/doomer/ - Doomers Club

We also know that Ancient Pompeii absolutely did not have brothels:

>The Lupanar of Pompeii is the ruins of a brothel in the Ancient Roman city of Pompeii. It is of particular interest for the erotic paintings on its walls. Lupanar is Latin for "brothel". The Pompeii lupanar is also known as Lupanare Grande.

>The Roman word for brothel was lupanar, meaning a wolf den, and a prostitute was called a lupa ("she-wolf").

And nobody until the 1960's had ever tried to develop contraceptive methods to get their freak on while avoiding having to sire children:

>Attempts to control fertility have always depended on social factors as much as on research and religious beliefs have played a large part in the provision or prohibition of contraception. Before the 20th century most references to contraception were linked to illicit sexual relations. It was not until the early 20th century that birth control became available for married couples.

>The earliest method of contraception was probably coitus interruptus. Barrier methods of contraception were later developed. The use of a goat’s bladder as a female sheath was described in Roman literature and ancient Egyptian texts describe the use of vaginal pessaries. In the 17th century Casanova used condoms made of animal intestine. In the 1920s research confirmed the timing of ovulation and the role of the ovarian hormones, oestrogen and progesterone, in reproduction. This led to the development of the rhythm method of contraception, based on the woman’s monthly variation in body temperature, and the development of the contraceptive pill. The first large scale trial of the pill took place in 1956, and it has been refined since then.

>Intrauterine devices developed from metal pessaries used to cure painful periods. IUDs came into widespread use in the 1960s when flexible plastic devices became available. Sterilization was first used for eugenic reasons in the early 1900s, but by the end of the 20th century vasectomy and occlusion of the fallopian tubes were popular methods of birth control.

And I can hear you millenialoids now:

>Noooo, how am I supposed to jerk off to the SJW jew tranny nigger society subversion compilations without vehemently believing that dirty peasants and corrupt elites from 300 years ago weren't perfect god-fearing precious snowflakes!?

Pic rel is the leftoid version of your retardation.

In short, the only reason you consider casual sex to be a failure is because YOU cannot get any. If you did, we all know you would be just as much of a COOMER as the rest of the human race. But then you couldn't hold yourself up to be BETTER THAN NORMIES LOLOLOLOL now could you? You're literally willing to sacrifice your own prime years and end up a suicidal wreck at boomer age just to own randos who will never know you exist?

How proud you have become. And how blind.

W.T. Stead, shown here looking like a REAL man before two successive global fratricides ensured all that was left was detective, proto-millenial garbage, wrote tirelessly about Victorian sexual practices:

>"But," I continued, "are these maids willing or unwilling parties to the transaction–that is, are they really maiden, not merely in being each a virgo intacta in the physical sense, but as being chaste girls who are not consenting parties to their seduction?" He looked surprised at my question, and then replied emphatically: "Of course they are rarely willing, and as a rule they do not know what they are coming for." "But," I said in amazement, "then do you mean to tell me that in very truth actual rapes, in the legal sense of the word, are constantly being perpetrated in London on unwilling virgins, purveyed and procured to rich men at so much a head by keepers of brothels?" "Certainly," said he, "there is not a doubt of it." "Why," I exclaimed, "the very thought is enough to raise hell." "It is true," he said; "and although it ought to raise hell, it does not even raise the neighbours."

>"But do the girls cry out?" "Of course they do. But what avails screaming in a quiet bedroom? Remember, the utmost limit of howling or excessively violent screaming, such as a man or woman would make if actual murder was being attempted, is only two minutes, and the limit of screaming of any kind is only five… But suppose the screams continue and you get uneasy, you begin to think whether you should not do something? Before you have made up your mind and got dressed the screams cease, and you think you were a fool for your pains… Once a girl gets into such a house she is almost helpless, and may be ravished with comparative safety".

