File: 1749332152348.jpg (13.43 KB, 400x400, XJqlJG3R_400x400.jpg)
No. 2553040
Share your unpopular opinions here.
>don’t be a retard>no racebait >no infighting >don't reply to bait >don’t revive old infights or baits>rest of /ot/ board rules apply >farmhands are always watchingPrevious thread:
>>>/ot/2537530 No. 2553110
File: 1749333891245.jpg (56.04 KB, 720x770, 1000076140.jpg)
I hope OP of the locked thread enjoyed browsing the ugly male psyop thread and the ideal male bodies thread kek. Idk why males lurk here, it's pure masochism on their parts and they just end up upsetting themselves and lashing out with bait posts because they want attention from the nonnas here.
No. 2553123
>>2553095As a philosophy antinatalism aims to end all human life on earth (and possibly that of other living creatures as well) by the total stoppage of procreation. Slightly limiting procreation in some specific instances by 'parent shaming' is just a cop-out because it doesn't come close to achieving the desired aim, it's like if someone called themselves an Actual Communist because they continued to live in a capitalistic society that they view as completely inevitable and permanent but managed to shame 1-2 rich people into giving up their wealth/ceding the means of production to their workers but the rest of society stayed capitalist forever. I don't really see the point of holding a philosophical view that you don't believe will ever actually come to fruition in any way, but I guess that's my own view. I just don't take something seriously as a 'real' philosophy unless there is some vision for the philosophical aims actually coming to fruition.
>>2553113But what resources? Once only old people are left who will maintain the resources? The grid will start to fail, no one will be farming, starvation will set in, etc.
>The only reason why you are encouraged to have children is government propaganda to create more cogs for the system, or bioessentialism. That's weird because the government has always encouraged me NOT to have children. As early as primary and middle school I was taught that having children is bad because of overpopulation. I think that's the most conventional grew that most people grew up with, at least where I live - except now they say there aren't enough young people to work so they import people from other countries to avoid 'the reverse population pyramid' so that's why I'm wondering how it would work to continue that reverse population pyramid worldwide, since apparently you need to import people to do the work of caring for an aging population otherwise they will suffer once you convince people to stop procreating.
No. 2553139
>>2553117>>2553123There would be already existing workers ideally for a retirement home and other medical areas, and the children of the already existing old people. I personally don't believe that all life should cease and not be created, but I 100% think there should be a child limit like China had. Only the bare limit to sustain population should be allowed in my belief. Ideally max of two children per mother.
>That's weird because the government has always encouraged me NOT to have children.I wonder if this is dependent on where you live. I'm sure in most countries, especially third world motherhood is shoved on young girls. In my experience it has been here for me in USA. The propaganda really is everywhere though, for example on all sites I use, all algorithms try to shove motherhood content on me no matter how much I click "Not interested". The propaganda is also in political leaders trying to make you think abortion/birth control are bad, etc.
>except now they say there aren't enough young people to work so they import people from other countries to avoid 'the reverse population pyramid'This is not even close to being the real reason, that's what they're telling you. For example, Indian workers get imported because it's statistically FAR cheaper to outsource from third world than to hire residents. There are plenty of young people who want to work, but shitty corporations don't want to pay real wages and instead hire these third world people for much cheaper.
No. 2553161
>>2553139>and the children of the already existing old people. I'm asking about what happens when those children get old, and there are no more people younger than them? Like at some point during the trajectory toward extinction you are going to have a group of people on the planet that are all, say, 65-100 years old.
>I 100% think there should be a child limit like China had. It was disastrous in China, how would you prevent the same disaster elsewhere? Anyway, that's not antinatalism so doesn't really answer my question, but it is more feasible than antinatalism so I'm interested in how you think the issues with the one-child (or two-child) policy could be fixed in the future.
>I'm sure in most countries, especially third world motherhood is shoved on young girls. In third world countries, probably. In first-world countries it's the opposite. But then the first-world countries say they need migration from the third world to 'fix' the population pyramid. If importing young people from other countries was banned, I wonder how the countries that have the inverse population pyramid would handle things.
