/lit/ - Literature

>>23071584
OP is a faggot.

>>23071584
OP here, I'm trans btw
Don't know if it matters though

>>23071584
The post that reaffirmed what we already know about gay posters and their need to interpret something in a gay way.

>>23071584
We need more shitposts like this and less board crossover slop

>>23071724
I'm OP and I shared that picture with you anon, of the Canadian schizo. I'm glad you're enjoying it. He doesn't get enough attention

>>23071584
>Here is what I- UH I mean this cool and right anon said two days ago on the 4chanz.
>Agree with this now thankyou.

>>23071736
yeah

>>23071731
I don't even care about aeschylus but this is a sorta okayish opportunity to use it. Still thankful bro.

>>23071584
Damn, you‘re right. I didn‘t have the patience for that whole thread but this is good input.

Achilles and Patroclus still weren‘t gay but I can appreciate Aeschylus‘ ad-hocing the standards of his own military experience as more than degeneration now which is nice.

>>23071584
Wait a fucking minute............
You seem familiar.....
I think i know you.
Aren't you the dude that got destroyed in the "Achilles was gay" thread?
And now i see you are showing your post without context, to impress other people, because you are pathetically coping, because you got destroyed.
Hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahaha hahaha.
Did you think i was not going to notice.
Hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahaha.
I already destroyed your Aeschylus, retarded post, and now i see you posting those post, here??
Hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahaha.
Pathetic.
When i was talking to you, i didn't even realize how pathetic you actually were.
I should have destroyed you harder that i did.
Lol.

>>23071756
Are you ok?

This pathetic idolisation of Classical society proceeds from a grotesque prelapsarian impulse that does not correspond to reality. Classical Greece was, on the whole, a backwards and degenerate civilisation, and its rampant homosexuality testifies to that truth. Their polytheistic religion of anthropomorphic gods demonstrates a culture yet unable to pose the most fundamental philosophical questions; for as with all polytheisms the question arises of what grounds the gods’ existence and furnishes them with power. Polytheism represents a stage in human development when the question of Being as such is not yet grasped, and men are still entwined in stumbling around finding causes for particular types of beings. Thus come the sea gods, the air gods, the earth gods, who ground particular aspects of being but are themselves dependent upon a more basic ground, which is left unexplored. Hence Euthyprho’s dilemma could not be answered, and Socrates was executed.

Greek philosophy may be seen therefore as a rebellion against Greek polytheism, for it begins with a search after one Urstoff, one primary matter, that grounds the existence of everything else. Thales decides on water; Anaximenes: air; and it is not until Plato that the question of Being as such receives a plausible ground in the Form of the One, the undivided unity which may be seen as Plato’s discovery of monotheism.

>>23071584
You retard, your Aeschylus shit alredy got destroyed here:>>23059647
So stop coping, you retard.

>>23071584
>desperate to prove Achilles was gay
>Keeps mentioning an old theater fag who lived 300 years after Homer was alive

>>23071584
Can we stop pretending pls?
>but.. but... the ancient homo had virility ... and muscles...and.. and.. they were based too
Your parades are nothing but filth, rubbing asses on each other and with children in skimpy outfits. You lost the plot mate.

>>23071819

>>23071819
Yes, in Cringemerica

>>23071826
This is the Iliad's tradition.

>>23071584
>kisses exchanged between muscular warriors

>>23071826
Nice cherrypicking there, idiot.
Did you know the etruscans, are a extinct civilization, now???
Mmmm, i wonder why did they go extinct....
Could it be because they were gay and femenine???
Do you really want to replicate a extinct civilization??
If you actually want that, then that means you are a idiot gey retard.

>>23071843
>oh my Allah-Yoshua-Science! Non-heterosexuality? In my SUPERBOWL COMMERCIAL MARATHON? THAT'S NOT LE HECKIN HALAL WHOLESOME!

>>23071859
The mural you posted is Etruscan. The Iliad is about a bronze age war through the eyes of dark age Greek bardic poet Homer. The Iliad itself is about Achaean warlords fighting over war brides and even Patroclus are mentioned as having slept at opposite ends of their tent with a their slave women. Aeschylus lived 300 years after Homer and was a theatre fag you Kinaidos.

