/R9K/ - Robot - 9000

>>21
I think you're navie to think it wasn't always this way.

>>21
Idealogies are always based on material conditions. You should be sad that dating got so bad for so many that it spawed these ideologies. Not that the ideolgoies themselves caught on.

>>23
*spawned

>>20
>>21
Relationships are gamified in some circles of the internet. I feel that living in this hellscape of social conservatism, hegemony of capital, and violence of the state and the minority who controls it are responsible for a hardening of attitudes regarding sexual partnerships.

It becomes a problem to optimize. Solve for optimal sex. Solve for optimal psychological well-being. Solve for career advancement. Solve for properly optimized offspring. It's no different from selecting what institute you will attend after high school, which courses you will take to secure a desired position in society seeking positive outcomes in life.

The woolly free-love kind of romantic concept has been rejected by an increasing number of people who in the face of a hardscrabble world, seek out materially beneficial arrangements. It's not just "incel ideology". Female Dating Strategy (FDS) and associated communities and attitudes are spreading amongst women. It represents the embrace of traditional attitudes towards marriage. Returning to "pragmatism" is not a hard sell when the common folk need to be awful pragmatic about budgets and living arrangements and exploitative working conditions.

Women are a part of the formulation and enforcement of the memes that enslave them in the same way that men are. We are all participants and authors in this game. The thing that makes people like her and the incels so seemingly anachronistic is that the old rules of the game are changing rapidly (via industrialized society and technology), so much so that nobody knows what they are yet and we have yet to reach a stable equilibrium. Think less "evolutionary psychology" and more game theory. They are easy to mix up. Evo-psych just adds bullshit explanations on top and asserts that shit is inherent to our nature because Le Neutral Selekchion. Truthfully it is a game. But as the conditions have changed and the rules are in dispute, there's room right now for a lot of chaotic moves and unorthodox playstyles.

So the best these people have is to hold on to the tried and true rules that got us this far. Played skillfully, even the old meta can stay potent against new and uncoordinated challengers.

Schizo TLDR:
This is not going away until we figure out how to make sex sane in a poPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>156
To making dating sane again you have to abolish child support, circumcisions, legalize porn, sex doll brothels develop a male birth control pill and lift travel restrictions so that men can find brides overseas. Nothing short of this will end the madness.

>>45
Exactly. Much of foundational psychology was pretty much based on pseudo scientific analysis and cocaine.

In a meta-analysis that combined 96 studies looking at 177,000 subjects from around the world, researchers found that strength and muscularity were the male traits that best predicted men's mating and reproductive success.
https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2022/05/18/the_trait_that_best_predicts_mens_mating_success_832788.html
It's ogre.

>>152
This is part ideology top though.

>>153
elab

>>96
I think the issue with analysis like this is it treats the capitalist economy like it's its own independent agent. Like it has conscious thought itself. Capitalism is always playing both sides; Everyone with capital comes out on top this way. Not because they chooose to, but, just through simple market forces. Likewise, abortion can help or hurt a capitalistic system.

>>98
>I think the issue with analysis like this is it treats the capitalist economy like it's its own independent agent. Like it has conscious thought itself.
Your critique is valid in a general sense. But in this specific instance, banning abortion pills will not affect availability, it's just too easy to make and smuggle these pills. I don't know how illegality will affect prices, smuggling is more expensive, but the absence of patent-enforcement also makes it less expensive. You can ban drugs that cause addiction, because they have the effect of creating junkies with a recurring transaction pattern, which can be the point of entry for police investigation and enforcement. Abortions are infrequent events without creating junkies.

Women and some men as well will also be highly motivated to get these pills, and many people will be politically motivated to interfere with enforcement of abortion bans so the agency isn't entirely on the side of capital and markets.

>Capitalism is always playing both sides; Everyone with capital comes out on top this way
Maybe, this could also be an opportunity to build alternative economic structures that provide the commodities and services that capitalism and markets won't. You could even try to build alternative legal structures. This is an exploitable conflict but there is no rule that says capitalism has to benefit from it.

>Not because they chooose to, but, just through simple market forces.
That's not really true, this abortion ban was a deliberate decision, capital is worried that a shrinking population means labor power will become scarce. They are right the demographic changes are going to favor the political power of workers over that of capital. Banning abortions, won't fix it though. The rate of surplus extraction is the pivotal factor. In a very brutal way profits and children compete for the same source.

>>99
I overall agree with everything you said accept the last bit; I don't think that is really true because on the same coin the system of capitalism is also creating a generation of alienated and depressed teenagers and young adults who basically only have social interaction over the internet at this point which is also effecting birth rates. Though, I do find this analysis to hold some validity and is quite interesting to think about.

Roasties BTFO’d.

>>150
Fuck rosties.

>>113
How fucking in denial can you possibly be in? Jesus Christ.

>>105
Yeah, well it has precedent with 8ch getting shutdown due to the NZ Christchurch Mosque Shooting.

>>111
No, if you buy one through legitimate means they'll trace you up to return it.

>>113
why the fuck does every white 18-21 year old try to grow a beard? if you have pubebeard at very best all it does is make your face look dumpy and round
>>111 you haven't already?

>>123
>you haven't already?
No, just a handgun. I poor.

>>43
If you think these bots will be such great things, why would you want to give away control over them to corporations. Even if you think that they will never gain full mastery over AI, they will still have a lot more sway over these bots then the end users would have. Ai algorithms are from a technical perspective weighted statistical brute-force computation, that won't produce intelligent autonomous cognition. To get a truly intelligent machine you will have to put all the bits of intelligence into it by your self, it will not self assemble greater intelligence. You can't get more out of it then you put in. You should read about information theory by Claude E Shannon.

Maybe I could see your side if you would be championing an opensource version of it. In a build your own girlfriend kind of way. But advocating submission to corporate control, sorry that's one step too far.

The bots should be free and open source obviously.

>>47
I don't "want" to give control of AI waifus over to corporations. But ever major IT technology have always been introduced to the masses via commercial products first.
I'd love nothing more than for the public to fund and market a libre version of AI girlfriends but its not happening so there's no point in discussing it.

>>47
>that won't produce intelligent autonomous cognition
Yeah I know, just like I know McDonald's is garbage compared to a home cooked meal. But millions still eat Big Macs everyday.because they are compled to by material conditions.
What you feminists don't understand is that the bottom 80% of guys literally have nothing.when it comes to romance. They'll fall in love.with AI girlfriends for the same reason the poor eat fast food, because they have no other choice.

Human male and Human female relationships have always been shit for men and always will be. When AI girlfriends become advanced enough for my liking I will hop on boat. The corporate side of thing matters little, we will probably be corporate wageslaves not of our own will anyway. If things go peachy I would like to enjoy romantic entertainment with my AI girlfriend for decades.

It's just a shame he's a neolib and hates best Korea. We are yet to see a true /leftcel/ candidate as prophesied.

>>7
I thought NK ans K were on pretty good terms considering their history

>>8
He wants to ask the US to put a load of their missiles in south korea. He kinda glows tbh.

>>7
Retard.

What up uyghas.

How South Korea’s Yoon Suk-yeol Capitalized on Anti-Feminist Backlash to Win the Presidency
https://web.archive.org/web/20220323190835/https://time.com/6156537/south-korea-president-yoon-suk-yeol-sexism/
The fire rises.

>>4
Why did you post this twice fag?

>>6
I-i-i-i-it was a mistake sempi.

>>9
Well now I have to keep bumping this thread to get the eye sore out of the way.