Why can't you just be happy with the idea of being a beta provider? Isn't that better than getting nothing at all?
>>24347176
Nothing at all is better than a lot of things.
>>24347176
No actually that sounds a hell of a lot worse than being alone. At least when I am alone I am not be used as a financial tool. Being a beta provider is honestly my worst nightmare.
>>24347245
so being used as a provider is your worst nightmare, but you'd be perfectly fine being a pump-and-dump alpha who is just using women for sex? #doublestandards
I'd be fine with it as long as she's good to me. I have a fair amount of money and I'm desperate for human contact.
>>24347176
No get fucked. Why do I have to fulfill that position? So she can have the comfort of a stable life while cheating on the side? Better to be alone than to be with someone who makes you feel alone
>>24347318
No I would much rather be neither. I have no interest in pumping and dumping. Nice projecting you have going on there. I can tell you aren't too bright.
>>24347176
robots aren't betas, betas are average males, who will have average jobs, average mates, and have average chance at happiness.
robots are omegas and low deltas, most will never really support themselves let alone have the financial capacity to be a provider for others.
>>24347318
>but you'd be perfectly fine being a pump-and-dump alpha who is just using women for sex?
Where did you get that from, senpai?
>>24347324
>Why do I have to fulfill that position?
because you aren't chad.
>>24347345
>I have no interest in pumping and dumping
if you don't want to be a provider and you don't want to have casual sex then what do you want?
>>24347369
>robots aren't betas
but betahood is at least achievable for most robots.
>>24347374
>Where did you get that from, senpai?
isn't that the dichotomy you guys believe in? that you're either in the alpha chad 20% who is fucking 80% of the women or you're a beta whose best strategy is to be a provider for one of those women after she hits the wall?
>if you don't want to be a provider and you don't want to have casual sex then what do you want?
A virgin in an equal relationship that isn't Chad's used goods using me strictly for money so she can bang guys on the side.
>>24347492
>but betahood is at least achievable for most robots.
makin the clime from 1/10 to 4/10 is theoreticly possible, but would require a radicle personality change, robots are the way they are because of the choices they make, and actually working to self improve is terrifying to them.
>>24347531
>A virgin in an equal relationship that isn't Chad's used goods using me strictly for money so she can bang guys on the side.
i'm not saying that's impossible but you have to admit it's extremely rare and thus pretty unlikely to happen to you
>>24347492
I just want to get by in life senpai. Don't play that "every robot thinks in extremes" game to make a loaded thread.
>>24347176
I'd rather stay alone and play guitar all day. Bitches arent gonna appreciate going fast anyways.
>>24347564
Yep but its at least better than being a beta provider. I would rather be alone if I cannot get it. Better to die alone than be a provider to Chad's used goods. I know I would be happier alone.
>>24347318
But woman get just as much out of sex then men.
>>24347318
are you implying women cannot enjoy sex like men? they both get something out of it. that is extremely sexist of you to imply that
>>24347176
Because I'm a man, not a fucking bank account.
>>24347176
being a beta provider IS getting nothing at all.
>>24347176
Because if I'm giving her my hard earned money, I'd better be the only one she's intimately and romantically involved, and that wouldn't be the case.
>>24347755
>I'm a man
>>24347755
>Because I'm a man
you're not a man, you're a robot
don't let the captcha go to your head
>>24347176
>being a provider, giving
>getting
because this idea is illogical and toxic
>>24347176
>Wahhh! Subsidize me! I'm a useless female! I manipulate men into thinking that subsidizing me is a privilege!
>>24347492
>isn't that the dichotomy you guys believe in? that you're either in the alpha chad 20% who is fucking 80% of the women or you're a beta whose best strategy is to be a provider for one of those women after she hits the wall?
That's the "best strategy" in an evolutionary sense. However evolution seems to have fucked up and made us value things like personal happiness more than reproduction so it doesn't apply. Did you seriously not understand that distinction or is this just shitty bait?
>>24347318
>#doublestandards
That's retarded. It's each person's choice if they want to get used in some way by someone else. If you don't want to be pump and dumped then don't be. That has nothing to do with 'double standards'.
>>24347176
Death is much better
>get to sleep
>no dreams
>don't have to worry about shit
I choose death
>>24348113
>value things like personal happiness more than reproduction so it doesn't apply
i never said it was just about reproduction. it's also about not spending your life alone, bitter and miserable.
>If you don't want to be pump and dumped then don't be
that implies i have any say in the matter
>That has nothing to do with 'double standards'.
it's a double standard in the sense that they're OK with using women but not OK with being used by women.
>>24348200
>it's also about not spending your life alone, bitter and miserable.
gee, spend my life alone, bitter and miserable OR spend my life with a stupid slut, broke, bitter and miserable
I think I'll chose the option that gives me freedom and wealth while being miserable, rather than the alternative which gives me nothing and nothing while being miserable
>>24348333
i guess that brings me back to my original question; why exactly can't you be happy with the idea of being anything other than an alpha?
