So he escortmaxxed in Japan
The picture above looks like a typical ladybar in Bangkok, I can guarantee that the two femoids on the picture are pay to play.
So he escortmaxxed in Japan
The picture above looks like a typical ladybar in Bangkok, I can guarantee that the two femoids on the picture are pay to play.
fine, but he still never had to escortmaxx ,it was his choice, he could still get foids even without escortmaxx
but in my case i can t get foids
but in my case i can t get foids
But the question is why pay for sex if it's available to you for free? He probably wasn't able to find partners in the USA so he had to geomax since foids are so fucking picky today.
IT IS BEYOND OVER FOR THE MALE RACE
WE HIRE ESCORTS OR WE DIE KHHV
WE HIRE ESCORTS OR WE DIE KHHV
I was told that bar girls are sometimes afraid of taking young and good looking customers, because they might be seeking an escort to do bestial sex stuff that a normal foid would not accept doing.
Mangione also had a fight with 7 ladyboys, I really wonder what was going on.
At least it's a ladybar, not a ladyboy bar... . lol
He was probably a degenerate.
Yeah, he looked perfect. His only minus was his height.
Doesn't he himself come from an afluent family? Aren't they rich?
No wonder he of all people killed that CRO.
This screams entitlement.
But why degenerate? Because he escortmaxxed?
I feel kinda attacked, ngl. I only did it so I wouldn't have to turn 30 and not know what sex is like.
Mogs ER they said
Because he escortedmaxx despite not needing it. Indicating he might have seeked degenerated practices including some with ladyboys.
The term "degenerate" was originally a biological term. An organism is degenerate if it's maladaptive to its environment, unable to survive, tending towards decay, weakness and extinction.
He's removing the term from its original fuction, turning it into a worthless moralistic abstraction. In reality, the onanistic incel forum poster is far more biologically degenerate than the escortmaxer. The latter has more energy, drive, confidence, self-esteem, virility etc., all hallmarks of one's ability to survive and thrive.
The incel moralist is a delusional hypocrite who frames his weakness and passivity as a badge of honour.
He's removing the term from its original fuction, turning it into a worthless moralistic abstraction. In reality, the onanistic incel forum poster is far more biologically degenerate than the escortmaxer. The latter has more energy, drive, confidence, self-esteem, virility etc., all hallmarks of one's ability to survive and thrive.
The incel moralist is a delusional hypocrite who frames his weakness and passivity as a badge of honour.
There's nothing wrong with escortmaxxing to experience sex as an incel, but I highly doubt that was the case with him.
Woah there, shots fired. I however also believe that there are two types of degeneracy, the physical and mental.
So, he is not wrong, but neither are you.
I doubt that, at least @AtrociousCitizen , is such an onanist.
I'm not surprised. He lived in Japan for a while from when I remember, and Japan is ultra nightmare difficulty when it comes to trying to get a woman, especially as a foreigner. Very xenophobic (even a lot of prostitutes won't touch a gaijin), very hypergamous women, among the highest rates of inceldom on the planet and looksmaxxed pretty boys are everywhere.
I've talked to a lot of people who lived and worked in Japan and most agree it's easier to get a gf in America than Japan.
There are some japanese women who are into gaijins...but they want the young, tall, blonde haired blue eyed, nordic/germanic phenotype ones....and Luigi's a 5'8, dark haired, brown eyed med.
Last edited:
He is just a gray who is interested in taking the unnecessary role of the contrarian — the term degenerate also stands for having lost the physical, mental, or moral qualities considered normal and desirable; showing evidence of decline. I can substantiate my usage of the word degenerate with anthropological, moral, and pragmatic arguments; one doesn't have to pay hefty sums to whores to be any of the things he listed, quite the opposite.
He has taken a biological term that describes redundancy and tried to apply it to individual behavior in a moral vacuum. That’s like saying a lion that refuses to eat a poisoned carcass is “degenerate” because it’s not consuming calories, while the hyena that gorges itself and dies a week later is “more fit” because it showed more “drive” and “virility.” to put it simply, he is confusing short-term reproductive activity with long-term adaptiveness, which is the basis of all human civilization and the greatness of the modern Western world.
In nature, fitness isn’t about how many impulses one indulges but about how effectively one’s behavior sustains genetic and social integrity. By that measure, the “onanistic incel,” who rejects a system he views as corrupt and maladaptive, is more akin to a cell refusing to replicate a cancerous mutation.
Besides, just because something is natural, doesn't mean it ought to be good. And he also misapplied the biological term 'degeneracy' here, which is quite ironic, as he himself moralizes it
Last edited:
He is just a gray who is interested in taking the unnecessary role of the contrarian — the term degenerate also stands for having lost the physical, mental, or moral qualities considered normal and desirable; showing evidence of decline. I can substantiate my usage of the word degenerate with anthropological, moral, and pragmatic arguments; one doesn't have to pay hefty sums to whores to be any of the things he listed, quite the opposite.
He has taken a biological term that describes species-level maladaptation and tried to apply it to individual behavior in a moral vacuum. That’s like saying a lion that refuses to eat a poisoned carcass is “degenerate” because it’s not consuming calories, while the hyena that gorges itself and dies a week later is “more fit” because it showed more “drive” and “virility.” to put it simply, he is confusing short-term reproductive activity with long-term adaptiveness, which is the basis of all human civilization and the greatness of the modern Western world.
In nature, fitness isn’t about how many impulses one indulges but about how effectively one’s behavior sustains genetic and social integrity. By that measure, the “onanistic incel,” who rejects a system he views as corrupt and maladaptive, is more akin to a cell refusing to replicate a cancerous mutation.
Besides, just because something is natural, doesn't mean it ought to be good. And he also misapplied the biological term 'degeneracy' here, which is quite ironic, as he himseld moralizes it
"He is just a gray"
I've been on this forum in some capacity for years but I'm not addicted. Half a million posts in 12 months is itself proof of degeneracy.
"By that measure, the “onanistic incel,” who rejects a system he views as corrupt and maladaptive"
Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I have far less respect for a shut-in virgin who plays with himself while watching images of women being fucked (the virtual cuckoldry you won't deny you engage in), who will never fulfil his physical desires and who will gravitate towards even more sordid perversion over time, than I do a man who satisfies heterosexual lusts physically in the real world via the oldest institution, as males have from time immemorial.
Hypocrisy and dishonesty are also contemptible traits. It wouldn't be so bad if you admitted that you are a degenerate yourself, no better (and indeed worse) than escortmaxers, and conceded that the real reason for your abstention is a lack of confidence, competance, bravery, virility etc. But you lack the courage to do even that.
