Regarding whores

[evilkog]

We dislike whores. Ostensibly, it's because they're degenerates who lack impulse control. That's part of it, but almost everyone would agree that jacking off is less degenerate than hooking up with a stranger. This is despite both scenarios being the same thing at a high level, giving in to your sexual desires. We look down on whores because we regard the naked body as sacred, particularly women's, so we dislike violators of that sanctity. As a result, we cover up our bodies, value "virginity", and push back against our sexual desires. But, it wasn't always like this.

Hunter gatherers had different views on naked bodies. Generally, they didn't cover up unless their climate forced to. They didn't repress their sexual desires. You'd think this meant they were shameless degenerates, but it was the opposite. They had a more casual view of nudity and sex, human bodies weren't as sexualised. Tribe members would look at ass and tits all day and wouldn't think much of it, it was normal for them.

Contrast that with our modern, sexually repressed societies. Our genitals are our "private parts". Hooking up with strangers is seen as immoral. This approach is rooted in Christianity, and in theory it leads to less degeneracy and more discipline. But I'd argue it does the opposite. When you tell someone they can't have something, they only want it more. Sexual repression creates the desire it's trying to repress, there's a reason a large percentage of the internet is porn.

That being said, I do understand the need for sexual repression in modern society. A long-lasting, monogamous marriage is probably the best arrangement for raising children, maybe society would be worse off if we had a more casual approach to sex. But I think sexual repression leads to a more sex-obsessed mind, unfulfilled needs, and is deeply unnatural.

 

[Decapitated Nigger Baby]

IM DELETING YOU, DADDY!

██]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] 10% complete.....

████]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] 35% complete....

███████]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] 60% complete....

███████████] 99% complete.....

ERROR! True Daddies are irreplaceable I could never delete you Daddy! Send this to ten other Daddies who give you cummies Or never get called squishy again If you get 0 Back: no cummies for you 3 back: you're squishy 5 back: you're daddy's kitten 10+ back: Daddy

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/aliens...manyvids-is-falling-into-ai-psychosis.237611/

In posts on ManyVids, the porn platform’s official account holds imaginary conversations with aliens, alongside AI-generated videos of UFOs, fractal images, “angel numbers,” and a video of its founder and CEO Bella French in a space suit shooting lasers from her eyes.

French launched the site in 2014 as a former cam model herself, and the platform has millions of members and tens of thousands of creators. Adult content creators use it to sell custom videos and subscriptions, and perform live on camera. French recently changed her personal website to state her new goal is to “transition one million people out of the adult industry and do everything we can to ensure no one new enters it.” The statement follows posts on X’s ManyVids account about new strategies to pivot the site toward safe-for-work, non-sexual content.

 

[Milles d'Allemagne]

words words words

Sorry about your mom

 

[Ryo Ma]

I like your title so I had AI make this. Also, your mother.

 

[teriyakiburns]

babby's first primitivism

 

[herefortheactualthreads]

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Shameful that this is Deep Thoughts and no reply yet treats OP seriously

jacking off is less degenerate than hooking up with a stranger. This is despite both scenarios being the same thing at a high level, giving in to your sexual desires.

This claim does a most of the work in your post, and it does that by flattening distinctions that people already accept. The obvious difference is downstream consequences.
With casual sex come possible pregnancy risk, paternity uncertainty, disease transmission, jealousy dynamics etc.pp., and that doesn't happen with masturbation. That alone is sufficient to explain why people judge these two things differently without invoking sanctity, repression, or theology

Hunter gatherers had different views on naked bodies. Generally, they didn't cover up unless their climate forced to. They didn't repress their sexual desires. You'd think this meant they were shameless degenerates, but it was the opposite. They had a more casual view of nudity and sex, human bodies weren't as sexualised. Tribe members would look at ass and tits all day and wouldn't think much of it, it was normal for them.

Even if your anthropological claims were accurate (as of now they're mere assertions) they wouldn't carry weight. Small kin-based groups with no inheritance structures, no accumulated capital, and radically different mortality pressures are not a baseline for modern and postmodern societies. Customs that may emerge in low-scale high-mortality environments don't automatically generalize to large intergenerational systems where child investment horizons usually go for decades. Pointing to a different context and calling it "natural" doesn't explain anything

Sexual repression creates the desire it's trying to repress, there's a reason a large percentage of the internet is porn.

I disagree. The continual rise of Internet porn correlates with technology. It can be clearly related to bandwidth, anonymity, close-to-zero marginal cost, and attention markets.
Like, Internet porn is a frictionless always-available dopamine product. If you need Christianity to explain why such a thing gets consumed... Either way, to treat porn usage as evidence of repression is to ignore the most obvious variables.

 

[AMHOLIO]

I think in winter people make more bizarre threads because they haven't seen the sun or as many people in a while, and it can really get to some people.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Whoring should be legal and it being illegal is another product of uppity women (same types as temperance) being allowed to stick their noses into things.

We should also get into the habit of calling it whoring again. Not even prostitution, whoring. Whores.

