Well, it isn't an absolute take. There's a lot of flaws in the argument, but I understand what he is getting at.
succubi are horrid little creatures, but I fail to see how a thread discussing their sexuality fits the ideal of disregarding them.
Them having voting rights causes far more problems then them being whores.
Them having voting rights causes problems because
they're whores. They're natural traitors, incredibly cheap ones too. Persistent incorrigible fifth column.>>278821
Good luck ignoring the 50% of the population that's doing its absolute best to run your country into the ground on behalf of the international elites.
Y'all should tech out TFM's content.
He goes in to pretty deep detail how succubi having "rights" like voting is the cause of most problems, and taking them away would be the solution to the vast majority of issues but is realistic about how that will never happen. And is even realistic about the end result being very hard times up coming as several systems collapse as a result.
i don't like this argument because it attempts to convince you that unrestricted female sexuality is bad because of a supposed need for societal progress. i don't believe that progress is something that should be desired, so this would actually make me like unrestricted female sexuality.
Even if you don't care about "progress" it's main problem is that it destroys stability on every socioeconomic level.
Even in a primitive society it would be bad because of how disruptive it can be.
if the chads can't control their wimmen it's their own fault and proves they aren't all that tough to begin with, letting themselves get neutered by some feminists and jews, haha
fuck em, and screw "progress"
stop this dumb meme. primitive humans were not naturally social. humans had once been solitary animals, without reason or language or communities, and had developed these things due to accidents of pre-history. being social and part of a group identity is only necessary because you have been conditioned to believe it
>>278838>fuck em, and screw "progress"
fucking this. i don't want to be a part of your "progress". if you are going to "progress", just leave me behind
Societies were forced to evolve out of nothingness because at some point humans realized they can band up with other humans to terrorize solitary and smaller human groups.
Hence forcing practically all humans to take sides and join a clan or tribe.
Not because they liked those people or were social, but because even cavemen brains understood there is only safety in numbers against groups of raiders, looters and thieves.
Because of their rare contact with each other, differences between individuals would have been of little significance. Living separately, there would have been no feelings of envy or distrust, and no existence of property or conflict
I thought wizard were smarter than this.
What this means is that female preference is not fit for sustaining civilization. A thing which was invented in the first place to keep succubi in check.
>>278840>humans had once been solitary animals
then should it not be possible to live alone in the wilderness very easily if this is what every human was once capable of? as far as i know, no one has gone their entire lives alone in the wilderness with no outside human contact, even with the initial modern technology and knowledge they brought with them. plus how would a child survive on its own without knowing anything about the world? they would also have to be fed for the first few years of their lives, necessitating the creation of a family.
cope, succubi think long term. reason they are choosing mates that will give them strong offspring, succubi are nature.
the need to breed is hard coded in crabs, succubi have the power to stop civilization right now at this very moment. everything will come to a halt if they suddenly announce no more snatch for yall lmao
But it's not just 'their problem.' We have to live in the fallout of their lifestyle.>>278840
Show me just one example of solitary apes. Yeti isn't real and doesn't count.>>278841
Unless you move into an off grid cabin in the middle of nowhere you're always going to be a part of it whether you like it or not.>>278854
OK delusional monk NTR fetishist.
Not sure if low IQ bait or if you are actually retarded.
>>278854>succubi are right because nature is always right
So succubi who hook up with lowlife men and criminals creating dysfunctional families are right because muh nature fallacy, right?
>>278855>not just their problem
chads? well they're the ones in charge if you listen to them tell it, so it's entirely their problem
half-kidding, but I really don't care about whatever collapse of civilization shit you're on, I'm just pointing out it's funny these fags suck their own dicks about how "alpha" they are while they can't keep their hos under control even after a whole century, not so manly and dominant after all huh
In the end "nature" has no conscience, succubi choose those men because they are physically attractive and tall.
They don't give two shits if they are capable fathers or providers. In fact many will just take some balding fat cuck as a husband once they already have kids by that "chad".
I wish I wasn't born in this shitty species.
>>278861>cope, succubi think long term.>They don't give two shits if they are capable fathers or providers
so thinking long term is ensuring that their children go fatherless by hooking up with antisocial men?
Google what a dualistic mating strategy is.
They choose attractive genes from one man, and get resources from a fat short balding man with a good career, inheritance or business.
Some even do this while *married* behind his back, making him raise a child that isn't even his.
Note that all paternity fraud doesn't even get caught because
most dads are such simps they don't even bother to check if the kids features match any of his own.
>Strategic pluralism in evolutionary biology suggests that succubi have evolved to evaluate men in two categories: whether they are reliable long term providers, and whether they contain high quality genes.
>The theory of strategic pluralism was proposed by Steven Gangestad and Jeffry Simpson, two professors of psychology at the University of New Mexico and Texas A&M University, respectively.
>As humans evolved, several trade-offs were prevalent, especially involving spending time and energy on child-rearing and mating. Gangestad and Simpson noted that even in species where male mammals offer little or no paternal investment, females still prefer some males over others for mating purposes.
You are either a provider for succubi (she demands you have a good paying good status job before having any relations with you) or you have good genes (attractive face, tall, low body fat toned body).
The vast majority of men alive are providers. Only 1-2% are "chads". But chads can have tons of children by several succubi.
If you have neither a good paying job nor looks, succubi have zero use for you and do not even see you as a man.
As you can't provide them with money or attractive offspring.
strategic pluralism is correct. anybody who thinks beta buxx is just a meme is delusional at this point. but it is actually hyper-cucked and fallacious to think that this means succubi are acting in their best interest, or for the good of the species. this is just FDS cope to justify sexual liberation and hypergamy to the fullest extent so that the "best genes" get passed down.
just because something is genetically selected for doesn’t mean it’s “good” or “benefits the species”. this “dysgenic” behavior is natural and happens in most animal species. obviously a short indian university student “contributes to humanity” more than unemployed bad boy Chad with three felonies. in fact, most true civilisation builders actually have little success with succubi because they think outside the box and just transcend the beliefs that their normalcattle contemporaries conform to. guys like ted kaczynski, kafka, van gogh. i would much rather the mathematician, the writer, and the artist pass on their genes than some of the degenerate low lifes succubi select for: the negro, the wifebeater, the drug addict. female choice is not eugenic.
i view sexual liberation in the west in light of the humanist tradition and a history of democratic rule. the problem with this "power to the people" idea is that they are inherently evil and dont know whats best for themselves. the innate selfishness of the female animal can only be contained by force. it is therefore in their best interest, and in the best interest of the species, to have an enlightened despot rule over them and make decisions for them. they have to give up some freedoms to protect themselves from themselves.
Did you make that feminism comic? Funniest shit I've seen in a while. Accurate as hell though.
Seen it in my own life over and over, even in rural Missouri.
No. It was made by some guy named Eurasian Tiger as part of a collection called “blackpill comics”
You are Eurasian Tger, Mel.
Well they're not even hiding what they're going to do anymore. They feel they've already won what's coming so they're outright gloating and boasting. They're turning the climate change scam up to 11 and their mouthpieces such as prince Charles have been allowed to start saying all the quiet parts out loud. They're announcing the need for a global "military style campaign" to transform the world's societies into one global equitable respectable enlightened green society. Look it up, he said that today. Literally. They're preparing to make life absolute hell for every low-status wrong-thinking white man in the world.
Democracy allowed weak beta men to rule. Those beta males allowed succubi to take over. Democracy was a big fucking mistake.
>How true is this? Thoughts and opinions?
Instead of asking how true you should be asking yourself how relevant is it to the board and if this is the right place to be egging on these troglodytes with their inane racket about wahmen.