I've been on this forum in some capacity for years but I'm not addicted. Half a million posts in 12 months is itself proof of degeneracy.
"By that measure, the “onanistic incel,” who rejects a system he views as corrupt and maladaptive"
Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I have far less respect for a shut-in virgin who plays with himself while watching images of women being fucked (the virtual cuckoldry you won't deny you engage in), who will never fulfil his physical desires and who will gravitate towards even more sordid perversion over time, than I do a man who satisfies heterosexual lusts physically in the real world via the oldest institution, as males have from time immemorial.
Hypocrisy and dishonesty are also contemptible traits. It wouldn't be so bad if you admitted that you are a degenerate yourself, no better (and indeed worse) than escortmaxers, and conceded that the real reason for your abstention is a lack of confidence, competance, bravery, virility etc. But you lack the courage to do even that.
Apparently he was using troons which is why he visited Asian countries:
View: https://x.com/nypost/status/1980793399859966199
View: https://x.com/nypost/status/1980793399859966199
By your own standard, obsession with short-term sexual satisfaction, especially when mediated through transactional or virtual means, is far more “degenerate” in the biological and civilizational sense than considered, intentional abstention. In biology, degeneracy actually refers to reversion to a simpler form as a result of losing a complex or adaptive structure present in the ancestral form (unlike the moralistic definition you hypocritically gave); by that very logic, to act in an animalistically promiscuous and superficial manner — to contribute to a system of corrupt sexual gratification, and pay for an insulting mockery of intimacy — is the true degenerate behavior one can exhibit within a civil society, for it also the most basic and primal one; that is a reversion to ancestral form of animalistic lust (which is not even met in a genuine manner). Such a person is the degenerate, for he isn't even engaging in the act of reproduction; he often pays an exorbitant price to a woman, within a gynocentric, anti-male system — what does that make him, if not a degenerate? Some degree of prostitution could theoretically make sense, but in a society as gynocentric as this one, it's much more cucked than in the past.
Your whole notion presumes that “satisfying heterosexual lusts physically” is automatically virtuous, but a large portion of history and anthropology do not support such a simplistic correlation. It was often seen as immoral, even if it was tolerated. Sexual indulgence, especially via commercialized or morally vacuous channels, undermines social cohesion, long-term reproductive strategy, and mental integrity, which are qualities that hold great importance when it comes to adaptiveness.
Furthermore, you mentioned the metric of judgment as courage, competence, or virility. I think we should at least define them accurately. To be courageous is to act in accordance with one's principles and long-term views despite pressure and animalistic lust (unlike women), competence is the ability to traverse the social and moral landscape without succumbing to base impulses (again, unlike women), and virility is not mere sexual activity but the ability to propagate one’s values and genetic legacy sustainably, which does not occur in habitual prostitution, nor does it occur without it as an incel, but at least in the latter you are not lying to yourself that you are some slayer with "muh virility" because you are paying whores money and contributing to degeneracy.
Also, you mentioned how it's one of the oldest institutions, and you are correct; if I remember correctly, there was even a study conducted on monkeys that found that when given a sort of currency, one of the first concepts that emerges is prostitution; I agree, the habitual escortmaxer is akin to a monkey — incapable of observing the fact he is engaging in a superficial imitation of desire — he fulfills his primal desires, but at what cost? He is now a primal being bound by the powers of its dick. Clearly, just because something is old and natural, it must also be good, surely.
Also hilarious how you insist on labeling me as some sort of hypocrite, yet all your arguments collapse under the very logic you invoke, and you are the one who already exhibited hypocrisy by trying to label me as moralistic, yet you did the very same thing, even if your morality is clearly more hedonistic. You claim I am degenerate because I abstain from transactional or virtual sexual indulgence, but you are fine with short-term gratification, moral cowardice, and slavish submission to base impulses. By that standard, it is you who is truly degenerate, addicted to instant pleasure, dependent on prostitutes, and entirely incapable of exercising self-restraint or principle.
"for it also the most basic and primal one; that is a reversion to ancestral form of animalistic lust"
Humans are animals and sex is inherently animalistic. It's a basic and fundamental expression of vitality. Celibacy by contrast, at least the kind of celibacy that is common on this forum (onanistic and voyeuristic, techno-cuckoldry) represents a fundemental failure of animal vitality and instinct, forshadowing the end of one's line.
"Such a person is the degenerate, for he isn't even engaging in the act of reproduction"
This applies to an even greater extent to the celibate. At least in principle having sex with a woman is reproductive. And a man who has sex with prostitutes builds sexual experience, confidence, competence, motivation and he acquaints himself with risk. The average escortmaxer is no doubt physically superior and more socially adept than the average celibate masturbator. The celibate withdraws from the active sexual world and becomes a passive voyeur, making reproduction less likely.
"an insulting mockery of intimacy"
It's far more authentic and potentially intimate than watching a whore get ravished on the internet, or abstaining entirely, which virtually no one does because it's completely unnatural. You're also putting the romanticised "individual connection" on too high a pedestal (which you and I will likely never experience, particularly you). Even if not perfet, there's potentially great physical and psychological relief from satiating one's lusts with heterosexual sex, as we are all born to do. The idea that being a terminally-online nerd virgin is more masculine ("muh repression, muh moral principles") than having sex with prostitutes is nothing more than intellectual gymnastics and self-delusion.
"he often pays an exorbitant price to a woman"
It's cheap compared to the price you pay to regular women (usually for far less in return), in terms of time, energy and stress as well as money. Society is gynocentric, sure. So therefore you check out? Withdraw into your little cave or parents' basement? How is that masculine?
"undermines social cohesion"
I'm not in favour of increasing social cohesion in a corrupt society. Men having passive addictions like the internet and video games increase "social cohesion". Your whole perspective is low T, cucked, unmasculine, oversocialised and overcivilised, suicidal, passively degenerate.
"To be courageous is to act in accordance with one's principles and long-term views despite pressure and animalistic lust"
As if you don't watch porn or masturbate, you're on the internet most of the day. Come on. Virtually every religious larper is a hypocrite.
"You claim I am degenerate"
Yes. You live in a world of abstraction and are going to die an onanistic, voyeuristic virgin, owing to your hypocrisy and cowardice which masquerades as "civilised morality", which itself is baseless and socially conditioned.
Humans are animals and sex is inherently animalistic. It's a basic and fundamental expression of vitality. Celibacy by contrast, at least the kind of celibacy that is common on this forum (onanistic and voyeuristic, techno-cuckoldry) represents a fundemental failure of animal vitality and instinct, forshadowing the end of one's line.
