@beer wow I didn't read all of it, but it's still interesting this is so triggering. Fucks up your endgame, doesn't it?
@adam-l Oh! And you know this to be a fact how?
And in typical lefty psychoanalyst-y fashion you attribute reproduction to some psychological lack explained by upbringing and society. You even split reproduction from the instinct of reproduction in an attempt to sound smart. It is only now that we are able to split the instinct from the outcome via contraceptives. But then you will say "oh but our instincts wanted sex, not reproduction!!!". To which I will reply the mechanism is irrelevant, because those instincts don't evolve in a vacuum and are intrinsically tied to the outcomes they produce in the real world.
Wait what's that? I should read freud or xyz? I don't grasp the weight of your great proclamations because of my small intellect? I am a righty reactionary now? Bullshit deflections. Let's get into this then. A psychoanalytic lack is of 2 kinds. One is in the intrinsic nature of man and his psyche. The other is attributed to personal upbringing, personal desires, personal whatever else. If you are talking about the former, then that is a lack present in all organisms that reproduce. It is a completion of a life cycle. That cannot be blamed on a man. If you are talking about the latter, in an attempt to shame a person by saying "you want children to fill a void inside you, grow up buddy, you don't need children", then this is referring to people who have children for attention and to fill the emotional void. How do you conflate this latter with the former? You can't. But YOU do because you get to push your retarded lefty anti-natalist agenda. Hey, let's go a step further: reproduction is nature's evolutionary goal. Not the feeling of sex, not the feeling of parenthood, not the feeling of whatever else. It is reproduction, making whatever retarded mechanism you attribute to it irrelevant. Meaning even if someone feels an "emotional void" and has kids, nature has achieved its goal.
You "intellectuals" and lefties operate in this manner: think of something that you think will solve all problems of the planet. It will be a superficial, but moral and intellectually superior sounding. Then you search for any theories, philosophies, evidence, etc. that support what you decided will solve the world's problems after cherry picking all the facts. Then you go about browbeating others with your pretend superiority. When questioned or driven into a corner, you deflect and pretend the argument never even happened, only to repeat your talking points after some time when you think everyone has forgotten.
Then you call wanting to raise your own kids beta. Because of course you do. Because you can associate a behavior you don't personally approve off with a negative label. By that logic you are a fucking cuck, cause you don't mind raising other's kids.
It all seems like... whoa... wait a minute... these are your rationalizations for you personal choice (which is also prescribed by your leftist affiliation) of not having kids.
You COULD have said "its not practical for men to have children now, considering the courts, women, etc.". You COULD have said "if you still want a family you can do xyz". You COULD have said "hey man I'm at my wit's end, I don't know how you could safely raise a family in the west". But that wouldn't grant you any intellectual superiority and legitimacy now would it. So you give passive aggressive remarks or deflect the argument completely.
Oh and RPS leave this post up on the main page. People need to see this. Cause every time I come to this website after a month or 2, I see this dude and mentorpheus spouting some nonsense, deflecting and repeating the same talking point after they think people have forgotten about it.
Read More