The "incel" phenomenon is likely a deliberate government policy/psyop

Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
21,494
Which countries, and "Just fine" by who's definition? And I didn't say just prostitution, but whoring in general. It's promiscuity and sleeping around, too. That absolutely destroys families, which is the foundation for any strong nation. Both illegitimacy and divorce have been skyrocketing in the US, ever since the sexual revolution in the 60s. I think it has become worse with the advent of constant internet porn, and hookup apps.

Why did you focus on the last part of my statement, while ignoring the part about why the government regulates it in the first place? I'll reprint it without that last part-

"A more technical answer is that everything has been converted to "commercial crimes" in the US, and that congress has the right to regulate "interstate commerce" under Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution. They have no authority to regulate individual sexual practices in the private, but as soon as you bring money (more specifically, Federal Reserve Notes) into it, it becomes commercial in nature."

While shady characters may thrive in a black market, it's clear that they thrive in legal sex work, too. Pornography is legal, for example, but it's still dominated by those same shady characters, and plagued with the exact same problems as prostitution. I didn't imply that prostitution is "safer" because it's illegal (specifically, a commercial crime), but it's really a disgusting industry in general, and will bring with it true human rights violations, like all the ones I mentioned above, whether it's legal or illegal. You can see this in both legal pornography, and illegal prostitution.


Maybe that's the problem, you just don't care. I don't truly buy that, though. Would you want to live right next door to a brothel?
Well said.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
21,494
The traditional reason why Prostitution is illegal is that whoring destroys nations.

A more technical answer is that everything has been converted to "commercial crimes" in the US, and that congress has the right to regulate "interstate commerce" under Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution. They have no authority to regulate individual sexual practices in the private, but as soon as you bring money (more specifically, Federal Reserve Notes) into it, it becomes commercial in nature. Your body is your temple, and you aren't supposed to conduct commerce within the temple, anyway.

There is also the very real problem of human trafficking/rape/torture/kidnapping/slavery that goes along with sex work.
+1
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
21,494
I hope not to offend anyone but I do find the comments on Christianity in this thread ironically amusing, since in all likely hood the religion was fabricated to exert power and control over the masses through threats of hell and damnation for disobedience and promises of heaven and glory for conformity.. and fit the "elites" such as kings and queens, the court structure and the law, and of course the church structure etc into the tapestry of the divine hierarchy. Turn the other cheek and accept how life is, even if you feel it is unjust, for it is god's will and in death you will reap all the benefits. Slaves accept your masters and you too will be saved. The message is hilarious. And nothing is private and yours - even god watches and judges your private intimate moments if it is not condoned through the institution of "marriage". Funny stuff.
If God hadn’t shown himself to me at such an early, preteen age, I would be with your thinking. Being discerning is a very good thing. The problem I would have with thinking that Christianity was formed to “exert power” is contradictory. Why would those same powers warn of the “mark of the beast” saying not to take it, when the controlling powers are the ones pushing it? How could revelations even fathom computer chips and exactly what is coming, so many thousands of years ago? There is no getting around that one.


View: https://www.bitchute.com/video/c7ATYjKzGLM7/
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
495
You completely miss the points of what I was saying. It has nothing to do with some “moral code from the Bronze age”. But your eyes haven’t been opened yet, so yeah, you’re right. There’s no point in debating this…..with you.
For someone claiming the Lord Jesus has led to a positive impact on your life, you seem pretty butthurt and bitter lol
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2021
Messages
1,313
Location
Here
For someone claiming the Lord Jesus has led to a positive impact on your life, you seem pretty butthurt and bitter lol
How did you get that I seem “pretty butthurt and bitter” from my comment? I was telling you, you are wrong. That’s not bitter.

*Methinks maybe you are bitter and are perhaps projecting that on to my comments.
 
Last edited:

DaikonRadish

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
44
I think the final answer is Islam for the west, we need a scientific Islam that keeps population growth in check.
 

Ritchie

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
490
You didn't answer my question.

