Since modern women have given themselves unto the evils of liberalism it is only natural for Men to seek alternatives especially if you take note that Men are rejecting liberalism it would seem to be only a matter of time until advances in genetic engineering and computer science bring about Monstergirls and Robowaifus replacing human women https://theweek.com/politics/conservative-men-liberal-women also post Monstergirls/Robowaifus and yes this thread is political https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanist_politics
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
47 replies | 4 files | 18 UUIDs | Page 10
Be a part of the engineering team that makes horse robowaifus possible at:
Alogs.space/robowaifu
Trashchan.xyz/robowaifu
Alogs.space/robowaifu
Trashchan.xyz/robowaifu
I may say that while humanoid robowaifus are the primary focus of /robowaifu/ , we also have at least 3 pone enthusiasts (one is a Mod there, btw).
>tl;dr
Pones (and /pol/acks!) welcome.
-t. Chobitsu
P.S. OG bread-related from back in the day:
>>>/cyb/401 →
>tl;dr
Pones (and /pol/acks!) welcome.
-t. Chobitsu
P.S. OG bread-related from back in the day:
>>>/cyb/401 →
The idea of Robowaifus is interesting.
The fundamental problem is that women, especially as they currently are in modern society, are consistently unreasonable, and have almost no-one telling them "no". The world was restructured to redistribute most economic and social authority and opportunity to them while men/boys have been systematically demoralized over generations through all possible forms of attack.
In order to make women understand the utility and need for men, they need to personally experience a collapse of civilization scenario. Thankfully, that's well on it's way to happening.
Traditionally, we need to either artificially decrease the supply of men (normally through generational wars), artificially increase the supply of women (robowaifus), or maintain social authority/privileges in line with responsibilities such that women are, generally, of a less significant social status than men.
Removing women's artificially induced status would mean basically destroying all the things Feminism has done. Unfortunately, most people seem to have been raised for generations to find this concept deeply, often violently, heretical.
Artificially increasing the supply of women in society via the use of robo-waifus seems to be the least monstrous way of plastering over the societal stresses caused by women refusing to uphold their traditional trades in civilizational survival. I'm in favour of this as a concept.
Feminists do hate the idea of sex dolls, and even "girlfriend" roleplay chatbots. This is because it takes away from the power they have over men. They hated the idea of men's masturbatory tools like fleshlights, finding it disgusting, while having no negative words to day about dildos.
I mention this because Feminists will be one of the biggest public-facing lobby groups trying to oppose waifubots, and a fairly clear understanding of the thinking could be needed to understand why it's not worth listening to their complaints, no matter what shallow and ultimately nonsensical justifications they invent to justify their feelings of losing power over men.
The fundamental problem is that women, especially as they currently are in modern society, are consistently unreasonable, and have almost no-one telling them "no". The world was restructured to redistribute most economic and social authority and opportunity to them while men/boys have been systematically demoralized over generations through all possible forms of attack.
In order to make women understand the utility and need for men, they need to personally experience a collapse of civilization scenario. Thankfully, that's well on it's way to happening.
Traditionally, we need to either artificially decrease the supply of men (normally through generational wars), artificially increase the supply of women (robowaifus), or maintain social authority/privileges in line with responsibilities such that women are, generally, of a less significant social status than men.
Removing women's artificially induced status would mean basically destroying all the things Feminism has done. Unfortunately, most people seem to have been raised for generations to find this concept deeply, often violently, heretical.
Artificially increasing the supply of women in society via the use of robo-waifus seems to be the least monstrous way of plastering over the societal stresses caused by women refusing to uphold their traditional trades in civilizational survival. I'm in favour of this as a concept.
Feminists do hate the idea of sex dolls, and even "girlfriend" roleplay chatbots. This is because it takes away from the power they have over men. They hated the idea of men's masturbatory tools like fleshlights, finding it disgusting, while having no negative words to day about dildos.
I mention this because Feminists will be one of the biggest public-facing lobby groups trying to oppose waifubots, and a fairly clear understanding of the thinking could be needed to understand why it's not worth listening to their complaints, no matter what shallow and ultimately nonsensical justifications they invent to justify their feelings of losing power over men.
>>386644
>Traditionally, we need to either artificially decrease the supply of men (normally through generational wars), artificially increase the supply of women (robowaifus), or maintain social authority/privileges in line with responsibilities such that women are, generally, of a less significant social status than men.
Why?
>Traditionally, we need to either artificially decrease the supply of men (normally through generational wars), artificially increase the supply of women (robowaifus), or maintain social authority/privileges in line with responsibilities such that women are, generally, of a less significant social status than men.
Why?
>>386644
>a fairly clear understanding of the thinking could be needed to understand why it's not worth listening to their complaints
Preaching to the choir. I don't think anyone who is in favor of sexbots or robowaifus or what have you takes feminist's opinions seriously. The problem is that the simps in power do.
