel any power is to hurt men

Just saw a thread somewhere, they were saying that hurting men is their own empowerment, men who do nothing to them. Yeah, women are probably just evil... I want to believe otherwise. Some ladies seemed good... Idk I can't make sense of this. If they're all against me protecting myself from them, then they are evil too amd were only helpful for self serving reasons.
I hate so much.

>>598
>means more when the victim is female
sexist

don't fuck people, fuck the dimensions in their heads.

>>1181
I agree with this.

Because most of them are hardly better than you faggot! What , you 2 scared,to pee on an ice cube tray and make a diarrhea smoothie,and drink it? Cuz that's what you should do!

I hate that they make me horny in public. Today, some hot puerto rican chick with straight, dyed hair, decked out in a schoolgirl uniform, skirt and all, straight out of a fanservice anime, was giggling to her friends about how she had to take a huge dump. Girls have no class these days ヽ(`Д´)ノ, but they're so goddamn cute ( ´ω`)

I feel insecure so women are bad

Women don't exist. They're just faggot guys with underdeveloped micro penis clitoris and balls split into walls. Faggots are treated either by fuck, or kill.

I hate you krauts you ruin guro by being racist and sexist, i hope more male guro is made to teach you krauts a lesson

>>1403
Great minds think alike!

>>1420
Wow!( ´ω`)
ヽ(´∇`)ノ

Experiencing normal sex is getting redundant, pretty sure guro takes the experience to another level, where you can feel the person inside-out.
Guro should be mainstream from now on.

yeah stop trying, all women are already fucked by someone else nones into fucking you anon

Men are the dominant sex and women are nothing but slaves to men! No reason to hate our slaves except when don't perform their duties!

Fucking women are a stupid parasite in human nature, they have crazy unlogical emotional outburts. When a woman thinks she thinks wrong. Just like in other species the females seek to spread the genes of the strongest male they see. But in our case nature gave us the skill and made women fuck apes and kangaroos, any animal that looks strong and seems like it wants to rape and kill them
(exemples of women getting arroused by animals)
https://youtu.be/DYGlaRJv5B4
https://youtu.be/tNm4nn5eu_g
https://youtu.be/agQVxiEru8Q

My old hag mother got super sexually excited talking about the time the anti riot (slavery enforcement) brigade were in front of her car. I couldn't believe my eyes, I was more right on women than I ever wanted to be. Their nature of being unable to think and want to fuck anything strong/imposing made it so when their familly/tribe/country got killed/conquered by men of an other race. They opened up their ass for them and race mixed the global zionist parasite (the kike) that teared off the g-spot of 1/3 of male babies in the fucking world into existence. Bitches are evil and have no compassion for men, they smugly say that female circ is the worst thing ever but it's good for males because we're insensitive, have natural errors while they're perfect and deserve the pain of getting our baby dicks mutilated. Tie down those masochistic creatures, rip out their foreskin and clit!
(They will love it)

What you describe rather implies that women are submissive slaves, not parasites.

Circumcising women is absolutely useless task because at least half if not more women do not ever feel orgasms anyway and have zero interest in sex which makes them useless frigid trash or corporate drones at best only capable of serving their rich overlords. They can make perfect match for those "high value" workaholic plowhorses who send 99% of their life at work making money.


And those rare ones who have at least some interest in sex and can feel orgasms should be loved and treated well. Be happy if you by some miracle meet one of them.

I know circumcising women doesn't do anything, the g-spot 3-4 inches deep is left intact + I'm sure even if it's destroyed aswell they'll still orgasm from being raped or such cuz woman. Just that I'm a female circ mutilomaniac.

I'm not sure I can love women after seeing so many stories/videos of women lying, fabricating evidence ect to ruin their boyfriend/husband's life. Also this good stuff https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6996829/Good-Samaritan-says-woman-accused-assaulting-fixing-car-up.html

I don't think I could love things that gets arroused to police who removed their nametags trempling and tear gasing peacefull protesters, since I'm agaisnt being governed. But I know I love them dead so maybe that's it (・∀・)

Is natural to hate women! But natural things bring us closer to the meaning of life! What is life you ask and look above and below at the black hole what swallows our cosmos inside and out? But beyond the veil of darkness there is our red star! Like a cow floating on the milkyway we drift closer to the underverse where all the dreams come true! There is wisdom and tauren know the secret! Be free like a tauren shitting freely upon the open plains beyond the black hole of time! And then you find the truth written in star that is near and far! Like a snakey shit the turd comes down upon your sight and the smell of shit takes you closer to the shitty cosmic truth that you find only in the deepest black hole of pure primordial shit! Life is full of shit and you are full of life!

And I wonder why are you so strongly against women having orgasms?
Isn't that supposed to be the good thing? The reason why they behave so horribly is precisely because they are incapable of having orgasms or because they get orgasms not from sex but from consumerism and attention.


women already have very very weak sex drive and practically no interest in sex. so they naturally focus their life on various crap which is highly valued by conservatives. women who are actually nice usually get destroyed by society and men.
read about this woman for example
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodil_Joensen In my opinion she was one who deserved to live but she was destroyed by those traditional pieces of shit.

Or maybe you are yourself that idiot plow horse who want to spend life in the plantation to produce cannon meat for elites to kill?

i liek woman

Onix, have you ever dated? Anyone who has dated women has met women with high sex drives. I've dated women who exhausted me with their sex drives.

Also, go read female forums. When there aren't swarms of men to harass them, women openly talk to each other about their sexual fantasies and experiences.

You'll probably never experience sexual enthusiasm from a woman if you treat her like an object with no sexual desires of her own, just a thing for you to fuck. So it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: your views about women prevent you from having any experiences that will challenge those views.

You talk like a woman, because you rely on possibilities not probabilities. Yes of course there are few nymphomaniac women and there are few dickless asexusl men but what matters is statistic, it is how likely you are to meet what you want an how much competition there will be.
Those women are very rare and there are lots of men who want them, so it is absolutely pointless to even bother.
I just said that if someone gets lucky to meet such woman be happy because you got something what most will never have.
many men live in completely sexless marriages for decades and their wives stop having sex with then next day after wedding

What you say about swarms of men harassing women is actually what I explained above too, and it also proves my point. because if by some miracle you there is a woman who has any value to a man and everyone wants her she naturally gets overwhelmed and starts chasing away everyone, because no matter what is her sex drive or what are her interests she will not have sex with 100 men at once neither she can have that many friends competing with each other for her.
If men and women were similar there woud be no swarms of men chasing women, because everyone woud find someone easily and there woud be a balance both genders woud chase each other.

Yes some people get lucky by accident if they somehow meet each other without advertising themselves and without competition like you visit your grandma in the village and meet a pervert girl there. But woud I rely in that to happen? No that's not going to happen in real life even if it does happen for some people.
internet probably makes things worse to some extent, because now we can see what we will never have and how extraordinary lucky some people get.

I do not treat women as objects and that is precisely what I am absolutely NOT interested into. I do not need a sex object I need a sex human who woud make her own decision and take initiative by herself not some sex doll who expects me to do everything and she will react to my actions at best. and this is not something what can happen on this world. because you want it or not women are sex objects only and never be anything else If you don't make initiative you are object by definition to be a human you have to do things yourself. And do more than just cover yourself into shiny wrapping expecting that a customer will pick you from the pack of other objects.

And speaking about those female fantasies they are nearly all about being sex object. it is super rare to find any woman whose fantasy is to take the lead in relationship.

> statistics

Statistics you invented in your head.

Women with high sex drives are common; the female bell curve might skew lower than the male bell curve, but the skew is much smaller than you seem to believe. Libidinous women might seem rare in Japan, but how women seem in Japan is not how women are. Japanese culture doesn't expect women to want or pursue sex, and disrespects them for doing so. In Japanese culture, sex is for the man, and, unsurprisingly, this attitude has consequences. To reuse the phrase from my last comment, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Japanese culture constructs a fake woman and forces real women to act like her. Compare how Japanese women act in Japan to how they act after living abroad for a few years. Even their voices are lower and less childish. Controlling for height and weight, Japanese women living in Japan have some of the highest voices in the world. Having such a high voice is an artificial cultural construct that women go along with in Japan.

Male and female sexuality do (on average) function in different ways. Women tend to be less visual and anatomical in their fantasies. Also, women are more likely than men to need an emotional connection for sex, and in patriarchal cultures like Japan this connection is harder to find. Compare women in East Germany and West Germany, before the fall of the Berlin wall. Both were patriarchal cultures, but East Germany less so.

Finally, I cannot imagine a woman feeling an emotional, sexual connection to a man who says what you say and believes what you believe about women. Of course the women you date are going to seem sexually passive. You are making them passive.

> swarms of men harassing women with high sex drives

Swarms of men will harass literally any young woman on the internet. You're showing your ignorance of women and what they experience.

Also, this behavior by men does not indicate that men just have *that much* more sex drive (the bell curve skew is not this extreme), it mostly indicates that men feel *that much more entitled* to women and do not respect women's boundaries.

> women fantasize about being objects

This phrase can be interpreted in a way that is true for some women, but I think you and I are using the word "object" in two different ways.

You are using it to mean "not taking the lead in sex." I am using it to mean "no interest in sex." This is also what you originally said - that women "have practically no interest in sex."

I want to emphasize this point: you acknowledge that women have sexual fantasies, so you must acknowledge that women have an interest in sex.

