[ 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: 863 KB, 1748x1816, 1339058861843.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2784863 No.2784863[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Are there any good writings (I'm thinking academic of philosophical stuff; but feel free to throw anything into the ring here) about sexuality written in the last 50 years that aren't tainted by feminism (or bored and horny religious women)? Point me to 'em, /lit/.

>> No.2784868
File: 39 KB, 697x197, respechahand.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2784868

>>2784863
The whole OP is poorly formulated and written. I apologise. You get the gist, though.

>> No.2784867

Lolita. Lo-lee-ta.

Lo. Lee. Ta.

>> No.2784873

Read Foucault on sexuality.

Also, don't confuse your idea of feminism with all ideas on feminism. Read The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir.

>> No.2784869

>>2784867
>check

Anything else?

>> No.2784876

>>2784873
De Beauvoir's writings are mainly interesting as historical documents--they have little to do with reality.

Also, she is very much tainted by feminism.

>> No.2784877

>>2784867
Wrong

It is lol-uh-tah

>> No.2784879

>>2784876
You fucking cunt, not all of feminism is bad.
What are you? An MRA?

>> No.2784889

>>2784879
Obvious troll is obvious.

>> No.2784890

If you want legitimate knowledge about human sexuality, cognitive science and neuroscience are sufficiently untainted that you can depend on them.

Read textbooks and journals - it's the feminist postmodernists who rely on hero worship and therefore need to reference individual authors like Lacan and Foucault, whose opinions are based more on a desire to further their political ideology than a search for actual truth.

>> No.2784891

Feminism does not mean women's rights. Please educate yourself.

>> No.2784893

>>2784889
0/10

>> No.2784894

>>2784890
>cognitive science and neuroscience are sufficiently untainted that you can depend on them.
>Read textbooks and journals

Any recommendations?

>> No.2784901

>>2784879

Dear Anon,

Welcome to 4chan. Please be aware that on these boards feminism is a Jewish plot to destroy civilization, niggers are not technically human, and anyone to the left of Genghis Khan is a communist.

Yours sincerely,

Anon

>> No.2784912

>>2784890
You're judging on who wants to know the truth more than others. Think about it, man. Biased as fuck.

>> No.2784918

>>2784912
whatthefuckamIreading.jpg

>> No.2784923

>>2784863
I am canning myself. Corey in OP's pic always gets to me, every single time.

>> No.2784928

Somebody answer the OP already.............................................................................................
............................................

>Lolita
>Foucault's Sexual thing (it really doesn't have any feminism in it?)
>[?]
>[?]
>[?]
>[?]

>> No.2784930

>>2784923
Jon is super cute.

No homo.

>> No.2784975

>Implying sexuality can not be tainted by feminism

>> No.2784992

>>2784930
What is a mack daddy?

>> No.2784995

>>2784992
A pimp, I think.

>> No.2785009

Nothing written since about 1970 could ignore feminism, so you are either asking for literature from 1962 to 1970, or literature that -- in your subjective opinion -- mentions feminism but is not "tainted" by it.
Maybe you could expand on what you mean by "tainted", and then we could try to think of works that fit your criteria.

>> No.2785010
File: 14 KB, 380x283, GeorgesBataille.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2785010

Prepare for the strangest literature experience of your life.

>> No.2785012

For Money or Love: Boy Prostitution in America

by Robin Lloyd

>> No.2785377

>>2785009
>Maybe you could expand on what you mean by "tainted", and then we could try to think of works that fit your criteria.

Something that doesn't believe that patriarchy is the root of all the evils that have befallen everybody/women.
Something that doesn't believe there is such a thing as "the patriarchy" and instead realises that women have always been co-creators in their own destinies, and that therefore if women are a certain way sexually, it's because they steered themselves/their group in that direction.
Something that doesn't assume that non-heterosexual experiences and situations have anything in common with feminism.
Something that doesn't assume that race relations have anything in common with gender relations.
Etc.

Help, /lit/. Thank you.

>> No.2785382

>>2785377

only reading stuff that confirms beliefs you alreay hold is a good way to go through life

>> No.2785391

>>2785382
I've already read all the feminist works I can bear. Which is why I would like a different take on things now.

>> No.2785421

Houellebecq is pretty good

>> No.2785422

>>2785382

Also, I used to consider myself a feminist (although, somewhere, there was this feeling that it didn't all quite add up; I couldn't feel any of this mystical superiority I apparently held) until just a few months ago, when I realised how much bullshit it all was.

>> No.2785424

>>2785421
It's always the French, innit? I love those guys. No homo.

>> No.2785443

Okay, so I've got

Nabokov (check)
Houellebecq (on the way to check)
Foucault's Sexual thing (maybe)

Anything else.

>> No.2785480

>>2785443
imcurious2.bump

>> No.2785568

I've heard that Twilight and 50 Shades are pretty untainted by feminism.

>> No.2785594

>>2785480
metoo.tif

>> No.2785627

>>2785568
I don't want anything written by lonely, horny housewives either. I want some man/lit/, or neuter/lit/, basically.

>> No.2785691

Is /lit/ telling me there is almost nothing that's been written in the past 50 years that hasn't a) been tainted by feminism, or b) been tainted by lonely, poorly-educated women?

>> No.2785713

today's sex is rather tainted by tasteless and violent pornography (or infantile and inexperienced heterosexual males) than by feminists

>> No.2785726

Jack Donovan

>> No.2785728

>>2785713
>tainted
>not improved
>tfw females these days consider it a duty to let you do to them what happens in pornography

Praise the Marquis.

>> No.2785729

>>2785713
not what the op asked and therefore irrelevant

>> No.2785739

>>2785726
>Jack Donovan

That seems a lot like what I was looking for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Donovan

Thanks dude.

This thread is finally in incline mode. More contributions, please and thank you!

>> No.2785848

foucault's history of sexuality vol 1 (the only one that really matters)

don't listen to that hater up there, foucault is very rigorous and brings up a lot of original ideas, ones that defy the standard marxist-capitalist ideological battles (which you can tell from the way the left and right reacted to him -- with hostility)

>> No.2785867

>>2785848

Great, thanks. More please.

>> No.2785874

>>2785867

nah dude if you're the type to cry about feminism you won't like foucault

>> No.2786029

>>2785874

feminist foucauldianism came after foucault.

he does do the homosex though

>> No.2786397
File: 974 KB, 200x165, 1324855330407.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2786397

>>2785867
Get some Jared Diamond in your bones son, you'll dig Why is Sex Fun? He takes a biological/anthropological approach to it, as he does with everything. Also, if you want to counter feminist bullshit, read Sperm Wars. You're doing God's work, OP.

>> No.2786575

>>2786397
Okay, more! Thanks! This is turning out to be a good-ish thread.

>> No.2787101

morebump

>> No.2787124

I like this thread. I get enough feminism from all angles everywhere all day. Some man/lit/ or neuter/lit/ is a good idea. More recommendations!