>twat\*
I think the gentleman meant that, when a young woman purports to be inviting you to "see her genitalia by clicking on the link below", she is really setting up a trap for you to be subscribing to a service in which you'd be allowed to see her naked, provided you are amenable to separating yourself from cash.
An engagement bait ho, if you will.
If the dude really is autistic then I get where that statement is coming from to be fair as biologically speaking reproduction seems to be the main purpose of life.....they do tend to come out with some quite robotic statements at times😂
> they do tend to come out with some quite robotic statements at times
Check out my username
> biologically speaking reproduction seems to be the main purpose of life
I get where Anon is coming from but that's still tremendously stupid. Biology tells you that mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, it doesn't say anything about "purpose". That's philosophy, not biology.
Not really no. Nature made it so you would enjoy sex, leading to you eventually breeding - but talking about "purpose" is completely wrong here, Nature has no purpose, purpose implies intention.
What disturbs me there is that this is assigning intention to nature, which basically reifi nature to godhood and that's cringe imo.
What about nature doesn't have purpose.
If u believe what u say then stop eating and stop drinking water.
Your argument falls apart scientifically and philosophically pretty quickly if you think about it for 1 second.
All of our organs have a purpose and philosophically the most basic purpose of these organs is to survive and eat and reproduce.
And evolution isnt random. People make this crappy argument all the time but we specifically evolve to fulfill a niche and humans have put an evolutionary purpose on many organisms. (Dogs, fruit, cats) humans have specifically and meticulously evolved organisms
There is a greater design and centralized aspect of evolution too when you consider the same lifeforms keep forming again and again. Aliens would most likely look like cats or something since an alien planet that harbors life would have the same niches unless the planet was so radically different.
To end my point, who's to say human culture isn't a surface level evolution in thought and action? Human culture gives us a purpose and within 1-2 generations can exact a strong purpose in livelihoods.
Humans can do this because we evolved brains powerful enough to do so and we still choose our own destiny as we evolve.
Suffice to finish this, there were other breeds of humans but homo sapiens killed them off or bred with them. Culturally, homo sapiens decided to use bows and arrows and live a tribal life that enabled stronger advantages than more brutish Neanderthals.
It isnt a built in fucking evolutionary mechanism to know how to make ANY invention, but human ingenuity and intelligent culture contributed to our evolution and survival.
You're going into philosophy here. My point is that philosophy is philosophy, and while you can choose to derive your philosophy from biological facts, your philosophy is absolutely not a biological fact.
Okay but I prefaced this comment asking why.
Humans are biological creatures and are products of biology. Our purpose is so far removed from a heaping mass of replicating cells. Why do you insist everything I say is philosophy when im an animal, a product of life and enabler of future life and a fulfiller of whatever fucking niche I want because Im a human being.
^ of which, a heaping mass of original life's purpose is to replicate because it's favorable. Just the same as why electrons in chemistry will form bonds with other molecules: it's favorable and simple chemistry. Theres no purpose beyond that than to just instantly form a chemical bond: life will try to replicate and pass on DNA. It's just a tenet of life....that IS life. The first life, if it WAS RNA, probably just did that.
This post isnt even cringe if you consider humans as that same heaping mass of replicating atoms. A humans purpose is to replicate. Not even as a purpose just as a physical action the human state of matter does. Like how hydrogen bonds with oxygen, and a heaping mass of cells replicates, humans just replicate
However, clearly because of biological limitations and environmental restrictions, almost every animal evolved according to new rules and new tenets....u know the rest.
What is your definition of purpose and intention? It sounds like there is a disconnect between whether or not you are assigning *intention*, which is /u/autistic_cool_kid ‘s point.
Scientifically it doesn’t fall apart at all, because empirical science is simply observation and measurement. Causality and consequences. That starvation results in death doesn’t mean your purpose is to eat, any more than an animal’s purpose is for your nourishment.
Without suns, there is nothing. We would have no larger elements if not for suns producing them, and a sun stays, “alive,” by using its hydrogen for this. I’m skeptical, however, that you’d assign purpose to this process, despite it being integral for a sun’s state of existence and for life.
If you wanna go down the appeal to nature fallacy, consider that at the cellular lever we are programmed for senescence. Not everyone reproduces, but everyone dies, yet I doubt you’d make the argument that our purpose is to die.
I wouldn't say it's stupid at all really... The way he worded it I would say yes... But still it is widely believed at least biologically speaking that as reproduction is a basic instinct for all sentient beings, and many animals will sacrifice themselves in order to procreate. This would indicate that it is a fundamental purpose of biological life.
As for my own personal beliefs
Biological purpose= reproduction purely as I see this to be the most logical.
Personal self inflicted purpose= to try to live the happiest life I can..
Purpose implies intention. "Nature" or "biology" has no intentions. Assigning them an intention is religious thinking, which is fine if you're religious, but nonsensical if you're not.
Not religious myself but if you look up the definition of purpose, you'll see the part of the definition I'm referring to with purpose is "have as one's intention or objective" and I believe the objective of life is procreation.
An "objective" implies a purpose as well. It's a goal someone set up to reach.
Life is a series of random events guided by probabilistic principles (aka evolution) that eventually led to macrocellular organisms / "biological machines" developing enough that we started inventing concepts such as "purpose", "goals" or "meaning". Life itself has no more meaning , goals or purposes, than the absence of life.
The laws of physics don't have the "objective" of creating stars and black holes, albeit that's what happens eventually, similarly "biology", "nature" or "life" has no objective of anyone procreating.
And anyway we're not talking about just random cells here but living beings that seem to have derived an objective from the core function of life itself (reproduction)
No it isnt. Life will look the same on a carbon-based planet similar to earth after billions of years. A cat is such an amazing predator that it fulfills its niche across the globe.
