[ 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: 141 KB, 500x627, big_85b1f7292e9d32dd92fa1a92802dbe99.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2599521 No.2599521 [Reply] [Original]

Know what would be an extremely interesting book?
A very attractive author incorporating her experiences of what living beautiful is like, while being totally and brutally honest about the whole thing.

For example: "Oh this guy is already in love with me. He hasn't even asked me about my hobbies and yet already assumes I'm the most important and useful being on earth"

>> No.2599533

You just need to find an incredibly attractive and social person who is also a very good writer.

Good luck with that.

>> No.2599531

Why? More fuel for your cuckolding fetish?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2124782/Samantha-Brick-says-backlash-bile-yesterdays-Daily
-Mail-proves-shes-right.html

>> No.2599547
File: 127 KB, 540x524, 5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2599547

>interesting
>author
>her

>> No.2599553

Only if they find the book after the author has been brutally raped and murdered. Then the men in the book all become suspects.

>> No.2599559

>>2599553
That doesn't sound particularly interesting either.

>> No.2599567

Know what would be an extremely interesting book?
A very wealthy author incorporating his/her experiences of what living rich is like, while being totally and brutally honest about the whole thing..

>> No.2599636

>>2599521
Most females will have the experience of wanting to know someone better and getting blocked by their physical appearance. Just the other night I was trying to have a discussion about the state of medical science with a guy and a girl who currently study it, and I soon decided to speak more with the female, since he couldn't keep his hands of my leg or kept aiming the conversation towards anatomy. She was a little more interested, but not much longer she shifted the topic towards local surgeries, then our own body parts, then erogenous zones...It's a touchy subject because everyone wants to be attractive, but it does get somewhat frustrating.

>> No.2599643

>>2599636
That's why I'd like an actual attractive female to write it, because it would be authentic that way, not some neckbeard fantasy.

>> No.2599657

>>2599521
I'd fuck her.
Couldn't care less what she has to write though.

>> No.2599665

>>2599643
but you, a neckbeard fantasist, already tried it, and you failed

>> No.2599670

>>2599643
An actual female would not gain much by doing so. She would either be acused of being cold hearted and bitchy or her experiences would be dismissed, as mine just were by you.

>> No.2599678

>>2599670
Lol, as if OP is actually interested in what real women have to say. I didn't find you cold-hearted or bitchy at all, for what it's worth

>> No.2599693

Only if she's an ugly duckling and extremely suspicious and her self esteem is crippled by each encounter. story of my life

>> No.2599709

>>2599678
Well he should, we all should.
Seriously here, this thread begs a good discussion. Why is it that physical attractiveness blinds people to such points? It's not just because people can think only of sex, it's not only men, even thought they tend to be more obvious. It's just that that kind of behavior is stimulated by all the cultural and sociological attention body gets over soul or mind. You should find that a little more indignant, you c/lit/s

>> No.2599865

>>2599709
I don't think it's sociological. It's evolution. Beauty equals health. Ugliness equals disease.
It's not fair but it is what it is.

>> No.2599874
File: 21 KB, 341x414, original..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2599874

> Beauty equals health. Ugliness equals disease.

Get a load of this guy

>> No.2599888

>>2599874
You're not exactly advancing the discussion, but yeah. This is what evolutionary biology says. And it makes sense.

>> No.2599909

>>2599865
>I don't think it's sociological. It's evolution. Beauty equals health. Ugliness equals disease.

Not equals. But they correlate.

>It's not fair but it is what it is.
Nothing in life is fair with regards to genetics.

>> No.2599911

>>2599888
Maybe some years ago, it did say that, but nowadays that isn't always true. Neverminding the fact that beauty is not only genetic these days, it's also put under such scrutiny that a girl with shorter hair or a different nose than the one pictured above could be said to be more beautiful, would that mean she was healthier? Clearly not.

>> No.2599916

>>2599521
I share the interest, OP. Altho i haven't read anything serious about the topic. I have talked with many attractive females about it.

>> No.2599918

>>2599909
I was being terse but I assume you get what I was saying.

>> No.2599922

>>2599911
I'm talking about our instincts. Our instincts are not smart.

>> No.2599938

>>2599922
So what you are saying instinct is the only, or strongest thing that rules our behaviour?

>> No.2599944

>>2599938
Oh I don't know if it's the strongest. I think it can be overcome by reason. But it is certainly very strong. Look around us. Men want pretty women. Women want men with resources. Even if it makes them miserable. I think this is our instincts at work.

>> No.2599977

>>2599944
That's true. I was associating it more with culture but the behaviours you just mentioned are seen in many different cultures, if not all.

>> No.2599990

American Psycho is sort of like that.

>> No.2599994

This has been a nice discussion. And all started by OP's curiousity about a beautiful and candid women.

>> No.2600026

>>2599521
>Know what would be an extremely fappable book?

Fixed that for you. Fappable yes, interesting? Not really.

