[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]

/ot/ - off-topic

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File(20 MB max)
Video
Password (For post deletion)

The site maintenance is completed but lingering issues are expected, please report any bugs here

File: 1720284983845.png (677.42 KB, 940x655, princesa.png)

No. 2079804

>no racebait
>no infighting
>don't reply to bait
>rest of /ot/ board rules apply
>farmhands are always watching
prev >>>/ot/2069255

No. 2079870

some of you bitches need some dick and a zoloft(infight bait)

No. 2079872

>>2079870
Personally I think I just need a million dollars

No. 2079875

>>2079804
let it die

No. 2079879

File: 1720292294822.gif (607.57 KB, 200x190, IMG_0621.gif)


No. 2079884

>>2079872
I also wish I had at least 20 thousand dollars deposited in my bank account monthly.

No. 2079886

>>2079872
In this economy? you need at least two

No. 2079892

Now that its the year 2024 can we admit that the hate that Melania Trump received in 2016-18 was based on misogyny?

Its fine to hate trump or be against conservatives, i too don't like trump but i always found the hate that leftists gave Melania to be icky and gross because if another woman was called thoae misogynistic slurs everyone would see how wrong it was.

I wonder if it has to do with people seeing women as a extension of men? Whenever a man does something people always want to punish the mother or the wife too. Like cmon she married him back in 2005 when he was politically neutral, and by the leaked audio or how their body language became distant with trump after the presidency its obvious that she didn't want to be involved in politics nor cared about it so i don't know why leftist men (and some women) always shitted on her.

No. 2079897

>>2079892
I live in a very liberal area and I literally never heard people bring her up. On the internet though, “progressive” moids love the excuse to be misogynistic if the woman in question doesn’t share their political beliefs

No. 2079907

Whoever named the upcoming hurricane “beryl” was obviously a sailor moon fan.

No. 2079943

People who read or go on their phones while pooping are so dirty. I don't care if you have to sit there for ten to twenty minutes why do you need to be entertained while expelling your bowels, do you need keys jingled at you constantly? Not to mention the poo particles are going to go on your choice of entertainment no matter what, and where do you put it when you're wiping? on the floor, on your lap? do you stand up to put it on the sink? Disgusting

No. 2079951

>>2079943
not trying to be judgmental nonny but how much are you shitting? like are you blasting around diarrhea when you go potty because when i go to the bathroom and wipe i don’t get shit on my fingers or hands/on my phone

No. 2079953

>>2079943
Holy shit not you again I remember infighting with you about this exact same thing like 2-3 years ago. How've you been nonnie?

No. 2079971

>>2079951
Like most normal people my poo is normal most of the time.
>>2079953
Nah, that wasn't me but I'm glad other anons share my sentiment.

Toilet particles rest in the air in a 1 metre radius after you flush and the traces of poop in those particles will be crawling with bacteria for several days or weeks (this is why you don't put your toothbrushes close to your toilet) and you will enter that cloud at least twice a day and add to it. Now this is a silly hypothetical but what if someone with cholera came into your home and used your toilet, and then you come in playing cut the rope or where's my water on your phone and your phone passes through this invisible cloud of cholera poo air and catches it all. And then when you leave the bathroom and call the ambulance for the dying cholera victim all those strands of disease are on your face and around your mouth and it's on your hands too. And your toothbrushes.

No. 2079978

>>2079943
you must be a fast shitter. most people get bored if theyre sitting on the toilet for 20 mins, especially if theyre constipated or have diarrhea.

No. 2079986

>>2079978
I've been in that situation, it's rough. But if soyboy King John can shit himself to death with no entertainment so can you.

No. 2079999

We should bring back silent movies

No. 2080009

I really think we’d all be happier if we lost streaming services, video games, social media, websites, etc. If for some reason losing Wikipedia would throw you into a crisis then that sounds like a you problem.

No. 2080010

File: 1720305534865.png (1.49 MB, 3230x1678, IMG_1593.png)

I agree with this.

No. 2080014

>>2080009
most people are already ignorant as fuck so might as well delete wikipedia amirite

No. 2080017

>>2080014
If you’re someone who’s so ignorant and lazy that you can’t open a book then Wikipedia existing will not make you any smarter

No. 2080020

>>2080010
what happened to tiktok getting banned why is it still available

No. 2080021

>>2080014
I don't agree with that anon because the 50s, 60s and 70s weren't that happy but Wikipedia is not a good or trustworthy source of info because of the tranny jannies. There's been a lot of times where articles are just blatantly incorrect in some areas.

No. 2080029

>>2080017
NTA, but what type of answer is that lol? I don't every book that Wikipedia references. Hold on, let me just go buy a rare novel on 16th century gold trade routes of Korea so that I can answer my curiosity. Lol, no.

No. 2080033

>>2080029
But what reason do you have to be seeking that out in the first place

No. 2080034

>>2080021
yeah yeah nobody’s ever happy, it’s a figure of speech. i feel like we’d all be better off if the internet was no longer as prevalent as it is now.

No. 2080035

>>2080033
Curiosity is the seed of the human soul. If you don't have it, you're not actually human.

No. 2080041

>>2080035
But don’t you agree it could be more fulfilling to the human soul to actually go to Egypt to Korea or wherever you’re referring to instead of scrolling on Wikipedia all day

No. 2080043

>>2080041
NTA but major kek

No. 2080046

>>2080043
Thats what you had to do before you could just open your laptop and go online nonny

No. 2080052

You shouldn’t buy another pet if you had to give away a previous one

No. 2080053

>>2080009
without social media i would not be enlightened about so many things i will still be naive and ignorant social media impact is crazy so its needed to bring attention to issues in society people should just stop being addicted

No. 2080054

>>2080041
some are poor some people are sick etc

No. 2080058

>>2080053
If you needed social media to learn how to do research about the world outside of your bubble then, like I said, that’s a you problem

No. 2080068

Age gap couples are fine as long as they’re adults and not het (because moids are porn rotten and will fetishize it). People in their 20s interact with people in their 30s all the time in university or at work and some will unavoidably click together, as long as they have adult experiences in life it’s their business.

No. 2080076

>>2080068
Just say you like grandma pussy

No. 2080083

>>2080076
It’s the only thing lesbians can get kek

No. 2080084

>>2079953
I have the same opinion and i'm nta. the hygiene is honestly secondary to me to the risk of dropping it. why do i know so many people who have dropped their phones in the toilet?

No. 2080088

>>2080084
I don't use the phone on the toilet because I don't use the phone basically ever but… how would you drop it?

No. 2080090

>>2079978
>most people get bored if theyre sitting on the toilet for 20 mins
Maybe if you're some ADHD retard who need to constantly be entertained. How hard is it to be alone with nothing but your own thoughts for 15-20 mins?

No. 2080141

Straight relationships are too transactional. Even if you want do the 50/50 thing with a scrote it won’t work because men can’t handle being treated with respect and equality. All straight men really want to do is be a wage slave for a 10/10 looking stacy, that’s the only way they can be happy.

No. 2080146

>>2079943
I prefer to read my morning newspaper whenever shitting

No. 2080150

>>2080017
>>2080014
Wikipedia is actually a great source for getting cursory knowledge about a subject you're interested in before you decide to look into it more. Encyclopedias existed before the internet you know

No. 2080153

>>2080009
>If for some reason losing Wikipedia would throw you into a crisis then that sounds like a you problem.
I'm confused. Why shouldn't we have free information?

No. 2080157

>>2080150
Wikipedia is often extremely politicized and a lot of the info on it is straight-up false, but yes there is nothing wrong with the concept of an encyclopedia.

No. 2080176

>>2080153
when did I ever say we shouldn’t have free information? the library exists and always will

No. 2080179

>>2080150
But you can also get that same knowledge by reading a book on the subject, you know, the way everyone did for millennia up until very recently

No. 2080186

>>2080153
NTAYRT but books existed before Wikipedia did, and not only that but Wikipedia often censors/changes information based on their own politics which is to be expected with their actual tranny jannies

No. 2080187

>>2080150
>>2080179
I mean the old Brittanicas are more reliable than Wikipedia imo but not a lot of people would be willing to buy about fifteen large books that are already pretty expensive if you were to buy only one. There can be a middle ground you know, like for example saving those Britannicas in pdf form from a digital library to have on hand or reading papers from ncbi. If we go back to the original purpose of the internet I feel like everything would slightly better.
I don't know, but while social media is definitely fucked and detrimental to society the internet has some good.

No. 2080190

>>2080187
I'm neither of those anons but I don't think they meant that you had to buy all those books I assume they were referring to frequenting the library. And I don't know, I kinda agree that the internet has some important tools that should be available to the people who actually have a legitimized purpose (STEMfags, primarily) but no longer needs to be used by regular citizens.

No. 2080197

>>2080176
>>2080186
I guess I'll be clearer about it: Why shouldn't we have one more source of free, easy to access information? Not everybody in the world has easy access to books or libraries. In some parts of the world, certain books and information are literally banned, and the internet is a way to get past that. Just seems half-baked to say all websites should be banned.
>Wikipedia often censors/changes information based on their own politics
This happens with books, too, except there's no one around to argue and fact check them in the talk section, and you can't look at multiple external sources if they're not available to you. Tranny jannies are not difficult to fight when you have a wide range of information.

No. 2080200

>>2080190
NTA, I think you put way too much trust in "people who actually have a legitimized purpose".

No. 2080208

>>2080197
Except that the tranny jannies on Wiki do very effectively lie and hide information all the time while making it seem like it would get 'fixed' or 'cleaned up' or is somehow objective. At least with a book you know it's a book, and lots of different people can write them.

Wiki is good solely for extremely noncontroversial topics like 'what is this fruit' etc.

No. 2080217

>>2080197
nta but if someone is in an area where they dont have access to books then how would they have access to the internet..?

No. 2080218

>>2080208
You can view the history of any Wikipedia page, there are archived pages of most sites with info, and it's extremely difficult to wipe the entire internet of factual data someone don't like (in contrast, it's very easy for any group that's supported by the government or wealthy backers to burn books and effectively erase existing information). Things get edited out of books for all sorts of reasons, too, especially controversial ones.

No. 2080220

>>2080217
Live in a place that bans books on certain topics for religious or political reasons, teaches or omits certain things in school, get blocked from accessing "inconvenient" information IRL in general, or in a country that just doesn't prioritize libraries. Have computer or phone with internet, download VPN, look at whatever you want.
This is the case for quite a few thirdies, and some political orgs seem to want that sort of the thing to be the case in more rural parts of first world countries too.

No. 2080221

>>2080197
This isn’t completely accurate though, because if you try to search a topic or prompt that is banned/illegal you just won’t be met with any results when you search it, just like how you won’t be able to find any books in the library about it if you try to go find some

No. 2080222

>>2079943
unironically replying to this post while shitting

No. 2080224

>>2080221
Depends on what you use to search, really. There's no way around that with books.

No. 2080225

>>2080220
>>2080220
Thirdies never fail to amaze me. how is it you’re impoverished as hell but still somehow prioritize having a cellphone with internet…?

No. 2080226

>>2080225
Nta but a phone and Internet access is pretty important have these days

No. 2080227

>>2080224
>>2080220
what topics are you guys referring to though

No. 2080230

>>2080226
ntayrt but why is that? Having a cellphone or access to the internet has no effect on your physical health and i know it sounds unbelievable but it is possible to have a life and job without a cellphone

No. 2080231

>>2080225
You sound sheltered as fuck. I hope you don't end up in a rural shithole with no cellphone and no internet at night lol. Try getting a decent job without some access to the internet or a phone, too.

No. 2080233

>>2080230
NTA. Are you a NEET? What job do you have that would tolerate employees having zero access to phones or internet?

No. 2080234

>>2080230
>it is possible to have a life and job without a cellphone
In this day and age? I'm sorry but even if you don't have a phone but you absolutely need internet.

No. 2080237

>>2080233
i've had multiple jobs during times in my life when i couldn't afford a cell phone and so long as i actually stuck to my schedule i had no issues at all, and i could see most employers for the majority of low-wage jobs feeling the exact same way

No. 2080238

>>2080237
Were they high school jobs before your mom let you have a cellphone?

No. 2080240

File: 1720328703357.jpg (179.65 KB, 2500x2500, CS5229_Straight.jpg)

>>2080234
i can understand needing some method of communication but, you don't necessarily need a cellphone or a computer to communicate with others. bring back the house phone
>>2080238
nope, these were jobs when i was in college and after i left

No. 2080242

>>2080240
I doubt you were even old enough to attend college, anon.

No. 2080246

>>2080243
do you need to sit down grandpa

No. 2080247

>>2080242
i'm not sure what to say nonnie i'm not gonna selfdoxx just for the sake of the conversation

No. 2080249

>>2080247
No, I say that because
>when i was in college
You need to use the internet to do coursework in college. Online coursework started in 2009, so you are either 40 or 15. In both cases, please leave. You do not understand current society and how things work.

No. 2080253

>>2080252
Most coursework and submission forms were fully online by 2012. There's no way you were submitting everything handwritten, lmao. The only question is, why lie? Were you making a whole point of submitting handwritten work, getting a "funny look" from your professors and a shrug of their shoulders? That wouldn't work today.
>$2,000 for a computer
You can get a computer for $300.

No. 2080259

>>2080249
i wrote a whole other post but deleted it because i just now noticed
>In both cases, please leave
i was studying from 2010-2013, since when are slightly older users not allowed to be here?
>>2080253
thats cool if that was the case for your university or the places you studied at, but when the clock struck midnight on 2012 my teachers didnt come banging down my door forcing me to buy a computer to suddenly do my work for them on that kek. and im really not sure why everyone is suddenly plugging so hard for businesses..? KEK weird to get so sensitive over an unpopular opinion posted in the proper thread.

No. 2080263

>>2080225
I'm not from a third world country but I'm a rural poorfag and the closest library to me is three hours away because no one wants to build one on a flood plain that causes all the houses and buildings to be moldy. Sometimes shit is easier to access online, even if most of the surface level shit sucks.

No. 2080264

>>2080259
>Well, my university
Uh-huh, sure thing nonna. Even my high school was using online submissions in 2012, and it wasn't even wealthy at all. I'm sorry you went to the world's poorest university (or glad that you went to the world's most accommodating university), but please understand that's not the case for most people kek.
In the unpopular opinions thread, you must be prepared for people to disagree with you.

No. 2080266

>>2080264
Nonny this isn't the "lets disagree!!!" thread though. This is just unpopular opinions kek. Its not really necessary to try to debate with someone, try to make them think their opinion is wrong, try to make them think the same thing you do, etc.

No. 2080275

>>2080225
you do know people in third world countries can still have access to the internet even if material conditions aren't the best right

No. 2080279

>>2080275
but why would you prioritize having access to the internet if you dont have food or running water

No. 2080281

>>2080279
but they literally do lol. do you think they're living in huts?

No. 2080290

>>2080281
oh yeah that sure does sound very realistic, no food or water, but a 5G fiber optic cable modem? You bet, Muhamad!

No. 2080291

>>2080290
this is your brain on americuck education

No. 2080295

I'm so tired of the way gay men randomly post porn on social media accounts that they use for fandom and hobby things. It's so gross and trashy.

No. 2080298

>>2080266
The thing is, sometimes, opinions are wrong, and it's okay to say so, or just that you personally disagree. Sometimes, unpopular opinions are unpopular for a reason.

No. 2080300

>>2080279
>>2080290
Are you trying to make first world anons look retarded or something? This is embarrassing.

No. 2080301

The internet is a lot like summer camp. You either go and have a good time and its the best memories of your life, or you get molested

No. 2080305

>>2080298
Right, this is unpopular opinions. But an opinion is only wrong by your personal definition of what is considered to be "wrong". Because its not a statement thats being made as a fact, it is a statement that is an opinion. So riding in on your white horse trying to wax poetic of how OP is just so wrong doesn't really do anything

No. 2080306

>>2080300
are you pretending to be stupid? genuinely why the fuck would you have internet if you dont have food or running water.

No. 2080314

>>2080306
obvious bait is obvious

No. 2080320

>>2080305
Based on your opinion of my opinion, my opinion is that you're retarded.(infighting)

No. 2080322

>>2080320
You can think I'm retarded all you want but that doesn't really change the fact that trying to make someone else think their opinion is wrong just for being unpopular is nonsensical(infighting)

No. 2080323

File: 1720334469726.jpeg (71.15 KB, 600x888, 1649698972230.jpeg)

Cmon guys, can we please just come together. It's all so unserious there's no need to be angry.

No. 2080332

>>2080322
That's not what's happening here, though.

No. 2080337

>>2080332
i mean yeah that basically is what is happening when you try to haggle someone into thinking their opinion is wrong

No. 2080340

>>2080337
Sure, when what you described happens, that is indeed the case, but that's not what's going on here.

No. 2080349

>>2080340
Thats literally what is happening right now, that is this back and forth we're having, anon. You are trying to convince me that my opinion is incorrect, saying "thats not whats going on here" doesn't change the fact that that is precisely whats happening kek.

No. 2080357

>>2080349
I'm not trying to convince you that your opinion is incorrect? I'm calling you a retard kek

No. 2080369


No. 2080383

Why are you people acting as if Wikipedia is the only website on the internet?

No. 2080387

>>2080383
It's one among other useful ones that should always be freely available. Social media can go, though.

No. 2080389

>>2080387
NTA or luddite chan but Wikipedia can go too when britannica is also free and online and seems to be unpolitical and has every page fact checked

No. 2080391

>>2080383
It may not be the only website but it is a prominent aggregate for information, easily within someone's first few choices for an introduction into a topic. And still somewhat accurate enough you can functionally use it 80% of the time.
Something like this being defiled for no other reason than a narrow political goal is abhorrent. It shows how short sighted the people doing the vandalism are and certainly promotes confusion in an age already marked by tribalism and rival nareatives.
Do you get upset at how retarded Facebook and Twitter are? Because that's only the start if public sources of historical and topical narratives are raped beyond recognition.

No. 2080398

>>2080389
Fuck brits

No. 2080428

Women should be allowed to cheat

No. 2080481

As a cocsa victim male children are just as much of a vermin as their adult counterparts and should be treated as such. Empathy for them is misguided

No. 2080491

>>2080252
This is completely false lmao you cannot turn in handwritten work to any major university anymore. Without a computer you can't even sign up for your courses let alone do coursework which is mostly online.

No. 2080534

>>2080491
Exactly. Literal children show up and lie about the dumbest shit here, kek.

No. 2080537

>>2080534
If you needed anymore proof that a majority of the people who are annoying you on this site now are children pretending to be adults, that helps

No. 2080592

>>2080357
NYA but calling someone retarded is a way of trying to suggest that their opinion is incorrect

No. 2080596

>>2080491
I don’t know if you guys have a hard time reading or something but that post clearly says from 2010 to 2013? She didn’t try to pretend like that’s the way things are now. And even if they aren’t, who the hell said it’s impossible to return to that?

No. 2080597

>>2080491
>REEE YOU CANT TURN IN A PAPER TO A UNIVERSITY!!
In what world is this factual kek?

No. 2080605

>>2080252
I graduated university in 2013 and all the course signups, as well as most of the homework and submissions and even some exams were online. Even for things that were handed in in person, they had to be typed and printed, any work would be automatically thrown out if it was handwritten.

>>2080597
Most of the developed world at least? Maybe you can hand in handwritten papers if you, idk, go to some university in an extremely empoverished area in the jungle or something.

No. 2080606

>>2080597
Nta but it's true in multiple countries and continents. Just take the L kek.

No. 2080609

>>2080606
i mean if at your school for some reason there’s rules against turning in physical papers that sounds like a shitty school but, that’s not reality for all of us kek. i’m not understanding why everyone is suddenly acting like the way we all used to be educated was somehow impossible.

No. 2080610

this is really the dumbest infight bait i’ve ever seen. pretending like turning in papers at school was not a real thing? really?

No. 2080614

>>2080606
Maybe gen alpha/younger zoomers are starting to panic realizing that you need to know how to type in order to go to most colleges?

>>2080609
It's a rule in almost every university in developed countries nonna, and it has been for at least a decade and a half to two decades. It also wasn't a 'shitty' university and I've attended and taught at other universities since.

The way people 'used' to be educated back when handwritten papers were the norm in the 70s-80s (because already typed papers became the norm in the 90s in most universities) was very different in part because class sizes tended to be much smaller and people's handwriting or printing needed to meet a certain standard to be legible, which was taught in primary school. It is not easy to do grading on handwritten papers because you have to read a hundred different people's handwriting nor is it easy to implement edits and so on. Also a lot of homework submissions, quizzes etc. have been on online platforms for ages because they're not done during class time. The whole system has changed a lot since the 80s and it would actually not be easy to go back.

>>2080610
Turning in papers is normal at university, but they must be typed at every university anyone I know has ever attended.

No. 2080615

The internet really has made people 10x stupider, but not in the way any of them think kek

No. 2080616

>>2080614
>need to know how to type
It’s not about typing/abilities with your physical hands, it’s about accessibility to the open internet from a young age being completely unnecessary to education.

No. 2080617

>>2080616
University isn't a young age anon…

No. 2080618

>>2080617
Please lurk moar. The conversation is about the internet period, not just university. That was just a singular example. A large issue with education today is the fact that it is all online, including children’s education.

No. 2080619

>>2080617
NTAYRT but I would venture to say that university age is definitely young. If you think you’re a grown adult as a freshman in college then you’re on the wrong website sweetheart kek

No. 2080620

>>2080618
I'm responding to the posts about university anon, you can't tell me which posts to respond to. However
>University doesn't require internet
>Small children's education requires internet
Uh… you wanna rethink what you're saying?

No. 2080621

>>2080619
Most university freshmen are adults, unless they haven't turned 18 yet. And it's certainly not too young to learn how to use the internet or type, considering that those are required skills for most jobs you'll get after graduating from university. I don't support putting little kids on devices either but if you can't type, use office suite, email, and don't have basic internet literacy skills by the time you're 18 you're going to have a really, really hard time on the job market even if you go to some magical university that doesn't require any computer work at all.

No. 2080622

>>2080619
University students are grown ass adults. Don't give them chances to infantilize themselves. They're fully responsible and capable for themselves.

No. 2080623

>>2080620
When did I use the word ‘require’? I said the internet isn’t necessary for university education, which is true. And I brought up the fact that children are educated using the internet/technology, when that’s not at all beneficial or necessary to their education either.

No. 2080624

>>2080622
When you’re 40 I’m sure you’ll feel different anon but I bet you’re just the oldest adult who’s ever lived, aren’t you?

No. 2080625

>>2080623
I assume you are not the only anon responding here because there were tons of posts saying universities don't require internet or typed papers.

The internet is necessary for a current university education, but it wasn't always.

No. 2080626

>>2080621
>thinks 18 is an adult
this conversation isn’t going anywhere

No. 2080627

>>2080597
I'm in eastern europe and we tend to be fairly behind on things but yes, we have an online platform you turn all of your assignments into. I started uni in 2016 and this platform has been a thing even before that. The pandemic made sure that all universities would follow suit if they already hadn't by then. Where are you from?

No. 2080628

File: 1720365875152.png (38.79 KB, 697x213, adult.png)

>>2080624
Just because young adults are immature doesn't mean they're not adults.

>>2080626
18 quite literally is an adult.

No. 2080629

>>2080627
I’m from the U.S., and we’ve had an educational system that was not online before. We can easily go back to that.

No. 2080630

>>2080614
you cant "turn in" a physical paper anymore b/c then professors cant check them as easily for plagiarism. that was the reason cited to me when i started college in 2013

No. 2080631

>>2080628
I don’t really think you’re able to understand why just because someone may legally be recognized as an ‘adult’ does not mean that they’re actually a grown, coherent adult who’s capable of reasonable thought.

No. 2080633

>>2080630
Well that obviously didn’t prevent anything, considering the fact that the majority of college students essays are written by chatGPT now

No. 2080634

>>2080630
And because professors are lazy and don’t actually grade your paper themselves the way teachers used to have to do

No. 2080636

>>2080631
Sorry if you weren't capable of reasonable thought at age 18 nonna, but not all of us suffer the same plight. I was living on my own, making my own money, paying all my own bills and caring for myself/making my own decisions since age 18 and had no problem.

>>2080630
This is another reason, but I think the simpler reason is that a lot of papers that are handwritten are basically illegible, and that turning in homework online solves a lot of problems both for teachers and students at university, since they don't see each other every day. I did teach a class where papers were turned in physically recently though (typed of course) and just checked for plagiarism by typing what seemed to be the plagiarized sections into a search engine. Turning in papers physically works well in secondary school when you can see your students every day, but not at college.

No. 2080638

>>2080623
>>2080610
>>2080597
>>2080609
You are not old enough to be using lolcow.

No. 2080639

>We should completely change the educational infrastructure!!1!
>A decade passes
>Wow, why are kids so stupid? Why are college students so retarded?

No. 2080640

>>2080636
Everything is true on lolcow.farm!

No. 2080641

>>2080624
Is it a contest? Someone in their 40s is more mature than someone in their 20s but they are still fully responsible adults who have the presence of mind to make decisions. The only ones pretending otherwise are emotionally stunted dipshits who want to cling to childhood so they aren't accountable for their actions.
>>2080631
Are you a 25 year old teenager? Is adulting soooo hard? Get a fucking grip.

No. 2080642

>>2080640
If you think it seems unlikely that someone would live independently at age 18 you're definitely too young to post here.

No. 2080644

>>2080638
You can just say “I disagree with your opinion that is unpopular hence why you posted it in the correct thread” instead of rolling around on the floor and shitting

No. 2080645

>>2080641
A response like this only reaffirms my entire point

No. 2080647

>>2080639
I don't necessarily think the changes to the university system have been good either but they started decades ago and would be basically impossible to reverse now, for a number of reasons. Just to give one very simple reason, most academic journals don't distribute physical copies anymore, so if you want to do any kind of current/exhaustive research at college you wouldn't be able to find most of the articles at your physical library. Only a few 'heritage' journals might still distribute physical copies to university libraries.

No. 2080648

>>2080642
I do find it hard to believe that kids fresh out of high school are suddenly able to support themselves, unless you live in middle America or a place where it’s cheap to live

No. 2080649

Locking yourself in a cold house during a hot summer day sounds way unhealthier for your body than going outside and sweating a river

No. 2080650

>>2080648
I worked since age 15 and saved up money for my university living costs, took minor loans (10k over my entire degree to pay for my tuition) and worked over the summers for the rest of my living expenses. Then when I graduated I got several shitty jobs to survive until I could get a better position. Not everyone has rich parents lmao

No. 2080653

>>2080648
people can start working (legally) as young as 15 and roommates exist. some people have no option but to be self sufficient at 18

No. 2080654

>>2080653
Ah ok when I say living independently I mean that in the literal sense of the word, as in living alone.

No. 2080656

im happy that im no longer a radfem because other than it makimg me lean more to the right it also made me start transvestigating random online people for some reason.

I remember this adrogynous pretty gay guy showed up in my video recommendations and the first thing i did was try to see if he was a man or a tif instead of enjoying his videos. I went through multiple videos of his just so i can analyze his skull and the fat distribution on his face, then i kept staring at his chest in videos where he shows it to see if he has tit-chop scars or not. Then i analyzed his voice and in some videos id did sound too soft and that just made me even more confused. It ended up being a male though.

i do feel sorry for the other anons here who are in too deep into being GC and are suffering from trans delusion.

Eitherway i dont give a fuck about troons anymore (way more important things in life) so i will probably stop using this site since almost every thread here is a discussion about troons.

This site will never be actually feminist and snow, w and pt are proof of that. The feminism here is more-so a mockery, a bad imitation of actual feminism.

No. 2080662

>>2080656
Where are all you people coming from thinking this was ever meant to be a feminist site, this is like the third post this week

No. 2080663

>>2080654
Yeah. You can start working at age 15 to have some savings to move out and live alone by age 18. Or live with roommates, which is still 'independent' living as an adult since your roommates don't finance you, pay your bills or tell you what to do, they just share the same space.

Even if it's becoming more difficult for 18 year olds to support themselves due to inflation and unemployment, it's not because they're 'not coherent adults' or too 'unreasonable' to live like adults, it's simply because things are getting expensive. Your average 18 year old is fully capable of living an adult life cognitively.

No. 2080664

>>2080656
No offense intended anon but if the so-called radfems you're around are encouraging transvestigation and making a big deal out of other nothingburger social media garbage, you're among cowish people.

No. 2080667

>>2080656
> Transvestigators are malleable retards
Say it isn't so kek

No. 2080668

>>2080656
Lmao what about being a radfem makes you so schizo you start transvestigating? I think you were not hanging out with radfems but schizos, nonna.

Anyway lolcow is not a 'radical feminist' site it just allows misandry unlike basically every other female-dominant space on the internet. People bring up troons all the time because they do affect other people's lives even if they don't affect yours.

No. 2080672

The '18 year olds aren't adults' anon(s?) should duke it out with my mom who thinks age 29 is the start of being middle aged. That would be a fun conversation to witness.

No. 2080685

>>2080656
It's not the radfem's fault you're retarded.

No. 2080687

>>2079943
To add on to what you're saying anon, I think it's insane anyone takes longer than 3-5 mins to take a shit. Why do you even need to read? Take your shit and go. I dont want fecel matter anywhere near my phone. I hear so many stories from my straight friends about how long it takes their boyfriends/husbands in the bathroom. That sounds concerning. I just take my shit and go after 5 mins. Why does anyone need longer?

No. 2080691

>>2080009
Social media like tik tok and twt, yes. But why should information in general be blocked? You sound sus

No. 2080698

>>2080691
When did anyone say information should be blocked?

No. 2080702

>>2080698
If people didn't have the internet anymore then a huge majority of information that the average person has access to would be blocked from them, even if it existed somewhere in the world.

No. 2080711

Can we all agree how pathetic is for a woman to defend a scrote? a guy is getting humiliated or is getting beat on a fist fight? the guy is bleeding or says he'll take his own life? Well sucks to be him don't ever try to be nice to any of them because they'll just get worse, so much for "stronger gender"

No. 2080718

>>2079943
>>2079978
>>2080090
wait wait wait, 10-20 minutes? what the fuck? literally if i am on the toilet for more than 5 i consider that to be constipation…

No. 2080720

>>2080718
It is weird but a lot of people seem to go on the toilet for that long. My dad always did and I found it weird even as a kid, I think the meme of men watching porn on the toilet might often be true but apparently moids have worse bowel control and actually are likely to poo for longer. Otherwise you're prob constipated…

No. 2080721

>>2080711
Suicide baiters get no sympathy from me at all, especially not scrotes. I always intrinsically knew that it was just a manipulation tactic and experience confirms it.

No. 2080722

>>2080649
genuinely so true anon

No. 2080725

>>2080711
The worst is all the videos I've seen of scrotes on public transit or out in public harassing couples and the moid hiding behind his gf or backing away while she defends him/herself. If a moid wouldn't defend you from a verbal or potentially physical altercation why would you defend him/put your body in the way so you can get beat on instead? Insanity

No. 2080729

>>2080722
I think it's partly true, it is better overall to go outside but in very hot places it can be dangerous to stay out all day if you're heat sensitive, older, etc. especially if you don't have a body of water to cool down in or whatever. Cold deaths are much more common than heat deaths but heat deaths do happen, I got heatstroke in India when I was like 9-10yo and I never want to repeat that experience. People from colder climates who visit or migrate to a hot climate are often worse at handling the heat which might explain why some people in an area seem fine while others feel like they'll die without air conditioning. I had a hormonal problem that was so bad for a while my body's temperature regulation was out of wack and I felt like I was about to die if I stayed out too long in the heat, now that the hormonal problem is better I also deal with heat way better. I think it's mostly elderly people that die of overheating and I assume it's because their bodies don't temperature regulate as efficiently anymore.

No. 2080739

>>2080644
>doesn't deny it, just seethes

No. 2080749

>>2080739
nta but what exactly is that anon supposed to do kek? post her ID and try to convince you otherwise?

No. 2080753

>>2080749
nta but if she's one of the anons that claims universities don't require computers or typed papers (or didn't 10 years ago or whatever) she could just say which country or city she attended university in so that we could get an idea of where these strange universities exist or if she's just BSing. I imagine there might be some colleges out there somewhere that still do things the 1980s way but I'd be very curious where. No need to post ID

No. 2080757

>>2080749
If a person makes childish statements online, everyone else isn't wrong for saying as much lol. People from 2010-2013 were not handing in handwritten coursework, that's literally something a gen alpha baby would dream up because that time period might as well be 1940 to them kek

No. 2080761

>>2080757
Speaking of this though am I correct in assuming that a lot of younger zoomers aren't being taught computer skills in high school or earlier? When I was teaching a few years ago I had multiple college freshmen ask if they could turn in handwritten papers and get seemingly upset that it wasn't allowed by the university, so I assume they either didn't have computers or weren't used to typing (computers were available for them to use at the school though so it's fine). But at that time I thought it was just a weird thing, like they had one weird teacher in high school who made them handwrite all their essays or something and it was just what they were used to. Now I keep hearing stuff that suggests basic computer skills aren't being taught in some schools anymore and even people on lolcow thinking you wouldn't need to type papers for university… it's like computer literacy is on the decline and is not being taught in high school? Like word processing, excel, etc. Or are these people just trolling, I'm genuinely curious, question for you younger zoomer anons.

No. 2080768

>>2080757
>your lived experience is not real because i don't want it to be
What a weird thing to vehemently deny kek

No. 2080770

>>2080768
NTA, but again, it might be real but it's exceptionally unusual and she refused to say where this was so it sounds kind of suspicious. And she (or some other anon making the same points) was arguing that it is the norm, which it obviously isn't and most people know it isn't.

No. 2080771

>>2080770
How is a handwritten essay "exceptionally unusual"? And why would anyone doxx what university they went to?

No. 2080773

>>2080770
ntayrt but i don’t think they were trying to argue that it’s the present norm

No. 2080774

>>2080771
She could just say what country she went to school in, since I'm guessing countries where universities don't use the internet/computers for anything are very different from where most of us live.

It's exceptionally unusual for all or most of your essays in university to be handwritten. There are some situations where I can see it happening, like if it's an essay for a sit-down exam or you're filling in a small worksheet or something, but otherwise the vast majority of universities for the past couple decades have had typing standards for homework like essays/papers. Even 10-15 years ago most modern universities had online platforms for quizzes, homework hand-ins, etc. so even physically handing in printed out typed essays wouldn't have been possible for every class.

No. 2080777

>>2080774
If you lurk it looks like she claims to be from the U.S. . And I don't know what her major was, but at least when I was in art school we weren't assigned online google classroom style assignments like students are now

No. 2080779

>>2080773
At least one of the anons who was arguing this said it was like that in 2010-2013, which it definitely wasn't the vast overwhelming majority of places. Also >>2080597 was clearly talking about the present, as was >>2080609 as was >>2080623

No. 2080781

>>2080779
the second post you tagged verbatim says “the way we all used to be educated”, and the third one sounds to be speaking hypothetically

No. 2080783

>>2080777
If you were doing fine arts I would imagine not, even now probably, but I'm sure if you went to a university with multiple programs the other programs did require some online submissions or at the very least typed, not handwritten, papers. This system was already in place in the 2000s. Hell my parents both went to college in the mid-90s and most of their papers were typed although it might have been an 'optional but preferred' thing back then, and that's before we even had internet.

No. 2080784

>>2080761
I've heard of the lack of computer literacy for sure. You'd think they'd be more attuned to typing and computers, but I guess they're all on iPads. Sad to see.

