Oh also, liberal men offer better sex. LolI've never been with a conservative that didn't think all they had to do was jackhammer me until they came. And if I didn't cum they never considered trying to help me cum. Liberal men, however, actually listen to their partners, and carry that experience to other relationships.
Well, conservative men tend to be more alpha, whereas liberal men are more on the soyboy spectrum.
That's because Natural Order is a big part of conservative mentality. Trying to impose your subject views on Nature and believe you can redefine Objective Reality in such way is like the big no-no for conservatism.
That first sentence, is so true
I don't believe in the idea of alphas. Especially in human society. 🙄If someone describes themselves as an alpha that is an instant ban from ever having sex with me. LolAnd trust me, there's "soyboys" on both sides. Most incels are conservative and they're the biggest bitches in the world. On the other hand, people like my brother who is hardcore liberal could fuck up damn near any other guy I've ever met. So, to say that conservatives are "alpha" and liberals are on the "soyboy spectrum" just isn't accurate at all. The real reason is that conservatives hate the idea of being equal to a woman. They have to feel superior, and get butthurt if they don't. Liberal men actually tend to care about human rights, and as a result treat women with respect. Does this describe all men that falls into those categories? No. But it definitely describes the majority.
Quoting Aristotle ( which you will hate for sure ) : "The worst form of inequality is trying to make unequal things equal". So a central tenant of conservatism is Natural Order , that there is an intended structure or hierarchy on nature designed to optimize systems by establishing things like division of labor. Since there is a division of labor among biological sexes ( hence the sexual dimorphism ) , the roles of each biological sex is not in any way, shape or form interchangeable. That's way men are women have different body structures, different brain wiring, different reactions to same stimuli. In that sense, is this realistic view ( instead of liberal's idealistic view ) what drives conservative men behaviors.
Second thing is, it doesn't really matter what you "feel" or what you "believe".It only matter what you can measure.So even if you deny that there is an inherent hierarchy in male in-group competition ( well, commies believe that all hierarchies are some for of "oppression" anyway which is just plain bullshit ), that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. All you have to do is to observe male in-group competition to measure whether the winner/loser structure leads to an alpha/beta structure.
Lol yeah and it's all bullshit. It's not the natural order, it's male superiority. It's men thinking they're better than women because it makes their egos feel better. You can argue all you want man, but you're straight up wrong. Men are not superior to women, women are not superior to men. Each have things they do better than the other, but that is to compliment a partnership, not draw lines in the sand and create a class divide. Keep talking about your theories posited by dudes thousands of years ago. It doesn't apply to today's world. Lol
Oh , I agree that neither biological sex i "superior" to the other in all and every aspect.That's the nature of division of labor.Men excel at physical force and strategic thinking.Women excel at communication and social skills.That's exactly why men are women are not equal. Each biological sex is designed to serve a given evolutionary purpose.
Conservatism at its core is a con, intended to lure people into following a system out of fear of chaos, a system designed to enslave, just without the chaos, which is why people fall for it, thinking just because there is no more chaos, that there will be no more evil. In other words, it's a kind of a slaughterhouse that is just well organized.
@thehorriblesheikh very well put. I like that.
So... promoting individual freedom ( i. e. "live and let live" ) is "enslaving people" ? How does that works?
Well. competition is an inherent trait of Conservative mentality. That's exactly why soyboys tend to reject it, they already know they will mostly be crushed in the competition by more ambitious ( and sometimes , more capable ) men. It is not surprise to opt for deluding themselves into believing they can be "equal" to more capable men, especially if they are given an "all men are winners" participation trophy.
Individual freedom has always been a liberal thing. American Conservatism simply adopted it, probably to lure people.Competition is an inherent trait in all human beings, it's not just a conservative thing. Liberalism is not against competition, it just exposed that in Conservatism, the game is rigged to favor a few.
> Individual Freedom is a Liberal thing> Lets be good progressives and impose all these regulations and tax hikes while we attack first and second amendment in order to create a hive-mind comformity
To be honest, you do not even know what I am talking about.When I say "individual freedom" I am talking about Isiah Berlin's concept of "Negative Liberty", not about the concept of "Positive Liberty", I am talking about things like rugged individualism.