I asked if you had ever read the gospels or other books of the New Testament. Not if you relied on the opinions of others for a summary of what is actually in those books. Claiming you got the gist of it implies that you haven't read them yourself. Which, if true, means you are judging other's beliefs based on something you don't have knowledge of.
To specifically answer your question, yes I have read through them in school. Since school I have read through the parts that scholars and Christian theists deem the most significant.. mainly in an attempt to understand why so many follow the religion outside of sociological/cultural/psychological factors.

I’m curious as to why you ask? Is there something specifically in them that you find profound and inspiring? You are asking in relation to what I said about Christianity being a religion designed in part for manipulation and control of the masses so am I safe in assuming you find something in these books runs counter to that suggestion? If so, do you mind being specific about what it is in the gospels or other books of the New Testament that makes you feel that way so I can have a look..
 
P

Peatness

Guest
I haven't seen the documentary but I heard it being discussed on the radio yesterday.


The documentary

UNTOLD: The Secret World of Incels | Channel 4 Documentaries​


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kReeoKoOvZI
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Chad_Catholic

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
373
Location
Algonquin, Illinois
Uh neither? Living for yourself , creating your own meaning because this is the only life you have, maximizing your own happiness, because, well isn't that the purpose to life?

Christianity take everything that makes you weak and a loser and tries to turn it into virtue and say don't worry after you're dead you'll be finally good to go and get everything you wanted...how convenient. If you can't have sex because nobody likes you well you're "chaste" if you're poor well at least you don't have 1 of the 7 deadly sins of "greed / gluttony", and so on and so forth.

See master morality.
No, this life is a filtering process which will determine whether you end up in heaven or hell, and the amount of suffering and pain you will endure here on Earth for entrance into God's Kingdom will be like nothing when compared to the amount of suffering you will endure for all eternity if you should choose to live for yourself rather than for God
Oh, hi :)

You are devoid of logic and reasoning so there's no point in debating this with you but continue relying on a moral code from the Bronze age which justified slavery, killing gays, poor treatment of women, has traces in anti-semitism, etc. and then cherry-pick good things that may have appeared and run with that.
Lol "anti-semitism"? Oy vey
 

ALS

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
204
It is hard to believe that the government would engage in such absurd actions, but according to the article below the US military was convinced as far back as early 20th century that sexual DIS-satisfaction was key to making men angry, aggressive and homicidal and the military designed official policies towards sexually manipulating its soldiers in WWI towards such a dissatisfied state. If the government holds the firm belief that sexually satisfied soldiers are happy, anti-war, and disobedient and the govt has openly pushed the incel "phenotype" on its soldiers as far as back as WWI, then it does not seem too much of a conspiracy to assume the same would be (or has already been) attempted on a nationwide scale, and not just in regards to military service.
I've noticed since the Cold War how the 'enemy's' women have been portrayed as ugly or fat. I recall seeing Russian women fat jokes on the Tonight Show in the 80's. At the beginning of the war against Afghanistan, I read an article (Joe Vialis?) going on about Afghan women being hideous. Now things have changed and all Russian women are super-hot. It's all manipulation, but most people swallow it due to confirmation bias.
 

ALS

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
204
Yes, but 5-AR inhibitors also raise cortisol, so the net "anabolic" or "alpha" effect may be null (or even negative) as cortisol antagonizes testosterone.

At "best", taking finasteride/dutasteride may turn men into "cheaters" (by raising both cortisol and T) in every sense of the word, which is probably quite desirable for the elite that rules us.
On the M.A.S.H. series there were some jokes about the food being spiked with saltpeter, which was used supposedly to lower libido.
 

