/lit/ - Literature

>>19268048
Imo it's more likely that the nascent signs he saw of what would eventually become the idea of sexual liberation created the instincts he mentions. It a kind of social market speculation.

>>19268048
He's fundamentally right

>>19268048
Gays have a more measured view of women.

Women are just hyperdarwinists, men are naive fags because they have less emotional intelligence and so mistake their ignorance for moral superiority. Both are shit for their own reasons but seething at women accomplishes nothing. Take the Jelenik pill.

Women are even worse than most straight men realize

he b right doe

>>19268110
>Jelenik pill.
what's this?

>>19268048
>meet nonbinary (they/them) girl-thing on dating app
>hot but outspoken on gender issues
>still loves being spit on and choked during sex
every time

>>19268118
>2021 on /lit/
>hasn't read peak femcelcore

>>19268110
>hyperdarwinists
You have to be joking. Show one ounce of confidence and all their "feminine intuition" and emotional intelligence become useless. All that shit you wrote is post-facto rationalization cope, the opposite reaction to thinking that women are innocent angels, but equally cringe.

>>19268171
Not an argument

>>19268171
>Show one ounce of confidence and all their "feminine intuition" and emotional intelligence become useless
Honestly this. Be in a social situation where you appear to be above average and act like a cocky narcissist. It works 9 times out of 10

>>19268171
You have no idea what I'm talking about moid. Women imagine themselves victimized angels but are in fact cruel spiders, much less forgiving of the flaws of others and petty slights against them. They judge people based on appearances much more brutally than men, and if you knew what a woman typically thinks of you, even if you are a 10, you would be embarrassed by some gay little fault you didn't even know you had.

Women are more calculating and able social creatures, it is known. Males are autistic fags by comparison, but males are also physically stronger and emotionally retarded so when they manage to lash out it is much more disastrous for everyone. No countryside was decimated and set on fire and everyone there raped and killed because a woman was a conceited cunt. That is the difference. You think you are in perfect control because you can seduce women (you can't though larping nerd) but even chicks who fall for violent niggers are more emotionally intelligent than you. Men will literally simp for the dumbest, foulest bitches which why there are women on OnlyFans making millions. Moids are emotional brainlets and it's laughable that you think women are little children to be sexually manipulated because the bank accounts of e-girls filled by pathetic sois in the thousands prove otherwise. Cope.

“My dear boy, no woman is a genius. Women are a decorative sex. They never have anything to say, but they say it charmingly. Women represent the triumph of matter over mind, just as men represent the triumph of mind over morals.”


“My dear Dorian, it is quite true. I am analysing women at present, so I ought to know. The subject is not so abstruse as I thought it was. I find that, ultimately, there are only two kinds of women, the plain and the coloured. The plain women are very useful. If you want to gain a reputation for respectability, you have merely to take them down to supper. The other women are very charming. They commit one mistake, however. They paint in order to try and look young. Our grandmothers painted in order to try and talk brilliantly. Rouge and esprit used to go together. That is all over now. As long as a woman can look ten years younger than her own daughter, she is perfectly satisfied. As for conversation, there are only five women in London worth talking to, and two of these can’t be admitted into decent society. However, tell me about your genius. How long have you known her?”

Women who like being sexually dominated can not be real feminists.

>>19268216
All w*men trash are that way, there has never been any feminists then

>>19268205
Why do you keep saying moid? You're not a woman.

>>19268214
based person who actually reads books

>>19268221
I'm nonbinary.

>>19268048
homos don't know shit about pussy
but they know a whole lot about shit

https://odysee.com/@Realfake_Newsource:9/RFNS-2.21-003-002:3

>>19268214
based Wilde

>>19268205
Thanks for this. I’ve never actually laughed out loud at a shitpost before. It’s unfathomable, remarkably tasteful how you play this character with such a sense of (facile, deluded, soi-disant) superiority while at once advancing so confidently such a pretentious, retarded philosophy. Really well done. If you’re not shitposting… let’s just say, I’m confident you are, since most people—except your delightfully satirical character wink wink—with a grain of self-reflective capacity would realize that what they’ve written is so humiliating they would just abandon the thread and hide it.