>a fairly clear understanding of the thinking could be needed to understand why it's not worth listening to their complaints
Preaching to the choir. I don't think anyone who is in favor of sexbots or robowaifus or what have you takes feminist's opinions seriously. The problem is that the simps in power do.
>>386644
If women complain about sex robots just turn it around on them "it's not hurting anyone and it prevents the creepy men from harassing you"
If women complain about sex robots just turn it around on them "it's not hurting anyone and it prevents the creepy men from harassing you"
>>386653
Otherwise, women will think they are so much better than men that they will refuse to form families with them.
Men are taller and stronger than women. If you remember your biology lessons, this means that humans are a tournament mating species. This means that the "natural order" according to our base instincts is for a small number of men to have almost ALL the access to women in a harem style of civilization, while the other men do not have a chance to reproduce.
We have been able to rise above animality, rise high enough to build a civilization, by enacting the concept of "marriage". A monogamist pair bonding between men and women to form families. This gives all men a reason to value the continued well-being of society.
Without the overwhelming majority of men proactively and willingly co-operating to build and maintain civilization, humanity will devolve into a savage animal-like state.
The way to ensure this co-operation is to give every man a long term stake in society. The best method we've figured out in human history is a strongly patriarchal society with male authority/responsibility and one wife per husband.
Do you know what hypergamy is?
Otherwise, women will think they are so much better than men that they will refuse to form families with them.
Men are taller and stronger than women. If you remember your biology lessons, this means that humans are a tournament mating species. This means that the "natural order" according to our base instincts is for a small number of men to have almost ALL the access to women in a harem style of civilization, while the other men do not have a chance to reproduce.
We have been able to rise above animality, rise high enough to build a civilization, by enacting the concept of "marriage". A monogamist pair bonding between men and women to form families. This gives all men a reason to value the continued well-being of society.
Without the overwhelming majority of men proactively and willingly co-operating to build and maintain civilization, humanity will devolve into a savage animal-like state.
The way to ensure this co-operation is to give every man a long term stake in society. The best method we've figured out in human history is a strongly patriarchal society with male authority/responsibility and one wife per husband.
Do you know what hypergamy is?
>>386677
>The way to ensure this co-operation is to give every man a long term stake in society. The best method we've figured out in human history is a strongly patriarchal society with male authority/responsibility and one wife per husband.
Throughout history this has been the case, but I think our leaders have realized this isn't possible to go back to. Hence why they are speed running the singularity. See >383887
>The way to ensure this co-operation is to give every man a long term stake in society. The best method we've figured out in human history is a strongly patriarchal society with male authority/responsibility and one wife per husband.
Throughout history this has been the case, but I think our leaders have realized this isn't possible to go back to. Hence why they are speed running the singularity. See >383887
>>386682
>What made you think it wasn't their goal from the beggining?
Because the technology to make the singularity possible wasn't even closer to existing when feminism took off.
>What made you think it wasn't their goal from the beggining?
Because the technology to make the singularity possible wasn't even closer to existing when feminism took off.
>>386684
When you think about it, it fits.
>feminism reduces patriarchy
>reducing patriarchy reduces patriarchal religion
>reducing patriarchal religion reduces civilization
>reducing civilization reduces everybody's lifestyle
Fear of the loss of lifestyle will make normies demand for singularity.
When you think about it, it fits.
>feminism reduces patriarchy
>reducing patriarchy reduces patriarchal religion
>reducing patriarchal religion reduces civilization
>reducing civilization reduces everybody's lifestyle
Fear of the loss of lifestyle will make normies demand for singularity.
>>386686
How could they have planned for the singularity when at the time of feminism it wasn't even known if such technology was even possible? Pretty sure no one was planning to live forever with genetic engineering and AI in the late 1840's...
How could they have planned for the singularity when at the time of feminism it wasn't even known if such technology was even possible? Pretty sure no one was planning to live forever with genetic engineering and AI in the late 1840's...
>>386677
> Do you know what hypergamy is?
nigger, just have self-respect and you'll find a girl
if day in, day out you're focusing on all the misgivings of women (or others) you're not focusing on your own progress. If you can't get a woman it's almost always because you lack self-respect. The only way to cultivate self-respect is to willingly fail and yet try again and keep trying and never give up. It's messy and scary but every day you lock yourself inside and study all the ways in which women are wrong, you're not living.
> Do you know what hypergamy is?
nigger, just have self-respect and you'll find a girl
if day in, day out you're focusing on all the misgivings of women (or others) you're not focusing on your own progress. If you can't get a woman it's almost always because you lack self-respect. The only way to cultivate self-respect is to willingly fail and yet try again and keep trying and never give up. It's messy and scary but every day you lock yourself inside and study all the ways in which women are wrong, you're not living.