Some women might have kinks and fantasies about scenarios where a partner treats them like an object, because the power imbalance turns them on. Let me emphasize that: IT TURNS THEM ON. Makes them horny. Because they are interested in sex. What you are describing is a submissive fantasy. This phenomenon is different from the one where a woman lies motionless during sex and does not react. Lying there like a dead fish often indicates either shyness, cultural repression, and/or a lack of emotional connection with their partner. Of course, cultural repression and a lack of emotional connection with one's partner often go hand in hand.

>>1503
sorry if my writing style is repetitive. it's a bad habit.

>>1505
referring to the first big paragraph, not the last one. the last one is repetitive on purpose. the first one i just say "japanese culture represses female sexual agency" a bunch of different ways.

>>1503
first not sure why you are bringing up Japan, all women are pretty similar, besides maybe black women in africa who see to be more sexuslly aggressive according to some testimonies of people who went there.

This statistic is not from my head it is practically common knowledge. It was tested in multiple social studies dating site experiments and "folklore". it was discussed by psychiatrists and marriage counselors.

>Male and female sexuality do (on average) function in different ways.
Yes, exactly my point. and in other words it means women are practically asexusl by male definition it is same as if we compare flying abilities of the plane and submarine both can move from one place to another but submarines don't fly.

You should not need any sexual connection you just want to do it with anyone because you just want it then you do it with with someone or with your hand if you have no such desire you by definition have no sex drive. because sex drive is what makes you actively seek sex with anyone it is not some kind of response to to something it is like hunger or tiredness.
see how cats in heat behave? That's sex drive.
A woman with high sex drive should be pretty aroused most of the time constantly thinking about sex to the level where it even starts to interfere with her life as it woud not allow her to concentrate and she would need to get off somehow.


>Also, this behavior by men does not indicate that men just have *that much* more sex drive (the bell curve skew is not this extreme), it mostly indicates that men feel *that much more entitled* to women and do not respect women's boundaries.
It means men are sexually hungry and frustrated and they are behaving exactly how any animal woud behave in that situation that's how your dog behaves as well who proceeds to rape every visitor who enters your room. yes humans have more self control but it does not make sense to repress yourself all the time and don't even get anything back for your effort.
And in the ideal world women woud behave exactly the same they woud also harass men behave very provocatively break their boundaries and that woud be equality between sexes.
Also in general this kind of behavior is pretty rational because by harassing women you can quickly screen for those who are interested in sex because they will respond favorably.


And enough of that nonsense that women are in any way represed or controlled. they are completely free and for decades the only reason why they fell so is because if she is behaving like a slut she has no chances to marry high value man who is usually looking for submissive frigid ice queen because he is not interested in sex himself, too busy working. That's why we have female genital mutilation to make girls more attractive to those highly desirable men.
if as a woman you are just interested in sex and fun you will have infinite amount of men who will love you but they probably will be all broke because they focus on sex rather than work and achievements just like you do.
Good example is that porn star who came up and made a claim that she was horribly cheated and abused by those evil men. Poor damsel in distress was not aware what she was doing even if she wrote the script herself for her own rape movie.
If women are controlled by anything its evolution, because those who had low sex drive found higher value men than those who had sex with everything what moves and died in poverty which is why they evolved to be frigid and passive.


>You are using it to mean "not taking the lead in sex." I am using it to mean "no interest in sex." This is also what you originally said - that women "have practically no interest in sex."

when we speak about objects it is not exactly related to interest in sex, because in general *if you do not take the lead you are object* either you act or others act on you. it is separate topic which you brought about me treating women as sex objects, which is absolutely wrong in my case (but valid for any other people here who want women to be sex objects)

Yes, if woman has sexual fantasies then she does have interest in sex and that is very good. That's exactly a woman which I woud like. And I recommend to everyone to love and treat her well, consider that you won jackpot and don't hurt her because next one you will me will not be like that. The problem is that most women don't have any of those sexusl fantasies or they are very rare for them.

Lying like a dead fish is neither shyness or cultural repression. it is simply not being interested in sex and just pleasing a guy to get some other benefits from him.
sometimes it can mean that she has some other sexual fantasies like maybe she wants rough sex or maybe some more cuddling but either the guy is not interested in that or she is not telling what she wants
but most likely she is just not interested in sex at all and her head is full of some other thoughts.

i liek women

> why Japanese women

because I am under the impression that you are Japanese and live in Japan

> high sex drive means not needing an emotional connection

no, high sex drive means a strong desire for sex.

Having a high sex drive and needing an emotional connection are not mutually exclusive. Just like someone can have a high sex drive but need a specific kink to get off. A woman who needs an emotional connection and has a high sex drive might constantly yearn for emotionally intimate sex, and might masturbate often to the thought of it. When she finds a man who can give that to her, she might want it multiple times a day, as I have experienced.

Not all women are like this. I dated a woman for a while who was super visual. She would browse gay porn on reddit and she would slap my ass when she wanted to fuck. It was hot to me but I bet you'd find it emasculating.

> a woman with high sex drive should be pretty aroused most of the time constantly thinking about sex to the level where it even starts to interfere with her life as it would not allow her to concentrate and she would need to get off somehow.

yes. I dated her. You can also find a ton of women describing their lives like this online. Not the bulk of women, but it's not that far out on the bell curve either.

I can say the same for men. It's closer to the center of the bell curve than for women, but still not the bulk of men after their teens and early twenties.

> men are sexually hungry and frustrated

men who send unsolicited dick pics score high in narcissism.

I have a pretty high sex drive. Been single for a few months now and I jerk off pretty often. Not only have I never sent an unsolicited dick pick, or harassed a woman online, but to be blunt Onix I've never even felt the urge to. This is because I do not score high in narcissism or sexism. I can relate to women (some women, some people) as friends, make them laugh, and laugh at their jokes. Treating someone like a piece of meat - unless we're talking about a consensual kink thing - is not appealing to me as an adult man with adult emotional depth and interpersonal skills. I prefer to have a sane, personable conversation with a woman, flirt with her a bit, and get to know her. This is how I screen for personalities I want to spend time with.

> high value men want a submissive, frigid ice queen because they are too busy working to have sex... and that's why we have female genital mutilation

holy shit lmao.

no, we have female genital mutilation because it's meant to guarantee that a woman is a virgin. The idea is to de-infibulate the woman after you marry her, so you can fuck her all you want.

The practice began long before modern working hours. Men had all the time they needed to fuck their mutilated wives.

> most women don't have any sexual fantasies

ah yes.

there are also 8 days in a week, and the sun rises in the west.

Onix you can't just make shit up like that. You have to consult more than just your uninformed, preconceived notions before you decide something about the world.

You mentioned "studies," earlier. So go read some. Search women's sexual fantasies on google scholar. Read up on the prevalence of sexual fantasies in women and come back.

>>1511
>A woman who needs an emotional connection and has a high sex drive might constantly yearn for emotionally intimate sex, and might masturbate often to the thought of it. When she finds a man who can give that to her, she might want it multiple times a day, as I have experienced.

I don't even understand how that can work. if she needs that connection how she is going to get aroused to masturbate if she does not have it? If she can masturbate then it means she can do it with any man by asking him to at least roleplay that connection which is nothing else than kink. Her arousal does not depend on that connection after all.


>yes. I dated her. You can also find a ton of women describing their lives like this online.
of course you can find lots of women like that online. I also found lots of great women online on the other side of the globe LOL world is big with lots of different things. And so what? to get on a date I need to meet such woman somewhere nearby preferably in my neighborhood so that we could visit each other . The women I meet in real life do not look like that maybe because i live in quite conservative country where finding a wife is in orders of magnitude easier than finding sex friend. If i wanted to marry I probably could do that in a month and find pretty good wife. when I was in school none of the girls displayed even slightest interest in sex or any intimacy at all as if they hate boys. otherwise there should be some attempts to have skin contact of get closer to each other. I never even met any slutty girls or crazy girsl or those who self harm and situation when a girl in the party offers me to suck my dick (like for other people internet) did not happen. all people around me are just super normal.


>It was hot to me but I bet you'd find it emasculating.
I don't care about emasculation but I don't like when woman is acting like a masculine man neither I like to act like that myself.
my sexual preferences are a bit more complex than just slaping someones ass and skicking my dick in them it is more about keeping arousal for as long as possible doing interesting things together

>Treating someone like a piece of meat - unless we're talking about a consensual kink thing - is not appealing to me

Yes it is not appealing to me either but if that's what you like, it does make sense to try that on random women and see how they will respond and when you see one who responds favorably you can continue. or how else you are going to find out that completely random woman on the street has this kind of kink? and as I know it does work to some extent, because woman with such kink simply uses you as a sex toy and throws away. while if you tried to act properly you woud be either rejected or placed into another category where you have to date her.

That is one of the problems for nice guys who are rather placed into category of boyfriends and husbands instead of the category of fucktoys in which they actually want to be. So acting properly is not always good idea. Sometimes it is better to present yourself as piece of shit to be treated like a piece of shit.


>no, we have female genital mutilation because it's meant to guarantee that a woman is a virgin. The idea is to de-infibulate the woman after you marry her, so you can fuck her all you want.
nope, it does not guarantee that she is a virgin the official reason why it is done is to prevent her from feeling pleasure from sex. aka to prevent woman from being a slut because she has to focus on being housewife not on pleasure. Infibulation is just undesired side effect of badly performed surgery. You already have hymen as reasonable guarantee that she is virgin
Male genital mutilation performed in US has exactly the same goals reduce pleasure from masturbation.


