HA code of relationship conduct

[Cornfed]

Since this issue has come up in various threads, it might be helpful if some consensus could be reached as to what is morally OK when it comes to Western men having sexual relations with foreign women. I'm not talking about behavior we would likely all agree is not OK such as deliberately spreading STDs, sex with little children, breaking into houses and raping people etc. I'm talking about behaviors that might seem normal in Western feminist dystopias, but which we might have differing views on when exported to foreign lands. Here are my suggestions, put up for discussion, on what should be considered morally OK and what should be considered not morally OK.

Morally OK
1. Courting women with a genuine view to marriage in a manner normal by local standards
2. Whoremongering with professional hoes
3. Courtship and casual relational sex with non-virgins in a manner that would be normal for local men
4. Casual sex with skanks who are or would be having sex with other men

Not morally OK
1. Conning virgins or near virgins into casual sex with false promises of marriage or similar relationships
2. Gaming virgins or near virgins into casual sex where this is not normal by local standards
3. Taking advantage of temporary economic crises to whoremonger with females who might have otherwise become wives rather than hoes
4. Adultery

That is the list I thought of off the top of my head. Maybe some other situations could be added and we could reach some kind of HA consensus.

[drealm]

I think you should relabel your list like this:

Morally OK
1. Courting women with a genuine view to marriage in a manner normal by local standards
2. Whoremongering with professional hoes
3. Courtship and casual relational sex with non-virgins in a manner that would be normal for local men
4. Casual sex with skanks who are or would be having sex with other men

Not morally OK
5. Conning virgins or near virgins into casual sex with false promises of marriage or similar relationships
6. Gaming virgins or near virgins into casual sex where this is not normal by local standards
7. Taking advantage of temporary economic crises to whoremonger with females who might have otherwise become wives rather than hoes
8. Adultery

I see 3 as no different than 5-6. What's a near virgin and what's a skank?

4 is difficult. What qualifies as a skank? A woman who's been with 2+ men? An unmarried non-virgin woman over 30? I'm not comfortable with 4 because there's no easy to to judge a skank. Even if there was, no matter what the woman will feel hurt. I don't like hurting people because it makes me feel sick and while women aren't guilt free it's ultimately the men who shaped them - so men are responsible. I know if it's p4p she won't be hurt.

I've never seen a case of 7. Any woman can find a man to support her.

8 is the worst offense possible.

__________________________________________________

Theres huge camp of parasites on this forum who go from culture to culture looking for easy casual sex with good women. These men are incapable of connecting the dots that they can only benefit from such liberal exploitation while a culture is pure or collapsed. The party ends when what they're doing becomes the norm. Of course they'll never see this in their own actions.

[drealm]

I should add, I don't think anyone should be asked to adhere to a code of conduct. I think people should arrive at their own conclusions. The only point in something like this would be to see who are your enemies and who are your allies. You cannot convert morally inferior genetics into higher standing people. All you can do is group like minded people together.

[E_Irizarry]

I should add, I don't think anyone should be asked to adhere to a code of conduct. I think people should arrive at their own conclusions. The only point in something like this would be to see who are your enemies and who are your allies. You cannot convert morally inferior genetics into higher standing people. All you can do is group like minded people together.

^
|
|
This.
Except being a zealot for claiming that things that may not be adhere to what you deem as a high standard doesn't necessarily mean that it's a byproduct of morally-genetic inferiority. Your making an opinion too for what you feel should be categorized when it comes to what you think is"morally-inferior genetics."

[Cornfed]

I think you should relabel your list like this:

Morally OK
1. Courting women with a genuine view to marriage in a manner normal by local standards
2. Whoremongering with professional hoes
3. Courtship and casual relational sex with non-virgins in a manner that would be normal for local men
4. Casual sex with skanks who are or would be having sex with other men

Not morally OK
5. Conning virgins or near virgins into casual sex with false promises of marriage or similar relationships
6. Gaming virgins or near virgins into casual sex where this is not normal by local standards
7. Taking advantage of temporary economic crises to whoremonger with females who might have otherwise become wives rather than hoes
8. Adultery

I see 3 as no different than 5-6.

The difference is that in (3) you are being honest and conforming to local standards. If it is the excepted norm for females to have a few sexual liaisons before marriage in the way it was in the West in the 80s and probably is in urban, coastal East Asia today, and it is understood by all that any of these liaisons has a less-than-50% chance of resulting in marriage, then I don't see any harm if one man in the chain is a foreigner. This is different from getting a female who would likely otherwise have remained a virgin until marriage to have sex with you by falsely promising marriage. Similarly, if it is usual for divorced women and widows to have affairs without being thought of as hoes, that is OK too.

