/R9K/ - Robot - 9000

>>1814
Kek, you actually think you're just like Lenin lol

>>1815
I'm glad you recognized that

>>1817
Puff puff pass

COVID reduced everyones socializing so everyone became more fat and lazy.

That's it really

All the women I see on Tinder in the USA are ugly af now lmao

>>2586
its been that way since the mid 2010s atleast. you referring to femoids 17+ now?

oops i forgot
<constantly strawmans
<brimming with resentment
<Twitter-tier clapbacks
<no intellectual curiosity or integrity
should i continue

>>2520
>Good thing voting doesn't actually matter, right
yes?

>>2523
>Butthurt that no one cares about their own obscure leftoid pet theory such as cybersocialism
>Omg why won't you effortpost (couldn't possibly make this claim in good faith unless they're a mod)
>Even then not making a good faith argument since anything which doesn't comport with their preferred obscure leftoid pet theory can't count as effort poasting. Alternative pet theories, even when presented in long form, dismissed
>Doesn't understand how active imageboards boards operate
>Wants to talk about speculative fiction, presented as fact, instead of real world
>Wedded to ghey western liberal values while loudly proclaiming themselves as superradical omegaleftist
>Simp in the streets, lonely in the sheets
Missing anything?

>>2529
Like clockwork

>I just go with the popular thing
t. Women

>>2364
>contraceptive for men with no side effects invented
>WHY DOESN'T ONE FOR WOMEN EXIST YET
at least you found something to bitch about

REMINDER
SWERFs get the bullet

>>2537
What is a SWERF?
Try to explain it without sounding ridiculous

>>2538
What is a SWERF?
That might be spelled wrong, the Swerve is the name that ancient greek atomists had for random particle motion in physics. (It's been roughly 1500 years since those texts were written so the interpretation is somewhat contested.)

The greek atomists say that all of reality is composed of the void (absolute nothingness) and atoms . With atoms they don't mean elements from the periodic table you might learned about in chemistry, they mean the smallest most fundamental and indivisible building blocks of matter.

The ideological mysticism enforcers on Wikipedia attached a "reductive" label to atomism, and you know when these people say "reductive" they mean "it's accurate but we don't like it", it's like one of the social discrediting mechanisms that mysterians use to attack you with when you cut through their bullshit.

>>2538
feminists who support making sex work illegal

>Will this be the new norm?
Probably not, polygamy and polyamory require too much mental capacity to keep track off the social complexity, there is a potential small advantage in genetic diversity for societies where everybody has multiple partners, but it usually isn't worth the tradeoff.

>>2488
I do some times think that society would be better if we treat sex and romance as a more group oriented thing in society, some times. I know it's idealistic but…

>>2489
>Everyone else should change to accomodate my feelz and sense of inadequacy
Leftychan is on a roll today

>>2490
That's no what I said at all.
Imagine posting the same straw man every single day to try and get a rise out of people on an anonymous image board. I be you have a super interesting life.

>>2489
That already happens a lot. It's called swinger parties and orgies. A big underground kink thing

>>2408
kek, is this OC?

>>2408
>>2415
wait, there's a watermark
who tf watermarks their memes? imagine being such an egotistical fag

my enjoyment of this meme is now ruined

>>2403
Dengoid cope.

Just wait and see how production shifts to India now that labor costs in China are rising.

>>2403
>India can't become a big power without wage-growth stimulating the tech base.
How did China become "big power" Gods I hate this nazoid speak then, multipolaroid?

India is already becoming a "big power". It's not even "if" anymore.

>>2419
>How did China become "big power"
The industrial foundation were build during the Mao era, with some help from the Soviets. During the Maoist period there was also modernization of society. For example backwards social practices like foot-binding was rooted out. They also did literacy programs and much more. During the Deng era the communist party traded surplus from Chinese workers for advanced technology and productive forces with western capitalists. And during the Xi era China has begun a massive expansion of Chinese domestic technology development.

