The top post on Reddit's front page right now is a picture of an 'anti-rape' poster. It explicitly paints a double standard for what counts as rape when it's done by men and women, and also when alcohol is involved.
I don't need to point out how fucked up the poster is, I'm here to draw attention to the tone of the comments. Men are waking up. Most will probably nod off again, back into their slumbers of toil and cuckoldry, but perhaps a few will manage to get the pill down their throats, before the delirium sets in again, and find us.
#1 Upvoted - 4221, gilded - 1
Men can be raped to, Jake couldn't consent, Josie should be charged with rape as well.
Makes sense in the real world, but not according to law;
#2 Upvoted - 224
I think a lot of people are missing that rape laws often explicitly require penetration. (I do not condone this, I am simply reporting the laws.) For example: FBI Definition: Previously, offense data for forcible rape was collected under the legacy UCR definition: the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Beginning with the 2013 data year, the term “forcible” was removed from the offense title, and the definition was changed. The revised UCR definition of rape is: Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim. UK Definition: A person commits rape if they intentionally penetrate the vagina, anus or mouth of another person with their penis without consent. Canada removed "rape" from the legal code, and changed the laws to have degrees of sexual assault that account for a gender-blind definition for sexual activity without consent. One might argue that this is very progressive, but opponents of the change (anti-rape activists, primarily) argued it was regressive. So, in the legal definitions in the US, the only way the female could possibly be guilty of rape is if she used an object to penetrate the male via the anus or the mouth. In the UK, she cannot rape him no matter what she does.
Someone sheds more light into the nature of our times;
#3 Upvoted - 540
No silly, men can't get raped! Its a hilarious concept. Its literally impossible for a woman to abuse men Also all men are constantly eye raping every woman
All are links going to anti-feminist media. The comments below it are almost unanimous in their contempt and disdain for the regime of the feminine imperative.
#4 Upvoted - 2586
So according to this ad men can still think clearly enough to be charged with a crime when drunk but women are plainly too stupid to know better
It's almost like the modern feminist agenda is disingenuous, isn't it? Another few thousand upvotes for comments continuing in this absurd vein directly below.
#5 Upvoted - 1316
So that's how it's gonna be, eh, ladies? Fine. We'll just start fucking each other. Supreme Court says it's legal. Let's get weird fellas.
1300+ votes for MGTOW, fairly high up on the most popular current post on the front page of the Internet. MGTOW is no longer the strange periphery inhabited by the occasional loner neckbeard.
#6 Upvoted - 218
Don't equate this with feminism. This isn't feminism; just ignorance.
It was only a matter of time before the White Knights arrived. However, it is interesting to observe how widespread the failings of modern feminism are - a collective with their intentions ought best to hide them, but they get more transparent by the day. We're lucky they're so fucking insane that they can't understand other people well enough to fool them this much.
The decline is happening, and men are waking up. The exodus continues. Feminism hamsters onward.
So lemme see if I got this right... Josie could not consent because she was drunk, so she's not held responsible for her actions she engaged in while drunk. Being drunk absolves her of responsibility for her actions. Only her, though - not Jake.
Suppose she then gets behind the wheel of a car and decides to drive back home after a drunk hook up. Suddenly this dynamic is turned completely on its head and now she's held accountable for the consequences of her actions regardless of the same level of intoxication that absolved her of responsibility in the sex acts she just participated in.
This example right here shows why this whole dynamic is COMPLETE BULLSHIT. Either they both get charged for rape, or she is not held accountable for what happens when she gets behind the wheel of a car whilst intoxicated.
They'll be lobbying for that next week.
I doubt it because then you are going up against madd. And they are a pretty strong group.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving.... unless it's a mother who is drunk who is driving away from one of those horrible man things. That's just self defense.
Really? Link! I wanna read
Oh my, well, let me get you a link for your downvotes, women should not go to jail, ever!
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/aug/02/closedownwomensprisons
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/10015766/Isnt-it-time-to-abolish-most-womens-prisons.html
They were actually lobbying for it as this post was written...
FML....
You guys are missing the larger point and it's one that I posted in the topic and post here often:
The law, the government, and women themselves are telling you, repeatedly, over and over, women are children, you are responsible for them.
Why do you think women say things like "I'm not going to have sex with you"? It's so that when you do have sex she can say it was YOU who made her do it.
They are openly admitting to women's submissive, malleable nature.
I've been lurking for quite a while now and feel I have a decent grasp of RP concepts. This is the first time my mind's been blown due to one of them.
Ultimately, TRP is about responsibility. Society holds men responsible*. TRP shows you how to use that expectation of responsibility to your own benefit (with great responsibility comes great power?).
Maybe this is something basic I've just been oblivious to. The insight is so powerful that I'm kicking myself for not catching on to it sooner. Thank you for the epiphany, TheeRyanGrey.
*Not just for men's own actions, but for the shaping of society itself? I'm wary of taking the logic that far as of yet.
(Reposting, previous comment was removed due to a link)
We talk about all the failings of women but lately we're garnered a victim complex and we stop discussing the failings of men.
We are, at this point, and most likely all future points, the most powerful creatures in the universe. Do you not believe great expectations and responsibility falls upon our shoulders?
It needs to be said that lately men seem unequipped or even worse, unwilling to take on that responsibility. They want all the power with 0 consequences or standards held their way.
This is, ironically, the same problems we complain about women
This is why I feel like the poster in the OP isn't that far off from the truth. In most sexual situations, I as the man am taking the lead. The girl usually is playing her usual "but I'm not that kind of girl" routine, and I'm pushing the boundaries and trying to take it past first and second base.
It sucks that women are able to turn around on some men and accuse them of rape after consenting the night before. I think it happens less than some MRA would have you believe, but its awful that it happens at all and the legal system shouldn't be so quick to throw men in jail for those kinds of cases. But, as a man, I do ultimately take responsibility for what a girl and I end up doing on most nights.
Exactly. That's the mentality.
Accept that you will ALWAYS be responsible for women despite what they say or how they present their characters. You were born a man. You were born the universe's most powerful presence. You have a responsibility to uphold the standards and morals of your society.
If you're not willing to accept the responsibilities or feel you can't handle them that's fine, we'll just treat you like a child or, even worse, ignore you completely.
[permanently deleted]
There are a lot of things women should not be doing.
Look, our forefathers had the right idea. Women need to be at home and need to submit to first their fathers and then their husbands. It is patently absurd to pretend women are actually capable of making adult decisions and taking care of themselves.
It is obvious even by their own actions and inability to ever take responsibility for anything that even they don't actually believe they are "equal" to men.
The big mistake with society is socially engineering all the affirmative action, lowered standards and outright BS to let women "feel" that they are better than they are. It's a tremendous misallocation and waste of resources.
And it's absolutely sad and pathetic that most men are so BP and such beta males they can't take their place above women, as the leader and dominant figure that women are seeking and craving. I know a lot of that is to blame on the Western governments that imposed the brainwashing on everyone from a young age, but at some point men need to shake that off and either swallow the red pill and use TRP tactics, or at the least just go MGTOW and opt out. But just puttering along as a beta male is inexcusable, IMO.
Moderation my friend, moderation.
The world does not exist on a plane of 0 or 10. People aren't either perfect or worthless. Inferior doesn't mean useless.
Extreme measures are, on the occasion, necessary, but this is not one of them.
It's exactly necessary.
Women have a different set of emotional reaction amplitudes and will vote differently on political issues. It just so happens that their choices are different than choices preferred by men and destructive to the existence of the nation state.
This is true. Women will, and this is one of the greatest majorities known to man, always vote for what benefits them the most.
Unfortunately, most men nowadays do the same thing.
Most women are not fit to vote.