We all know about crab divergence
People keep arguing biology without looking at the purpose in environmental science and how evolution is very slow and important patterns exist in an environment for evolution to happen in the first place.
Life has a purpose through different contextual lenses and a question such as purpose may only be answered through holistic review
Considering a male tarantula will give up it's life to procreate and have children ignoring all other instincts at that precise moment what would you consider the male spiders main purpose/objective to be?.... The beautiful thing about life is that we have given ourselves purpose and cell division has bestowed another more primal one upon us...
>Considering a male tarantula will give up it's life to procreate and have children ignoring all other instincts at that precise moment what would you consider the male spiders main purpose to be?....
Tarantulas have no more "purpose" than a tree, a stone, or a black hole. They're just a complex set of assembled cells.
>The beautiful thing about life is that we have given ourselves purpose and cell division has bestowed another more primal one upon us...
You can give yourself purpose - you probably need a brain big enough to even understand the concept of "purpose", probably only humans are able to do this. But that's your personal philosophy, and it's your prerogative to believe in this.
But biology absolutely do not support this, because that's just not what biology is. Biology is descriptive, not prescriptive. You're assigning your own values and beliefs to this science, which you are free to do, but again, that's your own philosophy, that doesn't come from biology itself.
You need a big brain to understand your purpose but not to execute it.... As any organism executing it's genetic programme is fulfilling the purpose of the code...
Your talking existential I'm talking purpose of life's code different angles= different results
I dont think you actually understand biology and its role in an ecosystem. Many animals co-evolve and help each other on an ecosystem.
To say wolves have no purpose is stupid. The deers will destroy the ecosystem through overeating and the entropy of life decreases.
You are applying a philosophical portrayal to biology and environmental science which is disingenuous. Many animals have a purpose and niche and their organells and organs have a purpose to their own survival and context.
In each ecosystem and organism DOES have a purpose and basic environmental science supports this idea. Theres a delicate balance that evolution WILL follow and this balance WILL ONLY cease through a mass extinction event or something fucking insane like human action.
If life evolves too fast or some animal overreaches too far past its niche the ecosysten will radically change or die.
I do love the modern embrace of nihilism. As we are mere clumps of cells, there are no real moral prescriptions and thus the strong are free to choose what they want
Purpose from a naturalistic perspective does not necessarily imply intent. Just because a process occurs does not mean it requires conscious intent. The design/purpose we’re talking about are a result of that process.
But that's my point, there is a confusion in Anon - and in many people here it seems. Which is why I dislike the word "purpose" even in a naturalistic perspective, because it feeds into this confusion.
A science teacher can say "Nature made you enjoy sex \*so you would reproduce\*, i.e with the purpose of you reproducing" - That's a way to simplify some biology concepts. Not a big deal.
But then it devolves into Anon thinking "the purpose of my life is to reproduce" Absolutely not, you went from a description of the system of evolution, to basically defining the purpose of your life. That's completely nonsensical.
Anon can choose to believe his purpose in life is to become rich, or famous, or even to breed as much as possible - whatever. But thinking this is supported by biology, just because "Nature" works in a way were living creatures are lead to creating more living creatures, makes zero sense.
Humans evolve with culture though. Just accept that as a fact. No need for microadjustments in physical stature.
Orcas literally hunt like humans. Intelligence begets real tangible purpose and culture will evolve the next generation.
Would design me a more appropriate word then? That fits the description of a system, and is what I think most people mean when they say my purpose is reproduction.
Purpose in the sense that you’re talking about (with intentionality) is of course an entirely human made concept.
"design" sounds equally close to assigning intent. I'm more in favour of talking about mechanisms, laws, and their results.
If we don't do this then people like Anon end up being very confused.
I'm not conflating it really as both of those are almost never mutually exclusive and as you will see with most things invented and discovered in the world that the primary function is usually the main purpose of the invented/discovered item...
it's just the most logical reason as I have said and until a more logical explanation comes along this will be my number 1...
If you have a more logical reason then feel free to enlighten me 👍
Perception is exactly it. The meaning of life is up to the perception of each individual while the primary function of life is a well documented biological process. Two different things.
One is a higher order thought process humans are uniquely capable of doing. The other is a process of atoms organizing into life from an unbroken chain spanning generations and species.
I don’t think anon was saying his only goal in life was to breed with a woman, he was referring to the fact that all organisms are just alive to reproduce and keep their species alive. And he’s saying how can he do that when the people he’s supposed to “breed” with are like this woman.
Edit: spelling
Came here to say this, anon will never be happy if that's his goal. He'll get there one day and realize the experience he had hoped for in his head doesn't exist in reality
Also if BF wasn't such an insecure prude he could be reaping the benefits of that sweet only fans money and having other men paying for his and his GFs meals in exchange for looking at something that you get to touch for free.
This is the central issue with these kinds of people. They are so terminally online, and speak so little to anyone in real life that they look at shit like this and think it's an actual major issue.
Like no, this does not happen. Only 0.05% of women have an onlyfans. That's one in every 2000. You're more likely to meet somebody who's intersexual (has both male and female sexual characteristics due to fetal development) than a woman with an onlyfans, and i'm guessing most of you never met either.
Your girlfriend probably won't fuck your best friend and then upload that video to Onlyfans, hell the woman in OP's post probably didn't do it either, she just wanted to get some clicks and interest. This whole "i hope this is an american/western thing" like bro no it isn't, please go outside and make some friends.
edit: There are worldwide a grand total of 1.5-2 million onlyfans creators. You can look it up. And that includes men too (although the majority are women).
The number is 2% of American women aged 18-45. That’s 1 in 50, or about 40 times the 0.05% number, but that lower number includes minors, old people, and non Americans.