>Search women's sexual fantasies on google scholar.
here
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Frequency-of-sexual-fantasy-and-sexual-arousal_tbl2_287124285
even slutty US women who get aroused or fantasize about sex multiples times a day is 4 times rarer than men. which means that 3 of 4 men will be left with no sex
It can be seen that female sexuality is easily supressed and fragile but male sexuslity is just unstopasble.


Another proof why women are largely asexusl is because we have term like COOMER but where are the coomer girls? Where are women who live in their parents basement and all what they do watch porn and play games? Because of my position I had some internet surveillance access and used it to spy to find if there are any girls who would watch porn and what do you think no porn at all. When I fix computers I also never find any porn or sex references there.

just hit the back button and lost my response. i think i can reproduce it from memory though

> study shows women are basically asexual

not really, most women in the sample fantasized and got aroused between once a week and once a day

Also, check out the enormous gap between Macau women and US women. The real story here is the impact of culture. What will the numbers be in 100 years?

The study collates self-reported responses from 353 college undergraduates in Macau and the US. Take a look at the breakdown for arousal across female students:

78.0% Macau, 18.5% US ---- "seldom" getting aroused
13.4% Macau, 36.2% US ---- getting aroused once a week
7.3% Macau, 33.8% US ---- getting aroused once a day
0.0% Macau, 11.5% US ---- getting aroused more than once a day

And for fantasizing:

59.5% Macau, 34.1% US ---- "seldom" fantasizing
29.7% Macau, 35.3% US ---- fantasizing once a month
8.1% Macau, 24.7% US ---- fantasizing once a day
2.7% Macau, 5.9% US ---- fantasizing more than once a day

The cultural difference is massive. How and why does this occur?

> table shows that women's sexualities are inherently fragile and easily suppressed, while men's sexualities are unstoppable

Does it?

Do you think men and women face similar pressures and men just bear them better?

Or maybe you think men and women face different pressures with similar magnitudes?

I invite you to visit planet Earth. I will host you.

> 3 of 4 men will be left with no sex

You should try foreplay some time.

A partner can arouse a woman who might not get aroused often by herself. Conversation, touch, cuddling, leading into kissing and petting, then sex. Arousal tends to be a more mental game for women than for men, and some women just need a little warming up to get the machinery running. Even a woman who only masturbates a few times a month will still seek partners and respond to intimacy. Sex will still be a motive in her life.

One of my first girlfriends in college had never cum or masturbated before. The first time we had sex we basically spent the whole evening working up to it. Second time was much quicker. Later in the relationship when we lived together we were fucking almost once a day for a while, and often she would initiate. She also started masturbating, I think because sex was just on her mind more often and she was more in-tune with her body.

your study's fine but here are some more studies to round out the picture:

https://www.sci-hub.st/10.1080/0092623X.2011.628440
masturbation in women. 88% of women in the sample masturbate, and most masturbate at least once a month

https://www.sci-hub.st/10.1080/01614576.1991.11074012
old study on orgasms and fantasizing across generations: each generation was more sexual than the last.

https://sci-hub.st/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018740210472
force in women's fantasies - not all respondents fantasize about force, but almost all respondents fantasize.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23268743.2021.1956366
not scientific or a representative sample, but interesting. 2000+ Finnish women discuss the extreme porn they watch

> hymen was enough

hymens break easily. More importantly, infibulation does more than just prove she's a virgin, it ensures that she stays a virgin. It physically prevents sex, like a chastity belt.

less extreme forms of FGM also have this function. FGM makes sex painful, which prevents women from seeking sex. This helps ensure virginity before marriage and fidelity after.

my understanding, and I might be wrong, is that virginity and fidelity helped avoid STIs and conflicts over property inheritance. Hard to prove fatherhood back then.

> women don't watch porn

yes they do, just less often. Google Scholar it. Also, women tend to be less visual than men.

> where are the coomer girls

reading gay fan-fiction

>How and why does this occur?

the explanation is that women need some trigger to get aroused while men get aroused on their own if you live in society where sex is very hidden women will naturally never feel any desire for it unless someone will create appropriate environment
But either way it is very clear that female sex drive is much much lower than male sex drive and yes if you are nor that interested in sex as guy then it is all fine fine but if you are interested you will be facing extreme competition to get a woman who is just as interested as you are.

you just explained it yourself
>and some women just need a little warming up to get the machinery running
if there is no warming up then there is no interest. that is exactly the thing I was talking about in my claim that women are not interested in sex. It does not count if you need warm up because that warm up will not come from somewhere for no reason.
The amount of warmup is exactly that sex drive we are talking about , of you need no warm u then it will be level zero, if you need warmup it is negative and if you are taking initiative to warm up someone then it is positive

>Do you think men and women face similar pressures and men just bear them better?
Actually yes the proof is that there are way more male deviant that female. Girls are usually very obedient and submissive even from the very young age and even those who start as tomboys eventually change during puberty.

from my own example I can say that I was extremely disobedient even as a baby always fighting with my parents even refusing to use world and inventing my own my sister was complete opposite. and that was pretty stereotypical situation for all the time not only with me all girls in school are submissive and boys just make constant problems for adults wherever they can
no punishments and pressure was able to affect that.
In the patriarchal cultures sex is pretty extreme taboo for everyone and if you want to do it you have to be extremely deviant and expect pretty severe punishment. So you need very very high motivation to take that risk.

In situation of full sexual freedom like US women may have some more interest because why not it is pleasant, but will she take severe risk to do it sex?

also the fact that women are far less interested also remains, maybe we both like chocolate but You like it just "ah ,meh, tastes good" and I like it as I am thinking about it all the time.

>masturbation in women. 88% of women in the sample masturbate, and most masturbate at least once a month
LOL by male standards I tink 99% of boys masturbate once a week or once a day doing that once month is like doing it never
when I was reading some sexology book long time ago, there was one sentence:
99% of boys admit to masturbate, and the remaining 1% is lying :) the context was in discussion on how to prevent boys from masturbating.


>Hard to prove fatherhood back then.

According to my knowledge paternity was not really that important at older times and it was common custom to offer sex with your wife for your guests as that ensured better genetic diversity and more healthy family. And since everybody was sleeping on the same bed you want it or not, sex was an orgy when it did happen In some tribes they even offer underage girls to guests sometimes. some eskimos tribes even had ritual where they visit neighboring tribes and have sex with their wives with deliberate intent to get them pregnant.
Way more important factor was how good worker is your husband or wife. in my culture nobody ever bothered with virginity but dowry was the most important factor of marriage as well as her ability to work. since marriages usually happened at the very young age caring about virginity of 12 year old girl is irrelevant. aslo when you see children mostly as workforce who cares who is their father you want as many as possible of them.
sex drive was always considered a nuisance which distracts from school and work and has to be repressed and energy diverted to other tasks.

> FGM makes sex painful
where did you even get such information? some ultrafemminst website? it does not make sex more painful just makes orgasms hardly achievable.
what it will really make more painful is birth. because baby is far bigger than even biggest penis.

>reading gay fanfiction
they can read any fiction they want but my point was where are girls who do nothing else than just read the fiction?
As if you read about situation of guys there are even talks about porn addiction, nofap culture. Where is all that for girls? where are girl porn addiction and where are girl groups bragging about ultimate achievement that they managed to abstain for masturbation for almost entire week using extraordinary concentration and willpower.

alright, let's nail this thing down lol

Women enjoy good sex, yes? The female orgasm is on par with the male orgasm, yes? Our question, in this discussion, is "do women NEED it." Yes?

Do women feel an ITCH that INTRUDES into their life and DEMANDS to be scratched? This is our focus. This is how you, personally, have been defining the words "sexual" and "asexual." Yes?

We agree that, at the starting line, women skew toward having a weaker INNATE itch than men. The female "innate itch" bell curve skews weaker than the male bell curve. I believe we agree on this - though we might disagree on the extent of skew

I hypothesize an "acquired itch" on top of the innate itch. I say women can "get a taste for it."

I base this hypothesis on my personal experiences dating women, on the studies and anecdotes I have read, and on my understanding that women's sexualities TEND TO BE (again, bell curves) more mental than men's, more situational and emotional, less visual, less CENTERED on the anatomical features of the opposite sex (although those features still matter). Women are bigger fans of erotic fiction than men, for example.

the acquired itch arises from a woman's malleable relationship with her sexuality, her body, her partner(s), and her culture. A woman can "get to know herself" and become more sexual, either through solo experimentation or through experience with partners, possibly until she reaches some biological ceiling unique to her genetics and hormones. Various regional barriers to this process will result in a less "itchy" population of women. Compare Macau to the US.

> if there is no warming up, then there is no interest

there is still the desire to GET warmed up. I add this on top of what I said above.

Sexual desire consists of multiple components. Some can be present while others are not.

> wife sharing in olden times

You are talking about hunter-gatherers. Hunter gatherers have no personal wealth or inheritance.

> FGM does not make sex painful

you may be right about this. Looked at some studies, and "feeling nothing" is reported much more often than painful sex

still, your overall theory - that FGM exists because high-value men do not want to fuck their wives - is 100% insane. In such cultures the wife's desires, or lack of them, do not affect the husband one way or another. He can choose not to fuck her even if she's still got a clit. What does he care? The purpose of destroying a woman's pleasure and her sexual agency is not to spare her husband the burden of fucking her. The purpose is to ensure that she belongs to him.