No. 2080785

>>2080781
The second post said if your school requires typed papers NOW it is a shitty school (even though that's a requirement at most major universities, so the 'good' ones) and the third one was referring back to the previous conversation so implying that currently, university does not require it.

No. 2080786

>>2080768
You wouldn't be trying to insist this was "your lived experience" this way if you had actually been around in that time period, what a weird strawman.

No. 2080788

>>2080786
it sounds like you're going to choose to disagree/attempt to disprove literally any statement i make

No. 2080790

>>2080788
Just the ones that are obvious BS.

No. 2080791

>>2080785
no, that’s actually not what the post says. the post never says “if your school requires typing it sounds like a shitty school”. it says if your educators wouldn’t accept a handwritten paper it sounds like a shitty school, which is factual. go grab a professor off the street and ask them if they’d accept a handwritten assignment, they’ll likely say yes.

No. 2080793

>>2080784
Yeah it shocked me at first to hear that computer literacy is going down in younger students but makes sense when most of them grew up on app-based devices like smartphones and iPads, which I guess would make you less accustomed to computers. But I still would think that schools would at least have computer labs inside the school where students would be taught typing, excel, how to save files and basic stuff like that? I can see how if you mostly type on a phone you would be a slower typist than someone who mostly types on a computer, but not being used to typing on a computer at all just seems like an oversight since it will be a big problem for most people entering the workforce if they have any even vaguely office-related job.

No. 2080795

>>2080790
>REEEE USING YOUR HANDS TO WRITE IS BULLSHIT!!! COMPUTERS EXISTED IN 2010 SO THEY WERE FORCING EVERYONE TO SIT IN FRONT OF THEM!!!
This really sounds like a fantasy statement made by an alfie

No. 2080798

>>2080791
"If it requires typed papers" and "if your educators wouldn't accept handwritten papers" mean the same thing. It's not factual that only shitty schools don't accept handwritten papers.

Uh like I said I literally taught college classes for several years and papers had to be typed, which was a departmental requirement and not the individual professors' choice. But I'm sure if it was up to professors most would still say they won't accept handwritten papers as handwriting can make it impossible to actually read the paper (lots of people have semi-illegible handwriting), it can make it impossible to edit papers that need to go through rounds of edits, and it can make it harder to put it into anti-plagiarism software (though not impossible). Also most university papers will have word count min and max limits which can't be checked if a paper is handwritten but can easily be checked if there is a standard font and margin size. Where are these universities where profs accept handwritten papers?

No. 2080799

>>2080795
Calm down. There's no reason to have that kind of tantrum just because someone said you lied on the internet, kek.

No. 2080801

>>2080798
NTAYRT but…No, they actually do not mean the same thing? They are different sentences entirely?

No. 2080802

>>2080791
>go grab a professor off the street and ask them if they’d accept a handwritten assignment, they’ll likely say yes.
NTA but it doesn't sound like you've ever been to uni or spoken to a professor kek

No. 2080803

>>2080798
>I taught college classes for several years
professor nonny kek

No. 2080804

>>2080802
I did go to university, but it was also 15 years ago.

No. 2080805

>>2080795
Using your hands to write is fine and good but there is a difference between taking notes in your class or writing out responses on an exam and writing out a 15 page paper with academic references all by hand. It's not practical for a grader and it's not practical for the students either as paper writing often requires several rounds of edits and handwriting is both much slower and doesn't allow for major edits to be made without rewriting the whole thing.

No. 2080807

>>2080801
How does 'requires typing' and 'doesn't accept handwriting' not mean the same thing? What is the difference? A requirement means 'not accepting anything else.'

No. 2080809

>>2080799
it is kind of insane to think that writing with your hands wasn't an option just because typing was also an option in the early 10's

No. 2080810

>>2080803
I wasn't a professor lol I just taught course sections as a grad student.

No. 2080811

>>2080807
I never once said that it’s a shitty school if it requires typing, I said that it would be shitty (and also unrealistic) to not accept handwritten content. I don’t know if you need to open a dictionary to learn the definitions of all of those individual words but I seriously can’t help you if your literacy skills are so poor that you need to be spoonfeed information like a legitimate retard.

No. 2080812

>>2080809
Writing with your hands is always an option but typically typing is required for the version that gets handed in to your prof or TAs, for the aforementioned reasons. If you think they are bad reasons can you explain why? Also even if you believe it's a bad system, it still was the system in the early 2010s and continues to be the system now, whether it's good or not. If you think better when you write with your hands you can always do that and type it up after, there's even AI programs now which will convert photos of handwritten text to typed text with relatively high accuracy (if your handwriting is neat enough).

No. 2080814

>>2080809
You could always write with your hands, you can even write with your tongue. Doesn't mean uni professors were accepting coursework that way in the early 2010s.

No. 2080815

>>2080811
Not accepting handwritten content is the same thing as requiring the paper to be typed though. What would be the difference between 'typed paper required' and 'not accepting handwritten papers'? I asked this once already and you didn't or couldn't answer.

Most universities accept some handwritten content for some things (exams, short in-class quizzes or lab reports, etc) but not for most longer content like papers. And that's just papers, most universities also require powerpoint presentations, excel work, etc. which definitely require a computer. If you are in anything like compsci or engineering or physics you also likely need to code in your classes and program things for which you need a computer. If you are in any STEM field you will need to use computer programs for your stats. Even assuming your professors were so impractical they allowed people to hand in 20 page handwritten papers, there would be no way to do the rest of these things without computers and in some cases without internet, plus the research for the papers themselves would require internet at a certain level.

There are tons of other things in universities that currently require internet like course registrations, applications, weekly quizzes, etc. but at least these plausibly could be done (although they would take a lot more time) in person if the university wanted to stop internet-based course registration etc.

No. 2080835

>>2080791
delulu

No. 2080837

>>2080835
I mean she's right, they probably would accept a handwritten assignment if it was a 1 page worksheet/quiz or something. Beyond that, they probably wouldn't.

No. 2080839

>>2080837
I was able to submit handwritten assignments when doing it online would have been overly tedious (i.e. mathematics where graphs and formulae had to be drawn) but I had to take pictures of my papers and combine them as PDFs

No. 2080843

>>2080839
Oh where I went to school in the early 2010s physics lab reports and stuff like that had to be handwritten and handed in on graph paper for that reason (required hand-drawn graphs and showing your work with math) but stuff like that is just one of many things you have to do in college. Saying 'no one needs a computer/the internet for university' is plainly false and even the claim that no one should need to use a computer/internet for college is wrong now, because most of the industries university prepares you for require them and have moved to using technology for everything, so of course your education should introduce you to/use the same technology also. Even in fields like architecture where a lot of hand-drawn drafting is required, there are usually some digital drafting courses and assignments too since it's become part of the industry standard, it's the same for any science field that uses heavy stats which pretty much can't be done by hand because computing technology allowed people to invent a bunch of more complex stats, etc. There are a few college majors like probably fine arts or performing arts where there are very few computer-based assignments so profs might be willing to accept them done by hand (although even people I know who did, say, music, needed computer and internet for listening assignments and powerpoint presentations) but in any STEM, social science, etc. field it would be basically impossible and in most humanities fields people are likely to go into jobs that require computing too.

No. 2080846

>>2080839
the person whose never been to college tho is definitely not talking about math work

No. 2080872

>>2080843
Yeah nowadays computer access is essential, you have to upload your assignments in most courses these days so you literally can't pass if you don't have computer access

No. 2080888

I feel like if an old lady commits a crime she should just be allowed to get away with it

No. 2080896

>>2080872
Not only is it essential, but students wouldn't benefit even if it were made less essential for college programs. It's not like most of the computer/internet-dependence of university programs is unnecessary or useless - some is strictly speaking unnecessary but probably saves a lot of time and money, while a lot of the rest is just essential to teach the things that are now taught in universities.

Like just as an example, around the time I went to undergrad, LME was kind of in its infancy, considered 'advanced' statistics for an undergrad level that we didn't know how to do, and simple ANOVA and other stats that were typically used in the sciences and social sciences were still considered acceptable for a lot of science papers. With a small enough dataset something like ANOVA is doable by hand. About 10 years later LME was considered the standard for my field and many others, and I'd like to see someone doing a complex LME on a big dataset by hand. Although there might be some case to be made to teach students 'the simple stuff' first for basic conceptual understanding and statistical literacy, there's no point not teaching students things that they absolutely will need to know and use if they ever want to work in the field or go to grad school or publish.

No. 2080901

File: 1720381431129.jpeg (197.9 KB, 1300x821, IMG_2810.jpeg)

The Olympics is genuinely stupid. It would be funnier if people were randomly selected to participate, like how they choose people for jury duty.

No. 2080902

>>2080901
Why do you think they're stupid?

No. 2080906

>>2080725
NTA but if you're dealing with a crazy person, there's not much you can do to de-escalate but try and ignore them.
I agree that it a woman has a moid she should expect him to put himself between her and a potentially dangerous confrontation but it's unwise to escalate it

No. 2080909

>>2080888
I agree with this

No. 2080911

>>2080906
I'm not saying they should escalate it, I'm saying it's insane that when someone is accosting their gf they will literally hide behind her or back away and put her in the crosshairs. This happened to me once, not with a bf but a male friend who did a ton of martial arts and always talked about how tough he is and even made fun of me once for feeling vulnerable walking alone at night because 'if you're trained in martial arts you can just scare off criminals even if you're a 5'0 90lb woman,' we were taking a short hike together and some schizo homeless moid started threatening and advancing on me, screaming he's going to cut my genitals with a knife and all this shit, and when I turn around my much bigger, stronger martial artist moid friend did a road runner and was like a solid 300feet away down the path. Pathetic.

No. 2080929

>>2080911
That is really pathetic nona, sorry to hear it. Chickenhawk moids are the most pathetic subspecies
In my (albeit limited) experience it's the other way around though, moids get extra protective of their egos when they're with a girl and will pick fights over nonsense in order to impress (in their testosterone pickled brains) the girl
I once had a date with a guy who decided to pick a fight while we were in line at a corner store because the guy in front of us was taking too long. Got both of them kicked out of the store and I was out of there, these retards think they look cool but the first thing I think of is how unhinged this guy could be with me if he's willing to get physical over waiting in line

No. 2080931

Americans are privileged and have a very warped concept of what being "poor" actually is.

No. 2080937

>>2080929
I believe you anon but I'm mainly talking about videos I've seen online where someone obviously dangerous/threatening was accosting the woman or the couple, not just random infights about grocery lineups or whatever. I feel like there's a difference between moids puffing their chests around other obviously normal/sane moids to start minor spats and when shit actually goes down and a guy just fucking hides behind his gf or runs away while she's getting spat at, hit, etc. by some schizo or testerical man for some reason.

Thankfully I don't know any scrotes who do what you're describing in public to impress girls, but I know it's a thing some men do. I think they do it because they think there's no real risk of it escalating to real violence though.

No. 2080953

>>2080931
There's different levels of being poor/poverty.

No. 2080964

>>2080931
You’re still sperging about this?? kek

No. 2080966

>>2080911
did you atleast call out your martial moid friend after that or make fun off him too?

No. 2080973

>>2080888
8's confirm God agrees

No. 2081005

>>2080931
I'm from a poorfag country as well and I do appreciate Americans and other westerners for having a little bit of a standard for what poverty is. Just because other people from around the globe have it worse, doesn't mean that they can't complain about things like recession for example.
This type of mentality is one of the many factors (besides ofc greedy and corrupt politicians in charge and shit currency etc.) that keeps poorfag countries poorfag - no, enduring worse forms of poverty isn't some badge of humility and honor.

No. 2081025

>>2080973
Yeah I called him out but he was all 'I'm just being safe! You should have run away too!' Even though the guy was targeting me and there was no way I was turning my back on that shit. The worst part is the moid didn't even call the cops, which he could have. I was trying to call the cops on the schizo but he kept trying to grab my phone out of my hand. I didn't really hang out with him (my friend, not the schizo) after that because I thought he was a huge hypocrite lmao

No. 2081029

>>2081005
Also poverty is kind of relative to the living standards of a country. Of course there are 'objective' levels of poverty too - like obviously we know that objectively people living in a hut with no locking doors and no running water are more 'poor' than people living in a 1bd apartment in a US city who have electricity, water and heating, but it's relevant what your level of income buys you relative to the survival needs and standards where you live. If you could buy out a whole grocery store in, idk, Turkey, but you can't buy a week's worth of meals in the US, it kind of doesn't matter how rich you'd be in Turkey, you still don't have adequate food. If you need a phone, computer, internet, and home address to even apply for a job then pointing out that a tribe living in the remote jungle doesn't have internet or cellphones is pretty meaningless to you personally. I know my parents who lived in a Soviet country experienced levels of poverty I couldn't imagine (not having toilet paper or tampons/pads available for sale, not even knowing what oranges or bananas were, having only 2-3 pieces of underwear they needed to wash every couple days) but since that was normal-ish for their time they didn't feel as deprived as someone living in a modern US city who doesn't have enough money for toilet paper. Mentally your perception of poverty and how 'well off' you are relates to the people around you, no matter how much you try to tell yourself 'at least I'm not starving and living in a mud hut.'

No. 2081067

Pretty "privilege" is not actually a privilege because its only limited to two things social media or looks-specific jobs such as the entertainment industry, prostitution or being a stewardess. Outside of those things that privilege doesn't exist.

Sure pretty women get treated nicely when it comes to social media but not everyone wants to be a influencer and some pretty women want normal jobs and ive seen the way actual super beautiful women get treated at school or at work and it's not nice.
People act hostile towards women who are very pretty in real life, in social media they are nice, but in real life it's different.

Also it's always the obese women, the ugly men, or the boomer women act the most hostile towards pretty women and give them death-glares. Like its not pretty women's fault that you're insecure.

Like i remember when i was in school i started taking care of my appearance and fixed my hair and skin and looked better in general and i showed up looking different than i ususally do and there this morbidly obese girl, we were in the same class but we never talked but for some reason this time she kept staring at me and glaring, she looked so upset like her whole day was ruined just because i looked better, like she was gonna cry or attack me. I remember feeling weirded out by that. Even now in the present when ever i dress up good theres a certain type of people who always get upset or hostile.

No. 2081069

>>2081067
Actually pretty people are 'privileged' in every job - more likely to be hired, more likely to get good performance reviews and raises. Men too, not just women. And in many social situations as well that may affect other aspects of your life, for example networking that may lead to job or educational opportunities. A few people will be hostile to very beautiful women (not so much beautiful men who only get privileges) but not as hostile overall as ugly or fat women. The only women who tend to get less hostility are average women who look 'put together' but not stunning, who seem to largely be treated okay but don't get the hostility that either ugly, GNC, or very beautiful women get.

I've been on both sides of this and being pretty is 100x better than being ugly, there are literally zero advantages except possibly a slightly lower chance of catcalling/getting hit on by random moids but it still happens even if you are ugly. If the worst thing that ever happened to you as a result of being pretty was some jealous woman 'staring/glaring' at you from afar, that really shows you that it doesn't create any real problems.

No. 2081070

The days of a pop super stars are over. Every few months they come out with a new pop girlie who is supposed to go down in history and be successful. First it was ice spice, then it was tyla and now it chappel roan…they all become forgotten in a few months or so and can’t sell out concerts. The last really big name pop star was Ariana grande, no pop star will be able to reach Britney Spears or beyonce star levels again.

No. 2081074

>>2081070
There probably will be superstars again, but likely this will happen after some paradigm changes, it might be someone who's doing something really different musically than what's normal now or the way music is marketed/distributed might change again. I think right now the problem is that we're really oversaturated with extremely obvious industry plants, and for the most part all their music is being written for them by the same few producers whose songs all sound basically the same. Even the popstars who write their own music for the most part are writing music that's very similar to the people who came before them, so it all seems very repetitive. But I don't think this will last forever, there will probably be a new big genre that gains some ground or something.

That being said I think people like Olivia Rodrigo and Billie Eilish are 'bigger' and have more longevity than Ice Spice, Tyla, Chappel Roan, Sabrina Carpenter etc. since they at least do a lot of their own writing and have a more obvious 'style' although they are not Ariana Grande or Britney level famous.

I think actual bands might make a comeback eventually, honestly, as people get burnt out on the shiny shiny pop producer music, but it could go in a different direction as well.

No. 2081076

>>2081069
The hired thing is not exactly true though. You must be going off some outdated statistic. There are just as many studies showing that women who look too "well put", too goodlooking or wear makeup are more likely to be turned down from job offers as well.
Theres moids (and some pickmes too) who dont want to hire beautiful women because moids cannot resist doing sexual harassment. Moids literally think women who wear red lipstick are trying to seduce them.

I feel like you are so close to getting the truth when you mentioned average women because i feel like they have it the best compared to ugly and beautiful women. The majority of the world population looks average so something out of the norm whether its a ugly or a pretty woman gets treated differently.

No. 2081085

>>2081076
> wear makeup are more likely to be turned down from job offers as well.
Where are you getting this from? It is still a basic expectation in a lot of industries that you wear makeup, to the point where you can get fired for not wearing it, in many places. I haven't seen any statistics about how physically attractive women get work disadvantages, though I have seen dozens showing the opposite, but I also have my lived experience to go off of and in my lived experience ugly women have massive, and I really mean massive, obvious disadvantages in the workplace, both with hiring and how people actually treat them once they get the job.

Yeah average women are the least likely to get 'jealous bullying' or 'punching down bullying' because… they are average, but there are many advantages to being beautiful that average looking people don't get anyway. And there are zero advantages to being ugly. Being non-ugly but non-stunning and getting privileges from that is also 'pretty privilege' just a milder form of pretty privilege, the point is if you're ugly you're really screwed.

No. 2081086

>>2081067
I hate beautiful people tbh. And I think it's just because Instagram and social media has really made me resent the "influencer" look that most beautiful people lean into these days. Beautiful people just don't feel real to me, I feel like I'm just constantly waiting for them to hit me with the "like and subscribe for more". I try to correct my bias but it's really hard. Also yes I am ugly before anyone asks.

No. 2081093

>>2081086
Maybe it's just where I live but most of the stunningly beautiful people I see don't look anything like influencers and have very diverse looks. I'm glad you're working through your resentment for how they were born though, I wish women would not resent or judge other women for either (being beautiful or ugly/fat/whatever) but it's to some degree biologically ingrained. People naturally think beautiful people are more intelligent, competent, etc. so even if people consciously try not to judge them based on their 'looks' it's likely they're still giving prettier people advantages because they wrongly perceive them as smarter or more talented.

Also I think it's really silly to suggest that men avoid hiring women 'because they'd sexually harass them' lol men always try to put themselves in positions to be able to harass the people they want to fuck, it's the same with adult women and it's the same with pedos who somehow always have a job around kids. Moids do not have the self awareness or self control to avoid hiring women because they're attracted to them, they might just say that if asked so they can pity themselves about how 'everything is considered sexual harassment these days.'

No. 2081096

>>2081067
tbh it seems like you’re the insecure ex uggo by being so sure another random girl was deadly jealous of you

No. 2081098

>>2081096
Nta but as a conventionally attractive woman I thought she was larping as me and then I got embarrassed in case someone I know reads it and thinks it's me. Pretty girls being bullied by insecure girls is a canon event and it never stops. My biggest hater is my ugly ma

No. 2081101

>>2081070
I mean… Taylor Swift exists and will absolutely go down in history (of mediocrity). There are other big names as well. The thing is that no one is provocative or transgressive like Madonna and no one is really skilled and putting in effort like Britney or MJ. Entertainment industry is mostly the same now: plenty of remakes because it’s proven to sell, everything is polished and politically correct, there’s barely any creative risk.

No. 2081102

>>2081098
What she described wasn't even bullying, it was 'staring.' I got bullied for being pretty when I was pretty (actual bullying not someone staring) but I got bullied worse for being ugly/awkward when I was ugly/awkward, and the latter is a lot worse both because everyone joins in and enjoys it and because you know it's not out of jealousy.

No. 2081103

>>2080711
>>2080725
Blame the deluded idea that males evolved to "protect" rather than parasitize.

No. 2081104

>>2081093
Yeah it's a given that naturally beautiful people also exist and I shouldn't judge them for being beautiful, but I think my problem moreso lies with people who chase beauty really hard in that artificial sort of way. Like I had a friend who could never shut up about beauty trends and dieting, fashion, taking cute yoga pictures to post on Insta, that kind of thing. It was honestly so obnoxious and shallow. It's good to want to better yourself but some beautiful people chase something they already have so obnoxiously because that's all they have going for them and it really shows. You're right about beautiful people not necessarily being better in other aspects of life.

No. 2081105

>>2081101
There are plenty of extremely talented musicians making pop music (and other genres of music) who are well known, like Jacob Collier for example, they just aren't the ones most pushed by the mass media. I think there's a growing disconnect between the 'pushers' of what is supposed to be popular and the people who actually have talent. Talented people don't want to be 'controlled' by labels anymore so what labels get is less-talented people desperate for fame whereas there used to be more of an overlap between actual talent/charisma and marketability.

No. 2081106

>>2081102
I mean unless your autistic its pretty easy to tell when someone is staring daggers at you. Also idk how you go from being bullied for being pretty to being bullied for being ugly. What happened

No. 2081107

>>2081101
I said Ariana grande is the last. Taylor swift predates Ariana grande.

No. 2081108

>>2081098
Idk, the projection that everyone secretly hates you for being so attractive is ex uggo/fat thing in my experience. Most gorgeous women I know are rather chill.

No. 2081110

I think Hasan Abi has good takes, except for troons, but that's a given that he could never understand arguments against those things given that he is a moid

No. 2081111

>>2081108
They can appear chill and still register the shitty treatment they receive because someone's insecure. Anons hardly causing a scene posting in the unpop opinion thread she's maybe the gorgeous girl you think about

No. 2081113

>>2081106
Uh I was mostly bullied for being ugly when I was in my early teens, dressed GNC, had a bunch of orthodontic issues and 'developed early' so I had problems with my posture and was very insecure. People all assumed I was lesbian, claimed I sexually assaulted other prettier girls (everyone believed them), people even literally threw rocks at me and stole my shit and people I'd never met before would gossip about me in front of my face and treat me like garbage. I got sick of it so once I got my weird jaw screw devices off and changed schools I also changed my hair, style, etc., started doing a lot of sports and generally 'grew into' my looks and then was bullied for being pretty but it was not anywhere approaching the same degree of awful. I then went through another ugly phase due to disease but luckily I was a bit too old to be explicitly bullied at that point, I did notice that I lost a ton of 'advantages' in society though and was treated in a much more hostile manner by strangers even though people who actually knew me were not that bad. I'm now more attractive again (not as attractive as before my disease but a lot better looking than I was a couple years ago) and the way people treat me has dramatically improved, although I don't get the same 'privileges' as I got when I was really attractive. The absolute worst was when I was both ugly and visibly very GNC, because in addition to ugly-person bullying I got homophobic bullying.

No. 2081114

>>2081113
That sucks anon isn't it mental how people treat any woman that sticks out

No. 2081118

>>2081113
I won't guess your disease because i don't want to start a infight.

No. 2081119

>>2081111
Kek I doubt it. Most of the time they weren’t too focused on their looks because they knew they were beautiful, everyone knew they were beautiful and that they’re sort of 'winning' in life because of that, they were carefree so they were liked by most women, the ones uglier than them too.

No. 2081120

>>2081110
Lol yes that is unpopular, he is retarded

No. 2081121

>>2081067
I've been on both sides of this fence and it's a million times worse to be the ugly, awkward woman who gets asked out as a joke. The only times I ever got "bullied for being pretty" was when I had pickme friends who would gang up on me out of jealousy whilst simultaneously using me as a prop to attract (unwanted) attention from scrotes.
>>2081113
Absolutely, the homophobic bullying you get as a GNC or even just awkward woman is appalling. I got outed against my will in school and I can relate hard. You have my full sympathies nonna.

No. 2081122

>>2081119
I mean you're literally not in their heads you've no idea how they register their physical appearance in relation to socialising. They sounds like lovely woman but I'm sure you're not aware of every interaction they experience. Especially if they're so chill they probably won't tell you about every time someone's been an ass

No. 2081124

>>2081118
Why would it start an infight?

>>2081114
It is mental but also I think it happens to so many women in one way or another that we have more in common in general. It's mostly men that don't really get treated like crap for how they look one way or the other, and are respected regardless.

No. 2081125

>>2081070
i wonder what'll be big in music next? i can't preconceive whatever may be the next big thing

No. 2081127

>>2081124
I agree. That's why all those bullying bitches that target other women should be othered as pickmes, apart from us anons when it's about cows that's an exception to the rule obviously lol

No. 2081129

>>2081127
Like if you hurt others it's karma. For instance my ugly ma has done so much negative karma that I have a lot of free karma to call her fat online etc

No. 2081130

>>2081121
NTA but as someone who is also ugly, I think sometimes people hate you just because you make the aesthetic or vibe of the place worse. Like you can tell when you're ugly and you go to a really cute cafe for example, people glare at you more because you're so ugly that you ruin the vibe. I was on the train in between some seats shared by a group of beautiful people and they literally got mad because they were trying to film themselves and their friends having a cool night out and I kept ruining their shots by being frumpy and ugly.

No. 2081132

>>2081121
Thanks nonna luckily it was a looong time ago and it was a learning experience I guess and in a way it pushed me to 'come out of my shell' which I'll always be grateful for in a roundabout way, but it was the kind of bullying I think some kids try to kill themselves over. I'll also agree with the other anons that when I was very pretty it was very easy to be a 'chill' person, I did get some very overt bullying for my looks from jealous people but aside from that I never really assumed anyone meant me harm and wasn't bothered by staring or whatever, it was definitely the easiest phase of my life by far. It was easy to 'assume the good in others' too because most people were so nice to me, which has its disadvantages (naivety) but makes your mood and socializing much better.

No. 2081133

>>2081125
I think the next big act is either likely to be something like an actual band/group that play their own instruments, or maybe someone who will invent a 'new' trend in electronic/digital production, whatever that might be. It seems like it's leaning toward a more acoustic trend though imo.

No. 2081137

No offence but ive noticed that fat women do the same opression olympics just like ugly women do when someone is telling their experience. Like this is not a competition, you dont need tell others who went through something that it was nothing just because you went through worse.

It reminds me how when skinny flat women talk about their experinces of being shamed for being flat or gaunt there is always a fat woman waiting to tell her how they as a fat woman have it worse and that skinny women are privileged and should not complain.

No. 2081138

I am so bored and want to infight.


Jk rowling is a bad person and shouldnt be seen as a radfem leader or spokesperson we need someone better than a moid abuser sympathist who is friends with anti-abortion radicals.

No. 2081139

>>2081130
Yeah I think conversely one of the 'privileges' pretty people get is that a lot of the times people want them around (at events, in groups, etc) merely for the reason that they make that group/event/etc. and photos from it look better. Like I know the original anon said 'with the exception of the entertainment industry' so she kind of covered this but even outside of stuff like 'pop music' in performance fields which emphasize looks ostensibly less, you're more likely to get invited to play shows or be in someone's band as a mid musician who is pretty than a mid musician who is ugly/average. If you are a dancer you are likely to get hired for more stuff if you are really pretty even if you're a 'background' dancer in a random video or whatever. But this also holds with just random social events too I think.

No. 2081142

>>2081125
NTA but I've thinking about similar things recently I feel like at this point of time we don't really have a defined culture in the West anymore besides the internet, and the internet at this stage is homogenous and revolves around being advertiser friendly and everyone is in the same places breathing down each other's necks. Everything feels hollow and everyone wants to go back to a time before that which is why there's so much nostalgia bait or people glorifying the past but even that feels like a empty simulacrum, this is extremely apparent with the current generation's (and a large amount of millenials) obsession with aesthetics and use that or troon out or become a queer spicy straight to play the role of a more interesting person. I'm not trying to imply white people have no culture, I think we definitely do or did at one point just overexposure to it made feel like the boring default state to a lot of people.
I think a lot of creative industries are going to cannibalise themselves, which AI is definitely going to play a major part in for a good while, until something happens to disrupt it. Even indie shit like breakcore is pretty much a walking corpse of what it used to be not even 5 years ago.

No. 2081143

>>2081113
GNC GNC GNC GNC GNC GNC GNC lol

No. 2081144

>>2081138
Why do you think she is a bad person? I don't know which people she's friends with but I usually don't think someone is a 'bad person' just because they are able to be friends with people with some different views.

No. 2081146

>>2081138
I would’ve agree with your point if you showed some screencaps of her being a sympathizer for male abuse. Otherwise learn how to integrate, newfag

No. 2081149

>>2081139
I mean sweet nonnie…the fact that you are only listing influencer and entertainment stuff despite that nonie saying stuff outside that…isnt that kinda proving her point, no?

No. 2081152

>>2081146
..I don't know if you're going along with the infight larp or you are actually being a hostile bitch

No. 2081153

>>2081138
I don't think she's a bad person but I do think she could post more about other parts of radical feminism other than owning Le troons. She could convince so many Harry Potter loving libfems over to our side if she just talked about troons just a little bit less. Talk about male violence, talk about impossible beauty standards for women, talk about abortion and contraceptive rights.

No. 2081155

>>2081138
i don’t know if she’s a bad person but i do consider her to be obnoxious and weird, she’s like a checkers team kid

No. 2081156

>>2081142
AI is not going to disrupt music, but I think you're right about the rest - the current model for 'sales' and monetizing music or getting it to be popular is just not one that tends to bring interesting things to the forefront since anything less generally palatable is also less marketable and less safe for advertisers. But I do think people are starting to resent how everything is marketed and how everything is basically 'advertising' so we may move back toward a system in which people are more likely to look for 'unique' things. My hope as a musician myself is that people actually start going to more live, local music shows (not like giant stadium shows) and develop more of an appreciation for both live performance and actually listening to albums start to finish again, because that's something that has somewhat gotten lost. It might just be that if people are looking for 'authenticity' fandoms are going to be smaller, more local and more fragmented again.

No. 2081158

>>2081153
I never got the sense that she was a radfem though, I think she's basically a libfem that saw the light about troons and male violence/women's shelters, and got piled on so badly for that she made it her whole raison d'etre.

No. 2081160

>>2081158
JKR rich enough to comfortably shit on those that most normal people can't now because our politicians have made a minority group a major political talking point rather than say the economy which actually impacts everyone's life

No. 2081164

>>2081160
Yeah that's the thing, the vibe I get is that she is trying to 'make herself useful' in her older age and substantial wealth by just doing one thing that other women around her can't do, and is just doggedly trying to 'open up the conversation' that way. It works I think, she's made it much harder to persecute other women in the UK for wrongthink/wrongspeak about gender/troons, which is one of the main battles for women's rights we're fighting right now since it affects so many other things.

I was never a harry potter fan and I don't really know much about her beyond that but at least she's doing a couple useful things (that and funding women's shelters/charities) which is already more than I can say for most celebrities, so I don't have it in me to be mad that she's not a 'real' radfem.

No. 2081165

>>2081160
Also most trannies are men with dicks telling other women they can believe they know our experiences and can share in womanhood. They can all fuck off

No. 2081166

>>2081160
> our politicians have made a minority group a major talking point rather than talk about the economy
That's by design.

No. 2081167

>>2081166
No shit point dexter. It's the cheapest campaign strategy ever. Cap for the lowest demographic and make bank. However the indoctrination of kids into "gender" studies that somehow always end up into exposing kids to sexual context far too early. It's a pedos wet dream

No. 2081169

>>2081166
It's not like the political class give a shit what citizens think or say about the economy anyway, they will do what they will do regardless and they're all playing for the same team.

No. 2081175

>>2081169
Apathy like that is why they get away with not addressing shit. If they weren't so worried about what the masses have the power to do they wouldnt proganda us so fucking much

No. 2081176

>>2081153
>Talk about male violence, talk about impossible beauty standards for women, talk about abortion and contraceptive rights.

It pissed me off alot when she stayed silent when roe v wade got overturned because i know this woman is chronically online and fights with the troons 24/7 yet couldnt say anything about that. I did suck because many radfems wanted to hear her opinion about that but it was radio silence.

Why cant our leaders or representatives be actual radfems, im tired of right-wing GCers like posier parker, meghan murphy or libfems like JK rowling who dont seem interested in feminism unless its talking about troons being our spokespoerson. Can we find someone from radfem tumblr and make them our spokesperson instead.

No. 2081177

Vaping is so embarrassing and whenever someone hits their vape they look like a massive dork.

No. 2081178

>>2081174
I'm not apathetic, I'm just stating facts. The masses do have power in theory but politicians aren't worried what people will 'say' about the economy, because they aren't going to listen to what people 'say.' People would have to do something concrete to exert our power, but voting isn't one of those things since all the political parties share the same economic aims more or less (slight differences in details for the look of things mainly). All the other culture wars issues are just to serve as a distraction, but not in the sense of 'making people not notice the economy getting worse' (everyone notices the economy getting worse). It's a distraction to keep the population divided and thinking the political 'team' they vote for matters, because they will have differences in platform about cultural differences, women's rights, other shit that makes people really mad but not about economy.

No. 2081179

I don’t care if I sound like a boomer when I say this but it should be illegal to use chatGPT. Same with any AI bots/generative resources, you should be required to have some type of licensure to be allowed to use shit like that.

No. 2081180

>>2081070
yeah it’s just not possible in this era of streaming. everyone has their own niche corner now, one unifying superstar is not a thing

No. 2081181

>>2081176
There are plenty of 'actual radfems' who were involved in various feminist movements recently too like idk Julie Bindel, Kathleen Stock, etc. but they just didn't gain as much popularity or whatever they were doing had less mass appeal. Actual radfems also keep fighting amongst themselves and breaking up their various coalitions because, e.g., some of them think it makes sense to legally work with conservatives to prevent anti-woman legislation while others think that's a betrayal, so on and so forth. In general there are very few successful 'movement leaders' who are intellectuals/academics because they tend to have less charisma and be less practical-minded, and get stuck in the weeds on academic topics normies don't understand or care about.

FWIW I think Megan Murphy was much closer to a typical 'actual radfem' when she first got famous, she just changed her mind about some things eventually and went somewhat further right. But she does still spend a lot of time and energy talking about shit like male violence, prostitution, porn, etc. either directly or via her website which still platforms plenty of radfems. She was somewhat ostracized by other radfems for her views on COVID which is when she started hanging out with more right wingers because she was basically kicked out of her own group for having different opinions on an unrelated topic - like I was saying, overly academic communities always seem to end up splintering from unrelated infights.

No. 2081182

>>2081160
This. I used to like her but not anymore, she’s just some bored white woman who doesn’t really give a shit about radical feminism. She probably isn’t even a radfem, she fits the bill of a liberal feminist who’s just against trannies. Every tranny and gendie on twitter likes to call anyone against their agenda “terfs” or “radfems” when it isn’t accurate to the person’s views at all, it’s the same as calling everybody Nazis kek

No. 2081183

>>2081146
I dont have screencaps but the only bad people i know she has supported were Johnny Deep and Greg Ellis. Meawhile for associating with or interacting she did it with Matt Walsh and Caroline Farrow.

This can be easily found by googling Jk rowlings name together with one of the people i mentiones. She even ended up blocking one of her fans when questioned about why she supports johnny deep.

No. 2081184

>>2081179
I agree with you anon. It's an unmitigated disaster. I'm also really mad because a lot of my friends or at least my friends' boyfriends/girlfriends (for some reason?) work on AI for one or the other of the big tech companies and they're all so retarded about this I want to leave whenever they start sperging about it.

