/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3057772]

i'm having trouble encapsulating the essence of being a man. any recommendations of any books that'll help me out in that department?

pic unrelated

[Anonymous No.3057780]

'The Way of the Superior Man' is a good start.

[Anonymous No.3057789]

Beowulf

[Anonymous No.3057795]

'If', by Kipling, is probably the most explicit treatment of the theme. Also, 'adventure stories' written for boys are a good source of conceptualisations of masculinity - 'Treasure Island', 'King Solomon's Mines', 'The Talisman', etc.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.3057796]

>>3057780
Sounds nu-age crystaly.

[Anonymous No.3057811]

Ulysses.

Seriously.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.3057820]

>>3057811
Tennyson's

[Anonymous No.3057826]

>>3057811

Oh please! Joyce is basically Celtic-Catholic-cum-Byronic: he's fundamentally feminine, with High-Modernist machismo borrowed from Wyndham-Lewis.

[Anonymous No.3057851]

Andrea Dworkin had some good ideas.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.3057860]

>>3057826
Ah, you have a preconceived notion of what it is to be a man, do tell OP the finest in machismo-lit.

[Anonymous No.3057865]

>>3057820

Homer's.

[Anonymous No.3057870]

Faulkner, Hemingway, Breece D'J Pancake...

[Anonymous No.3057875]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Way-of-Men-ebook/dp/B007O0Y1ZE

[Anonymous No.3057900]

The Iliad
The Odyssey

Nothing else compares.

[Anonymous No.3057904]

In during the cultural construction of gender.

[Anonymous No.3057916]

mishima's "sun and steel" and his annotations to hagakure "hagakure nyumon"

[Anonymous No.3057921]

>>3057904

biology constructs culture

[Anonymous No.3057927]

>>3057921
Not even Althusser is naïve enough to think that.

Biology is so fundamentally intermediated that you may as well say that the laws governing sub-atomic particle formation construct culture.

[Anonymous No.3057937]

>>3057927

biology weights the chances of cultural structures emerging

[Anonymous No.3057948]

>>3057937
Wow, you mean the capacity for language calls forth language. Bullshit, you're trying to establish the grounds of a racialist argument. That shit does not fly, sir.

[Anonymous No.3057954]

>>3057927
>>3057937
yes it does, but that doesn't mean that you can use biology to justify specific cultural features, esp ones that aren't universal across cultures and across times

which is what everyone who talks about evo-psych or wtf ever wants to do

[Anonymous No.3057976]

don't respond
don't acknowledge
let the tumblr shitposting bleed

[Anonymous No.3058017]

>>3057948
>discarding an argument because it might imply something that isn't socially acceptable in liberal arts circles

[Anonymous No.3058104]

The essence of being a man is to give your life for women. Remember, you are expendable. You should get a job that benefits society and forward the benefit of your labours to a woman. In the event that women appear in danger you should protext them regardless of the cost.

[Anonymous No.3058106]

>>3058104

no it means finding glory in battle and killing the men who try to steal your women

see homer

[Anonymous No.3058110]

You are doing it wrong. Try being a great human instead.

[Anonymous No.3058183]

>>3058110
OP here, found winner

[Anonymous No.3058218]

>>3058110
Ding ding ding.

[Anonymous No.3058249]

>>3058110
/thread

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.3058707]

The Hero with a Thousand Faces, by Joseph Campbell, of course! (Or pretty much anything else by him is great)

Its all very much there. I'm almost ashamed I didn't post this first. But as I said, I've been ill.

[Anonymous No.3058793]

>>3057927
don't buy into that bullshit field that is western sociology. claiming everything as a social construct is silly at best and shows a fundamental lack of scientific knowledge, or too many soft science courses.

it's on the level of new age crystal mysticism shit

[Anonymous No.3058816]

>>3058110

Faggotry.

[Anonymous No.3058848]

Try the Republic. Looking at thexwesterb tradit. Through lock to your's truly, the western literary cannon, I don't think we've gotten out if the tail-spin of the Greek dark ages.
However this is a very nietzchean viewpoint, and a Socratic one of man being a political animal. That is to say you'll need your armor, and you've come to the right place.

[Anonymous No.3058888]

>>3057772
Unless you want to resort to essentialism, I suggest you abandon the belief that there exists this thing x such that x is the essence of a man.

P.S. google problems with essentialism.

[Anonymous No.3058897]

Do you mean "man" as in masculinity or in the broader sense of humanity?

[Anonymous No.3058937]

>>3058848

>thexwesterb tradit
>lock
>your's
>literary cannon
>nietzchean

hoo boy.

