# Sexual energy



## HypernovaGirl (May 9, 2016)

In the happiest and healthiest phases of my life I was very sexual. 
I don’t really understand why, in a psychological sense. I don’t masturbate often, I didn’t feel particularly emotionally connected to all of my partners, it was mainly hormones, it seems.
Looking back I notice that the happier I was the more sex I wanted and sex fulfilled something important in me.
Lately, I haven’t been as happy and coincidentally not as sexual.
I would appreciate some input from scientists saying if lack of sex or sex that isn’t fulfilling has a negative impact on one’s health.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

I am not going to say about science--though I think there is lots of information about it. Maybe later.

But what you said sort of reminded me of the concept of libido as a sort of energy source...just the metaphysical concept of libido as life force.

I think Maslow's heirarchy of needs is sort of messed up because he put reproduction at the bottom along with survival. If I was trying to survive--reproduction is not the first thing I would try to take care of in my hierarchy of needs. Because it would likely threaten my survival (as well as that of the offspring). 

To me, sex would be far above the lowest rung of the hierarchy of needs, because being drained in other areas of my life (feeling unsafe or threatened, lacking in physical resources needed for my own sustenance etc...)all this inhibits sex drive or the desire to be in a romantic or sexual relationships.

So for me, sexual desire isn't really even a thing unless I feel some level of security in my life.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WickerDeer said:


> I am not going to say about science--though I think there is lots of information about it. Maybe later.
> 
> But what you said sort of reminded me of the concept of libido as a sort of energy source...just the metaphysical concept of libido as life force.
> 
> ...


But haven't we somewhat separated the urge to have sex from the urge to reproduce? One is a survival trait and the other is an intensely pleasurable act that may or may not be about building intimacy with a partner, or it may just be "mutual masterbation."

As for the OP, sure I can see where when you're happier, wanting sex becomes something you desire, but when you're not happy, the urge diminishes.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> But haven't we somewhat separated the urge to have sex from the urge to reproduce? One is a survival trait and the other is an intensely pleasurable act that may or may not be about building intimacy with a partner, or it may just be "mutual masterbation."
> 
> As for the OP, sure I can see where when you're happier, wanting sex becomes something you desire, but when you're not happy, the urge diminishes.


I do think they are separate, but I was trying to build off of Maslow's concept, where I think they would be combined.

Personally, I do find that sexual urge also diminishes though when I do not feel safe. If I feel threatened or as if I need to focus more on my survival, I do not feel sexual desire any longer.

At first I explained it as sexual desire being higher on Maslow's pyramid, but then I saw he had reproduction down at the bottom...so both as sexual desire and also as desire for actual reproduction--that part of his hierarchy makes no sense to me.

But I can see it as perhaps having the true physiological needs fulfilled, opening up to things like sexual desire, which imo is beyond just physiological for me.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WickerDeer said:


> I do think they are separate, but I was trying to build off of Maslow's concept, where I think they would be combined.
> 
> Personally, I do find that sexual urge also diminishes though when I do not feel safe. If I feel threatened or as if I need to focus more on my survival, I do not feel sexual desire any longer.
> 
> ...


I'm going to say that a strong intimate sexual relationship goes way beyond just love and belonging needs and can actually carry on through both our esteem needs, and self-actualization. Being completely loved and trusted by another human being to the point where you can bare yourself completely and feel the light of their love wash over you (and vice-versa) can influence a person to be a much greater person than they might be alone.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> I'm going to say that a strong intimate sexual relationship goes way beyond just love and belonging needs and can actually carry on through both our esteem needs, and self-actualization. Being completely loved and trusted by another human being to the point where you can bare yourself completely and feel the light of their love wash over you (and vice-versa) can influence a person to be a much greater person than they might be alone.


But would you say that if you were in a position where you feared for your own survival, as in the lowest wrung of Maslow's hierarchy is being threatened, that you would feel the desire for this sefl-actualization?

I know that for myself, I do not feel I can afford to be concerned with that when I feel threatened or unsafe. That is my point. It shuts down my libido as well as the romantic desire for me...and to be honest, much of my desire for human connection.

