Should sex and intimacy be considered a human right? If internet access is now considered by the UN to be a human right...

Should sex and intimacy be considered a human right? If internet access is now considered by the UN to be a human right, why not sex?

Other urls found in this thread:

fr.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Français,_encore_un_effort_si_vous_voulez_être_républicains
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>women are literally killing us by not having sex with us
Hes just pretending to be retarded right...right?

it's true. women are literally destroying society by haremizing it. women have blood on their hands

I will post some extracts from a famous republican pamphlet, published in 1795.

Now that we have got back upon our feet and broken with the host of prejudices that held us captive;
now that, brought closer to Nature by the quantity of prejudices we have recently obliterated,
we listen only to Nature's voice, we are fully convinced that if anything were criminal, it would be to
resist the penchants she inspires in us, rather than to come to grips with them. We are persuaded
that lust, being a product of those penchants, is not to be stifled or legislated against, but that it is,
rather, a matter of arranging for the means whereby passion may be satisfied in peace. We must
hence undertake to introduce order into this sphere of affairs, and to establish all the security
necessary so that, when need sends the citizen near the objects of lust, he can give himself over todoing with them all that his passions demand, without ever being hampered by anything, for there is
no moment in the life of man when liberty in its whole amplitude is so important to him. Various
stations, cheerful, sanitary, spacious, properly furnished and in every respect safe, will be erected in
divers points in each city; in them, all sexes, all ages, all creatures possible will be offered to the
caprices of the libertines who shall come to divert themselves, and the most absolute subordination
will be the rule of the individuals participating—the slightest refusal or recalcitrance will be instantly
and arbitrarily punished by the injured party. I must explain this last more fully, and weigh it against
republican manners; I promised I would employ the same logic from beginning to end, and I shall
keep my word.

Although, as I told you just a moment ago, no passion has a greater need of the widest horizon of
liberty than has this, none, doubtless, is as despotic; here it is that man likes to command, to be
obeyed, to surround himself with slaves compelled to satisfy him; well, whenever you withhold from
man the secret means whereby he exhales the dose of despotism Nature instilled in the depths of his
heart, he will seek other outlets for it, it will be vented upon nearby objects; it will trouble the
government. If you would avoid that danger, permit a free flight and rein to those tyrannical desires
which, despite himself, torment man ceaselessly: content with having been able to exercise his small
dominion in the middle of the harem of sultanas and youths whose submission your good offices and
his money procure for him, he will go away appeased and with nothing but fond feelings for a
government which so obligingly affords him every means of satisfying his concupiscence; proceed, on
the other hand, after a different fashion, between the citizen and those objects of public lust raise
the ridiculous obstacles in olden times invented by ministerial tyranny and by the lubricity of our
Sardanapaluses14—, do that, and the citizen, soon embittered against your regime, soon jealous of
the despotism he sees you exercise all by yourself, will shake off the yoke you lay upon him, and,
weary of your manner of ruling, will, as he has just done, substitute another for it.

It is certain, in a state of Nature, that women are born vulguivaguous, that is to say, are born
enjoying the advantages of other female animals and belonging, like them and without exception, to
all males; such were, without any doubt, both the primary laws of Nature and the only institutions of
those earliest societies into which men gathered. Self-interest, egoism, and love degraded these
primitive attitudes, at once so simple and so natural; one thought oneself enriched by taking a
woman to wife, and with her the goods of her family: there we find satisfied the first two feelings I
have just indicated; still more often, this woman was taken by force, and thereby one became
attached to her—there we find the other of the motives in action, and in every case, injustice.
Never may an act of possession be exercised upon a free being; the exclusive possession of a
woman is no less unjust than the possession of slaves; all men are born free, all have equal rights:
never should we lose sight of those principles; according to which never may there be granted to one
sex the legitimate right to lay monopolizing hands upon the other, and never may one of these
sexes, or classes, arbitrarily possess the other. Similarly, a woman existing in the purity of Nature's
laws cannot allege, as justification for refusing herself to someone who desires her, the love she
bears another, because such a response is based upon exclusion, and no man may be excluded
from the having of a woman as of the moment it is clear she definitely belongs to all men. The act of
possession can only be exercised upon a chattel or an animal, never upon an individual who
resembles us, and all the ties which can bind a woman to a man are quite as unjust as illusory.