'political animal' is an Aristotelian concept, btw

>>3058888
>Unless you want to resort to essentialism

>2012
>existentialism

[Anonymous No.3058946]

who gives a fuck about being a "man" or retarded shit such as masculinity/femininity

we individual now

[Anonymous No.3058949]

>>3058937
I wrote essentialism? Existentialism is irrelevant to my point.

[Anonymous No.3058952]

>>3058897
Man is inseparable from masculinity.

[Anonymous No.3058955]

>>3058952
>implying the word "man" hasn't been used to refer to "mankind" or "humanity" since for fucking ever

[Anonymous No.3058963]

>>3058946
Concepts of masculine and feminine are largely tied to biological differences between men and women.

>>3058955
I thought you were being a starbucks hipster crying about how gender is a social construct.

[Anonymous No.3058967]

>>3058963
>I thought you were being a starbucks hipster crying about how gender is a social construct.
I think it is in major part. Note that "social construct" doesn't inherently mean "bad." I'm not going to get into my views on gender here, but when I was asking OP I was simply asking for clarification.

[Anonymous No.3058970]

>>3058963
>privilege

[Anonymous No.3058973]

>>3058963
>Concepts of masculine and feminine are largely tied to biological differences between men and women.
Then OP shouldn't have to try.

[Anonymous No.3058979]

>>3058963
>be a radical queer
>rage at that image
>mfw people think a rich gay guy is less privileged than a poor black woman
>mfw people think gay marriage is more important than poverty
LITTLE JIM WHO JUST GOT KICKED OUT OF HIS HOUSE BECAUSE DAD FOUND OUT HE LIKES DICK IS NOT GOING TO BE COMFORTED BY THE FACT THAT HE COULD LEGALLY GET MARRIED. GET YOUR FUCKING PRIORITIES STRAIGHT.

Fuck.

[Anonymous No.3058982]

>>3058979
Centrist here. I think you're a pretty cool person.

[Anonymous No.3058987]

>>3058973
What if he was punished for expressing male instincts during childhood?

[Anonymous No.3058994]

>>3058973
Wrong, just because every man isn't Clint Eastwood doesn't mean a thing. Testosterone is to "masculinity" as estrogen(and a lack of significant levels of testosterone) is to "femininity".

[Anonymous No.3058998]

>>3058979
>be "progressive"
>think that poverty is a great evil in the world, socially constructed by rich straight white Christian men.
>deny that poverty will continue to exist long after your death, and that "spreading the wealth around" will slow the same progress that pulled the now developed world out of poverty in the first place.

[Anonymous No.3059012]

>>3058998
N-NO SHUT UP COMMUNISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED YOU STUPID FUCKING BOURGEOIS CAPITALIST

[Anonymous No.3059018]

>>3058994
>Prepubescent child claims to be "gay"
>Taking him seriously

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

[Anonymous No.3059020]

>>3058110
This isn't Reddit. We don't need your safe, twitter level politically correct responses.

[Anonymous No.3059024]

>>3059018
Many gay men claim to have known since they were children.

[Anonymous No.3059026]

>>3059018
Society is decaying.

[Anonymous No.3059027]

>>3059024

Seven year-old children aren't sexually attracted to anything, dipshit.

[Anonymous No.3059028]

>>3059024
>pedophilia is wrong because before puberty kids have no idea about sex and can't understand it!!!
>lel I knew I wanted to fuck guys since I was 4

[Anonymous No.3059029]

>>3058998
It's a bit more complicated than that. Attempting to help the poor is not equivalent to setting up a bolshevik party.

[Anonymous No.3059031]

>>3059026
Homosexuals should not be allowed to raise children.

[Anonymous No.3059032]

>>3059026
Decaying? So you'd consider that worse than institutionalized racism, homophobia, sexism, and nationalism? Not on par with, but worse?

[Anonymous No.3059033]

>>3059026

...I'm moving to Saudi Arabia.

[Anonymous No.3059034]

[Anonymous No.3059038]

>>3059032
Racism, sexism, homophobia and nationalism are all natural human behaviors. It's funny how liberals think we've evolved significantly since our hunter-gatherer days. It doesn't work like that.

So, in short, absolutely.

[Anonymous No.3059039]

>>3059032
Nationalism isn't a bad thing you indoctrinated vagina.

[Anonymous No.3059040]

>>3059027
>>3059028
Sexual identity is more complicated than "hurrrrri wanna fuq somethin." Children psychologists realize that most boys, from a very young age, interact with girls very differently from how they interact with other boys

[Anonymous No.3059041]

>>3059040
If so, why aren't the pushing for the legalization of pedophilia? Either kids are devoid of sexuality, or they aren't.

[Anonymous No.3059042]

>>3059038
Fucking members of your own gender is also quite a natural human behavior. Why are you working from the assumption that every negative aspect of human nature shouldn't be at least partially mitigated?