You really have to be retarded to think that succubus being allowed to choose who they mate with freely will lead to EXTINCTION of the human race and I question why anyone here should care for extinction anyway.
Every side has their silly arguments and succubus who are extreme like crabs claim we can do away with men because they are tools of brawn and no longer needed a inferior agressive sex.
WHy waste your time arguing over nonsense though? >>278840
I hope you are joking
I mean you guys are crabs, so you don't really have any authority on this subject. I just come here because I'm hikikomori, but not crab. succubi are nearly as varied in psyche as men.
glad to see at least one of my kind here.
fuck these crabs
as opposed to yer so-called alpha males? these terms you people use are meaningless considering all those big strong "alphas" are so easily broken by "betas," who's the alpha now? the whole masculinity hierarchy is just a figment of your stupid imaginations, I'm so sick of hearing it
I hope she sees this, monkcel bros.
This is crabchan, where you come for the fap threads, to discuss female sexuality and argue about gay wizards. This place could have been a respite from the sexuality that pervades nearly everything created by humans, but crabs wont let it happen
OH GOD, THE SINGULAR FAP THREAD IS TEARING THIS WEBSITE APART, HELP ME MONKCELS
It's pretty easy to ignore that, but the other stuff pervades most threads. i suppose since this site is defined by a sexual metric it was always destined to be focused on sex
Wizchan is actually pretty fucking great compared to most websites if "lack of sex/relationship talk" is your metric. I agree this thread has no place on /lounge/, although /dep/, /wiz/, and /lounge/ might as well just be one board.
do you disagree that people just shitpost endlessly on all three?
>>278979>Wizchan is actually pretty fucking great compared to most websites if "lack of sex/relationship talk" is your metric.
absolutely not, that just reflects the types of sites you frequent
I dont even come here because lack of sex talk and relationships talk. I come here because of the culture of the site.
So I’m sure you’ll tell everyone what amazing websites you frequent that are so much better than here.
The only possible mechanism through which this could be true is crab rage. Basically if you liberate succubi's ability to choose whom to fuck and also give them the ability to support themselves financially, there will be a lot of lonely crabs out there who will conspire to grab control of power and regress society. I, however, like to think that we as a society will simply round up and shoot the crabs if they ever make trouble so I would say it's false, but that may just be wishful thinking. We'll have to tune into the American Civil War 2: Electric Boogaloo to find out.
shopping like amazon, language learning content, tech content like hackernews, github, financial exchanges, telegram channels, youtube channels about a variety of topics like animals, torrent sites that have a lot of content.
Not everyone refreshes dirty social media sites all day
obviously not, why would I post the name of the obscure active outcast board here?
telegram and youtube are "dirty social media sites"
true in many ways, but you can use them in a way that you dont get sexual content shoved in your face, unlike wizchan
that's thanks to their strict censorship, how can you expect something like that on an ib populated by <25yo contrarian 4chan retards
>>278819>How true is this?
Fuck, man. I'm not sure you realize just how much evolutionary biology goes into this question. So allow me to drunkenly put some thoughts down, and put some thots down.
First of all, run-away sexual selection usually produces bad or ridiculous results for the species. People (being human) adhere to human ideas of progress, and therefore expect evolution to meet human ideas of progress. You know, better, faster, stronger, etc. Evolution, though, doesn't care about any of that. Evolution only cares about making babies, which means sluts are usually favored. And fucking sluts is usually favored, because it means your offspring will be slutty too.
Unfortunately, evolution only sees immediate evolutionary success. Thus, a gene that has a competitive advantage could result in the extinction of the species. Thus, in some circumstances, sluttiness could be an evolutionary dead end. Humans are an excellent candidate for such a dead end, since they require years of intensive parental care in their early years. Needy children are a result of advanced human brain growth. If humans were not either social or monogamous, human fetuses would rarely survive to adulthood. I know this guy has already been BTFO'd, but >>278840
"humans used to be solitary" guy is going against 100% of the biological and paleoanthropological evidence from the last century.
Until very recently, humans lived in promiscuous societies. Even in monogamous societies, infidelity has always been common. Yet, this did not cause the extinction of the species. In fact, we arose from promiscuous ape ancestors. Not to mention that many primitive cultures were highly infanticidal. They produced so many offspring that they were just chucking them out like used tissues. I'm not saying that I approve of promiscuity, but it does not pose an extinction risk.
Now let's examine the quote:>Unrestricted female sexuality causes extinction
We evolved from primitive monkey ancestors (close outward resemblance to squirrels) to modern humanity with "natural unrestricted female sexuality." Still waiting on this extinction.
The fact is that sluttiness is the antithesis of human progress. Nonetheless, our species has made it this far in spite of their sluttiness. None of the monogamous species have achieved what we have.
>Oh but its caucasoids going extinct!
Caucasoids aren't a species. If they go "extinct" it will be because of race mixing, in which case all of their good genes will still persist. The category "caucasoid" may disappear, but the genes will survive in the new populations. So, what was lost?
>Societal progress is impossible without suppressing the human female sexuality.
Civilized nations tend to be less sexual in general. That does not mean that a civilization's sexual habits dictate its success. Rather, I would consider the careful approach to courtship (in both men and succubi) to be a result of civilization, rather than the cause of civilization. Furthermore, I would point out that civilizations with greater progress in philosophy and STEM tend to also be more sexually progressive. Of course, I do not suggest that sluts are a result of scientific progress. They are merely a side-effect of the attitudes that also promote scientific progress. Stagnant, traditionalist societies tend to be more stable, sure, but they do not accomplish anything of note. Tolerate the sluts patiently. The sluts can be safely ignored.
>>279022>>279022>The category "caucasoid" may disappear, but the genes will survive in the new populations
this is not necessarily true. Genes are easily lost from populations.
Most of the shitposting is on /dep/>>279006
I've looked far and wide and there is no other place like wizchan. Especially since normos started flooding into every imageboard in existence within the last decade. Sex and and relationshits are everywhere now, unfortunately.
They aren't, some populations to this day have 1-2% neanderthal genes and they haven't lived for ~50,000 years.
The only people without neanderthal genes are some isolated pockets of Australian aboriginals and some African tribes.>>279022
Good anthropologically accurate post.
There has never, ever been a period in human history where promiscuity hasn't existed, even during the strict control of the catholic church or islam.
succubi cheating on their husbands with handsome tall men or having random one night stands while single is as old as men waging war.
Or boys playing with stick swords before they could even speak words.
Genetics and primal instincts are a tough cookie to fight.
At best, humans are only capable of serial monogamy with the occassional cheating.
At worst, they just 'fly from flower to flower' like chimpanzees and other cousins of the human race.
That doesn’t mean the whole Neanderthal genome is preserved in us. In fact it means most Neanderthal genes have been lost, and only a few scraps are left in modern humans.
Neanderthals mated with Denisovans
How can this be falsified?
>>279022>They produced so many offspring that they were just chucking them out like used tissues.
Sure. Following the traditions of prehistoric people who used to inhabit my land I also bury my used tissues in separate stone graves with farewell gifts. To show how little I care.
even shitty modern parents who treat you lesser than the family dog until you shoot yourself will pretend to cry at your funeral
Sounds like some crab bullshit. Societal regress =! regress of the species. It is natural for succubi to pick the most powerful male to have a child with. Only lived in an unnatural system for the last couple thousand years.
>white knight whore defenders regurgitating sexual revolution-era slut pride talking points
If that is your take away from what anyone in this thread said then there is no helping you and your terminal case of stupidity.
Who cares about societal progress.
