[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 173 KB, 496x426, 1539965341063.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11958430 No.11958430[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Is he right?

>> No.11958456

>>11958430
I'm not a violent person, quite the opposite in fact, but I really wish I could punch John Green in the face.

>> No.11958465

>>11958456
upvoted

>> No.11958468

>>11958430
half right. It's a bit of a caution note if I meet a woman on a first date and she's slept with like 50 guys... suggests this is going to have trouble developing an actual relationship and might have a "thing" for sex with strangers. But it shoudl be the same for her, she should think a guy who has slept with 50 women might not be a faithful person for a relationship for the same reasons.

It's not great to pretend women *have* to be held to a different standard as men, but it's perfectly right to think we should have some standard generally.

>> No.11958470

>>11958465
thanks, have an internet

>> No.11958471

What the fuck is he waffling on about?

>> No.11958489

How the fuck can english teachers like him at the same time as they teach Shakespeare, Dostoevsky etc?

>> No.11958495

>>11958489
Do they really like him?

>> No.11958509

>>11958430

>48 cheerios
He wishes he had that many hookups. Guy has probably never been with a woman. White knight faggot.

>> No.11958515

>>11958489
Yeah, in the 9th grade The Fault in Our Stars just came out and my teacher who was had us read Homer and Shakespeare didn’t stop praising it. She was a middle aged southern woman who also liked anime and manga, and would tell kids reading The Hunger Games that it knocked off Battle Royale. I thought she was based desu until I asked her opinion of John Green

>> No.11958525

>>11958430
I think you shouldn't judge someone AS A PERSON because of who they sleep with, but if YOU want to sleep with them then you're entitled to not want to sleep with someone that's been with too many people.

>> No.11958535

>>11958495
Meant to reply to you
>>11958515

>> No.11958546

>>11958515
> based
I don’t think you have any room to speak anon

>> No.11958618

>>11958430
I think I'm going to have non-consensual sex with John Green.

Yes, in fact right this moment I have resolved to rape this man. All of my faculties and resources are now going to be put into achieving this end. The way this man controls the contortions of his face elicits a deep, ape-ish urge within me to do extremely violent and sexual damage to him.

If you think about it, how is John Green different from a woman? They are equally timid. Equally frivolous. Equally acquiescent. Equally narcissistic. Equally upset by a combination of words or ideas that do not conform to the status-quo. And no doubt Mr. Green has sucked a penis too--maybe just a silicon one (for now), but nevertheless he has tried it; has been struck with the same sort of 'oh-i'm-so-so-naughty' inclination that seizes all women at some point in their life and with the frenzied tom-tom of feminine sexuality blaring in their head which is only ever empty and only ever filled when the image or implication of a Penis can be grasped in external reality, and just like such a woman has John Green greedily taken hold of the dildo that he secretly keeps in his top drawer (why disguise it further? why, wouldn't he be happy if someone were to discover his little perversion? oh think of how oh so so naughty that would be!) and after taking the full 7.5" of rubber down his throat he is filled with such a thrill such that no expression of his "masculine" sexuality has ever come close to attaining.

Hmm, indeed, the lines between Woman and John Green continue to blur, and my dick continues to rise. Raping him could be ethically and epistemologically justified, both through Utilitarian ethics and Platonic Teleology, but I will not go into that here. Suffice to say that raping John Green would be a net benefit for the world as such, as material entity and conceptual ideal. It would be a rape that would satisfy so many hearts, so many minds, and most importantly my own penis.

I am decided: John Green will be raped within the month. I will devote myself to finding out his residency, his routines, and I will plot and plan my moment of violation meticulously. This is a very real goal I have set, and I shall know neither rest nor mortal satisfaction until it has been attained.

>> No.11958632

>>11958430
No. Sluts are mentally unstable.

>> No.11958670
File: 25 KB, 316x316, Emerson,_Lake_&_Palmer_-_Tarkus_(1971)_front_cover.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11958670

>>11958430
It depends on what we are dealing with.
If we put things in theory, we cant make take many conclusions. But in reality/in practice.
A person who has slept with many others in swings, hookups, it means that he/she probably hasnt much self control and is probably shallow,with not much culture and a most likely iliterate hedonist.

If we are talking about a person that has had some past boyfriends/girlfriends and slept with them, then we cant take anything out of that alone.
Guy in pic probably only speaks like that because he himself wants and craves for a lifestyle of hookups and swings and wants to sound approving to other women who do that.
His argument and comparison is also extremelly weak and pointless. And shows ignorance.

