File: 1746962661556.jpg (49.13 KB, 542x502, 450a9976b01f92986cfbe46e57b567…)
No. 2520159
General Conspiracy Thread.
Do you have somewhat schizophrenic beliefs that worry your friends and family? Tired of getting red-texted for "tinfoiling" about recent events around the globe? If so, you've come to the right place.
Discussions surrounding government cover-ups, entertainment industry secrets, odd predictions, political intrigues, etc., are all welcome here.
Please follow all /ot/ board rules. Don't start petty infights, and remember to report bait instead of responding.
Previous threads:
#1
>>>/ot/369313#2
>>>/ot/490893#3
>>>/ot/636795#4
>>>/ot/849990#5
>>>/ot/935591#6
>>>/ot/1028419 #7
>>>/ot/1028464#8
>>>/ot/1068732#9
>>>/ot/1147862#10
>>>/ot/1190469#11
>>>/ot/1240193#12
>>>/ot/1330198#13
>>>/ot/1417052#14
>>>/ot/1478839#15
>>>/ot/1571083#16
>>>/ot/1616325#17
>>>/ot/1712160#18
>>>/ot/1876599#19
>>>/ot/2023344#20
>>>/ot/2085806#21
>>>/ot/2177582#22
>>>/ot/2255446#23
>>>/ot/2416922 No. 2520193
File: 1746967362977.gif (612.68 KB, 500x463, Tinfoil 24.gif)
Thoughts?
No. 2520587
File: 1746984962656.jpg (164.16 KB, 421x318, 1000019736.jpg)
No. 2520762
>>2518900It's not so simple as you paint it, either. I don't know what part of
>Its publication in 1997 was well received in Russia; it has had significant influence within the Russian military, police forces, and foreign policy elites,[1][2] and has been used as a textbook in the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian military.Makes it some big coincidence to you that a lot of things happening right now regarding Russia and its influence is going along as it was written in Foundations of Geopolitics. But nah, it's just plain western xenophobia, nothing to see here. No dots to connect, pay no attention to the world around you. As if things are so black and white. I don't have anything against the average Russian citizen, it's the governments around the world that are fucked up and obsessed with power plays and land wars at the expense of regular people.
No. 2521486
File: 1747063016708.jpg (38.38 KB, 679x251, 1000019901.jpg)
The government committing biological warfare against the population never ends.
No. 2521734
>>2521526It's discussed in both the sources I provided there.
>One of his six recommendations was: The leaflet should have, if possible, the picture of a beautiful woman, after the method used by the Germans in the First World War. This device would insure that the soldier would be attracted and would be unable to resist looking at the picture over and over again. This would rouse his passion, and his heart would be inclined for love and to hate fighting.It's been mentioned in some documentaries I've seen and stuff too but mostly it's just referenced in WWII-era sources. Doesn't necessarily mean Germany was not conservative - remember, they were propagandizing their military ENEMIES with pornography, not their own side. Producing pornography to demoralize enemy soldiers is in line with a conservative culture.
No. 2523305
File: 1747221944155.webp (141.41 KB, 1200x960, TB1027061.webp)
I remember having a very vivid religious dream when I was like 5, which was kinda weird for a kid from a not particularly religious family. In this dream I was also sleeping, and I awakened because it smelt like sulfur and because of smoke that filled my room, and when I looked around there was a horned, devil/demon-like creature standing by my bed. After initial shock, I was not afraid of it and I started grinning at it, showing it that I'm not afraid, it looked surprised, and at that moment a beam of light appeared from the ceiling. The creature got afraid and disappeared, and a powerful voice that came from that light told me that I will always be protected no matter what. And I kinda felt like it throughout my life, despite my many fucks ups, and despite having shitty abusive family and no good patterns of behavior form them and being alone most of my life, something was always there to bail me out in the end, and the only time when I wanted to commit suicide and I prepared all the stuff to do it and was about to start, my teacher randomly called me (it was almost midnight) and he asked me what I was doing, he told me he got a "feeling" that he had to call me and tell me that everything is going to be all right in the end, and he said he wanted to see me in the class the next day. Later I felt like it was my guardian angel telling him to call me. (btw my teacher was gay so there wasn't anything sketchy about our relationship). I'm also very good at "feeling" people, despite not being good at communicating with them, and I can immediately spot a narc. God gave me autism in exchange because otherwise my powers would be too powerful probably kek. But yeah, I do believe something is out there guarding me (I don't know why though since I'm such a retard) and it's a weird feeling. I wonder if there's anyone else here who felt that way
No. 2528709
How do I navigate the endless shitty articles about certain conspiracy theories to find the good stuff? There are so many middle aged american men writing blogs about nonsense.
>>2528212Yeah but who will take the fall after Diddy? Who's next?
No. 2528959
File: 1747668501346.jpg (27.47 KB, 358x400, 1000021174.jpg)
Maybe I'm just schizophrenic but sometimes I'll see posts that read like blackpills disguised as venting, like the kinds of superficial problems men think women care about.
>i don't have big boob! my friend has big boob. no moid like me. moid only like big boob. there is NO POINT IN LIVING if you're small boob
No. 2530676
>>2528959Moids write fiction like this on reddit all the time but I actually think it's also very common for women to be insecure about minor issues like breast size because of how brainwashed we are practically from birth to compare ourselves (negatively) to other women and to beauty standards. I would generally assume someone saying this is just an insecure/brainwashed woman unless it's somewhere like Reddit where 85% of the user base is moids who like to make up fictional stories for fictional internet money.
>>2530503I have similar thoughts when I hear stories like this but I don't know. I would like to think even most pro-lifers would find the story horrifying, because the pro-lifers I know are all very happy to say there should be exceptions carved out for the woman's health and rape. But then again the pro-lifers I know are almost all women, and I wouldn't put it past moids to pass laws like this just to wage a war on women. There is a huge push for transhumanism in medicine and politics right now though (on both the right and the left, too - Elon and Thiel are the 'right wing' side of the Rationalist/transhumanist tech dystopia circles but there are many left-wingers in those circles too). And what they all have in common is they love weird experimental reproductive technology, AI, bionics, etc.
No. 2532840
File: 1747934421270.jpg (145.66 KB, 928x696, 1000001336.jpg)
Majority of skyscrapers are empty and attempt to give the appearance of a thriving and populated city
No. 2533859
>>2524837I have a theory that true crime and horror movies are deliberately pushed to help break down society.
Most people I know who consume true crime slop are extremely paranoid and mistrustful because they think everyone they meet is the next Jeffrey Dahmer and going to torture and kill them.
I think it's intentionally designed to break down trust and cohesion within communities and make everyone depressed, paranoid and misanthropic.
No. 2533943
File: 1748014332500.png (75.43 KB, 1024x1024, 1000001340.png)
The only "great transfer of wealth" is going to nursing homes to pay for fox news and stale bread and CNAs on EBT that get paid 10 an hour but staying there costs 50-90k a month. At some point we need to just euthanize everyone over 80
No. 2534005
>>2533856Hela cells are so creepy, but not in a spooky way just that it feels like it's something that shouldn't exist and yet it does. It also defies what most people believe about tumors or how cells work. Same with that one canine viral tumor that carries the cells of a dog from god knows how long ago and it's still capable of existing even now. It's almost like cellural immortality.
>>2533859Some time ago I was almost obsessed with true crime and horror content, I would watch every video coming out from major creators and I would want to know about several cases. After a while I realized that listening to that shit made me miserable, like I would often think about crimes and all the horrible things that happened and I hated it. It took some time and effort for me to conciously avoid these things and I can tell I'm better mentally. Sometimes I still fall into the rabbit hole of true crime and bodycam footages and it ruins my day. It's worrying that so many people happily consume true crime content, they can't tell it poisons them.
No. 2534034
>>2534022Most antinatalists aren't women, though. It's misanthropic depressed dudes, like the guy who carbombed an IVF clinic and killed 4 randos not even associated with it. America also isn't the whole of humanity. Again, any living antinatalist is the counter argument to their own claims, as they wouldn't choose to continue living if they actually believed what they said.