VitD

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
32
It is hard to believe that the government would engage in such absurd actions, but according to the article below the US military was convinced as far back as early 20th century that sexual DIS-satisfaction was key to making men angry, aggressive and homicidal and the military designed official policies towards sexually manipulating its soldiers in WWI towards such a dissatisfied state. If the government holds the firm belief that sexually satisfied soldiers are happy, anti-war, and disobedient and the govt has openly pushed the incel "phenotype" on its soldiers as far as back as WWI, then it does not seem too much of a conspiracy to assume the same would be (or has already been) attempted on a nationwide scale, and not just in regards to military service. Note that the "powerful figures" (as the article calls them) that came up with the WWI "incel" policy did not envision its applicability only in regards war/military. They believed that sexually dissatisfied men are motivated in general, in regards to any objective. Considering CIA ops such as Mockingbird or MKULTRA, a psyop on manipulating the sexuality of the populace towards facilitating obedience and lifelong hard (low-paid?) work seems like an innocent cartoon in comparison. There is an old proverb saying "The rich thrive when the poor strive", and apparently one of the best ways to ensure that the "plebs" (both men and women) "strive" (especially at work) is to deprive them of sexual satisfaction. The "incel" movement is hardly a niche problem any more. A number of large recent studies showed that a record number of Western citizens are completely celibate, and the highest rate of celibacy is in the youngest cohort. The rates of sexual deviancy are also through the roof and keep increasing.

Just a decade ago, such findings would be unthinkable, but now they are a reality and resonate strikingly well with other studies finding chronic diseases to be skyrocketing in the young instead of the old. In other words, it looks like there is a "war on the young", that war is not at all coincidental, and sexuality is a major target in that war.

@Drareg @Regina @tankasnowgod @AlaskaJono @Rinse & rePeat @FocusedOnHealth @InChristAlone @yerrag

USA sexually ‘teased’ its troops in the First World War to make them fight harder
"...Initially neutral, the US began to change its position after a German U-boat sank the Lusitania in 1915, and when it was revealed that Germany sought to urge Mexico to attack the United States. But even as their first troops landed in France in June 1917, few Americans fully understood let alone supported this faraway conflict. In a study published in the Journal of the History of Sexuality, Eric Wycoff Rogers argues that the US Government and military took drastic action to use sexuality to motivate its conscripted soldiers to embrace their roles in the war. “The war didn’t feel relevant to young American men in the way it did to European men,” Rogers says. “Particularly after President Wilson’s sudden U-turn on American belligerency, the government had to work hard to convince civilians to support the war, and this was doubly true for soldiers, many of whom were drafted against their will. “In this context, the War Department actively exploited sexuality to psychologically manipulate American soldiers to fight.” This involved enforcing sexual abstinence while simultaneously exposing soldiers to carefully controlled forms of sexual stimulation. Believing that sexually satisfied men could not be easily motivated, the aim of this teasing was to generate unmet sexual desire, which the War Department could leverage as motivation to fight, especially through appeals to chivalry and heroism."

"...Drawing on the relatively neglected records of the morale agency, and the writings of the academics and reformers who led it, Rogers shows that these powerful figures believed that sexual climax wasted the energy which fuelled a man’s motivation. They also believed, however, that stimulating and then diverting a soldier’s sex drive could boost his motivation. Based on this “parasexual logic”, as Rogers terms it, these theorists of morale designed a range of manipulative policies and activities that both regulated and stimulated soldiers."

"...Through the Young Women’s Christian Association, the CTCA trained women and girls to support their aims. The CTCA dispatched speakers to cities and towns close to training camps to advise young girls and their mothers on guarding their sexuality from the troops. At the same time, military and civilian leaders set about extracting sexually active women and girls from areas frequented by soldiers. “By making sexual opportunities hard to find, the military sought to preserve men’s fighting strength.”"

"...Thousands of women were arrested, examined under duress and detained during the country’s brief involvement in the war. Rogers says: “One of my key findings is that venereal disease was primarily an excuse to police women and reduce sexual opportunities for soldiers. Morality, too, was a pretext for these programmes. “The real purpose of these horrific measures, however, was fundamentally about maintaining the sexual frustration that kept soldiers motivated.”

"“They also engaged in censorship,” Rogers says. “In a few instances, the Morale Branch’s staff opposed the inclusion of cartoons and other content that they deemed off-message.”

"...At the same time soldiers were pressed to write letters to women back home, supported by the provision of free envelopes and paper in YMCA huts and tents. CTCA officials hoped that when soldiers penned their love letters, the presence of attractive canteen workers would act as an exciting proxy for the women they were addressing. “Sexual denial, status anxiety and perceived pressure from women – this was a powerful combination,” Rogers says. “In striving for the approval of women, the morale planners hoped soldiers would perform their duties without complaint, fight harder, and be willing to risk their lives.”

