/jp/ - NEET & Hikikomori/General

woman detected. go get fucked by 20 giant black cocks you whore.

they arent people

Because the women don't pay them any mind in real life and they are to cowardly to do anything about it there.

>>2491760
wut?

The few that say out loud what the many think to themselves, etc.

Because they make threads like this.

They're butthurt because no girl would ever want to speak to them.

>>2491798

You're butthurt because no guy would ever want to speak to you.

You know what I find absolutely amazing? The hipocricy of women.

For years women had absolutely no rights. NONE. Stay in the kitchen, raise babies, make me a fucking pie, etc. They LIKED it, too, or at least a good chunk of them did. Then we advanced in society, women wanted some independence, and they finally got some rights. Of course, they didn't have the SAME rights as us, the superior gender, so they had to have a bitchfest about it. With time they got them, and we got into shitstorms until we reached today, where they STILL don't have quite the same rights (of course, never fucking good enough).

Here's where it kills me. You women back us into a corner, constantly. When we cheat, it's fine to bitchslap us, kick us in the balls or destroy our game consoles out of rage. But if we do it? You call your mother, sisters, grandmother, dad, etc. WHAT A HORRIBLE MAN. I KNOW IT'S WRONG THAT I CHEATED, BUT WHY THE DESTRUCTION?

When you hit us, we can't fight back. That would be so cruel of us. So you scratch our faces up with your stupidly long nails and kick us while we're down. Porn? It's disgusting for men to love it, but to women it's okay, because it's just a "tasteful thing to tide us over while you're away." It's fine, talk about male models and "hottie" Hollywood actors while we're sitting next to you and make us feel like inferior shit, but fucking condemn us when we try to do something even REMOTELY close to that.

ITT fuck women. You will never, and should never, equal us.

>>2491812
But I'm not gay, why would I care?

>>2491812
err, i already HAVE a boyfriend though

hate women. I really do. Every time I look at them, my blood pressure shoots through the roof. When they're gabbing on the cell phone about Paris Hilton. When they're adjusting their lipstick and taking up my time rifling through their stupid purse. When they whine to me about their period. When they blither on and on about some artist/film director/musician nobody else gives a flipping fuck about. When they cry and expect your personal sympathy.

But most of all, /a/, I hate them because they're smug, hyperactive little bitches made that way by our shithole society. Look what uncontrolled feminism and the media has done to them: they think they're superior. They can call the shots. No woman will even know what it feels like to be completely alone and unloved unless she is FIERCELY ugly. All their crying about relationships is merely them fucking up; any girl can get any guy she wants if she tries.

When girls are feeling down, they can have any man they like and fuck him. Even if they have no friends in the world, even if they are pathetic, ugly whores, they could strike up a conversation with any guy in class and make him theirs. But a lonely, pathetic man is hated by women. They know they're better than him. They give him nothing. Even though they know he suffers from his biological urges, they sit and laugh and do nothing for him. They get to choose who is happy and who is sad.

I know this is BAAWWWWW over being a virgin. I know that it's not morally right. But I'm posting it because every single one of you sexless /a/ssholes thinks the same thing. When you watch your roomate make out with his girl, when you hear it in love songs on MTV, when you see it on the streets: know that those women are laughing at you, hating you, denying you something completely harmless, just because they hate who you are as a person. And that's their never-questioned right in this world.

I hate women. I really do. Every time I look at them, my blood pressure shoots through the roof. When they're gabbing on the cell phone about Paris Hilton. When they're adjusting their lipstick and taking up my time rifling through their stupid purse. When they whine to me about their period. When they blither on and on about some artist/film director/musician nobody else gives a flipping fuck about. When they cry and expect your personal sympathy.

But most of all, /a/, I hate them because they're smug, hyperactive little bitches made that way by our shithole society. Look what uncontrolled feminism and the media has done to them: they think they're superior. They can call the shots. No woman will even know what it feels like to be completely alone and unloved unless she is FIERCELY ugly. All their crying about relationships is merely them fucking up; any girl can get any guy she wants if she tries.

