Life on Earth. Tooth and Nail so you can Fuck and Breed.

Might wins. Every time.

But then again, there is no real universal "right".

You are on earth to live long enough to fuck and breed, and ensure that your spawn can live long enough to do the same. All lifeforms are the same in this respect. Well, some simple lifeforms don't fuck, but they all breed one way or another.

The world already exists in anarchy, it always has. The governments and rules invented by people are simply a means of control. Some are made by collections of people, most are made by individuals. Some are made to protect a community, some are made to protect individuals.

But you are still free to do whatever your body is capable of. Of course, others may not like it and they might use their bodily capabilities to try to stop you, but that's life.

If you kill a man and steal his food, you still hava a chance to fuck and breed and carry on with your own life, he doesn't. The world has been living by this law of nature since the first little bacteria discovered that it could eat other bacteria.

Of course, human beings are herd animals. We like to create the illusion of morals, society, and authority because our brains are programmed that way. It's a good survival strategy, and in an anarchist world, good survival strategies are essential. Those who cannot survive don't live long enough to fuck and breed, unless they are protected by a herd, in which case they do have a good survival strategy.

Why do people feel a need for "morals"?

Well, you don't want to be murdered do you? If you're dead you can't fuck and breed. You don't want anyone to take your resources, you could die and you couldn't fuck and breed. You don't want anyone to fuck your wife, you might still be able to fuck, but who knows if you're breeding? So most people develop a sort of agreement to not do these things.

Why do people feel a need for "societies"?

Life on earth is rough. There are plenty of lions, tigers and bears on this planet who would be perfectly happy to kill and eat your soft, weak body so that they can continue to fuck and breed. A herd protects the individuals in it, two people can put up a better fight than just one, and hundreds can put up a hell of a fight. Well, at least in the time when we developed our herd instincts this was true, with modern weaponry large groups of people tend to make easy targets. Besides defense, where better place is there to find a suitable mate to fuck than in a herd?

Why do people feel a need for "Laws"?

People are weak creatures in a biological sense. Just about any 150 pound animal in the world could kill just about any 150 pound man in unarmed combat. We have relatively weak limbs, we are slow for mammals, we have no claws and our teeth are not suited for fighting. Lucky for us, we figured out how to make pointy sticks, that sort of leveled the playing field. Ever since the first pointy stick, our weapons have been getting more advanced, and we reached the point where we became afraid of ourselves, we fell back on our herd mentality and decided to use society to keep the people who are really good at living long enough to fuck and breed by disregarding your desire to fuck and breed. We invented laws, and special elite herds with lots of pointy sticks, to deal with these trouble makers.

We have been trying, since the dawn of history, to exchange individual strength for communal strength. Regardless of what deluded liars might say, this isn't because we particularly value the functioning brains of others, it is because we are already too far gone. Most people are incredibly weak individuals and unable to survive outside of society. Society is already strong as hell, so the path of least resistance is to strengthen society.

We make laws, and form herds, and profess morality so that our society can continue to fuck and breed, and hopefully us along with it. But then, in all societies there are those who decide to strengthen themselves. They still profess morality so that the herd will accept them, but in the middle of the night they may skewer you on a pointy stick and steal your food. They still profess sociey, because they are predators, and predators do very well with a herd to prey on. They still profess that they follow laws, because it sucks to be pursued by the elite pointy stick tem. But they will kill you, enslave you, and steal from you because it helps them fuck and breed.

How do you deal with these assholes? Develop your personal strength. You don't have to leave the herd, just be ready to defend yourself. If someone tries to kill you, shoot the motherfucker, if someone has enslaved you, escape and form your own life. Don't just rely on the herd to protect you, most of them are as weak as you and the ones who aren't are probably the predators.

If you suck at life it's your problem and you are dragging down the human race. Either make yourself strong or get out of the pool. You can still keep your societal benefits, it's a good survival strategy, just stop pissing in the gene pool, or at the very least stop lying to yourselves about your intentions, you just want to fuck and breed like anyone else, any charity on your part is just another trick up your sleeve to achieve that end.