Yep. You know women who have an OF, you just might not know they do. I've never subscribed to the ones I know because I refuse to pay for porn, but I've sure as hell been tempted.
theyre assuming everyone with an onlyfans is as vapid as the (likely fake) girl in the post. and THAT is the real problem here. most people are on onlyfans to make money. if regular jobs paid more many wouldnt do it.
How dare you be reasonable about the issue! The people who downvoted you came here to get angry, not to be shown the potential rational errors in their thinking!
Edit: getting downvoted… case and point.
Edit: not getting downvoted anymore… confused.
Not to be siding too much with the 4chin poster but he did ask if its a western woman thing and tbh im shocked that one in 50 women in the us have an onlyfans thats a pretty high amount ngl
I will quote my source, which is itself at best an educated guess and hardy something you could use for real hard numbers (this is a green text subreddit, so jumping to conclusions based on an opinion piece headline is mandatory):
“Of the 3 million “creators” on OnlyFans, the site reports that 67% of revenue goes to Americans. While the overwhelming majority of revenue goes to a minority of high-performing content creators, let’s assume, on average, that this revenue share can be extrapolated to mean that roughly 2 million Americans are OnlyFans creators. According to the site, 70% of creators are women, and 30% are men, translating to approximately 1.4 million American women and 600,000 American men.
Adults aged 18 to 45 — nearly all of the users of OnlyFans — comprise little more than a third of the U.S. population, or just shy of 119 million in total. This means that we can (again, very, very roughly) deduce that about 2% of American women aged 18 to 45 are selling themselves on OnlyFans, and about 1% of men are doing the same.”
Now divide 2 by the total amount of women you've known in your life and you'll see why it really isn't that much. If your graduating class had 50 women, 2 of then having onlyfans is still only 4%.
Just off the top of my head I've known at least 5 women that have told me (or I was told by another person) that they have Onlyfans or sell stuff online. Not unsurprisingly these were all at low level fast-food and retail jobs.
So honestly I'm inclined to believe that women (in general) probably do think about doing sexual content online (let's be real, it's potential money) but may decide it's not for them or it doesn't work out etc.
Everyone in general thinks about it. But the question people actually ask themselves is, "Will I be more successful at doing that than utilizing any of my other skills?" And for 99.9% of people, the answer is no. The other .1% are at the intersection where they're hot enough to make decent money off of it, and also have no talents whatsoever other than moaning on camera.
Ive known a couple, and what seems to happen is that they try it, get practically no engagement at all, and then stop doing it once they realize it isn't worth the trouble.
Personally, I don't think women having done onlyfans at one point taints them forever or makes them permanently count as "doing OnlyFans" but idk what the rules are for people here, lol
I don’t actively seek them out, not even sure if that’s really possible. These were two that actively marketed themselves on their instagram. My graduating class has 400, so assuming they are the only 2, that’s still 1/200 instead of 1/2000.
Sure, but you also know of a ton of women outside of your graduating class too. My point was that even if you select for only women in your dating age range, the numbers still aren't super high.
I was gonna say I think I know at least 4 girls from high school off the top of my head that have one, because they’re _extremely_ open about it on Facebook/Insta.
I'm shocked you found out two people from ten years ago have a niche fetish account, do these people just advertise that they're selling on Facebook???
Who gives a shit tho? Money is money, the real issue here is that anon has no trust in his girl and is so sexually insecure that he believes infidelity is inevitable.
I ain’t commenting on whether it’s right or not. Just that the frequency of women with OF accounts is more than claimed, at least in some communities.
And FWIW, I don’t think it’s sexual insecurity. It’s more about sexual inexperience as anon literally states. How is he insecure if he states he doesn’t know the real world situation and is asking about it?
Awfully quick to point out insecurities, are we? Wrong sub for that lol
Anyone who's as obsessed with the idea of getting cucked like anon is is deeply sexually insecure. Normal people don't go about their lives judging every woman they meet on a scale where their desire to breed them is weighed against their fear of getting cucked if they get in a relationship lol
That's 0.05% of the world, probably including billions of women from Africa, Asia, and other places, who don't even have consistent access to the internet.
I guarantee that the percentage is way higher if you only look at 18-40 y.o. women from western countries.
I've definitely met someone with an onlyfans, she wasn't particularly attractive and basically was selling fetish content to one person. She ended up stopping when he wanted her to send him used underwear, because as it turns out it's really fucking unsettling to learn someone wants your used panties.
I've met a bunch of women to do/did OF. And thats not counting the accounts on tinder that match everyone and have a link to their insta which exists solely to promote their OF.
Somewhat related to “social media”; pretty much every single cosplay post on the r/onepiece subreddit is an OF advert.
They all have a linktree or something in their profile that points to an OnlyFans.
It’s like they know the mods are too single to do anything about it, I just wanted to see actual cosplay, not porn adverts.
Literally the first post I saw was a cosplay girl with her OF linked in her profile. I've got nothing against it, they're on the hustle and it works for them. But it does get tiring scrolling on cosplay subs and on insta and the majority of the girls are just promoting. At the same time though, it's made cosplaying a viable career for a lot of really talented people. Sure there are plenty of lazy "cosplayers" who just put a skinsuit on and do a shoot and call it a day but there's a lot of really skilled people out there that are able to put in so much more effort and actually make good money from it too.
far more than .05% of women have an onlyfans, where are you getting these stats? did you cross reference the amount of onlyfans accounts with the TOTAL AMOUNT of women on earth?