[Anonymous No.3059046]

>>3059032

Yes. Though not as bad as liberal democracy or the rise to prominence of the sort of materialist-reductionist ideologies that inaugurated this decay in the first place.

>homophobia
>sexism

These labels are generally applied to attitudes and behaviors that aren't real problems in the first place.

[Anonymous No.3059048]

>>3059038
Violently murdering other people is also natural, but it's not looked nicely upon nowadays.

[Anonymous No.3059049]

>>3059041
Because their brains aren't fully developed and they can't reasonably say 'yes' or 'no' to someone in a position of power. Are you being deliberately autistic?

[Anonymous No.3059058]

>>3059046
>inaugurated... in the first place.

I herped

[Anonymous No.3059059]

>>3059049
he just wants an excuse to fuck kids

[Anonymous No.3059061]

>>3059046
>not as bad as liberal democracy
Which form of government would you prefer?

[Anonymous No.3059064]

>>3059049
>MUH POWER STRUCTURE

Bosses are in a position of power over their secretaries, should sex between then be illegal as well. Also, you are coming at this from quite a puritanically perspective, and are looking at sex as something vile and wrong instead of something that's mutually enjoyable. Who are you to tell a child what they should and shouldn't want to do with their own bodies, fascist?

[Anonymous No.3059068]

>>3059049
>Because their brains aren't fully developed

The brain doesn't stop developing until what, 25?

[Anonymous No.3059079]

>>3059064
>Bosses are in a position of power over their secretaries, should sex between then be illegal as well
No, but it's usually looked down upon.
>Who are you to tell a child what they should and shouldn't want to do with their own bodies
Society has agreed that children don't have free agency to do as they wish, they need to be told what to do from someone in a position of authority. Due to their undeveloped brains they can't reasonably make a decision like who to have sex with. There's also the fact that, pre-puberty, they don't get pleasure from sex.

[Anonymous No.3059080]

>>3059064
you're still being purposely dense so you can continue to believe it should be okay to want to act on the compulsion to fuck kids, or you're stupid. you purposefully sidestepped the issue that their brains aren't fully developed in the same way an adult's is

also knowing you "like" somebody isn't the same as knowing or wanting to fuck. I don't know about you but I didn't want to fuck until I was around 13 or 14

>>3059068
I see what you're trying to do but you're trying to compare I to II, and that's not similar. best graph I could improvise

[Anonymous No.3059086]

>>3059068
The difference in brain power between a 16 year-old and a 25 year-old is quite minor compared to the difference between a 6 year-old and a 16 year-old.

[Anonymous No.3059093]

>>3059079
>Society has agreed that children don't have free agency to do as they wish
>Society has agreed that African slaves don't have free agency to do as they wish

You're basing the morality of something on laws? The average person isn't capable of much critical thinking.

>There's also the fact that, pre-puberty, they don't get pleasure from sex.

Penetrative sex? Of course not. But that does not mean they don't feel sexual pleasure, children start masturbating as toddlers.

[Anonymous No.3059100]

inb4 FBI

[Anonymous No.3059108]

>>3059093
No, it's more of a biological fact than a legal one. Children are dependent on their parents for survival. Their reasoning capacities aren't developed, so they need someone to tell them what to do.

>children start masturbating as toddlers.
They play with their genitals, but that's quite different from masturbating to achieve orgasm.

[Anonymous No.3059111]

>>3059108
>It's a biological fact that children don't have free agency to do as they wish.

uwotm8

[Anonymous No.3059112]

>>3059093
Why did /pol/ turn so quickly into pedophilia

[Anonymous No.3059113]

>>3059112
cums with the territory

[Anonymous No.3059123]

>>3059108
>Children are dependent on their parents for survival. Their reasoning capacities aren't developed, so they need someone to tell them what to do.

"Don't touch the stove, it's hot." is quite different from "Don't have sex, because the lord Jesus Christ says it's wrong." Regardless, I'm not arguing that parents shouldn't be able to decide what's best for their children, but rather that laws against adult-child sex are an example of the government forcing their morality on people.

>They play with their genitals, but that's quite different from masturbating to achieve orgasm.

If you're not aware, most females don't achieve orgasm from vaginal intercourse. That's completely irrelevant, the discussion was about sexual pleasure which children do indeed feel.

[Anonymous No.3059126]

>>3059111
No, it's a biological fact that children are highly suggestible and necessarily adhere to their parent's authority because otherwise they'd walk straight into a tiger's mouth.

[Anonymous No.3059127]

>>3058104
Butthurt misogynistic strawmanning

I don't have to listen to you

[Anonymous No.3059129]

>>3059126
Sex isn't harmful.

