a) 50% of men are gay
b) global male population increases by 50% and female population decreases by 50%
c) one child policy
>seriously, China and India has so many extra males because of sexism that one economist suggested that China enable MMF marriages. Seems like a reasonable plan so, of course, it will never be adopted.
>Like so many modern couples, Wang and his wife met online. On their first date, in a teahouse, he admired her femininity. They married a year later and are now negotiating the decor of their new flat.
>Wang hopes they will grow old together, yet refused to pay for her wedding ring and is wary of having a child. "I have a headache when I talk about that," said the 40-year-old software engineer, with a half-smile, half-grimace.
>His wife is not family; not even a friend, he said – merely a partner in their joint endeavour. He is gay, she lesbian. The marriage is a facade, erected to satisfy their parents and protect their careers.
can't even deal with same-sex marriage properly let alone MMF relationships
A
I'm bi so I'm okay with it
>>73331437
bisexuals should be able to have MMF marriages and FFM marriages
that's the next frontier in equality
>>73330823
A means less competition.
[spoiler]And more traps [/spoiler]
>>73331650
>FFM marriage
harems next?
>>73330823
i pick d
100% gay population
all women die
literally a utopia over night
>>73331918
because three people is a harem
>>73331956
>literally a utopia over night
the other species on earth would rejoice but it would mean the extinction of humanity
>>73330823
>50% of men are gay
I'm not seeing a downside here, this increases my chances of not dying alone
A
would make straight men more desirable and lead to desperately needed population decline.
>>73330823
>A)
Narrows down options for straight women, also gays will no longer be a minority so will stop supporting other minority groups
>>73331650
Well I'm not poly. I don't really get it. I know there are people who are into that but I'd get jealous. Not because of insecurities but because I'm just not cool with the idea of my significant other fucking someone else.
>>73332490
I think if you're all fucking together you'd get used to it
jealousy is ingrained in us by culture so it takes time to get over it
>>73332062
we would have around 50~ years to come up with a solution to replace women
already making great strides in the area and there is no pressure
How about killing anyone with an IQ below 100?
>>73330823
C obviously. The only advantage third worlders have over us is numbers,
>>73332759
(you) on suicide watch
>>73330823
Gay men can still reproduce through IVF, plus most gays are pretty cool and not flaming. It's not even a question
>>73330823
>c) one child policy
Sounds great to me, 7 billion People are to much, and a global 1 child policy for 100 years would make Earth great again
>>73330823
good thing I'm neither a chink nor a poo
>>73332649
I'd be more concerned with women no longer needing men
once robotics get up to par
science has already created a fertilized egg from two women
>>73330823
A
>>73330823
>China and India has so many extra males because of sexism that one economist suggested that China enable MMF marriages.
They should. Legalize gay civil partnerships, polygamy, make transgender treatment available from every doctor so at least if you can't get a gf you can get trap instead.
>>73330823
>a) 50% of men are gay
Wut is downside of this? More poon for me.
inb4 faggots ruin the world, idgaf
>>73331650
I'm bi and poly relationships disgust me. I can only be loyal to one person at a time. I wish people wouldnt confuse Bisexuals with polyamorous stick your dick in anything faggots
>>73330823
A.
China and India will be 50% gay, therefore no more children.
USA will be 50% gay, therefore a bigger pool of females to choose from on my end.
>>73330823
Option a) would be amazing!
If i turn gay with the 50%, I figure I won't mind, it's almost like the status quo with being hetero.
If I don't turn gay, there would actually be a lot more females looking for a relationship with me.
>>73333182
it's not confusion
it's the recognition that, in order to be fully fulfilled, a 50/50 bisexual would need to be able to be with both sexes
your disgust is most likely the result of social programming
we're taught to be covetous, greedy, and insecure about relationships from the time we're born
>>73333337
this would be pretty nice honestly
i wouldn't mind being with two different types of guys fem/masc best of both worlds
>>73333337
The disgust maybe, but I think there's quite a lot of evidence for us being most loyal to one partner being biological.
