/lit/ - Literature

Yes.

>>19452868
Women will really do all sorts of crazy shit outside of a relationship and justify it as them being single meaning they can do whatever they want.
Those very same women will then boast about how 'loyal' they are when in a relationship, and expect the absolute most out of their partners.

Here's an analogy. You can't eat three course meals every day - it's unhealthy and expensive. However, it's available to you whenever you want, on command.
That's how I think women view the dating market. They have tens of chads lined up for a quick fuck whenever they want, but they know it's unhealthy and they won't be able to manage a relationship with chad, so they settled for brad.
The problem is, knowing what they're missing out on and giving up on to settle for brad makes them spoiled, arrogant and extremely demanding.

I don't blame women for being this way. After all, it's not easy to refuse temptation, especially when society tells you it's a good thing. What I can't accept, however, is how these thots refuse to compromise and carry on believing they are deserving of love and companionship up until they hit the wall and are forced to settle.

Any books for this feel?

>>17050032
>>17050505
These are copes,
>>17048991, a third cope is surprisingly not mentioned here yet. Look, if it hasn't happened yet then it's not going to happen in any significant way, you're psycho-sexually underdeveloped for whatever reason, unimportant now, to try look at yourself as a sexual being now is sadly quite pathetic and laughable but the silver lining is that you can be and are a different kind of animal free to do whatever else of which sex will eventually be a part of given you do so around women, just don't expect it to be noteworthy. You can consider your way of life a disaster mitigation as opposed to success maximization, in the frame the alpha beta dichotomy

Does Catholicism preserve, in some degree, the spirit of Rome? Interested to know if there is a way to go back by going through. Any good books on the topic?

>>16314746
>>16314694
>>16314398
Fuck Greeks. Fuck Romans. Give me a race of people who aren't afraid of showcasing their roast beefs.

>>16304909
>objective proof
Doesn't exist in "real" philopshy no matter how many axioms or whatever people throw at you. Real philopshy has practical purposes and often has no proofs. Look at Marcus Aurelius, did he really need proof of Stoicism to deal with his hard life? No, the model simply worked for him and he kept at it. Find a model that works for you and follow it. And don't be afraid to change it or intertwine ideas from different kinds.

Any nonfiction on the sexual domination of peoples? Pic related.

>>16308999
OPs post is referring to people who can't even afford a bus ticket. But, those types of people have too many problems to deal with than writing a book. Stupid bitch in the post is virtue signaling.