[Anonymous No.3059134]

>>3059012
Not pictured: Everyone who is above average being forced to work in shitty jobs along with the rest of the mouthbreathers.

[Anonymous No.3059138]

>>3059123
>"Don't have sex, because the lord Jesus Christ says it's wrong."
Why are you ignoring the various negative psychological effects pedophilia has on the victim?

>the discussion was about sexual pleasure which children do indeed feel.
That's not a fact though

[Anonymous No.3059142]

>Ginsberg expressed the opinion that the appreciation of youthful bodies and "the human form divine" has been a common theme throughout the history of culture, "from Rome's Vatican to Florence's Uffizi galleries to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art", and that laws regarding the issue needed to be more openly discussed, telling an interviewer "to label pedophilia as criminal is ridiculous."

[Anonymous No.3059143]

>>3059031
Shocking statistic, need source!

[Anonymous No.3059146]

>>3059080
Bad graph, but I agree with you

>I SHOULD BE ABLE TO FUCK KIDS BECAUSE /I/ WANT TO AND THEY MIGHT WANT TO EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK SEX IS
>>3059086
Exactly.

[Anonymous No.3059149]

>>3059129
Rape is. Forcing someone to have sex isn't very different from forcing someone who's highly suggestible and can't reasonably give consent to have sex.

[Anonymous No.3059150]

>>3059142
>pedophilia has been taboo throughout every single human culture in history
>now it's ridiculous to consider it so

[Anonymous No.3059154]

>>3059061

idk exactly, but one with a more solid foundation than the mercurial, myopic, easily-manipulated will of the masses.

[Anonymous No.3059157]

>>3059138
>Why are you ignoring the various negative psychological effects pedophilia has on the victim?

Moving the goalposts I see. Alright. Do you really believe that if a man and a young girl lived in a forest removed from society, that a consensual sexual relationship would be psychologically harmful? We live in a society that demonizes child sexuality, is it surprising that in such a society children are indeed traumatized? Your utter disregard for pedophilia throughout history is stunning. Samurai took young boys as their apprentices and had sexual relationships, yet shockingly they didn't end up cutting their wrists and listening to linkin park.

For a board that prides themselves on thinking outside the box, you sure are close-minded.

>That's not a fact though
Yeah, it is. Touching your genitals prior to puberty provides sexual pleasure, and kids masturbate as toddlers. These are documented facts, look it up yourself.

[Anonymous No.3059158]

>>3059157
The thing is, until we get an argument that doesn't come from a pedophile, we must ALWAYS err on the side of caution.

[Anonymous No.3059169]

>>3059149
>forcing

Nobody is talking about forcing anything, stop strawmanning. Sexual relationships that provide mutual pleasure for both parties, the adult and the child, are not evil or wrong. In 100 years people will look back on you all just as we look at homophobes.

[Anonymous No.3059182]

>>3059169
laughing my butt off. the elaborate mental gymnastics these sperg pedos are going through. b-but I want to fuck toddlers they'd probably like it and 100% of all child abuse totally doesn't harm the child psychologically

[Anonymous No.3059184]

>>3059158
If a black man was talking about racial discrimination, would you also err on the side of caution? The only difference is that you personally see one viewpoint as valid and the other is taboo.

[Anonymous No.3059190]

>>3059182
Compelling argument. I remember when I was in high school.

[Anonymous No.3059199]

>>3059157
How is that moving the goalpost? If you accept the premise that pedophilia has negative psychological effects on the child, then it's morally wrong to be a pedophile.

>Do you really believe that if a man and a young girl lived in a forest removed from society, that a consensual sexual relationship would be psychologically harmful?
How can anyone, including you, possibly know the answer to this? Any would just be speculation. Everything we do is within the context of a society. We can't remove ourselves from our milieu

>Samurai took young boys as their apprentices and had sexual relationships
And we live in a more enlightened age. Ritualistic suicide was also part of their repertoire.

>and kids masturbate as toddlers
It's stimulation, but it isn't sexual like the term 'masturbation' implies.

[Anonymous No.3059201]

>>3059169
The vast majority of children who are victims of pedophilia don't get any enjoyment out of the sexual acts. I'll stop strawmmaning when you stop inventing scenarios.

[Anonymous No.3059217]

time 4 Sotos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IybFMNFOfpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4X3iUsAcXI

[Anonymous No.3059222]

>>3059199
>If you accept the premise that pedophilia has negative psychological effects on the child

In the past a homosexual man who engaged in a sex act with a man might feel disgusted with himself, since he lived in a society that demonized such behavior. Now multiply the reaction by 1000 and you'll have the level of trauma our society forces on children.

