/lit/ - Literature

I remember three or four references to splashing drinks on people, as if it was the ultimate humiliation. He really fixated on it. I thought this was funny, probably worth examining.
In general it read like a kid trying to play the villain to upset his mommy

>>16627180
rambling and repetitive. some funny parts but overlong and half-baked as a whole.

If he had published it as satire he would have gotten laid

he was asbergers and covert narcissist.

>>16627214
Kek

>>16627201
from a Freudian perspective, it represents both his desires and fears regarding intercourse, i.e., "splashing" a woman with his ejaculate
>>16627219
>covert
he would look at his reflection and say 'look how awesome i am"
nothing covert about it

>>16627201
The climax of that ordeal about drinks is when he splashes orange juice on some people playing frisbee in the park with a super soaker.

Women are not humans. Women are quality control robots who exist to select the best genes and allow them to replicate. They do near nothing aside from this. Sometimes, they will use dissimulation and deceit to trick men of poor genetic quality into providing them resources with which they can sustain their own lives. Other than in those circumstances, genetically-inferior men are generally ignored or seen as a nuisance by women. Men with superlative genes - men who "pass" the quality control assessment - are, however, allowed by women to pass on their genes, regardless of whether or not the woman is already in a relationship with another man. Marriage fidelity is, to the instinctual, robotic, and genetically-driven mind of the woman, merely a flimsy modern invention, a roadblock to the happiness of said woman. Reason and morality, perhaps the two things that make men human, are nowhere to be found in the actions and thoughts of the woman. I'd no sooner call a woman a human than I would a robotic arm affixed to a conveyor belt.

>>16627243
Okay but what about a psychologist who wasn't wrong about all stuff?

>>16627243
covert narcissism is a specific mental condition/illness as contrasted to grandiose narcissist. he fit the description perfectly. it doesn't have to have his narcissism covert

>>16627244
Oh yeah. Completely insane and childish

>>16627259
50% of psychology is a hoax
look up the reproducibility crisis
you've been duped, pal

>>16627266
Oh I know..I followed realpeerreview... I am fully enlightened

>>16627243
>he would look at his reflection and say 'look how awesome i am"
Everyone does this

>>16627294
kek

>>16627256
Women cannot feel the emotion of love: it is impossible for a woman to lie with a man and leave all thoughts of the world behind. This is true because 50% of women, when in a relationship, have a backup partner whom they keep close. Learning of this statistic was profoundly upsetting to me, as it indicated that women and men fundamentally disagree on what love is. For men - or, at least, for me - love is something delicate and special which can only be shared between two people. It is to envelop one's self into another's soul, and it can only work if the process is mutual. Women, however, see love as an action equivalent to an economist performing a cost-benefit analysis. Women, when dating, will never dissolve their ego into their partner's; instead, they will plot behind their backs, set up relations with other men for fear of their present relationship failing, and enact other such devious things. A man may sever all ties to the outside world to love his partner wholly and completely, but a woman is incapable of returning the favor. To think you can possess a woman's full attention is foolish: she will always be eying strange and superior men with whom she will make her escape from you. It is no wonder, then, that half of all marriages end in divorce, and that 70% of the time it is the woman that files for it. Love does not exist because women do not practice it.

>>16627501
>love
>statistic
>It is to envelop one's self into another's soul, and it can only work if the process is mutual.
>Women, however, see love as an action equivalent to an economist performing a cost-benefit analysis.
Time to be gay

>>16627501
the blackest pill I've ever seen. Jesus Christ...

>>16627180
What is this?

>>16627180
Elliot should have just gotten a sexdoll

>>16627256
>Women are quality control robots who exist to select the best genes and allow them to replicate.
Stopped reading here.
Our feminine society is supremely dysgenic. And whatever fantasy you have of women as physiognomists choosing to breed with strongjawed high IQ ideal Aryans is fucktarded, one glance at twitter shows millions of them simping for androgynous Korean twinks, or whatever the next fashion trend will be. And the fuckboys aren't reproducing, they don't care to hold on to their cumdumpsters long enough to put a baby in them, who are on all kinds of birth control anyway.

Why do you think we're in the middle of a fertility crisis?

>>16627501
>Women, when dating, will never dissolve their ego into their partner's;
Which stage follows the dating stage?

>>16627551
>millions of them simping for androgynous Korean twinks, or whatever the next fashion trend will be
i've never heard of such a thing, but it clearly is an act and is never put into practice
(if you are an asian man, pls do not watch)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWD9n1cyeQU
>And the fuckboys aren't reproducing
modern technology allows women to circumvent the consequences of promiscuity, but the biological drive to select the best genes remains
>Why do you think we're in the middle of a fertility crisis?
...der juden...
>>16627501
> It is to envelop one's self into another's soul
is this grammatically correct? my spell-check says it is wrong

>>16627180
Eliot Rodger is /lit9k/ personified. Just see how this thread has gone. There are some parts of the book that really are touching, like him listening to his sister have sex, but a lot of it is him just playing World of Warcraft when he should have been re-evaluating his life and values.

>>16627866
>There are some parts of the book that really are touching, like him listening to his sister have sex
ok virgin

>>16627180
Is it bad that I recognized it was him just from the thumbnail

>>16627501
>Boy doesnt have a backup girl.
Loser.

>>16627917
you can't be in love with someone if you are thinking about other people

>>16628011
>>16627917
if your goal is love itself you're going to be disappointed

>>16628043
Yeah man, take the Huxley pill and just be happy all time, you'll have plenty of time to worry about your empty life on your death bed

>>16628078
i thought that was the Ivan Ilyich pill

>>16627501
Guys I really want to give everything I have to a woman. She doesn’t need to be a model, or a genius, or anything. I just want to provide for and protect and cute and loving woman. But I don’t know man, it seems like women in the modern age (especially zoomer girls) ont want that. Is it really true that good women can only exist by fluke or by social restraint? Did the sexual revolution doom me to be constantly at the mercy of the whims of whichever woman I eventually put my trust into?