>>23071868
>Aeschylus lived 300 years after Homer and was a theatre fag you Kinaidos.
The Persian Wars played a large role in Aeschylus' life and career. In 490 BC, he and his brother Cynegeirus fought to defend Athens against the invading army of Darius I of Persia at the Battle of Marathon.[11] The Athenians emerged triumphant, and the victory was celebrated across the city-states of Greece.[11] Cynegeirus was killed while trying to prevent a Persian ship retreating from the shore, for which his countrymen extolled him as a hero.[11][17]

In 480 BC, Aeschylus was called into military service again, together with his younger brother Ameinias, against Xerxes I's invading forces at the Battle of Salamis. Aeschylus also fought at the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC.[18] Ion of Chios was a witness for Aeschylus' war record and his contribution in Salamis.[17]

>>23071868
>OH MY YOSHUA-MUHAMMOCK, BISMILLAH AL-MACHAMBURGER, YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S NON-HETERONORMAL NON-MISSIONARY INTERCOURSE HAPPENING? THIS IS ANOTHER BOSTON TEA PARTY HIDJRA, BUT IN REVERSE LIKE IN THE MARVEL HARRY POTTER JUSTICE LEAGUE!

>>23071880
I'm not Christian and I don't like gays because they molest children. You think Christianity is the source of homosexual condemnation but Germanics would kill their homosexuals, Romans and Greeks had laws against them. There's no reason to pretend they were overly celebrated.

>>23071880
What?
That post in not even readable.

>>23071890
>Greeks had laws against them.

>>23071890
>THIS *clap* IS *clap* TOTALLY *clap* LIKE *clap* HARAM *clap* AND *clap* AND *clap* SINFUL *clap* MY *clap* BRO *clap* DAWG *clap*

>>23071890
i think boy fucking is gross because I grew up in a western country, but it seems pretty clear that prepubescent pedophilia *is* harmful to development, while after the onset of puberty, it's the *shame* around pedophilia and adult-child sex that causes such profound damage to the childrens' psyches. That is, these negative effects are absent in cultures tolerant of pederasty. I'm not in favor of it but I think it's back-projection to assume a modern, western model of predator-victim for ancient Greek man-boy love.

schizophrenic AND gay? if god is real it would seem he truly hated you

>>23071584
How is that relevant?

>>23071880
>>23071897
Oh, it's a soiteen tantrum thread.

Weird that mods never seem to ban these underage kids despite their endless tantrums and spam.

God damn OP is retarded.
>But the men of Lacedaemon, holding that "if a man but lay his hand upon the body and for lustful purpose, he shall thereby forfeit claim to what is beautiful and noble"—do, in the spirit of their creed, contrive to mould and fashion their "beloved ones" to such height of virtue,
Retards keep trying to say homosexuality was a thing in Greece. Modern faggotry CANNOT be compared to Greek practices. In nowhere was there a lack of stigma against actual homosexual intercourse, and essentially all texts make note that if the lusts cannot be suppressed, it is ignoble.

The only reason OP can get this deluded is because he's a readlet, and the more he posts the more he relies on modern interpretations and youtube trash.

>>23071972
Post the rest of the text
>The other Greeks either do as the Boeotians do, where man and boy are joined as couples and live together, or like the Eleans, who get to enjoy the charms of boys by making them grateful; there are also those who wholly prevent boy-lovers from conversing with boys. . . . in most of the Greek cities the laws do not oppose men’s desire for boys.
Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaimonians

>>23071584
Holy BASED
The Christcuck contingent on /lit/ needs to GTFO

>>23071986
Cringe.

Leftists out.

>>23071919
>but it seems pretty clear that prepubescent pedophilia *is* harmful to development
Wrong. There is nothing wrong or harmful about pedophilia.

Children have a sexuality and expressing this sexuality with adults is not harmful. Children are not harmed by masturbating. Children are not harmed by engaging in sexual play with other children. Children are also not harmed by engaging in sex play with adults. Children have been free to engage sexually with adults in cultures all across the world throughout history and they were unharmed by it, because sex is something which is pleasurable and positive, not something traumatizing and degrading.

Child sexual abuse theory is pseudoscientific horseshit and there has never been any proof that consensual sexual relationships cause psychological harm. It shouldn't even be taken seriously in polite society. Every low quality study which makes this claim uses clinical samples, doesn't control for confounding factors, and most importantly, they don't account for whether or not the experience was consensual. Essentially they use victims of incestuous child rape to argue that children who have consensual sexual experiences with adults will be harmed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al._controversy

You can learn more about pedosexuality and adult-child sexual relationships on IPCE and NewgonWiki.