Even in most poly relationships (or the attempts that ultimately fail), you can't easily get around this.
>>73333558
I'd like to have a really young guy to go with my older guy. I prefer young but married older
>>73332986
And we're en route to getting male eggs from stem cells and artificial uteri, your point?
>>73333855
most pair relationships fail
humans are not naturally monogamous
while it's true the pair bond tends to be the strongest it also comes up against that fact
the best compromise is probably three people, especially for 50/50 bis
>>73333906
it's a lot harder to go that route than it is to get some DNA into a natural egg and womb
>>73334043
what's the significance?
I support Trump over Clinton
>>73334130
although I'm no fan of Dole
>>73333337
>73333337
Beautiful.
>>73333558
I won't mind being the fem in an mmf relationship and we could all have children.
>>73334034
Yeah but it's not like women will learn how to program, operate robotics or electronic engineering, so men will still be needed in the age of robots.
>73333337
>Beautiful.
I agree. It's serendipity.
>>73334249
I don't know. Almost every time I see some advance in thin film solar or GaAs computing (like nanopillars) I see a Chinese woman.
>>73330823
easiest decision
a)
the remaining heterosexual men will have the straight women fighting over them, which is great.
>>73333182
But anon, 99% of bisexuals are polyamorous stick your dick in anything faggots. I am a faggot and I wouldn't go anywhere near a biscum for this reason.
>>73334685
You silly willy, Chinese women are like female dwarves, completely different from other specie's females.
>>73334785
I have yet to see ONE bisexual who is is against polyamory. You are the first one I have ever seen in fact. All bisexuals I have talked to are either in a polyamorous special snowflake "relationship" or have nothing against such relationships and thus contribute to this degeneracy through their apathy. Either way, biscum should be gassed. Even those who start with normal relationships eventually pressure their significant other to make it open after several years or leave them for a woman.
>>73334785
don't shitpost
>Even in the city, being openly gay could really harm you at work, he says. Simply being single is a problem: "I work for a foreign company so it's not so bad, because they respect personal privacy, but they still want you to take your girlfriend or wife to company events. If you are single, people think you're weird. They feel you are more responsible and mature after you marry. They also feel you have a family to feed so maybe they should give you a chance," said Wang.
And China wonders why it has an overpopulation problem
>>73334772
come away, it's too perilous!
>>73333967
> most pair relationships fail
Where and measured how?
> humans are not naturally monogamous
True, we are more opportunistic with regards to fucking - but we usually have a primary partner.
> while it's true the pair bond tends to be the strongest it also comes up against that fact
Again, I think we mostly are just opportunistic.
It likely will fail if you expect your partner to be dedicated to *only* you, rather than *mostly* you, but IMO that doesn't result in any particular number of partners that works better than one.
The rest *are* just extras, and for most of the extras, that won't be enough.
> the best compromise is probably three people, especially for 50/50 bis
Good luck with doing that. I don't think you'll get an equal love triangle going.
>>73335045
It is a biscum. Biscum think with their genitals and are incapable of forming any relationship that goes beyond the shallow muh dik mentality.
>>73334977
>I have yet to see ONE bisexual who is is against polyamory
anecdotal evidence is best evidence
reality is that bisexuals are just as jealousy-prone as anyone else who has grown up to believe that humans are naturally monogamous (which they aren't)
>>73335045
>Where and measured how?
divorce rate
rate of cheating for those who don't divorce
>>73334785
I have to agree with this, all the bisexuals I've met either
>treated gays as sexual objects that should feel blessed for being offered the chance of being receptacle for """straight""" dick
>libtards
>poly slut faggots
>some times all of the above
Not ONCE have I talked with a bisexual guy who didn't try to treat me as a cum dump because he couldn't get any from women (either his girlfriend or the whores from clubs)
>>73330823
A) I'd love if 50% of men were gay, it would mean straight men would become somewhat of a commodity, women would become desperate to get laid, you'd almost have of choice of any woman. Pyle would also be considered some kind of hyper-masculine übermensch if you were straight in a 50% gay world. Since gays fuck each other, and considering their population would be so huge, they probably would have no reason to interact with normal people, and would have their own gay communities. You probably wouldn't even see them most of the time.