You don't see many deer just walking up to bears and saying "Gee, you need bigger claws." Stop empowering the predators, and stop sacrificing the strong for the weak. You don't need big government, big communities are enough, you don't need communism, culling the predators is enough, you don't need nanny laws, letting people face their own consequences is enough. The weak will figure out how to be strong anyways if you give them a chance, if they don't then they are just a drain.

Please stop devolving yourselves, it's disgusting. Stand up for your gods-given right to fuck and breed on your own merit.

[Rant over]

 

Well I hope to fuck, but breeding isn't on my agenda. To be honest, I'd probably be a horrible father. So I guess I'll have to make up a replacement purpose for my existence, or maybe I just won't bother since existence is utterly pointless anyway. Doesn't really matter - if you enjoy this life, you've beat god's system (or at least got the most you could out of it).

 

Sounds like you read a lot of Nietzche.

If fucking and breeding is analgous with general desire, I agree. You cannot dismiss the human beings essential characteristics of Reason and subsequent potential denial of one's urges, according to given self-actualized morality/enforced laws--fear of punishment/etc. Most instincts are extinct in the human being. We do not fuck in order to breed, we fuck for pleasure. We do not breed to satisfy some primal urge of species continuation, we breed to satisfy the status quo of society or similarly to fulfill egocentric desires.

As Nietzche and others have rightfully pointed out: Morality's purpose is to protect the weak.

It is quintessentially, however, a matter necessarily involving personal philosophy on whether this is a righteous phenomena or not, relying solely humanistic valuation.

 

Why does fucking bring you pleasure?

 

You are in a small minority if it does not.

 

That does not answer the question. The question was: Why does fucking bring you pleasure?

 

Because when you orgasm your brain gets awash with endorphins, that's like asking why shooting heroin gives you pleasure, it's all to do with brian chemicals.

 

yeah what he said

 

Yeah but you can just jerk off and get that. All it is, is friction, nothing more. There is a psychological component to it as well, unfortunately.

 

Well, why does your brain release endorphins when you orgasm? It is a biological incentive to breed. The drive to breed isn't neccessarily just a desire to have children, it's a desire to fuck in order to reap the little reward, breeding just follows naturally whether you want it or not, well, at least it does in a society without modern birth control.

Think of it this way, there are two guys. One, who we will call Bob, really likes to fuck because his brain releases a lot of endorphins when he orgasms. Another guy, who we will call Steve, doesn't really like to fuck, his brain doesn't release any endorphines on orgasm and he would rather spend his time doing other things. Which of these guys do you think would end up with more children? Which one would have a higher percentage of children who like to fuck? 100,000 years down the line, which family tree will be more dominant?

 

Your persistant asking of "why" is what leads to religion.

If the mechanical expliantion of how (endorphins) is not the direction that you ment by the question, then you must be asking about the purpose of sexual pleasure. That implies that there is a purpose for that pleasure. And therefore an entity that can plan and has caused sex pleasure to acheive that plan.

The notion that there is a "why" to the way things are implies a counsousness that has a goal. (This conscousness does not need to be an anthropomorphic god. It could be a Gaia type shared consousness or some other abstraction.)

 

I clearly never asked "how", and "why" does not neccisarily have anything to do with conciousness. "Why is grass green?" "Because chlorophyl, which plants use to collect energy from light, is green, and grass has a lot of chlorophyl." Abso-fucking-nothing to do with religion.

Here, I'll repeat myself in simpler terms for simpler people who think they aren't: YOU LIKE TO FUCK BECAUSE CREATURES WHO LIKE TO FUCK HAVE MANY OFFSPING WHO IN TURN LIKE TO FUCK. IF YOU DON'T LIKE TO FUCK YOU WILL NOT BREED AND WILL NOT PASS ON YOUR TENDENCY TO NOT FUCK.

What the fuck does any of this have to do with religion?

Jeeesus fucking Christ.

 

We like to fuck because it feels fucking good.