>>19268148
based

>>19268221
she's dealing with mild-moderate mental illness and is incapable of recognizing her own projections. she made an extremely cringe post, yes, but let's just pretend like it never happened and spare her the indignity of facing what she wrote.

>>19268110
>Both are shit for their own reasons but seething at women accomplishes nothing.

Yeah this. Men and women have been at each others throats for the entirety of human history, it is nothing new. In fact, it's very funny to me on the feminist side of things they present themselves as progressive and yet they engage in the same "men be like / women be like" cliche talking points that have been made for the past forever. It's all incredibly repetitive.

>>19268182
>9 times out of 10
Nah
Works every time

>>19268110
>Women are just hyperdarwinists
>hyperdarwinists who breed without regard to their own genetic quality, or the thought of the sufferings their offspring might endure as a result
t. houellebecq

>>19268205
Who hurt you?

>>19268048
He's wrong. Britain had some of the kindest women, but due to various subversive movements (e.g., Crowley), such an archetype fell out of favor. Look at Beatrix Potter, Jane Austen, Molly Brett, and many others. You're just lying to yourselves because you refuse to look at the problems that led to this decadent situation.

>>19268205
>Cope.

It was good of you to end with the word cope so we know you are coping

>>19268306
Breathtaking imho. To write that stupidly but confidently while railing against stupidity and unwarranted confidence. One of the finest uses of irony even though it’ll go over most heads. She’s George Meredith for our time!

>>19268351
Oscar Wilde only spoke about the upper crust of British society. Beatrix Potter middle class, Jane Austen's family was broke, and I have no clue about Molly Brett's upbringing.

>>19268306

>If you’re not shitposting… let’s just say, I’m confident you are, since most people—except your delightfully satirical character wink wink—with a grain of self-reflective capacity would realize that what they’ve written is so humiliating they would just abandon the thread and hide it.

another character in my great tragicomedy dilates their neovagina and hands themself in their closet with a belt. but wait, the drama gets better.

>>19268535
If anything, that proves it wasn’t really a gender thing. Wilde absolutely took the piss out of the upper class regardless of gender. The only thing about the upper class he approved of was the practice of hedonism. He never once made fun of the poor— If anything, he seemed to pity them.

>>19268058
>sexual liberation created the instincts he mentions.
Sexual liberation created the want to be dominated? I doubt it. You can find the want expressed in erotic literature throughout the ages (albeit usually written by men ..)

>>19268205
Well put. Other writers like this that honestly explore the perverse strangeness of male-female relations?

>>19268535
>Jane Austen's family was broke
Much of the upper class was broke by the Regency period. They were still "rich" though.

>>19268535
Middle-class or low-class British seemed to be the best then.
Do you think the upper-class British were always involved in debauchery, the occult, and other shit thanks to the Rothschilds?

>>19268110
>>19268338
women may be hyperdarwinists, but they are too retarded to make quality reproductive choices. it is a fallacy to think that because a woman fucks someone, that person was the best possible mate. men would be better at practicing eugenics if they actually chose to

>>19268321
Yes. I often find it ironic too how they'll go on and on about the discounting of the female experience in literature, and then proceed to do the exact same thing against men by only ever focusing on women's experiences and sexuality but call it "feminism".

>We have emancipated them, but they remain slaves looking for their masters, all the same. They love being dominated.

Yes... and...?

>>19268550
>but wait, the drama gets better.

As in, turns out it was you all along and you're dangling at the end your cardboard belt from your closet rod as I write this? Fuck Wilde, your life is the work of art. Bravo.

