L
As the title says constructivism was a mistake. Nowadays every pretentious big brain on Reddit or other platforms comes up with "Men just have been socialized to want sex/success/relationships!" - no, even in an ideal/egalitarian society that wouldn't see money and sex as the main differentiating characteristics between individuals and depicts sex constantly it would still hurt to be the last option or no option at all for a female, the social context is nothing more than the hourglass that channels inherent biological desires/pressures.
It's an inherent biological want for a social and sexually reproducing species to be accepted by the group and also to propagate.
But you retarded fucks are too stupid to recognize the false dichotomy between the human as the highly sofisticated master of everything that only makes his own laws or the human as a primitive slave of his instincts/primal desires with no higher cognitive ability - the truth is however something in between.
And yes, "Asexuals exist!" -but we are (like most people) not asexual and the mere reference to the existence of certain "aberrant"/from the norm deviating individuals brings us nothing, because it says nothing about our desires/problems and the psychological strain that we get from being excluded from the most basal human experiences and from living in sensory deprivation. It's like saying to a tranny "CIS people exist and they don't cut off their balls, therefore your desire to be of the opposite sex is retarded/invalid! So forget about your hormone treatments and operations because others survive well without them!" (an analogy you normtards might be able to understand because this is -unlike men- a protected group of theirs)- saying something about the desires of individuals judging by the desires of others is inherently retarded because people have different desires and it's generally speaking very hard to find something that isn't desired by some people (no matter how taboo).
Funny that liberals always say that you must listen to the (subjective) stories of blacks or trannies and value their life experience while they act like highly-methodical/logical Einsteins when it comes to other groups - one group just needs single individuals to tell something while the other group would need a peer-reviewed paper by Albert Einstein himself to say that the water is wet.
[UWSL]And last but not least, most social contructs like explicit and implicit laws were put in place specifically to combat/suppress certain aspects of human nature (like the innate male desire for sexual conquest - even at the expense of females or the innate female desire for hypergamy/more at the expense of all average/below average men) or further certain aspects of human nature (like kindness/respect/etc.) that were deemed as desirable, your beloved human rights are also nothing more than a social construct which does not say anything about the validity of the concept, every concept was influenced by a social context and the opinion at that time that was nothing more than the sum of subjective value judgements that people agreed on, but the validity is still existent. [/UWSL][UWSL]This also shows the true nature of leftist/liberal critique: It's never constructive critique, it's nothing more than rabulistics that is in the end only disintegration work targeting the integrity of cultures/nations, whenever they find the most minor inconsistency within a value system (even if it doesn't affect functionality as the important characteristic) they say that the entire system is invalid while never displaying that amount of attention to detail within their own ideas, these people cannot be debated with, you cannot play football with someone who constantly redefines the rules with rabulistics and mental gymnastics, always remember they change the definition however they deem fit and then go "Checkmate!" [/UWSL]
It's an inherent biological want for a social and sexually reproducing species to be accepted by the group and also to propagate.
But you retarded fucks are too stupid to recognize the false dichotomy between the human as the highly sofisticated master of everything that only makes his own laws or the human as a primitive slave of his instincts/primal desires with no higher cognitive ability - the truth is however something in between.
And yes, "Asexuals exist!" -but we are (like most people) not asexual and the mere reference to the existence of certain "aberrant"/from the norm deviating individuals brings us nothing, because it says nothing about our desires/problems and the psychological strain that we get from being excluded from the most basal human experiences and from living in sensory deprivation. It's like saying to a tranny "CIS people exist and they don't cut off their balls, therefore your desire to be of the opposite sex is retarded/invalid! So forget about your hormone treatments and operations because others survive well without them!" (an analogy you normtards might be able to understand because this is -unlike men- a protected group of theirs)- saying something about the desires of individuals judging by the desires of others is inherently retarded because people have different desires and it's generally speaking very hard to find something that isn't desired by some people (no matter how taboo).
Funny that liberals always say that you must listen to the (subjective) stories of blacks or trannies and value their life experience while they act like highly-methodical/logical Einsteins when it comes to other groups - one group just needs single individuals to tell something while the other group would need a peer-reviewed paper by Albert Einstein himself to say that the water is wet.
[UWSL]And last but not least, most social contructs like explicit and implicit laws were put in place specifically to combat/suppress certain aspects of human nature (like the innate male desire for sexual conquest - even at the expense of females or the innate female desire for hypergamy/more at the expense of all average/below average men) or further certain aspects of human nature (like kindness/respect/etc.) that were deemed as desirable, your beloved human rights are also nothing more than a social construct which does not say anything about the validity of the concept, every concept was influenced by a social context and the opinion at that time that was nothing more than the sum of subjective value judgements that people agreed on, but the validity is still existent. [/UWSL][UWSL]This also shows the true nature of leftist/liberal critique: It's never constructive critique, it's nothing more than rabulistics that is in the end only disintegration work targeting the integrity of cultures/nations, whenever they find the most minor inconsistency within a value system (even if it doesn't affect functionality as the important characteristic) they say that the entire system is invalid while never displaying that amount of attention to detail within their own ideas, these people cannot be debated with, you cannot play football with someone who constantly redefines the rules with rabulistics and mental gymnastics, always remember they change the definition however they deem fit and then go "Checkmate!" [/UWSL]
Last edited:
