Let's All Watch A Fedora Man Destroy Himself Online

[Orogun01]

What I learned from this thread:
People are so self centered that can't even seem to communicate and have to project faults to protect their ego.

I expect that in the future, relationships will be a thing of the past and everyone is their own self sufficient island. Way to go Humanity!

[Amentep]

What I learned from this thread:

People are so self centered that can't even seem to communicate and have to project faults to protect their ego.

 

I expect that in the future, relationships will be a thing of the past and everyone is their own self sufficient island. Way to go Humanity!

"in the future"?

[Nonek]

I expect that in the future, relationships will be a thing of the past and everyone is their own self sufficient island.

 

No man is an Island.

 

 

 

Except when he's in the bath.

[Walsingham]

 

" I grab the dame by the shoulders like THIS, see? And she gets hysterical, so I have to slap her around to calm her down. And then I kiss her so hard I bruise her teeth."

 

(Old Harry's Game)

[Orogun01]

 

I expect that in the future, relationships will be a thing of the past and everyone is their own self sufficient island.

 

No man is an Island.

 

 

 

Except when he's in the bath.

 

I think Japan is an excellent example of what will become commonplace if relationships continue to dwindle. Lot of markets to supply the demand for a relationship experience without having an actual one. It seems modern life (and in some ways emancipation) has made people reluctant to enter in a relationship or just incapably inadequate for one.

[Blarghagh]

Urgh, nothing is worse than entitled geeks. When will they ever learn that if your thought process is "what the hell is wrong with these stupid bitches I'm interested in that only go for the jerks instead of a smart, nice guy like me" then you are neither smart nor nice.

 

Not to say the rebuttal was any better. That was grasping for straws for counter-arguments and hitting none. Written by a person who is obviously not good at thinking things through. Still better than that entitled, worthless geek.

Edited April 25, 2014 by TrueNeutral

[Nonek]

Personally I think there will always be a certain percentage who naturally pair bond, and a certain percentage whom are (for wont of a better word) loners, and that what we are seeing in the modern age is a natural extension of this. In previous times we had quite large societal pressures to follow (and we all know mankind generally does,) but now we are simply following our natural urges. Of course there will be individuals who want one state and yet due to various factors, including possibly their own inherent lack of charisma as in the case illustrated in the OP, cannot attain that. But life rarely gives what one wants anyway.

 

I'm split on whether this is a good or bad thing. Many of us will be children of divorce or unhappy marriage, where the participants were quite obviously unprepared, unsuitable or unwanting of such a commitment. Is being reared in such an environment healthy? Still more pertinent is the fact that maybe a reduced birth rate may well be a good thing, for the planet and the race, but that is extremely debatable.

 

Certainly society is changing to accomodate these people, and traditional family units are passing away, but then again in many countries society is in general re-organising itself. I'm not sure of the outcome, all I know is that if i've had to suffer many years of marriage so should everybody else!

[Malcador]

A $100 steak and not even a handjob? This dude needs to up his game.

 

Or just find reliable hookers.

[Orogun01]

 

A $100 steak and not even a handjob? This dude needs to up his game.

 

Or just find reliable hookers.

 

Honestly if it wasn't illegal and if feminist would raise such a fuss I think prostitution would take off like a firestorm.

[JadedWolf]

 

 

A $100 steak and not even a handjob? This dude needs to up his game.

 

Or just find reliable hookers.

 

Honestly if it wasn't illegal and if feminist would raise such a fuss I think prostitution would take off like a firestorm.

 

 

Over here prostitution is legal. The idea was that girls who wanted to earn their money that way could work in controlled, save conditions and no one would be hurt.

 

Sadly, what actually happened was that our red light districts became magnets for gangs that lure girls from Eastern Europe and other poorer parts of the world this way with the promise of a good life, take away their passports, and force them to service as many men as possible in one night. And if they are lucky, they get to actually keep a few euros from all the money they earn after the gangs take their share.

[Orogun01]

Isn't the industry regulated or do the police take a blind eye to that sort of stuff?

[pmp10]

Personally I think there will always be a certain percentage who naturally pair bond, and a certain percentage whom are (for wont of a better word) loners, and that what we are seeing in the modern age is a natural extension of this. In previous times we had quite large societal pressures to follow (and we all know mankind generally does,) but now we are simply following our natural urges. Of course there will be individuals who want one state and yet due to various factors, including possibly their own inherent lack of charisma as in the case illustrated in the OP, cannot attain that. But life rarely gives what one wants anyway.

Historically marriage was less about social pressures and more about economy.

Transfer of property has always been absolutely vital in making the wealth of families.

 

Modern times simply reversed the cost/benefit ratio of marriage.

Today you are more likely to lose property in a divorce than gain anything substantial.

And unlike in the past rising children costs a fortune but produces little benefits.

 

The only thing that awaits us in the future are state-run reproduction programs.

[JadedWolf]

It's quite a complex matter, really. Girls don't really dare to come forward and the community they belong to is closed to outsiders. And even though the police does manage to dismantle some gangs and does manage to take some girls out of prostitution, they can't seem to keep up.

 

It's not just the foreign gangs either. There's also the "lover boys", who seduce young girls, promise them the moon, shower them with gifts - and then slowly groom them to be prostitutes and piggybanks. "You know I really love you, but all those gifts were expensive, and we really need to make some money, babe..."

[Orogun01]

Do they have women's sanctuaries or some place which offers housing to girls trying to get out from the streets?

[JadedWolf]

Do they have women's sanctuaries or some place which offers housing to girls trying to get out from the streets?

 

Yes, there have been shelters here for ages, and billboards asking clients who suspect prostitutes to be abused to report their suspicions.

 

The problem is the stranglehold the pimps have on their prostitutes, and the unwillingness and fear of the women to come forward.

[Orogun01]

 

Do they have women's sanctuaries or some place which offers housing to girls trying to get out from the streets?

 

Yes, there have been shelters here for ages, and billboards asking clients who suspect prostitutes to be abused to report their suspicions.

 

The problem is the stranglehold the pimps have on their prostitutes, and the unwillingness and fear of the women to come forward.

 

Do you think that making prostitution illegal will improve the problem?

[JadedWolf]

 

 

Do they have women's sanctuaries or some place which offers housing to girls trying to get out from the streets?

 

Yes, there have been shelters here for ages, and billboards asking clients who suspect prostitutes to be abused to report their suspicions.

 

The problem is the stranglehold the pimps have on their prostitutes, and the unwillingness and fear of the women to come forward.

 

Do you think that making prostitution illegal will improve the problem?

 

 

Well, there is talk of doing a complete turn-about and switching to the Swedish model, where visiting prostitutes is illegal and it's the clients who are prosecuted. I doubt it would be effective. For one, we have no idea how effective the model is. It is claimed to be a success, but does that mean prostitution really went away or that it has been driven deeper underground?

 

As for what the solution is? I have no idea, but I think Amsterdam should really try to get rid of the image it has of a city of vice. The fact that so many youngsters come to Amsterdam to get wasted and visit prostitutes is exactly what makes the forced prostitution so lucrative.

[Rostere]

Well, there is talk of doing a complete turn-about and switching to the Swedish model, where visiting prostitutes is illegal and it's the clients who are prosecuted. I doubt it would be effective. For one, we have no idea how effective the model is. It is claimed to be a success, but does that mean prostitution really went away or that it has been driven deeper underground?

 

As for what the solution is? I have no idea, but I think Amsterdam should really try to get rid of the image it has of a city of vice. The fact that so many youngsters come to Amsterdam to get wasted and visit prostitutes is exactly what makes the forced prostitution so lucrative.

 

It's a tough problem to solve, but in the end I think some kind of regulation is needed.

 

But really, the best way would be to make visiting an enslaved prostitute so socially abhorred nobody would do it.

[Nonek]

 

Personally I think there will always be a certain percentage who naturally pair bond, and a certain percentage whom are (for wont of a better word) loners, and that what we are seeing in the modern age is a natural extension of this. In previous times we had quite large societal pressures to follow (and we all know mankind generally does,) but now we are simply following our natural urges. Of course there will be individuals who want one state and yet due to various factors, including possibly their own inherent lack of charisma as in the case illustrated in the OP, cannot attain that. But life rarely gives what one wants anyway.

 

Historically marriage was less about social pressures and more about economy.

Transfer of property has always been absolutely vital in making the wealth of families.

 

Modern times simply reversed the cost/benefit ratio of marriage.

Today you are more likely to lose property in a divorce than gain anything substantial.

And unlike in the past rising children costs a fortune but produces little benefits.

 

The only thing that awaits us in the future are state-run reproduction programs.

 

 

I agree on the financial aspect, both in terms of marriage being a costly affair, divorce even more so and children being an extremely unwise investment. Half an hour of joy and eighteen years of misery as they say. However I think there are other factors to consider: The urge to do what's right for a young man who trusts his paramour with birth control, though this was more of an issue in my youth than now. The urge to partake of the only form of immortality we know that works, that being reproduction. The societal ideal of the perfect mate and life that we still see trumpeted in every form of media, wherein the bachelor or spinster are treated as the outsider to be disdained and shunned. Etcetera.

[Bryy]

I don't know if it was outrage or people going "Hell yeah!  You tell 'em!" in agreement or what.

Just be glad I didn't chose to link to the guy that wrote a strongly worded letter to someone that made My Little Pony porn... because he was engaged to Twilight Sparkle and it offended him.

[Walsingham]

I genuinely don't see why marriages shouldn't be an 8 year contract. Or at most 10 years.

 

 

I think most people who were serious would get to the first re-up. In fact I think it would help. No more feeling antsy. No more blame game if you split.

[JadedWolf]

I genuinely don't see why marriages shouldn't be an 8 year contract. Or at most 10 years.

 

 

I think most people who were serious would get to the first re-up. In fact I think it would help. No more feeling antsy. No more blame game if you split.

 

 

To follow up on that, let's make it mandatory for couples to have to go to a special office where they are put through a thorough verbal exam before they are allowed to even think of having children. The first question should be what they plan to do with the child when they inevitably split up.

 

Another question could be:

 

"You are in a supermarket, your child is crying for that candy they had their eye on, what do you do?"

 

The answer to that question in particular should decide whether they would be allowed to have children or not.

 

(In case you're wondering, I am only half joking).

[Nonek]

 

Another question could be:

 

"You are in a supermarket, your child is crying for that candy they had their eye on, what do you do?"

 

 

Slap the child forcefully, pick him or her up by the nape of the neck and roar at them that sweets are not called "candy." Then sell the child into living death in an Abyssinian slave mine.

 

But with regular beatings and verbal admonsihments the child should really never be lifting their eyes or talking.

[Malcador]

I would give them the candy for a minute then take it away. Then tell them "welcome to the real world".

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I would eat the candy in front of them.