"...The sudden end of the war did not mark the end of morale or sexualized motivation. After the war, Munson and some of his fellow morale planners published their theories as part of a new focus on human resources management which sought to boost morale and motivation in commercial industries. The campaigns to police women’s sexual behaviours – labelled the ‘American Plan’ – continued for over two decades, with police detaining thousands of women accused of being infected with STDs. According to Rogers, the spillover of the wartime programmes testifies to their enduring significance in modern society, and complicates how we periodize historical eras."

"...“The military’s ‘parasexual’ blend of constraint and stimulation offers a clear sketch of a cultural logic that runs deep in American culture: the use of sexual allure to motivate and to sell non-sexual experiences and products.” “Especially if we are going to navigate the tensions of the so-called ‘gender war’, we urgently need to understand the role that powerful individuals and organisations continue to play in manipulating sexuality and fuelling sexual frustration, not least in advertising, films and on social media.”
Hadiut do you believe no Fap is a move by the government or is based from citizens in the United States. I feel as if porn is more of a manipulation than no Fap.

As well strips clubs, what are your thoughts on the strip club world, if guys really want I mean they can get their nut off their. I know that it isn’t free but most sexual interactions with a female for most guys my age require us dropping some dough before hand so, the strip club is kind of an easy fix if your strapped and, don’t want to watch porn, but want to be satisfied without any emotional attachment. Let me know what you think on all of this.
 

VitD

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
32
It is hard to believe that the government would engage in such absurd actions, but according to the article below the US military was convinced as far back as early 20th century that sexual DIS-satisfaction was key to making men angry, aggressive and homicidal and the military designed official policies towards sexually manipulating its soldiers in WWI towards such a dissatisfied state. If the government holds the firm belief that sexually satisfied soldiers are happy, anti-war, and disobedient and the govt has openly pushed the incel "phenotype" on its soldiers as far as back as WWI, then it does not seem too much of a conspiracy to assume the same would be (or has already been) attempted on a nationwide scale, and not just in regards to military service. Note that the "powerful figures" (as the article calls them) that came up with the WWI "incel" policy did not envision its applicability only in regards war/military. They believed that sexually dissatisfied men are motivated in general, in regards to any objective. Considering CIA ops such as Mockingbird or MKULTRA, a psyop on manipulating the sexuality of the populace towards facilitating obedience and lifelong hard (low-paid?) work seems like an innocent cartoon in comparison. There is an old proverb saying "The rich thrive when the poor strive", and apparently one of the best ways to ensure that the "plebs" (both men and women) "strive" (especially at work) is to deprive them of sexual satisfaction. The "incel" movement is hardly a niche problem any more. A number of large recent studies showed that a record number of Western citizens are completely celibate, and the highest rate of celibacy is in the youngest cohort. The rates of sexual deviancy are also through the roof and keep increasing.

Just a decade ago, such findings would be unthinkable, but now they are a reality and resonate strikingly well with other studies finding chronic diseases to be skyrocketing in the young instead of the old. In other words, it looks like there is a "war on the young", that war is not at all coincidental, and sexuality is a major target in that war.

@Drareg @Regina @tankasnowgod @AlaskaJono @Rinse & rePeat @FocusedOnHealth @InChristAlone @yerrag

USA sexually ‘teased’ its troops in the First World War to make them fight harder
"...Initially neutral, the US began to change its position after a German U-boat sank the Lusitania in 1915, and when it was revealed that Germany sought to urge Mexico to attack the United States. But even as their first troops landed in France in June 1917, few Americans fully understood let alone supported this faraway conflict. In a study published in the Journal of the History of Sexuality, Eric Wycoff Rogers argues that the US Government and military took drastic action to use sexuality to motivate its conscripted soldiers to embrace their roles in the war. “The war didn’t feel relevant to young American men in the way it did to European men,” Rogers says. “Particularly after President Wilson’s sudden U-turn on American belligerency, the government had to work hard to convince civilians to support the war, and this was doubly true for soldiers, many of whom were drafted against their will. “In this context, the War Department actively exploited sexuality to psychologically manipulate American soldiers to fight.” This involved enforcing sexual abstinence while simultaneously exposing soldiers to carefully controlled forms of sexual stimulation. Believing that sexually satisfied men could not be easily motivated, the aim of this teasing was to generate unmet sexual desire, which the War Department could leverage as motivation to fight, especially through appeals to chivalry and heroism."

