/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21999485]

Books to understand women's sexuality? It's mind boggling to me how pristine creatures like them can possibly be attracted to smelly, sweaty, hairy beasts like men

[Anonymous No.21999496]

>>21999485
In order to understand female sexuality, you have to be just a little gay.
I'm a little gay (just a tiny bit), and hence, I can intuitively see the appeal of a hairy, savage animal that wants to both cuddle and beastfuck.
Until you embrace the gay, you will always be stumbling in the dark when it comes to attracting women.

[Anonymous No.21999498]

[Anonymous No.21999509]

>"Alcohol is like love," he said. "The first kiss is magic, the second is intimate, the third is routine. After that you take the girl's clothes off."

>"Is that bad?" I asked him.

>"It's excitement of a high order, but it's an impure emotion — impure in the aesthetic sense. I'm not sneering at sex. It's necessary and it doesn't have to be ugly. But it always has to be managed. Making it glamorous is a billion-dollar industry and it costs every cent of it."

>He looked around and yawned. "I haven't been sleeping well. It's nice in here. But after a while the lushes will fill the place up and talk loud and laugh and the goddam women will start waving their hands and screwing up their faces and tinkling their goddam bracelets and making with the packaged charm which will later on in the evening have a slight but unmistakable odor of sweat."

>"Take it easy," I said. "So they're human, they sweat, they get dirty, they have to go to the bathroom. What did you expect — golden butterflies hovering in a rosy mist?"

— Raymond Chandler, 'The Long Goodbye'
FRAGMENT OF AN ANCIENT TABLET

>Above — the well-known lips, delicately downed.
>Below — beard between thighs.

>Above — her brow, the notable casket of gems.
>Below — the belly with its blood-knot.

>Above — many a painful frown.
>Below — the ticking bomb of the future.

>Above — her perfect teeth, with the hint of a fang at the corner.
>Below — the millstones of two worlds.

>Above — a word and a sigh.
>Below — gouts of blood and babies.

>Above — the face, shaped like a perfect heart.
>Below — the heart's torn face.

— Ted Hughes (from 'Crow')


>"No man should marry until he has studied anatomy and dissected at least one woman."

— Honore de Balzac


>"Excreting is the curse that threatens madness because it shows man his abject finitude, his physicalness, the likely unreality of his hopes and dreams. But even more immediately, it represents man's utter bafflement at the sheer non-sense of creation: to fashion the sublime miracle of the human face, the mysterium tremendum of radiant female beauty, the veritable goddesses that beautiful women are; to bring this out of nothing, out of the void, and make it shine in noonday; to take such a miracle and put miracles again within it, deep in the mystery of eyes that peer out-the eye that gave even the dry Darwin a chill; to do all this, and to combine it with an anus that shits! It is too much. Nature mocks us, and poets live in torture."

-Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death

[Anonymous No.21999525]

>>21999509
too long

[Anonymous No.21999546]

>>21999509
>they're human, they sweat, they get dirty, they have to go to the bathroom
Incredibly fucking hot, nothing, and I mean nothing gets me harder than when my sweaty girlfriend wants oral just after she took a horse-like piss and didn't even wipe.

[Anonymous No.21999582]

>>21999485
theyre not so different to men. Just how men wanna be chad, which is a form of attraction so to is the attraction of the women to chad, except rather then being chad they want to be with chad. Attraction isnt some mystery, just have a symmetrical face. lean body - not too fat or skeletal. (bare minimum looks) have a means of living independently (bare minimum wealth), dont be an autist and have somekind of hobby that u excel at (bare minimum status)

[Anonymous No.21999586]

>>21999509
>pic
Thank you for bringing this image to my attention. The dirty soles and heels are a particularly nice and artful touch.
Very stimulating, truly.