>sucking dick is Le based
Ok faggot

>>23071992
>Ernst Röhm
Executed with his faggot friends, faggotry used as an excuse for it
>Ernst Jünger
Ah yes, 1944, the perfect time to be gay in Germany. After all he wrote that passage.
>Wyndham Lewis
Who?
>Antony M. Ludovici
Who?

>>23072039
>Ah yes, 1944, the perfect time to be gay in Germany.
What's the relevance?

>Findings from a high-quality, national Australian dataset (n=11,564) indicate that individuals with low cognitive ability are less likely to support equal rights for same-sex couples. This pattern holds in the presence of confounds, is consistent across measures of ability, and is more pronounced for verbal ability.
The Cognitive Roots of Prejudice towards Same-Sex Couples: An Analysis of an Australian National Sample

>>23072057
Yes retard because the ruling ideology in the west is secular liberalism so generally those who are educated, middle class, and have higher IQ will support Liberal ideas such as feminism, homosexuality, diversity, etc.. That says nothing about the objective issue.

Homosexuality is obviously an abomination that subordinates the sexual drive to the pursuit of mere pleasure. It is also a disordered affection since it fails to realise the metaphysical and aesthetic complementarity that inheres in the relationship between a man and a woman. Society only ever tolerates homosexuality as a weird perversion that exists on the fringes and does not contribute to the social good since it fails to realise the telos of the sexual drive which is procreation. A man who gets fucked in the ass necessarily loses his masculinity and becomes an effeminate abomination which is why in homosexual relationships they have sex with "boys" who haven't attained manhood or submissive partners who act like women. Even the homosexual knows deep down that his "relationship" is a cheap imitation of marriage which is why one of them attempts to act like a woman. Lastly homosexuality is not "love" or "friendship". Homosexuality is a perversion of male-male love since it introduces irrational passion, degradation of manhood, and possessiveness without the corresponding pregnancy and complementarity of gender that exists in a heterosexual relationship and creates strong familial bonds.

I don't want to be offensive or anything, but fags are gross.

>>23072167
>Homosexuality is obviously an abomination that subordinates the sexual drive to the pursuit of mere pleasure.
That doesn't follow. The existence of a romantic and sexual element in a relationship between two men does not obliterate whatever other objective goods exist in that relation between them, and often the love of the other is the seed of further and richer joys and virtues. Homosexuality may be a sin and still produce 'goods'. CS Lewis said as much in his book 'Surprised by Joy', when he wrote that the erotic attachments that formed between the boys at his boarding school was the only humane part of their school lives, the only time they went out of themselves and devoted themselves selflessly to another person. He could say this and still hold to his position that homosexuality is a grave sin, because under a Christian ethic homosexuality, even when it produces objective goods, cannot be countenanced on account of the fact Christians are not consequentialists. But people who do not adhere to a Christian ethic (and whose opposition to homosexuality stems from personal prejudice, not adherence to a rational moral system) have to invent other reasons to disapprove of homosexuality, including denying the very possibility that a homosexual person, or a homosexual relationship between two people, could ever instantiate human virtues and goods. This is not a very secure argument because it is instantly demolished by the first exposure to empirical evidence of the contrary (of which there is a significant amount). I also find your argument essentially anti-human and anti-life since you denigrate romantic love as a mere 'irrational passion'. The most rewarding relationship in my life is my with my male partner -- it would be one of the most rewarding relationships in my life even without the romantic ingredient, but eros has not diminished or degraded our intimacy, but rather multiplied it. I find it perplexing to see other people be so adamantly committed to denying this. I don't understand it. I have never been hostile to you. We are alike in so many ways.

>>23072017
Full mask off moment.

They already did this experiment in Germany where they put little boys with pedophiles as foster parents and not a single one of the boys grew up right. Most had anger issues, were not able to function in society, and many became hoarders / homebodies. This is why people hate fags.

>>23071897
I don't understand why child molesters think they're hated because of Abrahamic faiths. Many other cultures hate gays who follow different religions. It's weird that they will push boy fucking as a natural act.

Yeah, I just hate homos

>>23071584
yeah christcucks are retarded, we already know this there's no need to make a thread about it.

>>23072277
If anything, we wouldn't have the homosexual problem in the west if Christians weren't so tolerant.

>>23072204
Conservative values are always more difficult to defend because they are rooted not within a simple consequentialist framework but rather a telos-oriented Aristotelian metaphysic which is very intuitive but difficult to argumentatively articulate. It is much easier to scream "they're not harming anyone!" than to give an analysis of the form of homosexual attraction and to demonstrate why it is disordered, and why it is in fact harmful both to the homosexual and society at large. This is why conservative values are more easily propped up by the weight of divine authority, or the simple appeal to intuition, both of which fall on deaf ears in our age.

>The existence of a romantic and sexual element in a relationship between two men does not obliterate whatever other objective goods exist in that relation between them, and often the love of the other is the seed of further and richer joys and virtues.
Human sexuality expresses itself in a dimorphism. There is the active and the passive part, the lover and the beloved. Penetration is a violation and a possession of the other. A woman naturally desires to be loved, to be dominated, to be penetrated; and she must desire this for the propagation of the race. It is not fitting for a man to be in such a position, because of the form of his body and soul, which are essentially active. In order to consent to being fucked in the ass, a man must renounce his masculinity; and one may easily observe how homosexual "bottoms" are imitations of women, and not true men. Thus homosexuality obliterates the goods that exist in the relationship by robbing one of the participants of his dignity.

>could ever instantiate human virtues and goods
If a homosexual helps his partner in some non-sexual way, he may have performed a virtuous action. Nevertheless, the intrinsic form of their relationship is disordered, and this outweighs the possible goods which could exist.

>I also find your argument essentially anti-human and anti-life since you denigrate romantic love as a mere 'irrational passion'.
I do not know what romantic love is. Lust is an acute bodily desire that overwhelms the mind and impels one to the emission of semen. Romantic love, to the extent it exists between husband and wife, soon gives way to a mundane love whose foundation is familial duty. This mundane love is much deeper, because it is built on an objective metaphysical complementarity, and not on mere sentiment, which is actually worthless.

To put it politically: Homosexuals should not have political rights, since they either do not form families or, if they form them, they disintegrate them with their behaviour. Thus they have no interest in the future of the Polis, but are totally engrossed within their immediate sentimentality and pleasure-seeking.

>>23072329
>And this is why I should get to fuck kids

I'm liberal (NEET - need free gibs) but you're not really winning any "I should get to fuck kids" arguments.

>>23072366
Meant to reply to >>23072204

All pedophile claims to the nobility or essential goodness of their position fall flat in the face of the fact that they are definitionally trying to support their sexual perversion of raping children. What they have cannot even be called love, because they must always throw away the object of their filthy "love" after some amount of years, lest they live with an adult and not the helpless victim of their abuse. Even then, could they not delay their sexual gratification for a time? No, because their object is only perverse sexual fantasy. All pedophiles are disgusting filth incapable of actual love and the fact that they're able to run around spewing their nonsense in liberal colleges under the guise of being "MAPs" is a testament to the perversity of our times.

>>23072329
5/5 pretty good

>>23072391
What's worse is if allowed into positions of power they might actually get to enact some crazy pedophile program like they did in Germany with professor Kentler's program.

From the late 1960s until the early 1990s, with the authorization and financial support of the Berlin Senate, Kentler placed neglected youth as foster children in the homes of single pedophile fathers with the ostensible purpose of resocializing them, while explicitly encouraging sexual contact between them.

>>23072391
Ok, but just to be clear, "pedophile" only applies to prepubescent children. My urges to fuck budding 13 year olds are perfectly natural and healthy. It's society that's wrong.

>>23072329
There is no such thing as 'conservative values', ipso facto. Conservatism as a word can refer to a mental tendency, a behaviour, and (I gather this is the sense in which you are using it) a modern political philosophy. In all other senses of the word conservatism can only be a relative phenomenon, relative the object or state of affairs one wishes to conserve. An ancient Greek conservative, for instance, would not hold to the precepts you outline here. There are many people who are conservatives who are not Aristotelians. And there are many people who are Aristotelian virtue ethicists who are not conservatives, or are conservative in a different way to you.
It is noteworthy you assume that anal sex is part of our relationship, when neither myself nor my partner practice it. I also find the myopic obsession with the sexual element of the relationship strange.
>Homosexuals should not have political rights, since they either do not form families or, if they form them, they disintegrate them with their behaviour.
This is not borne out by the empirical evidence. Your assertion that homosexuals should not 'have political rights' lacks clarity. Do you mean rights specifically related to homosexuality (marriage and so on) or do you mean that people with a mere homosexual preference should have their civil liberties stripped? The Catholic Church would certainly disagree with you if you mean the latter thing, and also with elements of the former position.
>Thus they have no interest in the future of the Polis
This is also not borne out by historical evidence. It is very strange for you to use the language of classical antiquitty when the record shows homosexuals and homosexual relationships playing a constructive role in the life of the city state: consider Epaminondas, or Pelopidas, or the Sacred Band, or Solon. Was Lord Kitchener a poor Englishman? Or Frederick the Great a poor German?
>>23072366
>>23072373
Where was pedophilia mentioned, retard? I am not the pedo poster.

>>23072445
>pedantry
Alright, you're literally retarded. All you can do is hope rhetoric protects your nasty ego.

>>23072448
It's not pedantry, I just find your claim to arbitrate what 'conservative values' are to be pompous and overblown -- especially considering that a major strain in conservative thought is scepticism towards perfect abstract philosophical systems, whether they are Peripatetic or Marxist or something else. You can see this in Cicero and in Edmund Burke.

>>23071584
post starts with a good point than devolves into the usual, main point of contention, that is, the "jump" between intense male friendship/love, which I also found quite superior to our modern environment, and the imitation of the carnal sexual act normally reserved to the female as receiver, aka sodomy
you can't call someone "feminized" on one hand while trying to defend a relation with the implication that one of the males takes the feminine passive side of carnal lust
I would argue in fact that there is nothing more significative regarding the effemination of the male sphere than the almost instinctive confusion between the meaning of male love with sodomy, it's in fact precisely what I imagine a foid immediately thinks about when the word males and love appear together, a purely feminine ovarian projection.
I found the relation between Enyalus and Nisus in the Aeneid as well as the male atmosphere in the games in honor of Patroklos almost tearing yet I will never possibly understand how sodomy is relevant to any of it, where I see it as far more spiritually and intellectually bound.

>>23071584
He said nothing and you are a LITERAL faggot.

>>23072810
>a purely feminine ovarian projection.
Aeschylus depicts Achilles and Patrolcus as sexually involved.

>>23072844
and Plato would rightfully reproach this carnal, lustful element, and I'd agree more with the latter, considering it a fall of male love into the dimension of Aphrodite

>>23072861
such nonsense

>>23072844
300 years after the Iliad was composed. Achilles also impregnated a girl before leaving for Troy. Both Patroclus and Achilles slept with their war brides according to Homer.

>>23073206
You are missing the point. It’s not about “what really happened” (they are myths, there is no strict canon), it’s about the character of the people creating them. Aeschylus was an infinitely worthy person. Ergo, a homosexual interpretation of the myth is not a bad thing

>>23072017
this but unironically.
seriously, you're gonna have a hard time convincing anyone of this fact since they all choose to believe that every single pedophile is a rapist automatically. I'm still trying to think how you'd convince one normally of such a case, because it seems impossible for me to tell anyone about this without sounding like a lunatic.

>>23071584
Just sounds like this guy is trying to cope with his homosexual desires.

>>23072445
There’s no use in arguing semantics. The meaning of the word was clear from the context in which I used it. What I meant was that conservative values are usually subtler because they are based on a view of the world in which ethics is grounded in ontology and aesthetics. A modern liberal has an easier time arguing on purely rationalistic grounds against some conservative principle than the conservative has in defending it. The liberal notion of “harm” is obvious and immediate; the conservative notion appeals to concepts such as the “social fabric” and “moral integrity” of the nation which are much less measurable. For a conservative, bestiality is not only wrong because the “animal can’t consent”; it is wrong because it fundamentally contradicts the telos and sacrality of sexuality. A liberal could easily argue that, so long as nobody is harmed, a man might have sex with a horse. It would take an exhausting lecture on teleological metaphysics in order to get to the point of opposing the liberal on purely rational grounds. Like Russell’s 700-page proof of 1+1=2, the conclusion is obvious but the argument is hard to construct. Thankfully in our culture people have enough of an intuitive disgust against bestiality that the argument need not be made, but more and more these intuitions are being broken down by the ever-revolutionising spirit of modernity. Without an assertive moral authority (like the Church used to be) that does not need to justify itself before the masses but instead appeals to a divine mandate, the cascade of degeneracy can never stop.

