If IUDs are so poisonous to the environment, and there's all these studies proving it, why is there no push on that basis to ban, regulate, or improve them? Why is it only pushed as part of a general contraceptive ban along with banning condoms, vasectomies, tubal ligation, et cetera?

>>403414 >why is there no push on that basis to ban, regulate, or improve them? Did you see how completely fucking insane women went when they were told they couldn't murder their offspring (with wanton abandon, everywhere and anywhere) anymore? It would take a true natsoc or other traditionalist patriarchal uprising in a Western nation (through physical violence, also directed at women) in order to ban or change it. That's why. Also because the powers that be don't want it done. Because they LIKE that men have half the testosterone we did 80 years ago.

>>403253 It will be hilarious if she ends up killed as an example to others of her kind.

I don't care if one deletes the fetus but the taxpayer, shouldn't pay for it period.

>>403417 This.

>>403415 The powers that be are trying to IUDs right now.

God, she's so fucking hideous. https://x.com/WurzelRoot/status/1854581579571413348 https://archive.md/RKa7I >>403419 Did you accidentally a word there?

>>403420 I don't know. You me.

>>403411 >I'm off to buy every natural disaster insurance right now regardless of historical probability in my area. You haven't already? >No in the way that's important. What makes a consciousness "important"? >No, that would be at most, equally as often. Then pull up some examples. >That doesn't make them conscious in the same way as higher thinking animals. How so? The plant can distinguish between real and artificial sounds. >Otherwise, robots are conscious just because they can be made to automatically respond to certain stimuli. There is an argument to be made. >I take back what I said about it simply not being the same consciousness as humans and animals, and now agree with the other anon, that your definition is simply radical. In what way? >I think this sums up my views on it nicely as well. I thought that was the point I was making too. >>403412 >Is food exclusively for nourishment, flavor irrelevant to anything but determining nutrition? In it's most basic needs, yes. If I'm stranded somewhere, I don't care whether what I'm eating tastes like shit or chicken, just as long as it allows for me to survive. It's only after that I'm relatively secure that I can start being picky about the taste. >>403414 >If IUDs are so poisonous to the environment, and there's all these studies proving it, why is there no push on that basis to ban, regulate, or improve them? Because contraceptives were only ever about providing sexual liberation for women. If you really want a redpill about this, look up how the government keeps banning male contraceptives from entering production, even ones that have zero evidence of environmental and health impact (Unlike birth control).

>>403420 Wasn't the "games aren't just for gamers" push happening before gaymergayt so companies could make crappy edutainment games for schools and make up literacy rate improvements by disrupting the education industry?

>>403420 I gotta wonder, do the people in Quinn's friend circles blame her for Trump getting into office, even if they make an effort not to let her know? People constantly blamed Gamergate for Trump getting elected back in 2016 and it's certainly going to happen again now that he's back in office. Being friends with the woman who indirectly got him elected by being a giant whore must weigh on someone's mind.

>>403412 What an obese man says when you tell him to lay off the fries. >>403413 Don’t reply to yourself faggot.

>>403423 Yes and no. The "Gamers are dead" articles were suppose to be a "late game" move for the Communist take-over of vidya because it was suppose to show how there's an "overwhelming consensus" that "gamer" is now a "meaningless" term that's "only" used to "exclude" people. However the industry was suppose carry on relatively intact for the coming years because the shift in the public's mindset was suppose to be a gradual process with them "salami slicing" their way into making games political edutainment software without anyone noticing until it was "already all there". Basically imagine if there was zero pushback to anything that was going on in the industry, and LW1 kept her legs shut, then there would have been ZERO response to a game like Dustborn and Concord coming out because "every" game is now Dustborn and Concord and no one would care. At that point, "Gamers are dead" would be accepted as a societal fact. However because the game journos panicked and blew their load to protect a literal and unironic SuicideGirls reject, everyone lost the culture war.

>>403424 I due the nature of the business I'm building, have had to deal with sjws on occasion. She is not really liked by a lot of other sjws, because of how she handled GG and etc. The whore has no tact and no risk assessment even by sjw standards, she ruined years of planning by being a dumb whore.

>>403299 >this retard believes in the myth of "rich to never work again" LOL! Wait a few years and he will have spent all his money, never recouping any, and starts begging for money like a hobo.