>>19268321
>>19268678
there are many feminists now in headlines at least (silly to take too seriously as the media is what it is, but remember that at least a good sized demographic is defined by headlines) who think the real problem is that there are too many soibois and that if men just lifted weights and had sex, we wouldn't live under patriarchy because patriarchy is a consequence of weak and ineffectual men. nevermind how insane and reductive and hypocritical and ironic that is according to much theory plus faggy mainstream talking points, the funny part is that if all men actually became benevolent chads then women would still be ruled by men, because in a world where all guys are high test weightlifter lotharios, women would be in an even worse spot of personal choice. no chad gives a single fuck about bitches' opinions, you already have to be half gay to read a feminist text in the first place.

it's almost like they want to be brutalized and men are fools for taking them seriously in the FoRUm oF iDeAs. reading >>19268148 etc. will just confirm this. maybe that is why otto weininger killed himself, he was a woman trapped in a man's body. otto weininger says... trans rights!

>>19268813
>there are many feminists now in headlines at least (silly to take too seriously as the media is what it is, but remember that at least a good sized demographic is defined by headlines) who think the real problem is that there are too many soibois and that if men just lifted weights and had sex, we wouldn't live under patriarchy because patriarchy is a consequence of weak and ineffectual men.
Is this real? lol post examples pls, I wanna laugh

>>19268339
a woman, presumably.

bump

>>19268205
>No countryside was decimated and set on fire and everyone there raped and killed because a woman was a conceited cunt.
Iliad.

>>19268048
Voltaire spotted.

>>19268205
You have a point somewhat that men are emotionally and socially retarded a lot of the time, but this can easily be learned to be on the same footing as the woman. I agree but it isn't that hard to grasp.

>>19268205
Emotional intelligence is a meme and it doesn't achieve anything meaningful.

>>19268048
>>19268106
but keep your enemies closer

Nobody (excluding the mentally ill) wants to suffer. Everybody wants everyone to know how much they've suffered. They take pride in being an individual that has endured hardship and misfortune while being wronged but came out the other side alive.

Mentally ill people actively seek suffering as atonement for their spooks. They feel they deserve misfortune and ill treatment for their own perceived shortcomings. This is why christcuckery is such a debilitating mental illness; it normalizes suffering-seeking behavior as virtuous.

>>19268205
Impressive, I actually was about to answer seriously.

>>19270264
>Nobody (excluding the mentally ill) wants to suffer.
If only you knew how wrong you are.

>>19268171
Women are darwinists in the sense that they instinctively respond to strength and signs of dominance. Not the soiboy garbage that the average guy thinks they do.

>>19270371
This way of thinking is post enlightenment brainrot.

>>19270675
This way of thinking is correct.

>>19268317
Trannies are not real women. Only biological sex matters.

>>19270706
It is not.

>>19270371
So does every animal on the planet
This has nothing to do with women

>It's another "/lit/ falsely attributes a quote to an author" episode
This quote is form The Picture of Dorian Gray. Sibyl has just killed herself, and Basil tells Lord Henry he "was teribly cruel to her". The quote in the image is Lord Henry's immediate response. If people on this board had actually read this book, they would have known that. OP makes it seem like this is something Oscar Wilde wrote in his journal or said in conversation with a friend. N.B. I am not defending women. I am simply pointing out the fact that people on /lit/ don't read.

>>19270787
proofs?

>>19270835
>women are on the level of female animals

whoa cool it with the misogyny sister

>>19270835
>>19270902
Female animals are larger and sexually select for small males in the majority of animals species.
Your comparison doesn't make sense. If women behaved like female animals the world would be a better place.

based and neechpilled

>>19271038

>>19268641
The very dichotomy is modern I'd say, just like how supporting family values is now seen as being a partisan opinion. My point isn't that values change over time in a linear fashion, but rather that something that seems to have obviously been present in the past isn't necessarily. Classical man was practically a different species.

>>19271833
Whats different about the classical man vs now?

>>19271862
Imo ideas like self-actualization, our concepts of tyranny, and a "human race" or general human condition would be totally foreign to classical man.

>>19271494
How is that a cope its literally true you fucking ignoramus.
Don't post shit if you don't know what you're talking about dipshit.

>>19268235
video lags too much i stopped watching

>>19271898
more cope

>>19268058