"Such a person is the degenerate, for he isn't even engaging in the act of reproduction"
This applies to an even greater extent to the celibate. At least in principle having sex with a woman is reproductive. And a man who has sex with prostitutes builds sexual experience, confidence, competence, motivation and he acquaints himself with risk. The average escortmaxer is no doubt physically superior and more socially adept than the average celibate masturbator. The celibate withdraws from the active sexual world and becomes a passive voyeur, making reproduction less likely.
"an insulting mockery of intimacy"
It's far more authentic and potentially intimate than watching a whore get ravished on the internet, or abstaining entirely, which virtually no one does because it's completely unnatural. You're also putting the romanticised "individual connection" on too high a pedestal (which you and I will likely never experience, particularly you). Even if not perfet, there's potentially great physical and psychological relief from satiating one's lusts with heterosexual sex, as we are all born to do. The idea that being a terminally-online nerd virgin is more masculine ("muh repression, muh moral principles") than having sex with prostitutes is nothing more than intellectual gymnastics and self-delusion.
"he often pays an exorbitant price to a woman"
It's cheap compared to the price you pay to regular women (usually for far less in return), in terms of time, energy and stress as well as money. Society is gynocentric, sure. So therefore you check out? Withdraw into your little cave or parents' basement? How is that masculine?
"undermines social cohesion"
I'm not in favour of increasing social cohesion in a corrupt society. Men having passive addictions like the internet and video games increase "social cohesion". Your whole perspective is low T, cucked, unmasculine, oversocialised and overcivilised, suicidal, passively degenerate.
"To be courageous is to act in accordance with one's principles and long-term views despite pressure and animalistic lust"
As if you don't watch porn or masturbate, you're on the internet most of the day. Come on. Virtually every religious larper is a hypocrite.
"You claim I am degenerate"
Yes. You live in a world of abstraction and are going to die an onanistic, voyeuristic virgin, owing to your hypocrisy and cowardice which masquerades as "civilised morality", which itself is baseless and socially conditioned.
Last edited:
its so over. even luigi magione an chadlite, with millions of dollars had to escortmaxx, and who foids lust over lmao.
He probably just wanted to fuck a girl in Japan and didn't want to get into a relationship pretty understandable if you ask me
Fuck a Tranny*
N
My chad friend used escorts even lol, and he sed to get like two girls a day during summer so definitely not the issue, guy even wanted to do a two man on an escort fir my birthday lol
Men are animals, but they are also social and rational animals, which distinguishes them from mere instinct-driven creatures such as females. The problem I have with what you are saying here is your framing equates any expression of lust with vitality, ignoring that vitality also requires self-control, foresight, and contribution to one’s lineage and society, as well as a principled refusal to participate in degenerate behavior.
The celibacy on this forum doesn't represent a failure of animal vitality, but a failure of a society that has lost its way and the depraved nature of the female in the majority of cases; honestly, surprising to see you aren't banned with the rhetoric you are spewing here
No, that does not apply to the celibate, as the celibate does not engage in a superficial act while funneling money to whores; he is honest with himself about the situation a corrupt society put him into, and he refuses to engage in a mockery of intimacy. Your comparison is superficial. The biological purpose of sex is not automatically fulfilled by prostitution, where conception is completely irrelevant. Experience with std ridden whores is not synonymous with evolutionary fitness or social adaptiveness. Paying a woman for sex and calling it experience building is nonsensical; you are simply gratifying impulses without creating lasting social, genetic, or moral value. Meanwhile, abstention from transactional sexual indulgence is an active rejection of the lowest common denominator of primal desire, which preserves integrity even if it seems less physically demonstrative.
There is simply no causal link between fucking whores, paying them money and being strong, competent, or whatnot. Your entire argument is also fallacious, because while you are claiming you are talking about averages, you are equating the most acceptable escortmaxer in your view, and painting him as someone with vitality, strength, and courage — yet you are appealing to an extreme on the other end, by specifically focusing on this figure which you present as a voyeuristic masturbator who is feeble and sanctimonious; that would be like me appealing to an escortmaxer who pays escorts to peg him in the ass, or some fatass who has money to pay for whores — neither of them is superior to a principled, healthy individual who rejects degeneracy, and not even an equivalent man is, especially in terms of morality.
You are conflating physical release with genuine relational or psychological benefit. Abstention or restraint is simply a principled refusal to engage in an inherently exploitative or shallow system. As far as I am concerned, engaging in corrupt sexual systems for relief is itself a delusion masquerading as masculinity, far worse than the so-called delusion I am under.
Obviously, it's cheaper than betabuxxing; I do respect escortmaxers more than subservient cucks who fund their wife's lifestyle without receiving anything in return, but that is entirely irrelevant to the conversation, and I don't see how mere indulgence in transactional satisfaction is masculine unless you have some skewed definition of masculinity. It's preferable and more 'masculine' to show restraint and limit participation in a corrupt system as much as possible, and restraint has historically been one of the core traits of masculinity.
You misunderstood my point. Social cohesion is not advocated as a moral obligation; it is part of measuring adaptiveness and sustainability. Disruption of cohesion via transactional sexual indulgence does not improve your position, and reinforces the gynocentric system you claim to despise. Actively participating in a degenerate system does not demonstrate “masculinity" — hell, if anything, it demonstrates uncivilized femininity, which is one of the primary reasons society is in a state of decay.
Viewing porn or masturbating occasionally does not equate to the transactional exploitation you glorify. Critiquing the moral or adaptive consequences of prostitution or transactional sex does not require perfection but an understanding of the system’s structural degeneracy. Your attempt to discredit me via expected human flaws is a red herring. Sure, one may watch a video depicting a naked woman for 10 minutes a day while masturbating, but that is no way, shape, or form equivalent to an active participation within a corrupt and gynocentric system that undermines some of the central values of a healthy society, and to funneling money directly into the hands of a whore so she can have sex with the man she truly desires later on and often times live an extravagant lifestyle.
Living according to principle may appear abstract, but it is the only consistent way to avoid degeneracy defined as regression to primal, exploitative behavior. The logic you are demonstrating here is no different than the one women we often criticize abide by. I'd rather die an incel than pay money to some whore just so I can experience the most fake and empty act imaginable, while behaving in the same manner that I utterly despise, no different than some Chad who goes around fucking women left and right, with the difference being that I would be a cucked degenerate who also has to pay for a substandard experience. Your entire line of reasoning implicitly elevates chad as superior, not only in looks, but genuinely, intrinsically superior.