Why? Because endorphins released during orgasm.Why? Because a human's brain is complex enough to produce such endorphins. The only other species who have brains comparable to a human's and who also fuck for pleasure are the chimpanzee,who's our closest primate relative,and the bottlenose dolphin...the smartest and highest evolved sea-mammal(often referred to as the human of the ocean).

Endorphins released during orgasm ARE NOT essential to human procreation nor to any species' procreation. We were just lucky enough on the evolutionary chain to aquire the ability to have orgasms. Men can ejaculate without having a true orgasm...some men even have painful ejaculations which can make it more like a task then something pleasurable.

Of course this doesn't mean that orgasm isn't important and orgasm actually helps conception easier because in the female orgasm, the cervix actually tips down into the puddled semen to aid in the sperm travels.(Thanx Discovery Channel and their amazing inside cameras)

But many a millions of babies have been concieved without the aid of orgasm, especially without the female orgasm.

Does that answer your stupid WHY?'s enough for you there Monkeyboy?

 

No, it's not enough. While up to the point where you basically say "It just is" you demonstrate workable logic, for some reason you and the rest of the people in this thread seem unable or unwilling to follow the chain of cause and effect past the point of pleasure.

If it is not to encourage breeding, why is sex pleasurable? Is it just a pointless accident that this complex biological system developed? Is it a birthday present from god to apes? Is it a natural side effect of a brain capable of producing pointy sticks? Why is fucking pleasurable?

And here's another why for you: Why do so many people refuse to acknowledge, address or question function in pleasure?

By the way, as for the difference between men and women regarding orgasms, women have less need for orgasims from a darwinian perspective. Women tend to have a stronger desire to raise children, and women can only parent, at most(except in the rare case of twins, triplets etcetera) only one child every nine months. Of course, orgasm offers incentive for breeding to women as well as men, but here's a doozy: Why do orgasms improve a woman's chance to concieve?

 

Okay is this what you're getting at:





Animals who don't fuck don't breed.



Animals who fuck breed -> Animals who fuck many times are more likely to breed many times -> more chances to pass on genes for fucking many times = Nature favours those who fuck many times. -> Nature likes those who fuck therefore gives them incentive -> orgasms are born -> Orgasm = incentive to fuck



Bsicaly: Incentive to fuck = more times people fuck = more chances to breed.

 

Finally, someone who didn't get here from just fucking alone. Obviously your ancestors were good at making pointy sticks as well.

I'm not sure what this has to do with my points about social darwinism, but people seem to be pretty fascinated with fucking, so it was what people latched onto and it is what had to be pounded past some serious mental blocks for reasons I don't quite understand. Although, when I think about it, sexuality plays a huge role in shaping society so I suppose it is relevant in some way or another and this discussion is delicately handcrafted by a team of disgruntled garden gnomes to have a free flow of evolution.

Ok, now on to the pointy sticks. The human race isn't just at the top of the food chain because we fuck a lot, almost all animals fuck a lot. We are here because we figured out how to make pointy sticks.

If you look at the body of a human being, we are physically weak animals. We are slow, we have thin skin, we have very little hair to protect us from the elements, and we have very little in the way of natural weapons.

Here's the next question, which came first, the modern human body or the modern human mind? [/font][/color]

 

You are trivialising human existence. For you, it may be to fuck and breed. For others it may be different. Some people, devout monks for example, have no need for endorphins.

It's not 'mind over matter' for nothing.

If you want to remain in the realm of the animal, great. If you want to go somewhere else, that's great too. The freedom is what makes it great. If you want endorphins to exist solely for the reason of fucking, that's great. You know, perhaps the invention of pointy sticks was a freak occurence? Maybe art came first, a man or woman was drawing primitive images in the sand with a stick, an animal came up to him or her - hoping to eat them and by chance the person used to the stick to kill the animal. That isn't the best example, but the point is it is likely that in your lifetime you will NEVER know exactly how and why the 'pointed stick' got invented.

People just assume that it should logically be used for defense or offense. I agree, that is a likely assumption but I never rule out the exceptions.

It seems to me that you are merely trying to justify a philosophy of yours. That's great, do what you want.

