Was the sexual revolution of the 1960s a mistake? Are we currently on the verge of a backlash? Was second wave feminism...

Was the sexual revolution of the 1960s a mistake? Are we currently on the verge of a backlash? Was second wave feminism, at least partially, caused by young new left men trying to fuck every girl in sight now that premarital sex had become fashionable?

Attached: 1505551729425.jpg (1748x1200, 789K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/m2ua3O_fdCY
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25940736
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00996.x/abstract
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x/abstract
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0347-0520.2004.00369.x/abstract
psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-25811-011
ftp.iza.org/dp4200.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Society veers into the traditional and the "degenerate" all the time. Ancient Rome was a hotbed of degeneracy.

Threads should discuss past historical events and not their modern consequences

you fucking faggot

Greeks fucking boys in the ass was still less degenerate than the right side of this fucking picture.

How can you discuss the past without taking into account how it affects us to this very day?

>>Are we currently on the verge of a backlash?
No, We're seeing the end of one. The traditional religious conservative demographic is dying out, and their secular children are the last gasp of their puritanical religious mores. The soc-jus generation will be thoroughly incapable of indoctrinating their children with their anti-fun ideology. Expect the coming decades to be incredibly "decadent"

>How can you discuss the past without taking into account how it affects us to this very day?
The absolute state of Veeky Forums

Hardly.

In all fairness, the 60s were a combination of mass lead poisoning in gas stations and withdrawal effects from taking prescribed and very legal methamphetamine.

But normies are faggots so they value "ideas" over something more fundamental (diet and habit). No longer was the housewife able to be super focused on her household cleaning. The comedown from taking medical meth robbed joy from a near-impossible-to-reach-sober peak. Depression and anxiety she felt in the house and that was all the house meant to her in that mental state. Depression and anxiety. So of course she wants to "go out" away from the domicile.

Young people have way way less sex today then they had in the 70s or even the 80s and 90s. How is that not already a backlash against "free love"? Shit, in the 60s they had a saying here in Germany that went like: "Wer zweimal mit derselben pennt, gehört schon zum establishment", which roughly translates to "If you sleep with the same girl twice, you're already part of the establishment/the man/them etc."

With SJW shit everywhere, why wouldn't teenagers rebel by being edgy conservatives. Even if the don't really believe in it at first, only doing it as an attempt to piss of their parents, some of them will probably embrace it in a very post-ironic way. We are currently moving away from post-modern irony and towards new sincerity. Just look at how the term autism on this website went from a medical diagnosis to, a metaphorical insult for socially retarded people to a positive self description. Same applies to the term shitposting. The writing is on the wall. The age of irony is over and many people who have embraced right wing values purely out of spite will slowly find themselves embracing them. Maybe I'm projecting a little from my own experience, but this evolution seems pretty clear to me.

Attached: 1520362556061.png (300x300, 128K)

The sexual revolution is another of thise things you can blame Hitler for. Women had to enter the workforce in massive numbers because of WW2. Once the genie was out of the bottle it was hard to put it back.

OP here, I'm a reactionary alright, but you can bet that I despise Hitler exactly for this reason. All this cultural Marxist bullshit is his fault.

>Young people have way way less sex today then they had in the 70s or even the 80s and 90s.
No, men are having less sex. Women are having more sex with a smaller pool of men.

That's not sustainable and accelerate this process even faster. Also that's bullshit, women have always been selective and men have always been predatory horny morons. You have twice as many female ancestors as males for a reason, user.

Attached: 1518130582999.png (2084x2084, 1.64M)

not really related but I have no idea why ariana grande is seen as attractive

No idea either. Maybe tastes are just different. Perhaps even at a genetic level. Posting some actual qts.

Attached: 1518809929586.jpg (529x800, 66K)

most women only have sex with 3 or 4 different men in their lifetime

she is attractive to women

She has a really great voice though.
Too bad she is so annoying.

youtu.be/m2ua3O_fdCY
No autotune here.

She was attractive on Victorious, but that was like 8 years ago

Females have a natural chastity instinct, because childbirth is some serious fucking shit. Better make sure it's with the right man. That's the only reason they are able to withstand this intense slut brainwash in the first place. If women had a male sexdrive, it would be armageddon.