>> No.11958735

>>11958670
How can you conclude that a person is shallow, lacks culture and/or is illiterate from the number of people he/she has slept with? Sex addiction is a thing that affects all kinds of people to my knowledge. Also your last part of pseudo psychological analysis is total garbage.

>> No.11958906

>>11958430
Short answer, no.
Long answer, sort of, but effectively no.

>> No.11958914

Lock and key metaphor yadda yadda

>> No.11958940

>>11958735
Degradation of generation itself is very telling.

>> No.11958973

>>11958618
You really deserve more you's anon I'm sorry these retards aren't acknowledging you.

>> No.11959051

>>11958430
I think I just don't share the same moral values than roasties, if this guy or anyone does then fine by

>> No.11959062

>>11958468
This.

>> No.11959069

>>11958468
I agree that men should be held to a similar standard, but it's a fact that casual sex negatively affects women more.

>> No.11959086

>>11958618

Nice one, Punchy.

>> No.11959093

>>11958430

A man apologizing for women's depravity is most depraved.

>> No.11959106

>>11959069
It's because they can end up mothers afterwards, but how would a man know he is a father? Especially if the entire town slept with the woman.

>> No.11959114

>being a whoremonger
>entering a relationship with another whoremongers discarded concubine
>becoming an adulterer
> being fundamentally incapable of comprehending love
>cursing yourself and your children

No thanks. Fornicators do not understand the severity of their sin. (not even christian btw)

>> No.11959123
File: 91 KB, 945x945, maxresdefault.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11959123

>>11958735
>How can you conclude that a person is shallow, lacks culture and/or is illiterate from the number of people he/she has slept with?

As i said im only speaking from a more "in practice" kind of view, im speaking from what you see in the real world. Most people that have really high partner count normally tend to be the things i described.
Would also argue that a person that only thinks about sex and getting sex doesnt have much self control on his/her urges.

>Sex addiction is a thing that affects all kinds of people to my knowledge.
People wanting to have sex isnt an addiction, i would say it is only an addiction if you cant control and put your mind and reason above the urges.

>Also your last part of pseudo psychological analysis is total garbage.
Didnt really want to come off as a pseud, but it was honestly what i felt about him. Judging from the usual bullshit that he says and the character that he is, and the kind of stuff that he writes

>> No.11959137

>>11958468
Disagree. Women are attracted to guys who are attractive to other women. Meaning if a guy had sex with a lot of other girls, a woman will see him as more desirable.

For woman it is the opposite. The more a woman fucks men, the less guys are interested in haveing a relationship with her.

The reason for both mentalities are quite simple. It's difficult to get girls to pull their panties down for you. You have to be a very appealing man for women to sleep with you. So if women know that you have been around (not man slut material, but had a decent amount of sexual partners), they know that you are a man worthy of their attention.

For women on the other hand, they can get sex anytime they want. Its virtually no effort. Unlike guys who really need to be appealing (in almost every category) to get sex with women. A girl just needs to spread her legs and someguy will guaranteed fuck her.

>> No.11959158

>>11959137
Why do people like you post on /lit/? Why parrot these sophomoric platitudes?

>> No.11959175

>>11959106
It's because their brain chemistry ends up permanently fucked up afterwards.

>> No.11959187

I just hate women man, i dont know

>> No.11959198

>>11958618
Shit, this made my day. Thanks, anon.

>> No.11959222

>>11958430
Wtf is this cringe

>> No.11959227

>>11959158
What’s with the sudden influx of people like you with leftist, feminist, superiority complexes? You don’t even sound like you’re trying to make a point. You just brushed it away and insulted him. Sure it’s unethical or whatever, but you’re not contributing anything or convincing anyone like that

>> No.11959246

>>11959175
how so? i’ve never heard of that

>> No.11959273
File: 63 KB, 633x360, F6974582-2D61-4240-BB7D-DD984DAF28CC.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11959273

>>11959246
Oxytocin (love hormone) is only released to a significant degree with a woman’s first sexual partner

>> No.11959288

>>11959137
>>11959158
I mean it's not completely true, but it's true to some extent, I think he's right to post that. Just look at your average woman/man, the difference is quite clear.

>> No.11959296

>muh sexes are the same
Women rarely initiate and they have a much bigger biological consequence than men overall.