>>2534005That canine viral tumor is the only genetic legacy of North America's domestic dog population, too. Very creepy and yet fascinating.
No. 2534073
>>2533231You don't even understand what antinatalism is if you ask people who are ALREADY alive why they aren't killing themselves kek
And as a gnostic I find antinatalism very based. Many gnostics were antinatalist.
No. 2534079
File: 1748021613528.png (33.9 KB, 666x450, you_look_just_like_einstein.pn…)
>>2534076>redditReddit is a useful source of spiritual information anon. Every neckbeard knows that
No. 2534084
File: 1748021825227.jpg (28.15 KB, 402x402, too_bad_so_sad.jpg)
>>2534082Nta but yes it is a reddit thing or the spiritual conclusion every moid comes to, before or after buddism. And sometimes islam, when shit gets really bad
No. 2534110
>>2534076The demiurge has a strong hold on you,
nonnie. Don't let that false god steer you away from the true path to enlightenment. YHVH is not your friend.
No. 2534125
>>2534005>>2533859true crime just exposes the hatred of men in current society. Would you prefer women to be dumb and naive about what happens to them?
>>2533865we already live in a low trust shithole
No. 2534187
File: 1748028938048.jpg (103.03 KB, 768x768, 1000001344.jpg)
Why is American parenting so consoomery? First it starts with loads of supplements and medications for small babies, a lot of times without even testing the babies mineral levels, then having higher weight standards to push formula, then diaper companies funding studies claiming delayed potty training is better, then loads of "necessary" stuff like parents being told to only by organic high end baby products, fear mongering about baby bottles and such, breastfeeding women told they need to pump after each feed even when EBF. Telling parents they need to be rear facing until 6-10 yr old, sterilizing machines and air purifiers, vaccines galore, then in school they HAVE to be in every sport and such, hoarding books and tablets and everything else, then when teen hood rolls around you have to get expensive dresses for dances and limos and college coaches and everything else
No. 2534219
>>2534187They want their consumers started early. Even in the baby thread on /g/ there's women who are convinced that a baby isn't supposed to fart or have loose stools sometimes so they need to spend $400 a month on lactose free formula instead of just accepting that babies are in the middle of learning how to digest and poop. But no, it's lactose intolerance even though every single mammal on the planet can digest lactose because that's kind of the whole thing with mammals.
Even for stuff that's supposed to be less consumptive like cloth diapers has people with 100 all in ones and crazy huge stashes. Each of those things costs like $15-20 each, like what the fuck. And they're all plastic anyway.
You would not believe the reaction I got during pregnancy when I was like "I'm not taking a prenatal, I'm just taking methylfolate and my normal vitamins". Like nooo I need to buy a less good prenatal and I need to take unisom and I need to take zofran and I need to take xyz. Like holy fuck it's unreal.
No. 2534324
>>2534219While I agree it's consoomery, they typically don't put babies on lactose free formula unless it's constant, months on end of diarrhea to the point of the baby getting dehydrated and needing IV fluids. I highly doubt it was just a couple of weird poops, also trying to tell parents who have babies with digestive issues that they're just hypochondriacs is super harmful when there's in insane amount of documented cases of this
>even though every single mammal on the planet can digest lactose because that's kind of the whole thing with mammals.There's actually been similar issues documented in apes. I think it was a rhesus monkey (?) that had to receive soy. That being said, humans can be born with all kinds of fuck shit that most animals don't have, humans have more cases of pre e, more need for emergency c sections, more cases of digestive issues like NEC, hell there's even a condition that babies intestines can just randomly turn itself inside out, it's completely believable that enzymes in baby humans can get messed up and have trouble digesting breast milk
No. 2534335
File: 1748039127045.jpg (16.13 KB, 261x193, 1000001345.jpg)
>>2534223Americans, typically millennial parents, like having a dick measuring contest with how much of a "safe and science based parent" they are. They'll give actual meth to their kids without questioning it if studies say so. They'll fight for days about how so and so rear faces until 4 but this mom rear faces until 6 because shes a super duper safe smart mom unlike every other mom who follows the correct guidelines for car seats which is typically to front face around 2, but everyone who doesn't follow that is a baby murderer.
Enfamil in particular (who makes the most supplements for babies) realized they lose money because of breastfeeding women so funded a bunch of studies claiming babies aren't getting enough iron or vitamin d from breast milk, and then funded even more for unrealistic weight standards for breastfed babies
"Crunchy" moms are constantly under fire, I suspect as a psyop sent from a lot of baby and kids corporations due to the fact if enough moms become crunchy they can basically shut down majority of companies geared to force parents to consoom, typically pushing worst case scenario crunchy moms which is zero vaccines at all, homeschooling strictly with zero qualifications, "homemade" baby formula in the instance that the baby can't consume breast milk, letting your baby or yourself die before getting a c section or hospital birth, not even taking Tylenol, etc when in reality most crunchy moms really aren't that extreme and typically just avoid plastics, eat organic, avoid screens, use cloth diapers, etc
No. 2534339
File: 1748039533497.png (551.18 KB, 1080x1695, 1000001346.png)
>>2534219It happens to animals in nature with high levels of lactose in their milk, typically cows, as the rhesus macaque monkeys were mentioned too because they have the highest level of lactose in the animal kingdom, it happens in foals as well
https://horsesport.com/magazine/nutrition/lactose-intolerance/Sometimes the animal will receive special formula, a lot of the times if it's a farm animal they won't really do much because their lives aren't as valued as humans unfortunately. You can actually buy soy formulas from farm stores. If there's other animals with lower levels of lactose in their milk (like jerseys, goats, camels, etc) the farmer will give the baby that milk
>t. literal farmer No. 2534440
>>2534034>Most antinatalists aren't womenNot true. Almost half of women of this generation are going to be childfree by choice. Most childless men are childfree not by choice but because no woman wants to have their kid.
Men in general are extremely pro natalist because their entire drive in life is to force a woman into giving birth to his spawn. That's why there's so much hatred for childfree women, because every woman who refuses to carry a scrote's spawn is an existential threat to the moid and his 'legacy'.
Anti-natalist moids are just a very loud minority.
No. 2534520
>>2534470What are you even smoking? Thinking deeply doesn't mean you have to turn into a retarded misanthrope who hates humanity kek.
>>2534472No, plenty of moids are Malthusians kek. More so than women anyway. Most types of death cults are followed mainly by moids since moids are prone to death cult bullshit. Every antinatalist I have ever met in my life (a lot of people) has been male.
No. 2537547
File: 1748287544567.png (470.23 KB, 627x787, Screenshot 2025-05-26 at 20.24…)
elites really like virginity taking and dont mind even when the person isnt a teenager anymore. i wonder if its a form of loosh harvesting.
also i bet the hollywood moid is dicaprio.
No. 2537703
The reason trannyism attracts such depraved, awful and disgusting people is because it's an anti-society subculture that purposely appeals to lowlifes who need attention and want to act out, just like Satanism was for kids back in the 80s and 90s.
Trannyism is seen as an edgy and subversive inversion of the divine order of everything. The opposite of good is bad, the opposite of above is below, the opposite of man is a woman etc. So it naturally attracts these contrarian, unpleasant edgelords and lolcows, because trannies are basically Diabolist satanists in their worldview. Just like how satanism was a fad for people who felt angry and rejected by society, trannyism has replaced that as the new fad.
There’s a reason satanists were traditionally very pro homo, tranny and pedo, because those things were seen as the inversion of the status quo, and satanism gave them a religious/philosophical standing to hide behind to justify their naturally creepy moid tendencies. Theistic satanism basically, like with the crosses turned upside down.
TL;DR: trannyism is just the new satanism for angsty kids and contrarian adults
No. 2537710
File: 1748295137355.png (46.04 KB, 1280x1280, Pentagram4.svg.png)
on the topic of satanism, are there any nonas here who genuinely practice satanism? i'd be interested to hear about your experiences with it, and why you practice it, without judgment.
No. 2538166
>>2537716the common theme with all trans people (especially moids) is they feel rejected, wrong, and want to rebel against society.
they know that they are seen as outcasts and freaks and they revel in this rep. they dont actually want mainstream acceptance or a trans majority, because that would take away their angsty little
victim cult mentality. they need to feel like they're part of a special little club.
women and tifs generally show these kinds of emotions and anger less because females are told not to be unreasonable or disagreeable. but theres a reason tims have a reputation for being insane and violent.
