From time to time certain degenerates attempt to weaponized inceldom and use it as an argument against the “patriarchy” and our capitalistic society.
“It’s because of capitalism that you want to own women like they are objects.”
“Our patriarchal culture makes you think you are worthless if you can’t have women.”
Usually followed by a transparent attempt to promote feminism and the abolishment of capitalism.
What those retards don’t understand is that virtually ALL men in ALL times in ALL cultures always desire to be with women. It is, for good reason, our biological imperative and only the most unnatural conditioning and brainwashing will ever change that. It is not the patriarchate or capitalism that tells me to be physical attracted to women. It’s my hormones and the way my brain is wired and that will be true no matter in what kind of society I live.
Constructivism is a mental disease of mankind. You aren't socially conditioned to feel anger/hatred/sadness when you get left out of all fun things in life and the most basal parts of human interaction (like romance/sex/friendship), it's natural, biologically ingrained into us as a social species.
Virgin shaming/etc. only amplifies these natural feelings - but it doesn't create them. The extreme focus on sex in our so(y)ciety is nothing more than the hourglass that increases/channels/amplifies the inherent biological pressures - but it doesn't create those feelings. Like pornography/alcohol: It only amplifies what was always an integral part of your being.
And furthermore: The leftist implication that competition is unnatural. It is natural - as well as hatred/jealousy/everything else that they just don't like, these are fundamental parts of human nature and neutral on their own, only the way how they are used matters (e.g. the context), they would never blame someone for hating US, but when we hate them it's suddenly a problem.
Even (under the premise of a communist system) money was inexistent, people would still find other metrics to compare themselves with others and this would again lead to arrogance/jealousy/resentment. Again: If you remove the financial aspect other aspects will gain more influence.
The seen variance is always a sum of many factors - when you remove a certain factor altogether individuals will still differ, but now just based on other factors. You remove one factor and increase the effect of the other factors - the game stays the same but now with different rules and different axioms that are used for the quantification of success.
Even in a communist society people would still differ due to varying traits like intelligence (=mental capability) and physical capability, the more fortunate would still look down on the less fortunate and ask themselves why they should even tolerate the existence of something that only takes and takes (like a parasite) and will never be able to give back as much as it takes from you even if it wanted to do so (due to its inherent characteristics) and the less fortunate would still have jealousy against the more capable individuals.
The neighbor wouldn't eny someone because he has more money and wouldn't look down on someone for having less money, but he would judge him due to other traits (like his ability to contribute to the welfare of society as a whole which is again predetermined by genetic traits like intelligence, height, strength, etc.) - the game remains the same in the end.
And again: The false dichotomy between the view of humans as these intelligent god-like beings that fully control everything and primitive slaves of their own nature and no free will is also all too common with them, but the truth is that it's a mixture between those extremes really.
Exactly, at the end of the day it's just simple biology.