[Anonymous No.21999638]

>>21999485
There's nothing to really understand,
1) the sex act takes maybe 2 minutes
2) the libido is basically dead after age 25
3) a society obsessing over this will be found in a state of delayed intellectual development
also, probably biggest,
4) artificially induced fetish of the body and sex acts caused by censorship and repression of adolescent desires (which would otherwise pass if allowed to indulge)

source: i had lots of sex in my teens

[Anonymous No.21999641]

>>21999638
>the libido is basically dead after age 25
Kek, I wish

[Anonymous No.21999653]

>>21999485
>It's mind boggling to me how pristine creatures like them can possibly be attracted to smelly, sweaty, hairy beasts like men
They're not - women sexualize themselves being sexualized by a man sexualizing them. The man is just a mirror for her vanity.

[Anonymous No.21999656]

>>21999638
>i had lots of sex in my teens
doesn't sound like it frfr

[Anonymous No.21999659]

>>21999641
Ah well.. see: complex philosophy of epicurean-hedonism, you're right in one way; the mechanical need is still there but the 'desire' is long gone.

[Anonymous No.21999661]

>>21999546
larp

[Anonymous No.21999668]

>>21999496
You literally just have to look at your feelings. Every man knows which men are hot. The caretaking man might be the hardest for the straights to understand

[Anonymous No.21999670]

Sex is about power.
Austin Powers said it best: [in reference to Powers]:
>Women want be WITH him, and men want to BE him!

[Anonymous No.21999677]

>>21999659
How do you do discern between need and desire? What's the criteria?

[Anonymous No.21999678]

>>21999656
I'd suggest you're a virgin in that case, or you're just aping the society around you. I think what I did but didn't really realize it at the time was just have a normal sex life fairly early in life, so when I was an adult I didn't relate to that linger pitiable shit that other people were spending their early 20's fucking up at.

Although if you're one of those people who've constructed a personality based upon a sex act (like putting things up your bottom, anon) then you won't want to come (pun intended) around to the biological reality of things..... we're supposed to be hunting and building and killing and raping, not laying around fascinated over sexual intercourse and marveling over a pair of tits.

[Anonymous No.21999681]

>This post again
Second Sex.

[Anonymous No.21999686]

>>21999485
>pristine creatures
lol, what? Women are just animals like everyone else. I know a lot of poor women, and I would describe them as anything but pristine. They fuck men for the same reason other animals fuck. It's just natural instinct...

[Anonymous No.21999692]

>>21999678
>I'd suggest you're a virgin
on god imma go with a "no u" on this one after reading your posts

[Anonymous No.21999696]

>>21999677
In this context the 'desire' is absent; women have no appeal or 'magical powers' over me at all, but i'd call that maturity. I'm not talking like.. the "mechanical need" to purge your tubes of soldier-seed vanishes. Although.. depending on how well you practiced
>epicurean-hedonism
w/re: discovering that sex is 10000x better after abstinence, and developing that abstinence into a habit... 'maybe' even that mechanical need fades away. It becomes less important anyway, for sure. But I'm not talking about celibacy, that'll turn you psycho.. always did.

[Anonymous No.21999703]

>>21999696
You didn't answer my question

[Anonymous No.21999713]

>>21999692
Well I'm just saying, the male orgasm is over in seconds. If you have't gotten bored of the novelty of having sex after a few years then low IQ, or more likely, trying hard to fit in. Like Epsteins client list.

[Anonymous No.21999724]

>>21999703
... yes i did, read again.

>>how do you define
desire
>'desire' is absent; women have no appeal or 'magical powers' over me at all, but i'd call that maturity.

need
>the "mechanical need" to purge your tubes of soldier-seed

I guess you could almost compare ejaculation to a womans period.. ha..

[Anonymous No.21999729]

>>21999485
>It's mind boggling to me how pristine creatures like them can possibly be attracted to smelly, sweaty, hairy beasts like men
That's because you're straight.