C
JFL
"equates any expression of lust with vitality"Men are animals, but they are also social and rational animals, which distinguishes them from mere instinct-driven creatures such as females. The problem I have with what you are saying here is your framing equates any expression of lust with vitality, ignoring that vitality also requires self-control, foresight, and contribution to one’s lineage and society, as well as a principled refusal to participate in degenerate behavior.
The celibacy on this forum doesn't represent a failure of animal vitality, but a failure of a society that has lost its way and the depraved nature of the female in the majority of cases; honestly, surprising to see you aren't banned with the rhetoric you are spewing here
No, that does not apply to the celibate, as the celibate does not engage in a superficial act while funneling money to whores; he is honest with himself about the situation a corrupt society put him into, and he refuses to engage in a mockery of intimacy. Your comparison is superficial. The biological purpose of sex is not automatically fulfilled by prostitution, where conception is completely irrelevant. Experience with std ridden whores is not synonymous with evolutionary fitness or social adaptiveness. Paying a woman for sex and calling it experience building is nonsensical; you are simply gratifying impulses without creating lasting social, genetic, or moral value. Meanwhile, abstention from transactional sexual indulgence is an active rejection of the lowest common denominator of primal desire, which preserves integrity even if it seems less physically demonstrative.
There is simply no causal link between fucking whores, paying them money and being strong, competent, or whatnot. Your entire argument is also fallacious, because while you are claiming you are talking about averages, you are equating the most acceptable escortmaxer in your view, and painting him as someone with vitality, strength, and courage — yet you are appealing to an extreme on the other end, by specifically focusing on this figure which you present as a voyeuristic masturbator who is feeble and sanctimonious; that would be like me appealing to an escortmaxer who pays escorts to peg him in the ass, or some fatass who has money to pay for whores — neither of them is superior to a principled, healthy individual who rejects degeneracy, and not even an equivalent man is, especially in terms of morality.
You are conflating physical release with genuine relational or psychological benefit. Abstention or restraint is simply a principled refusal to engage in an inherently exploitative or shallow system. As far as I am concerned, engaging in corrupt sexual systems for relief is itself a delusion masquerading as masculinity, far worse than the so-called delusion I am under.
Obviously, it's cheaper than betabuxxing; I do respect escortmaxers more than subservient cucks who fund their wife's lifestyle without receiving anything in return, but that is entirely irrelevant to the conversation, and I don't see how mere indulgence in transactional satisfaction is masculine unless you have some skewed definition of masculinity. It's preferable and more 'masculine' to show restraint and limit participation in a corrupt system as much as possible, and restraint has historically been one of the core traits of masculinity.
You misunderstood my point. Social cohesion is not advocated as a moral obligation; it is part of measuring adaptiveness and sustainability. Disruption of cohesion via transactional sexual indulgence does not improve your position, and reinforces the gynocentric system you claim to despise. Actively participating in a degenerate system does not demonstrate “masculinity" — hell, if anything, it demonstrates uncivilized femininity, which is one of the primary reasons society is in a state of decay.
Viewing porn or masturbating occasionally does not equate to the transactional exploitation you glorify. Critiquing the moral or adaptive consequences of prostitution or transactional sex does not require perfection but an understanding of the system’s structural degeneracy. Your attempt to discredit me via expected human flaws is a red herring. Sure, one may watch a video depicting a naked woman for 10 minutes a day while masturbating, but that is no way, shape, or form equivalent to an active participation within a corrupt and gynocentric system that undermines some of the central values of a healthy society, and to funneling money directly into the hands of a whore so she can have sex with the man she truly desires later on and often times live an extravagant lifestyle.
Living according to principle may appear abstract, but it is the only consistent way to avoid degeneracy defined as regression to primal, exploitative behavior. The logic you are demonstrating here is no different than the one women we often criticize abide by. I'd rather die an incel than pay money to some whore just so I can experience the most fake and empty act imaginable, while behaving in the same manner that I utterly despise, no different than some Chad who goes around fucking women left and right, with the difference being that I would be a cucked degenerate who also has to pay for a substandard experience. Your entire line of reasoning implicitly elevates chad as superior, not only in looks, but genuinely, intrinsically superior.
No. I equate heterosexual sex to vitality and being a porn-addict onanist incel (almost all here who don't escortmax or haven't covertly ascended), onanist incel or non-onanist incel, with degeneracy.
"but a failure of a society that has lost its way"
We can blame society until the cows come home. But rotting in your room and trying to justify it does no good.
"by specifically focusing on this figure which you present as a voyeuristic masturbator who is feeble and sanctimonious"
That's a good description of you, yes. And it's a common position on this forum in the anti-prostitution crowd.
What is the basis of your ethical beliefs? Is it Christianity? The men of the cloth are a bunch of hypocritical perverts. If it's non-Christian traditionalism in the mould of Julius Evola then he was a nororious whoremonger and saw nothing wrong with it.
"You are conflating physical release with genuine relational or psychological benefit"
I have quotes from incels who claim it's dramatically improved their psychological state. But you're never going to find out.
"and restraint has historically been one of the core traits of masculinity."
Self-control is a masculine trait, LDARing is not masculine behaviour. Heterosexual fucking is more masculine than jerking off, especially to porn. Long-term celibacy exerts a huge psychological toll on men, sex increases one's confidence, competence, motivation, happiness, drive, self-esteem, testosterone, in other words his masculinity.
"reinforces the gynocentric system you claim to despise"
Prostitution weakens women's power over men relative to relationships and it doesn't undermine or destroy a man's virility as porn does. By opposing prostitution you effectively encourage porn addiction as these lusts WILL be satiated one way or another.
"Viewing porn or masturbating occasionally does not equate to the transactional exploitation you glorify."
Finally. You've conceded that you are a moralistic techno-cuckold degenerate hypocrite yourself.
The gynocentric powers that be want men watching porn more than they want them escortmaxing. Porn is "free" for a reason and by consuming it, you are contributing to the financial and status success of pornstars, who become symbols of femininity in the culture for women to imitate and men to support. Prostitution has always been around, always been common and never destroyed society, porn in its modern form is unlike anything historically. It's psychologically, morally and symbolically corrosive, yet you are treating it as a lesser evil. Because you can indulge in it without leaving the comfort of your house, being in physical or psychological shape, or because it's far more of a social norm than the relatively taboo prostitution.
"as regression to primal, exploitative behavior"
This is the basis of organic life. You're at war with your own instincts, despite your indiscipline/inability to avoid indulging them by watching another man have sex with women (presumably, though given your religious moralism who knows) that you find attractive.