I also tend to be unhappy at times like that, to say the least.

I guess it might not really apply to the topic though, and it probably goes without saying for most people that feeling one may be in mortal danger can kill the libido.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WickerDeer said:


> But would you say that if you were in a position where you feared for your own survival, as in the lowest wrung of Maslow's hierarchy is being threatened, that you would feel the desire for this sefl-actualization?
> 
> I know that for myself, I do not feel I can afford to be concerned with that when I feel threatened or unsafe. That is my point. It shuts down my libido as well as the romantic desire for me...and to be honest, much of my desire for human connection.
> 
> I also tend to be unhappy at times like that, to say the least.


Absolutely. According to Maslow, the lower needs have to be met before you can ascend to the higher ones. I agree, if you feel like you aren't getting these other needs met, it can greatly decrease your libido.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Absolutely. According to Maslow, the lower needs have to be met before you can ascend to the higher ones. I agree, if you feel like you aren't getting these other needs met, it can greatly decrease your libido.


I agree too. Perhaps Maslow would have put the sexual desire somewhere else, but I was confused because he put "reproduction" on the bottom. I was trying to argue what you said (you said it more concisely), here.

I have found that when I am concerned about my own survival, I lose interest in romance, love, sex, and even friendship.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

WickerDeer said:


> I agree too. Perhaps Maslow would have put the sexual desire somewhere else, but I was confused because he put "reproduction" on the bottom. I was trying to argue what you said (you said it more concisely), here.
> 
> I have found that when I am concerned about my own survival, I lose interest in romance, love, sex, and even friendship.


Have you ever gone through a survival situation with a partner and emerged on the other side safe and sound, and found yourself with a strong "urge to merge" as a result?


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Have you ever gone through a survival situation with a partner and emerged on the other side safe and sound, and found yourself with a strong "urge to merge" as a result?


I don't think I've felt that as strongly--I do think some people might do that. Maybe I have--I don't really remember it markedly though.

Isn't there the stereotype that people watch horror films on dates, and then maybe because stereotypically the girl is frightened, the man sort of becomes her support so it is romantic? I've never watched horror films though and in my personal experience, it kind of creeps me out and does the opposite.

Though I suppose in those survival instances, recognizing trust is a libido enhancer--knowing who to trust and who isn't a threat. So perhaps that is part of it.

Often times I've found I require more reassurance--even if a partner goes away for a few days it's almost like I am a goldfish that needs to meet them again, get to know them etc. I just don't change modes very quickly, maybe.

My libido is strongest when I am alone and safe, I think. I don't find a huge difference in libido when I'm in a relationship and when I am not.

I would say I probably have a higher libido when I am happier--and when I have time to explore my own feelings, understand them, process them, and connect with those higher impulses (I do agree with what you said about it being much more than (or separate than) reproduction, and also more than dry definitions of emotional support etc.) Or perhaps when I felt most hopeful about a relationship--like that perhaps this person is the right person (the soul mate etc.) Of course it also makes some cynical sense that would happen more in my imagination since lol it doesn't seem to have happened in reality.

(but then again, I haven't had sex in about a decade now so I have probably forgotten what it is like to have a libido in a relationship)


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Maslow was talking about ensuring the species survives, not simply having sex and it’s more about biological needs tbh. You need food, water, shelter and to propagate the species. I do think that it should be in a different level because if I’m wondering where my next meal is coming from, having babies is definitely not on my mind. 


There’s definitely been research linking libido to mood, especially in those with clinical depression. 
But it’s also a mood elevator. 
I don’t think there’s a straight answer because this will be different for everyone


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Have you ever gone through a survival situation with a partner and emerged on the other side safe and sound, and found yourself with a strong "urge to merge" as a result?


Sex is listed as one of the most common things that happen after funerals or death of a loved one.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Queen of Cups said:


> Sex is listed as one of the most common things that happen after funerals or death of a loved one.


The boomer generation was the result of the survival cycle.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

mia-me said:


> The boomer generation was the result of the survival cycle.


"Pip-Pop came home from the war and then they had our parents. Our parents are called the baby boomers because Pip-Pop came home from Normandy and he was like, “I’m not dead. Boom, Gladys, let’s fuck.”

