/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.8388571]

Are there any good books about Polyamory /lit/?

I just read the latest article by Laurie Penny and it really made me think...

>"Having been polyamorous for almost a decade, I spend a good deal of time explaining what it all means [...] It’s the conversations. It’s the texts with your girlfriend’s boyfriend about what to get her for her birthday. It’s sharing your Google Calendars to make sure nobody feels neglected."

>"There’s something profoundly millennial about polyamory"

>"People have all sorts of needs through their lives – love, companionship, care and intimacy, sexual adventure and self-expression – and expecting one person to be able to meet all of them is not only unrealistic, it’s unreasonable. Women in particular, who often end up doing most of the emotional labour in conventional, monogamous, heterosexual relationships, don’t have the energy to be anyone’s everything"


http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/08/many-my-fearful-frustrated-generation-having-it-all-means-opting-out-monogamy

[Anonymous No.8388580]

That last quote holy fuck.

[Anonymous No.8388588]

>>8388580
Why are you so shocked? It's 2016.

[Anonymous No.8388591]

Can't you please fucking talk about this in /pol9k/? This isn't literature and you know it.

[Anonymous No.8388595]

>>8388571

you know in the past people were able to share companionship, care and (non-sexual) intimacy with friends.

I feel like that woman has no idea how to make lasting relationships and thinks sex if far, far more important than it is.

[Anonymous No.8388598]

>>8388591
She wrote an article, which is a form of literature. There may be books that go into further detail, which would help OP.

[Anonymous No.8388599]

I'm still blown away by the fact there actually exists men that want to deal with women like this.

[Anonymous No.8388610]

>>8388599
She is merely part of a harem of sub-standard women who exist for the pleasure of a single Chad.

[Anonymous No.8388613]

>>8388610
And yet she feels "empowered" by it.

Ironic.

[Anonymous No.8388616]

>>8388610
Just because she gets banged by Chad and Friends doesn't mean she isn't still good

[Anonymous No.8388618]

>>8388616
Good for what?

[Anonymous No.8388620]

>>8388618
To dump semen I guess

[Anonymous No.8388623]

>Over the past ten years, I have been a “single poly” with no main partner; I have been in three-person relationships; I have had open relationships and have dated people in open marriages. The best parts of those experiences have overwhelmingly been clothed ones.

It sounds like she discovered having friends desu.

[Anonymous No.8388627]

>>8388613
She is empowered by it. I mean I realize it's hard for you to understand, but some of us appreciate the option of expending emotional labour for one man and sexual labour for another. It's only a very rigid and very ancient and outdated form of patriarchal restraint which tells a woman that she must be everything to a single man. If a woman has the choice to spend part of her time with one man who she can discuss nerdy stuff with and even live with but not have sex with, and another part with a man she can relate to on a sexual level, then it's a win-win situation for all involved.

[Anonymous No.8388630]

>>8388571
>>>/r/eddit

[Anonymous No.8388633]

>>8388623
S A V A G E
A
V
A
G
E

It's funny because it's true.

[Anonymous No.8388636]

>>8388627
>I mean I realize it's hard for you to understand, but some of us appreciate the option of expending emotional labour for one man and sexual labour for another
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna%E2%80%93whore_complex
I wonder how it feels, being in your twenties and still mentally a child

[Anonymous No.8388646]

>>8388627
>then it's a win-win situation for all involved.

Doesn't sound like a win-win for the man who doesn't get any pussy.

[Anonymous No.8388647]

She dances around the issue of family and raising children. Is polyamory just for people who don't want kids, or until they do? Or does she think a polyamorous relationship can be a good environment for child-rearing?

Those are genuine questions, I'm not sure what it would look like. Maybe in practice it would just be a single mother with lovers flitting in and out of her life.

[Anonymous No.8388648]

>>8388623
fuuuuuuuuuuck

[Anonymous No.8388653]

>>8388647
>Maybe in practice it would just be a single mother with lovers flitting in and out of her life.
So, the archetypal black family.

[Anonymous No.8388664]

>>8388636
Feels great!

>>8388646
But if he is open-minded and empathetic (a big ask, I know) he will accept that his partner does not see him in that way, and if he truly loves her (or him) he will cherish their conversations and holidays and geek-outs regardless as to whether their relationship is of a sexual nature.

[Anonymous No.8388671]

>>8388664
>But if he is open-minded and empathetic (a big ask, I know) he will accept that his partner does not see him in that way, and if he truly loves her (or him) he will cherish their conversations and holidays and geek-outs regardless as to whether their relationship is of a sexual nature.
So >>8388623 ?