It sounds like a utopia to me.
>>73331970
no, but harem would be next after those 3 people
>>73335460
can we please drop the meme-grade shitposting about bisexuals and get back to the topic?
>>73335657
slippery slope is fallacy
A doesn't mean shit. The gay men in shitty countries could still breed, but in white countries they wouldn't.
>>73332759
no plz. not me plz
>>73335460
Biscum are also the only ones attracted to degenerate flamer faggots. They are the sole reason for their existance as no gay male could possibly be attracted to them. Basically 99% of the degeneracy and sexual deviancy from these cunts.
>>73330823
>c) one child policy
unenforceable.
>>73335705
It's not shitposting, there may not be studies about bisexual behavior, but every gay men will tell similar stories. Like that anon said, you may not be one of them, but 90% of the bisexuals act that way, so it's better to be safe and not trust them.
>>73336019
He is one of them, see his previous posts where he shills for polyamorous marriages and claims that monogamy is unnatural and wrong.
>>73330823
Follow-up question: if 50% of all men suddenly turned gay, do you think everyone in Saudi Arabia would just continue pretending that everything is like it used to?
>>73335215
> divorce rate
Well under 50% in the vast majority of countries?
> rate of cheating for those who don't divorce
I agree that sexual monogamy is quite unrealistic. I don't think we biologically work that way. Given a tempting enough invitation, most of us will fuck someone else.
On the other hand, social monogamy (primarily living with and favoring one partner) is probably something that we actually do. The term doesn't imply you only fuck that person, though...
>>73330823
A, like is this a real question? I mean, gay men typically fucking hate feminists and the street value of vagina just fucking crashes.
>>73336229
only around 60% of the population cheat on their partner. Humans are culturally conditioned to be capable of monogamy regardless of our natural inclinations for promiscuity.
>>73336229
>Well under 50% in the vast majority of countries?
50% is supposed to be impressive?
>>73336229
>I agree that sexual monogamy is quite unrealistic. I don't think we biologically work that way. Given a tempting enough invitation, most of us will fuck someone else.
ah ha
>>73336229
>On the other hand, social monogamy (primarily living with and favoring one partner) is probably something that we actually do. The term doesn't imply you only fuck that person, though...
So you're really trying to argue that lying to your spouse, fucking other people behind his/her back is better than having a trust relationship between three people?
that is how married people give their spouses AIDS
>>73336157
"Shills" meaning making a logical argument for why they can make sense. Monogamy is unnatural for humans. Humans are not a monogamous species.
>>73336487
>only around 60% of the population cheat on their partner
"ONLY"
and, for men it's more like 95%
>>73336498
>"Shills" meaning making a logical argument for why they can make sense. Monogamy is unnatural for humans. Humans are not a monogamous species.
This does not make it wrong. May as well start fighting other males for territory and raping every female in sight.
>>73336559
You pulled that out of your ass
>>73336498
Many things humans do are not natural, your appeal to nature holds no value.
>>73332490
>>73332490
As someone in a long term MFF poly relationship, having three working adults wach pay 1/3 the rent is almost a good enough fucking reason to start a MFFpoly relationship.
To seriously address what you are saying, the phrase "I'm just not cool with" is childish. Why aren't you "cool" with it?
>Not because of insecurities
Having worries about it is completely normal. And if you are still against it, that is fine. But I just hate looking at fucking comments where an adult poster doesn't know how to vocalize basic emotions.
Who the fuck wouldn't choose 50% gay? How is having fags around a downside? "Oh no, they might dance around half naked oh god the world has ended" The upside is now my dating pool has fuckin' doubled.
Supply and demand, man. Supply of cock drops by half, and the value of my cock shoots up.
we harem now
>>73330823
Also:
A) would be the most reasonable choice
B) would be a disaster and cause mass riots and murder
C) would either be horribly ineffective or require a global China-style police state
>>73331650
>that's the next frontier in equality
Homosexual here. Kill yourself.