No. 2081185

>>2081177
Agreed, they think they look edgy when they do it and it just makes me want to kek

No. 2081186

>>2081182
Yeah she literally was never a radfem, she actually was pro-troon but they started harassing her anyway because she wasn't bootlicking enough of them and then all the hate she was getting made her take note of and start posting about the troon topic. She's literally just some normie middle aged mom who never especially cared about feminism.

No. 2081192

>>2081186
She never had to until it affects her like you stated, doesn’t matter if normal women were speaking out against it because it actually impacts our lives more than hers who can afford to stay away from them it only became a problem for her until it reached her doorstep. I can’t trust a lot of female pundits, at the root level the intentions behind their beliefs are purely for survival.

No. 2081193

>>2080901
the olynpics isn't supposed to be funny anon….

No. 2081195

>>2081183
Idk about the other things but as for associating with Walsh and Farrow it seems like she just replied to their tweets about trans activists (and then went on some podcast with Walsh where they supposedly had an argument, so I doubt she really agrees with him on much). I personally think it's counterproductive to be too critical of people just for interacting with people who have different views I don't like or being willing to talk to them, when they have one or two things in common. I think our society would honestly be better if people were more willing to talk and civilly argue with people with different political beliefs and find points of commonality, as that's one of the main ways people can actually be convinced to your side.

Not really arguing that she is a great feminist or anything but I wouldn't hate or dislike someone on that basis alone, I would be more interested in their own opinions and their concrete actions, and from what I know she has made many concrete actions to help women (like donating heavily to women's charities/setting up shelters etc) so she's still feminist-leaning in my book even if it's the milquetoast libfem variety.

No. 2081197

>>2081181
Oh i didnt know that was the reason she left the radfem movement…are you sure it was that? Because i always see people saying different reasons for why she left. I still think its shitty how Meghan used radfems for clout and once she got semi-famous she basically stopped identifying as one.
Posie Parker also did the same thing.

>julie bindel

Hello no she seems like a schizo and im pretty sure she has admitted to being a political lesbian, id rather have a thousand JK rowling clones than someone like Julie Bindel.

>>2081195
She did way more than just interact with Matt, she watched his whole movie and praised it. She shouldn't have given that piece of shit man attention.

I personally dont care that much about her slight interaction with Caroline and Matt just like you said. But you should look into her support of Johnny Deep and Greg Ellis. It makes her look pretty bad.

No. 2081204

>>2081197
I don't think that's exactly accurate about Megan Murphy, nonna. I had seen a lot of her talks prior to her 'shift right' and from what I remember she always said she doesn't identify as a radfem, she just associated with a lot of radfems and agrees with a lot of their views (which she still does imo, I don't think she 'abandoned' anyone per se, I think she just changed some of her other political opinions). My understanding is she was always clear about being a journalist who started an online newspaper/magazine about feminist issues, and she was actually extremely, extremely brave in the face of a lot of violence and threats when she was doing stuff no one else in Canada ever even attempted to do for women's rights issues. She more than did her part and put in her time, and last I checked a few months ago her website was still active and still publishing articles by radical feminists, anti-porn people, etc. She was 'semi-famous' long before her shift to the right as well, she was quite well known back in 2016-2017 and her shift to the right happened around 2020-2021.

I watched at least one (possibly like one and a half?) interviews with her after the shift and her explanation was mainly that she was ostracized by other radfems for her views on COVID, but also that she met a bunch of people/went to some events for 'heterodox thinkers' during that time and befriended people and changed some of her opinions about right wingers. I think she also got a boyfriend who was sort of MRA-leaning and he might have also influenced her views somewhat (she was always a massive simp for men though even in her super-leftist days, her interviews with Benjamin Boyce pissed me off so much she was so simpering).

As for Julie Bindel yes I think she might be polilez as are a lot of the famous 'radfem intellectuals,' iirc she also started some big infight with the WolF people over something or other so they stopped working together. That's the problem, a lot of actual dyed-in-the-wool 2nd wave radfem intellectuals who actually know about radical feminism are kind of crazy, intellectualize everything to the nth degree and fight with each other constantly.

That's why people like Posie Parker are more 'effective' and become 'leaders' - she's just some lady who was like 'haha what if I print a bunch of ads that say woman: adult human female?' and it got a ton of sympathy and attention from a whole bunch of feminists but also a whole bunch of total normies so she actually got bigger crowds sympathizing with her because of the simplicity and relatability of the message. Average suburban moms worried about their kids getting ROGD in school or whatever aren't going to sit down and listen to 3 hour long speeches by 2nd wave lesbian academics, even if they would agree with a lot of it. They just find it too unrelatable and confusing and boring.

I saw her praise of the movie and she just seemed to be saying 'thanks for drawing attention to this issue, good job' which why not? The movie itself didn't do anything wrong, and it did get a ton of attention to the issue. I wish more politically/ideologically palatable people than Matt Walsh were making similarly successful movies, but any little bit of attention drawn to the issue still helps and I'm not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth if he alerts all the religious republicans to what's going on with gender therapists. That's a big voting bloc we should want on our side.

No. 2081284

>>2081204
Samefag but I just went through and checked Feminist Current and while it's not suuper active, there are several recent articles about porn, prostitution, male violence etc. as well as the troon stuff, there's not much about Murphy's 'other' opinions and there are several interviews with people like Kathleen Stock and Helen Joyce, so honestly it seems like she is still relatively 'radfem aligned' on these issues and she's still platforming actual radfem thinkers.

No. 2081374

>>2081179
It should be illegal and highly punishable to use it to cheat on school or work papers. Write your own damn papers you lazy fucking shits

No. 2081379

>>2081374
The problem is that there's basically no way to detect and/or prove that someone cheated on homework using chatGPT.

No. 2081385

>>2081379
Surely big brain universities could just put more weight into examinations taken away from computers if this is such an issue.

No. 2081387

>>2081385
For exams sure, but for homework they can't. Anything that is done outside of the classroom, people can use it.

No. 2081388

>>2081387
Yea obviously which is why give like 10% for coursework and 90% for exams

No. 2081390

>>2081388
That would be absolutely terrible for education though.

I agree with the first nonna who says just make it unavailable to normies.

No. 2081392

Sending nudes is a dumb move. Seriously, why would you do that?

No. 2081393

>>2081392
Is this even remotely unpopular? I feel like 100% of people over the age of 18 know it's dumb af

No. 2081394

>>2081379
ntayrt but thats exactly why i feel like it shouldn't be available to the general public, its way too easy to abuse and get away with it. not only following the rules, but also using your brain to actually formulate your own thoughts to put to paper is crucial to every humans development. AI and shit like that just makes everyone stupider and incentivizes lazy, stupid behavior.

No. 2081395

>>2081392
I wish I understood this 10 years ago

No. 2081396

>>2081393
I see people saying that it's victim blaming to say people who send nudes are dumb or that it's fine if it's just between you and your bf. It's become way too normalized. So many women have their pictures on Telegram groups that they don't even know exist.

No. 2081398

>>2081394
Yeah I'm agreeing with you anon. There's pretty much no good purpose for chatGPT except plagiarism/cheating. It doesn't give good/accurate information so it's fairly useless for doing any kind of 'research' (out of curiosity or otherwise), plus it makes you dumber and worse at researching things yourself. It isn't a useful resource for 'teaching' or 'tutoring' since it gets things wrong so incredibly often either, and for stuff like math homework there are already programs like wolframalpha that actually give you correct results and a correct play by play of how and why you do the math the way you do. What else is it useful for, lonely people? Why not just use dumber chatbots or otome games or something if you need to talk to a computer for company. I would like to hear what it supposedly is good for other than being lazy and cheating on things, because no one has ever actually given me a good explanation.

A personage I know who works on an AI (the microsoft version of chatGPT) was recently talking to a guy I know who's a scientist, showing him how 'useful' it is to do scientific lit searches. It was absolutely laughable, pulling up the most random papers that weren't even on topic lmao and this guy kept trying to excitedly explain how it's so much better than existing search engines like a tard. Meanwhile my friend was like 'uh scientists don't need this, I already know what important papers have been published in my field recently since we all keep up to date with that kind of thing.' But if some random student who didn't know tried to do a lit search they would be going down the garden path and reading some incredibly useless lit when they could just use google scholar instead.

No. 2081402

>>2081396
I mean I don't blame young naive girls who are convinced to send nudes to their bfs but if people don't say it's dumb, how will you know? Refraining from telling people it's idiotic will just lead to more girls naively sending nudes because they don't know any better and think 'everyone does it so it must be fine'. Sometimes it's kinder to be honest about something before it's too late.

No. 2081404

File: 1720410954658.png (274.55 KB, 749x450, lolll.png)

>>2081398
After googling it I learned it can help with coding (sounds useful but can't it just be available by license at tech workplaces if so) and also that it's great for writing cover letters! Picrel is the cover letter it wrote. I wonder why it would be time saving to make it write this as you probably input all this info for it in the first place so the only thing you would have to do would be to add a few connecting words so it's in full sentences.

No. 2081406

>>2081404
It helped me with job interview tips and questions but I'll be damned if it doesn't piss me off that companies are using AI to automatically reject candidates and try and replace human beings

No. 2081407

>>2081392
I'm still confused on why moids are so persistent on seeing nudes of the women they talk to? They go to porn to masturbate anyways and there's millions of curated nude pictures for them. Degradation? Idk.

No. 2081408

>>2081406
What kinds of things did it tell you, like was it highly specialized and accurate to a specific position or was it just 'general tips' because I feel like there's so many resources on the internet for that kind of thing already.

I agree its use for hiring is troubling.

No. 2081410

>>2081407
Yeah, degradation. And if she dumps him or upsets him he can use it for revenge porn. Or even if she doesn't dump him or upset him he can show her body to his friends and brag.

No. 2081411

>>2081404
ntayrt but i think we should be capable of writing our own cover letters. needing a bot to write 5 sentences for yourself is not good, and i think how common it is that the average young person is so illiterate that they can't write their own short little cover letter is quite telling of where we're at educationally

No. 2081412

>>2081411
AYRT and that's what I was saying. This cover letter isn't even particularly well written, and completely lacks personality. If you have to tell it what your skills are anyway, why not just take the 5-10 minutes to write it down yourself? The last time I was job hunting I would bang out like 10 of these in half an hour.

No. 2081413

>>2081411
It took me about 2-4 hours to do my first cover letter and I thought it was pretty subpar but I desperately wanted to apply for an internship and had less than 12 hours to deadline

No. 2081415

>>2081413
Yeah the first one or two will always feel hard/daunting but then once you get over the nerves and understand the format they should be easy to do, it's pretty much just a themed list of your skills/summary of your resume that's slightly tailored to the job you're applying for.

No. 2081419

File: 1720411537736.png (395.71 KB, 754x797, lolllll.png)

>>2081404
It also gives really deep and meaningful relationship advice like picrel, and in the end just tells you to talk to a friend anyway

No. 2081424

>>2081398
This isn't specifically about Chat-GPT however I'm very anti-AI but honestly I think it can be used for good. Some examples are language translation, tool for the disabled (TTS), helps regulate road traffic, etc etc. I just think AI needs to be heavily regulated, there's a major issue when quite literally anyone can access this tool. The worst issue of it all being AI-porn.

No. 2081425

>>2081424
Nonna I agree certain AI applications are useful, but I think it would be possible to keep it on specific applications rather than having something like ChatGPT that is basically just a 'plagiarism/cheating/not thinking for yourself' program. I agree that the only way to keep it from being abused is to keep a tight rein on it, and clearly they are fine at doing that when they want to like making sure it doesn't say certain wrongthink opinions or whatever. They just don't mind that it's going to ruin the education system and make everyone stupid and reliant on it for 'info' that isn't even correct.

No. 2081426

File: 1720412336720.mp4 (392.88 KB, 566x318, lol.mp4)

so i'm fine with ai…outside of porn, like think deepfakes and stuff. at most i feel everything ai generated Needs To Be Tagged as being ai generated, otherwise i just don't care, and i find all the drama and moralfaggotry surrounding it to be really fucking tiresome. the whinging regarding the ~human spirit~ is equally annoying, especially when they're coming from soulless tranny tards whose media consumption is just gacha games and whatever's popular on hbo. you have no concept of soul or taste, you don't know what individuality really is, you happily consume slop that's indistinguishable from ai…why do you care so much? probably because you saw a tiktok that gave you five reasons why """"ai"""" is going to kill us all.

i hate the idea that human output isn't 99.9% total trash anyway. like omg, christ forbid we can generate big boobied anime girls poutily staring into space on white backgrounds or yaoi boys going at it instead of sucking some "artist's" cock to do it for us at the rate of 50 usd an hour. christ forbid we can get that idea that's been rotting in our heads for years out with ai roleplay instead of cruising discord for a they/them with a trigger list longer than the bible. crazy that people who want to cheat on essays for classes that won't matter in their jobs will no longer pay russians over fiverr, they'll just gen one from ai and get a c+. nooooooooo!!!

No. 2081427

>>2081204
>I wish more politically/ideologically palatable people than Matt Walsh were making similarly successful movies, but any little bit of attention drawn to the issue still helps and I'm not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth if he alerts all the religious republicans to what's going on with gender therapists.
There's failures on both sides imo. 2nd wave+ feminists abandoned morality (particularly sexual morality) as oppressive and this drove them into the arms of the liberal left, who used them as cover while legalizing and normalizing pornography and other forms of sexual exploitation.
The right wing on the other hand is composed of backward looking reactionaries who want to go back to an obsolete relationship model for women (and the economy/society in general), its basically weaponized nostalgia.
If I was some kind of feminist influencer I would dialogue with the right on some issues we agree on (pornography and overall sexual decadence in society) and also see what kind of compromises can be made across the aisle. For example there's a lot of valid complaints about no-fault divorce ruining the institution of marriage, I would be fine with eliminating it and treating marriage as a legal contract again so long as we have clear protections for women built into that marriage contract so abuse is a valid reason for ending it.
What I would want from the right in exchange would be giving women who have children in their 20s set-asides for starting education and careers in their 30s, so talented ambitious women can still be successful without having to sacrifice their childbearing years

No. 2081430

>>2081424
Ntayrt but i do definitely agree with this, there are some fields of work and i'm sure a pool of professionals who would know how to properly utilize these tools. They're trying to sell AI as a product that anyone can use instead of regulating it the same way they do drugs, weaponry, etc

No. 2081437

>>2081426
Just because most people are dumb doesn't mean we should implement tools that make them dramatically dumber, make cheating and plagiarism the norm, destroy people's basic literacy and extremely basic skills, etc. It's not even about morality or how great 'the human spirit' is in every single person, and instead of making it easier for more and more people to go to and pass through college who shouldn't be in college in the first place, maybe we should just limit who goes to college and make it for only the people who actually want to learn again? It's a huge waste of society's time and resources to create a system where a bunch of dumbasses who won't do important jobs anyway and don't like learning pay tens of thousands of dollars and sit in lecture halls for 4 years while asking a mindless AI program to do all their homework so they pass and get a completely useless 'diploma' worth less than toilet paper.

There is nothing chatGPT is remotely useful for for the average person, so why should it be pushed on them? To dumb them down and prevent them from learning even the paltry skills they may have learned. And to indoctrinate people with completely wrong information and make them incapable of even thinking critically about what is true because they don't know how to utilize or find real information. Not everyone is completely dumb, and people don't need to be made dumber.

No. 2081439

Translations by AI are better than trusting people that hate their job and hate the audience and "lol just learn an entire language if you want to play a single one hour videogame so badly".
That being said, I do think it is worth learning to draw as it's a universal skill.

No. 2081441

>>2081427
Most 2nd wave feminists are/were radfems, nonna - they didn't abandon sexual morality and they certainly weren't used to legalize and normalize pornography or sexual exploitation. Although some people have claimed that the early 3rd wave feminists like Camille Paglia were just a different subset of the 2nd wave, I think they're better thought of as early 3rd wavers. We were talking about radical feminists here, not 3rd wave feminists so it's not really relevant to the discussion because one of the 'sides' we were talking about isn't liberal feminism.

The right wing has done tons of things wrong, but Matt Walsh's movie was not really pushing his right wing views or honestly any of his more objectionable views, it was just exposing gender ideology. I know people love to purity test feminists about who they 'hang out with' aka ever talk with, are seen at the same events at, etc. even if they disagree but I think it's counterproductive personally. Purity testing is what has always fucked up former feminist movements and communities, and real radical feminism is never going to be popular so it's always going to have to rely on other groups to agree on stuff to advance most of its political aims.

I'm curious about your opinion on no-fault divorce though, I think that opinion is actually fairly unpopular. Why do you think it's ruining marriage?

Unfortunately I don't think 'give and take' like that usually works in politics, especially when one side (radfems) are a tiny political group with no influence, and the other side (the right wing/conservatives) constitute roughly half of most populations. I also don't think the right wing really cares about no fault divorce very much.

No. 2081442

>>2081439
So why not just use AI for translation then? Why is the entirety of chatGPT necessary for the public?

No. 2081444

>>2081427
>For example there's a lot of valid complaints about no-fault divorce ruining the institution of marriage
Like what?

No. 2081445

>>2081442
>>2081437
NTA, but are you the anon who said she thinks only STEMfags should be able to access the internet at all?

No. 2081447

>>2081426
Why should we be encouraging the use of a technology that makes it so that people no longer feel the need to thing for themselves? Why should we be okay with a generation of college graduates who are incapable of doing work that they find boring or difficult and instead just palm it off onto an AI program?

No. 2081448

>>2081445
Lol what? No, that's retarded.

ChatGPT serves the opposite function from the internet though, roughly. I think it's an attempt to centralize and control information, and dumb people down while internet access typically does the opposite.

No. 2081449

>>2081442
nta but the only reason openAI has their bots available to the public is just to squeeze cash out of lazy fuckers who can't formulate a sentence

No. 2081451

>>2081441
>Most 2nd wave feminists are/were radfems, nonna - they didn't abandon sexual morality and they certainly weren't used to legalize and normalize pornography or sexual exploitation.
Maybe I'm mixing my waves up, but from what I've read the tone of feminists shifted in the postwar era from securing legal equality, the right to work free from discrimination and protections from domestic violence and other forms of abuse to removing any limitations on womens' personal freedoms, regardless of the purpose of those limitations.
A good example of this is the support feminists gave to no-fault divorce as well as eliminating adultery as a criminal offense. This greatly weakened marriage as an institution and makes no sense from my POV given that adultery is overwhelmingly a male crime with female victims.

Though to be fair, in many cases moral arguments were made for laws and institutions that actually did discriminate against women (Robert Dabney's 1871 essay against women's suffrage "Women's Rights Women" is one of my favorite examples, though he does make some arguments that apply to other elements of feminism that I agree with), so their mistrust of moral arguments has some basis.

>>I'm curious about your opinion on no-fault divorce though, I think that opinion is actually fairly unpopular. Why do you think it's ruining marriage?

Marriage as it stands is a meaningless legal contract, because it can be withdrawn from by either party at any time. The original purpose of marriage was to create a legally binding union between husband and wife in order to ensure that children were reared in a stable environment, and to punish people who break their vows in order to protect the legitimacy of marriage for everyone else. When you stop punishing bad actors, this creates a prisoner's dilemma where the cost of getting screwed over by your spouse is higher than the benefit of marrying them in the first place. Marriage is the most important institution in this regard but it filters down into all relationships, if there's no punishment for cheaters you can't risk being trusting and neither can the other person. Its similar to how big cities in the US have de facto decriminalized theft by not prosecuting criminals, and the result has been businesses leaving cities like San Francisco in droves because the losses from thieves outweigh the profits they make in those cities

>>2081444
See above

No. 2081457

>>2081439
I don't trust AI translations, AI is not that good and it can give you a wrong translation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence)
Drawing is not an "universal skill" though, you either have talent in drawing or you don't.

No. 2081460

>>2081457
NTA, but I disagree. You can learn how to draw and put in the time/effort, or not. Anyone can learn it as a skill.

No. 2081461

>>2081457
I meant universal skill as in unlike a language, you can use it in most situations, universally. And, I think pretty much anybody can at least learn to draw to a generally good extent.
Also it's not hard to check if an AI translation is getting something wrong. At least, I trust being able to check AI translations with each other than translators agreeing that a sentence totally said "hey sis from a other miss we gotta social distance"

No. 2081462

>>2081451
Yeah you're mixing your waves up. The first wave was in the prewar era and was focused on securing voting rights and a few other rights (like protections from domestic violence weren't really gained by the 1st wave even though they did agitate for them, they mainly just got prohibition passed), women's public bathrooms, etc. The second wave was mostly 'radical feminism' although there were different splinter groups but legally it focused on stuff like DV protections, ability to have your own money/access to banking and credit cards, getting women out of sex work, workplace protections, no fault divorce, reproductive health rights, title 9 etc. as well as intellectually a focus on the idea that patriarchy exists and women are oppressed on the basis of their biological sex and talking about the ways that marriage and social norms chain down women. Radical feminists (who were most of the famous 2nd wavers) were extremely, staunchly anti-pornography, anti-prostitution, etc. Radfeminism was always about women's collective rights as a class, not women's personal freedoms. The 3rd wave (what we usually call 'liberal feminism' or 'choice feminism' although there was an early proto-liberal feminism in the 2nd wave era as well) was the 'omg don't criticize women's choices' wave of feminism that tried to popularize the idea of sexual liberation via sleeping around, pornography, prostitution being good things, 'removing stigma' from femininity, and so on.

While you are correct the no-fault divorce thing happened in the 2nd wave, it happened mainly in order to give women an out from DV, abuse and marital rape situations (marital rape was still legal during the 2nd wave). Adultery is not 'overwhelmingly' a male crime; while it is more common for men it is actually quite common for women also and if men could 'fault' divorce their wives for adultery (which often happened specifically because women were being abused) they could basically leave them with nothing financially. There were very solid reasons why 2nd wavers wanted adultery decriminalized and it wasn't because they supported adultery. If a man was beating and raping his wife every day but she couldn't 'prove' it, she was just stuck legally bound to and living with a man who was beating and raping her until he killed her. That's what happened the overwhelming majority of the time, and that's why no-fault divorce was considered important.

Marriage still functions as a legal contract because there are repercussions for 'breaking' the contract, like with many other contracts that can be reneged on/not fulfilled by either party. People are still punished for breaking their vows (financially, usually) and it happens to mostly be men, now it's just possible for women to make that happen without needing to prove in court that their husbands did something terrible. It's usually moids who 'break' marriages via adultery or other misbehavior, and it's also usually moids who are 'punished' more financially via divorce, as it should be. It's not a perfect system but it's much closer to perfect than the system that existed before. Children are not well off in an abusive environment either, and it's not 'stable,' so keeping the parents together at any cost is simply not a good idea.

If you wanted marriages to 'work better' as contracts you should just make them illegal before age 25, as the overwhelming majority of divorces happen to couples who married before 25. Bam you got rid of 70-80% of divorce.

Do you think men cheated less before no-fault divorce was passed? Because uh… they didn't, so it's not like the theft example at all.

No. 2081463

>>2081457
You definitely can learn to draw, like basically any other skill. Almost any skill will be easier to learn with natural talent, but is still learnable without talent and the actual dedication to the craft is probably like 70+% of the outcome.

No. 2081468

File: 1720418077563.png (56.4 KB, 705x240, Adultery_Korea.png)

>>2081462
An example: South Korea decriminalized adultery in 2015, however prior to 2013 almost 60% of Korean men admitted to cheating on their wives with prostitutes (not even counting other affairs), which actually dropped somewhat after adultery was decriminalized. Korea still doesn't really have a 'no fault divorce' system (they do if it's by mutual consent, but not if only one spouse files). South Korea is considered one of the worst countries for women in the entire OECD, especially married women, despite having these supposedly 'helpful' divorce laws and despite adultery having been criminalized until a decade ago.

Sorry, imgrel wasn't the stat for married men, but this article suggests that there is very little difference in rates of being a john for married and unmarried men: https://www.econ.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/2012%20Fall%20Honor%20Thesis%20-%20WonSoon%28Revised%29.pdf

This article from a SK newspaper and claims that "According to the Korean Kinsey Report in 2016, which was run by Lina Korea and the Korean Institute for Sexual and Couple's Health and surveyed 1090 adult males and females, 50.8 percent of men and 9.3 percent of women have had an affair. This includes prostitution. According to the survey 42.3% of men in their 30s, 48.4% of men in their forties, 52.5% of men in their fifties, and 56.7% of those in their 60s have had an affair." Also, "According to the Korean Kinsey Report in 2016, 213 men were asked how many women they had had an affair with. The average number was 11.46 women with men in their 50s reportedly having had an affair with an average of 12.4 women. Out of the 34 women who were asked, the average number of men they had had an affair with was 3.62 men. The reason for the high numbers seems to be prostitution." Source: https://www.jejuweekly.com/news/articleView.html%3Fidxno=5667

No. 2081471

File: 1720418638589.png (301.02 KB, 4140x2397, ageofmarriageby1600.png)

>>2081462
>intellectually a focus on the idea that patriarchy exists and women are oppressed on the basis of their biological sex and talking about the ways that marriage and social norms chain down women.
This is the Marxist infiltration and subversion of feminism that happened in the postwar era. Marxists took class struggle and superimposed it onto feminism, with the same consequences; make the other side your enemy and destroy any ability to collaborate for mutual benefit. Now we have troglodyte moids screeching about revoking womens rights on one end and radfems with almost as much vitriol on the other end drowning out sensible moderate people on both sides.
>Adultery is not 'overwhelmingly' a male crime; while it is more common for men it is actually quite common for women also
If someone breaks their vows and commits adultery, they should be punished, end of discussion. You don't have a right to destroy the stability of marriage for everyone else just because you can't control your sexual urges.
>(which often happened specifically because women were being abused)
>If a man was beating and raping his wife every day but she couldn't 'prove' it, she was just stuck legally bound to and living with a man who was beating and raping her until he killed her.
This may have been true in the past, but this justification doesn't hold any water today. The overwhelming majority of marriages are ended now due to "irreconcilable differences" without any abuse being cited. And given how easy it is to record evidence of abuse compared to the past, we can include domestic violence and abuse as grounds for at-fault divorce (including legal penalties for the offender) and solve that dilemma.
>Marriage still functions as a legal contract because there are repercussions for 'breaking' the contract, like with many other contracts that can be reneged on/not fulfilled by either party.
Technically that's true, but as has been shown in divorce causes the vast majority are no-fault because its two spoiled brats who grew up with the world revolving around them being incapable of setting aside their wants for the greater good. I don't know where you're from, but in my parents case that was the cause and this was also true for most of my friends. Parents got to live individualistic lives again, all it cost was tearing their children's foundations apart when they needed that stability the most.

>If you wanted marriages to 'work better' as contracts you should just make them illegal before age 25, as the overwhelming majority of divorces happen to couples who married before 25. Bam you got rid of 70-80% of divorce.

This is something I can get behind, I agree 100% with you there and if you look at western European history, the average age of marriage for women was mid to even late 20s as far back as the 17th century. The idea that women were married off at 14 like cattle in Europe is a lie spread by both neckbearded incels and legbearded femcels.

>Do you think men cheated less before no-fault divorce was passed? Because uh… they didn't, so it's not like the theft example at all.

Yeah in fact, I do. Reason being that it was a legally punishable offense. Frank Sinatra got thrown in jail for adultery. Besides, moids today are by every measurable metric more degenerate and awful human beings than at any time before. The post-1950s sexual liberalism is a direct result of this, when you reject sexual morality as a serious concept you end up with depraved moids because the good ones who would have set examples for the rest are disempowered and the worst moids are empowered.

>>2081468
>South Korea decriminalized adultery in 2015,
Womens Rights as a concept was alien to Asia until European colonialism, before western influence women were no better than slaves and could be disposed of by their husbands at will. Korean women are given freedom from their moids and the first thing they did was torpedo the whole ship, because of how horrible their moids are to women to this day.
Korean moids are also revolting against women's rights because from their point of view, it is an alien concept imposed on them by colonialism (which is correct, btw). As western influence declines in Asia and elsewhere, we will see women around the world losing their freedoms as countries revert to their pre-western cultural norms that are organic to them.
Point is, you can't compare Asian countries to western countries, they had child marriage and child prostitution well into the 20th century.

No. 2081472

>>2081471
Honestly I wish my parents had just divorced rather than screaming at each other all day then divorcing anyway when I turned 18.

No. 2081474

Can I vent here about my hyper fixation since it's an extremely unpopular opinion, it will be recognized, it's extremely cringeworthy but I dwell on it due to it being something important in human lives:
Men can love a woman and still cheat on her because all the conceivable love a man can have in a hetero relationship for a woman is just him loving being loved by her plus sexual attraction, romantic attraction of a man is the same exact that as sexual, no separation between both. I have good real life example I studied of a woman on social media who overshares, specifically less normie but more FDS misandrist type of a woman, not a real misandry but she is anti porn and all of that, the man fit the descriptions of a perfect man Nigelfags all over the world describe: he worshipped her everyday and showed it, told he the loves her, served her, didn't act porn sick in sex didn't jump straight to sexual talks at the beggining of dating, agreed that porn is exploitative, said he wants to get married on a first date to see if she's a good match and was gushing over how cool being a husband must be, gazed into her eyes constantly and kisses her forehead, waited months to have sex and didn't rape her on one of the first dates when she got blackout drunk he just tucked her to bed, she called him the most gentle nurturing person in the world like thousands times and gentle in sex okay with stopping and not continuing anytime without throwing s tantrum, was okay with no anal or more violent versions of certain sex acts, acted sad while going out without her, said he will make this year of her life the best one, called a man at his work a pornsick pervert, said his friends made fun of him for not hooking up with models on a trip, she said people shame him for not having hook ups but he has nothing to prove, she said he wouldn't cheat cause his ex did it to him and he knows how much it hurts, kissed for million hours straight with no sex, acted caring and fed her food, used to pay for many things and took her to expensive restaurants and dates, took no as an answer when she refused sex and lectured her about how she doesn't have to apologize for it, cried at her pain sometimes, his friends said they will hurt him if he harms her, his female friend said he's good.
But he was cheating since the beginning esp during the honeymoon phase when he was sweeting her so much that's why he waited months for sex, he cheated on all of his exes, threatened suicide to them (this is because I think they really want to fuck other women so they are emotional about it all and feel oppressed when they get held accountable), had violent sex with other women while faking his preferences to her to seduce her, texted "I want you to gag on my cock" to them lol, constantly hooked up with other women,his friends knew but lied about it,
Once he sen ther Andrew Tate video but pretended he has no idea who he is, then said he wants her to compliment his life in the best way possible and I immediately knew he wants her to be a naive house slave while he bangs other women on the side. His mom is a tradwife so his gf used to find it amazing and think she's a well taken care of woman(sigh FDS), he threatened to sue her for ruining his reputation and exposing him while knowing she's broke and dependent on an abusive person. He switched on her immediately like he doesn't care if she does or lives. He gave her utis but she thoughts he is amazing because he went to the doctor and took antibiotics without complaining. he promised a house marriage and adopting children together. a good story on how men get off on lying despise it all being authentic(besides the eyes) because the sexual therefore romantic attraction was after all, real. They can love a woman like a healthy non pornsick Nigel's all over the world who serve their women do yet still cheat, if a man desires a woman then he desires other women as well, I'm saving it as an example cause I'm tired of brainwashing. This girl was into female dating strategy a lot, there was no visible red flags to her but all man is a red flag to me. This kind of love and cheating doesn't contradict and those utis are not so mysterious… Married men get off in saying they never cheat it watch porn like they legit just do it makes them feel good imo saying it intuitively, guild appears when catched. All of his behaviors never suggested he will not cheat, his sensitivity was actually what's fooled her cause this type of men can easily pretend things through their calmness and through being a child mentally that gets attached and acts like he needs her then it gives the illusion of something. Moid acting like he needs a woman makes her feel special .

No. 2081475

>>2081474
This is true to an extent, moids can't have sexual freedoms because they can't control themselves in most cases. I have known cases where moids have ruined their lives in otherwise happy marriages because they were unable to control themselves. This is why feminists should have been pushing for greater sexual restrictions on men rather than liberalizing sexual norms for everyone

No. 2081476

>>2081474
blowjob-chan please go back

No. 2081478

>>2081472
Same, my parents hated each other and it made me and my siblings miserable, I wish they had divorced. A marriage where both people are unhappy and are fighting constantly is in no way a stable marriage.

No. 2081480

>>2081476
how did you know it was her kek

No. 2081481

>>2081472
>>2081478
Easy to say the grass is greener on the other side. You didn't get exposed to unrelated men (mom's relationships) where abuse and sexual assault is orders of magnitude more likely than with your own father.

No. 2081482

>>2081480
because those words, facts and points make her mad and she became hysterically obsessed

No. 2081483

>>2081480
She literally won’t shut up about this Twitter radfem for weeks

No. 2081485

>>2081483
Now you say this but if I said it all without using her as a proof everyone would tell me to kill myself and that I'm delusional and bitter

No. 2081495

File: 1720421037558.png (57.8 KB, 763x404, Infidelity_US.png)

>>2081471
In the US, currently, 20% of men and 30% of women report being unfaithful in their marriages: https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-cheats-more-the-demographics-of-cheating-in-america

However, this is not higher than over the last 100 years - it is one of the very lowest reported rates in modern history (picrel). I doubt this is because of people lying, since they actually have less incentive to lie now than in the past since it's no longer illegal (in most states - I think it is still technically criminalized in some US states).

>Marxists took class struggle and superimposed it onto feminism, with the same consequences; make the other side your enemy and destroy any ability to collaborate for mutual benefit.

Yeah I don't really agree with this. Although I know a lot of radical feminist thought had its roots in Marxist class analysis, I think it was mostly a logical extension of the first wave based on a recognition that men have always been oppressing and harming women based on our reproductive capacity and the physical differences between us and men. Radical feminists didn't cause 'troglodyte moids screeching about revoking womens rights,' men never wanted women to have those rights and have been screeching about it ever since women tried to gain some. What 'vitriol' do you think radfems are spewing that isn't true and what 'sensible, moderate' views are they drowning out?

>If someone breaks their vows and commits adultery, they should be punished, end of discussion.

Sure, in theory, but that's not what happened when adultery was criminalized. Since men controlled most of the finances in the marriage and most of the legal system, it was extremely difficult for women to successfully nab them for adultery even though men were committing adultery at higher rates than now, while on the off chance women cheated or tried to leave the marriage, men would destroy their lives and leave them without financial autonomy. The same goes for DV - it had to be proven, and women could almost never prove it, so women lived and died shackled to their abusers. At least now a woman can legally leave her abuser, even if it's hard to shake him off practically speaking.

> The overwhelming majority of marriages are ended now due to "irreconcilable differences" without any abuse being cited.

Abuse not being cited in legal proceedings doesn't mean it doesn't occur. Unless you have hard proof of abuse most divorce lawyers will tell you not to cite it as the reason for your divorce, since it can draw out proceedings and cause other legal issues. Most of the time 'irreconcilable differences' is the safest official reason to end a marriage, regardless of your real reason for leaving. If it is so easy to record evidence of abuse and rape, why is it still so rarely prosecuted and convicted? You are basically saying that if a woman is routinely abused and raped by her husband, but can't collect proof and take it to the police, she should just be stuck in the abusive marriage. I think not even one woman should suffer this fate.

> are no-fault because its two spoiled brats who grew up with the world revolving around them being incapable of setting aside their wants for the greater good.