[Anonymous No.21999743]

>>21999485
Simone de Beauvoir - the second sex

[Anonymous No.21999744]

>>21999485
on topic >>21997100

[Anonymous No.21999770]

>>21999653
Men desire women. Women desire the man's desire for her.

[Anonymous No.21999834]

>>21999770
Meaningless babel
Socially woman are used to a criteria for men. A job or a drive in life that can support a family is a major factor. They don’t like wishy washy, nasty, pasty, wallflowers. Sadly they’re not able to detect guys with good potential and end up with abusive smooth talkers because they think they’ll be successful.

[Anonymous No.22000058]

>>21999668
It’s the gay who doesn’t understand women. And to the full gay, women are totally alien creatures. OPs post sets off my highly attuned gaydar, for example. Every guy who has this “oh men are such ugly sweaty hairy beasts and women are pure pristine princesses” attitude is a closeted homo.

[Anonymous No.22000071]

Are there really this many newfags on this board?

[Anonymous No.22000114]

>>22000058
>“oh men are such ugly sweaty hairy beasts and women are pure pristine princesses”
it's just OP saying that, of course, gaydar poster,it's not like this is the constant culture reinforced 24/7 lawl

[Anonymous No.22000191]

>>22000114
>letting others pound their throbbing girthy ideas into your soft pliable little empty skull
Yeah I’m calling sus

[Anonymous No.22000215]

Test

[Anonymous No.22000226]

>>22000215
levels: low

[Anonymous No.22000238]

>>22000226
I am going to start drinking onion juice and start eating Ray Peat's carrot salad. And maybe some zinc supplement?

[Anonymous No.22000249]

>>22000238
just drink some semen
doesn't get testier and zestier than that

[Anonymous No.22000260]

>>22000191
are you really claiming that men don't have this predisposition? as children we're told it, our dads tell us it, culture (pre-media) told us it for centuries, ... c'mon, gaydar poster, what's the psyop you're trying to pull?

[Anonymous No.22000263]

>>22000249
That's what you do? Really? Look at this faggot hahahaha

[Anonymous No.22000307]

The intentions of women are an unknowable enigma I could never hope to untangle.

[Anonymous No.22000362]

>>21999485
Based Aishwarya Rai poster, that too in her prime.
Good fucking taste, anon.
That said, some books on your topic are;
Sexual Personae - Camille Paglia
The Second Sex - Simone de Beauvoir
Sex and Character - Otto Weininger
Eros and the Mysteries of Love - Julius Evola

[Anonymous No.22000388]

>>21999485
>pristine creatures
you've never cleaned a public women's room before, have you?

[Anonymous No.22000394]

>>21999713
>having sex is a novelty
>le IQ
Your shit's all retarded.

[Anonymous No.22001468]

>>21999834
This is what they look for in relationships, but the anon you were responding to is likely still correct in terms of what gets them sexually excited.

[Anonymous No.22001552]

>>22000394
Your opinion has been taken on board, doctor, but (no pun intended)
> a novelty
i'm thinking also of the ideological position of the peterson/columbine crowd, where they believe that having sex will make a person suddenly no longer care about anything else happening around them (bomb victim etc.), since it's the same premise which can only be coming from a virgin or sex-starved person who would have that view from never having experienced and "gotten over the novelty" 'of' "having sex,"

I hope that assuages (nopuntended) your concerns as you come (nopunintended) to this subject

[Anonymous No.22001558]

>>22000388
or been into a womans bedroom

[Anonymous No.22001707]

there's nothing to understand
>I want the tallest man with sharpest jawline and thickest hairline to put his cock in me
boom, that's it, here you fucking go

[Anonymous No.22002252]

>>22001552
>assuages
That's very Julian of you.
Your position stemming from the perspective of the incel is what set off the red flags in the first place. Same page.

[Anonymous No.22002295]

>>21999485
They don't. At least not in the same way men like women.

[Anonymous No.22002426]

>>22002295
So, they do, and your first statement is false.

