>>199
Most of the time it's just for jokes.
It's the feminists and karens I hate, for being brainwashed.

Yes, but the hatred of all western society is justified at this point, themselves included. They are quite happy to criticise a woman's lack of morals while they themselves act like vulgar animals, download CP and take drugs.

I have a mixed view on women, I don't hate them but I hate what our society has turned them into but then I hate the men our society has produced as well.

>Lack of good role models killed women same with how a lack of good role models killed men.

It's exactly this.

>>200
>Most of the time it's just for jokes.
>It's the feminists and karens I hate, for being brainwashed
Thing is I know a lot of it's for jokes I joke about it too. However some point I think some people started accepting it as reality. While yes a lot of women are whores not all of them are. Virgins are absurdly difficult to find but they're out there. Feminism ruined women for taking them out of their natural role as supporters.
>>201
>Yes, but the hatred of all western society is justified at this point, themselves included. They are quite happy to criticise a woman's lack of morals while they themselves act like vulgar animals, download CP and take drugs.
I won't say I'm a saint but I don't drink alcohol or take drugs or any of that shit. I've completely stopped masturbating to the point I can even read hentai without masturbating. People should hold themselves to higher standards especially if they hold others up to high standards.

>>202
>Feminism ruined women for taking them out of their natural role as supporters.
I'm going to blame modernity instead of feminism alone for making women leave their natural roles.
For a working class family, it's impossible to sustain a roof without both husband and wife working because living expenses have skyrocketed but wages have been stagnant for years. Thus, women are compelled to work.
Moreover, women are more suitable for jobs such as teacher, nurse, receptionist, etc.
Modern women have no option but to leave their traditional roles, sometimes just for basic living contitions.
Just playing devil's advocate.

>>202
>Feminism ruined women for taking them out of their natural role as supporters.
Most aspects of gender roles aren't determined by nature and even if they were that'll just be an appeal to nature fallacy.

>>203
I get the idea. Since the living conditions are too high. Women are encouraged to leave their traditional roles. It's understandable, however feminism is also to blame in other aspects because it amplifies this behavior by celebrating it.

>>204
>Appeal to nature fallacy
Why wouldn't appealing to natural roles not be a good thing. Even then I'm a christian. If you read genesis you know that eve was made from Adam's rib. The rib is the part of the body that supports the body. Which is where I get the whole women support thing from. Not to mention a women supports her offspring as well. There's more to it than "appeal to nature fallacy"

>>206
>Why wouldn't appealing to natural roles not be a good thing.
Nature isn't good or bad it just is. Human society is fundamentally oppose to idea of nature being an inherent good as we use tools and knowledge to change our environment to fit our needs.
>Even then I'm a christian.
Lol

>>208
>
Nature isn't good or bad it just is. Human society is fundamentally oppose to idea of nature being an inherent good as we use tools and knowledge to change our environment to fit our needs.
This isn't true. Even things like ants and lions have "societies" where the men lead and the women supports. Animals like otters, orangutans and parrots can use tools. Messing with the environment isn't limited to humans I remember a story where a bird of prey set fire to a forest to get some food. Animals can problem solve as well. Bees make hives which is used to make honey how is that any different from humans farming? Or for instance prairie dogs dig complex tunnel systems that's also changing the environment to suit their needs.

>>210
Found the story
https://www.sciencealert.com/birds-intentionally-set-prey-ablaze-rewriting-history-fire-use-firehawk-raptors
Also adding to this is the fact that Corvids in Australia have adapted to kill cane toads by attacking them without activating their poison glands. Here's the story.
https://www.australiangeographic.com.au/topics/wildlife/2018/01/can-crows-eat-cane-toads/
Adaption doesn't mean that roles should be completely abandoned. That's a ridiculous argument.

>>210
I meant that humans' use of tools and knowledge is fundamentally different because of the extent we go too. All the crops we grow, livestock we raise, & pets we befriend are tamed and have been genetic modified through generations of selected breeding, their wild ancestors bare little resemblance to their current form.
>Even things like ants and lions have "societies" where the men lead and the women supports.
Males in those societies are degenerate bums who do nothing of importance. This and your other examples don't really change the point that nature doesn't necessarily equates to goodness. It could possibly be good for women to be in a support positions but that would just be coincidence not because of nature. I think the thing that makes humans human is their ability to rise above nature and control it instead of being subjugated by it like animals .

>>212
I'd like to add something to your reply.
Good and bad are just human constructs. Nature seeks convenience, if Darwinism is true.

>Males in those societies are degenerate bums who do nothing of importance.
Yep. Even male lions are lazy bums. Women do most hunting there.

