/lit/ - Literature

The Holy Bible.

I'm going to be straight here. I am a cuckold, but I am also a white nationalist. I believe that whites have contributed more to humanity than any other race, space travel, anti—biotics the list goes on. But when it comes down to it, blacks are just better at fucking. Theres no shame in admitting this. There is no shame in admitting that despite the infinite intellectual and moral superiority of the white race, black cock is just better at pleasing women.

The reason white women are turning from the cause and running to niggers is simply because they are not being sexually satisfied. Can you blame them? If you dont get enough to eat at home youre going to go out to eat. The only way to save the white race from miscegenation is cuckolding. My pure white wife is my angel, the apple of my eye. And I want nothing but the best for her. So every friday she gets to have her fill of big black cock. And our relationship goes on like normal. We love each other, and plan on having a child soon. She also shares my red pilled beliefs.

Monogamy is a tool of the jew. Just give it a chance once. Its exhilarating. Theres something deeply majestic about watching a toned muscular black stud going in and out of a beautiful white woman. Try it once.

>>10267717
LACAN
A
C
A
N

tldr: Polyamory isn't just shit, its self defeating

>>10267717
>>10267717
None. There aren't any books. Marriage is cold war propaganda, and people used to just live in big piles whether they fucked or not.
Physical intimacy needs to be fostered more- between friends, as much as lovers.

Why do you expect Polyamory to be bad? You have more than one friend, don't you? Romance is just another type of love.

>>10267725
*dick in hand* that's great dude

all civilisations of note have practiced either monogamy or polygyny, whereas polygamy (of the non-polygynist variety) is favoured by maybe a handful of primitive, isolated tribes in some remote location

>>10267725
Why don't you become a toned muscular white stud then? Its hard sure however it will reward you. Plus you'll get to keep your wife all to yourself and further the continuation of your people

>>10268108
There's no point, you can diet, work out and lift 6hrs everyday day but you'll still be a doughey marshmellow against the body Tyrone will have from a life of BigMacs and basketball

>>10268062

Entirely meaningless statement.

>>10268021

This, I would actually go further and say that the split between romantic love and friendship is entirely fabricated, they are both the same exact feeling.

You love your friends and vice versa (only if you truly have friends, obviously). I would also say that romantic love and sexual attraction can be entirely separate.

I say this as a strictly monogamous person who's been committed to the same woman for more than 5 years.

>>10268136
I agree with this but for the same reason I don't have any friends because I'm not a pathetic faggot. My heart is only for my love

>>10267717
Brave New World, Tropic of Cancer

>>10268135
So you're gonna sit back and quit? For gods sakes man id give anything to be white and you're just throwing it away like nothing?

>>10268136
>reddit spacing

Wonder who is behind this post

>>10268136
>Entirely meaningless statement
nah

>>10268136
>>10268021
Romantic love is associated with the feeling of "being in love" which is a form of strong obsessive-possessive attachment.
Are you in love with your friends?

>>10268234
yes it was

>>10268136
>This, I would actually go further and say that the split between romantic love and friendship is entirely fabricated, they are both the same exact feeling.
lol, you are very, very, very stupid

>>10268237
He's probably a nu-male faggot that considers his dykish wife his "friend"

>>10268244
explain then

>>10268247
he's never spoken to a girl in his life, but considers himself to be in a relationship with his anime waifu

>>10267725
Pls, niggers are the least passionate lovers.

>>10268252
I'd unironically have more respect for a waifufag than a nu-male with attitudes like that poster

>>10268247
>>10268252
>>10268263
>all this irrational anger
really makes me think about your love life

>>10268265
>oy vey look at all this anger, you should look into getting testosterone reduction

>>10268265
>gets made fun of
>accuses people of "irrational anger"
lol

>>10267717
It's not only morally reprehensible, it just doesn't work. The murder rate will probably skyrocket, too.

I have come to teh conclusion, however, that there must be 2 subspecies of humans. Those who are naturally polyamorous and those who are naturally monogamous. It would be ideal if we'd segregate.

>>10268153
He is trolling. It's a stale copypasta, too.

>>10268311
It'd be ideal if we gassed the degenerates you mean

>>10268136
>Entirely meaningless statement.
The successful reproduction of a society is not just a "statement".

