/lit/ - Literature

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.2686319]

feminism thread

[Anonymous No.2686323]

Wrong bra size.

[Anonymous No.2686324]

Bitches be whack.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.2686326]

>>2686323
>>2686324

dumb conservatives

[Anonymous No.2686328]

>>2686326
As a conservative, I am compelled to point out the older meaning of dumb referring to one who cannot speak, which is clearly not the case here.

[Anonymous No.2686329]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndCeUOML79E

relevant

[Anonymous No.2686348]

>>2686328
as a conservative your compelled to suck my dick

[Anonymous No.2686356]

[Anonymous No.2686358]

[Anonymous No.2686360]

[Anonymous No.2686361]

[Anonymous No.2686363]

[Anonymous No.2686365]

[Anonymous No.2686366]

[Anonymous No.2686370]

[Anonymous No.2686372]

[Anonymous No.2686373]

1/2

[Anonymous No.2686374]

2/2

[Anonymous No.2686376]

>tfw all the feminists I've known magically stop being 'radical' when they get a boyfriend.

[Anonymous No.2686378]

[Grumpy !!p9F2i77s6CD No.2686379]

>>2686328
>he thinks language is static

[Anonymous No.2686380]

[Anonymous No.2686381]

[Anonymous No.2686382]

>>2686356
This isn't feminism. This is the "traditional relationships" that lots of retards wish we could go back to. Both are misandrist shit.

[Anonymous No.2686383]

[Anonymous No.2686385]

why is this here why on /lit/ man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_capital

Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive?
http://www.csom.umn.edu/assets/71520.pdf

Sexual Economics: Sex as a Female Resource for Social Exchange in Heterosexual Interactions
http://www.csom.umn.edu/Assets/71503.pdf

Cultural Suppression of Female Sexuality
http://www.femininebeauty info/suppression.pdf

Female polygyny/hypergamy
http://www.nber.org/public_html/confer/2008/si2008/EFABG/saint-paul.pdf
http://www.econ.washington.edu/user/erose/hypergamy_v2a_paper.pdf
http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1000202
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2743334
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v41/n1/abs/ng0109-8.html

In the history of mankind as a species, some hundreds of thousands of years, 40% of men have successfully passed their genes to future generations, whereas 80% of women did. Today's human population is descended from twice as many women as men. This is statistical, scientific, genetic proof that women function as sexual selectors, and men evolved risk-taking and ambition behaviours to compete for mating rights. The study was conducted by Michael F. Hammer. A lecture on the implications:
http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm

Esther Vilar's seminal work on the concept that women enjoy a parasitic relationship with men.
http://www.naturalthinker.net/trl/texts/Vilar,Esther/ManipulatedMan.html The text itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Esther_Vilar&oldid=442296393 Synopsis.
http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/vilar.html A preview.

Female characters are defined more by their passive attributes and their emotional responses; male characters more by their actions. This is why male protagonists are preferred in fiction, by both women and men.
http://www.onfiction.ca/2011/02/actor-and-observed-man-and-woman.html

[Anonymous No.2686386]

[Anonymous No.2686387]

Culture sees men as expendable blank slates, whose self-sufficiency is their own responsibility, and who must prove themselves worthy of accolade or interest. Conversely, women are inherently valuable, but typically function as inert commodities or motivation for male actors. The TVtropes links serve as quantitative evidence that this basic dichotomy proliferates the culture, to the point that it can be casually and humorously catalogued.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GenderDynamicsIndex
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MenAreTheExpendableGender

"Without the higher powers of the imagination and reason, no eminent success can be gained in many subjects. These latter faculties, as well as the former, will have been developed in man, partly through sexual selection,- that is, through the contest of rival males, and partly through natural selection,- from success in the general struggle for life; and as in both cases the struggle will have been during maturity, the characters gained will have been transmitted more fully to the male than to the female offspring. It accords in a striking manner with this view of the modification and re-inforcement of many of our mental faculties by sexual selection, that, firstly, they notoriously undergo a considerable change at puberty, and, secondly, that eunuchs remain throughout life inferior in these same qualities. Thus man has ultimately become superior to woman. It is, indeed, fortunate that the law of the equal transmission of characters to both sexes prevails with mammals; otherwise it is probable that man would have become as superior in mental endowment to woman, as the peacock is in ornamental plumage to the peahen."
Charles Darwin

[Anonymous No.2686388]

>>2686356

Aww, what a peach!