Wait, so he's essentially talking about a beta uprising if men don't get to satisfy their carnal desires?

I speak French so I don't really understand perfectly.

If then it becomes incontestable that we have received from Nature the right indiscriminately to
express our wishes to all women, it likewise becomes incontestable that we have the right to compel
their submission, not exclusively, for I should then be contradicting myself, but temporarily.15 It cannot
be denied that we have the right to decree laws that compel woman to yield to the flames of him who
would have her; violence itself being one of that right's effects, we can employ it lawfully. Indeed! has
Nature not proven that we have that right, by bestowing upon us the strength needed to bend
women to our will?
It is in vain women seek to bring to their defense either modesty or their attachment to other men;
these illusory grounds are worthless; earlier, we saw how contemptible and factitious is the sentiment
of modesty. Love, which may be termed the soul's madness, is no more a title by which their
constancy may be justified: love, satisfying two persons only, the beloved and the loving, cannot
serve the happiness of others, and it is for the sake of the happiness of everyone, and not for an
egotistical and privileged happiness, that women have been given to us. All men therefore have an
equal right of enjoyment of all women; therefore, there is no man who, in keeping with natural law,
may lay claim to a unique and personal right over a woman. The law which will oblige them to
prostitute themselves, as often and in any manner we wish, in the houses of debauchery we referred
to a moment ago, and which will coerce them if they balk, punish them if they shirk or dawdle, is thus
one of the most equitable of laws, against which there can be no sane or rightful complaint.

You can read the French version there :
fr.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Français,_encore_un_effort_si_vous_voulez_être_républicains
Section "les moeurs"


...
15 Let it not be said that I contradict myself here, and that after having established, at some point further above, that we have no right to bind a
woman to ourselves, I destroy those principles when I declare now we have the right to constrain her; I repeat, it is a question of enjoyment
only, not of property: I have no right of possession upon that fountain I find by the road, but I have certain rights to its use; I have the right to
avail myself of the limpid water it offers my thirst; similarly, I have no real right of possession over such-and-such a woman, but I have
incontestable rights to the enjoyment of her; I have the right to force from her this enjoyment, if she refuses me it for whatever the cause may be.

It is in vain women seek to bring to their defense either modesty or their attachment to other men;
these illusory grounds are worthless; earlier, we saw how contemptible and factitious is the sentiment
of modesty. Love, which may be termed the soul's madness, is no more a title by which their
constancy may be justified: love, satisfying two persons only, the beloved and the loving, cannot
serve the happiness of others, and it is for the sake of the happiness of everyone, and not for an
egotistical and privileged happiness, that women have been given to us. All men therefore have an
equal right of enjoyment of all women; therefore, there is no man who, in keeping with natural law,
may lay claim to a unique and personal right over a woman. The law which will oblige them to
prostitute themselves, as often and in any manner we wish, in the houses of debauchery we referred
to a moment ago, and which will coerce them if they balk, punish them if they shirk or dawdle, is thus
one of the most equitable of laws, against which there can be no sane or rightful complaint.
A man who would like to enjoy whatever woman or girl will henceforth be able, if the laws you
promulgate are just, to have her summoned at once to duty at one of the houses; and there, under
the supervision of the matrons of that temple of Venus, she will be surrendered to him, to satisfy,
humbly and with submission, all the fancies in which he will be pleased to indulge with her, however
strange or irregular they may be, since there is no extravagance which is not in Nature, none which
she does not acknowledge as her own. There remains but to fix the woman's age; now, I maintain it
cannot be fixed without restricting the freedom of a man who desires a girl of any given age.