I do? I mean, being able to fuck around on the internet and play videogames all day without having to worry about looters, war, and the plague would be pretty nice.
Keep in mind if only tall handsome faced chads reproduce this will mean a lot of inbreeding a few generations down the line and then problems begin again.
Society simply can't exist that way.
There’s more than enough “genetically fit” people that inbreeding will never be a problem.
>>278819>Societal progress is impossible without suppressing the human female sexuality (as proven by history)
This is a very good point since to my knowledge matriarchal societies never managed to prosper.
succubi's gaining more rights is a phenomenon often correlated with the collapse of a civilization.
So you think all the ugly fat short plumbers will simply accept living forever alone for 80 years and slaving away for chads who sleep with hundreds of succubi?
Sounds like a recipe for disaster, revolution and dissent.
The most tragic thing is they aren't even doing this on purpose.
It's just a consequence of their nature.
succubi are not attracted to at least the bottom 80% of men. They pair off with those men only for resources.
succubi get careers and jobs.
succubi make up 80% of consumer spending.
succubi no longer need men.
Beauty is the only things with intrinsic value in this world.
Human males and females are diametrically opposed in their goals.
who? Can you link to the specific video?
>>280445>Beauty is the only things with intrinsic value in this world.
The more I research this, the more I see humans interact with each other and share their experiences, the more I start to agree with you.
The only thing succubi really desire is tall men with handsome faces. Anything else is pay-to-play to them in one form or another. It's also the only way how they feel true infatuation and lust.
Men mostly prioritize a womans looks and also do not want to interact with ugly looking succubi if they are given a choice.
It turns out I was wrong about personality, romanticism etc., we are really just animals who can talk. And like all animals we judge each other primarily only through visuals.
Yes, yes, even the ugliest fatso bald wizard could theoretically get a wife with enough money. But she will never, ever be truly attracted to him just because he provides money and housing for her.
She will always and forever feel true lust for those chads with attractive faces and bodies.
I just don't like the human species in general. They are two faced and primitive at the core.
I sense you're a crab.
Another crab complaining about succubi.
Why are you implying every "wo—man is extremely lustful when in reality it is the opposite. A man's sex drive is much higher than a womans.
This entire thread is filled with fish trying to figure out the behaviors of a deer. Why does ANYONE here obsess about succubi so much is beyond me.
>>280462>A man's sex drive is much higher than a womans.
Not true. Only ugly men who get no action until they're married with a washed up succubus in their 30s think this.
That poster is right, they are extremely horny in college, just see that netflix show called 'sex lives of college succubi' (horrible Netflix show otherwise though).
But not for anyone, they are horny only for very facially good looking tall men.
Note that nearly 30% of young men are now crabs (and as that latest figure was pre-covid, it might be even higher now).
The same number in young succubi is less than 2%.
That means a small bunch of men is doing a ton of fucking (100+ a year), the vast majority gets 0-1 a year, while a third get absolutely nothing.
For social study purposes, I guess. I have no intention of sleeping with anyone, it's just interesting to research.
We are after all just one animal species among millions. To be studied in behavior just like ants, zebras or fireflies.
Anyone have that stick man sequence of images describing the creation of wizards?
I remember trying that with my face and some online friends faces. All got graded as 3 and 2 in the attractive department. All the notes and comments were stuff like "I do not like his face" or "the person in the photo looks unappealing".
It was brutal enough to stop me from ever putting my face out in the public again.
Then again, I did score 4 in 'smart ' so at least that is better than zero. Probably because I was wearing glasses.
>>280465>Why does ANYONE here obsess about succubi so much is beyond me.
I don't see it that way.
OP made a good topic and I see it in an anthropological way.
Why shouldn't we critically evaluate ourselves and our biology just like we do to other species?
Unchecked female sexuality would absolutely lead to a Fisherian runaway in humans, as most succubi are physically attracted to the same small minority of men.
There needs to be at least attempted monogamy and some kind of social contract forcing succubi to also marry uglier men (for money, status, titles etc) to stop human society from collapsing.
Normies that look below average will not do anything in life unless those efforts are rewarded with a wife or spouse
(he gives her money, she gives him physical access, sort of like prostitution but legalized and codified in law with mutual obligations).
The vast majority of men benefit from the social slut shaming of succubi who sleep around with these chads, and who attempt to turn them monogamous.
Since if succubi don't stop doing that at least by their mid 30s, the average man can't procreate with them by trading his money and status for her body.
How exactly does one judge a person's intelligence simply by looking at them?
Apparently there is a correlation between physical attractiveness and IQ for men but not succubi.https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201012/beautiful-people-really-are-more-intelligent
>the attractive men in the NCDS sample have a mean IQ of 105.00, and the unattractive men have a mean IQ of 91.39. The difference between them is 13.61, which is almost one full standard deviation in the IQ distribution (σ = 15). This mean difference implies a correlation coefficient of r = .414, which is very large in any survey data.
So you can literally look at someones face and probably make an educated guess about their IQ level.
These are of course just averages and most at the top 0.01% of the scale are butt ugly nuclear scientists, but the correlation is massive in general between facial attractiveness (in men) and IQ.
It's almost one full standard deviation.
There are also some other traits that can be deducted just by looking at facial traits, for example mental retardation or very low IQ.
sounds like someone just discovered a subject people have only talked about since 5000 bc, it's called physiognomy
Interesting rabbit hole to go down. I hadn't heard of that term before.
>A study of 90 ice hockey players found a statistically significant correlation between a wider face—a greater than average cheekbone-to-cheekbone distance relative to the distance between brow and upper lip—and the number of penalty minutes a player received for violent acts like slashing, elbowing, checking from behind, and fighting.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2570531/
Apparently, even proclivity to violence and high testosterone are visible in the face and the general population can spot these people by looking at them.
There's a reason this shit has long since been discredited. I will say, however, that these physiognomy caricatures are hilarious.
And that reason is usually stereotype-fearing jews.
Save it, /pol/kike.
Now now, we all know something is not "discredited" just because the big nosed man on TV said so.
To quote the great David Byrne, "first impressions are often correct"
This isn't extinction. Sexual dimorphism varies over time and will simply correct as disadvantageous traits are curtailed generationally.
the fertility drops among whites will eventually correct for the same reason
all civilizations collapse at some point. i'm not sure how female sexuality has influenced history
i always thought it was more a matter of population size or maybe geographic distribution. it is hard to maintain a cultural identity for a large number of people. it is really hard to do that over a large area. and it surely is impossible to do that for a long period of time
I don’t see the humor in it.
I was reading a book about game theory, and it talked about peacocks. and its much more extensive than stupid PUAs wearing clown hates at da club.
basically birds make themselves much worse, make their lives much worse just go get sex. the birds that had their tails trimmed, got double the food, and could fly better, and didnt get killed by preds. and vice versa. the birds that got longer tails in the experiment, got double the sex, but half the food.
so basically males live their entire lives making their lives worse, just because having a terrible life proves how macho you are, that you can take it, and keep grinding.
so just dropping out of it is smartest.
and sure evopsych bros will tells us we failed at the meaning of life. but we aren't birds and we aint wolves. and if we find ways to get pleasure other ways, its all the same in the end.
peacocking isnt a pua in da club with a funny hat, its making your life terrible just cuz that proves to succubi you are a good mate who can survive the terrible
thats were the term fucktard comes from. cuz you gotta be a tard to get fucked
evolution does its best to design our bodies and minds to find sex most enjoyable
Are you still a wizard if you have sex with a waifubot, or, in the future, are we all gonna decide waifubots don't count? If wizchan ever sticks around for that long, it would be fun to see how that turns out.