I don't know how you think you know that, but I don't think that is known or obvious. Most of the people I know who divorced divorced because of either infidelity or abuse, and none cited infidelity or abuse as the reason for the divorce (again, for legal reasons). The people most likely to divorce for 'silly' reasons are people who got married young, so again, young marriage should be discouraged.

>Yeah in fact, I do. Reason being that it was a legally punishable offense.

As I've shown, infidelity rates are not higher in the US than they were in the 1920s through 1960s, and countries like Korea which never implemented no-fault divorce nor decriminalized adultery (until 2013) have much higher rates of infidelity, which actually went down after it was decriminalized. South Korea also has steadily dropping marriage rates which is not the case in most Western countries today, suggesting that people are not more motivated to marry when no-fault divorce is impossible, but less.

>Korean moids are also revolting against women's rights because from their point of view, it is an alien concept imposed on them by colonialism

Yeah but the legally imposed institution of marriage and criminalization of infidelity didn't stop them and decriminalization of adultery didn't make them worse.

The US still has legal child marriage and plenty of illegal child prostitution. I don't think it's just an 'Asia' thing.

No. 2081510

>>2081474
Seems pretty obvious that a lovebombing narc would cheat lmao

No. 2081518

>>2081471
> Besides, moids today are by every measurable metric more degenerate and awful human beings than at any time before.
Not sure this is true either… there were many times in history where moids were in general doing way more depraved shit than they are now because of the lack of legal or social repercussions and the lack of protections for women. A lot of the current forms of new and worse depravity in men are caused by porn and have absolutely nothing to do with marriage or feminism for that matter, at least not 2nd wave feminism which tried to stop the scourge of porn and 'sex work' which was rebuked and shot down by moids and their less 'vitriolic' antifeminist handmaidens. People should have listened to 2nd wave feminists I guess.

But aside from porn and the internet making moids a specific type of depraved they are really no more barbaric toward women than they were at many/most points in history, e.g. during the Roman Empire or even in the late 19th/early 20th century where they were abusing women and then locking them up in mental institutions for 'hysteria,' coming up with entire moidbrained pursuits like 'psychiatry' to pathologize female and child abuse victims and claim they were projecting because they wanted to fuck their fathers, and yes, marrying children. Although Europe had better protections for women historically at many points than other cultures, one big difference between modern Europe/America/Commonwealth and many of those other countries is indeed that they actually had successful movements of feminism. You could argue these movements happened earlier and were more successful in Europe because Europe already had liberal democratic ideologies and ideas of 'inalienable rights' conducive to development of feminist movements, but many of our moms were still alive when women got the right to have their own credit cards and bank accounts in Western countries, again a product of 2nd wave feminism. This is the main reason why moids in the West appear to be screeching more now than before, because they don't have as much legal and financial control over the women they feel entitled to than moids in other countries, not because they used to be so nice and respectful toward women until no fault divorce made them all start cheating.

No. 2081519

>>2081510
(Its my hyper fixation I could find SS of me arguing about it on Facebook groups with other teenage girls from like seven years ago, I used to complain "girls are so naive all it takes is a few sweet words")
It didn't even seem like a love bombing (she overshares every day)

No. 2081520

>>2081519
Your description absolutely sounds like very obvious and egregious lovebombing.

No. 2081521

>>2081471
>This is the Marxist infiltration and subversion of feminism that happened in the postwar era. Marxists took class struggle and superimposed it onto feminism, with the same consequences; make the other side your enemy and destroy any ability to collaborate for mutual benefit. Now we have troglodyte moids screeching about revoking womens rights on one end and radfems with almost as much vitriol on the other end drowning out sensible moderate people on both sides.
If you know anything about Marxists you know they do not want to draw a parallel between class and sex in any way, shape or form. 2nd wave feminists took inspiration from Marxism (mainly, materialism, the idea that women aren't naturally weak, stupid and submissive and that we should look at social conditions and historical tendencies, etc) because they thought a materialist reading of women's history and current situation was useful. Sensible people employ these concepts all the time now and don't realize it comes from the ebil extremist class warfare people
>>2081176
>right-wing GCers like posier parker, meghan murphy or libfems like JK rowling
None of these people are USian. At the end of the day, the US is a country full of religious nuts and there's not much british GCs can do about it

No. 2081522

>>2081426
I'm sorry, but it is really obvious when essays are written by AI right now. We are forced to peer review in my class and let me tell you, it is crazy how many past the age of 18 can't write a short research or argumentative paper. People talk shit about writing, but having to defend what you are saying and learning the format of that is a useful skill that serves you well out of the classroom. AI if anything makes soft skills more useful.

No. 2081523

>>2081518
>Besides, moids today are by every measurable metric more degenerate and awful human beings than at any time before.
There was a time where there was like 2 million people on earth I think and one in 1000 girls or all women were married off as children and ending up with severe injuries. There was a yt video about coomer writings found in an ancient city walls

No. 2081524

>>2081495
>However, this is not higher than over the last 100 years - it is one of the very lowest reported rates in modern history (picrel). I doubt this is because of people lying, since they actually have less incentive to lie now than in the past since it's no longer illegal
Selection bias. Marriage has become an institution for middle and upper class people, with working class people no longer marrying and engaging in unstable cohabiting relationships instead
>Seriously referencing the homosexual pedophile apologist Alfred Kinsey
Please, please look Alfred Kinsey's studies up. He used prison populations as sources for his books with the explicit goal of normalizing degeneracy and in one of his masturbatory frenzies (he was a pornography addict) he sawed off his own foreskin with a knife. He also claimed children could enjoy sexual stimulation from the moment they were born, citing a notorious pedophile who sexually abused hundreds of infants. Sociology since Margaret Mead has been explicitly focused on destroying monogamy as a norm with fraudulent research, either using tribal savages as equatable to modern civilized people or by outright frauding the data as Kinsey did in his "Sexuality" studies.
The rest of your citations are highly suspect if they are still quoting Kinsey.
We know from self reported lifetime partner counts that Silent Gen men and women had far fewer partners than Baby Boomer men and women did. Modern forms of contraception and birth control only existed recently, promiscuity in any form would have resulted in diseases spreading or unintended pregnancies. The sexual revolution was only possible in the first place with the technological advances that allowed those behaviors.

>it was mostly a logical extension of the first wave based on a recognition that men have always been oppressing and harming women based on our reproductive capacity and the physical differences between us and men.

I don't deny we experienced oppression as a sex throughout history but the Marxist solution to class oppression is class warfare. That was a stupid solution to begin with as the different classes are essential in the function of society. It makes even less sense for sex, because we need each other to reproduce the next generation and, ideally, to be loving companions to each other. And on a more practical point, we need our men to defend the borders of our nations from other men. If we make family formation impossible, our nation starts dying and we get replaced by men from much more misogynistic cultures who do form families and reproduce. Take a look at the Ex Muslim thread on /ot/, the nonnas living in European countries are all fearful of the growing Islamic presence because they are outreproducing Europeans and will impose their values when they have the numbers. There are already Islamic parties in countries like Sweden.

>Sure, in theory, but that's not what happened when adultery was criminalized. Since men controlled most of the finances in the marriage and most of the legal system, it was extremely difficult for women to successfully nab them for adultery even though men were committing adultery at higher rates than now, while on the off chance women cheated or tried to leave the marriage, men would destroy their lives and leave them without financial autonomy.

I'm not arguing about the past, I concede that these laws were unfair to us and were used to exploit us. That doesn't mean the concept itself is wrong, it means it was misused. This is no longer the case, with the exception of hyper politicized topics like abortion in the US women have strong representation in the legal fields.

>Most of the time 'irreconcilable differences' is the safest official reason to end a marriage, regardless of your real reason for leaving. If it is so easy to record evidence of abuse and rape, why is it still so rarely prosecuted and convicted?

Given how acrimonious divorces can be, especially when financial assets are involved, there is an incentive against taking the no-fault route rather than claiming abuse and securing a better settlement against the ex. As for why its rarely prosecuted and convicted, is this in spite of physical evidence proving it, or because none was provided? I have a hard time believing a modern western court system would cover up proof of rape or assault unless it was done by a protected minority class against an unprotected class.

>Most of the people I know who divorced divorced because of either infidelity or abuse, and none cited infidelity or abuse as the reason for the divorce (again, for legal reasons).

Maybe your anecdote is true, but its heresay. My anecdotes are the opposite, in my life experience divorce was from quibbling spouses who refused to change their attitudes to life when they had a family. No way to prove one way or the other which is reflective of reality, except that the divorce system incentivizes spouses to claim abuse rather than not claim it.

>Yeah but the legally imposed institution of marriage and criminalization of infidelity didn't stop them and decriminalization of adultery didn't make them worse.

Because its unnatural to them, that's why. Women's rights is organic to western civilization, it developed here and only here. We saw a similar thing happen when black Americans were liberated from white cultural dominance with the civil rights movement. They went from a 16% illegitimacy rate in the 1950s to an 80% illegitimacy rate today, with poorer metrics by every measurable standard when it comes to their family structure or living conditions.

>The US still has legal child marriage and plenty of illegal child prostitution. I don't think it's just an 'Asia' thing.

Please show me examples of white American moids marrying 12 year olds and having dozens of legal concubines like Chinese, Japanese and Koreans did in the late 19th and early 20th centuries

No. 2081530

>>2081524
Glowie

No. 2081537

File: 1720424089944.png (91.78 KB, 972x371, nofaultdivorce.png)

>>2081524
So first it was 'people cheat more in marriage now' and now it's 'actually they cheat less, but it's only because more responsible people get married.' Earlier you were claiming that marriages fail because the people who get married are too irresponsible to do so, but now it's a bad thing?
>Seriously referencing the homosexual pedophile apologist Alfred Kinsey
I'm not referencing Kinsey, I'm referencing a paper on divorce rates that referenced Kinsey for one of the time-points. You can ignore that one if you want and look at all the others, they're still all higher than current rates. All survey studies asking about infidelity will be somewhat suspect, but the numbers that were collected at those times suggested they were comparable to higher than now. I don't know why on earth you would think the other citations would be quoting Kinsey, lmao? The Kinsey sample was in the 1940s-50s, not the other decades.

>We know from self reported lifetime partner counts that Silent Gen men and women had far fewer partners than Baby Boomer men and women did.

Of course they did, because casual pre-marital sexual dating was much more taboo. That doesn't mean infidelity in marriage was rare. Have you ever actually talked to an older person?

> the Marxist solution to class oppression is class warfare.

Radical feminism isn't Marxism and wasn't promoted by Marxists. They just used Marxist class analysis methods to analyse the oppression of women. It's not a 'solution' of any kind, it's a form of analysis of a pre-existing social issue and the reasons for it. It's not radfems' fault men were not 'loving partners' for women throughout history, they (like women before them for centuries) just pointed it out, and applied a different framework to think about the root causes.

>If we make family formation impossible

"We" are not making family formation impossible - people are still overwhelmingly likely to form families and have been for the 50-60 years since 2nd wave feminism began. The main reason that some people are less likely to form families now is economic issues, and not anything at all to do with radical feminism. The male politicians who support young muslim men coming to European countries also aren't radical feminists, or feminists at all, and no one is importing muslim males because of feminism.

>That doesn't mean the concept itself is wrong, it means it was misused.

And certainly would be misused again, especially if your claim that men today are more degenerate and depraved than ever before is to be believed. Despite women being lawyers, it is still extremely difficult and rare to prosecute rape, abuse, and adultery cases, or prove adultery in divorce court in countries that allow it as a reason for divorce (like Canada).

>Given how acrimonious divorces can be, especially when financial assets are involved, there is an incentive against taking the no-fault route

Not in most western countries, no. The no-fault versus the adultery route actually doesn't change the resource split or custody in a divorce in modern countries like Canada. Women claiming abuse as a reason for their divorces are actually less likely to get full custody of their children in many countries, and the no-fault route also preserves a lot more money for both parties (since the divorce proceedings tend to take much less time and be much cheaper). Most divorce lawyers will counsel you to take the no-fault route in almost every situation, unless you have enough money to sue in civil court afterwards.

>is this in spite of physical evidence proving it, or because none was provided?

It is still exceedingly difficult to provide incontrovertible physical evidence of abuse in most cases, but even when it is provided it often still isn't pursued legally/prosecuted/convicted. There are many cases in Europe where videos and DNA evidence of rapes are provided to police and the case is dropped, and even in the rare cases when it goes to court it is convicted but no jail sentence is given. I don't know why you have a 'hard time believing' something that is extremely common knowledge and that you can read about extensively with a quick google search. Especially in marriages things like rape are difficult to prove because how do you 'prove' your husband raped you with 'evidence'?

>in my life experience divorce was from quibbling spouses who refused to change their attitudes to life when they had a family.

Even in that case I'm not convinced it's good for them to continue having that family and influencing their children in that way. Depends what the 'quibbling' was I guess, and how severe it was.

>the divorce system incentivizes spouses to claim abuse rather than not claim it.

No, it really doesn't.

>Women's rights is organic to western civilization, it developed here and only here.

That's not true at all. Ancient civilizations in East Asia were matriarchal or matrilineal, had female queens/empresses. The Ancient (pre-Islamic) Middle East had strong women's rights, in fact women were allowed to own businesses, have their own finances and be heads of families. It is not a Europe-specific thing in all of history.

>Please show me examples of white American moids marrying 12 year olds and having dozens of legal concubines like Chinese, Japanese and Koreans did in the late 19th and early 20th centuries

Any FLDS compound in Utah.

No. 2081538

>>2081518
>there were many times in history where moids were in general doing way more depraved shit than they are now because of the lack of legal or social repercussions and the lack of protections for women.
I'm talking about within stable western countries, not during tribal times where the risk of dying from anything was far higher than today. STD rates have exploded since the sexual revolution, if moids were as bad before then compared to now we would have seen far more disease than we actually did. Prostitution and venereal diseases have of course always existed, but it was a minority of the most degenerate moids who exploited prostitutes and they paid dearly for it with incurable diseases like syphilis.

>even in the late 19th/early 20th century where they were abusing women and then locking them up in mental institutions for 'hysteria,' coming up with entire moidbrained pursuits like 'psychiatry' to pathologize female and child abuse victims and claim they were projecting because they wanted to fuck their fathers, and yes, marrying children.

Those "psychiatrists" were not Europeans. Freud wrote about himself as a Semitic general waging war on "Rome", i.e. western civilization, using psychoanalysis to undermine European sexual norms of the time.
And I'm not saying the past was perfect, I'm arguing that a) it was changing in the right direction, which never happened anywhere else, and b) the solutions that libfems offered to fix these problems only made them much worse by throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

>one big difference between modern Europe/America/Commonwealth and many of those other countries is indeed that they actually had successful movements of feminism.

Ask yourself this, how did feminism win in the first place when all the power was held by men? We didn't invade European capitals with armies and overthrow their governments, our own men voted to emancipate us and give us legal powers to regulate their behavior.
>but many of our moms were still alive when women got the right to have their own credit cards and bank accounts in Western countries, again a product of 2nd wave feminism.
Already answered that argument, I never claimed there was nothing left to fix or that we need to RETVRN. I'm not a conservative at all, I'm a paleo progressive.

>>2081521
>If you know anything about Marxists you know they do not want to draw a parallel between class and sex in any way, shape or form.
?
Its written in the Communist Manifesto that women are an oppressed class and that marriage should be abolished as a bourgeois institution. The early Soviet Union had sexual deregulation as extreme as we have it in the west today, with marriage rendered legally superfluous and abortion up until the 9th month legalized. It caused so much chaos in Russia that Stalin cracked down violently on the radicals on the eve of WW2 so Russian society could be functional enough to fight the Germans.

No. 2081543

File: 1720424959388.png (72.91 KB, 1339x190, Childmarriage.png)

>>2081537
Another picrel

No. 2081547

>>2081537
>So first it was 'people cheat more in marriage now' and now it's 'actually they cheat less, but it's only because more responsible people get married.'
No, we see lower cheating today compared to when Baby Boomers were married and divorcing because prior to the sexual revolution, all classes of people were married out of custom but that custom has been abandoned for the bottom half of society after the sexual revolution. If cheating was an epidemic as you claim it was, why is it STD rates exploded during the sexual revolution compared to before it? There were fewer medical protections against disease before the 1960s, if anything we should see higher rates of venereal disease compared to before.

>I'm not referencing Kinsey, I'm referencing a paper on divorce rates that referenced Kinsey for one of the time-points


If an author is taking that known fraud seriously to cite infidelity statistics, their data is suspect in the rest of their citations. Link the article your originally scraped those stats from, I'd like to look into the citations myself because 9 times out of 10 its bullshit

>Of course they did, because casual pre-marital sexual dating was much more taboo.

Why is it Millennials and Gen Z report far fewer premarital partners than Boomers as well then? Sex has certainly not become more taboo now compared to the 1960s-80s, yet we see self reported partner counts down far across the board.

>Radical feminism isn't Marxism and wasn't promoted by Marxists. They just used Marxist class analysis methods to analyse the oppression of women.

I.e. its an offshoot of Marxism, using the same methodology the Marxists use with class on sex. Its functionally Marxist.

>It's not radfems' fault men were not 'loving partners' for women throughout history, they (like women before them for centuries) just pointed it out, and applied a different framework to think about the root causes.

I'm not disagreeing with the complaint, my problem is using a stupid, easily refutable concept like dialectical materialism to try and resolve those problems. Marx actually made some very good evaluations of the problems inherent in capitalism, but he applied idiotic solutions to them that ended in disaster when they were put into practice.

>"We" are not making family formation impossible - people are still overwhelmingly likely to form families and have been for the 50-60 years since 2nd wave feminism began.

All European countries are dying, our populations are all old and birth rates are unsustainable. Politicians are allowing mass immigration because it widens the burden of paying for pensions and social services to more people. I never said radfems were responsible for this, I said it is an inevitable outcome when your societies are so socially borked that they can't reproduce anymore.

>That's not true at all. Ancient civilizations in East Asia were matriarchal or matrilineal, had female queens/empresses.

False, they had empress dowagers who were the mothers of child emperors, with a few token empresses in their entire history. And these empresses were ruling over civilizations where men could have an unlimited number of concubines, with no lower age limit to when they could be bought. One of the main factors that allowed Europe to advance was that the marriage age would go up for both sexes in hard times, lowering the birth rate, whereas in ancient China and India the age of marriage for girls actually fell during economic hardship, because more girls would be sold into sex slavery (i.e. concubinage) to elite men, who would overproduce children and maintain the economic hardship for much longer than in Europe.

>The Ancient (pre-Islamic) Middle East had strong women's rights, in fact women were allowed to own businesses, have their own finances and be heads of families.

What middle east are you talking about? Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria? All those civilizations had temple prostitution and polygamy, and there were no "businesses" at that time, capitalism as we understand it now did not exist then. 99% of their population was engaged in agriculture and slavery (including sex slavery) was the norm, particularly in ancient Iraq. Libfem historical revisionism has been a disaster.

>Any FLDS compound in Utah.

You mean the cult that the US invaded explicitly with the goal of ending their polygamy? FLDS is a tiny sect similar to the Amish in its obscurity, it in no way represents the mainstream

>>2081543
Please link the actual website you got that from, I want to check the data personally

No. 2081548

>>2081538
I didn't give any examples about 'tribal times' did I? Your STD point makes no sense. We simply don't have good data on STD rates prior to about 1900 since we couldn't/didn't test for most of them back then, but if you seriously believe veneral disease rates were low in ancient Rome you're trippin.

>Those "psychiatrists" were not Europeans.

It's convenient how they suddenly become 'non Western' because they're from a European ethnic minority when it's convenient, but even if Freud was from Papua New Guinea it wouldn't change the fact that society accepted his claims and started lobotomizing abused women with Valium in mental institutions with wild abandon. I'm starting to think you're just trying to couch a lot of sneaky racebait in an argument about 'feminism' though, although I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were being sincere before.

>I never claimed there was nothing left to fix or that we need to RETVRN.

No, but you did claim that second wave feminism was responsible for a worsening of conditions for women although this clearly was not the case, and also claimed that 2nd wave feminism was the root of moids becoming aggressive toward women, although the only reason for this aggression is they couldn't explicitly legally and financially control us to the same degree anymore. I already addressed your point about Europe.

>written in the Communist Manifesto that women are an oppressed class

Uh, sort of, but not in the radfem way. Marx called the oppression of women natural but also wanted them to do more labor and wanted to destroy the family unit, this is not the way in which second wave feminism approached the issue at all. There is a type of feminist thought called Marxist Feminism and it is not the same thing at all as Radical Feminism. Radical feminism used materialist analysis, but did not come to even remotely the same conclusions as Marx did about the origin or nature of women's oppression, nor did radfems support 'sexual deregulation.' They were the only bulwark against 'sexual deregulation' in the modern West, and that's why men hated them so much.

No. 2081558

>>2081548
>Your STD point makes no sense. We simply don't have good data on STD rates prior to about 1900 since we couldn't/didn't test for most of them back then
Yes we could, because they were physically visible on the afflicted moids. Syphilis was well known for centuries as a disease associated with prostitution, and as a congenital disease, and such outbreaks were one of the major motivating factors in eliminating prostitution in Protestant countries. Illicit sex was extremely dangerous for most of human history

>It's convenient how they suddenly become 'non Western' because they're from a European ethnic minority when it's convenient

Its not that he was from an ethnic minority, but rather he explicitly considered his psychoanalytic movement as an attack on conservative European sexual mores of the time.
>even if Freud was from Papua New Guinea it wouldn't change the fact that society accepted his claims and started lobotomizing abused women with Valium in mental institutions with wild abandon.
Yeah, and most of Freud's clients were rich degenerate moids who wanted moral absolution for cheating on their wives without actually having to repent or stop their behavior. The history of sexual license is rich and powerful men trying to undermine the social mores that blocked them from cheating on their wives and exploiting vulnerable women.
>No, but you did claim that second wave feminism was responsible for a worsening of conditions for women although this clearly was not the case, and also claimed that 2nd wave feminism was the root of moids becoming aggressive toward women
I never claimed that, I said Marxist feminism transformed feminism into class warfare, which eventually made men in general antagonists to women. This is stupid and self defeating, because it created its inevitable reaction of anti-feminism that we are dealing with now

>Marx called the oppression of women natural but also wanted them to do more labor and wanted to destroy the family unit, this is not the way in which second wave feminism approached the issue at all.

How is radfem in any way supportive of the family unit? I'm not being combative, I genuinely am ignorant of the finer details.

>nor did radfems support 'sexual deregulation.' They were the only bulwark against 'sexual deregulation' in the modern West, and that's why men hated them so much.

I agree with this. My argument is that they unintentionally gave rise to sexual deregulation by making feminism a partisan movement the liberals could easily psyop with libfeminism. Once you abandon the moral arguments and dive into dialectical materialism, you lose, because morality is the only defense you have against the rich and powerful

No. 2081561

>>2081547
STD rates exploded during the sexual revolution because of the normalization of homosexuality.

>Link the article your originally scraped those stats from, I'd like to look into the citations myself because 9 times out of 10 its bullshit

Just look it up yourself. If you can find better citations go ahead, the Kinsey is the only source I can find that surveyed people about infidelity of that era otherwise I would have found you a different source.

>Why is it Millennials and Gen Z report far fewer premarital partners than Boomers as well then?

I don't know, it's certainly not because we banned adultery and no-fault divorce.

>using the same methodology the Marxists use with class on sex.

A whole bunch of different people have used materialist analysis on a whole bunch of different issues and none of that implies a Marxist political ideology, don't be silly. It's not 'functionally' Marxist because it doesn't suggest any of the solutions that Marx suggested, or lead to any outcomes that Marxist thought led to. 'Liberal' feminism on the other hand, or third wave feminism which you keep complaining about but wrongly conflating with radical feminism because you are somehow confused about basic feminist history, has led to very 'functionally' Marxist outcomes, ironically.

>my problem is using a stupid, easily refutable concept like dialectical materialism to try and resolve those problems.

Uh can you give examples? How was agitating against pornography, prostitution, marital rape, or for women to have the right to open bank accounts 'dialectical materialism'?

>All European countries are dying, our populations are all old and birth rates are unsustainable.

Yes, and it's not because people don't want to form families. It's because they economically can't.

>False, they had empress dowagers who were the mothers of child emperors

You should learn a little more about history if you want to talk like you're smart lmao. Picking a specific time period in those countries' history and then saying 'none of the other time periods in their history existed!!!!' isn't making you look very smart or coherent.

>What middle east are you talking about?

The Quran says Mohammed married a successful merchant lady and stole all her money (that wasn't her dad's). But yeah I'm sure the mercantile class didn't exist back then because the anglosphere hadn't imported the word 'capitalism' to the Arabs yet.

>I want to check the data personally.

Sure.
https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(21)00341-4/fulltext
https://childusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2021-Report-on-Child-Marriage.pdf

No. 2081570

>>2081558
Many of the STIs that account for very high current STI rates are not physically visible (HPV and HSV being two of the main ones that account for a lot of the high rates). And even if they were 'visible' on moids, it's not like they were all getting regular penile checkups and the hospital and punching in their stats in Ancient Rome. Syphilis wasn't exactly rare at all points prior to the sexual revolution, either.

>Its not that he was from an ethnic minority, but rather he explicitly considered his psychoanalytic movement as an attack on conservative European sexual mores of the time.

He may have felt that way, but it didn't stop modern Europe from taking it all in stride and accepting everything he was saying about women, even though he was no feminist and it was long before the sexual revolution. You keep changing the goalposts, first everything in Europe was fine and dandy, there was basically no conflict between men and women until the 60s or 70s, and then actually things for women were horrible, but it was all because of people who were 'attacking' European social mores long before feminism and actually that's why moids hated women, but somehow feminists were still wrong and being 'vitriolic' for standing up to these moids and their sexual depravity because it was 'dialectical materialism' to not want to be marriage raped and want their own bank accounts, somehow, despite Marx being against private ownership of capital and also against marriage. You're not really keeping a coherent thread to any of your arguments and I'm starting to think you don't believe any of it.

>most of Freud's clients were rich degenerate moids who wanted moral absolution for cheating on their wives without actually having to repent or stop their behavior.

But I thought men never got away with cheating and abuse before no-fault divorce!

>Marxist feminism transformed feminism into class warfare, which eventually made men in general antagonists to women.

No, you actually said second wave feminism (which was not Marxist feminism) transformed feminism into class warfare, and yet now you are talking openly about class warfare against women in the 1800s by Freud's wealthy and influential clients who were some of the most important people in society at the time and who popularized an entire 'field' of medicine that was basically formed entirely as a form of class warfare against women.

>How is radfem in any way supportive of the family unit?

Although quite a few radfems were not supportive of the family unit per se, they were supportive of bettering the family unit by slowly reforming and improving marriage, other financial and legal protections for women within and outside of marriage, and arguing against the sexually degenerate behaviour of males (and some females). Radfems were staunchly against prostitution and porn, which since then have been almost solely responsible for the steady degeneration of what was left of the idea of the 'family unit' and 'sexual morality' in general. I already explained this though, several times, so I kind of doubt that you are 'genuinely ignorant' or genuinely curious.

>They unintentionally gave rise to sexual deregulation by making feminism a partisan movement the liberals could easily psyop with libfeminism.

That's not what happened. Early 3rd wave or "liberal" feminists existed at the time many 2nd wave radfems were at their peak of fame, and they were in direct opposition to each other on these issues. The problem is that the "liberal" feminists won because men supported them more, quite simply. There was no 'psyop' of radical feminism to convert it to liberal feminism, radical feminism was and continues to be opposed to liberal feminism but liberal feminism 'won' because it was forefronted by and supported by males while radical feminism was not, because it was contrary to males' degenerate sexual interests. Radical feminists did not 'abandon moral arguments' at all, that's what liberal feminists did, and radical feminists were famously hated specifically because they were seen as shrill and moralizing. Again, I have explained this several times, and asked you how radical feminism was applying 'dialectical materialism' to achieve their aims, but you do not and cannot explain it because you know it's nonsense.

No. 2081576

File: 1720428284330.jpeg (32.17 KB, 500x375, IMG_5394.jpeg)

I do not give a fuck about sonico figures or women who collect them. I don’t care what most weebs collect unless they unironically collect funko pops because those are ugly as fuck. Bottom line if you’re cool about it idgaf

No. 2081577

>>2081561
>STD rates exploded during the sexual revolution because of the normalization of homosexuality.
Homosexuality was actually taboo even during the 60s sexual revolution. Even the radicals of that time did not openly advocate for homosexuality, you see more pedophilia advocates like Kinsey or the German Greens of the 1980s than homosexual advocates, though the two were closely connected. I am of course talking about moidfaggotry here with regards to the homo-pedo connection.
The sexual revolutionaries were invariably moids who would push their wives into swinging or open marriages, I even have newspapers from the 60s with distraught wives writing advice columnists about their husbands trying to push them into sexual experimentation. The sexual revolution was on its whole an attack on women and the most extreme elements of 2nd wave feminism probably grew out of a reaction to it.

>the Kinsey is the only source I can find that surveyed people about infidelity of that era otherwise I would have found you a different source.

You really need to look into Kinsey and what a monster he was. The entire basis of the sexual revolution came from his "studies" and an even nuttier radical called Wilhelm Reich who openly advocated molesting children in order to overthrow bourgeois society (he was both a Marxist and a Freudian)

>Uh can you give examples?

Yeah, instead of saying something is objectively morally wrong, you have to rely on power and oppressor-oppressed dynamics to contort an argument against something. Ideals can't exist in such a framework, the only goal you can have is maximum individual liberty and freedom from whatever you define as oppression. Radfems argued that pornography, prostitution, marital rape etc are oppressive to women (ofc they are, that is correct) but that doesn't mean they are objectively morally wrong in principle because materialism requires you to reject objective morality. This is how liberals were able to create sex positive feminism and confine radfems to the fringes, because if the woman in question decided she enjoyed being a pornstar or a prostitute and found it "empowering", you've just lost the argument. All you can do at that point is claim that the patriarchy brainwashed her (I actually would agree with them on this) but because you don't have objective principles to rely on it becomes a semantic argument and they will just say they know better than you do about what they want. There were plenty of women involved in pornography like Nina Hartley who would use arguments like this.

>Yes, and it's not because people don't want to form families. It's because they economically can't.

That's true to an extent but its not the whole story. If we look at fertility compared to income, we see across all socio-economic classes fertility is depressed, not just poorer people. Its especially true for women, and the main reason is because relationships are so unstable now that nobody wants to commit. I grew up as a child of divorce and so did most of my friends, none of us want to go through what we went through growing up.

>You should learn a little more about history if you want to talk like you're smart lmao.

Its literally their entire histories, even Sun Yat Sen, the Kuomintang leader who established the government of Taiwan had many wives and concubines.

>The Quran says Mohammed married a successful merchant lady and stole all her money

Do you know anything about how tribal society functioned in pre-Islamic Arabia? Consider the fact that the modern gulf Arabs are the most socially backwards people in the Muslim world today (when you factor in wealth). One area where Islam actually improved the status of women in Arabia was limiting the number of wives a man could have to 4. Prior to that, Arabs could have as many wives, concubines and sex slaves as they could afford. Of course in practice the Muslims would just collect sex slaves in addition to their legitimate wives, completely circumventing the 4 wife limit, but before then in pre Islamic Arabia there were no laws whatsoever on the number of wives a man could have

No. 2081581

>>2081481
It’s pretty weird to say that we would have definitely been sexually abused if our parents got divorced.

No. 2081583

>>2081570
>Many of the STIs that account for very high current STI rates are not physically visible (HPV and HSV being two of the main ones that account for a lot of the high rates).
Okay, how does that change the fact that STD rates across the board have skyrocketed compared to before the sexual revolution? Even if we only look at the physically noticeable ones like syphilis or herpes.

>Syphilis wasn't exactly rare at all points prior to the sexual revolution, either.

I never said it wasn't, I said that the sexual revolution caused a skyrocket in venereal disease across the board compared to before the revolution.

>He may have felt that way, but it didn't stop modern Europe from taking it all in stride and accepting everything he was saying about women, even though he was no feminist and it was long before the sexual revolution.

All of Europe didn't suddenly accept Freudianism as valid, there was widespread opposition to it particularly from the Catholic church. The only people that were even aware of Freudianism were the elites of the time, it wasn't a mainstream movement.

>But I thought men never got away with cheating and abuse before no-fault divorce!

When did I say that?

>No, you actually said second wave feminism (which was not Marxist feminism) transformed feminism into class warfare

Okay, sorry that I mixed up my waves and subgroups of feminism.

>yet now you are talking openly about class warfare against women in the 1800s by Freud's wealthy and influential clients who were some of the most important people in society at the time and who popularized an entire 'field' of medicine that was basically formed entirely as a form of class warfare against women.

This is called moral subversion, not class warfare. It was an elite movement whose goals were to destroy the moral foundation of the society at large so the elites could do whatever they wanted, Harvey Weinstein style, without any resistance as long as it was "voluntary". Men as a whole were not being radicalized by Freudianism to impose Freudian sexual depravity on women, it was entirely top-down.

>Although quite a few radfems were not supportive of the family unit per se, they were supportive of bettering the family unit by slowly reforming and improving marriage, other financial and legal protections for women within and outside of marriage, and arguing against the sexually degenerate behaviour of males (and some females).

Well what was their goal exactly? If they didn't support the family unit, their ultimate goal would be to eliminate it even if they wanted to make it better for women in the short term. If we are in an oppressor-oppressed dynamic, all relationships are inherently power struggles. I agree that the original patriarchal marriage system was an oppressive dynamic, but that doesn't mean marriage in principle has to be oppressive.

>The problem is that the "liberal" feminists won because men supported them more, quite simply.

Yeah, we needed more restrictions on moid sexuality, not less.

>Radical feminists did not 'abandon moral arguments' at all

What's the underlying justification for their moral arguments then? What is objectively right and wrong according to radfems?

No. 2081585

>>2081581
>It’s pretty weird to say that we would have definitely been sexually abused if our parents got divorced.
I never said that, but its a reality that your chances of being abused are much higher with an unrelated moid than your own father

No. 2081589

File: 1720431185965.png (93.9 KB, 579x506, STDprevalence.png)

>>2081577
Honestly I appreciate that you have put effort into this conversation but I think you need to go do a lot more historical reading, as well as reading of the philosophy you keep citing and claiming things about, before trying to have conversations like this in the future. The points you're making are very self-contradictory and incoherent, and when I point out points of incoherence you don't clarify or try to make them coherent, but mainly this discussion isn't fruitful because you just keep talking about things you don't know very much about. Just a few examples off the top of my head
>Getting your entire knowledge of East Asian history from kdramas (apparently?) and thinking Han Imperial China was the only culture/period of time in East Asian history
>Being unaware that child marriage is still legal in most of the US and many European countries
>Being unaware that businesspeople and businesses existed prior to Adam Smith
>Being unaware of both the timeline and content of Western feminist history
>Not understanding the basic ideas behind materialist analysis
>Lack of awareness of basic historical facts about STDs (most STDs were first identified during/after the sexual revolution, hence the 'higher rates' of STDs after that point because they didn't functionally exist before, see picrel) or the fact that gay men account for a majority of many of them.
And many more than I can possibly list. You keep speaking in contradictions like 'it's because of feminism that people are so much more sexually active today and spreading STDs everywhere' then suddenly turning around and claiming 'actually we're so much less active today than before' etc. I can't keep up because I'm not sure you yourself have a coherent theory about this. I appreciate you might be spitballing but it's hard to discuss something with someone who keeps contradicting themselves. I'll respond to a few of your points but I really think you'd be served best by doing a bit more reading before you try to make up ideas about feminist history and thought on the fly and how that relates to trends in sex and marriage you yourself seem not to have ever looked up.