[Anonymous No.8388672]

>>8388664
Look, we all know that you're just memeing. You can drop the act already.

[Anonymous No.8388674]

>>8388647

[Anonymous No.8388677]

>>8388664
You're making me very sad right now. Please stop.

[Anonymous No.8388680]

polyamory never ends well unless it's a man with multiple wives (no one in this sort of relationship would describe it as polyamorous)
if you want proof:
https://www.reddit.com/r/polyamory/
nothing but jealousy and insecurity

[Anonymous No.8388682]

>>8388674
muh anecdote

[Anonymous No.8388683]

>>8388674
I've had my wife's son read this and he really liked it

[Anonymous No.8388684]

>>8388683

[Anonymous No.8388686]

>>8388636
You tell me.

[Anonymous No.8388687]

>>8388674
I really wouldn't trust Laurie Penny's judgement on what is and isn't well adjusted

[Anonymous No.8388695]

>>8388680
>people who read boojs are idiots
>if you want proof:
>https://www.reddit.com/r/books/

[Anonymous No.8388697]

The bonds of marriage make the underclass stronger. We must remove them, like we've removed religion, nation, race. Soon we will live in a world where nobody could have any possible reason to care about one another, and we can all be safely exploited and disposed of as individuals.

It also has the potential to keep men unfit for reproduction from meltdowns by keeping them tied up in sexless pseudo-romantic relationships.

Polyamory is a natural step in underclass dehumanization.

[Anonymous No.8388700]

>>8388680
>people who read books are idiots
>if you want proof:
>https://www.reddit.com/r/books/

[Anonymous No.8388706]

>>8388700
people that read books are idiots though

>>8388687
this
can this thread end and never reappear?
this laurie penny person completely discredits herself, discussion isn't necessary

[Anonymous No.8388717]

>>8388686
OMG BURN xDD
Solving the dicothomy between people to fuck and people to love is part of sexual maturity, but you wouldn't know, like most millennials. No wonder you don't understand how a relationship works.
Keep fucking people to your heart's content, just don't blame others when you can't settle and people see you as human trash, because you brought it upon yourself

[Anonymous No.8388718]

Is Laurie in this thread?

Has someone tweeted it to her?

[Anonymous No.8388721]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj9dA6E3fJw

[Anonymous No.8388725]

>>8388717
>Keep fucking people
Yep that's what I do. Fuck people. All the time. "Old fucker" they call me. I am certainly well experienced in the art of fucking.

[Anonymous No.8388750]

>>8388623
Someone should write it to her

[Anonymous No.8388753]

[Anonymous No.8388763]

>>8388623
Honestly, I feel bad for women because they do tend to do exactly this. It's so easy for them to make "friends" with a guy who just wants to fuck, or who is trying to keep his options open for a fuck, or who just sees having female friends as "Not Being a Loser," that they mistake all sorts of intimacy for real friendship and real appreciation of their company.

Women usually get their main source of real companionship in life from their partner, which is kind of OK but they miss out on the kinds of intense friendships that men can have, which would be undermined by romantic or sexual aspects entering in. And when they're not in a relationship, they kind of hop between fairweather FWBs whose interest in them is obvious.

Women think men who are trying to fuck them telling them they're interesting is genuine. That's just sad as hell.

>The clothed parts of my relationships with people who got to fuck me were the most rewarding :^) I bet Steve enjoyed the clothed parts the most, too!

[Anonymous No.8388769]

There's so much anger and resentment in this thread. Where does it come from? Why do you all care so much? It's honestly confusing.

>>8388717

Posting a link to a WIKI article about bloody "psychoanalytic literature" is probably the least argumentatively compelling thing you could ever do. If you don't understand why then it is certainly you who is the child here, at least in IQ terms.

You literally posted a wiki article about psychoanalytic literature as an argument or a point in a response to a small snippet of quote. It sort of boggles me that you think this is a legitimate tackling of the issue.

[Anonymous No.8388771]

>>8388769
Yeah, I bet they're virgins too. Who hurt them? I bet it's because they can't get laid haha. Only virgins who can't get laid would care so much about another person's behaviour. Ethics is for pathetic virgins. Virgins are so pathetic.

[Anonymous No.8388773]

>>8388697
This.
Her idea of "Polyamory" - or whatever the fuck it is - is a pure product of neoliberalism.

[Anonymous No.8388776]

>>8388771
>it's about ethics in videogame journalism!!!11!!

[Anonymous No.8388777]

>Having been polyamorous for almost a decade
What does it mean? She's a slut?