"...Drawing on the relatively neglected records of the morale agency, and the writings of the academics and reformers who led it, Rogers shows that these powerful figures believed that sexual climax wasted the energy which fuelled a man’s motivation. They also believed, however, that stimulating and then diverting a soldier’s sex drive could boost his motivation. Based on this “parasexual logic”, as Rogers terms it, these theorists of morale designed a range of manipulative policies and activities that both regulated and stimulated soldiers."

"...Through the Young Women’s Christian Association, the CTCA trained women and girls to support their aims. The CTCA dispatched speakers to cities and towns close to training camps to advise young girls and their mothers on guarding their sexuality from the troops. At the same time, military and civilian leaders set about extracting sexually active women and girls from areas frequented by soldiers. “By making sexual opportunities hard to find, the military sought to preserve men’s fighting strength.”"

"...Thousands of women were arrested, examined under duress and detained during the country’s brief involvement in the war. Rogers says: “One of my key findings is that venereal disease was primarily an excuse to police women and reduce sexual opportunities for soldiers. Morality, too, was a pretext for these programmes. “The real purpose of these horrific measures, however, was fundamentally about maintaining the sexual frustration that kept soldiers motivated.”

"“They also engaged in censorship,” Rogers says. “In a few instances, the Morale Branch’s staff opposed the inclusion of cartoons and other content that they deemed off-message.”

"...At the same time soldiers were pressed to write letters to women back home, supported by the provision of free envelopes and paper in YMCA huts and tents. CTCA officials hoped that when soldiers penned their love letters, the presence of attractive canteen workers would act as an exciting proxy for the women they were addressing. “Sexual denial, status anxiety and perceived pressure from women – this was a powerful combination,” Rogers says. “In striving for the approval of women, the morale planners hoped soldiers would perform their duties without complaint, fight harder, and be willing to risk their lives.”

"...The sudden end of the war did not mark the end of morale or sexualized motivation. After the war, Munson and some of his fellow morale planners published their theories as part of a new focus on human resources management which sought to boost morale and motivation in commercial industries. The campaigns to police women’s sexual behaviours – labelled the ‘American Plan’ – continued for over two decades, with police detaining thousands of women accused of being infected with STDs. According to Rogers, the spillover of the wartime programmes testifies to their enduring significance in modern society, and complicates how we periodize historical eras."

"...“The military’s ‘parasexual’ blend of constraint and stimulation offers a clear sketch of a cultural logic that runs deep in American culture: the use of sexual allure to motivate and to sell non-sexual experiences and products.” “Especially if we are going to navigate the tensions of the so-called ‘gender war’, we urgently need to understand the role that powerful individuals and organisations continue to play in manipulating sexuality and fuelling sexual frustration, not least in advertising, films and on social media.”
It is hard to believe that the government would engage in such absurd actions, but according to the article below the US military was convinced as far back as early 20th century that sexual DIS-satisfaction was key to making men angry, aggressive and homicidal and the military designed official policies towards sexually manipulating its soldiers in WWI towards such a dissatisfied state. If the government holds the firm belief that sexually satisfied soldiers are happy, anti-war, and disobedient and the govt has openly pushed the incel "phenotype" on its soldiers as far as back as WWI, then it does not seem too much of a conspiracy to assume the same would be (or has already been) attempted on a nationwide scale, and not just in regards to military service. Note that the "powerful figures" (as the article calls them) that came up with the WWI "incel" policy did not envision its applicability only in regards war/military. They believed that sexually dissatisfied men are motivated in general, in regards to any objective. Considering CIA ops such as Mockingbird or MKULTRA, a psyop on manipulating the sexuality of the populace towards facilitating obedience and lifelong hard (low-paid?) work seems like an innocent cartoon in comparison. There is an old proverb saying "The rich thrive when the poor strive", and apparently one of the best ways to ensure that the "plebs" (both men and women) "strive" (especially at work) is to deprive them of sexual satisfaction. The "incel" movement is hardly a niche problem any more. A number of large recent studies showed that a record number of Western citizens are completely celibate, and the highest rate of celibacy is in the youngest cohort. The rates of sexual deviancy are also through the roof and keep increasing.