>Even the radicals of that time did not openly advocate for homosexuality

That doesn't matter, the high rates of homosexual unprotected sex during the sexual revolution still largely accounted for the STD rates exploding (as well as the fact most STDs were discovered then) after the sexual revolution, even if 'radicals' didn't 'openly' advocate for homosexuality. Chlamydia doesn't care about the political beliefs of the time about the person it's infecting.

>The sexual revolutionaries were invariably moids who would push their wives into swinging or open marriages

And yet you've spent this whole time claiming radfems caused the 'war' between men and women because they pushed back against the sexual revolutionaries? Interesting choice to lay blame on the women who were trying to stop these 'sexual revolutionaries' rather than the sexual revolutionaries themselves. Seems like you want to absolve the pedo swinger moids by any means possible.

>You really need to look into Kinsey and what a monster he was.

I know about Kinsey, but it doesn't change the fact that his survey on rural white men is the only source I (and other authors, apparently) can find on infidelity rates in the early 1950s. Do you want me to, idk, make another study by a less morally objectionable person poof into existence?

>Yeah, instead of saying something is objectively morally wrong

I don't think any major radfem thinker had any difficulty saying something was morally wrong. Here, an academic paper summarizing their work says outright: ". This work comes from such radical
feminists as Dworkin, MacKinnon, Janice Raymond, and Gena Corea. Their descriptions of women’s objectification are radical in at least two respects: 1) they assume that all objectification of women is morally wrong" https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1347&context=philosophypub
At any rate, I don't know where you are getting this frankly bizarre idea that second wave feminists didn't think anything was objectively morally wrong, but maybe you should look into what they actually thought before going on long screeds about it. Materialist analysis is defined thusly by Oxford reference: "A wide umbrella term for forms of criticism which share a concern with the mode of production of the object under scrutiny; an analysis of the socio-historical relationships between the object, its moment of production, and its moment of reception; and a reliance on the material, or concrete, substance and effects of its existence. The term ‘materialism’ comes from philosophy, and denotes the belief that matter is the fundamental reality." Nothing about this implies that you must reject objective morality in order to materially analyse something, and in fact I've never met a single radfem or read a single radfem text in which moral relativity was implied. Maybe you could find me one? I bet you won't, though, you haven't provided a single source for any of the nutty things you've said throughout this entire discussion although I have provided many.

>Ideals can't exist in such a framework, the only goal you can have is maximum individual liberty and freedom from whatever you define as oppression.

You're also completely wrong about this, both conceptually and historically. Again, neither materialist criticism nor radical feminism itself are concerned with 'maximum individual liberty,' that's liberalism/libertarianism, and it is associated with Third Wave, not Second Wave, feminism. I have said this at least a dozen times throughout this discussion, but it seems like you can't read.

>This is how liberals were able to create sex positive feminism and confine radfems to the fringes, because if the woman in question decided she enjoyed being a pornstar or a prostitute and found it "empowering", you've just lost the argument.

No, this is not what happened, and again maybe you should spend a solid half hour looking into the history of feminism instead of just making shit up and spitballing. No radfem thinker 'capitulated' to liberal choice feminism, they were vehemently against it, and some of the radfems from the second wave who are alive now still continue to be. It's almost stunning how consistently wrong you can be after being repeatedly corrected, in almost every imaginable way and on every imaginable detail. If you're not interested in this, just say so, and stop trying to talk about it.

>That's true to an extent but its not the whole story. If we look at fertility compared to income, we see across all socio-economic classes fertility is depressed, not just poorer people.

To maintain high income, women need to keep their jobs. In countries with strong work and childcare protections for mothers, like Sweden and France, women of higher socioeconomic status actually have more babies. It's just not possible in most other countries, because the only reason they have high SES is because they aren't having many children.

>relationships are so unstable now that nobody wants to commit.

This is total bullshit. People (women) want to commit, but men are such deranged pornsick freaks who won't even get a job and the economy is so bad for women that it's just harder for people to. The vast, overwhelming majority of human beings want relationships if they can find suitable ones. FWIW tons of 'children of divorce' I know are happy and glad their parents divorced, your experience isn't everything.

>

>You should learn a little more about history if you want to talk like you're smart lmao.
Its literally their entire histories, even Sun Yat Sen, the Kuomintang leader who established the government of Taiwan had many wives and concubines.
Ah yes, the last 150 years of Chinese history is the entire history of East Asia. East Asia was actually under the sea until 1900, when it rose up from the sea by magic, and then Chinese civilization was born.

>Do you know anything about how tribal society functioned in pre-Islamic Arabia?

Yes, I do. Upper class women had property and inheritance rights, similarly to much of Europe where peasant women weren't exactly greatly respected either but noblewomen occasionally were.

No. 2081597

>>2081583
>STD rates across the board have skyrocketed compared to before the sexual revolution?
I'm saying they likely haven't, and the few that did definitely skyrocket around then (like HIV/AIDS) were due to gay culture at the time.

>I never said it wasn't, I said that the sexual revolution caused a skyrocket in venereal disease across the board compared to before the revolution.

For which you have provided no evidence, and given the example of Syphilis which was widespread for centuries. By the way, Syphilis rates were higher in the early 1950s than in either the 1960s or 1970s.

>

All of Europe didn't suddenly accept Freudianism as valid, there was widespread opposition to it particularly from the Catholic church. The only people that were even aware of Freudianism were the elites of the time, it wasn't a mainstream movement.
Again, wrong. The fallout of psychiatry was most definitely mainstream. Many women were put in mental hospitals and other institutions and abused, which the Catholic Church also did by the way - e.g. the Magdalene Laundries. But I'm sure that was Freud's fault too, or you'll come up with something about how the Irish aren't really white Europeans and it was all a veiled attack on European values by the Catholic Church.

>This is called moral subversion, not class warfare.

It was class warfare. Tens of millions of women were medicalized following the Freudian revolution by "psychiatry." If this isn't class warfare against women I don't know what is. It being an 'elite movement' doesn't change that it was a movement of elite men targeting women, propped up and supported by the women's fathers, husbands and brothers.

>Well what was their goal exactly?

To stop the abuse and subjugation of women, you don't even know this much about feminism? The central idea of radical feminism was to liberate women and society from the oppressor-oppressed dynamic, which would mean if the goal was met relationships would no longer be power struggles. As long as marriage is an institution to oppress women it should not be upheld.

>Yeah, we needed more restrictions on moid sexuality, not less.

Exactly. That's what Radical Feminism was trying to accomplish. But people like you are for some reason mad about it while whining that the radfems were meeeeaaan to the poor men by trying to repress their depraved sexual urges, and that therefore men are right to be ANGY at the radfems for trying to stop their sexual depravity.

>What's the underlying justification for their moral arguments then?

You could try reading their texts, if you are at all interested! That could be really fun!

No. 2081601

People who act like being an underweight BMI is unhealthy have either never been anywhere close to underweight, and thus see it some mythical thing only anorexics are, or are anorexics who had to become malnourished to get there. Most doctors don’t give a fuck about it so long as you have no deficiencies and a healthy body fat %. Part of the reason being because BMI was created in the 19th century by a mathematician (not a doctor) who wanted to compare the average weights of different races. After I learnt the average South Asian starts to get symptoms of metabolic disease at a bmi of fucking 19, as opposed to 25 for Europeans, I gave up on believing it was relevant for good. So anons on this site that think bmi 18 women are anachan while bmi 26 is “fine” have a dumbass double standard. Still not bad as HAES women though, “BMI is bullshit!” until they see a thin person.

No. 2081604

>>2081581
Lol nonna my mom was sexually and emotionally abused her whole life because she didn't want to divorce 'for my sake' and it just made me live my life feeling intensely guilty, fucked up about human relationships, suspicious of men and unwilling to have children. I think I would have been a lot more trusting and willing to start a family if my parents had divorced, like the nonna above whose parents were divorced and now seems to think marriage is the solution to everything. I have witnessed happy marriages in my extended family that were really beautiful but there's nothing worse for your kids' perceptions of relationships/marriage than staying together out of duty 'for the kids' and because you will be financially screwed over if you leave and forcing your kids to live 18 years witnessing the effects of abuse on their mothers.

No. 2081612

>>2081589
>Honestly I appreciate that you have put effort into this conversation but I think you need to go do a lot more historical reading, as well as reading of the philosophy you keep citing and claiming things about, before trying to have conversations like this in the future.
If I'm wrong about something, feel free to correct me, but use sources I can look into please.
>Getting your entire knowledge of East Asian history from kdramas (apparently?) and thinking Han Imperial China was the only culture/period of time in East Asian history
Han China was the Rome of Asia, its cultural norms set the standards for Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Thailand. And in all these cultures you see the same conditions of polygamy and restrictions on women's freedoms that you saw in China.
To use Korea as an example, women were confined to their own section of the house and were not even permitted to be seen by outside men unless in attendance of their husbands, and this was as reported in the 17th century, not ancient times.

>Being unaware that child marriage is still legal in most of the US and many European countries

Child marriage is prepubescent marriage, and in the original context I was using it I was referring to prepubescent marriage. Yes, all of it is wrong (marriage age limit of 25 is a great idea), but we can agree that a 10 year old girl becoming a "wife" or concubine is an order of magnitude worse than a 16 year old marrying a 19 year old.
And I read your source, it says that child marriage in the US (defined as marriage under the age of 18) declined by 97% from the year 2000 (76,396) to 2018 (2,493). It should be zero, but this isn't comparable to countries like Iran or Saudi Arabia where the AOC for marriage is 9.

>Being unaware that businesspeople and businesses existed prior to Adam Smith

They existed but they made up 1% of the population. You can't extrapolate the existence of a tiny rich elite to the entirety of an agrarian civilization. And even then, its irrelevant. Polygamy is ground zero for the status of women. When you have polygamy, the gender imbalance caused by it drives down the age of marriage for girls and increases the age gap, and by necessity lowers the status of women as they become a commodity to be bought and sold. There were wealthy elite women in the Muslim sultanates as well, it doesn't change the fact that sex slavery was widely practiced by them.

>Lack of awareness of basic historical facts about STDs (most STDs were first identified during/after the sexual revolution, hence the 'higher rates' of STDs after that point because they didn't functionally exist before, see picrel) or the fact that gay men account for a majority of many of them.

Here's a source for you:

>Results Temporal Patterns of Gonorrhea among Teenagers. Beginning in the early 1960s, the annual number of reported cases of gonorrhea among teenagers increased dramatically, peaking at approximately 276,000 cases in 1975. Thereafter, the number of reported cases declined slightly, although the age- and sex-specific rates remained stable (Table 1, Figures 1 and 2). Since 1975 over 250,000 cases of gonorrhea have been reported among U.S. teenagers; nearly 60% of these patients were female. Over the last two decades, gonorrhea rates for older teenagers have been persistently higher than those for younger teenagers (Figures 1 and 2). However, within the two age groups, the gender patterns differ. In the 10- to 14-year age group, rates for females were higher than those for males in the 1960s, and rates for females have risen faster than those for males, particularly in the early 1970s. In the 15- to 19-year age group, gonorrhea rates were higher for males (Figure 2). However, as of 1966, the gonorrhea rate for females in this age group began to rise faster than the rate of their male counterparts. By 1973, the gonorrhea rate for older teenage females overtook that for their male counterparts and remained higher through 1981. From 1960 to 1970 the rate at which females had gonorrhea tripled, while the rate for males increased twofold. For all teenage females, the gonorrhea rates have been quite stable since 1975, i.e., approximately 75 cases/100,000 females ages 10-14 years (Figure 1) and 1,400 cases/100,000 females ages 15-19 years (Figure 2).

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001717.htm

And the history of venereal disease goes far back. In fact the primary driver for the secular banning of prostitution in Europe was the 16th century Syphilis epidemic that decimated European armies. I'm not claiming all of history was one straight line from perfection to depravity, I am arguing that the gains made by first wave feminists in eradicating prostitution and therefore VD were reversed dramatically by the sexual revolution. And no, we see the rates of VD rise for both sexes, with girls rising faster than boys. This makes sense biologically as we are more vulnerable to VD transmission, and it makes sense under the presumption that overall promiscuity went up for both sexes during the sexual revolution. I'm 100% certain moidfags spiked those VDs much higher than any other group per capita but they weren't driving the VD wave.

>Again, wrong. The fallout of psychiatry was most definitely mainstream.


When did it become mainstream? Not in Freud's life. Psychoanalysis was a top-down project that took over elite circles before being spread down to the general population

>Many women were put in mental hospitals and other institutions and abused, which the Catholic Church also did by the way - e.g. the Magdalene Laundries. But I'm sure that was Freud's fault too, or you'll come up with something about how the Irish aren't really white Europeans and it was all a veiled attack on European values by the Catholic Church.


When did I say the Catholic church was infallible? I just pointed out they opposed psychoanalysis, as did the broad mass of the population at the time.

>It being an 'elite movement' doesn't change that it was a movement of elite men targeting women, propped up and supported by the women's fathers, husbands and brothers.


Its as much of an elite movement as transgender ideology is today. There are plenty of parents gleefully letting their daughters mutilate themselves because the Science Man reassured them that its the right thing to do. Every moid who allowed lobotomies to be performed on their wives or let shrinks institutionalize them is morally culpable, but that doesn't mean this was a conscious effort of one group to attack another group, anymore than the parents letting their children be mutilated are collectively engaging in class warfare against their children.

>people like you are for some reason mad about it while whining that the radfems were meeeeaaan to the poor men by trying to repress their depraved sexual urges, and that therefore men are right to be ANGY at the radfems for trying to stop their sexual depravity.


When did I say this? Please point it out

>You could try reading their texts, if you are at all interested! That could be really fun!


It should be really easy to explain though. I can start from the principles that adultery is wrong, promiscuity is wrong, breaking vows is wrong, all on a moral level, and we should oppose these things in principle. Pornography is morally wrong because it perverts sexuality from its intended purpose into masturbatory gratification. Its also wrong because its fuelled by sex trafficking and economic exploitation of women, but that argument can be countered by liberals saying "well what about self produced OnlyFans? What about this woman here who says she is reclaiming her sexual independence through nude modelling for Playboy?" When you don't have fundamental principles behind your beliefs, they can be weaseled out of by edge cases.

When you look at first wave feminists, they were overwhelmingly religious women motivated by genuine social justice with underlying moral principles to appeal to. And those women were strong enough to get alcohol banned in the entire USA, the actual success of that program notwithstanding.

By the way, do you know how pornography was legalized in the United States? Its a very interesting story.

No. 2081613

What the fuck did I walk in on? Idk if I can read all this

No. 2081646

File: 1720436047958.png (229.61 KB, 998x896, louisthefourteenth.png)

>>2081612
No matter how many times I have explained second wave feminism (and many other things) to you and given you sources, you have ignored them, continued repeating the same already contested falsehoods like a broken record, and provided no sources whatsoever for all your completely nutty claims. For example, you seem to think that Han China or Joseon Korea were the first civilizations in East Asia and that no civilizations existed before them, because you watched a kdrama once I guess. Despite the fact that I have asked you to check your facts repeatedly, and all it would take would be a 2 minute google search. For example, you are now talking about how gonorrhea increased from the early 1960s until the 1970s, which it did, but failed to point out that it was higher in the 1950s than in the early 1960s, and that it is at the same levels now that it was in the 1950s… oh and that from 1990 until around 2015 it was at much lower rates than the 1950s. So apparently the sexual revolution just sort of magically led to less sex, and less STIs, after a decade or two! We've been practically sexless since 1990, compared to the 1950s! So what is your point again? People were doing a lot of free love shit for a couple decades, and then radical feminism became popular, and then… the radical feminists caused the sexual revolution that radical feminism was a response to, and… and?

By the way I liked how you first tried 'all STIs increased' and then when I pointed out that's not true you tried 'syphilis' and when I pointed out that's not true you tried 'gonorrhea' and picked out an article on a 20-year period ignoring the fact it went wayyy down after that and was higher in 1950 than in 1960. Like what point are you even trying to make? Do you yourself know? Can you tell me the argument you think you are making and how STI rates rising before the intellectual movement of radical feminism is helping you make the point?

>Child marriage is prepubescent marriage, and in the original context I was using it I was referring to prepubescent marriage.

Source on prepubescent marriage being common in 20th century South Korea?

>it says that child marriage in the US (defined as marriage under the age of 18) declined

Your original claim was that child marriage was not legal or happening in 1900s America or Europe. I just showed you that it is still happening (there were 10 year olds getting married to adult men in the paper I sent you, which I guess you didn't read). And it is still fully legal in the US, unlike South Korea, where it is completely illegal with no exceptions. You're not being sneaky talking about Saudi Arabia when South Korea was the reason you brought up child marriage.

>They existed but they made up 1% of the population.

Noblewomen with rights made up a tiny proportion of European women, too. Polygyny and open concubinage was common throughout Europe as well, especially for noblemen and royalty. For example, French Kings had multiple 'official' mistresses who were given positions in court and apartments within the royal palace, similar to the Chinese system of concubinage around the same time (see picrel, I ran out of space to scroll so I missed a bunch sorry). I really think it would do you some good to develop an interest in history.

You don't even need to know about history to know that sex slavery is commonly practiced in the West. For example, brothels (of almost entirely trafficking victims) are entirely legal currently in Germany and the Netherlands, and that's just the countries that officially allow it. The US currently practices large-scale sex trafficking of both women and children across the border, aided by official border guards.

>When did it become mainstream? Not in Freud's life. Psychoanalysis was a top-down project

I was talking about the psychiatric mistreatment of women following the birth of psychiatry and the gradual acceptance that abused women are 'hysterical' and need to be institutionalized and medicated, not 'psychoanalysis' specifically.

>Its as much of an elite movement as transgender ideology is today.

Okay? That's entirely irrelevant. Also troonism quite literally is a conscious effort by moids to attack women.

>When did I say this?

Your very first post which started this discussion. You said:
>
There's failures on both sides imo. 2nd wave+ feminists abandoned morality (particularly sexual morality) as oppressive and this drove them into the arms of the liberal left, who used them as cover while legalizing and normalizing pornography and other forms of sexual exploitation.
Also:
> Marxists took class struggle and superimposed it onto feminism, with the same consequences; make the other side your enemy and destroy any ability to collaborate for mutual benefit. Now we have troglodyte moids screeching about revoking womens rights on one end and radfems with almost as much vitriol on the other end drowning out sensible moderate people on both sides.

I only started arguing with you in the first place because you blamed second wave feminism, a reaction to overwhelming moid depravity, for causing moid depravity. And you keep insisting upon that in every following post you make, while consistently admitting you 'get your feminist movements mixed up,' making it very clear you know absolutely nothing about feminist history, etc. Then you admit that moids were depraved, screeching troglodytes with no sexual morality who were oppressing women long before the second wave even happened, but go back to insisting it all started because of Second Wave feminists trying to rein in men's depravity anyway. Which is it? Was Freud subverting European civilization in order to corrupt sexual morality in the 1800s or did the second wave feminists invent male sexual depravity from whole cloth as you keep insisting elsewhere? Was the sexual revolution full of depravity starting in the early 1960s as you have claimed or was it somehow a result of the second wave of feminism that occurred as a result of it? I guess we'll never know because you'll keep changing your story.

>It should be really easy to explain though.

You shouldn't feel entitled to people's time and attention even if it's 'easy' for them when you do absolutely nothing to defend or explain your own views or correct yourself when you are repeatedly shown to be wrong. If you have genuine curiosity about this topic you can look it up. I'm only responding at this point to correct the many falsehoods you keep repeating for the sake of anyone who might end up reading this, not because I genuinely think you are interested or want to know. I don't know what makes you assume you are the only person in history to have discovered having fundamental principles behind your beliefs, but I assure you, you are nowhere near as unique in this as you think you are. You would learn a lot about humanity by reading and maybe realize that ideas like "I can start from the principles that adultery is wrong, promiscuity is wrong, breaking vows is wrong, all on a moral level, and we should oppose these things in principle." are not new or unique to you and they're not actually rare beliefs to hold. You're not the first or even the millionth person to have discovered the idea of morality and it seems to be some extreme form of NLOGism/hubris that is making you think you are special for having morals and projecting on everyone else that they don't.

No. 2081647

>>2081613
Don't read it anon not worth it and I say this as one of the participants.

No. 2081653

>>2081585
>I wish my parents divorced because they fight all the time
>Well at least you aren’t being molested!!
What am I supposed to take away from your comment?

No. 2081663

File: 1720439031695.png (47.72 KB, 968x169, radicalfeminismwikipedia.png)

>I've never met a single radfem or read a single radfem text in which moral relativity was implied. Maybe you could find me one? I bet you won't, though
Guess I was right.

Anyway I don't actually agree with radfems that moids as a group are savable in this or any other lifetime but it is kind of funny that male-lovers are now attacking a movement known for the (imo overly generous) ideology of 'men don't have to be this bad, they aren't this bad naturally, and if it wasn't for the patriarchy we could all get along and be equals' for being too 'amoral' and 'vitriolic' lmao. The real reason moids and radfems will never get along is because radfems wanted to deny moids free sex on demand, and moids will not stand for that.

No. 2081665

>>2081663
Radfems won’t support moral relativism because we’re strictly against men raping dead children

No. 2081673

Some women enjoy being in verbally/emotionally abusive relationships with men And these are dangerous women to be associated with and try to help

No. 2081676

>>2081673
Fact. It's like a slap in the face when they come to you for "help" then go back then repeat. I've learned some people are just hopeless

No. 2081678

>>2081676
Also they’re dangerous because any violent behavior they experience is going to happen to you if you stick around them long enough and she’s gonna pick his side

No. 2081684

Bohemian Rhapsody is not the best song ever written, but it is one of the most annoying.

No. 2081685

>>2081646
>No matter how many times I have explained second wave feminism (and many other things) to you and given you sources, you have ignored them, continued repeating the same already contested falsehoods like a broken record, and provided no sources whatsoever for all your completely nutty claims.

You corrected me on misattributing Marxist feminism to 2nd wave feminism in general, but you acknowledged that radical feminism adopted Marxist methodology. You deny that radical feminism is therefore Marxist, arguing that the slightly different conclusions Marx himself came to in the 19th century compared to 21st century radfems proves this. Its a strange argument to make. If you collectively designate women of all economic and social classes as a class themselves in the class struggle, you will come to slightly different conclusions because your Marxist analysis has different fundamentals, but its the same class warfare model. The oppressed (women) have to overthrow the patriarchy (men) and establish a revolutionary utopia, same basic formula. If you're talking about original feminism, it was elite women from educated backgrounds addressing specific examples of oppression (for example, allowing higher education for women, eliminating prostitution, challenging legal inequalities relating to inheritance, property rights, equal status in marriage, etc) with the goal of improving overall society. They had the moral high ground because women are innately morally superior to men, and at the time this was widely recognized by men themselves.

>For example, you seem to think that Han China or Joseon Korea were the first civilizations in East Asia and that no civilizations existed before them, because you watched a kdrama once I guess.


First of all, I generally don't like kdramas though some of them are cute. But that's besides the point, there were indeed no East Asian civilizations before the Shang dynasty, that was the beginning of the bronze age in China. There were hunter-gatherer peoples like the Jomon in Japan and neolithic farming tribes scattered throughout southern China, but they were overwhelmed by the Yayoi and Shang, respectively. I'm going by recorded history of urbanized civilizations, where they write in their own words what their ethical standards and social norms were. And in all of them, without exception, polygamy and concubinage were accepted norms and children from concubines and additional wives were considered legitimate heirs.

>or example, you are now talking about how gonorrhea increased from the early 1960s until the 1970s, which it did, but failed to point out that it was higher in the 1950s than in the early 1960s, and that it is at the same levels now that it was in the 1950s… oh and that from 1990 until around 2015 it was at much lower rates than the 1950s.


First of all this isn't true, picrel. There was a brief and rapid spike of gonorrhea during WW2 because of prostitution by soldiers, and this dropped with equal rapidity after the war when the soldiers returned home. The rising wave of gonorrhea during and after the sexual revolution was primarily in teenagers and involved both sexes, and stayed high until the 1990s when we had widespread contraceptive use, cheap pharmaceuticals and STI awareness. Also the collapse in fertility after the 1960s contributed to this, as the infections were primarily in young people who became a smaller and smaller proportion of the population as time went on.

>Louis XIV

Yes, mistresses existed in Europe. Their children were not legitimate and could not inherit, this is the difference from Asia where children of concubines and additional wives had inheritance rights just like the children of the primary wife. Kings were above the law at that time, and the sexual decadence of the later Bourbon monarchy helped bring about its demise in the French Revolution. Society at large did not have any legal recognition of mistresses however, it was only legally permissible to have one wife and only children from that wife were legitimate for inheritance purposes. If you can't see a difference between a king having mistresses and illegitimate children versus the entire society legally codifying polygamy as acceptable, I don't know what else to tell you.

>You don't even need to know about history to know that sex slavery is commonly practiced in the West. For example, brothels (of almost entirely trafficking victims) are entirely legal currently in Germany and the Netherlands, and that's just the countries that officially allow it.


And who allowed those brothels to open and operate? The right wing (and by right wing I don't mean "conservative") was basically outlawed in Europe post-WW2, everything shifted rapidly towards the libleft since then.

>The US currently practices large-scale sex trafficking of both women and children across the border, aided by official border guards.


That could be solved overnight if the US had an actual border, but it doesn't. Who is responsible for keeping the US-Mexico border open for human traffickers?

>I was talking about the psychiatric mistreatment of women following the birth of psychiatry and the gradual acceptance that abused women are 'hysterical' and need to be institutionalized and medicated, not 'psychoanalysis' specifically.


Psychiatry as a field began with psychoanalysis. Rigorous empirical psychiatry didn't begin until Behaviorism gained ground in the early 20th century, and even then it was deeply flawed, but women being blamed for "hysteria" came to an end by the mid-20th century when medical approaches to psychiatric problems became standard practice. Its good fortune that Freudianism had no empirical basis and collapsed within a few decades of Freud's death.

>troonism quite literally is a conscious effort by moids to attack women.


You mean in general? That's the first I've heard of that. Until recently, most of the pushback on transgenderism came from the conservatives (albeit losing as they always do) who are not exactly allies of feminism.

>Your very first post which started this discussion.

>you blamed second wave feminism, a reaction to overwhelming moid depravity, for causing moid depravity.

I misattributed Marxist feminism to 2nd wave feminism, but that's a semantic argument. There is a clear and sharp dividing line between pre-war feminists and post-war feminists in the framing of their beliefs. Pre-war feminists appealed to traditional morality as the basis for their arguments (or, for early feminists like Wollstonecraft, enlightenment ideals) positioning women as morally equal or (in my opinion) superior to men. Post-war feminists gave up the moral high ground and embraced Marxist methodology instead, which alienated the sympathetic centrists and conservatives on one side and neutralized any critiques of the sexually debauched libleft on the other side. They just have to reject your Marxist framework, say they feel free doing whatever they want and there's nothing you can do to stop them.

>I don't know what makes you assume you are the only person in history to have discovered having fundamental principles behind your beliefs

Its not about "discovering" fundamental principles, its about whether you accept them as a priori true or not. If we go back to Aristotle, his Nicomachean ethics were rooted in teleology, or determining the morality of an action by its natural intended outcome. In the case of sex, its natural purpose is procreation, therefore the only morally acceptable sex acts are those that conform to its purpose. I'm not necessarily making that argument myself, but it is an example of objective sexual morality.
As far as radfems go, what's the objective principle they can rest their values on? How do they judge something as being morally right or wrong, outside of the oppressor-oppressed dynamic?

>>2081663

See this is what I mean. They don't like the decline of monogamy but they can't make an argument against it other than it hurts women. I agree 100% with that assessment but that's not a rational argument, all you need to beat that argument is have some libfems come up and say that they are polyamorous or some other nonsense and this is empowering to them. You need to be able to say that something is wrong in principle, not just appeal to whatever harms it may or may not cause.

>Anyway I don't actually agree with radfems that moids as a group are savable in this or any other lifetime

Moids can be fixed if women have the police power to enforce social norms and sexual morals. They are not able to control their own sexuality, they fall into vice and corruption easily, but that can be solved by eliminating vice and corruption and raising the standards of male behavior as close to us as it can be. We were well on our way to getting police power up until the post-war era, because we were relying on moral truths, the ideals of which are best represented in femininity, instead of just power dynamics. Public morality was improving under feminist influence, alcoholism and prostitution were being sharply curtailed where we had power, the change in women's rights and social power between the 18th to early 20th century was enormous

No. 2081688

File: 1720442109802.png (12.2 KB, 800x532, Chart_of_gonorrhea_infection_r…)

>>2081663
>>2081685
Sorry forgot the pic

No. 2081692

>>2081684
agreed

No. 2081700

I don't see why divorce is such a big deal, marriage is not sacred.

No. 2081706

>>2081673
so true. they enjoy the sympathy and attention they get from misguided people who think they are victims all while going back to their moid for more because they secretly love the drama. it's the only thing that excites them because they're otherwise dead inside.

No. 2081729

>>2081700
I think most people who are not religious would probably agree. I don't get the concept of super sacred lifelong marriages at all. Especially when both parties are obviously no longer committed to each other. Get married when it benefits you(and love or something like that if you care about that), and then when it stops benefitting you, you can get divorced.

No. 2081746

Put this thread in /2X/. Problem solved

No. 2081752

I don't believe males who accuse women of rape. You're a man just push her off omg

No. 2081760

>>2081746
It's unpopular opinions, right? The whole point of the thread is to drop unpopular opinions and make your case for them

No. 2081765

>>2081752
Saw a thread yesterday on Reddit about a male calling sex with a contraceptive failing rape and can it make him exempt from child support. When are retards going to learn thar contraception is never 100% guaranteed to work. Don't cum inside a woman if you don't want to potentially become a father

No. 2081772

>>2081765
So when a woman accidentally gets pregnant everyone is quick to say its her fault and how she shouldn't sleep around if she doesn't want the consequences, call her a whore etc, but if a man accidentally gets a woman pregnant all of a sudden he's a rape victim? So retarded. Why does contraception always become the woman's responsibility? Men could always do spermicide or get a vasectomy or double up on condoms or some shit but don't because they think it's not their responsibility.

No. 2081778

>>2081772
Exactly. He was fighting with everyone who kept telling him his child bears no responsibility of the parents and child maintenance is for maintenance of the child. He kept arguing it's emotionally damaging to hand over money to the mother who he admits to have been in years long relationship with. Men are full blown retards he states he consented to safe sex and because the contraceptive failed his consent was voided. Scum bag. Then I saw a video on the public freakout Reddit of a man being confronted on a boat by the police because he had a warrant for child support and you can't rent a fishing licence with a warrant and he ends up jumping off the boat leaving his current gf while the police sail next to him and then arrest him in the shallows

No. 2081806

File: 1720448946721.png (62.65 KB, 817x651, gropeywomen.png)

>>2081752
Someone linked to this reddit and the top posts about rapist women just sound like whining or fantasies. My fave post is this about a guy who went to a BDSM sex club and it was full of women who didn't respect men! Omg! And he thinks he got raped because a woman groped him.

No. 2081808

>>2081778
>He kept arguing it's emotionally damaging to hand over money to the mother who he admits to have been in years long relationship with.
Kek, and there it is. Men don't actually care about consent or being 'raped' or any of this shit. He's just mad because in his mind it's an L for him to provide child support to his bitch ex who he probably hates. She doesn't get punished enough by having to raise the child own but should also be punished through financial burden or he can't sleep at night.

No. 2081819

Having a best friend is better than having a boyfriend

No. 2081831

>>2081806
> enters sex club
> people who attend sex clubs are degenerates
> women try to initiate sex because that's the whole reason why men go to sex clubs
> they back off when he refuses
> "OMG THE WOMEN WERE SO SCARY I WAS RAPED"
> "MUH FEMALE FRIEND WOULD NEVER UNDERSTAND"
Actual retard.

No. 2081880

>>2081772
>double up on condoms or some shit
Not intending to sperg at you, but for any anons reading this who don't know: Do not double up on condoms unless you want them to break. It increases the tearing risk because the two layers are rubbing against each other and causing friction. Also don't use any condom that came out of somebody's wallet (again, friction weakens the barrier). Most moids don't know this shit and they will probably use compromised condoms due to their own negligence. Stay safe nonnas.

No. 2082140

>>2081806
>r/mengetrapedtoo
fucking hilarious. What a pathetic loser.

No. 2082141

>>2081880
I thought this was common knowledge that doubling up on a condom makes them completely useless.

No. 2082196

Being pretty just makes the hard times better. When something bad happens to me I can at least be like “at least I’m pretty”, imagine having a rough time in life and on top of that you have to look in the mirror and see someone fat or ugly. It’s easier to get out of a depressing rut if you’re attractive and feel good about your appearance.

No. 2082198

>>2082196
how is this unpopular, people won't say it but most people would not think being ugly makes it easier.

No. 2082229

Mandatory sterilization of all males age 35+ should be a thing.

No. 2082251

There should be a Justin Bieber statue somewhere in Canada. I don’t get why there isn’t

No. 2082275

>>2082196
Duh. This isn't unpopular at all.

No. 2082295

>>2082196
A miserable fat woman was hassling me while she was drunk and calling me ignorant for not wanting to listen to her shite and I alerted a friend to this fat bitch won't leave me alone and the fat cunt saw red and started to attack me. She must have so many mental issues I can't even comprehend. I thought it was bad just having cptsd but I've never hassled strangers for some under lying need for attention. Shits weird

No. 2082304

Being ugly is actually losing at life because even when ugly people do bully their pretty counter parts the pretty person very rarely resorts to personal insults against their physicality because it's an unwritten rule that ugly is bad and they've already lost. It's why it's so frowned upon when a pretty person correctly interprets someone's aggression as insecurity because how dare you identify the crux of the issue

No. 2082355

I think barry keoghan is cute, especially when he was a young boy but I’d date him in his current form as well

No. 2082358


No. 2082439

I keep seeing memes about eyebrow blindness and it blows my mind how unobservant people are. Wonder how many years for people to wake up to botox and filler never looking subtle and it's very easy to spot

No. 2082446

>>2082355
Hi barry

No. 2082579

Idk why, but the weirdest thing about me is that I can handle people from all around the world mispronouncing things, but when a Burger/Amerifag did, it felt like nails on a chalkboard.

No. 2082584

The YouTuber Sloan is a fucking cow and I wish someone with actual clout would do an expose video to cancel him. I can't stand his conspiratard adjacent content and how he pretends to stand with victims when he can't even get his facts straight and report information accurately. Oh and how he constantly mispronounces shit.

Just another defective moid who pretends to be a feminist when he's grifting and profiting off women's pain.

No. 2082589

If a person can't drive, they can't consent to sex.

No. 2082591


No. 2082599

File: 1720510158957.jpeg (6.73 KB, 194x259, download (15).jpeg)

>>2082589
This five head moid would beg to differ

No. 2082601

>>2082589
makes it extra icky that 16 year olds can drive in the states…

No. 2082614

>>2082589
Chastity belts were a great idea but they should have been put on moids and unlocked when they are marriageable and engaged

No. 2082625

>>2082614
Do you guys ever get tired of typing these things and pretending men wouldn't murder their own families to take the key back

No. 2082631

>>2082625
I know its not realistic but its still fun to think about, don't be so serious

No. 2082634

>>2082631
/ot/ has become "insert played out fantasy" "insert played out fantasy" "insert played out fantasy" over and over again

No. 2082649

>>2082634
NTA but unpopular opinion let people have a little bit of fun even if it's stupid. I think anon's fantasy is also silly but I wouldn't berate her about it. This isn't a high brow debate thread.