>Stead commented that "Children of twelve and thirteen cannot offer any serious resistance. They only dimly comprehend what it all means. Their mothers sometimes consent to their seduction for the sake of the price paid by their seducer. The child goes to the introducing house as a sheep to the shambles. Once there, she is compelled to go through with it. No matter how brutal the man may be, she cannot escape". A madam confirmed the story for him, stating of one girl that she was rendered unconscious beforehand, and then coercively given the choice to continue or be homeless afterwards.

>>29272

>"I engaged her to be my little maid at the lodgings where I was staying. The very next day I took her off with me to London and her mother never saw her again. What became of her? A gentleman paid me £13 for the first of her, soon after she came to town. She was asleep when he did it–sound asleep. To tell the truth, she was drugged. It is often done. I gave her a drowse. It is a mixture of laudanum and something else. Sometimes chloroform is used, but I always used either snuff or laudanum. We call it drowse or black draught, and they lie almost as if dead, and the girl never knows what has happened till morning. And then? Oh! then she cries a great deal from pain, but she is 'mazed, and hardly knows what has happened except that she can hardly move from pain. Of course we tell her it is all right; all girls have to go through it some time, that she is through it now without knowing it, and that it is no use crying. It will never be undone for all the crying in the world. She must now do as the others do. She can live like a lady, do as she pleases, have the best of all that is going, and enjoy herself all day. If she objects, I scold her and tell her she has lost her character, no one will take her in; I will have to turn her out on the streets as a bad and ungrateful girl. The result is that in nine cases out of ten, or ninety-nine out of a hundred, the child, who is usually under fifteen, frightened and friendless, her head aching with the effect of the drowse and full of pain and horror, gives up all hope, and in a week she is one of the attractions of the house."

>"Maids, as you call them – fresh girls as we know them in the trade – are constantly in request, and a keeper who knows his business has his eyes open in all directions, his stock of girls is constantly getting used up, and needs replenishing, and he has to be on the alert for likely "marks" to keep up the reputation of his house. I have been in my time a good deal about the country on these errands. The getting of fresh girls takes time, but it is simple and easy enough when, once you are in it. I have gone and courted girls in the country under all kinds of disguises, occasionally assuming the dress of a parson, and made them believe that I intended to marry them, and so got them in my power to please a good customer. How is it done? Why, after courting my girl for a time, I propose to bring her to London to see the sights. I bring her up, take her here and there, giving her plenty to eat and drink–especially drink. I take her to the theatre, and then I contrive it so that she loses her last train. By this time she is very tired, a little dazed with the drink and excitement, and very frightened at being left in town with no friends…"

>"I offer her nice lodgings for the night: she goes to bed in my house, and then the affair is managed. My client gets his maid, I get my £10 or £20 commission, and in the morning the girl, who has lost her character, and dare not go home, in all probability will do as the others do, and become one of my "marks"–that is, she will make her living in the streets, to the advantage of my house. The brothel keeper's profit is, first, the commission down for the price of a maid, and secondly, the continuous profit of the addition of a newly seduced, attractive girl to his establishment. That is a fair sample case of the way in which we recruit. Another very simple mode of supplying maids is by breeding them. Many women who are on the streets have female children. They are worth keeping. When they get to be twelve or thirteen they become merchantable. For a very likely "mark" of this kind you may get as much as £20 or £40…"

>>29273

Ergo, we can conclude that what we consider "modern practices" were prominent throughout history. Pic related?

>Minnie Rae. Caption on the back of the 1871 photo says, ""Mary Simpson, age 10 or 11. She has been known as Mrs. Berry for at least two years. She is four months pregnant."

Of course, a lot of millenialoids will consider her a proto-waifu (then complain about ROASTIE SLUTS thereafter). I think it's pretty sad stuff. Those anons aren't pedophiles, they just pretend to be because it's easier on them. A little girl, with whom they would have nothing in common, and who is mightly impressionable as Stead pointed out, is easier to control, to exploit, then a woman with actual standards, a woman their own age.

>Foids have standards? Preposterous!

And what can you offer them? Jack shit, I imagine. Otherwise, you wouldn't be HERE, now would you?