[Anonymous No.22003019]

>>22002252
>incel
Uh huh. Well as you're insisting upon a fantasy to avoid discussing the matters themselves I am forced to declare you as a schizophrenic and use maximal possible force against you.

>see rules

[Anonymous No.22003122]

>>22003019
>i'm thinking also of the ideological position of the peterson/columbine crowd
>insisting upon a fantasy
So, if we agree and you claim fantasy therefore you are in fact larping by your own admission, yes? Hence the red flags.
>you as a schizophrenic
I do love irony.
>see rules
You have to be 18 or older to post on these forums.

[Anonymous No.22003200]

>>22003122
>
>
What, you're denying that 'you' and 'them' claiming that having sex is the solution to socio-economic or military events? Haha, you're literally calling me 'incel' with the same premise:, that def. is schizophrenia or socopathic gas-lighting if it's not legit. Seek help either way.

anyway I've already flagged you for trolling outside of /b/ so it doesn't really matter at this point.

Good luck being a homosexual fan of Jordan Peterson cult.

[Anonymous No.22003225]

>>22003200
>What, you're denying that 'you' and 'them' claiming that having sex is the solution to socio-economic or military events?
Yes, I for one didn't claim that. So far my interaction with you was a call out on your larp evident by the way you're conducting yourself in this thread.
> Haha, you're literally calling me 'incel' with the same premise:
You yourself confirmed the perspective. We're literally in agreement, why are you rejecting the consequences of that reality?
>that def. is schizophrenia or socopathic gas-lighting
The term is observation.
>Seek help either way.
For what, forming logical conclusions based on presented information?
>anyway I've already flagged you for trolling outside of /b/ so it doesn't really matter at this point.
Thanks for the laugh, anon.
>Good luck being a homosexual fan of Jordan Peterson cult.
This might come as a surprise to you but people outside of Peterson's hug circle enjoy sex on a regular basis.

[Anonymous No.22003337]

>>21999686
>Women are just animals like everyone else
Atheist pseud.

[Anonymous No.22003402]

>>22003225
>your larp
My larp of what..? Saying that I got over the novelty of having sex after I had it a few times? I was ... yesterday ... saying that people who think having sex is a big deal are more likely to be virgins. And you're ...implying... I'm pretending to have had sex.

Hm. I guess having sex is a mystery thing, and anybody claiming to have had it is lying..? It was your insistence on denying this that constituted schizophrenia, since it's a fantasy you can only pretend over a keyboard or to a tv audience about other people. It's not real.

>The term is observation.
No, it's as much schizophrenia as lying about WOMD in Iraq by senior western political officials. Which is to say it's an ideological pretense for ulterior motives against the target.

>You yourself confirmed the perspective. We're literally in agreement,
gas-lighting
... so you're engaging in psychological abuse at this point; you're attempting to psychologically harm a person because they have said sex is not important. This means you highly value the sex act of your personal choice and... probably I was completely correct n the first few lines I made in my original reply lol you're a homosexual or a transvestite.

>but people outside of Peterson's hug circle
Pun intended?

>Thanks for the laugh, anon.
I'll drink to that, kitty cat.

[Anonymous No.22003556]

>>22003402
>Saying that I got over the novelty
No, you said everyone is / will or low IQ. You've taken an absolute position that you based on your own experience. That's the larp.
>saying that people who think having sex is a big deal are more likely to be virgins.
That swings to the opposite on the spectrum. Example, my girlfriend, who lives in another country,we bang like all the time the novelty wore off for me so I am pretty much over sex.
>And you're ...implying... I'm pretending to have had sex.
Yes, and your incredulous defense is fanning the flames of my doubt.
>I guess having sex is a mystery thing, and anybody claiming to have had it is lying.
No, it is possible to communicate having sex in a believable manner.
>that constituted schizophrenia,
What constitutes my "schizophrenia" is your inability to see a perspective outside of your own so it must be a mental illness.
>so you're engaging in psychological abuse at this point
I simply hope we can arrive at some sort of understanding, but also if an opportunity for a funny presents itself I am going to take it. I am sorry you feel abused, anon.
>Pun intended?
Yes. Who doesn't like puns?