No. 2538594
File: 1748356651220.png (86.91 KB, 659x354, Screenshot_20250527_083608.png)
>>2538223How about all the women dying in Texas because hospitals "don't know" what a medical emergency is in order to deliver abortions? I know everyone is rightfully angry about the anti abortion law in that state, but I'm just as gobsmacked that multiple hospitals are just letting women die of sepsis because they're not sure if that counts as a medical emergency. Like, really? All the coverage I've seen has glossed this over, but these hospitals should not escape scrutiny just because the abortion laws are worse. Doctors get the rope too. "Oh I don't wanna save your life because I might have to justify treating SEPSIS by emptying your uterus of your dead, rotting fetus. You dying is more convenient for me."
No. 2539140
File: 1748388697243.jpg (605.31 KB, 1080x1821, 1000024663.jpg)
Hot take: Picrel was done on purpose.
>https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/27/health/genetic-mutation-sperm-donor-scli-intlWhy is there a reason for ANY sperm donor to impregnate more than several women?? Even if the sperm were perfect, fathering 67 kids all not knowing who each other are carries a risk for inbreeding down the line without their knowledge.
Women have the right to know if the sperm they selected has 1. Been screened for fucking mutations and 2. How many other women have been impregnated by their sperm donor choice.
Put it this way, think of how many regulations there are for blood and plasma donations and yet fertility clinics somehow get carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they want to with women who enter their facilities under pretense that it's safe and professional!
Now there are kids with cancer mutations everywhere, and even if they don't get cancer, they carry the mutation so that if they decide to have children they could get cancer too. This is so devastating, like being raped, and the outrage is not nearly enough. Reminds me how the US government lied about giving STDs and sterilizations to "undesirable" populaces back in the day just so they could observe the outcomes. Well, here a facility lied about giving women cancer babies so the government gets to again watch what the consequences of this shit move to give kids genetic cancers are. Despicable.
No. 2539162
>>2539140I feel like the article just glossed over this
>Unlike in some cases of serial sperm donors, such as a Dutch man who was ordered to stop donating sperm after being found to have fathered between 500 and 600 children around the worldWhat kind of sick fetish is this?
No. 2541569
>>2537650'Antinatalist' literally means that you think nobody should be allowed to have children, and you want the human race to die out. Not wanting to have children yourself is not the same thing. I know plenty of childfree women but no female 'antinatalists' because antinatalism is a misanthropic death cult where people get off on the idea of ending humanity and also want an excuse to hate pregnant women and mothers. I have never wanted children but I don't get upset by the idea of other people wanting or having children, it's their own risk to take, and I don't view it as political but rather a personal decision. The reason people think antinatalist is synonymous with anti-family is because it by definition is.
>>2537733There's no such thing as an actually normal trans person.
>>2538223Lol this happened to me but not in the context of anything pregnancy-related. I had to find out 1.5 years later from a fucking nutritionist that my male endocrinologist lied to me about my abnormal blood work being 'totally normal' kek. Medicine seems so sadistic toward women and seemingly always has been, especially when the doctors are male.
>>2540199I don't believe this about advanced LLMs, as someone with both theoretical background in a similar field and friends who worked/work on the 'cutting edge' of LLMs. The theoretical ideas for LLMs existed back in the 70s/80s (and were public knowledge) but the size of servers required to run them weren't built until recently, also most 'advanced' LLMs are just the result of AI trainers (people) not the software itself being particularly good, and these jobs just popped up recently. They really aren't that interesting or advanced a technology anyway, it's a fairly dumb technology that just convinces people it can do more than it actually can do because a lot of people these days are functionally illiterate and easily impressed.
No. 2541706
>>2541569I really want to commend you for your effort there in responding to the user who thinks childfree (a personal decision about your own life) is the same as antinatalism (an anti-life philosophy). It's really bordering on bait at this point, being that stubbornly obtuse about what's being written. Same as misunderstanding the statement "most antinatalists are male" which is not the same as "most males are antinatalists". When reading comprehension failures happen at this scale, it makes me question whether the person is actually retarded or just trying to start an infight. I have low hopes that the message will sink in, but thanks for your time.
>>2541630This is why I appreciate platforms like MyChart where you can read your own stuff. I always read my after visit report and the labs.
No. 2541763
>>2541706Lol nonna thanks, I have been frustrated reading this exchange too but I'm leaning toward it not being bait, just bad reading comprehension and a low level of understanding of what these words actually mean. I think a lot of people are just so politically polarized right now they don't look into what these philosophies are and assume that there are only two possibilities: being some kind of 'have 15 children' trad or being an antinatalist. The reality is that most people throughout time have been somewhere in the middle.
>This is why I appreciate platforms like MyChart where you can read your own stuff. I always read my after visit report and the labs.I don't think that exists in my country. When my labs are ordered by my GP I can access the results on my GP's clinic platform but when they're ordered by a specialist I can't see them unless the specialist shows them to me, and in the case of the endocrinologist in question he didn't print them out for me because he told me everything was totally normal. My health got dramatically worse for over a year before I even found out my labs had been abnormal (at which point I had them re-done and the disease progression was much worse already) and I ended up having to see another specialist to get diagnosed with PCOS and hypothyroidism once a lot of damage had already been done. All the specialists and GP I have seen since then have been female, and female providers can suck too but I still think they are way less sadistic and evil than male providers are toward women on average. The worst part of this is that I am highly educated in a biomed adjacent field and my endocrinologist knew that, even telling me on my discharge appointment 'I'll probably see you at a conference sometime soon,' so he was lying through his teeth knowing that I'm not too stupid to correctly interpret my test results if I had actually been told what they were.
No. 2541855
>>2541837>>2541817my mother is one of the strongest most selfless people i know—but that does not mean her choice to have a child was not inherently selfish. i adore my life and i think there is so much wonder in the world, but not as much as there is suffering. if i chose to have a child that would benefit only what i want in that moment—not the child. i want to care for the beings that are on earth presently, not bring anymore. there is much to correct and too much horror. i’m sorry you still feel i hate mothers, and even my own, that is not true. i wish i could have a child, but not only for personal worries (finances, if the father left or hurt them, etc.) but just too much chaos and suffering that is all. i stand by my point that having a child is a selfish decision, not that the person is overall selfish or “bad,” but that there is much to be corrected and cared for in this world currently. children are bright, innocent beings—so many already exist and suffer. i just don’t think it is a good place for them to be, just so we can have more families and feel nice to care for something that is our own.
No. 2541893
>>2541862absolutely agree with your latter point
nonnie but that is where they and i differ; not intending to sound like i stand on some moral high ground, but my choice/perspective is more grounded in how it affects the life of the individual (child), not due to solipsism/a desire to hoard resources and benefit my life. there are also many people in the world who reproduce for their own benefit (outside of them wanting a family/something to care for, im speaking in terms of utilizing them for sexual pleasure or financial gain [men]) so i think it goes both ways unfortunately.
also kek the anon you replied to above was not me.
No. 2541945
>>2541938
You're literally in the tinfoil thread nonna. I mean 'illuminati' is just one word I could have picked, I'm not going to die by it or anything but the reality is that moids extremely invested in controlling humanity (who are usually caught up in unsavoury shit like breeding farms etc. a la Epstein) will openly say they want to 'limit world suffering' and 'save the planet' by making women reproduce less, often by force. I did not insinuate the worst evil people would not have children, I insinuated the worst evil people want to control and reduce the global population and want OTHER PEOPLE not to be able to have children (they themselves, of course, want to have as many as possible). The philosophical idea of 'antinatalism' was started by these exact evil rapist moids. Rape and forcing women to have children is the exact same amount of evil, more or less, as forcing women not to have children via various eugenics strategies, which is what the people who invented 'antinatalist' philosophies have always done in the past and continue to admit they want to do.