>How can anyone, including you, possibly know the answer to this? Any would just be speculation. Everything we do is within the context of a society. We can't remove ourselves from our milieu

Yes, how could one possibly remove themselves from social norms for a second and think about things critically? To think the scenario I described would be harmful would be indicative of severe delusions and/or media brainwashing.

>And we live in a more enlightened age.

This isn't a rebuttal. People like you believe sex with children is intrinsically harmful and wrong, but that's demonstrably false if you take a look at history. This relates to the above point.

>It's stimulation, but it isn't sexual like the term 'masturbation' implies.

They touch their genitals for pleasure. Your original assertion that children cannot feel sexual pleasure before puberty is flat wrong.

>>3059201
Child molester =/= pedophile.

[Anonymous No.3059229]

In the future we will discover the the most virulent haters of pedophiles are actually pedophiles themselves with latent urges. Much like the homophobes on today.

[Anonymous No.3059231]

>>3058963
>Concepts of masculine and feminine are largely tied to biological differences between men and women.

You only believe this because you're a contrarian and secretly a misogynist.

>implying i still give a fuck about being masculine or feminine and not just do what i want

fuck off sociopath

also cant into reading comprehension as well, you're probably a determinist too, RETARD

[Anonymous No.3059234]

>>3058994
>estosterone is to "masculinity" as estrogen(and a lack of significant levels of testosterone) is to "femininity".

Has never been 100% proved. fuck off with your evo psych and come back with personality studies based on neuroscience and not retard shit such as test or est levels you stereotypist

[Anonymous No.3059236]

>>3059026
Fuck society, jesus freak.

[Anonymous No.3059237]

>>3059231
>>3059234
>>3059236

[Anonymous No.3059239]

>>3059038
>naturalistic fallacy

[Anonymous No.3059240]

[Anonymous No.3059244]

>>3059236

[Anonymous No.3059247]

>>3059038
being tolerant of intolerance isn't how tolerance works
sheesh

[Anonymous No.3059250]

>>3059239
>biologists denounce the Naturalistic Fallacy because they want to describe the natural world honestly, without people deriving morals about how we ought to behave

Liberals just got butthurt when people started questioning the arbitrary line drawn between humans and animals.

[Anonymous No.3059252]

>>3059247
>Tolerance or toleration a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own

[Anonymous No.3059253]

Funny, the indoctrination went so deep that once you became atheists you still couldn't shake off all the other values than the existence of God.

so you use bullshit science to justify your irrational and illogical evangelical values

[Anonymous No.3059254]

>>3059250
you're the one angrily spamming lazy strawmen

[Anonymous No.3059256]

>>3059038

Yeah fuck progress lets go back to the stone age and kill each other.

[Anonymous No.3059257]

>>3059253
That's why I find the prominence of blind humanism among atheists amusing.

[Anonymous No.3059259]

>>3059256
What you call "progress" is just people being forced to hide their true opinions. We haven't evolved significantly since the stone age.

inb4 tabula rasa

[Anonymous No.3059262]

>>3059252
still not how it works
get a load of this autist

[Anonymous No.3059264]

>>3059259
holy fuck you are retarded

[Anonymous No.3059265]

>>3059222

>To think the scenario I described would be harmful
That wasn't even implied in what I said. I just said it's an empty exercise that would be heavily subjective and inclined towards bias

>but that's demonstrably false if you take a look at history
We don't know that. Psychology is a modern science, we have a better notion of how something effects someone than the ancients did. Their histories are shrouded in bias. By that logic, history also tell us that most societies abhorred sexual behavior with pre-pubescents. And most societies practiced slavery, and many human sacrifice. That type of justification is flawed.

>They touch their genitals for pleasure.
That isn't necessarily sexual pleasure, it could just be tactile pleasure. You wouldn't call teething a precursor to oral sex, would you?

[Anonymous No.3059273]

>>3059257
>2012
>bragging about being a sociopath

[Anonymous No.3059284]

>>3059265
>That wasn't even implied in what I said.

I'm glad you agree.

>By that logic, history also tell us that most societies abhorred sexual behavior with pre-pubescents. And most societies practiced slavery, and many human sacrifice. That type of justification is flawed.

This is why I thought about adding a disclaimer saying "I am not saying that because it happened at some point in history it is alright, but rather that from history we can see that in some societies that did engage in adult-child relationships there is no record of widespread childhood trauma. This goes against the claim that sexual relationships with children are intrinsically harmful."

I guess I should have.

>That isn't necessarily sexual pleasure, it could just be tactile pleasure.

They derive sexual pleasure from rubbing their genitals, this is masturbation. Your deliberate refusal to accept this reality reveals the extent of your brainwashing.

Mara thread.

[Anonymous No.3059285]

>>3059259
I really, truly hope you aren't this retarded.