No. 2082730

When people die from unnecessary plastic surgery I consider it similar to dying from shit like bungee jumping, stupid death I feel no sympathy for. I think some people are meant to die young and stupidly and would've perished in a mine or of a disease in olden times but society's so bubble wrapped now they have to go out of their way to fulfill their suicidal fate. I feel the same way when someone that drives a motorcycle dies too, I think you have to be suicidal to choose that as your main mode of transportation so when they die I'm just happy for them getting what they wanted

No. 2082761

File: 1720524517695.jpg (96.74 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault (3).jpg)

The whole "sanrio girls are evil!!!" thing parroted across social media is just a variation of the "thing that young girls like = bad" stuff

No. 2082768

>>2082761
To be honest I think that's very apparent to anyone who isn't a moid, normie or pickme

No. 2082787

>>2082761
Sanrio Xanax girls are indeed evil

No. 2082798

>>2082787
I want to know why, I haven't encountered one so I'm curious as to why people say this.

No. 2082808

>>2082768
that's a very big population

No. 2082812

>>2082761
I sort of agree, but Twilight Beiber girls were so much nicer, at least offline. Sanrio attracts a lot of mentally ill gendies and genuine toxicity. Sanrio girls are annoying irl. They're usually the hypersensitive passive aggressive types who need everything to be soft and inoffensive at all times. They're like stuck up Christian grandmas if they were emotionally stunted zoomers. When Twilight and Beiber were at the height of popularity, I remember those girls being fun and nice to be around. Could just be my age. It could just be a small subsection of super fucking loud Sanrio fans. I think a lot of Sanrio characters are cute.

No. 2082818

>>2082798
I’m more of a San-x and klonopin girl myself but I don’t think I’m evil, I’m just full of panic and autistic.

No. 2082825

>>2082589
I’m 30 and will never learn how to drive but honestly I’m pretty immature, maybe I should be able to get all the guys who’ve fucked me hung up on rape charges

No. 2082850

I do not care about that gay moid going after that tranny. Natural selection

No. 2082867

File: 1720533840661.webp (37.21 KB, 1080x651, 8honfr643yg71.webp)

>>2082761
i agree although i do think the luna slater types who post pictures of their xanax in a hello kitty tin or dotted across a kuromi plush are pretty obnoxious. they're not evil but benzo addicts are some of the grodiest people alive and i think it's especially retarded when they pretend their brain-frying habit is cute.

No. 2083031

Homeschooling should be banned. I'm an overqualified teacher and still would not feel comfortable delivering an entire curriculum. Germany is based for banning it.

No. 2083068

Only a moid would get offended by direct scrotefoiling.

No. 2083072

>>2083068
To me sometimes scrotefoiling during disagreements can be annoying because i think it’s retarded that theres some anons who feel like we’re all supposed to feel the same way about stuff because we’re all women

No. 2083076

>>2083068
Banned for talking shit about moids by the proven male janny. Tired

No. 2083083

>>2083068
It literally is half of the time, sometimes they even tell on themselves later on.

No. 2083088

i think any problem that revolves around romantic love is barely a problem. literally just get over it

No. 2083117

This place reminds me of Reddit but without downvotes

No. 2083129

>>2083117
i am telepathically downvoting you

No. 2083133

>>2083117
If this was Reddit I would send you ukranian twinks getting flogged in dm

No. 2083134

>>2083072
I agree with this, it's only annoying cause it's always just used to shut down an anon because you don't like their opinion. Like a lazy argument ender for anons who can't actually have a discussion or come up with a real rebuttal. A majority of the time they're not even saying anything moidy. I say that as someone who's never been accused of being male (as far as I can remember, at least).

No. 2083136

>>2083133
can you post it pls

No. 2083139

>>2083133
I mean, if you have that saved somewhere, you could post it somewhere and discretely post the link.

No. 2083214

>>2083117
ew. that's harsh.

No. 2083231

>>2083117
Nah. We'd have to have far more mainstream attention, hive mind opinions and be infested by bots. This site has its issues but reddit is a goddamn cesspool comparatively

No. 2083239

>>2081426
unrelated but wtf is this video

No. 2083307

>>2083239
I think it's just people falling asleep in classes/lectures?

No. 2083309

There is nothing wrong with eating cats or dogs.

No. 2083323

I find mtf troons interesting. It’s like watching a car crash and not being able to look away. They’re interesting in the way weeaboos try to be Asian. They try and try to be something they’re not and it’s a interesting show to watch.

No. 2083326

Sweat stains aren’t gross

No. 2083327

>>2083323
I kind of feel the same way but with TIF’s, its shocking to see someone feel so ashamed of womanhood.

No. 2083328

>>2083309
Yes there is, unlike cows or pigs, dog and cat meat is full of parasites.

No. 2083329

>>2083326
Lol I agree, to an extent, but if people are wearing old clothing that still has very old and obvious sweat stains I start to wonder if they actually do their laundry

No. 2083331

>>2083309
huh, I didn’t realize that we had users from china here

No. 2083336

>>2083309
Wrong kek

No. 2083337

>>2083329
yeah i think permanent sweat stains are grosser than just in the moment ones

No. 2083341

>>2083337
Yeah I don't find it gross that people sweat and get their clothes wet. I find it gross that some people don't seem to wash their clothing well enough afterwards.

No. 2083343

>>2083309
Dog and cat meat is a little more dangerous, they aren’t apart of the class of animals that were put on earth to be consumed by us. Same with bunnies, squirrels, stuff like that. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should, they don’t offer us any nutrients.

No. 2083346

>>2083309
Parasites as one anon said, but also expensive if you aren't hypothetically hunting only strays, who would be too skinny and disease ridden or way too gamey. Obligate carnivores in general tend to have less muscle mass than herbivores as they don't really need it in a evolutionary sense, so it's a lot of work with not much pay off.

No. 2083350

>>2083343
Double posting (NTA) but humans have been eating rabbits for millennium. I don't disagree with your point but rabbits do have nutritional value

No. 2083357

File: 1720562142394.jpg (209.5 KB, 1436x1949, 20240709_164719.jpg)

I think the Melanie Martinez fanbase is just as toxic and crazy, if not crazier than the /b/ scrotes that followed and harassed Jessi Slaughter. Whenever there is a person Melanie no longer associates with, the fans go apeshit on them. No matter who you believe, no matter who's side you're on or whoever you like or don't like, doing shit like this isn't right. Oliver tree, Elita, Timothy Heller, and more to come actually. Just reminds me how 4chan edgy teens and adults went onto Jessi Slaughter's tinychats to record and bug her. All that behavior is one and the same.

No. 2083359

>>2083341
Squirrels, rabbits and hares are ok to eat because they are herbivores, they're also tasty.

No. 2083360

>>2083350
Oh that’s actually interesting, with that in mind then eating rabbit you could kind of equivalate to eating alligator, which I wouldn’t say is particularly healthy but still does have a baseline of nutrients

No. 2083362

>>2083360
My friend's family used to be "new world" homesteaders and apparently basically all they ate for decades was rabbit, apparently rabbit is very fine. It's eating carnivores that becomes a problem, both because of parasites and as someone else mentioned due to them having very lean muscle mass. I think rabbit is a pretty normal thing to eat in theory, it's just not done much anymore because other animals are easier to farm and have more meat on them.

No. 2083363

>>2083360
Basically, yeah. Rabbit is low fat but incredibly high in protein, so high in fact that eating too much of it can give you protein toxicity. It's not a meat you'd want to eat all the time but it's a nice replacement for other white meat from time to time.

No. 2083369

File: 1720563307633.png (975.21 KB, 720x709, IMG_20240709_161234.png)

I'm happy for Gypsy Rose no matter how much the media wants to portray her as a monster

No. 2083423

>>2083369
I agree, Jesus didn't said "love people who are nice to you" he said "love people" and that's what we lack in today's society, we as a species need to have god in our lives once again.

No. 2083427

We should go back to belittle people for their mistakes and publicly humiliate them, it is needed as the world today is full of special autism groups and a a bunch of pussies too.

No. 2083428

>>2083369
Nah she’s a criminal, could care less if she descends into poverty in a few years when the normalfag pity money and media cycle starts to dry out

No. 2083429

>>2083427
The amount of belittling never changed. It's just done for stupid shit like calling men men now.

No. 2083441

>>2083328
>dog and cat meat is full of parasites
Just cook it like pork. I just don't get the moral double standard we have for animals. Why are animals like pigs, cows, and chickens denoted as lower than cats and dogs? They all are of equal sentience and meat is meat.

No. 2083442

>>2083441
Pigs cows and chickens have different diets from stray cats and dogs

No. 2083444

>>2083442
I get that, but that doesn't really change anything.

No. 2083445

>>2083428
Are you one of those people who believe that she "manipulated" the scrote

No. 2083447

>>2083444
Idk nonny I think I’d rather eat a chicken that’s been eating some wheat than a dog that’s been eating his own shit, I don’t think it’s morally different or anything though

No. 2083450

>>2083447
I can respect that. Though, if you eat pork they are raised in unhygienic conditions and eat their own shit. Chickens also eat their own shit too. Most of the meat you eat will be unhygenic in some way, shape, or form. Personally, I just don't get why someone feels it's morally wrong to eat cats or dogs but will happily eat cows, chickens, or pigs. It's weird how we afford humanity to some animals but no humanity to others.

No. 2083501

>>2083445
I don’t really care about either of them and she honestly looks disabled probably because her mother was. I hope she doesn’t have any children, she’s insanely ugly and immature

No. 2083509

>>2083501
she's pregnant >>2083369

No. 2083510

>>2083369
i don’t think this is an unpopular opinion

No. 2083519

>>2083509
Oh god, why didn’t we sterilize her when he had the chance. I’m shocked nobody sees her cowish behavior from a mile away

No. 2083520

>>2083510
Some people are divided on her, who would of thought normal people don’t want to defend or give fame to a criminal

No. 2083522

I think if people actually thought obesity was a 'health crisis' like they claim to think it is, they'd make sure shit like Ozempic/Wegovy, other weight loss drugs, WLS, nutritionists, and even gym memberships/personal trainers were insured. A lot of the diseases that often 'result' from obesity and metabolic illness like T2D, heart disease, high cholesterol etc. have all their drugs and associated operations fully insured, so if our societies were concerned about weight as a health crisis they would insure weight loss measures too, even just as a preventive. The reason people don't is their main issue with obese people is a sense they are 'morally bad' so they'd rather see them actually get diabetes or heart disease than see them losing weight before they develop worse health issues, or they want to see them using 'willpower' to fix it. People actually enjoy shitting on fat people for being fat and don't want them to get thinner.

No. 2083534

Renee rapp, Julia foxx, chappel roan and Billie eillish are not lesbians. They’re just trying to differentiate themselves from all the other rich white women and seem less boring.

No. 2083536

>>2083534
Wait it's the first I heard any of them (except Chappel Roan, who obviously isn't) claim to be lesbians.

No. 2083542

>>2083536
Julia fox just came out as a lesbo

No. 2083551

>>2083542
Her brain is so moldable

No. 2083552

>>2083542
Real lesbians have enough to deal with

No. 2083555

>>2083542
I want to pop her lips tone down the filler woman

No. 2083558

>>2083534
we’re gonna see pictures of them all photographed with their own scrote sooner or later

No. 2083560

>>2083542
I know it does occasionally happen but when celebrity women come out as 'lesbian' past about age 25-30 I am really doubtful.

No. 2083563

>>2083534
My unpopular opinion on this topic is that 2-3 of these are probably genuinely bisexual (not the heroin addict). But everybody can clearly see the cause and effect between Woman has very publicly been wronged by a man or several men → Woman is suddenly coming out as a lesbian and pretending that she was never REALLY attracted to men in the first place even though she seemed 100% enthusiastic before, and it's a big emperor's new clothes situation that is absolutely going to embarrass all of us a little later on, and it could have been completely avoided if they just claimed bisexuality instead of playing the comphet game. Half of chappell's songs don't even make sense anymore.

No. 2083565

>>2083563
Yeah I think some of them may be bisexual, but as a bisexual, I feel like if you were actually 100% lesbian, you would likely know earlier in life before writing 293839484 love songs and breakup songs about moids. I do know of a couple older lesbian women who seem to be actually lesbian who were married to men before, but they were older when comphet was way more of a 'thing' and I'm just not sure that I believe women who spent most of their careers writing obsessive songs about men are 'really' lesbian.

No. 2083569

The older I get the less appealing I find tattoos, regardless of what they are or how well they're done. They're not attractive on men or women. Doesn't matter if they mean something profound or personal. No idea when my opinion changed because I use to appreciate them as art and wanted a few myself. Now I'm a judgmental old bidi. Wtf?

No. 2083572

>>2083569
If it makes you feel any better nonna I have always felt this way about tattoos and it's not like I can't appreciate the artistry in them. I get that some are very well done and even admire them but something about the idea of needing to put the art directly on your skin, permanently, is kind of off putting to me and I usually find people with tattoos somewhat less attractive. I can't exactly put into words why they don't appeal to me but they just don't, even if I really like the design and artistry of them.

No. 2083575

>>2083568
It's funny to me as a musician because I write lyrics for all the bands I'm in and most of my lyrics don't even make it obvious if the song is about a man, woman, etc. so it's just extra funny to me somehow when women write a bunch of songs that are very explicitly about men and then say they're lesbian. The fact that bisexuals aren't taken seriously as interested in women is its own problem, but by LARPing as a lesbian when you're not you're paradoxically making your interest in women seem even more fake.

No. 2083589

>>2083558
Even if they are bisexual they’re most likely going to end up married to a scrote when their fame dies down

No. 2083596

>>2083589
Which should be fine, most bisexual women have more male dating options and will live an easier life if they settle down with a moid. But they shouldn't pretend to be lesbian precisely because of that - lesbians have a very different reality concerning dating and relationships and social acceptance than bisexual women do, who can and often do slip through unnoticed.

No. 2083601

>>2083569
Tattoos, especially having multiple or a lot, are a huge sign of extreme mental illness for me. Every single person who has ink scars has something wrong with them. I know this because my fathers whole body is covered in tattoos and he’s a horrible person, same with every other human being I’ve met who has them.

No. 2083602

File: 1720579533893.jpeg (236.65 KB, 1412x1080, IMG_3561.jpeg)

Slut shaming is a good thing. If we still had it then trends like “showing your moose knuckle”, wouldnt exist. Western women are too far gone to porn sickness.

No. 2083604

>>2083601
I know some people with tattoos who are normal mentally healthy people, but most of them just got like one or a few smaller ones. The people I know who can't stop getting new tattoos are all pretty mentally ill. Just aesthetically though I don't like them in general, even if I don't always think they're a sign of mental illness.

No. 2083608

>>2083602
Is this the same anon who made that post about the 13 year old mother

No. 2083609

>>2083608
No idea but I wouldn't assume so because this post is on its surface far less deranged. I think this is actually a popular opinion that most people just won't publicly share though.

No. 2083610

>>2083609
Maybe not, the wording is just so similar that it made me curious

No. 2083613

>>2083608
No but everything is so pornified these has and is repulsive. Women need to be more active in telling other women their behavior is gross because most men these days are porn addicts and cheer it on.

No. 2083620

>>2083602
I remember when Anthony Padilla invented that term to describe the dickprint in his yoga pants

No. 2083622

Megan the stallions otaku bit is annoying. She probably hasn’t watched anime forreal since highschool.

No. 2083624

>>2083622
i feel like it's not genuine and is probably a bit her record label encourages her to do to make her seem more appealing and kwerky!!1 but everytime i'm honest about that i get called racist

No. 2083626

>>2083613
I don’t really see how scolding each other is going to help

No. 2083627

>>2083626
Well tbh I don’t see women slut shaming other women working because they would just get called jealous/ugly. Slut shaming only works when men do it because women care what they think, since most men are porn addicts and think having a instagram baddie or only fans gf is cool now there’s no way to keep it in check.

No. 2083631

File: 1720581711963.jpg (155.32 KB, 1200x800, img.jpg)

>>2083622
I honestly think people who say this (on lolcow or other sites) are just stuck in middle school when anime was for "weirdos" and not normie or attractive girls. Its 2024, everyone is a weeb and everyone and their mom has watched stuff like SNK, Naruto, MHA, and JJK. Plus she's been doing the anime thing since the beginning of her career, picrel is from 2018 iirc. I'm not saying that she doesn't play up the weeb thing because as a celebrity she has to have a public persona and appeal to the general public, but I don't think that necessarily means she's faking her interest in anime.

No. 2083633

>>2083626
it doesnt help, the attention they receive still makes them feel special even though its negative which only perpetuates their sluthood
>>2083631
> everyone is a weeb
Oh nonna, you have such an optimistic worldview.

No. 2083635

>>2083633
>>Oh nonna, you have such an optimistic worldview
I mean are we going to pretend like anime (particularly shonen) hasn't become an extremely popular thing that even people who aren't otherwise interested in Japan watch

No. 2083636

File: 1720581993418.png (606.99 KB, 993x1033, comparison.png)

minecraft skins with 1x2 eyes and lips are cuter than the ones with 2x2 eyes in my opinion.

No. 2083638

>>2083633
They would just take it as “these jealous bitches are just mad their bf wants to fuck” and not think deeper into it at all. It’s better to just let them do it and they face the consequences when they meet a scrote and he won’t marry them because of it or he cheats with women who are like them.

No. 2083640

>>2083635
IRL I haven't found that its that popular but it is definitely a crowd pleaser for people who spend a lot of time online

No. 2083642

>>2083640
Idk anon, that's just a difference in experiences. I know people irl who either enjoy mainstream anime now or did in the past.

No. 2083646

>>2083631
also there's the fact that enjoying anime isn't challenging or a talent to be cultivated or something impressive to accomplish. there's good stuff, but a lot of anime and weeb stuff is like junk food: it's cheap, easy, devoid of nutrition, and not that impressive to like. it's like, I'm sure the celebrities who play up their love of taco bell to seem down to earth aren't faking that either.

No. 2083648

It bothers me how women can be raped, molested, cheated on, beat on and everything evil under the sun that a man can do but will still have room in their heart for a romantic relationship with a scrote but if a scrote gets his heart broken once in highschool he’s going to be bitter forever and treat every woman like shit

No. 2083660

>>2083638
Idk if I agree with this, I think a lot of women would be happy to learn that they don't 'have' to act 'slutty' to be socially acceptable and that other women relate and have their back. Not every woman/girl who acts 'slutty' or promiscuous actually wants to, I think a lot of younger girls/women just genuinely think they have to or should. I don't think necessarily 'slut shaming' per se is the answer but I think if a majority of young women were open about the fact that they actually don't want to do these things and don't think it makes them or other women 'cool,' then most young women would feel more confident in saying no to moids.

No. 2083705

File: 1720592154961.jpg (24.47 KB, 220x325, Karate_kid_ver2.jpg)

I unironically like this movie—mostly out of nostalgia. It wasn't that bad and I really liked Jaden's romance with the Chinese girl, it was sweet.

No. 2083707

>>2083636
I agree. Also I think it looks bad when the hair extends to the body short like yours looks best

No. 2083768

I don’t care about teenage boys who get fucked by their female teachers. I don’t see them as victims. I’ve been to school with teenage boys and they sexually harass their teachers.
There was a case in my country about a teacher fucking two schoolboys and during the trial it was said one of those little scrotes went home to his mother and said “my teachers well fit” and made comments about her fat ass. The kids nicknamed her “bunda Becky” and sexually harassed her in class. Of course his mother did nothing about it because it’s ok for their grotty little scrotelings to harass women, it’s part of growing up, he’s uwu becoming a man and has urges, but as soon as a grown woman fucks one of them SUDDENLY he’s just a widdle baby!
The only people who truly care are their mothers, who like I said, don’t care that their disgusting scroteling harasses women and girls, and most of them are so weird about their sons it’s as if THEY want to fuck him themselves. They’re just jealous their darling little boy is giving another old hag attention.
Men are never victims and I don’t care if they get raped even by other men but I especially don’t care if it’s by a woman.

No. 2083773

>>2083660
>I think a lot of younger girls/women just genuinely think they have to or should
You're not entirely wrong because I remember being bullied if I didn't dress like the popular girls at my school. I remember it going something like
>male attention = social capital, the more you have the prettier you are assumed to be
>the prettier you are considered, the more you'll be admired by other girls
So a lot of girls dressed slutty just to be as cool as possible to their peers, male attention was just a tool to get there and so were boyfriends. Of course you had the option to not do this and you would still be liked, but only if you looked pretty and carried yourself with the confidence of a rich girl. If you were an ugly duckling, being a frumpy nerd who gets no male attention on top of that would get you bullied pretty badly because you're on the bottom of the teen girl food chain. Yes it is dumb, but that is teenagers for you.

No. 2083774

>>2083768
I don't care what happens to those teachers

No. 2083780

>>2083774
They shouldn’t go to prison though. Our prisons are full and men who molest children, rape women, beat women and watch CP get to walk free meanwhile a woman is locked up for giving a moidlet the sexual attention he begged for.

No. 2083781

>>2083780
Don't care

No. 2083791

>>2083768

Males don’t even give a fuck, half of them post about how lucky these boys are. So why should we care?

No. 2083795

>>2083780
>>2083791
The moidlets in question are not victims of course, even moids themselves laugh when the media pearl clutches over teacher sex scandals
These women should get some serious penalties however, idk if jail is appropriate but they should be banned from getting anywhere near a classroom again
These hoes destroy women as authority figures in the minds of the moidlets they fuck and all the other moidlets who see or hear about it happening
There should be an age limit of 35+ for teaching highschool for either sex, teachers can start off in grade school and become highschool teachers when they reach that age and seniority level

No. 2083812

>>2083428
>>2083520
She killed her abusive mother, she shouldn’t have even been sent to jail in the first place. People just hate to see abuse victims actually defend themselves.

No. 2083859

>>2083812
She sounds like my mom who says that women who kill their abusive husbands should go to prison because they still killed someone.

No. 2083861

>>2083859
Dumb. Bring vigilanteism back

No. 2083863

>>2083707
the hair does extend to her body in my picrel kek but I agree short hair looks (and works) best for mc skins. I didn't realize it but a lot of my favorite skins have short hair.

No. 2083864

I don't think the furry thread should be allowed on lc, it's normalizing calling any animal-fan a furry and i'm strictly against that(continuing to sperg for months about a thread title)

No. 2083871

>>2083522
Most insurances do suck, but this isn't entirely true. Some plans from insurance companies do actually cover nutritionists, online healthy eating programs and reduced gym membership. Hopefully this will become more the norm over time.

No. 2083873

>>2083791
Exactly, if the boys were “raped” then why is it always the hot teachers who get to sleep with them? Why is it always the most pubertal looking boys who are a foot taller than their peers? Almost as if they’re the active initiators of the situation!

No. 2083902

>>2083768
I care if boys get groomed by female relatives or raped by men but I don’t care if some 29 year old teacher has sex with her 16 year old foot ball playing student because they’re both consenting. Women need to save their empathy for real victims and stop crying over 16-23 year old males, the only people who ever care about this stuff are women.

No. 2083913

Father figures are important in the home to keep pedos away from the daughters because most single mothers act very naive about the men they let around their children and to keep boy moms from coddling their sons too much and turning them into violent nightmares

No. 2083917

>>2083902
every time a teacher who is even halfway attractive gets caught having sex with her male students the comments on news articles are always full of grown men saying how lucky he is and how they wish they had a teacher like that when they were boys. even if the students aren't traumatized i still think it's pretty gross for an adult to go into the teaching field purely so she can have sexual access to teenagers.

No. 2083918

>>2083917
I don’t think women go into teaching fields because they intend on fucking young boys. What I think happens is they have a loveless, balding post wall scrote at home who barely pays her attention and then she goes to school and the cute jock is aggressively giving her attention she never gets anywhere else and she folds.

No. 2083926

>>2083918
Samefag also high school boys will over hype the looks of a female teacher even if she’s just average because she’s better looking than most teachers. Some of these women never get attention like that with adult men.

No. 2083945

>>2083926
>>2083918
what you say is true but i still believe there is something wrong with a woman who is genuinely pretty and can have any moid she wants yet chooses to pursue a relationship with one of her students. i don't think she's a dangerous predator but i have a very low opinion of an adult who swoons over a teenager just because she's flattered by the attention he gives her. teen scrotes will fuck anything and if you let yourself get sweet talked by one you're either pathetically stupid or get off on the fact that you're his teacher.

No. 2083951

>>2083945
Teen scrotes are still scrotes and they can sniff out insecurity in women from a mile away and they’re going to press you to get laid if they can sense it(TikTok related). It takes a young woman who is very secure in herself to be a teacher to young men. I think women who weren’t attractive growing up are more susceptible to it. I don’t think these women go into these jobs trying to find boys but they are just extremely insecure and emotionally immature and the boys can sense that.

No. 2083997

The best pro about pretty privilege is you can be a terrible person and kind of get away with it

No. 2084183

cheerleading is retarded

No. 2084196

>>2083902
Omg are you larping as my misinformed bf? We literally discussed that Manchester teacher doing this with two students and getting pregnant by one. He was pretty much saying what you're saying and why are the boys acting affronted and it's like what? I'd I have a daughter with him is he OK with her fucking her teacher in what fucking world. The teen boys are not going to be praised by their peers. They're going to be mocked. Their female peers are not going to want to socialise with them like the rest of the boys. People are so fucking short sighted. A predator is a predator. It's not right for people in positions of power or guardianship to entice or coerce impressionable young person's to enter intimate life changing relationships. Imagine being the baby of this teacher and student. The mother was jailed thank fuck.

No. 2084238

>>2084196
You’re thinking with women brain and refuse to see things from a male perspective. Your bf thinks this way because he’s a male and knows how other males act and think, you are looking at this situation from the perspective of being a teenage girl in the same situation.

No. 2084290

I think lolcow is still good and basically fine as it is. Sure the cow culture has died a bit but websites evolve and change over time. Nothing stays the same. I've been here for 7-8 years now I think and while the culture has changed sporadically based on the different groups of people using the site, it's still pretty good. The only issue is really ban evaders but those have always been an issue.

No. 2084295

We should stop being mean to each other

No. 2084296

>>2084183
Gymnastics and acrobatics are waaay cooler than cheerleading

No. 2084300

>>2084295
no, fuck you

No. 2084301

I support Palestine but only because I have such a deep and ferocious hatred for Muslims. The more war in the Middle East, the more of them come over here and shit up Europe. We must destroy Israel and preserve the Middle East. Then we must deport them all en masse.(bait)

No. 2084303

>>2084295
Agreed, I feel like I’ve noticed an influx of super angry users (who seem young?) starting fights for no reason and not even in a joking way. The youngest zoomers are just rude as hell and they think it’s funny or something

No. 2084306

I’m not sure how unpopular this opinion is, but I’ll start out by saying I consider myself someone who very much dislikes dogs . I don’t understand them and don’t like to be around them whatsoever. That being said, I find the dog hate thread one of the weirdest ones in ot . Not because people aren’t aloud to hate dogs, but there is almost this fetishized hatred of dogs I can only compare to the way that those people who want to watch baby monkeys get tortured also experience. I find the posters in that thread mostly unsettling .

No. 2084308

>>2084306
If you're entering a thread about hating something you're not going to find the most moderate people on the topic.

No. 2084317

>>2083951
>I think women who weren’t attractive growing up are more susceptible to it
Nta but why do you guys talk about grown women like we're kids? It's weird as fuck. You shouldn't be susceptible to anything from a teenager. If you let a teenager play on your insecurities or emotions, you're just fucking dumb and letting it happen.

No. 2084339

>>2084306
well nonny it is called the dog hate thread, not the dog ambivalence thread

No. 2084348

>>2084296
i agree. sad to see so many fit athletic talented women waste their talents on cheerleading. it has such high risk of injury too.

No. 2084349

>>2084306
dead dove do not eat

No. 2084352

>>2084303
I guess because they feel like a rush of excitement or dopamine from the attention that comes from infighting? I just want us to have fun together, I consider my nonnies to be friends of mine

No. 2084353

>>2084317
Because it’s true. A lot women who end up in those situations didn’t take the job to get to younger boys, they just ended up being easy targets for hornball kids because they’re insecure/stupid. They’re not like men who intentionally take those jobs to get to little girls.

No. 2084356

I refuse to serve indian moids or do any sort of business with them. They can't consume services or products without demanding free shit left and right, incapable of running a business without scamming apparantly, and they're so fucking dirty. I don't care if this gets me banned. They want landlords to rent to them for like 20% of the advertised price and then trash the place completely, they want services for half the costs and making the workers do twice the work, they're inconviences.(racebaiting)

No. 2084359

>>2083861
people love vigilantes unless it's a woman doing it. there's literally loads of episodes on tiktok of people beating the shit out of predators and everyone loves it, a woman kills her abuser and suddenly it's wrong. At least people actually believe she was abused, when women kill their moid abusers everyone comes out the woodwork to scream "liar" at her

No. 2084361

>>2084295
there really has been a shift on this website the past year or so. everyone is angry and malding and snappy. people keep going on threads they are not the target audience of and then get mad. so many people are trying to make it to the screencaps thread so they keep saying these outrageous things just for the sake of it. it’s stupid.

No. 2084363

I don’t listen to people who whine about infights because if they really cared why is the site so dead unless there’s an infight…you just hate being wrong and want to scream in fight when you’re losing the argument

No. 2084366

>>2084363
i just wish we could have fun, spirited, you know lighthearted arguments about dumb shit that we’re able to move past easily instead of cat fights that drag out across 5 different threads for 3 days straight

No. 2084369

>>2084353
>easy targets
Idk if this is a psyop to make women look unintelligent and naive, but trying to infantilize women and act like males (especially teenage ones at that) can always manipulate or seduce them and they won't catch onto it is disgusting. It's insulting actually.

No. 2084370

>>2084366
If you didn’t crave to have the last word you could just stop responding to those aggressive people during a infight. A lot of you just want to have the last word but want to seem mature so you go for complaining about infighting or accusing anons of being scrotes.

No. 2084371

>>2084370
Nta but what are you even talking about? A lot of anons don't engage with infights but still find them annoying

No. 2084372

>>2084370
I wasn’t necessarily trying to single out infights specifically, I meant just in general we shouldn’t be so mean to each other

No. 2084374

>>2083871
I know some private plans do, but most of the countries with public healthcare don't really cover these things or will only cover them in a very limited capacity (like only nutritionists but nothing else, when nutritionists can't solve obesity for most people), and a lot of the regular normie people I know who talk about how obesity is a health crisis and they only fat shame people because they're 'worried' about them etc. are enraged at the idea of healthcare paying for ozempic, gym memberships, and weight loss surgeries even though those things are actually effective for people who otherwise can't lose weight. I think they should stop pretending to care about the health of society if they don't want healthcare to help reduce obesity and prevent obesity-related disease. They literally would prefer to wait for people to get diabetes and other illnesses and be a huge expensive burden on the healthcare system than have insurance cover anything that would prevent that beforehand.

No. 2084376

>>2084372
Why shouldn’t we be mean to each other? Being scared of confrontation even when you are anonymous is female socialization that you need to unlearn.

No. 2084379

>>2084369
nta but Idk why people always think admitting one woman was easily manipulated = the same thing as saying all women are stupid/easily manipulated. HUMANS are stupid and plenty are easily manipulated, regardless of gender, if anything it feels more misogynistic to not be able to talk about manipulative moids because "we're calling women stupid!!" but admitting to normal human traits

No. 2084380

>>2084376
I just feel physically sad in my body when I read someone’s vent and see people responding meanly to a nonny who’s clearly strugglin

No. 2084381

File: 1720645994643.jpeg (708.35 KB, 1241x2133, IMG_3568.jpeg)

>>2084369
Not all women are easily manipulated but I think the ones who end up fucking teens are. You expect me to believe some geeky 23 year old is a predator to a 18 year old scrote?

No. 2084382

>>2084380
Stop being so weak then. Idk how you survive going outside if you’re going to cry over some randoms you can’t see

No. 2084384

>>2084376
ruins the quality of posts and drives out nice anons that actually want to discuss things. isn't it weird that you're letting out your frustration onto an anonymous stranger? like some stimulation-deprived autist.

No. 2084385

>>2084384
It doesn’t drive nice anons away because when there is no infighting the threads are dead

No. 2084386

>>2084196
>The teen boys are not going to be praised by their peers. They're going to be mocked.
Kek, what is this retardation? Teenage boys mocking a peer for sleeping with his female teacher? In what world?
>>2084238
This. It's so fucking annoying. Babying huge neandhertalian PREDATORY teenage boys, it's so fucking tiresome.

No. 2084387

>>2084380
Lolcow is literally nothing compared to tiktok arguments. I've seen grown men throw multi-day tantrums, stalk people, and accuse people of abusing them and the whole fucking argument will be about a fast food restaurant or something. Oh and don't get me started on the insane amount of users claiming they're doctors, billionaires, and everything else under the sun all over a blank account

No. 2084391

>>2084386
I think it’s because women want to hold on to the hope that most scrotes think like them. Men tell them time and time again how they think and feel and women don’t listen. Every man i come in contact with said he liked fucking older women or wish he could, it’s not a coincidence.

No. 2084393

>>2084379
It's the fact that anon is saying those women are highly susceptible and easy targets to teenage boys. They weren't easy targets who were manipulated against their will. They were grown women who knew what was happening.

No. 2084398

>>2084381
Do you expect me to believe those women didn't understand what was going on and just fell into a relationship with their student?

No. 2084400

>>2084395
I know they understood what would happen but they probably aren’t used to getting attention from attractive men. So, when the school jock is just bored and trying to get laid by a teacher for bragging points…women who are insecure are easy targets.

No. 2084402

>>2084387
I’ve never been on tiktok before and I plan on staying that way kek

No. 2084404

>>2084393
NTA but it could still be very well a form of manipulation, teen boys aren't exactly known for having the best intentions + since almost no one would believe that a teen boy SA'd his young female teacher over vice versa, it's easy blackmail "do what I want or I'll tell everyone you diddled me!". It wouldn't surprise me if more of these cases are growing only because no one would dare to believe horny disgusting porn addicts with no self control would attempt to come onto their teacher and blackmail them rather than evil predator women

No. 2084405

>>2084385
Nta but let’s reread what you just wrote nonna: When there’s no infights the threads are dead. Because the infighting makes no one want to post. And then there’s a pool of users who do return to post for the purpose of shitflinging

No. 2084409

>>2084404
>SA'd
What sexual assault? Again, you're just trying to infantilize when and make it seem as if a woman can't just choose to do something of her own will.

No. 2084410

>>2084404
I know a scrote who was very sexually aggressive in middle school and high school but ended up with a young teacher. Of course he ended up on a talk show where he played it off like he was a groomed victim.

No. 2084413

>>2084409
why does it bother you when people admit human beings are capable of being manipulated, blackmailed, etc? You find it unbelievable the most porn addicted generation would assault an adult woman and try to use it against her if she didn't give into his whims?