They have no concept of the world beyond their own desires. They are experts at nothing. Their opinions do not carry the same weight, the same valuable insight, the same thoughtful reflection, or the same consideration for the well-being of the society that upholds them that men's do. They're all-too happy to bite the hand that feeds if it means getting another mouthful, nevermind that the next meal won't come as a result.
I think the most ruinous thing to happen to modern countries was the giving of voting rights to people who are predisposed to demand rather than to sacrifice and contribute.
i've met a lot of men i could say the same about nowadays
That's just inherent in their emotions-now-define-reality logic.
This comment is the reason I'll be leaving trp. I thought you guys were onto something but if thinking like you is the end game I don't want it. Good day sir.
While I agree with the poster you responded to in principle, I would be wary of depriving the few women responsible enough to vote. I don't know what the requirements for voting should be but the best I can think of is requiring you to have skin in the game. E.g. contributed more to society than you received.
There will always be extremists.
Unfortunately, Misogynists and hurt beta males flock to TRP the way ugly, unnoticed women flock to feminism and tumblr.
Only veterans should have the right to vote, being the only ones who care enough about the body politic to defend it. Service guarantees the franchise.
Your argument implies that all of America's conflicts are worth fighting.
It also fails when the country is in peace times. If only veterans were allowed to vote then only a small amount of people would be able to. We haven't had a real war in decades. There wouldn't be a big enough voter base.
As a vet I respectfully and completely disagree.
[permanently deleted]
The US doesnt have or need that many soldiers.
Even though I disagree with the premise, I think the point is actually that it needs less voters, not more soldiers.
This would not work whatsoever, how many vets have PTSD or other mental disorders for being in battle and drug use. And do I need to look up the statistic for how many vets are homeless?
Good point. I think vets should be funded for life if they end their service with any sort of physical or mental problem. There should be no such thing as homeless vet.
No one will willingly take responsibility. I've had friends get mugged before, I got out of a robbing once, both times we were doing stupid things (bad area of town, late at night, alcohol involvement, etc)
Yes it wasn't our "fault" but we realized that we made some dumb mistakes.
Yet if you try to give women advice on not being raped it's victim blaming, sexist, etc etc. they don't want responsibility
I've heard guys take responsibility for that shit all the time. I've heard a story and been like "and then that happened? shit!" and they're like "yeah but honestly it was my fault, I was doing some stupid shit and I deserved it."
How many times have you heard women have that kind of accountability? If they EVER talk about mistakes they made or negative events it always paints them as the victim, completely blameless and all of this is just happening to them.
Ive seen men do it too, but usually it's a more feminine trait. I stopped blaming others when I realized that in doing so you are admitting you have no control over your life. That is wrong.
It's one of the main reasons the average Reddit user disgusts me. Blame their parents generation, blame Bush, blame bad college advice, etc. none of them can sack up and take control of their lives.
Red Pill is the exact opposite of that mentality. I dont agree with everything hear. But god damn do I love that thought.
You want something to happen, you make it happen. That's true "empowerment" right there.
From c. 1980 - 2010, the baby boomers were responsible for the stewardship of western civilization. Did they leave things better than they found them? Sometimes blame is warranted.
Being a victim is all they know, it's how they garner support and attention, it's how they win.
Ironically, being a victim means you can never be equal. Modern women have been brainwashed just like modern men into being things they clearly do not want to be.
I call it Shrodinger's Consent: she deliberately keeps it ambiguous so that when she observes herself after the fact, she can rationalize consent (or lack thereof) based on the psychological needs of the moment.
pretty much
lack of personal responsibility is the calling card of the modern american woman
lack of personal responsibility is the calling card of woman
Hypoagency.
Or maybe, just maybe, somebody can still consent when intoxicated. Neither of them should be charged with rape. If she was unconscious, then they would have a point. But just being drunk is silly. The whole line of reasoning is setup entirely to absolve women of responsibility for stupid decisions that they regret.
One time in college, I got blackout drunk and woke up next to a chunker that lived in the building next door.
She was enthralled and was like "omg that was amazing, I can't wait to do this again!"
Being a man that takes accountability for my actions, my first thought was "holy shit... What am I doing with my life... I need to stop drinking so much... Also I need to figure out a way to let her down gently... We are definitely not doing that again."
I actually felt pretty ashamed of myself for a few weeks after tbh. But the fact is I took responsibility for my actions and didn't blame anyone but myself.
It's actually quite horrifying that colleges are teaching their female students to consider something like that rape. Like no bitch, stop getting so drunk that you go home with people you'll regret fucking. It's pretty simple.
I'm sure chunker girl didn't have any malicious intent. She was just thrilled the fit guy next door wanted to fuck her.
yeh..that's never going to happen. The female psyche and ego is wayyy too fragile that any self-introspection or even a tinge of guilt will send her into a chaotic mess with small chance of suicide.
Better to hamster the mistake as rape and deny any wrong doing on her part..
I've woken up next to some bad ones. Guess who's problem it was?
Ach, come on, "bad ones" ?
He made a big girl happy, that´s what he did.
Now, waking up next to a psycho bitch...
...with no open condom wrappers in sight...
I was in a similar situation once except it was during a time when I was on an official separation from my wife. I was so desperate to get it on with someone (anyone) else that I lowered my standards. I was so disgusted with myself afterwards and so apologetic to her (because I like you had no intention of doing anything beyond what we'd just done). Like you say she was really enthusiastic then let down.
Can you sign agreements while intoxicated? What if I get drunk and go and sign up for some porn websites in my drunken horny state of mind. Can I say that since I was intoxicated I wasn't in the proper state of mind to consent to the agreement of monthly charges?
Yeah and if alcohol is such a potent and harmful substance that it renders a person incapable of basic decisionmaking, shouldn't it be illegal?
Also, how much is enough to lose the capability to consent? 50 g of alcohol? 100 g? Or maybe we should use some elaborated formula which accounts for bodyweight, age, height and bf%? How would you then track the amount of alcohol consumed if it was done in private? Good ol he said she said? Or just she said will suffice as it happens recently?
Why then bother with all this pretend justice if we can simply allow a woman to point a finger at any man and convict him of rape on spot? That would definitely save some tax dollars, which then can be used to subsidize gender studies education, some reproductive health program or to the hell with it - it can be simply given directly to women. Such a shame my great granddad didn't live to see how glorious the country he was crippled for has become!
Colleges are held to a preponderance of evidence standard.
As opposed to 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' as would be normal in a rape case since rape is a criminal offense.
But on College Campuses due process (for men) is ignored and women are encouraged to file lunatic claims like 'nonconsensual kissing' 4 years after the fact (I can't find the story off hand about this) because there are no repercussions for filing a false report.
I know you were making a point with hyperbole, but the ability to point a finger at a man and convict him of rape on the spot isn't far off. Our current society and justice system has zero accountability for women.
[permanently deleted]
On college campuses there is no jury. The onus is on the defendant to prove that they (he) received consent. Thus why this is such a shit show.
With no due process and only a preponderance of evidence required to accuse and convict men's lives can be ruined by any vindictive woman who wishes ill upon anyone whose ever laid eyes on her (it sounds hyperbolic but the wording of what 'sexual assault' is on many campuses is very vague and could include as much as knocking shoulders in passing in the hall.)
[permanently deleted]
no, he'll just be kicked out of college. lose all scholarships. have his reputation tarnished indefinitely, etc regardless of if the college disciplinary board finds him 'guilty' or not.
A student from Amherst was wrongfully accused and within 6 weeks the plantiff held [he was] guilty of assault, expelled from the college, ejected from the campus and branded a sex offender,
Paul, the guy who was victim of the mattress girl's false allegation and whom was acquitted thrice, is suing Columbia for abetting her in her crusade against him. Paul’s entire social and academic experience at Columbia has suffered tremendously as a result of her false accusation.
another and another and another
on and on. Those stories might help to illustrate what happens to these men.