>>10268237
>Are you in love with your friends?
Depends what you mean by that. I love them, and we do things that are physically intimate as well as what you'd consider "typical relationship behaviors" I guess.

The only thing that we don't do is have sex with one another. My best friend and I enjoy kissing, and being physically (but platonically) intimate, while my other friend doesn't enjoy it at all, but even we sleep together.

To be fair, I am asexual, and I think if I weren't me and my best friend might have had sex already (I was invited to a threesome) but we both have issues with sex on different end of the spectrum.

We've talked about our relationship a lot and we are both fine with marrying one another, so...

Personally, I already feel like I'm in a relationship with my friends- my two most prominent ones especially. They are both very special to me, but very different from one another. They both provide different things that I need, and when they get along, I'm also happy, even if I can't participate. I don't feel jealous of either of them. (Although I do get jealous of other people) Honestly, I just can't imagine a romantic polyamorous relationship being that much different.

Take that how you will.

Sex at Dawn might have something you want

love of men towards women = love of women towards children = attempt at unconditional love (utopian for men, effective for women but highly delusional)

love of men towards children (= an aid to retire and stop their suffering) = love of women towards men = utility towards more pleasures and less pains, guilts, nagging days now and in the future

>>10267717
Relationships can take all kinds of healthy form is people are just honest about their intentions and priorities. It hardly ever works in any sustained way but that's not because there is a correct decision-making style that applies to one's genitals. These relationships fall apart because people are possessive and selfish and dishonest about their intentions and priorities.

t. been in open relationship for 7 years. Haven't acted on its "openness" in 4 because literally every person we try to bring in gets really manipulative about it.

>>10267725
is this pasta or bait?

>>10268502
yes to both

>>10268445
so essentially you're an extremely rare and bizarre anomaly but you think your standards can and should be applied universally

>>10268495
This guys got it down.
Being honest about feelings is the be all, end all of relationship advice. Even if it's saying something like "I'd like hug", or "I need to be alone." You need to be able to say it honestly, and the person needs to be able to say it to you, without fear of rejection or rebuke. I very much encourage my friends to say what they feel, but it can be HARD. We really are taught to be afraid of being honest. "I don't want to be whiny" or "I don't want to say anything, because it's stupid and doesn't make sense."

Yeah, fight's still happen, but at least they don't come from misunderstandings.

>>10268146
But Brave New World is a dystopia.

>>10267717
The book Sex at Dawn became wildly popular a few years ago as a "biological" justification for polyamory. It's trash and the authors intentionally misrepresent their sources. Read the rebuttal Sex at Dusk instead. It won't tell you that any social structure is good or bad, but it'll give you a better look at how relationships between the sexes have actually worked instead of a distortion of reality to fit a particular narrative

>>10268445
>I am asexual

No you're not you fucking flaming homosexual

>>10268519
Maybe, but you're assuming I'm an anomaly, and not something inherently wrong with the system. If 50% of all couples divorce, then something isn't working, right?

Besides, I'm not sure which part you find most anomalous, Me and T are a little more touchy feely than most, maybe, but we've been best friends for almost a decade now. Other than that, we're not all that strange.

>>10268539
>If 50% of all couples divorce, then something isn't working, right?

This figure isn't actually true, 50% of MARRIAGES end in divorce but the number is radically dragged by people who have multiple consequetive failed marriages

>>10268538
no

>>10268545
Yeah keep denying you want to suck cock, the real answer must be your brain lacks the most basic urge of most people on the planet

>>10268237

You are correct that romantic love is associated with that, especially now with Hollywood culture it is, but to me that is just a perversion of the concept of love/affection. We can play the semantics game all day, but my definition of love (romantic or not) is not osessive-possessive.

>>10268245

Elaborate please

>>10268247
>>10268252
>>10268263
>>10268270

Hmmhm, I wonder where that irrational anger stems from :thinkang:

What exactly is 'nu male' about monogamy and healthy relationships? Isn't everything else degeneracy? :÷)

>>10268524

Good post

>>10268551
>I'm not wrong, Shakespeare is
>obsessive-possessive, how problematic

Definition of a nu-male, you're a sad fucking husk of a being, you will always live a pedestrian half-life void of passion before spluttering down the drain unnoticed

>>10268543
Yeah, I mean obviously that's what I meant, since you have to be married to get divorced, but I guess that with repeat divorcees is true. Still, those are pretty damning numbers

>>10268550
i'm glad you're so deeply familiar with my life, too bad that I'm a girl.