>>403420 >Everyone saying reviews >No one saying positive coverage >>403422 >What makes a consciousness "important"? That's a good question. What's the difference between human life and a plant. And don't say potential, because that's a two-way street. >Then pull up some examples. You don't understand what I'm trying to convey. You said something that is logically impossible given the other anon's claim. He claimed A happened more than B. If B never happens, then A at least happens 1, not never. >How so? The plant can distinguish between real and artificial sounds. That's a response to stimuli, not the result of a nervous system capable of higher thinking. Robots can also respond to stimuli, and they are not conscious. >I thought that was the point I was making too. His point doesn't include banning contraceptives? And what I'm arguing is a point he doesn't address because he's not being pushed on that point. I'm arguing it's possible that there a point in the development of a fetus that a consciousness has not yet formed, however, neuroscience can not yet prove or disprove anything on this front, so the moral stance is to ban abortion outright except as a medical emergency, however however, this isn't practical morally in the real world because people will seek out abortion by non-legal means such as whoopsie stairs, and coat hangers. Those babies will still die, just more painfully, and even when they don't most of them are in for a life of suffering and possibly early death anyways from unprepared mothers. >>403422 > It's only after that I'm relatively secure that I can start being picky about the taste. And how do you define sexual security? Is a monogamous married couple not secure enough to have sex for enjoyment and further pair bonding without having a child every single time? >Because contraceptives were only ever about providing sexual liberation for women. If you really want a redpill about this, look up how the government keeps banning male contraceptives from entering production, even ones that have zero evidence of environmental and health impact (Unlike birth control). Aren't vasectomies a safe and relatively cheap procedure, and you can freeze sperm in advance if you ever change your mind? And I'm less sure about this, but aren't they also reversible, though not relatively poor success rate and it's more expensive to do so? >>403425 >(1) accusing others of samefaggotry Lmao.

>>403422 I'm not sure if reproduction should be on that graph. All of the other items are personal individual needs. From the perspective of a species and also from the perspective of a society reproduction is incredibly important, arguably the most important, but individually no one needs to reproduce. Not in the same way some one needs air or food. If it has a place on that list it should probably go some where in the middle and be worded as something like "desire to be a caregiver" or something.

>>403417 I don’t care if the taxpayers pay for it as long as I keep getting my neetbucks.

>>403284 Burn more women alive like it was done before, when the world was better.

>>403433 Men too, in the fires of war.

>>403429 >Aren't vasectomies a safe and relatively cheap procedure They're safe in the since that it's not going to kill you, but it's not without risks. The "icepick in the groin syndrome" where the blocked off epididymis swells until it explodes and until it explodes it causes enormous pain. There's also a prevalence in sexual dysfunction post snip-snip and it doesn't seem to be all psychosomatic either. The best theory I've heard is that sperm gets out of its proper place being backed up an all and it raises an immune response which in turn leads to an autoimmune attack on the testicles.

>>403435 >The best theory I've heard is that sperm gets out of its proper place being backed up an all and it raises an immune response which in turn leads to an autoimmune attack on the testicles. Is that why masturbation is argued to reduce the risk of cancer? Yes, everything reduces and causes cancer if you find the right studies. Is that why I seem to have a wet dream at least once a month as I don't masturbate? Sperm can't be recycled for too long?

What should the next edition be?

>>403437 Something relating videogames to abortion.

>>403437 Angry Tomboy Edition

>>403429 >What's the difference between human life and a plant. A plant can theoretically live forever if given the correct nutrients, water, sunlight, etc. The same cannot be said of humans as our body begins deteriorating in our 40's. >That's a response to stimuli, not the result of a nervous system capable of higher thinking What's the difference in practice? >His point doesn't include banning contraceptives Except I never said nor implied that. > I'm arguing it's possible that there a point in the development of a fetus that a consciousness has not yet formed Yes, before an egg is fertilized. Meaning you have a 24 hour window, after sex, before everything is set in motion and the fetus begins development: https://www.newhealthguide.org/How-Long-Does-It-Take-To-Fertilize-An-Egg.html <When a sperm penetrates the egg, the surface changes to prevent any other sperm from entering. The fertilization process is about 24 hours. >so the moral stance is to ban abortion outright except as a medical emergency, however however, this isn't practical morally in the real world because people will seek out abortion by non-legal means such as whoopsie stairs, and coat hangers So it's pointless to make theft an crime because "someone" is always desperate for cash and there's nothing you can do to prevent people from thieving in the first place. Therefore shoplifting should be made legal. It's literally the same argument. You're arguing that because you have desperate idiots who are going to do something stupid because they're idiots, there's never any reason to outlaw it in the first place. >And how do you define sexual security? In the example of Maslow's pyramid, sex for procreation is a physiological need just like food, meanwhile sex for entertainment is on the third-level. >Aren't vasectomies a safe and relatively cheap procedure, and you can freeze sperm in advance if you ever change your mind? Yes, people can do that if they want. >And I'm less sure about this, but aren't they also reversible, though not relatively poor success rate and it's more expensive to do so? I would not know. >>403430 >but individually no one needs to reproduce. Not in the same way some one needs air or food. Yes they do for the purposes of "continuing the species". >>403435 >The best theory I've heard is that sperm gets out of its proper place being backed up an all and it raises an immune response which in turn leads to an autoimmune attack on the testicles. Sperm actually doesn't come from the testicles. IIRC, sperm is actually the result of some reaction with your prostate.

>>403440 You no longer need sex for impregnation though.

>>403436 The thing is that normally sperm will leave the body one way or another as long as all the ducts are open and unobstructed. Cum finds a way, so to speak. But if it's completely blocked then sperm can find its way into tissues where it's not expected or even the blood stream. The immune system DOES NOT like for things to show up where they aren't expected. When that happens it assumes that it's a virus mimicking some cell type in the body and then goes scorched earth trying to purge what it believes to be a long hidden infection that it's just suddenly stumbled upon. The autoimmune thing rings true because a couple decades ago there was some experimentation with injecting men with their own sperm to trigger an immune response as part of a permanent contraceptive measure. I don't know what came of it because like the other anon said male contraception was basically memory holed but I remember it having positive results. I wonder if the process would work for women to now that I think about it? Women getting sperm shots to make her immune system attack all sperm.