[Anonymous No.2686389]

http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf

There are observable differences in the attributes of men and women that account for most of the wage gap. Statistical analysis that includes those variables has produced results that collectively account for between 65.1 and 76.4 percent of a raw gender wage gap of 20.4 percent, and thereby leave an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent.

Research also suggests that differences not incorporated into the model due to data limitations may account for part of the remaining gap. Specifically, CONSAD's model and much of the literature, including the Bureau of Labor Statistics Highlights of Women's Earnings, focus on wages rather than total compensation. Research indicates that women may value non-wage benefits more than men do, and as a result prefer to take a greater portion of their compensation in the form of health insurance and other fringe benefits.

Although additional research in this area is clearly needed, this study leads to the unambiguous conclusion that the differences in the compensation of men and women are the result of a multitude of factors and that the raw wage gap should not be used as the basis to justify corrective action. Indeed, there may be nothing to correct. The differences in raw wages may be almost entirely the result of the individual choices being made by both male and female workers.

[Anonymous No.2686390]

[Anonymous No.2686391]

Male civilians more likely to be targeted in wartime and less likely to be evacuated from dangerous areas.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=183059

Women are more likely to receive lighter sentences than men; eyewitnesses to equally violent male and female criminals tend to rate the female criminals as less violent over time.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100525090554.htm

Women's prisons should close, says justice taskforce
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13666066

Reaction To Women Abusing Men In Public vis. The Reverse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks

Video depicts what happens when a woman spikes a man's drink versus a man spiking a woman's drink.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-57-i1S95Kk

Paternity fraud as male slavery for the convenience of women, and the educated professionals who abet it.
http://www.canadiancrc.com/Newspaper_Articles/Globe_and_Mail_Moms_Little_secret_14DEC02.aspx

[Anonymous No.2686392]

>men
Our chart shows how men have rated women, on a scale from 0 to 5. ... Given the popular wisdom that Hollywood, the Internet, and Photoshop have created unrealistic expectations of how a woman should look, I found the fairness, and, well, realism, of this gray arc kind of heartening.

>women
As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys' pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren't good enough for her, but then she goes right out and messages them anyway. ... Paradoxically, it seems it's women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the "average" member of the opposite sex.

[Anonymous No.2686393]

Matters are such under this unrighteous combination that however men may laugh at it and make jokes, they do not willingly travel with single unknown female companions in railway carriages. They know very well that for a man to have the finger of a woman pointed at him with a charge of a sexual offence is to secure that man's extinction, no matter what the verdict of a jury may be. In 1881 (Lond. Med. Gazette) a case was tried in which a girl, to shield herself against her equal share of guilt, charged her partner in it with the crime of rape. The jury could hardly be got to acquit the innocent man even though the prosecutrix had to admit that she never called out, her mother sleeping in the next room, because she was afraid her cries would waken the old lady.

When, however, their bluffs are exposed, when the real facts of the case are laid bare to public notice, and woman is shown, not only as not oppressed but as privileged, then the apostles of feminism, male and female, being unable to make even a plausible case out in reply, with one consent resort to the boycott, and by ignoring what they cannot answer, seek to stop the spread of the unpleasant truth so dangerous to their cause. The pressure put upon publishers and editors by the influential Feminist sisterhood is well known.

The above attitude, with all its inconsistencies, has at its back a strong sex-conscious party, or sex union, as we may term it, among women, and a floating mass of inconsequent, slushy sentiment among men. The acquittal of women on the most serious charges, especially where the victims are men, in the teeth of the strongest evidence, is an everyday occurrence.