I never said women calling mothers selfish are just as evil as those moids, I said they derived their philosophy of 'antinatalism,' most likely unknowingly, from the philosophy of those same moids, and should reconsider it. This shouldn't be difficult to understand. No one's evil just for holding a misguided opinion or having an ideology I disagree with, but they should do some research and think about it some more imo if they don't know who started the ideology and why.
>the men that want women to have no babies, which are a tiny minority
Yeah just a tiny minority of the world's most powerful and influential men. And you better believe those men don't hold themselves and their own wives to the same standard.
>in any case people will never, ever stop having children
Then what's the point of antinatalism as a philosophy anyway? I don't see the point in philosophies where the main goal of the philosophy is literally impossible.
>womens' rights are at real threat at being done away with because of natalism
Huh? WTF are you even talking about? Women have far fewer children in most wealthy/first world countries than at any earlier point in recorded history (which is overall good imo but isn't antinatalist in origin), I don't think there is any real threat from 'natalism' in the countries 95% of lolcow users live in.
No. 2541957
>>2541945wanted to make a better response so I deleted but then I read this through and realized it's useless.
>Rape and forcing women to have children is the exact same amount of evil, more or less, as forcing women not to have children via various eugenics strategiesis easily among the most terrifying and evil rhetorics I've ever seen. you have no way of gauging why an individual does not have a child. most people don't have a child just because they see parent hate, their reasoning is usually complex and not tunnelvisioned, so the fact you think it's as bad as rape is appalling and even then comparing what essentially are thought crimes to rape is vile. well, in any case at least my first instinct about you was correct. also the fact you claim powerful men are antinatalists is objectively wrong because Elon Musk is a natalist, among other ones.
No. 2541967
>>2541957No, I don't know why people choose not to have children, and it's fine as long as they're choosing it and not forced or sterilized. The fact you think it's 'terrifying' to be against eugenics is in and of itself fairly concerning. I didn't say 'choosing not to have a child' is bad, I said moids using eugenics to force women not to is bad, and the types of men who invented antinatalist philosophy were eugenicists. Seriously people in this thread need to learn how to read.
Elon Musk is one exception to the norm and is also not (afaik) from one of the very old world-controlling powerful families, he just got lucky with a couple businesses.
Let me reframe this to make it clearer: By your own admission 'you have no way of gauging why an individual does not have a child' so presumably you realize you have no way of gauging why an individual DOES have a child either. Why do you think it is morally correct to force an individual woman not to have a child? By what moral right can you make this decision for her (something you yourself admit is a personal decision that can hinge on a huge number of unknown factors or reasons)? Why would it be morally correct for you to decide that you can and should decide whether or not she is allowed to have the baby?
No. 2541973
>>2541957also one of the main ways this is applicable is when, say, women were forcibly sterilized, such as has happened with some ingenuous populations, which yes is truly evil, more comparable to a violation like rape than basic antinatalist talking points, and absolutely was sanctioned by some powerful men. however eugenics isn't the exact same as true end-humanity type antinatalism. there's some overlap but generally those men wanted more of the people they wanted to have children.
>>2541967>forcewhat do you mean by this in regards to modern society, rather than the above example I gave which actually fulfills this criteria? why are you thinking random people's opinion = forcing someone? and why is it that you're talking about whether or not I'm the one deciding it? because I am not, isn't it the evil lizardmen overlords making those decisions for her?
No. 2541983
>>2541973I'm saying that the main proponents of antinatalism in modernity (those that have popularized the modern antinatalist philosophy) are eugenicists, I don't know what's confusing about this. You can easily google forced sterilization practices in the West if you're interested. Then realize that the people promoting those practices were and are in large part the same people promoting modern antinatalist philosophy. And understand why the modern uptick in antinatalism is suspicious.
Again, if you think that people won't stop having children and can't be stopped, what is the point or purpose in espousing an antinatalist philosophy? It's only a useful philosophy if it can lead to results. Otherwise it is just posturing and navel-gazing.
No. 2542056
>>2542030
I don't have a 'special interest' I just kept seeing dumb infights in the thread from bad reading comprehension where people were conflating childfree women with antinatalists and found it annoying. This is also the tinfoil thread so I thought it was on topic to point out that one of the most widespread conspiracy ideologies in the world right now, espoused by a majority of the world's most powerful people, is an antinatalist/eugenicist extreme population reduction ideology. I myself was taught in school as a child as a part of the curriculum that it is evil and destroying the world to have children. So much so that I had to spend years deprogramming myself from this innate hostility toward parents once I realized where that ideology was coming from and what purpose it serves for the world's elites.
You literally asked me what I mean by force, so I told you to look up all the Western eugenics programs, many of which have been documented even in the 2010s and more recently. You implied that there are no eugenics programs in modern society, when there, in fact, are - especially in the global south but also even in wealthy nations. I think you mean 'wary' not weary but I too feel wary whenever there is a sudden inexplicable uptick in extreme, anti-nature and anti-freedom ideologies and it's tiresome to hear people conflating personal choices with extreme ideologies. You don't have to be part of an extreme ideology to choose to have a child or not to have a child and constantly shitting on mothers, calling them selfish and evil, etc. accomplishes nothing but making life marginally worse for women and possibly guilting some exceptionally conscientious women who would have made actually good parents into choosing not to have children that they wanted to have, while thoughtless and selfish parents continue to have them.
No. 2542118
File: 1748581919355.png (20.14 KB, 1192x121, huh.png)
>>2542056>grouping anti-nature with anti-freedom as if they're conflicting is one another>admits to wanting the people you prefer to procreate and people you see as undesirables doing so is actually a problem, you're just sneakier and less evil about pushing it funny how things come full circle like this. it really makes me wonder what podcasts you listen to our what politicians you support in general. I actually do hope they're not what I assume, but there's always some doubt.
No. 2543130
>>2541881>the 'antinatalist' philosophical position is one pushed by those exact evil rapists moidsthis is not true at all. the illuminati and pedo cult moids want abortion banned so more women keep pushing out unwanted babies that go straight into the came home system and they can abduct and rape them and turn them into child sex slaves. same reason they want the third world kept poor and backwards so they have an endless supply of thirdie kids to rape.
theyre also the moids who love and worship crispr and IVF and gene editing because they want to farm child sex slaves in personal breeding clinics, just like epstein did.
No. 2543185
>>2542695How does this belong in the tinfoil thread? This is just you being mad about something. Take it to the vent thread.
>>2543117Pretty intense strawman you've made up there. You would be happier if you stopped making up people to be mad at.
No. 2543198
>>2543117I'm talking about men and eugenics. And of course that's the issue, this is men we're talking about.
Women being eugenicists is an ability we all possess when looking for a potential partner to have children with. We've been psyop'd into thinking it's wrong to seek out men with good standings, healthy features and family lines, etc. But that's literally what female animals do in the wild, especially birds with sexual dimorphism
No. 2543228
>>2543198Eugenics by women (aka reproductive choice) is normal, natural, our birthright as the females of the species, and how you maintain a healthy species. The 'eugenics' that is
problematic is usually rich and powerful moids who seek control over societies by controlling the reproduction of women instead of allowing women to freely choose their own reproduction. They can do this all sorts of ways, by sterilizing groups of 'undesirable' women or finding ways to insidiously affect their fertility, mandating shit like one-child policies (thereby encouraging/rewarding female infanticide), establishing breeding/IVF farms Epstein or Brave New World style, or if you go back far enough the good old fashioned way was for wealthy/powerful moids to hoard women and kill the children women had with other men (this isn't really the modern notion of eugenics but it's related because it comes from the same basic moid impulses). I'm confused why some women in the thread are conflating the two when they are opposite forces.