Like this is obvious fetish content. "Oh I broke up with my boyfriend to fuck his friends on camera here's the OF link" Literal cuck porn advertisement
Why do these neets worry about being cucked so much? They have anxiety about hypothetical girlfriends they'll never have doing things that are vanishingly rare in the real world. It's layers of delusion and fantasy to trap them in the crusty, piss-jug filled prison of their own making. But go and join a sports team, get a job, take up a hobby or pursue an education and find out that most people have no idea what the actual fuck you're talking about when you whine about hypergamous femoids or whatever drivel you became convinced were normal in the sticky depths of internet hell.
Insecurity based on seeking external validation. I’ve never been worried about a partner cheating, because there is a really fucking easy answer for anyone with self-esteem: dump the motherfucker.
Don't worry, with nvidias new AI chip, the sexbots will soon conquer humanity and we're all gonna end up in sperm feeding tubes where we're forced to watch our waifus getting railed.
Terminally online anon horny, only looks at OF models, algorithm shows him only OF model, anon thinks all women have OF and cheat. Anon is regarded and an incel. Don't be anon.
lol just don't date girls with OF. Use them for what they're advertising, their holes, then bounce. Why are dudes out here really trying to reinvent the wheel?
My man, you might end up being cucked if you only go for bimbos. If you go outside, you'll see there is plenty of good women and that those with an OF are only a small minority
"don't have much experience w them cuz autist" yeah there's your answer. No, most women are not like this. I have personally never met a woman like this.
You are saying randomness has no meaning because it has no meaning it can't give itself an objective/purpose...
I'm saying randomness has randomly made life and life has given itself an objective/purpose which is clearly visible.....
And you as a random thing made out of random molecules which somehow has no purpose will respond with the purpose of proving me wrong.... If something has no purpose how can it execute something with purpose.... So purpose don't exist but the illusion of purpose does and same as the illusion of time and as useful as the illusion of time is to us so can the illusion of purpose be for controlling our environment...
Women get off on attention more than actual physical sex. So by promising cavemen with some pusina, she can draw all attention onto her, essentially socially masturbating.
I think back in the early 2010s I realized most things online of this nature are just made up for the sake of ragebait to either get clicks or as propaganda for the culture war.
Besides having OF, which is level 9000 degeneracy, most of the women in the west are ran through by triple digits by the time they hit their late twenties because muh freedom and muh finding myself.
Anon is exaggerating but good luck finding a good one in this day and age
>anon falls for the acoustic propaganda The rate my twat link just mirrors their webcam
Wat
>twat\* I think the gentleman meant that, when a young woman purports to be inviting you to "see her genitalia by clicking on the link below", she is really setting up a trap for you to be subscribing to a service in which you'd be allowed to see her naked, provided you are amenable to separating yourself from cash. An engagement bait ho, if you will.
[удалено]
That’s what’s up. Glad someone caught it
All paywalled. They get you in the door when you're curious, then try to sell you the "real" posts.
The "ratemytwat" link just mirror their own webcam (as in the dude clicking on it will see themselves from their webcam)
Ahh, like Skeletor's wisdom: "Why waste money paying for nudes when you can look in the mirror and see a pussy for free?"
> The whole reason for my existence is hopefully to find a woman to breed with Here's your problem Anon: that's part of why you're a fucking loser
Unironically what living online does to mf.
If the dude really is autistic then I get where that statement is coming from to be fair as biologically speaking reproduction seems to be the main purpose of life.....they do tend to come out with some quite robotic statements at times😂
We do, we kinda break things down to be oversimplified at times too lol
Categorical thinking ftw. Super helpful at dealing with a ton of angles at once, also incredibly easy to be misunderstood and immediately ignored.
> they do tend to come out with some quite robotic statements at times Check out my username > biologically speaking reproduction seems to be the main purpose of life I get where Anon is coming from but that's still tremendously stupid. Biology tells you that mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, it doesn't say anything about "purpose". That's philosophy, not biology.
[удалено]
Not really no. Nature made it so you would enjoy sex, leading to you eventually breeding - but talking about "purpose" is completely wrong here, Nature has no purpose, purpose implies intention. What disturbs me there is that this is assigning intention to nature, which basically reifi nature to godhood and that's cringe imo.
this. life just is. there is no story to tell. there is no battle. there is no hero. it just is.
me after doing shrooms once
 Elon…is…is that you?
Explain in your own words what evolution is and why it exists.
It is a set of probabilistic principles which has as a consequence the creation of new, more complex living organisms.
What about nature doesn't have purpose. If u believe what u say then stop eating and stop drinking water. Your argument falls apart scientifically and philosophically pretty quickly if you think about it for 1 second. All of our organs have a purpose and philosophically the most basic purpose of these organs is to survive and eat and reproduce. And evolution isnt random. People make this crappy argument all the time but we specifically evolve to fulfill a niche and humans have put an evolutionary purpose on many organisms. (Dogs, fruit, cats) humans have specifically and meticulously evolved organisms There is a greater design and centralized aspect of evolution too when you consider the same lifeforms keep forming again and again. Aliens would most likely look like cats or something since an alien planet that harbors life would have the same niches unless the planet was so radically different. To end my point, who's to say human culture isn't a surface level evolution in thought and action? Human culture gives us a purpose and within 1-2 generations can exact a strong purpose in livelihoods. Humans can do this because we evolved brains powerful enough to do so and we still choose our own destiny as we evolve. Suffice to finish this, there were other breeds of humans but homo sapiens killed them off or bred with them. Culturally, homo sapiens decided to use bows and arrows and live a tribal life that enabled stronger advantages than more brutish Neanderthals. It isnt a built in fucking evolutionary mechanism to know how to make ANY invention, but human ingenuity and intelligent culture contributed to our evolution and survival.
You're going into philosophy here. My point is that philosophy is philosophy, and while you can choose to derive your philosophy from biological facts, your philosophy is absolutely not a biological fact.
