/lit/ - Literature

>>8595523

>>8595523

Everyone secretly knows we are better than them why do we try and hide it? Why does the world spout the opposite so hard?

>During the 1998 Australian Open, sisters Serena and Venus Williams boasted that they could beat any man ranked outside the world's top 200. The challenge was accepted by Karsten Braasch, a German player ranked No 203 (his highest ranking was No 38). Before the matches, Braasch played a round of golf in the morning, drank a couple of beers, smoked a few cigarettes, and then played the Williams sisters for a set each, one after the other. He defeated Serena, 6-1, and Venus, 6-2. Serena said afterwards "I didn't know it would be that hard. I hit shots that would have been winners on the women's tour and he got to them easily."

>>8595523
Women are meant to be cum dumps, so that's no surprise.

>>8595602
That's sports you dummy. Men are obviously bigger, stronger, and better at sports. Not to mention that more men take sports seriously and pursue it, so there's a greater pool for highly talented players to emerge from.

Art: There are plenty of women who are better at it than many men. If you believe otherwise you are an utter man-child who probably plays video games everyday, and an ultimate pleb.

>>8595670
>>Art: There are plenty of women who are better at it than many men.
only betas think this. Women have nothing to expose, besides their feeling of
-rape
-orgasms [but orgasms escape the language so it is always shit [or mystical to retards]]

don't you DARE denigrate jagged little pill you little shitstain

>>8595670

>That's sports you dummy. Men are obviously bigger, stronger, and better at sports

I have met many women who think they could beat me at any sport, which is very strange because I look more and am more athletic than the average guy. Their egos must be very large.

>>8595670
>That's sports you dummy. Men are obviously bigger, stronger, and better at sports. Not to mention that more men take sports seriously and pursue it, so there's a greater pool for highly talented players to emerge from.

I learned the truth of how fucking weak women are in sports when I was in 10th grade. I was on a middling, go nowhere sub .500 JV soccer team. We were pretty fucking bad. I mean there was a starting fullback who probably was 5'5" tall AND wide. Our goaltender thought he was an abercrombie and finch male model, and our best striker was lucky to hit the net on a penalty shot.

The girls varsity team was state champions 2 years in a row, and this season was going to make it 3. Half the team went on to play college soccer with fucking full ride scholarships, one of the girls made the US national team, and played for the girls in a world cup or atleast thats what the alumni association said.

We had a scrimmage between our shitstain JV team and the girls team. The girls wanted to play us because they wanted to kick the shit out of some guys to make themselves feel like world champs. We were forced into the game with nothing to win, and no desire to play, figuring because we had been fed all that equality political correctness bullshit we'd get crushed.

They fucking stopped the game at halftime. We were winning 8-0, and the girls were CRYING on the sidelines. I don't blame them for stopping the game. I felt like shit after I scored the only 3 goals in my soccer career against a future all NCAA goaltender of the year. I mean I felt like i was beating up a 5 year old kid for their candy. It was shocking how slow, weak and pure shit these Senior and Junior girls who were "hot shit" were in comparison to 2-3 year younger boys. We played a school for autistic and deaf kids that put up a better fight (4-0 at the end of the game)

>>8596325
holy shit women are fucking worthless

>>8595523
dumb frogposter

Art by women:
> Look at me, I'm beautiful and naked
> And so the better man got to fuck me. The End.

George Eliot
Virginia Woolf
Flannery O'Connor
Jane Smiley

>>8596358
Jane Smiley is trash though

>>8595715
>only betas think this

Only children and "betas" think in terms of "betas"

>>8596325

Dude, what kinda shitty team were you playing against that sounds pathetic.

Then again now that I think about it most girls don't try to get stronger and be more serious about sports. When I was in school there were usually only three girls that were good at sports in the each class I was in.

>>8596365
>Only ... "betas" think in terms of "betas"

But you just proved the entire point of the people who "think in terms of" betas, namely that something like being a beta exists and is shameful.