So... Liberals are in favor of competition, yet they decry Free Market, Free Speech and Sexual Competition as "unfair" and "oppressive" ?How does that work?
liberal men have smaller dicks
Regulations on companies are necessary because there is a history of big companies abusing their positions. Tax hikes on the rich who again have a history of abusing their power, are to support public social programs, which are necessary but only someone with empathy can understand why.Negative liberty is an impractical concept, concepts like this can be used by corporations to suppress regulations.The truth is without liberals, the world would be stuck in a monarchy, manipulated by religious institutions. Every time liberalism tries to bring change, there is the conservative minded ready to defend the rich and powerful like loyal little soldiers, that makes conservatives the dogs of the rich, not alpha males, lol.
There is no free market or free speech, everything is sadly controlled by systems designed to keep the poor and vulnerable down. As for sexual competition, if anyone cries about not getting women, it's the famous incels, the crown jewels of modern conservatism.
Translation : I am a liberal and I do not believe in individual freedom, so lets all be good slaves and knee to the almighty power of the centralized collective.In essence, you just admitted yourself that you are a petty tyrant who would love to use centralized institution to get what you can't achieve by your own efforts and merits.To be honest, that's quite the beta mentality.
What centralized collective? Those things exist only in the mind of a conservative. The thing is people are rising up against injustice and the unjust are afraid, and that fear is showing in your comments. Times up.
Wow that's amazing !So, essentially you do not only do not understand the philosophical bases of conservatism... they do not even understand the philosophical bases of progressivism.Progressivism central tenant is based in Hegel's Historical Determinism : that there is an unavoidable, unstoppable PROGRESSION in history towards a Socialist Utopia. As such, a Socialist Utopia can not exist without a centralized government that controls all forms of social interaction, from speech ( i. e. "Hate Speech Laws" ) to education ( i. e. Common Core ) to sexual competition ( VAWA, #MeToo, Title IX, Enthusiastic Consent Laws ) to job hunting ( i. e. diversity quotas ). This stems from the fact that the socialist dogma of rejection of natural order, that is that all forms of hierarchy are inherently a form of oppression ergo this "forms of oppression" must be "fixed" by making "equal what is unequal" ( equality of outcome ) through government intervention policies and social engineering. Fuck man !I mean, you call yourself a Liberal and don't even understand the philosophical roots of Hegel, Rousseau and Marcuse on modern progressivism? .Hell, man , how can you call yourself a progressive then?
Hate speech laws are necessary, if such laws were used to deal with Hitler, we may not have even had World War II. If you think the violence against women act, the metoo movement, title ix are a problem, then you have some serious issues you need to deal with.I don't like the idea of diversity quotas, but they are currently necessary in the United States of America.I think the problem with you is that you think like an ape, you refuse to evolve to something more, something better.
My god, you don't even knew the history of the Wiemar Republic, for god sake !Hate Speech laws were not only very active in the Weimar Republic, but actually worked to INCREASE the popularity of the National Socialists Worker's Party, in fact Goebbels was several times brought to court due to Weimar's Hate Speech laws, only for him to publicly explain his arguments and GAIN even more followers after he was acquitted of charges. Diversity quotas issue is threefold : a) it interferes with the freedom of an employer to hire whoever they see more fit for the job, b) it is a discrimination practice based on pseudo-scientific concepts and c) it assumes that the beneficiaries are so incapable that they could not achieve that position on their own merits and effort.I think in terms of : a) reason , b) logic and c) objectivity , which is very, very far from an "ape" which actually lacks the concept of use of reason to begin with ( also ad-hominems are not valid argument in terms of Analytical Philosophy ). Now, what you "feel" things should be is completely irrelevant, simply put, your feelings are not an argument, no matter how much you desire them to be,
liberal men are pussies
@The_Mad_Pirate and the autism spectrum as well
Fuckin hell this was still going on? Y'all need to calm the fuck down. Here's what it comes down to:Do they believe in equal human rights for all?Liberals - YesConservatives - NoI. e.Liberals > ConservativesYou can argue about historical facts or philosophies or ideologies and spout meaningless platitudes disguised as logic all you want. At the end of the day, conservatives believe that anyone that is not a Straight, Christian, Cisgendered, White Male is automatically beneath them. They fought against women's rights, they tortured and killed both black Americans and gay Americans, they think only heteronormative individuals deserve the right to marry the person they love, they harass trans teens to suicide, they think they should have control of women's bodies, and they have covered up and protected religious figures that have literally raped children. Is this all conservatives? No.Is it the majority? Yes. The liberal mentality is one of love, community, and acceptance. The conservative mentality is one of control. If you identify with a group of people that actively try to hurt, control, and demean any group that isn't them, you are an asshole. That's all there is to it.
