The eternal r-type

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/unbelievable-mother-of-15-kids-somebody-needs-to-pay-somebody-needs-to-be-held-accountable_12012011

for the Title alone

“Somebody needs to pay! Somebody needs to be held accountable!”

comment

“At what number of children does a woman loose her ‘reproductive rights’ to bring even more children into this world that she is unable to care for? Why are you and I ‘forced’ to support children that we had no part in creating? I had no part in the pleasure of any of the orgasms required to create these children …… so why am I required to support them and their mother?
I am informed that here in Florida, the grandmother of the children will go to DCF and allege that her daughter is unfit to care for and raise her grandchildren. Once the mother is declared “unfit”, then the grandmother will gain legal custody of the children and then become their “foster parent”. This changes the whole nature of the situation from a welfare issue to a foster care issue. Grandma can then collect approximately 2.5X more as a foster care provider than her daughter can receive as a welfare recipient.
At this point, the daughter moves back in with her mother and her children and they all live happily after ….. at our expense. How about after the delivery of two welfare babies we also provide the mother with a tubal ligation; at our expense of course. To be completely fare about the whole thing, we also give the father a free vasectomy.
Food for thought homies. Too cold on my part?”

This sex-positive Sexual Revolution propaganda is all about dem dollars.

It’s a wealth transfer to the immature dependents (high time pref) from the actual adults (low time pref). The productive are being vampirised for the leeches, that’s why they can’t afford to breed themselves!

You have a ‘right’ to breed as many children as you like, under our construct of consensual=moral, but you do not have a right to force others to pay for it. At most, your own relations ought to pay for them, not strangers. I find it funny the men complaining about free birth control are the ones (sluts) who benefit from it, they never want to shut down free STD clinics or the abortion clinics, do they?

Replacement-level only is too generous, one child only. You need to breed those genes OUT.
The old rule was all those claiming any welfare go on birth control OR forsake all right to support for any child they produce while claiming.

“This angers me because I remember trying not to cry when I went in for my tubal ligation. We wanted more kids but knew in our hearts we couldn’t afford more. We stopped at three, wanted five originally. It was hard but I figured if I was ever in a position to truly support another lil guy then I could afford a reversal or in vitro. Made sense to me then, makes sense to me now. I don’t regret it because I know my kids would have less if I had been emotional and selfish.

And then to think of the poor couples who can’t have any at all! Really makes me sick. And more and more people have no responsibility for thier actions in any way anymore. I have to wonder, if there were no such thing as welfare, would she have had all those kids?”

It hurts other, better women most of all, the ones who keep their legs shut.

In a way, it’s deeply sexist against K-women. We have a shorter breeding period where we’re forced to pay for welfare trash babies instead of saving for our own.

“Let’s be fair…
Norplant as long as you are on welfare.
Once you start on welfare no more children are added to the payouts.
You lose the right to vote as long as you are on welfare.
to collect welfare you need to turn in the father with a DNA test to prove it.
So if you are down on your luck you get help, and if you turn your life around you get to have as many children as you want, vote, and collect child support from dad(s)”

Why should anyone’s sex life (lifestyle choice) be subsidized by the taxpayer?

The assumption nobody ever attacks.

There is no such thing as a human right to orgasms.

You have no right to a sex life, especially at the expense of others. This goes from free contraception to rape. Within marriage, you have a right to sex. That is literally the ‘conjugal right‘. You don’t have conjugal rights over anyone you’re not married to. That’s the real issue, they refuse to marry.

They want all the perks of marriage: sex, children, financial providence but no obligations or responsibilities.

In a patriarchy, it’s always the father’s responsibility as the provider, this is more a paternal failure but the women are almost as bad. Simply extract all the mother’s costs from the father, or he can work it off in prison. That’s the only way to do this, the traditional way.

Without promiscuity culture, this would never have happened.

Social shame would have prevented it but who wants to name the Beast of lust? All both parents want is ‘fun’.