You have argued that your “romantic love” justifies your sexual behaviour. Love involves willing the good for the other person. Assuming you are the active homosexual, whenever you penetrate your partner you are robbing him of his masculinity and degrading him in the most obscene way. I believe you know this fact deep down —- which is exactly why active homosexuals often choose young boys who have not attained manhood, or “twinks” who look as if they have not, as their “partners”. This is not love but a perverse humiliation and abuse. Often these homosexual “bottoms” develop the forms, habit, and etiquette of women due to the retardation of their masculine development. This cannot be called love.

Not only this, but your “partner” is not formed in body and soul for the task of a wife. Not only will he never bear you children, he will be degraded in his position as a man if he must serve you like a wife would. Women, in their nature, are formed to be the helpers of men; and so far from degrading her, the office of a housewife and mother gives great dignity to the woman. This is not the case for a man.

Finally, the whole practice is wrong from a formal, aesthetic analysis. The male/female bodies were made for each other; and all of civilisation relies upon their coming together. The State should sanction no sexual activity outside of this.

>>23073759
Baseless teleological nonsense. Phantasms. Nature does not design with ‘ends’ in mind. She accumulates functions. One need only observe the utility of homosexual behaviours and pairings among black swans or bonobos, where the thing increases the creature’s evolutionary fitness. I used to be like you, but it is mental indiscipline.

you put your left ball in.
you pull your right ball out.
you pull your pecker free
and you shake it all about.
then you poke the pussy
as you turn the ass around.
and that’s what it’s all about

>>23073797
gg ez

>>23072219
Kentler put delinquent teenage boys (not children) in foster housing with pederasts, and the study was successful.

Five decades later a few of the participants of the study came out and made a bunch of false claims in the media so that they could claim compensation.
>>23072391
>they are definitionally trying to support their sexual perversion of raping children
Believing in sexual liberation for children has nothing to do with defending the rape of children.
>What they have cannot even be called love, because they must always throw away the object of their filthy "love" after some amount of years
It doesn't follow that a relationship can not involve genuine love because it ends after a certain point.
>they're able to run around spewing their nonsense in liberal colleges under the guise of being "MAPs"
This isn't happening. It's the exact opposite. Anyone who questions the feminist narrative that adult-child sex is harmful gets exiled from colleges.

Antis are delusional, they live in an alternate reality.

>>23074007
>>23072017
>Believing in sexual liberation for children has nothing to do with defending the rape of children.
>Children have a sexuality and expressing this sexuality with adults is not harmful
nice. jannies

>>23074007
>It doesn't follow that a relationship can not involve genuine love because it ends after a certain point.
Oh yes, you genuinely love your wife until her tits grt flabby so you leave her for the next object of attraction. What genuine love! You have demonstrated that you are capable of it.
I definitely would actually kill you, completely unironically, if it weren't illegal. The fact that it isn't legal is a disgrace.

>nice. jannies

>>23074047
You're a literal faggot kek. Doesn't get more onions than that

>I definitely would actually kill you, completely unironically, if it weren't illegal. The fact that it isn't legal is a disgrace.

>>23074058
>>23074047
>pedo faggot getting triggered that this isn't a pedo echo chamber
KEK

>>23074007
>Anyone who questions the feminist narrative
Yes, characterize anything you don't like as (disagreeable political group to the people you're speaking with) that will get people on your side. And I'm sure you tell the discord trannies you are a part of that pedophilia is the true leftist way, and fascists want to control le rights of le proletariat.
Your arguments are shit and it makes you look like (you are definitely) a disgusting animal. Nobody is reading your filth and going "I agree with this!" besides fellow wannabe-rapists.

>>23074066
>>23074057
>>23074071
Hol up. Let him cook.

>>23072017
>>23074007

>>23074007
Dude has pictures of children ready for posting on 4chan. Think this pedo has a little more than just that on his PC?