>>16628333
based trips, anon
i also want to be uxorious to my future wife
the problem is is that women hate that
they will always want what they can't have, what's just barely out of reach, and if you pamper them they will loathe you
i just want to adore a girl and have her love me back, but women are more receptive to coldness and abuse

>>16628333>>16628349

>like women in the modern age (especially zoomer girls) ont want that.
they want that, but transient-ly, ie moving from one provider to another one, because nowadays women are okay with being sluts since they killed the social stigma of divorce and slutiness.
plus to be fair, women have always been sluts in private, it's just that today they enjoy being slut in public too.

What you want to be to a woman is what a woman want to be to her kids. This is why women love kids and never ever love men.

Women are faithful to their kids, and never to their orbiters and sex providers. NEVER.

>>16628575
women live in my head rent-free
i can't stop thinking about how much i hate them and want to hurt them
what book do i read to fix this?

>>16627287
>peer review

Biggest meme in the world.

>>16627501
This is all completely true, any negative reaction is just the brain's reaction to deconditionng. If you're genetic trash, just become volcel. The difference between incel and volcel is a state of mind.

>>16628078
>empty life

Love is just decorated cumbrain

All your problems with women will be solved if you just took the loli pill.

>>16629309
Paedophiles deserve to be curb-stomped. Your death would be exquisitely pleasing to me.

>>16629311
Whatever gayboi

>>16629326
The inverse is the case. You know it, I know it. No amount of semiotic reversals will convince anyone you're anything other than filth to be eradicated.

>>16629339
Okay pal

>>16627515
Why? Why is it a black pill? Why does it make everyone depressed in here to discover that childish representations of romance are not true?
Of course you'll hate women if your frame of reference for a female and a relationship with a female is drawn from anime

>>16627501
You don't seem to realize that not every woman is the same as not every man is the same. You talk about love to a man being something delicate and special thing as if you don't have studs who place even less value on sex and relationships than sluts do. You can talk about women and men having certain traits and reacting certain ways to promiscuity, or women having the upper hand in the sexual market. but talking about women not being capable of love? Just an incel cope.

>>16627180
Fucking retarded, as is most of this thread.
>insecurity
>despair
>basing your opinion on women on what other anons say about twitter screencaps and pornography
>literally not ever approaching a women, as was the case with Roger
>thinking approaching women means interrupting them while they're doing something in public to try to have sex with them, then complaining that you need to be a 10/10 to get away with that
>phrenology
Absolutely retarded.

Also, some anons were complaining about men and women not sharing the same idea about love. This is a mistake. Idealised love which is based on adoration and devotion and overwhelming emotion is how both sexes first experience love. That is usually shattered by the first heartbreak. What follows is a practical idea of love based on collaboration and work and mutual respect. This second form of love is actually deeper, because it is easier to share. It can be sad, because it becomes a normal reality instead of something overwhelming, but the overwhelming shit can never last. The problem with idealised love is that it isolates the participants, and the love itself becomes the object of fascination.
The initial disillusionment doesn't come easy though. Both men and women can become deeply cynical about love. Other people insist that the idealised form of love is real and superior and try to get back to it. This can drive people to cheat, because cheating creates very intense emotions. Doomed love is often highly romantic (see poe), even if it is doomed by the participants being cheating scumbags.
What's worse is when people get disillusioned from idealised love without ever experiencing it. That can make people extremely bitter. What those people should do is find an older woman without kids who wants that idealised feeling back. Women will go for young dipshits if the young dipshit will fall head over heels, especially if the woman has given up hope of having kids (young meaning 20s). What you should not do is form a fetish for young virginal girls, because you won't mature that way, you'll just get into a cycle of looking for younger girls when the idealised love falls off. Once you no longer get the thrill of idealised love, you'll just be an old disgusting coomer trying to fuck teenagers.
Trust me bros, I want to see you happy.

>>16629388
Ok so¥boy

>>16627180
The Rodge was right about everything, even if he was insane. Goes to show how crazy our world has become.

>>16629388
>being a betabux is the highest form of love, just trust me, oh and please start going for 30 something women.

>>16627180
All men who hate women had poor relationships with their mothers. There is no exception.

>>16629496
We don't hate women, we just know what they are.

>>16629441
Nah dude. You're a million times more likely to simp and be a "beta" while in idealised love.
>oooh I'll do anything for you, my love
That's not how it is later, you expect each other to pull their weight.

The advice about going after older women, that's for inexperienced men who will REEE when they meet a 20 year old girl with more emotional maturity than them, but won't be able to recognise that because they associate maturity with being familiar with Spinoza or whoever the fuck. They'll invent shit like "women are incapable of love" when their paramore isn't texting them shit like "oh mi amore, how I would die a thousand deaths to taste your kisses right now" after being apart for 12 hours. That's what teenagers do, and it's what 25 year old anons expect. When you're like that, emotional maturity is going to read as disinterest.
Much better to have that with an older woman who knows its a folly, but wants to make again the mistakes of her youth. If you try that with a young girl, and you're older, once the passions fade the girl will see you as a creep. That's if you don't look disgusting to her right away, which you almost certainly will.
I say let an old gal use you.

>>16629505
I cannot claim to know man judging him by the poorest of his ilk.
>>16629517
>going after younger girls as an older man is creepy
Not at all, in fact it's how it should be as women emotionally mature far earlier than most men.
The only thing that's creepy is using said young girl as a masturbatory tool instead of making her your wife and raising strong children.

>>16629517
Reading your posts and realising you're sincere has made me realise that the future of dating and creating a family will probably be entirely centered around contracts. Like having x children one man and x children with another, it will all be decided based on the least amount of time spent interfering with people's "personal" lifes. People won't get merried or even live together but only spend, a previously agreed upon, enough time to maybe raise the kid until he's 3rd grade or something. The paragon of a loving couple in the future will be the one most based on practicallity and least damaging to the financial growth of the parties.

>>16629572
That's your society on materialism.

>>16629544
The optimum is for men and women to mature together, yes, and sometimes this is best accomplished when there are a few years between them.
But maturing together is the optimum. A very mature man with an immature woman is not good. Once the woman matures she may not feel the same way about him.
It's FAR from optimal for an inexperienced man to be with an experienced woman. If they're in their mid 20s and never been in love, they aren't going to fare well with a 20 year old girl who been in love a couple of times. Most likely the relationship will simply never happen, and if it does it will be short with much heartbreak for the man and little for the woman.
So I say get your first love out of the way with an easy, short, and less than optimal relationship. Even if the woman isn't stunning, you'll still catch feelings just from being around her and fucking her. But it won't be so bad when you breakup, you won't feel as if she was the "one" and that you missed your only chance.
Then look for a younger woman who is more your equal.