[Anonymous No.3059291]

>>3059285
>>3059264

Samefagging is not going to change reality. Ethnocentrism and tribal behavior has not magically vanished after years of evolution just because the views of society changed. It's just suppressed.

[Anonymous No.3059293]

>>3059284
>They derive sexual pleasure from rubbing their genitals
Unlike you, I have a good memory and it was in fact tactile pleasure, not sexual.

[Anonymous No.3059295]

>>3059291
You best run those two posts through a samefag checker.

[Anonymous No.3059296]

>>3059291
Go read your bible and stay away from Darwin if you cant understand him, little boy.

[Anonymous No.3059298]

>>3059291

holy fuck, i'm a feminist but these pictures piss me off

[Anonymous No.3059301]

>>3059296
I'm quite familiar with Darwin, kiddo. Maybe you should do some reading.

[Anonymous No.3059303]

>>3059301
Where do you live?

[Anonymous No.3059305]

>>3059293
>but my anecdotes!

I don't care. Children masturbate, it's time to face the facts grandpa.

[Anonymous No.3059306]

>>3059237
>>3059240
>>3059250
>>3059259
props to someone so indoctrinated that statements they don't agree with become arguments against themselves

I don't understand though, are people advocating for universal consent or whatever also saying children should be allowed to sign contracts and go to work? The historical appeals don't really make sense because it wasn't like the children were consenting so much as the parents were sending them off to pederasts or whatever. The child wanting it had very little to do with it, even if it is true that they didn't feel they were being molested.

[Anonymous No.3059309]

>>3059305
Where are those "facts'?

[Anonymous No.3059312]

>>3057772
You know that feel when you've drunk a lot of water and you about to burst and you're driving home as fast as you can and you get to the toilet and throw off your pants and piss for what seems like hours and you never want it to end? That's being a man.

[Anonymous No.3059314]

>>3059309
You see, gramps, we have this thing called google where you can find information all by yourself.

http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/masturb.htm

[Anonymous No.3059316]

>>3059312
gay

[Anonymous No.3059318]

>>3059284
>I'm glad you agree.
Yes, I think that discussions are necessary rather than harmful. Don't play this up as some sort of agreement between us.

>there is no record of widespread childhood trauma.
That doesn't mean anything. There could have been trauma that went unrecorded, or maybe just acute trauma that found violent outlets, or maybe adult-child relationships were just extremely rare. There's a fallacy somewhere in that argument...

>They derive sexual pleasure from rubbing their genitals
The pleasure a child feels when touching a body part isn't the same type of stimulation an adult receives from masturbation. Using the term 'sexual pleasure' in that case would be contorting the usual definition of 'sexual'

[Anonymous No.3059326]

>>3059301
>"The blacks, those magnificent examples of the African race who have conserved their racial purity by a lack of affinity with washing, have seen their patch invaded by a different kind of slave: The Portuguese. These two races now share a common experience, fraught with bickering and squabbling. Discrimination, and poverty unite them in a daily battle for survival but their different attitudes to life separate them completely: the black is indolent and fanciful, he spends his money on frivolity and drink; the European comes from a tradition of working and saving which follows him to this corner of America and drives him to get ahead, even independently, of his own individual aspirations."

Che was referring to black South Americans culturally, not racially. He opposed racism wherever he saw it, and pushed for desegregating Cuban schools before the revolution.

[Anonymous No.3059331]

>>3059318
>Don't play this up as some sort of agreement between us.

A young girl and a man have a consensual sexual relationship in a log cabin removed from society. You honestly believe that this loving relationship would bring the young girl extreme psychological trauma?

I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.

>That doesn't mean anything. There could have been trauma that went unrecorded, or maybe just acute trauma that found violent outlets, or maybe adult-child relationships were just extremely rare. There's a fallacy somewhere in that argument
>I-It could of happened even though there is no evidence of it whatsoever! Cognitive dissonance? What is that?

>The pleasure a child feels when touching a body part isn't the same type of stimulation an adult receives from masturbation. Using the term 'sexual pleasure' in that case would be contorting the usual definition of 'sexual'

Your semantic argument is filled with desperation. Children masturbate by rubbing their genitals for pleasure, that's a fact. Go ahead and try to rationalize this to fit your narrow worldview, though.

To claim child abuse is harmful in a society that demonizes child sexuality means nothing. /lit/ is usually good at looking at things from an outside point of view, but I guess that stops when their emotions get involved. You're no better than people protesting interracial marriage and homosexuality. The public always needs an enemy, and currently pedophiles are public enemy #1.

Mara reading a book.

[Anonymous No.3059335]

>>3059284
>>3059331
moar mara

[Anonymous No.3059336]

>>3059335
Mara with uncle Adolf.

[Anonymous No.3059338]

Mara sleeping.