"Your entire line of reasoning implicitly elevates chad as superior"
In the metric of physical attractiveness then virtually by definition he is. Not intrinsically though, it depends on one's values. One of the benefits of prostitution is that it provides sexual access to non-chads. It significantly separates sex from female validation and approval.
Two of my pieces on prostitution:
View: https://www.tumblr.com/neetzschean/793773967146139648/potential-benefits-of-prostitution-for-an
View: https://www.tumblr.com/neetzschean/793860437264465920/who-are-superior-regular-women-or-prostitutes
U
Jfl
Heterosexual sex can express vitality, but it can also be a symptom of compulsion or emptiness. Vitality is more akin to effective, principled engagement with one’s environment.
Withdrawal alone is not virtuous.
But withdrawal as protest or preservation from a degenerate social order is qualitatively different from apathy. When one makes the choice to refrain from transactional sex in a gynocentric, exploitative system, it is akin to actively rejecting a corrupt mechanism, much like refusing to participate in a rigged gambling system. Also, not engaging in prostitution ≠ rotting in your room.
t. Feeble degenerate
My ethical stance could be simply described as rule-consequentialism with some nuance for edge cases (typically by borrowing ideas from virtue ethics in some extreme areas).
The validity of an ethical principle does not depend on whether its past proponents were flawless. Evola’s personal indulgences do not invalidate his recognition that transcendence requires the hierarchy of the spirit over the flesh. Likewise, hypocrisy among priests does not negate moral philosophy.
Furthermore, in this case, all you’re simply making is a series of tu quoque arguments that aren’t even proper examples of the idea you think you’re invoking; it’s like saying gluttony and eating a snack once a day are morally equivalent, hence one must be a hypocrite if he eats a snack while criticizing a fatass who gobbles down a lot of food.
There are also plenty of drug addicts who claim drugs improved their psychological state.
Listing a bunch of alleged positive effects of prostitution does not make them true — confidence, for one, cannot be attained if one is cognizant of the fact he is essentially a subhuman who has to pay hefty sums of money to experience a fake act. You would have to be delusional to somehow increase your confidence if you are a 5'6, balding ethnic with a small dick, and the same goes for all the other nonsense listed. Now, I don't deny the fact that for some delusional people, it can and will have positive effects in that regard, but I highly doubt that would be the case for the majority of men who are self-aware enough to observe the pathetic situation they are putting themselves into. In the end of the day, even animals can copulate; only a man can refrain, and definitely should when it comes to prostitution, which is exploitative and degenerate.
That is a false dichotomy. Refusing prostitution does not entail promotion of consuming porn; both are degenerative in distinct ways. Your argument that prostitution “weakens women’s power” ignores the fact that it monetizes that power, institutionalizes it, and thus perpetuates gynocentrism economically. The man who buys sex is not free from female control, for he simply pays rent for his own subjugation. I will concede you are correct to some degree, as within our current society, if no drastic measures can be taken in the macro level, it doesn't make sense to specifically focus on prostitution and single it out as bad, in the same way it wouldn't make sense to specifically focus on porn; these are symptoms of an insidious problem in society, and I would obviously prefer it if, say, all the men who pay for OnlyFans, use that money on prostitution which is a better deal. Ideally, however, the focus should be to avoid prostitution as well.
As I said, acknowledging human imperfection is simply realism. I distinguish between occasional human weakness and ideological surrender to vice. You glorify indulgence as virtue which is the real hypocrisy, pretending submission to lust is strength.
Both industries thrive on male weakness. The solution is not to choose the “lesser corruption" in your perspective, but to outgrow both. Also, watching a bootleg video contributes far less financially to women than directly paying a whore an exorbitant sum of money, so I don't see the point you are trying to make there; again, you are presenting this caricature of the opposite side which is simply ridiculous, almost as if you haven't even read my previous reply. Furthermore, there are plenty of ways prostitution has hurt past societies such as moral degradation, weakening of long-term relationships, and spread of disease.
Yes, and that war is called civilization.
To sublimate instinct into higher purpose is the very process that created philosophy, science, and culture.
but he gets simped over wtf
Having sex is more vital and masculine than being a porn-addict onanist virgin with 500,000+ incels.is forum posts.
You've admitted to using porn, participating in a far more corrupt system and abstaining from sex makes porn addiction a certainty for most men. I gamble but prostitution is very distinct from gambling. It's x money for x minutes and if the experience is bad, you find another woman. You can spend any amount of money on gambling and lose it all for no return. In some sense, every decision we make is a gamble.
"rule-consequentialism with some nuance for edge cases"
You're not even invoking God to justify your baseless moral system. It's always been understood that unless there's some kind of cosmic carrot and stick (karma, heaven/hell), these moralisms are empty.
Your moral coping isn't doing you any good. Aside from being an internet addict permavirgin you are "consumed by fury". It's also ironic because regular women are far more mad about men who have sex with prostitutes than quasi-suicidal degenerates who rot in their rooms.
The child molesting and homosexual priests know that the injunctions of abstract moral systems are for the little people. They're smart enough to understand the con! They have little or no fear of the "hell" they preach about, clearly.
"There are also plenty of drug addicts who claim drugs improved their psychological state."
Drug users, rather than drug addicts. In many cases they'd be right.
"he is essentially a subhuman who has to pay hefty sums of money to experience a fake act"
This is extreme gynocentrism. "Subhuman" is women's sexual assessment, which you have internalised. Also, it's far more real than the porn you watch: you are actually fucking. Why is it fake? Because you doesn't "truly love you"? In other words, you are totally dependent on her finding you attractive or worthy, which is the essence of gynocentrism.
Hefty sums of money? It's worth it for the sheer physical and psychological relief of sex. What else am I going to buy rather than consistent sex? A house that I'll live in on my own?
"Listing a bunch of alleged positive effects of prostitution does not make them true — confidence"
Assume they are true, what then? Further, it obviously does increase confidence as you know you can perform, even with a stranger or relative stranger. A man's phallic potency is a cornerstone of his confidence, the castrated man is barely felt to be a man, if he's a man at all. If you're an onanist virgin you don't know whether you can perform, so your confidence will be shot.
"As I said, acknowledging human imperfection is simply realism"
There's no realism to be found in your argument. Realism: if prostitution isn't engaged in, an incel will be a porn addict onanist, a castrated slave.
At least you admit that prostitution is better than onlyfans addiction. But onlyfans and "free" porn is much the same.
"pretending submission to lust is strength"
The real pretence is that repression, onanism, guilt-ridden submission to porn and permavirginity is stronger than porn-free fucking.