I am not clear why rape on a college campus doesn't receive a criminal trial though. It seems to dumb the issue down a bit, ya? It says, "We've let these people whom we've deemed rapists go free into society. Their only punishment is a Scarlet letter and an end to their higher education."
It's all fucked man. I'd hate to be a man in college right now.
I don't know where you're from but I'd recommend familiarising yourself with the Ched Evans case in the UK. He's a pro footballer who was accused of rape, convicted but still challenging his conviction.
It was decided that his 'victim' was too drunk to consent - as you rightly said, one must be deemed too drunk - but on his webpage you can see the CCTV evidence of both parties entering the hotel just before the act. They walk in together but there's a point where she goes back outside to get a pizza box she left outside by accident. In so doing, she is seen walking, by herself, in high heels without incident. She looks perhaps a little unsteady, but doesn't fall over nor require assistance.
How the ever-loving fuck could a jury reach the conclusion that a woman who was able to walk fine in 6 inch heels and who had the wits to remember she had left food outside was yet not fucking capable of consenting to sex?
When I was studying this case at uni I was fucking incredulous. We discussed it in a seminar during which every girl in the class who offered an opinion said they agreed with the verdict. I sat there and looked in disbelief at girls whom I personally had seen five times as fucked up as this 'victim', vomiting their guts up then grinding on some strange dick 2 minutes later. Unable to consent my arse!
TL;DR yes the law is that one must be deemed too drunk to consent and in theory it is not the case that any level of intoxication with suffice to render a woman's consent as irrelevant. But you can bet your arse that a bunch of 40-something drones who haven't experienced fun in 20 years don't have a damn clue how much alcohol a seasoned 20 year old veteran of the CC can take, nor do they care. All they care about is that you're probably a rapist because you're a young, strong, confident man who has sickening sex urges.
[permanently deleted]
Is that link right because it doesn't seem to want to work (assuming it was a reddit link)?
Josie also briefly forgot that she had taken several dozen pictures with Jake, which are now all over social media. This would be fine, but she also has a boyfriend that buys her things she wants. On top of that already highly uncomfortable fact, she's a good girl and doesn't do things like that. What would her friends, or worse, parents think?
It's easier, no, morally better, to say she was raped; not just horny and wanting to fuck a guy.
She'd be let off, as fleeing the scene of her "rape" while still intoxicated would probably strengthen her claim.
"I know it's wrong to drink and drive but in my intoxicated state and fearing what had just happened I felt as though I had no other choice"
Even if the accusation didn't stick, she'd still probably worm her way out of it.
Haha for fucks sake this would completely work.
Since the drunken sex was rape, Josie can claim PTSD for her decision to drive.
Josie's also got a gun, and Josie becomes emotionally unstable and can't handle the stress after such an event. She crashes into a family of four, killing all but the youngest child, who was asleep. A man tries to stop her from driving away, fearing for her life she grabs the gun her father bought for her, shooting the man with every bullet in the clip, before speeding off until her car overheats from damage. She fall asleep at the wheel, police take her into custody. She receives no jail time, only community service for her actions. She writes a book about the event, embellishing but focusing on the trauma of the rape. Lands a lifetime movie deal, retires early. Lives knowing that it wasn't rape, but doesn't feel any empathy for the man who's life is ruined, because it made her famous.
Or you know, neither of them get charged because any reasonable judge should throw this case right out.
Except this will never make it to the real court after the guy gets expelled from his college.
Or constantly harassed and reputationally ruined as it were.
By a bitch with histrionic personality disorder who carried a mattress around and pretended it was "art"
It's never been about fairness or equality.
Men are rapists in the event of consensual sex when two adults are intoxicated while women are victims.
Women want to pursue jobs as firefighters, police and soldiers but insist on lower physical standards (they will still demand equal pay though). Is any major politician campaigning for women to be drafted?
It is illegal for insurance companies to charge women higher premiums for health insurance even though they consume more healthcare resources. Yet, it's okay for insurance companies to charge men more for car insurance.
A woman can hit a man and if the man hits back, he will be charged with assault.
Women play fewer sets in tennis than men, but they get equal pay. Women are allowed to compete in WTA events but of course they don't because even Serena Williams wouldn't crack the top 100. At Wimbledon they are allowed to take 10 minute heat breaks but men and boys are denied this luxury.
Title IX was passed in order to achieve "equality" for women in higher education. In 1972, females earned 44% of college degrees. Today, they earn 57%. Does any politician care about fixing this gender imbalance?
I could go on.....
So what happens if Josie puts her finger or a sex-toy in Jake's no-no place. Isn't that mutual sexual penetration?
Someone should tell Jake to file a false accusation.
Turnabout is fair play.
But what if a man were to ask a drunk woman to drive him home? If she were to get pulled over and claims she didn't want to do it, but he made her drive, would he be charged with the DUI?
Ninja edit: Beyond that, what if she, aware of her drunken state, offers an unaware male home then makes that claim?
Well the difference between a penis and a car is that you can't phrase drink driving laws in a gender specific way.
But with a penis, you can call it a penis and blame its owner. Err... regardless of gender.
If men drove blue cars and women drove pink cars, before you know it there would be a law saying it's only illegal to drink drive if the car is blue.
Many states have moved away from the definition of rape requiring penetration, therefore the woman could also be the rapist in that situation. I could imagine a prosecutor ignoring that case, however I've never heard of it happening. I'm sure a quick Google could reveal a case or two.
The law is slowly reflecting a gender neutral approach to rape. (See the Modern Penal Code). It's not really done to be gender neutral, I think it's done to be more inclusive of strange situatuons. There was a time when rape had to vaginal, that has changed obviously.
Penal Code, n. A system of laws prohibiting nearly all forms of penising.
Did you penis? You did? So you admit it!
I don't think the message behind rape laws is that the woman isn't responsible for her drunken actions because I think that would amount to an admission that her actions were voluntary at the time, under the circumstances, but they were vitiated by her drunkenness.
I think the message is actually much simpler: when women drink they get vulnerable (in all cases, with no assessment of the facts necessary case by case), and when men drink they become predatory. Coupled with society's instinct for suspecting the worst of men and presuming the angelic innocence of women, the conclusion is that having sex with a woman when she is drunk is "taking advantage" of her vulnerable state, regardless of how eagerly consenting she actually was or indeed that she may have been the instigator.
So although rape laws clearly DO allow women to avoid all responsibility when drunk, I think law makers' intentions were simply white Knight to the max: 'thou shalt not caress the fair maiden with your trouser snake, for she is innocent and defenceless!'
Why is alcohol legal for women if we can't trust them with the responsibility behind their actions while they're intoxicated?
#2 on the front page is a rudimentary sex bot (nsfw).
A top comment:
follow-up:
The sex bot will not only raise very interesting questions in the sexual marketplace, but the economic marketplace.
If it ever becomes affordable, like the price of a laptop or game console, an infinite supply of pussy is given an actual dollar tag, and its relatively cheap (with no need to maintain SMV). Beyond that, and the cost of subsistence living, what incentive is there for the beta male to work hard? This has the potential to be disastrous, especially considering the hikikomori phenomenon in Japan which is growing throughout Western civilisation.
Things like this and VR are not comparable to videogames. The potential for sensory stimulation goes way beyond the harmless way to kill time like it is for the vast majority of casual gamers. It will be life-consuming in a way we've never seen before.
Think about what young people were like and how they socialised 30+ years ago compared to today. That change will be magnified many times over with a mass commercial explosion of VR.
I wonder, will those in charge recognise this danger and artificially keep prices high? This is the only way I can see the West avoiding many millions of young men going hikikomori.
Someone in the main thread mentioned that thing costs about $300 and the vr headset is about the same. Will be interesting to see how women attack it if they feel threatened. We already see the "strong sexy empowerment" of women owning dildos while males owning something like a flashlight is "creepy". Sex positive feminism is just as female focused as the rest of feminism. I see a lot of people saying things like "the pussy cartel must be enforced" as an explanation, but really I think it's much more basic. Women see men using a sex toy as an admission he can't get laid. Unlike men, women only pursue the opposite sex to be used as a social trophy, to show off to their friends. So a man admitting he can't get laid is damning proof that most women find him valueless and therefore worthless to her. Any man who is beneath a woman is automatically "creepy".
A sex bot sounds interesting at first, but I don't think I'd ever buy one. The biggest reason I want to have sex with a women, besides the fact that it feels good, is that I want to be wanted. I want women to be crazy about me. Everybody can get a sex bot. But that's not the point. I could also get up right now and fuck a hooker within the hour because it's legal here and every town has a brothel. But I don't. It's either a women I seduced or jack off to porn.
Which as TRP tells us, has a lot to do with SMV and the way we look.
How about a world where anyone could modify their looks with ease? Nanotech that gets you buff in 12 weeks.
What if these sex bots weren't just sex bots, what if they were woman bots? That perhaps didn't necessary show the same level of bonding with everyone, who tuned their sexual behaviours to that of their current 'hosts'.
If the bot was 100% humanoid and was more charming and didn't shit test or leave you for an omega loser and didn't deny sex, dinner laundry... then well yes I'd get one for sure. This would force women to go full hardcore to change
Nah, they'll just increase their shaming tactics. Because complaining about something is much easier than making the effort to change.
Her (2013) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/
yeah, that movie was interesting. One of the subtle themes seemed to be that the sexual market was inverted from what it is now, and that women were a lot more frustrated than men.
That's because you CAN have a woman who desire you. Let's imagine the poor beta who has been through a dry spell of 8 years. He won't give a shit. He will spend all his nights fucking his damn robot. Good for him
The number one feminist priority will be getting them banned, then. Something about how they encourage women being seen as objects probably.
How this would impact different than prostitution, which exists since always yet didn't change the men's desire to have a family?
Prostitution is expensive, and illegal in many countries.
Also, if it's a single payment then that makes a big difference. If you had to pay tens/hundreds of dollars every time you wanted to play a videogame or watch porn, would you bother?
It will take a while before they get to single payments. (Referring to human-like sexbots with synthetic skin that can mimic human motion with 70%+ accuracy - look up 'Hanson Robotics' on youtube)
I'm aware of a few of companies that should be testing similar concepts (not just for sex, but other physical activity, like elderly care) in the near future.
The first couple of iterations will be stupidly expensive, and a bunch of enthusiasts will buy them, thus funding further research.
When they get the costs down comparable to that of a Tesla Model S, they're officially ready for the mass market (unfortunately won't happen in the next decade).
Due to the cost of such a unit (100-200K), companies that want to stay afloat (and push the growth of this emerging market; considering people aren't sure about sexbots yet at this point, they can't compare to the dynamics of the car ownership market) will likely push for an easier lease/subscription model, where you keep a bot with you for a month of so, after which they get shipped back to the company for maintenance/upgrades (with each bot having a mean lifetime of about 3 years).
I don't believe sexbot ownership (LTRs) will catch on.
If there's one thing in which I'll place my trust in humanity, it's the desire for easy and cheap access to sex.
I'm not saying it'll be near future, but think about where computers and mobile phones were in the 80s compared to today. Even in the 90s they were expensive and not nearly powerful and user-friendly enough for the average man to perservere with and justify the cost. As soon as they became as ubiquitous as TVs in people's homes, porn and its demand has driven so much innovation in entertainment technology.
You can bet on the Uber model here. You order a sexbot, she shows up in all leather on an autonomous motorcycle, parks outside your house, fucks you, plugs into your 240 outlet for 60 seconds, and peaces out. Then you get a push receipt from Apple Pay.
The thing is they don't need to actually build a car. They just need to make something that is like driving. VR Headsets are getting cheaper and cheaper (Google Cardboard). Someone will produce a bluetooth cock gobbler for sub $1000.
If a guy can just lay on his bed, slip on his VR headset, his bluetooth cock gobbler, and have an augmented reality porn star transported on top of his dick... That's it. Game over. It might even be easier for the market to welcome a product like that versus a realdoll-esc situation.
Just finished a major sci fi project (which required quite a bit of research), and yeah, gotta agree: the future isn't going to be "Give us half a million up front and now you're the proud new owner of a brand new sexbot...", more like "Here's your free, AD-SUPPORTED sexbot, and you can bring her back in and exchange her for a newer, better model after a 2 year minimum has passed..."
Much like Google's coming auto-driving cars are likely to be free and ad-supported, sexbots will almost surely follow the same trend: this will, after all, be the ultimate panacea to the "How do we motivate the betas??" problem we're going to be looking at in the latter half of this century. I say don't worry about the betas--once these guys get their hands on their first free sexbot, and the sexbot says "Oh, I'd love to have sex with you, but only after you buy X merchandise from Y retailer, which you can do though me just by speaking to me right now...", all those men that had previously checked out of the economy (figuring: if there's no reason to impress women, then there's no reason to work hard) are suddenly going to be stampeding back onto the field, when they start having to impress their sexbots (by buying things) on a regular (nightly) basis... Sexbots will, in effect, be WOMEN DESIGNED BY MEN--and like a great video game, the more you put into the bot (re: money, energy, time, investment), the more you will get back out, the two will be directly proportional to each other (this in contrast to, say, women designed by mother nature, wherein, generally speaking, the harder you try, the more resources you commit, the worse you ultimately do)...
Of course the nightmare scenario starts when you're 5 minutes into having sex with the bot and then suddenly she stops and says "You know, I'm just feeling it right now, but maybe if you bought me X from Y I might get more in the mood... MAYBE..." (Freemium gaming anyone? "You're in combat and wanna reload that gun?? That'll be 10 bucks my boy!!") Gonna be pretty funny if, at the end of the day, all the sexbots end up basically being modeled after Russian goldiggers--looks, personality and all... Who knows, maybe that really is the final evolution of woman--their "fitness peak", if you will...
[permanently deleted]
You should checkout that A&E show "Humans". Really goes into the subject of realistic human robots, including sexbots.
Yes but the point is, even in countries where it's legal and cheap, men still date and marry.
No robot will be anywhere near as good as a real woman. Not for many years yet. Therefore it stands to reason that whatever bots are available, they will have no more effect on the sexual marketplace than cheap and legal prostitution has had in countries where it exists.
It will change the market a bit. But not as much as people imagine.
I'd like to hear where prostitution is legal and cheap...with decent quality, clean women.
I think you also underestimate the proclivity of young men these days to succumb to social withdrawal and dopamine cravings.
I think VR takes care of that. Fixes the uncanny valley problem, drives down costs (much more software than hardware), and provides limitless potential, customizability and variability.
Good at what? That's the point. Machines aren't sentient beings, much less human beings. But if you're living without a woman anyway, why not use machines for sexual release and companionship-simulation convenience like you do with other appliances?
The question is thus: at what point does technology make men giving up on women? We can already reproduce "without" them (by hiring wombs and buying eggs) thanks to gay marriage laws. The end is near.
I guess there will be a trend of "naturalists": guys who don't want bots.
Also I have to bring up the old, biblical definition of fornication. It's not about sex, it's about idolatry: worshiping the form (the body) instead of the life (the being) inside it. And you know how idolators were punished by God.
So... Arcades? I can't remember how many thousands of dollars my friends stuck into the tekken, soul caliber, capcom, darkstalkers, etc.. whatever the popular fighting game was of the minute.
Edit: I don't know my fighting games. A bit of a tangent...