- Iliza Shlesinger


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

HypernovaGirl said:


> In the happiest and healthiest phases of my life I was very sexual.
> I don’t really understand why, in a psychological sense. I don’t masturbate often, *I didn’t feel particularly emotionally connected to all of my partners, it was mainly hormones*, it seems.
> Looking back I notice that the happier I was the more sex I wanted and sex fulfilled something important in me.
> Lately, I haven’t been as happy and coincidentally not as sexual.
> I would appreciate some input from scientists saying if lack of sex or sex that isn’t fulfilling has a negative impact on one’s health.


Premised on the bolded, your issue might be associated to the cortisol/testosterone negative interplay. Cortisol is produced by the body when someone's stressed and in doing so, it can lower your T levels. Lower T levels equate to reduced sexual desire.


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

mia-me said:


> Premised on the bolded, your issue might be associated to the cortisol/testosterone negative interplay. Cortisol is produced by the body when someone's stressed and in doing so, it can lower your T levels. Lower T levels equate to reduced sexual desire.


Much of this is controlled by the endocrine system, but teasing apart exactly how hormonal changes affect mood and behavior is complex. Have you found good/in-depth material on the subject that you can share? It’s fascinating.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Squirt said:


> Much of this is controlled by the endocrine system, but teasing apart exactly how hormonal changes affect mood and behavior is complex. Have you found good/in-depth material on the subject that you can share? It’s fascinating.


Too lazy to pull it up but the two hormones tap from the same precursor, specifically, prenenolone. So, one can call them competing hormones.


----------



## Rascal01 (May 22, 2016)

tanstaafl28 said:


> But haven't we somewhat separated the urge to have sex from the urge to reproduce? One is a survival trait and the other is an intensely pleasurable act that may or may not be about building intimacy with a partner, or it may just be "mutual masterbation."
> 
> As for the OP, sure I can see where when you're happier, wanting sex becomes something you desire, but when you're not happy, the urge diminishes.


I can’t say I ever had the urge or desire to reproduce. I found the desire and need for sex to be completely natural and normal. My testosterone level must have been off the charts and my sex drive had far more control over me than I had over it. The thought of children never entered my mind, other than not wanting an accidental pregnancy. I found women to be amazingly attractive and desirable. I also found great sex to be wonderful for mental and emotional health. With it I was happy as a lark. Without it I was miserable and on the hunt.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

WickerDeer said:


> I think Maslow's heirarchy of needs is sort of messed up because he put reproduction at the bottom along with survival. If I was trying to survive--reproduction is not the first thing I would try to take care of in my hierarchy of needs. Because it would likely threaten my survival (as well as that of the offspring).
> 
> To me, sex would be far above the lowest rung of the hierarchy of needs, because being drained in other areas of my life (feeling unsafe or threatened, lacking in physical resources needed for my own sustenance etc...)all this inhibits sex drive or the desire to be in a romantic or sexual relationships.
> 
> So for me, sexual desire isn't really even a thing unless I feel some level of security in my life.


You're looking at it wrong. This isn't about being horny. Look at animals to get a better view over this. You don't see it like that because you feel like you have a long time to think about children. But take some random rodent which doesn't know what tomorrow brings (and it's kinda silly for humans to think it's all sorted out and that they have all the time in the world to have kids) and you understand why reproduction is high on the scale (or low).

If you don't feel like sex is important, then it could be loads of reasons, but I'd look first at what you eat. If your life is normal but your sex drive is shit then it's probably medical or nutritional related. Assuming you're not too old or too young for that.

What you don't put in perspective is time. You might be in a bad period where it ain't on your mind, but how about the long run? And advice, you can have kids without having your "optimal" level of wealth or comfort. With life getting more and more expensive, you end up with less and less time for kids. More money does equal more problems. You might earn 5000 per month and your expenses are 4500. But do you think that if you would make 10000 per month your expenses would be still at 4500? That is naive. The resource race is really yourself putting a carrot on a dishing pole to keep delaying yourself from what you ultimately desire.