>> No.11959853

>>11958618
niceeeeee

>> No.11959875

STILL POSTING THIS PICTURE AFTER LITERALLY SEVERAL YEARS HOLY SHIT DONT YOU SHEEP SEE? IT IS YOU. YOU ARE THE FUCKING NPCS. JESUS.

>> No.11959882

>>11958430
Comparing intimate sexual encounters with eating is a sympton of vile feminism and one the reasons the West is dying.

>> No.11959888 [DELETED] 
File: 349 KB, 450x716, 4412.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11959888

>>11958430

>> No.11959889
File: 45 KB, 542x676, john green ships rey and chewbacca.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11959889

>>11958430

really activates the almonds

>>11958515

Why is it so hard for people on /lit/ to accept that a person can enjoy both high and low art simultaneously?

>> No.11959891

>>11959882
There are 7 billion people on earth and they all got here through fucking. Sex is as natural and routine as eating cereal more or less.

>> No.11959905

>>11958430
>48
>using first-person pronouns
Lettuce bee cereal for a minute, all he's trying to accomplish here is bragging about how many women he wants you to believe he fucked.

>> No.11959920

>>11958618
Based and rapepilled

>> No.11959922

>>11959891
That doesn't mean we should do it indiscriminately.

>> No.11959949

>>11959922
>>11959922
There's a big difference between indiscriminately and casually. We should absolutely be more casual about sex as a society.

>> No.11959961

>>11959158
He's right, though.

>> No.11959968

>>11959227
>What’s with the sudden influx of people like you with leftist, feminist, superiority complexes?
I've noticed this, too. In every recent thread.

>> No.11959970

>>11959137
>/thread
Anyone denying that is either Chad, a femoid or some delusional beta.

>> No.11959972

>>11958618
saved

>> No.11959975

>>11959891
That doesn't make it right. Whipping slaves used to be as natural and routine as eating cereal.

>> No.11959981

>>11959949
>We should absolutely be more casual about sex as a society.
We should be more sex-conscious, but we shouldn't treat sex as just a casual act like eating.

>> No.11959984

I'm gonna be honest with you, in terms of like just your abstract feelings it shouldn't matter, but in practice women who've had like 10+ sexual partners, in my experience, are a bit jaded to it, and that's disappointing.

It's not something I'm angry about or anything. Can you blame them? Imagine being at the theme park with someone and you've never been on a rollercoaster, or may just like one or two, and they've been on countless ones. Are they going to be all that fun to be with? They'll go on one with you and probably have fun because they haven't been on one in a while, and they're watching you have fun. But to them, what's there left to do? You can only ride so many rollercoasters before it's all the same thing.

Maybe you want to try this one that has all these funny loops and tricks. Well, that's fine, but they don't really want to. They've done it before with a different friend. It was fun, but kind of a hassle, and they can live without doing it again.

Now, maybe that's not the case. Maybe your friend really fucking loves rollercoasters and no matter how many they've got under their belt, they're always up for another ride. No problem! You love riding rollercoasters with them all the damn time. It's a nice little experience you share with them. But then maybe you're under the weather one week, and you find out they just went ahead and went to the park with someone else just like that.

>> No.11959989

>>11959975
Moron.

>> No.11959998

>>11959989
t. effeminate male/woman who doesn't understand how a counterargument works in formal logic

eating cereal isn't natural per se either

>> No.11960004

>>11959981
Yes, we absolutely should. There's literally no reason not to.

>> No.11960006

He's partially right, but still a faggot. You can't be John Green these days and not be an obnoxious faggot. Obviously it doesn't matter if the person you love (because you should only really have sex in the context of a romantic relationship) has slept with people before you, assuming they don't have some kind of horrendous STD from it. On the other hand, if you meet a man or a woman who is very promiscuous and has casual sex on a regular basis then it is a major red flag. Unfortunately, there is still largely a bias in our society against women in this regard. There are times when the bias shifts against the promiscuous men (especially in lefty urban areas and online where the loudest lefty voices can be amplified) but for the most part female promiscuity is less accepted than male promiscuity in our society. Promiscuity and sex outside of a loving romantic relationship are not good for society, though.

>> No.11960016

>>11958465
>implying this is a reddit opinion

>> No.11960023

>>11960004
Sex can lead to pregnancy and venereal disease. If you want to meet people who are casual about sex take a trip down to your local housing project or trailer park.

>> No.11960027

>>11960004
There's hundreds of reasons not to treat sex casually, but you're most likely a liberal vagina from Burgerland and I won't make you think otherwise.