I know I sound like a nerdy asshole and you nor anybody else should really care about shit like this but Dark Souls is not a fighting game and sure as hell isn't playable in any arcads.
Prostitution isn't legal in most countries. Also, the good kind comes at a steep price, which makes it more of a hobby for most.
Sexbots (that you can't tell apart from real women - google the videos on robot skin; sure to freak you out), when available, would eventually be aimed at the masses, capitalism drives prices down, and they could easily replace prostitution and soon more.
The question is, if prostitution were universally legal, if there was an unlimited supply and variety, if there wasn't a stigma associated, if there weren't STDs, would things be different?
(Let's not forget that these sexbots will be programmed with reasonably sophisticated AI that mimics bonding, romance, desire, female emotions, and more.)
Oh, and to answer the family part, eggs and sperm in a lab are the most efficient means of reproduction (IVF has proven that time and again). Artificial wombs are already being tested, so, we've got the family part easily covered.
It would probably eventually be cheaper, and it's a one-time cost. It's kinda like the difference between arcade games and owning a games console in terms of how much you are able to use it, except with the added bonus that there will probably be a lot of homemade/pirated stuff to download for free (assuming it ends up being kinda like videogames).
Plus the assurance that nobody else's dick has been in it.
But she's been with only like 5-6 guys or something
[permanently deleted]
I'd assume that's similar to the maintenance cost of something like a washing machine? I'm obviously not an expert though.
In the video the part the guy puts his dick in is one time use and roughly $20. Just get a washable one and the problem is solved. That "robotic arm" he's using is $300.
Right now there are already sex toys that can be controlled remotely online. For both men and women.
There are already cam girls offering services with them. The smart ones even have referral discount codes for the products. So they're getting a cut from you buying one just so you can pay them to remotely jerk you off.
It will translate over with the VR and these devices. It will be sold as a service same as everything else.
That arm is $300, the "tube" he's pushing is crotch against is one time use for $20. Soon companies like Fleshlight will get on board to build a model that vibrates and has massaging servos in it. They don't even have to change the sleeves. Throw in some control software for either the simulator program to operate it or have a person operate it remotely.
Depending on person's choice of head set and sex toy these VR set-ups will range from $1k to $2k.
No STDs. Don't have to pay. One could program the robot into romance mode and fool himself that 'she' really loves her.
Futurama did an episode on this. Almoat a decade ago, if not longer. It seemed like such a strange and foreign idea. Now? Attainable in the next ten years.
Even Blade Runner had sex bots, one of the "Replicants" was a working girl.
It seems to be a long running theme in sci-fi in general. The more realistic authors realized men were going to build fuckable robots/androids.
On the inverse in Star Trek TNG Data the male android even had a girl friend.
This is not even remotely attainable in the next ten years, some of you guys are getting too excited.
Even if they were, why would it make a difference? Video gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry which largely replaces more traditional recreational activities like sports and card/board games.
Millions of men opt for video games, to the relative exclusion of traditional games, and traditional games aren't even that hard to play or find groups to play with.
Now compare how hard it is to find a girlfriend with how hard it is to join a basketball/scrabble group.
Everything always gets cheaper, so you can assume that sex technology will be available for everyone. Maybe that technology will also work for women. Shades of Grey and Twilight work, so I don't see why not.
Who needs a sex bot when you get someone much more attractive than yourself to take you out, pay for your dinner, entertain you and then fuck you in whatever way you want? With the option of getting pregnant and leaching support money from the poor sap to support your own choice of having a kid?
Women already have it made. It will only be downhill from here.
Sex bots would see the bottom fall out of the SMP for women, so you can bet your ass these things will be shamed at best, outlawed at worst. Sex bots and quality virtual sex would satisfy the "creepy" guys women routinely turn down for sex, but that wouldn't matter, if she feels it's not good it won't happen.
They would be shamed but unless they make them pretty damn realistic I don't see any major changes. A large portion of men aren't getting sex anyways. This will just fill a need for the masturbation crowd that women already find ways to be repulsed by
Right, but anything that threatens potential attention from the right men will be shamed. There's no accounting for feels.
It'd be essentially nothing but positive for men but women would hate it. All of the fluffy underpinnings of men that are "beneath her" would be gone because who wants the grief? That means the loss of having a buncha shit done and bought for them for free because for men they'd get a much more honest financial transaction from a robot. I buy you for 15k and you put out whenever I want. Deal? Deal. I'm sure they'd have a high price tag but the conclusion would be a sure thing instead of the current system, which is guys bend over backwards likely to get rejected anyhow in the end just to feel even worse about themselves.
Oh Im sure women would be upset about Orbiter loss and that validation support
Of course fucking a robot would soon be considered infedility
If a guy can have a sex bot at home why would he settle for some woman hitting the wall and getting baby crazy at 35?
Just look at how many people in general now talk about staying home and Netflix binging. It's literately one step away from where you go home and use a VR headset while something jerks you off in some way. As the guy in the video showed the tech exists now.
You act like only women seek validation. A mans status is heavily dependent on the women he can attract. No one in the top half of men will rely on some sex bot
Without "creepy" guys to put down as being beneath her, where's she going to get her self esteem boost? She'll actually have to admit she's competing with other women without having the bolster of "well I could always fuck X but haha not like I ever would, I'm better than that!"
Eh I think they have a long way to go before it's anything like real sex. This is VR porn, not sex with an actual flesh and blood human,
I'm not saying I wouldn't try it.....just that it won't replace actual sex.
It's more a matter how how satisfying an experience it is. If a guy feels that the experience he gets is greater than the effort it'll take to attract a real woman, then it may as well be real sex.
we fuck our own hands
the bar is already set very low
I can't wait til women realize sex bots are here to stay and say it's sexist how they don't get male sex bots.
Of course the women would never want a male sex bot because of their ridiculous demands placed on men, a bot would never suffice.
Women want an active man, while men are fine with a passive woman.
This (ignoring all other factors) would make a male sexbot much harder to create.
It's a little depressing how excited they are for sex bots.
I imagine we're going to reach a point soon where porn will no longer cut it, so we're definitely going to need something more to satiate the unsexed masses.
on the front page, 2 post under this one.
http://i.imgur.com/WwjmcDN.gifv
it's basically a fleshlight with feedback controls to the game.
This will 100% be a real thing and I suspect will push prostitution finally over the edge into legal territory.
[permanently deleted]
"Why can Sony sell a fuck machine robot but I can't sell my ass"
Robots are slaves, they would be opening the door to sex robots you can bet that people will protest and they would be right.
It brings sex for money into the open in a whole new way that would chip away at that social norm.
I'd like prostitution to be legal, makes it easier
[permanently deleted]
What?
You can't see people making that argument? You're an idiot if you don't think the whores will lobby for it.
They already won a supreme court case in Canada because of saftey, you really think they won't make the argument that augmentative reality.devices or.full humioniod robots.
Keep dreaming yourself bro.
Sex bots would be disastrous, but for other reasons....
If you could equally implement them across society in one fell swoop, then the impacts to the sexual market, reproduction rates, etc. would be equal.
But that's not how it would/will work. They will be expensive at first, and only folks with the time and money to have them will. They will be the first to see a significant decline in their reproductive rates. Meanwhile, the less productive members of society will continue to breed like rabbits. Only now the proportion of kids coming into the world with parents who are barely eeking out an existence will be far greater. The upper/middle class will accelerate its decline, and the underclass, reliant upon them, will grow disproportionately until this whole sordid house of cards finally collapses.
TL;DR: Sex bots = downfall of civilization.
I don't know why this got downvoted. It was a decent tangent and a reasonably good sci-fi idea.
It's not sci-fi if it's happening in real life.