I'll argue that it would depend. If waifubots don't count since they aren't actual people with their own thoughts, feelings, opinions, personal story, worldview, etc., but rather, highly advanced sex toys which you can turn into your own waifu. It wouldn't actually be sex with another person, and not fundamentally different than a dakimakura with a fleshlight. I'd be for their use as tools of wizardry.
But if these robots were to have such qualities as well as agency, then it would actually count as sex and having sex with them would rob you of your magic powers. In that case they'd be people but with a different bodily shell.
Tbh, I don't believe in fully self-aware AI, so I think the issues raised by those screenshots, while more ambiguous, are simply too speculative.
Fucked up that second sentence, but the point still stands. Having your own non-self-aware anime waifubot would be great.
Isn't there a chan dedicated to people trying to make a waifubot? Where'd that go?
Julay world's /cow/. They called robo waifu cows cuz ppl usually give em big tits.
What is that place wizard? by the way do they happen to practice communism there?
are you sure california is 96% females?
>Communism is the major political leaning here.
And what country is that? If you say America I hope you die in a nuclear fire.
How bold of you to demand the truth from a man and then threaten him if he speaks anything other than the truth.
Is America just astronomically retarded? Do word definitions mean nothing to you? How is the neoliberal hellhole we know as America in any way communist?
the way things are defined these days, a big corporation like disney, twitter, facebook is "communism" and a state-owned Russian oil company is "capitalism"
>Treachery, deceit, back-stabbing, betrayal; all are an everyday occurrence here.
>None of it is based on rational thought processes.
>Emotions / feelings / outside influences control all decisions.
>bloody ef'n scary.
If it was just a matter of treachery and deception it would be fine, as it's easy to outfox a succubus, but succubi are more cunning than that. One of their talents is cutting through whatever nonsense you've surrounded yourself with
When you're attacked from behind the fog of war you can call the other side irrational, or recognize you're being outmaneuvered. To stop being outflanked you must conduct reconnaissance into irrational territory. If you don't have enough for recon units you must construct additional pylons or tiberium harvesters. One problem with having total vision on the battlefield is you become a real enemy, you aren't just a man but a total bitch as well, so you are fair game for feminine vitriol as you are in her base killing her dudes
If we only want a playful battle and not a war, each army needs space to maneuver to not be frustrated. succubi grant that space to men by pretending to be more stupid than they are, and men grant that space to succubi by pretending to be smarter than they are. The worst thing to do is call for a truce or mutual understanding, as that is simply masking retreat from the battlefield, the aim should be to retake territory until we can joyfully shell each other across a dmz with less collateral or casualties
it is true.if females had all the agency then they would follow in the footsteps of the birds of paradise. breeding exclusively for aesthetic reasons. they already do it for the most part today because almost all governments push gynocentrist agendas.
in nature, human men select among themselves through competition and this competition fuels progress as we know it. of course men select the most attractive females, but an attractive female is typically one that can contribute greatly to the well being of the offspring.
on the contrary, an attractive man doesnt have the same value as an attractive succubus. since a mans role is to protect himself and his territory, this requires a lot more than attractiveness. it requires strength, intelligence, grit, and so on. These men pass their genes not by attracting females to them, but taking them for themselves
So you're saying all mating in the pre-feminist world was basically rape, the strongest powerful men seizing the succubi they want?
> These men pass their genes not by attracting females to them, but taking them for themselves
According to feminists it certainly was.
Do you have any particular reason to doubt feminists on that?
though>taking them for themselves
can mean more than just plain rape. nevertheless, one needs only to look at the biological differences between the two sexes to see why rape is so common in humans.
Human Males and Succubi are extremely different. theres no denying it. at least 50% of men are stronger than 100% of succubi. in nature, a succubi has no real options if she is unaccompanied by a man other than to submit or risk her well-being. if succubi had any say in the matter they would at least be as strong or fast as the average man, but they dont even stand a chance in such encounters. and when i say average man i mean the average hunter gatherer man. not the fat drugged up dopes you see litering the streets today
So when does pre-Feminism end? Lets be generous and say the 1920s with suffrage
So you're saying the Western succubi of 1890 were all in rape marriages?
marriages were usually arranged by men. sometimes it was the two parents agreeing to wed their children or it was a man proving to the father that he can be responsible for the father's daughter or he could just buy her outright if he was loaded.
Again, femenism is not a brand new construct. it has existed in some forms for around 2000 years no thanks to christianity. before that, it was almost always as i said in the first paragraph or as i said in the last post
courtly love began in the medieval period, initially it could only be chaste and celibate between a volcel and a married succubus, but then it expanded to all couples
the frat parties are basically the wild west and 1/3 succubi are raped in college, they even call it "the hunting grounds"
While rape was a common way of reproduction, I doubt it was the main one.
I think pre-agricultural "families" were basically one man and his 'harem', there were more succubi than men because a lot of men died not because of nature but because of in-fighting with other males, this aggression in males either evolved during our fish/reptilian/rat-like ancestor or testosterone always does this idk.
Also the fact that men are stronger than succubi doesn't prove rape was a common method of reproduction, parrots are not as sexually violent as mammals yet the males have more muscle mass than the females.
Either all vertebrate organisms evolved to have testosterone react in a way to promote extreme muscle and bone growth or testosterone always promote muscle & bone growth just like how chlorophyll will always make a plant green when in contact with a yellow star
isn't harems sex slavery AKA rape?
The harem probably willingly joined the single male due to there not being that much men to begin with due to men dying more than succubi, also the male would provide resources and shit which makes the succubi flock to him and be with him. It could've been rape too but idk, multiple succubi can easily kill 1 man if they want to
>>290441>I think pre-agricultural "families" were…
we literally know what pre-agricultural families are like, they still exist to this day you fucking moron. remember the native americans, africans, all those guys?
lets be civil pl0x>>290441
primate relationships dont have anything in common with birds or most four legged animals. if a succubus parrot doesnt want to be with a male parrot it can just fly away. if a succubus dog doesnt want to offer up her hind and instead run away then the male dog has nothing to really stop her decision. great ape succubi generally dont have anywhere near as much agency as the examples i just gave. they cant run or fight like men and thus have no choice but to submit as they naturally have no agency
>>290441>there were more succubi than men because a lot of men died not because of nature but because of in-fighting with other males
Our ancestors were animals + a lot of men died in conflict back then clichés…
"it's evolution, i aint gotta explain shit"
>>290480> primate relationships dont have anything in common with birds or most four legged animals. if a succubus parrot doesnt want to be with a male parrot it can just fly away. if a succubus dog doesnt want to offer up her hind and instead run away then the male dog has nothing to really stop her decision. great ape succubi generally dont have anywhere near as much agency as the examples i just gave. they cant run or fight like men and thus have no choice but to submit as they naturally have no agency
Ok… You literally proved what I said, parrots can fly from other aggressive parrots yet the males are bigger and stronger than the females, so it can't just be rape = sexual dimorphism in muscle
I know about that idiot. They aren't the same as cavemen 200k years ago, even tribes nowadays make contact with modern civilization sometimes.
Also not all tribes behaved the same moron, they have different practices and customs, perhaps the most common tribal custom was >>290441
before they became extinct due to agriculture becoming popular
I don't know, nature nor god would make something so cruel like that. it has to be something else man.
why would fish with half its brain hanging out step out of it's lake to have an asthma attack until its primitive lungs adapted many offspring later
was it a succubus or male?
why didn't that thing get eaten?
was something wrong with it so they left it alone?
too many gaps in that theory my guy
Why the fuck has this shit thread not been deleted yet?