No. 2084419

>>2084238
Ayrt and I don't think so. Back in the early 2000s my female teacher who was a cunt to the girls was sleeping with some 6th form students. She eventually got fired somehow it was hushed up but there's been at least 3 rapists from my year and one of them was given honours cause his dad is rich and paid off some stuff when his soliciting minors for nudes was known. All us girls got a letter to our form classes which were sex segregated and basically us girls got told off for attention seeking and my bf att said the boys never got any letters. Anyway. The older guy that was known during my time to be sleeping with the history teacher was awkward and bullied and mocked by near enough everyone. People like to assume everyone thinks sex is cool but kids make fun of everything for anything. Like when I read about the Manchester teacher apart from being shocked I also took the piss that she bought a teenager a gucci belt or some shit and ruining your life for a £300 belt. Like a fucking belt. People never hear the end of their fuck ups

No. 2084422

>>2084382
You’re right anon I am pretty weak

No. 2084424

>>2084413
>why does it bother you
Sorry. I forgot you can't disagree with anyone on lolcow.farm, especially not in the unpopular opinions thread.
Anyway I've already said this but, it's the fact that anon is calling adult women easy targets for teenagers. I am not saying that women cannot be manipulated at all. I'm saying it's strange to act like if a woman entered a relationship with a teenager, it must've been because she was manipulated (or actually sexually assaulted, which I guess is the new angle you guys are using) and absolutely COULD NOT AT ALL have just choose to have done something wrong. I'm not even saying that teenage boys don't flirt with their teachers. I'm saying that if a woman actually falls for it it's because she WANTED to reciprocate it, not because she was just didn't know better and was manipulated into it. Anyway I'll let it go now since we're all just going in circles and repeating the same shit. I'm just saying, I see through what that anon was trying to do.

No. 2084425

>>2084419
I meant to also mention the guy that got honours has now been jailed.

No. 2084427

File: 1720648362163.jpeg (849.16 KB, 1284x1434, IMG_3464.jpeg)

>>2084424
Nta but teen boys rape elderly women. You find it hard to believe they’d be able to pull a fast one on some young teacher aide?

No. 2084429

>>2084424
Yes, but also avoiding the idea that the teenage boy could very well be the manipulator/aggressor in these sorts of situations just sounds counterproductive and if anything will just make the aggressive moids target their teacher more because who's gonna believe a female teacher got assaulted by a student? Predator moids love targeting women in situations that would sound unbelievable because they know they can get away with it (female teachers, unconventional women, female medical staff, etc)

No. 2084430

>>2084427
Nta but if these teachers are being sexually assaulted and coerced why is it them using their paycheck to buy gifts for their abusers? Get your fucking head checked

No. 2084433

>>2084430
Think about it though. If he wasn’t recorded doing this stuff by her security cameras would anyone believe it?

No. 2084434

>>2084430
You can't be that naive

No. 2084435

>>2084433
What are you on about?

No. 2084438

>>2084434
You honestly sound like a virgin if you think someone in a position of power will cave at the highschool jock attempting to flirt.

No. 2084441

>>2084435
Do you think anyone would’ve believed a 14 year old boy raped a 91 year old woman that was his baby sitter since he was a young child if she didn’t have cameras in her house? That was the situation in that story I posted just now

No. 2084442

>>2084440
Yea I can believe teenagers rape the elderly because I know of a local case in the same town as my pedo history teacher and my rapist classmates. The teen assaulted and raped and elderly woman several times in her home and was caught when a neighbour saw him gaining entry through a window.

Adults in positions of power that abuse it to enter into intimate relationships with those in their care are predators regardless of their sex.

No. 2084445

>>2084442
>a predator is a predator
There’s a reason you don’t hear about teenage girls raping elderly men. If teenage boys are so innocent why is it always them doing these things?

No. 2084448

>>2084445
I just said I know of a teenage rapist and I know of a pedo teacher. How simple are you that you can't comprehend two different events

No. 2084449

>>2084448
And I’m saying don’t think the women are pedophiles. Most women who get caught for crimes like that are not repeat offenders, because falling or some 6’4 17 year old boy isn’t pedophilic.

No. 2084450

>>2084449
If you're a teacher and you fuck your student who you regularly assess on his growing young mind you're a fucking pedophile and should not be working with minors

No. 2084451

>>2084448
>>2084449
nta both of you, women who insist that women can't be pedophiles, in regard specifically to a case of child sexual abuse, are suspicious and weird

No. 2084452

>>2084450
That’s because you apply female thinking to male brains. You plan on birthing scrotes or marrying scrotes so you can’t fathom how differently they think from you.(Infighting)

No. 2084454

>>2084387
Not only is lolcow nothing compared to tiktok, fb, etc. but it's nothing compared to other 'women's websites' either. Like I used to go on ovarit occasionally but it was just full of the most petty, vitriolic and retarded infighting all the time that wasn't even funny, and users took themselves so seriously. I actually think lolcow is pretty 'fun' and there's lots of funny and lighthearted posts, even a lot of the 'mean' posts are funny. I don't know where else on the internet people are frequenting that they think lolcow is too nasty, there are a handful of really nasty anons but a lot of the 'infights' aren't even that angry or mean. Is it just because we're allowed to call people retards here?

No. 2084456

>>2084452
Well then a round of applause for the feminist minded judicial system that takes issue with people that abuse their positions of power to have inappropriate relations with minors.

No. 2084459

>>2084456
The way I see it is I don’t see boys or men who have an issue with it. It’s not my job to play captain save a ho to a demographic of people who don’t care, it’s mens job to care about this and if they don’t care why should I?

No. 2084460

>>2084459
I mean weird if you make exceptions for pedophiles I'd rather a precedent be set that adults shouldn't date school children

No. 2084461

>>2084460
I care about women who have issues with it because they talk about the negative effects. I only see men and boys talk about how great it is because they like it. You want me to care because your future sons are going to be degenerates and it triggers you that there are women out there who don’t care

No. 2084462

>>2084441
>>2084433
What does that have to do with what that anon said though kek. Sometimes it really just seems like anons have no argument so they pivot to something else

No. 2084464

>>2084461
excusing pedophilia in any form is disgusting
to be sexually attracted to children is disgusting
simple as

No. 2084465

>>2084460
NTA but while I disapprove of adults dating schoolchildren, and I definitely don't think they should be allowed to keep teaching, I also think that treating some 17yo scrote like a poor widdle boy who was groomed when boys much younger than that gangrape and kill girls and women is kind of silly. Like the 23yo teacher posted above who slept with an 18 year old, if the genders were reversed and she wasn't a teacher would be seen as completely normal. I knew several dozens of girls that age who were dating moids at least that old and even their parents approved. I also knew some girl from my school who married one of our teachers after she graduated, so I'm guessing they had a relationship in school but no one caught them, and he wasn't even prosecuted and her family was fine with it. I think female teachers doing this shit are dumb and retarded but I don't think most of them are actual pedos or predators if they're getting into relationships with 17-18 year old boys who could be living on their own with a job and apartment if they weren't in school. I just don't get how people have the energy to fixate on these women as 'predators' when moids are so much more likely to be actual predators, I just think they're dumb women who shouldn't be in an environment where they teach teens if they are prone to seeing them as equals.

No. 2084466

>>2084464
It’s not my job to are about male issues. Men do not care about young girls getting raped/molested unless it’s their own kids. You’re not going to see me crying over some teen bragging that he fucked his 24 year old teacher. I’m indifferent to it.

No. 2084467

>>2084461
Well you can read the story of the 34 year old teacher getting pregnant by her second known victim and then birthing the baby and telling a teenager he'll make a great dad. She was in a previous long term relationship with a peer so she wasn't some touch starved insecure virgin who never got male attention. She's now in jail. I'm sure the victim she left with a kid isn't bragging about it.

No. 2084471

>>2084466
you don't seem to understand that excusing female pedophiles leaves girls to be abused by them as well

No. 2084472

>>2084465
Don't fuck a student.

No. 2084474

>>2084471
Her male brain can't comprehend lesbians

No. 2084475


No. 2084476

>>2084471
I dont think women in those situations are pedophiles though

No. 2084477

>>2084472
Well yeah obviously. Like I said it's retarded and shows weakness of character to fuck students. But boys sexually mature faster than girls and are fully capable of rape, harassment, etc. at that age so I don't see them as poor victims either and I just don't have the energy to be omg shocked at the pedophilia of a 23 year old woman dating an 18 year old moidlet. It's retarded to date a student, but I wouldn't really call the woman a pedophile, and most likely she was not a 'predator' either knowing how moidlets that age act toward women.

No. 2084478

>>2084476
if they willingly copulated with a child, they are
>>2084477
>it's retarded and shows weakness of character to fuck students
No, it's evil. All people who fuck children are evil. You don't fuck a 14 year old, you wild animal.

No. 2084479

>>2084477
Don't relish in attention from kids then if you're not a pedo and shut down the inappropriate behaviour by handing out a fucking detention or essay on not being a creep

No. 2084480

>>2084478
I thought the moid she fucked was an 18 year old adult?

No. 2084481

>>2084480
I thought we were talking about the one who went to jail pregnant with the boy's baby?

No. 2084484

>>2084479
Yeah, again, I don't think women doing this should be allowed to teach, and the behavior is inappropriate. She should be fired.

No one ever has this kind of energy thought to call out 23yo moids who date 18yo girls 'pedophiles' though even though moids are far more likely to act predatory.

>>2084481
No I was talking about the one posted above who had a relationship with an 18 year old student. A woman who sleeps with a 14yo is a pedophile, yes.

No. 2084485

>>2084480
I mean you keep jumping around events when I originally discussed the Manchester teacher in her 30s. UK law is age of consent is 16 however an adult in a position of power or guardianship is not allowed to fuck minors it is against the law.

No. 2084486

File: 1720650291775.jpeg (858.5 KB, 1284x1277, IMG_3569.jpeg)

>>2084478
>chid

Edward furlong was 17 here and his ex was 29 here. They barely look out of the same age group. Emotionally immature?yes. Pedophiles?no

No. 2084488

>>2084484
I called boys in my years pedos if they went after freshman girls if they were a senior. I have so much energy to decry moids tf.

No. 2084489

File: 1720650363832.jpg (465.26 KB, 1200x1623, 1200px-Stoned_Fox (1).jpg)

Unpopular opinion: I've said this before, but I don't understand why anons go so hard to defend female predators or teachers who enter relationships with their students. They're such a ridiculously small minority that it makes absolutely no sense to whiteknight for them so hard. It can't be for feminism or defending women as a whole because, again they're a small minority, defending predators doesn't benefit women in general, and it opens the door for excuses to be made for women that do things like prey on young girls or groom girls to be assaulted by men. And regardless, I think there's something wrong with you if you're attracted to teenagers so I'm never gonna be on their side. Again, they're such a tiny amount of women but anons act like you're a raging misogynist if you don't support them.

No. 2084490

>>2084489
They've got male brain disease

No. 2084492

>>2084485
I don't 'keep jumping around events' I think you're mistaking me for another anon. I only referenced the woman who dated an 18yo.

>>2084482

Idk about other nonnas but I have no desire to 'defend' women who act this way, I just think it's a double standard that men who do this are always given a pass and it's seen as normal by society but when a woman does this all the men go 'omg so jealous' while women fall all over themselves to defend the precious little angel moidlets when men don't even care. The number of female teachers who sleep with students is probably less than 1% of all the student-teacher relationships yet it gets brought up 500% more than male teachers sleeping with students. I'm just sick of people always bringing this up when it's so disappearingly rare and when adult moids in their 20s-30s-40s dating teenage girls is completely normalized in a lot of sections of society. Men rarely get this upset over a 23yo moid dating an 18yo girl.

No. 2084494

>>2084492
Oh well then you and your buddy two pedo pandering weirdo apologists. My mistake

No. 2084495

>>2084489
The same reason why the posters who cannot be named insist that it's "misogynistic" to say that real, flesh-and-blood little boys shouldn't be predated on by pedophiles.

No. 2084496

>>2084492
Because they will give birth to moids one day and don’t want to accept their precious babies are going to be hypersexual porn addicts

No. 2084498

>>2084366
I find this place more chill in the mornings. It's gets more sour in the evening and night times(GMT2+ for ref).

No. 2084500

>>2084494
How is it 'pedo pandering' to say that dating an adult student is retarded and irresponsible and makes someone not fit to be a teacher but not pedophilia? By definition it's not pedophilia if they are an adult. I'd like to see someone call out the dozens of 20-something year old men I knew in my life who were dating 18yo girls even once let alone call them 'pedos' but it somehow only becomes a problem if the younger person is male.

No. 2084501

>>2084489
this why they are suspicious at best
at worst, they were the women telling me I couldn't have been abused by my teacher as a child because she was a woman and women just simply can't ever be pedophiles

No. 2084503

>>2084501
Uh I didn't say women can't be pedophiles, I said women dating minors or sleeping with them are pedophiles. Women dating adult students are not pedophiles, they're just retards.

No. 2084504

>>2084495
That's what I thought too kek it's a weird "moids do it so I should too" mindset. These things don't need defending or reasoning. Males do heinous shit because they want to, not just because they are copying someone

No. 2084505

>>2084498
That's when the NEETs wake up kek

No. 2084509

File: 1720651169085.jpeg (530.87 KB, 664x1556, IMG_3570.jpeg)

Most women who care about looks are more prone to falling for teenagers and young adults. Women who don’t care about looks are more likely to stick to their own age group. I’m 35 and this scrote is the same age as me and these are the men I have to date/fuck. Try to have a little empathy for us.

No. 2084510

>>2084489
Yeah and it's really weird how they're treating the boys as well. Like even though by 16 most boys would have metamorphosised into a shithead moid they still look and act like a kid to me. I saw some anons one time defending a teacher who raped a 14 year old and it disgusted on a visceral level because that's a child, how is a 14 year old attractive to anyone but another child or a predator?

No. 2084514

>>2084510
While you’re having a bleeding heart those boys are at school verbally and physically abusing your daughters. Womens empathy will always be your down fall.

No. 2084517

>>2084509
I care about looks but I haven't been attracted to teenagers since I was one, I think the most attractive age for moids is usually around 25, and later if they take good care of themselves and have good genetics. I wouldn't date a 25yo moid because they're too immature but they look attractive, I don't think teen moids look attractive.

I am just tired of how much late teens moids are infantilized when they are often so fucking creepy while people act like girls that age who get into relationships with older men 'knew what they were doing' and put the full responsibility on the girls. In fact moids sexually mature earlier and are far more likely to be extremely violent and depraved at those ages, while girls are much more likely to be innocent around that age. I rarely see mass societal outrage at moids dating 18yo students, people are just like 'oh well she's an adult' but when women do it suddenly there's a pandemic of female pedo teachers when 99% of creepy teachers are males and no one gives a shit most of the time. I think I was groomed by a 30yo male teacher when I was 14 (it never progressed to anything sexual but I started avoiding him when I became weirded out and got weird vibes) and everyone told me I was overreacting.

No. 2084519

>>2084518
I don't think it's a good idea to extend the word 'pedo' to mean 'anyone who likes younger adults.' I think it is creepy for older adults to date much younger adults, and I think there are often grooming dynamics involved, but it cheapens the meaning of 'pedophilia' which is about adults grooming and molesting children, not grown mature people with their own homes and jobs.

No. 2084521

>>2084514
Wdym nonna they're all busy raping the teachers

No. 2084523

>>2084519
Nah pedo should be used more it should be used as a slur it should be known to kids its a bad thing. The way I grew up in the 90s calling everything gay. Pedo needs to be the new slur and it never needs to change because there is nothing normal about being an adult and being interested in school aged minors

No. 2084524

>>2084521
Obviously not all of them but a lot of boys that age do in fact constantly sexually harass adult women as well as girls their age or younger. I've been sexually harassed by actual 10-12 year old moidlets on the street to the point where I was actually scared, and the women I knew who worked as elementary or middle school teachers had even more of these experiences, let alone high school teachers. On the other hand I can't recall ever hearing a story of a middle or high school aged girl sexually harassing a male teacher.

No. 2084525

>>2084523
How is being 30 and thinking 25 year olds are attractive "being interested in school aged minors"? Calling that pedophilia is cheapening the meaning of the word and will do the literal opposite of what you're suggesting, it will make people not take pedophilia seriously as a concept if it is applied to 30yo women who think 25yo men are cute.

No. 2084527

>>2084525
How is a 25 year old a school aged minor

No. 2084529

>>2084514
It's not even able the boys, it's about the fact that it's disgusting to be attracted to a 14 year old .

No. 2084532

>>2084489
It's not unpopular, just a handful of anons being too edgy out of misandry. I hate moidlets too but pedophiles can also die in a ditch.

No. 2084533

>>2084517
Women want desperately for young boys to be the same as young girls because they don’t want to think that they birthed these monsters

No. 2084534

File: 1720652165532.jpg (7.65 KB, 260x194, 1719951495655.jpg)

>>2084514
And that makes it okay to prey on boys how exactly? Holy shit you can care about more than thing at once, like for example I think boys only and girls only schools should be the norm for public schools because both sexes require different environments for learning and to minimise boys lashing out at girls because they're literally retarded as well as pickme NLOGs bullying other girls. Boys being disgusting retards doesn't mean you get a free pass abusing them, like you wouldn't hurt a chimpanzee for no fucking reason if you really want a comparison dehumanising them.

No. 2084535

>>2084527
You responded to my post, which was a response to this post:
>When you age over 30 youll be called a pedo for liking those guys just as much as a woman who finds an 18 year old attractive
So you tell me?? Why are you saying finding 25 year olds attractive is 'being attracted to school aged minors'?

No. 2084539

>>2084535
Oh right. My sentiment still stands. Pedo should be used as a slur and then children will learn to internalise and adult acting overly friendly to them is loser cringe pedo behaviour

No. 2084540

>>2084539
as if that really worked out well for "gay" kek

No. 2084541

>>2084539
I don't think the term pedo should be cheapened in that way. If everyone just calls anyone who likes an adult 4-5 years younger than them a 'pedo' it will completely lose all meaning as a 'slur' and no one will take the concept seriously. I think we should only call actual pedos pedos, and call out that behavior (predating on children) for what it is - something much worse than liking a somewhat younger adult who is old enough to own a home and several years out of college.

No. 2084542

>>2084539
Nta but that won’t work on young males. Shame has never stopped males from wanting something sexually.

No. 2084545

>>2084540
Being gay isn't offensive disgusting behaviour though being a pedophile is. Gay as a slur should not have happened. Calling someone a pedo should be a slur because you should be offended that someone thinks you're a pedo

No. 2084548

>>2084545
Men have been called pedos for centuries and they not care. They’d just call you a jealous bitch. Shame only works on women.

No. 2084549

>>2084542
Just go on the sub Reddit for ukdrill and see how drug dealers make guys kiss each other over drug debts and film it for blackmail. Are you not aware of male suicide rates? They're terrible at regulating emotions and their ego

No. 2084551

>>2084548
Then why are so many dr disrespect fanboys on suicide watch cause their fav keeps getting called a pedo

No. 2084552

>>2084548
>Shame only works on women
Truest words ever put to pixels

No. 2084555

>>2084552
I can see shame keeping women away from young men/boys but men are going to keep going after young women and girls and they don’t care if their career or life is at risk kek

No. 2084557

>>2084549
Men are embarrassed they kissed other men, not ashamed. Shame implies moral culpability, feeling bad because you did something morally wrong, not just humiliation that you did something your bros might tease you for.

Male suicide rates are only higher because they're more violent and chimp out more, women attempt more suicides but they think about how it will affect their families and choose more 'peaceful' methods (which are more likely to fail).

No. 2084558

>>2084557
Ok then embarrass them by calling them pedos

No. 2084559

>>2084558
NTA but that doesn't embarrass them either, just annoys them

No. 2084560

>>2084557
Not surprised men got stuck on the initial embarrassment and can't connect the dots to shame. Not even sure what the relevance is on decrying pedophiles but go off.

No. 2084561

>>2084548
insert reddit moids crying about "getting sideeyed" (guilty conscious) for interacting with children here

No. 2084563

>>2084558
Nta but it will stop it behind closed doors but not in public. A 18 year old isn’t going to say no to sex with a 30 year old woman, just like he’s not going to say no to sex to a fat woman. Might be embarrassing in public but his dick runs the show.

No. 2084564

>>2084560
I wasn't the one who started the conversation about using the word 'pedo' on non-pedos to 'shame' moids about it. I'm just pointing out that the 'gay' slur working on men isn't because of shame, it's because they feel uncool. Moids usually care about other moids' opinions, not women's, and moids like this have moid friends who think they've scored by being pedos and wish they could be pedos themselves, so 'shaming' them for it is unlikely to work.

No. 2084565

>>2084555
Men are just opportunistic sex pests, I've heard a bunch of stories of gay moid raping little girls just because they were there. I don't think any amount of shame would solve that for way too large of a portion of their population, and the other portion only feel shame when a figure like Jordan Peters on tells them to.

No. 2084567

>>2084565
Yeah the Jordan Peterson point dovetails with what I'm saying, men only feel 'shame' or embarrassment when they're judged by other males, especially males they feel are in positions of authority.

Women mocking men for grooming younger women or girls won't make them feel real shame, it just might make them feel embarrassment at most because they don't want women to judge them as being 'lame' in some way, but it doesn't make them feel actually bad about what they did, it just makes them think they should hide it better next time. Very few moids are ethically whole enough to feel actual shame because a woman tries to shame them, and they're the ones least likely to do this shit in the first place.

No. 2084573

>>2084391
I sometimes think women can't help, but do so. You need to concsiously stop yourself going this route. I know anons here talk a lot about how men project all the time, but i think women project all the time too.
>>2084510
You're right, they don't actually metamorphise into a rapeape at 16, they do it much earlier. Especially in our hypersexualised age, the rapeape onset comes at earlier and earlier ages.
>>2084533
You must be right.

No. 2084574

>>2084563
Using pedo as a slur is a good idea because it's offensive to be called one and then kids can learn that pedos are bad. Awareness is a good thing so things kept behind closed doors gets outted

No. 2084577

>>2084574
Men think pedo is offensive because they just call you a jealous bitch and tell you that liking fertile women isn’t pedophilic. They find ways around telling you they aren’t a pedo.

No. 2084580

>>2084565
one of the studies blanchard did measured how hard moids dicks got for stimuli that were classified as hetero, homo, pedophile, hebephile and the adult normal form I forgot the name of. About half of the gay moids were full on pedos and they on average got harder when seeing a little girl than an adult moid. It's grim.

No. 2084581

Prison is a life hack better than joining the military in some cases

No. 2084585

>>2084573
If women in this thread don't realize how young some boys become unsaveable rape apes they should just peruse the 'news stories that fuck you up' thread for a few minutes to see countless stories of moidlets age 10-16 gangraping girls and women, killing 6yo girls for not performing porn acts for them, telling other moidlets to go rape unconscious gangraped girls in the park in their group chats, etc. I know 'not all moidlets' but moidlets are built different than girls that age, who tend to be far more innocent and have intrinsic moral instincts.

I don't think this excuses female pedos at all and I know (very rare) female pedos do exist, but we can't assume teen moids are the same mentally as teen girls.

No. 2084586

>>2084581
county jail isn't bad but literal prison sounds scary as shit

No. 2084587

>>2084580
To be fair anon I think the Blanchard study was done exclusively on criminals many of whom were sex offenders, so I don't think it applies to the same extent to normal non-criminal moids, but still it is disturbing how many moids are pedos.

No. 2084588

>>2084577
Just witness the absolute state of Dr disrespects fanbase finding out he was a pedo. Yes a lot of them excuse it but they're on the defensive because people are calling them pedo apologists so obviously people don't like being called pedos. Onision is another loser that can't handle being called a pedo either. Annoying men is one of my favourite past times tbh. Most pedos are men too so it's pretty much also a sex based slur against men and I love those.

No. 2084589

>>2084588
Okay but it will lose all meaning if 'we' collectively decide to call 30yo women who find 25yo men cute 'pedos.' Broadening the definition won't make it more embarrassing or offensive, it will make it less embarrassing or offensive, just like people stopped being offended by the 'gay slur' en masse when society decided being gay is socially acceptable. I don't want to see people 'reclaiming' the pedo label in 10 years and proudly calling themselves pedos for having a 4-year age gap relationship in their 30s as a joke, it's too serious of a term to be cheapened that way. Men are already trying to whitewash the pedo slur by talking about 'non offending' pedophiles and how they're such precious socially conscious little pumpkins who didn't do anything wrong.

No. 2084592

>>2084589
Nah it doesn't lose meaning. Like how kids in the 90s calling everything gay didn't change the meaning.

No. 2084600

File: 1720653826915.jpeg (840.57 KB, 1284x1424, IMG_3572.jpeg)

>>2084585
Nta but women who plan on giving birth are holding on to the hope that men are made by their environment and not born that way. They hope their parenting will make a difference.

No. 2084605

>>2084592
Kids in the 90s calling everything gay did change the meaning, look at what people use 'gay' to mean now.

No. 2084608

>>2084605
NTA but Gay still means homosexual? Unless you mean gay as in fun

No. 2084610

>>2084600
I don't plan on having children and I am (personally, not in general) anti-abortion but I think if I learned I was pregnant with a male child I would abort because I would be too scared the child could turn into a monster and wouldn't be able to handle it. I know somebody needs to give birth to males otherwise our species would stop existing but personally I would be too terrified, I remember talking to a female friend who had a female baby and telling her she's lucky it was a girl because it would be so scary to raise a boy, and she was all 'what do you mean?' When I brought up 9yos becoming porn addicts and shit she was like 'oh well if they did that you could just teach them better, I wouldn't be too worried' and I was like wtf I hope you grow out of this by the time your daughter becomes that age because you should be way more suspicious of her male peers than this.

No. 2084611

>>2084605
No it didn't? Gay still means homosexual. We learnt it wasn't to be used as a slur because its not an offensive state of being.

Being a pedo is offensive.

Honestly. In the age of a billion different terms for sexualities you're trying to argue people won't be able to make the distinction in severity about going after prepubescent children and teenage aged minors? No one honestly thinks anyone is a pedophile for going after a 25 year old. You need to get your autism checked out

No. 2084612

>>2084608
Most zoomers and younger millennials use 'gay' to mean all sorts of things other than homosexual now.

No. 2084613

>>2084600
How the fuck did he manipulate the babysitter into leaving the house?

No. 2084616

>>2084611
I was responding to someone who said 'pedo' should be used as a slur against 30 year olds who are attracted to 25 year olds, so tell them that.

No. 2084617

>>2084616
That was me you dipshit and what felt like hours ago I accepted my mistake and said me sentiment of using pedo as a slur still stands. I didn't see the post you replied too

No. 2084618

>>2084612
Uh I'm a zoomer, and gay just means homosexual? Like as in gay and lesbian both. What else exactly have you seen other people calling 'gay'? That could also just be their own inability to articulate their feelings

No. 2084620

File: 1720654413749.jpeg (817.57 KB, 1284x1730, IMG_3573.jpeg)

>>2084613
Idk how he did it but he did

No. 2084622

>>2084617
Okay well my point which I think I made pretty clearly was that, I quote
> If everyone just calls anyone who likes an adult 4-5 years younger than them a 'pedo' it will completely lose all meaning as a 'slur' and no one will take the concept seriously. I think we should only call actual pedos pedos
So if you agree with me then idk why you are arguing with me at all.

No. 2084623

>>2084612
There's a meaning of "lame" now, but nobody thinks calling someone gay as in "homosexual" is actually offensive, kek.

No. 2084626

>>2084622
Because you're arguing against me using pedo as a slur? Calling someone a pedo doesn't devalue it's meaning like me calling a lamp gay doesn't have the Oxford dictionary rewriting the definition of gay to some shite about my lamp

No. 2084628

>>2084618
I see people calling het relationships between two gendie people 'gay,' I see people saying 'that's so gay' about random aesthetic things and hobbies associated with troons, I see people calling themselves 'gay' who are 100% straight because they 'think girls are so pretty,' I see people calling asexuality, polyamory and kink 'gay.' Maybe we just live in very different environments but I'd say that among my peers and slightly younger people where I live at least 50% of the time I see someone calling something 'gay' it has nothing to do with homosexuality. I can probably count hundreds of times I've heard someone call themselves 'gay' because they're a girl who identifies as an enby dating a normal moid.

No. 2084630

>>2084623
It's meaning of lame was popularised in the 90s anyone using it now is outdated

No. 2084631

>>2084620
not trying to cape for a murderer but that babysitter is dumb as hell and should've stayed there until the mother got home from work. that's dangerous and careless

No. 2084634

>>2084626
I'm not arguing against using pedo as a slur (it already is used as a slur and has been used that way for decades), I'm arguing against using pedo as a slur against non-pedos, because I think that will cheapen the meaning.

No. 2084635

>>2084631
I think he would’ve ended up killing his sister or some other woman eventually anyway since he was killing animals as young as 3

No. 2084636

>>2084630
ntayrt but the definition of gay was never lame? the definition of gay has always been homosexual, people just used the term gay to call something lame because they thought fags were lame and sort of held them in a similar regard. i don't think gay and pedo are comparable, because no ones ever used the term pedo to call someone lame

No. 2084638

>>2084630
Yet i see it used all the time, if i'm being honest. Two meanings just coexist.

No. 2084639

>>2084634
And I don't think you can cheapen the meaning of pedophile.

No. 2084640

>>2084635
i definitely agree with that, however the babysitter still should've stayed there because a single mom was trusting her with her children

No. 2084643

>>2084587
Not exclusively, but yes a lot of them were criminals. But both the hetero and homosexual pedo moids liked little girls and pubescent girls more than adult men. It goes to show that even gay pedo moids are a big threat to girls, the opposite is not true btw. Hetero pedos were more in to adult women than little boys, which is probably why a lot of them can have semi functional relationships with adult women.

No. 2084644

>>2084639
I already see people cheapening the meaning, genuinely convincing others that 'being a pedo isn't that bad,' pedophilia is becoming more socially acceptable especially with the 'noMAP' movement to destigmatize being a pedophile, look in the MtF troon or gender ideology threads for tons of heavily reblogged/upvoted posts whining about how pedo shaming is bad. I don't think calling adults dating adults 'pedos' will help with this at all, but I guess you just have more faith in society than me if you think that people will take pedo accusations as seriously once everyone starts using it to mean 'any adult dating another adult slightly younger than them, in a derogatory fashion' or whatever.

No. 2084645

>>2084628
NTA but that's because of tumblr and TRAs and spicy straights not because people were over using the word "gay" to mean stupid or retarded. I miss when "queer" meant weird though, I think it's funny whenever a spicy straight poly weirdo calls themselves queer because it auto corrects in my head to the original meaning.

No. 2084647

>>2084643
That's interesting, I read the study in the past but I forgot about that part. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of gay male couples adopting/procuring children through surrogacy for this reason, because I think biologically unrelated moids are often a huge threat to children.

No. 2084648

>>2084636
Gay was used as a slur. It was an offensive term but not considered a bad word like fuck shit or dick that an adult could punish you for saying. It was used in a derogatory manner and it's shameful that it was and I get embarrassed if it still slips out into my lexicon.

Pedo is an offensive term and in that merit it would be a good contender as a slur and I think kids instead of saying all their skibi weird shit they should call creepy adults pedos and lame shit pedos. That could be their wonderful counter culture from the gen zs and their "pedo" gender identities (did you see what I did there)

No. 2084650

>>2084644
Those people are probably pedos anon you want to listen to the people that think being a pedo is offensive

No. 2084651

>>2084645
I think it's a feature of 'slur reclamation' that a lot of people find it cool and edgy to call themselves something that used to be considered a slur. I don't see people doing this as much with words that usually were kept to their technical meaning, but I obviously don't have any statistics on this, it's just an observation from life.

No. 2084652

>>2084600
I want to be a mother someday but one of my biggest fears is that my kid will end up being one of those psychopaths who were just born that way no matter how much of a positive environment I raise them in. Nightmare fuel.

>>2084620
That babysitter was so stupid for leaving but I feel so bad for her. Imagine learning about the murder and knowing it happened because you left the house. Fuck.

No. 2084653

>>2084643
And faghags on here still say homophobia against gay moids is bad

No. 2084654

>>2079804
I don’t understand the threadpic

No. 2084655

>>2084650
I know those people are pedos but I'm saying it would make it easier for them to make the word lose its gravity as an accusation if everyone started slinging it around as a random slur like they did with 'gay' in the 90s.

No. 2084656

File: 1720655178954.png (511.41 KB, 1798x487, blue-goat-pancake-fly.png)

not really my opinion but i'm sure it's unpopular on lc, and she was so real for it

No. 2084657

>>2084495
Women shouldn’t care about little boys either. Let the MGTOW/whataboutusmales crowd take care of other males

No. 2084658

>>2084654
Just a pic of stan in a cute jacket

No. 2084659

>>2084656
This is retarded. I wish a lot of anons would understand most normal people are going to lean into traditional gender roles and most women are into drama and romance books. Being GNC is not the norm, idk why some feminists like to frame that going against tradition is the norm when it is not.

No. 2084660

>>2084656
sounds like a seething barafag that got told her taste is moidish to be honest

No. 2084661

>>2084655
And I'd argue against that.

No. 2084662

>>2084656
I kind of agree with this but when it comes to media I think it's worthwhile to talk about the intended audience of something and how that affects its content. Like there are many 'x gender typical' things that 'y gender' people enjoy but when people make criticisms of 'x gender typical' media there is kind of a point in talking about who it's directed at and why it is the way it is. Like I'm sure even straight men can enjoy some BL content as just a 'cute story' or whatever but when discussing BL content and people's reactions to it I think it's good to keep in mind that it's woman-directed, usually written by women and at least one of the male characters is usually a female self-insert character to explain why the media is the way it is and who it appeals to.

No. 2084666

>>2084661
But why/how? Like what good do you think it would do? Imagine in the current moment someone tells you 'he's a pedo' about someone you know. You would probably take it seriously and want to know more and stay away from that person or report them or whatever. Now if 10 years passed and everyone called anyone they don't like a pedo and it became a slur that meant 'lame,' and someone told you 'oh he's a pedo' you would probably not even take it seriously or think they're talking about an actual pedo.

No. 2084667

>>2084659
women only engage in feminine hobbies because they are brainwashed by the patriarchy. When the patriarchy is gone, women will have the exact same interests that men do now

No. 2084668

>>2084667
Wrong. They will still like the same things and that’s okay

No. 2084669

>>2084666
I think if someone was genuinely telling me someone was a pedophile they'd say more than one sentence to me before walking off. And I've already made my points

No. 2084671

>>2084667
I highly doubt it nonna, the average stereotypical male interests right now are cooming, video games that simulate violence/killing, and (male) team sports. I don't think getting rid of the patriarchy would make women all turn into coomers and gamers and make women all obsessed with football.

No. 2084681

File: 1720656164880.jpg (92.13 KB, 1268x859, degeneracy.JPG)

>>2084647
Study anon again: This is a graphic from the study that shows all I talked about. It is called "Sexual Attraction to Others: A Comparison of Two Models of Alloerotic Responding in Men" if you nonnies are interested in looking it up, it is available for free.

No. 2084685

I think the anons that keep posting about how it’s ‘based’ to rape teen boys, are men that are posting their sexual fantasies here.

No. 2084686

>>2084656
Most people won't get it because they're very attached to stereotypes. Just to keep things easy, they're happy to throw people who don't fit established "norms" under the bus for not conforming, even when it comes to cringe little hobbies like BL. The anons who seethe at barafags who mind their own business instead of just saying "Not my thing" and moving on would probably also mald at tomboyish women if their weeb interests didn't set them a little bit outside of normal society.

No. 2084687

>>2084681
Thanks for this nonna, as an aside I hate when researchers take data that should be bar charts but put in in line graphs for whatever reason. Pretty disturbing that heterosexual men still had penile response to prepubescent girls even if they weren't pedos, fuck.

