/lit/ - Literature

homos can’t love

>>17627045
Fpbp

>>17627045

>>17627045
Fine, let me rephrase: Schopenhauer believed we are attracted to people solely for the purpose of procreation. How does homosexuality fit into this?

>>17627038
>since he believed love was just an illusion to drive us to reproduce?
You're pseud faggot
I thought I was the biggest pseud on this board but it's comforting to know that I was wrong.

READ. A. FUCKING. STANFORD. ARTICLE. AT. LEAST.

Love has been selected because it aids in survival and reproduction. He was on the right track but it's not an illusion 'tis real.

>>17627069
Fuck off

>>17627038
He would probably think they are still being driven to the biological urge, but that they have divorced the reward from the job of reproducing. Gays want to cum like everyone else, they are just gaming the system.

>>17627045
based
homos seething itt

>>17627038
"It's a misguided or transpositioned drive to reproduce"

>>17627038
“Mental illness.”

>>17627059
Pure egoistic pleasure seeking. As Kierkegaard would attest to.

>>17627038
Y'know, for all his talk about the futility and fakeness of love, I think he just loved and wanted to be loved.

>>17627045
FPBP /thread

>>17627045
Love between men will always be stronger than love with a w*man.

>>17627936
False you little assdwelling disease-monger

>>17627936
Not homosexual love.

>>17628002
>>17628016
Coping breeders seething about the fact they will never experience true love

>>17628047
Lust isn’t love, you’ll be straight eventually once you get over your traumas and conditioning.

>>17628070
It’s straight “love” that is actually just lust. Straights are attracted to each other and fall in live only for the purpose of breeding children. Homosexual love transcends that; it is the purest form of love.

>>17628070
>having to put up with femoids because you can't fall in love with men
>taking your frustration out on superior homos

>>17628079
Keep telling yourself that, must be why monogamy is so rampant in the lgbbq community.
>>17628105
>superior
kek

>>17628118
Dilate

>>17628136
Hahaaaaaaa ur mad. Lol. Stop being gay.

Degenerucy

>>17627936
>>17628047
>>17628079
>>17628136
>(you)

the Will to Boipussi

homosexuality is a defect

>>17628575
homosexuality is a social construct

>>17627045
neither can women

>>17628586
>I hate women

>>17628586
Women can love just not you

>>17628686

>>17628686
Women are property and therefore cannot love unconditionally the same way a dog can't love unconditionally

>>17627045
I genuinely do think this even if the post was meant to be funny. Homosexuality is a perversion (the anus is simply not designed for sexual intercourse) therefore it's a kind of repression that motivates it as opposed to love (which only occurs when the spirit is free).

>>17628730
homosexuality is a meme that you fell for ya queah.

>>17628118
Holy shit the homos must be SEETHING, absolutely BTFOed

>>17627038
I know you haven't read WWR because he justifies it in there just to prove he can.

You dumb niggers have never read schopenahuer. He literally covers this in volume 2 of world as will.
>faggots exist when the will is not trying to reproduce. Which is why old men like twinks.
>not many people trying to reproduce so faggots are abundant in current year.

>>17629007
Thanks I was too lazy to look this up but iirc he was pretty cheeky about it too and said something to the effect that "now when you accuse me of defending x you'll at least be correct"

>>17628725
Women are conscious living humans not property

>>17628994
They are though look how hard they have to police every cranny of the internet

>>17628730
You speak of intention, yet do not consider the unintended results. Any man could be forced into pleasure through the anus. Not acknowledging this weakens your argument, as you speak of theoretical framings of human sexuality and biology, based on the limitations of your imagination and not what the in praxi matter of sexuality, which do not apply all; thus making your projections be akin to a punch in the air.

>>17627079
you are running circles. Attraction was there before life

>>17627038
The drive to reproduce manifests itself as horniness in cismen. Whatever a man does with that horniness thereafter does not refute the initial purpose of the drive.

>>17627038
Are you seriously reading Philosophy as a means of understanding homosexuals? The absolute state of /lit/, irredeemable.
>>17628070
>unironically believing homosexuality is a trauma induced perversion.
Back to /pol/ you go. I can't believe I share a board with faggots like you.

>>17630720
Kill yourself

>>17630818
You're not cut out for philosophy. Browsing reddit and /pol/ might be more your speed.

>>17629096
Ok anon but what about black women?

>>17627038
You think Shope wasn't aware of pederastic love in the ancient world? The sexual drive is primordially reproductive but not exclusively, it can also be onanistic, dominative, etc. None of which excludes these drives from being illusory, in the sense of representing all false teloses, assuming the subject is unable to see them for the dead-ended labyrinths they truly are: the only way to escape such neverending labyrinths of desire is to discover their containing walls, scale these, and never fall down into such pits of blind unknowing again. So, yes the principal sex drive is procreative and love or lust is the illusion that dissolves what otherwise would incite the wariness or disgust of being smeared by another's sexual fluids, or worse. But, similarly, sex, when devoid of the romantic element, is simply an extension of onanism, to wit of another primeval or infantile illusion, that to is an illusion as it involves incomprehension that behind such sexual walls exists a incomparably richer and infinitely more complex world of self-understanding in the round, which can manifest without the need for any passage through onanism or actual sex of any sort.

>>17627105
Fuck!
Easy and Well said Anon
Kudos for you

>>17627038
Mental illness

Germophobes.

>>17627069
>Puts periods between each word
Have you ever tried reading that out loud? It sounds retarded as fuck. Just go back to R*eddit where you belong

>>17631522
have a downboat you toxic chud

>>17627069
Now put clapping emojis between the words you deranged tranny, it'll make more of an impact
Go back to twitter, even reddit might be too smart for you

>>17628079
>It’s straight “love” that is actually just lust. Straights are attracted to each other and fall in live only for the purpose of breeding children. Homosexual love transcends that; it is the purest form of love.
wrong

>All these nerds claiming love is purely for biological reproductional purposes, but doesn't even consider the function of love in social biology

Love is often a part of sexuality, but it certainly is not bound by sexuality.

why are there so many /pol/tards on /lit/ these days?

>>17633450
They're the jews to our white society. They want to destroy their host

>>17633450
When ideas are in crisis, they often seek to the classics for guidance. I believe many /pol/tards experience such a crisis. If they were contempt, rather than under pressure, they wouldn't spent so much time yelling at everything.

Change isn't always dangerous fellas.

>>17627038

Homosexuality is actually an epistemological disease, leading its victims to believe consistently that reproduction *is* only possible with same sex partners. And the only way to consistently do so is to invert the mean of multiple linguistic constructs in order to camouflage their deception.

From what I read about Schopenhauer, which I'll admit isn't much, something about them acting out and pretending love in an effort to appear as normal. That's with the 2020 definition of homosexuality. With the older definitions it's easier to explain as a mental illness.

>>17627667
Why is homosexuality pleasureable, then?