[Anonymous No.22003649]

>>21999485
What you are looking for is fanfiction and those shitty romance novels you find in every used book store. That's what women masturbate to.

Women's sexuality is based on emotions more than visual input. That's why they prefer literature to pornography and why they don't mind being with ugly bastards.

[Anonymous No.22003701]

>>22003556
>No, you said everyone is / will or low IQ. You've taken an absolute position that you based on your own experience. That's the larp.
Oh, I see. Well, no it's not my experience only, my experience was the trigger however - if you want to put it that way, which led me to study the subject more and recognize that contemporary humans were out of step on this matter to biology, other societies (past societies) and psychology on the whole matter of sexuality. I was talking about delayed development or repression 'of' a bad society which creates an unhealthy fetish w/re: to the human body itself and that of the low IQ mentality / delayed development, etc., which enters adulthood and yet remains intellectually the same as a 13yr old on this.

>saying that people who think having sex is a big deal are more likely to be virgins.
>>That swings to the opposite on the spectrum. Example, my girlfriend, who lives in another country,we bang like all the time the novelty wore off for me so I am pretty much over sex.
I'm sure you've phrased this badly - I'll assume you're saying that the same position can be reached either avenue, and that you agree with (whatever i was saying). ... but then why you would you arguging aainst it...?

>What constitutes my "schizophrenia" is
uher well, see immediate last paragraph, for one.

>What constitutes my "schizophrenia" is
...is: insisting on untrue things; a creation of an artificial narrative which you're hoisting over facts, i.e. a prejudicial ideological bias or a dogma you've reached on the subject. In this case it's a societal narrative that anyone saying XYZ is this or that pejorative, designed to turn others against them; an ad hominem sophistry which also skirts (no pun intended) the subject and thus constitutes a severe deception (or perjury, libel, et al.).

> I am sorry you feel abused, anon.
It is fine. I am merely providing legal and intellectual justification or any future violence against you and those who question anything I say about anything whatsoever. pun intended.

>Yes. Who doesn't like puns?
Even the Gods admit that it is the highest form of fun; second only to gladiatorial contests with urban political prisoners.

[Anonymous No.22003712]

>>21999498
I'm a brainlet. What does this mean? Niggers?

[Anonymous No.22003731]

>>21999638
>2) the libido is basically dead after age 25


I wish someone told me that. I would've fucked hookers instead of studymaxxing.

[Anonymous No.22003957]

>>22003731
Yeah this is kinda of the thing... the brain is almost unfit for education before that point, then is good for nothing but afterwards. Maybe we should have kids in military service until age 32, idk, im just saying, scipio

[Anonymous No.22003983]

>>22003701
>which creates an unhealthy fetish w/re: to the human body itself
You mean attraction? Let me reiterate so we're on the samge page here. Mucho sexo until the novelty wears off or you develop a fetish for the flesh? If so, I still disagree.
> but then why you would you arguging aainst it.
Because if both avenues are available and I am not taking the one you're taking then that must mean I am taking the other avenue, no? Once again, this all boils down to your unwillingness to see a perspective outside of your own.
> of an artificial narrative which you're hoisting over facts,
All narratives are aritifical, anon. Also, I take issue with the notion that any opposing view to the reality you're experiencing is prejudicial or dogmatic.
>designed to turn others against them;
Designed to illustrate a different point of view
>ad hominem sophistry
Ad hominem's aren't plausible they attack the character. Your word salad is getting mixed up.
>merely providing legal and intellectual justification or any future violence against you and those who question anything I say about anything whatsoever
No need, just swing.