> where are the girls addicted to erotic fiction

porn addiction isn't just having an insanely high sex drive. It's a complex psychological issue. Anxiety is a big part of it. But also, because women tend to be less visual than men, sexually, they might not be as prone to porn addiction because they don't get the same instant hit of dopamine the moment they look at a picture. Reading a story takes a while.

Looks like you now started to understand what i meant.
>though we might disagree on the extent of skew
the problems with that extent than that it highly depends on the distance from the norm.
If you are average male and average female then yes difference is not that big, although still very significant to cause problems.
but if we go to the edges differences become very extreme.

>Women are bigger fans of erotic fiction than men, for example.
this may be true but But at least for me it is not like that at all. I woud say that in my puberty I had absolutely no interest in any of that anatomy, neither I even had any clue that it has any importance. I did not even know that it is in any way related to girls or women. Just later I found out that you are supposed to look for certain things. But everything started from the fiction. visual interest was also extencion fo that fiction because it was mostly based on seeking forbidden thing. in societies where women walk naked men have no reaction to their bodies and even in our society men do not react to almost naked women in the beach but they will jerk on the same thing in on the porn page.
So it is not so much about looks as it is about the message sent with those looks.


>there is still the desire to GET warmed up. I add this on top of what I said above.
But desire to get warmed up is not sex drive it is just knowledge that this way you can acquires some pleasure, yes some women may act on that or maybe even get addicted to that pleasure.
the requirement of warm up we could define as "sex brake" not as "sex drive" and in that case the less warmup is required the better. Maybe with extreme effort and creating ideal conditions you could even arouse asexusl person but to do that you must have absurdly high sex drive or expectations to justify all that effort and expenses.

Without sex drive there is very little chance that woman will take the risk and initiative she will just wait and demand the guy to make all effort and depending on the amount of warmup required it can take from just few minutes to talking to many months of expenses building emotional connection with unpredictable results.

Men also are have desire to get warmed up because after your puberty ends you sex drive is not that extreme either. Even with high sex drive you do have it you still very much enjoy warm up.
Youm mentioned that you girfriend was just slapping your but when she wanted sex. That does not look like much of effort from her side in comparison to a guy who needs to take her on a date and spend money or otherwise work alot to create proper atmosphere. Even your girlfriends seem to expect you to be ready all the time and do not make any effort to warm you up.


>Hunter gatherers have no personal wealth or inheritance.
Peasants and workers also had no inheritance or wealth so inheritance issues only apply to aristocracy but majority is not aristocracy.

>The purpose is to ensure that she belongs to him.
She belongs to him either way but it will not guarantee fidelity because even circumcised woman will still enjoy attention will still agree to have sex even if it does not lead to orgasm. You said it yourself that women care about feelings more. The most it will do is prevent woman from actively seeking sex.
But if you are high value man you want woman who is not wasting time on masturbation or otherwise getting distracted from her duties. You do not want someone who is fantasizing about something rather than cleaning up your room or milking your cows. By my knowledge women in africa are way more sexal and they even harass tourists inviting them to have sex. their society does not keep sex as some super secret like ours.

>>1522
>porn addiction isn't just having an insanely high sex drive

of course I agree that is is not just sex drive but the question remains valid why do we have so many male porn addicts and so few female addicts even if women are way more susceptible to drug/ alcohol addiction. That woud suggest that they probably don't get that much pleasure from it to justify the effort.

Visual or not is not important in that case because if you don't care about visuals you still can read that gay fiction or whatever else turn you on until you get desired result.
I don't think that men get instant hit of dopamine either because it is not about orgasms but rather about being aroused for as long as you can be. Orgasms are actually undesirable and by design they will erase all your dopamine leaving you unmotivated and sleepy. Actually achieving your goal will always kill your dopamine and replace it with serotonin.
If you just open pornjub and jerk of to have organsm you wont have any addinction. addiction will be when you spend several hours edging keeping your dopamine levels at the maximum and staying highly motivated all the time.

Situation should be very similar for women they probably should also enjoy being high for several hours. But it does not happen

Also you can get that dopamine not just from porn or sex, I get it from making pictures and even from programming or building things (you can literally stay aroused and masturbate while writing software code and solving mathematical problems) if that activity is somehow related to sex and I know that it will somehow improve my chances.
If a guy is working on his car expecting that this will allow his to get girls and have sex that is almost same as searching for porn.
but in both situation the end goals is to have orgasm at first which later becomes irrelevant and you enjoy the process more than the goal.

My suspicion is that women may be not even that responsive to dopamine and lack any motivation in general, which is also the reason why they are quite susceptible to depression.
You will not often find a woman who is excited by doing something at all and feeling highly motivates by the process itself, which is one of the reasons why they are so passive.

i'll respond in depth later when I have time, but the way I see it, you live in a culture that stifles women's libidos and then you go online and complain about women having no libidos. you might think stifling is just revealing the "normal, innate" state of women's sexuality, but I would argue that this is an artificial situation that does not reflect evolutionary conditions or the direction the world is headed today. It is the remnant of a temporary period in human history when women in certain farming cultures were enslaved, confined to the home, and denied proper development of their sexualities.

>>1529
In response to that short comment I can say that whether society stifles women's libidos is irrelevant because it stifles male libido far more. And you completely ignore that fact.
Sex is generally considered a crime in most societies that focus on work and success and furthermore all kinds of pleasure are shunned regardless of the gender, for very obvious reasons. There was a time when not only sex but even Christmas were banned in UK.

You just expressed your own complaint about guys who sexuslly harrass women and that is exactly one of the ways to suppress male libido.

maybe female libido is somewhat suppressed but even if we attempted to encourage it that woud hardly change anything because you would just make life for few women who have high libido better (and I actually recommend that as well as you can see) but globally that woud not change a lot unless each high libido women will have like 10-50 high libido male friends. the rest will just stay as they are without much interest in sex
also
I wonder how woud you even support it at all even in principle? like if we decided to encourage female libido rather than suppressing it how that woud be dome in practice?

>>1531
I have little time to participate here but I've read your comments and I must say they are absolutely correct based on logic and also my own observations of life! Also there is little to add, you have covered the subject perfectly! Basically society turns people into mindless working drones with sex drive limited to procreations. I think realizing this is the first step to break out from this control! I'm following this discussion with great interest! Great job Onix!

do you think human beings are good at perceiving the nature of other groups of people?

please keep your response short and focused for this one

what the fuck am i doing. ignore >>1533, i'll respond in the usual way later.

>>1535
lol Everytime I see someone who wants the response cut short I smell a moralfag! GP is right and Onix dismantled your arguments to pieces! Give up! Any person with an an ounce of free will and self-conscience, and self respect for that matter, will disagree with you!

The more we hate women we get closer to the truth! What is the truth you say when you look upn the cosmic egg that hides the essence of life in a hidden jar of cosmic dust from the world beyond! The tauren know the answer you seek but it was lost in the veil of time.
Eternal darkness surround the path to the cosmic netherrealm.
Venture forth to find the answer to the cosmic riddle!
Measure your steps because the underverse is closer than you know!
Count millenias with a needle cause in the end you will uncover the secret of life!
And life is power, like tauren be free to shit and fart upon the endless plains.ANd then like a steamy turd the hard shit hits you hard in the face and you collapse in a sea of floating shit drifting towards the end of the cosmos you fall into the slimiest shit hole full of putrid shit and then ull know what you are really made of! Are you a shit or are you a turd? As the shit fill your mouth and expands into your nose and brain you realise that Life is full of shit and you are full of life!

>> desire to get warmed up is not sex drive

address the bulk of the comment Onix. the "acquired sex drive."

>> assumptions about ex-girlfriend who slapped my ass

people with a simplistic understanding of human nature always think they understand someone from a brief description

> stifles male libido much more than female libido

you're using stifle to mean "prevent from acting upon," not "prevent from feeling."

i'm saying patriarchal cultures are deeply unsexy to women. women end up in unrewarding relationships, enduring bad sex with men who only focus on themselves.

patriarchal cultures aren't unsexy to men. in fact the objectification of women makes men more sexually frustrated. all around you, hot objects to fuck, but you are not allowed to fuck them unless they consent, and because you view them as objects and your culture has no sense of romance or seduction you are bad at getting them to consent, and because your culture is unsexy to women they are not that intent on finding a man, so you are constricted at both ends.

>> high value men are not interested in sex

both japan and europe made an effort to uphold this illusion for a while, at least in the upper classes. really it was not disinterest in sex, it was scorn for women, and scorn for the power of women's sex appeal to sway men. the suppressed sexual urges still bubbled up in other ways. men found their outlets one way or another. raping the maid when the wife was away, visiting prostitutes, more civilized men would see mistresses on the side, etc.