Shit, I just realized that Ariana Grande is only a year older then me. She is a slutty popstar and I'm sitting here at 2 AM shitposting about social conservatism on a kyrgyz bride kidnapping forum.

Attached: 1518444735480.png (1440x1080, 1.3M)

>Are we currently on the verge of a backlash?

Gradually, perhaps. Even so, please OP do keep in mind that representation of "degeneracy" (read: nudity, cosmetics, openness about sexuality, abortion rates) does not have any necessary relationship to actual degeneracy (rape, promiscuity, STD, IPV, preteen pregnancy, single parent rates, incest, foetal deformity).

Marriage, being an economic contract first and spiritual/social arrangement second, is not relevant to the history of sex and courtship.

she looked nice before the industry bought her and made her conform to a marketable image. pretty much toed the britney spears line from there on in.

she does have a nice voice and she used to sing about falling in love, the confusing feelings involved, the sadness of breaking up, etc.

last i checked she had a song quite literally about fucking.

Do you really believe this?

Attached: IMG_20170913_055121_361.jpg (320x320, 28K)

It's because you're clearly attracted to just one type of woman. (Blondes with blue eyes)

People with more diverse taste venture outside of that.

Someone made a thread earlier about the roaring twenties and how it went back to normal after the war.

> does not have any necessary relationship to actual degeneracy
It does if taking to it's logical conclusion. People are having sex these days without having feelings for the other person and only maybe falling in love with them afterwards. That's what the entire night club, one night stand culture, pick up artist, open relationship and fuck buddy cultures does. It makes people miserable. Those who participate, because it reduced them to a peace of meat and those who try to participate in this shallow culture but fail (elliot rodger types, incels and so on), because they believe they are worthless if they are not sexually desired. How our culture has fed young people with the cancerous idea that sex is the highest good worthy of pursuit and if you are missing out you are nothing is absolutely poisonous.

Nice bait.

Attached: f8fed35ca35fde7c.jpg (682x1024, 110K)

>>Young people have way way less sex today then they had in the 70s or even the 80s and 90s
No. A certain subset are due to prolonged social isolation and lack of legal alternatives to the whole dating scene.
>>Shit, in the 60s they had a saying here in Germany that went like: "Wer zweimal mit derselben pennt, gehört schon zum establishment", which roughly translates to "If you sleep with the same girl twice, you're already part of the establishment/the man/them etc."
I find it highly doubtful that Germans are going to be the group that becomes more sexually conservative over time, your nation has legal brothels.

>>With SJW shit everywhere
I'm going to stop you right here and simply point out that SJW horseshit IS the conservative backlash as far as sexual mores go. These people are the last dying gasp of sexual prudery and once they're gone that will be it for the next few decades.

The 20s were way less degenerate than the 70s or the current year. The idea that the interwar period was some literal Sodom and Gomorrah (outside of Berlin) is literally just Nazi disinfo.

if you feel that way about it, maybe don't subscribe to it and just court a girl in a more traditional way? not everyone is like that user, go outside and meet some people.

>sees different opinion
>Ha! Bait!

Attached: 8e989259a540151759fb5cc165c1f552.jpg (500x500, 42K)

It's funny how people go out of their way to avoid blaming capitalism for social degeneration when there is quite literally the saying "sex sells" and that's all any of this has ever been about.

Remember its all about profit margins and doing anything to boost them. All trends are nothing but a see saw of supply and demand.

Nigger, that's what I am trying to do. Because I used to be that shallow prick. Taking the social conservatism pill was the most liberating realization I ever had. The thing is, my old way of looking at the world almost did me in and it sure did elliot rodger in. I just want to share my thoughts in the hope that it could save someone else from their mental and emotional torment.

When a lonely young men asks "why am I still a virgin, why does no girl want to fuck me?", the answer shouldn't' be "just be urself" or "dude, pua lmao". The answer, the only honest to god answer, as far as I am concerned, is that the entire premise is wrong. You are not a worthy person because you are desired, you are desired because you are worthy. Go earn you happy ending. Make yourself a worthy and upstanding person. The best version of yourself that you could be. Nobody seems to tell this to young men it seems.

>sees ONE picture of girls I consider to be qt
>concludes that I am ONLY attacked to this specific type
user...

Attached: 1506389903751.jpg (500x537, 46K)

So 1917 wasn't capitalist?