People have been having kids regardless of their status or money. It is a basic need. You're not seeing it because you've been probably sold a lie by globalists telling you that you need more and more before you can think about having kids. If you were living in the wild and on your own with your family, you'd probably have kids by the time you're old enough to drink.

Sexual energy is something that is maintained and needs to be tended to. Lucky those that can have a healthy sex life without having a healthy body. It is work. It is also something that I've noticed has momentum. Sex leads to good sex, which in turn leads to more good sex. It's like a bike. The faster you go, the more stable it is. That's how it works for me. Helps that I'm married and don't have to swipe desperately every friday night on some dumb app to get some action. But that's more to "you made you bed" thing. And I'm not talking about you, just in general. Speaking of, a healthy sex life without feelings is kinda hard, at least for me. meaningless sex mostly results in low satisfaction. If feelings are involved it does add more.

Look into foods that affect your sex life. There are plenty of poisonous foods out there. As a man, anything that contains estrogens and phytoestrogens is a big no-no. It kills your mood and keeps you depressed. Beer is bad, wine is good, that's not just a myth. I don't even know if you're a man. But still. Fat and processed food is terrible for anybody's sex drive.


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

FreeKekistan said:


> You're looking at it wrong. This isn't about being horny. Look at animals to get a better view over this. You don't see it like that because you feel like you have a long time to think about children. But take some random rodent which doesn't know what tomorrow brings (and it's kinda silly for humans to think it's all sorted out and that they have all the time in the world to have kids) and you understand why reproduction is high on the scale (or low).
> 
> If you don't feel like sex is important, then it could be loads of reasons, but I'd look first at what you eat. If your life is normal but your sex drive is shit then it's probably medical or nutritional related. Assuming you're not too old or too young for that.
> 
> ...


You realize that poverty is associated with poor nutrition, right?


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

I can sorta relate.

Ive had a conundrum where I came to some sorta life revelation that I should stop having as much meaningless sex about 4 years ago or so.

But now I find myself a very intense person that needs to get laid, but yet is just too callous about dating/hookup culture from a been there done that angle. That even when I try to talk to people I’m just like “oh brother 🤦🏻‍♀️, lame heard and met your doppelgänger already”. So I seem to be broken and can’t even go release any tension even tho I want to. Because I usually can’t get past the first sentence of talking to most people without thinking they’re a tool.


----------



## Rascal01 (May 22, 2016)

FreeKekistan said:


> You're looking at it wrong. This isn't about being horny. Look at animals to get a better view over this. You don't see it like that because you feel like you have a long time to think about children. But take some random rodent which doesn't know what tomorrow brings (and it's kinda silly for humans to think it's all sorted out and that they have all the time in the world to have kids) and you understand why reproduction is high on the scale (or low).
> 
> If you don't feel like sex is important, then it could be loads of reasons, but I'd look first at what you eat. If your life is normal but your sex drive is shit then it's probably medical or nutritional related. Assuming you're not too old or too young for that.
> 
> ...


Being 74, I think sex drive is more related to health than age. When you are starving or dying, and I’ve done both, you could care less. It never crosses your mind. If you are healthy it’s often on your mind, at least for men. Ou job is to fertilize eggs. We don’t seem to have much interest in whether or not we are successful, but we certainly enjoy making the contribution.


----------



## Dalien (Jul 21, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> I am not going to say about science--though I think there is lots of information about it. Maybe later.
> 
> But what you said sort of reminded me of the concept of libido as a sort of energy source...just the metaphysical concept of libido as life force.
> 
> ...


He didn’t put reproduction on the bottom but did put sex. I do get what you’re saying though. Sex drive is on a continuum due to circumstances of the physical and environmental and/or social aspects (these latter two can collide with each other; physical can stand on its own or collide with the other two.)


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

I really like sex. 
I do not want to reproduce. 
I have once. I am done. 

Not even like the idea of reproducing is okay. 
No. 
It's gross and horrific.
It's basically as terrifying as an alien chestburster
Even after going through it once. 
Nope nope nope. 

I have an IUD with a 99% success rate because they won't let me be steralized. 
If I were to get pregnant, I'd have a few options: abortion, suicide, or medically induced coma.
I tried to get the coma during pregnancy but that's not a thing, apparently. 