>>16629572
It has been this way since women were required to work for money. If you can afford to have your wife stay at home and raise kids, there is less negotiating about money and shit. Then of course there is the cope about this financial reality. The reality is that women need to work now, but they sell this to us as women being independent and empowered, when really it is the opposite. This cope makes it so that women feel inadequate without financial independence, which leads to all sorts of trouble.
Before, if you were a pesant, there were a lot of domestic chores that needed serious attention, and women grew up understanding the kinds of things they needed to do around the house. And there were communities around these chores, women would do the laundry together and talk and stuff, like men would talk to their boys as they worked. Now (with le nuclear family) if you are doing domestic chores, you're doing shit on your own. It's thankless and dull and lonely.

>>16629597
Other way around. This is what material does to a society.

>>16629607
>Once the woman matures she may not feel the same way about him.
I don't think this can ever be the case.

>>16629673
Of course it is. Take maturation as "change", which it is.
Men and women change together, they likely will change in ways that compliment each other and grow deeper in love.
When one party changes and the other stays the same, there is every change that the one who changes will not see the other in the same way they saw them before. They will often feel as if they have "outgrown" their stagnant partner.

>>16629692
>there is every change
every chance

>>16629692
This can only be the case if the man is really retarded in some way, which if he was I don't see how she can be attracted to him in the first place.
Women find the same things attractive in a man whether she if 15 or 30.

>>16629496
(you)

>>16629722
How was was Weininger's relationship with his mother?

>>16629709
Everyone is really retarded in at least one way.
Attraction doesn't have to change, but powers of perception must improve if one is to mature.

>>16629311
>look, I said paedohpiles should be killed! Am I not brave?

>>16630456
Not about bravery, it's just the sincere impulse of someone without brain-rot.

>>16630456
>>16630462
> lol you hate pedophiles how mainstream and brain dead can you be?
Considering Netflix released a movie that exploited children on camera, and that the movie had a sizeable group defending it, I'd say publicly shaming the growing degeneracy in our society is a good thing. Not brave, but that's not the point of reminding people that pedophilia is a mental illness that damages a vulnerable population for life.
Take your consoomer meme where it belongs

>>16630462
It's an impulse of you being an oversocialized faggot, the same way hyclics throw hissy fits when their programming is broken.
>>16630502
>and that the movie had a sizeable group defending it
and everyone defending it was fed to the cancel culture mob
>I'd say publicly shaming the growing degeneracy in our society
It was perfectly fine and legal to court and marry children in the past.
>Not brave, but that's not the point of reminding people that pedophilia is a mental illness that damages a vulnerable population for life.
Pedophilia does not damage anyone, rape and molestation does.
>Take your consoomer meme where it belongs
It's right where it belongs.

>>16629388
Cope and naivepilled

>>16627598
>Incel TV
lmao is this serious?

>>16630572
> fed to cancel culture
you mean like the new Yorker, they got cancelled too? Also stop trying to align your movement against cancel culture, nobody wants it
> fine and legal in the past
Not a defense, plenty of terrible things were legal in the past. This may surprise you but regression is not always progress
> only rape damages
What's it called when a child is too young to comprehend the consequences of consent. How can that be actual consent

>>16627180
WEW. Thanks ppl keeping to make threads about him. They have forgotten about him even on /r9k/, his homeboard.

Now to read the thread.

>>16627180
it was bad, quit reading early, a long whine by a literal retard

>>16630790
>you mean like the new Yorker, they got cancelled too?
Criticism of the film for it's "sexual exploitation" of children is pretty much the socially accepted view to hold within the vast majority of people
>Not a defense
Neither is calling it degenerate, which you have not explained how it is considering the fact that child marriage became illegal as a result of feminist lobbying.
It is certainly "degenerate" to encourage young girls to become sexually active amongst their peers but illegal for them to regect the advances of older men.
>What's it called when a child is too young to comprehend the consequences of consent. How can that be actual consent
>under the law only adults can consent so children can never consent
Retarded circular logic. There is no reason for any law to prohbit sex between two mutually attracted individuals.

>>16630901
>but illegal for them to regect the advances of older men
illegal for them to accept

>>16629505
No. Instead, you are COMPLETELY DELUSIONAL about them. That is because you HAVE TO BE, to be able to COPE WITH YOUR PAIN caused by you not getting to fuck them or be loved by them. It's always easier to cope with your loss, if you start to hate or loath what you are missing or can't have.

>>16630909
Don't worry Anon, the link between retardation and pedophilia is well known. No one could think any less of you for making typographical errors.

>>16631082
This.

>>16631082
it is possible not to hate women

>>16631107
>adhominem attack
ah yes, the link between pedophilia and retards who have been incarcerated is pretty well known.
The non retards apparently run global trafficking networks and share their material on TOR

>>16631082
I'm not a virgin, try again simp.

>>16629607
>The reality is that women need to work now
Women need and WANT to work, because they NEED TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THEIR TALENT, INTELLECT AND SKILLS THE WAY THAT ENABLES ONE TO USE THE FULL CAPACITY OF THOSE TRAITS. That is because Homo Sapiens has developed to the evolutional stage that ALL INDIVIDUALS of the species have INTELLECTUAL need and drive to do so or at least attempt to do so. Also women CAN NOT BE DEPENDENT on men, as the risk of becoming the target of violence and abuse is too high when they are being so. Especially these days as no man in a relationship is satisfied with less than anal intercourse and deep throat at least twice in a month.

*Capitals added for idiots with blurry brain to grasp the key issues of the matter.

>>16631185
>Homo Sapiens has developed to the evolutional stage that ALL INDIVIDUALS of the species have INTELLECTUAL need and drive to do so
No.

>>16631185
>Women need and WANT to work
Yes, as mothers and wives. If you think the majority of women like being a wagie, you're literally retarded and are swallowing propaganda meant to fuck you over. MEN don't like being a wagie, why the fuck would women like it? Nobody likes being wagie.