>on all sites I use, all algorithms try to shove motherhood content on meThat's really strange, it has never happened to me. Maybe it's because you're interested in stuff like fertility rates and your search history makes them think you're interested in parenting?
>political leaders trying to make you think abortion/birth control are bad, etc.None of the political leaders where I've grown up have ever done that, in fact I think it's the opposite, I grew up thinking hormonal birth control was supposed to be really good and harmless, and only realized later that it has serious harms that were being covered up. But I've never experienced what it would be like to live in an anti-birth-control or anti-abortion society.
>There are plenty of young people who want to workIn elder care and shitty jobs like that? Not at the pay rates that are feasible. I know people who work in elder care and they cannot find young people who are willing to do the job at sustainable rates, many burn out and quit pretty quickly. And the pay is kind of limited by how much family members are able to pay for elderly people staying there, or how much the elderly people have saved up.
No. 2553199
>>2553161I'm asking about what happens when those children get old, and there are no more people younger than them? Like at some point during the trajectory toward extinction you are going to have a group of people on the planet that are all, say, 65-100 years old.
If we impose a limit on population, there should always be someone younger than them if they chose to have children. However, even if you have children that doesn't mean they'll want to take care of their elderly parent.
>It was disastrous in China, how would you prevent the same disaster elsewhere? Anyway, that's not antinatalism so doesn't really answer my question, but it is more feasible than antinatalism so I'm interested in how you think the issues with the one-child (or two-child) policy could be fixed in the future. It was disastrous in China because the population was skewing to male sided, and this happened because of gender-selective abortion being encouraged and abuse/abandonment of baby girls. The easy solution to that would not encourage the idea that baby girls are lesser than and do not allow for sex selective abortion, despite unfortunately the fact that IVF exists which is essentially the same thing which I also think should be abolished.
>That's really strange, it has never happened to me. Maybe it's because you're interested in stuff like fertility rates and your search history makes them think you're interested in parenting? This is just my experience but my interests that I looked up have far exceeded anything related to antinatalism, yet I find parent content everywhere all the time.
>That's really strange, it has never happened to me. Maybe it's because you're interested in stuff like fertility rates and your search history makes them think you're interested in parenting? Thankfully it seems like you live in a mostly good country/society (from what it sounds, I could totally be wrong) and I really should look into the perception of other countries but the USA is so severely fucked when it comes to pushing on procreation to sustain end stage capitalism.
>>2553173Unfortunately medical and adjacent jobs usually have the highest rates of burnout and here, CNAs really do get paid shit for all for all the hard work they do. There are people still willing to do it though, as far as here where the number of nurses are growing
No. 2553216
>>2553199>If we impose a limit on population, there should always be someone younger than them if they chose to have children.My question was to antinatalists. They can't have children, because all procreation will end. So there will be no younger people, ever again.
>this happened because of gender-selective abortion being encouraged and abuse/abandonment of baby girls.It wasn't really explicitly encouraged, it's just what people did. How would you stop sex-selective abortion and infanticide if you imposed a limit? Just saying 'we won't encourage the idea baby girls are lesser' won't work since it wasn't encouraged under Mao either, but it's a ubiquitous moid idea. There is female infanticide all over the world like in India too, moids are the same everywhere.
>I find parent content everywhere all the time. That would be very annoying, I can't imagine.
>you live in a mostly good country/societyNot at all, my country is a shithole and I wish I could move to America. Just in this one particular respect the Evangelical Protestants in America seem obsessed with being anti-abortion/anti-bc which is unusual basically in every other first world country since most other countries don't really have much Evangelical Protestantism. Most countries in the OECD have far below-replacement fertility (so much less than 2 children per women) and many of them are now beginning to see it as an issue and panic, especially countries that don't allow much immigration like South Korea and Japan. Personally I don't think it necessarily is a big problem to have below-replacement fertility as long as there's still a sizeable population of young people being born (although it remains to be seen how it will pan out in countries like Japan) but that's not antinatalist at all, and I was asking antinatalists about their opinions.
No. 2553235
>>2553229>Where is all that money even going?'administration'
>>2553233I have to hand it to you, that is one hell of a controversial view to hold if you use this site.