I think some anons are also getting confused because certain technocrat moids sperg about 'birthrates' and seem to want to reproduce their own genes with IVF and other reproductive technologies, but first of all this doesn't really make them the opposite of 'antinatalists' (since many of the same moids are skirting the line of being antinatalists/are part of the very same groups who encourage antinatalism in the general populace while wanting to be able to breed their own bloodlines as much as they want, by force if necessary, with the women they choose), and second, the moids people are thinking of (like Elon Musk) are not the most powerful people in reality. The popularization of antinatalism in the general populace via propaganda isn't because the people propagandizing actually want all of humanity to die off; propagandists don't operate by telling everyone honestly what they want. Even if you look at actual avowed/self-identified Malthusians (of whom there are many, and in many high places) they don't want all of humanity to be gone, they want most of humanity to die off leaving only a group of the stupidest and most easily controlled people as slaves while they themselves breed within their own bloodlines (which they consider superior) as much as they like and have their pick of women to breed with. But one of the many ways to achieve this aim without too much violence is to convince all of the more intelligent, responsible, and wealthy-ish women who otherwise would have wanted children to voluntarily stop reproducing themselves with the partners they would willingly choose, which makes the population easier to control. Of course not all women would willingly reproduce, but some would so it helps to brainwash them into thinking having children is 'morally wrong' and that it's selfish and harmful to willingly do so. Other strategies will be (and already are) employed to control the reproduction of other population groups, like secret sterilization. All these various insidious patriarchal psyops are a way of trying to cheat nature and reverse the natural order by taking reproductive choice away from women.
No. 2543243
>>2542685Kek nonna I have no idea, sometimes I just think zoomers can't read.
>>2542118I don't listen to podcasts or support politicians, your reading comprehension is so bad other anons think you're a bot, your screenshot is unrelated to the discussion and no one said anything about undesirable parents initially but you, yourself and other antinatalist posters who claimed mothers are 'selfish' and have children thoughtlessly and without concern for the child. If you want women to become mothers more thoughtfully and selflessly you shouldn't be discouraging the thoughtful and selfless women who want children from having children with this 'omg bringing children into the world is evil' guilt trip. Wanting potentially good, caring parents to procreate rather than bad,
abusive neglectful parents is not something I will ever apologize for, and I have no intention of being sneaky about it. Yes, that is what I want, for people who become parents to be good parents, and for people who don't care about raising children to not have them.
No. 2543530
>>2543117Humans are definitely becoming uglier. I think anyone with eyes can see that. And no, zoomers wearing 10 inches of makeup and 15 different Chinese filters on tiktok doesnt count.
Not only are people fatter than ever, but everyone's face looks weird as fuck nowadays. My hypothesis is because people nowadays (especially women) select far more for wealth and social status than good looks. Even the most beautiful women are all dating hideous but rich men now, and having ugly babies that look the fathers.
No. 2543539
>>2542695You're getting screeched at by people who intentionally misinterpreted your post to scream about how abortion is the greatest thing ever and how women should practice it willy nilly (literally any woman who's ever had an abortion, even a chemical early stage one, will tell you it's not a fun or easy process, it's actually extremely traumatic and painful, just proves how many zoomer retards/trannies/permavirgins who have never had one are on this board)
The biggest drains on society are by far druggies and alcoholics but it's considered extremely taboo to say anything bad about them, they're always painted as poor little
victims no matter what. 70% of weekend visits to A&E are alcohol related. Go into any emergency ward at any time and I guarantee you at least 1/2 of all the people in there will be in for drugs or alcohol related issues.
Not only are addicts a huge medical drain but they're also antisocial, prone to criminality, usually
abusive and awful people to know in general and ruin all their relationships, friendships, families lives etc etc. You're allowed to screech about evil downies ruining the world as much as you want when in fact it's failed normie substance abusers who are the worst people on the planet, yet nobody is calling for them to all be culled.
No. 2543542
>>2543539Also, people willt try and make excuses for addicts by saying
>well MAYBE one day they will get clean and become functioning members of societyEven though alcoholics and opioid addicts have a 90% relapse rate.
Most addicts are also undiagnosed narcs or bippies. I would much rather people with clusterbee personality disorders, criminals, rapists, pedophiles, shitty
abusive moids and addicts were ejected out of the gene pool than some retards who basically do no harm, but they're never the focus of the topic of eugenics. Level 3 autists are 1000x worse and more challenging to deal with anyway out of all the disabilities, but autism is the one disability that normies think is acceptable, which is ironic. For every 1 savant genius grandmaster autist, there are 1000 AGP brony gooner autists.
No. 2544087
>>2544064This sounds like such an American problem to me, like I know it's increasing in many wealthy countries but I now know a few women who have had babies (several of whom are from Eurocountries) and they all breastfed the normal way and didn't describe having any particular issues other than just the typical having to wake up at night constantly, fatigue, annoyance, etc. but nothing really health-related. Which does make me think that the companies and health professionals browbeating moms about everything they do are largely to blame because it seems like the chiller the culture is about motherhood the fewer of these problems moms seem to have, but I don't know enough young mothers to know that for sure.
I do think the pharmaceutical industry making up problems to treat thing is a real thing though, I even think the widespread shilling of birth control pills was in large part to induce additional health issues in women. No I'm not anti-birth-control but I think hormonal birth control is not the ideal form of birth control and definitely shouldn't be shilled to teens for acne or whatever considering all the issues it causes. I had a friend who worked for a health economics company where pretty much their entire job was trying to look in the medical literature for random rare conditions that could potentially be treated by existing on-patent drugs and then generating journal articles suggesting that the government should fund tests for the drugs for those conditions (never the condition the drugs were initially developed for).
No. 2544211
File: 1748713431239.jpg (686.01 KB, 1189x1598, 1000015095.jpg)
>>2544087Don't get me started on bc. Im so against it I would almost call myself anti-bc. Its shilled SO HARD and sold as if its the only form of birth control you should be partaking in. The promotion is so deep when I say the word bc you know I'm talking about the pill. Meanwhile what's the benefit? Your boyfriend gets to do it raw? It doesnt even protect against stds and you take on the onus of buying it, keeping up with it, and if it fails it's your fault. And I think they fudge the numbers on how effective it is because the ONLY people I know who oppsied a pregnancy were on it. I guess you could say it helps get rid of your period, but its not sold as that at all and I dont know how much the trade off is worth it for most people. I dont understand the benefit over condoms. I used condoms my entire life and never had an issue, plus no STDS, even in marriage I still use them cause theyre so much easier.
I hate the way theyre sold as "empowering too", literally HOW? Even on this site when I said I dont like BC I was told "sure it's got health problems bit pregnancy is worse!" As if I was saying you should just do it raw instead. Wtf. I lump it in with being "empowering" in the same way sex work is, where basically it just means its empowering cause it makes it easier for men. Empowerment is so backwards and co-opted and they'll never stop using it to drag women further into their bs, like when they shilled cigarettes as "empowering" for women to smoke.
No. 2544268
>>2544211>And I think they fudge the numbers on how effective it is because the ONLY people I know who oppsied a pregnancy were on itIt's only as effective as they claim it is when you take it at the exact same time every day, just a 2 hour difference is enough to decrease it's effectiveness. That's where it goes wrong most of the time.
But yeah I agree they prescribe hormonal bc way too easily. It's used as a bandaid solution for a lot of women's issues they don't want to 'waste' more time and resources on.
No. 2544297
>>2544211AYRT and by 'I'm not against birth control' I mean I'm not against contraceptive measures generally. I am largely against the birth control pill except in specific situations where the person taking it has been fully informed of the risks. I was against taking bcp for many years despite doctors pushing it on me for anything and everything, but finally I agreed to try it for a couple months due to severe endometriosis because my doctor did not want to prescribe me pain meds. What followed was basically the complete ruination of my life - I was only on it for 3-4 months but it
triggered latent PCOS that I probably had but wasn't very obvious yet and I did not get my periods back for 2.5 years after I stopped it, I gained over 100lbs in under a year (even after I stopped taking it I kept gaining weight) despite basically starving myself, developed issues with my thyroid and even worse period cramps and pains than I had before. Even after that happened I kept being told by gynecologists that I should just try it again and see if it helps with all the issues it directly caused kek. The worst part is in the end I was just put on those painkillers for endo that I was asking for in the first place but now the rest of my health is ruined. And I wasn't even sexually active when I was taking it, I was single and didn't need birth control for anything. So many of my friends who have taken it have had weird shit happen to them up to and including multiple people developing psychotic episodes that only stopped a few months after they stopped taking the pill.
