LifeFuel If we had sex on female conditions…

[Tunadiver]

If we as humans had sex exclusively on female conditions, wouldn’t the amount of sex had expand compared to an order where women aren’t in full control of human sexuality?

Women are in power when it comes to the sexual market and men are subordinate to them, so it is obvious that the market has to align to female wishes, not just in terms of quality, but also in mode of conduct. Wouldn’t it be logical that girls and women would offer more of their resources (sex) if the premises of the market had become more gynocentric e.g.: use of condoms instead of the pill, or tracking their cycles and even safe abortions as means of contraception to be fully freed of either loss of libido by hormones or reproductive consequences by sex.
They should be more willing to have sex while suffering less to no consequences, thus sex had should increase and even men, though cucked and subordinated (condoms), could profit from sexually free girls and women.
I know this is pretty much limited to the top 10-20% of men, but the bottom bracket of men might be given more of a chance if females feel safer and thus the stakes for them were lower. If the stakes are high they’ll fall into their natural behavior of choosing the absolute best they can get, men had to suppress this in order to establish social justice for men. But now that the market has opened and women have taken back their birthright, wouldn’t it be an interesting thought to have sex on their conditions to make them more accessible?


I’d be glad to hear some constructive opinions on this take.

 

[baldcel123]

Are you a foid?

 

[Somalicel2222]

If that happens than there would be alot less sex. If a women cant get sex she doesnt care while a guy will lower his standards and this just repeats the cycle we have now.

 

[baldcel123]

The most suffering for a foid is to have sex with an incel. This by far exceeds the suffering they have from taking the pill or anything else. So it doesn't matter. Foids will rather fuck a chad and taking the pill then fucking an incel with a condom

 

[Seahorsecel]

Doesn't work that way. We humans adapted to a certain environment (ice-age Europe for whites, Africa for blacks, Siberia for East Asians)

I skimmed through your post so I might have missed some lines, but what I think you are trying to say is to give more dating power to women. (Encouraging men to use contraception instead of women)

If that happens nothing will change. Women evolved to choose the best mate for themselves (hypergamy) Hypergamy scales depending on the males. Foids will never give ugly men a chance ever even if there weren't any consequences for doing so. Foids have a natural disgust for low-status men. You aren't blackpilled if you don't know this.

 

[Seahorsecel]

Are you a foid?

Yeah, I wonder if OP is a troon/foid.

 

[Tunadiver]

If that happens than there would be alot less sex. If a women cant get sex she doesnt care while a guy will lower his standards and this just repeats the cycle we have now.

If women are freer and have to fear no consequences, they should be less restrictive and thus have more sex with more partners.

 

[InceldianWarrior]

the bottom bracket of men might be given more of a chance

It isn't a matter of chance if men are in control of sex.
If women control sexuality you have to be attractive, if men control sexuality you can simply be productive.

In patriarchy what matters is what you achieved or can achieve, whereas in a matriarchy all that matters is what you are, the genes you were born with and the physical appearance they gave you.

 

[Seahorsecel]

If women are freer and have to fear no consequences, they should be less restrictive and thus have more sex with more partners.

...In your dreams.

Women are a lot freer today compared to 100 years ago. But their standards have not decreased. They have increased dramatically! (At least in the west)

 

[NeverEvenBegan]

I know this is pretty much limited to the top 10-20% of men

Pretty much this.

but the bottom bracket of men might be given more of a chance if females feel safer and thus the stakes for them were lower.

You'd think that would be the case, but the thing is, women just want the upper tier Chads. Yeah, they could theoretically fuck non-Chad men more often, but they don't. They want only the best looking men possible. They rather fuck dogs or not at all, if they don't get Chad.

wouldn’t it be an interesting thought to have sex on their conditions to make them more accessible?

It would, but women still want Chad only. They simply do not want to touch non-Chad men. They just want to have sex with the best possible looking men. They don't want to hear about fucking an average man.

 

[Tunadiver]

I skimmed through your post so I might have missed some lines, but what I think you are trying to say is to give more dating power to women. (Encouraging men to use contraception instead of women)

What I’m trying to say is that aligning human sexuality to female needs should make them less restrictive, contraception is just one variable that could be relevant.

