Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Proposed solutions
| Line 235: | Line 235: | ||
Some propose ''sex communism'' and ''state-issued girlfriends'' as a solution to inceldom, however others have objected that such projects seems unlikely to succeed socially/politically, as they are well outside of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window Overton Window] in all liberal democracies, at least, and as such would likely require an authoritarian state that was invested in solving the problem to sucessfully implement, and it is also seen as doubtful whether healthy relationships can form when a relationship is not "earned", but assigned by fiat. Both men and women often want to be proud of their partner choice. For that, both men and women need to know where they stand. | Some propose ''sex communism'' and ''state-issued girlfriends'' as a solution to inceldom, however others have objected that such projects seems unlikely to succeed socially/politically, as they are well outside of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window Overton Window] in all liberal democracies, at least, and as such would likely require an authoritarian state that was invested in solving the problem to sucessfully implement, and it is also seen as doubtful whether healthy relationships can form when a relationship is not "earned", but assigned by fiat. Both men and women often want to be proud of their partner choice. For that, both men and women need to know where they stand. | ||
</li><li> | </li><li> | ||
Extending | Extending the idea of introducing laws and rules to regulate behavior like in ''state-issued girlfriends'', one can consider various ways of punishing singlehood and promiscuity, and reinforcing pairing up monogamously, whether by removing existing conditions (negative) or introducing new ones (positive). | ||
State subvention could e.g. pay male and female incels to for pairing up (''positive reinforcement''). Similarily, one could disincentivize promiscuity and singlehood instead, e.g. by taxing promiscuous behavior<ref>https://www.academia.edu/40699045/Flower_Power_Tax_Academic_Supports_FULL_</ref> and singles (''positive punishment''). Further one could consider ''negative reinforcement'', e.g. by removing burdens that are associated with pairing up. | State subvention could e.g. pay male and female incels to for pairing up (''positive reinforcement''). Similarily, one could disincentivize promiscuity and singlehood instead, e.g. by taxing promiscuous behavior<ref>https://www.academia.edu/40699045/Flower_Power_Tax_Academic_Supports_FULL_</ref> and singles (''positive punishment''). Further one could consider ''negative reinforcement'', e.g. by removing burdens that are associated with pairing up. | ||
Lastly, one could do ''negative punishment'', e.g. depriving female singles of certain benefits they may have. | Lastly, one could do ''negative punishment'', e.g. depriving female singles of certain benefits they may have. | ||