[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/siberia/ - Off-topic

"No chin, no right to speak."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
siberia archives


File: 1707636661863.png (81.49 KB, 905x1280, waow.png)

 No.502441

ITT we have controversial opinions about love and such
I'll start: Arranged marriage is like based and kino because it dispels the illusion that marriage is anything beyond an economic partnership, and since it requires little to no effort in your or your partner(s)' part it enables a degree of detachment that allows the partnership to overlook small infidelities here and there. (As long as say it does not result in a complicated entanglement or gets leaked to the outside world and thus dishonor the family)

 No.502444

another fucking thread about this?

 No.502446

In pursuit of developing communist social relations and social units, we should study the kibbutz. The kibbutz is one of the most useful examples of a reinvented social unit to analyze, for both successes and failures. It's a model with an unusually long lifespan for this sort of utopian "intentional community," with mixed success. Kibbutzism has a socialist character (at least historically), but has since evolved to support settler colonialism and capitalism. Therefore it's an even more useful example for ways this type of project can go wrong, so we can learn from these errors and not commit them again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz

 No.502448

>>502444
Siberia is for sex threads, porn threads, and sex/porn shitposting. Why do you come here?

 No.502449

communists should be celibate like Shaolin monks
embrace the birth strike
avoid relationships that aren't platonic.

 No.502450


 No.502452

File: 1707641126121.gif (1.51 MB, 200x200, 1707620525268714.gif)

Sex is overrated.

 No.502460

This shouldn't be controversial, but yes, communism will lead to the abolition of the family, simply because the family is, and always has been, an economic unit and nothing more.

 No.502649

>>502460
Dad, how do we make kids under communism?

 No.502650

crypto-incel thread innit

 No.502651

File: 1707693656032.png (252.89 KB, 493x700, ClipboardImage.png)

>>502460
>This shouldn't be controversial, but yes, communism will lead to the abolition of the family *sex
FTFY

 No.502670

men want women to be their mothers
women want men to be their fathers

 No.502672

>>502670
I mean it would be really awkward for a man to be my mother, wouldnt it?

 No.502745

>>502441
divorce exists though and is economically beneficial for the partner with lower income

 No.502746

>>502672
Not really, a femboy who really leans into the "fem" part (not just or only in looks) would be pretty fun.

 No.502747

>>502746
i want a big muscular man mommy with big man tits

 No.502804

>>502649
Storks will still exist.

 No.502954

>>502746
😳

>>502441
People say love is hard, or it has to grow slowly, etc. - love is easy. I love all my comrades, I love my Ligibitqua cousins. Only familial and friendship love are hard. Friendships based on no shared struggle do simply build over time, and family love is often toxic and full of contradictions. On the other hand, our society places a high value on infatuation, which to me is a very dicey love emotion that should never be glorified, and should be relatively shunned internally. It's a dangerous emotion that causes confusion, infinite artificial need, enmeshment, and submission. It's antithetical to free, independent individuals, and a classless society should try to do away with it. In its place, other kinds of love may go. Sex shouldn't be without warmth and a little craziness, but the warmth can come from camaraderie, and the craziness should be embarrassing and not indulged in.

 No.502955

>>502441
How about we have marriages for love and not economics

I mean I agree marriage is pretty pointless anyway but still

 No.502987

File: 1707762507935.jpg (22.32 KB, 250x397, the giver.jpg)

>>502441
I find The Giver's system to be intriguing.
>procreation is purely a job (at least for women, I forget if it covers where the semen comes from)
>all babies are adopted
>there is no procreation outside of this system
>old people are euthanized
Just get rid of the no color, no casual sex, and no twins thing. You could also have old people -actually- be sent to a permanent vacation spot somewhere instead of it being a euphemism.
And I'm talking about the book not the movie, I think the movie invented Meryl Streep's character out of whole cloth.

 No.503001

>>502987
>You could also have old people -actually- be sent to a permanent vacation spot somewhere instead of it being a euphemism.
bro this happens irl. Theyre called hursing homes.
Also what is intriguing about this world? Its not even le feminist matriarchy, its just a weird anti-nature anti-fun world
Like, who made it and why?

 No.503004

>>503001
It's intriguing to have procreation be 100% removed from the family unit and have both procreation and child rearing be handled by those who are trained to do so.
I said intriguing and not ideal because it could end up not working even if you removed the more dystopian elements.

 No.503008

>>503004
Brave new world blows the concept out of the water with the post-family child raising, where children have no parents and are even told to sexually experiment with eachother, since "everybody belongs to one another".
Theres no trauma or weirdness though.
A lot of people who havent read it think its a dystopia when its obviously written as a "realistic" end-stage utopia. Its the anti-1984 in a lot of ways.