India never had social modernization, they still have socially backward practices from their cast system. They did not have dedicated industrial base builders, they never put much focus on means of production or domestic technology expansion. That's why India is only a regular power.

India and China were at a similar level of development at the beginning of the 20th century. But then they diverged because India had a bourgeois revolution while China had a communist revolution. And the communists were much better at development, that's why China overtook India and it's also why China is still increasing it's lead.

>Gods I hate this nazoid speak
I'm supposed to insult you back, but i can't be bothered, just pretend that i did.

>multipolaroid
more than one Polaroid picture ?

bump

bump and also get rid of the faggot e-celeb spam

This got posted on .org earlier today. I didn't know there was an entire movement around being a sexless bum tbh

>>2028
These people should be put into a gulag. Let them rot while doing labor

>>538
So the Haz-thot is just the same stalinism. Good to know, I guess.

>>2028
>movement

> is this probably overblown?
Likely
> is this some bourgie pedos winking at each other?
Nah. Prob just an intern trying to mess with anyone that tried to look into it for the lolz
> will I defend a megacorpo for this shit?
XAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXA

>>1816
Who's defending Balenciaga?

>>1179
>what do u think?
I think "what an ugly little goblin"

I hate kids.

>>1828
Based

>>1828
Spiteful mutants have an intuitive hate for children because deep down they know that they themselves are defunct and could only produce more defunct people. It's an evolutionary adaption that helps inhibit harmful mutations from being rapidly proliferated.

>>1782
>then why shouldn't men fight against that?
Even if we assume that what women are attractive to is somehow objectively wrong, there isn't really a unified collective of men capable of mounting some united effort to change things, especially in the context of contemporary western society [the very notion of divine moral objectivity has been replaced with post modern values faggotry.]

>Like suppose that women find it attractive for men to always be subservient to their bosses. In that context, being a socialist don't think it's unreasonable for men to be upset about it.
This is such on unreal claim (women attracted to subservient men) that is doesn't even warrant a response.

>Generally speaking I think what women find attractive in men and vice versa is partially shaped by bourgeois values but also by the necessities of life and to some extent biology, so it's more often than not plastic to whatever social situation they're in.

Women are generally attracted to 3 things: status, preselection, and genetic fitness/superiority. Those three things are conditioned by society (i.e., what is given status or how genetic fitness presents itself is conditioned according to social context), but the underlying basis for female attraction remains constant. Women don't recognize the underlying thing that they are attracted to. It doesn't register for them. Instead, they tend to register the emotions of fun and security. Hence, they believe that they are attracted to guys they have fun and feel secure with.

>In the perfect ideal world in my head, both sexes would have a shared responsibility to figure out what ought to be to them by engaging the topic together in civil society organizations rather than simply allowing their values to be the result of social conditioning or biology.
You frequently make the mistake of reification. Taking some abstract concept (i.e., the collective of men and the collective of women) and mistakenly assuming it's a real thing that acts in the real world. It's not. People are largely individuals, pursuing individual interests, which in turn are shaped and conditioned by society.

Obviously, society will change over time. But dedicating yourself to changing society is a fool'sPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>1783
In b4 some faggot's gotcha hot take
>This is such on unreal claim (women attracted to subservient men) that is doesn't even warrant a response.
As I said, women are attracted to a few fundamental things (status, pre selection, genetic health/fitness). What they don't particularly care about, aren't aware of, and aren't moistened by is the work and effort that might go into these things.

In fact, it's much more attractive to women when they aren't aware of the work (or subservience) which might go into these things. They want status, pre selection, and fitness that seems to come naturally, as if it's a gift from god, not something which had to be created through discipline and practice.

This is why things like self help, work out pictures posted on social media, or even consciously trying to improve one's social skills and experience with women (i.e., learning game) comes across as cringy. It violates this idealized principal that things should just sort of happen naturally for high quality men.

But, when it comes to women as well, they are acting based on their perception rather than any sort of objective reality. Hence, in many cases, presentation is more important than fact or reality. This can cut both ways. Thus, presenting yourself in the right light is crucial and will help determine which zone you end up in.