>>73336679
everything humans do is natural
humans are part of nature no matter how smug they are
but, within nature there are also social constructs
monogamy for humans is a social construct = fantasy that humans can be naturally monogamous through willpower
we are not birds. many bird species are monogamous. we're primates
>>73336599
>You pulled that out of your ass
it's a lot closer to reality than you 60%
your number is more like "how many get caught"
>>73336871
I have yet to see one biscum who is not a complete subhuman degenerate of the highest degree. Even those who are not in polyamorous relationships fully support it.
>>73336871
>shitposter
>not gay either
>>73336936
What you said is baseless. It is anecdotal evidence at best.
>>73336498
>50% is supposed to be impressive?
It is the hurdle for "most pair relationships fail", so you were wrong about that.
> So you're really trying to argue that lying to your spouse, fucking other people behind his/her back is better than having a trust relationship between three people?
I'm trying to argue that we should *expect* our spouses to opportunistically fuck other people.
It should not be considered to violate any trust - it's apparently who we are.
But yes, even if you lie, it's better than trying to get an equal relationship between three people going, because unlike intended-to-be-equal relationships between three people it tends to work, and these relationships between three people usually don't.
They'll generally loose to social monogamy, one person almost always ends up being the "extra".
>>73336957
>tfw literally everyone hates bi people
greece pls
>>73336957
Bi girls are degenerate. I think its openness about sexuality that is the main contributor.
>>73336871
Biscum always use top tier mental gymnastics and the most obscure Jewish moral philosophies to justify their bottomless lust and hedonism. They think with their genitals and are incapable of understanding any higher ideals like commitment and monogamy.
>>73336886
clothes aren't natural
medicine isn't natural
your computer isn't natural
shitting on toilets isn't natural
>it's a social construct that means it's bad
I see you're a leftard
rape is also natural
infanticide is also natural
cannibalism is also natural
Again appeal to nature holds no value.
>>73337025
your 60% is baseless
my estimate is a lot closer
>>73337051
because people only get married when they have relationships. They don't break up from LTRs without having been married first. sure
and, sorry, 50% isn't impressive at all
>>73337116
Bisexual men are equally bad. I can say this as a faggot. Even trannies are less degenerate.
>>73330823
a
Fewer breeders "cloning and feeding"..
>>73337051
>I'm trying to argue that we should *expect* our spouses to opportunistically fuck other people.
>It should not be considered to violate any trust - it's apparently who we are.
>But yes, even if you lie, it's better than trying to get an equal relationship between three people going, because unlike intended-to-be-equal relationships between three people it tends to work, and these relationships between three people usually don't.
horrible reasoning that leads to spouses getting STDs
"sorry I gave you AIDS, honey, but don't you feel so much happier knowing that you were being lied to all these years?"
>>73337235
>my estimate is a lot closer
How? Are you sure you are not pulling statistics out of your ass to justify your hedonism?
>>73335460
That's probably because you're not white. Non-white guys are gross desu. Except for Jews, they can be pretty qt.
>>73337323
your 60% was pulled out of your behind
and it wasn't impressive either
Option B please.
Women are stupid and annoying. I don't care if it feels good to fuck them. The less, the better.
>>73337349
Absolutely disgusting. Totally expected from biscum though, your kind is notorious for being attracted to the feminine looks of boys.
If 50% of men are gay, then that's two girls for every boy!
Surf city, here we come!
>>73337377
almost all research estimates are closer to mine
https://www.google.gr/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1RNLE_enGR561GR562&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=infidelity%20statistics
Since you are a complete retard I will google it for you.
>>73337349
I'm a white looking jew and you can go fuck yourself.
>>73337235
>and, sorry, 50% isn't impressive at all
Most countries aren't even near 50%.
Either way, the right conclusion by that metric still is that *most* pair relationships don't fail, they actually mostly succeed. The opposite of what was claimed.