 

[Jershua Coomer Troon]

Whoring should be legal and it being illegal is another product of uppity women (same types as temperance) being allowed to stick their noses into things.

We should also get into the habit of calling it whoring again. Not even prostitution, whoring. Whores.

DM null to get verified as Russell Greer

 

[teriyakiburns]

DM null to get verified as Russell Greer

Funny way of spelling Frank Miller.

 

[evilkog]

This claim does a most of the work in your post, and it does that by flattening distinctions that people already accept. The obvious difference is downstream consequences.
With casual sex come possible pregnancy risk, paternity uncertainty, disease transmission, jealousy dynamics etc.pp., and that doesn't happen with masturbation. That alone is sufficient to explain why people judge these two things differently without invoking sanctity, repression, or theology

I agree, my comparison with porn was pretty dumb. But I still think "sanctity" still plays a huge role. Concepts like virginity and body count wouldn't exist otherwise, you could even look at what clothing is acceptable and what isn't. And even if the cause of sexual repression is different, my main point is most of us live in sexually repressed societies, regardless of the cause. Maybe I'm overstating the extent of this repression, but its there and influences our attitude towards sex.

Even if your anthropological claims were accurate (as of now they're mere assertions) they wouldn't carry weight. Small kin-based groups with no inheritance structures, no accumulated capital, and radically different mortality pressures are not a baseline for modern and postmodern societies. Customs that may emerge in low-scale high-mortality environments don't automatically generalize to large intergenerational systems where child investment horizons usually go for decades. Pointing to a different context and calling it "natural" doesn't explain anything

I didn't bring up hunter gatherer societies because they're "natural". I used them as an example of a sexually free society, and contrasted them with modern societies to convey that sexually free societies are ironically less sexually obsessed. I was wary of saying we should follow their relationship structures, but maybe we need a slight shift in attitude. In the modern age, most of sex's downsides can be mitigated, and the negative consequences our sexual repression are evident. I believe our attitudes towards sex are a vestige of a different time and environment.

I disagree. The continual rise of Internet porn correlates with technology. It can be clearly related to bandwidth, anonymity, close-to-zero marginal cost, and attention markets.
Like, Internet porn is a frictionless always-available dopamine product. If you need Christianity to explain why such a thing gets consumed... Either way, to treat porn usage as evidence of repression is to ignore the most obvious variable

I used it to show how sexually obsessed we are despite (or in part due to) our sexual repression. But yea it's pretty hand-wavy.

 

[⋖ cørdion ⋗]

Society went downhill when we became okay with women having an onlyfans and quitting, going "lmaoo everyone did it during covid xoxo relax".

You became a sexworker. That's not something normal people do.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

I still think "sanctity" still plays a huge role. Concepts like virginity and body count wouldn't exist otherwise

I disagree. I think it's more plausible that these concepts are inevitable consequences of coordination problems around sex. Like, reproduction, pair bonding, long-term investment. To me this functional explanation is sufficient, without any need for a moralized explanation like "sanctity".

my main point is most of us live in sexually repressed societies, regardless of the cause

This "sexual repression" is doing explanatory work it hasn't earned. Like, you're assuming a baseline that never gets specified. Repressed relative to what?
Repressed compared to small tribal groups with constant exposure, no privacy, no contraception, no inheritance, and radically different survival constraints? If so, then the comparison points at different incentives producing different customs, rather than establishing repression. The fact that there's a difference does not by itself imply that there's a pathology.

I used [hunter gatherer societies] as an example of a sexually free society, and contrasted them with modern societies to convey that sexually free societies are ironically less sexually obsessed.

I used it to show how sexually obsessed we are despite (or in part due to) our sexual repression.

Obsession is a result of novelty and stimulus concentration, rather than prohibition versus permission. You can't compare continuous low-amplitude exposure in a closed group with a high-novelty high-variation algorithmically optimized stimulation delivered to isolated individuals. I think that difference alone is sufficient to explain the obsession bit.

In the modern age, most of sex's downsides can be mitigated

I don't think contraception and antibiotics can eliminate or mitigate pair-bonding effects, jealousy, mate competition, or the compounding impact of short-term incentives on long-term relationship stability. At best, they're easier to ignore individually, but they remain visible in aggregate outcomes.

To me it seems like you're mixing up three different questions.
1. What are people free to do?
2. What behaviors tend to produce stable and cooperative outcomes over time?
3. Does disapproval of certain behaviors require theological or repression-based explanations?
For me it's clear that people can permissively tolerate behavior while still recognizing that some customs evolved because they solved real coordination problems under conditions that may have changed, but have not gone away yet. And at that point, the "sexual repression" narrative is no longer necessary.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Hunter gatherers had different views on naked bodies. Generally, they didn't cover up unless their climate forced to. They didn't repress their sexual desires. You'd think this meant they were shameless degenerates, but it was the opposite. They had a more casual view of nudity and sex, human bodies weren't as sexualised. Tribe members would look at ass and tits all day and wouldn't think much of it, it was normal for them.