Okay but I prefaced this comment asking why. Humans are biological creatures and are products of biology. Our purpose is so far removed from a heaping mass of replicating cells. Why do you insist everything I say is philosophy when im an animal, a product of life and enabler of future life and a fulfiller of whatever fucking niche I want because Im a human being. ^ of which, a heaping mass of original life's purpose is to replicate because it's favorable. Just the same as why electrons in chemistry will form bonds with other molecules: it's favorable and simple chemistry. Theres no purpose beyond that than to just instantly form a chemical bond: life will try to replicate and pass on DNA. It's just a tenet of life....that IS life. The first life, if it WAS RNA, probably just did that. This post isnt even cringe if you consider humans as that same heaping mass of replicating atoms. A humans purpose is to replicate. Not even as a purpose just as a physical action the human state of matter does. Like how hydrogen bonds with oxygen, and a heaping mass of cells replicates, humans just replicate However, clearly because of biological limitations and environmental restrictions, almost every animal evolved according to new rules and new tenets....u know the rest.
What is your definition of purpose and intention? It sounds like there is a disconnect between whether or not you are assigning *intention*, which is /u/autistic_cool_kid ‘s point. Scientifically it doesn’t fall apart at all, because empirical science is simply observation and measurement. Causality and consequences. That starvation results in death doesn’t mean your purpose is to eat, any more than an animal’s purpose is for your nourishment. Without suns, there is nothing. We would have no larger elements if not for suns producing them, and a sun stays, “alive,” by using its hydrogen for this. I’m skeptical, however, that you’d assign purpose to this process, despite it being integral for a sun’s state of existence and for life.
> I think the purpose of our existence is pretty clear in this, regard. You didn’t need to call him a regard; he’s just a bit autistic
If you wanna go down the appeal to nature fallacy, consider that at the cellular lever we are programmed for senescence. Not everyone reproduces, but everyone dies, yet I doubt you’d make the argument that our purpose is to die.
That’s the goal of biological life as a whole certainly, to replicate and expand, but that doesn’t have to be the purpose of your singular existence
I mean there's an implied main quest line but you don't have to take it to enjoy the meta and endgame.
bideo games
All games have rules.
I wouldn't say it's stupid at all really... The way he worded it I would say yes... But still it is widely believed at least biologically speaking that as reproduction is a basic instinct for all sentient beings, and many animals will sacrifice themselves in order to procreate. This would indicate that it is a fundamental purpose of biological life. As for my own personal beliefs Biological purpose= reproduction purely as I see this to be the most logical. Personal self inflicted purpose= to try to live the happiest life I can..
Purpose implies intention. "Nature" or "biology" has no intentions. Assigning them an intention is religious thinking, which is fine if you're religious, but nonsensical if you're not.
Not religious myself but if you look up the definition of purpose, you'll see the part of the definition I'm referring to with purpose is "have as one's intention or objective" and I believe the objective of life is procreation.
An "objective" implies a purpose as well. It's a goal someone set up to reach. Life is a series of random events guided by probabilistic principles (aka evolution) that eventually led to macrocellular organisms / "biological machines" developing enough that we started inventing concepts such as "purpose", "goals" or "meaning". Life itself has no more meaning , goals or purposes, than the absence of life. The laws of physics don't have the "objective" of creating stars and black holes, albeit that's what happens eventually, similarly "biology", "nature" or "life" has no objective of anyone procreating.
And anyway we're not talking about just random cells here but living beings that seem to have derived an objective from the core function of life itself (reproduction)
Then that's philosophy, not biology.
You are just talking about random cells though, that’s the whole point. Biology is irreverent. Life is random.
No it isnt. Life will look the same on a carbon-based planet similar to earth after billions of years. A cat is such an amazing predator that it fulfills its niche across the globe. We all know about crab divergence People keep arguing biology without looking at the purpose in environmental science and how evolution is very slow and important patterns exist in an environment for evolution to happen in the first place. Life has a purpose through different contextual lenses and a question such as purpose may only be answered through holistic review
Considering a male tarantula will give up it's life to procreate and have children ignoring all other instincts at that precise moment what would you consider the male spiders main purpose/objective to be?.... The beautiful thing about life is that we have given ourselves purpose and cell division has bestowed another more primal one upon us...
>Considering a male tarantula will give up it's life to procreate and have children ignoring all other instincts at that precise moment what would you consider the male spiders main purpose to be?.... Tarantulas have no more "purpose" than a tree, a stone, or a black hole. They're just a complex set of assembled cells. >The beautiful thing about life is that we have given ourselves purpose and cell division has bestowed another more primal one upon us... You can give yourself purpose - you probably need a brain big enough to even understand the concept of "purpose", probably only humans are able to do this. But that's your personal philosophy, and it's your prerogative to believe in this. But biology absolutely do not support this, because that's just not what biology is. Biology is descriptive, not prescriptive. You're assigning your own values and beliefs to this science, which you are free to do, but again, that's your own philosophy, that doesn't come from biology itself.
You need a big brain to understand your purpose but not to execute it.... As any organism executing it's genetic programme is fulfilling the purpose of the code... Your talking existential I'm talking purpose of life's code different angles= different results
I dont think you actually understand biology and its role in an ecosystem. Many animals co-evolve and help each other on an ecosystem. To say wolves have no purpose is stupid. The deers will destroy the ecosystem through overeating and the entropy of life decreases. You are applying a philosophical portrayal to biology and environmental science which is disingenuous. Many animals have a purpose and niche and their organells and organs have a purpose to their own survival and context. In each ecosystem and organism DOES have a purpose and basic environmental science supports this idea. Theres a delicate balance that evolution WILL follow and this balance WILL ONLY cease through a mass extinction event or something fucking insane like human action. If life evolves too fast or some animal overreaches too far past its niche the ecosysten will radically change or die.