And that is your argument against hate speech laws? If so, how come your opinion still fails to hold up in practical experience, like your so-called alpha-ness that no one even wants to have sex with. Diversity quotas make sure that the employee cannot only hire white, and that is what really bothers the conservatives, that they can no longer run that racket.None of my arguments are based on my feelings, and none of your arguments are based on reason. All that are simply the delusions in the mind of a conservative. Since, you cannot come to terms with the fact that the world has rejected your beliefs, you try to push pseudo scientific beliefs to manipulate the vulnerable, which is the main tool of any conservative.
@thehorriblesheikh dude just let it go. The guy is gonna live in his ignorance until the day he dies alone. You are wasting your time trying to fight back at him. Just say your piece and move on.
@ZiZi_Bell at the core of all of his beliefs is his misogyny, his hate for equal rights, I want him to accept that for his own good. But it does seem like he wants to stick to his delusions for now, at least.
@thehorriblesheikh a random stranger on a sex-filled drama app isn't going to change his ignorance. He'll most likely have it the rest of his life.
@ZiZi_Bell that is the sad truth about him.
@ZiZi_Bell I wish most people in this app had your mindset.
Right to life, private property, freedom of speech and self defense are both human rights, and progressives believe in neither of them, while conservative defend them to death. If anything the push of progressives to deny a human of it's individuality and freedom from a collective, it's the most blatant human rights violation.
There is only one central tenant of conservatism : that Nature provides a Natura Order, that is an inherent hierchical structure build upon Natural and Sexual Selection, so Merit and Competition can Optimize ( Matthew Effect ) all aspects of Society. That's all.That's what conservatives believe in.
Hiring should be based upon merit and skills only, not someone's race, sexuality or gender. Also, nobody in his right mind will hire someone with a blatant psychiatrist disorder.
I love the inherent competition of the bloodsport. Don't you love it too?
Why would accept an ideology whose premises are either unfalsifiable or have already been falsified when constrasted against objective reality?Really, why?Why would accept the same ideas that lead Venezuela, the richest Latin American country to become a nightmarish hellhole as some kind of "promised paradise on Earth"?Really, why should I?In essence idealistic utopianism is for parasites and losers.
@elisa_0 actually, I am having a lot of fun with this thread.
@The_Mad_Pirate again dude, you're wrong. Liberals firmly believe in the right to own private property, the right to freedom of speech, and the right to self defense. I honestly don't understand why you think they don't? Unless you're thinking of communists or hardcore leftists maybe. Liberals firmly believe in private property and freedom of speech, as well as self defense, we just want guns to be regulated. That's it. And if by right to life, you mean the anti-choice movement that wants to tell women what they can and can't do with their own bodies to protect a mass of cells that conservatives will throw to the wolves the moment it's born, then yeah, I agree, liberals are against that. But even if they were opposed to them?You're comparing private property to literal human life. The right for gay people, black people, and other minorities to work and get paid without harassment. The right for gay people to get married. The right for transgendered people to even exist. The right for people to have choice and autonomy over their own bodies. The right to see a rapist actually brought to justice, instead of protecting priests for raping children. Conservatives literally protect child rapists while telling gay people they're entitled for wanting to get married. And yet you think it's ok because conservatives are trying to protect private property from a threat that doesn't even exist. Boy you're just delusional. You're done. Lol
Reagan wasn't against human rights,
@The_Mad_Pirate Maybe you should stop harassing people for their views and just get it through your thick skull that not everybody shares your views. Begone
@The_Mad_Pirate how many times will you lose this debate to finally understand that you are convincing no one here?You are truly a conservative, saying the right words to lure people in, then doing all the wrong things. The traps of conservatism no longer work.I have reported you for spamming, so expect to see some action from the moderators.