>>8596357
Beautiful post my man. This is the /lit/ I've been fighting for.

>>8596358
Start writing up male writers; see if you can count past five.

>>8596369
>namely that something like being a beta exists and is shameful.

You can't get through to these people unless you use their own terminology. The idea of "betas" is silly and simplistic. There are people who struggled to find women to have sex, but this isn't necessarily because they aren't 'alpha', it can be for any variety of reasons. People with stereotypical "alpha" traits often don't get pussy. People with "beta" traits, whatever you define them as, often do.

People aren't wolves. And the simplistic idea of alpha animals has been largely discredited by zoologists anyway. It's fair more complicated than there simply being a single alpha type of animal or not. Animals exist in a constant flux of power and differentiation based on circumstances relating to resources, social dynamics, luck and opportunity. It's even more retarded to apply the thing to humans.

>>8596421
The semantics of alpha/beta as an analytic are flexible, and there's no reason why they should be tethered to any one theory or model.

When people use "beta" analytically, as evaluatively meaningful, they don't mean "behaving like a 'beta' wolf." That's just not how thought works. It's adapted or inspired from that sort of thing, but, trivially, not identical to it. It's also trivial that they don't mean "beta = someone who never, ever gets laid because of their 'beta' traits, and if such a person ever did get laid, it'd invalidate my whole analytic framework!" precisely because it's also trivially obvious that betas DO get laid, and some seeming alphas don't. No one using these terms is applying them like a robot computer program from one domain to another with zero adaptation.

You may think it's retarded, but some people apparently find it helpful. I think they would agree with you that animals exist in a "constant flux" of vicissitudes and social interrelations. They're just claiming that certain tendencies or instincts are constant enough to be observed. On the face of it, nothing is even particularly weird about claiming that mammals share certain mating priorities. Harem behaviour, hypergamy, peacocking and violent mating contests are all shared across mammals and clearly have both homologous AND analogous evolutionary origins.

Even as a bare-bones heuristic it's perfectly fine. Women pretty obviously do prefer powerful, high status, wealthy, etc. men. Those traits are often associated with high confidence, high self-esteem, and all the thousands of subtle behaviours that they imply (like emoting more, or dominating social interactions and assuming leadership roles).

The real value of the beta/alpha framework is recognising that holistic "alpha male" traits (again, nothing wrong with creating a heuristic ideal type, even if some of the empirically associated traits end up being merely incidental) tend to result in sex, success, and happiness, and that the corresponding "beta male" ideal type tends to burrow itself into a hole of NEGATIVE associated traits, like defeatism, fatalism, letting the alpha male style on you, being used/cucked by women because you're so desperate for a shot and have such low self-esteem that you allow them to maltreat and exploit you.

Even if there is no METAPHYSICALLY REAL FORM OF THE ALPHA MALE, as a heuristic it's fine. At worst it's basically just a cultural aversion to being a little bitch.

Alpha/beta is just furfag roleplay for people too cowardly to wear a costume.

>>8596325
I've always known they are bad but holy shit not THIS bad.

>men take women that hurt them and turn them into idols worshiped by the same poem over and over again

>women still fall for the slam poetry meme

Nobody wins

>>8596476
Women always win.

>>8596476
>>men take women that hurt them and turn them into idols worshiped by the same poem over and over again
yeah. ti is the same with music. always about finding woman to provide love/sex

>>8595523
>men live in a society dominated men, building standards and values centralised around the male gaze
>assess works from a normative perspective believing to be unbiased, when the normative perspective is actually positioned from a system of values derived from the defaulted view of the man
>asserting visions of 'truth' and 'beauty' in the vain attempt to find objective values, despite the impossibility of escaping from the masculine norm

really makes you think

>>8596449
but only betas think that being alpha is to be easily noticed by women and easily giving them orgasms

>>8596540

Found the butthurt woman.