I agree with you that the people I know who have gotten accidentally pregnant have all been pill users too, no one I know who just uses condoms has had an accidental pregnancy and it's not like those are the only two birth control options either. There are issues with most forms of birth control but I really think the hormone pills should be discouraged for most people unless they are sure they know what they're getting themselves into health-wise (potentially) and have no other options. But a lot of women just associate the pill with reproductive rights generally and if you criticize the pill it means you're some forced-birther freak or anti-abortion or trad or whatever. Also we need to stop thinking that getting rid of your period is generally a good thing. Natural hormonal cycles are important for physical functioning, as unpleasant as periods can be for many women myself included. Things got so much worse for me when I lost my period, the endometriosis pain didn't even stop it just happened all month long instead of a few days a month. The BCP is mostly just used as an excuse to plaster over women's actual health issues even when a woman isn't sexually active.
No. 2544393
>>2544268This. Women aren't properly educated on their conditions. Why are women with PCOS prescribed BC that literally causes PCOS and makes it harder to lose weight?
For conditions like endometriosis, hyperplasia, etc the baffling thing is that they don't even check if the birth control is working. They just "meh it's probably managing your condition, good luck" it's so fucking bizarre
No. 2545842
>>2545831It's 2025, if you live in a country where the pill is legal it's also legal for you to keep your legs closed or, if not, stop letting men raw dog you on a daily basis. I have never experienced this supposedly inescapable problem of 'back to back pregnancies' nor met any woman in my life who has, it sounds like a terrible condition indeed. I wonder what causes it, maybe indiscriminate unprotected sex or some kind of weird fetish?
If you want to please moids so much you don't even ask them to wrap it up, at the expense of your own body and health, go for it. No one's stopping you.
>And the whole medical industry is built upon using the bodies of poor people as guinea pigs, should we take every medicine of the market? Uh typically not without their knowledge, and typically drugs don't pass approvals when they've been shown to be so dangerous/intolerable in a study on patients who didn't even know they were taking them. But you're so right, big pharma should be able to sell anything they want without proper testings and without proper side effect warnings/informed consent from the patients. You're so right permapregnant-chan.
No. 2545850
>>2545842>it's also legal for you to keep your legs closed or, if not, stop letting men raw dog you on a daily basisI don’t fuck men, but there’s a ton of women who do. I’d argue with you that you don’t know shit about history because it was common place for women to have 5+ children but you’re either dude or an edgy black pill teen (who will eventually end up partnering with a male once you get bored of your edgy phase)
>You're so right permapregnant-chan.I bet you’ve got your dick in your hand imaging me getting cream pie
(scrotefoiling) No. 2545859
>>2545850No, I'm an early-mid thirties childless woman kek. I have a boyfriend but this does not mean I have to have unprotected PIV sex with moids or have babies. You sound like you need to go back to school and get a middle school level sex ed course refresher if you think bombing your body with dangerous hormones is the only option to prevent back-to-back pregnancies.
I have plenty of older female relatives and none of them have ever experienced 'back to back pregnancies' either.
>>2545852I do know exactly what I am talking about, actually. The fact you are on the tinfoil thread shilling pharma companies so hard you're covering your ears and telling me to leave the thread when I mention how the first BCP was tested makes me think you're some kind of fed or bot.
>>2545856AYRT and I agree, it is indeed fucked up for that anon to be happy that women are getting hurt by the medical industry because 'women must have unprotected condomless sex with moids at all times or else.'
No. 2545872
>>2545864The anon who has been shitting up the thread shilling for big pharma and claiming that the only way for women to avoid back-to-back pregnancies is to take a medication with an extremely high rate of severe side effects, the only benefit of which is to allow the moid to avoid using protection when he has sex with you (also putting you at high risk of STIs). She is the one saying 'yes, women must let big pharma harm their bodies to please moids' because they will whine and cry if they don't get to stick their dick in without a little piece of rubber covering it. This seems like a problem moids should deal with themselves - there was a birth control pill trialled for them which had similar (actually milder) side effects to the female birth control pill, and it was not approved. Why? The side effect profile was too dangerous/intolerable for the MALE version of the pill to be approved. This isn't even tinfoil shit, it was all over the mainstream news.
I don't know why that anon is getting so incensed at the idea of women having PROTECTED sex, but it kind of sounds like a pharma bot unhappy that women are starting to wake up and deciding to stop harming our bodies for the good of a pharma company and a moid having a 0.1% "better" orgasm.
No. 2545893
>>2545883Kek I'm not the one that started a conversation about how everyone on the thread who's skeptical of harmful big pharma inventions will be 'bred' by men and have 'back to back pregnancies.' If you find that post perfectly fine and not disgusting at all, you should have no issue with me mentioning (gasp! horror!) condoms. You need to be 18 to post here.
>>2545886Women choosing not to take a drug moid pharma execs are trying to force on them isn't 'shilling' anything, it's us exercising our right to bodily autonomy and personal choice. The fact you are so upset about this is, in fact, pretty disturbing.
No. 2545942
File: 1748809796285.png (223.67 KB, 710x774, harvardbcstudies2.png)
1/2 Everyone who thinks there were no initial problems with this drug should read this entire article, here are some good snippets, from
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/9/28/the-bitter-pill/
>After graduating from Harvard Medical School in 1918, he continued to work at Harvard, serving as a Clinical Professor of Gynecology for more than three decades. In 1923, Rock revived the Massachusetts General Hospital’s infertility clinic. The following year, he started a new infertility clinic at what was then the Free Hospital for Women (now part of the Boston Hospital for Women and Brigham and Women’s).>The Free Hospital, a yellow French estate house in Brookline, offered Rock a special advantage: Because it was a teaching hospital, Harvard-associated physicians had increased access to patients there.>Eventually, Rock began testing combinations of synthetic hormones on his low-income patients, a strategy he and Pincus would return to again and again in later research.>Rock had encountered artificial versions of estrogen and progesterone—the hormones that maintain the lining of the uterus—through his work on a national committee. He believed that the compounds might “develop” his infertile patient’s dysfunctional reproductive systems. The dosages were dangerously high—many orders of magnitude above what women take today. However, they appeared to have the desired effect: 13 of the 80 previously infertile patients became pregnant after the tests ended. His colleagues called this phenomenon “the Rock Rebound.”>The following year, the two researchers would begin a much larger trial on 60 patients from the Free Hospital and outlying clinics with the goal of determining the effect of progesterone on the menstrual cycle. Many of the women who did not become pregnant via rebound were disappointed by the compound’s misleading side effects, which mimicked the symptoms of pregnancy. Half of the women dropped the trial.>Unhappy with the results, Pincus learned an important lesson: He would need to take more drastic and less ethical steps to achieve the degree of experimental control needed to understand the compound’s anti-ovulatory effect.>Meanwhile, Rock had set his sights on the overpopulation issue. Over the following years, the goal of curbing population growth—especially among people he saw as inferior—would become a way of reconciling his contraception work with his Catholicism, and a rationalization for working on nonconsenting subjects. “People like to have babies. And this is particularly so among primitive peoples.” Rock said in a WGBH interview a decade later. No. 2545947
File: 1748810004335.png (232.69 KB, 699x866, harvardbcstudies4.png)
2/2
>As the side effects of the pill became more clear, Pincus failed to acknowledge their gravity. He told the New York Times many years later, “These side-effects are largely psychogenic. Most of them happen because women expect them.” Pincus would repeat this message over and over again in the years to come.
>When he exported his methods to Puerto Rico a few short years later, even his collaborators grew unsettled by his carelessness. During the large-scale clinical trials, the G.D. Searle Corporation medical director sent a cautionary note to Pincus’s partner, John Rock: “We here have long been disturbed by the casualness with which materials pass from Pincus’s animals to your patients.”
>But the development of birth control—and other wonder drugs—happened during a relatively unregulated period of scientific history. The Nuremberg Code of 1947, which established the importance of informed consent, was not legally binding. The Kefauver-Harris Drug Amendments of 1962 and the Belmont Report of 1979, which required proof of drug safety and “respect, beneficence, and justice” throughout all human trials, had not yet been written.
>American researchers had no formal obligation to obtain informed consent.