Dude, Hunter Gatherers societies still existing engage in tons of child rape, including (and especially) boy rape. They absolutely were degenerates. You just fell into the trap of thinking of some noble savage ideal.

Most cultures hate whores because they tend to carry nasty STDs.

 

[Paper Machete]

One thing I never see brought up in these arguments is that it's costly for women to reproduce in a variety of ways. And contraceptives are a relatively modern invention (there have been attempts in the past going waaaay back but efficacy is questionable). A woman that is "loose" basically is implicitly saying she doesn't care if her mates don't take care of her or their offspring, that questions of her physical health both in terms of pregnancy but potential disease risks don't matter to her, that she doesn't care what strange males she has around her children if she has any, that she continuously opens herself up to possible violence being in an intimate and vulnerable position with someone that is always going to be the stronger party in the equation, etc. To make the choices she does speaks to a very mentally unwell person.

There's also a large and vast difference between genuine repression and making good life choices and also the question of sex is good yes but why seek out continuous strings of new sexual partners? Body count doesn't necessarily mean a high volume of sex, it means a high volume of partners. A lot of people who sleep around spend most of their time in the seeking phase of things. We all joke about sex lessening after serious commitment but there are lots of long term partners and married couples I'd bet good money have more sex than your average "I'm free, I'm free! I sucked dick at the bar!" person. So what is being valued? Good sex and a decent frequency of it or having many sexual partners. They're often not mutual.

That's not even getting into what set ups are clearly best for children. Producing and raising the next generation is very important for all species that reproduce sexually and there are many mammals that evolved to figure this out by pair bonding. Humans are very adaptable (but in ways that's not always healthy) and all advanced civilizations controlled sexual behavior for obvious reasons.

Modern medicine and contraceptives are wonderful but they really have made people think we now have magic to wave away consequences that we don't and to look poorly on people in the past who a lot of times only had social ways of keeping certain things at bay.

 

[evilkog]

I disagree. I think it's more plausible that these concepts are inevitable consequences of coordination problems around sex. Like, reproduction, pair bonding, long-term investment. To me this functional explanation is sufficient, without any need for a moralized explanation like "sanctity".

I don't think so. You can't ignore the role of Abrahamic religions. I'd point to the correlation between the increase in sexual liberalism and decline of Christianity in Western cultures. Also, Ancient Rome is an example of a sexually liberal society where sex would've had similar consequences, if not more due to a lack of contraception.
Nudity is less related to those consequences yet it's viewed as shameful. Romans, without the restrictions of Abrahamic religions, viewed naked bodies as more or less normal. This can be seen in their public bathhouses, or their naked statues.

This "sexual repression" is doing explanatory work it hasn't earned. Like, you're assuming a baseline that never gets specified. Repressed relative to what?

It's difficult to provide a baseline here. Compared to pre-Abrahamic cultures, modern cultures have a greater aversion to sex and sexualisation of the naked body. I can't provide examples of every culture, but I believe most would agree with my assertion.

Obsession is a result of novelty and stimulus concentration, rather than prohibition versus permission.

I don't see how this refutes my point. This novelty and higher stimulus concentration is caused by our more hesitant attitude towards sex, and how nudity is seen as indecent.

I don't think contraception and antibiotics can eliminate or mitigate pair-bonding effects, jealousy, mate competition, or the compounding impact of short-term incentives on long-term relationship stability. At best, they're easier to ignore individually, but they remain visible in aggregate outcomes.

That's true. Society would be worse off if we all became whores, a reluctant attitude towards sex serves a functional purpose. The question is to what degree, and whether we've gone too far. I can't say the same about the idea that are bodies are inherently sexual. This contributes to the novelty mentioned earlier. I like how Nordic countries have a more relaxed view of nudity, which can be seen in their sauna culture. I'd like to think they have a healthier view of sex, i.e. less sexually obsessed, but I don't know.

 

[Pomniman]

It's tempting to think you can decide what'd be "healthier" on a societal scale, but in reality civilizations and countries are organisms in their own right and the form their sexual mores take on is a reflection of where they are in their lifespan than something that can or should be easily altered from the top down.

 

[Town Drunk]

I view whores the same way they have been seen throughout time, until present day. (more on that later)

If you can sell your body to mine coal, you can sell your pussy to the coal miner. Neither is a glamourous profession, that requires skill, and only people with no skills take the job. Hence prostitution should be legal, but never glamorized. So you are a low class citizen, but even lower than said coal miner. He doesn't sell his purity. Sex is the most intimate thing two people can do, and you sell it.

Now we go the modern day, where as a conventional prostitute had a limit in the day to how many men she could service, an online one can have millions of fans, and thus rake in much more money. So now you can get rich selling your dignity, it's not just a means for desperate women to stay alive. Which makes this more attractive as a career.

Because let's be honest, it takes no skills, or specialized knowledge to bend over and take a cock up your ass on camera.

I find the empowering bit that is sold as hilarious. Imagine you are a rich, powerful man, who wants to get as much pussy as possible. Tell them the one thing that requires no effort, talent, education, skills, etc. is empowering. You are a warm wet hole, but this is a good thing for you.