4 is difficult. What qualifies as a skank?

As I say, if she is already having casual sex with other men on a regular basis, then you will not be making any difference to the situation, so she is fair game.

I've never seen a case of 7. Any woman can find a man to support her.

I'm thinking of occasions such as the collapse of communism in EE or the end of the civil war in Cambodia that brought in a flood of whoremongers (in the latter case under the guise of U.N. peacekeepers) which, combined with local economic collapse, enticed a lot of females to become hoes who otherwise might have been (or were) respectable married women.

8 is the worst offense possible

In general yes, but it depends. I personally see nothing wrong with nailing the wives of Western manginas like publicduende. Arguably nailing the wives of men like Japanese and Korean corporate types who go out drinking with the boys all the time and barely recognize their own wives is no biggie and is in fact helping them out by doing their job for them. In either case you likely wouldn't be the first. But generally yes, adultery is pretty bad.

[drealm]

I think you should relabel your list like this:

Morally OK
1. Courting women with a genuine view to marriage in a manner normal by local standards
2. Whoremongering with professional hoes
3. Courtship and casual relational sex with non-virgins in a manner that would be normal for local men
4. Casual sex with skanks who are or would be having sex with other men

Not morally OK
5. Conning virgins or near virgins into casual sex with false promises of marriage or similar relationships
6. Gaming virgins or near virgins into casual sex where this is not normal by local standards
7. Taking advantage of temporary economic crises to whoremonger with females who might have otherwise become wives rather than hoes
8. Adultery

I see 3 as no different than 5-6.
The difference is that in (3) you are being honest and conforming to local standards. If it is the excepted norm for females to have a few sexual liaisons before marriage in the way it was in the West in the 80s and probably is in urban, coastal East Asia today, and it is understood by all that any of these liaisons has a less-than-50% chance of resulting in marriage, then I don't see any harm if one man in the chain is a foreigner. This is different from getting a female who would likely otherwise have remained a virgin until marriage to have sex with you by falsely promising marriage. Similarly, if it is usual for divorced women and widows to have affairs without being thought of as hoes, that is OK too.

But women aren't capable of embodying principles or sexual restraint. A woman conforms to whatever the local standards are. If the local standards are set by men and men choose to whore out women then the women will be whores. So this action may not be outside the norm but I certainly wouldn't look to locals as a justification for destroying women.

I also think that if a man partakes in these escapades it conditions him into a sleazy man and sleazy men are unproductive and unreliable. So I see it as a negative habit for men. It's similar to a case of becoming a liar. Even if you only lie to people who are your enemies lying may become a part of your habit and you may eventually end up lying to people whom are part of your trusted community. It's like an infection.

4 is difficult. What qualifies as a skank?

As I say, if she is already having casual sex with other men on a regular basis, then you will not be making any difference to the situation, so she is fair game.

Well how do you find this out? A woman isn't going to tell you she's a slut of how many partners she's had. She's not going to tell you her boyfriend count. If you want to go based on guesses you could be damaging an otherwise well intentioned woman.

I've never seen a case of 7. Any woman can find a man to support her.

I'm thinking of occasions such as the collapse of communism in EE or the end of the civil war in Cambodia that brought in a flood of whoremongers (in the latter case under the guise of U.N. peacekeepers) which, combined with local economic collapse, enticed a lot of females to become hoes who otherwise might have been (or were) respectable married women.

Even those women could find local men to support them. All this showed is that there was a weak culture insulated from a liberal infection and as soon as host culture made contact with a liberal infection it showed how weak of an immune system it had against resisting infection.

[Cornfed]

But women aren't capable of embodying principles or sexual restraint. A woman conforms to whatever the local standards are. If the local standards are set by men and men choose to whore out women then the women will be whores. So this action may not be outside the norm but I certainly wouldn't look to locals as a justification for destroying women.

You're not destroying them if they are already sluts/hoes before your arrival. You are simply using an existing resource. I don't think it is our place to act as missionaries and order the local men not to whore out their women. Quite the reverse. We should be trying to avoid making an imprint on other societies. Incidentally, the whore lifestyle is not an intrinsically bad thing. A certain percentage of whores existed openly in most functional societies and served a useful purpose. It is the overwhelming preponderance of whores in Western societies that is the problem.