When girls are feeling down, they can have any man they like and fuck him. Even if they have no friends in the world, even if they are pathetic, ugly whores, they could strike up a conversation with any guy in class and make him theirs. But a lonely, pathetic man is hated by women. They know they're better than him. They give him nothing. Even though they know he suffers from his biological urges, they sit and laugh and do nothing for him. They get to choose who is happy and who is sad.

I know this is BAAWWWWW over being a virgin. I know that it's not morally right. But I'm posting it because every single one of you sexless /a/ssholes thinks the same thing. When you watch your roomate make out with his girl, when you hear it in love songs on MTV, when you see it on the streets: know that those women are laughing at you, hating you, denying you something completely harmless, just because they hate who you are as a person. And that's their never-questioned right in this world.

they're all just bitches and whores

>>2491833
>You know what I find absolutely amazing? The hipocricy of women.

Men are hypocritical too, you know.

>For years women had absolutely no rights. NONE. Stay in the kitchen, raise babies, make me a fucking pie, etc. They LIKED it, too, or at least a good chunk of them did.

On what grounds do you say this? Not everyone is an agoraphobic NEET and on the contrary, many people would have a tendency to become bitter, unhappy or depressed in living an unfulfilling, unchanging and directionless life trapped in the house. Don't believe me? Look at the posters on this board
.
>Then we advanced in society, women wanted some independence, and they finally got some rights. Of course, they didn't have the SAME rights as us, the superior gender, so they had to have a bitchfest about it.

Not every woman is a strawman radical feminist. If you compare the aims of traditional
feminism to the sort of cranks you see today, they're so different as to be indistinguishable.

>With time they got them, and we got into shitstorms until we reached today, where they STILL don't have quite the same rights (of course, never fucking good enough).

It seems to me that you're the one complaining.

continued in the next post. Also, inb4 "you're a woman." I'm not, I just dislike these sorts of butthurt ronery threads in disguise. If you're a real man, you should refuse the company of women, not because of imagined grievances or perceived inferiority, but because you have (or try to) cultivate your strength by rejecting your base instincts.

inb4 another goddamn athens thread

>>2491853
Only a butthurt woman would reply to such obvious copypasta trolling

>>2491853
brainwashed eco-feminist sissy boy detected

Enough of this shit /jp/eeps.

>>2491853
You fell for it. Proof that women are bitches.

>>2491853
>they're so different as to be indistinguishable
>different
>indistinguishable

hurrdurrgaburr

>>2491853
>so different as to be indistinguishable

>dis thred

>Here's where it kills me. You women back us into a corner, constantly. When we cheat, it's fine to bitchslap us, kick us in the balls or destroy our game consoles out of rage. But if we do it? You call your mother, sisters, grandmother, dad, etc. WHAT A HORRIBLE MAN. I KNOW IT'S WRONG THAT I CHEATED, BUT WHY THE DESTRUCTION?

It's natural for people of lesser fibre to be affected so strongly by cheating, regardless of gender. (Read what you typed, you certainly seem to be speaking with a sense of personal indignation). Honestly, you shouldn't have a problem with cheating - let her do what she wants and you can do what you want. Discard her and get someone else if it's really an EYESORE.

>When you hit us, we can't fight back. That would be so cruel of us.

Radical feminists advocate complete equality. Put their faith to the test.

>Porn? It's disgusting for men to love it, but to women it's okay, because it's just a "tasteful thing to tide us over while you're away." It's fine, talk about male models and "hottie" Hollywood actors while we're sitting next to you and make us feel like inferior shit, but fucking condemn us when we try to do something even REMOTELY close to that.

Protip: the /d/ themed japanese cartoon pornography enjoyed by most people on this board is unpallatable to the majority of most "normal" people regardless of their gender.

Also, if you have feelings of inferiority, you should honestly reassess your character. No matter what you might be in actuality, by detatching yourself from sensitivity to criticism and the opinions of others to follow your own course, you'll be better off than nearly everyone else around you.

>ITT fuck women. You will never, and should never, equal us.

They aren't equal to us, but then again, we're not equal to each other, either. And that's a good thing; makes life interesting.