This is why I'm a wiz.
if you think about it men are as guilty as rewarding evil as succubi are. evil men aren't virgins, but they aren't friendless either
No the fact here is the human race is full of evil people, and everyone wants to pass the buck. "succubi are evil because evil men reward them" "men are evil because evil succubi create more evil men" "I'm evil because my parents were evil". It's all just passing the buck.
The whole 'let's restrict female sexuality!!' narrative is pushed by people who have special reasons to push this agenda, like in the case of every agenda look at who preaches it and you will understand the preaching itself. In this case it is thirsty crabs, christians and conservative beta males. People who find it hard to get sex and partners in a world where succubi are free to decide who they go out with. People fighting against "female sexuality" don't care about chastity, the human species and our future, they simply want a world where they can get laid easily. It's not even about "muh precious family unit" conservatives obsess over so much, it is about wanting pussy they can't get in this world and system. Or if they already have a family and a wife they want to stick to they just want more control over females because they are so insecure and afraid their wife will cheat on them and leave them. That's it. It is always about egoism, don't fall for these "logical" arguments and "objective" reasoning these people come up with.
As a wizard I don't care whether female sexuality is restricted or not, it makes no difference on my life. If anything though I prefer feminism over some patriarchal order because this way I got porn. Sexuality is always stupid but if you feel the need just masturbate, much better than chasing pussy or spending money on females until they are gracious enough to let you have sex with them. I don't want a family and children and I certainly don't want to wag my tail before a succ so porn satisfies my needs better than anything. If anything, we should advocate for a more "degenerate" and sexually free world, I really dislike puritan normals who think everything that isn't normal hetero missionary pose sex for the purpose of making children is "degeneracy". I'd rather be free alone as a wiz, masturbating in my room to my weird taste than to have a wife and kids because some succ would be forced to be my wife by society.
>>290500>As a wizard I don't care whether female sexuality is restricted or not, it makes no difference on my life>we should advocate for a more "degenerate" and sexually free world> I prefer feminism over some patriarchal order because this way I got porn
You're not a wizard, you're a disgusting degenerate.
lol is that the guy who's always derailing threads by arguing for public orgies with kids and the elderly?
I guess wanting to change the current social order just because you want to have sex or a family is totallly wizardly? Right?
I'm an actual wizard so I'm okay with masturbating to porn in my room. Apparently you and many others find this to be not enough, you want to have sex so you want to bring patriarchy back. Nice.>>290503
I'd much rather live in a world with public orgies where I am free and can masturbate alone in my room than live in a patriarchal society where porn is banned and I'm told to have sex with succs and make children.
Nazi Germany for example was peak normaldom. The Weimar Republic on the other hand was a very wizardly society.
"I'm an actual wizard"
says the nigger who wrote all of this:>As a wizard I don't care whether female sexuality is restricted or not, it makes no difference on my life>we should advocate for a more "degenerate" and sexually free world> I prefer feminism over some patriarchal order because this way I got porn>>290503
He's a dumb degenerate nigger who doesn't belong here.
>>290505>I'd much rather live in a world with public orgies where I am free and can masturbate alone in my room
Yeah, that's him. He's always saying the same things.
Also, if you fap to 3dpd you should kill yourself.
He's not wrong. Just live and let live wizards. There are a lot of people who hate us for being neets and not chasing succubi, not living up to their vision of manhood, even though we ain't hurting no one
t.deluded holier than thou hentai coomer
That's different than actually advocating for>a more "degenerate" and sexually free world
Also, when he detailed his utopia he said that everyone, even wizards, should be forced to sexually participate in the yearly orgy festivals, even if only masturbating in a corner. That's a real comment here.
Yes, I wrote all of that. What's wrong with it? How wanting to be left alone masturbating in my room is opposed to the wiz life? Try to formulate a response. And saying "nigger" and "degenerate" aren't actual arguments.>>290513
Yes, I masturbate to 3D, especially granny porn and shemales. But I like gangbang porn and BBC related stuff too. Bet it enrages you so much. What is the problem with it?
3D is bad but 2D hentai with rape, furry, loli, gay things and tentacles is okay? I'm not against those things, just trying to understand why 2D=good, 3D=unclean and degenerate.>>290512>>290517
Wizards are looked down by normals because we are seen as degenerates or abnormals. Why? Because of our sexual habits (or rather lack of them). A sexually free world is the prerequisite for wizards to exist. In the past we would have been forced to become monks (slaves of the Church) or normals with family. I much prefer this current "degenerate" world to that world.>when he detailed his utopia he said that everyone, even wizards, should be forced to sexually participate in the yearly orgy festivals, even if only masturbating in a corner. That's a real comment here.
So what is the problem? Not like you would be raped or anything. Festivals like that would strengthen the bonds between members of the community. That is why pagan cultures held orgies regularly.>>290514
Yes, my point exactly. This whole obsession over sexuality is just pathetic. It should be entirely up to the individual whether he likes incest, lolis, animals or simply just wants to be alone masturbating. Everyone is so fixated on fitting in with normal society and its tastes, it's making me vomit. "If you don't have the same sexual desires as me then you are a freak" when will people finally drop this retarded line of thought?
>>290526> In the past we would have been forced to become monks (slaves of the Church) or normals with family.
Thats not entirely true lots of men never married back in the day and they were not monks at all like Isaac Newton, Nikola Tesla and even some nobles never married like Basil II emperor and they couldn’t force you into that .
>>290526>2D=good, 3D=unclean and degenerate
Actually it would be the other way around, 2D would be more 'degenerate' than 3D. Keep in mind I stick to tue use of the word degenerate in a strict sense and not in the emotionally-loaded buzzword used by pseoduopolitical fanatic ideologues.
My 2 cents
If you are a Newton or Tesla or some emperor ofc people left you alone. However, most of us aren't like that. We would be average class people who would be forced by family, religious and social pressure to marry and make children. Also, being NEET was impossible in that time too except if you were someone special or lucky like an aristocrat.>>290564
I don't have a problem with either, I don't think people should be judged based on their sexual habits.
That's right. That'd be the normalfag perspective. The perspective of those who've transcended normalfaggotry would be the inverse (like in the Genealogy of Morals I).
There's something inherently normalfag (even if failed normalfag like crabfaggotry), lowly, and unsophisticated about 3dpd and 3d-worship. It's not that there's anything "bad" or "wrong" about it, only as much as there's something "bad" and "wrong" about normalfaggotry. It's merely that the perspective of those who've ascended beyond it is to look down at it with cold disdain.>>290526>>290582>Try to formulate a response. And saying "nigger" and "degenerate" aren't actual arguments.
"Nigger" and "degenerate" are manifestations of drives, as are arguments and reasoning. The arguments you ask for would be rationalizations by those same drives. (Maybe see the first paragraph of >>287560.)
>that would strengthen the bonds between members of the community
>Everyone is so fixated on fitting in with normal society and its tastes
Not here, though. You yourself said it, we don't live in a "truly degenerate" society because "tell people you fap to 2d lolis and see their reactions" (or something like that). But lolis are only degenerate from the normalfag perspective.
>it's making me vomit
I vomit on your 3d-worshipping.
>"If you don't have the same sexual desires as me then you are a freak"
I still respect people who fap to thicc 2d succubi and other 2d tastes I can't understand like loli yuri without futas (even yaoi and bara). And when I call them old hags I'm just playfully joking. I don't even look down on those who fap to 2d guro and such other things that deeply repulse me when I randomly encounter them.
>I don't have a problem with either, I don't think people should be judged based on their sexual habits.