"Yes, and that war is called civilization."
Prostitution has underpinned civilisation, ask Aquinas and Augustine. Virility is a key root of human culture.
Think from the perspective of one's enemies: do they want men sexually active or as life-long virgin techno-cuckolds? What is more consistent with a healthy society?
If masculinity were reducible to “who ejaculates where,” then a chimpanzee outperforms any philosopher. “Vital” to what, exactly? To the propagation of genes divorced from principle, meaning, or higher purpose? Civilized masculinity is the sublimation of raw instinct into self-mastery and symbolic creation. The problem is that we have a fundamental disagreement about this part.
Acknowledging exposure to a corrupt system ≠ endorsing it. I also addressed this argument in my previous reply already.
A moral system does not require a supernatural overseer to be valid; it only requires internal coherence and alignment with long-term civilizational flourishing and intuitive morality. When it comes to meta-ethics, I am essentially a moral emotivist, and I also believe that morality has a level of truth similar to inductive knowledge, but that is an entirely different conversation. It does not make it baseless, but the fact you think it does is not surprising.
A moral argument isn’t “coping” merely because it contradicts your hedonism, and there are many women who support prostitution so long as it's within a gynocentric system, just as there are plenty of women who are angered by porn. It's impossible to simply quanitfy which causes more anger, especially when there are means far superior to combat gynocentrism.
"Because some doctors smoke, medicine is useless!"
So your argument is some people temporarily benefit from a destructive habit, therefore it’s fine? That’s the same rationalization every addict uses.
Fake because the intimacy is mechanical, commercial, and void of reciprocity. It's the simulation of desire rather than its presence. Every dollar you hand over reinforces the hierarchy where female sexuality remains the premium currency. Also, the label subhuman is simply an intersubjective reality, and using your own definition of value against you, just in a slightly different way, in order to demonstrate how stupid it is; the logic you have used so far has been the most gynocentric, female adjacent that I have seen on this forum.
All I am getting from this reply is that you value release over purpose, and comfort over meaning. Civilization was not built by men who thought like that.
Even if I granted that prostitution boosts confidence, it would be illusory confidence, derivative of dependency.
Again, a false dichotomy. I have already responded to this, so I won't regurgitate the same argument as it would be a waste of time with this pointless interaction.
Both prostitution and OnlyFans erode dignity and reinforce the commodification of intimacy, much more than watching a video of a naked woman does, even if all are harmful to varying degrees. The ultimate goal, however, would be the cessation of all forms of degeneracy like that.
A man who must pay money to copulate for validation is the true slave to repression, as he fears facing his own emptiness.
Aquinas and Augustine did not endorse prostitution as a virtue. They tolerated it as a lesser evil, a pragmatic containment of lust, much like sewage systems contain filth without glorifying it.
"Prostitution is like the filth in the sea, or a sewer in the palace. Take away the sewer, and you will fill the palace with pollution; and likewise with the filth (in the sea). Take away prostitutes from the world, and you will fill it with sodomy".
Not even saying I agree with the principle here btw.
Enemies would prefer men who are enslaved by their impulses, easily pacified by orgasms and expenditures. Neither of the two options is preferable, for you are already operating with the presupposition of a fundamentally flawed society. Both of these are broken men, with the latter "techno-cuckolds" being better and more principled overall.
Luigi Mangina
Believe it or not, some men hire escorts for the experience and quick fun. It is not a strictly incel activity only.
Also luigi is nowhere near chad territory.
Hes 5'8", its just the criminal halo gave him an smv boost.
In reality hes an average normie maybe slightly above average, he would do good with noodlewhores and thats it.
Also luigi is nowhere near chad territory.
Hes 5'8", its just the criminal halo gave him an smv boost.
In reality hes an average normie maybe slightly above average, he would do good with noodlewhores and thats it.
"Civilized masculinity is the sublimation of raw instinct into self-mastery and symbolic creation"
At its core masculinity isn't civilised and civilising masculinity amounts to watering it down. By your standard the virgin nerd-genius is the epitome of masculinity, even though he may be largely or entirely lacking in primordial masculine attributes.
"Acknowledging exposure to a corrupt system ≠ endorsing it"
In practice it does. If a man's lusts aren't satiated with irl heterosexual sex, they will be in some other way, as you know. For most on this forum, it will be porn (whether "free" or paid) and masturbation. Others will drift to femdom, homosexuality or transgenderism.
"it only requires internal coherence and alignment with long-term civilizational flourishing and intuitive morality"
Moral intuitions vary wildly. "Long-term civilisational flourishing" is an arbitrary valuation (what constitutes long-term? Why is civilisation so valuable in itself?) Many systems may have "internal coherence" but are ultimately based on nothing. Morality requires force for imposition and the "moral systems" with the greatest force behind them in modern Western civilisation are liberal individualism + Zionism + third worldism.
"A moral argument isn’t “coping” merely because it contradicts your hedonism"
It's coping because it's baseless, yet a way in which you can derive some feeling of superiority to the "immoral" masses who don't care about it, even as you're not able to follow it yourself (which produces additional feelings of guilt and anger).
"Because some doctors smoke, medicine is useless!"
There's nothing scientific about the claims of theologians, whether they are hypocrites or not (and most no doubt are).
"So your argument is some people temporarily benefit from a destructive habit, therefore it’s fine?"
All benefits are temporary as life is temporary. But I see no reason why one couldn't benefit from this for decades. I don't think there's anything inherently destructive about having sex with a woman semi-regularly for money, whereas I think there's a lot destructive about being a permavirgin onanist voyeur.
"Every dollar you hand over reinforces the hierarchy where female sexuality remains the premium currency"
This isn't going to change, better go the prostitution route than to invest copious amounts of time, energy and money into regular women (who have all of the vices of whores, with none of their virtues), and risk one's mental health to boot. Also better to have sex with prostitutes than to have sex with your hand while watching others have sex.
You care so much about some kind of "pure mutual desire", which is the essence of gynocentrism. "I'm not enough unless she truly wants me." You need to stop worrying about this so much.
"Civilization was not built by men who thought like that."
It wasn't built by a bunch of virgin onanists, that's for sure. And if it were I'd seriously question its value.
The "comfortable" option devoid of purpose or meaning is LDAR'ing with half a million posts on Is.
"Even if I granted that prostitution boosts confidence, it would be illusory confidence"
At the very minimum, it gives man confidence that he can fuck, that he's not in practical terms a eunuch. It may pain you to read this but much of a man's confidence comes from his sense of primal virility.