>>10268539
you're an anomaly because your behaviour deviates very significantly from the norm. as for marriage being in a precarious state, that's largely a modern problem which is hardly a damning of monogamy

>>10268558
>I'm a girl.

Oh Christ thats even worse, you're a dime a dozen whore

>>10268551
nobody cares what your definition of romantic love is. it obviously doesn't coincide with that of most people and in practice what you're doing is calling a cat a dog and expecting people to understand you.

>>10268570
>what you're doing is calling a cat a dog and expecting people to understand you.

Not only that, zhe also wants to say that actual dogs don't exist and they'll actually just cats so zher inferior masquerade doesn't get pointed out

>>10268559
>which is hardly a damning of monogamy
No, not monogamy. I'm not saying monogamy is wrong, just that the idealized view of romance is deeply flawed and people sort of cling to it, because that's what's been sold to us.
"There's that one perfect person, who completes you perfectly."
That kind of thing. It's building a house on marshland, since people are just fuck ups in general. It's doomed for failure. Monogamy is just one of the... core principles of this fake hollywood romance ideal. It's not wrong, but that's not true for everyone, and it's not the most important part of a relationship. I think it comes naturally, if you focus on whats important with the right people.

>>10268526
>he thinks it's not real

>>10268590
>its hard to achieve an ideal so lets not try, lets just sink into a degenerate swamp of colleaguial contacts rather than look for truly significant encounters
>Romantic love is a consumerist invention definately not my carefree shop around trend of the week mentality to human beings

You're a disgusting piece of shit, rank blistering wound where a woman should be

>>10268602
>I say stupid shit because I can't hold a discussion if people aren't vomiting my own dumbass opinion back at me
would you kindly fuck off

>>10268563
what do you want from me?

>>10268590
i agree that the idea of the soulmate or whatever is hollywood nonsense, but historically people have treated marriage much more realistically.

the only important element of a long-term relationship is the emotional stability required for a happy familial environment conducive to the healthy development of children, the actual point of marriage. anything else is better achieved by short-term flings or visiting a prostitute

>>10268611
Whats to discuss? I'm watching a raving sow spitting diarhea on the civilization that brought her everything. Its not discourse its just flagrent lunacy

>>10268616
Go find a man who can love you and be a proper wife and mother for fuck sake

>>10268617
>>the only important element of a long-term relationship is the emotional stability required for a happy familial environment conducive to the healthy development of children, the actual point of marriage
Right. I agree. I don't think children are a requirement, but I think people who don't love each other, but are willing to work together to make a better life for themselves just as capable of having a happy, stable marriage as two people madly in love.

>>10268557

I'm quite passionate my man. What makes you project so much onto Me? I genuinely want to know where your hatred is coming from

>>10268570

Do you expect everyone to believe in your embarrassing RomCom© fantasy of love? What did the Greeks say about love, what the Persians? Did they share the same definition that has only been popular since Shakespeare (arguably later)?

>>10268577

Are you mentally Ill? No one is talking about transgenders here, go back to your echochamber you mouthbreathing brainlet.

>>10268633
>happiness
>stability

Imagine having a short ticket of time and Earth and these being your priorities.

>>10268635
>I'm quite passionate my man.

Yeah right, can you say you've ever been willing to die for something, to kill for something? Passionate, what the fuck do you know about passion, its a disgrace you even use the God damn word

>>10268624
>Its not discourse its just flagrent lunacy
which part? The part where you wildly misrepresented everything I said, and then attacked me for it?

>>10268646
>I'm not wrong just misrepresented

Maybe make a fucking counterargument then

>>10268624

>being this pathetic

Time 2 go 2 bed

>>10268261
t. has never had sex with a black guy

>>10268650
I can't make a fucking counter argument if you don't actually have a fucking argument you chucklefuck. You haven't actually made a point!

>>10268539

>I am asexual
>I do not understand why people want exclusive sexual relationships

Jesus Christ, just stop posting.