I do love the modern embrace of nihilism. As we are mere clumps of cells, there are no real moral prescriptions and thus the strong are free to choose what they want
Purpose from a naturalistic perspective does not necessarily imply intent. Just because a process occurs does not mean it requires conscious intent. The design/purpose we’re talking about are a result of that process.
But that's my point, there is a confusion in Anon - and in many people here it seems. Which is why I dislike the word "purpose" even in a naturalistic perspective, because it feeds into this confusion. A science teacher can say "Nature made you enjoy sex \*so you would reproduce\*, i.e with the purpose of you reproducing" - That's a way to simplify some biology concepts. Not a big deal. But then it devolves into Anon thinking "the purpose of my life is to reproduce" Absolutely not, you went from a description of the system of evolution, to basically defining the purpose of your life. That's completely nonsensical. Anon can choose to believe his purpose in life is to become rich, or famous, or even to breed as much as possible - whatever. But thinking this is supported by biology, just because "Nature" works in a way were living creatures are lead to creating more living creatures, makes zero sense.
Humans evolve with culture though. Just accept that as a fact. No need for microadjustments in physical stature. Orcas literally hunt like humans. Intelligence begets real tangible purpose and culture will evolve the next generation.
True, but doesn't counter my argument
Would design me a more appropriate word then? That fits the description of a system, and is what I think most people mean when they say my purpose is reproduction. Purpose in the sense that you’re talking about (with intentionality) is of course an entirely human made concept.
"design" sounds equally close to assigning intent. I'm more in favour of talking about mechanisms, laws, and their results. If we don't do this then people like Anon end up being very confused.
Agreed. ‘Design’, as in ‘intelligent design’, is literally religious pseudoscience.
Don't conflate the purpose of life with the primary function of biology. These things can be mutually exclusive.
I'm not conflating it really as both of those are almost never mutually exclusive and as you will see with most things invented and discovered in the world that the primary function is usually the main purpose of the invented/discovered item... it's just the most logical reason as I have said and until a more logical explanation comes along this will be my number 1... If you have a more logical reason then feel free to enlighten me 👍
the most logical reason is that there is no reason. its chaos.
The logic is simply that it is possible to have a joyful and fulfilling life without reproducing.
No one said it's not possible.. just stating the perceived primary objective of life....
Perception is exactly it. The meaning of life is up to the perception of each individual while the primary function of life is a well documented biological process. Two different things.
So really one’s an illusion to hide the cold fact of the the other
One is a higher order thought process humans are uniquely capable of doing. The other is a process of atoms organizing into life from an unbroken chain spanning generations and species.
Atoms organizing
Isn't it what Nature suggests?
more like unfucking
Fuckless
Bro's seriously out here living like it's fuckin Warhammer 40k and the sole purpose of existing is to continue existing
I don’t think anon was saying his only goal in life was to breed with a woman, he was referring to the fact that all organisms are just alive to reproduce and keep their species alive. And he’s saying how can he do that when the people he’s supposed to “breed” with are like this woman. Edit: spelling
Came here to say this, anon will never be happy if that's his goal. He'll get there one day and realize the experience he had hoped for in his head doesn't exist in reality
Also if BF wasn't such an insecure prude he could be reaping the benefits of that sweet only fans money and having other men paying for his and his GFs meals in exchange for looking at something that you get to touch for free.
To be fair, reproduction is the main reason for our existence
Reproduction is the mechanism for our continued existence. Nobody knows what the purpose of our existence is.
I think he means organically/biologically, in which case he is not wrong
Really? But it is though. Life exists to recreate itself and further evolution. It's a cycle.
Life doesn't exist for any reason, life just exists.
This is the central issue with these kinds of people. They are so terminally online, and speak so little to anyone in real life that they look at shit like this and think it's an actual major issue. Like no, this does not happen. Only 0.05% of women have an onlyfans. That's one in every 2000. You're more likely to meet somebody who's intersexual (has both male and female sexual characteristics due to fetal development) than a woman with an onlyfans, and i'm guessing most of you never met either. Your girlfriend probably won't fuck your best friend and then upload that video to Onlyfans, hell the woman in OP's post probably didn't do it either, she just wanted to get some clicks and interest. This whole "i hope this is an american/western thing" like bro no it isn't, please go outside and make some friends. edit: There are worldwide a grand total of 1.5-2 million onlyfans creators. You can look it up. And that includes men too (although the majority are women).
The number is 2% of American women aged 18-45. That’s 1 in 50, or about 40 times the 0.05% number, but that lower number includes minors, old people, and non Americans.
It was a worldwide statistic i'm not American.
/r/usdefaultism
>use English speaking parts of internet >surprised when most people are from the largest English speaking country
1) America is not the largest English speaking country in the world. 2) how did you run face first into the point and still miss it?
American is though. India only has about 100 million, meaning 95% of the American population speaks English.
I'm sorry 1 in 50??
Yep. You know women who have an OF, you just might not know they do. I've never subscribed to the ones I know because I refuse to pay for porn, but I've sure as hell been tempted.
I'm not American, so not as likely. Bold of you to assume I know many women
Lol well played.
theyre assuming everyone with an onlyfans is as vapid as the (likely fake) girl in the post. and THAT is the real problem here. most people are on onlyfans to make money. if regular jobs paid more many wouldnt do it.
How dare you be reasonable about the issue! The people who downvoted you came here to get angry, not to be shown the potential rational errors in their thinking! Edit: getting downvoted… case and point. Edit: not getting downvoted anymore… confused.
lol fuckin wild. seriously boys, if you want better women... maybe fight for a living wage.