Work on your self-esteem problems if you wish to be worthy of being called a man.

>>2491853
>they're so different as to be indistinguishable.
Why are women so fucking dumb?

>>2491898
>Put their faith to the test.
And get put in jail.

It's like I'm really browsing /r9k/

Every woman I've met in my life thus far has been emotionally unstable(to a varying degree) and has had their life ruined at one point by drugs or a relationship(or both). Inversely most of the men I have met have remarkably stable personalities even compared to my own, don't use drugs, and are much wiser in their relationship choices.

Until I meet some significant number of women with good self-control I will continue to be cautious around them.

>>2491828
lol those virgin losers at /a/ will probably never get laid AMIRITE, mates?

>>2491906
Yeah, or how about her fucking redneck dad:

HURR YA DONT HIT A LADY, EVEN IF SHE CLAWED YER FORESKIN OFF HURR

>>2491862
>>2491861
>>2491859
>>2491867
Sorry, it's rather late here.

As I said, if you deploy these sorts of sweeping generalizations based on emotion as a justification for hating women, you come off sounding like a woman. Is it not the custom of women and other ignoramuses to base arguments based off of emotion rather than rationale? Think about it a moment.

I'll repeat what I said - a good man is simply not interested in women, just as he isn't interested in men or anything else outside his own goals. Especial hatred for something is no better than especial love: it betrays that you have personal investment in the object of your emotion.

>>2491916
Women are emotionally driven, impressionable and foolish.

Basically, women are children. Maintain this perspective, and a lot of things you see will start to make sense.

>>2491918
What? Just in case you didn't know, that body of text originated from /a/. The person was just too lazy to edit it.

As the guy who posted the copypasta, I'm laughing my ass off that some dimwit actually dissected it.

I don't even agree with it myself. It's from /a/, after all.

>>2491928
I actually hadn't thought of it that way, but it makes far more sense. Women 12-60 seem incredibly childish... Not to mention the ones under 12. Or in some cases the ones above 60.

That's a neat way to think of it, but the big thing that mystifies me is why more of the guys(especially guys like here on /jp/) don't just give up women and try being gay. They seem miserably aware that women are almost always bad news, but unwilling to do something about it.

>>2491928
>emotionally driven, impressionable and foolish.

So a fairly good match to the virgins posting in this thread?

ITT ronery NEETs talking about things they know nothing about women

>>2491906
>>2491921

I don't see why you had dealings with a woman from a redneck family to begin with, but let me remind you of something. If you don't have a criminal record, something as minor as beating your girlfriend would likely be commuted to a very minor sentence with little or no jail time if you had the help of an attorney. And this isn't even taking into account if you found a way of provoking her (through alcohol or other means) into attacking you, by which you could really put her in her place and allege self-defense. Anyone who calls himself a man could easily execute a plan of that variety against a woman, to say nothing of a woman of redneck descent.

>>2491924
>I'll repeat what I said - a good man is simply not interested in women, just as he isn't interested in men or anything else outside his own goals.
Actually, a good man is interested in all of his fellow comrades. The thing that make humans 'special' is their ability to connect with others, past and present, real and imaginary. We build on the achievements of other people.

>>2491938
When I masturbate to 3D images, it's only of transsexuals.

I find women aesthetically pleasing, but know they're not worth a relationship.

If it's a man in disguise, I feel okay about it.

>>2491929
lol thats what i mean. /a/ is filled with pathetic virgin losers like that so it makes sense something like that would be posted in there.

>>2491938
why do that when theres perfectly fine 2d women?

I remember on /b/ there was some thread about rough porn years ago. And some guy posted a pic of some girl (this was all amateur porn keep in mind) being fucked by a gang of 15 niggers. They got her to swish all their jizz around in her mouth, spit it out into a cup, then they poured it down into a funnel into her asshole, then they attached a big straw to her asshole that reached up to her mouth, so she sucked it all out again and repeated the process.

At that moment I pretty much lost what last slither of respect I had for women and keep in mind as a porn afficoniado I could tell this was amateur shit. The kind of 'put an ad in the paper' thing.

Women sink so low it isnt even funny.