>> No.11960031

>>11960023
>Condoms don't exist
Whoa...

>> No.11960033

>>11959989
>this is how the left discusses

>> No.11960052

>>11959998
>Calls other males effeminate
>has never slept with a woman

hmm.

>> No.11960065

>>11960023
“When you were partying I studied the blade...”

>> No.11960066

>>11959889
I don't give two shits if people ship Chewbacca with humans are other aliens or what. In science fiction, there are sentient alien races capable of achieving interstellar travel and building complex societies. In some cases, these species are so intelligent that it would really be a question of whether we are intellectually and emotionally capable of consent to the difference in intellect between our species, like how there is such a difference between a retarded adult and a normal adult that the retarded adult wouldn't be able to consent. Who cares if they fuck humans? The real problem here is that that prose is dogshit.

>> No.11960069

>>11960027
inb4 this poster spams a bunch of graphs that don't actually mean anything like the /pol/-tard he is

>> No.11960093

>>11960016
it’s obvious he means the wording

>> No.11960096

>>11959273
this even has an implicit evolutionary function behind it - presumably throughout all of patriarchal history, a woman would be bound to one man unless their tribe was killed and she found herself the property of this new tribe, and so the female psyche readily absorbs rape without breaking as often as you'd think, because the ones who didn't were killed. This is what manifests as a rape fetish nowadays. So when you see that women bond most strongly with their first partner, this is logical. Men, as seen in that same and similar studies, are a bit less affected by this heuristic. They're the ones doing the conquering. Its male and female nature.

>> No.11960098

>>11960069
I'm a fucking Mexican, you judgemental cunt. I don't even browse /pol/. Stop trying to justify your whoreness.

>> No.11960102

>>11960031
So this totally normal, natural, routine activity requires an artificial device to be done safely? That's interesting. I wonder what people did for the ~200,000 years before mass produced latex prophylactics hit the market? I wonder why so many people still get gross diseases, or have to have their babies hoovered out at the abortionist?

>> No.11960106

>>11958430
I bet he would still eat that cereal if 45 penises have been rammed into it.

>> No.11960108

>>11958618
How do I explain my tears of laughter to my parents?

>> No.11960231

>>11958618
literally me

>> No.11960257

ah good old incelbait

>> No.11960273

>>11958430
He's fundamentally wrong about everything, except, perhaps, the last part.

>> No.11960292

Toasty ass roasties in here

>> No.11960325

>>11959968
It’s r/chapotraphouse for the most part, as far as I can tell

>> No.11960348

>>11960325
Those guys are the worst. They complain about everything, but you can see in their eyes that they care deeply about League of Legends and resent themselves.

>> No.11960365
File: 115 KB, 634x697, smirk.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11960365

>>11958618
good post anon.

>> No.11960379

>>11958618
masterful

>> No.11960398

>>11958618
And thus, a new pasta is born.

>> No.11960410
File: 9 KB, 240x223, 1514686021917.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11960410

If a woman exercises her freedom to have many sexual partners that is fine. If a man exercises his freedom find her undesirable for that reason that's fine.
To imply that somehow the man is morally wrong in this scenario is hypocritical.

>> No.11960419

>>11960348
Yeah. While I don’t support Marxism, I believe these guys are actually harmful for it as an ideology. They seem to be solely motivated to use it as means of justifying their aggression towards other people. Underneath the ego is a whole lot of anger and the hubris is only as large as it needs to be to accomodate the resentment so its justified. Everything that goes against their beliefs is either met with “I’m so smart, please” or an ad hominem.

>> No.11960420

>>11958468

i lost my virginity to my gf who had slept with 5 dudes in her whole life at the time (all after her 20th bday) ..i had no issue being number 6, and probably her last ..we've been together for four years and it ain't an issue ..if she had told me she'd slept with over 20 i would have been grossed out

>> No.11960422

>>11960410
/thread

>> No.11960444

>>11960410
>>11960422
it's not /thread though

similar to how many leftists will argue white men who don't want to have sex with black women are falling back on underlying racism rather than simply "having preferences", many leftists would argue that the man's preference for a low partner count gf is similarly falling back on some sort of underlying misogynistic notions about women and that even though it's hypocritical to allow one side (women) their preferences while denying the other (men), this is fine because the man's preferences are oppressive on some level and can still be challenged

...which means that hypocrisy is fair game, and that you as a man should exercise your hypocrisy

>> No.11960488

>>11960444
wtf I hate liberals now

>> No.11960495

>>11960444
where is my hypocrisy if I’m a fucking virgin and I don’t want a woman with 100 cocks inside her prior

>> No.11960501

>>11958430
He is gf cucks him and psychologically he feels emasculated so that's why is displacing his anger at the society.
>I am getting cucked but it's not my fault it's the societies. Society needs to change not me. If only we stopped condemning thots.