- E. Belfort Bax, 1913

[Anonymous No.2686395]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Plea-deal-ends-charge-stemming-from-false-rape-2
273163.php

A San Antonio woman who authorities accused of instigating a murder by lying to her boyfriend about being raped has accepted a plea agreement in which she now faces up to eight years in prison. Ramos lied about being raped in an attempt to cover up the fact she was two-timing Kelly while he was in jail, prosecutor Miguel Najera said Wednesday. In reality, Najera told previous juries, she had been in a consensual relationship with Ramirez.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2074339/Cry-rape-slap-wrist-Teenage-girl-lies-left-man-priso
n-savagely-beaten-gets-80-fixed-penalty-notice.html

A teenage girl whose false rape allegation led to an innocent man being beaten up and another man sent to jail was let off by police with just an 80 pound fixed penalty notice. Andrew Lester...lost eight teeth and his hearing was permanently damaged. The judge said Lester 'may suffer from the effects [of the attack] for the rest of his life'.

[Anonymous No.2686397]

>>2686360
the part about men feeling more love for women is bullshit all-around. women are always pining over men, desperately craving the image of romantic love that they have been fed since birth, whereas many men are womanizers and fuck anything with a pussy or simply marry their work. this is supported by the fact that men's brains, biologically, are less prone to emotional attachment. the true "lovey-dovey" men who write poetry are rare.

[Anonymous No.2686399]

>>2686397
You should read Vilar. It's actually a very fun combo of idiotic chivalry in males and ruthless exploitation in females.

Fun sidenote: chivalry is a Western aberration. The entire notion of supplicating and propitiating women was made up by French vernacular authors in the High Middle Ages. No one else does it.

>This is how the peoples of antiquity and of the Orient have regarded women; they have recognized what is the proper position for women far better than we have, we with our Old French gallantry and insipid women-veneration, that highest flower of Christian-Germanic stupidity which has served only to make women so rude and arrogant that one is sometimes reminded of the sacred apes of Benares which, conscious of their own sanctity and inviolability, thought themselves at liberty to do whatever they pleased.

[Anonymous No.2686402]

>>2686397
*women are always pining over men, desperately craving the image of financial unaccountability that they have been fed since birth.

Fixed that for you.

[Anonymous No.2686403]

>Jack so obviously demanded from a woman--a relationship between a man and a woman where a man would be the leader and a woman be his wife and look up to him as a man. With Adlai you could have another relationship where--you know, he'd sort of be sweet and you could talk. ... I always thought women who were scared of sex loved Adlai.

Jackie Kennedy

[Anonymous No.2686404]

>>2686402
so why do women marry financially irresponsible/broke-ass niggas, claiming love?

[Anonymous No.2686408]

Chivalry is sexist?

[Anonymous No.2686409]

>>2686404
big willies

[Anonymous No.2686411]

>>2686404
I'm not the person you're asking the question of, but it is simplistic to say that the primary goal a woman has in a relationship or marriage is always financial. It can be anything, really. Maybe the sex is really good. Regardless, the important thing is that once that benefit is gone, she will leave. You will become useless to her and she move on to the next male which can provide what she is looking for. There is no "love" present.

[Anonymous No.2686413]

>>2686366
something about "THIS BABY DEAD" makes me cry with laughter every time

[Anonymous No.2686420]

>>2686404
Good sex. That, and the prospect of divorcing him on the grounds that they 'weren't being properly supported' so that they then can take what little he does have, and hit the market again.

[Anonymous No.2686424]

[Anonymous No.2686429]

The primary theme of the works of Smith is the role of the reader as observer. Tilton[1] states that we have to choose between patriarchialist theory and postsemiotic materialist theory. But the subject is interpolated into a neodialectic discourse that includes consciousness as a whole.

Baudrillard uses the term ‘cultural sublimation’ to denote a self-referential paradox. Therefore, an abundance of deconstructions concerning patriarchialist theory may be found.

The main theme of d’Erlette’s[2] model of neotextual libertarianism is the role of the artist as writer. Thus, the subject is contextualised into a cultural sublimation that includes language as a totality.