So..... I have an IUD, and we use condoms. 


Love sex though. That's great. 
It's not about the reproduction aspect. 
Obviously. 

I've seen dudes on here be like "check your condoms to make sure your woman isn't poking holes in them." Meanwhile I'm like researching the safest brands, getting metal devices inserted into my uterus and begging every doctor I can to be steralized. Lmao also the kicker is they won't do it because I'm "only" 32. If only they bought into the idea that my eggs wouldn't be viable anyway so may as well. How do I redpill my doctor? I need to so I don't have to risk pregnancy. 

I became pregnant the ONE time we didn't use birth control. 
Literally one.

Be careful out there, kids.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

My eight year old post tubal baby is proof:


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> My eight year old post tubal baby is proof:
> 
> 
> View attachment 888222


You have to come terrorise me with that every time. 

I read that if your uterus is removed but your ovaries aren't you don't have hormone issues but can't get pregnant. Brb I'm gonna go find the most sexist doctor that I can and ask him to remove it since it's unnecessary as I'm old anyway 🤣🤔


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You have to come terrorise me with that every time.
> 
> I read that if your uterus is removed but your ovaries aren't you don't have hormone issues but can't get pregnant. Brb I'm gonna go find the most sexist doctor that I can and ask him to remove it since it's unnecessary as I'm old anyway 🤣🤔


I'm not even gonna get started on the hoops we have to jump through to be able to take charge of our own fertility. It makes me effen rage.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You have to come terrorise me with that every time.


He’s been the easiest most laid back child. 
It was the bed rest and him being ten pounds that almost did me in.

I like to say he was the convergence of the full wolf moon, the mountain air and the homemade moonshine. 😅


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

FreeKekistan said:


> You're looking at it wrong. This isn't about being horny. Look at animals to get a better view over this. You don't see it like that because you feel like you have a long time to think about children. But take some random rodent which doesn't know what tomorrow brings (and it's kinda silly for humans to think it's all sorted out and that they have all the time in the world to have kids) and you understand why reproduction is high on the scale (or low).
> 
> If you don't feel like sex is important, then it could be loads of reasons, but I'd look first at what you eat. If your life is normal but your sex drive is shit then it's probably medical or nutritional related. Assuming you're not too old or too young for that.
> 
> ...


It might be fine advice--I don't know. I don't think we're really talking about the same thing.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

I don't really think about sexual energy that much, but I noticed that when I felt excited because I went to see artists and paintings/sculptures, etc, I definitely felt more energy and perhaps also more sexual energy? Just noticing b/c of this thread.

So that is going towards OP's experience--that being happy or doing things that are exciting and make you feel happy and alive will end up building up libido. It makes sense.

I don't get excited about things that often though, and I find libido pretty regular except when, as I said before.  But I think some situations are just more apt to build libido--activities that are intellectually stimulating and exciting like taking classes, seeing art, hearing artists explain their philosophy or their thinking, etc. I used to get a lot of crushes on my university teachers (like not A LOT but enough to notice).

But then again--that's all part of the constellation of what makes me feel happy and fulfilled as an individual. So I would have to say, just from that--that individual happiness does boost libido for me. Maybe it's different for others--I'm sure many people don't start feeling a higher libido from hearing lectures, but maybe when they do something else that makes them happy or they feel excited by. lol


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

HypernovaGirl said:


> In the happiest and healthiest phases of my life I was very sexual.
> I don’t really understand why, in a psychological sense. I don’t masturbate often, I didn’t feel particularly emotionally connected to all of my partners, it was mainly hormones, it seems.
> Looking back I notice that the happier I was the more sex I wanted and sex fulfilled something important in me.
> Lately, I haven’t been as happy and coincidentally not as sexual.
> I would appreciate some input from scientists saying if lack of sex or sex that isn’t fulfilling has a negative impact on one’s health.


Were they with a SO? I tend to be more sexually attuned when with a SO. The other is just distractions imo

Sex is a sedative for me though. 🤷‍♀️ I have been told I exude sexual energy.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

Squirt said:


> You realize that poverty is associated with poor nutrition, right?