"much more than watching a video"
Intimacy has always been commodified and it's been of great social benefit (Aquinas, Augustine, Houellebecq, Evola). Man becoming a voyeur en masse with the aid of technology is entirely new and far more destructive. But you will be inclined to condemn the (supposed) vices of others much more vehemently than your own.
"A man who must pay money to copulate for validation is the true slave to repression, as he fears facing his own emptiness."
I've faced my empiness for a very long time now. I'll be having sex in about two weeks after nearly 20 years of masturbation and porn use, so I will let you know the results. What stopped me was my own weakness: internalised guilt, porn addiction, sexual anxiety, longing for "pure" female validation.
"Both of these are broken men, with the latter "techno-cuckolds" being better and more principled overall."
There we go: better and more principled(!) in your view to be a life-long virgin techno-cuckold than a whoremonger (as a large proportion of our more masculine ancestors were).
At its core masculinity isn't civilised and civilising masculinity amounts to watering it down. By your standard the virgin nerd-genius is the epitome of masculinity, even though he may be largely or entirely lacking in primordial masculine attributes.
"Acknowledging exposure to a corrupt system ≠ endorsing it"
In practice it does. If a man's lusts aren't satiated with irl heterosexual sex, they will be in some other way, as you know. For most on this forum, it will be porn (whether "free" or paid) and masturbation. Others will drift to femdom, homosexuality or transgenderism.
"it only requires internal coherence and alignment with long-term civilizational flourishing and intuitive morality"
Moral intuitions vary wildly. "Long-term civilisational flourishing" is an arbitrary valuation (what constitutes long-term? Why is civilisation so valuable in itself?) Many systems may have "internal coherence" but are ultimately based on nothing. Morality requires force for imposition and the "moral systems" with the greatest force behind them in modern Western civilisation are liberal individualism + Zionism + third worldism.
"A moral argument isn’t “coping” merely because it contradicts your hedonism"
It's coping because it's baseless, yet a way in which you can derive some feeling of superiority to the "immoral" masses who don't care about it, even as you're not able to follow it yourself (which produces additional feelings of guilt and anger).
"Because some doctors smoke, medicine is useless!"
There's nothing scientific about the claims of theologians, whether they are hypocrites or not (and most no doubt are).
"So your argument is some people temporarily benefit from a destructive habit, therefore it’s fine?"
All benefits are temporary as life is temporary. But I see no reason why one couldn't benefit from this for decades. I don't think there's anything inherently destructive about having sex with a woman semi-regularly for money, whereas I think there's a lot destructive about being a permavirgin onanist voyeur.
"Every dollar you hand over reinforces the hierarchy where female sexuality remains the premium currency"
This isn't going to change, better go the prostitution route than to invest copious amounts of time, energy and money into regular women (who have all of the vices of whores, with none of their virtues), and risk one's mental health to boot. Also better to have sex with prostitutes than to have sex with your hand while watching others have sex.
You care so much about some kind of "pure mutual desire", which is the essence of gynocentrism. "I'm not enough unless she truly wants me." You need to stop worrying about this so much.
"Civilization was not built by men who thought like that."
It wasn't built by a bunch of virgin onanists, that's for sure. And if it were I'd seriously question its value.
The "comfortable" option devoid of purpose or meaning is LDAR'ing with half a million posts on Is.
"Even if I granted that prostitution boosts confidence, it would be illusory confidence"
At the very minimum, it gives man confidence that he can fuck, that he's not in practical terms a eunuch. It may pain you to read this but much of a man's confidence comes from his sense of primal virility.
"much more than watching a video"
Intimacy has always been commodified and it's been of great social benefit (Aquinas, Augustine, Houellebecq, Evola). Man becoming a voyeur en masse with the aid of technology is entirely new and far more destructive. But you will be inclined to condemn the (supposed) vices of others much more vehemently than your own.
"A man who must pay money to copulate for validation is the true slave to repression, as he fears facing his own emptiness."
I've faced my empiness for a very long time now. I'll be having sex in about two weeks after nearly 20 years of masturbation and porn use, so I will let you know the results. What stopped me was my own weakness: internalised guilt, porn addiction, sexual anxiety, longing for "pure" female validation.
"Both of these are broken men, with the latter "techno-cuckolds" being better and more principled overall."
There we go: better and more principled(!) in your view to be a life-long virgin techno-cuckold than a whoremonger (as a large proportion of our more masculine ancestors were).
I thought he was physically unable to have sex and that’s why he chimped out?
It’s crazy how many people, even on this very forum, believe that Japanese women are “heckin’ based and treat men like kings” and that the ungodly overdrive incel epidemic there is the result of “herbivore men”
So many retards can’t grasp the basic concept that men aren’t born “herbivores.” They become this through patterns of repeated rejection, be it sexual or social
It absolutely is civilized, and has been considered that way by almost all respectable definitions of masculinity.
If you think masculinity begins and ends with physical copulation, we’re simply speaking different languages. Someone can have many masculine traits and not engage in prostitution, and I prefer to define masculinity more by consciousness than merely physicality, but it's a mixture of the two.
Exposure to rot doesn’t make one rotten unless he indulges it, and while there is some truth to what you say, prostitution is still worse overall for the reasons I have already stated.
And yet, even amidst variation, nearly all stable civilizations have converged on some restraint of base instinct as a precondition for order. I would classify long-term as anything that takes into consideration the consequences that certain behavior can cause eventually; hypergamy and unchecked female nature for the example or many secular ideologies can still function on the fumes of society for a reasonable amount of time, but eventually the long-term consequences of that behavior and ideologies will continue to worsen; that is an example of behavior that isn't concerned with the long-term, not just on an individual level, but also on a societal level.
Projecting guilt onto others won’t make indulgence a philosophy. You call moral thought “coping” because you’ve reduced meaning to appetite.
The analogy was about hypocrisy. Besides, there are plenty of arguments for an objective basis of morality that isn't theological; the question is how do you define something as scientific? At the end of the day, all epistemology has its limits, even the science — for it is based on inductive reasoning, which one could argue is not much different from inductive reasoning in morality. All you are doing is elevating science derivative of inductive reasoning over morality that is derived from the same sense-based thought pattern arbitrarily.
It’s ironic to invoke meaninglessness while still appealing to “vitality” as if it meant something. We also disagree on the destructiveness of the act, so we are just going in circles now.
If your only response to corruption is “it can’t be changed, so submit to it,” you’ve just articulated the slave’s creed. There many situations where the unfolding events can't be changed, yet it would still be better to refrain from participating.