[Anonymous No.2686430]

>>2686429
In the works of Smith, a predominant concept is the distinction between opening and closing. Many theories concerning a dialectic paradox exist. But Derrida uses the term ‘cultural sublimation’ to denote not, in fact, construction, but subconstruction.

If one examines neotextual libertarianism, one is faced with a choice: either reject cultural sublimation or conclude that art, surprisingly, has objective value, but only if the premise of semanticist postmodern theory is invalid; if that is not the case, Lyotard’s model of neotextual libertarianism is one of “prepatriarchialist Marxism”, and hence fundamentally impossible. Lacan promotes the use of semanticist postmodern theory to attack sexism. It could be said that the primary theme of the works of Smith is the futility, and some would say the rubicon, of semiotic society.

The subject is interpolated into a neocultural dialectic theory that includes sexuality as a whole. But if semanticist postmodern theory holds, we have to choose between cultural sublimation and the subconstructivist paradigm of context.

The main theme of Humphrey’s[3] critique of semanticist postmodern theory is not discourse, but neodiscourse. Thus, the submaterial paradigm of expression implies that the raison d’etre of the artist is social comment.

The subject is contextualised into a cultural sublimation that includes consciousness as a reality. However, Derrida uses the term ‘neotextual libertarianism’ to denote the common ground between class and art.

Sontag suggests the use of semanticist postmodern theory to challenge and analyse society. Thus, the characteristic theme of the works of Smith is the absurdity of cultural class.

[Anonymous No.2686431]

I don't have a problem with feminists, I just wish they'd remember that a lot of young men sacrificed their lives so they could live in a country where their rights are respected and their ideas are allowed in the public domain.

[Anonymous No.2686432]

>>2686430
“Sexual identity is part of the genre of consciousness,” says Lacan. Marx’s essay on neotextual deappropriation suggests that society has significance, given that culture is interchangeable with sexuality. But Derrida promotes the use of cultural sublimation to deconstruct hierarchy.

If one examines capitalist postdeconstructivist theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept neotextual libertarianism or conclude that narrativity is capable of significant form. The subject is interpolated into a cultural sublimation that includes language as a totality. In a sense, an abundance of discourses concerning neotextual libertarianism may be discovered.

Lacan suggests the use of cultural sublimation to modify class. Thus, the primary theme of la Fournier’s[4] critique of semanticist postmodern theory is not theory, but subtheory.

Marx uses the term ‘neotextual libertarianism’ to denote a mythopoetical whole. However, Foucaultist power relations holds that expression must come from the masses.

The characteristic theme of the works of Gaiman is the difference between narrativity and society. It could be said that Sartre promotes the use of cultural sublimation to attack class divisions.

[Grumpy !!p9F2i77s6CD No.2686436]

Jesus, guys...

[Anonymous No.2686437]

>>2686431
Feminists feel that they have a right to live, i.e., they are inherently more valuable than men, while it is your job to die to protect them. Why would you be okay with them?

[Anonymous No.2686438]

All of my hahahahahahahahahaha OMG someone doesn't know what they're talking about. Good joke.

[Anonymous No.2686439]

>>2686432
The essay you have just seen is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator. More detailed technical information may be found in Monash University Department of Computer Science Technical Report 96/264: “On the Simulation of Postmodernism and Mental Debility Using Recursive Transition Networks”.

If you enjoyed this, you might also enjoy reading about the Social Text Affair, where NYU Physics Professor Alan Sokal’s brilliant(ly meaningless) hoax article was accepted by a cultural criticism publication.

[Anonymous No.2686440]

>>2686429
>>2686430
>>2686432
Really? For a number of years now work has been proceeding in order to bring to the crudely conceived idea of a transmission that would not only supply inverse reactive current for use in unilateral phase detractors, but would also be capable of automaticaly synchronizing cardinal grammeters. Such an instrument is the turbo encabulator.

Now basically, the only new principle involved is that instead of power being generated by the relative motions of conductors and fluxes, it is produced by the modial interaction of magnetoreluctance and capacitive directance.