As good as the last part sounds it'll never happen
Lol women will just have sex bots too so they will only talk to men for companionship... Vibrators are so good. Imagine a robot fucking u with a perfect rhythm and also a well placed vibrating thing.. Fuck men. I want this. Future now!
Amazing.
4600 upvotes?? I know its comedy, but the fact its even said and is on the way to 5000 upvotes is amazing.
[deleted]
But it's sarcastic right?^right?
It's genius because some people upvote the sarcasm and others upvote it as truth.
This poster pretty much sums up feminism in a nutshell:
All women are children. They have no agency and are not responsible for their actions.
All men are rapists. They are inherently evil.
That's a pretty fucked up worldview.
I swear, feminism instilled a deep hatred of anything masculine in women.
Holy shit, the reddit bluepill majority is starting to gain a little confidence. I think taking down Pao may have started a little bit of momentum, I really hope it continues.
Feminists are fucking up their rhetoric. At first they were the only source of equality rhetoric. They've made people hypersensitive to equality and when feminists pull this shit, they notice. The problem is that most of them are gonna continue thinking that feminism is the solution. When feminists fuck up, you'll get angry comments, but nobody's going to the MRM for help.
Their big mistake was shifting from things like "look at how tough it is being a woman" to talking points outright blaming men and their privilege.
You think a sexless, frustrated redditor is going to be fine with constantly being told "you have it so easy?". No. No one likes that. It's how the feminist movement gained vocal enemies.
There was NEVER a time when people on reddit would think that poster isn't bullshit.
Shit happened to a good friend of mine in high school. The bitch told everyone she lied. If course she didn't go to the cops.
She had almost every guy in our school kick his face in. Canada is a fucked up place.
And to the people who say this isn't feminism, this is exactly why people hate feminists. You can do anything you like, and then add to the end "this isn't feminism." you're absolving yourself of all responsibility.
This is the result of feminism. Grow up.
Crazy people demonstrate on funerals - "This isn't christianity"
Crazy people chop heads off - "This isn't islam"
Crazy people think males are all rapists - "This isn't feminism"
Well it is, of course it is christianity/islam/feminism. An axe doesn't stop being a tool just because some dude in a mask hunts college kids down. It's just another form of using a tool. It think it's just easier for people to say that these are not real **** so they don't feel the need to do anything about it themselves.
if you're going to add religion to the mix, you might as well add in democracy.
O think the list could go on forever if i tried to put in everything. Democracy didn't come to my mind, sorry.
It's not the result of feminism, it's the result of innate sympathy for females.
Feminism is also the result of innate sympathy for females.
This sympathy exists because women look more neotenous, much like children. People also have innate sympathy for children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CWomen_are_wonderful%E2%80%9D_effect
I saw a video recently of a guy trying to break up a rape. This wasn't a human rape--it was a group of male ducks trying to fuck a female duck. The guy kept chasing down the male ducks, trying to get them to leave the female alone.
This is the power of feminine-derived sympathy. The dude most likely eats duck, and would have no problem seeing a housecat violently hunt down a mouse or rabbit, but when he sees the oppression of female by male in nature, he personifies it and sympathizes with a duck.
The duck itself doesn't look all that different from a male duck, but he takes the physical neoteny that human women have, along with the social conditioning propagated by it, and associates those things with the female-ness of the duck, and thus sympathizes with it.
...there's a line and this... this is all just gone to hell.
We need to curb this enthusiasm. This isn't healthy at all.
Not sure what you're talking about.
The guy gets wrongly convicted for rape and they still think that their rights are being taken away,why?,because they don't see the double standards every one else is pointing out ,they only see someone saying that men can function while being drunk and women can't,how dare they say women are weaker than men right?(which by the way nobody is suggesting)
Some people just disgust me.
In truth we all know that women are rarely ever held accountable for their own actions
To be fair, the people are recognizing that feminism itself is actually more sexist towards women than the phantom TRP monster...it's not a bad thing. Very sad, but it's like what GirlWritesWhat always says...no one listens to issues regarding men unless they can be spun as actually being damaging to women...
I don't know why all of humanity doesn't disgust you personally. They all disgust me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CWomen_are_wonderful%E2%80%9D_effect
This problem will never go away. Trying to get people to sympathize equally along gender lines is like trying to elicit the same emotional response across age lines.
3 year olds are cuter than 30 year olds, and women are cuter than men. They've literally evolved to elicit powerful caretaker emotions in us.
I totally agree that feminism is more sexist towards women,the best example is the metro here in my country.
First coach is reserved for women,which is guess is fine but in all the other coaches too there are two seats each reserved for women,old and physically challenged.If they really cared about equality they would have protested against this as it is implying that they are as physically weak as old and PHC people but infact I have seen young women telling old men to get up from the seats reserved for women
And I'm not saying that ALL old and PHC people are physically weak but there are assholes who don't offer seats to people who actually need and that's why government had put those rules so that people who need those seats can get them if they choose to
Where the hell do you live??
In my country, some seats are marked for old people, physically challenged people and pregnant women/women with small children. What the hell are women seats for. I think i would lose my shit if some young woman wants an old man to stand up for a seat.
I agree with your general post but the idea is actually pretty solid. They're recognizing that feminism today fights for increased freedom for women but reduced responsibility. The only people in our society with the legally mandated privilege of reduced responsibility are children. You just have to glance at the side bar to see how women are the oldest teenagers in the house.
Look at our legal system, look at the corporate culture in the west, look in academia, in all of these places women have protection from severe repercussions for their actions no matter how heinous. Even women murderers spend less time in jail than male murderers, just like juveniles.
That post is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of championing strength and equality of women while campaigning for child like protection on account of their fragile and immature minds.
It's not only in the west its here in India too
prime example:http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2015/02/19/rohtak-sisters-_n_6710858.html
There was a viral video showing two women beating 2 men in a bus and they said they were molesting them and guess what?Everybody believed them.Both of them (guys)had applied in the army and as soon as this report cam out the army suspended their application.
On the other had the girls were being glorified to the extent that they were called "bravehearts"
But luckily ,passengers in the bus stepped up and told everyone the truth that the guys weren't being beaten up because they were molesters it was because of a seat.
It's called Feminism, not Equalism.
Just stop listening to bitches. They complain when they don't get what they want, and they complain when they get what they want.
Just make yourself happy. Women are supposed to be our equals, right? Let them take care of themselves.
IT'S GONE FROM FRONTPAGE, WTF, and the other top posts that were with that at the same time are still there.
Gotta silence reality, reason, and logic. We can't have those pesky things getting in the way of feminine supremacy.
that's odd, it's still the top post for me while logged in and the 2nd post when going incognito.
But who did that? And why? Are their self worth and self esteem tied so tightly to the blue pill ideology that they can not even suffer to see their ideology challenged?
It's still there for me up top in both all and pics.
It was on all and pics, then it vanished from all, while still #1 on pics and getting upvoted.
Now it came back for me also, but I'm sure it went gone for a good 30 minutes, they probably realized it was going to backfire ( since KIA loves a happening like that )
Violent rape is assault; non-sexual assault is kind of like rape in that someone is exerting dominance over your body and physically harming you- the difference is the sexual nature of the crime.
Anything else is weaponizing consent for the sake of female supremecy, and women are pushing hard enough now that even Blue Pill men are waking up to the nonsense nature of non-violent rape.
There comes a point where it's just sex. So you had sex with someone you wouldn't normally have sex with because of reasons; get over it, learn from it, and don't repeat the mistake again.
Women need their sexuality to have this aura of sacrament around it because they know it's the only bit of power they possess.
At its heart Feminism is a Marxist Critical Theory the purpose of which is to destroy the nuclear family so it can be replaced by the state. This is accomplished by making women fear men. By calling all men rapists. By telling women they are too good for men. And by encouraging women to be sluts instead of wives.