And yes I’m not blackpilled, it might be foolish but I want to hope for a sufferable solution to the red pill.
And I’m not female either, I just happened to read a lot about a female perspective, and to understand their natural position of privilege, how it might make them select whom they select.

 

[Seahorsecel]

What I’m trying to say is that aligning human sexuality to female needs should make them less restrictive, contraception is just one variable that could be relevant.

And yes I’m not blackpilled, it might be foolish but I want to hope for a sufferable solution to the red pill.
And I’m not female either, I just happened to read a lot about a female perspective, and to understand their natural position of privilege, how it might make them select whom they select.

@LeFrenchCel
@Uggo Mongo
@Fat Link
@proudweeb
@SlayerSlayer

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

no GrAY you're wrong

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

yes let's have single mothers everywhere ingenious only a GrAY could have come up with such a plan

and after all, hasn't feminism already seen a dramatic increase in birth rates or w/e? oh wait no. but how could that be? the retard with under 200 posts said it would!

get lost infiltrator

 

[Tunadiver]

The most suffering for a foid is to have sex with an incel. This by far exceeds the suffering they have from taking the pill or anything else. So it doesn't matter. Foids will rather fuck a chad and taking the pill then fucking an incel with a condom

Would you agree if I said that possibly getting pregnant from an incel would increase their suffering even more? Less suffering should result in less fear and thus a slight increase in chances of a casual sexual contact.

 

[Tunadiver]

yes let's have single mothers everywhere ingenious only a GrAY could have come up with such a plan

and after all, hasn't feminism already seen a dramatic increase in birth rates or w/e? oh wait no. but how could that be? the retard with under 200 posts said it would!

get lost infiltrator

Dude, I invited people to discuss, I didn’t preach no gospel.

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

Dude, I invited people to discuss, I didn’t preach no gospel.

what's the point of discussing with a GrAY infiltrator lol

 

[LeFrenchCel]

Sexhaver problems tbh

 

[baldcel123]

Would you agree if I said that possibly getting pregnant from an incel would increase their suffering even more? Less suffering should result in less fear and thus a slight increase in chances of a casual sexual contact.

The problem is that foids view the confrontation with our appearance as their biggest suffering. That is why they try to avoid us at all cost especially sexual contact and instead fuck chad only

 

[Tunadiver]

what's the point of discussing with a GrAY infiltrator lol

I don’t know, mutually exchanging opinions, learning new perspectives.

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

I don’t know, mutually exchanging opinions, learning new perspectives.

at least you admit that you're an infiltrator ig

 

[Tunadiver]

at least you admit that you're an infiltrator ig

Not really, I just don’t care about accusations too much. But have a nice day/evening.

 

[LeFrenchCel]

Btw what do you mean by "having sex in female conditions"?

Taking a dick inside you?

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

Not really, I just don’t care about accusations too much.

and yet you cared enough about whatever this thread is about to write a whole essay about it in the OP

peculiar

 

[Tunadiver]

Btw what do you mean by "having sex in female conditions"?

Taking a dick inside you?

I mean aligning human sexuality to their wishes in order to increase their willingness to consider other men of lower value.

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

Btw what do you mean by "having sex in female conditions"?

Taking a dick inside you?

they contrast it with a situation where 'women aren't in full control of human sexuality'

so they are basically saying 'if women were in full control of human sexuality (ie. extreme feminism), it would be a good thing'

somehow, after feminism has worsened inceldom, they think that the solution is more feminism

the rest of their post is wordswordswords

 

[Tunadiver]

and yet you cared enough about whatever this thread is about to write a whole essay about it in the OP

peculiar

Yes I care about the substance indeed, not about other people fronting me.

 

[wagger12]

If we as humans had sex exclusively on female conditions, wouldn’t the amount of sex had expand compared to an order where women aren’t in full control of human sexuality?