[Anonymous No.2686441]

The original machine had a baseplate of prefabulated Amulite, surmounted by a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings were in a direct line with the pentametric fan. The latter consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzel vanes so-fitted to the ambifacient lunar wane shaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented.

The main winding was of the normal lotus-o-delta type placed in panendermic semi-boloid slots in the stator, every seventh conductor being connected by a nonreversible trem'e pipe to the differential girdlespring on the up-end of the grammeters.

The Turbo Encabulator has now reached a high level of develement, and is being successfully used in the operation of nofer trunnions. Moreover, whenever a barescent skor motion is required, it may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocating dingle arm to reduce sinusodial depleneration.

[Anonymous No.2686448]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dmNCjLUqA4

[Anonymous No.2686449]

>>2686437

Because I understand that men are better suited to certain things like fighting in war; that's a fact that can't be denied.

I would happily fight if an agressor posed a threat to my country's quest towards total egalitarianism and equality and not ask for anything in return; the knowledge that I have defended the right for people to be treated as human beings and be who they want to be is reward enough.

[Anonymous No.2686451]

>>2686448
Whoops. Wrong link, but that one is good too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lXUd7VxuSA

[Anonymous No.2686452]

The hilarious thing is that I spotted that Postmodern Generator bullshit a mile away as bullshit, but I still love Continental theory. Suck my dick Sokal.

[Anonymous No.2686454]

>>2686449
If you're willing to die for a system that thinks you are disposable and will never give a fuck about you, then I don't know what to say other than that you're an idiot.

[Anonymous No.2686459]

I'm not sure what attacking strawmen has to do with literature.

[Anonymous No.2686464]

>ITT

[Anonymous No.2686466]

>>2686454

I'd be an idiot if I signed up for the army to go and blow up brown people, yes.

But I would if a legitimate threat that needs to be defeated (i.e. Nazism, Fascism) arose and posed an actual threat to my comparatively egalitarian system.

I'm no fool, I'm as cynical as they come about my government/country, but I know it's probably better than a lot of other places and much more likely to be the epicentre of strides forward in human thinking.

Plus, going to war might be an interesting adventure.

[Anonymous No.2686467]

>>2686459
>>2686464
>saging
>then posting a pic

[Anonymous No.2686469]

>>2686467
>implying im him

[Anonymous No.2686470]

>>2686449
>Because I understand that men are better suited to certain things like fighting in war; that's a fact that can't be denied.

Of course. It's plain to everybody that men and women are different physically, physiologically, and psychologically. In light of this, isn't it silly to insist that there are no aptitudinal differences between the sexes and that men and women are equally suited to the fill the same roles in society? Waging war can't be the only example of this, can it?

[Anonymous No.2686471]

>>2686389

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2010/11/26/how-the-consad-report-on-the-wage-gap-masks-sexism-instead-o
f-measuring-it/

http://www.glassdoor.com/blog/engineering-pay-gap-glassdoor-reveals-many-women-engineers-earn-less-t
han-men/

pic unrelated

[Anonymous No.2686472]

>>2686466

>implying the army wants beta faggots such as yourself.

[Anonymous No.2686475]

>>2686469
>implying that anonymous poster is a man
Fucking misogynist pig. You'll never get a girlfriend.

[Anonymous No.2686477]

>>2686466
men thrive on altruism beyond the immediate, women only value themselves and occasionally their offspring, and thus despise and pervert what they can't understand.

As Mencken said;

"...women, as a sex, are shrewd, resourceful, and acute; but the very fact that they are always concerned with imminent problems and that, in consequence, they are unaccustomed to dealing with the larger riddles of life, makes their mental attitude essentially petty. .... Women's constant thought is, not to lay down broad principles of right and wrong; not to place the whole world in harmony with some great scheme of justice; ...but to deceive, influence, sway and please men. Normally, their weakness makes masculine protection necessary to their existence and to the exercise of their overpowering maternal instinct, and so their whole effort is to obtain this protection in the easiest way possible. The net result is that feminine morality is a morality of opportunism and imminent expediency, and that the normal woman has no respect for, and scarcely a conception of abstract truth. Thus is proved a fact noted by Schopenhauer and many other observers: that a woman seldom manifests any true sense of justice or of honor."