>>16631185
>Women need and WANT to work
kek, women are actually retarded then.

>>16631185
>women WANT to work
look at this dude

>>16631204
Are you SERIOUSLY implying that human life is about more than just PRODUCING and CONSUMING to benefit the ECONOMY*?! That people AREN'T HAPPY doing THINGS that MAKE THEM UNHAPPY!?

*Capitals added so NPCs whose eyes are burnt out from looking at a screen all day can better grasp the intricacies of my post.

>>16631137
He was retarded too. He tried to get Steven Pinker involved in some sort of scheme to impregnate 20 women because he thought he had genius DNA and this his breeding program would advance the human race somehow.
He also thought there was a particle that gave you the feeling of someone watching you, and tried to finance experiments to prove it.
He was not smart, he was an intelligence asset. You don't to be intelligent to useful to the CIA.
>adhominem [sic] attack
Again you are demonstrating the truth of pedophillic retardation. I did not insult you as part of an argument, I simply insulted you.

Here is some advice. Consider that you may well be retarded, and act accordingly. Just take it on faith that it's wrong to fuck kids, you don't need to be capable of understanding it.

>>16631123
Haha. I love that.

>>16631146
You do not have to be a virgin, to cope with the pain caused by your failure with women, by hating them. Same applies to women. I mean, you've seen all of those divorced women who hate all men, haven't you?

>>16627180
Can someone do a Freudian rundown on Eliot’s thoughts?

>>16627180
I tend to be optimistic about issues like the incel question. The day is coming that we see a men's rights movement take steam in the mainstream. I am not referring to the current manosphere or anything like that. I believe it will be women who will push this movement.

>>16631222
I never got the whole
>yeeee nigguh epsteen got dat DRIP gnomesayin he a genius
thing. The man was a fucking retard, and a bagholder.

Reminder that women are attracted to sex cults
>>>/tv/141081703
>>>>/tv/141081703
>>>/tv/141081703
>>>>/tv/141081703

>>16627551
>millions of women simping for androgynous twinks
I noticed this too, not to mention shit aimed at women a lot of the time has the male character as being an effeminate pretty boy

>>16631222
Nice digits and nice bantz
Eitherway Mr. Epstein, tool that he is, is still not a literal retard.
>i'm not insulting your argument, I'm insulting you!
woah, i'm sorry. that was not clear to me due to my retardation.
>Just take it on faith that it's wrong to fuck kids
You should be able to explain why. Give my retardo brain a chance.

>>16631240
>The day is coming that we see a men's rights movement take steam in the mainstream.
Huh it will never happen. An atheist republic always privileges women.

>>16631196
If that is how you think and feel, then I guess we are not part of the same human species.

>>16631204
>wagie
Slur word of a person who is capable of utilizing their talent, intellect and skills the way that enables one to use full capacity of those traits, used by the ones who are not.
>Yes, as mothers and wives.
Most women do not want to work as mothers and wives only. Only the ones whose set of skills and talents best suit doing that, want it, and that's a fracture of women.

>>16631265
yes we are, vast majority of people have no semblance of chasing after """intellectual pursuits""

>>16631223
I said that I don't hate them, stay irrational though.

>>16631257
I think that even now more and more women are coming to the realization that our current society is very flawed for the majority of men. I am sure that once a "critical mass" of women understand and sympathize with the men society has failed, you will see them push a men's rights movements that addresses the ways society is stacked against men.

>I need evidence
I have none, beyond my gut feeling.

>>16631274
Note that I am also referring to being able to utilize one's talents and special skills as part of the human intellectual drive and need. For example, wanting to work as a hairdresser or a carpenter, which usually require a specific set of skills, is a manifestation of the human intellectual drive too. I mean, you do not know a lot of lower primates who'd be longing to do those things on a daily basis, do you?

>>16631350
>you do not know a lot of lower primates who'd be longing to do those things on a daily basis, do you?
I don't know any lower primate, so maybe they want to do just that.

>>16631265
Yeah, that's your entire problem: you conceive of yourself and other human beings as economic agents. The sheer fact that upon hearing "mother and wife" you instantly assume that it's some kind of discrete profession is a testament to this. Your entire conception of human life is that you are nothing but a robot to produce and consume.

The fact that you conceive of being a mother and a wife as just being something that you can "only" do is a testament to this. You are literally a drone, and it makes you miserable. Not only do the vast majority of women want a world where they can be a wife and a mother full time, but you do too. You're just scared of the consequences of admitting it.

But, hey, some CEO has a fifth yacht to buy, and that makes it all worth it, right?

>>16631350
Then I suppose in that regard you are correct on (hu)mankind's intellectual drive.
Eitherway, the duty of woman first and foremost is the proliferation of her kind. A woman abandoning motherhood is like a man abandoning his post during wartime.

>>16631252
Kids are too stupid to consent. They don't understand what they are getting into.
I'm sure I could convince someone with down's syndrome to walk into a synagogue wearing a bomb vest, but that wouldn't make the downie responsible. Allah might not even give him 72 virgins (or grapes depending on the translation).
So if you convince a kid to suck you off, doesn't mean it isn't rape. In your mind you might be seducing or wooing the kid, but in reality you're just tricking him.

On top of that, it fucks them up long term. This is the bit where it might be difficult for you to follow. Say the kid is a very willing and active participant, maybe the kid makes the first move. That will fuck the kid up just as much. They'll be plagued by guilt, they'll feel like they aren't allowed to feel bad about what happened. There's all sorts of spiraling and confusion that will follow in the kid's brain.
When soldiers get PTSD, it's not usually because they got hurt and they feel vulnerable. A lot of times it's because they did something fucked up, even if it was the right thing to do at the time, it fucks with who they think they are.
If the kid doesn't act like that, they'll still develop really complex and intractable trust issues because an adult raped them. Adults have authority for kids, even strangers. It confuses the shit out of them, and they'll be just as confused as adults.

PTSD is more than just "bad thing happened and I feel bad about it still". It's a really complex thing that involves how you relate to the world and other people. It takes years to fix. As someone who wants to fuck a kid, you can't know that you won't cause that. So just don't fuck a kid. You might be causing their suicide 20 years down the line.