I could go on. I could dreg up historical precedents in all countries - I could mention the proliferation of pre-anime yuri on Japanese woodcuts, complete with older women breaking in younger girls with big, hulking strapons. I could bring up the pederasty found in the ranks of the Samurai. I could bring up Indian erotic art. I could bring up all sorts of shit, and all you'd have to say for it is that it doesn't count for whatever reason.

>>29280

>Not exactly true. It's hard to believe, but girls as young as seven are ambitious little devils. They're already practicing pelvic moves and dolling themselves up and classifying their male peers based on fashion and age. They suck up to many older boy/adult male they find.

Perhaps, but let's remember that none of them would tolerate the imageboardcels - they preach about "muh cunny" despite having literally no chance with them. I've always found it funny how they insist that "the younger the better" and never factor in that these girls, like the women their own age, would be just as likely to reject them. But like I said, imageboardcels aren't actually attracted to little girls, but to what they represent: a chance to live their childhood again, to have the childhood crush they never had, to live life like the Hollywood movies that babysat them. That's why they constantly deflect whenever you tell them that even if man/girl relationships were a thing, they wouldn't make the grade. They would be turned away. This also is why they harp about that pair bond bullshit: they just cannot accept that they're AGING. They are desperate. They come up with shit like the wall: yeah, and? That woman STILL lived a life better than you ever will. She will STILL have plenty of suitors - their quality isn't as important as the QUANTITY that you lowkey envy, you tradcuck goofs. Traditionalism is just the same shit as consumerism among the "SJW" types - it's a fear of aging, a fear of ADULTING. And then you look at pic related. Yeah, I guess I can see why lol.

>>29281

Traditionalism, like radical feminism, is rooted in self-hatred and projection. It's the belief that the more you "fight the Other," the more you don't have to admit that maybe they had a point after all. It's why I laugh when radfems appropriate incelspeak for themselves. Foid becomes moid. Roastie becomes scrote. They too use words like normie and NPC. Lolcow Farm is chock full of them, although I'm still thinking they're men pretending to be women. I see it all the time. Any "red pilled woman" online is either a man or a desperate pick-me at best, a handmaiden who doesn't mind the knee on her neck because it's still attention.

>>29283

>Why bother?

Because someone has to say it. Someone has to call these idiots out after a decade of ruining everything: the internet, pop culture, simple human to human interaction. I'm just one person, true, but I feel like enough is enough.

>If they lived in the 50s they idealised so much they'd be rotting in an asylum (and asylums were brutal back in the day).

It's trickle down economics blended with cargo cult thinking - they believe that the more boomerish they make themselves, the more the boomers will finally let the wealth trickle down, but it won't, it never will. It's also rooted in the fear of aging, of losing the genetic lottery, of le wrong generation-ing. It's like the character of Nathan in Daria - he tried so hard to be a cool, suave proto-based dude only to end up looking like a total cringy goofball. Ah, Daria. Ever read tradcucks trying to claim she'd be a MIGApede or some shit? Makes as much sense as people saying George "I gave up on my species" Carlin (y'know, the guy who openly respected a big time fan and fellow open borders supporter Robert Anton Wilson, who said Trump was fucking crazy) would've voted for Trump in 2016 AND 2020.

>BTW the nuclear family model has only been variable in that time period (and among the WASP middle-class) because the economy allowed it

Literally EVERYTHING we take for granted was. Now that Amerimutts have to pull themselves up by the bootstraps, they can't cope. They can't cope with the fact that they can't just coast on the successes of the past. They're saddled with millenials, who are going to be okay boomer'd to hell and back by zoomers and younger gens. You know how every sitcom since forever had that senile WWII vet grandpa stock character? We'll be getting those just with neon hair and sagging, wrinkled tattooed skin, wildly going on tangents on how how they punched fitty Nayzees/soibois in their youth. Take every stereotypical trope the millenials came up with (incel, femcel, doomer, thot, Trumpist, I was just pretending to be retarded, SJW, soyboy, etc) and, in sixty or so years, watch as they all end up the suicide generation. The decisions they’re making now are going bite them very hard in the ass. They’re going to be lonely, sitting in a nursing home with no family and completely broke because they have no children to support them. Just like "OWN THE LIBS LOL" isn't an actual way to govern a country (five hundred thousand plus dead Americans speaks for itself), it's not a way to live either.