Women are in power when it comes to the sexual market and men are subordinate to them, so it is obvious that the market has to align to female wishes, not just in terms of quality, but also in mode of conduct. Wouldn’t it be logical that girls and women would offer more of their resources (sex) if the premises of the market had become more gynocentric e.g.: use of condoms instead of the pill, or tracking their cycles and even safe abortions as means of contraception to be fully freed of either loss of libido by hormones or reproductive consequences by sex.
They should be more willing to have sex while suffering less to no consequences, thus sex had should increase and even men, though cucked and subordinated (condoms), could profit from sexually free girls and women.
I know this is pretty much limited to the top 10-20% of men, but the bottom bracket of men might be given more of a chance if females feel safer and thus the stakes for them were lower. If the stakes are high they’ll fall into their natural behavior of choosing the absolute best they can get, men had to suppress this in order to establish social justice for men. But now that the market has opened and women have taken back their birthright, wouldn’t it be an interesting thought to have sex on their conditions to make them more accessible?


I’d be glad to hear some constructive opinions on this take.

what the fuck are you talking about

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

Yes I care about the substance indeed, not about other people fronting me.

disgusting that you ignore the opinion of your brocels, but care about foid opinions enough that you want them to be unquestioned dictators of everything

bros before hoes, nigger

 

[Tunadiver]

so they are basically saying 'if women were in full control of human sexuality (ie. extreme feminism), it would be a good thing'

No, it wouldn’t be a good thing, but it might be less shitty than it is right now. I might also be wrong about it and my premises be flawed, that’s why I’m here to exchange opinions on an edge-case.

 

[LeFrenchCel]

they contrast it with a situation where 'women aren't in full control of human sexuality'

so they are basically saying 'if women were in full control of human sexuality (ie. extreme feminism), it would be a good thing'

somehow, after feminism has worsened inceldom, they think that the solution is more feminism

the rest of their post is wordswordswords

In every market, the less rules you have, the more it benefits to the people who control that market.

Women are having all the benefits of the sexual/dating market since most of those barriers got deleted or saw their efficiency reduced in the last few years/decades.

They already have the power on the sexual market nowadays so I don't get how OP came to the conclusion of "women having even more power than they have now = good for us"

 

[Tunadiver]

disgusting that you ignore the opinion of your brocels, but care about foid opinions enough that you want them to be unquestioned dictators of everything

bros before hoes, nigger

Dude, there’s no useful insight in an opinion like accusing me of infiltrating.

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

No, it wouldn’t be a good thing, but it might be less shitty than it is right now. I might also be wrong about it and my premises be flawed, that’s why I’m here to exchange opinions on an edge-case.

foids having control over human sexuality is already largely the case today, which has led to um declining birth rates and mass inceldom

idk why you think there's a discussion to be had here

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

They already have the power on the sexual market nowadays so I don't get how OP came to the conclusion of "women having even more power than they have now = good for us"

 

[LeFrenchCel]

If women are freer and have to fear no consequences, they should be less restrictive and thus have more sex with more partners.

Btw "more sex with more partners" just means more orgies with the same chads.

Every woman would rather share a chad than settle with an incel.

 

[Audley Porter]

If women are freer and have to fear no consequences, they should be less restrictive and thus have more sex with more partners.

That's what is happening today but less and less men are having sex as a consequence to female liberty. You're forgetting that it is women's natural imperative to seek out the most suitible mates for procreation, this instinct acts as the basis for all superfluous intercourse.

Sexually liberated women will have plenty of sex with desirable men, and only men judged desirable. What is desirable in men to women? Looks, status, wealth, and personality: in that order.

 

[Audley Porter]

Btw "more sex with more partners" just means more orgies with the same chads.

Every woman would rather share a chad than settle with an incel.

This OP.

 

[SoycuckGodOfReddit]

Dude, there’s no useful insight in an opinion like accusing me of infiltrating.

you have barely any posts and come up with this whack theory of how 'actually more feminism is the solution to everything, and female choice will make everything great'

how did you get this great insight?

did you wake up one morning and a landwhale dropped on your head, leading to the epiphany?

did a burning bush tell you on a mountain?

did you run around screaming 'eureka' after realizing?

 

[Tunadiver]

They already have the power on the sexual market nowadays so I don't get how OP came to the conclusion of "women having even more power than they have now = good for us"

I might be delusional, but I thought removing all the consequences might make them less picky, based on the assumption that the severe consequence of carrying a low value males offspring in them was the main reason to avoid sex with them and thus be super picky.

 

[LeFrenchCel]

I might be delusional, but I thought removing all the consequences might make them less picky, based on the assumption that the severe consequence of carrying a low value males offspring in them was the main reason to avoid sex with them and thus be super picky.