[Anonymous No.2686479]

>>2686475
>Implying that having a girlfriend is a good thing

Sure is mangina ITT.

[Anonymous No.2686481]

>>2686472

I just want to fight in a just war against a legitimate threat to humanity/freedom.

I think a good long war will stop the betaness of this generation. Hopefully kill off a few dicks as well.

[Anonymous No.2686497]

>>2686481
You say that because you've never been in a war. It's one of the last things you would ever want to do. It's basically a choose your own adventure between

>Death
>PTSD
>Loss of limbs
>Other permanent disfigurations
>Suicide
>Shitty healthcare
>Homelessness
>Etc.

[Anonymous No.2686494]

>>2686408

Yes.

[Anonymous No.2686495]

>>2686481
>Hopefully kill off a few dicks as well
>dicks are a masculine symbol
>you want to force men to die in war
Fucking misandrist bitch. Fight your own fucking battles if you're so equal.

[Anonymous No.2686500]

>>2686470

Of course it's not the only example. What I mean is that males and females are inherently suited to certain things, but neither should be revered or looked down upon for this fact.

In situations where things unique to one gender are not involved or important (say business, government etc.), then equality is perfectly acceptable. And by equality I mean a meritocratic system that does not take into account gender, or any other extraneous factors.

[Anonymous No.2686501]

>>2686481
Come to Afghanistan, it hasn't wound down yet. It might not be classically just, but you're pretty much guaranteed to be killing *evil people.

*while evil may not be objective, evil in this context is arbitrarily close to evil as defined in classical western culture. People who don't think power drilling kids' kneecaps for the lolz is evil, or dispute me shooting them in the face is good...can go wave a protest sign. Us letting you protest? That's another sign of our infallible morality, suckers.

[Anonymous No.2686503]

>>2686479
LOL I bet you are a virgin! You must be so ugly hahaha! No woman wants you! xD

[Anonymous No.2686505]

>>2686503
Lel so fanny xD

[Anonymous No.2686507]

>>2686497
You say that like you've never been. Yes, lot's of bad shit can happen, but the scenery, camaraderie, explosions, adrenaline, and shooting people in the face for money, I mean freedom, can't be beat.

Causing more sustainable, positive change in the world than an entire campus of peace protestors is nice too.

[Anonymous No.2686512]

>>2686507
Okay, go die for your state. Whatever floats your boat.

[Anonymous No.2686514]

>>2686430
>>2686432
>lacan
Stopped reading right there.

[Anonymous No.2686515]

>>2686507
>sustainable, positive change
>da army

Oh God, my sides.

[Anonymous No.2686522]

Am I seriously the only one here who dreams of something like the Spanish Civil War to happen again so me and other bros (in a perfect world, we'd be writers, artists etc.) can go and fight for what we believe in?

[Anonymous No.2686523]

>>2686481
What if I told you that we no longer fight for our freedom, we fight for our government's freedom

[Anonymous No.2686525]

>>2686522
Not really. Civil wars are vicious, hateful, personal business full of moral grays and blacks. Killing insurgents is a beacon of purity, in contrast.

[Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA. No.2686528]

sterilize all men ftw

[Anonymous No.2686542]

>>2686481
>I just want to fight in a just war

That is stupid. Haven't you ever read a war noel? War is godawful regardless of however just one side views it as, and it negatively effects everyone involved.

You're a woman? How would you like to be taken as a POW, raped and tortured on a daily basis, and survive on whatever bile your captors deem you worthy of? Because that is a lot more likely than any naive romanticized idea you have of what war is like.

[Anonymous No.2686544]

>>2686542
*novel

[Anonymous No.2686561]

>>2686542
>haven't you ever read a war novel
>novel
This is something I noticed, rereading some novels after my first deployment.

All Quiet On The Western Front is a fictional account by a WW1 rear-echelon man who saw little action. War is depicted as a crippling, mind-crushing, dreary event.