On top of that, if you get found to have fucked a kid, or even just caught with CP, literally most people will want to see you tortured and killed. Your parents will hate themselves, people will regret every time they were ever kind to you.
See a therapist, consider chemical castration. It's unfair on you if you were just born wanting to fuck kids, but some people are born retarded or crippled or prone to disease. That's what it is to be a pedophile. Tough shit.

>>16631389
>Kids are too stupid to consent. They don't understand what they are getting into
Sex is one of the most basic and utmost primitive acts. They are certainly not too stupid to consent to sex and can partake in tasks infinitely more complex and far more disasterous to their health.
>I'm sure I could convince someone with down's syndrome to walk into a synagogue wearing a bomb vest, but that wouldn't make the downie responsible
Comparing children to literal retards is just insulting to their intelligence. Comparing someone to have sex to bombing synogoges is also just laughable.
>So if you convince a kid to suck you off, doesn't mean it isn't rape. In your mind you might be seducing or wooing the kid, but in reality you're just tricking him.
When I trick a woman of age through my cunning intellect to fuck me, is it rape?
Why is tricking or any sort malice a presupposition in the act?
Do you really think children are incapable of feeling sexual attraction towards someone?
>They'll be plagued by guilt, they'll feel like they aren't allowed to feel bad about what happened. There's all sorts of spiraling and confusion that will follow in the kid's brain.
This is because society tells them to feel guilty and convinces them that were hurt and abused.
>If the kid doesn't act like that, they'll still develop really complex and intractable trust issues because an adult raped them.
>Adults have authority for kids, even strangers. It confuses the shit out of them, and they'll be just as confused as adults.
Having power over someone in a sexual relationship does not make it rape. All interactions between people involve power dynamics.
>On top of that, if you get found to have fucked a kid, or even just caught with CP, literally most people will want to see you tortured and killed. Your parents will hate themselves, people will regret every time they were ever kind to you.
It's an advanced form of virtue signaling.
>See a therapist, consider chemical castration. It's unfair on you if you were just born wanting to fuck kids, but some people are born retarded or crippled or prone to disease. That's what it is to be a pedophile. Tough shit.
We will go full circle eventually, perhaps not in my lifetime. Mind you, I'm not attracted to prepubescent children.
So what do you think the "age of consent" should be?

>>16631292
That is what you always say, that you do not hate women, but know how they are, yet you "knowing" how they are, usually is a pack of hostile delusions and lies, to cope with your failure or lack.

Yawn, guess it's a waste of time trying to debate on this topic around here on these boards. When people need to believe in their own delusions to cope, there isn't much hope for one single person to turn their heads. Even women do not want to lose their delusion about anal intercourse or deep throat being fun, to cope with the fact that they have to accept those things to be able to have relationships with men.

I think I already said what is the most important thing for me to preach, here >>16631185

>>16631461
>Sex is one of the most basic and utmost primitive acts.
Yes. Snails can fuck. But sex in human society is pretty fucking complex.
>Comparing children to literal retards is just insulting to their intelligence. Comparing someone to have sex to bombing synogoges is also just laughable.
Yes, it was a deliberately exaggerated analogy. The point wasn't to say "this is as bad", but that the mechanism of action is similar. We're on /lit/ and you can't figure out a metaphor? Although I guess this thread is a honeypot for retards, myself included.
>When I trick a woman of age through my cunning intellect to fuck me, is it rape?
Yeah, it might be.
>Why is tricking or any sort malice a presupposition in the act?
It isn't. As I said, in the mind of the pedo, he probably thinks of it as seduction.
>Do you really think children are incapable of feeling sexual attraction towards someone?
Of course they can feel that. That isn't consent. If dog wants to eat chocolates, I'm not going to let him.
>This is because society tells them to feel guilty and convinces them that were hurt and abused.
Quite possibly. I don't know. But we're not in ancient greece, we're in now. You can't cure someone of PTSD by telling them that in another culture they might feel positive about what happened.
>All interactions between people involve power dynamics.
Sure. But at some point, the power difference is so large that coercion is near impossible to avoid. So you need some kind of arbitrary rule to protect the weaker party.
>It's an advanced form of virtue signaling.
Whatever. The feelings of disgust are genuine though. People aren't lying when they say they'd want to see all pedophiles killed. Are nazis virtue signalling when they talk about how much they hate jews? Probably a bit, but that doesn't ungas the jews.
>We will go full circle eventually
Possibly. If it was different in the past it can be different in the future. But it isn't different now.
>So what do you think the "age of consent" should be?
As I said it's arbitrary, which doesn't make it unimportant. I think it should be banded. I think 15 year olds should be able to fuck each other without being labeled as sex offenders. I think someone 19 or 20 should be able to fuck a 17 year old. Above that, 18 should be the minimum.

i want to tie up Elliot Rodger in his favorite clothes and splash drinks on him in front of a howling audience. it would absolutely destroy him

>>16631672
kekkers
What do you think would hurt more, his dolce & gabbana logo t-shirt, or his armani logo t-shirt?

>>16631631
>Yes. Snails can fuck. But sex in human society is pretty fucking complex.
No it isn't, it's an act between two willing participants.
>but that the mechanism of action is similar
It is not, I called your metaphor retarded and that you should not be comparing children to people with mental disabilities.
>Yeah, it might be.
So in certain situations it can be, and other situations it may not?
>It isn't. As I said, in the mind of the pedo, he probably thinks of it as seduction.
Do you think only the pedo can be the one initiating the act?
>Of course they can feel that. That isn't consent. If dog wants to eat chocolates, I'm not going to let him.
Why is it not consent? Children are not dogs and having sex is not a suicidal endeavor.
>Quite possibly. I don't know. But we're not in ancient greece, we're in now. You can't cure someone of PTSD by telling them that in another culture they might feel positive about what happened.
So it's not an argument and the trauma comes from dealing with the social stigma rather the act itself.
>Sure. But at some point, the power difference is so large that coercion is near impossible to avoid. So you need some kind of arbitrary rule to protect the weaker party.
Are we going to start making laws limiting age gaps, wealth gaps, and intelligence gaps to "elimnate power imbalances"?
I think an intelligent and affluental man has just as much power over a woman of age as any old joe over a minor.
>I think 15 year olds should be able to fuck each other without being labeled as sex offenders.
Why? The consequences of sex between teenagers is far greater than between teenagers and adults.
You wouldn't let your teenage daughter learn how to drive with a teenage boy of similar driving experience.
>I think someone 19 or 20 should be able to fuck a 17 year old.
What if they fuck a 14 year old, or a 13 year old? They should be put into prisions, branded as deviants, or chemically castrated?
>Above that, 18 should be the minimum.
Why?