>>10268660
My argument has been extremely clear I'll repeat it:
You suppose that because the ideal of Romantic Love is difficult to actualize that it should be abandoned towards a swamp of ambiguous collegue-contacts rather than strive and suffer towards a significant encounter
You propose that Romantic Love is rooted in market ideology without reflecting on the fact that your own isolated consumers engaging in carefree shop around trend of the week relationships isn't far more reflective of the post-industrial ideal citizen
Utterly unflective assinine shit for brains

>>10268644

Why so much pathos? Is there so little going on in your life that a discussion on 4chwn brings out this much repressed emotion?

Be honest: When's the last time you cried, either out of happiness or else. I'll answer yours.

I don't have an ideal I would die for, but three people in my life I would sacrifice myself for (none of the family, though I love my family very much). Do you think wanting to sacrifice yourself is needed on order to be passionate?

I am more passionate about art and beauty than anyone you and I know, do you doubt that? I'm serious about the few things that excitement me.

>>10268635
>Do you expect everyone to believe in your embarrassing RomCom© fantasy of love
what fantasy, you dumb little man? tell me where that post (my only interaction with you in this thread) described a fantasy

>>10268677
>Why so much pathos?

Holyfuck you are insufferable, you're such a flacid piss streak you can't even fucking type like you have a heartbeat.
No I sincerely doubt you have any active engagement with what little emotion you pretend to have

>>10268675
>You suppose that because the ideal of Romantic Love is difficult to actualize that it should be abandoned towards a swamp of ambiguous collegue-contacts
Wrong. I never said that, and I don't believe it. I said that romantic love is complicated, and some people have different needs than other people, and communication is the most important aspect of a relationship.
>Romantic Love is rooted in market ideology
Wrong. I never said that and I don't believe it. I said that the romantic IDEAL is a product of what's been marketed as romance.
>your own isolated consumers engaging in carefree shop around trend of the week relationships
Wrong. It's neither true nor did I ever imply that was the types of relationships I engage in. I have two very close friends that I don't have sex with, but we engage in physical, nonsexual intimacy. I don't have sex at all.

Maybe shut the fuck up for once and listen more, you stupid motherfucker.

>>10268679

Sorry, I should be more specific. Your fantasy is your belief that love ought to be what the majority thinks as love.

I realise you dislike me using my own special snowflake definition, I can understand why, what I am telling you is that it's not all that special.

Consider the fact that some of the brightest ancient Greek philosophers believed that 'only two men can truly love each other'. Clearly they thought a deep friendship equal or superior to romantic love in terms of passion.

>>10268688
>you're wrong because I'm not talking about red tomAtoes I'm talking about red tomAHtoes

Yada yada, smelly whore thinks she has a defence because she can scurry under the next special snowflake label. Dirty rancid dish towel keeping the fungus of every piece of shit she wipes

>>10268687

Why do you think you know anything about me judging from very little information and my prose style? Do you not realise how dumb this is? You could ask me anything but prefer to pretend you know me. I'd love to understand why you act this way, it seems like a futile attitude. Would you answer my questions though? I'd appreciate it very much.

>>10268711
>I don't have sex at all.
>whore
WORDS HAVE NO MEANING

>>10268711
brilliant

>>10268715
When you throw your body and your dedication to the wind without a care of sacrifice or devotion then you're a whore plain and simple. It doesn't matter if you think you're cheating the system because you don't feel anything for it

1) Promiscuity has been denounced for many thousands of years, in many cultures. It would be arrogant to think all those people had it wrong and a couple of modern gender thinkerists have it right.

2) A woman's self interest is roughly to always mate with the best man available, but this is not necessarily the best option for society as a whole. This can create an underclass of men with no reproductive opportunities who have nothing to lose in trying to destroy and recreate society. This is one reductionist explanation of why terrorism is common in polygamous muslim societies.

>>10268616
is a hug okay?

>>10267725
I never really considered it that way

>>10268687
I wish you could stop posting.
I could even pay money for that.

>>10268711
I really wish you could shut up.

at one point, that thread was nice

>>10268756
>Promiscuity has been denounced for many thousands of years, in many cultures
Polygamy has worked in many cultures. Cultures that are traditionally monogamous have always had struggles with adultery. This is why adultery/cuckolding is such a common theme in Western literature. Today, when it's much easier and not as socially unacceptable to get a divorce due to the more secular public climate, we're seeing the failure of strict monogamy in all the divorces.

>>10269486
yeah.
hug sent, anon.