Holy shit, what a thread! That was a fascinating read. I haven't read such a good debate on this in ages.(And I'm with you, Zizi and sheikh.)
@The_Mad_Pirate wasn't harassing anyone. He was polite and respectful the entire time.But I agree with Amanda that this was a good debate.
@Jamie05rhs He was spamming, and that is why I reported him. He could write what he wants to say in one comment, but instead he posts multiple comments. He was also very rude from the beginning, but even then I debated in a polite and respectful way. However, he did not stop being rude, even after that.
It just looked to me like you guys were having a friendly debate. That's what I saw anyway.
19th Century "Oppression Theory" was proven false a long time ago ( it comes from the false premise of Objective Value/Price theory of David Ricardo, the actual correct theory is the Subjective Value/Price theory of Menger ).In short what you are complaing about is about Corporate Socialists who create a collective between progressives CEOs and Government agents to stiff competition and engage in the kinds of mischief you are talking about. In short what you are complaing about is not about the Henry Fords or Andrew Breitbarts the of the world, you are complaing about the Jeff Bezos, George Soros, Bill Gates, or Jeff Zuckers of the world. The ones who wants to be "friends" with government agents, not the ones who want nothing to do with it. After all, regulations are meant to kill the "little guy", not the them who can use lobbyism , "revolving doors" and hire massive law firms to bypass such regulations.There is no such thing as "taxing the rich", since Laffer's Law shows that hiking taxes beyond an optimal point reduces tax revenue. Besides, increasing corporate taxes results in less job creations and increased product prices ( what the government steals from the company through taxes is compensated increasing the product price).
Funny because those demanding more control are liberals.What you are saying is that liberals restrict people's individual freedom, and when people try to recover the inherent freedom, liberals turns to them and say "there is no such thing as individual freedom... Don't you see how much I am restricting yours?".But do appreciate you admitting that you are a petty tyrant. Well, liberals love tyranny after all... they love China, they love Cuba, they love Venezuela, they love North Korea...
@The_Mad_Pirate who are you even talking to and what are you even talking about? You lose the debate and then start talking about something off topic to restart shit up again, for no reason at all. Go somewhere else to get the attention you want.
How can it be "her on body" if the human being been killed has a different DNA structure than its mother?
@elisa_0 How is an intellectual debate a "harassment" ?All I'm doing is confronting ideas that do not corroborate with Objective Reality with logically coherent arguments and common sense.What I am doing is challenging emotion with reason.by the way, all Continental Philosophers are charlatans from the moment they refuse to impose that they arguments are exclusively logically coherent and consistent. There's no place for fallacies in philosophy.
I have no idea how you can consider spamming to replying mentions in a question asking plataform.In other words, expressing ideas you don't agree with is not spamming ( which is weird, given your question invites both sides to debate, but then again you were seeking a confirmation bias not an actual debate).
@The_Mad_Pirate my question is about dating, it is not about philosophy.
I didn't say one negative thing about anyone here. Still, two male downvotes. You guys are pathetic. You just want to continue to demonize any talk of your ridiculous 2-party politics, even if it's positive and supportive. Once again, proof of how many immature triggered men are out there, who can't even take or allow a compliment.@Jersey2 and @GoodGuyBreakingBad obviously this is not about you. You rock.
@AmandaYVR do you WANT men to place orders for you? I personally could never do that. It just rubs me the wrong way. But maybe some women like it; I don't know.