[Anonymous No.22004096]

>>22003983
>Because if both avenues are available and I am not taking the one you're taking then that must mean I am taking the other avenue, no? Once again, this all boils down to your unwillingness to see a perspective outside of your own.
... no, no. I'm happy if, as you say, you agree entirely with me on the conclusion and arrive it at it from a different orientation, pun intended.

> until the novelty wears off
That's it.

>or you develop a fetish for the flesh
No, I'm arguing that the fetishization 'of' the flesh is the artificial thing which 'delays' the mature "it's not important" perspective toward sex... and that the fetish is created 'by' the censorious-puritan-alien attitude toward it.

>narratives are aritifical
citation needed. If I point to a tree and ask you to tell me what it is, and you recite to me the hymns of your tribe where the tree is cast as a petrified wizard; and if you aren't aware of the tree itself (what it is, what its material uses are, how it grows, etc.), then that's an "artificial narrative which you're hoisting over facts, i.e. a prejudicial ideological bias or a dogma,"

>salad
No, I was quite precise in what I said:

a societal narrative that anyone saying (sex) is pejorative (incel), designed to turn others against them (negative association; character attack); (i.e.) (it is) an ad hominem sophistry

It's not bad because it's an attack, it's bad because it avoids exploring, refuting or building a case (on whatever the topic is), which, as i said, is an inherent deceptive act as it avoids the topic.

[Anonymous No.22004129]

>>22003712
women

[Anonymous No.22004257]

>>22004096
>the mature "it's not important" perspective toward sex
We disagree here. Mature people can and do love sex. Not to say what you're talking about doesn't exist. It's simply not the entire spectrum of possible outcomes.
>citation needed.
You know of any narratives occurring naturally without human input?
>you recite to me the hymns of your tribe where the tree is cast as a petrified wizard
That's a false equivalence. I didn't recite an esoteric hymn I showed you the other side of the coin.
> it's bad because it avoids exploring, refuting or building a case
Then how can it be sophistry? Don't you need plausible argumentation? Ad hom's are never a plausible argument to disregard a position, hence the salad.

[Anonymous No.22004270]

>>21999485
>I don't understand how anyone can like things that I do not
Welcome to the human condition. At a base level all literature is about this.

[Anonymous No.22004287]

>>22004257

>>the mature "it's not important" perspective toward sex
>We disagree here.
I think we disagree over the aim of the statement; "not important" doesn't mean not enjoyable, but rather "not all-defining; not overly important," - e.g. you beat and rape a man in the heat of combat, but it does not make you anything; you are "not defined by it" (in the sense of a sexual persona), it is just a physical action, it is "not important".


>You know of any narratives occurring naturally without human input?
Ah. ... that is quite so ..and... quite skillfully put.

>a false equivalence
It would be a long off-topic divergence to go into this; only that there is a validity to a true report on a thing, and an invalidity to anything else spoken instead of that true report on a thing:
e.g. it 'is' an apple tree, it is not a petrified wizard, it 'is' an apple tree, it is not a dancing bear, it 'is' an apple tree, it is not the international space station

>Ad hom's are never a plausible argument
I agree, I bet you're glad to be helped explain how your ad hominem was a bad thing so that in, say, a court of law you won't make the same rhetorical error there - where it matters.

[Anonymous No.22004355]

>>22004287
>I think we disagree over the aim of the statement;
I see what you mean now. The action that they enjoy doing does not define who they are as a person. I agree. Glad we could work this out.
>only that there is a validity to a true report on a thing,
I am not clairvoyant. I don't know how to get to the depth of the matter without asking probing questions. The questions aren't in themselves ad hom's there is responsibility in the way the person reading the questions perceives them. Granted, I did l lead with "your shit's all retarded" so it's not out of this world to assume malice.
> say, a court of law
Are we in a court of law? Shitposting is the nature of the beast. Wouldn't change it for the world.
Fun talk.