Maybe you don't understand the aim of my post. Let me clarify it for you. EVERYONE needs meaning in their life. Even without meaning, the meaning is to have no meaning. Or the meaning is that you find no meaning. EVERYONE desires more in their life; be it more of more, or more of less.

You can make things as complicated or as simple as you want, the most important ideology to you might be non-existent to another person. What difference does it make? What is the purpose of your post? To propagate your ideology that people are only here to breed and to fuck?

I'll deviate from my post to enter your argument, but don't forget that this is a tangent to me.

---------------------------------------------------------------

You never explained the complications in life. Why would two such simple desires create such complexities in life? If these two motives are the simplest and most primitive, we should have no incentive to evolve into what we are now. We shouldn't even have the incentive to live longer, so that we can breed longer. We should just be breeding and fucking.

Now the argument of food enters. To breed and fuck, we need food. Correct? Maybe not. Add some shelter in there, primitive shelter. A cave. Then some clothing. Forget Maslow's entire hierarchy of needs. That's bullshit right? Who needs self-actualization anyways, when all we want to do is breed and fuck, right?

So let's disregard an entire branch of psychology, for the sake of your argument.

Now that we have clothing, and pointy sticks, and primitive shelter, and a primitive society, we can breed and fuck. You might now add that people have evolved those components to increase the longevity of their time here, on this earth, in order to breed and fuck. Fair enough. So forget art. That has nothing to do with breeding and fucking. It has nothing to do with fulfilling something inside. Yeah, maybe a nice painting will attract a suitable mate. Fair enough.

Forget all the cuisine, science, knowledge, the evolution of mankind, the hundreds and thousands of people out there who have given up the need for 'breeding and fucking'. Let's disregard those. Education does not do a thing anyways besides distract you from breeding and fucking.

Your post disregards the entire population plateau of the human race. The way that educated women will have less kids and educated men will on average have sex less as an insurance policy but more for pleasure. People in cold climates sometimes have sex just to stay warm! Kids are nice by-product, but let's say in Victorian times or pre-Victorian times, when 8 out of 10 kids died, you HAD to breed a lot.

Prove to me that this is the case now. That your philosophy is not somewhat archaic in its thesis that the sole driving force behind life on earth, is to fight tooth and nail so you can fuck and breed. That in fact, people might fight tooth and nail so that they can LIVE. The meaning is broader than than what you make it to be.

I think that your philosophy of 'fucking and breeding' was a mindstate of the past. It might be relevent for when humans were a somewhat endangered species and had to go in alert mode to ensure their survival. Now that we have pointy sticks, or their somewhat advanced brothers and sisters, we know that our survival on the earth is ensured; atleast from the predictable environment. 'Fucking and breeding' as a life goal, even a subliminal one, is for the most part a thing of the past.

That's my opinion. And that's great. Life could be an entirely different ordeal for someone else, without the conception of this argument and without the need to 'fuck and breed' but perhaps the need to wash their hands then times a day. To them, that is the basic underlying meaning to their lives, it is something they cannot live without.

What about the future, when people might not even have to 'fuck' in order to breed. What if babies are breeded mechanically? Then what?

 

jesuswasamonkey, i'm assuming your lack of a reply means you are either still thinking of one, you agree with what I posted or you don't feel like admitting to yourself that your theory is somewhat archaic in its thesis.

 

Jesuswasamonkey obviously doesn't get laid!. .... jk I agree with you totally that sex is just programming to continue our species as with all life. To what your somewhat incoherent posts (no offense) question about which came first the modern human body or human mind. They both came togethor, you can see this by looking at the life scale of a modern human, once a human baby develops the physical ability to speak and understand, it then begins to think. Then as you grow physically your mind capacity expands, then your physical body peaks bvut your mind can go on learning and developing. Then you start to devolve and get physically old and then soon your mind follows your body. THey go hand in hand without the body theres no mind.

 

Wait, I don't get it. How are my posts incoherent?

I admit, they tend to ramble and go off-topic often, but that doesn't always lead to it being incoherent.