Storm of Steel is the personal memoirs of a WW1 front-line soldier wounded numerous times, who volunteered to go back into the fight each time. War is depicted as a brutal but also vibrant and uplifting experience, practically a tonic for the soul.

This contrast between front line reality and the inexperienced imagination is a common theme, throughout wars old and new. Pacifists who've never experienced war shake their heads, people who've actually been there disagree.

BTW, people we detain get better meals sitting in an interview room then they usually do in the villages. They certainly sleep better than us. So cry me a river about faux moral equivalence.

[Anonymous No.2686578]

>>2686542

Not everything in life has to be nice & rosy for it to be a rewarding and important experience.

You'll learn more about human nature and how the world really works in a 6 month deployment to a warzone than you could ever dream of learning in 6 years of further education for a Phd.

Even arguably one of the 20th century's greatest minds Wittgenstein signed up for the Austrian army in WW1 because he felt facing death was an invaluable component to personal growth.

You can't learn everything from your profs. or sitting on your PC all day.

[Anonymous No.2686575]

>>2686561
Nice confirmation bias. What you're describing is called cognitive dissonance. Of course, people who volunteered for front line service are going to think it was worth while. If they didn't, then they would look pretty fucking stupid, now wouldn't they?

[Anonymous No.2686577]

>>2686501
>People who don't think power drilling kids' kneecaps for the lolz is evil

All of them do that, huh? Is that the Taliban initiation ritual?

[Anonymous No.2686591]

>>2686575
I liked war for it's subjective merits - the emotional rush - and the objective merits - preserving a higher net balance of innocent lives than would have existed, had we not gone to war.

Of course, it's only natural for people who don't do x thing, to go full fox and sour grapes, and criticize it independently of the actual merits or dismerits of y issue.

I'm always open to dialogue, but people ignorant of the subjective experience have no standing to talk about it. As for the objective worth, I'm willing to listen, but since I'm working with firsthand knowledge and you're not, I don't give much weight to your opinion.

[Anonymous No.2686598]

>>2686577
>generic baseless sarcasm
Maybe you'd be surprised, if surprise were still capable of penetrating your faux-cynical sheltered western shell. Usually, it's something like "hey kid, come and see if you can crush this plastic bottle." Ofc, it's a way to test a pressure switch, though since it's only a detonator and not the full bomb, the children rarely lose more than a foot.

[Anonymous No.2686600]

>>2686575
Reminds me of, the book, Catch-22.

[Anonymous No.2686605]

>>2686578
Stuff you'll learn in a war zone:

1). How to use a latrine.
2). How to function with little to no food or sleep.
3). How to kill time.
4). How to feign injury or illness.
5). How to kill time after your first method of killing time has lost it's appeal.
6). How to dig ditches.
7). How to think you are better than other people because you were dumb enough to sign your life away to corporations (Because normal people surely couldn't work out on a daily basis or operate firearms or personify gear as well as you).
8). Fuck, it is getting hard to kill time around here.
9). How to take bullshit orders from your higher ups.
&c.

[Anonymous No.2686609]

>>2686578

>learn more about human nature

Sure is romanticism and dogmatic assertions in here.

[Anonymous No.2686611]

Does anyone else find Bukowski's sexism unbearable? It's like reading a Frank Millar comic book.

[Anonymous No.2686612]

>>2686429
>>2686430
>>2686432
>>2686439

bahahaha i remember when the postmodern generator would fool me (by almost sounding like real theory, at least to my mind). im glad i grew a brain and know substantial continental theory from nonsense.

[Anonymous No.2686625]

>>2686598
>Maybe you'd be surprised, if surprise were still capable of penetrating your faux-cynical sheltered western shell.

Pfft, fuck off.

>Usually, it's something like "hey kid, come and see if you can crush this plastic bottle." Ofc, it's a way to test a pressure switch, though since it's only a detonator and not the full bomb, the children rarely lose more than a foot.