>>73337557
>Most countries aren't even near 50%.
again, not impressive
>>73336957
This. Every bisexual person I've ever met was seriously mentally ill and suffering from at least one other psychiatric disorder (usually borderline personality or some shit). The craziest bisexuals are women that have had a baby, but still identify as bisexual.
>>73337271
Now that i look back yeah people just used to say they were bi for easy sex.
>>73337512
>almost all research estimates are closer to mine
regardless, 60% is not impressive
>>73337608
given your post quality I'd say you may be projecting
>>73337633
50% of pair bondings work and 40% work without infidelity involved. Cultural conditioning has exceeded the natural drive of humans for promiscuity for 40-50% of the population.
>>73336702
I've always understood relationships to be a 2 person thing. So naturally I wouldn't be okay with my bf/gf fucking someone else. I understand that in mmf or mff relationships it's a 33/33/33 kinda deal. Equal attention. You're all into each other. But personally I'm just not into that. It's not my thing.
>>73337692
>given your post quality
I made one post in ITT and you're sperging out. What a retarded, subjective measure. Given your post quality, I'd reckon you're no older than 15 years old and are simply following the "gay is cool" trend you young millennials are so fucking enamored with.
You're the gayest and most mentally ill generation I've ever seen.
>>73330823
>mmf
the absolute epitome of degeneracy
>>73337875
thanks for the additional proof
>>73337891
based on what objective measure?
>>73331437
A. I'm straight and therefore doubles my value to a woman
>>73337781
In other words, the fact that you are a subhuman slut incapable of understanding higher concepts like monogamy and commitment because you think with your genitals and only live to satisfy your botomless lust, excusing this hedonistic lifestyle through bullshit philosophies and appeals to nature does not mean that everyone is like you.
>>73337515
Are there jews in Brazil?
>>73336988
I'm 100% serious. And faggy.
>>73336957
>>73337163
They're the ultimate hedonists.
>>73337970
You're so fucking butthurt.
Seriously--bisexual people are literally unable to remain committed to one partner and are living, breathing degenerate fuck machines that are filled to the brim with self-hatred. They are the most miserable, vindictive, disloyal, and insecure people I've ever met. And I've met a lot of them during my 30s years of life.
You guys are even worse than trannies.
>>73337322
> horrible reasoning
Good luck reasoning against what I consider to our typical biological behavior.
> that leads to spouses getting STDs
Not really, and they'll be able to spread their genes (including resistance to diseases they were not affected and killed by).
Figures this is possibly one of many reasons why and many animals do fuck more than one partner, even if we concentrate most of our efforts on one.
>>73338323
continued proof continues
>>73337875
You're a millennial too baka. Either that or you're 40 and need to get the fuck off 4chan.
>>73338216
Part of my ancestors came here running from germany on WWII, so I imagine there are more. At any rate I'm a secular one.
>>73338415
I said "young millennial."
>Either that or you're 40 and need to get the fuck off 4chan.
>HUE HUE once you hit a magical age you're supposed to grow out of anonymous Internet chatting
I said the same thing when I was posting in 2005. You'll still be here ten years from now.
>>73331437
>>73330823
>>73331650
This jew especially
>>73332587
>>73332587
>>73332587
>>73332587
>>73332587
>>73332825
Fucking breibart new nigger kike shills , kill yourselfs
100% Not /pol/ senpaitachi
>>73338511
If you are redpilled on elite Jews you are ok. I assume you are aware of their influence.
Fun Fact:
China's 'One Child' policy is one of the primary reasons why China will never achieve superpower status. It will certainly be a great power, but demographic challenges will fuck up that nation's economic policies and public expectations for the rest of the century.
>>73338686
Only an idiot or ignorant wouldn't be. I had the chance of being sent to Israel to study on that super university of theirs but I refused, I want no part on their schemes.
>>73337599
It's not a question of what you think what is impressive.
It was just said that most pair relationships fail by this metric. Which was just false. Most succeed. In some places, it's >90% that succeed.
Apart from that, dismissing even the numbers close to 50% as "not impressive" begs the question what is doing better. Go and try to find numbers that objectively show less of the registered poly relationships fail - but I think you won't succeed.