>>16631377
Christ, you got it all the wrong way and I do not even get where you draw all of these conclusions.
>you conceive of yourself and other human beings as economic agents
No. I conceive myself and other human beings as INTELLECTUAL agents, with needs and desires according to that.
>Your entire conception of human life is that you are nothing but a robot to produce and consume.
My entire conception of human life is that we are beings with a basic psychological need to utilize our intellectual abilities, including skills and talents, aside from having other biological and psychological needs such as a need to reproduce and socialize.
>being a mother and a wife as just being something that you can "only" do
If you have skills and talents the capacity of which you can not fully use while doing the household work or taking care of the children, then doing those things is you doing them "only". It would be the same the other way round: in case your set of skills and talents suit best for doing the household work and taking care of the children, then doing something else would be you "only" doing that.
>You are literally a drone
Nothing drone-like to be able to work daily doing what I love, if I ever get to do that. I do not care about money, but being able to do what I love, and what enables me to utilize my talents and my skills the way that I can use the full capacity of those traits, and being appreciated for it.
>Not only do the vast majority of women want a world where they can be a wife and a mother full time
Does not apply to females of modern Homo Sapiens, who suffer mentally, as well as the males of the same species, when not even having a change to pursue a change to utilize their talent, intellect or skills.

>>16631875
Why didn't you reply to me faggot >>16631381

>>16631755
I'm tired of entertaining you.

Tv had a great EG thread yesterday and lit has this shit, jesus.
It's been 6 years already. Watched Serrania Park today. One day i will read My Twisted World.
Recommended incel reading:
https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2009/08/why_did_george_sodini_shoot_wo.html

https://hotelconcierge.tumblr.com/post/87341171254/dont-become-elliot-rodger/

>>16631917
>I'm tired of entertaining you.
Because you are a big dumb dumb.
Don't worry, I will not even claim this argument as a victory, I will accept that your vigor has been tired out and that we've reached an impasse.
Majority of the world already has an age of consent lower than 18 anyway, and it's 14 in many places in Europe.

>>16631937
that tumblr post was interesting to read when was that written?

>>16632035
2014, you can check in the archive the exact date

>>16631897
I did not bother to waste my time as you ideas seem to so out of date that I do not think we'd find any kind of common ground.

>>16632064
>ideas
>out of date
Lol.

>>16627180
Read like my diary desu

>>16627180
not gonna lie. read the whole thing. found it fascinating.

shows how fucked you are if you can't relate to other people and are stuck in overwhelming negative feedback loops.

>>16631185
not a MGTOW/Red Pill guy but shut the fuck up

bitches are lazy as shit and marry up the first chance they get. that's the way it's always been. doesn't mean they're evil. just human.

>>16627180
I read it, as a 28 year old KHHV it was somewhat relatable, I was especially taken by his sincerity. It's clear he thought a lot about the underlying causes of his mental state

>>16633948
was he seriously almost 30?
he looked so young
plus he acted like a teenager

>>16627180
Autism pilled

>>16627180
Well done, this is one of the better cover designs out there

>>16634229
No, that anon is talking about himself. Elliot was 22 when he died, IIRC.

>>16634948
sorry, anon
my reading level is that of a 5th grader
idk why i go to this board, desu

25% of white women have dated a negro

>>16632150
>Lol.
Probably the shortest lie in existence to invalidate what others say.

>>16631672
that sounds like a reddit thing to do

>>16631937
Do you have any link to that thread's archive page? It was removed from 4chan.

>>16633646
>bitches are lazy as shit
Then why do so many of them want to work and even have influential careers? You can't have such in any context if you are lazy as shit. Maybe you only got to know the superficial, lazy bimbos in your life. That's what men are drawn to most.

>>16631250
>millions of women simping for androgynous twinks
This has always been the case. Effeminate men attract women because women see their own image in these men, appealing to a sense of narcissism. Being able to appear feminine while retaining a sense of masculinity has always been loved by women.

>>16636299
>appealing to a sense of narcissism
Yet another hostile delusion certain type of men have of women. The real explanation to women feeling attracted to effeminate/less masculine men is that they are thought to make more reliable and nurturing partners than masculine men. It also depends on women's menstrual cycle which type of men they like: when women are ovulating, they feel drawn to masculine men as women's/females' instincts tell them that those men are more fertile than effeminate men, and when their ovulation is over, they feel attracted to the less masculine, even effeminate type of men, as women's/females' instincts tell that those men are more reliable caretakers. In other words, women aim to be impregnated by the chads/alphas and have their kids supported by betas.

>>16631875
>>16631755
You write like a fucking retard

>>16631875
>you are a drone working for a system that hates you
>Yes, everything you have said about me is true. I am deeply unhappy because of this system.
"Agreeing with your critics" is a bold strategy.

>>16636252
Because they have to, or they end up poor and starve to death. Worse, they end up viewed poorly by society. Most women would love to spend their days being a mother. They can't, because the one-income family was destroyed (this was intentional). Morons like you then promote this "hurf durf women are exactly the same as men durrrrr" narrative, which reinforces a system by which women who do what all women want to do are looked down upon for being "lazy bimbos". This was already answered here >>16631204.

Which is a really bizarre thought, actually. The idea that if your mother had spent a little bit more time with you as a kid then she'd be a "lazy bimbo" is just bizarre. You want your parents to have spent LESS time with you? You've sucked this corporate bullshit so far up your ass that you aren't even being a hedonist, or a utilitarian here. You're saying that you personally deserve to be unhappy so Big Line can go up.

>>16636559
AND YOU LIE LIKE A RETARD. Haahahahahaha!

>>16636640
>"Agreeing with your critics"
That is full of shit.