>> inheritance only applies to aristocracy

over-generalizes european and japanese medieval feudalism to the rest of the world. peasants in many times and places did inherit property. FGM developed in africa, not europe or japan, and in many regions of africa the rural poor have historically owned land and cattle. i agree though that inheritance is not the only reason men have sought to control women and female sexuality.

this article is an interesting read, wikipedia links to it: https://web.archive.org/web/20131029210333/http://www.polisci.ucsd.edu/~gmackie/documents/BeginningOfEndMackie2000.pdf

> porn addiction is actually edging addiction

i think this is obviously not true. before the internet, was masturbation addiction as common as porn addiction is now?

also, about porn and dopamine:
https://www.nature.com/articles/npp201778
https://www.nature.com/articles/npp201219

> women are passive

i think this is your central contention. "women are asexual" is an auxiliary point

i don't feel like responding to this yet but i'll write one later. i don't expect to change your mind though

>>1538
I was trying to be concise, but "prevent from feeling" is a little too concise.

...I feel like I am one of those pilots on the ground who talks on the phone with a passenger to help them land the plane, only the person on the other end is not a passenger in a plane but rather someone in a hospital attempting to perform a surgery, so we are looking at two totally different things and nothing I say about the cockpit of a plane is going to make sense to a man holding a scalpel and looking into someone's chest cavity.

our understandings of women are just too different, and this thread is not the kind of discussion that is going to bridge that gap. it's too much of a "who's right" contest.

I have to be concise because the more I say the more opportunities there are for you to misinterpret me, but there is a lot to say. "the nature of a person" is not a thing you can summarize.

This went strange way.
The link you provided about FGM sem to fully repeat what I said above I could not find anything better myself.
and in fact it explains the main problems as well. Just like I said the reason for FGM and other similar practices is not to improve female behavior as it is MARRIAGEABILITY and as it was said in that article the goal is to marry high value man
If woman is ok with some piss poor loser she does not need to do any of that she can live happy romantic life wandering around sleeping under the tree and starving together while being happy that her boyfriend manage to catch some rat or worm. marriage is entirely irrelevant in that situation.
But no that's not what women want they want rich resourceful guy and it does not matter that he will treat her like shit as long as he is resourceful.


>i'm saying patriarchal cultures are deeply unsexy to women.
And so what? whose fault is that? And the question is whether you can even in theory create a culture which is sexy to women considering very serious issue with female sexuality in general.

>patriarchal cultures aren't unsexy to men. in fact the objectification of women makes men more sexually frustrated.............

That's the strangest claim I ever encountered, because what you essentially say is that repression of male sexuality is what makes it so sexy. maybe some men have masochistic tendencies and suffering and frustration makes them very aroused but I think majority just get angry and bitter.

Also I don't even understand the meaning of that "romance" or "seduction". as if women are so interested in that stuff why men have to do it? and as I see from practice, the real meaning is that you just have to make effort and suffer while another person will judge your performance.
which, as I said before, makes women nothing more than sex objects. If you don't act you are object so your romance and seduction is exactly what makes women sex objects.
You can't eat cake and keep it, either women take active actions, either they are sex objects.

>both japan and europe made an effort to uphold this illusion for a while, at least in the upper classes. really it was not disinterest in sex, it was scorn for women....

you need to care about the difference between real high value man and son of high value man, real high value man is one who achieved all by himself. And that is only possible if he has high determination to achieve things and work very hard. Like high value men say: "chase excellence not women"
So it is not illusion.
yes of course there will be quite a lot of fake high value men and also high value men who suddenly encountered middle age crisis. But in general, real high value men have no interest in sex if they had they woud not be high value men. It is just impossible.


>i think this is obviously not true. before the internet, was masturbation addiction as common as porn addiction is now?

masturbattion addction is technically impossible for biological reaons at least for men. because if you have orgasm you lose interest. for quite some time and you need pretty strong stimulation to recover quickly or otherwise you will stay uninterested for few days.
But even if one has high sex drive and masturbates like twice a day that will have no effect on their life because it takes just few minutes to reach orgasm and wasting 10 minutes a day is not going to do much impact on your life. what it rather will do is to kill your motivation and change your life goals.

Porn addiction is very different because if you spend several hours on porn every day that has very serious impact on your performance. If men were interested in just having orgasm, making 1 hour long porn movie woud be ridiculous idea.

Your links don't seem to have any relevance to dopamine but I see it interesting that porn addiction is essentially compared with money addiction.

>i think this is your central contention. "women are asexual" is an auxiliary point
I can agree on that in part, but when it is about acquiring resources and status women seem to be pretty strongly motivated. Feminist women show quite a determination if doing those dumb things rather than redirecting it into sex and just screwing everyone in the town as a man woud usually behave.
also it shows quite strong motivation of woman is happy to get mutilated just to get rich resourceful husband.
In fact this is typical source of conflict in the family when a man wants to have fun and woman is nagging and complaining that he is not making enough effort to achieve things.

>>1539
>...I feel like I am one of those pilots on the ground who talks on the phone with a passenger to help them land the plane, only the person on the other end is not a passenger in a plane but rather someone in a hospital attempting to perform a surgery, so we are looking at two totally different things and nothing I say about the cockpit of a plane is going to make sense to a man holding a scalpel and looking into someone's chest cavity.


yes this may be happening and the question is why. from what you say i see as if your complaint is that men don't do enough to worship women. But it is not entirely clear what you want to prove

Otherwise it does not look like we even disagree on most things and it is matter of interpretation of the same fact.
I see everything just from the perspective of happiness and fun and the only thing what matters is how to become happier and have more fun in your life. every minute you spend unhappy and not having fun is wasted time of your life.

>> my FGM link agrees with you

it does not agree with your central argument, which is that high-value men do not want to fuck women. that is an interpretation you are fitting onto the article.

>> "repression" of male sexuality makes it more sexy

we're talking past each other. i'll try again to explain when i have time

>> masturbation addiction

perhaps my argument would be more clear if i had said "edging addiction."

>> men don't do enough to worship women

this is not what i'm saying but it illustrates the difficulty of bridging the gap in our understandings. i'll try again to explain when i have time

>>1542
>it does not agree with your central argument, which is that high-value men do not want to fuck women. that is an interpretation you are fitting onto the article.

This is not my central argument, in the conversation about FGM my argument was that like in that article the main factor is not fidelity or virginity but *marigebility* aka How well a woman is suited to being wife. And the reason why women do is to indicate their suitability for that role and obtain a high value man who is especially interested in that role.


as for high value men not being interested in sex that is just logical and practical conclusion, because if you spend so much time working and your main goal is status and success then you just don't give that much importance to sex naturally. You will not become high value man if rather than working you will be spending time with women or jerking on porn. It is simply impossible.

In fct it often happens that regardless how low is sex drive of women, women will get frustrated by the absolute absence of their husband who does not even bother to have any contact with her but if something just throws money at her and leaves.

>perhaps my argument would be more clear if I had said "edging addiction."
yes it woud be but then your idea about dopamine "spike" is broken because addiction if not for reward but rather for process
In some way this is valid for drug addiction as well because people are addicted not so much to drugs as they are addicted to process of obtaining those drugs

and this can be also extended to sex as we can speculate that it may be just as easy to make woman addicted to sex as a guy if only she had decent sex drive initially to bootstrap that addiction and reconfigure all her live into sexual pleasure seeking.

This also explains why such a great lengths are went to prevent boys and girls from feeling that pleasure. Anyone who experienced that too much will be considered as "damaged" and unsuitable for marriage.

>>1543
You are amazing Onix, who could imagine that on a thread created by a retarded oerson and a debate with obtuse individual could bring out such excellent conclusions and perspective on facts of life!

>>1544
Oerson

>>1566
Really? I've made that post, just forgot to type my alias! I support Onix because if I would have bothered to invest time in this debate I would have said 99% the same thing! So you fail!
Again way to go Onix!

I've read the thread completely now and I think that beside the fact that it's meanwhile far away from the OP's question it became much more interesting than any answer to that question.

IMHO Onix and sage present a lot of good points. Unfortunately I must agree with sage that at this moment
>it's too much of a "who's right" contest.
There is no exact "right" or "wrong". Culture, education, experience and other influences form our thinking, behaviour, likes and dislikes - and of course our kinks. May I recommend to keep this in mind, while you continue your exchange of arguments?

One thing I'd like to add concerning the female genital mutilation. Please consider the fact that in most cases this cruelty is done by (old) women to little girls on behalf of the girls' mothers. These girls for sure have none of the intents you are talking of.

>>1584
Obviously any kind of argument between anonymous people has no other purpose than "who's right" contest. :)


>These girls for sure have none of the intents you are talking of.
Actually those girls do have those intents, because when they become mother themselves they mutilate their own daughters rather that rebelling against this tradition. They do not condemn what was done to them. And also sometimes even adult women agree on performing this operation if that is necessary for getting high value man.
By using analogy between US male genital mutilation I would bet that mothers who do if to their baby daughters actually do it because they are afraid that later those daughters will complain that they were not properly mutilated.

>>1585

>Obviously any kind of argument between anonymous people has no other purpose than "who's right" contest. :)
That may be very true and is not only a problem for strangers but for close people too. Its the cause of most divorces and leads often to hating women (and men OTOH). LOL.

In the German language (the one in the country of poets and philosophers) you find the word "Streitkultur" which means "culture of debate". It's remarkable that only the German and the Portuguese wikipedia hold an entry for this lemma. The first one is most likely the "original" (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streitkultur), the second is a slightly extended translation.