>>73338713
China has lifted their One Child policy, iirc.
>>73330823
>a) 50% of men are gay
slows down population growth big time and will kick the idea of survival of the fittest into overdrive
>b) global male population increases by 50% and female population decreases by 50%
slows down growth FAR worse. far more males than females in a species = extinction
>c) one child policy
tries to artificially control growth while destroying lives
christ almighty these are all just terrible. if i HAD to pick one of these shit stain options, i'd take A because i'm actually a winner who doesn't fear women like a lot of the fedora tippers ITT.
>>73339125
They replaced it with a two children policy
>>73338713
They already are a superpower by most definition, so you basically are wrong.
Also, the one child policy is probably why they have a better future outlook than India.
>>73330823
What exactly is the problem with option a?
It just means less competition.
>>73339166
>slows down growth FAR worse
no
it would mean war for population culling
>>73330823
c) then I would just not follow the rule
How you like dem apples?
>>73339283
You are wrong. China's economy is inherently weak and they possess no ability to project military power in any significant way. From their economy, politics, demographics, and military prowess...there are storm clouds on the horizon. Instability is inevitable.
>>73339125
It's too late. Demographics are destiny.
wtf, c is a good thing, it would be good for everyone, why is this even on the list
>>73339544
Because gay men are not exclusively homosexual, which means bisexual sex, which means more AIDs.
c) because you can break rules, but you can't cure AIDs, which I might remind you, is more transmissible through unprotected, receptive buttsex. Something degenerate males contemplate having.
>>73339810
fedora tipping moron who doesn't understand simple biology detected.
stay in school, kid. that post makes you out to be a fucking idiot.
>>73340157
Gay means homosexual.
>>73339912
>wtf, c is a good thing, it would be good for everyone, why is this even on the list
One child policy is population reducing, and two children don't consider mortality rates. Three child policy is sustaining, while four would be surplus and possibly compensate for people who don't procreate.
>>73340378
Have you ever met a homosexual who has never had heterosexual sex, or wouldn't do so in the future?
>>73330823
Why would I not choose A?
1 child policy for the world sounds good to me.
Africa and the middle east would completely die out a decade or two from now.
>>73330823
>Being gay is a choice... by someone else.
>>73340593
I am a homosexual. I have never had and I most certainly wont have heterosexual sex.
>>73340593
Yeah, most of the ones I know.
If they're bisexual then they will so instead.
Why would anyone ever pick b?
>>73330823
>MMF marriage
> a good idea
Or you could just let the excess 300 million men die off and it will be fixed when they die. It happened in the USSR after WWII. There were far more women than men (~16 million men had died in the war, and only ~5 million women) and that shit was fixed within a generation.
Just let nature take its course. Dont intervene, you goddamn leftist, interventionist, statist.
>>73340697
>1 child policy
>implying it doesn't take at least 2.1 for a sustainable population
>entire economies and civilizations collapse as the old continue to milk the decreasing youth for retirement benefits
B) is the only option that doesn't result in complete global destruction
>>73339840
> You are wrong. China's economy is inherently weak
They could crash the "world economy" almost as much as the EU or USA could, if they did it intentionally.
> and they possess no ability to project military power in any significant way
They have nukes and a big army, but I guess they can't really project other military force globally.
The question is what you do with the many
military power projection fails of whatever entities that you might consider superpowers? All of them even quite regularly failed against third rate opponents as long as they were more pissed off against them than their local governments...
>>73340697
1 child policy is a statue, not a given natural consequence of law.
>"Hurr durr 1 child policy, we can't have any more guys"
>"Hurr durr guise, murder is a crime now, no more murder."
>"I don't think the government had the right to decide what people do in the bed room."
>"The government needs to decide what the people do in the bedroom."
It's okay canada, I know you love weed and alcohol. Yet, understand the faggotry is social pollution, that homosexuals push the most sex saturated art into the mainstream, and romanticize drug usage through their hollywood productions.
>>73330823
What China and India could do if ethics went out the window is implement policies that cause there to be more female than male babies born.