Then you're in the wrong place. Go to some crab Xenforo to worship grannies and trannies, bestiality (bbc), and all forms of 3dpd.
You can laugh but prostitution and orgies were part of ancient cultures and they served as bonds that tied the community together.
Wizchan is an extremely small community, if you can even call it that. "Weird" tastes should be common and introduced into the mainstream. To make people more tolerant, sensitive and supporting of minorities. Like us.
>I vomit on your 3d-worshipping.
How very sophisticated and cultured of you. I have yet to hear why 3D is worse than 2D, aside from you having some complex and phobia of 3D. You preferring 2D over 3D is just another form of "truwiz elitism".
>>290608>You can laugh but prostitution and orgies were part of ancient cultures and they served as bonds that tied the community together.>How very sophisticated and cultured of you. I have yet to hear why 3D is worse than 2D>"Weird" tastes should be common and introduced into the mainstream. To make people more tolerant, sensitive and supporting of minorities.
rooting the basis of an act in mass morality demeans the act. it's pretty obvious why 2d is more sophisticated than 3d, one of the criterion for sophisticated behavior is dissimulation and artificiality. so we describe the performative mating rituals of birds as being more sophisticated than rabbits, for example, because of the distance between the performance and the act. it appears to us in this way because we recognize some concordance between their performances and ours, despite other mammals having entirely different and likely equally sophisticated, but imperceptible to us, social conduct
in the case of humans the ritual of courtly love is so dissimulated it approaches sterility, and that is one of the reasons it's considered more sophisticated relative to mass human behavior. bacha bazi is perpetrated by security officials, and pederasty in ancient greece was reserved for the athenian elite. the historical prostitution and orgies you cite weren't exercises in communal bonding, but were cultic. i doubt whether mass tolerance and sensitivity ever entered their thoughts, because the act was one of erotic love and devotion to isis, aphrodite, dionysius, etc, and not "the community". recall in this period of history most people in the wider community would have been slaves
>>290505>a patriarchal society where porn is banned and I'm told to have sex with succs and make children.
Patriarchal societies nowadays aren't that strict with porn. In places like modern Afghanistan, Isis-ran cities and the like succubi are treated horribly yet men watch porn as much as they want, sure it might be "illegal" but if a law isnt enforced then it basically doesnt exist
>>290592>there's something "bad" and "wrong" about normalfaggotry>It's merely that the perspective of those who've ascended beyond
t. masturbates to lolicon and thinks he is morally superior to the normalfag who has sex with his wife
There's no ascension when you're still watching pornography and obsessing about drawings of succubi done by japanese men
Stop with your stupid copes. You're not superior to anyone for watching hentai. You're deluded and ignorant.
lol butthurt normalfag
t. paranoid virgin thinks there are normal people on wizchan
>>290608>How very sophisticated and cultured of you.
Highly sophisticated culture can also manifest barbarity in the face of that which it finds most repulsive, and such barbarity is also another manifestation of its lofty nobility.
>I have yet to hear why 3D is worse than 2D, aside from you having some complex and phobia of 3D.
I already told you that there's nothing "bad" about 3dpd but that it's inherently normalfaggotry and 3d-worship. In regards to the greater cultural sophistication of 2d and lolicon, it derives from being a manifestation of the sex drive sublimated to something more culturally elaborate, distant, and artistically developed from the the base biological act of sex itself, and the 3d animals involved in it. The base animalistic sex drive would still be naturally driven to thicc 2d t and a. So the sexual desire for characters with thiccer t and a, the more animalistic that desire is. Inversely, the sexual desire for more slender, prepubescent, and loli characters, the more sophisticated that desire is, as well as the more pure and noble. Therefore, the appreciation of loli is the greatest sophistication. But the appreciation for thicc 2d characters is still a much greater sophistication than 3dpd, and is therefore still admirable.
This is a noble and spiritual transformation of a base, animalistic drive. But the noble and lofty is always constructed upon and emerges from the base and lowly, so there's nothing contradictory or ironic about it. The base of all culture is always animality.
Now, think of how you can animalistically devour a piece of meat with your hands, and how it could also be done in the form of a steak using fork and knife, dishes, napkin, etc., according to arbitrarily defined cultural manners and etiquette (arbitrariness is a form of ornamentation). That's basically the difference between 3dpd and lolicon. (Of course, this is just an example and not a defense of that specific, or any kind of, normalfag "high culture", since the specific culture that I'm promoting is highly hostile to that. I don't care for normalfag etiquette and normalfag notions of refinement and sophistication, which no matter how "refined" they may consider themselves to be, are always inherently more lowly.)>>290619>drawings
That's the point. And drawing is itself an artistic medium.
>done by japanese men
Art is always produced by artists. How is that some shameful revelation?
Not all drawings are high art, less pornographic ones. You've forgotten that art can be degenerate too.
You enjoy 2d for the exact same reasons you evolved to love 3d, there's no distinction in here.>the appreciation for thicc 2d characters is still a much greater sophistication than 3dpd, and is therefore still admirable.
every single straight normalfag male will appreciate the same hentai succubi you enjoy, there's no sophistication in this. It will trigger the same emotions of lust. You seem to lack awareness.
>>290629>The base animalistic sex drive would still be naturally driven to thicc 2d t and a. So the sexual desire for characters with thiccer t and a, the more animalistic that desire is. Inversely, the sexual desire for more slender, prepubescent, and loli characters, the more sophisticated that desire is, as well as the more pure and noble. Therefore, the appreciation of loli is the greatest sophistication. But the appreciation for thicc 2d characters is still a much greater sophistication than 3dpd, and is therefore still admirable.
there's apparently a lot of evidence to suggest neoteny is associated with intelligence, both over the course of evolution and culturally
Did you even read what I wrote?
>Not all drawings are high art, less pornographic ones. You've forgotten that art can be degenerate too.
I already said that I don't believe in old-fashioned normalfag conceptions of high art. Obviously, the art produced by the Europeans of the past centuries is incredible, but is overshadowed by what is currently being produced by the Japanese, even if it's considered lowly by that old-fashioned perspective. I don't believe in being tied down to the art of past ages without continuing to explore new frontiers being opened right now. "It’s like saying that Velasquez did not agree with Giotto… It’s nonsensical. It means nothing" (Deleuze's lectures on Leibniz).
>You enjoy 2d for the exact same reasons you evolved to love 3d, there's no distinction in here.
I already addressed this as well.
>every single straight normalfag male will appreciate the same hentai succubi you enjoy, there's no sophistication in this. It will trigger the same emotions of lust.
Random people of the street who only listen to the garbage that plays on the radio are very likely to also enjoy Bach if played to them, though they'll almost certainly just drift back to listening to their usual garbage and never seek Bach on their own. Doesn't refute my point.
Talk about mental jerkoff. Do you even listen to yourself? lmao at the superior kultured fedora gentleman who "sublimates" his sexual drive by jerking off to lolicon.
Civilization really has done a job on these apes, leading them to build crazy fantasies and think they're so superior for it.
>>290635>lmao at the superior kultured fedora gentleman>Civilization really has done a job on these apes
i hope you see the contradiction, as kultur is a product of civilization. superiority is relative, but within the paradigm of civilization "more civilized" is superior by definition
>>290634> though they'll almost certainly just drift back to listening to their usual garbage and never seek Bach on their own. Doesn't refute my point.
Nice nonargument. There's nothing sophisticated about watching hentai when it's more popular than ever you even have tards like yourself praising it like high art> the art produced by the Europeans of the past centuries is incredible, but is overshadowed by what is currently being produced by the Japanese
You must have shit taste to believe this.