I also think that if a man partakes in these escapades it conditions him into a sleazy man and sleazy men are unproductive and unreliable. So I see it as a negative habit for men. It's similar to a case of becoming a liar. Even if you only lie to people who are your enemies lying may become a part of your habit and you may eventually end up lying to people whom are part of your trusted community. It's like an infection.

Men having honest and amicable sex with pre-existing whores is not sleazy and has been the accepted norm for most of history. You are falling for feminist shaming propaganda.

[drealm]

But women aren't capable of embodying principles or sexual restraint. A woman conforms to whatever the local standards are. If the local standards are set by men and men choose to whore out women then the women will be whores. So this action may not be outside the norm but I certainly wouldn't look to locals as a justification for destroying women.

You're not destroying them if they are already sluts/hoes before your arrival. You are simply using an existing resource. I don't think it is our place to act as missionaries and order the local men not to whore out their women. Quite the reverse. We should be trying to avoid making an imprint on other societies. Incidentally, the whore lifestyle is not an intrinsically bad thing. A certain percentage of whores existed openly in most functional societies and served a useful purpose. It is the overwhelming preponderance of whores in Western societies that is the problem.

I agree you can't dammage a woman beyond a certain bed count. The important question is what is that bed count? 2+ men? 5+ men? 10+ men?. What do you define as a near virgin? If this definition isn't clear, how do you show restraint? There could be a large segment "near virgins" depending on how you draft the definition. If the code your proposing for handling "near virgins" is do whatever a local men do then your code could be anything, which really isn't a code at all.

There are very few societies that aren't affected by liberalism. You have three choices: Live in a feminist society, live in a ultra conservative religious community or find a place in between a religious haven and a feminist society. A place in between a feminist and religious society would be somewhere like China. Unless you plan to live in a religious haven you will be making an imprint on the society you're living in.

There's a difference between a working girl and a loose woman. I don't think any amount of loose women is a good thing. But I do fully support p4p.

I also think that if a man partakes in these escapades it conditions him into a sleazy man and sleazy men are unproductive and unreliable. So I see it as a negative habit for men. It's similar to a case of becoming a liar. Even if you only lie to people who are your enemies lying may become a part of your habit and you may eventually end up lying to people whom are part of your trusted community. It's like an infection.

Men having honest and amicable sex with pre-existing whores is not sleazy and has been the accepted norm for most of history. You are falling for feminist shaming propaganda.

This is a general principle that I don't think most people will agree with me on. It's not particular to bedding women. Let's take a broader picture, supposing you lie, cheat, steal, abuse and murder your enemy do you not think this will change the kind of person you are? I don't care how the enemy is affected, I care how it changes me as a person. I think regardless of whom I do these actions to, they may make me a more callous person for everyone.

[fschmidt]

I should add, I don't think anyone should be asked to adhere to a code of conduct. I think people should arrive at their own conclusions. The only point in something like this would be to see who are your enemies and who are your allies. You cannot convert morally inferior genetics into higher standing people. All you can do is group like minded people together.

The Bible teaches the opposite of what you say. Jeremiah and prophets spoke the truth and were considered crazy. Jesus tried selling morality with magic tricks and promises of heaven and he was crucified. But Moses imposed morality on a bunch of worthless slaves by beating the shit out of all who opposed him. This actually worked.

People are too stupid to arrive at their own conclusions. They must be led.

[fschmidt]

I fully support Cornfed's list.

[abcdavid01]

I should add, I don't think anyone should be asked to adhere to a code of conduct. I think people should arrive at their own conclusions. The only point in something like this would be to see who are your enemies and who are your allies. You cannot convert morally inferior genetics into higher standing people. All you can do is group like minded people together.

The Bible teaches the opposite of what you say. Jeremiah and prophets spoke the truth and were considered crazy. Jesus tried selling morality with magic tricks and promises of heaven and he was crucified. But Moses imposed morality on a bunch of worthless slaves by beating the shit out of all who opposed him. This actually worked.

People are too stupid to arrive at their own conclusions. They must be led.

viewtopic.php?t=18275

Freedom, in the sense of Liberalism, is the domain of God. Man, however, is not God. He is not immortal, nor omniscient, nor omnipresent.

Those who are free are truly savages. The homeless miscreant struggles for food and shelter. The empty soul cries out for meaning. What freedom is this?

Are wild animals truly free? The animal's concern is survival. It must keep to strict routines or it will fall victim to predators.

The trade is not between freedom and security; security is freedom's goal. This is the process from which civilization emerges.

Freedom is necessary at times for greater security. This means freedom for medical experimentation, which allows people to live healthier, more able lives. Innovation requires freedom to create security - lightbulbs, central heating, more efficient sources of energy production, etc. Even arts and entertainment require greater freedom to create security of man's mind.