>>23074071
>Yes, characterize anything you don't like as (disagreeable political group to the people you're speaking with)
Child sexual abuse theory is a discredited pseudoscience which was invented by Jewish Feminists in the 1970s who took samples of victims of incestuous rape and extrapolated their outcomes to consensual participants in adult-child sexual relationships. There is not a single study which shows that consensual adult-child sex is correlated with negative outcomes, because that doesn't happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#In_society
>"By the early 21st century, the issue of child sexual abuse has become a legitimate focus of professional attention, while increasingly separated from second wave feminism ... As child sexual abuse becomes absorbed into the larger field of interpersonal trauma studies, child sexual abuse studies and intervention strategies have become degendered and largely unaware of their political origins in modern feminism and other vibrant political movements of the 1970s. One may hope that unlike in the past, this rediscovery of child sexual abuse that began in the 70s will not again be followed by collective amnesia. The institutionalization of child maltreatment interventions in federally funded centers, national and international societies, and a host of research studies (in which the United States continues to lead the world) offers grounds for cautious optimism. Nevertheless, as Judith Herman argues cogently, 'The systematic study of psychological trauma ... depends on the support of a political movement.'"

Nobody believed in the retarded myth that sex harms children until Jewish Feminists started pushing it in the 1970s, and that myth has since been used to attack and destroy the foundations of Aryan civilization, by making taboo age-gap relationships, delaying the onset at first marriage, eliminating youth pregnancy, and by dividing white people with mass hysteria. A society can not flourish if youth-marriage and man/boy love are criminalized.
>Your arguments are shit
Refute them, then?

>>23074105
you down to party bro?

>>23071584
gymcels are absolutely pathetic. daily reminder that nobody gives a fuck about your muscles and most people think you're vain and boring.

>>23071584
>LGBT thread
>deranged pedophile comes out the woodwork
like clockwork

>>23071584

Human sexuality is fucked up in general. Ancient Persians fucked their moms, ancient Athenians fucked little boys, ancient Romans had a weird power dynamic with homosexual sex, Scythians fucked femboys during ecstatic occult rituals, ancient Arabians had sex with camels, and so on. It's very chimp-like, which makes sense given we share our closest common ancestor with chimps. Interestingly, the sexualities & polygynous social organizations of gorillas and orangutans seems more stable relative to the polygynandrous loose organizations of chimps & bonobos.

Oddly enough, our glans penises are like gorillas and orangutans, but chimps & bonobos have filiform penises. Interestingly, gorillas have small glans penises whereas ours tend to be relatively larger, much like the filiform penis of a chimp. It's interesting how our penis seems to be a midway point between the gorilla and chimp.

I am a massive prude and vanilla heterosexual, and I want to keep it that way personally. Granted, I am not averse to morally neutral and impartial historical analysis of human sexuality from a behavioral ecological context. I wouldn't call myself an expert in this matter, but I do have a few observations to make.

I believe the notion that homosexuality is sinful originated as a way to avoid intestinal parasites. Anal sex leads to high chance of intestinal parasites. Many ancient cultures do have herbal remedies recorded for deal with intestinal parasites, and studies show there's a direct link to anal sex and such parasites. I'm interested in whether this risk is increased if one is in the submissive role (bottom) or the dominating role (top)?

Based on newer research, it seems the microbiome in one's gut constitutes a second brain, and it is possible that intestinal parasites could increase sex drive, leading to increased risk of spreading STDs, which would explain the attachment of "sinful" label onto homosexuality, which is typically accompanied with anal sex.

In regards to my own personal assessment, I believe male bisexuality and polygyny do not disrupt civilizational integrity, but the promotion of female bisexuality, polyamory, and/or polyandry leads to civilizational erosion. The latter has been leveraged as a means to prevent tight-knit male fraternities due to risk of nationalist movements tearing away the liberal foundations of modernity. Ultimately, female empowerment is dangerous in the preservation of an ethos.

I want to also discuss avian sexuality a bit. While many bird species are serial monogamous, extra pair copulations are very common amongst them. However, it seems the most intelligent ones, especially corvids, are sexual monogamous for most of life, in particular ravens and parrots. It seems that avians are better equipped for fidelity and monogamy than mammals, in general, as their lineage increases in order and complexity with greater phylogenetic differentiation. The most disturbing thing about bird sexuality are brood parasites though...