>>290640>There's nothing sophisticated about watching hentai when it's more popular than ever
I have no delusions about its increasing popularity among normalfags. I've also written some posts about that in other threads. But fundamentally, hentai is by itself only a medium, and even though>the appreciation for thicc 2d characters is still a much greater sophistication than 3dpd, and is therefore still admirable (>>290629),
hentai may still portray purely normalfag elements. Naturally, normalfags will make normalfag hentai, and will mostly enjoy normalfag hentai. Notice, for example, how normalfags always say shit like, "$popular_vn would be good [or better] if only it didn't have all those loli scenes", and anybody who says otherwise is immediately excluded and branded a pedo. The Japanese, though still mostly normalfags, do tend to be a bit more cultured in this regard than most ignorant westerners.
But it's more complicated than just normalfag v. non-normalfag. "Normalfag" and similar categories are just ideal types that don't actualize with complete purity in empirical reality but only in theoretical thinking (read Max Weber's article "Objectivity in Social Science and Social Policy" to not reason like most crabs who only think in purely conceptual categories devoid of any empirical content, as is evidenced by the wizardry and blackpill thread). Within us are also normalfag drives and values mixed in to different degrees, they just don't happen to be our ruling drives, as is the case with people that can be correctly referred to as normalfags. And in them are also present to different extents and gradations drives that we'd refer to as "anti-normalfag", or even "wizardly". So it's inevitable that some normalfags may still be attracted to non-normalfag hentai beyond just normalfag hentai, and there's nothing surprising about that.
But my point was never really about normalfags. I can recognize that a few of them may be capable of appreciating lolicon, even if they have to hide it from others. I'm also not a contrarian at all. It doesn't inherently bother me in the least that normalfags like something I love, except when they hijack it and infect it with their normalfaggotry, and drain it of all that was good in it. So to repeat, that normalfags may like hentai is not by itself a refutation of my point.
>You must have shit taste to believe this.
All you're doing is give yourself away as a 3dpd-addict. Why do I get the feeling that all the people arguing otherwise have effectively rotted their brains by so much obsessive fapping to 3dpd? Or maybe it's all the incessant pondering on the blackpill, redpill, etc., and arguing with crabs that has left your brains completely numb and incapable of subtle reasoning and refined artistic appreciation for lolicon. I have learned to maintain a strict hygienic policy of never engaging in sincere argument with crabs.
You have lost touch with reality when you think you're sophisticated for watching a certain kind of porn like hentai. There's nothing admirable about doing something so mundane with your time.
Discussion was never about lolicon but about you being so deluded to believe that the porn you watch makes you in any way superior to other people. That your masturbation habits are sophisticated and other nonsense. You even praise the japanese porn over european's art and accuse anyone who doesn't of being a crab or 3dpd-addict:>Why do I get the feeling that all the people arguing otherwise have effectively rotted their brains by so much obsessive fapping to 3dpd?>rotted their brains
I guess that doesn't happen to people who obsessively watch hentai to the point where they think it makes them superior. The irony. You seriously need to touch grass at this point. Too much Wizchan has fucked with your belief system.
it's funny reading this because all those victorian paintings of erotic fairies are now considered kitsch art
No, I don't think so.
It is just that men cannot avoid to fall into succubi games wherever this sexuality roams freely, allwoing the monster to grow bigger.
If men were more wizardly, these things could be solved.>>278838
Basically what I say, but without actively grasping them into a cage due to men's lack of control.>>278850
The fact of you not knowing how much real such issues is makes me worried about your isolation levels from outer world.
But, why do you worry about a world which will hardly change? Can't you plan about having some immunity to its retarded, vice-dominated influence?>that would be the useful point to discuss
>>278819>(as proven by history)>proceeds to provide zero examples
Also what problems are succubi creating in particular?
I’m not that anon but succubi support mass immigration of foreigners (mainly africans and muslims) that will destroy entire western civilization. Sweden and France will collapse because of succubi before the end of this century
better start learning their languages then black pigeon and stay one step ahead
This seems pretty intuitive but how can you objectively prove this?
Married men are typically more conservative and beta males who only care about getting laid tend to think like you and support feminism out of a lack of will and a belief it'll get them pussy.>>290502
It's retarded anyways since patriarchal societies and men produce porn, art, and beauty, feminists are selectively prude phillistines who are already at war with all of that.
You could just look to voting patterns of succubi they mostly vote overwhelmingly for greens and left and those parties support unlimited immigration.
I think I hate succubi.
I don't want to feel this way. I don't want to feel angry and full of hate all the time. But I honestly think I really just hate succubi.
And I don't mean I hate some succubi, or a certain type of succubus, or that I hate succubi that I know. I mean I hate all of them.
succubi are fucking stupid, selfish and very narrow minded.
I know from experience, since I've had female roommates, sisters and a mother.
They're disgusting spiteful little creatures.
Both of you’re right and especially when you see in the media its all glorifying succubi. When I look to news its all about making life better for succubi and humilating
men, my hatred grows even bigger. succubi are so privileged and we live in a time period which they have best in everything. succubi are truly evil, all of them and without exception.
The problem isn't with succubi only. It is with 99% of the population, called normals or failed normals. The problem isn't female sexuality, it is sexuality itself. Yes, even if you worship 2D you too are part of the problem. Just masturbate quickly once in a while if you feel the need, otherwise disregard this thing entirely. Don't get attached to this vile desire.
Also, before feminism: succubi were forced to marry the strong males.
After feminism: succubi throw themselves freely at the same type of males who exploited them in the past and enslaved them to prove how "liberated" they are.
No matter what society or culture or political ideology we live in, relationship and sexual stuff is disgusting. Same goes for 2D romance and hentai too. Nobody forces normal men to chase after succubi, they do it out of their own stupid drive for competition. Yes, it's not even about pleasure because they could just masturbate if that was the case. They want to prove to themselves and to other males how "cool", "masculine" and "alpha" they are by getting as many attractive succs as they can. It is quite pathetic, really.
With how fast cultural narratives tend to fluctuate, expect this to change, but not succubi nature. Ignore them and focus on your wizardry.
>reproducing is pathetic
So we should be normals reproduce and create more pathetic people? You should be banned for this post.
The purge is already happening, been happening for countless hundreds of years. Every society that doesn't have good bux or welfare system that lets NEETs live in peace is effectively killing off weak men. They want us to die as homeless people or to kill ourselves. Whenever you hear someone freaking out about free health care, welfare, bux or generally free stuff being given to people equally then you can recognize the enemy.>>292646
Yes, it is pathetic this way. Maybe one day perhaps humanity can create kids or children without anything related to sexuality. That would be interesting.
succubi suck but I kind of feel sorry for them because they are cursed to be gates into this hell and have the hardwired desire to pull people in.
I blame religious guilt. I probably would've been aborted without it.
Why do you feel bad for succubi? They do enjoy men fighting each other for access to their pussies. You should feel bad for men because of living in this shitty feminist world.
Why feel bad for men in general? Most men are cannon fodder material. They worship succubi and their thoughts revolve around them only and would push you under the bus in a heartbeat if it meant that they could get pussy. There is no war of the sexes. There is a war of normal vs non-normal people like us.>>292785
Abortion is a sin. It should be banned. Succubi and men who make children should be forced to take responsibility for what they did.
I'm not the one that made them, their parents should take care of them or the responsible social services.
If someone is 'adult enough' to have sex then he can take care of a child too and can take responsibility. Stop defending retarded normals and wymen.
Sound copey as fuck, sorry to break it to you, OP.