Attached: 1506173727937.jpg (495x600, 242K)

>No. A certain subset are due to prolonged social isolation and lack of legal alternatives to the whole dating scene.
Do you have any data to back that up? This study suggests otherwise

> Number of sexual partners increased steadily between the G.I.s and 1960s-born GenX'ers and then dipped among Millennials to return to Boomer levels. The largest changes appeared among White men, with few changes among Black Americans.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25940736

>>became a boring prude because a dryspell went on too long
You should have just gone to a whore instead, idiot.

If that study is viewing white men as a whole then it absolutely is in line with what I'm talking about, as that socially isolated subset is largely comprised of white nerds. As the rest of the ethnic groups in the county become more prosperous you can expect similar things to happen to them.

What? No. I mean yeah, brush your teeth, be responsible and accountable, have a future and all that, but the important thing to do is find a girl who is into you for the things that make you uniquely you, not for the things society tells her she should want in a man. Look for the right woman, not a woman society tells you you should want.

Its part of an overall trend which literally confirms the notion of "Young people have way way less sex today then they had in the 70s or even the 80s and 90s"

I don't see how they're more attractive than Ariana grande. If anything they're uglier, with the one on the left having a pudgy butterface with shit tier eyebrows, and the one on the right looking like an prepubescent crack addict

Using historical events as a preamble to discuss present society with anecdotal evidence and armchair psychoanalysis isn't history.

>Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences

Read the fucking sticky faggot

With the rise of anti-biotic resistant STDs, peak HIV medication production, and possibly even a restriction on birth control access for environmental reasons on the horizon, I honestly anticipate the rise of a Nu-Victorian prudery.

I'm not a prude, I just realized that wanting to stick a dick in someone you have no feelings for is not a goal you should strive towards. I could have probably fucked the ugly immigrant girl I met on Tinder, and trust me I wanted to. But something from deep within me told me that what I was planing to do was wrong. Not because I would be using her. No, I was totally fine using her as a piece of meat and my fucktoy. It was that I would be degrading MYSELF to the exact same thing. It would have been a prostitution of my soul for the basic desires of my body.

Horseshit. Women are not attacked to feminine whiny beta men. If you fail up to live up to the masculine ideal, the vast majority of women will not find you attractive. And no, I don't mean appearance or muscle mass. This is also a cancer, telling boys that they are fine just the way they are and that they should just look for the right match for their current quirky pampered self, instead of embracing masculinity and becoming a proper independent and self sufficient man. How does that song go? "You are beautiful just the way you are"? Bullshit. Bull fucking shit. Maybe this applies to women, but certainly not for men. This is the wrong message and gives people an excuse of taking the easy way out instead of constantly improving themselves.

Meh. I just got around to reading the abstract and it doesn't seem to say what you think it does.

>>In the nationally representative General Social Survey, U.S. Adults (N = 33,380) in 2000-2012 (vs. the 1970s and 1980s) had more sexual partners, were more likely to have had sex with a casual date or pickup or an acquaintance, and were more accepting of most non-marital sex (premarital sex, teen sex, and same-sex sexual activity, but not extramarital sex). The percentage who believed premarital sex among adults was "not wrong at all" was 29 % in the early 1970s, 42 % in the 1980s and 1990s, 49 % in the 2000s, and 58 % between 2010 and 2012. Mixed effects (hierarchical linear modeling) analyses separating time period, generation/birth cohort, and age showed that the trend toward greater sexual permissiveness was primarily due to generation. Acceptance of non-marital sex rose steadily between the G.I. generation (born 1901-1924) and Boomers (born 1946-1964), dipped slightly among early Generation X'ers (born 1965-1981), and then rose so that Millennials (also known as Gen Y or Generation Me, born 1982-1999) were the most accepting of non-marital sex. Number of sexual partners increased steadily between the G.I.s and 1960s-born GenX'ers and then dipped among Millennials to return to Boomer levels. The largest changes appeared among White men, with few changes among Black Americans. The results were discussed in the context of growing cultural individualism and rejection of traditional social rules in the U.S.

I fail to see how millenials having as much sex as baby boomers while simultaneously having more acceptance of various forms of promiscuity then most other generations is somehow proof that people now are having less sex then before as a whole and even less so that we're going to see a return to some sort of omnipresent social conservatism. Like the OP of this thread likely hopes for.

