/b/ - Siberia

>>154405
A society that benefits workers would probably invest a lot more into the health of their population. A socialist society would also, get this, be more social. People would be more socialized and more fit, and we would have less shut-in neets because people would have more money to go out and do shit, leading to more socialization.

Besides improving socialization, dating for women wouldn't come down to how wealthy a man is, but rather their status within society, which in a communist society would likely come from having actual merit rather than exploitation. So anyone that's a hard worker and a community leader would probably be seen as having higher social status.

This gives regular people a much higher chance to be seen as a capable provider/protector etc for a woman. Of course not everyone wants the same things, and I don't really know what kind of social issues we will have in the future, but I can tell you for sure you will feel better living under communism, dating life included.

>>154406
>dating for women wouldn't come down to how wealthy a man is, but rather their status within society, which in a communist society would likely come from having actual merit rather than exploitation
What "merit" exists in a communist society? I though the whole point was that there is no hierarchy and everyone will have access to equal resources.

What OP is saying is that in a communist society only the 6" 6 pack chads will get all the women and the genetically ungifted men won't even have the option of working hard at a good job and making money to attract a wife.

Communism takes away the only hope that incels have.

>>154407
>What "merit" exists in a communist society?

Whatever you can provide for other people, sure you have access to the same public resources, but what you do with your time and what you work on might make you either a brilliant scientist or doctor or artist or you can be just some guy that keeps his head down and does the bare minimum to get by because he doesn't care to contribute. It's all fine by me, but women might prefer the former, no?

>>154407
>genetically ungifted men won't even have the option of working hard at a good job and making money to attract a wife

Of course they will. That was my point. They will have a much, much, more fair chance at that. Yuri Garagrin was the son of a milk maid and a carpenter. He would not have had the opportunity he did under capitalism where everything is gate-kept by the rich for the rich.

The genetic thing, I don't really know man. You'll have to be funny or something.

>>154408
>women might prefer the former, no?
The only reason women prefer the former under a private property society is because those men earn more resources to spend on their family. What you call "status" is merely a heuristic for earning potential.

If everybody has access the the same resources then women would probably prefer a man who spends all day with his family instead of working for ungrateful strangers for zero profit.

>>154409
>Of course they will. That was my point. They will have a much, much, more fair chance at that.
And I'm telling you you're wrong. In a private property society a short ugly man can still work hard to become an engineer or drug dealer or something.

>Yuri Garagrin was the son of a milk maid and a carpenter.
Careful now was that "real" communism?

>You'll have to be funny or something.
Funny is just a proxy for intelligence and intelligence is just a proxy for earning potential. Female attraction is genetics and earning potential. Under communism everybody has the same earning potential so genetics is the only thing left. And you can't change genetics. If you're struggling to find a mate now you will be completely fucked under communism.

OP here
The people you lot aren't considering at all is that not everyone is going to be an artist or an astronaut. Some people are still going to be janitors and cashiers. How would these guys cope? They have no status to rely on, and they can't cope with the usual copes because there's no incentive to provide porn for free or for prostitutes to do their work for free.
>but porn is free now
yes because ad companies make money from it, under communism ad companies obviously wouldn't exist, so why would porn continue being made without a porn industry backing it?

>>154406
Invest in trades and life skills in schools. People mystify the sociobiological realm when its just trade skills that make the man.

>>154411
These guys are idealists.

>>154405
Communism would probably mean the death of introverts. Can't run a commune with a bunch of people who don't enjoy speaking to other people.

Humanity will likely be gone before socialism is even implemented at a global scale.

>>154414
I think youre confusing autism with introversion.