They had sex knowing the biological consequence. You are taught this before puberty. You can have ‘fun’ in a thousand other ways or take up a masturbation habit if orgasms are so core to your self-esteem. Too much sex and the wrong sex (out of marriage, with strangers) is bad for your body and mind. It’s also common sense. There is NO such thing as ‘casual sex’. It has one, clear outcome.

comment
“If you can’t feed em, don’t breed em.”
“The bitch and her bastards belong in the gas chamber.”
“How’s about the Dads pay and you keep your legs together. I don’t owe you anything.”

If anything, they owe society.

In these cases, it’s always unfair to blame only the mother when it takes two to horizontal tango.
Always ask: where’s the father?

comment on a previously linked article, relevant
Long before you start saving money for your own kids, you pay for someone else’s. Get some single mother’s kid set up with toys, clothes and food and THEN you can start putting aside some money for your OWN kid, but not before. First some brown kid somewhere gets a Tonka truck, new jeans, KFC, ice cream sandwiches with your money. See what’s left, stick it in the piggy bank for your kid. Fuck it.”

The welfare system is unjust.

Our future is stolen.

Hatefacts to trigger

I use ‘fact’ with caution. One study doesn’t make a fact, but it’s something.

http://archive.is/LRe05
“Here are about 700 hatefacts (politically incorrect but true statements) on Islam, race, gender relations, ethnocentrism, diversity, and more. These facts and other commentary were originally posted on the @LibrarianofHate twitter account. This is by far the largest listing of politically incorrect facts to date, but it’s only a small sampling of everything out there. After all this research, I don’t believe hatefacts are meaningful or convincing, since they only have value as part of a larger narrative that makes sense of the world, but perhaps someone will find this list worthwhile. If you find an error, typo, or just want to call me an evil nazi KKK member, you’re out of luck.”

e.g. “All available studies find that non-European immigrants to Britain cost about $10 billion/year. Source: http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/fiscal-impact-immigration-uk#kp3

The gender section mostly attacks women but otherwise pretty fair where it covers both (aka the scientific standard).
“40% of women with more than 20 sex partners have an STD. Source: http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf#page=19
How does that not apply to men unless they’re all lesbians?
Oh wait, I looked up the link and it’s the guy that ONLY studies women (on heterosexual sex?!) and then acts like it’s scientific. Yeah, check the links first before using, guys. Severe quality issue in places. The obvious question would be, which sluts (men) are infecting these sluts? And the sample is at least ten years old.
“All the charts and data in this report refer to sexually active women; girls and women who have never been sexually active are excluded.” ….So it doesn’t even study all women, of that age, in that country. #facepalm
But this other one doesn’t study male happiness in marriage either…
Reassessing the Link between Women’s Premarital Cohabitation and Marital Quality
https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/91/2/635/2235785/Reassessing-the-Link-between-Women-s-Premarital

Do they not care about men too? Or is it just hostility with a poor methodology?
It’s men doing the studies…. why aren’t they studying men? What kind of data are they hiding?
Like the promiscuity divorce risk….

Not one has the balls to look at it.

And they call themselves redpill.

Where’s the data, dude?

You can’t just ignore half the dataset. I’m so disappointed. I have nothing to talk about if there’s only half, on a topic predicated on the need to compare BOTH. Still, some of the immigration links are useful. They have decent methods.

There’s no such thing as an “incel”

Dear Americans who can’t English

Celibacy is voluntary, that’s the point of it. It’s always a choice, that’s baked into the definition.
There’s also no such thing because nobody is entitled to sex.
It’s the new Forever Alone meme, mutated into a whiny complaint. They tell people how desperate they are for any wet hole (but no homo because beggars can also be choosers) and wonder why nobody is into that.
This term is a nonsense, an oxymoron to deny reality of their situation and make out it’s some new tumblrism identity, to feel special about themselves. You’re just single in a dry spell, get over yourself. Unless you’re married, you have no conjugal rights.
If the feminists started claiming this and demanding the guy from the Notebook slept with them, they’d dogpile on laughing at them and saying it’s the new self-descriptor of the cat lady who marries herself. Essentially you’re so r-type you’re asking for AA with sex. Like free brothels. Can you not find enough octopus porn to slake your postmodern lusts? And why should any man or woman (it could be either, both have orifices) serve you, if you don’t want to marry them? What kind of degeneracy is this?

TLDR: Incels advocate sex slavery, wonder why unloved. Same guys to openly call women ‘females’ and wonder why nobody wants to spread their genetics and the guys who spend all their time bitching like women and wonder why only masculine feminists are interested in them.

If either sex became state prostitutes, it would be men. Guess you can’t turn down any of those feminists or lard-asses at the bar. And you’ll have to pretend to like it.

Celibacy is also an oath, something you are bound to by conditions or principles and religious. Atheists cannot be celibate.
Someone who has engaged in premarital sex/fornication cannot be celibate, it relates to virginity. A period of celibacy is a misnomer, unless you mean the condition will be met by marriage (they never mean this). They want physical intimacy without the emotional (so Millennial it hurts). Words have meanings and while you’re complaining that feminists misappropriate terms like gender or problematic, maybe crack open the dictionary on the terms you use as well.
Now. Who wants to help me off this high horse?

Brought to you by People Who Know What Words Mean.

Get someone to buy you a dictionary for Christmas…. oh wait.

p.s. Inb4 other men are getting laid. Other ‘males’ and mostly ghetto trash. Also doesn’t make it right. On the subject, today’s youth have less sex than their parents so science says you’re wrong.

Hook-up culture and promiscuity bad for psychiatric health

The “Well, duh” brand of science.

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/casualsex.htm
h/t AC

“There’s always been a question about which one is the cause and which is the effect. This study provides evidence that poor mental health can lead to casual sex, but also that casual sex leads to additional declines in mental health.”

Age of first sex (what a pedophilic name that is) is a great marker for mental illness later in life, including risk of suicide. Yes, it very much includes abuse victims. Both count as social harm and personal damage.

Sex is an easy, natural high. Self-medication aside, the disturbance in the psyche caused by yet-more unstable chemicals, self-produced or not, would cause a downward spiral. It’s known as a self-destructive behaviour because there is no limit. It’s about dopamine more than serotonin, a close second. They are training their brain for the worst possible mechanisms, making it weaker, more capricious and brittle. These are the rats who would always push the dopamine lever, forsaking any food, until they die. It is an insane behaviour and at minimum, betrays a form of self-loathing which calls their willing consent into question. At least, medication must be regular and in this case it poses other health risks from the fact sexual activity is not (masturbation is lesser stimulus and may even out as a basic relief depending on timing). Many of them are on SSRIs, artificially boosting their body’s endorphins and continue to seek out more. It should be seen as self-harm, like cutting. They cannot appreciate the little things, which compounds the issue, like a hot-sauce addict who calls any food less spicy ‘bland’. Trendy, foreign food would also trigger dopamine release i.e. foodies are self-medicating. If placed on any dietary restriction, however minor, the novelty ‘buzz’ of food would wear off and they’d stop caring about it. Rations would infuriate and they queue for hours for a mediocre but fashionable dish. Fashions become insane because bored, rich people buy them. Fashions are casual because they are lazy and the psychology needs to be comfortable in looser clothing, compared to a minimal symbol of authority like a tie. They begin to loathe the sex they crave, from a feeling of entitlement, that ‘everybody belongs to everybody else’ and rejection becomes rage-inducting to them as narcissists.

There is no such thing as sex addiction because it’s simply more convenient for them than a dopamine drip (this would save the Government money in the long run and prevent their use as vectors of disease, including memetic transmission). However, sex is addictive. It’s a subtle distinction that must be made as they continue to plummet for the sake of a never-ending hunger, that is irrational and divorced from reality (read: psychotic). Unlike actual drugs, they burn out their body’s own production, which often leads them to begin supplementing with drugs to plug the deficit they feel, from party highs to mixing things and harder stuff. Escalation is the addiction and the sex itself is more a behavioural addiction that spirals into other habits, they do a similar thing with alcohol and chili peppers.

The Nazi undercut sported by hipsters is a symbol of victory over the ideology. It is also convenient to care for and less likely to pick up bugs from their indiscretions.

Street music discusses their favourite things: all hedonic but the treadmill never slows.

What is rape?

Sexual Revolution + Entitlement = r-types

There’s no excuse.

That’s literally, legally and morally the point. There is no mercy, no pardon, no excusing it. It’s an animal thing to do and reduce humans to, disgusts all upright citizens. If one person’s right to their body ceases to exist, it affects all of us. It is always 100% of the time, a crime. ‘Muh dick’ appeals to sexual emergency belong in the desert with the camels. Men, who are the majority of rapists by prevalance data, always have an outlet – two hands. Therefore, no such thing as blue balls as excuse for assault. Like Winona Ryder stealing, it’s spoiled for choice already.

If you try to come up with exceptions, you’re one of them.

Don’t defend criminals. If someone is richer than you, you can’t rob them. If someone is smarter than you, you can’t kill them. If someone turns you on, their body still belongs to them. Prison rape is sometimes deeply ironic.

The language of these discussions is dodgy too. The meaning of sex in society is ‘having sex’, it implies consent between parties (therefore, masturbation isn’t sex). Unless there is consent, it is automatically rape, so calling it sex rather than something literal like penetration, congress or coitus, is plain false. Consent is never assumed. Rape until proven consensual. Like any dead person turning up is presumed murdered. At first. The courts do not operate like that but common law and society do.

If the person you’re sleeping with would lie, you shouldn’t have consented to sleep with them. That’s your filtering problem, society shouldn’t have to change itself and suffer for your singular stupidity. Nobody forces you to be a slut #irony
It’s like promiscuous people complaining about STDs. You chose that life, you chose to take on the risks involved. Drunk people expect hangovers. If a bad consequence happens, question who is responsible for the bad cause. Don’t give crazy people power over you, it’s common sense. Society shouldn’t have sympathy for the dumb, but scorn. And no, wearing a mini-skirt doesn’t count as dumb in the First World, anymore than tight shirts on men. People get raped in petticoats and niqabs. Rapists want to rape, thieves want to steal, murderers want to murder- because they’re evil people. A tape measure to your hemline, a lock on your door and a baseball bat won’t stop such people from existing or targeting anyone (anyone). Nobody is exempt from crime, including punishment.

In the good old days of a Patriarchy, we’d hang rapists.

Not be autistically pedantic about ‘what counts’.

Whataboutism? Sounds like they’re arguing there’s no objective thing as rape, implying we should strike off all those laws and it won’t exist, and that’s the side they ‘debate’ from. Think of the people you’re defending, all of them. That’s you. Like gay stuff that inadvertently defends paedophiles. Still doing it. Yet we continue to see it, it isn’t clever. Nobody will think that.

Moving the goalposts, really? This from so-called ‘smart people’?

You can’t slide a moral absolute. There is no slope, they don’t notice because they crawl on their snake-yellow belly.

If a savage would think you’re a piece of shit…

You can’t defend the indefensible.

This is right up there, top 2. Totally taboo.

The Sexual Revolution had nothing to do with politics

Because which sexual strategy would benefit from this?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/17/girl-aged-11-to-become-britains-youngest-mother
Plenty of outlets are covering this. I’m linking them because they report it like it’s a nice thing.
https://www.rt.com/uk/381135-pregnant-youngest-mother-girl/
The fornication is fine, it’s good for you goyim…
You’re definitely not going to Hell because we said so.

Call it right. Call it consensual, I fucking dare you.

Think rabbit, think-

Your kids

Little Emperor Syndrome is genetic. I never met a brat without brat parents.

Great point, but reverence for marriage itself is what we’re aiming at. It isn’t about any individual being ‘happ-y’, like every divorcee ever crows, humans aren’t like dogs, happiness doesn’t happen – it’s a useful excuse to do whatever they want in the moment, usually swinging, the true origin of hookup culture. Liberals started acting like everything was all ‘for the children’ the moment they wanted access to the neophyte brains of the conservative’s children. A behaviourist once said ‘give me the boy at 7 and I’ll give you the man’. You give a liberal your kids from 3-18… and they’re a drooling moron.

Once the ‘consenting adults’ excuse to morality doesn’t apply, they have NOTHING.