>>10268445
This has to be bait.

>>10268551
>Justifying your contrarian view of Love by pointing to the big bad mass media
So this is the power of postmodernism...

>>10268732
WORDS HAVE NO MEANING

>>10268638
What do you propose our priorities should be?

>>10268533
Can you tell us more about that, anon?

>>10269531
that's really nice, thank you.
but what do i do with this erection now?

>>10269609
Dedication to your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ

>>10269518
>Polygamy has worked in many cultures

Only one that has survived and that's Arabian Islam and "worked" in that case is being rather fucking generous

>>10269666
Zhe's asexual so you're outta luck, pal.

>>10269676
>Only one that has survived
Wrong. [spoilers]I'm too fucking lazy to look this shit up right now though [/spoilers]

>>10269687
>You're wrong but I'm not going to prove it xD
kys my man

>>10269687
I'm not wrong you fucking retard. There is no other major civilization that permitted it and among those who had there was a intrinsically connected trend of despotism and intellectual degeneration
And this is only male polygomy, female polygomy is rightfully unheard of outside arsefuck nowhere tribesmen

>>10269682
asexuality has nothing to do with gender identity. If you're going to be an obnoxious cockslap, at least be a coherent obnoxious cockslap.

>>10269693
*surviving major civilization

>>10269697
Its the same field of tumblr artificial pseudo-identities. Being a prudish dry-pussy shrew doesn't mean you're "asexual" even if it sounds better

>>10268445
>Depends what you mean by that.
he kinda defined what that meant to him in his post you fucking moron

>>10268539
50% of couples divorce because they settled for that relationship and committed to someone they lost respect for and ultimately stopped trying. 50% of marriages fail because its hard to get along perfectly with someone for over a decade even if both parties are totally smitten and rational people who can talk about their issues, not because polyamory is just the better lifestyle.

>>10269729
Nah dude one system doesn't get perfect results every single time so its time for a revolution, everyone needs to fuck on a pile and vote Bernie and open borders

After Many a Summer - Huxley

>>10267717
Leo Strauss’s ‘Natural Right and History’

>>10267717
She Came to Stay by Simone De Beauvoir, it's about the reality OF polyamory.

>>10267717
>To me it feels intuitive that letting everyone fuck whoever they want is morally reprehensible, but I don't have any good arguments

Your girlfriend's talking you into it, right?

>>10267717
Just read a classic Chinese novel like the Dream of the Red Chamber.

'Wives and Concubines' by Su Tong is also an interesting read, although much more contemporary.

Remember, polygamy was legal in Hong Kong until the 1970s afaik.

>>10268062
it's called polyandry. Tibetans practised it, usually between brothers, due to the extreme living conditions.

You proles ought to read Denis de Rougemont's Love in the Western World/Passion and Society before commenting crap.

>>10270772
The only thing I care to know is that white catholic culture disallows polygamy, and it is also the most successful culture in all of human history.

>>10270821
Bollocks. Read up on ancient Greece and Rome, pleb. Concubines were par for the course.

>>10270826
Yes, let's take sexual advice from fucking Caligula

>>10270836
Cato would be more appropriate, but your meme-tier level of discourse precludes you from any serious grasp of the subject, not to mention your own personal life and behaviour.

But, no matter.

>>10270837
It's a serious question, you're talking about the civilization that publicly watched women get raped by baboons in the Coliseum. The promiscuity and sexual irreverance of the Roman elite precluding its inevitable degredation and downfall.

>>10270841
Polyamory has been there since the beginning, my /pol/ddit friend.

>>10270847
And that disputes anything I said? Rome was doomed from the beginning

>>10270854
>rome was doomed for a thousand years
Quality pol post.

>>10267717
Meditations by marcus aurelius

>>10270857
>I don't like it so its pol
Christ I can just imagine you trying to read authors outside your prescrubbed pseudo-histories

>>10270883
>I don't read anything outside of my polddit redbills

>>10269697
stop talking with this angry virgin, anon
may i affectionately slap you with my cock instead?
i also like to cuddle

moar

>>10270841
>the civilization that publicly watched women get raped by baboons in the Coliseum
s-sauce?

Most people have enough troubles navigating around a single romantic relationship. For every long-term partner you gain, the amount of in-laws increases by at least two. You can also expect to go through the list of typical couple arguments once again.