Of course I am interested in being desired and to receive affection, as that is the essence of inceldom, but even if I know I will never have that — it is preferable to avoid funneling money into the hands of whores to experience something which I know won't be enjoyable. It's still less gynocentric than paying a whore money for what I deserve for free, and I can differentiate between personal value and intersubjective one.
Nor by men who mistook ejaculation for purpose. Civilization was built by men who could endure desire without being ruled by it.
Confidence stems from years of positive reinforcement, not paying hefty prices to a prostitute who sees you as a nobody.
Most of those you listed would not call prostitution noble. At best, they would tolerate it. And I acknowledge my own vices openly, but I can also understand when certain acts aren't comparable in their weight. In this case, however, you are the one who questioned my correct usage of the term degenerate and tried to appeal to a moralistic argument while criticizing me for doing the same. I rarely ever discuss prostitution, so I would hardly call it "vehement."
Good. Then nothing I say can add or subtract from what you’re about to learn. You’ll find out firsthand whether it cures emptiness or merely distracts from it.
Yes, because principle, however pathetic you think it looks, is the last refuge of dignity in a decaying world, and to me, that alone grants meaning and the possibility to die whole.
Jack Donovan defines masculinity as strength, courage, mastery and honour (collective esteem). They are traits that are shared by men who are "good" and "bad", civilised and primitive, and are culturally universal. But they are traits which evolved under primitive conditions and even non-human animals have masculine dominance hierarchies based on these traits. It's long been acknowledged that civilised conditions erode primal masculinity, which has historically underpinned civilisation. The core of masculinity is ultimately independent of civilisation and we'd see much more of it if barbaric conditions reasserted themselves ("gender equality" for instance would go by the wayside without modern technological civilisation).
Does masculinity begin and end with copulation? It's probably too reductive to frame it like that. But without copulation there's no masculinity. And a man's masculinity is in large part based on his physical/sexual virility, his confidence and ability to have sex. A life-long virgin is going to inevitably considered a sub-man or man-boy, even if he has exceptional traits, which most do not. I suspect that someone like Kant, had be been born in our era, would have been a porn addict and thus many of the benefits of his celibacy wouldn't apply.
"nearly all stable civilizations have converged on some restraint of base instinct as a precondition for order"
There will always be laws in any social organsation. But unleashing basic instincts can be a good way to maintain order. Massive access to porn for example. That may make society more passive, reduce the population, enhance system control. But I do not see order as being inherently good.
"Besides, there are plenty of arguments for an objective basis of morality that isn't theological"
And none of these arguments count for anything. While some moral sentiments are innate (not shared by "psychos" though), moral systems are control mechanisms for the masses, with nothing underpinning them (which is why lack of belief in God was considered such a terrifying concept by moralists like John Locke). Many philosophers have argued as such, there's a rich tradition of "moral anti-realism".
But beyond this abstraction, it's ridiculous to think that sticking your penis in a woman for money is "immoral". Does the immorality come from the act in itself (why? how?) or its supposed negative consequences? (which falls apart if the consequences are beneficial, as many have attested).
"If your only response to corruption is “it can’t be changed, so submit to it,”
You seem to see sex as inherently corrupt, which is why you've talked yourself into permavirginity as a "moral" position. Men have always supported women financially, whether through marriage or prostitution, just as males in other species trade resources for sex. In the absence of rape or some kind of romantic idealism or intense mutual lust, this is the basis of male-female relations.
A wise negro had this to say about prostitution in his masculinist classic "The Anatomy of Female Power":
In Western societies in the days of male franchise, the husband, as voter, was his wife's political emissary. He used his vote to elect male law makers who passed laws in his wife’s interest, laws which often punished the natural inclinations and delights of men, and helped to trap men in nest slavery. Some of these laws, passed by all-male legislatures, are monuments to female rascality and misandry. For example, long before women got the vote in the USA, there were laws against prostitution, a service which men needed to lesson the tyranny of frigid or sex-striking wives. - Chinweizu
"It's still less gynocentric than paying a whore money for what I deserve for free"
The more one cares about being "truly desired" by a woman, the more gynocentric one is. We've been socialised into this by a feminist society and it's based on natural desires too (narcissistic ego-stroking) but it's psychologically unhealthy to allow others to dictate your value to you to this degree. You don't "deserve" anything in some cosmic sense, no one does and most men aren't and never were getting it for "free" anyway.
"to experience something which I know won't be enjoyable"
So if it were enjoyable, you'd do it?
Let's say you were placed in a low-tech environment with no women for weeks or months, a kind of rehab facility where you did healthy physical labour, socialised with other men, ate nutritious food etc. Then the man who put you there brought a highly attractive and skilled prostitute to your room. Do you think it wouldn't be enjoyable to have sex with her? You enjoy playing with yourself to porn, which you also claim is immoral. Or is the worry you'd become addicted to this base immorality?
So far, your arguments against prostitution are 1. "She doesn't really love you" (so limited narcissistic validation, from an "inferior creature"), 2. "Waste of money/giving it to women" (this is just miserism, sex is a vital psychological need and a priority for expenditure) 3. "Disease risk" (which always applies to an extent with sex but this betrays an attitude which regards sex and the body as disgusting in itself) 4. "Moral loss" (as if being an onanist porn addict isn't going to warp one more).
Just as feminists will claim that they oppose prostitution due to "disease" or "exploitation", the real reasons for your opposition, like theirs, are more personal and base.
"Nor by men who mistook ejaculation for purpose"
It was built either by slaves or by men providing for their families. And ejaculation was a massive part of that purpose: be fruitful and multiply. Again this shows a hatred of the body and its animal functions.
It's also ironic because incels make sexuality and our relationship with women our implicit purpose, even if purely in a negative sense. It's only when we actually have sex that our obsession with it will subside.
"Confidence stems from years of positive reinforcement"
If I successfully have sex with a prostitute my confidence will increase significantly and permanently because I will know going forward that I'm not, in practical terms, a eunuch.
"Yes, because principle, however pathetic you think it looks, is the last refuge of dignity in a decaying world, and to me, that alone grants meaning and the possibility to die whole."
There is no "principle" in being a life-long virgin techno-cuckold. You can only "die broken" in this state.
Last edited:
The experience exceeded all reasonable expectations. Either the best or second best day of my life.
Granted these are early days but I feel greater confidence, self-esteem, optimism, improved libido, mood, reduced loneliness and deep relief, with the sense that my brain has started to "unwire" the lingering residue of porn addiction.
Luigi Mangione was a degenerate. I'm not going to shed any tears for a health insurance executive, but at the same time, his actions didn't do anything, and leftards invoking his name like a god only further diminishes his actions.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