This threads going to go on for a while. I'll be here eating my chocolate and watching the retardation.

>>23072810
>you can't call someone "feminized" on one hand while trying to defend a relation with the implication that one of the males takes the feminine passive side of carnal lust
That jumped out at me too, I agree completely.

>>23071891
It is readable you're just angry lol
>>23071990
Yeah that's what christucks are
>>23071992
Only retard libs would get mad at that pic but you're a rightoid so you likely don't even know the difference.

>>23071880
in contemporary studies, gay men are rated the most unattractive by themselves and other subjects in the sample. its why faggot posters like you are so butthurt and inferior in your posting skills hehe

>hebrew prejudices
any culture with sense has the same prejudices

>>23071826
>>23071859
>>23071880
you think youre well read, but youre really not. a pseud, prattling on uselessly like a woman; only more retarded and more gay

>>23075019
>>23075022

>>23075042
GIGABASED POST.
Chad Yukio mishima enjoyer.
The jeys fear the samurai, because the samurai are peak masculinity.
Based.

>>23075042
GIGABASED POST.
Chad Yukio mishima enjoyer.
The jews fear the samurai, because the samurai are peak masculinity.
Based.

>>23071584
I dabbed on you in that thread tho.

>>23073797
A man who gets fucked in the ass is not a real man. It's against the very nature of manliness, not to mention the very nature of the penis and the asshole. You know I'm right. Deep down you know it. Which is exactly why, as I said, passive homosexuals take on the speech-patterns, habits, and etiquette of women. You can appeal to your bullshit Darwinian nominalist worldview all you like, but ultimately, every man knows in their core that this is a disgusting perversion of the human ideal.

>>23075187
Anal copulation is not a compulsory feature of homosexuality. You're obsessed with it. Again. it's not something I'm interested in.
>bullshit Darwinian nominalist worldview
Sober rationality discomforts you.

>>23075231
>Anal copulation is not a compulsory feature of homosexuality.
Maybe, but then it barely counts as sexuality at all:
>"I am gay but I don't fuck other men or let them fuck me, we just suck each other's dicks and trady handies is all"
It's self-embarrased and restraining, which is at odds with the very principle of sexuality. It's borderline inceldom.

>>23075231
Anal sex causes anal fissures, which aren't a big deal with antibiotics but without antibiotics anal fissures are lethal so I assume more of history had very little anal sex.

>>23075231
>rationality
The nominalistic Darwinian worldview you appealed to destroys the very possibility of rationality. For if our minds are the result of random mutations selected for survivability, there is no reason to trust one's thought processes at all.

Moreover, as "rationality" in this worldview is just equivalent to certain configurations of atoms and chemical reactions in the brain, and as nominalism disallows universals, there is no such thing as rationality. The chemical reactions in my brain are different from the chemical reactions in your brain. If there is no universal that both chemical reactions instantiate, rationality does not exist.

You could say "but the chemical reactions are similar, and this similarity is what rationality resides in". But Similarity itself is a universal. The relationship of similarity that attains between the chemical reactions in our brains and the relationship of similarity that attains between, for example, a red pen and a red motorcycle are different individual relationships of similarity. If similarity is the ground of universals, what grounds these different individual relationships of similarity, and justifies their common name? Is it a similarity of similarities? If so, what grounds the various similarities of similarities? A similarity of similitaries of similarities? You can keep doing this forever. Nominalism is untenable.

>Anal copulation is not a compulsory feature of homosexuality. You're obsessed with it.
The other types of sexual activity are similarly evil and degrading. You have not answered my repeated emphasis on the fact that passive homosexuals become cheap imitations of women, because you can't. It is a simple psychological proof of the harm that homosexuality does to the mind.

>>23075506
>The nominalistic Darwinian worldview you appealed to destroys the very possibility of rationality. For if our minds are the result of random mutations selected for survivability, there is no reason to trust one's thought processes at all.
Debunked by Elizabeth Anscombe.

>>23074007
>KENTLER'S EXPERIMENT WAS A TOTAL SUCCESS
>All the kids end up isolated homebodies, have rage issues, or can't function at all
>TOTAL SUCCESS

>>23071584
there is already a thread
you self centered faggot
imagine screencaping your own post and making a thread out of it

>>23071584
Faggots are bouba and therefore objectively bad.