Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Deteriorating world events as reproductive strategy


Recommended Posts

Talking to a young female friend who said to me: "Although I didn't suffer from this much as I actually enjoy sex for what it is and started out relatively late, there seems to be a shift from women being somewhat 'victims' of the male scoreboard in our early 20s. I've now realised, in my late 20s, that this isn't a 'thing' anymore, that most men are desperate for connection (or any form of sex that affirms their soul) and that, well, as a woman of this particular age (and not yet in the danger body clock phase), we have an immense amount of power and choice (maybe not so much in my example given my need for you) without huge drawbacks (apart from the selection available itself, which is pretty bleak). This is no reflection on my love life right now, more of what I've picked up; I've only just realised that I no longer have to deal with the early 20s assault course anymore."

My response: "There has certainly been a huge shift in the past ten years or less, courtesy mostly of dating apps and the strengthening feminist imperative. Men are now commodities to be chosen from a swipe-list and if one doesn't measure up, you can swipe for the next and have it delivered to your door within the hour. Only it's not that simple, of course; or rather, now that the advantage has shifted to the female, the male mating strategy is changing fast to compensate. It's fascinating to observe. I would go so far as to say that the increase in global political/social tension might be indirectly attributable to men making the world a more scary place so that women appreciate them for more than (just) their cocks (not the conscious reason but the group unconscious imperative). Scared women make for more compliant partners. However, interestingly I think women as a whole might even be complicit in this shift, because of something you noted: the bleak selection available ("Where are all the decent men?"). Hard times make for strong men, which women love. I rate this hypothesis as about 27% likely to be true. Regardless, I'm an arrogant old arsehole who doesn't give a fuck what people think of me, which means I'll be surrounded by willing quim regardless of the prevailing social circumstances..."

Thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Is that how you really talk to each other?

My uncle Toni from Basel advised me that a man should choose his wife like he chooses his car. If he drives a 1996 Toyota Corolla, then he should pick a 24 year old Japanese.

I’ll do it in a picture.

Posted Images

Sigh.

The point is not her epiphany phase, nor the existence of hypergamy. Those are bleedin' obvious.

The point is that changing world dynamics and general global social breakdown might be an unconscious mass male response to the increasing ease with which hypergamy is facilitated by dating apps, etc.

For the hard of reading: is the world turning to shit because that's the only way men can (re)gain control of reproduction? Without sex, men have no reason to be nice.

Edited by Alex
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex said:

Talking to a young female friend who said to me: "Although I didn't suffer from this much as I actually enjoy sex for what it is and started out relatively late, there seems to be a shift from women being somewhat 'victims' of the male scoreboard in our early 20s. I've now realised, in my late 20s, that this isn't a 'thing' anymore, that most men are desperate for connection (or any form of sex that affirms their soul) and that, well, as a woman of this particular age (and not yet in the danger body clock phase), we have an immense amount of power and choice (maybe not so much in my example given my need for you) without huge drawbacks (apart from the selection available itself, which is pretty bleak). This is no reflection on my love life right now, more of what I've picked up; I've only just realised that I no longer have to deal with the early 20s assault course anymore."

My response: "There has certainly been a huge shift in the past ten years or less, courtesy mostly of dating apps and the strengthening feminist imperative. Men are now commodities to be chosen from a swipe-list and if one doesn't measure up, you can swipe for the next and have it delivered to your door within the hour. Only it's not that simple, of course; or rather, now that the advantage has shifted to the female, the male mating strategy is changing fast to compensate. It's fascinating to observe. I would go so far as to say that the increase in global political/social tension might be indirectly attributable to men making the world a more scary place so that women appreciate them for more than (just) their cocks (not the conscious reason but the group unconscious imperative). Scared women make for more compliant partners. However, interestingly I think women as a whole might even be complicit in this shift, because of something you noted: the bleak selection available ("Where are all the decent men?"). Hard times make for strong men, which women love. I rate this hypothesis as about 27% likely to be true. Regardless, I'm an arrogant old arsehole who doesn't give a fuck what people think of me, which means I'll be surrounded by willing quim regardless of the prevailing social circumstances..."

Thoughts?

Is that how you really talk to each other?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appreciate I found my wife in the heady days of raves, going out, no internet....but this thread is weird.

Lots of men are wankers, ego obsessed, constantly trying to prove themselves, but do you honestly believe they're trying to make the world burn because they can't pull a bird?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, choochoo said:

Appreciate I found my wife in the heady days of raves, going out, no internet....but this thread is weird.

Lots of men are wankers, ego obsessed, constantly trying to prove themselves, but do you honestly believe they're trying to make the world burn because they can't pull a bird?

Thank you, a reasonable response.

individually and consciously? No. But hypergamy isn't conscious and nor is most of the feminine imperative that's dramatically changing the world. It doesn't seem impossible that men would kick back when things went too far, also en masse and also unconscious.

Consider this: Would you rather be involuntarily celibate in a perfectly peaceful world or have numerous women offering you sex in exchange for your protection in an uncertain, more violent world?
 

As I wrote, I think this has about a 27% chance of being true. But it's not so weird. I know Rollo Tomassi has referred to the feminine imperative as the world's biggest shit test (a theory on his part, not statement of fact). Maybe he's right, and this is men meeting the challenge.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex said:

For the hard of reading: is the world turning to shit because that's the only way men can (re)gain control of reproduction? Without sex, men have no reason to be nice.

No in short. In fact it’s the opposite. Men are becoming increasingly effeminate. Basic manual skills what would be considered masculine i.e. basic car maintenance, DIY etc are becoming rarer (partly because of cheap labour, partly because of skills no longer taught by father figures etc)

Mass media encourages anti-male or anti-masculine agenda and stereotypes. Encourages gender fluidity and androgynous concepts which has spawned the likes of Femboys twinks, soyboys or even furries. I have nothing against Men liking men, live and let live, it’s been a thing for millennia. It is now however being pushed by society as more of a requirement rather than a preference.

The world is turning to shit because an agenda is being pushed far too fast on a western society that is old enough to know what the way of life was like before and are voting, rebelling and pushing back accordingly as they never asked for that to change.

In relationships, most straight women will still have an inherent desire to reproduce and are attracted to a successful masculine male, just like in the animal kingdom. This will always be a thing that’s ingrained in our genetics, however the agenda pushes otherwise.

Edited by Sideysid
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sideysid said:

No in short. In fact it’s the opposite. Men are becoming increasingly effeminate. Basic manual skills what would be considered masculine i.e. basic car maintenance, DIY etc are becoming rarer (partly because of cheap labour, partly because of skills no longer taught by father figures etc)

Mass media encourages anti-male or anti-masculine agenda and stereotypes. Encourages gender fluidity and androgynous concepts which has spawned the likes of Femboys twinks, soyboys or even furries. I have nothing against Men liking men, live and let live, it’s been a thing for millennia. It is now however being pushed by society as more of a requirement rather than a preference.

The world is turning to shit because an agenda is being pushed far too fast on a western society that is old enough to know what the way of life was like before and are voting, rebelling and pushing back accordingly as they never asked for that to change.

I think we are coming to similar conclusions from different directions, your last sentence in particular.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Alex said:

Thank you, a reasonable response.

individually and consciously? No. But hypergamy isn't conscious and nor is most of the feminine imperative that's dramatically changing the world. It doesn't seem impossible that men would kick back when things went too far, also en masse and also unconscious.

Consider this: Would you rather be involuntarily celibate in a perfectly peaceful world or have numerous women offering you sex in exchange for your protection in an uncertain, more violent world?
 

As I wrote, I think this has about a 27% chance of being true. But it's not so weird. I know Rollo Tomassi has referred to the feminine imperative as the world's biggest shit test (a theory on his part, not statement of fact). Maybe he's right, and this is men meeting the challenge.

Can't think of anything worse than numerous women offering me sex in exchange for protection in an uncertain, violent world to be honest. I mean sex is good and all that, but it's fleeting moments and even supposing I wanted it for an hour a day, every day, it wouldn't make up for the haranguing that having numerous women would require for the other 23hrs.

I think some men just like to be manipulative and in control (demonstrably) and for those people women are probably insignificant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Roger_Mellie said:

No, nobody talks like that. It's so obviously made up. 

Ha ha, we've got another fantasist. I don't know why Dosbods attracts so many. 

No I really was in the mile high club in first class that time, and not just the one, the rest were queuing outside the toilet door for their turn.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Funn3r said:

No I really was in the mile high club in first class that time, and not just the one, the rest were queuing outside the toilet door for their turn.

First class? Fucking Pleb. Have I ever told you about the time I was getting sucked off by Miss Venezuela '95 as the chopper I was in was coming in to land on the White House lawn? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think women (or the families of women, which would have included patriarchal figures but not, one hopes, suitors) have almost always had more control over reproductive pairings.

Women have wombs which are the resource that is in short supply.

Men must find something to offer in exchange. Resources. Physical strength. Winning personality. Mad seduction skills.

Everything else -- the entirety of our evolved gender relations, IMO -- stems from that trade-off. Feminism is a backlash against (unfair on women) aspects of those results.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alex said:

Shit, now I'm going to have to prove myself to random strangers on the internet who have an ego investment in not believing me.

Oh no, wait...

There's an art to bragging on the Internet. I haven't quite fathomed the intricacies of it, but some people are just more believable than others. Starting by recounting a conversation that looks like it was lifted straight out of a low budget rom com probably isn't a good start. 

But seriously, if you do talk to your friends like that, and they reply in exactly the same style, fair play. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lightly Toasted said:

I think women (or the families of women, which would have included patriarchal figures but not, one hopes, suitors) have almost always had more control over reproductive pairings.

Women have wombs which are the resource that is in short supply.

Men must find something to offer in exchange. Resources. Physical strength. Winning personality. Mad seduction skills.

Everything else -- the entirety of our evolved gender relations, IMO -- stems from that trade-off. Feminism is a backlash against (unfair on women) aspects of those results.

It's a shame it has to come down to this level of calculated shit. What's wrong with you know two people that find they get on well with each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Funn3r said:

It's a shame it has to come down to this level of calculated shit. What's wrong with you know two people that find they get on well with each other.

Keith Chegwin sums it up best, it's very simple: pop knob in fanny

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6XfG0VOTgw

Edited by Roger_Mellie
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Funn3r said:

It's a shame it has to come down to this level of calculated shit. What's wrong with you know two people that find they get on well with each other.

Nothing for those two people, but over generations you'd find that the women who made better (pragmatic not romantic) choices would have more/superior offspring so the cultural practices that led to those outcomes would predominate.

In the modern age it doesn't seem to matter. But we only ever look at a snapshot. Related example: which demographic will predominate 100 years from now, the offspring of modern liberated women who used concentration and abortion, or the offspring of those whose religious husbands and fathers refused?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, choochoo said:

Can't think of anything worse than numerous women offering me sex in exchange for protection in an uncertain, violent world to be honest. I mean sex is good and all that, but it's fleeting moments and even supposing I wanted it for an hour a day, every day, it wouldn't make up for the haranguing that having numerous women would require for the other 23hrs.

I think some men just like to be manipulative and in control (demonstrably) and for those people women are probably insignificant.

Fair enough for you personally, but if all men felt like that then the majority wouldn't ever have sex. Not just occasionally, but not ever. I think the biological imperative might kick back quite hard against that, and (maybe) is doing so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...