In a nutshell:
Having a culture of debate means being able to represent one's own point of view with words and media without denying the other that he too has and may have a different point of view.
The principle of a constructive culture of debate is: Conflicts between individuals and groups are normal. They are the natural, even necessary, consequence of living together as a human being. The problem is not so much whether there are conflicts as how they are carried out, i. e. how the conflict partners argue with each other: level-headed and cooperative or authoritarian and violent. A constructive culture of debate means speaking one's mind openly and fairly without hurting each other.
There are "Fair Dispute Rules" like "a dispute is no sporting competition" and "a good argument ends with a settlement and not with one side triumphing over the other".
(from the German Wikipedia - translated by Ggl with a little human help)

>Actually those girls do have those intents
Objection! You can't believe they have it at this age. Although children are not asexual they don't think in these dimensions. What you wrote about the grown-ups is sadly true. And it is unbelievable that this still happens.

>>1587
>Having a culture of debate
I think this is exactly the situation when the purpose is just to prove yourself right, in that situation it is more like a friendly competition with no intent to hurt each other or get other benefits.


>You can't believe they have it at this age.
Oh no, definitely, am not talking about any sexuality at the time when a girl is just a baby. But what I mean is that when she grows up she does not condemn what was done to her. And opposite is more likely that she will complain that she was not mutilated properly if her mother decides not to do it.
Yes sometimes some girls may be upset about what was done to them but this is very tiny minority.

And even from the perspective of parents it is a serious dilemma what to do. Let's assume that they are willing to give her daugher a choice to be a slut or a housewife. But how do they know what she will chose in the future?
This probably could be solved if that mutilation was postponed to the later time she girls becomes adult when she can make choice by herself. There is no guarantee that she will not get upset about it again 10 years later.

But how is that different from situation when parents decide that their daughter will be ballerina or pianist? When she becomes adult it is too late to make that choice.

>>1588

>in that situation it is more like a friendly competition
Oh, what a wonderful world it would be, if all disputs were like this. :))
But culture of debate can be helpful in all situations where different opinions clash together. Its a kind of Geneva Convention for talking.

>when she grows up
As I said, adults act like you describe it. When the time comes for their daughters, they are already shaped by the traditions of the "tribe". With that constant pressure they don't question it anymore.

>sexuality at the time when a girl is just a baby
A very common belief is, that children have no sexuality. And if they show some, they are bad, because they are not allowed to have some. This is often influenced by religion and it might be the reason, why the mutilation is done to kids and it is not waited until they can decide themself.

>choice to be a slut or a housewife
Hey, there are a lot more shades of grey! ;)
Feeling sexual pleasure does not mean you are a slut. Well, it should not. In some communities the border is very small and extremely shifted to one side. In this context you are right.

>different ... situation ... be ballerina or pianist
There is a big difference. In one case somthing is irreversibly destructed, in the other case something is build up. Yes, you will say the psyche of the kid is harmed. This can happen, but it also can be healed - admittedly, except for very extreme treatments. A circumcision can be reconstruced optically, but the tactile sensation is gone forever.

>In one case something is irreversibly destructed, in the other case something is build up.

well my point was that parents are deciding fate of their children without asking for their opinion or consent, often even forcing them onto certain path using threats and violence. And all that is considered proper way of parenting while giving your child a choice is considered wrong.

So in this situation same can be said: can parents decide for a girl if she will grow into slut or into housewife? (just theoretically speaking)

Like in my situation when I was at the age of 6 I was forced to learn how to read at that time I had no clue why do I need it at all and why those idiots are torturing me like that more or less entire school was worse than hell which I hated more than anything. My mother was also forced to go to the musical school and she received extracurricular torture there. :) But I did not notice anyone to complain and say that teaching your children to read is wrong. even opposite, refusing to torture then may be considered a child abuse or neglect.

>>1595

LOL, your example is terrific.
I think we agree that average parents usually want the best for their children. They protect them from danger and give them the requisite know-how to manage the challenges of life. Unfortunately, this requires force in different gradations. I skip the list of obvious examples save an extension of yours: You also were pressed to learn to write. ;)

The point is: Parents are predetermined to do this as part of the naturally reproduction. It ensures the passing on of genes. Humans are unlike other animals, eg. fishes, limited in the number of descendants. So its economically not justifiable to loose a single one.

To call education torture is possible, but overdone as long as it doesn't come to real violence. Of course kids feel sometimes different. :)
To start early with the training of certain skills makes sense, because to gain highest performance takes much time. You can learn to read (and write :p ) or to dance as an adult, but it is way more difficult. Parents need a sure instinct to keep the right balance between the necessary force and the respect for the kids wishes.

>>1597
Yes all that is correct but that means that it is Ok to torture and even harm your child if that improves reproductive success.

>>1598

This depends on the point of view and the resulting definition.

As a human I condemn torture as an educational method. Though I don't consider situationally adjusted use of "means of coercion" as torture. Shouting at children will be better than let them get harmed, for example by falling down from the railway platform. You'll say that one shouldn't let the children come close to the edge, but that is using force too, because the kids aren't allowed to go where they want. As told before children are to precious to let them gather experience on their own under any circumstances. The problem is that experience is the worst of all teachers. It quizzes first and then teaches the subject matter. Do you still insist in the term "torture"?

From the sight of Mother Nature torture is perfectly normal. She allows even snuff. Ask predators if they think about torture while hunting. Their main goal is to feed the kittens, chicks and puppies to keep them and the species alive. May be the prey feels tortured. However, the most danger applies to the young ones due to their lack of experience (see above) - and probably because they taste best. ;)

>>1599
You talk about a bit different issues because what I say is that the child is forced to do what he does not want to do and get skill he does not even want to get. (Of course that depends on the character of specific child how obits they will be as girls in my class were always super obedient and they did all in their power to do assigned task as well as they can without any visible attempt to rebel)

The school is like nazi concentration camp where they force you to do completely pointless work under threat of punishment if you refuse. this is why I use term torture. as all your motivation is just how you avoid the punishment rather than how you do the task.
It has nothing to do with protecting children from danger but all about turning them into what adults want them to be.

Also in my opinion pain and even snuff is not torture, torture is when you live your life in the way you don't want it to be doing stuff you don't want to do.
Cat feels pleasure while hunting and feeding kittens while a man suffers while working and feeding his children. It is a lot of fun for predator to get the food even if you provide food to the predator he will still continue hunting but for the human even getting the food task is nothing more than a torture and the food he gets is also usually plain shit.

The analogy would be as if you take a lion, force him to be vegetarian and then use it as a horse to plow fields. that will be the ultimate torture.

>>1601

As I understand the child were you and in your personal perception school was something very extreme. But this does not change the fact that for an average child it is beneficially. Even you should take into account that it was not "completely pointless work". Otherwise you would have problems to complain here. ;)

>>1598
Agreed!

>>1605
No, you just don't get what I am trying to say: as children, I and my mother were forced to do and learn things we absolutely did not want or need. But later we sort of changed our opinion about the usefulness of that. Yes it was not always completely pointless work but it was torture.

Same as about that FGM where woman to whom it was done eventually does not complain about what was done to her because it happens to be useful after all.

Yes in my situation I am still angry about what I was forced to do but my mother is totally fine with all that and does not complain that she was forced to go to musical school and even say that the punishments she received from her mother were right.

As for ability to complain here I actually learned english language pretty much all by myself, what I was told in school was absolutely worthless.

>>1608
Ok, you experienced it as torture though it was none in the common meaning. At least it did not matter if was real or you and your mother "only" felt like it was - the impact was the same. I see. So it was a terrible shortcoming on side of your teachers.
However, there are differences between your situation and FGM (as I mentioned before):
- You got something build up (knowledge/skills) versus FGM destroys something (pleasure).
- Your "torture" benefitted you versus FGM benefits the girls future husbands.
- Your (mental) pain ended (more or less) someday versus mutilated girls suffer from their (physical and mental) pain a life long.

I agree with you in regard to the teaching content of schools. A lot of what I learned at school I never needed again. Fundamental knowledge and skills (read/write/calculate) and some "add-ons" (eg. local history, foreign languages, geography, political education) are surely reasonable. All of it is still helpful for me. Beside these subjects it should be teached how one can aquire further knowledge and skills on its own. This unfortunately happens seldom.

>>1635
You still got the wrong idea, as you think that I am complaining that I was told how to read and write and rather stay illiterate.
but my point is exactly that it turned out to be useful after all and i don't complain about what was done to me even if that was horrible torture for me (while other things were useless and probably even that reading stuff could be done in some better way but we can ignore those details here)

So in comparison to FGM I use same logic that because woman was properly mutilated she got better value husband and she does not complain about the sacrifice which she was forced to make. furthermore she will even mutilate her daughters because she knows that it turned out pretty well and probably it will work just as good for her daughters.

FGM benefits women and it has no benefit for their husbands, because by getting mutilated woman gets better quality husband just like by learning how to read and write you get better job and you don't say that education benefits employers. Uncircumcised woman will still be able to marry but her husband will be some low value loser who does not work as much as the proper good quality husband.

Destroying pleasure is precisely the main intent because if a woman gets taste of that pleasure she may get distracted from her primary task.
Here we can draw analogy with drugs that parents want to prevent their children from even trying. If you try drugs you will not become addicted but you will get taste of the pleasure which you will be willing to repeat again and again
Same as masturbation which when you learn how to do you do it when you can.