No. 2553279
>>2552627Ayrt. I didn't say you should only date for money, and even if you do date for money, you should never only rely on his income.
>>2552614Women are
already dating for love and personality, and those women are dating ugly men too.
No. 2553281
>>2553276Voluntarily altering your face/body with cosmetic surgery shaves away little bits off of your soul's enamel and makes it weak and easier to penetrate (for demons)
Also how narcissistic is it to think literally anybody cares about the shape of your nose? You're not that important.
No. 2553297
>>2553276I legitimately think that Chinese moms that force their daughters to get the eyelid surgery and Lebo moms that pressure their daughters to get nose jobs as 'gifts' are straight up
abusive.
No. 2553304
>>2553282It's funny how he tries to blend in yet doesn't understand us at all
>chastity will protect you from sex pests and fuckbois trying to waste your time because they are known to be so honest and respectful of your boundaries!>sex with some socially stunted porn addicted virgin who can't get a gf let alone pleasure you is akschually real romantic sex>chastity protects you from moids knowing you naked, in the age of AI>never regrets her choice to only have one moid as your romantic frame of referenceJust giga kek
No. 2553390
>>2553358As long as you aren’t a ddlg or a submissive it’s fine
>>2553368Me
No. 2553392
File: 1749348421024.jpg (129.66 KB, 740x740, kbVA1tib9s5o1_1280-3108757973.…)
>>2553365Omg anon it's "dog-eat-dog"
>>2553368I don't like the things femdom anons do, it seems autistic and weird. Outside of sex-fandoms and social clubs, most normal people enjoy taking control some of the time bc otherwise sex would get boring
No. 2553397
File: 1749348659016.jpg (47.48 KB, 480x311, doggydogg.jpg)
>>2553392I don't know, I feel like calling it a Doggy Dogg world does far more to capture the vapidity and inescapable grind of image based modern life.
No. 2553403
File: 1749348879850.jpg (164.78 KB, 1400x700, Rockos-Modern-Life-Static-Clin…)
>>2553397Your post made me think of this show, subconsciously hypno-anon. I think rocko has a dog and is part dog tho
No. 2553524
>>2553500I deeply looked into it and the studies you are seeing are examples of decreased inhibitions in bisexual and gay closeted people, as I mentioned, not sexuality change. From a cursory glance they do at first appear to be about sexuality change, but they are not. Unless there has been new research published or you somehow found something that my mega deep dive didn't.
>>2553508I'm not saying it's not inherent necessarily, just that it doesn't seem to be built into the brain in a concrete way.
>>2553507That is an egyptian-ass theory…sexuality is stored in the pussy? kek I laugh but to be honest who even knows, it literally seems like no one has a fucking clue so might as well be stored in the damn pussy I guess
No. 2553623
File: 1749359236405.webp (42.33 KB, 994x1387, Acosta_pro.webp)
>>2553584This sounds more like something dogs are always thinking and saying about each other. Or "dog logic". A capybara wouldn't concern herself with such matters, for example
No. 2553636
>>2553631You don't have to say that at all, you're choosing to say it and it teaches others how you view the world. Women in general will never (ever) be receptive to the way you're presenting your worldview because only women who enjoy being submissive
and humiliated at the same time are going to enjoy thinking of themselves as an animal, while the moid gets to be their human shepherd. It's so easy to rephrase everything you're saying to make it sound less bdsm-coded and humiliating to women but you're choosing to present this info in a way you know will gross them out and annoy them
No. 2553645
>>2553637The analogy isn't perfect. The point is, two people cannot both be in charge. There can only be one person in charge. So in sex, there has to be a dominant partner and a submissive partner.
>>2553636Where did I ever say a woman has to be the submissive one? Women can and should be dominant both in sex and in daily life. Men should be submissive and obeisant. I'm saying, during sex, both partners can't be both dominant at the same time.
No. 2553658
>>2553652>mainstream tvAs if tv is anything like real life.
>most women are submissiveBut they don't have to be.
>I imagine one of you guys stopping to point out the phenomenon of automatic breathing or noises people make when they're eatingI don't see the point you're making here.