>& humanities

>I honestly anticipate the rise of a Nu-Victorian prudery.
I'm in, but only if we also bring back 19th century architecture too.

Attached: 1505993784710.jpg (682x1024, 379K)

>Greeks fucking boys in the ass was still less degenerate than the right side of this fucking picture.
t. low sex iq

>there was never a time before the 1900s were people were more sexually experiential

Attached: 363743745.jpg (645x773, 56K)

god, get a fucking life and stop blaming women because you cant get laid

>>anti-biotic resistant STDs
lol this is simply fear mongering. The only people who have to worry about anti-biotic resistant ailments in general are those people with already weakened immune systems. Even then, that will only be until new medicines are developed.

>>peak HIV medication production
This sounds like a recent trend that you are assuming will continue into the future uninterrupted.

>>possibly even a restriction on birth control access for environmental reasons on the horizon
Yeah no, this just isn't going to happen.

t. shallow hedonist.

Wanting to """get laid"" instead of having meaningful sex with the person you deeply care about is the entire fucking problem!

Attached: 1505548947186.jpg (377x500, 56K)

Except there are some women who are to blame for men having a harder time getting laid. The modern day sex negative feminists who want prostitution outlawed for example.

>I honestly anticipate the rise of a Nu-Victorian prudery.
>Victorian
ah yes the era where talking about sex was taboo, but people were hyper promiscuous

man you've really swallowed that red pill haven't you? No one's telling you to be a feminine beta male either, though there's nothing wrong with a man having his masculine and feminine energies in balance (too far in the feminine is bad though). what i'm saying is that you don't need to care if "the vast majority of women will not find you attractive," the goal isn't to bang a lot of girls, it's to find a partner you can have an intimate and comfortable relationship with for a long and joyful time. also this whole idea that a man needs to embrace a warped ideal of masculinity is the same as the idea that a girl needs to be hot, sexy and whatever else to get the guys.

you're preaching one thing but talking in the opposite direction there, do you see it? the things you say indicate that you actually do subscribe to the beliefs you claim to rebel against.

You fell for the romance meme.
It doesn't exist. Just a rethorical device people made up in the Middle Ages to delude themselves.

All relationships are based on money and power. I pay a high class escort to pose as my gf in social events and get to do whatever I want to her in bed.

I've had girlfriends, I'm not some turbovirgin nor a social autist and I'm honestly more comfortable with this arrangement than a real relationship. I am in total control of the relationship and I don't get attached. And I get to fuck the hottest woman I know.

I see my friends dating fat chicks, spoiled girls throwing tantrums and annoying feminist cunts and I feel sorry for them having to put up with that shit.

The way I see it, I pay for the convenience of not having to deal with a girl's bullshit. And I would be paying for almost everything in a real relationship anyway.

Perhaps we are talking past one another. Of course there are feminine and masculine sides to every person, but what makes a man a man is that the masculine side is the dominant one. People these days seem to be afraid and actively discouraged from embracing this masculinity with all these talks about "toxic masculinity" and "redefining what it means to be a man". I fell for all this bullshit because it gave and an excuse not to work on myself and embrace the men I was meant to be, which is hard work and sacrifice. It's much easier to believe someday some girl will like you just the way you are and that masculinity is a negative force to begin with. When I talk about embracing your masculinity, I don't mean some PUA bullshit and turning yourself into a macho, but keeping your soul, the inner core of your personality intact, burning away all the bad stuff and emerging, not as a different person, but as better more capable version of yourself.

>the goal isn't to bang a lot of girls, it's to find a partner you can have an intimate and comfortable relationship with for a long and joyful time
Feminine men are less desirable as partners, period, not just as sex partners.

>the goal isn't to bang a lot of girls, it's to find a partner you can have an intimate and comfortable relationship with for a long and joyful time
Men should strive to be capable, independent, strong and able to protect what they love and women should strive to be beautiful, kind, empathetic and creative. If left to their own desires and wishes, without filling them with cancerous ideas how gender roles are somehow a social construct, the majority of people will gravitate towards this naturally. Don't fucking tell people to ignore their nature.

>All relationships are based on money and power.
Marxist or ancap detected. Either way, begone materialist. Disgusting.

>All relationships are based on money and power.
Marxist or ancap detected. Either way, begone materialist. Disgusting.