So I wonder how it woud turn out if FGM was performed at the later age when girl can make a conscious decision if she wants to give up the pleasure for the perspectives of better husband and more wealth or she rather keeps the pleasure and foreuts ability to get high value husband?
and also whether getting mutilated at the later age woud not even be considered cheating because girl probably experienced the pleasure already so she will be mentally ruined as she will be trying to repeat it. just like a drug used will never get rid of the desire to repeat their drugs.

>>1636

Au contraire, monsieur! I got your idea completely - with the exception that I thought you were still complaining, because you are "still angry" (>>1608).

I even understand your plot with the analogy of addiction to drugs. But I disagree with your opinion on the matter of benefit. You are confusing cause and effect. The men want submissive women, hence they set this cruel rules. And in communities where this can happen women have no other choice than to follow, because also other restrictions are enforced. It is a take it or leave it situation.

And this is my main point: Your "torment" was reasonable, FGM is absolutely not. To say women benefit from circumcision is the same as to say a rape victim is at fault.

>>1636

I find this debate pointless but for what is worth I think you are right! The counter-arguments I've read are null, void and laughable!

>>1641

>And this is my main point: Your "torment" was reasonable, FGM is absolutely not.
And you did nothing to prove your point.
It is not that I support FGM procedure either but my idea is that this is no different from what we consider completely valid and acceptable things.

>women have no other choice than to follow,
No, women do have choice. Nobody enforces this procedure it is done purely because of future benefit. It is not even some kind of rule, you can read the article provided by sage above where it is all well described.
Not even all men want submissive women but men whom women want to marry usually do want submissive women. This is even valid in western world where carrier women are complaining that men don't want them conveniently omitting that "rich successful" men don't want them.

So there is no reason to sympathise with those "poor" women. If you want to be successful then be ready to suffer create your personal hell for yourself if you want. Want a good husband then make sacrifice, give up on pleasure forever and become his slave living in the golden cage.

Yes of course woman can't make that choice herself at the time when she is being cut just like a child can't make a choice to learn how to read or not, but I think we discussed issue of consent above.

In general all human life is never ending self torture where you make yourself suffer expecting future benefits that never really come. If people choose to do that to themselves then it is their own problem.

>>1644
Sorry for the delay.

>And you did nothing to prove your point.
There is no need to proof an opinion. Apart from this, I mentioned my reasons in >>1635.

>my idea is [...]
I'm not sure I get this. Do you mean that in "their" culture it is valid and acceptable and "we" are not entitled to criticize it? I would agree with this, especially as this would be a sign of respect, which in turn raises credibility.

>you can read the article provided by sage above where it is all well described.
I did - and I think there are a number of interesting aspects, of which I find three particularly remarkable. (weblink in sage's post >>1538)

[b]--[b] Most important is knowlegde. Most people who perform Female Genital Cutting (FGC) not only don't know the origins of it, they also are very often overall less educated. While participating in a credible nondirective basic education program they can additional be provided with the information that an unmutilated alternative is possible and already exists in other communities. This is suitable to initiate a reconsideration.

[b]--[b] In order to start an abandonment of FGC a critical mass of participants is needed. A single family is not enough. Even if they oppose the mutilation, they may stick to it under the pressure of marriageability. If there is a certain number of uncut families - not necessarily the majority - their children can marry one another and it is possible to escape that convention trap.

[b]--[b] The next is my personal favorite, because it supports my proposition of who benefits (>>1641).
"A practice such as FGC is the best alternative only for a male who is attempting to control sexually a large number of females. It is not best for the controlled female, but under the circumstances, it is better for her than the alternative of nonmarriage."
>from: Gerry Mackie, Female Genital Cutting: The Beginning of the End; Page 269;
>in: Female "Circumcision" in Africa: Culture, Controversy, and Change (Directions in Applied Anthropology);
>by: Bettina Shell-Duncan (Editor), Ylva Hernlund (Editor);
>Published by: Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc; Hardcover – July 1, 2000; ISBN-13: 978-1555878719.
>The weblink in sage's post (>>1538) points to a PDF-File with Mackie's text in the thirteenth chapter of that book.

>>1681

>The next is my personal favorite, because it supports my proposition of who benefits
"A practice such as FGC is the best alternative only for a male who is attempting to control sexually a large number of females. It is not best for the controlled female, but under the circumstances, *it is better for her* than the alternative of nonmarriage."

well that's exactly my point as well, but I wonder why do you claim that it benefits men rather than women. It even clearly said there being cut is better than not being cut.
first it was said that it is beneficial for men who control *large number of females* while that's applicable only to ultrawelathy. poor/average men do not benefit from that as they only have one woman at best.
Next, it was mentioned several times in the whole article that there is no social pressure of any kind besides desire to get married.
And we can also make a guess that if woman is willing to marry poor man there will be no problem because there are plenty of undesirable men available if rich men are allowed to have multiple wives.
So logically mutilation benefits woman because the choice is not even between marriage and being single but between desirable and undesirable man.
Poor undesirable men have no standards and they do not(or even can't) require woman to be cut they are happy to get any woman at all. I guess that many of them even prefer uncut women because by design poor man is not hardworking or controlling or else he woud not be poor.

So by this logic how can you say that FGM does not benefit women? if it clearly improves female "carrier" perspectives but it has no benefit for majority of men. Yes maybe if does benefit ultrarich men, just like education benefits employers, by giving them wider choice of candidates but that is female logic where undesirable men simply do not exist in the world at all. And whatever is necessary to get that rich man or at least to be eligible to enter the competition is considered absolute necessity.


>I'm not sure I get this. Do you mean that in "their" culture it is valid and acceptable and "we" are not entitled to criticize it?

Not exactly that as I do not have any respect for any culture. I even consider myself as outsider of society and loot at it as anthropologist so I do not criticize anything but just analyze it and try to find out how it works. All cultures are acceptable because they are result of evolution and if they exist they are valid in aspect of survival.

The main issue here is that the top priority goal for women in their culture(and also partially in our culture) is marriage with high value man and whatever is done in name of marriage is absolutely justified.

If you want to eliminate FGM rather than complaining about how barbaric or destructive it is you have to complain about the end goals. Or else you sound like feminist who wants to retain all privileges of traditional women but also gain all benefits of traditional men.

>>1685

>I wonder why do you claim that it benefits men rather than women.
May I draw your attention to some details of these two sentences:
1) "[...] best [...] only for a male [...] to control [...] females."
2) "[...] not best for the controlled female, [...]"

It does not matter how wealthy a man is. The article points out, that the cutting was passed through from the highest social levels to the lowest. So its not done to marry a rich man or to climb the social ladder, the reason is to get a marriage at all. Women don't have a real choice. They can replace one disease with another, just like casting out Satan through Beelzebub. I can't see this as a benefit.

>retain all privileges of traditional women but also gain all benefits of traditional men.
Why not? Remember, “[...] that all men are created equal [...]” (American Declaration of Independence), “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” (First article of the UN Declaration of Human Rights) and - not to forget - "All animals are equal [...]” (George Orwell's Animal Farm). These are heroic goals, "[...] but some animals are more equal than others", as we all know. Nevertheless, gender shouldn't make a difference. So why not get the best out of both "worlds"?

>>1687
>May I draw your attention to some details of these two sentences:
the devil is in the details that you skipped :) "a *large* number of females " In the societies where you are allowed to have large number of females you need to be ultra wealthy to be able to do so.
And of course the best for female woud be to marry some local oligarch who preferably never even gets home from his work then have parties using his money and raise children on his money as well. Or even better like in the western world mary Jeff Bezos divorce him next day and get half of his money(or even better all his money LOL). Too bad you never get what is the best for you :)

>The article points out, that the cutting was passed through from the highest social levels to the lowest. So its not done to marry a rich man or to climb the social ladder, the reason is to get a marriage at all. Women don't have a real choice.

And what is your reason to believe so? I did not notice anything in the article that woud imply "not done to climb the social ladder" in my opinion it is much more logical that it was passed to down precisely in attempt of those lower class women to climb up the social ladder not because some pisspoor homeless guy is demanding properly cicumcised wife to marry him. While to even get a chance to be considered as possible wife by high class man she has to be cut. he has almost limitless choice of candidates to be super picky.
And this is how culture of rich people gets passed down in general.

The basic universal principle is that poor people just can't make any demands they take what they can get while rich people choose best from the best.
If you want to marry someone who is better than yourself you will have to follow their demands and if you marry someone below yourself you can make your own demands.
That is the price of female hypergamy.


>So why not get the best out of both "worlds"?
Because it does not work that way, there is no such thing as "equality" everyone gets different set of privileges and obligations, if you are lucky you may get only privileges if you are unlucky you only get obligations or stay somewhere in between but on average you trade obligations to privileges.
If you want privileges of traditional woman you have to take obligations of traditional woman and if you want privileges of traditional man you take obligations of traditional man.
if woman wants to be a man she can: find a good job, make good money them find a pisspoor man who never worked in his live and keep him at home on the leash where he will take care of your children I am sure she will even find someone who will be willing to get completely castrated to prove his fidelity or whatever else she wants. You will work like slave and he will live like a slave.

But so far we see that women prefer to stay at home and be fully supported by a man rather than working super hard and providing for the family. That comes at a cost of losing freedom.
Don't you think it woud be stupid to expect that you get all that easy life for free?
In general if your partner is suffering in hell he or she will not allow you to have fun either.