>>24348200
>i never said it was just about reproduction.
I guess I was confused by you bringing up a paradigm specific to the context of reproduction as if it was somehow relevant.
>that implies i have any say in the matter
You do unless they rape you.
>it's a double standard in the sense that they're OK with using women but not OK with being used by women.
That's not what "double standard" means even ignoring your retarded assumptions. They are not expecting you to let yourself get used while refusing to be used themselves. They are refusing to get used and if some dumb bitch wants to let them use her it's her choice.
>>24348491
>I guess I was confused by you bringing up a paradigm specific to the context of reproduction as if it was somehow relevant.
it's relevant because pairing up and maybe having a family is one of those things that many people consider important to their happiness, if not the single most important thing in life.
>You do unless they rape you.
what? what i mean is i have no control over whether a guy is going to be the pump-and-dump type or relationship material or even interested in a relationship. i have literally no say in the matter.
>That's not what "double standard" means even
it's exactly what a double standard is, "a rule or principle which is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups". the rule is "using someone is not OK". but when men use a woman for sex; it's ok. when women use a man for money, it's literally >>24347318's worst nightmare. how is that not a double standard?
>>24348438
>why exactly can't you be happy with the idea of being anything other than an alpha
Not that other anon, but personally, I could give a shit about alpha/beta social paradigms. I only care about one thing; having my own children. I steadfastly refuse to date single mothers and only give the time of day to women looking to start new families. I have resolved to only expend my time and resources on my own progeny. If I end up getting kucked, so be it. My entire life will be dedicated to ensuring my seed grows up to be a healthy functional adult.
>>24348438
I don't care about being "an alpha" I only care about having a girl who isn't a stupid slut that will just use me for financial stability and cheat on me.
>>24348587
>it's relevant because pairing up and maybe having a family is one of those things that many people consider important to their happiness, if not the single most important thing in life.
Well apparently not the people here seeing as how they're choosing not to do that. And that wasn't actually the context you brought it up in if you bother to go back and look. You assumed people here would be willing to pump and dump because it's one of the two evolutionary strategies. That doesn't follow at all, it was just you pulling something you thought seemed vaguely relevant out of your ass and implicitly equating reproduction and happiness. Which as I pointed out is not the case here.
You have a choice whether to put yourself in a situation where the guy might use you. You are free to avoid that situation just like robots choosing to avoid you once you start looking to settle down.
>the rule is "using someone is not OK"
This is not what you asked about. You asked 'are you ok with being used'. And the answer was no. You're just jumping between concepts because you want to say "I let people use me why won't you let me use you wah"
>>24348746
>Well apparently not the people here seeing as how they're choosing not to do that
and i'm just trying to find out why that is desu.
>You assumed people here would be willing to pump and dump because it's one of the two evolutionary strategies
i used the word "strategy" but that doesn't mean i was implying evolutionary strategy, and to be honest all i really meant was general strategy for finding a partner and being happy, not necessarily reproducing
>You are free to avoid that situation just like robots choosing to avoid you once you start looking to settle down
avoiding sex entirely doesn't sound like a good way to find a partner to me. it sure doesn't seem to be working out for robots either.
>>24348746
>choosing
Oh just fuck off.
>>24348903
>avoiding sex entirely doesn't sound like a good way to find a partner to me
>implying robots are avoiding sex entirely
>implying robots aren't avoiding sex with used up cumrags.
You are not what robots are looking for. Your feelings and opinions on the matter are irrelevant. Robots are looking for family oriented women with a low partner count looking to initiate long-term relationships.
>>24348903
>i used the word "strategy" but that doesn't mean i was implying evolutionary strategy
That dichotomy only makes sense in the context of evolution and reproduction. Otherwise it's nonsensical. You referred to it like you thought it was some kind of contradiction in what people were saying because those were the two strategies for happiness so they had to choose one to be happy. But it actually refers to something entirely separate from happiness. I mean you could try to forge forward and say "well I hereby declare that reproduction is a key to happiness" but no one here agrees so you'll be arguing for irrelevant conclusions.
>avoiding sex entirely doesn't sound like a good way to find a partner to me
It's a good thing people have told you they're willing to forgo that then. Also that's not actually what they said they were doing.
>it sure doesn't seem to be working out for robots either.
You think they would be happier not having sex but looking forward to giving you money than not having sex and trying to figure out something else that makes them happy? Robots weren't handed a position where it is as easy to find early happiness as you. Congrats. The fact that you are happier than robots under the current system isn't somehow evidence that robots should stick with said system.
because fapping to exhentai is a lot easier and less stressful than worrying about coughing up money every month so i can fuck a pussy that was hammered by chad back in high school. if i cant get something good then staying alone is much better.
>>24347176
why can't you have a normal sex life with hookers instead of being a money machine for an old slag and shitty kids ?