What is self actualization but security of mind?

Freedom is an investment with the reward of security. Like any investment it can fail and too many failures lead to bankruptcy. In finance this refers to monetary bankruptcy; in sociology this means moral bankruptcy.

When man is too successful he begins to forget the traditions which lead his ancestors to victory. This is when empires fall.

[C.J.]

People are too stupid to arrive at their own conclusions. They must be led.

Yup. 99.98% of humans are much too stupid. They ALWAYS take down the more superior and benevolent of their lot. This is why Jesus was killed by the silent minority - he taught the people to have FREEDOM from soul slavery(bad food, taxes, contracts etc.) and to fight against those who oppress you, but the people were MUCH too stupid and complacent to know and apply what he was talking about, even though he spoke in a way even monkeys could understand.

That's what the Christ principle was all about - Jesus himself could've fought off the silent minority, as he threw them out of the temples - they were evil disguised as good. But he chose to die for all mankind, to set them free to choose their own destiny. As long as you're pure of heart and be evil for good's sake, you could be born again through Christ, which would free you from penance through your sins. This would keep the balance between good and evil, as evil people would be killed by good. Therefore, you had a reason to be good as you could commit evil, but only in Christ's name. Karma was then managed by the group consciousness.

However, the Christ principle no longer works for most people as they've chosen to take penance for their sins, instead of choosing Christ to take them instead. This is why I now don't go to western churches, or deal with religious westerners - they are f***ing crazy! You have to be, to take the burdens of the world on your shoulders.

[jboy]

Since this issue has come up in various threads, it might be helpful if some consensus could be reached as to what is morally OK when it comes to Western men having sexual relations with foreign women. I'm not talking about behavior we would likely all agree is not OK such as deliberately spreading STDs, sex with little children, breaking into houses and raping people etc. I'm talking about behaviors that might seem normal in Western feminist dystopias, but which we might have differing views on when exported to foreign lands. Here are my suggestions, put up for discussion, on what should be considered morally OK and what should be considered not morally OK.

Morally OK
1. Courting women with a genuine view to marriage in a manner normal by local standards
2. Whoremongering with professional hoes
3. Courtship and casual relational sex with non-virgins in a manner that would be normal for local men
4. Casual sex with skanks who are or would be having sex with other men

Not morally OK
1. Conning virgins or near virgins into casual sex with false promises of marriage or similar relationships
2. Gaming virgins or near virgins into casual sex where this is not normal by local standards
3. Taking advantage of temporary economic crises to whoremonger with females who might have otherwise become wives rather than hoes
4. Adultery

That is the list I thought of off the top of my head. Maybe some other situations could be added and we could reach some kind of HA consensus.

Good one man, +1

[***JP***]

Since this issue has come up in various threads, it might be helpful if some consensus could be reached as to what is morally OK when it comes to Western men having sexual relations with foreign women. I'm not talking about behavior we would likely all agree is not OK such as deliberately spreading STDs, sex with little children, breaking into houses and raping people etc. I'm talking about behaviors that might seem normal in Western feminist dystopias, but which we might have differing views on when exported to foreign lands. Here are my suggestions, put up for discussion, on what should be considered morally OK and what should be considered not morally OK.

Morally OK
1. Courting women with a genuine view to marriage in a manner normal by local standards
2. Whoremongering with professional hoes
3. Courtship and casual relational sex with non-virgins in a manner that would be normal for local men
4. Casual sex with skanks who are or would be having sex with other men

Not morally OK
1. Conning virgins or near virgins into casual sex with false promises of marriage or similar relationships
2. Gaming virgins or near virgins into casual sex where this is not normal by local standards
3. Taking advantage of temporary economic crises to whoremonger with females who might have otherwise become wives rather than hoes
4. Adultery

That is the list I thought of off the top of my head. Maybe some other situations could be added and we could reach some kind of HA consensus.

Finally an excellent post that makes good sense on what most of us should focus here. I agree we are not promoting sex tourism but for decent guys to find decent women. After all this is what happier abroad is about. Finding something meaningful and making a positive change in your life. I honestly can't stand whoremongers who give us american guys a bad reputation abroad.

[well-informed]

@ CJ

I'm curious can you expand on why Western churches crazy, i think i already have some answers in mind as to why you feel that way. i just want you to hear your opinion on the subject

Christ was constantly reminding his audience to open up their ears if they want to understand wisdom, and to have the opportunity to break the yokes/lies that the enemy has been feeding you for years.