>Most women would love to spend their days being a mother.
I wonder where do you draw this lie. From your own rear?
>Because they have to, or they end up poor and starve to death.
Yes, please, go on believing in your own delusions to cope. By no means you do not want women to be fully developed members of the species Homo Sapiens, who actually have the same intellectual drive as males, as them being able to follow that drive means that you can not make them dependent on you to get some pussy to beat.
>"hurf durf women are exactly the same as men durrrrr"
That is not what I said. If I say that women have the same intellectual drive as men, and they become mentally ill not being able to follow that drive any way, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I THINK THAT WOMEN ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AS MEN. But I guess you need to misinterpret what I, or anyone agreeing with me about the things talk say, to invalidate what we say. Also, a person may act like a "lazy bimbo" both in the work life and staying home. Basically tho, taking a proper care of the household and the children, allows one to be lazy as little as having a proper career.
>You're saying that you personally deserve to be unhappy
I NEVER SAID THAT I AM UNHAPPY, but the other way round. I COULD NEVER BE HAPPY doing the household work and taking care of the children, without having a chance to utilize my personal set of skills and talents the way that enables me to use the full capacity of them. That is because my personal set of skills and talents are not suitable for doing those things but something totally else, AND because my intellectual drive has always been a lot stronger than my reproductive drive. I still have nurturing drive though but it gets targeted on animals, I have always liked them more than human children.

Now off. You're a bad liar and clinging to your delusions too much to have a decent conversations with. I go to utilize my talents and my skills now and you won't see me here for a while.

>>16636229
Ideas don't go out of date, and I thought it was genuinely funny somebody could hink that.

>>16636447
Major blackpill

>>16629249
The Very Hungry Caterpillar

>>16636447
why would women seek out effeminate men as caretakers? correct me if I'm wrong but for most of human history taking care of children was a woman's job, and men's job was to hunt for food and defend the tribe. both of these tasks are better accomplished by masculine men, not feminine ones. for hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution society was not structured like how it is now. we evolved in the wilderness, where tribal warfare could break out at the blink of an eye, where your next meal almost always depended on how well you could kill an animal. having a 'nurturing' partner seems low on the priority list for a typical female.

>>16628333
That's a slavish mentality anon

>>16627501
>falling for shitty, facile sociological studies and statistics
>if you don't agree with my arguments you're being deconditioned
Just a simple "cope" would have sufficed, but I can't take you seriously when

>the survey of 1,000 women on OnePoll.com also found plan B...
>half of ALL women

But sure, love is something that should not be profaned, but I'd rather not condition myself into a blackpilled grotto and see others around me as conditioned. Who's to say all women are like this?

40% of all first marriages in the US end in divorce, apparently, and further marriages have a higher percentage. But divorce in the US is still a blackpill; women are becoming hoes, thanks to our culture and permissive society.

https://bestlifeonline.com/women-initiate-divorce-more-than-men/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20study%20after%20study%20has%20proven%20that%20women,to%20split%20up%20may%20seem%20confounding%20to%20many.

Forgive the gruesome link;

"Women are more likely to feel like marriage is holding them back" likely because they constitute over half of the workforce. Because women do more housework than men, if they want "gender equity," they'll have "emancipate" the housewife from her work, further tearing down the cultural differences between woman and man. Marriages will just be two working individuals, but who will raise the child? Daycares? Soon, there will be no reason to marry because there will be no dynamic in the marriage, just two identical, self-sufficient units that spend so little time with their children that the children cannot serve as a common ground or glue for them, just a terrible onus. So they'll stop having children. Get ready for childless polygamy

The other point presented was the bluepill of "men are not taught by tradition to show their emotions, so there is little emotional communication and investment in the relationship." A flimsy point to make, based on a stereotype. A man has just as many emotional support nets as his wife, if he is a functioning human being. A functioning man should also know when stoicism is needed, and when it becomes unhealthy for his relationship.

Apparently women also have less of a capacity for tolerance nowadays. They cannot tolerate "abusive and manipulative husbands" (and they are inculcated with this watchman's mindset from all of their manipulative women's health and news websites) or just about anything. We can especially see this in the age of feminism

In short, it's munted, go get you a woman from a village in Europe and get to know her family first

>>16637153
We're not hunter-gatherers anymore. Women don't seek out effeminate men per se, but rather effeminate traits such as "caretaking" or "compassion" because such traits are conducive to a long-lived, healthy relationship. In a tribe, the husband and wife might not have so much time together, but we have more than enough free time with our lovers now, and so we need the right traits to coexist.

>NOOO my heckin' hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution
This is the new God

Sure, a "nurturing" partner WAS low on the priority list in the past, but times have changed. One who professes Evolutianity should know as much

>>16629369
ask any random stranger on the street "are women capable of love" and almost all of them will say yes. women are often portrayed as the more emotional and sentimental gender, and not just in anime and children's cartoons. how is it not a blackpill to say that women can never actually love their partner? every man with a gf/wife would be devastated to learn that truth

>>16627866
>There are some parts of the book that really are touching, like him listening to his sister have sex
>touching
More like touching HIMSELF lmao

>>16636640
>gets accused of being a materialistic drone that is unhappy because of the very system that he is defending
>admits that he is a materialistic drone
>admits that he is unhappy
>admits that the system that he is defending makes him happy
So, yes. You are agreeing with your critics. You're saying that every criticism of you is correct, and that you're wrong for holding the views that you do.

>>16627598
imagine caring so much about not touching stinky pussy that you'll waste your whole life on a mopey temper tantrum, black pills are just annoying distended sentimentalism shut the fuck up

>>16628333
Don't worry anon, there are women out there that are not affected by western values I am sure. Look for a woman who have had a good religious upbringing. Western women are conditioned not feel bad about hedonism, the sexual revolution gave way for women to slut around with no remorse, so they pursue it. However, a woman who was brought up to believe that hedonism is a bad quality will always feel shame.

>>16627180
Puerile to the point of nausea. Its only value is that it serves as as psychological evidence and testimony into the mind of a disturbed young man. Rodger's level of emotional maturity was that of a underdeveloped 15 year old. And it screams out on every page of his screed.