Just a decade ago, such findings would be unthinkable, but now they are a reality and resonate strikingly well with other studies finding chronic diseases to be skyrocketing in the young instead of the old. In other words, it looks like there is a "war on the young", that war is not at all coincidental, and sexuality is a major target in that war.

@Drareg @Regina @tankasnowgod @AlaskaJono @Rinse & rePeat @FocusedOnHealth @InChristAlone @yerrag

USA sexually ‘teased’ its troops in the First World War to make them fight harder
"...Initially neutral, the US began to change its position after a German U-boat sank the Lusitania in 1915, and when it was revealed that Germany sought to urge Mexico to attack the United States. But even as their first troops landed in France in June 1917, few Americans fully understood let alone supported this faraway conflict. In a study published in the Journal of the History of Sexuality, Eric Wycoff Rogers argues that the US Government and military took drastic action to use sexuality to motivate its conscripted soldiers to embrace their roles in the war. “The war didn’t feel relevant to young American men in the way it did to European men,” Rogers says. “Particularly after President Wilson’s sudden U-turn on American belligerency, the government had to work hard to convince civilians to support the war, and this was doubly true for soldiers, many of whom were drafted against their will. “In this context, the War Department actively exploited sexuality to psychologically manipulate American soldiers to fight.” This involved enforcing sexual abstinence while simultaneously exposing soldiers to carefully controlled forms of sexual stimulation. Believing that sexually satisfied men could not be easily motivated, the aim of this teasing was to generate unmet sexual desire, which the War Department could leverage as motivation to fight, especially through appeals to chivalry and heroism."

"...Drawing on the relatively neglected records of the morale agency, and the writings of the academics and reformers who led it, Rogers shows that these powerful figures believed that sexual climax wasted the energy which fuelled a man’s motivation. They also believed, however, that stimulating and then diverting a soldier’s sex drive could boost his motivation. Based on this “parasexual logic”, as Rogers terms it, these theorists of morale designed a range of manipulative policies and activities that both regulated and stimulated soldiers."

"...Through the Young Women’s Christian Association, the CTCA trained women and girls to support their aims. The CTCA dispatched speakers to cities and towns close to training camps to advise young girls and their mothers on guarding their sexuality from the troops. At the same time, military and civilian leaders set about extracting sexually active women and girls from areas frequented by soldiers. “By making sexual opportunities hard to find, the military sought to preserve men’s fighting strength.”"

"...Thousands of women were arrested, examined under duress and detained during the country’s brief involvement in the war. Rogers says: “One of my key findings is that venereal disease was primarily an excuse to police women and reduce sexual opportunities for soldiers. Morality, too, was a pretext for these programmes. “The real purpose of these horrific measures, however, was fundamentally about maintaining the sexual frustration that kept soldiers motivated.”

"“They also engaged in censorship,” Rogers says. “In a few instances, the Morale Branch’s staff opposed the inclusion of cartoons and other content that they deemed off-message.”

"...At the same time soldiers were pressed to write letters to women back home, supported by the provision of free envelopes and paper in YMCA huts and tents. CTCA officials hoped that when soldiers penned their love letters, the presence of attractive canteen workers would act as an exciting proxy for the women they were addressing. “Sexual denial, status anxiety and perceived pressure from women – this was a powerful combination,” Rogers says. “In striving for the approval of women, the morale planners hoped soldiers would perform their duties without complaint, fight harder, and be willing to risk their lives.”

"...The sudden end of the war did not mark the end of morale or sexualized motivation. After the war, Munson and some of his fellow morale planners published their theories as part of a new focus on human resources management which sought to boost morale and motivation in commercial industries. The campaigns to police women’s sexual behaviours – labelled the ‘American Plan’ – continued for over two decades, with police detaining thousands of women accused of being infected with STDs. According to Rogers, the spillover of the wartime programmes testifies to their enduring significance in modern society, and complicates how we periodize historical eras."