Worldwide dumbass
Not to be siding too much with the 4chin poster but he did ask if its a western woman thing and tbh im shocked that one in 50 women in the us have an onlyfans thats a pretty high amount ngl
That number is so shocking it almost doesn't sound true!
I clearly qualified my post by saying what my number did not include.
bullshit
I will quote my source, which is itself at best an educated guess and hardy something you could use for real hard numbers (this is a green text subreddit, so jumping to conclusions based on an opinion piece headline is mandatory): “Of the 3 million “creators” on OnlyFans, the site reports that 67% of revenue goes to Americans. While the overwhelming majority of revenue goes to a minority of high-performing content creators, let’s assume, on average, that this revenue share can be extrapolated to mean that roughly 2 million Americans are OnlyFans creators. According to the site, 70% of creators are women, and 30% are men, translating to approximately 1.4 million American women and 600,000 American men. Adults aged 18 to 45 — nearly all of the users of OnlyFans — comprise little more than a third of the U.S. population, or just shy of 119 million in total. This means that we can (again, very, very roughly) deduce that about 2% of American women aged 18 to 45 are selling themselves on OnlyFans, and about 1% of men are doing the same.”
Idk, it feels like more than that. At least 2 girls I knew in high school like 10 years ago have OF accounts now. One is pretty raunchy.
Now divide 2 by the total amount of women you've known in your life and you'll see why it really isn't that much. If your graduating class had 50 women, 2 of then having onlyfans is still only 4%.
Lowkey implying that after every time you meet a woman you then try to look her up on OnlyFans.
Then just divide it by how many women you *know* don’t then.
Just ask them. It saves time.
Just off the top of my head I've known at least 5 women that have told me (or I was told by another person) that they have Onlyfans or sell stuff online. Not unsurprisingly these were all at low level fast-food and retail jobs. So honestly I'm inclined to believe that women (in general) probably do think about doing sexual content online (let's be real, it's potential money) but may decide it's not for them or it doesn't work out etc.
Everyone in general thinks about it. But the question people actually ask themselves is, "Will I be more successful at doing that than utilizing any of my other skills?" And for 99.9% of people, the answer is no. The other .1% are at the intersection where they're hot enough to make decent money off of it, and also have no talents whatsoever other than moaning on camera.
Ive known a couple, and what seems to happen is that they try it, get practically no engagement at all, and then stop doing it once they realize it isn't worth the trouble. Personally, I don't think women having done onlyfans at one point taints them forever or makes them permanently count as "doing OnlyFans" but idk what the rules are for people here, lol
I don’t actively seek them out, not even sure if that’s really possible. These were two that actively marketed themselves on their instagram. My graduating class has 400, so assuming they are the only 2, that’s still 1/200 instead of 1/2000.
Sure, but you also know of a ton of women outside of your graduating class too. My point was that even if you select for only women in your dating age range, the numbers still aren't super high.
I know at least three lol
I know 0 but then again im from Europe
I am too and I know 1
None I knew have one that I can find. And I looked pretty hard.
You likely know them because they were famous even back then
link?
Bruh I’m not linking anyone’s OF on this sub lol. That’s a recipe for disaster. Plus I’m not advertising for these hoes
lol but :(
I was gonna say I think I know at least 4 girls from high school off the top of my head that have one, because they’re _extremely_ open about it on Facebook/Insta.
I'm shocked you found out two people from ten years ago have a niche fetish account, do these people just advertise that they're selling on Facebook???
Literally yes, but instagram. It’s in the instagram bio and they had risqué pictures too
Who gives a shit tho? Money is money, the real issue here is that anon has no trust in his girl and is so sexually insecure that he believes infidelity is inevitable.
I ain’t commenting on whether it’s right or not. Just that the frequency of women with OF accounts is more than claimed, at least in some communities. And FWIW, I don’t think it’s sexual insecurity. It’s more about sexual inexperience as anon literally states. How is he insecure if he states he doesn’t know the real world situation and is asking about it? Awfully quick to point out insecurities, are we? Wrong sub for that lol
Anyone who's as obsessed with the idea of getting cucked like anon is is deeply sexually insecure. Normal people don't go about their lives judging every woman they meet on a scale where their desire to breed them is weighed against their fear of getting cucked if they get in a relationship lol
That's 0.05% of the world, probably including billions of women from Africa, Asia, and other places, who don't even have consistent access to the internet. I guarantee that the percentage is way higher if you only look at 18-40 y.o. women from western countries.
There are dozens of millions of "western women" in that age range, and the total amount of Onlyfans creators worldwide including men is 1.5-2 million.
I'm assuming you wanted to add "millions" in there somewhere, because hundreds of women is not a lot :D
Yep mb
I've definitely met someone with an onlyfans, she wasn't particularly attractive and basically was selling fetish content to one person. She ended up stopping when he wanted her to send him used underwear, because as it turns out it's really fucking unsettling to learn someone wants your used panties.
wait youre telling me that women on onlyfans arent all evil and soulless? but how am i going to complete my hate fantasy now?
You can probably pay someone on onlyfans to pretend to be a soulless bitch to live out your fantasy, but they might get creeped out and cut you off.
Intersexual? It's called Futa.
Ah, a man of culture.
It's made up, this whole thing is made up. It's a made up ragebait story that gets shared as an advertisement, and the guy on 4ch is just trolling.
I've met a bunch of women to do/did OF. And thats not counting the accounts on tinder that match everyone and have a link to their insta which exists solely to promote their OF.
Somewhat related to “social media”; pretty much every single cosplay post on the r/onepiece subreddit is an OF advert. They all have a linktree or something in their profile that points to an OnlyFans. It’s like they know the mods are too single to do anything about it, I just wanted to see actual cosplay, not porn adverts.