These magazines talk about pleasing their boyfriend, simply enjoying sex does not necessarily make a woman thot.
I have seen no evidence that ordinary women go to secret Chad gangbangs before going back to their beta boyfriends

netorare/cuckold porn is not real life

Perhaps we are talking past one another. Of course there are feminine and masculine sides to every person, but what makes a man a man is that the masculine side is the dominant one. People these days seem to be afraid and actively discouraged from embracing this masculinity with all these talks about "toxic masculinity" and "redefining what it means to be a man". I fell for all this bullshit because it gave and an excuse not to work on myself and embrace the men I was meant to be, which is hard work and sacrifice. It's much easier to believe someday some girl will like you just the way you are and that masculinity is a negative force to begin with. When I talk about embracing your masculinity, I don't mean some PUA bullshit and turning yourself into a macho, but keeping your soul, the inner core of your personality intact, burning away all the bad stuff and emerging, not as a different person, but as better more capable version of yourself.

>the goal isn't to bang a lot of girls, it's to find a partner you can have an intimate and comfortable relationship with for a long and joyful time
Feminine men are less desirable as partners, period, not just as sex partners.

>the goal isn't to bang a lot of girls, it's to find a partner you can have an intimate and comfortable relationship with for a long and joyful time
Men should strive to be capable, independent, strong and able to protect what they love and women should strive to be beautiful, kind, empathetic and creative. If left to their own desires and wishes, without filling them with cancerous ideas how gender roles are somehow a social construct, the majority of people will gravitate towards this naturally. Don't fucking tell people to ignore their nature.

Maybe. The sexual market and making sex a transaction seem to be pretty bad overall, they tie sex/relationships far too much to external factors.

>simply enjoying sex does not necessarily make a woman thot.
au contraire mon ami.

go away kid

>but people were hyper promiscuous
It's amazing what people believe now a days.

Your LARPing is cute. You sound very young. I'm just trying to teach you how the real world works.

It's not pretty or how I would like things to be. But it's the way it is. The first step to having a successful life is accepting the world for how it is rather than dreaming utopian fantasies.

There is a difference between accepting the world for what it is and actively making it worse. Life sucks, yeah, but you're not helping.

Prostitution was more rife in western countries than it is nowadays.

>The only people who have to worry about anti-biotic resistant ailments in general are those people with already weakened immune systems.
That doesn't make any sense.
If an uncompromised immune system was adequate protection against STDs we wouldn't need anti-biotics for them in the first place.

>This sounds like a recent trend that you are assuming will continue into the future uninterrupted.
Why would it change? Just how much biotech infrastructure do you think its possible to devote to churning out AIDS medication?

>Yeah no, this just isn't going to happen.
I agree it's unlikely, but it is certainly a conceivable reaction to us finally beginning to appreciate the ramifications of dumping massive quantities of female hormones into the water supply.

So?
That doesn't equate to wide-spread hyper-promiscuity. Not every man frequented prostitutes, and the vast majority of women weren't selling their bodies.

There's this weird current in modern historiography where historians (especially pop historians) postulate that in every documented conservative era everyone was a secret fag, slut, tranny etc. Any man who hated women and had male friends was a fag, literally ANY non-physical close interaction between two men means there was gay sex, it's fucking retarded.

>I fail to see how millenials having as much sex as baby boomers while simultaneously having more acceptance of various forms of promiscuity then most other generations is somehow proof that people now are having less sex then before as a whole

Because Boomers have less sex than than the non millennial generations that come after them. In the same way that it would be correct to say people are getting shorter if the average height of millennials matched the average height of people from the Depression era.

She was beautiful before the Jewificafion started taking root.

Attached: IMG_1530.jpg (600x393, 101K)

>hair dyed bright red
Fuck off

There's no one here telling you not to be masculine, but you are wrong about having femininity being a straight negative in a man. Masculine energy also takes a lot of forms, not just whatever ideal is being promoted at the time. And the healthiest people, men and women alike, channel both energies in harmony without worrying whether they fit within the current mold their gender ought to in order to be desirable by random members of the opposite sex.

Both men and women should strive to be capable, empathetic, creative and strong, these are traits that benefit literally everyone. Beauty is a plus in either gender. The independent meme is laughable, from the moment you're born til the moment you die you rely on other people whether you're aware enough to realize it or not - we are a cooperative species and benefit from it hugely.

