Discussion Are there any arguments for having an uncontrolled sexual/dating market?

[NaserOric]

I figure in generations where women werent both culturally and lawfully sexually liberated, men could choose women with whom they wouldve more compatibility compared to boomers that married the first girl they liked in their early 20s.

But for people born in the capitalistic-feministic and technologically advanced dystopia (90s kids and later), i cant find a single argument for preferring the current sexual/dating market. Its really just a Chadfest and below that its chadlites, high tier normies and statusmaxxers (through fame, social circle, money etc.) competing in a ratrace for lower quality, more superficial women with less substance than previous generations.

 

[Deleted member 22999]

no

no

In b4 muh natural selection

 

[Personalityinkwell]

"Women should be able to choose their partners"

 

[Lookscel]

Interesting thread. Will watch.

 

[sub8male]

Foids like to have their pussy fucked by chad. Hooray for foids rights.

 

[Deleted member 25274]

Current one is chad only

 

[BummerDrummerOG]

no

 

[sub8male]

"Women should be able to choose their partners"

 

[Mulattocel]

No there isn’t. Everything would change if men started being men again and dethroned these cunts

 

[COPE GmbH]

Cucks made them considered human and it seems that foid advantage in dating market affecting all facets of like won't change anytime soon unless we have removed the dependence on foids. We should get a waifu robot instead of selling ourselves low for crumbs of roasties.

 

[FrothySolutions]

With regard to who/what? Whether it's good for society? Whether it's fair to the individual?

 

[BraincelsRefugee]

I mean it's great for foids. But terrible for us.

 

[Deleted member 23813]

Would things change if the roles reversed and male "choosiness" became a thing so that toilets competed for men and men chose partners based on the most favorable traits? (Not saying it'll ever actually happen). Foids would just compete for Chads and Chadlites and their looksmatches would be left in the dark. Anyone sub 6 would stand no chance. They'd rather rope than compete for an incel. Nothing would change.

 

[ItsOver4cel]

no

In b4 muh natural selection

only reasonable answer

 

[ShiiOfTheSPLC]

womens sexual freedom means the sexual market has regressed back to caveman times. women are naturally hypergamous and will only be attracted to the highest tier males, the high tier males have an infinite supply of pussy, and the low tier males are the losers. its just the natural order of things when women have sexual liberty. thats not my political opinion its a law of evolutionary biology

 

[cryptic__egg]

There is no argument for it from our perspective, but being able to fuck who you want works well for people with options, which means that normies will always support sexual freedom.

You could argue that people with genetic disorders shouldn't be given free rights to reproduction, but contraceptives can be used so sex doesn't mean reproduction in all cases.

 

[San Salvador]

"Buuut we'll have better genetics n be taller n be prettier garglgarglgargl subhuman genetics will go extinct bro"

 

[Kirito3]

This might be controversial, but yes, just not for us. Letting hypergamy run its course will most likely be a net improvement on the gene pool. An uncontrolled sexual dating market is basically a way to do eugenics that is technically in line with human rights.

I don't think thats a good thing, but normalfags, especially women would love it.