>> No.11960520

>>11960444
You can't really 'challenge' preferences in any meaningful way. So what if the origin is racism? You can't mandate that white men have sex with black women.

>> No.11960529

>>11960520
Yes you can just mk ultra them or use one of the new methods

>> No.11960536

>>11960444
True. If they claim the only difference between blacks and other people is skin colour, if that's the only difference for them, then it's not racist to not want to have sex with black women because it's a mere preference, like how some men prefer brunettes to blondes or redheads to brunettes, etc.

>> No.11960594

>>11958430
you can be right and still be a weenie

my life is perfect evidence of this

>> No.11960637

>>11958618
Excellent post.

>> No.11960655

>>11958618
The most woke thing I've ever seen

>> No.11960663

>>11959989
So... this is the power of... leftist debate...

>> No.11960669

>>11960004
>There's literally no reason not to
I could post so much shit, so much, man... But you're beyond salvation.

>> No.11960670

>>11960069
Wow nice argument

>> No.11960676

>>11960069
Begone thot. You may have a decent amount of social command via spreading your legs and exposing your putrid slime infested gash, but that will end sooner than you can possibly believe. Genuine advice, get thee to a nunnery before society throws you in the trash bin you deserve.

>> No.11960686

This idea that there's a "different standard" for men is a total lie. Any woman would have second thoughts about seriously dating a man who's known to not take things seriously, of being a womanizer or a cheater. People like John Green are completely delusional if they think only women are held to such standards.

>> No.11960689

>>11958430
Honestly I agree with a lot of what John says and does he just has this awful smug aura about him that I really really hate on a gut animal level

>> No.11960775

>>11958618
rape jokes are not funny....apparently

>> No.11960779

>women and men are held to a different standard
Yeah no shit, that doesn´t mean said standard is unfair.
Good woman: little to none sex life.
Bad woman: active sex life.
Good man: active sex life.
Bad man: little no none sex life.

>> No.11960818
File: 43 KB, 1893x281, i WILL rape john green.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11960818

>>11958618
Excellent.

>> No.11960866

>>11958430
I thought this man was a Christian.

>> No.11961291

>>11958618
absolutely fucking based

>> No.11961328

>>11958618
The bits about the dildo made me hard.

>> No.11961357

>>11959114
based

>> No.11961472

>>11961328
fucking faggot

>> No.11961485

>>11958430
I don't see the act of having sex with other people as bad, but it is generally indicative of personality problems in a woman. If they've gone out with four or five guys by their mid 20s and had sex with all of them then there's no problem. If they have had regular casual sex with random men, then I may have issues with their personality.

>> No.11961498

>>11961485
sex has an inherently traumatic component

either she's sex with enough people to gain a kind of kinesthetic wisdom and transcend the trauma, or she's just enacting the first traumatic experience over and over again without understanding what it is

(a) is arguably good, (b) is very bad

>> No.11961499

>>11960069
wow you got owned by a minority >>11960098
what are you going to do? I mean you can't oppress him, you are obviously white or Jewish and have more privilege than him. He's suffered heavily from your race defiling and enslaving his people with Christianity and Capitalism. What do you have to say for yourself whore? What an awful person you are. Shameful, ungrateful, a harlot, and a RACIST

>> No.11961538

If sex is so easy and meaningless then why can't i rape you?

>> No.11961543

>>11961472
Naughty fucking faggot

>> No.11961545

>>11958430
I'm not gonna eat cereal if its had 30 dicks in it. Don't get why people like this guy, fucking onions history

>> No.11961549

>>11959137
This.

It's basically boils down the the saying that a key which opens many locks in good while the lock which is opened by many keys is not

>> No.11961550

>>11958430
if I was a cereal and someone ate literally every other type of cereal before me, I'd be spiteful in response to this because in this scenario I'd be the literal last choice. terrible metaphor

>> No.11961554

>>11961549
perfectly put

>> No.11961607

>>11959875
So much value in this image, I never get sick of looking at it and reading how others respond.