@Jamie05rhs All of those things I listed I recognize as the nice gesture that they were intended.However, I don't need any of them. I don't expect any of them.A man ordering for the table used to be proper and customary. Particularly in formal settings. However, now, waiters will always look to the woman first, and take her order from her. Unless, an appetizer is ordered, in which case she/he may glance at both to see who answers first. Things have certainly gotten more casual.In my case, it was not them choosing what I was going to eat - that would irk me, yes. It was discussed before what I would have, what we might want, and sometimes I will narrow appetizers down to two I might like or something, and let the other person ultimately decide more (if I truly don't have a strong opinion or preferences.) If I go with someone who is a food or legit very knowledgeable about food or a particular restaurant, I will defer to them, male or female. But I do not trust everyone to do this. It's based on knowledge, in that case.What I have noticed, and been concerned about, is can a guy handle me ordering for the the table? That takes a secure man to handle that. There should be absolutely nothing wrong with that, but some people are more traditional. Some guys will feel emasculated by that. (Even if he's not in a social mood and would actually prefer not talking or making eye contact with a stranger.) But I know food, and I have pleasant relationships with people in businesses, so they are in good hands if I were to do it.
It does get more complicated, though, because one of those two guys did eventually, suddenly, get upset. He was apparently trying so hard to be 'that guy' - carrying the bags, and the umbrella, and being irked shopping (which I didn't know he hated), and trying not to complain, or have a smoke break, etc. He was trying to hold it all together and take on too much. He eventually cracked and snapped at me. I told him "I had no idea!" and we ducked into a sports bar (more his style, not mine), and he got some beer while watching sports in the background. Now, he was finally comfortable, finally relaxed.So even when gender roles are clearly defined, classic, in a sense, people can find them exhausting at times.
Well, I just wouldn't feel comfortable even announcing her choice even if she had chosen it herself. To me that just seems like you're taking away her voice. It's basically dehumanizing them into a second class citizen. That the way I see it, anyway. "If I go with someone who is a [foodie] or legit very knowledgeable about food or a particular restaurant, I will defer to them, male or female.". I agree with you. I find myself in that position often, since I almost never go out, so when I do I'm often a first-time customer at whatever establishment is chosen. So I have have no clue about anything on the menu (if the cuisine is not familiar to me.)So I often do ask for suggestions -- from my friends as well as from the server. (But I can smell a salesman a mile away, so I disregard if they're giving me "scam" vibes.)"can I guy handle me ordering for the entire table?". Interesting topic. It entirely depends: Are you paying? Then sure! Go right ahead and choose for me. I have no problem with that whatsoever.But if I'm paying, then HELL to the No. I would feel violated to the highest degree if someone tried to choose for me what I was going to spend my own hard-earned money on.Regarding the guy who snapped at you,... I'm sorry, but he has no excuse. You didn't ask him to do all of those things. If he didn't want to be burdened in that way, he should have spoken up sooner instead of suffering in silence.
@Jamie05rhs It's not meant to be dehumanizing. It's taking care of her. It's a custom, tradition.How about this - my dad is a very casual guy. He is either not aware of some of these customs, or rejects and rails against it - I'm honestly not sure which.But every time we would go to a restaurant (with me as an adult), this is what would happen: he would order a coffee from the hostess who seated us (not wait to see who our server is.) He would order his entree at the same time as the person came over to ask what drinks we wanted. He would order his food first, always before mine. It created havoc. The hostess would have to break protocol, bring him his drink, or tell the server. The server was uncomfortable, because they are used to starting with the woman's order. The timing was off. He was often hungry, guess this factored in, but oh, you should have seen the looks.Some of these things were created, and are in place, to have a sort of common structure, a pattern which all can rely on.Things are different now. It's part of the equalizing of genders. But it's not smooth sailing. It is far less formal, but it is also creating more uncertainty.
@AmandaYVR Well, I'm not really into customs or traditions in general. Lol.Omg- I think I love your dad. 😆 I think we would get along very well. 😃. (... Except I do like to let the other people order first.)I know. But I just don't care about "common structures.". I like to disrupt things. I like to do things my own way in my own style. 🙂Eh... the restaurants can learn to adapt. A lot of those folks are too uppity anyway; they need to be knocked down a peg or two.
Differences between liberals and conservatives are more than just political, both have radically different perspectives on life itself. According to Dr. Helen Fisher, the differences might even be related to the neurotransmitters, serotonin and dopamine.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
You will eventually want kids
There are many people in this world who decide to not have children and do not regret that decision. Children are not for me and that’s okay. Not everyone wants them. You shouldn’t assume so much about a stranger
Conservative men tend to assume a lot regarding women and how they should and shouldn't behave...