"...“The military’s ‘parasexual’ blend of constraint and stimulation offers a clear sketch of a cultural logic that runs deep in American culture: the use of sexual allure to motivate and to sell non-sexual experiences and products.” “Especially if we are going to navigate the tensions of the so-called ‘gender war’, we urgently need to understand the role that powerful individuals and organisations continue to play in manipulating sexuality and fuelling sexual frustration, not least in advertising, films and on social media.”
Do you think no fap is government made or society made? I believe porn is dog ***t and ruins young mens minds and motivation to honestly find and have sex with women. Secondly do you think strips clubs are made by the government to have sexually irritated men go have sex with stripper but use their hard earned cash towards getting their nut off, I personally think the strip club is just as expensive as a nice date but you honestly get what you desire in the end but don’t feel as good as would taking a girl out then having sex her that night or later in the weeks to come, yet the strip club has no emotional attachment more or less business with some pleasure at the end. What do you think I mean their are options for the incels out there they just got to have the means to make it happen. Even if your fat happy and metabolically healthy we live in a world where material goods and looks are everything and most top tier girls are to shallow to look past the fat goofy easy going guy who may be hilarious who they may in the end have an awesome relationship with, for some vain **** that is toxic. All I’m saying is incels can b**** buy self improvements need to be done if men want tu ****.
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
495
No, this life is a filtering process which will determine whether you end up in heaven or hell, and the amount of suffering and pain you will endure here on Earth for entrance into God's Kingdom will be like nothing when compared to the amount of suffering you will endure for all eternity if you should choose to live for yourself rather than for God

Lol "anti-semitism"? Oy vey
Any evidence for this after life? I’d be happy to review it 🙃

Regarding the second comment, not an argument - fallacious
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2021
Messages
1,313
Location
Here
How did you get that I seem “pretty butthurt and bitter” from my comment? I was telling you, you are wrong. That’s not bitter
For someone claiming the Lord Jesus has led to a positive impact on your life, you seem pretty butthurt and bitter lol

Look, you being an MK Ultra survivor and guinea pig your whole life, you have been lied to, manipulated and used by your controllers. Who don’t have your best interests at heart. I understand why you are so reactionary. Because you’ve been burned many times. And lied to and on and on. It’s very difficult to trust when you’ve been manipulated your whole life. That goes for anyone who has been raised in a very dysfunctional environment. When you are raised in that, it’s very very hard to trust others, let alone, Father God our Creator.

Anyways, what I wrote to you was the truth. In fact, Jesus the Christ is called “the Way, the Truth and the Life” because He is. His words from the scriptures stand the test of time.

I personally had a major spiritual encounter, a major spiritual awakening from the Spirit of God. I was not religious. I didn’t go to a church. I never read any religious books. Yeah, I did read philosophical literature, but I never came to personally know that God was real until the spiritual encounter I had.

I always knew God was somehow real when I was a child and I would talk to Him, but I never KNEW Him.

All that changed when Jesus came to me and revealed Himself to me thru 1) someone telling me about Jesus (whom I never knew about before) 2) and, investigating for myself, His words written in the New Testament. Then some time after that, God supernaturally removed a spiritual veil off my eyes, (which I now realise is a real veil, a covering, that we can’t see with our natural eyes) that is on our eyes until we are ready to receive the Truth- and He opened them. To His truth. Because He is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

So yeah, He did and does have a positive impact on my life. But it’s more than just a positive impact. It changed my whole life. In other words, it changed the direction I was going in, which was towards the darkness, and redirected me towards the Light, because scripture says He is that Light. When you are in darkness, you can’t see.