15 years from now, there would be an abundance of young women. Young women and older men are a classic combination.
>>73340955
because all the extra men shouldn't have fulfillment at all
just let them die
you're cool bro
>>73340918
muh war profits
>>73341194
>They could crash the "world economy" almost as much as the EU or USA could, if they did it intentionally.
...and why would they ever do this? The have 800 million people in dire, rural poverty that they're trying to improve. China has more to lose than anyone regarding the global economy.
Also, while China does have a large army, that army is inept in any meaningful or long term capacity. They're poorly paid, poorly trained, and poorly equipped. Size is all they have going for them.
>>73341444
>Young women and older men are a classic combination.
a shitty one
genetically it makes the most sense for a young male and an older female
the female body isn't ready for safe reproduction until spinal maturity
the male body is ready as soon as sperm is produced and the sperm quality only deteriorates with time
>>73330823
a) more women for me
>>73340780
Don't you have straight guys to convert to your dick? You greenland faggot, go huff barbiturates as you read on some popular science article on clinical psychiatry about feeling better of yourself.
Unless you're living together with a exclusive boyfriend, I have no way of trusting you are not some flamboyant cum-dumpster.
>>73341540
they could line them up on the coast and have them all yell boom at the same time
>>73341809
I am, actually. I hate promiscuous and effeminate faggots as much as you do and believe they are a cancer to society, as is the LGBT movement. This is evident from my posts in this thread. I have only been with one person in my entire life with whom I am still with after 7 years. You on the other hand are a brainless subhuman Stormcuck.
>>73341992
Cheeky boy. I acutally LOL'd. I scared my dog a little.
>>73330823
China removed one child policy last year, ding dong
>>73330823
I'd choose A just because I'm gay and is like a larger pool of men to choose from. Men are naturally slutty so we'd all have a shot at sleeping with a 10/10 eventually if half of all men were gay.
>>73342684
Nothing wrong with self interest, anon.
>>73342684
Until you eventually die from all the STDs you spread amongst yourselves.
>>73342966
if half the men in the world were gay, there would be a cure found for STDs pretty damn quick
>>73342796
It's an all around positive as well, economically speaking. Gay men consume more than women, more expensive shit in particular, and they make more than almost all other demographics. You get the positive influence of a woman's conspicuous spending without their parasitic nature. There is the issue of STDs, but safe sex practices coup basically get rid of these. The rates have been decreasing significantly ever since sexual education via the Internet became readily available.
>>73330823
How is C not the choice everyone's choosing? It really helps with the exponential increase of humans by decreasing the amount of potential humans.
>>73343229
Very well said. Also, monogamy is coming along and gaining traction very quickly among the gays. This also cuts down on the risks of std's especially HIV. For gay men, HIV is the equivalent of pregnancy for women. Do you have any idea how easy it is to NOT get pregnant nowadays? You're also dead-on about the parasitic nature of women and men's greater productivity.
>>73343404
Will result in a top heavy population age-wise.
>>73332759
Having high IQ doesn't make you hard worker or a good person.
The psycopaths have always high IQ.
>>73341540
>...and why would they ever do this?
It's only that they *could* do that which I find to be defining.
Not that they would. No superpower ever wanted this, they always were the entities that had most to loose.
> Also, while China does have a large army, that army is inept in any meaningful or long term capacity.
All the superpowers that come to mind had massive military fails to the point where I almost doubt anyone was able to militarily force political goals in a country that wasn't already mostly willing. At least globally. The immediate vicinity of a superpower is certainly their domain, and I think that's also the case for China.
>>73330823
Would I be at risk of becoming gay?
>>73330823
50% of men be gay are you nuts
WWM Threesomes would be the standard.
>>73344377
Damn right.
>>73331427
Gay. More girls for me.
>>73343482
Monogamy is actually a contentious issue in the gay community. A lot of them are embracing normalcy, but a significant portion of them look down on the 'normies'. See faggots like Milo for an example of a fag that hates the idea of gays acting normally for a change. I suspect that normalcy and monogamy will continue to increase in the community. It got pretty far already considering that just 10 years ago fags were still viewed negatively even in the west. Like we both have pointed out, stds aren't really an issue anymore. /pol/ just loves to focus on them for some reason.