<unlike spinning your wheels about muhcommunism online, you are able to test out theories of social interaction with women in real time, gaining direct feedback, and refining your practice into something which has the effective impact you desire. In essence, the art of seduction, relationship management, and virtually anything practical in the real world is more scientific than muhimmortal science of Marxism..

>>1783
>Even if we assume that what women are attractive to is somehow objectively wrong, there isn't really a unified collective of men capable of mounting some united effort to change things
Yeah that's true, ideally I'd want both men and women tome come together and consciously work this shit out.
>This is such on unreal claim
Don't be autistic just substitute the claim for a more realistic one and address the actual point
>Taking some abstract concept (i.e., the collective of men and the collective of women) and mistakenly assuming it's a real thing that acts in the real world. It's not.
>People are largely individual
I know this, the point is it doesn't have to be this way. What I want is to constitute men and women into a community and develop a form of group consciousness.
>dedicating yourself to changing society is a fool's errand - one which usually makes society worse
Capitalist realism? On MY leftychan?
I can get being skeptical of aocial movements but come on now

>>1776
>Is the friendzone really just a social construct.
It depends if you chase after barely socialized women with good looks, nice makeup an flashy attire, than yes. If you go for the plain looking ones with a good brain, then no.

It's a bit like those game character creation screens, you only got so many points and you can't max out all the character traits.

*to let men they know are courting them know that they're not interested?

>>1728
You roastie feminists are just moving the goalposts. The original pejorative just meant someone that doesn't have sex because that antithetical to women who pretty much universally can have sex with someone at anytime.
Also if it's pathetic to have sex with someone that doesn't desire you, what about all the women who are heartbroken when Chad pumps and dumps them? Are they as pathetic as incels too?

>>1732
This has been common blackpill knowledge for years. Many incels argue that a white man can never be a true incel, just someone too lazy to improve themselves.
Not sure why you posted this as some kind of clap back. It completely aligns with my beliefs.

>>1734
>Many incels argue that a white man can never be a true incel, just someone too lazy to improve themselves.
not everyone can afford to move to asia or india to play his white card tho, there is also a language barrier

>>1724
He thinks the low quality droppings whores offer nowadays is "sex". The joke that is commodification, lol.
The whole thing of whoring is a trap to laugh at those who are not in the club where sex is free and easy. If you're paying money for a pure lie and have the shame and trouble of being a whoremonger on top of it, you're an idiot. Don't pay those bitches a dime. The system will keep them up anyway - if there were no men buying whores, it would be necessary to support them like temple prostitutes, because it's part of the trap we live in. Intel ghouls will never give up prostitution and porn, because it's too useful for their purposes, and that's who proliferates porn as much as it has been. Sane countries know to stamp that shit out rather than let it take over everything.

Ugly truth is that most men are incel, but tell themselves their miserable existence is okay and don't want to be one of those people. No one likes a complainer, after all. There are many strategies for coping with this. The "golden age" where marriage was common was always a lie, and now the lie is being destroyed because it is no longer necessary. They're mandating orgies and artificial insemination and they're very aggressive about pushing it. They do not want us, and they never wanted us. If your only argument for yourself is that no one else will have you, that isn't a really good cause for fucking. Better for everyone to be alone.

Also Sparta got their shit kicked in by anyone who could beat a phalanx. which was eventually everyone. The Spartans were smart enough to know they were going to lose in the long term, but dumbasses like to take the name of the Spartans to justify their faggot versions of it, so they can get young men killed for horseshit. So, they're not a good example.
Bitches have always clamored for war though, and then claim to be the victims. It's all a great game to them, and if they suffer for it, it's just the way of the world and they keep going back to it. Few of them have any sustained principles to stop the war drive, and when they do it is almost always about an economic incentive since war is really fucking expensive. How can they have nice things for me me me if the money is all spent on weapons and paying off generals?
Sparta is not unique in exposing the unwanted children. That has always been the case. That's why abortion is Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>1559
These are high-school students, anon. I wonder what the rate of suicide is for young male teens.