You do realize that there are poor people that have a shit ton of kids, right? My grandparents had lots and lots of kids and they were themselves kids back when the war was a thing. Then they had to live under a socialist regime (communism, for american students) where they had to work on collective lands and have everything but a small percentage taken from them. If they had a cow, they had to give a set amount of milk to the state, regardless if the cow could or not give that amount of milk that day. Poor? Hah! America doesn't know what poor is. Even your homeless have more money that my grandparents had during the 60's and 70's. Also, they lived in the country side. So maybe if one's sexual energy is low, try having less starbucks with soy filling or MCDs. Less microwave dinners and more cooked stuff.

Silly westerners, they think being poor is not having an iPhone. In my country, back in the days of the Soviet Union being poor was not having an iPhone, never having money to get an iPhone, but constantly owing the state money for an iPhone every month. Please, tell me more about poverty. As a kid I experienced the collapse of the failed Soviet Union and inflation was 400% just in one year (1992). That meant that if you did not buy all your food the moment you had the money, you would basically lose all value by the end of the month. We had to eat baloney and stale bread for months and freeze inside our homes because heat was unafordable.

Yes, tell me more about poverty, I bet you know what it looks like.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

FreeKekistan said:


> You do realize that there are poor people that have a shit ton of kids, right? My grandparents had lots and lots of kids and they were themselves kids back when the war was a thing. Then they had to live under a socialist regime (communism, for american students) where they had to work on collective lands and have everything but a small percentage taken from them. If they had a cow, they had to give a set amount of milk to the state, regardless if the cow could or not give that amount of milk that day. Poor? Hah! America doesn't know what poor is. Even your homeless have more money that my grandparents had during the 60's and 70's. Also, they lived in the country side. So maybe if one's sexual energy is low, try having less starbucks with soy filling or MCDs. Less microwave dinners and more cooked stuff.
> 
> Silly westerners, they think being poor is not having an iPhone. In my country, back in the days of the Soviet Union being poor was not having an iPhone, never having money to get an iPhone, but constantly owing the state money for an iPhone every month. Please, tell me more about poverty. As a kid I experienced the collapse of the failed Soviet Union and inflation was 400% just in one year (1992). That meant that if you did not buy all your food the moment you had the money, you would basically lose all value by the end of the month. We had to eat baloney and stale bread for months and freeze inside our homes because heat was unafordable.
> 
> Yes, tell me more about poverty, I bet you know what it looks like.


lol

Pop quiz--do you think it's harder to own a fucking cow in the US or an iphone? Who would be richer IN THE US...someone who has a cow or someone who has an iphone?

But yeah--I get it--socialism was just sooo bad, because you know, your family had a place to live and a cow and stuff...but um...not an iphone. And somehow it's Americans who don't have places to live or cows...but they can probably steal an iphone out of someone's pocket, and that means poor people in capitalist countries are rich...because you can totally live in an iphone, and you can totally get milk from an iphone. So thank god this country isn't socialist.

I don't want to belittle your family history, but it's really kind of out of touch with what it's actually like to be poor in a capitalist and urban environment.

Can I get an iphone that gives milk? How about one that gives me a place to live so I don't have to worry about homelessness...is that some kind of magical capitalist invention too?


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Furthermore--like if a poor person in the US--in an urban environment even got a cow, where are they going to allow it to graze?

On the courthouse lawn that they have their five homeless children sleep on, in hope that some crackhead isn't going to come abuse them during the night?

You are so out of touch...in areas where houses cost millions of dollars, having an iphone is nothing. You know what would have been really hard on your family? Living homeless downtown in LA or San Francisco, or any city. Cities are also where people go to get jobs btw.

You think it'd be fun to try to take care of five kids on minimum wage while you live in an area where rent costs three times your monthly earnings?

Oh but you know...your family had a cow that they had to give milk to the govt. for. WOW no homeless American could ever understand the horrible trauma of socialism (because they are too busy not having their kids get abused by crackheads on the street BECAUSE of socialism).