[Anonymous No.22006217]

>>21999485
I can't believe the entire thread has bean and gawn without anyone mentioning ESTHER VILAR and NORA VINCENT

[Anonymous No.22006297]

>>22006217
Esther is legit but Nora was on a republicuck paycheck and heavily mentally ill(not from pretending to be a man for a year and a half), to take her takes without a grain of salt is to be very disingenuous.
Basically she played the token gay for the republicans for a long time, even backing some extra retarded shit like conversion camps(don't get me wrong homosexuality is a pathology but you won't "cure" it by randomly shocking the brain).

[Anonymous No.22006329]

>>21999668
everyone thinks that gigachad is the epitomy of male sexuality while women barely give him above average ratings

[Anonymous No.22006335]

>>22003649
All men on these covers are tall ripped gigachads. I assume they are described the same in the books, though i have never read them. You are contradicting yourself

[Anonymous No.22006438]

>>22006297
She demonstrated the falsehood of the general claim that "women are nice and men are nasty," by showing the duplicity of how women behave towards men (to her when she was thought to be a man) and how men behave towards men and women. I don't think anyone arguing against this could ask for a better study than the year and a half that she did.... and it compliments Vilars 'thesis'; together they're much more solid than they would be on their own.

[Anonymous No.22006456]

>>22006438
See this is exactly what I meant when I said you need a grain of salt with Nora. She explicitly confirms a couple of points which we're most emotional on and which I want her or women in general to admit to.
Which means I'm highly overvaluing her input due to personal bias and also overlooking her biases - like how she experienced only some parts of male bonding and the like, as far as a twink could, while not properly being welcomed into for example a monastery because they thought her gay. She played pretend through and through, only scratching the surface Similarly she can show the worst women are to men, but doesn't actually show a healthy male perspective, only the most fucked up version.

> I don't think anyone arguing against this could ask for a better study than the year and a half that she did
I think this is exactly why it's not worth nearly as much as Esther in my opinion - a "study" of one person, with at least one noted mental health condition, giving us their take, tailored upon our preconceived notions, on a way of life she fetishized(again, her mental illness played a big part in this).

[Anonymous No.22006644]

>>22006456
Ah well, let me pose this, then:

>and which I want her or women in general to admit to.
>I think this is exactly why it's not worth nearly as much as Esther

Why would you eve expect Women to 'admit' if, as Esther points out, they're already fully aware?

It's use as a subject is useful only to Men, I think, with all of this taken into account.

[Anonymous No.22006678]

>>22006644
Because I "want" validation of my beliefs/stances on things. It's not rational nor was I trying to frame it as such.
I don't "expect" anyone to do it, but it feels good to have it confirmed.
I think human motivations operate on this level which is why I'm approaching it like this(saying this so you don't counter me with a rationalisation - that would be too easy but entirely pointless).

[Anonymous No.22006754]

>>22006678
>Because I "want" validation of my beliefs/stances on things. It's not rational nor was I trying to frame it as such.
Uh... okay Sisyphus, good luck with that unattainable endeavor, then lol

[Anonymous No.22006799]

>>22006754
It's obviously not the same want I was talking about. I even used quote marks to indicate that. Our most base desires are unobtainable by nature, or else there would be a way to "finish" life like a quest. Whoever has it all, always wants more. Is that a contradiction?
In other words; how young?

[Anonymous No.22006887]

>>22006799
Well if you have proven the truth of a thing and recognize also that most people are far too stupid (i.e. imagining themselves deviously clever) to humble themselves to admit (whatever you've discovered), then why would you require third party validation of your discovery of a thing?

The object, upon confirmation of a thing, is to utilize your discovery and find out the various ways it can be utilized. Even recognizing how to utilize the denialism of others toward your discovery is yet another opportunity; e.g. if a man is trapped in a thing that his own pride won't allow him to acknowledge then you've discovered how to completely control that man, with the added moral good that he will only stop being controlled by you (or rather the countless others who also discovered the thing) if he admits to the thing he was denying, to his overall benefit.