Also, the nature of women isn't exactly a secret. Anyone with even a cursory understanding of evolution and biology would be capable of reasoning that females are usually the exploitative sex. This doesn't change for humans. The nature of a female's gametes and their mode of reproduction both influence this behavior. Sperm are expendable, eggs are exceedingly precious. Therefore, makes are expendable and females are valuable. This is the root of gynocentrism, derived from evolution.
>>73344655
*males
>>73344655
When will these people realize that sexual preference is only a character-defining trait if you're a one-dimensional borefest?
A
More dick for me
>>73344655
Yeah I've heard of a lot of dudes settling for 'monogam-ish' with anything "extra" sexually taking the form of a couple seeking a third partner or another couple to mix things up.
>>73344831
try telling that to the next straight guy you fancy
maybe he'll let you suck it
>>73344655
>acting normally
shame on you if you are acting and not being yourself
>>73343990
>Having high IQ doesn't make you hard worker or a good person.
It doesn't even make you smart.
I know a guy who's a member of Mensa. He's terrible at managing money, is a complete fucking manchild, is the shallowest person I have ever met, is an alcoholic and is actually addicted to sex.
He's not the only member I know; in fact, the others I know are actually intelligent and well adjusted and doing very well for themselves.
This guy is doing okay career wise but the rest of his life is a complete mess. And yet he has a high IQ.
>>73333182
To be truly bisexual, you'd have to have tried both.
It presupposes more than past (see also: failed) relationship in a way being gay or straight doesn't.
>>73337621
That's what I thought, too. They're rarely desirable people. They become bisexual to get some shadow of a relationship going.
>>73341809
>sub human.
>implying you don't bend over for monkey dick.
>>73335779
Doesn't make it untrue, as we've seen with the rising push for pedo and necophelia acceptance in Europe. That was one of the objections to the gay rights movement originally and the libs were all like MUH SLIPPERY SLOPE, yet here we are
I'd take the 50% gay anyday. Time to fug some boy ass
>>73330823
50% of men are gay. 40% of men already don't have kids so it's a non-issue. The other stuff is fucking retarded. Also:
>seriously, China and India has so many extra males because of sexism that one economist suggested that China enable MMF marriages. Seems like a reasonable plan so, of course, it will never be adopted.
Whore detected.
>>73346603
shitposting
>>73330823
I wish I were gay. All women are bisexual so they have it so easy.
I'd choose a) so I get 1000% more pussy
>>73330823
Option "b)"
More men means more votes for right wing =>uncucking Europe.
>>73337271
I'm bi, I wouldn't mind a monogamous relationship with a male if I knew we could tolerate each other for a long time. I actually kind of prefer it.
Until then il fucking anything that weights less than 120 lbs.
>>73330823
are all the gay men pic related?
>>73348163
he's not that cute.
>>73348981
Back up, boys, the spokesperson for all gay men is here.
More gay men means more possibility of AIDS which means higher condom demand which higher condom prices which means women will be more accepting of birth control which means more unprotected sex for straight males which could lead to a generation of true men. Men who settle for nothing less than bareskin fucking. It could lead to a new utopia.
Refute me. But be warned, it is literally impossible.
>>73330823
A
Especially if they look like those dudes. Fuckin aye
>>73330823
a)
more pussy for me
>>73349390
>higher condom demand which higher condom prices
if the company is really bad at selling things maybe
>higher condom prices which means women will be more accepting of birth control
what?
>more unprotected sex for straight males which could lead to a generation of true men. Men who settle for nothing less than bareskin fucking. It could lead to a new utopia.
yeah if only we had more STDs and accidental pregnancies, great
note how not using a condom is super important to americuts who can barely feel anything anyway lmao
Option d
New plague
I hate when people post small version of a pic. They're too lazy to find a bigger one.
>>73351480
Thank you so much!! <3