[Anonymous No.3059339]

>>3059331
>>3059336
backstory on mara?

[Anonymous No.3059341]

Mara standing by a wall with a chubby tummy.

[Anonymous No.3059342]

Mara holding her feet.

[Anonymous No.3059347]

>>3059331
Not your argument buddy but something tells me you're a pedo. Anyways...

>A young girl and a man have a consensual sexual relationship in a log cabin removed from society. You honestly believe that this loving relationship would bring the young girl extreme psychological trauma? I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.
You ever had a relationship with a woman? Children aren't capable of being involved relationship and that comes with it. A relationship besides mentorship that is, notice how pederasty is more common than out and out pedophilia. Even if children capable of having a relationship, you cannot deny that children are weak and vulnerable and given how many time adult relationships go to shit how bad do you think a pedo relationship could get? The example you postulate is airy bullshit, no relationship is so pure. I won't beat around the bush anymore, anyone seriously interested in children in an sexual is fucked up in the head. They want to love and fuck some defenseless kid and they couldn't care less what the child thinks about it or even if the child is capable of making a choice.

[Anonymous No.3059348]

>>3059331
>You honestly believe that this loving relationship would bring the young girl extreme psychological trauma?
You can't remove society from the equation; nearly everything we do we do in relation to other people.

>I-It could of happened even though there is no evidence of it whatsoever!
I said this before: modern psychology is a better method of detecting the causal effects of pedophilia than history books are. Do you not see the flaw in your method of reasoning?

>Children masturbate by rubbing their genitals for pleasure
Again, tactile pleasure isn't sexual pleasure. They're different things. Think of teething.

>You're no better than people protesting interracial marriage and homosexuality.
No, we are. The ability to give consent matters.

[Anonymous No.3059352]

>>3059331
>To claim child abuse is harmful in a society that demonizes child sexuality means nothing
>demonizes child sexuality
Nigga, you ever seen Nickelodeon? You can't possible be serious with this shit.

[Anonymous No.3059355]

>>3059336
>>3059341
>>3059338
Quit with this shit you fucking pedo!

[Anonymous No.3059361]

>Children aren't capable of being involved relationship and that comes with it

[citation needed]

>anyone seriously interested in children in an sexual is fucked up in the head

Compelling argument.

>They want to love and fuck some defenseless kid and they couldn't care less what the child thinks about it or even if the child is capable of making a choice.

[citation needed]

>>3059348
>You can't remove society from the equation; nearly everything we do we do in relation to other people.

>I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.

It's like I'm psychic.

>I said this before: modern psychology is a better method of detecting the causal effects of pedophilia than history books are

Modern psychology as opposed to psychology 40 years ago that deemed homosexuality a mental disease. Your blind faith in the absolute objectivity of modern "science" is frightening. There is absolutely no evidence that sex with children is intrinsically harmful, seeing as these studies were all done in a society that demonizing child sexuality. Not exactly a controlled experiment, now is it?

>Again, tactile pleasure isn't sexual pleasure. They're different things. Think of teething.

Semantics. They derive pleasure from massaging their genitals. This is masturbation.

>No, we are. The ability to give consent matters.

So a child can't give consent to an adult rubbing their genitals in order to give them pleasure, but they can consent to taking hormones that prevent puberty and permanently change their gender? See >>3059026

Mara's face when exposed to your ignorance.

[Anonymous No.3059367]

>>3059355
>Pictures of cute girl doing cute things.

>bawww must b pedo

>>>reddit

[Anonymous No.3059373]

>>3059367

Anyone who has that many pictures of a little girl saved didn't very likely do so for innocent reasons

[Anonymous No.3059375]

>>3059331
>currently pedophiles are public enemy #1
I want /tv/ to go

[Anonymous No.3059378]

>>3059375
I'm from /jp/. My goal is to stop people from bullying pedophiles and hurting their feelings.

[Anonymous No.3059380]

>>3059361
>I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.
I don't accept the fucking premise. I'll say this as simply as I possibly can: It's a ridiculous thought experiment that leaves us nowhere. Any answer given will be colored by bias and lack any real evidence.

>Modern psychology as opposed to psychology 40 years ago that deemed homosexuality a mental disease.
Yes. First, the methods have changed considerably. Second, we're specifically referring to the effects of child molestation on the child, not on definitions of certain mental 'illnesses' which can be rather arbitrary and up for debate.

>Semantics
No, masturbation specifically refers to sexual stimulation. There's a big difference between scratching your gentals and trying to orgasm.

I don't know why I'm arguing along with you and responding to your flawed reasoning. The simple fact is that a child cannot give cannot because the child lacks the ability to reason, therefore it's rape.