If you analyze the poster via a classic Western perspective it makes no fucking sense. Two people are doing the same thing yet one of them is the victim and the other is a rapist. Equality under the law is a central tenant of western jurisprudence.
However, if you look at the poster with the understanding that Feminism is a Marxist Critical Theory it makes perfect fucking sense.
I get frustrated when people want to criticize Feminism without understanding the ideological and political underpinnings of their agendas. The problems arising from Feminism are the same problems that arise from any other "progressive" Leftist agenda.
edit: a word
B-B-But TRP is supposed to be apolitical! There is no left-right divide and it's not a left-right thing! Tradcons (an autistic as fuck term if there ever was one) are just as bad as feminists!!
It's a good goal, but it's a rare day when you have a leftist asking anyone to accept responsibility...unless he's what they deem "capable" ....each according to his need and each according to his ability..
Your term "marxist critical theory" is literally meaningless. Marxism is an economic critique, it can't be applied in the manner you suggest here.
You are completely wrong. Marxism is an economic critique. It can also be a social cultural critique.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory
In what way is the argument you are presenting a "marxist" critique then?
Sounds to me like you're hijacking the term to add weight to your flimsy point.
The Marxist Frankfurt school is the birth place of feminism. That video was linked in the top post of the week. Explain to me how the Frankfurt school isn't Marxist.
The Frankfurt school was influenced by Marxist thought amongst the work of many other thinkers, and although they were trying to create alternatives to dominant capitalist ideology you certainly couldn't accuse them of being the "birthplace of feminism". You couldn't be wider of the mark if you tried.
You only have to look up the timeline of the origins of feminism to see that it predates the founding of the Frankfurt school by decades...
Isint this actually doing the opposite though? It is getting to the point where betas especially are actually afraid to have sex with women, especially younger women, because they know if they don't commit , do everything the woman says and curl her toes then she is liable to cry rape. Moreover, the claim will be taken at face value and the betas life ruined.
What is the purpose of that, exactly? Women have proven they cannot run society, including a state. By robbing yourself of compliant beta males, they actually weaken the power of the state. Without betas as good worker bees, then you can't build a sustainable state.
Maybe once the Chairman resigned, the Reddit gestapo lost their authority.
And I'm not sure any of this would have been upvoted without the recent regime change. Reddit was doing some serious censorship and once that's removed we're going to see some serious truth pour out.
So a woman can't rape a woman either?
Under UK law, women can't rape. End of.
They can't even rape children?
This right here is a very important question.
Nope, just charged with sexual abuse. From time to time stories pop up in the news with women raping their children and prostituting their kids to men. The men usually get charged with rape on top of child abuse charges while the mother gets a lighter charge or even just have the child taken away by social services.
Only due to the legal definition of the word. "Causing a person to engage in sexual activity without their consent" is in the law and includes being forced to penetrate and has the same sentencing guidelines as "Rape". See sections 1 and 4 of http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1
Personally, I think it is ridiculous that they aren't both classified as rape, but at least it is in the law somewhere. Although having said that, it would be naive of me to think that men and women will be treated the same way when it actually comes down to trial.
In a court, that's the only definition that matters.
If I read that definition correctly, if you ask a girl to stick her finger up your butt at some point during the drunk sex she could be charged too. Hmmmmm..... Back door solution (pun intended)
There's a hashtag in this somewhere I know it.....
#FingerButtInsurance perhaps ?
If men and women lived and abided by the same standards, men would outclass women 99.9% of the time. Inherently, we all know this. The only reason why women have leverage over us is because we (the people that represent us in government) keep allowing them to live by situational rules based on their gender.
Stop calling the government 'we'. They never asked your opinion, and they do not think like any of us. All they did was lie and manipulate you to get elected, under the guise that you needed them to hold society together.
'we' got to this place by continually handing our responsibilities to a set of people, who are by definition, not accountable to us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Auf1rehiA-4 'How they see you', by Larken Rose.
I like the Australian ad posted lower in the thread.
The poster itself is fucked up! Look at how Josie is smiling happily looking away at the guy enjoying herself, and Jake has the cup up to his mouth only showing his eyes looking straight into the camera. The effort to paint men as sinister is strong
I may have just ruined my laptop. Spit water out all over it.
Women won't be gettin' "the feels" after signing a sex contract and consent to be filmed while in estrus.
There are night vision-enabled alarm clock cameras on the market. Filming without consent carries with it a punishment; however, a rape charge on your record will be much worse.
I don't think it's a secret that feminism is widely regarded as a bit of a joke.
What people don't understand is that "equality" means "the same". This symbol: "=" means the same. Men and women will never be equal because we are not the same and will never be the same and that's a good thing.
The sentence "equal but different" doesn't make any sense and is a contradiction.
I would disagree strongly that Femimism is widely regarded as a joke. IRL, pretty much all of my peers are Feminists, many are white knights, and if you disagree with the herd then you get shamed into changing your position (not that I have, I just self censor now when I am around those people because there is no upside to having my peers see me as some kind of misogynist/partiarch).
I think the main reason is that many of my.peers are homosexual, and many of my peers are women who are professionals. Pretty much all are university educated, and so have been indoctrinated into their current worldview, which has benefitted them so the go with it.
It's really not regarded as a joke. It's the "cause" of our time. It has been since the 1980's. It really gained traction when most of the racial based causes had succeeded and when AIDS forced everyone to pay attention to sexual habits. The feminist message was unrelentingly played alongside the safe sex message and then even moreso because talking about sex in mainstream media was frowned upon by studios but talking about causes was a long established practice. Most men didn't speak up at first because those that did were shamed by the media and the others thought it was a fad that would blow over. More still didn't realize the juggernaut it would become.
Now we live with 2 generations of women who have been born into a world where they're told from the moment they're born "you're right, you're special, men are trying to oppress you, the system is trying to oppress you, fight for yourself, your whims are your rights and no one is justified to take them from you". This of course makes rational discussion on the subject between a man and a woman almost impossible because much like arguing with someone who is very religious, almost all arguments end in a cliche feminist tagline response which both justifies a complete lack of integrity on her part and vilifies you for being born male.
But all people can still have equal opportunities, its just impossible and retarded to try have equal outcomes.
For example: Giving all people access to state colleges at an affordable rate VS giving all people a cushy job regardless of their actual competence.
Hopefully women realize that these definitions objectify women. It says they have no agency and when a blanket description is applied to women as being unable to consent when drunk, no matter what, they are defined as objects unable to think for themselves.
I also just hope more reasonable women understand that these sorts of depictions of rape are lopsided as fuck, especially and very sadly, males can definitely be violated without penetration. (OBVIOUSLY! ... did they forget about the catholic church scandals?!)
Honestly I appreciate what you're trying to do here but I'm tired of people having to make arguments like yours that yes, argue against the typical feminist message but also coddle and pander to it at the same time. If the feminist crap is ever going to stop, it's certainly not going to be because women suddenly start saying "shit, I just realized that what we're doing is wrong".
Found this comment about the poster on another website.
A sober woman isn't responsible for anything, either. Alcohol is just the contextual excuse for her chronic hypoagency.
If she's looking for a job and can't find one, it's patriarchy.
If she wants "equal pay" and "can't find it", it's the wage gap.
If she wants to be left alone while walking down the street in a miniskirt and can't, it's male entitlement.
If she wants to be cat-called while walking down the street in a miniskirt and isn't, it's male cowardice.
Understand that, because women are children, they will always look for someone to blame. The sooner a man internalizes this idea, the less anxiety he will feel about his interactions with women, and the better his life will become.
Imagine if all men agreed to not have sex with woman for about a month, what would happen?
Taken from another thread:
Most relevant post in this thread.
It's nothing short of misdirection, the way feminists have attempted to paint Drunk Sex As Rape, when it's not.