>>2491934
I stopped visiting /a/ quite a while ago; the board's become a veritable extension of gaia in recent months. Still, I don't feel it's a waste to examine the way some of you think. You're an interesting lot.

>>2491951
Did /jp/ just turn into the cool fratboy board or something? Glass house, stones, etc...

Shouldn't this be in /a/?

I'm indifferent towards women, I just don't bother with them because I'm antisocial and don't want a relationship nor can I support one since I don't have a car. I also like to spend my money on myself.

Modern women piss me off just as much as modern men. Men are all faggots and women are all sluts with shitty "cute" humor.

My standards are also too high since I won't date a non-virgin and I'm almost 21.

>>2491966
>cool fratboy board
Always has been.

>>2491960
Link? Source? Rapidshare?

>>2491946
>Actually, a good man is interested in all of his fellow comrades. The thing that make humans 'special' is their ability to connect with others, past and present, real and imaginary. We build on the achievements of other people.

I suppose our definitions of "interested" are at odds. Could you explain what you mean when you use the word?

>>2491924
Rejecting all urges is just as pathetic as having no control over them.
One is caused by stupidity and the other out of fear but neither is superior.

>>2491938
Guys are pretty damn gross mate. At least women (can) look good.

>>2491985
I never suggested to reject all urges. Having goals entails having an urge at its heart. What I am advocating, however; is rejecting base, useless or destructive urges.

>this thread
>4 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.

>>2491972
>My standards are also too high since I won't date a non-virgin and I'm almost 21.
Go pedo or go gay.
Those are your only options.

>>2491973
Interested as in concern. Worried about his fellow men, helping the weak, motivating the capable, etc...

No man is an island and all that jazz.

>>2491998
Damn it, Pyggy. You made me misquote with your fratboy comment.

>>2491991
I'm not speaking from experience, but I'd guess that the only reason women don't seem gross to you is because you haven't ever been intimate with one. If you did, I'd think you'd find them nearly, if not more disgusting then men.

>>2491960

look, it may seem kinda gross (and i would never do that myself!!) but as long as nobody is hurt, why do you have a problem with it??

if she likes it kinky like that, i say more power to her!!

>>2492005

>52 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>this thread

>>2491996
Or go neither, I've lasted without sex for 21 years and I don't see myself breaking down without it.

I see a girlfriend as a luxury, not a need.

>>2492017
I don't even know what that expression means. Name your images!

You have been waylaid by enemies and must defend yourself

what anime is that in the op's picture?

>>2492033
Generic shit anime #753284

>>2492007
Not the case, hard as it may be to believe, although since I'm an autogynephiliac much of my disgust for the thought of having sex with another man iscaused by dislike of the image of myself in that position. At least with a woman I can focus on her.

Reading through what I wrote it seems I didn't really say anything besides tastes differs I suppose. As far as genitals go I don't consider either noticeably more disgusting than the other but as for overall aesthetics men are just (in my opinion) ugly as fuck.

>>2491998
>Interested as in concern. Worried about his fellow men, helping the weak, motivating the capable, etc...

Ask yourself this. How many acts of altruism are done out of actual concern for the parties involved rather than self-gratification, fulfillment of ulterior motives or directly advancing ones own interest?

Thus, when I say that a good man should be disinterested, what I mean is that if he does something, he should have an awareness that ultimately, he's doing it for himself and not someone else.

>>2491960

Meh, I've seen worse.

>>2492033
Eden of the East
Watch it.

>>2491960
I'm pretty sure that it's not that easy to find a woman who'd do something like that. Unless you think all women work in porn industry. If I was a woman, I wouldn't do that. I could imagine having 3 guys on, or in me, but they surely wouldn't be people that I had met last week.

>>2492041
You might just need to find the right man then; it's not as though all women are attractive by any means either.

>>2492041
vaginas are uglier than cock.

they simply are.

look at the mouth of jabba the hutt, in return of the jedi.
thats a fucking vagina for ya

>>2492007
>I'm not speaking from experience

No shit?

You ass with out the woman YOU wouldn't be here...
Think next time when you want to insult someone...
Because most women think the same MEN are useless.