>But explicitly eugenicist legislation also codified forced sterilization. By 1955, 16.5 percent of Puerto Rican women of childbearing age had been sterilized. In a 1988 study of women who had been sterilized at the time, 16 percent reported that they had not made the decision for themselves.
>Many on the island justified these practices. “The tragedy of the situation is that the more intelligent classes voluntarily restrict their birth rate, while the most vicious, most ignorant, and most helpless and hopeless part of the population multiplies with tremendous rapidity,” the governor of Puerto Rico wrote to Margaret Sanger in 1933.
>But, as in the earlier trials, researchers had trouble convincing women to remain on the pill. Participation was arduous: For three months, subjects were made to take one tablet a day for the majority of their menstrual cycle and undergo regular testing. According to letters, social workers and doctors, including Pincus and Rock’s in-country collaborator Edie Rice-Wray, visited the subjects often, collecting vaginal smears on glass slides, recording side effects, and distributing tablets.
>According to Pincus and Rock’s paper, 22 percent of women dropped out due to side effects, which remained severe.
>Ten years after its first release, the birth control pill made headlines again during the Nelson Pill Hearings, a Capitol Hill investigation into the pill’s safety. When feminist activists noticed that no women were being invited to testify, they interrupted the proceedings and testified from their seats. “Why isn’t there a pill for men?” activist Alice Wolfson shouted. “Why are 10 million women being used as guinea pigs?”
>Neither the physicians nor the protesters mentioned the Puerto Rican trials.
No. 2545997
>>2545988Kek sorry, with the number of people accusing me of saying shit I didn't say earlier and acting like 'not taking the pill gives you back to back pregnancies' was a reasonable take I wasn't sure if you replied to the wrong post or if it was another instance of terrible reading comprehension.
As of 2017-2018 about 12-13% of premenopausal women in the US were on oral contraceptives yet the fertility rate has remained below replacement for the entire chunk of time since roughly 2010, so clearly the other 87-88% of potentially fertile women were all managing pretty well not to have 20 children. Only about 5% of 40+ year old women in the US have 5+ children. Women from age 30-39 in the US currently only have on average 1.3 children, not the 5-15 you'd expect if they were having back-to-back pregnancies every year. I can't believe I'm even typing this out but apparently my obvious sarcasm in this post
>>2545842 wasn't obvious enough for the ex-redditor anons who expect tone indicators, so I'm trying this approach instead.
No. 2546052
File: 1748816417034.jpeg (1.75 MB, 1125x1312, IMG_8993.jpeg)
>Totally not a right wing psyop you guise!!! Completely one hundred percent organic, women taking control of their bodies!!! Peter Theil hew?????
No. 2546061
>>2546058See this post
>>2545947 that clearly explains the earliest 'anti bc movement' was a movement by feminist activists. Just because you spend all your time following random tiktok tradthots doesn't mean everyone does or that there is no reality outside of trad tiktok. Maybe stop poisoning yourself with 'christofascist ideology' intentionally and you will learn to stop splitting. This is an absolutely insane, controlling overreaction to women telling you they don't want to take a drug you want them to take just because you seem to hate the idea of any other woman asking a moid to wear a condom.
No. 2546073
>>2546064Says the person literally calling feminists right wing christofascists who want to remove women from public life for… promoting barrier methods of contraception? Choosing not to take drugs they don't want to take? kek.
>>2546065Are the fascists in the room with us right now? This whole argument started because a schizo accused 3 pro-condom posters of being evil pro-natalist board infiltrators and then started stating outright that women who don't use oral birth control pills will get 'bred' by moids and suffer back to back pregnancies. So yes someone is very mad about condoms.
No. 2546074
File: 1748817462820.jpeg (385.96 KB, 1125x973, IMG_8995.jpeg)
Why do TPTB keep shoving Mormonism down our throats?
No. 2546093
File: 1748818654284.jpeg (136.67 KB, 1125x686, IMG_8996.jpeg)
>>2546086They changed Mormon underwear to be more fitted, like a tank top.
No. 2546113
>>2546102>>2546093Yeah, this tradition
definitely started because some closeted fag had a fetish.
No. 2546389
File: 1748839290763.png (115.65 KB, 808x337, bbcsdefdelf.png)
>>2546380The FDA won't approve male birth control because it has the same symptoms as female birth control and that's not acceptable for moids but it is for women. I'm not even kidding kek, see picrel from
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230216-the-weird-reasons-male-birth-control-pills-are-scorned
>To get to grips with why side effects are so much less acceptable in male contraceptive pills, it helps to go back to when the female combined pill was first developed – the late 1950s. At the time, there were no widely adopted formal standards for clinical trials, and the drug (a relatively high-dose combination of oestrogen and progesterone) was tested in a series of controversial experiments in several countries such as Puerto Rico. There were just 1,500 women involved, and though half the participants dropped out and three died, the drug was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1960.>Modern versions of the combined contraceptive pill are considered to be safe for most women, though they can lead to high blood pressure and blood clots in rare cases. However, they can also cause a number of less serious side effects, including mood swings, nausea, headaches, and breast tenderness. There's even some evidence that it can change your body shape. (Read more about how the pill changes your body shape.) >Which brings us to the next reason male contraceptive pills are held to a higher set of standards – both in terms of acceptable side effects, and safety more generally: to state the medically obvious, men (except transgender men) can't get pregnant.>"I think you have to think about how ethics committees weigh up risks and benefits in terms of a trial, because although you have a couple involved, it's the female partner who bears the physical risks of a possible pregnancy," says Walker. "Weighed against that, inconvenient side effects are [more] acceptable," she says.So basically their argument is that since women bear the risks of pregnancy, we should also have to bear the risks of contraception, since it's not 'worth it' for men to suffer 'inconveniences' (like death, blood clots, strokes I guess? but also all the actual inconveniences) when they won't die in childbirth anyway. Very good logic! I guess they'd use the same logic when approving procedures like voluntary kidney donation that women often do for their moids… right? Right?
No. 2546404
>>2546381I am almost 100% positive there is widespread access to female condoms, spermicidal foam, diaphragms, etc. in the US in addition to copper IUD (if you can't get them at the drugstore you can get them online for sure). But honestly almost everyone (unless they are married/in a very long term relationship and open to having a baby) should at the very least be using a barrier method, because it protects from STIs which oral contraceptives don't. Condoms (and female condoms, iirc) are more effective (with 'average' use) than oral birth control pills and most of the other methods you mentioned, and almost 0 people use birth control perfectly outside of clinical trials so the 'perfect use' stats for oral birth control can effectively be ignored, while using condoms perfectly is easy with a half hour of sex ed in 9th grade or whenever.
If a condom is not enough protection to make women feel safe it can be combined with spermicidal foam, diaphragms, copper IUD (which comes with its own problems like potential pain, heavy bleeding and damage to the cervix/uterus but I would still consider better than hormonal methods in some cases, like women with pre-existing hormonal conditions) or even mirena/hormonal IUD (can still cause some of the same problems as other hormonal contraception but the doses are lower and hormones are more localized than most other forms so at least in theory the effects are less likely to be systemic/severe although those claims are understudied imo) or even with methods that are not very effective by themselves but should be fairly effective combined with a condom, like fertility tracking (with a wide abstinence window) or even pull-out if you trust the moid.
One of my personal biggest concerns though isn't even oral contraceptives as birth control, it's the sheer force with which doctors will try to prescribe it for anything and everything women/young girls (including barely pubescent girls) suffer from, even if they are not sexually active. It is considered a first-line treatment for acne, for endometriosis, for PCOS, for painful period cramps, PMDD, dysmenorrhea, and even issues as non-severe as irregular periods in the teen years or Being An Athlete Who Finds Periods Inconvenient. Sure, the birth control pill may be a trade-off that's worth making if the alternative is the risk of an ectopic pregnancy, but the calculus changes if you're giving yourself high blood pressure/blood clots because of some mild teenage acne or a disorder like PCOS which is actually
triggered/worsened by the pill. Personally I had birth control aggressively pushed on me by at least a dozen doctors, at least 50-60 separate times between the ages of 13 and 30, and a lot of the time they would not take no for an answer. I was even told repeatedly that I would literally die if I refused to take hormonal birth control by my gynecologist - she only admitted it was a lie later and didn't explain why it was so important to her that I take it instead of other options that she knew were available. I had to spend over 20 minutes fighting with her until she offered to prescribe me the safer alternative. Maybe the women that got on the pill young and stayed on it don't know how aggressive doctors are about it because they've been on it the whole time, but if you're not on it they act like a pack of rabid dogs that will not leave you alone until you finally do what they want and it is honestly disturbing. I even had doctors threaten me by implying that I could get raped so I should take it anyway when I told them I was celibate and not interested.