[Anonymous No.3059385]

>>3059380
>I don't accept the fucking premise. I'll say this as simply as I possibly can: It's a ridiculous thought experiment that leaves us nowhere. Any answer given will be colored by bias and lack any real evidence.
>I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.
>I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.
>I'm waiting for another question dodging answer.

Looks like I've won.

>Second, we're specifically referring to the effects of child molestation on the child, not on definitions of certain mental 'illnesses' which can be rather arbitrary and up for debate.

Studies show that children raised in an environment that demonizes childhood sexuality, can be traumatized by sex. Is this supposed to be proof of something? That in no way implies that sex with children is inherently wrong, just that it has adverse effects in a society that goes out of a way to emphasize how wrong the experience was.

>No, masturbation specifically refers to sexual stimulation. There's a big difference between scratching your gentals and trying to orgasm.

http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/masturb.htm

It's time to avoiding reality.

>he simple fact is that a child cannot give cannot because the child lacks the ability to reason, therefore it's rape.

I'll post this again since you conveniently ignored it.

So a child can't give consent to an adult rubbing their genitals in order to give them pleasure, but they can consent to taking hormones that prevent puberty and permanently change their gender? See >>3059026

Pedophile: 1
Normal who took a break from blogging on facebook to cry about how pedophile is an injustice: 0

[Anonymous No.3059389]

everyone who posted in this thread should be banned / killed

[Anonymous No.3059391]

>>3059385
>So a child can't give consent to an adult rubbing their genitals in order to give them pleasure, but they can consent to taking hormones that prevent puberty and permanently change their gender?

Don't forget chopping off parts of male babby dicks!

[Anonymous No.3059413]

>>3059385
>all this delusion

[Anonymous No.3059416]

>>3059413
>all this lack of an argument

[Anonymous No.3059417]

>>3059385
>Looks like I've won.
I'm trying my hardest to be cordial, but you're a fucking idiot. If I were to say "yes" to that question, I couldn't back it up with objective evidence. Same with your answer of "no." You can't separate the person from their society just like you can't sperate the mind from the brain.

>Is this supposed to be proof of something?
Yes, it's proof that children raised in an environment that demonizes childhood sexuality can be traumatized by sex with adults. That argument would make more sense if children having sexual contact with other children wasn't incredibly common and didn't usually lead to any later trauma. It isn't the sex part that makes it wrong.

>http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/masturb.htm
While I'd disagree with their definition of masturbation, i'd be willing to concede that. That still says nothing about the ethical implications of child molestation.

I'll post this again: I don't know why I'm arguing along with you and responding to your flawed reasoning. The simple fact is that a child cannot give cannot because the child lacks the ability to reason, therefore it's rape.

I don't think changing the gender of a pre-pubescent boy is okay for similar reasons, but I don't know the details of that case.

[Big **** ************ No.3059465]

>>3058017

lol 5 star post

>>3058104

lol 0 stars

>>3058110

Acknowledging gender differences and even gender at all is important.

>>3058946

We individual's of human nature of the male gender

[Big **** ************ No.3059470]

>>3058973

What if humans are cerebral not-in-perfect-harmony-with-their-instincts creatures?

What if thinking about masculinity is....

Wait. I don't even understand your point?

[Anonymous No.3059473]

>Ctrl + F
>No Wasp Factory
You fucking plebs.

But yeah, read The Wasp Factory is basically the definitive piece of literature on this topic.

[Big **** ************ No.3059487]

>>3059247

I think it is.

[Anonymous No.3059488]

>>3059487
I think you need to shut the fuck up.

[Big **** ************ No.3059500]

>>3059488

lol irony

[Anonymous No.3059687]

sorry man, that cannot be learned reading a book. it is learned collectively in the practice, cause that is the only way it can make sense. you cant make sense of "being a man" in an individual way, cause that is by definition collective. if you try, you'll find nothing to support it.

[Anonymous No.3060371]

>>3059465
>Acknowledging gender differences and even gender at all is important.

No it isn't.

fuck why are you mra types all over 4chan

[Anonymous No.3060615]

Fiscal responsibility and a dick

[Anonymous No.3060630]

Fiscal responsibility is overrated and bullcrap, although that is generally the census people try to agree upon so yea

[Anonymous No.3060639]

Step 1 of being a better human being/man:

get the fuck off 4chan.

Otherwise, you become a keyboard warrior drinking whiskey on his own and sharing his amazing insights with like-minded pieces of shit like him- pieces of shit either because they do nothing and are slugs, or because they are pretentious, or because they are (worst of fucking all) pretentiously unpretentious.

You want the best advice anyone will give you on this site? Fucking leave it. Best thing you can do.

And if you don't, then don't bother asking how to be a man because this isn't the right place to find the answer.

I know this because I am god.