Why Won’t Leo Date A Real Wahman?!
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (84)
sorted by:
20-year-olds are not mature enough for that. It's not as if they're making the decision to cut off their breasts, which is OK even for 12 year olds. Having a relationship with DiCaprio is quite another ballpark.
I think most of the people who support 12 year olds cutting off their breasts would also support 12 year olds consenting to sex.
That is in fact where they are going.
I think they would support 5-year-olds consenting to sex.
Woodchipper is just a machine
If consent is the sole foundation of sexual morality, your moral system is based solely on power and you're on the slope to "but what if the child consents?"
This particular situation isn't a huge problem by itself and I'm rather fond of such a pure display of misogyny, but the reasoning that brought it about isn't sound.
It is by no means 'misogynistic' to date only young women.
He has reduced them to pleasure meat, no different than a good veal.
Women reduced themselves to pleasure meat, not men.
The veal isn't getting anything out of it though.
I'm saying that consent is not a solid foundation of sexual morality. Harvey Weinstein did nothing wrong based purely on a consent based system, but most people instinctively recognize that the casting couch is not a good thing. The sexual revolution, and its consequences, have been a disaster for civilization.
You say that though. Even leaving aside the fact that this allows for all sorts of gross wrongs, like incest between adults, your motivation for limiting it to adults is likely that you think children cannot consent.
But we're dealing with people who think 9 year olds are able to consent to being trooned and getting drugs to chemically castrated sex offenders. Is this really the world in which we want to introduce the idea that consent and the ability to consent is all that matters?
Truth of the matter is that 'consent' is an empty standard.
It could also just be based on stripping out emotion and leaving it to pure logistics.
No power needed, just A wants X and B wants Y, both can provide. No further depth needed. Which seems to be the case here.
It's not particularly good for the women. Every new partner a woman has impairs her ability to bond, or as Gibbons put it, "the female mind is totally depraved by the loss of chastity."
Little of what women do is good for women. They are allowed to ruin their own lives.
Pair bonding isn't real, it's a tradcon cope based in complete pseudoscience.
I think it's funny that it's happened enough times that the new Girl must know, and whether or not it's discussed. Like they're on his yacht and he makes comments "make sure you don't leave anything behind"
Yes there is something wrong with being a coomer degenerate. The fuck are yountalking about
Unfathomably based.
yes. romantic love is a relatively new made-up construction. Quite a lot of evidence for this, coming about sometime around The Enlightenment. Where SIMPing really started to take off, especially among the French.
The fact that women are incapable of returning romantic love should be the cuckold's first clue that it's all gaslighting.
It's literally your brain trying to prevent you thinking rationally.