@ACupOfT I couldn’t agree with you more
Oh you may never want kids. But at some point your body will go into baby mode. At that time, likely 10 years from now, it will be a decision point for you. by the way everyone makes assumptions, without any expectations we can’t succeed or fail in life. You make assumptions just like I do.
@OutdoorsForLife There's a big difference though. We know ourselves and we're speaking for ourselves. You speak for us just like you know better.
Lol I’ll never meet you, I am offering an opinion based on feedback from others. How could I know what will happen in the future? The only person I have control of in life is myself, I take responsibility for my own actions. I expect others to do the same. If you only speak for yourself, have you ever given advice?
@OutdoorsForLife Of course, based on my own experience and how accurate it was regarding to their situation.
Great, I’m glad we agree. And as we both know when giving advice we are often wrong. Have a nice week.
@OutdoorsForLife But you're not a woman. Hence, you don't know how women feel 😉
Lol, I’m not sure other women know how women feel. Wanna make billions of dollars.. write a book on predicting how all women feel :)
@OutdoorsForLife Not everyone thinks like you. Many people don't want children, remain childless, and never regret it.
I would be an egotistical asshole if I thought everything I said was right. I’m probably wrong more often then I am right. Yes there are lots of reasons for people to never have kids. But she is also not at an age to totally rule out kids, she can change her mind can’t she?
@OutdoorsForLife Who are you to say I am not at an age to determine such a thing? Many people make this decision at young ages and stick to it. I can say that even as a kid I felt that I never wanted kids of my own. It’s not something I have ever wanted. Sure, I could change my mind, but it isn’t your place to say so. My comment/answer was for a question of a different topic. So let’s stick to the topic at hand please instead of picking apart the needs and wants of a complete stranger.
Fair enough. Honestly I posted one sentence and it generated 15 replies. If you happen to change your mind in 10 years, let me know. Peace :)
@OutdoorsForLife Expeditive Reproduction ( aka "baby rabies" ) is a biological fact.
But that means, and yeah its a little petty lol, that as a woman who allows him to make all of the "Big" decisions it is also up to him to make sure he considers you and makes the "Right" decision (on a whole not just because you told him to) or risk suffering your nagging or I told you so's for a very long time.
Exactly. You can have whatever beliefs you want, just don’t expect others to adhere or even care what those are. Like I can understand wanting to be the head of the household. But that won’t work with me, because that is my title. Issues like that b
@Agape93 Lol amen sis
Hail Edmund Burke, a guy whose ideas are more than needed in this day and age.
@Agape93 Edmund Burke
@The_Mad_Pirate Go place your nonsense elsewhere
So... philosophy is nonsense for you?
> Dosen't want men to act like her daddy> Wants government to act like a Daddy> Doesn't want men to act like they own her> Wants the government to own her through excessive regulation and social engineering> Doesn't want men to treat her like a child> Wants to government to treat like a child by enacting policies that assume that she is incapable of assuming self responsibility> Says she wants men to see her as a human being> Wants government to strip people of their natural rights like free speech ( 1st amendment), self defense ( 2nd amendment), private property ( 4th amendment) and fair trail ( Title IX and VAWA).
@The_Mad_Pirate Maybe you should get some rest. You clearly are too emotional and subjective right now to have a civil, grounded discussion. Come back when you have something relevant to talk about.
It's interesting that you are projecting, I have been nothing but logical and rational in all my interactions. In fact, it's you who have been emotional and subjective, so don't accuse me of what you do yourself.Then again I guess Vox Day's 2nd Law is universal.
Oh well, I am a liberal. What do you believe are some things about liberal men that make you not compatible with them?
I dont wish to list my reasons here but I have a lot of liberal friends and I once tried to get to know a liberal man as a potential partner. We are just not compatible. The same way I can't be with religious men, traditional men, feminists, and socialists. Anyone who has strong extreme affiliation I guess.I would like a balanced partner.
That is understandable, no matter what sort of extremist a person is, at the end of the day they are mentally unhealthy people.
So True.Hard to call for some guy to call himself masculine when such guy supports a political ideology whose values are inherently femenine. Masculinity cares about honor, duty competition and productivity, not about feelings, compassion, community or caring.