>>29298

>If said youth are cynical/skeptical, they bully and shame the youth as being "lazy/selfish/weak."

Bingo. That's why they gatekeep mundane life problems on this board.

>Wait until you pay the bills, zoomer! lol

I wonder if this is just them getting back at the boomer educators who told them this growing up when they were angsty and depressed teenagers and younger themselves. In fact, expanding on this, you could conclude that a lot of the anti feminist backlash from young men is because all the authorities in young men's life are female. Single moms are more common and even in most two parent households, Mom is the one telling you to go to bed at a reasonable hour instead of staying up all night playing Minecraft or asking you to stop leaving pee bottles in your bedroom. Most teachers are female. Most managers at low level service industry jobs are female. The face of "the man" in young men's lives is mom and they're asserting that she can't tell them what to do. Every alt-lite type dude I've picked the brains of eventually starts telling me that all of today's problems are actually because of the increase of single motherhood, women getting too much power after divorce, and the lack of father figures and traditional family values. They never had a guy to teach them how to perform their masculinity so they're constantly feeling insecure about it and unsure if they're doing it right, and this insecurity is pinned on the women who raised them and on the "feminists" who made society so confusing and frightening for these young men. Instead of realizing that gender/masculinity is a performance with no actual rules, they just think they were robbed of their ability and rights to express their masculinity because it was not personally handed down to them by a blood relative and/or because their upbringing was tainted by feminism and soy products and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify their precious bodily fluids. They are always on a quest to find a father figure to guide them into the inner sanctum of manhood that they feel has been hidden from them by women, and also to bravely carve out their own lone wolf version of

masculinity, hence their worship of Jordan Peterson, Vox Day, Donald Trump, et cetera. Their approach is flawed, childlike, and fuelled by butthurt, and so obviously they get bad and toxic results. imagine having a single mother that provides for you and being mad about that; that's crazy, right? Well, she might want you to take out the trash or pick up the clothes you have strewn across the floor of your room. Basically white genocide.

Reverse the genders, and you'd have SJW/woke women explained just as succintly.

I'm sure, though, once economic circumstances begin to worsen, we will see them gain at least a little perspective on what actually matters in life.

Look at the incel/loveshy community. To a man, they all think they're deserving of a 10/10 blonde with a 24" waist, DDD cups, and a dual PhD in astrophysics and blowjobs who is simultaneously a virgin and really good at sex. It's millenial fragility and entitlement taken to its logical conclusion.

They all share this entitled belief that they are "deserving" of the best of the best without putting forth any effort at all, and that is damning even for attractive people. Pic related is the best they can do.

>>29326

>You just sound like your projecting on those you disagree with.

I'm sorry, but I have to mention this again, and not just because you called those girls "whores" for being open sexually, something you disagree with.

You see, there's this group of millenials and older online, I'm sure you've heard of them?

>LIKE, OMG, EVERYTHING, LIKE, SUCKS THESE DAYS? I WISH I WAS, LIKE, BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, IGNORING ALL THE SOCIOCULTURAL PROBLEMS OF THAT TIME 'CAUSE, LIKE, THE MUSIC WAS, Y'KNOW, BETTER?

YouTube is chock full of them. They will literally rage to Hell and back if you even so much as happen to know the music they do, from something as silly as a glorified kids' toy (aka video game), movie, whatever. What? You got into the same music I like? NORMIE! CASUAL! FUCK OFF! You'd think this crowd would be happy to know the music they like was being popularized, but y'know what?

It was never about the music.

It was always about the elitism. It was always about being superior to somebody else. It was always about having supposed power and authority over others in the cheapest, laziest way possible.