>Our most base desires are unobtainable by nature, or else there would be a way to "finish" life like a quest.
I mean that you've already surpassed Sisyphus in one sense by recognizing the the goal is not attainable, but then unlike Sisyphus (who would stop his endeavor and do something else) you're content to keep doing the thing that you already figured out was not rational.

That: a revelation of one thing or another generally comprises of relizing that one had set out upon the wrong path to reach the objective they had in mind, or that the objective itself was not the most all-encompassing objective toward that aim and all the vital peripheries surrounding that aim.

[Anonymous No.22006979]

>>21999485
Most pussies are repulsive to look at, the tightness can’t compare to a fap grip, queefing is absurd and embarrassing, there’s an anus that shits like an inch away, and period farts smell like literal death.
Even the sole purpose you have for a woman doesn’t hold up when examined. The fembrain doesn’t need to be addressed at all obviously.

[Anonymous No.22007062]

>>22000263
great album

[Anonymous No.22007069]

>>21999485
women are gay, gay men like other men, it's easy retard

[Anonymous No.22007072]

>>21999485
Read an essay instead: Sexual Utopia In Power

[Anonymous No.22007238]

>>22006979
I'm pretty sure if they stopped shearing their vaginas and stopped eating dead animal flesh that the visual and odor problem would cease to be a thing.

[Anonymous No.22007593]

>>21999498
more like Schhopenhomo, amrite?

[Anonymous No.22007651]

>>21999678
I agreed with you until
>we're supposed to be hunting and building and killing and raping
Sounds like you would love to live in Africa

[Anonymous No.22007677]

>>22007651
nonsense, abduction is a time honored pasttime in many europid societies; from the mighty georgians, to the mericiful spartans, to the defiant romans, to the proud warrior people of restorian england.

[Anonymous No.22007717]

Listen /lit/, it's all very simple. Forget everything you know about gender/troons/mutant retards/etc. I will tell you now the penultimate truth about the four modes of sexuality.

It's quite simple, you have two opposites: male/female, and autist/narcissist. From this, we can derive objectively four modes of sexuality

>autist male: the alpha male/lone wolf
The lone wolf is a bit of a lumberjack. He's tall, not very sociable, and made for self-sacrifice. The lobe wolf is often a military man, a cop or a monk. He generally doesn't have a lot of kids, because this would hinder his duty of self-sacrifice for the greater good.
>autist female: the tomboy
Same as the lone wolf. The tomboy is often a lesbian, for many of the same reasons as the lone wolf. She's active, but rather shy, likes to be active physically and mentally, but can usually hide her autism better than the lone wolf. Will therefore have more kids than the lone wolf, but not a whole lot
>narcissist male: the femboy
The femboy is an effeminate male, very charming, very handsome, kind of a sissy. Also a bit gay and mean. Will have quite a number of kids, but will not have a good relationship with them
>narcissist female: the bimbo
The bimbo will pretty much fuck anyone that can make her the talk of the town. Thus, she will often be hated by other bimbos and the femboys, but also tend towards a more softer, and caring side. In fact, some of the most caring mothers are former bimbos, but some bimbos will also hate their kids, usually when she gives birth to a bimbo, and her looks begin to fade.

Ok, these are the four sexual modes, they are inarguable, and I will not answer any question because I'm 100% correct

[Anonymous No.22007748]

>>22007717
Thanks Jung

[Anonymous No.22007760]

>>21999485
Female sexuality is about psychology, physicality, and intent. How attractive a man looks to a woman aesthetically depends on the character archetype she assigns to how that man looks based on cultural stereotypes and past experiences. The typical female sexuality favors a man whose vibe is confident, predictable, and apparently feels desire (toward her).

[Anonymous No.22007820]

>>21999485
Read the Neapolitan Novels by Elena Ferrante.

[Anonymous No.22008021]

>>22000362
>Eros and the Mysteries of Love - Julius Evola
is this any good?