>>403440 >Yes they do for the purposes of "continuing the species". Not individually though. If I dont breath, eat, or drink I'll die. If I fail to fuck a baby into someone I won't suddenly drop dead. Nor are humans like those insects that have adults with atrophied digestive systems and no mouth and are instinctual driven to fuck because they will be dead in days or hours. >Sperm actually doesn't come from the testicles. UH

>>403440 >What's the difference in practice? Variability of responses based on factors other than genetic mutation, primarily due to previous experience within one life, rather than the ancestral memory of instinct. That brings one at least up to the level of an animal. I'm not sure if I'm eloquent enough define what makes humans higher thinking creatures than animals though. >Except I never said nor implied that. >>403370 >How does telling people to not have sex if they don't want a kid "imposing" something on anyone? In a discussion about banning contraceptives, you argue in favor of telling people to simply not have sex instead. This at least implication, if not endorsement. You make these arguments repeatedly, but this is the first example and I see no point in making an exhaustive list. >Yes, before an egg is fertilized That is not a part of the development of a fetus. That precedes it's development. But I get your point. You outright reject that consciousness might not yet exist, even in a single celled zygote that has yet to develop a braincell, which is obviously ludicrous and means your definition of consciousness is so wide as to be meaningless, and may as well include the sperm and egg as well, as they are also single celled organisms. What the hell are you defining as consciousness at that point? >So it's pointless to make theft an crime because "someone" is always desperate for cash and there's nothing you can do to prevent people from thieving in the first place. Therefore shoplifting should be made legal. It's literally the same argument. You're arguing that because you have desperate idiots who are going to do something stupid because they're idiots, there's never any reason to outlaw it in the first place. You're, that was a bad argument. Mitigation through threat of legal action should be the point of such law, as law is not a perfect solution to any problem, but still necessary. >In the example of Maslow's pyramid, sex for procreation is a physiological need just like food, meanwhile sex for entertainment is on the third-level. So people should have kids before they have personal security, employment, resources, health, and property? Before they have love? >Yes they do for the purposes of "continuing the species". He already brought this up. Did you not read what you replied to? >>403440 >Sperm actually doesn't come from the testicles. Of course it doesn't. That's where pee is stored.

>>403440 >Sperm actually doesn't come from the testicles. IIRC, sperm is actually the result of some reaction with your prostate. I take it Sex Ed in America is now all about fetishes, buttsex, and trannies now - rather than biology? Sperm is made in the testacles. Cum is largely made in the prostate, and precum is made in the Cowper's gland. Christ, it's like that Orange is the New Black episode where the niggresses thought that pee came out of the birth canal.

>>403440 >So it's pointless to make theft an crime because "someone" is always desperate for cash and there's nothing you can do to prevent people from thieving in the first place. Therefore shoplifting should be made legal. It's literally the same argument. You're arguing that because you have desperate idiots who are going to do something stupid because they're idiots, there's never any reason to outlaw it in the first place. Completely different things. It's comparatively easy to prove that a theft took place because there is a documentable interaction between an owner, a piece of property, and a thief. You can't "prove" that a miscarriage is intentional rather than accidental unless someone goes on social media and posts "getting this fetus gone today brb stairs". SO this leaves a law that is either generally unenforceable but is still on the books which means that someone can whip it out for lawfare at some future time to go after someone the government considers undesirable OR you have to create the very type authoritarian bureaucracy that these crazy women are in hysterics about to be able to enforce the law. Neither are good outcomes. For anyone. Government doesn't care about politics it cares about power and power that is gained during one administration can be used in a future one that's completely 180 in regards to politics.

>>403439 Sorry, maybe next time; went with something a bit more topical, you know. Things will hopefully start going back to roots as DEI initiatives, SJWs cancellation and censorship, and journo rags and shit games are continuing to implode in the NEW THREAD: >>1037126 >>1037126 >>1037126 >>1037126 >>1037126 >>1037126 >>1037126 >>1037126 I feel like celebrating but there will be more work to be done...

>>403440 >>So it's pointless to make theft an crime because "someone" is always desperate for cash and there's nothing you can do to prevent people from thieving in the first place. Therefore shoplifting should be made legal. It's literally the same argument. You're arguing that because you have desperate idiots who are going to do something stupid because they're idiots, there's never any reason to outlaw it in the first place. >You're, that was a bad argument. Mitigation through threat of legal action should be the point of such law, as law is not a perfect solution to any problem, but still necessary. I changed my mind. >>403446 made a better argument. Also your cum slime is full of artifacting, so here's a superior version, plus and alt, and the rest of the set.

>>403311 This anon gets it. Take out all regulations, and watch the big and incompetent die, while millions of small and competent thrive a little, without anyone ever being able to grow too much. That is the perfect outcome.

>>403406 >Women were a mistake Yes. Thankfully, science is creating permanent replacements for them.