[Last 50 Posts]
>For Reagan not only saw communists as parricides, but also as extremely active sexually-completely in contrast to the actual sexual code in most communist countries. For instance, when he ran for Governor of California, one of the central themes of his campaign was “the mess at Berkeley,” a place where, he said, they held “sexual orgies so vile I can-not describe them to you,” promising if elected to “investigate the charges of communism and blatant sexual misbehavior on the Berkeley campus.” A good part of the reason why he was elected was that, as one biographer put it, “hidden away in the hearts of parents was the fear that their own children might one day go away to college, grow beards and march against authority.”… Reagan promised these voters that his first targets as Governor would be the students at Berkeley, “advocates of sexual orgies, drug usage, and filthy speech,” who wanted only to “disrupt the academic community” and who therefore must be brought under control immediately. The situation at Berkeley, he told a woman’s club in April of 1966, was now so bad that their “morality gap is so great that we can no longer ignore it.” He had proof, he said, that the Alameda County District Attorney had just investigated a student dance which had turned into “an orgy,” where they had displayed on a giant screen “pictures of men and women, nude, in sensuous poses, provocative, fondling.” Since Reagan had waved a piece of paper in the air during the speech, saying that he had the report of the DA’s investigation “in his hand,” curious reporters later asked the DA for a copy, only to be told that “my office made no investigations of the college dance.” - Lloyd deMause, "REAGAN’S AMERICA"
You can even see this sort of mentality in people like Ben Shapiro who conflate communism, socialism, and "the left" with rebellion against all authority and goodness for the sake of mindless pleasure. Not to mention the endless obsession with LGBTQ+, qanon pedophile theories, porn, abortion, etc.
What is the actual materialist explanation for the right wing obsession with sex? Does porky get some sort of benefit from everyone being a heterosexual monogamous who goes to church once a week? if not why the backlash? is it just to ensure a constant supply of new workers?
They're squares
>Does porky get some sort of benefit from everyone being a heterosexual monogamous who goes to church once a week
Yes
>>1751299>What is the actual materialist explanation for the right wing obsession with sex?Projection.
>>1751307I think the most important aspect is that you are indeed more compliant in the "majority" population. The whole idea of "normalcy" is limiting.
There is a reason Marx said "The ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class" and it is not just because they simply like to enforce their worldview on their underlings.
>>1751299I think the men who become cultural conservatives are not actually straight but actually repressed asexuals. Thus they need all these abstract justifications for sticking their dick in a woman (the nation, the religion, the white race, etc.) Like that recent spat of memes where they cover up naked women with AI. They are obviously disgusted by sex.
>>1751317
>To create more physical proles who will create economic value in the future
WRONG, porkies are just fine with migration. What they want is families, because families have a very specific list of goods only/mostly families want and also can afford
>>1751321>WRONG, porkies are just fine with migration. I think it's like, there's the liberal porky faction that encourages migration, and the racist porky faction that doesn't want that and resorts to turning white women into broodmares as recompense
>>1751316this makes way too much sense. much like the homophobic homosexual conservative
The 1960's did mark an intellectual current that is pro-liberation of desires against all authority. The youth of the 60's chanted Marxist slogans, but their true lineage is closer to Bataille and De Sade. This is not, however, inherently Leftist, nor does it always manifest in lurid orgiastic outbursts that conservative parents imagined.
The reason for that particular schizophrenia was the changing nature of American economy which by then was at the peak of its global capitalist empire. This period was basically a runner-up to the neoliberal explosion of the Reagan years that would put an end to Industrial America and subsequently birthed the Managerial, Financial America. Just like how structural changes of 1900's America resulted in the Prohibition, the economic changes of 1960's America caused by a surplus of superprofit from its Empire resulted in a panic against the rapid decline of the industrial society pitted against that of College-educated financial society. It is in this context that some very paranoid conservative Americans probably saw college kids talking about the liberation of sexual desires, and their already panicked state of mind converted that into imagination of basically satanic orgies happening in US universities
I want to nitpick something in OP before the population growth bickering starts and I gracefully bow out.
>>1751299>mindless pleasureI think the powers that be (the Man, as it were) have no problem with mindless pleasure (the idiot box etc.) It's mindful pleasure that is worrying.
>>1751366It's 10+ years that the european govs whine about population decline, and how they need immigrants to keep the population up.
Not to mention that the image you gave us specified exactly that population growth in the LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES is a problem for the US.
Global population control is a rightoid spook and part of the white genocide narrative.
>>1751368>I think the powers that be (the Man, as it were) have no problem with mindless pleasure (the idiot box etc.) It's mindful pleasure that is worrying.so what, like the rave movement in the 80s uk being infused with a backlash to thatcherism?
>>1751952I don't know anything about rave or inbred island.
>>1751316Lmao why is it so hard for you fags to understand that we're just religious and we adhere to our faith pretty strictly
>NOOOOO THEY'RE HAS TO BE AN UNDERLYING PSYCHOSEXUAL PATHOLOGY THAT CAUSES THIISSS!!! MUH HECKIN FREUDORINO
>>1752094Religious people fuck more often than non religious ones unironically. Since their community literally sets them up to do nothing but that and reproduce
>>1752094>No I don't have a sex thing going on>I'm just retarded, straight upWeird defense but ok
His wife was rumored around hollywood to giving great head.
>>1752094Because, my dear religious friend, religion is less about God than it is about our sexual neuroses. That is why 99% of religions are about arbitrary restriction on sex: how many wives you can take, when and where you should have sex, how to treat sexual refuse, and whether usage of contraceptions is acceptable. The Sexual taboo is the most comprehensive field in religions because Sex belongs solely to humans; it is alien to the Divine.
and yet so many pious rabbis, imans, priests, and pastors, fap to traps, rent boys, fuck children, and goon away at home behind lockd doors while condemning it in public. there's something going on.
>>1752094Freud was right, cry about it repressed faggot.
Best explanation for rightoid motivations is psychoanalytical. Repression, projection, reactive formation, castration anxiety, all of that motivates them far more than any "material" factors.
>>1752094If that were the case, priests wouldn’t molest boys.
>>1751362>Americans probably saw college kids talking about the liberation of sexual desires, and their already panicked state of mind converted that into imagination of basically satanic orgies happening in US universitiesso fear of orgies is just sublimated fear of financial neoliberalism and the PMC it creates?
>>1752094>Lmao why is it so hard for you fags to understand that we're just religious and we adhere to our faith pretty strictlyok but why do rightoids want to use the state to mandate or not mandate lifestyles on others?
>>1752225Teachers molest boys at a higher rate than priests. Are teachers repressed sexually in your head
>>1798842Yea that’s coz teachers have more access to kids.
"Trad" or conservative rightwingers like Reagan seems to see communism or the left as some kind of pagan Nietzschian vitalism.
"Communists just want to rape all our women & girls, do genocides and have a good time afterward because it gets them off! Remember the barbaric red army raping it's way throught berlin and killing all germans in the east!". Their idea of communism is an orgy of life affirming violence, sex and perpertual war.
They basically sees use as a bunch of Dirlewanger squads and themselves as austere stoics trying to resist our urges to conquer. Odd.
>>1751299>Does porky get some sort of benefit from everyone being a heterosexual monogamousmore children = more reserve labor
>who goes to church once a week?The church serves as a substitute for welfare and offers a way for people to socialize in an environment that's otherwise heavily regulated. Part of it is also the enduring influence that religion had before the colonial era, particularly in places like Europe where the Catholic Church was effectively in charge or the United States where settlers were organized by Protestant sects.
>why the backlash [against sex]?As stupid as it is, lots of people just hate sex. They aren't asexual, which is a perfectly legitimate reason to dislike sex; rather, they're heterosexual men and women who have been
taught to hate sex. Places like the United States have abysmal sex ed, where young adults are told to shut up and repress anything they feel rather than sit down and talk about it or engage with it in a healthy way; this leads to revulsion as they grow older, and repeat the cycle down the line.
For conservatives in particular, being anti-sex is a great way to control people. They can tap into the sexual repression I mentioned above and claim moral depravity if someone has sex, which is very effective fuel for outrage culture and offers an easy answer to problems in society.
>>1752191This is only true in monotheism whose priesthood is usually made up of eunuchs and people who are generally disgusted by their bodies (philosophers), like paul who says that even to have a wife is sinful and implies that procreation is actually the "original sin" that mankind is bound in (an ode to the early christian gnostics).
Pagan religion is incomparable, even though all human cultures generally attempt to guard the concept of sexual modesty (which freud explicates in "totem and taboo" is the first act of restriction that enters man properly into civilisation by disbanding the sexual monopoly of "the primal father [kronos] by arranging marriages thereafter for the sake of peacekeeping).
>What is the actual materialist explanation for the right wing obsession with sex?
Jouissance. Taboo creates the "surplus enjoyment" of denial, politically with the public-private distinction, which leftists erode this by publicising sexual identity and relations.
Ive already made the point before too about the jouissance of homophobia arising from a constitutive homoeroticism, by emptying the signifier of activity from its anunciation (but by formalising relations you disperse what you [didnt] have by refraction - like how you fall into a relationship, you dont one day say that youre bf and gf, thats anti-social). Youre allowed to be "gay" by not being gay, thats why there are no publicly gay athletes or soldiers, because homoeroticism barrs the autonomy of this identity through enjoying it's coded placation.
Think for example too of the whole "trap" phenomenon. The womanly image sustains an "excess" through her male sex, which is the "enjoyment" of her condition, and this is also why MtF transhumanists who get their cocks cut off lose all of their appeal, because they are caught within the constitution of a contradiction which gives meaning to their character.
So the conservative enjoyment is in this pre-political relation of the informal sexual excess, where leftists usually want to bring this into formality, thus creating political autonomy but losing the qualitative excess.
This is the same divide political between femboys and transhumanists. One is allowed to have this discursive excess of being a boy while appearing as a girl, while the other has identified with the cause of their subjectivity and so lost their mystique.
>>1798946>sex>with girlsPedophile.
Desire to have sex with women.
Push this nonsense out from your head.
Essentially this
>>1751362The fight between conservative and liberal social values was the fight between industrial capitalism where frugality was a virtue vs financial capitalism which encourages mindless consumption. Financial capitalism used to be the side of progress, but in its triumph has done away with history and the idea of progress altogether. What's left is only the commodified images of former realities in a parodistic eternal fight against eachother.
>>1751299Post cuckservative greatest hits.
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/kompromat-or-revelations-from-the-unpublished-portions-of-andrea-manaforts-hacked-texts/That’s a rather dainty way to refer to over a decade of coercive and manipulative sexual behavior, in which Manafort allegedly forced his wife, vulnerable from having sustained brain damage after a near-death horseback riding accident years before, to engage in “gang bangs” with black men while he watched.
¤
She shouldnt have to do that and i would feel the same way
she keeps saying she has tried so hard
but she can’t keep doing it
and the stuff he has made her do is outrageous
mom thinks dad will end their marriage bc she won’t do it anymore
i don’t even know what to think
Im in shock
This is abuse
but apparently he has a thing for black men
hard core.
one time it was 6 black men in a hotel room
i hate him jessica. i think i hate him.
she asked why so many black men and he said bc they are the ones willing to do it
Seymour Hersh, the journalist famously responsible for bringing the truth about the My Lai massacre to the American public, received a phone call in 1974 from a hospital in California. A doctor informed him that Richard Nixon, who had recently resigned the presidency, had beaten his wife Pat so badly she had just been admitted. Hersh never published the story, partly so as not to put his source — and, by extension, the hospital — at risk. Over the years, as Nixon’s abuse was confirmed by multiple other sources, Hersh maintained his silence. What did wife beating have to do with the man’s diplomacy in China or his role in Watergate? What did a “bad marriage” have to do with a man’s public life?
At a 1998 event with the Nieman Journalism Fellows at Harvard, Hersh shared the story — about Nixon, about the hospital — and was surprised at the response from women journalists in the room, who pointed out that he chose to not write about allegations of repeated criminal behavior by an American president. Hersh told them, “I did not think it was a story, I thought it was his business.” The event was recorded. After 25 years, both Hersh’s knowledge of Nixon’s abuse and his reticence about reporting on it became a matter of public record.
This past summer, Hersh released his memoirs. He includes the Nixon story and the Nieman Fellows event, framing it, apologetically, as an example of his “ignorance”: “I did not think it [Nixon’s abuse] was a crime.” In subsequent televised interviews, however, Hersh appears frustrated that people keep asking about his being caught in this act of omission, stating repeatedly his regret that the Nieman event had been recorded. Hersh seems equally impatient at himself, for not believing the story was relevant in 1974, and at the people who shared the story after 1998, believing it was.
Roger Stone did not ask black guys to bang his wife. He did advertise for “exceptional muscular well-hung single men” to join him in three-ways with his wife (who seemed an enthusiastic participant). The National Enquirer’s exposé on the Stones’ swinging marriage lost Roger his role as Bob Dole’s political consultant during the ’96 presidential campaign. The humiliation appears to have been galvanizing for Stone, who transformed himself into a defiantly flamboyant agent provocateur, rat-fucking on more subterranean levels of the Republican party politic. Stone performs his public self as such an unapologetically sleazy bon vivant (he refers to himself as a “try-sexual” because he’ll “try anything”) it’s easy to make him the target of the joke.
>>1799276Idk anon I would ask why your mind woul go to 'girls'…
>>1799295In modern English, "girl" is often is often used to refer to young adult women, not just children.
>explanation for the right wing obsession with sex
I recommend "Fascinating Fascism" by Susan Sontag and when you finish that one, Male Fantasies by Klaus Theweleit. Right wing ideology is sexual at a fundamental, subliminal level. Whereas socialism is, as your quote says, rather boring and tame with regards to sex.
>>1751299>What is the actual materialist explanation>materialismThere's your problem. Materialism is insufficient to account for reality.
>>1751316 &
>>1751359Reducing it to some freudian breakdown of RWers' psyches is super lazy. You really think the vast majority of conservatively-minded people, like entire townships in certain parts of the US, where everyone strictly shares the same sexual morality, is full of nothing more than projecting perverts?
>Does porky get some sort of benefit from everyone being a heterosexual monogamous who goes to church once a week?first of all:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_and_superstructurematerial base always takes precedence over superstructure, material base shapes the spiritual domain never the other way around like gullible idiots falling for idpolitics would like u to believe, culture helps maintain the base but it is unable to shape erect its foundations
back in the day when mobility was restricted and scarce and one could not import workers just like that the bourgeois in order to secure a flow of surplus value had to maintain stable numbers of toilers (2 children were typically enough to keep up with the replacement rate that's why the ideal family consisted of wife man + 2 children) - meaning they had to pay substantial sums of money to the worker so that he could raise the toilers of tomorrow (sustain his family) as u can imagine investing in someone who preferred sex with men and hedonistic pleasures was out of question
a good example is Henry Ford's approach - he sent inspections to his workers checking whether they 'carried themselves with dignity' - no drunkards, vagabonds, gays, devout christians were preferred, if u failed to meet expectations you could be sure that your paycheck would have been cut in half or you'd have got kicked out
any oldschool capitalist seeing 'his money' invested in gay orgies that could end in dangerous diseases decimating communities (his toilers) would scream in agony, class awareness among capitalists is much greater than among workers they recognise common interests easily and keep control of institutions that bolster their class interests
nowadays the situation is much different - importing people isn't particularly difficult, standardisation of education has gone a long way, division of labour makes it laughably easy to teach a worker the local language on top of that there's an ongoing automation that literally is about to make workers obsolete (therefore u hear all the babble about UBI)
conservative retards are just that they're idiots they don't realise the times have changed, the old days are long gone, they cling to outdated ideas that made sense 150 years ago, they vote for ridiculous cretins that prey on their idiocy like trump they tell them how 'religious' they're just like them in spite of fucking prostitutes and being unable to quote a single passage from the bible
notice how every country the conservatives regard as based is an awful backwater where capitalist relations haven't yet developed fully
>>1751323>>1751321<very specific list of goods only/mostly families want and also can affordwell is the market for diapers, cradles, daycare, etc. that huge?
Its all a giant cope for not being able to breed
>>1751307One simple thing is that they want a monopoly on orgies.
Only the rich in their fancy yachts and billion dollar mansions should have orgies. the population is merely the seeds to pick their victims on harvest.
>>1799078disregarding the pedo allegation,
>command your desire!YES SIR! THAT'S HOW IT WORKS!
>its another "shitting on the rightwingers that live rent free in my head" thread
>theyre still calling them prudes/sexual deviants
>>1817337bruh not that youtuber… please
David Graeber's essay on manners, hierarchy, and private property also studies the origins of capitalism.
<As most of my readers will no doubt be aware, Max Weber many years ago made a famous argument in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1930) that the rise of Puritanism in Europe was intimately related to the rise of a commercial economy there, and ultimately, that it played a key role in shaping the kind of near-monastic work discipline and obsessive strategies of accumulation that opened the way to modern capitalism. Weber’s argument has been debated endlessly and I have no intention of addressing his specific arguments here. W hat really interests me, instead, is the confluence between what Weber describes and other, apparently quite different, social trends occurring at roughly the same time. One was a phenomenon that was called, at the time, “the Reformation of Manners,” spearheaded in England by the Calvinists themselves, but in other parts of Europe, with equal gusto, by their Catholic equivalents. As Peter Burke (1978: 207) has pointed out, these campaigns were directed less at manners in the contemporary sense of the term than at popular culture. Beginning in the sixteenth century, Church authorities across the continent began a series of concerted campaigns to eradicate what they considered to be immoral elements in public life and ritual. The result was a great deal of very fractious social conflict: in fact, many of the popular struggles between Puritan and Royalist factions in the years before the English revolution turned precisely on struggles over at tacks on the place of festivals in popular life. At the same time though, even more profound changes seemed to be going on, much of it on a level that most people of the time did not seem to be fully aware of. Norbert Elias (1978: 70—84) has pointed out that the sixteenth century also marked the beginning of profound changes in people’s immediate physical sensibilities in Western Europe. Specifically, he speaks of a broad “advance of thresholds of shame and embarrassment,” an increasing tendency to repress open displays of anger or extreme emotions, but even more, displays of, or references to, bodily functions in everyday interactions. Basic standards of how one was expected to eat, drink, sleep, excrete, make love, shifted almost completely. The transition from the world of Rabelais to that of Queen Victoria was, in historical terms, so remarkably rapid— a mere three centuries— that historians have puzzled over the phenomenon ever since Elias first pointed it out. It seems obvious that all this must have been, in some sense, connected to the rise of Puritanism and the more formal “Reformation of Manners” it brought in its wake, but no one has offered any really plausible suggestion as to what that connection might be.<In this essay, I am going to make a suggestion based on the tools of comparative ethnography. I will start by picking up two hoary ethnographic categories called “joking relations” and “relations of avoidance.” These are terms originally coined by European and American anthropologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to describe what they considered exotic and extreme forms of behavior prevalent in what they considered “primitive” societies. It strikes me that the logic of joking and avoidance actually provides a very useful means to begin to create both a rudimentary theory of manners, and a rudimentary theory of hierarchy. Armed with this theory, I will return to Early Modern Europe, and demonstrate just how all three of the processes described above—Weber’s Calvinism, Elias’s standards of comportment, and Burke’s reform of popular culture—really are part of the same broad historical process— one that also brought about ideologies of absolute private property and the increasing commercialization of everyday life.https://davidgraeber.org/articles/manners-deference-and-private-property-or-elements-for-a-general-theory-of-hierarchy/| 58 replies
>>1752094>Lmao why is it so hard for you fags to understand that we're just religious and we adhere to our faith pretty strictly>AN UNDERLYING PSYCHOSEXUAL PATHOLOGYThere is, it's called idealism
>>1812559>material base always takes precedence over superstructureThat's a fascist ideology from
>wikipediaa fascist source. How about a real primary source that isn't merely fodder for the autistic theory of mind?
<According to the Materialist Conception of History, the factor which is in the last instance decisive in history is the production and reproduction of actual life. More than this neither Marx nor myself ever claimed. If now someone has distorted the meaning in such a way that the economic factor is the only decisive one, this man has changed the above proposition into an abstract, absurd phrase which says nothing. The economic situation is the base, but the different parts of the structure-the political forms of the class struggle and its results, the constitutions established by the victorious class after the battle is won, forms of law and even the reflections of all these real struggles in the brains of the participants, political theories, juridical, philosophical, religious opinions, and their further development into dogmatic systems-all this exercises also its influence on the development of the historical struggles and in cases determines their form. It is under the mutual influence of all these factors that, rejecting the infinitesimal number of accidental occurrences (that is, things and happenings whose intimate sense is so far removed and of so little probability that we can consider them non-existent, and can ignore them), that the economical movement is ultimately carried out. Otherwise the application of the theory to any period of history would be easier than the solution of any simple equation. We ourselves make our history, but, primarily, under pre-suppositions and conditions which are very well determined. But even the political tradition, nay, even the tradition that man creates in his head, plays an important part even if not the decisive one.
>>1751299The idea that fascists are sexually repressed is based on madjacketing fascists, and the association of sexual deviance with mental illness. Psychiatry creates sexual deviance where there was none before. If fascists are mad then fascists must be sexually deviant by definition.
>>1864563Like, fascists are sexually deviant, but it is in part due to the intertwined systems of psychiatry and sexual norms which mold sexual deviants into fascists and vice-versa.
Related:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sylvia_Likenshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Suzanne_Capperhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Junko_FurutaCountries known for brutal colonial tactics, no outlet as the colonial empire collapses, so the atrocities turn inward.
But heres the catch, they are also all sexually motivated.
>>1751312Here are some of the things that the "majority" tends to hold true unrelated to sexuality:
>burning teary-eyed puppies alive is bad>cannibalizing your newborn children is bad>exterminating the entire human race through the use of nuclear weapons is badAll of these only hold true because of the power of the bourgeoisie.
>>1864564You're probably not far off the mark but you are also probably missing the forest for the trees.
Fascists are sadistic, violent trash while still being repressed. They want to abuse children because of that. Power fantasies, aggression, repression. Weaklings go after the weak.
>>1864682They want to abuse children because it reproduces themselves as damaged and in pain, and therefore "alive". Scratch a perfectionist, find a pervert underneath.
>>1751299>What is the actual materialist explanation for the right wing obsession with sex?The more reactionary liberals want to think that communists/radical liberals are just freaks the same way radical liberals itt want to think that "fascists" are just freaks. Both want to simply discard what the other wing of bourgeois thought has to say. It's false in both cases: psychologists have determined that even Nazi leaders were psychologically "normal". This is a way to avoid the implications of their enemy's existence, to maintain that their moralistic worldview is simply the transcendental eternal truth that the enemy won't see because they're mentally ill. Liberals fucking love psychologizing, they do it all day every day because it lets them ignore reality. Every single leader who isn't on their side is just mentally ill: from paranoid Stalin to totalitarian Kim Jong Un, willy wonka Putin, insane fascist Drumpf, and just fanatic Khomeini.
Producing workers has nothing to do with this. If anything, the nuclear family is terrible for that. Porkies would be shilling for living with your grandma if they actually gave a shit about their workforce reproducing. They don't even care about maintaining infrastructure at this point.
>>1864858>The more reactionary liberals want to think<materialismThe absolute state of magacoms
>>1864858 (me)
Additions:
1) Drumpf is also a liberal whose policies were doubled down on during Biden's presidency, and his fanbase is very liberal in this way as well. This doesn't seem to matter to the liberals who oppose him. The leaders mentioned are in no way equivalent, just some of the people liberals hate. They fucking never acknowledge that the other side might actually be people with brains and it doesn't matter if that other side is exactly the same as them. The same seems to be true of all previous class societies, as far as I know.
2) Communists are unique in the fact that they can consistently see the other side as regular people shaped by forces far outside of their control and understand how this happened.
>>1864875The superstructure is an important part of the material reality, retard. Bourgeois do need to defend their positions and somehow make the working class go along with their bullshit, at least begrudgingly. Just saying that the opposition is insane is one of their most beloved tools.
Also, not a magacom. Trump didn't start fucking WW3 in Syria in 2016, thank god, but he might just do that in 2024 in China.
>>1864899>Drumpf is also a liberalhe's also an empty suit who will do whatever the people in the conservative thinktank ecosystem will tell him
Why is everyone on here pretending we live in the 1980s and religious sentiment is still in any way relevant in mainstream culture?
>>1865006Because it is.
We are still living in the 1980s.
Look at our ounk and rap cultures influencing fashion and music.
The Internet and PC which came about in 1983.
>>1865006Because magatards want it back and pathological lying is a celebrated art form in their culture.
>>1865019>le fake gravitas redditor styleGo back
>>1865006>Why is everyone on here pretending we live in the 1980s and religious sentiment is still in any way relevant in mainstream culture?t. zoomie who lives in a blu state
bruh one of the major political parties in america is entirely controlled by christian reactionaries who have a fucking veto power over who becomes president, not to mention they're about to win in '24 and ban abortion nationwide.
>>1752096Since when is sex within marriage a bad thing?
>>1799070Total nonsense. Read 1 Corinthians chapter 7. You're confusing Christian Revcel with pagan sexual negativity.
>Is that what they teach you in positive christianity?
you guys are all fat losers holy shit
>>1900955hey you watch your mouth, im not fat
>>1751316Or we just value it more than you. We hold sex as sacred while you view it like the capitalists do (a commodity)
>>1900992>We hold sex as sacred.No no you really don't at all.
>>1751299Okay, but real talk. How do I stop myself from being such a prude? I still have a lot of brainworms from 4chan, and my time self-identifying as in incel. At an intellectual level I am pro-sex, but personally I am extremely scared of sex.
>>1900955This is the post
It's all about power dynamics.
>>1901040>>1900992wouldn't a commodity be exchanged for money? its not free its a commodity. you may as well declare breathing a commodity
>>1752094>Ugh women are so loose and slutty these days>Women should only have sex after marriage>Actually you shouldn't even kiss a girl until your wedding>When you do have sex it should only be for procreation>Women should cover up>Ugh women are so annoying and their bodies are so icky>In fact women should not be seen in public>This is uh what god wantsFag.
>>1901031just accept yourself. you can be pro-sex doesnt mean you have to go to a swingers club or bonding dungeon.
>>1902511
>commodify and promote hedonism.
Both hedonism and the opposition to it are commodified. All the tradwaifu tradcath tradwhite tradanything shit is as artificial and propped up by capital as all the porn on the internet.
The various pre-packaged "traditionalisms" out there are brands. Commodified subcultures at this point where people buy "traditionalist" products and watch "traditionalist" eclebs who fund their "traditionalist" lifestyles through capitalist advertisements and sponsorships, in order to pretend they're not at all like those soy slurping funko pop buying consoomerist hedonist liberals which they have been convinced are bad and they shouldn't be anything like because some advertisement told them to.
And I'm using the terms ads, not propaganda. Because there isn't just a lot of money behind this, the primarily motivation is money. Many of these "traditionalist" (e)celebs are nothing like what they claim to be in their carefully choreographed (online) performances.
And of course all those insecure shy white and mixed-race-self-hating ("middle class") failsons and I'm-not-like-the-other-grils types eat it right up. Because of course they will. They're the target audience after all.
>>1902511
As anon pointed out, they commodify both. You have terminal culture brain.
>>1902511
>a true marxist follows everything every dictator ever said in their name
Marxism is not a subculture you infracuck
>>1864646You don't need morality or ideas for that in the first place. Empathy is perfectly sufficient to arrive at those positions. Naturally, I object to the idea of a moral bad on principle.
Animals have empathy (I am not saying they "hold these positions" in a conscious manner, non-human animals generally do not have very complex language). What is important (meaning of any value whatsoever) is how you act, not what you feel is the correct thing to do in theory.
>>1902586
Yeah, I'm gonna ignore you until you are ready to rejoin reality. It is waiting for you.
>>1902591
The conservative's true sexual nature in one clip
Well, they're Satanists. They know what their god commanded them to do, and what they are. None of the right believes in honesty. They believe betrayal is glorious and throw that in your face repeatedly to insist you must be fags like them.
You may call this "alarmist" but it really is what they are, and they insist you're not allowed to call these Satanic fags what they are. Call a fucking spade a spade, you know. They love that line.
The disease among the left has largely worked within. The rest of the world does not care about their particular perversions, since the perversion of aristocracy and the conservative order is loud and proud. Like we know though, the left parties do not conform to this aristocratic narrative given to them. Conservatism is highly homoerotic and faggy.
>>1751323>I think it's like, there's the liberal porky faction that encourages migrationWho's this faction? Since bill Clinton the ruling class has only become more militant against migrants. Just because the democrats "feel bad" about putting children in cages and deporting pregnant women back to the collapsed central American country the CIA wrecked. Doesn't mean that they encourage or are fine with immigration. Much less want open borders. Porky doesn't want open borders because they want control the movement of prols. Mexican are cheaper labor wise in Mexico. Porky doesn't need illegal immigration to keep wages flat, that's buying into their own propaganda and capitalist logic.
>>1751299Sex is salacious and whips up the repressed gooners that make up the Christian nationalist base. Idk what the materialist explanation, they're likely isn't one or if there is it's an historical event lost to time. But Christians are sexual repressed and the only way they can talk about sex is in opposite to it. If you read the transcript from the salem witch trails they'll ask the girls stuff like "describe the head of the devils cock and how he ravished you!". Shit like that. An entire town snapped and we're burning women because they couldn't rub one out.
it comes from the prevalence of patriarchal values in reactionary ideologies
reagan was appealing to racist christians, and shapiro does, too
>>1902675>>1902675If Trump wanted to get rid of all of the immigrants, he had little stopping him. All he did was show more sadism towards them, doing what Bush and Obama had been doing since 2001.
Getting rid of the immigrants is silly and pointless, and the reality is that few people care enough about that narrative. That's always been petty-managers recapitulating their eternal faggotry and inducing others to kick down. That's the only thing their fag race knows, and they made themselves a race and nothing else. Trump even said himself that he likes "legal immigration", making clear that he was using sadism and faggotry to maintain the status quo, so that managers could keep stealing everyone's shit and bitch about poor people. They really are a Satanic race.
>>1902675A funny thing is that a few local areas did vote to deport all of the immigrants, pushed them out of farm labor, and then no one did the job. They tried recruiting prison slaves, who all fucked off. This has always been about grinding down the conditions of the native work force, first relitigating that old eugenic creed and racism, and then reaching their real goal - enslaving outright the white commoners, which was always the endgame of the slave power. Only thing these Satanics know how to do.
All of you people keep inventing culture war excuses to elide what the right is, as if these people had any interest in decency or could be a thing we co-exist with. Satanics should be put down like dogs as befits their religion, and they disdain to hide their Satanism then and now.
>>1902664"Degeneracy" is just Protestant social reproduction, negated and reified. Fuck "generacy".
>>1902683Shut the fuck up with your larpy intersubjective branding shit and kill yourself for needing a god in the first place.
>>1902678> Trump wanted to get rid of all of the immigrants, he had little stopping himHe did get rid of immigrants, there were mass deportations and they are to this day. You can't actually stop illegal immigration completely nor can you shut down one of the largest borders in the world. Whats stopping Trump and porkey is reality. If they had the actual means and resources to shut down the border they would.
>Getting rid of the immigrants is silly and pointless,It's not pointless for porkey, because they get to blame immigrants on all their failures. And by being cruel and sadistic to them they can say "See we're doing something!".
>and the reality is that few people care enough about that narrative.The media is constantly pumping out anti-immigrant rhetoric and following that up with polls showing the immigrations is a primary issue. I wish Americans didn't care about immigration but I know fucking illegal immigrants that bitch about immigration. The propaganda is near constant.
Anyways I'll try not to respond anymore to this as not to derail the thread any farther. To get back on topic. Sexual repression is just another perversion. Sexual repression is for perverts that can't off being told they can't have sex and then breaking the taboo which makes it way hotter. TBH thats just from my personal experience dating church girls.
>>1902811
I think you are looking at things from an overly moralistic lens. How exactly does homosexuality help capitalism?
>>1902804Don't forget that in some US states, "anti-sodomy" laws are still on the books and given the right-wing theocratic direction SCOTUS has gone, could come back into force again soon.
>>1902970>WMAF and WMBF are far more popular. Lol wut
>>1902970>Freudian-Marxist pseudoscience willl debunk this.Kek, in more ways than 1.
>Also, WTF is smoking?
>>1902970Who the fuck calls it gen Y anymore?
>>1902970Why gen Y has this interest in "Korean" in specific?
>>1902984probably the remnants of Korean boyband craze
>>1902973It's pretty self explanatory.
>>1902989>It's pretty self explanatory.And inaccurate.
>>1902970>disgusting chaser shemale porn is losing relevancy in younger generationssisters, we made it
>>1902954>>1902970>WMAF and WMBF are far more popular. Most men just don't like watching other races of men fuck their womenAnd you never even explained why blacked is such a popular jav genre. There is not a single AMBF Jav.
>>1903046In fact the only black category they have is called "black actor" whatever that is in japanese. Only interaccial japs make is AMWF and BMAF
>>1903039Now does it tell you which people are watching these videos?
>>1903052No but it does tell us the majority are white.
>>1903051>>1903051>Only interaccial japs make is AMWF and BMAFBut blacked stuff out numbers riced stuff 10 to 1 to add.
>>1903057Well at least that was my perception but maybe the stats say I'm wrong. I was 100% right that White Actor and Black Actress are non existent JAV genres.
Black Actor:
https://www.javlibrary.com/en/vl_genre.php?&mode=&g=arlq&page=93White Actress:
https://www.javlibrary.com/en/vl_genre.php?&mode=&g=aqra&page=98
>>1903053Where does it say that? Also what the hell is adult vid empire? Why couldn't you cite a more popular porn site like pornhub or xvidoes instead of fishing out some obscure little site to prove a point?
Unique IPs: 77