No. 2084689

>>2084685
Nobody said it's "based", stop strawmanning.

No. 2084690

>>2084685
Who said it's based to rape teen boys?

No. 2084691

>>2084671
it's human nature to fight and cum. female socialization focuses on breaking women from this nature, whereas men are taught to embrace it. if women were socialized in the way men were then yes, they would focus on cooming and fighting

No. 2084693

>>2084686
I don't really know the context of the post, but how frequent is it that people are 'thrown under the bus' for liking weird shit that isn't typical for their gender? At most I see people get poked fun at a little, or told that their interests might be a response to overexposure to gross shit.

No. 2084694

>>2084689
You sound like a redditfag

No. 2084697

>>2084693
If it's from the gender thread then it's probably about how mentally ill people think their hobbies define their sex more than their chromosomes

No. 2084698

>>2084691
It's not human nature to coom to porn, no. It's human nature to want to have sex and intimacy with other human beings, which is what is typical of most women currently. Women's 'stereotypical' interests are more natural in this regard. Men being addicted to supranormal stimuli like porn and extreme graphic pointless violence isn't 'human nature' it's a side effect of broken moid nature and the fact that moids are easily mindbroken. No matter how much people have tried to socialize girls and young women to be into porn and coomshit and other male brained interests over the last couple decades, a majority of girls and women aren't naturally interested, and have natural interests in more productive and creative and cooperative pursuits, which is actually 'natural' and adaptive. I think you have too little faith in women and human nature if you think women would 'naturally' be into coomshit (which itself is a product of the patriarchy) without the effects of the patriarchy.

No. 2084700

>>2084696
Oh I don't read that thread sorry. I just meant like in general, in my real life. When women I know irl are into 'male oriented' media most men think they're cool for it and most women are just like 'oh okay' or maybe think it's mildly cringe. I actually don't think the pressure to completely conform to gender stereotypes is that strong when it comes to the media people like anymore, it is stronger in other areas like behaviour or more creative/active hobbies and pursuits.

No. 2084703

>>2084691
If that were the case you'd think the Mosuo would be more militant instead of just partcipating in polyandry

No. 2084709

>>2084703
The Mosuo are an interesting case, but I also would hesitate to take such small extant 'tribal' societies/ethnicities to paint all of humanity with a broad brush. I agree with you in general, but the Mosuo probably are only one of the many models of culture that coexisted in the past, and they are basically an agrarian society that I don't think was ever very warlike.

No. 2084712

>>2084687
I agree. I think he did it because he tries to mirror them later and this style of diagram allows that, but he still could have just done that later and do a bar chart for better clarity first.

No. 2084713

>>2084705
Not only that but even if you want to compare humans to other mammals, or birds or other 'intelligent' animal species, there's a wide variety of behaviours within those species both across sexes and between sexes. Like in many mammalian species the females are far less prone to fighting than the males, which suggests that aggression is not just socialized. In some mammalian or bird species males are actually very prone to 'making nests,' decorating and dancing for females in order to copulate and attract females rather than engaging in same-sex aggression to fight over females. Several other mammal and bird species pair-bond and are fairly peaceful and cooperative within their colonies. Even just looking at apes alone some are much more prone to aggression than others, and the aggression in the more aggressive ape species is mostly within the males. So you're right that humans aren't other animal species, but even within other animal species it's normal to have both variety in survival strategies and sexual dimorphism in behavior. This is actually one of my main points of disagreement with radical feminism - I think some behaviors are sexually dimorphic by nature so 'getting rid of the patriarchy' wouldn't get rid of all sex differences, even though it would flatten many of them.

I'm not entirely sure that human nature is all about being just, kind and loving, I think human nature is not as benign as that, but the nature of larger human societies is to become more altruistic and cooperative in order to enable higher survival rates for the whole group, so humans do have a tendency to 'tend' toward justice and goodness as societies, even if not every individual is 'wired' that way.

No. 2084722

>>2084713
I think it's human nature to invent and expand. I always think to myself there's more good than bad or simple shit like driving down a highway couldn't work. Going by history we've obviously made a lot of mistakes but I do believe in when you know better you do better. There are obviously evil people under many different terms that strive to corrupt and derail progress. Humans have been writing for centuries about good vs evil. Collectively we want to do do good and banish evil.

No. 2084726

>>2084667
>>2084667
nonny i'm sorry to disappoint you but you couldn't pay me to give a shit about things like sports, video games, porn, carpentry, whatever other shit men do. I'm gonna continue baking bread and laying on the grass

No. 2084741

>>2084726
Why is 'carpentry' in this list carpentry is a pretty gender-neutral hobby and women are often better at it

No. 2084750

File: 1720660082048.gif (3.77 MB, 480x640, tumblr_d4d5f7dffd4b11304f8223a…)

>>2084726
Mfw I wish there were more women in cool and niche hobbies (not sportsball vidya and coom) but theyre all laying in the grass.

No. 2084752

>>2084726
Basedddd. Way more useful than caring about stupid dhit like DND games or autist collectibles, baking is beneficial for the community and a good skill/hobby to have. During an apocalypse what the fuck is some sperg woman going to help me with? Nothing, weaving, knitting, baking, all of those are undervalued hobbies and talents that men don’t care about because they’ve learn to parasitize themselves to women.

No. 2084753

File: 1720660532245.jpg (81.06 KB, 1024x768, CNrK_-xWIAACiKm.jpg)

>>2084752
>Sperging about sperg women on the sperg woman website
Why are you even here

No. 2084756

>>2084656
>blue-goat-pancake-fly.png
why did you name the file like that?

No. 2084759

Emetrol tastes really fucking good
>>2084750
same, I wish there were more women dominated communities that were centered around spergy stuff that wasn't like anime or some shit, moids complain about women in "their" communities all the time so there's no point in interacting with them. Although I have some ""Feminine"" hobbies(I dont consider hobbies masculine or feminine tbh).

No. 2084761

>>2084752
During an apocalypse I the sperg woman will kill you and eat your liver just like my foremothers did in WWII

No. 2084762

>>2084752
you reminded me of how men will usually almost always have a fantasy of going out guns blazing when presented with a hypothetical apocalypse while women either would kill themselves if it were a nuclear or zombie scenario or try to build a community. You also this differentiation in doom preppers, the men will collect actually retarded amounts of weapons and firearms all while having about three months worth of water rotting in plastic containers and a measly shelf of tomato soup.
>>2084753
She's not wrong though, and I'm a sperg woman

No. 2084763

>>2084752
It's funny because most of the people I know really into knitting, baking, and weaving are/were men, including my grandpa and great grandpa who were both obsessed with weaving, knitting and sewing, and stuff like pickling/making jams/etc. I think they used to be considered 'general life skills' for more people than just women, and have become more gendered over time lately. It's kind of pathetic that some men think they can be 'emasculated' by basic survival skills like making/repairing clothes or making food.

No. 2084764

>>2084759
>I dont consider hobbies masculine or feminine
Based. I like baking and various kinds of fiber arts just as much as I like my niche sperg shit. Once you get into complex recipes and specific kinds of materials it's just another fun rabbit hole to go down, same as something like coding. Feels pointless to enforce gender roles on hobbies just to make women who are already stigmatized for being "weird" feel bad.

No. 2084769

>>2084750
One of the things I miss about pre-LC 4chan is that while the site was filled with moids there were threads where no one mentioned anything to do with gender or politics and was just a sperg box for autists to discuss and argue about the finer details of a particular hobby. This type of discussion is long gone from the internet, 4chan is a shithole of trannies, incels and politics and niche forums are mostly dead.

No. 2084781

>>2084769
It's usually better to meet people irl to do/discuss weird niche hobbies anyway. The internet was only good for that for a very brief time period, I miss that era of the internet though (although I'm not an autist). Any niche hobby thing that existed pre-internet basically got popularized in a very annoying way by social media imo. But the main reason some early internet shit was less annoying was probably unironically because moids assumed only other moids used the internet, so didn't think to bring gender wars dynamics into everything, and there were fewer troons trying to infiltrate female-dominant hobby groups as well. Politics infiltrating absolutely every 'hobby' community is one of the worst things that happened to the internet and then bled into every aspect of society, but I think it was kind of driven by tumblr and twitter and was young people's own fault.

No. 2084782

>>2084769
>4chan is a shithole of trannies, incels and politics and niche forums are mostly dead.
This is because of the centralization of the internet tbh (Also post-2020 internet culture). People from every corner of the world put on one or two websites/apps so there's no culture on said website and it just becomes a cesspool of whatever appeases the algorithm. It's why so much gore and weird extremist political shit is pushed to people's feeds on twitter, it garners the most interactions. People having to stay in their homes all day for two years did not help with this at all, the extreme politics shoved in peoples faces eventually rotted their brains. Not to mention bots…

No. 2084792

>>2084782
I swear every day I start believing in the dead internet theory more and more.

No. 2084793

>>2084782
NTA but this was what I was trying to say in my reply above yours, every 'niche' thing was ruined by the centralization and de-niche-ification driven by social media. A really obvious example of this is anime/manga which was never exactly unpopular in the west but it was considered a sort of 'niche' thing and then as soon as everyone moved to the same 5 social media websites it's the most normie thing imaginable. I think this started well before the covid lockdowns but the lockdowns definitely made it worse since (at least for people who were actually following restrictions) the only way to really interact with other human beings was the internet and every interaction was getting funneled through the same handful of platforms. The proliferation of bots is likely as a result of this too, they wouldn't have had much use if the internet was more disperse and decentralized like it was before and if people interacted with each other in more unique ways. Social media made most of the people in the world all adopt the same tone, the same sense of humor, the same weird linguistic tics and everyone started repeating same dumb 'arguments' and thought terminating cliches.

I actually think so many young people now would functionally gain like 10 IQ points if they had to spend a month off grid/off the internet just interacting with actual human beings in ordinary settings and learning to do some basic life tasks for themselves without a how-to video but using their own instincts and creativity. This doesn't even apply to young people either, I noticed even boomers got worse at reading social cues and relating to other human beings irl.

No. 2084796

>>2084792
At this point I don't even think it matters if dead internet theory is 'true' or not, because your average actual person on the internet speaks and behaves in a way essentially indistinguishable from a bot. At that point does it even matter if you are talking to 10 bots or 10 'real' people if they will say the same things and have the same incapacity for actual organic interaction and reasoning?

No. 2084799

>>2084741
cause i only know male professional carpenters

No. 2084800

My unpopular opinion is that it is extremely obvious that Andrew Tate is gay or bi and on the DL and I can't believe so many people take him seriously as some kind of MRA/casanova/PUA type either among his followers or his detractors. When I hear some moids or trad women sperging about his 'traditional masculinity' I'm just in shock.

No. 2084804

>>2084799
I think this is mainly because professional trades are really good at alienating women (for a variety of reasons including that most apprenticeship-based careers have non-meritocratic hiring/educational practices and an aggressive boys club mentality where women are bullied out of the group), but I know plenty of female carpenters. I think they're more likely to either do it as a hobby or to 'freelance' though and do more niche projects.

No. 2084805

>>2084800
Didn't he talk about how he doesn't enjoy sex? If he is gay then he is just another proof that gay moids are not our friends.

No. 2084806

>>2084793
I wish normies were off the internet(that will not happen though unless I huff enough copium), it's so weird seeing internet slang make american speech so homogeneous. I hate sounding like a boomer but phones are literally rotting the kid's brains

No. 2084810

>>2084805
He recently scored some points with the 'left' by sperging about how he'd fuck male trannies lmao and how they're 'hotter' than ugly women, but even way before that it seemed pretty obvious to me that he's not into women.

No. 2084816

>its another “women are better because community group nurturing group cooperation knitting baking bread” episode
sigh

No. 2084818

>>2084806
It's not even a boomer thing to say, high phone usage literally eats away at your grey matter which is super fucked

No. 2084819

>>2084816
Actually it looks more like anons are talking about Andy Tate

No. 2084821

>>2084816
kek for real

No. 2084822

>>2084816
I'm NTA who said that but there is some truth to what they were saying. Stuff like knitting and baking is literally just basic life skills that used to be far less gendered and that most people were expected to know how to do, it is literally pathetic that modern moids feel emasculated by them because they are stereotyped as 'feminine' hobbies. The fact that many women aren't into stuff like that aside, at least women are less likely to feel pathetically embarrassed for knowing how to do basic shit like making clothing and food.

No. 2084827

>>2084816
anon from that post here, i just mean that scrotey hobbies arent as fun or relaxing as hobbies that are labeled as feminie

No. 2084834

>>2084827
to YOU

No. 2084835

>>2084834
well yeah..i wasn't trying to speak for anyone else, thats why i said "you couldn't pay me" not us

No. 2084887

>>2084835
Honestly my problem with a lot of the currently stereotypical male hobbies is they are very consoom-based and passive which I think is likely to improve your happiness less in the long term than more active, generative or creative hobbies which tend to have a lot more life benefits aside from just being 'fun' in the moment. Of course there are some feminine stereotyped hobbies that are pretty consoom-based too like makeup, and there are some male-stereotyped hobbies that are active too and build skills.

I think overall if we lived in a less patriarchal (and less capitalistic) society though and just had a healthier society overall, most people would gravitate more toward hobbies that are active, creative, and involve cooperation and skill building since these tend to be the most fulfilling. A lot of those are 'female stereotyped' currently. I don't think women would all start gravitating toward what are all now currently male-typical hobbies and interests. Something like carpentry I can see many more women getting into if it wasn't as male-dominated as a job field, but not most of the other stereotypical male hobbies listed. People get a lot more joy from, e.g., making things as a long term pursuit than they get from buying things or consuming media.

No. 2084912

>>2084887
>carpentry I can see many more women getting into if it wasn't as male-dominated
I used to think this, but I've noticed that one of the larger barriers to entry for a lot (not all!) of women picking up more physical/labour-intensive hobbies and skills is actually the physical effort required– I've tried to help other women get into similar things after they express interest in joining me in my hobbies, but the second most of them have to lift anything heavy or put their back into something, their interest dies. It doesn't even have to be anything particularly gruelling or stereotypically 'manly' either, doing a couple hours of outdoor gardening can be too much for them. I get that it's normal for people to seek the path of least resistance and all that too, but men either know they'll be bullied for giving up or have been taught to find the effort rewarding/acceptable to achieve their goal, while a lot of women get used to having a guy/someone else do physical tasks for them without being chided for being weak or lazy and see doing these things themselves unappealing and unrewarding. I'm not saying all women should be out there doing strenuous things for fun, but it's something I've noticed both from my friends and when I've helped teach courses aimed at getting women into hobbies like wood and metal working or gardening/landscaping (again, there are women who discover that they enjoy these things and the effort required to do them, obviously).

We need for women to idolise being capable more imo (which includes stereotypically feminine hobbies too btw), but I see a lot of 'im just a smol delicate stupid weak girl who can barely feed herself tee-hee' being bandied around lately, which is kinda depressing tbh

No. 2084939

The funniest part about white trash and the kind of black people they hate is that they have so much in common. White trash hill billy types live worse than black people living in the ghetto.

No. 2084956

Cars shouldn't (and don't need to) be fast.

No. 2084960

probably not unpopular here but i just found out who mia woodhall is and i can't believe she's deemed like extremely gorgeous by people. it's not her face, she's likely pretty as she is, but the way she does herself up is terrifying imo. the makeup, fillers, excessive tanning, facetuning. i saw a video where there were a bunch of photos of her and i was so fascinated by all the comments with girls saying they wish they looked like her and guys saying she's their ideal. like how did we get here? it was such a wake-up call, people really are more obsessed with conventionally attractive individual features than features that are cohesive and build an attractive person

No. 2084967

>>2084912
I think you're right that many women just don't gravitate toward hobbies that are too physically laborious, but I also think if we lived in a 'healthier' society most women would be physically healthier and fitter and not afraid to build muscle/trying to be as dainty as possible. My family all came from farming backgrounds and all the women even after they moved to cities or whatever had hobbies like hiking, climbing trees, gardening, building things, etc. I was very healthy and athletic growing up and tons of my hobbies were physically intense, I then developed a chronic illness and feel much weaker/more tired but I still have many quite physical hobbies. I notice women who are scared of even stuff like 'light' carpentry where you don't do that much heavy lifting are usually women who were never given an opportunity to build adequate muscle mass; once you have built it and are used to using your body you can do these things even if you become more physically weak and tired than you were before. My grandma is still heavily gardening in her 80s with many health problems, like for many hours a day in a rather large plot of land.

Actually with carpentry I think the bigger issue might be women's (rightful, to some extent) fear of power tools because women tend to be a bit more naturally risk-averse. But there are aspects of stuff like that that even more risk-averse women could do too, not every project like that requires very dangerous power tools, you could just be making smaller things and using less powerful tools and stuff and it would still be a similar hobby.

>men either know they'll be bullied for giving up or have been taught to find the effort rewarding/acceptable to achieve their goal

In my experience the opposite is true. With the exception of the (relatively rare) moids I know who are into extremely physical hobbies and sports, most moids I know have hobbies that are extremely passive, don't require much skill building and don't require much patience, and they are also very easily frustrated and quick to give up. I've done a lot of more 'extreme' sports in my life or combat sports and the girls in those sports usually were much less likely to quit out of frustration near the beginning, most of the dropouts were men who were frustrated because they thought they would 'naturally' be good and quit when they weren't good right away. I used to do physical summer jobs like landscaping, working with farm animals (cleaning up their poop, moving hay bales etc), and janitorial work since those were higher paying jobs than service work for people my age and it was usually the male teens and twenty-somethings hiding in the back avoiding all the heavy physical tasks while the girls and even older women employed there ended up picking up the slack and doing all the really heavy duty tasks. I rarely meet any women in my life whose hobbies are just 'sit in front of TV/gaming console all day' or 'go to sports game' while I meet tons of men where that's their hobby or like researching philosophy lightly in their free time or something is their 'hobby.' When I ask most women my age about their hobbies it's more likely to be actually creating and making things, building complex skills, etc. The only type of hobbies I find relatively well-matched for gender that are high effort are sports, and ironically they're typically much easier for moids but I still see fairly even numbers of women doing them.

No. 2084974

any type of animal-hate thread is for psychos

No. 2084975

>>2084960
I've never heard of her before but she just looks like a collection of tiktok filters, has she ever shown her real face anywhere?

No. 2084985

>>2084912
>>2084967
I read somewhere that girls and boys have similar (or near-identical?) levels of physical activity as children but it drops at puberty for girls and doesn't go back up later in life. I'm optimistic about it because you can reverse this if mothers/teachers incentivize girls to keep practicising sports to counter the fear instilled in girls to be anything but a dainty little flower. My parents did and even though i'm a lazy fuck and hated PE as a kid i have no issue working with power tools and love 'physical' hobbies.
>When I ask most women my age about their hobbies it's more likely to be actually creating and making things, building complex skills
Yep. Women also have consumption-based hobbies (they are voracious readers) but it's more even. Also think that older men (boomers et al.) are more likely to get into crafting stuff because they typically have more space, own homes and have more disposable income to work with wood/metal etc. I've noticed 'masculine' crafting hobbies are most popular with retired men, when they work they fall back on passive computer-based hobbies or sports (unless they're into crafting replicas of cars/mecha/diorama). Honestly both men and women should give 'feminine' crafting hobbies a try, it's very compatible with tight schedules and it feels less daunting than chopping wood for a project

No. 2085006

>>2084985
Even the women I know who are into reading are more likely to actually spend time discussing books and talking about what they learned from them, reading a mix of fiction and non-fiction and implementing some of the stuff from non-fiction in their lives. The men I know who are just into vidya, game of thrones and star wars just rewatch episodes over and over or play games repeatedly collecting fake virtual items and achievements (I don't hate gaming I play some video games myself I just don't think this is healthy as a main/only hobby) and rarely seem to engage critically with these things, discuss them carefully or learn anything from them. I think you're right about retired men being more into crafting stuff due to the space, but you can do smaller crafting projects with limited space. I don't do full blown carpentry but I refurbish furniture in my small apartment sometimes, like cutting off bits with a saw, reinforcing broken parts, sanding it down and painting little murals and pictures on it. It's not as useful of a skill as building entire furniture pieces would be but it's satisfying and cheap and then I end up with things I can use and like. I agree re: 'feminine' crafting hobbies, my mom got both me and my bf into knitting but he went way further with it because I had a much more time-consuming job, and he ended up enjoying it a lot and wanting to make things for me and himself. It came in handy for me too when I was on a multi-day car trip as a passenger with no other forms of entertainment, very fun and relaxing and you get something out of it you can use. I also used to sew and do 'fashion design' when I was younger, now I don't have the space or money to do sewing as a hobby anymore but the skill comes in handy when I need to repair or alter clothes I own or just convert spare fabric to curtains or whatever. You're never going to lose anything from having these basic skills or food-related skills like cooking, backing or preserving/canning. It's a very good way to prevent food waste and makes your life better and healthier, it's not 'lame' at all to at least have the skills even if you rarely use them.

No. 2085015

>>2080428
What is stopping you?

No. 2085033

>>2084967
I think it also stems from women generally being afraid to do things alone and being used to/expecting a moid to do the hard work. There is nothing wrong with that (after all moids remain more mentally stable when they're doing physical labour) but if a woman is alone then it's necessary to know how to do shit. Many women are dependent on men when it comes to physical labour (and not by choice) so obviously anything physical is off-limits. I'm pretty frail but I learned to do more physical labour once my father got too old and sick to do things, so I had to step up because my mother is too scared/insecure to do even some light gardening and my brother only wants the computer and vidya. Now I'm not doing full-blown carpentry (I wish my father would teach me though, but women stay in the kitchen I guess) but when it comes to gardening/cleaning/farming/doing dirty shit I can do it all and I think it's a skill every woman should learn because they might need it and it may lead them to some rewarding/interesting hobbies.

No. 2085042

>>2085033
>I think it also stems from women generally being afraid to do things alone and being used to/expecting a moid to do the hard work.
I guess I'm just not familiar with this, most of the women I know have lived alone for an extended period and didn't have random men around doing stuff for them. This might be the case in some cultures though.

No. 2085061

I don't think alogging or hicowing should be against the rules. These are just harmless comments most of the time

No. 2085066

>>2084967
ayrt I agree with you, and I should have been clearer when I made that comparison between men and women's responses to being confronted with the realities of more laborious tasks/hobbies– there absolutely are men who are passive in their hobbies or content to be completely useless, or react like spoiled children when they try to do something 'masculine' and it, shockingly, doesn't actually come easy to them just because they're men and then they shun the activity. But in my experience, guys are much easier to get to even try these hobbies than most women and are more likely to put up with (or even react positively) to the strain, even if they come from more passive hobbies like gaming etc., but tbf this might also just be anecdotal/biassed and not reflective of broader trends outside of my area kek

>>2084985
I've heard that too, which I remember finding surprising at the time because most of my peers did something physical during our teens, whether at school, as an activity outside of school, or while hanging out. I'm forever grateful that my parents raised me fairly neutrally alongside my brother and encouraged me to do stuff that interested me like scouts and swimming and rock climbing kek, while also accepting me as a quiet turbo nerd.
I think part of more 'masculine' crafting hobbies being more common in older men also comes down to them having backgrounds that had them picking up similar skills– my grandfather worked in a furniture shop for his first job, and a computer technician for his last, and so he already had a skill set (that is hard to pick up now due to most furniture no longer being locally hand-made) that allowed him to jump into making custom miniature motorised boats. Most guys now (hell, people in general) go from school to a generic job like burger flipping to an office job or something else that doesn't require any craft on their part, so it's unsurprising that they default to more 'passive' hobbies that also don't require them to create anything from scratch.

No. 2085079

Is Konstnar a cow?

No. 2085101

>>2085079
she looks like empath chan in that thumbnail

No. 2085109

>>2085079
yes. its kind of retarded to think youre battling "parasocialism" by making a paywall just seems like the usual YouTube narctuber

No. 2085116

>>2085066
Nta, probably confirmation bias or due to your area. Where I am (rural, community focused shit hole) women do the active labour and try more things when men are generally wary of taking on more stress, but that's my own observation and confirms my own bias so it just depends on the environment more than anything

No. 2085142

The comments on this video are fucking abysmal. Misogyny and Misandry are not and will never be equal.

No. 2085156

>>2083997
Not true unless you’re a male. People are desperate to paint beautiful women as evil.
Maybe one or two simps will let a beautiful woman get away with stuff but the rest of the world demonises them for just existing. You’re more likely to get hired or promoted as a pretty woman but only because scrotes want access to you.

No. 2085157

>>2083913
I agree with the second part of your statement but not the first.

No. 2085168

>>2083913
>to keep boy moms from coddling their sons too much and turning them into violent nightmares
This would not help. Half of the boymoms online are still married but overly coddle their sons anyway because they don't feel loved by their husbands.

No. 2085171

>>2083997
My unpopular opinion is that pretty privilege is just misogyny. A prettier woman doesn't have a significantly better life than you just because of her looks, that's just what society and men want you to think so you'll invest in becoming pretty and benefit companies who profit from you, and men who fuck you. Saying pretty women can be evil and get away with it is no different from a scrote saying all women can be evil and get away with it. You're being a misogynist in the same way men are when they precede their mysogynic statements towards women with the word "white".

No. 2085186

>>2084196
You're naive and misinformed. Please don't try to pull the Redditor's Trick on us. He's going to get high fived by his peers who have to make do with their right hands or pillows. They will experience 0 (zero) adverse effects. The young man will never complain, the only time legal action is taken is when the jealous father finds out. "If I can't fuck a hot teacher, neither should my son!" And sometimes the teacher is the victim. She's blackmailed or threatened into sleeping with her student and sometimes straight up raped. A 30 year old woman is MUCH less dangerous than a 16 year old male. In fact, 12 year old males perpetuate more rapes than adult women of all ages combined. You're worried about the wrong sex and projecting your female fears onto him. Stop anthropomorphising. He's not scared of her, he's not going to drop out of school to take care of a baby he wrecked his body while birthing. He's not going to get killed or pimped out. Relax.

No. 2085196

>>2085186
You replied to my old post all my thoughts on the matter were said hours ago you can lurk them if you want to be corrected

No. 2085209

File: 1720698408687.jpg (41.92 KB, 620x675, 77fda5d37d960c7cb2ae3f604bb1f8…)

>>2085196
>lurk them if you want to be corrected

No. 2085216

>>2085209
kek nona

No. 2085241

tradwives are just introverted women

No. 2085253

Demi Lovato has a solid discography. She's up there. I unironically love her rock remixes of all her best songs album.

No. 2085327

>>2085171
Hot men can be evil and get away with it too. There are plenty of women who will let full blown pedophiles and Ex cons move in with them and pay all their bills if he’s extremely hot. Women usually don’t have pretty privilege because they aren’t self aware enough to know how to use it. Men are self aware and know how to use it to get jobs, free shit, to get people to pay for their shit etc. pretty privilege only works if a woman is smart enough to know how to use it, which they usually aren’t.

No. 2085331

>>2085327
He doesn’t even have to be “extremely hot” for that to happen, unfortunately

No. 2085336

People doing a 180 towards gypsy rose is mostly just misogyny motivated. I've never once seen moids get shat on for killing his abusive mom even if he did so in unfavorable ways/involved others

No. 2085339

>>2085331
This. Wade Wilson is so god damn ugly and looks like he smells like shit yet gets female simps. Is not being fat and getting a god damn flattering hair cut for once in their entire lives all it takes for American women to think they're the hottest guy in the world? I can't

No. 2085341

>>2085336
I don’t usually see men shitting on Gypsy, it’s usually women. I think because Gypsy is a victim who has a cocky attitude, didn’t become a victim, gets money and does whatever she wants. They want to see victims abused by scrotes, losing in life and crying all the time because that’s the kind of abuse victim they are and they’re pissed/jealous that they didn’t win like gypsy did.

No. 2085345

>>2085336
I think people are just annoyed at clickbait headlines trying to make a tragic figure famous who should really be left alone and out of the mental illness circus that is media.

No. 2085350

>>2085341
I typically see both men and women doing it, a lot of them trying to doubt her abuse all together despite it being one of the most well documented cases of child abuse I've ever seen.
>They want to see victims abused by scrotes, losing in life and crying all the time because that’s the kind of abuse victim they are and they’re pissed/jealous that they didn’t win like gypsy did.
Literally it. Look at how many people got pissy when she left Ryan despite people admitting he was suspicious. Not even the first time I've seen people get upset about abuse victims profiting off of their story as they should? We get compensated for any other shitty events why can't we get compensated if our parents abuse us?

No. 2085359

>>2085350
People don’t like seeing abuse victims profit off their stores because they don’t like the idea of the people they have abused doing better than them or they were abused and no justice was served. The people who don’t like Gypsy are abusers or just jealous.

No. 2085366

>>2085336
They don't want to see her win, they want her to be weak, crying, sorry all the time for having her abuser killed when more women should be doing what she did (towards scrote would be even better)

No. 2085369

>>2085359
Abuse victims should always profit off of their abuse, especially since child abusers typically never face actions for their consequences and the victims never get compensated and end up having to pay for therapy out of their own pocket + have trouble with employment, education, etc. unless people are going to instill laws allowing abuse victims to get compensated and harsher sentences towards abusers, victims should do whatever the hell they want to take life on easy mode

No. 2085383

>>2085327
Most of the men who do evil shit around the world are fucking ugly. Excons and pedos who move in with women don't do it because they're attractive, they do it because they purposely pick mentally/poor/vulnerable women. Looks has nothing to do with it.

No. 2085398

File: 1720710127255.jpeg (954.94 KB, 1284x1364, IMG_3576.jpeg)

>>2085383
I’ve seen ex con men get modeling deals and married to rich women just because they fit normies standards of beauty for men. Pretty privilege is probably even better for good looking men because they can find sugar mommas who are good looking and have money.

No. 2085399

File: 1720710262915.jpeg (1.2 MB, 1284x1724, IMG_3577.jpeg)

>>2085398
Or this

No. 2085404

>>2085369
Considering how much of her life was stolen from her by her mom I can't blame her for doing whatever she can to make her remaining life as easy as possible. Moid criminals who were violent for no reason are given so much leeway and forgiveness even if they never apologize, I think with gypsy rose people are just mad she doesn't seem especially contrite.

No. 2085407

>>2085398
Hit the wall

No. 2085425

People who are ESL or the equivalent in non English speaking countries should not work any sort of job that involves customer service. There is always miscommunication especially over telephone, if someones accent is thick they are harder to understand.

No. 2085431

>>2085253
same!!! I love her rock album so much, my favorite track is Neon Lights. Her voice is so powerful and the song gives me goosebumps everytime. I've never been much of a pop girl but I've been steadily working my way through her entire discograph. After everything she's been through I think/hope that the aggressiveness/assertiveness of rock music has been helping her heal.

No. 2085462

>>2085398
And how many of these do you know? 2? 3? There's far more cases of ugly ex con men using women.

No. 2085699

>>2084975
not that i'd know of. her pics are so jarring

No. 2086001

The extreme push that anything bad that happens to a woman is her fault is the exact reason stuff like vid related keeps happening. We quickly turned the switch from why the man is bad and needs to be punished to what the woman could've done different and questioning her trauma
>Inb4 but no one said he shouldn't be punished!!
Just because you didn't outright say it doesn't mean it's not extremely implied when the conversation about an abusive man immediately gets turned 90% into what the woman did wrong. Of fucking course when you focus almost completely of what the woman did wrong misogynistic people feel more free to do this stuff and allow men to get away with no consequences. I honestly don't know what the hell you retards expected when every single conversation about abuse is always what the woman did wrong

No. 2086004

>>2085253
Demi has been a cow of a person but she's actually very talented

No. 2086012

>>2085241
and more often than not they’re not even actual ‘trads’, just normie women

No. 2086013

>>2085253
I remember when Heart Attack came out and everyone made fat jokes left and right kekk

No. 2086014

>>2085209
Are soyjaks allowed again?

No. 2086015

>>2085171
Most "pretty privilege" is literally just being treated as a human being that women should've got in the first place. The default is that women get treated like shit constantly so small "W" like getting the job you need to feed yourself, not getting yelled at, getting help if you breakdown or something and not getting the $500 speeding ticket for going 2 miles over should've already been standard. Majority of example of pretty privilege isn't privileges but ugly oppression they can just avoid

No. 2086019

File: 1720755462433.jpeg (29.09 KB, 739x415, Nanamin.jpeg)

He's ugly.

No. 2086021

>>2086019
no the fuck he isn't, take that shit back. i don't care stop with this shit anon he's sexy

No. 2086025

Animation is the most difficult art form you can master which is why so much of it is not great.

No. 2086028

>>2086019
ew why is he so old?

No. 2086029

>>2086025
I agree. Also 2D mediums are more difficult than 3D, and I say this as a 3D artist.

No. 2086032

File: 1720756421081.jpg (257.56 KB, 1079x606, Screenshot_20240712-135140_Goo…)

>>2086021
NTA but I hate his clothing. It's like something Patrick Bateman would, and I mean the book version where everyone was making fun of him but he was too retarded to notice. I'm a suitfag and this is not it.

No. 2086124

>>2086021
you're brainwashed by his 401k,voice actor, and blonde hair. Nanami is a passport bro

No. 2086128

>>2086028
He's 27 years old, that's just what working overtime everyday does to your face.

No. 2086143

>>2086124
>Nanami is a passport bro

Pretty sure his thirdie fangirls would not be opposed to him being one.

No. 2086149

This is actually funny as shit and I watch it whenever I wanna feel like a kid

No. 2086150

>>>2084613
iirc, the babysitter was only a teenager, he convinced her that she would be okay to go home early because they were, indeed, not far apart in age, and that he could easily handle watching his sister alone since she was already asleep and his mother would be home soon

No. 2086153

>>2086150
nta but she was still dumb as shit for that. obviously the mother asked her to come watch her children and trusted her with the task of caring for them because she knew that the son was not capable of caring for his sister by himself. I'm looking for information about the baby sitter, theres essentially no information identifying her name, her age, i don't see any statements shes made publicly, so we actually have no way of confirming if she was a teenager or a grown adult.

No. 2086154


No. 2086160

>>2086128
Ew, he's not even 30 and post wall already. Even in fiction they age like banana flavoured milk…

No. 2086211

>>2086160
I wouldn't be surprised if Gege was inspired by an actor whose name I won't type to create Nanami and his age was an afterthought because he realized too late he needed Nanamu to be a few months younger than Gojo and Geto for plot related reasons. That would explain his face and his Danish grandfather which made him blond I guess?

No. 2086394

>>2086001
Sometimes it is their fault though. Like women who date men who they know have domestic violence charges against them in the past or women who have Babies with men who already have like 10 baby mommas that they don’t support. They think they’re special and he won’t do them the same way. A lot of situations like these can be avoided by women understanding they aren’t special, and if a man treated other women bad, he’s gonna do it to you too. It’s like those women who get in relationships with cheaters and are distraught when he cheats on them because they thought they were better than his ex.

No. 2087189

File: 1720842060297.jpg (19.21 KB, 640x427, AP24194812056397-(1).jpg)

I still think Alec Baldwin deserves the death penalty.he at least should have gotten prison time.hate this crusty old fuck and his worthless baby maker wife.

No. 2087193

>>2087189
do you think he loaded the gun purposefully nonnie

No. 2087243

>>2087189
I'm on the fence about it. Like with Brandon Lee's death it's definitely the armourer's and prop people's fault for even putting a live round in in the gun in the first place, but even with a blank round he shouldn't have been pointing it at Hutchins
<