>>199
>I've also noticed that it's absurdly rare to find a virgin women in western media.
Why is there such a value held on virginity? If virginity were to be the most important aspect of a woman then that were disqualify MILFs who are some of the finest specimens. MILFs have experience so if you can properly pleasure one you know you have some level of skill instead with if a virgin with who has no frame of reference.

>>212
>I meant that humans' use of tools and knowledge is fundamentally different because of the extent we go too. All the crops we grow, livestock we raise, & pets we befriend are tamed and have been genetic modified through generations of selected breeding, their wild ancestors bare little resemblance to their current form.
I was just pointing out that other animals can manipulate nature to their whims and that it's not exclusive to humans. Since other animals do in fact change their environment to fit their needs. In fact an argument could be made that literally every animal does that.
I also agree that humanity supercedes nature but that doesn't mean I think that everything about nature is suddenly wrong.
>Males in those societies are degenerate bums who do nothing of importance
That's actually false they protect the home and make children with the females. Obviously human society is different in that we work and provide for the family and the women raise up the children.

>>213
>Good and bad are just human constructs.
If it's degenerate it's wrong. no exceptions.

>>214
>Why is there such a value held on virginity? If virginity were to be the most important aspect of a woman then that were disqualify MILFs who are some of the finest specimens. MILFs have experience so if you can properly pleasure one you know you have some level of skill instead with if a virgin with who has no frame of reference.
Virginity is valued because it shows that the women is more pure and is more or less your women. Think of it this way. Would you really consider a women that's slept with 3 other men to be your women. Virgins are good in that regard because the love will specifically between the two partners and less chances of cheating occurring. I think the fact that virginity is scorned in modern society is terrible because it shows moral degradation. Also eventually your virgin wife will turn into a MILF no? More specifically a MILF that has only had your seed. Also I think people would be more cautious around a women who's had more than one partner with the chances of her cheating probably being higher. I mean there's always the harem option. However taking care of multiple women would come with it's own complications.

>>208
>Nature isn't good or bad it just is.
You misunderstand what is meant when people say that women have a natural role.
There are generally two concepts people mean to refer to when they talk about nature. First, things as they are without the influence humans I.e. natural food, natural animal behavior, ecosystems. In this sense, one might say that two lions being gay is natural if it happened without the influence of man.
Second, the inherent teleology and design of a structure. I.e. a natural arm (as opposed to an unnatural and deformed arm), or the fact that the vagina was clearly made for the penis but the anus was not. In this sense, we would say that what the two gay lions are doing is unnatural because they are going against their inherent structure and design.
In the same way, one can see the inherent physical and mental differences between men and women, and understand why they have always acted differently and had different roles for as long as humanity has been around.
If you think roles can be done away without wrecking society then I would advise you to look at how society has degraded over last half century (skyrocketing divorce rates, suicide rates, single motherhood, etc).
I would also say that you are no different the people who think that if you just gave the low iq blacks a good education and money they'd suddenly stop being criminals.

>>213
>Good and bad are just human constructs. Nature seeks convenience, if Darwinism is true.
Thanks should've added that.
>>215
>That's actually false they protect the home and make children with the females.
No it's isn't while male lions offer some security for the pride while the lionesses are gone it's mostly them protecting the pride from other male lions seeking to take control. Male ants are even worse since they exist only to have sex and don't last much longer after their job is done, a lot of communal insects are blatantly matriarchal.
>Obviously human society is different in that we work and provide for the family and the women raise up the children.
Then why bring it up in the first place?
>If it's degenerate it's wrong. no exceptions.
Like the other poster said good and bad are human constructs so we decide what they are and aren't, not nature. Degenerate is just another word for bad. One could say history is the change of human values throughout time.
>>222
>we would say that what the two gay lions are doing is unnatural because they are going against their inherent structure and design.
Again wouldn't modern human society by your definition be unnatural. We create medicine to heal illness, machines to do our jobs and in general live in a society that is counter to our design, like sitting for hours in a chair to do an office job which leads to back issues or staring at a book or scene straining our eyes resulting in a increase in nearsightedness.
>If you think roles can be done away without wrecking society then I would advise you to look at how society has degraded over last half century (skyrocketing divorce rates, suicide rates, single motherhood, etc).
I would say those aren't because of loosening gender roles. The rise in divorces were brought on by the advent of the no-fault divorce and actually lead to a decrease in suicide rates (at least in women). Suicide rates also face problems with data collection as in the past suicide was seen as an ugly thing which family would try to hide, even with that suicides are on the decline. https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/06/health/global-suicide-rates-study/index.html?no-st=1566571953
Though single motherhood is up teenage pregnancy has drop significantly. https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb187-Hospital-Stays-Children-2012.jsp In the past a pregnant teenager would often be kept at home and out of sight or sent to a facility until the baby was born and either be put up for adoption or raised by the grandparents as their child with no one knowing the wiser.