Do you have anything to share that isn't purely anecdotal? The people you're fighting have similar stories about you, I'm sure, and they're probably about as accurate. Gotta convince yourself that the guys you're killing are real pieces of shit, right?

[Anonymous No.2686630]

>>2686611

the thing that mitigates it for me is that in bukowski you pretty much always see how sexist attitudes and behavior fuck over the character in question -- like, chinaski in women would be a billion times less miserable if he'd just treat the women he's involved with with something approaching respect

frank miller just wants to scream about whores

[Anonymous No.2686668]

bumping for a mildly fascinating thread, but alas I am too tired to read through all of it just now.

[Anonymous No.2686674]

>>2686668

fascinating? it was one troll shit posting men's rights bs. it would only be fascinating to a sociologist, or maybe a psychoanalyst

[Anonymous No.2686676]

>mfw you're all that dirty peasant

[Anonymous No.2686680]

Can you guys, like, not do this bullshit on every single board? Thanks

[Anonymous No.2686681]

>>2686680
Nope.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.2686684]

>>2686676

[Anonymous No.2686685]

>>2686681
More proof misogynists are irrational emotional illogical nerds.

[Anonymous No.2686701]

feminist theory is neat

[Anonymous No.2686723]

>>2686685

>implying the opposite camp doesn't do precisely the same thing in anti-feminist (or whatever you want to call them) threads

All of you are retarded.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.2686996]

fuck yeah

[Anonymous No.2686997]

>>2686996

Go away, fake butterfag.

[Anonymous No.2689371]

bamp

[Anonymous No.2689376]

Good thread.

[Anonymous No.2689380]

>>2686348
>your

[Anonymous No.2689388]

>>2686361
initiating a divorce doesn't confer responsibility.

rather than tediously respond to every picture, I'll just assume they use similar fallacious arguments.

>>>/Jealous neckbeards general/

[Anonymous No.2689393]

Since this is /lit/ and all...

[Anonymous No.2689445]

>>2686328

How could you possibly know that they are not dumb?

[Anonymous No.2689464]

[Anonymous No.2689466]

>>2689464
wait. who said licking a toilet seat was like philosophy? oh yeah, no one.

please learn to understand things completely rather than reductively.

[Anonymous No.2689467]

>>2689466
sasha grey enjoys drinking human urine

[Anonymous No.2689515]

>>2689464
Much as i support your argument... The toilet seat is up. Try again.

[Anonymous No.2689516]

i'm kind of getting tired of feminism seeing it become more of an identity politics rather than the light of reason

[Anonymous No.2689520]

>>2689516
>i'm kind of getting tired of feminism seeing it become more of an identity politics rather than the light of reason
What? If you don't support our cause, I will get my tits out and protest.

[Anonymous No.2689527]

>>2689520
>Implying that American feminists look like that

Pic related

[Anonymous No.2689537]

>>2689527
Oh dear God, that's horrible.

Check out the feminist on the right.

[Anonymous No.2689538]

>>2689467
yeah there's a lot of people who are into some whacky shit, more outrageous than anything she's done. That doesn't change who they are. it doesn't affect most of their personality or any other aspect of their existence. it doesn't affect how they are perceived. unless of course you're sexist. Seriously this attitude would only be put towards a woman.

[Anonymous No.2689546]

>>2686386
This one genuinely drives me crazy. There is no need for this. It frustrates me when ignorant men adopt this view as well. Either don't hit people, or hit people. Fuck them if they're a woman. If they want equality they should get it. In the fucking face.

[Anonymous No.2689559]

>>2689546
Right. Even as a woman, I support the idea that when someone is a proper bitch, they need to be backhanded, if it's a guy or a girl. You shouldn't be able to hide behind your gender to be a complete royal fucking asshole.

[Anonymous No.2689561]

>>2689537
>male feminists

ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.2689566]

>>2689537
French version of Brownbear on the right there.

[Anonymous No.2689622]

shit this thread's intense

guaranteed 150+ replies every single time

Every angry post you make in this thread is like screaming to the world that you're ugly and alone.

Good thing I'm a cute girl and I get all the jobs and all the guys I want.