P.s. Pretty =/= hot.
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/pat-archbold/the-death-of-pretty

>> No.2600052

>>2599521
>>2599567
Seriously, if you'd really like to read a book like this try American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis. It's pretty much exactly like that.

>> No.2600067

>>2600026
That is a ridiculous article. If you think that person's definition of pretty equals interesting, I'm sorry for you (as I am for the majority of people who commented in that page)

>> No.2600074

>>2600067
I agree with him, yeah, even though the article is poorly written. There's no need for you to feel sorry for me.

>> No.2600081

>>2600074
You might agree that women who seek more than "hotness" are more interesting than the ones who pride themselves in only that, but I DO feel sorry if you agree with him in the misogynistic idea that they do this only to please men and should change that for the same reason. It's not only poorly written, it's poorly thought of.

>> No.2600103

>>2600081
Misogynistic: "reflecting or exhibiting hatred, dislike, mistrust, or mistreatment of women."

Women strive to be hot for men. What's misogynistic about that? It's just natural.

>> No.2600111

>>2600103
I do think that is a mistreatment of women, because they strive to be appealing not only for men but also for themselves. And the whole article is clearly stating that they are either pure and ever so pleasing or hot and vile and oh so wrong FOR men.

>> No.2600159

>>2600111
It's not mistreatment if they do it to themselves. Fact of the matter is that in many cases, it's more beneficial for a women to present herself as a commodity.

>> No.2600170

>>2600111
>they strive to be appealing not only for men but also for themselves

Are you even reading what you write? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

>And the whole article is clearly stating that they are either pure and ever so pleasing or hot and vile and oh so wrong FOR men.

Actually, that's not what the article states. Firstly, it states that women once valued innocence and pretty more than they do now, which is not the same as saying they were any more pure back then. Secondly, it states that as a society we (men and women) benefit from pretty, whilst hot brings the worst out of men and debases the women who let themselves become victims of their own desire to be desired.

>for men for men for men for men
Look, like it or not, men tend to influence women's choices and lives just by virtue of existing, and viceversa. Why this simple fact of life seems to bother you so much, I can't begin to understand.

>> No.2600177

>>2600159 It is for men also but I don't see any women writing about how they should go back to when they weren't flanting their abbs or wearing tight pants because they were better that way. It is not one sex's right to say how the other should be behaving.

>> No.2600179

Oh good.
Are we talking about sex now?

>> No.2600184

>>2600177
I'm sure that there are plenty of women writing about that. Regardless, I'm sorry, but you seem to be under the assumption that this author speaks for the entire male population.

>> No.2600189

>>2600177
I'm not the guy you're replying to, but as a man I wouldn't object to such a rant by a woman. Actually I would welcome it.

>It is not one sex's right to say how the other should be behaving.
Says who? I like honesty.

>> No.2600194

>>2600184
You are right, I'm not expressing myself well in any way. But the dichotomy of women being either innocent or hot is still very wrong. And I personally think that the image of purity that the autor transpires is not that appealing sexually or otherwise, he is taking so many layers out of consideration.

>> No.2600200

>>2600189
>I'm not the guy you're replying to, but as a man I wouldn't object to such a rant by a woman. Actually I would welcome it.
Well it's actually more fair if you do welcome it, because than you truly are for equality. My point it that women's actions are clearly more scrutinized than men's and if you like honesty you'll most certainly agree with that.

>> No.2600209

>>2600200
I don't know if I agree with that. I don't know if it's even possible to know. How do you measure that kind of thing? But one thing I know for a fact: it's possible, and very much socially acceptable and fashionable in fact, to hate men but not women. Make of that what you will.

>> No.2600216

>>2600209
How is it fashionable to hate men?

>> No.2600219

>>2600216

because /pol/ told him so

>> No.2600229

>>2600216
Don't you ever turn your tv on? Listen to a politician's speech? Read newspapers or magazines? Where do you live...? It's very noticeable here in Italy and probably in other western countries as well, if more and more men are beginning to speak openly about it.

>> No.2600247

>>2600229
Oh boy.

I'm not at all worried about a widespread hatred of men. As I see it, militant feminists tends to try and overcompensate for pre-sufferage times. I've got absolutely no problem with equal rights. There's no reason why women shouldn't be paid as much as men. Though what I would really like to see is a steady campaign to allow women to be drafted and fight on the front lines of wars

>> No.2600264

>>2600247
>I'm not at all worried about a widespread hatred of men.
And to think you were the one accusing me of sexism. Ha. Anyway, it's 3 am here and I have better things to do than argue with feminists on the internet. I think I'll go troll /g/ some more. Bye.

>> No.2600268
File: 34 KB, 400x400, 1335622588461.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2600268

>>2600264
Forgot pic.

>> No.2600269

>>2600264
I'm not the person you were talking to. I'm a guy, and I'm not accusing anyone of sexism.