He who has the right to eat the fruit of a tree may assuredly pluck it ripe or green. But there is an age when the man's proceedings would be
decidedly harmful to the girl's well-being. This consideration is utterly without value; once you
concede me the proprietary right of enjoyment, that right is independent of the effects enjoyment
produces; from this moment on, it becomes one, whether this enjoyment be beneficial or damaging to
the object which must submit itself to me. Have I not already proven that it is legitimate to force the
woman's will in this connection? and that immediately she excites the desire to enjoy she has got to
expose herself to this enjoyment, putting all egotistical sentiments quite aside? The issue of her
well-being is irrelevant. As soon as concern for this consideration threatens to detract from
or enfeeble the enjoyment of him who desires her, and who has the right to appropriate her, this
consideration for age ceases to exist; for what the object may experience, condemned by Nature and
by the law to slake momentarily the other's thirst, is nothing to the point; in this study, we are only
interested in what agrees with him who desires. But we will redress the balance.

If we admit, as we have just done, that all women ought to be subjugated to our desires, we may
certainly allow then ample satisfaction of theirs. Our laws must be favorable to their fiery
temperament. It is absurd to locate both their honor and their virtue in the antinatural strength they
employ to resist the penchants with which they have been far more profusely endowed than we; this
injustice of manners is rendered more flagrant still since we contrive at once to weaken them by
seduction, and then to punish them for yielding to all the efforts we have made to provoke their fall.
All the absurdity of our manners, it seems to me, is graven in this shocking paradox, and this brief
outline alone ought to awaken us to the urgency of exchanging them for manners more pure.

You have the right to have sex. I am not aware of any country in the world that has outlawed sex.
Or perhaps you mean that you have the right to rape, to a sex slave who will give you sex against their will? In that case I suppose you think restaurants should serve you food for free because you have the right to eat.

I say then that women, having been endowed with considerably more violent penchants for carnal
pleasure than we, will be able to give themselves over to it wholeheartedly, absolutely free of all
encumbering hymeneal ties, of all false notions of modesty, absolutely restored to a state of Nature; I
want laws permitting them to give themselves to as many men as they see fit; I would have them
accorded the enjoyment of all sexes and, as in the case of men, the enjoyment of all parts of the
body; and under the special clause prescribing their surrender to all who desire them, there must be
subjoined another guaranteeing them a similar freedom to enjoy all they deem worthy to satisfy them.

neck yourself for wanting to legalize rape and pedophilia

There will then be houses intended for women's libertinage and, like the men's, under the
government's protection; in these establishments there will be furnished all the individuals of either
sex women could desire, and the more constantly they frequent these places the higher they will be
esteemed.From the most tender age,16 a girl
released from her paternal fetters, no longer having anything to preserve for marriage (completely
abolished by the wise laws I advocate), and superior to the prejudices which in former times
imprisoned her sex, will therefore, in the houses created for the purpose, be able to indulge in
everything to which her constitution prompts her; she will be received respectfully, copiously satisfied
and, returned once again into society, she will be able to tell of the pleasures she tasted quite as
publicly as today she speaks of a ball or promenade. O charming sex, you will be free: as do men,
you will enjoy all the pleasures of which Nature makes a duty, from not one will you be withheld. Must
the diviner half of humankind be laden with irons by the other? Ah, break those irons; Nature wills it.
For a bridle have nothing but your inclinations, for laws only your desires, for morality Nature's alone;
languish no longer under brutal prejudices which wither your charms and hold captive the divine
impulses of ),our hearts;17 like us, you are free, the field of action whereon one contends for Venus'
favors is as open to you as it is to us; have no fear of absurd reproaches; pedantry and superstition
are things of the past; no longer will you be seen to blush at your charming delinquencies; crowned
with myrtle and roses, the esteem we conceive for you will be henceforth in direct proportion to the
scale you give your extravagances.