I'm not saying you're entirely wrong thinking the way you do, because in fact there are people who subscribe to gender norms lock, stock and barrel, and there are people who do their best to defy them, and every shade in between. So if you build yourself up to your masculine ideal, and get a lot of desirable pussy to desire you in the end, and that's what you wanted, good for you. But I think you'd be a less frustrated person a lot quicker if you just got with a girl who likes you for aspects that fall outside of that false dichotomy.

Pussy has always been marketable, in desperate times you can always see women falling back on it because it's something that works. The scene in schindler's list where a bunch of girls smear their own blood on their cheeks to look younger and prettier in front of Amon Goeth comes to mind. Everyone in that lineup knew what job they were applying for.

Second wave feminism brought about the glorious 90's Third wave feminism has been a shackle to society since the 00's

Sex as a transaction has pretty much the status quo before feminism, Feminism just changed who was actually getting paid for the services rendered.

>we are a cooperative species and benefit from it hugely.
Stopped reading right there. You clearly are a leftist. Life is a competition. That doesn't mean that we shoudln't corporate, but boy should you not assume that corporation is the default or that you don't have to fight for your own survival.

>Beauty is a plus in either gender.
More important for the attractiveness for women then for men. Denying this is madness.

>If an uncompromised immune system was adequate protection against STDs we wouldn't need anti-biotics for them in the first place.
Anti-bacterial medication resistant bacteria have a much harder time infecting adults then regular bacteria.

>>Why would it change? Just how much biotech infrastructure do you think its possible to devote to churning out AIDS medication?
I think we'll always have more then enough considering that HIV infection rates are going down and not up with the possible exception of some shithole in sub-saharan africa.

>>I agree it's unlikely, but it is certainly a conceivable reaction to us finally beginning to appreciate the ramifications of dumping massive quantities of female hormones into the water supply.
It's not even remotely conceivable that any first world nation would pursue a policy of limiting access to contraceptives given how useful contraceptives are at keeping people from having too many children.

Except that study didn't specify which groups of millennial were having less sex. It's like using the shorter lifespans of American blacks to say that the lifespans of all Americans are shorter then they were before.

It looked charming on her

Attached: IMG_1531.jpg (570x309, 55K)

>and get a lot of desirable pussy
Nigger, you are incapable for listening to what I am truly saying. I don't want to man up to slay pussy, I want to because it feels right and it will also increase my chances of finding a partner. Do you seriously not understand the difference between making yourself more attractive to the opposite sex, in order to find a nice loving wife, and doing so because you want to get laid? You really seem to think that sexual attraction isn't linked to emotional attraction. Christ, you have a fucking brick in front of your face.

>But I think you'd be a less frustrated person a lot quicker if you just got with a girl who likes you for aspects that fall outside of that false dichotomy.
Quite the opposite. Only a minority of people fall outside of this dichotomy, which makes it a dichotomy to begin with, which radically deminishes your pool of potential partners, making something that is already hard to begin with really fucking hard and almost next to impossible. Yes, I would love to have a dominant alpha wife that's twice the man I am, but that's not going to happen because these women usually don't want feminine men. Jesus fucking Christ. I've been sexually frustrated all my teenage years because I used to listen to bellends like you

>Except that study didn't specify which groups of millennial were having less sex.
Which goupings are you after?

>It's like using the shorter lifespans of American blacks to say that the lifespans of all Americans are shorter then they were before.

No it compares apples with apples. For instance
>Researchers also noted a particular trend toward sexual inactivity among millennial and nascent Gen-Z women, and that 15 percent of the 20- to 24-year-old set has not had sex since coming of age, which is a 6 percent bump from early '90s rates.

>>Researchers also noted a particular trend toward sexual inactivity among millennial and nascent Gen-Z women, and that 15 percent of the 20- to 24-year-old set has not had sex since coming of age, which is a 6 percent bump from early '90s rates.
Yeah dude, those would be the female equivalent of those socially isolated men.

>>Which goupings are you after?
Huh? I already explained this shit. Socially isolated people have fewer opportunities for sexual activity with the opposite sex or the same sex, so they have less sex. This however does not mean that the majority of people are having less sex however.