>>16627180
The Bible for niggas with zero game

ER genius will echo through the centuries way beyond the future point when the necessity to carry out his retribution plan on a worldwide scale (female genocide) becomes evident.
The tomb of womanhood will overshadow all landmarks.
Male collaborateurs will be dealt with like Elliot dealt with his two chinese roomates, knifing them like bugs...

>>16638480
>Male collaborateurs will be dealt with like Elliot dealt with his two chinese roomates
how were they collaborators with women?
women fucking hate asian men
if anything, they were just as incel as elliot was

>>16637353
you're comparing seconds to hours thinking the first will outweigh the second, delusional
at least I can safely presume you're a 'caring' man the next step in our downward 'evolution'

>>16638500
They would never have gone ER, this will count as collaboration in the coming sex war.
If you are not outspokenly anti-women you get the knife while you sleep

>>16629388
ok if woman are so great why am I a 30 year old khv when I really present like a normal person?

>>16629388
>The problem with idealised love is that it isolates the participants, and the love itself becomes the object of fascination.
The initial disillusionment doesn't come easy though. Both men and women can become deeply cynical about love. Other people insist that the idealised form of love is real and superior and try to get back to it. This can drive people to cheat, because cheating creates very intense emotions. Doomed love is often highly romantic (see poe), even if it is doomed by the participants being cheating scumbags.

A-fucking-men. These people don't want actual love because love takes work, they want an emotional high.

Incels need help. Like discipline from boot camp or something. Shitting on them doesnt help anybody. Most incels are mentally ill and I mean that in a sincere way, as in they need mental health help and adjustment and integration into society is possible if they are willing to be helped. Often times people would rather be miserable than seek help because the sick person uses their choosing to be miserable as a cope for their powerlessness. If they earnestly seek help, that would be an admission of powerlessness, and that is extremely painful.

These statements are, of course, general, and I won't attempt to cite any authority to support my claims. It's what I think based on personal experience.

>>16638848
do you not see any truth in what they say at all?
do you not even acknowledge the fact that 50% of marriages end in divorce and usually it's the man who gets fucked by alimony and child support?
women are fucked up in a lot of ways and you can't call incels mentally ill for noticing it

Ok boys how do we fix women

>>16638902
bullets, chains, whips, electricity, knives, fire, acid, saws, clubs, and bombs.

>>16627501
BASED AND ABSOLUTELY BLACKPILLED

>>16638902
reeducation camps

>>16638923
>>16638957
incredibly based

>>16627243
Freud is so ridiculous

>>16638848
>Often times people would rather be miserable than seek help because the sick person uses their choosing to be miserable as a cope for their powerlessness. If they earnestly seek help, that would be an admission of powerlessness, and that is extremely painful.
I never understood people who say this, at the very least it certainly doesn't apply to me, I have no problems admitting that I am powerless, yet it doesn't make me feel better, if anything it's worse, I know I am powerless and I know that I'll always be like this, everyone will always step on me and I can't change that, I wish I was deluded enough that I would be able to think that this is something that could be changed.

>>16627180
Where can I read it?

>>16627501
>Women, when dating, will never dissolve their ego into their partner's
IMAX projection like this is the quintessence of congenital inceldom. It's also curiously greyscale, as well as far too grainy and contrasty for the size of the surface: For the same reason I don't select seeds for the deadest look when planting, or stony aggregate for transplanting from forest floors, I deliberately overlook talk like this in real life because there's no kind, much less polite, way of putting what it indicates. Not that a desolate air troubles me all that much, since a change to drier scenery once in a while clears mold out of the attic, but the instinct to avoid permanently settling in areas like that is universal, and not at all sorted by sex. At best, males of the sort get used to whores, and avocations like mathematics practiced for its "purity" from the taint of application, but they'll never be lovable, not even in the secondary way that romantic egotists are when charming someone more than usually endowed with the quality into their company, to play for play's sake.

>>16627501
>50% of women, when in a relationship, have a backup partner whom they keep close.
Source?

>>16638885
How else would you describe a small portion of the population which is unable to integrate and fulfill their needs, except to describe them as mentally ill? It is true that women, like most people, are selfish and, unlike men, are extraordinarily privileged. There's no point denying that. What I am denying the idea that women are exclusively evil beings (I know most of the rhetorical is hyperbolic, this rhetoric itself being attention seeking behavior), and I am denying that incels are unfixable. First it would have to be shown conclusively that they could never, under any circumstances, fulfill their needs and desires to a satisfactory degree. That has never been demonstrated in this thread.

>>16639208
>I know I am powerless and I know that I'll always be like this, everyone will always step on me and I can't change that
What proof of this can you demonstrate? How do you know this is the case? What would falsify this claim you're making?

>>16629388
I like this post

>>16636231
You would know. I personally don't use that website

>>16627180
middle-class white boy autism

>>16640074
>white boy
he was half-chink half-kike

>>16629607
>Once the woman matures she may not feel the same way about him
Wise anon. That 20 year old you locked down at 28 soon turns 25+ and starts missing the freedom of what her early 20s offered her. 33+ husband is now in a terrible position.

It's unfortunate what this thread has devolved into, as his tale is actually an extremely interesting and insightful example as to why you shouldn't ever race-mix.

It was evident throughout that his Chink status-seeking genes were in deep conflict with his white ability for self-reflection. Of course he daren't go the full length of his train of thought and admit to himself that he was a deeply flawed and terribly mediocre person and instead saw himself as a temporarily embarrassed Chad who would inevitably live up to the standards set by his father and grandfather despite having no discernible talent in any particular domain.

>>16641854
he never saw himself as a "chad" though. He always reflected on how he was smaller and physically pathetic and remarked that his younger brother will easily grow up to surpass him

If anything incels believe too little in themselves. They immediately see any opportunity to be with a woman they like as a hopeless endeavor

>>16627180
I twist the world!!

>>16641854
>Chink status-seeking genes were in deep conflict with his white ability for self-reflection
Do you actually believe these are distinct racial traits lmao

>>16641914
you will never be a woman

>>16627501
Based and whitepilled. Fuck bitches get money

>>16627256
nice post but can we hear what this whackjob Rodgers had to say now?

If this guy lifted and watched RSD tyler he would have been saved.