>>386691
Hindu pajeet legends say all kinds of silly shit. I wouldn't go basing my understanding of reality of what a pajeet from thousands of years ago said. Singularity has not been obtained before. We should be treating this as something new.
Hindu pajeet legends say all kinds of silly shit. I wouldn't go basing my understanding of reality of what a pajeet from thousands of years ago said. Singularity has not been obtained before. We should be treating this as something new.
>>386697
It's a better theory than aliens, but we shouldn't look to the past for answers when those answers don't exist. Singularity is new and it is going to change things differently from anything we have seen before. Any ideas to wade the waters ahead must also be new.
It's a better theory than aliens, but we shouldn't look to the past for answers when those answers don't exist. Singularity is new and it is going to change things differently from anything we have seen before. Any ideas to wade the waters ahead must also be new.
>>386704
To be honest I don't think it's a coincidence the ones who finance feminism are also the ones who finance big AGI.
To be honest I don't think it's a coincidence the ones who finance feminism are also the ones who finance big AGI.
>>386705
A lot of different people finance AGI. The reason for the overlap is because both feminism and AGI reduce the cost of labor.
A lot of different people finance AGI. The reason for the overlap is because both feminism and AGI reduce the cost of labor.
>>386706
Also because they're anti-human.
Feminism is essentially civilizational sabotage. The biggest aid to feminism was the hormonal birth control pill. Feminism is a cognitohazard that, if left unchecked, traditionally destroys a civilization in about three generations.
AI is another way to replace the useful intelligent labouring whites with a lifeless automaton. It also serves a transhumanist agenda, to let people "transfer their consciousness" to new perpetual forms and obtain a form of immortality.
There are a lot of bad things happening, and a lot of bad (and stupid) people involved.
So many wild paradigm shifts and threats are happening simultaneously, and have been happening over the last two hundred or more years, that it's hard to keep track of.
Having a robowaifu to talk to about this would help to contextualize this all.
Also because they're anti-human.
Feminism is essentially civilizational sabotage. The biggest aid to feminism was the hormonal birth control pill. Feminism is a cognitohazard that, if left unchecked, traditionally destroys a civilization in about three generations.
AI is another way to replace the useful intelligent labouring whites with a lifeless automaton. It also serves a transhumanist agenda, to let people "transfer their consciousness" to new perpetual forms and obtain a form of immortality.
There are a lot of bad things happening, and a lot of bad (and stupid) people involved.
So many wild paradigm shifts and threats are happening simultaneously, and have been happening over the last two hundred or more years, that it's hard to keep track of.
Having a robowaifu to talk to about this would help to contextualize this all.
>>386709
Sure the CCP is financing it too, but just because people you don't like fund the technology does not mean the technology is evil in and of itself. The motivation for funding this stuff is simply cheap labor.
Sure the CCP is financing it too, but just because people you don't like fund the technology does not mean the technology is evil in and of itself. The motivation for funding this stuff is simply cheap labor.
>>386711
>AI is another way to replace the useful intelligent labouring whites with a lifeless automaton.
Agreed. Definitely part of the reason the kikes fund it, but there doesn't seem to be any stopping it.
>It also serves a transhumanist agenda, to let people "transfer their consciousness" to new perpetual forms and obtain a form of immortality.
Mind uploading is a pipe dream. The real AI path to immortality is biotech. AI generated senolytics will be the money maker here.
>AI is another way to replace the useful intelligent labouring whites with a lifeless automaton.
Agreed. Definitely part of the reason the kikes fund it, but there doesn't seem to be any stopping it.
>It also serves a transhumanist agenda, to let people "transfer their consciousness" to new perpetual forms and obtain a form of immortality.
Mind uploading is a pipe dream. The real AI path to immortality is biotech. AI generated senolytics will be the money maker here.
>>386712
If the long term ramifications is evil then we have to conclude our best interests aren't on their minds.
If the long term ramifications is evil then we have to conclude our best interests aren't on their minds.
>>386714
Why would they long term ramifications be evil? And we should move this discussion to the transhumanism thread. >>383887 →
Why would they long term ramifications be evil? And we should move this discussion to the transhumanism thread. >>383887 →
>>386715
In theory, they should've known technology can and will disrupt society and if they've known and made big money out of it, it's logically to assume they aren't going to stop.
In theory, they should've known technology can and will disrupt society and if they've known and made big money out of it, it's logically to assume they aren't going to stop.
>>386717
Disruptions are not necessarily bad especially if that disruption is about to end the power of feminism and give people a real incentive to participate again. Again. >>383887 → →
Disruptions are not necessarily bad especially if that disruption is about to end the power of feminism and give people a real incentive to participate again. Again. >>383887 → →
>>386720
Can you tell me why disruption in and of itself is bad? The enlightenment was a disrupting force and for all the flaws of the modern world we are still better off than we would have been under fuedalism. If you think this will be bad then simply explain your reasoning.