Great pic. 3rd down from top left hand side is LMAO
sooo awww soo he's soooo awww
>I don't fuck, so succubi bad, must control succubi so that I can fuck
That's all that I read between words, in another way, is just cope, isn't this site supposed to disregard females?
How can we when you post here?
God, i hate crabs.>>278821
I give it perfect credit. Go look at ex-convicts on youtube, they all have wide fetal-test faces too.
How true is this?
"Females being liberated has caused the fall of the Roman empire (this has been mathematically proven) and their tendency to have sex with men that are assholes will make me have to go my own way" - anon
The Roman Empire was wrecked by Christianity, not hedonism or sexual "degeneracy". That is just a lie spread by christians and moralfag normalfags, they want people to believe that only a society where people live in perfect monogamy and succumb to "traditional" family values can be strong.
Christianity ruins everything it comes into contact with, nothing new here.
Fuck Christianity what a mindfuck wasted so mahy years of my life escaping that maze
It makes me feel sick how I still have subconscious poison in my mind from it. They know they push horrible shame on people to manipulate behaviour, and purposely try to get to vulnerable children. The level of evil is incredible
I really don't think most of them are cognizant of the damage their ideology has caused to the West and its colonies. Many are born into it and it becomes deeply ingrained, apparently. I mean I spent nearly half my life on that shit and got out of it, but I just did it to placate family instead of actually believe in it. There is the resident schizo4jez0r, though, and he seems to lack any shred of self-awareness despite only recently coming around to Judaism 2: Electric Boogaloo.
None of these people can be expected to come around. There are so many canned responses that the Bible and Christians over the years have invented (that all fall apart under basic scrutiny) that it often takes people a very long time to snap out of it, if ever. It is important to remember that this is the core identity and sense of community for many of them so it is somewhat understandable why they don't want to give it up.
Yes, culture is literally the operating system of our mind
Many ex-christians here, me included. It's like almost one of the essentials of creating a wiz. At least it has this advantage.
But it is seriously a disgusting religion, along with any kind of religion that places a big emphasis on asceticism (being a cuck, if you will).
I left cristianity at age of 12 when my parents stopped forcing me to go to church. Later i studied cristianity by myself without being forced, but i wasn't satisfied with it either. 0 regrets.
However, i have a mixed opinion about it being bad for society. Sometimes i think its bad, sometimes i think its neutral pra slightly good. Can you elucidate me? Why tou think it is that evil?
Edward Gibbon also said that as well. Rome was strong when it was strong. Christianity turned Romans into losers, pagan Romans was strong on the contrary
All civilizations face entropy eventually. Just as with imageboards, but on an exponentially larger scale.
Of course, but measures should be taken to stave off collapse and decay (to a certain point, anyway). Admittedly, nobody can prove Rome would've lasted significantly longer without the festering wound of the Christ cult.
Not true, just sound some random bullshit spewed by an angry schizo.
Not him but I hate how Christianity brainwashed people into believing there was some divine plan at work in everything that happens in existence. You get burned alive? Well, your fault bro or God had this in mind for you, just accept it.
Then the morality of it. It doesn't prevent evil people from acting shitty , like it never did, only idiots like me who believed in this shit acted like cucks and weak people because "forgive your enemies or turn the other cheek bro". So the effect of Christian teachings is that assholes will still be assholes (in other words, the majority of people) but you will be powerless to defend yourself against them. Then there is the whole authority worship that comes with it, always respect and obey your superiors, needless to say I was disappointed countless of times.
In general, it makes weak people even weaker. I believed there was no sense in worldly pleasures and pursuing them but still most people, even christians!, still pursued earthly pleasures around me, I was really an idiot. Christianity creates weak, defenseless lambs ready for the wolves to devour them. It is anti-reality to a stupid extent. I hate its idealism and asceticism. It also creates an air of forced peace, societies where you can't offend anyone and always need to be "polite" and can't express your opinions, even if they are true. It is a classic slave-herd mentality.>>293091
It's not about lasting longer, it is about being higher quality. Christianity overcame Roman culture because it was more barbaric and appealed to the majority of idiots much more. The cruder and more savage ideology destroyed the more sophisticated and aristocratic culture.
Can't you go make a "christianity is gay and stupid" instead of posting off topic here?
This is a shit thread to begin with so nothing of value is lost. Failed normals telling everyone the "blackpill" about female nature lol The amount of trouble some people go just so they can invent a society where they can get laid lol lol That is what this thread is about. As if female sexuality should matter to wizards in the slightest, this thread deserves to be nuked, typical r9kid thread.
Currently females have more power on society and as shown by their actions and the laws imposed by them, they hate virgin males and weirdos. Females are naturally against the existance of wizards so this quote is true.
One of the most anti-wizardly political regimes ever, Nazi Germany was run by males mostly and they gladly gassed or worked people like us to death. What you say about that?
Not him but that's not a surprise, men have an outgroup bias, and succubi an ingroup bias, so succubi prefer other succubi and men prefer succubi, studies prove this, so any society or regime is going to be hostile to low status or defective men.
Anyway this thread is complete trash, I don't give a fuck about the sexuality of normalfag succs or the implication that society was somehow better in the past for guys like me because durr hurr succubi were suppressed (they weren't, they were coddled) and now le "degenerate" sex culture has made things worse, this is a very /pol/tard erroneous frame and should be disregarded.
Also Nazi Germany was successful (for a brief time) because it was a military regime, war is done for access to resources, resources that succubi expect from men (as a bribe price) so neither gender are innocent - men have such disregard for their fellow man they're willing to go and kill other men for access to pussy, and succubi don't protest when their husbands go over seas to kill and die so long as they get their paycheck, not to mention have no skin in the game because they'll never get conscripted by martial law like the guys in Ukraine right now.
Couldn't be more wrong if you tried. succubi hate each other more than anything else on the planet. All they do is compete and fight with each other while putting on a fake smile. The only reason they appear to like succubi more than men is they will band together for protection or offense when needed. It's preservation with a fake smile.
succubi have skin in the game when their sons are sent to war. 20 years invested in raising a son for him to be shot is a big waste of resources and likely impossible to recover.>>293138>Believes Jewish lies about Nazi Germany
Men are generally more tribalistic actually. Succubi are effectively just spoiled brats and gynocentrism is heavily pushed in society now.
It's pretty funny though how even with all this men tend to congregate around each other and prefer doing their own thing vs succs constantly whining about "inclusion". Patriarchy wouldn't have been possible if men preferred succs.
Meh, they're just sex cattle, evolved to arouse men and take care of children.
Even if given a choice they'd still choose to be shite.
[Last 50 Posts]
There is a difference between current Western European countries for example and Nazi Germany though when it comes to treatment of "low status or defective men". Authoritarian regimes are more likely to just round people like us up and to shoot us or imprison us. So what you saying isn't completely accurate. You can't excuse the genocide of wizards.
Nazi Germany was successful because it sucked up to low or middle class working males (as long as they were whites, of course). It was basically the dream political system of beta provider wagecuck normals. People who didn't have anything going for them and who wanted to feel powerful or useful to the community. The same kind of people who cry about the "degenerate" sexual culture nowadays and who want to bring back patriarchy because they can't get pussy nowadays. Some things never change. Hitler was the typical low class normalfag who made it big success story, german edition. KKK or Nazi Germany, it doesn't matter, these people adore the white succubus and would do anything to protect her.>>293273>succubi hate each other more than anything else on the planet
This is true, they pretend to get along because they hate direct confrontation. They compete by stealing each other's bfs and gossiping about each other.
>Believes Jewish lies about Nazi Germany>Believes normalfag nazi propaganda
Continue to whiteknight for your precious white wymen.