So mig-tow is now another word for "gay"?
MGTOW means men who cut women out of their lives where possible. It's a joke of an extreme example, but humour masks many ponderous intentions.
Or he was just making a joke and saying that they would all become gay ...
I'm not sure why you'd say that the links in #3 "all go to modern feminist media". Did you mean anti-feminist, or did you not watch the videos?
I confess that I did not watch. Have now watched. I presumed that all were sarcastic links to sincere media. Have now corrected the post. May have made an ass out of umption and myself.
+1 For taking responsibility for your mistake like a man.
"1300+ votes for MGTOW, fairly high up on the most popular current post on the front page of the Internet. MGTOW is no longer the strange periphery inhabited by the occasional loner neckbeard."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Beyond a few concepts (AFBB especially), red pill will never be mainstream accepted (not a bad thing), but MGTOW is gaining massive traction all the time. If it is generally called MGTOW by most or just seen as a growing trend remains to be seen.
While not really MGTOW myself (I'll never marry but like long term plates/FWB), it's becoming increasingly obvious that the game is rigged and for many simply not playing is the smartest way to go
Looks like a PSA from Coastal Carolina. This is what they are teaching our youth. This message is not so much a threat to young men as it a reminder to young girls to wield their pussy power over their male providers.
The average commentors on reddit are white males, younger, usually pretty nerdy. They would never join feminism and never were their intended demographic. But they would tolerate it. At least, at first. They are slowly waking up to the bullshit that is 'male privilege'
The more people we can get calling out feminism the better off we will be
I would respectfully disagree with this. Many of them are in college, which has a mandate on progressivism. I have very, very smart friends who are into "causes" like this without really knowing anything about them, other than parroting popular stats.
Eh, angry nerds at their computers never changed anything. It only matters what the warrior caste does. I don't expect to see any "waking up". This society will still collapse on schedule.
Replace "warrior caste" with "business and political castes," and I'll agree. Just look at the United States order of precedence and scroll down to the bottom. The U.S. military is a beta institution subordinate to the President, and has instituted homosexual, feminist, and SJW policies like affirmative action, double standards, and interminable "rape culture" seminars (See the work of Jackson Katz); not to mention female servicemembers getting pregnant to get out of deployment and the notorious trashiness, obesity, and cheating of military wives.
Mother fucker... the moment they associate with any part of the manosphere, those upvotes would be taken down to the negative number line's area.
Seems like if they're both drunk the trick is to file charges first.
The poster is entirely correct, no one should be complaining about it. The laws are fucked up.
In Nazi Germany, would posters declaring "Everyone wearing yellow stars will be singled out for extermination!" Be messed up, or a prescient warning of an actual risk?
Drunk sex is not rape.
Incapacitated sex is rape.
Drunk =/= Incapacitated.
Drunk sex is not rape.
If you break down the ad as a sentential logic statement, it looks like this:
Other than the therefore, these are direct quotes. But even then, men and women in that thread know intuitively that the premises don't justify the conclusion. While the conclusion is technically "valid" in logical terms, it may not be sound by virtue of not flowing from the premises. So to make sense, you either do one of two things: refute the conclusion, or add premises to make the conclusion real.
Take a guess at what sane people will do, and what radical feminists will do. My best guess is that the latter will add premises like "MALE PRIVILEGE," "FEMALE FEELINGS OF POWERLESSNESS," etcetc until they're blue in the face. Anything to make sense of why Jake is charged with rape, but not Josie.
Don't take this top post for granted, fellas. You can't get front page without men and women, and for the most part, women on that post are not trying to rationalize the conclusion with more premises; they simply reject the conclusion as gross and offensive.
5) is a joke, not a MGTOW reference.
Nothing has changed and nothing will change with this temporary internet flare of common sense.
To be fair I do not know a single man or women who would be in favour of this. Literally not a single person. I have no idea how this shit get's passed as law.
troll bait. its a fake poster.
Fake or not, it still is the truth.
Funny, I just fucked one of my feminist plates tonight. We were sitting laying in bed, smoking, watching family guy after we fucked and just generally chilling. Even she agrees this tumblr feminism shit leeching into general society is the true "toxic" influence on our culture. BTW, bonus points, we drunk fuck all the time, she likes it in the ass after a few glasses of bordeaux.
have any men here been raped by a woman? serious question
Long time ago, I was arrested for being homeless. I fought the case on principle, lost, was sentenced to 11 months in jail by an irate judge. Soon as I got to jail, warden read my case details, laughed, then sent me to a coed work release program.
There was a girl there for rape. She even bragged about it (if it had been a guy, other inmates would have been harassing him, pissing on his bed, ect.). Apparently, at a party, she took her pants off and sat on some passed out guy's face. He actually came conscious during this, started yellling for her to get off, she refused until she orgasmed. Lots of witnesses and he went to the police.
Even still, she got off super easy. A guy doing a similar thing would have got 5-10 years in prison (no parole) in that state. She got a plea bargain for 90 days at a work release center.
According to the legal definitions, I'd say that most sexually active men have been "raped" by women. Waking up to a blowjob in progress or a ride from a cowgirl can be a wonderful thing.
I don't really mean by legal definition, but literally being raped. I know it's happened before so just wondering if there's anyone out there willing to admit it
The banking cartel Zionists/Jews are trying as hard as they can to stop families from becoming powerful thru traditional marriage and courtship and this the start only.
Old fucking Zionists/Jews ruling the fucking world. Fuck that shit. Send them to Mars.
It's totally not the Jews you guys. They only control mainstream media, pornography, and world banks.
Jet fuel something something steel beams.
[permanently deleted]
In the same boat, I even watched the linked videos.
[permanently deleted]
Simple solution I used quite effectively; Do not fuck USAF females. Don't even speak to them except for when it's mission required.
In our inprocess briefing at Osan, they told us it's far safer to fuck the Russian and Philippine girls than the AF bitches, because the chances of getting an std on base was about 5x more likely. Since the girls go for the top 10% of AF males, and being overseas as a minority(golden pussy syndrome), that means they're sharing the tallest and best looking men who will actually fuck them. It only takes one to have something and they all get it. Then you have the hardcore sluts. One chick in my unit fucked 40 guys in our unit, and an unknown number from others. She made a video in her wedding dress fucking one of the E5s, then went back to Texas and married her E4 fiancé...wearing that dress. Somehow that video ended up on dvd, and made it around to other bases.
Don't fuck military girls, don't talk to them except for duty related issues, and sure as hell don't marry them.
[permanently deleted]
I stopped talking to them entirely, four bullshit sexual harassment accusations on three different bases was enough for me. One was a white knight supervisor not liking that a married chick was friends with me. The others were because I extended a verbal greeting to a female who saw me as too short to speak to her.
They sure get pissy when they find out you're not giving them a pussy pass and kissing her ass. I wasn't about to lose a stripe to those cunts.
...but...didn't your dad... shack up with one?
I could just imagine that convo:
Dad: Son, don't shack up with military girls.
Mom: He's right son, they're horrible.
You: But mom, aren't you one? Didn't dad meet you that way?
Mom: Yep, huge mistake.
They go based on the first report they receive, so it's literally a footrace to the phone the morning after to see who gets theirs in first.
It's the Prisoner's Dilemma experiment, basically.
What a fucked up system. If the guy was sober and girl was drunk then it would be easy for him to get his report filed first. But if a girl is filing one maliciously (or genuinely, but over something really minor) then its easy for her to get there first as the man suspects nothing. It rewards the wrongdoer in each case
[permanently deleted]
Duh guys. The only dicks women have are their men.. Am I right fellas?
OMG I think they just removed it...
I got my daily dose of rp porn, thank you
How can people be so stupid?
Anger...phase...relapse...INITIATED.
Just kidding.