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

WickerDeer said:


> lol
> 
> Pop quiz--do you think it's harder to own a fucking cow in the US or an iphone? Who would be richer IN THE US...someone who has a cow or someone who has an iphone?
> 
> ...


Why hello fellow red. Let me give you a quick reply on what you said. The cow wasn't given by the state, but the state acted like it owned it and not the ones caring for it. The state is not entitled to the citizen's work.

Before you complain about the problems of capitalism, may I ask what is your job?



WickerDeer said:


> Furthermore--like if a poor person in the US--in an urban environment even got a cow, where are they going to allow it to graze?


The US cities are centres of decadence and immorality. If you want to grow cows you do it in the open country side. You allow the cow to graze out in the middle of nowhere. There is plenty of grass by the road side. Any road.


WickerDeer said:


> On the courthouse lawn that they have their five homeless children sleep on, in hope that some crackhead isn't going to come abuse them during the night?
> 
> You are so out of touch...in areas where houses cost millions of dollars, having an iphone is nothing. You know what would have been really hard on your family? Living homeless downtown in LA or San Francisco, or any city. Cities are also where people go to get jobs btw.


Oh, you must be talking about the biggest centres of decadence is american history, LA and SF. Aren't those two "sanctuary cities" that give free needles to drug addict homeless people? Aren't the streets so full of shit, that they had to create a poop patrol? Oh, that's right, those are the cities you are talking about. Where rich people can watch zombie homeless people take a shit near their Lexus. If someone in those cities are afraid of their kids being assaulted by some druggie, then maybe they shouldn't have voted in the politicians and those ideas that brought those problems to their cities in the first place?


WickerDeer said:


> You think it'd be fun to try to take care of five kids on minimum wage while you live in an area where rent costs three times your monthly earnings?


The rent isn't that high outside of the cities. Why would anybody want to live in an american city, the source of all the western decadence? Live outside of the city, your country has plenty of land. Grow your own food and stop relying on the gooberment.


WickerDeer said:


> Oh but you know...your family had a cow that they had to give milk to the govt. for. WOW no homeless American could ever understand the horrible trauma of socialism (because they are too busy not having their kids get abused by crackheads on the street BECAUSE of socialism).


My family suffered for more than having to give the milk to the state. My grandma after working for a full day on the field got a handful of potatoes for it. And on the way home she lost one so she went back trying to find it. Do you think socialism is fun? Do you think you'll live better than you do now? Socialists tell you that everybody will be equal under their regime. What they don't tell you is that when they say equally they mean equally poor. And if your argument is "that wasn't real socialism", then what you're seeing now "isn't real capitalism". You can't convince me socialism is good. Here, in Eastern Europe we had it and we know all its dirty little secrets. We've seen all the "party" gold and riches that get discovered after a communist regime falls. We have seen the big fortunes made by a few on the dead bodies that suffered during the hard times to make the party rich. We know the cost of communism. The US can have it and become the bottom of the barrel of the world, but here, you'll have to fight us before we become slaves again to some utopia that doesn't exist. The US empire has fallen. Nobody looks at the US seriously anymore. It used to produce culture, now it produces propaganda and CRT. We can take care of our own. I rather be poor and free than be a socialist drone that gets executed first once the revolution is complete. Read some history.

The government isn't entitled to anybody's resources. I think even taxation is theft. It's not the government's deal to take a cut of the money you worked for. If you think the government should be allowed to demand whatever from you, or that the means of production should belong to the people, think about this: a hooker's vagina. It is a means of production. Everybody gets to use it, tovarisch. Is that the ideal future?

If you want another reply from me, you'll have to tell me what you studied and what is your job now. Anything less gets no more replies from me. I don't want to waste my time.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

FreeKekistan said:


> Why hello fellow red. Let me give you a quick reply on what you said. The cow wasn't given by the state, but the state acted like it owned it and not the ones caring for it. The state is not entitled to the citizen's work.


Cows are born from cows--it's not hard to get them--what is difficult in a captialist, post industrial country, is having the land to feed and house a cow (as well as a family).



> Before you complain about the problems of capitalism, may I ask what is your job?


Up until the pandemic I worked as a preschool teacher.