It's pretty clear we aren't going to agree on this, I don't mind agreeing to disagree. I'm just putting an alternative view out on the chance that one of you might get into a good relationship sooner rather than later, and be less frustrated by the way you guys believe the world is. Like I said before, what do you need to be desirable to all or most women for? Just find the girl for you and go for it. You won't have to change a thing if it's the right girl (and she happens to be single, and you don't smell bad or have gross nails or something).

>Ancient Rome was a hotbed of degeneracy.

They would have considered themselves sexually conservative.

whatever dude. you can live your illusion and i live mine. dont pretend that your lifestyle isnt an illusion aswell.

Yes.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00996.x/abstract
>Bivariate results suggested that delaying sexual involvement was associated with higher relationship quality across several dimensions. The multivariate results indicated that the speed of entry into sexual relationships was negatively associated with marital quality, but only among women."

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x/abstract
>"I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution."

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0347-0520.2004.00369.x/abstract
>"The happiness-maximizing number of sexual partners in the previous year is calculated to be 1."

psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-25811-011
>"Both structural equation and group comparison analyses demonstrated that sexual restraint was associated with better relationship outcomes, even when controlling for education, the number of sexual partners, religiosity, and relationship length."

ftp.iza.org/dp4200.pdf
>"Social and legal changes have given people more autonomy over individual and family decision making, including rights over marriage, children born out of wedlock, the use of birth control, abortion, and divorce (Stevenson and Wolfers, 2007). Once again, men may have been able to disproportionately benefit from these increased opportunities: Akerlof, Yellen, and Katz (1996) argue that sexual freedom offered by the birth control pill benefited men by increasing the pressure on women to have sex outside of marriage"

Attached: 1490346388820.jpg (4920x4161, 2.69M)

You still don't get it. I used to hold your view when I was aw teenager and in my early 20s and I finally managed to overcome all that frustration by letting go of that worldview. It's been the most liberating and positive change in my entire adult life.

>Just find the girl for you and go for it. You won't have to change a thing if it's the right girl
This advice is so fucking bad it's almost comical if it didn't cause so much misery whenever people follow it. Yeah, waste your life hoping for the slim chance that you could randomly come across a partner who considers your inadequacies to be qualities instead actively fulfilling your biological role and increasing the set of potential romantic partners a thousandfold. What's the next horrible thing you are trying to sell me own? Fucking fat acceptance?

Attached: 1521500240609.jpg (688x788, 45K)

if more people are becoming more isolated = less people having sex overall.

Go away LiterallyHitler

>Was the sexual revolution of the 1960s a mistake?

Yes. Yes it was.

Good to know the mods are working hard today

Re-read both your posts and his and maybe you'll learn a lesson about overestimating your intelligence.

Yes.

It has led to a vulgar kind of hedonism as the dominant way of life spread by mainstream media (magazines, television, etc).

So much that some people even here think that the only people who are not sexual hedonists are those that failed at it and so are bitter. They can't even imagine in their minds someone having a different view from their hedonism.

OP here. Thank you for understanding. I feel like I'm going crazy.

Ancient homosexuality is a meme. You wouldn't have been burnt at the stake for it but it would still completely ruin your reputation.

You can't escape the truth.
I am everywhere.

...and? What is this "contraire"?

Sexual and civilizational degeneracy is just nature's way of getting rid of weak genes. All these homosexuals, de facto prostitutes and assorted mongrels and so on are either the future slave caste or just failures. They won't breed, and even if they do their progeny will be inferior and worthless.

I see the current age as just another evolutionary step of mankind. The inferior parts are getting burned off in their own fires. The backlash against hedonism and civilizational/cultural death is already occuring. The future will inevitably be more traditional, and tards who speak of muh dikk and feminism will either be internally cast aside or another country will destroy theirs and force them in line. Or make them into slaves.

>THANKS FOR AGREEING WITH ME
>I LOVE THIS!!!
you sound a little like SJWs

Depends more on the place and which side of the relationship you are on. Philip of Macedon and his son, Alexander the Great, both openly had boyfriends and several wives. Caesar's own army jokingly sung about him being the Queen of Bithynia, and that "Caesar laid the Gauls low, Nicomedes laid Caesar low". This of course might have just been slander against him by his political opponents. Then you have the Germanic tribesmen who would throw queers into bogs.

Attached: 1520214296856.jpg (700x644, 170K)