>like in the western world mary Jeff Bezos divorce him next day and get half of his money
Instead of only one day it took her nearly 26 years (1993-2019), but MacKenzie Scott (former Bezos) did exactly this. And she got only 25%, which seems a little too less to me in regard of her help in building the company. According to Forbes shes at this moment number four of the world's most wealthiest women.

>the reason is to get a marriage at all.
>And what is your reason to believe so?
Its the part on pages 262 to 264 of Gerry Mackie's text (source citation see >>1681).
TL;DR:
>People prefer to support closely related children rather than unrelated children. Women seldom question the relation, but men never can be 100& sure. OTOH women often doubt a man's promise to support her and the children. Both want assurance. Hence, marriage is prefered to nonmarriage, because it "is intended to exchange and to enforce these assurances."

>Stratification diagrams of inegalitarian societies would be represented by a pyramid. It would show a few rich starting at the top going down to a mass of poor at the bottom. The rich men can each support a lot of women and their children, so they are more attractive to women. Unfortunately each woman gets less time with the man, the more women he has. Therefore they might "seek insemination from men more available than he". In return the man will "inflict costly methods of fidelity control: enclosure, guarding by eunuchs, hobbling, the honor and modesty code, and so on." In order to get to the pyramid's top the people on lower stratums will "imitate and exaggerate fidelity-control practices so as to gain economic, social, and reproductive access to the" higher stratums. Women are marrying up, conjugal practices flow down.

>"However the custom originated, as soon as women believed that men would not marry an unmutilated woman, and men believed that an unmutilated woman would not be a faithful partner in marriage, the convention was locked in place. A woman would not choose nonmarriage and not to have her own children; a man would not choose an unfaithful partner and not to have his own children."

IMHO, climbing the social ladder is the effect and the seeking for guarantees is the cause - not vice versa. As long as it takes to saturate all stratum levels it might even be the primary urge, but later it is no more than a pleasant concomitant.

>So why not get the best out of both "worlds"?
>Because [...] there is no such thing as "equality" everyone gets different set of privileges and obligations
Yes, some are "more equal" and your description includes many truths. But those ideas are not about reality. They just grant options. TBH, I did't mean it that serious. ;D

>>1697
>Instead of only one day it took her nearly 26 years
Now you took it too serious :)
But what I described was the best case scenario since we were talking about what best not about what real :)
and the best woud be if you could marry and divorce the next day or your rich husband just chokes on peanut and you inherit all his wealth :)


>"However the custom originated, as soon as women believed that men would not marry an unmutilated woman, and men believed that an unmutilated woman would not be a faithful partner in marriage, the convention was locked in place. A woman would not choose nonmarriage and not to have her own children; a man would not choose an unfaithful partner and not to have his own children."

This is pretty obviously wrong because if you want to marry you will marry. Situation when you want to marry and can't is almost impossible. The only question is the quality of your mate which you can marry.
Both men and women can only choose from what is available. if you are on the top you chose from the best if you are at the bottom you chose from the worst. your status will allow you to access higher quality partners.

And this mutilation thing simply increases perceived quality of the woman giving her access to higher quality men.

>In order to get to the pyramid's top the people on lower stratums will "imitate and exaggerate fidelity-control practices so as to gain economic, social, and reproductive access to the" higher stratums.

Yes exactly what I was saying all the time. although this mostly applies to women, men do not really care that much about those things. and they dont mind even go to the lower stratums to reduce effort required.

>>1704

>Now you took it too serious
Not really. *g*
I just tried to show, that whatever weired scenario people can come up with, somebody else already did it. Even the aftermaths of your "peanut idea" is not new enough. Round about one half of the most wealthiest women made it into the list by heritage. LOL.

>"However the custom originated, [...]"
>This is pretty obviously wrong [...]
You realized, that I literally cited a paragraph from Gerry Mackie's article? I ask, because you contradict him, although you recommended his text. This is basically ok, I only want to make sure, that I understand it right.

I think his description is correct:
A man does not accept an unmutilated women, because he thinks she could cheat on him; and a woman accepts mutilation, because she thinks a man could think she could cheat on him, if she is not mutilated. As soon as this continued reflection is established, the same applies to the convention - no matter from where it originated.
That is what the paragraph says.

Its a "vicious circle" or a "self-fulfilling prophecy" which cannot be broken easily. Even if you want to marry you can't without a partner, who accepts you. And this is, where the critical mass comes into play. But this was already mentioned.

(My) Conclusion:
Except for your three sentences concerning "obviously wrong", "almost impossible" and "only question" I can more or less agree with your post. Well, may be more "more" and less "less". :D

>>1721
>I just tried to show, that whatever weird scenario people can come up with, somebody else already did it.

oh ok, but that's not exactly what matters, as I was just parodying the term of "what is the best for a woman". Because expecting what best for anyone is unrealistic and almost never happen in real world. It only happens in the fantasy. :)

>I ask, because you contradict him, although you recommended his text.
no, I do not contradict him I agree with what he and you say here, but my remark is that this only applies to high value men who have ability to chose.

It was my main idea all the time that by getting mutilated woman gets a chance to marry *high value* man. But the author of that article did not emphasize it enough(even if it was loosely mentioned) and you decided as if woman cannot marry at all.

So what is said in that article is right but you need to do proper interpretation.

Surprised noone archived this thread yet just in case something happens to GC again. Discussion here is looks too precious to lose to time so I did it https://web.archive.org/web/20220515174712/https://dis.guro.cx/dis/koko.php?res=202

>>1722

>So what is said in that article is right but you need to do proper interpretation.
Thats true and our interpretations differ slightly. The contents themself don't fall too far apart, its just the weighting that varys.

I'd like to say, we can call it a good conversation and look forward to the next one. :))

>>219
Don't be silly. It is always okay to molest children. They cry so sexy.

im not interested in sex, im interested in killing women just because i need to cool off.

has anyone of you ever considered watching humans go extinct?
i mean, being the last person alive is the best feeling ever.
life is too rare and once you kill it, you know that you're now diamond crusher.

>>1838
Someone pls kill this piece of shit

>>2010
You responded to obvious bait set up by straitjackit or someone else, you dumb sack of protoplasm.

>>1991
Don't you think it will be pretty boring to wander around all alone?
Internet would stop working as well.

You reasoning works only if you consider life something rare and valuable in the first place. But who cares if humans go extinct? Universe ceases to exist when you die anyway and turns back into sea of meaningless quantum interactions.

>>2012
You're on a board with people who like the suffering of other human beings. Is it really that surprising that some people here like the suffering of children?

Fucking hell you're all edgelords

>>2019
This is a website for expressing violent fantasies, go away.

I hate then becuase they are sin. Femoids ARE sin. Asking why I hate them is like asking why someone hates cancer, or a plague. Or demons. Cunts are literal demons. Literally.

Women deserve to be punished for being the gender they were born as. Period.

>>13834

Do you know what world you're in?

I don't hate women. And nobody else should either. (I only give bold statements)

Sure, some are absolutely stupid bitches and could use a good slap, and others are just straight up terrible human beings.

But not all women are terrible. If anything, the bad ones make the good ones more valuable. It may seem that everyone today is that bitch from Twitter that hates all men but still has an OnlyFans, but that's the internet being the internet.

The internet is the biggest soap box on the planet that anyone can jump on and yell whatever they think of.

It's where all the bitches with daddy issues and shitty exes in the far and wide world can unite into a seemingly infinite congregation of insufferable hoes that can, will and strive to make anyone without the patience of a saint and backbone of a doormat seem like a hateful incel. And incels are just what they want and need to gather more mass and attention. They don't want them eradicated, they need more of them to satisfy their endless hunger for attention and feelings of importance.

If we stopped reacting to their bullshit, they'd stop and die out as a phenomenon, but sadly they are too good at pushing everyone's buttons, including me. Because of this grand war, their influence has managed spread from niche text battles on forums into everything we love. Movies, TV shows, videogames and even into the real world.

I almost became an incel because of the fucking Tumblr whale movement of the early 2010's. Their cringy shit infuriated me and I came close to just shutting down the very idea of ever liking women.

But the thanks goes to all the kind and sensible women who didn't have a fucking clue about any of this shit. They were normal. Focused on the real and important things in life.

This is an overused unfunny joke, but honestly, go outside and touch grass. Or in this case, snow? You can't fester in that much hate for over half the population of the world because of a few fat, jealous and ugly bitches online who had mean fathers.

Don't let them win. Don't let them trick you into hating all women. It's what they want you to do. They either want you as their and society's #1 enemy, or they want you as their slave. Don't be either of those. Be your own man.

Go find that beautiful girl who doesn't conform to all the "new norms."

Make every single one of those bright haired lard balls seethe in their unwashed fat folds as you marry your truly beautiful queen.

Do not spring the mousetrap. Just push it aside and walk off without even mentioning it.

>>12256
No, I dont hate women, real or fictional. I like hentai because I get turned on by watching characters I love, not because I hate them.

>>16994
Same

>>16993

“Marry your beautiful queen, go meet your dream girl”

In this day and age? Good luck when these overdemanding retards think onlyfans is a job but expect a man to make six figures and be a muscular, smart college grad.

I don't hate women per se. They just have the misfortune that their pain and death is the most exquisitely beautiful thing in the world. It's like I don't hate trees, but love a good book and think it's worth the tree for paper. I don't hate cows, I just think it's worth the cost of the cow for a really good stake. True art is worth paying a price for, and there is no greater art I've found than a woman's suffering.

>>12256
Fuck you.