> The US cities are centres of decadence and immorality. If you want to grow cows you do it in the open country side. You allow the cow to graze out in the middle of nowhere. There is plenty of grass by the road side. Any road.
> 
> Oh, you must be talking about the biggest centres of decadence is american history, LA and SF. Aren't those two "sanctuary cities" that give free needles to drug addict homeless people? Aren't the streets so full of shit, that they had to create a poop patrol? Oh, that's right, those are the cities you are talking about. Where rich people can watch zombie homeless people take a shit near their Lexus. If someone in those cities are afraid of their kids being assaulted by some druggie, then maybe they shouldn't have voted in the politicians and those ideas that brought those problems to their cities in the first place?


Yeah--none of this is incriminating for socialism--most of those allies would be strewn with more feet of shit if it weren't for socialism or at least some reforms that give a fuck about human needs and not just profits.



> The rent isn't that high outside of the cities. Why would anybody want to live in an american city, the source of all the western decadence? Live outside of the city, your country has plenty of land. Grow your own food and stop relying on the gooberment.


Well actually, while I hate cities myself, big cities are great centers of industry...so someone who wants to "pull themselves up by the bootstraps," and work hard for capitalism would make sense to go to a city, because in many regions of the US there isn't much industry and that is also a problem.

So not everyone can just go live in tornado country and find their happily ever after.



> My family suffered for more than having to give the milk to the state. My grandma after working for a full day on the field got a handful of potatoes for it. And on the way home she lost one so she went back trying to find it. Do you think socialism is fun? Do you think you'll live better than you do now? Socialists tell you that everybody will be equal under their regime. What they don't tell you is that when they say equally they mean equally poor. And if your argument is "that wasn't real socialism", then what you're seeing now "isn't real capitalism". You can't convince me socialism is good. Here, in Eastern Europe we had it and we know all its dirty little secrets. We've seen all the "party" gold and riches that get discovered after a communist regime falls. We have seen the big fortunes made by a few on the dead bodies that suffered during the hard times to make the party rich. We know the cost of communism. The US can have it and become the bottom of the barrel of the world, but here, you'll have to fight us before we become slaves again to some utopia that doesn't exist. The US empire has fallen. Nobody looks at the US seriously anymore. It used to produce culture, now it produces propaganda and CRT. We can take care of our own. I rather be poor and free than be a socialist drone that gets executed first once the revolution is complete. Read some history.


Ok thanks



> The government isn't entitled to anybody's resources. I think even taxation is theft. It's not the government's deal to take a cut of the money you worked for. If you think the government should be allowed to demand whatever from you, or that the means of production should belong to the people, think about this: a hooker's vagina. It is a means of production. Everybody gets to use it, tovarisch. Is that the ideal future?


A hooker is actually a human being. So valuing a hooker's autonomy and agency is to value and respect humanity. But in communities, people work together--they own land together. If not, your grandma probably wouldn't have had any cow, wouldn't have had any land. And newsflash--you can't raise a family without a home...it's very very hard to raise a five person family while homeless. So that needs to be considered into whatever utopian capitalist society that rejects socialism, because that family will still need a place to live. And not everyone can be rich, unless you want to award field workers with higher wages, and if so it doesn't sound as capitalist as you seem to be advocating for.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

You said what you used to do pre plandemic. What do you do now and what kind of studies do you have? Or even better, what kind of practical skills do you have?


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

FreeKekistan said:


> You said what you used to do pre plandemic. What do you do now and what kind of studies do you have? Or even better, what kind of practical skills do you have?


Sorry?

Fine--my most current job is construction. Consider that however you'd like. My career was preschool and I have a lot of experience in various jobs as well as a lot of other skills--whether you'd consider them practical or not isn't really my problem.

I don't really see it as your business though--if you'd like to explain why you want me to divulge personal information about myself, rather than you just making an argument that can stand on its own legs, it'd be appreciated.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

But what is it that you do? I didn't ask the "domain". I want to know what you studied and what you do currently.

It's really not that personal. It's as generic and non-specific as can be. I didn't ask for your name or any other form of identification. I want to understand what is it that you do, specifically, for a living. I don't care where or for who.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

edit: not on topic


----------