>>2492051
>but they surely wouldn't be people that I had met last week.

Regular paragon of morality right here guys!

>>2492065
It's always important to preface a statement as such on these sorts of issues.

>>2492042
But the thing is that we're interconnected. Caring for others is caring for yourself and the opposite is also true.

>>2492068
>morality

Who gives a shit?

>>2492084
As noble a sentiment as this is, I can't say that Harlem slumdwellers, North Koreans, Brazilians, Somalians or certain other people would agree with this.

>>2492095
I was being sarcastic. Fucking 3 guys at the same time means you are a slut, no exceptions.

>>2492095
You have the right idea. Not because being GRIMDARK makes you cool and edgy, but because all these inane diatribes against sluts and whatnot are invariably justified by a veneer of "morality." Ironically enough, these same people are typically the ones who beat off to rape pornography and leech off their parents for survival.

>>2492121
Unless you love all three guys.

>>2492121
But it feels so damn good! It's easy to get addicted.

>>2492134
I thought I'd heard every excuse but this is a new one. Women who are into that thing (i.e. most of them) do it because they want to be degraded. They get off to being degraded in that way.

>>2492112
Oh? They have family and friends, don't they? Even if they don't have the opportunity to express this sentient on a macroscopic scale, they can still express it to those right next to them. Even in the more difficult societies, family, friends, and neighbors still look out for each other; no one is in it alone.

>>2492121
I know you were. You were very clever and actually meant she lacks morals, even though you actually wrote the opposite. Good job. My question to you was, what the fuck is immoral about having a foursome? Because I'd jump at a chance, and I certainly wouldn't feel any moral pangs. Would you?

>>2492145

>>2492150
>Women who are into that thing (i.e. most of them) do it because they want to be degraded. They get off to being degraded in that way.

WHY!?

>>2492152

I would. Menage a trois and all other kinds of arrangements of that kind invariably end in tears and failure. The only reason you disagree is because you are a woman.

>>2492151
>Oh? They have family and friends, don't they? Even if they don't have the opportunity to express this sentient on a macroscopic scale, they can still express it to those right next to them. Even in the more difficult societies, family, friends, and neighbors still look out for each other; no one is in it alone.

I'm aware of this and I think it's a good thing too. But this in itself is proof of what I meant; they help those in proximity to them either out of an expectation that they'll receive help in return or because they want to be able to justify to their conscience that they're a good person. Which is why they have no qualms about killing complete strangers.

I like this thread, I'll post my most recent favourite quote in it about women:

>"The Princess, in the mean time, insinuated herself into many families; for there are few doors, through which liberality, joined with good humour, cannot find its way. The daughters of many houses were airy and cheerful, but Nekayah had been too long accustomed to the conversation of Imlac and her brother to be much pleased with childish levity and prattle which had no meaning. She found their thoughts narrow, their wishes low and their merriment often artificial. Their pleasures, poor as they were, could not be preserved pure, but were embittered with petty competitions and worthless emulation. They were always jealous of the beauty of each other; of a quality to which solicitude can add nothing, and from which detraction can take nothing away. Many were in love with triflers like themselves and fancied they were in love when in truth they were only idle. There affection was seldom fixed on sense and virtue, and therefore seldom ended but in vexation. Their grief however. like their joy, was transient; every thing floated in their mind unconnected with the past or future, so that one desire easily gave way to another, as a second stone cast into the water effaces and confounds the circles of the first."

>Samuel Johnson, Rasselas

>>2492162
Funny how it's still the most common male fantasy. Must be all those millions of female-to-male transsexuals fucking up the statistics.

>>2492042
Stop reading Kant, not only will it put you off from every doing anything you'd consider virtuous ever again, it will also make you see everyone in an ugly manner.

>>2492154
Sorry, I meant that if I was a woman, I'd probably enjoy it. You know how they say how it feels to be cummed inside etc?

>>2492175

I guess I'm an exception to the rule then. After having gone without sex for so long I dont consider it that vital to me. Maybe you do, but as I said, you're just confirming the stereotype of the sex obsessed woman.