 No.503010

>>503001
If everyone do something, le cool edgy contrarian do the opposite. Sheeps think edgy contrarians are cool and imitate them.

Everyone have a family? Being anti kids is cool and edgy man.

 No.503011

>>503008
A central authority that raise the kids and teach them its values instead of loving parents is literally what fascists do.

 No.503014

>>503011
Not really
Fascists fetishise the family unit, while the state is the surrogate, universal parent
Its actually an interesting contradiction today between the rights of parents vs children
There was a recent case in canada i believe where a trans teenager was taken by the state from the parents who were repressing their child's ability to pursue HRT and whatever

 No.503037

>>503014
In fascist country, the education system was made so both parents could work at the tank factory 10 hours a day. The kids had to move away from their parent at a young age and be raised in state facilities where they would receive the correct values and get extra point if they rat their parents.

Somehow, I don't dream of a world like this.

 No.503078

File: 1707776101810.png (147.99 KB, 1200x894, ClipboardImage.png)

Dating will always suck. The people who are good at relationships will pair off and leave the dating pool after a while. This leaves the dating pool disproportionately full of people who are bad romantic partners. Even in an ideal situation where people get free state mandated relationship coaching that works, this bias will still exist and people will still complain that dating sucks and be envious of the people with romantic partners. Even if we assume some kind of future where people are generally polyamorous or swingers or something, the stable relationships will still "drain" the best matches from the dating pool and leave it over-representing the worst partners.

 No.503080

I can't think of anything

 No.503085

File: 1707776717756.webm (Spoiler Image, 1.56 MB, 720x1280, siberia_8.webm)

spooky thread

 No.503132

>>503078
Opposite. The dusties and some poor young woman will pair off because of unplanned pregnancy, meanwhile everyone else remains in the dating pool. The best among us will never pair off for good, so as we get older it will only get better.

 No.503135

>>503078
Good opinion.
>>503132
Wrong. Relationships are hard, boredom is a real issue but love does actually go beyond that boredom where despite the sort of sexual spark no longer being there, there is still that companionship. I think it's basically impossible for someone to be sexually attracted to a person till death do us apart and nothing to do with aging and more with you being so used to a person.

 No.503144

>>503135
is this AI? I don't see how what you said has anything to do with what I said. But go off I guess? I don't really disagree.

(unless you think I'm on the side of breaking up over boredom, and that's why I say the best among us will never pair off for good? What I mean is just that I genuinely see no positive place for the couple format of relationships outside of short-term sexual encounters. It's a bourgeois form of relating, it provides some needed stability but it skews patriarchal in its benefits, women really don't get as much out of it. Women should just stay single and unburdened with children for as long as possible. This doesn't equate to loneliness or lack of family; extended family, chosen family, friendship, and community are all superior replacements to some dusty who you are expected to slave for. As the dusties get taken out of the sexual arena, the dating pool just gets better.)

 No.503146

File: 1707791156984.jpg (7.28 KB, 300x100, captcha.jpg)

which brings us to my next controversial opinion, it's 2024, all internet relations should start with pic related, just to be sure

 No.503148

>>503146
You don't want to have a robot date anon?

 No.503155

File: 1707794488274.png (418.89 KB, 780x625, ClipboardImage.png)

>>503078
Addendum to this.

Paradoxically the more you try to intervene in the dating scene to improve things for people the worse the dating scene will get. This is because the object of dating is to stop dating and form a relationship. That means that the more you help people who are dating, the more of them will get into relationships and the fewer will remain in the dating pool.

Since there is variable receptivity to any measure aimed towards improving dating and relationships, what will happen is the most receptive people to the strategy will benefit and will stop dating. In other words, the people who are already closest to being good partners will become better partners. The more people you help with dating, the fewer people are dating, and the ones who are still dating will skew towards being bad partners. So while you will be helping people overall, your help will be changing the composition of society in terms of being in a relationship or not.

The paradox is that the more you help people find relationships and the dating pool shrinks, the worse the dating scene in and of itself will get. So if you are looking for feedback on things like satisfaction, it's imperative to look also at people in relationships. That's because the more you improve the overall situation, the worse the dating scene will become. That is the paradox, that by trying to improve dating, you will make the dating process worse.

 No.503159

>>503155
the solution, obviously is a revolution in sexual relations. Dating and pair-bonding is capitalist

 No.503186

File: 1707808282226.png (80.26 KB, 856x544, ClipboardImage.png)

>>503085
I look like this

>>503146
>>503148
Bots are now better at solving captcha than humans.


Unique IPs: 22

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]