/siberia/ - Off-topic

Some top quality pussy here

>>819666
Checked.

>>819651
Omg…HE IS KILLING OTHER CATS cat serial killer!?!?!

noes

i think we're overdue for a nothing

nobbin ebar habbens doe

Only a few more decades until we get to those weeks, bros!

Ur mom is overdue for a habbening

>>819724
>sports tend to be divided so that no one is given an unfair advantage
it's impossible to do this. in an even matchup 2 equally skilled guys with similar body types with equal amounts of training and hard work and good choices will still have 1 of them with some unfair advantage over the other. the trick is just to make it hard for the audience to notice. it's a trick.

>>819781
Yeah exactly, why do you think they're so mad

>>819700
How is he blue?!

>>819801
But cis women can have multiple orgasms.

>>819803
I see the error in my ways, sorry.

>>819527
I saw a clip of some Japanese leftist lady saying Japan is fascist because most people don't want to bring in African immigrants. I think people should be able to decide who comes into their country so I guess I'm a fascist too.

>>819752
Yes, if you're pro ethno-states you're at least fascist-adjacent, this is not an absurd claim. For this reason you should kill yourself.

>>819769
Socialist countries don't tend to import millions of poor immigrants. Are they fascist too?

>>819786
In this regard, yes.

>import millions of poor immigrants
Most soy, pearl clutchy, emotionally loaded way of putting this.

>>819527
>what do u think abt racism
I don't get it. why can't people just be cool with everyone??? cultural differences are more important anyway. a black man from america or britain is going to have more in common with a white american or european than he will with a black man from some clandestine african tribe.
>what do u think abt sexism
I don't get it. why can't people just focus on their similarities, and try their best to understand their differences? I really, really love women, and yet I see that a lot of women are suspicious of men like me because they also know that a great deal of men are abusive and violent, and that makes me sad because I don't want to hurt anyone. I don't blame them for being wary, it's a dangerous world, I just wish it didn't have to be this way.
>what do u think abt rape
we shouldn't do rape. rape's bad, m'kay. if there's any nuance to be found here, it'll be in the definition of rape. is it rape if I sex with a girl I bring home from the club, if she's drunk enough out of her mind that she might regret it upon waking up? maybe so, but a lot of people wouldn't think so, and would probably just reciprocate whatever sexual advances the drunk girl expresses while she's sloshed.
>what do u think abt homophobia
sometimes I have a reactionary cringe at men and femboys, but I know that it's just the same sort of cringe that I'd have for anyone else that I find sexually unappealing. I think the gays should be given their free rights, but I also don't think it's right when, at pride parades, they make nuisances of themselves by being so lewd in public. have some respect!
>what do u think about tomato sauce
I like it.
>what do u think about onion rings
I like it.
>what do u think about segmented buses
I don't care.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

marx wasn't even a marxist

>>819778
This but unironically

Moralism

just plug em up

infibulation of all orifices, or turn them into long proboscis

has someone ever raped the nose of an elephant?

>>819657
if you want to lose your penis,that's a great idea,they're stronger than an human arm

>>819691 still hot

>>819458
They should vote with their rifle, like they tried to do last election but should aim better.

I'm still a little confused by the whole "Americans can't afford anything" narrative when my monthly expenses are $1500 at most bringing in $3000 from an entry-level warehouse job.

>>819422
>>819425
I agree, but I also live in a cinder block shack and steal internet

>>819433
>>819437
>>819438
They're right though.

>>819407
Don't fall for Democrat propaganda.

>>819386
>exterior cause
I never proposed an exterior cause, but only saw the cause of "stuff" as internal; e.g. stuff comes from stuff. Your incoherent alternative is that stuff can come from not-stuff, but you know that's impossible. I never invoked "creation", either, that was the other anon, since its impossible to "create" matter. That's why reality is uncreated/eternal - and so time must also thus, by necessity, come from the timeless.
>>819476
The ancients reckoned that matter is uncreated, and that time was an imposition upon matter by a deity, since time must begin after the margin of chaos. Flux is then presupposed as eternal, with time being a type of local order which allows for the formation of natural bodies. A deity puts matter into a harmony we call "time", or relative motion; so absolute motion is the same as stillness (as we read in Heraclitus).
>>819509
>Evidence
Logic is built from self-evidence. That is the nature of it.

>>819284
>We see in the Epic of Gilgamesh (2000 BCE) not a single hope for an afterlife. Homer (800 BCE) denies any idea of Heaven. Hesiod (700 BCE) speaks of the "Isle of the Blessed" as a sort of Heaven. It is only really with Plato (380 BCE) that we see a full belief in both Heaven and Hell.
OH FUCK SMITH ANON IS IN SIBERIA

>>819284
>>819280
>people invented god to express their alienation from a cold and uncaring universe
>>819284
>I don't really believe that - at least in general […] We see that religious faith is highest in the least well-off, and so the fantasy of revenge (e.g. Hell) and reward (e.g. Heaven) is attributed by Nietzsche to be symptom of "slave morality". Slaves are the most alienated and so are most religious - but its a matter of cause and effect.

Bruh you said you don't believe that but then you backed up his argument.

>>819590
It requires subtlety, nonetheless.
The fantasy of religion is particular to historical development, since otherwise the human condition would permit the full indulgences of sublime reward at all times. I don't take Nietzsche's argument that the Bronze Age was a paradise seriously, since Gilgamesh bemoans his fate unto death - the Freudian point would be that Death Anxiety induces fantasies of immortality, yet immortality is barred from Gilgamesh. So it cannot be a purely psychological affair. We see in the Bible, litters of economic metaphors concerning "wages of sin" and "heavenly treasures" and parables of God as a creditor. The very structure of "Judgement" is a courtroom, as an example, so courts must historically precede its idea, with justice being renumeration. I might say then that material alienation precedes the psychology of alienation, with fantasy as a medium. So, it is society which creates God, as a reflection of itself, and God is internalised in this way. It's the same way science fiction isn't really about the future, but the present.

>>819586
>I never proposed an exterior cause, but only saw the cause of "stuff" as internal; e.g. stuff comes from stuff.
<Note, then, to begin with, that things cannot act upon each other and turn into one another at random, unless it be by incidental concomitance ; for how (to take an example) could culture, as such, ‘ become’ pallor ? A man of culture, who had been of a swarthy coinplexion, might indeed become pale, and so the person we had described as ‘ cultured’ might come to be a person we describe as ‘ pale,’ but only incidentally to the fact that the cultured person who became pale had other qualities concomitantly with his culture ; for he cannot ‘become’ pale on the mere strength of already having some quality other than pallor to start from, unless that quality is on the specific line of antithesis to pallor—swarthiness or some intermediate shade.
P.53, Aristotle The Physics Vol-i : Philip H Wicksteed : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive https://share.google/4RXCkmBwZhxzenv2v
If I read this correctly, something can't change into something else without being the "patient" of an external "agent " - unless it already had the necessary qualities characteristic of what it changes into in it already , in which case it would already be that thing.
>The ancients reckoned that matter is uncreated, and that time was an imposition upon matter by a deity, since time must begin after the margin of chaos.
>A deity puts matter into a harmony we call "time", or relative motion; so absolute motion is the same as stillness (as we read in Heraclitus).
Like in Genesis?. God doesn't create matter out of nothing, but out of watery chaos.
But what caused the watery chaos?
And later in the Bible, there is a reference to God smiting the heads of dragons in the waters. What were dragons doing in the waters?

It's all very unsatisfying. If the gods didn't cause Matter to physically exist, but just tweaked it to give it Form, the question of why everything exists, rather than nothing, isn't answered.

Google Bioleninism

>>819634
The guy on the top right is a gigachad

>>819634
That's quite a sample. You're supposed to extract a typical phenotype from that? Because it ranges from "not even with a ten foot pole" to "you make my kokoro go doki doki senpai <3"

>>819673
Which ones make your kokoro go doki doki?

>>819634
Completele nonsense empirically, like where the fuck do you see these disgenic identities elavated, top of society in liberal democracies consists mostly out of elite school raised psychopaths. Ironically right wing politics are basically the only venue for uneducated low culture low autism score untermensch to raise above. Like look at any right wing populist politician and contrast them with their more center or leftist counteparts.

>>819362
>And what? Who cares, that's largely inconsequential, and other people's kids do have the potential to be an inconvenience.

So do dogs and partnered adults and disabled and elderly. Yet it’s considered wrong to discriminate against disabled and elderly and romantic partners in the same way we do to children.

Most anti-natalism concerns are rooted in seeing children as leeches. They don’t take into account adult consumption of resources for non-essential purposes.
They even promote shameless adult self-indulgence

>>819316
>Personally I don't think men are as invested in that that type of thinking because women are most likely to become primary caregivers anyways so they are more likely to worry about that. Men can just deposit their seed and move on or kick back and let the woman worry about running a household

You couldn’t be more wrong. Men are more into antinatalism than women. Women are often the ones wanting to have a baby to “seal the deal” in relationships. I swear this place has shallow distorted view of gender just like the rightoids they complain about.

>>815537
>>819362
>>816927
>>818086
It’s amazing that you will complain about “muh eugenics” whenever someone suggests that people with hereditary disabilities shouldn’t be allowed to breed.
But, you have no problem with wanting to kill unborn kids for “moral” convenience.

Also
>shoot every breeder moid in the dick

Yet, there’s no proposal for violence on breeder foids?


>>818890
Reddit doesn’t need to be excessively edgy like imageboards are. Tbh I prefer it being “saccharine/inoffensive”.

>>818086
>>819243
>>819261
>>819362
>>819463
>>819470
>Kill everyone capable of having kids
>Being a parent makes you a fascist chud
>Nobody should be allowed to have kids or else Mother Nature (Peace Be Upon Xer) will hecking die
All Reddit tier views by the way.

>>819463
>You couldn’t be more wrong. Men are more into antinatalism than women. Women are often the ones wanting to have a baby to “seal the deal” in relationships. I swear this place has shallow distorted view of gender just like the rightoids they complain about.
Maybe it's just what I've seen on Reddit but it does seem like more women use the childfree and antinatalist subreddits. Often one of their main complaints is that men often trap women in pregnancies and that seems to be a common sentiment, at least among the female part. Not that they don't blame the female for her part but I feel they tend to put the blame more on the man. Also in the comment your replying to I did try to differentiate between the childfree and antinatalist communities as while there's crossover their is some differences. Or at least that's how they try to portray themselves. I did say that women predominate more in the childfree subreddit. I think antinatalism might be more equal or possibly male dominant, at least on Reddit. Also childfree is more of a dating preference anyways.

>>819463

1. it's considered wrong to discriminate against people in general.
   
2. there are too many people is about as simple as I get it for you. we can't kill people who are already alive, the only way to address overpopulation is by reducing the birthrate. I know that makes you nazi larpers big mad because some of your rhetoric revolves around increasing the white birthrate, but the environment is more important than preserving your genetics, and also brown people should be having less kids, too.
   

>>819470

1. eugenics is pseudoscience hogwash with no basis in reality, and I would not be against the cessation of certain genetic profiles being proliferated via pregnancy if it is scientifically certain that those genetics will result in defects.
   
2. you can't kill a fetus, it's a fetus, and morality doesn't really factor into it unless you're some fundamentalist christian type who already sees the fetus as a person.
   

>>819623
why should I care that some people on reddit might have enough sense to understand that climate change is a result of human activity, and that only humans can make the choice to reduce that activity? good, I'm glad people on reddit understand that. why don't you?