No, removing any consequences of sex won't get us laid, neither will giving foids more power in modern society.

 

[ResidentHell]

What I’m trying to say is that aligning human sexuality to female needs should make them less restrictive, contraception is just one variable that could be relevant

No. Females usually do not fuck with males that she considers as below her in SMV, regardless of the circumstances. There are few reasons for this (this will sound like a “scientific incel” analysis):

(1) It is self-depreciating from the female perspective. Unless the female perceives herself as a worthless creature, she will not do things that she perceives to correlate with low self-esteem, including having intimate relations with lower SMV males​

(2) Physical unattractiveness (e.g., ugly face, sub 6'ft height) is often thought to be associated with illness / genetic faultiness. The female has an evolutionary survival instinct that encourages them to minimalize or entirely avoid contact with things that are perceived in connection with illness / genetic faultiness, including low SMV males. Unless she’s a BPD whore who’s into self-harm and has attempted suicide on several occasions, or the male partner is a betabux / statusmaxxed, the female won't want to sleep with a male she believes is physically unattractive​

​

(3) Females seem to lean towards non-heterosexuality when their sexual freedom is unrestricted. This is reflected by the fact that most LGBT zoomers are female. An increase of non-heterosexual females only reduces the dating pool for straight males​

If human sexuality were to be aligned with the female’s wishes, there’s only one thing she will do – Dual mating routine aka “alpha fucks, beta bux”. The current state of the sex & dating market is already aligned with the female’s wishes, and it’s quite obvious that women naturally lean towards hypergamous / dual mating practices when their options for potential mates are vast enough. The minority of zoomer males have sex more than once a month. Most zoomer males are either jestermaxxing for occasional pussy, or they aren't touching any pussy for at least a year

 

[The Abyss]

If we had sex based on female standards 90% of men would get none, every kid would grow up in a single mother household, bestiality in the streets & many would die of STI.

 

[lifesucksandyoudie]

I made a post addressing this very cope in another forum. This took me less than 10 minutes to find something that directly contradicts it.

"Can't get laid? Just be a leftist bro!"

No, you would not be having more sex under a matriarchy. In fact, you'd probably be having less sex.

 

[JudeoBiden]

Retard alert. Say the amount of sex increases. So fucking what? It's all going to be for Chad and Tyrone. When men control sex, it's evenly spread around.

Are you a foid?

 

[Tunadiver]

I made a post addressing this very cope in another forum. This took me less than 10 minutes to find something that directly contradicts it.

"Can't get laid? Just be a leftist bro!"

No, you would not be having more sex under a matriarchy. In fact, you'd probably be having less sex.

Thanks for the input, interesting thread to read through. Might look into their forum.

I want to state that I don’t think being a leftist will get anyone laid, and my thought experiment doesn’t originate from a leftist point of view. I rather accept the market power women have, and consider the market mechanism as a helpful way to explain and improve a situation. Leftist reject the notion of a market and therefore dismiss male suffering.

 

[Olive Oil]

If women are freer and have to fear no consequences, they should be less restrictive and thus have more sex with more partners.

Either you are leftist and actually understand female nature or you are simply a foid.
No actual forum member would think that "women are still oppressed" by society.
Foids can get nice jobs in various fields, become politicians, have bank accounts on their own.
They have been for many, many years, and yet they yap as if they are still held in chains.
Foids biggest problem in lve is getting sexual atention rom guys, they don;t find attractive. That's it.

 

[Tunadiver]

Either you are leftist and actually understand female nature or you are simply a foid.
No actual forum member would think that "women are still oppressed" by society.
Foids can get nice jobs in various fields, become politicians, have bank accounts on their own.
They have been for many, many years, and yet they yap as if they are still held in chains.
Foids biggest problem in lve is getting sexual atention rom guys, they don;t find attractive. That's it.

Women are not oppressed in todays society, they inherited a natural privilege and add socioeconomic power on top of their most valuable asset of being female, and thus be able to bear children.

 

[Linesnap99]

ok jew

 

[edgelordcel]

Yeah, I wonder if OP is a troon/foid.

 

[Cock'nBalls]

this is the actual reason for feminism, made by a man and approved by other men. Look at it now, has it worked out?