But once you have the Light, you can finally see.
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
@VitD

I don't know if nofap is a govt op but I don't think it is healthy to artificially impose yet another "rule" in our lives. Sure, constant overstimulation and masturbation is certainly harmful but the latter is an attempt to reduce perceived stress, as Peat mentioned. If the stress is there 24x7, I don't think removing an, albeit less-than-optimal, stress relieve option would be beneficial. Porn is more likely to be a govt psyop than nofap, since porn degrades/devalues the human sexual interaction and turns it into a mere product/transaction, which over time leads men and women to treat each other with the same transactional attitude. As such, when conflict between a man and woman arises (inevitably), instead of being incentivized to work through their problems, both the man and the woman are incentivized to simply replace the "problematic" partner/product with another, less problematic one - i.e. the same way we are incentivized to replace an inferior household product with a better/cheaper one. In my experience, the replacement partner is very rarely better, and if such replacements are done a sufficient number of times this behavior builds a character/personality that is incapable of connecting with anybody, sexually or otherwise.
 

VitD

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
32
@VitD

I don't know if nofap is a govt op but I don't think it is healthy to artificially impose yet another "rule" in our lives. Sure, constant overstimulation and masturbation is certainly harmful but the latter is an attempt to reduce perceived stress, as Peat mentioned. If the stress is there 24x7, I don't think removing an, albeit less-than-optimal, stress relieve option would be beneficial. Porn is more likely to be a govt psyop than nofap, since porn degrades/devalues the human sexual interaction and turns it into a mere product/transaction, which over time leads men and women to treat each other with the same transactional attitude. As such, when conflict between a man and woman arises (inevitably), instead of being incentivized to work through their problems, both the man and the woman are incentivized to simply replace the "problematic" partner/product with another, less problematic one - i.e. the same way we are incentivized to replace an inferior household product with a better/cheaper one. In my experience, the replacement partner is very rarely better, and if such replacements are done a sufficient number of times this behavior builds a character/personality that is incapable of connecting with anybody, sexually or otherwise.
Ok so adults around my age 24 aren’t having sex, and if they do it’s almost transactional because it’s casual most of the time, well with a lot of people I know it is. Which in result doesn’t build true connection to the other human being, so one half of my generation is sexless and the other half are becoming less socially connected society through casual hookup culture, but what’s better to be sexless and angry or have sex with less no strings attached and become a zapped zombie with no emotional connection or quality relationships lol, wtf is going hahaha
 

VitD

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
32
Ok so adults around my age 24 aren’t having sex, and if they do it’s almost transactional because it’s casual most of the time, well with a lot of people I know it is. Which in result doesn’t build true connection to the other human being, so one half of my generation is sexless and the other half are becoming less socially connected society through casual hookup culture, but what’s better to be sexless and angry or have sex with less no strings attached and become a zapped zombie with no emotional connection or quality relationships lol, wtf is going hahaha
Ok so adults around my age 24 aren’t having sex, and if they do it’s almost transactional because it’s casual most of the time, well with a lot of people I know it is. Which in result doesn’t build true connection to the other human being, so one half of my generation is sexless and the other half are becoming less socially connected society through casual hookup culture, but what’s better to be sexless and angry or have sex with no strings attached and become a zapped zombie with no emotional connection or quality relationships lol, wtf is going on hahaha
 
OP
haidut

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
@VitD

I don't think either group is doing well. It is a hard pick between a sexless, angry incel and a zombified, transactional psychopath that sees others as nothing more than a resource to be "consumed" and then cast aside. Yet another good indication that the Western world is doomed. There can be no cohesive society, let alone flourishing civilization, when those are the only choices allowed (and promoted) by the system.
 

VitD

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2021
Messages
32
@VitD

I don't think either group is doing well. It is a hard pick between a sexless, angry incel and a zombified, transactional psychopath that sees others as nothing more than a resource to be "consumed" and then cast aside. Yet another good indication that the Western world is doomed. There can be no cohesive society, let alone flourishing civilization, when those are the only choices allowed (and promoted) by the system.
It’s funny but you talk about how people especially men work harder to be praised by women because sexlessness will drive a man to pursue what it takes, but a lot of times men end up with females they work with, any thoughts on that how things are set up this way or if it’s all coincidence and through real emotional and physical connection with a coworker that flourishes into a relationship? Not sure if you have a conspiracy or theory behind coworkers becoming intimate lol I’m sure that’s a rabbit hole in its self.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom