article: Millennials: Society Will Be Just Fine Without Marriage

[MatureDJ]

http://www.theatlantic.com/national...ty-will-be-just-fine-without-marriage/374060/

Let's see if the Millenial *women* feel the same once their golden vajaja hits the wall in their 30s ...

 

[( . )( . )]

I don't think this woman has thought this all the way through. Who does she think is going to keep the power running and the shelves stocked for all these vast and expansive pet food superstores that will be needed for this progtard utopia?

What does she think is going to happen when all these betas/omegas (which is what 80-90% of the Western male population?)wise up? They're already starting to drop out now or doing the minimum amount of work or just enough to pay rent and they're porn and corn syrup habit.

Will there be enough faggots and alphas to keep the machines running? You can bet your ass women won't be doing it. Imported third worlders? Forget about it. When they reach critical mass these type of self hating, abortion loving white libtard chicks will obviously be in for a world of hurt and smacked all the way back to the stone ages and we'll never hear another peep about empowerment and "here's why that's a problem" fem-articles. So something is not quite adding up here.

 

[Desdinova]

"Society is better off if people make marriage and having children a priority."

The subject of marriage isn't the root of society's problems. The breakdown of marriage and male-female relationships is the result of society's problems.

A more intelligent statement would be "Mankind is more likely to survive if people make marriage and having children a priority." Male-female relationships are not surviving, men are exiting out of the idea that marriage is useful due to extreme women's rights, and women are looking to find way to manufacture their children without a man. Let's also not forget the gay couples having their children manufactured and raising them in an environment that doesn't promote male-female relationships. Those kids will likely have their children manufactured as well.

You don't see this 5hit happening anywhere else in the animal kingdom. Currently, animals as stupid as turkeys have a better chance of surviving than humans.

Researchers have found that male turkeys will do mating dances and mount a model of a female turkey. Sure, that’s not that uncommon for animals, but what is odd is the fact that when researchers started to strip the parts off of the fake turkey, all it took to get the males going was a head. As if that weren’t bad enough, the turkeys would even attempt to mate with a two year old dehydrated male turkey head on a stick.

 

[Zarky]

The people who say that society is on a downward path perplex me. I just don't see it.

If you show me a sustained economic meltdown that lasts a few generations, then perhaps I'll believe it. But to point to the last 10, 20, 30 years and say "society gonna crumble mannnn!!!"... well, that's just retarded.

Study your history. People who don't know history make retarded predictions.

 

[( . )( . )]

I just don't see it.

So you've said many a time. All this societal decay and communal atomization is all a wacky mystery to you. :crazy: Apparently snarky now lives in Oriana

Oh yeah and FYI you might want to ease back on this obsession with polyamory you have. You know any men in real life who won't shut the phuck up about polygamy? No neither do I. You keep showing your hand sweetheart.https://twitter.com/Zelcorpion/status/486543828892270592/photo/1

 

[Scaramouche]

Dear MDJ,
Of course Society will seem OK,it generally has for Millennia...In living the life you will justify it,it's rather like a Philosophy that closes upon itself like a Circle.

 

[sharkbeat]

The people who say that society is on a downward path perplex me. I just don't see it.

If you show me a sustained economic meltdown that lasts a few generations, then perhaps I'll believe it. But to point to the last 10, 20, 30 years and say "society gonna crumble mannnn!!!"... well, that's just retarded.

Study your history. People who don't know history make retarded predictions.

That's like saying the US economy is getting better because the DOW goes above 17000 points. There's a lot more economic indicators than just the stock market.

Likewise, the fact that an entire generation can say that marriage is not important is a HUGE RED FLAG. Symptomps are not showing yet, but one of the pillars has cracked. Not just any generation, this is the generation in their late 20s, 30s, the driving force behind the current economy right now, and those who's supposed to be having kids.

Economy hasn't recovered enough that marriage and starting a family is expensive. Women are having entitlement mentality that marriage is almost a bad deal for men. Housing prices is skyrocketing again, not because Americans can afford them, but because foreign investors are dominating the market. How is this OK??

 

[Zarky]

People have been predicting the downfall of civilization for thousands of years. To think your generation is any different is completely egocentric, narcissistic folly.

 

[( . )( . )]

Was pattern recognition crimethink though?

People have been predicting the downfall of civilization for thousands of years. To think your generation is any different is completely egocentric, narcissistic folly.

The big difference though is for the most part those lucky bastards of the past didn't have to deal with a certain group waging a war on noticing stuff. They saw someone straddling the well and taking a dump in the village water supply they generally fixed that problem. They didn't have half the village pretending through indoctrination it never happened and then shaming anyone who dared to make reference that there was indeed somebody taking a sh!t in the village water supply.

 

[ArcBound]

Study your history. People who don't know history make retarded predictions.

http://www.atmos.umd.edu/~ekalnay/p...paper-draft-safa-motesharrei-rivas-kalnay.pdf

Like this retarded mathematical model of rise and fall of historical societies funded by NASA, carried out by the University of Maryland, National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center, among other institutions.

"In summary, despite the common impression that societal collapse is rare, or even largely fic- tional, the “picture that emerges is of a process recurrent in history, and global in its distribution” [Tainter, 1988]. See also Yoffee and Cowgill [1988]; Goldstein [1988]; Ibn Khaldun [1958]; Kon- dratieff [1984]; Parsons [1991]. As Turchin and Nefedov [2009] contend, there is a great deal of support for “the hypothesis that secular cycles — demographic-social-political oscillations of a very long period (centuries long) are the rule, rather than an exception in the large agrarian states and empires.”
This brings up the question of whether modern civilization is similarly susceptible.

Fvck those uneducated cvnts.

 

[Zarky]

^^^ I'm missing the part where it says that current western society will crumble because chicks are acting sluttier these days.

Maybe you can quote that part for me.

 

[( . )( . )]

^^^ I'm missing the part where it says that current western society will crumble because chicks are acting sluttier these days.

Maybe you can quote that part for me.

I don't think you can snark your way through this one sweetheart. Just trust the men here who are telling you when 80-90% of the disincentivized (aka no longer rewarded through traditional wife/pair bonding, offspring, affordable castle etc etc) male population realise they're the beta bux part of alpha fux/beta bux it's doubtful things are going to stay the same as they are now for you and your girlfriends.

Yeah you and your dyke "life partner" MAY have changed over that flat tyre that one time, that's great but running a healthy, creative and inventive higher civilization takes men I'm afraid and those men need a carrot. Ironically the type of men you love to hate coz patweearky !

Then again we might have lifelike sex robots or something soon and cheap third world incubators. Which reminds me, you do realise the poorer a country gets the more patriarchal and less libtard (out of necessity) it becomes? People like you are gonna be fvcked either way. Hence probably why you get so touchy about this subject. Hmmm the plot thins.

 

[ArcBound]

^^^ I'm missing the part where it says that current western society will crumble because chicks are acting sluttier these days.

Maybe you can quote that part for me.

Who claimed it was because of chicks getting sluttier? Not I, though that is one symptom of it.

But sure thing, I know Ctrl + F is hard for some old folk like you:

"The scenarios most closely reflecting the reality of our world today are found in the third group of experiments (see the scenarios for an unequal society in section 5.3), where we introduced economic stratification. Under such conditions, we find that collapse is difficult to avoid, which helps to explain why economic stratification is one of the elements consistently found in past collapsed societies. Importantly, in the first of these unequal society scenarios, 5.3.1, the solution appears to be on a sustainable path for quite a long time, but even using an optimal depletion rate (δ∗) and starting with a very small number of Elites, the Elites eventually consume too much, resulting in a famine among Commoners that eventually causes the collapse of society. It is important to note that this Type-L collapse is due to an inequality-induced famine that causes a loss of workers, rather than a collapse of Nature. Despite appearing initially to be the same as the sustainable optimal solution obtained in the absence of Elites, economic stratification changes the final result: Elites’ consumption keeps growing until the society collapses."

"While some members of society might raise the alarm that the system is moving towards an impending col- lapse and therefore advocate structural changes to society in order to avoid it, Elites and their supporters, who opposed making these changes, could point to the long sustainable trajectory “so far” in support of doing nothing." Look Zarky they pointed you out!

Let's get this straight. You call people in thread retarded for saying civilization could possibly collapse. I paste an article via the U.S. Government that says it is a definite possibility, and they themselves said HARD TO AVOID. Then you post some straw man trying to reduce my argument to saying sluts cause societal collapse, and then I continue to quote for you, because you were too lazy to read the article, exactly where they say our modern world is modeled in that paper.

But of course as Boob Man predicted you are gonna get touchy, make some bullish!t argument that doesn't apply to anything and try to snark your way out.

Be honest did you read the paper? One of the common themes throughout the paper is the Common Class either dying, not finding enough work, or not working at all, leading to a collapse for the whole of society. And ( . ) ( . ) in the very first reply to this thread, made exactly that connection. He noticed the very real phenomenon of men not wanting to work for or uphold society if they are devalued by society and women. So in the very first reply of this thread, he hit the nail exactly on the head.

 

[Zarky]

That's fine, and I don't disagree that social inequality can lead to social instability, but I don't see any connection between that one paper you provide and any proof that women are causing (or are a symptom) of some sort of imminent or long-term collapse of our society. It's just too far-fetched.

I think social collapse is far more likely due to massive natural disasters, repeated economic downturns, or widespread pandemics than chicks "riding **** carousels" or dads getting a raw deal in family court. I mean, come on. Your theory is silly and I'm embarrassed to have to explain that society is far more likely to crumble due to something like the Black Plague than women not wanting to bang betas as much as they once did.

Furthermore, the paper you link to is an interesting thought-exercise but it says:

"We propose
a simple model, not intended to describe actual individual cases, but rather to provide a general
framework that allows carrying out thought experiments" for the phenomenon of collapse..."

It's basically a big mental-masturbation piece, with some mathematical models. That's fine, and I loooove intellectual theories, but to assume that any of that points to anything that's going on in modern society is simply goofy.

Basically, a certain segment of the population of every generation has some strange psychological need to believe that the world is dying. Maybe it's because those people themselves are dying and they can't see anything other than death when they look around.

But in fact, even if certain civilizations "crumble," they are soon replaced by more effective civilizations which rise to even greater complexity and efficiency. Even assuming, arguendo, that your theory is true... I don't see what the problem is.

Here's the upshot: Just because you can't get laid doesn't mean we're all doomed.

 

[( . )( . )]

Here's the upshot: Just because you can't get laid doesn't mean we're all doomed.

Yeah !!! Well you can't get da puzzy. And there it is. You haven't brought that one out for awhile .

 

[Alvafe]

That's fine, and I don't disagree that social inequality can lead to social instability, but I don't see any connection between that one paper you provide and any proof that women are causing (or are a symptom) of some sort of imminent or long-term collapse of our society. It's just too far-fetched.

I think social collapse is far more likely due to massive natural disasters, repeated economic downturns, or widespread pandemics than chicks "riding **** carousels" or dads getting a raw deal in family court. I mean, come on. Your theory is silly and I'm embarrassed to have to explain that society is far more likely to crumble due to something like the Black Plague than women not wanting to bang betas as much as they once did.

Furthermore, the paper you link to is an interesting thought-exercise but it says:

"We propose
a simple model, not intended to describe actual individual cases, but rather to provide a general
framework that allows carrying out thought experiments" for the phenomenon of collapse..."

It's basically a big mental-masturbation piece, with some mathematical models. That's fine, and I loooove intellectual theories, but to assume that any of that points to anything that's going on in modern society is simply goofy.

Basically, a certain segment of the population of every generation has some strange psychological need to believe that the world is dying. Maybe it's because those people themselves are dying and they can't see anything other than death when they look around.

But in fact, even if certain civilizations "crumble," they are soon replaced by more effective civilizations which rise to even greater complexity and efficiency. Even assuming, arguendo, that your theory is true... I don't see what the problem is.

Here's the upshot: Just because you can't get laid doesn't mean we're all doomed.

if the problem was only some guys not getting laid, this forum wouldn't be full of men trying to improve, and the pua would not sell a single book.

also if you do remember in japan they ahve some guys who even marry a damn game character, others don't care about females and do the minimum work just to get by

and saying old soscietys will be replaced with more effective civilizations is not true, theywill be diferently yes, but most technology of old who made things like piramids, are not know, also when civilizations falls take years(normally decades) for another society get strong enough to replace the old one, and during that time chaos reign, and during this time most of things know is lost

 

[ArcBound]

That's fine, and I don't disagree that social inequality can lead to social instability, but I don't see any connection between that one paper you provide and any proof that women are causing (or are a symptom) of some sort of imminent or long-term collapse of our society. It's just too far-fetched.

I think social collapse is far more likely due to massive natural disasters, repeated economic downturns, or widespread pandemics than chicks "riding **** carousels" or dads getting a raw deal in family court.
Once again you didn't read the paper. The paper specifically pointed out natural disasters and pandemics play less of a role in collapse of society than they thought. You still didn't read it?

I mean, come on. Your theory is silly and I'm embarrassed to have to explain that society is far more likely to crumble due to something like the Black Plague than women not wanting to bang betas as much as they once did.
Once again they addressed that natural disasters only played a part in collapsing society because of what they did to the Commoner Class in killing them or the unemployment of them. The Black Plague collapsed the feudal society of Europe because it killed off a lot of people but especially the Commoners giving rise to a middle class and lessening power of the nobility. But you knew that since you study history.

Furthermore, the paper you link to is an interesting thought-exercise but it says:

"We propose
a simple model, not intended to describe actual individual cases, but rather to provide a general
framework that allows carrying out thought experiments" for the phenomenon of collapse..."

Except that other scientific institutions already proclaimed that the model made in the paper can model extremely complex societies.

It's basically a big mental-masturbation piece, with some mathematical models. That's fine, and I loooove intellectual theories, but to assume that any of that points to anything that's going on in modern society is simply goofy.

Once again, the scientific consensus is that it is an accurate model of complex societies.

Basically, a certain segment of the population of every generation has some strange psychological need to believe that the world is dying. Maybe it's because those people themselves are dying and they can't see anything other than death when they look around.

You know I constantly give you sources from accredited institutions and people, as well as directly quote to you the parts you ask about. Meanwhile you keep making claims that you never support.

But in fact, even if certain civilizations "crumble," they are soon replaced by more effective civilizations which rise to even greater complexity and efficiency. Even assuming, arguendo, that your theory is true... I don't see what the problem is.

Once again the paper described this which you didn't read. There is usually a several hundred period time gap between the more "effective civilizations". If you are in that time gap, good luck!

Here's the upshot: Just because you can't get laid doesn't mean we're all doomed.

And you end with another poisoning the well argument. You have no basis for any of your arguments, I address it at every turn, you don't even read the paper and make ad-honimen attacks, and then you end your argument with "you can't get laid".

But ya man those guys are retarded, fvck those retarded cvnts

 

[ArcBound]

if the problem was only some guys not getting laid, this forum wouldn't be full of men trying to improve, and the pua would not sell a single book.

also if you do remember in japan they ahve some guys who even marry a damn game character, others don't care about females and do the minimum work just to get by

This guy also gets it!

Do you see the panic of the Japanese government because of all the herbs? Since the Japanese man is so devalued by his boss, his corporations, his wife (who takes all his money) and his family he has no incentive to work for any of that sh!t. And now the Japanese economy is contracting, birth rates are falling, and they are wondering how to support social systems for an increasingly older Japanese population. Similar in Korea though driven by slightly different factors. The respective fertility rates are 1.39 and 1.21.

We see the same thing increasing in American society though slightly earlier in the timeline. Maybe when our fertility rate drops to their level (and i mean look at the native birth rate, not immigrant birth rate), we have an ever increasing elderly population who don't want to cut social services, with record high national debt and less people marrying, less participation in the work force we might say "Hey I think something is wrong guys"

 

[Zarky]

And you end with another poisoning the well argument. You have no basis for any of your arguments, I address it at every turn, you don't even read the paper and make ad-honimen attacks, and then you end your argument with "you can't get laid".

But ya man those guys are retarded, fvck those retarded cvnts

Bro, if your entire theory of the collapse of civilization is based on one paper using an extremely simplified mathematical model, then you're not gonna convince anyone. Sorry.

If I modeled all of humanity by saying, "All people are crazy," I'm sure I could support that contention with historical observations. But it would be a poor predictor of specific future occurrences. I'll save that paper on my laptop and look at it in 50 years. If it's come to pass, I'll change my tune. But in the meantime you're gonna have to come up with more than that.

Chicken Little, my friend, Chicken Little.