No. 2546452
>>2546429Yeah when I was like 13 or 14 (I got my period when I was 10) I had some super late/irregular periods and when it didn't come for 3 months one time I went to the clinic and was forced to take a pregnancy test in the clinic even though I insisted I was a virgin. OK fair enough they gotta check I guess. Luckily I didn't even have to wait for the result because my period came while I was peeing into the cup and the doctor laughed about it and then told me that it's extremely common for periods to be late/irregular before the age of 16-17 but 'if it bothers me she can put me on the pill which will make me more comfortable.' Thankfully she wasn't pushy about it and my mom was there to be like 'hell no' but that same year I went to a dermatologist for cystic acne and was, again, pressured, heavily this time, to go on bc because 'it's the best treatment for acne.' I checked later and there isn't even much evidence that bc helps with cystic acne, only regular hormonal acne. Those were both when I was still in middle school. At that age it can't possibly because they're so worried about pregnancy because most girls (when I was growing up anyway) had their first sexual experiences between the ages of like 16-18 on average, I don't think they were seriously worried about 13 year olds getting pregnant. I also had a male doctor in high school who told me that me being sexually abstinent doesn't mean I can't get pregnant, because 'sometimes you're just fooling around and sperm flies everywhere and gets in your uterus' or 'you can get pregnant from a swimming pool or toilet seat.' This backfired on me and gave me extreme pregnancy paranoia for years even though I was a virgin to the point I was having crying breakdowns and panic attacks in school and missing classes even though I knew getting pregnant from toilet seats was supposed to be a myth kek, but the doctor put that seed of doubt in my head.
I just think it's messed up especially considering the history of the pill which was moids trying to control female fertility (first, trying to treat infertility and get women pregnant using bc, then trying to use bc for population control or sedation for mentally ill women) that we've now retconned this drug as like the singular best drug in the world that will solve every single female-specific health problem. It was the first FDA approved medication that wasn't for treating an illness but rather for breaking normal biological processes and we now have roughly 3 generations of women who are taught that being out of touch with our reproductive/hormonal cycles and the natural physical changes that come with them, often from a very young age, is completely normal and benign. In that same time frame the incidence of female hormonal diseases like PCOS and endo has shot up exponentially and hardly anyone is looking into the causes, they're just throwing more birth control at the problem. It's also contributed to the normalization of other drugs that basically exist to just try to modify normal health without fixing the root causes of actual diseases (see: the entire psychiatric drug industry for one example, see: the statins controversy) but women were the first guinea pigs and continue to be the main guinea pigs.
I don't want to see these drugs being made illegal because I think they can still be useful to some people but I think there needs to be a thorough informed consent process (including a discussion of alternatives) and they should be very careful prescribing them to any woman under 18 or who hasn't had her menstrual cycle fully 'normalize' yet (like your clots example or my irregular periods example). There are women in their 30s and older who discover they probably had PCOS since they were preteens that they didn't know about because they skipped all their periods for 20 years, finding out it's too late for them to treat it and have kids or undo 100s of lbs of weight gain they didn't know were hormonally caused. Anyway I'm ranting but I just don't get why people are so immediately hostile to any discussion of this, although I suspect in part it's the fact that zoomers seem more resistant to condom use in general which my generation all considered the normal 'default' form of birth control. And also that people have forgotten the history of the pill and how it was used by men to pressure women into casual sex since the sexual revolution. I'm not some ultraprude who thinks no one should be having sex with multiple partners but I think encouraging the attitude of 'well I'm on the pill so casual sex with men I wouldn't trust to put on a condom and wait until I'm out of my ovulation window can't hurt me' in young women isn't a good thing and it's leading to worse STI awareness than millennials had growing up as well.
No. 2550222
>>2544399Because democracy is completely fake and the will of the people doesn't actually make a difference. The entire world can scream 'Free Palestine' and it will have absoltely no effect. Politicians are not scared of their populace, they know they can act with impunity. Blair and Bush starved 500,000 children to death with sanctions over oil deals, and nothing happened to them, they are now retired and living comfily in their mansions with their pipe and slippers and whiskey.
We're ruled by a small class of politicians who in turn are working on behalf of billionaires like the Rothschilds and George Soros. What the public wants is absolutely irrelevant to these people's interests.
No. 2551182
>>2551088Anyone who calls anyone schizo for suspecting the government of being corrupt on the DL is a tinfoil in itself imo. You have to be incredibly naive to believe nothing shady would ever happen in the gov
>>2551157Fraternity for sure. Free Masons? Red shoe Mafia? Or if they just have different ones in different locations
No. 2552173
File: 1749271115734.png (133.92 KB, 2422x308, Screenshot 2025-06-07 at 05.34…)
this shit depresses me. its hard not to go schizo when you realize there are no good guys in power and never has been.
No. 2555136
>>2551182Masons, I haven't heard of the red shoes.. Also shit like $ceintolo Gee, Kabbalah, T M meditation cult, OTO, some public figures were also born into cults like Children of God, there's some ones like Magical Mystery school I haven't looked much into.
I believe most of the masons are high rank: Jesters, Shriners, Scottish rite 32/33rd degree.
Does anyone here know about the hermetic order of the golden dawn? I'd like to look into them
No. 2555458
File: 1749462365648.jpeg (182.46 KB, 1205x905, IMG_0376.jpeg)
>>2555136The red shoes thing is really weird to me and I’d like to learn more about it. Haven’t watched anything on it but I’m assuming it’s a literal metaphor for stepping in children’s blood or something. It’s not the first time I’ve heard of such symbolism. I’ve heard the reason that Masons and Royalty love purple so much was because it represented the blue blood of the royals and the red blood of the common people dying for them being mixed together. Rangers football club had red lines at the top of their black socks and apparently it’s to represent them ‘being up to their knees in Catholic blood’ in reference to the Plantation of Ulster.
No. 2555470
>>2551157I remember years ago in the UK, the government wanted the list of all judges, police officers and politicians who were members of the Masons/secret societies to be made public record. They threw a huge bitchfit over this and claimed it would be breach of privacy, and so the law was scrapped with help from Jack Straw.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1225532/Judges-longer-declare-freemasons-Straw-says.htmlBut it’s well known in the UK that almost all high ranking judges and police chiefs as well as a ton of politicians and Royals are Freemasons. Theyre one big nonce club and that’s why they’re so soft on pedophiles and other sexual criminals in Britain. Why would they want laws that sentence men to life in prison for child rape when they’re all child rapists themselves?
No. 2555473
File: 1749463745356.jpeg (100.5 KB, 380x599, IMG_0377.jpeg)
>>2555470These old pedo Freemason scrotes literally look like Nosferatu.
No. 2555495
>>2555479Exploitation and cheap labour ofcourse it's like this
>destroy the stability of these countries by waging wars,putting in puppet states funding those "radical" terror groups so you can steal their resources >make support groups and totally not government funded NGOs to "help" (exploit)the very people you fucked over >do charity to hide the war crimes you've done I think at this point it should be obvious
No. 2557441
>>2557136There's been a ton of covert white supremacist, right wing propaganda on this site lately that makes me want to leave.
>>2557363 Masons feel like one of the whitest groups to ever white… persecuted my ass. They barely even allow women to the day.
No. 2557928
File: 1749582742342.jpg (14.45 KB, 181x278, images.jpg)
>>2557441>Masons feel like one of the whitest groups to ever whitesurprisingly they have been there for a relatively long time, they basically allow anyone of any race or religion to join as long as they are male and have been wealthy for generations, a few ottoman political figures (such as the governor of syria) were masons and there are also mason lodges all across india.