>If internet access is now considered by the UN
>considered by the UN
There's your answer

Well it is a human right. But having a right doesn't mean anyone has to supply it to you.

>Monitoring this thread

That doesn't mean that everyone gets free internet. It means you can't be denied access to the internet.

No one's telling you you can't have sex, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to give it to you.

>ANOTHER incel thread

Just kill this board already, it's done.

>a bloo bloo bloo
I haven't had sex in five years and I would never talk like this much of a whiny faggot. This fourteen year old needs to stop spending so much time on reddit.

It died the moment it became "thinly-veiled /pol/thread" - the board m8, which is like 2 years ago.

>No one's telling you you can't have sex

If governments pass and enforce anti-prostitution laws, that means you are being told you can't have sex if you can't get it otherwise, no?

No, that just means you can't pay for sex with money.

You can still get sex. It's not like sex is banned because prostitution is illegal.

Why is prostitution illegal if not to punish and deny sex to ugly beta males who can't attract a mate otherwise?

because ugly beta males can still have sex by putting in effort and/or lowering their standards. in this day and age you have literal apps on your phone that you can use to try and find one night stands at little cost.

the only people who think they cant have sex are defeatists who gave up and entitled fedora spergs that think eveything should be handed to them on a silver platter.

>You can still get sex
What if, factually, you can't?

Where is it illegal to pay for sex with money?

America, the Land of the Free.

>ugly people don't get laid as often as attractive people
>therefore, women should be required by law to have sex with me

Genius

>the only people who think they cant have sex are defeatists who gave up
Well what the fuck am i supposed to do, ive tried nothing and im out of ideas. Im literally fucked.

Do you have a penis?

If so, you can most likely find at least one person willing to have sex with you.

If it is a human right then it is also a human right for gay men to get to fuck you in the ass.

Bro, lemme be real for a minute here. It doesn't sound like you're too far gone so this is for your benefit.

I'm 22. I lost my virginity two months ago. For the past 4 years or so my teeth have been in very poor shape due to improper care when I was younger, and I am just now starting to be able to fix them due to financial problems.

I knew that bad teeth is a severe turn off and had just sort of accepted that I was going to be alone for at least until I got them fixed. Maybe even longer because I'm not fit at all and weigh about 130.

Despite all of this, I managed to find someone that doesn't care about any of that and actually does want to be with me.

>"oh, well she's gotta be pretty ugly/fat to lower her standards that much"
This is where you'll have to just believe me, but no, she isn't.

This isn't me bragging or anything, this is an example to you that yes, SOMEONE will want to be with you. First though, you gotta make it not look like all you care about is poon.

Ive had several woman want to be with me and i always fucked it up. Failed normie is the best i can do and obviously that isnt good enough. Im 24 and havent had sex in 4 years. In that 4 years i kissed one girl once. Its over. Besides, Veeky Forums isnt the place for this shit.

I must find a person who feels desire for me and who I feel desire for.
That's NOT easy.

Nothing worth having is easily obtained.

Did you miss the part where you've done better in life overall than I have? If you don't put yourself out there and put the work in, you won't ever get what you want.

If you view yourself as failed, so will other people. When people say confidence is attractive, they're not talking about the confidence to hit on every girl you see. They're talking about self confidence. If you think you're great, eventually you'll start convincing other people too.

>Nothing worth having is easily obtained.
Untrue.

Im lazy and dying alone is easier.

You have an awful a lot of unjustified faith there. There are a lot of really fucked up, ugly, mentally ill or socially incompetent people.
Some people can't get whatever they want if they just try hard enough.

A right is inherit. This requires another party to provide a service.

Yes, healthcare is not a human right.

Am I free to travel ? Only with a passport !

Human rights are just a meme.

>Bro, lemme be real for a minute here.
>Reddit spacing
>Off topic blogging about sex
Holy crackers.

I'll just masturbate to anime until VR and AI are perfected.