Can you tell me why disruption in and of itself is bad? The enlightenment was a disrupting force and for all the flaws of the modern world we are still better off than we would have been under fuedalism. If you think this will be bad then simply explain your reasoning.
>>386723
I didn't say the enlightenment was beyond question or that everything about it was good, but all and all we are better off because of it. I like air conditioning and antibiotics.
I didn't say the enlightenment was beyond question or that everything about it was good, but all and all we are better off because of it. I like air conditioning and antibiotics.
>>386726
What about "the trail of money" makes you distrust this? And what makes you think we can't put this kind of technology to use?
What about "the trail of money" makes you distrust this? And what makes you think we can't put this kind of technology to use?
>>386727
If they can pay for it to be made they can pay for it to be made however they see fit and this means programmable digital currency and spyware robo-waifus.
If they can pay for it to be made they can pay for it to be made however they see fit and this means programmable digital currency and spyware robo-waifus.
>>386729
Then help make the robowaifus yourself or create propaganda for the /robowaifu/ community so those who can will start building the robowaifus.
Then help make the robowaifus yourself or create propaganda for the /robowaifu/ community so those who can will start building the robowaifus.
>>384497
I skimmed those boards and didn't see any quadrupeds (which would be a lot easier than a biped)
I skimmed those boards and didn't see any quadrupeds (which would be a lot easier than a biped)
>>384496
Software is the current limitations. There are open source quadrupeds that do the dumb tip toe walk.
The hard part is training AI models on simulations so it can walk smoothly.
Software is the current limitations. There are open source quadrupeds that do the dumb tip toe walk.
The hard part is training AI models on simulations so it can walk smoothly.
It really is odd to see people unironically psyoped into making every aspect of their lives a form of culture war.
Women are turning to monsterfuckery too, and trying to justify it with precisely this same premise but replace liberalism with machismo. Ad libbable marketing demographic brainworms derailed into an ideology of it's own.
Why do you feel guilt for liking things that bring you pleasure?
Women are turning to monsterfuckery too, and trying to justify it with precisely this same premise but replace liberalism with machismo. Ad libbable marketing demographic brainworms derailed into an ideology of it's own.
Why do you feel guilt for liking things that bring you pleasure?
>>386694
The Indian Pajeets today have No Relation ethnically to the People who recorded those legends.
>>386704
>"...we shouldn't look to the past for answers when those answers don't exist."
But how do we know those answers don't exist in the past if we refuse to look. Many ancient legends tackle subjects that are only now(to are admitted limited knowledge) coming to fruition, such as the Suomi legend of the Golden maid made by Ilmarinen or Greek servant tripods serving the gods. There's too many stories about things happening now in the ancient past for me to say definitively that there has never been a time like ours. Whom does it hurt to look?
The Indian Pajeets today have No Relation ethnically to the People who recorded those legends.
>>386704
>"...we shouldn't look to the past for answers when those answers don't exist."
But how do we know those answers don't exist in the past if we refuse to look. Many ancient legends tackle subjects that are only now(to are admitted limited knowledge) coming to fruition, such as the Suomi legend of the Golden maid made by Ilmarinen or Greek servant tripods serving the gods. There's too many stories about things happening now in the ancient past for me to say definitively that there has never been a time like ours. Whom does it hurt to look?
>>387062
>Whom does it hurt to look?
Well if we look to superstitious ancient legends for solutions to very really modern advancements then those solutions might not be very effective.
>Whom does it hurt to look?
Well if we look to superstitious ancient legends for solutions to very really modern advancements then those solutions might not be very effective.
>>387062
Correct Indo-Iranians aka Aryans were from far north of India. They are unrelated to the dravidian Indians people think of when talking about street shitters. Aryans are European Arabs.
>>387071
>modern advancements
>telephones are 200 years old
>electric carriages are 200 years old
What advancements? The really fancy typewriter?
Correct Indo-Iranians aka Aryans were from far north of India. They are unrelated to the dravidian Indians people think of when talking about street shitters. Aryans are European Arabs.
>>387071
>modern advancements
>telephones are 200 years old
>electric carriages are 200 years old
What advancements? The really fancy typewriter?
>>387117
No. I've never seen a woman actually be into blacked stuff, that seems like a purely audience serving thing.
No. I've never seen a woman actually be into blacked stuff, that seems like a purely audience serving thing.
>>387140
>What advancements? The really fancy typewriter?
The data analysis tool that can also pass the turing test. Try to pay attention.
>What advancements? The really fancy typewriter?
The data analysis tool that can also pass the turing test. Try to pay attention.
this thread glows (see: transhumanist Technocratic agenda)