>>2492184
except that there are no nerve endings down there.

>>2492195
>Menage a trois and all other kinds of arrangements of that kind invariably end in tears and failure. The only reason you disagree is because you are a woman

>I guess I'm an exception to the rule then.

If you admit that, why do you persist with the idea that I'm a woman? Or why did you try to chance the argument from foursomes being a valid fantasy to constant sex being "vital"?

>>2492234
He's no exception, menage a trois is pointless, it can only end badly and love cannot be divided equally between two people.

>>2492234
Because its immoral, because although on a hypothesized, ideal atomized level it is 'harmless' the truth is the more you legitimize it the more people that indulge and on a macrosocietal level the more corrosive it is.

>this thread

>>2492164
>they help those in proximity to them either out of an expectation that they'll receive help in return or because they want to be able to justify to their conscience that they're a good person.
Or they help others because it makes everyone feel good. Happiness tends to be reciprocating since it's not a zero-sum game. When you're spreading the cheer, you're really spreading the cheer, not just taking it from one person and giving it to the next.

When faced with a situation, people don't think 'what do I have to gain'; they think 'what do I have to lose'. If it's possible for them to give without a significant loss, they'll do it. It's a giving sort of stinginess. If you give it all today, you can't give anymore tomorrow.

This is a loss cause though since you stuck in your thoughts and I'm stuck in mine.

>>2492256
Ok, so you're religious. Have a nice life.

>>2492244
We're talking about sex. Also, there are people who seem to be happy in their polygamous relationship. You might not want to be in their position, but you're basically denying they exist now.

hahaha owow
ITT: stupid women, bitter anons and GRiMDaRK rejects

Seriously, what the fuck happened?

>>2492315
Love happened, baby.

>>2492298
>Also, there are people who seem to be happy in their polygamous relationship.

Hey there, please see:

Buunk B. (1981). Jealousy in sexually open marriages. Alternative Lifestyles, 4, 357-372.

Ramey J. W. (1975). Intimate groups and networks: Frequent consequences of sexually open marriage. Family Coordinator, 24, 515-530.

Trost, M. R., Brown, S., & Morrison, M. (1994). Jealousy as an adaptive communication strategy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans, LA

Jealousy is far more widely reported in open relationships.

>Some studies report at least 80% of people in open marriages experience jealousy over their extramarital relationships.

Enjoy your shitty, unworkable dynamic.

>Ok, so you're religious. Have a nice life.

No, I'm not, and thats not an adequate rebuttal, try again.

>>2492275
>Or they help others because it makes everyone feel good. Happiness tends to be reciprocating since it's not a zero-sum game. When you're spreading the cheer, you're really spreading the cheer, not just taking it from one person and giving it to the next.

This is true, but only with regards to simple exchanges of sentiment. Help often takes an economic guise and when it does, it becomes zero-sum thanks to the nature of money/labor. That isn't to say that one form of cheer is more important than another, but just an acknowledgement than more than one variety exists.

>When faced with a situation, people don't think 'what do I have to gain'; they think 'what do I have to lose'. If it's possible for them to give without a significant loss, they'll do it. It's a giving sort of stinginess. If you give it all today, you can't give anymore tomorrow.

Whether you calculate losses or gains and for what motive (like helping others later or what have you), it has at its heart the same concern; a concern for the self before others. There's nothing wrong with that, so long as it doesn't degenerate in sociopathy.

>This is a loss cause though since you stuck in your thoughts and I'm stuck in mine

You're assuming I'm trying to convince you. I'm not, I'm simply outlining my thoughts. Honestly, I'm quite gratified to have someone with whom to discuss this, as most people I've bet have a distaste for the subject.

>>2492177
>Stop reading Kant, not only will it put you off from every doing anything you'd consider virtuous ever again, it will also make you see everyone in an ugly manner.

I'll be honest; I'm not quite familiar with Kant. The only work by Kant which I've read is about half of "A Critique of Pure Reason" as part of a class on Epistemology and more than anything, I found myself confused. Did Kant really say the same things which I'm saying?