And that's what I see with imageboard posters like yourself.

You come onto imageboards, a place where you can finally be free from THEM: the NORMIES as you call them who dare to share the same interests as you do. You watch the same anime, play the same vidya, read the same books, cheer for the same sports teams, but YOU are somehow BETTER because you, like, GET it, man. See, it's not that no one actually cares about "muh quality" and just makes whatever they want with the sole purpose of GIMME MONEY! It's not like the point of capitalism is to make the most money possible, and thus instead of catering to the same old, same old bunch of obsessive autistic elitists, they open their creations up to get as many willing customers as possible. It's not that sports teams aren't just a bunch of rootless cosmopolitan millionaires who don't even care about rivalries anymore and are just there to collect a paycheck on the off chance they might win something someday at the behest of billionaire boomers whose only goal is to milk the working class.

It's that you GET it.

And that's why people mock and belittle you.

You're not mentally ill. You're not doomers. You couldn't really care less about any of the shit you talk about here. You're only "doomers" because you're desperate to maintain the fantasy that you're somehow better than everyone else. That's why you have anons raging that your fellow goofs at Reddit adopted the doomer subculture. Because now they can't be doomers. They can't be doomers because someone else dares to share their tastes. Like the faggots who go "well, I can stop being a fan now of something I once loved' cause THESE people are fans now" like the scared pussies they are, you drop all interest in being doomers and revert to the one thing that no one will ever adopt en masse.

National Socialism.

See, the leftoids have it all wrong. You're not Nazis. You're pretending to be Nazis to keep up the charade of being unique and different. It's the male version of I'M NOT LIKE THOSE OTHER GIRLS bimbos who post about how different they are 'cause, like, OMG, I like, uh, camping, and stuff. As Nazism is the ultimate taboo ideology, you have finally found something normies will never touch.

And that's why you come on here. Posting about how it's "wrong" to have sex with "whores" because you'd rather be the martyr for a cause no one will ever give a shit about than someone who gets laid, realizes sex isn't a big deal, and gets the fuck on with his life. You're just an elitist, anon. An elitist desperate for validation.

>You just sound like your projecting on those you disagree with.

>Those women who are confident in themselves and actually interested in living life? Man, they're just notorious whores.

Of course, we both know they never existed. No man who's desirable enough to get girls into him would call him a fucking doomer. A real doomer is someone like Terry Davis or, fuck, the mothers in the Phillippines who sell their kids to Western boomer sexpats. Not some tryhard faggot who thinks people don't appreciate the finer points of cuckime.

>>29335

>The irony is? Most of these nostalgiatards don't even know nor care much about the hip stuff of their parents/grandparents' heyday.

And that's a very good point, but there's an excuse they have for this:

>YEAH, WELL, IT WAS ALL POZZED/KIKED/PROBLEMATIC ANYWAY LOL.

They always have a convenient excuse, wouldn't you agree? Anything to maintain the delusion that any moment now, the day of the rope will commence, and Der Yankee Fuhrer will accept them into the Volk, and they will never have the fact that they NEET'd it up on the backs of hard working white men hanging over them.

In the end, /doomer/ was just a poor man's r9k mixed with scraping the bottom of the /pol/ barrel, and /doomer/ was just an attempt to capture sympathy from the "too mature for /pol/" crowd of cornball rightoid jackass, like how people think drinking diet soda is healthier than regular soda. Imageboards themselves were never all that special to begin with, anyway. Contrary to popular opinion, there's nothing on imageboards you couldn't get elsewhere, and that's probably why /pol/ was a thing to begin with. Gotta market the medium somehow. Problem is, /pol/ KILLED the medium, and now no one takes it seriously unless it's to sperg out about how a bunch of NEETs are somehow going to destroy MUH POC or some shit. Sweetie, the only thing these NEETs will be destroying is their brain matter as it flies out of their skull when they hit fifty.

Pic related, because I think it really does apply here. How can you change the world if you don't change yourself first?