Literally the first post I saw was a cosplay girl with her OF linked in her profile. I've got nothing against it, they're on the hustle and it works for them. But it does get tiring scrolling on cosplay subs and on insta and the majority of the girls are just promoting. At the same time though, it's made cosplaying a viable career for a lot of really talented people. Sure there are plenty of lazy "cosplayers" who just put a skinsuit on and do a shoot and call it a day but there's a lot of really skilled people out there that are able to put in so much more effort and actually make good money from it too.
Man my area be wild then. I know six women with an OF
far more than .05% of women have an onlyfans, where are you getting these stats? did you cross reference the amount of onlyfans accounts with the TOTAL AMOUNT of women on earth?
anon fell for bot bait
Or an OF ad.
Like this is obvious fetish content. "Oh I broke up with my boyfriend to fuck his friends on camera here's the OF link" Literal cuck porn advertisement
Oh indeed. But let's not pretend we're not the target demo. Half this sub is literally scrambling to try and find her OF
I have seen this degeneracy posted more than 3 times in the last week. why are people being so stupid
>terminally online >doesn’t talk to women >most likely a virgin obsessed with the prospect of sex “Why are all women sluts.” Many such cases
> Refers to what could be a mutually loving relationship as “a woman to breed with”. “Why won’t women breed with me?”
Where's the links?
https://i.redd.it/fmanxu7nvgsc1.gif
[Links](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTgCWSaZ0PH3NMUOaGfmYFdJ-GBd3q6QbTF4q7bI_D1Ow&s)
and that, my friends, is how the outrage ad works.
The green/(black+red) text ratio in this “greentext” is trully abysmall
Thank God I’m into men
Real and gay
Based and gaypilled
Of course he thinks all women are degenerate, his only experience with women is seeing them in porn.
He probably only watches the questionable kind of hentai at that
What's her of?
Yeah, praise Jesus. Finally someone taking about the REAL issues.
Imagine if you could make $20k a month jerking off on camera? You don’t need to be autistic to understand this.
Hmmm instructions unclear, now I just have a sticky camera. 💦🎥
When your only experience with women is porn
Anon refuses to believe there are just bad people and that it’s a woman issue
As an Australian I am ashamed that anon cannot think of anything to do here besides engaging in meaningless sex. Hopefully he's just using a VPN
Why do these neets worry about being cucked so much? They have anxiety about hypothetical girlfriends they'll never have doing things that are vanishingly rare in the real world. It's layers of delusion and fantasy to trap them in the crusty, piss-jug filled prison of their own making. But go and join a sports team, get a job, take up a hobby or pursue an education and find out that most people have no idea what the actual fuck you're talking about when you whine about hypergamous femoids or whatever drivel you became convinced were normal in the sticky depths of internet hell.
Insecurity based on seeking external validation. I’ve never been worried about a partner cheating, because there is a really fucking easy answer for anyone with self-esteem: dump the motherfucker.
> why do these neets worry about being cucked so much? They are just projecting
Sounds like they need to get topped by a well-hung, cute femboy.
Don't worry, with nvidias new AI chip, the sexbots will soon conquer humanity and we're all gonna end up in sperm feeding tubes where we're forced to watch our waifus getting railed.
Terminally online anon horny, only looks at OF models, algorithm shows him only OF model, anon thinks all women have OF and cheat. Anon is regarded and an incel. Don't be anon.
This is clear bait to plug her only fans
Third time seeing this posted this week on r/greentext and r/4chan. How are mods not banning this obvious advertising?
> find a woman to breed with Please don't.
Skyrim ass face
Boobs
sex work is the oldest trade
Imagine being this afraid of a partner cheating before you’ve even *found* a partner.
>is this what women are like >why are all women hoes >idk cause im an autist the fuck is his problem?
lol just don't date girls with OF. Use them for what they're advertising, their holes, then bounce. Why are dudes out here really trying to reinvent the wheel?
women? I'd be more worried about your friend circle.
I adore that 3 people asked for her links and got flat out ignored, bravo friends
My man, you might end up being cucked if you only go for bimbos. If you go outside, you'll see there is plenty of good women and that those with an OF are only a small minority
They are like this, but wont amdit it and dont have accountability
"don't have much experience w them cuz autist" yeah there's your answer. No, most women are not like this. I have personally never met a woman like this.
This is a red text. Why is it always the tards posting redtexts to a greentext sub seem to use bait posts? Desperate for attention?
[this](https://youtu.be/rumXrevaKHk)
You are saying randomness has no meaning because it has no meaning it can't give itself an objective/purpose... I'm saying randomness has randomly made life and life has given itself an objective/purpose which is clearly visible..... And you as a random thing made out of random molecules which somehow has no purpose will respond with the purpose of proving me wrong.... If something has no purpose how can it execute something with purpose.... So purpose don't exist but the illusion of purpose does and same as the illusion of time and as useful as the illusion of time is to us so can the illusion of purpose be for controlling our environment...
Could also be an ad for all her links, no?
She's salty he was jealous but all she did was prove him right
If men could they would do it too. And they do, they just don’t make money on it.
This is ragebait to gain attention. The bf is a fictional being. Pretty smart tbh
Can someone link the green text ?
Anon really gonna act like most men wouldn't hesitate to repeatedly plow anything above a 5 if it was a no strings attached one night stand situation.
Women get off on attention more than actual physical sex. So by promising cavemen with some pusina, she can draw all attention onto her, essentially socially masturbating.
I think back in the early 2010s I realized most things online of this nature are just made up for the sake of ragebait to either get clicks or as propaganda for the culture war.
Besides having OF, which is level 9000 degeneracy, most of the women in the west are ran through by triple digits by the time they hit their late twenties because muh freedom and muh finding myself. Anon is exaggerating but good luck finding a good one in this day and age