>>2492298
I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm saying they are inherently unequal and lead to bad events.

>>2492329
What a shitty study. "People in relationships sometimes experience jealousy." Holy shit, fucking revelation there.

>>2492329
Siblings are often jealous of each other, are families now a shitty unworkable dynamic?

>>2492344
Nice one ignoring the fact its a comparitive study you absolute mongoloid. The pont is people in sexually non-monogamous relationships experience jealousy more frequently than people in sexually monogamous relationships to a far, far greater degree.

>>2492350
see
>>2492353

God you're really clutching at straws now arent you?

First it was 'anyone who believes in monogamy = religious' now its 'lah dee dah! ill put my fingers in my ears and pretend the studies posted show a strawman i invented'.

>>2492338
>You're assuming I'm trying to convince you. I'm not, I'm simply outlining my thoughts. Honestly, I'm quite gratified to have someone with whom to discuss this, as most people I've bet have a distaste for the subject.
I'm merely being realistic. We see differently even though we're looking at the same thing. It's like love and hate. You can paint any situation into a situation of love and you can paint any situation into a situation of hate. It's all about how you frame it. This uncertainty is where doubt comes from.

>>2492338
About morals, Kant says that one can act in a moral way if he does something that is adequate to morals.
However, to act MORALLY, one has to act out of quasi-instinct, without having any backthoughts about how the actions will affect you, nor should he act in a moral manner because it "feels" good.
So, acting morally, opposed to acting in a moral way, is an inhuman lifestyle, mostly, because you'd have to act like doing this was the only possible option, and do so without thinking about it, only to resume your normal life afterwards.
That being said, your post only reminded me of this theory, I went on a tangent.

>>2492329
lol@social studies. No wonder you're so bitter.

>Some studies report at least 80% of people in open marriages experience jealousy over their extramarital relationships.

I'd really have to wonder about the kind of person who'd say they never felt jealousy in their relationship, no matter whether it's polygamous or not (provided they've been in one, that is). 80% seems a rather low number. It's a perfectly normal emotion.

>>2492370
>I'd really have to wonder about the kind of person who'd say they never felt jealousy in their relationship, no matter whether it's polygamous or not

Ignoring the fact that the jealousy is based around the key difference of their relationship to normal relationships, namely the fact they fuck other people.

>80% seems a rather low number.

Actually, its fuckng high given the nature of the study. The probability is all of them experience jealousy.

And stop replying to my post 3 times, keep all your thoughts in one reply mongoloid fuckstick.

fun fact about kant, was so punctual that people used to set their watches by the time he walked past their windows.

>>2492375
Contrary to popular belief, there are more than just two people on /jp/

>>2492343
>>2492344
>>2492350
>>2492359
>>2492360
>>2492364
Op here, I cant beileve you guys fell for my 6 week old copypasta. Don't you know by arguing with me on this subject you're doing what I wanted you to do. Had you simply ignored me I would have had no choice but to delete this thread and make it on /r9k/. Next time simply ignore me and it wouldn't happen again.

120+ replies, I love it!

Those that reply to /relationship9k/ threads are no better than the people that create them.

>>2492359
Boo hoo. You don't actually show the source for your statistic, and I have no means nor the time to evaluate its credibility even if you did. Also, your numbers don't mean shit unless you can show people in monogamous relationships (or in no relationship) are happier overall. Even then you wouldn't have shown that polygamous relationships are bad for people: maybe fucked up people just are drawn to polygamous situations and skew the statistic.

Finally, you make ridiculous unquantified claims about how threesomes are "corrosive" and expect not to be called out for it? Grow the fuck up.

>>2492388

>LOLOLOL I TROL U

/jp/ - easiest board to troll since ever. thread is decisive proof.

>>2492388
Making a 100+ replies thread when you mention women is not an accomplishment, it's just a natural law.

I'm just here for the
>>2492341

I don't get why those people act so happy about "lolitrolu" I mean, do you see people in a discussion suddenly jump up and yell how anyone who has expressed his opinion on the matter is an idiot ?
It's not like talking about a subject is any bad, as long as people enjoy doing so without being aggressive.