>>215
>Would you really consider a women that's slept with 3 other men to be your women.
I feel like this a submissive stance to take. If you aren't confident in your ability to satisfy a woman and make her yours then that's a problem. A true man should be able to make even a slut feel like a virgin when they're with them. I find that men who of value virginity the most often have insecurities surrounding their manhood. This can be most clearly seen in incel communities which instead of increasing their social value and skills seek to blame others for their inability to lose their virginity.

In the book "Why Is The Penis Shaped Like That and Other Reflections on Being Human" by psychologist Jesse Bering he cites the work of evolutionary psychologist Gordon Gallup that the purpose of the shape of the penis is to displace semen of other males and better position their own semen increasing their likeliness of paternity. If we go by nature then it seems humans shouldn't value virginity much and should be competing with other males to spread their genes.

>Virgins are good in that regard because the love will specifically between the two partners and less chances of cheating occurring.
Is there any proof to back this up? I feel that if a woman has been with multiply partners and deemed that you're the best then she's less likely to cheat. There's no curiosity of what's out there or what could have been.

>Also eventually your virgin wife will turn into a MILF no?
No, I dread the day I when MILFs are my age or younger. The joy of MILFs is conquering someone more experienced than you along with the caring motherly aura they exude.
>I mean there's always the harem option.
That's just degeneracy. Having multiply sex partners is fine if you know what you're doing but marriage is a exclusivity contract between two partners with no exceptions.

I scrubbed two pics from here because one was broken in the db, and I can't delete one from a post of several media, just the whole thing.
Please post them again.

>>255
Done.

>>256
Okay it werks now.
If a media appears to be broken it have to be scrubbed with the deletion menu first, then repost, this should solve the problem.
The reason is that many media were corrupted in a botched migration of the db some time ago. And lynxchan doesn't uploads media if it's already in the db, just links it there, and if that particular one is corrupted, that results in the error.

>>256
Interesting but how was this data collected and how do they know the women were being honest.

>>252
>I feel like this a submissive stance to take.
It's not, If I put a standard on myself to find a virgin girl then that's on me. While you don't have that same standard that doesn't mean other people have such a standard. Placing limitations on yourself is the epitome of manliness as it makes you challenge yourself. If you lack the discipline to find a respectable women does that really make me the submissive one?

>If you aren't confident in your ability to satisfy a woman and make her yours then that's a problem. A true man should be able to make even a slut feel like a virgin when they're with them.
Again a man would have standards on what constitutes as a decent and respectable wife. A true man would never go near a slut because he would want to set an example on what a healthy and loving relationship would look like. He would act like a role model and strengthen his bond with his wife.

>I find that men who of value virginity the most often have insecurities surrounding their manhood
If the only thing that matters to your "manhood" is how many women you've slept with then I believe your priorities are skewed. There's more to being a man than how many women you've slept with. Can you take care of yourself?, Can you take responsibility for your own actions?, Can you act confident? These are more important than promiscuity.

>This can be most clearly seen in incel communities which instead of increasing their social value and skills seek to blame others for their inability to lose their virginity.
That community has more problems than their virginity though, That's the point you seem to not be getting. I want a virgin because I won't accept anything less. I've got a job a part time one but one none the less. Most Incels are simply NEETs who endulge in escapism and never try to improve themselves. Standards does not equal escapism.

>Is there any proof to back this up? I feel that if a woman has been with multiply partners and deemed that you're the best then she's less likely to cheat. There's no curiosity of what's out there or what could have been.
Sort of related but this
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/10/sexual-partners-and-marital-happiness/573493/
https://ifstudies.org/blog/counterintuitive-trends-in-the-link-between-premarital-sex-and-marital-stability/

>That's just degeneracy. Having multiply sex partners is fine if you know what you're doing but marriage is a exclusivity contract between two partners with no exceptions.
They're the same thing. A man having multiple sex partners. Marriage is the bond between a man and his wife. But who gives a shit about your wife when you've already had multiple sex partners. That's the equivalent of saying she's expendable for any of the other women you've slept with. At least in a harem there's some mutual agreement with the multiple women and the man so they all know that their bodies are exclusively for that man. I have a very specific view on love. I think it should be like it is in a fairy tale. A pure love that both the man and the women put their maximum effort in. Sure I may never find it, But lowering my standards to settle for something less just isn't apart of my personality.

>>259
These data are usually published as thesis. Sources are cited. I just picked it off from google.