[Anonymous No.8388778]

>>8388771

lol you got me.

Wait... no.

[Anonymous No.8388783]

I wonder what will happen to her in her late 30s.

[Anonymous No.8388784]

>>8388783
At this pace, a position at the UN and a Nobel peace prize or something like that.

And she'll still be alone and miserable.

[Anonymous No.8388787]

>>8388571
Polyamory must be like having a lot of friends but no truly close friends. You kid yourself into thinking that you have a close intimate relationship with each of your friends but really it doesn't go beyond a few laughs, some conversation, and seeing each other once a week or every few weeks.

>>8388623
Spot on. But hey, she's a "millennial" so of course she needs a new and unnecessary label, what else would she base her identity on?

[Anonymous No.8388794]

>>8388763
>Women usually get their main source of real companionship in life from their partner, which is kind of OK but they miss out on the kinds of intense friendships that men can have
U wot m8? Women typically have more close friends than men. It's more common for men to have their spouse as their only confidant.

[Anonymous No.8388811]

>>8388763
I feel like that's an American problem, at least out of western countries.

[Anonymous No.8388836]

Hey look, another thread where people can't think about polyamory without bringing jealousy and/or cheating into it.

It can be difficult to imagine, even for me, but there are those who make it work. It's not for me, personally. I have issues regarding jealousy, and I'm incredibly possessive too. Still, if the terms of polyamory are made clear before going into it - and people abide by those terms - what's the problem? Of course, if the terms aren't made clear, that's when you get axe murders/etc.

It's easy to confuse or conflate with cheating/etc, as both involve having sex/etc with more than one person, but the context is wildly different.

It's not even comfortable to think about polyamory/etc. But frankly, that's on me. If it works for you, or anyone else, it works.

The trouble arises when people try to 'push' it onto others or society. Same for monogamy. Stop giving a fuck.

[Anonymous No.8388839]

>>8388598
Fuck off

[Anonymous No.8388841]

>>8388794
Are you a woman? Is that why you think the gross sex-acquaintanceships men have with women are "close friendships?"

All of my FWBs and girlfriends, and all the girls I've ever tried to turn into FWBs or girlfriends, thought I was their "close friend." I wouldn't have been talking to them if they hadn't been a girl. Some of them, I talked to for years, because it's not that big a deal to keep in touch and socialise, for the same reason you occasionally socialise with not-very-close acquaintances (from work or whatever). Some of them I still talk to even though I haven't been trying to bang them in forever, because it's just habit and they're just sort of "there."

All of these women thought we were close friends, and it always weirded me out when they did, because if they had actual friends, they should have been able to tell the difference. They should have been able to tell that I was just tolerating the vast majority of them, that flirting was very common in our conversations. Even the few who were semi-decent personality-wise were still just chat partners at best. And not a single one of them comes close to even the mediocre friendships I have with men, where actual bonding takes place.

You may say "well, that's just you," and accuse me of having unhealthy relationships with women, or of being predatory, or something. But I'm a pretty well-adjusted and social guy and most of my friends agree on this. It's common knowledge: Women are boring, for the most part, and they're not very loyal / they don't bond very deeply. So they don't make great friends. They're interchangeable socialites that you can maybe date or fuck.

[Anonymous No.8388850]

>>8388841
>But I'm a pretty well-adjusted and social guy and most of my friends agree on this. Women are boring, for the most part

time to suck cock, faggot.

[Anonymous No.8388855]

Goethe's Stella

[Anonymous No.8388872]

>>8388850
I top only.

[Anonymous No.8388884]

>>8388841

I have never ever seen a person who knows less about women than you do you absolute imbecile..

The reason why they called you a very close friend is because they want to make you feel better, show you they cherish the relationship and make it clear that you are just friends...

If they're actually flirting they're obviously into you, you complete autist. If anything you are the one who can't decode the signals.

Just because you are told that you're "muh closest friend" doesn't mean it's fucking true. The world doesn't revolve around you.

Meanwhile I can have non-superficial relationships with women because I'm not on the spectrum...

The fact that you think you can only really have deep friendships with men is just sad. I feel sorry for you.

[Anonymous No.8388885]

>>8388872
maybe you then need to try some of that polyamory. I heard they like guys who only top.

[Anonymous No.8388886]

If I ever run across even *one* woman who's into being super promiscuous, open relationships, making a huge deal of being sexually liberated etc. who isn't also a psychological trainwreck I might change my mind about this stuff. It's all fun and games until they get drunk and the mask slips a little, then you realise they haven't even fooled themselves.

[Anonymous No.8388891]

>>8388571
She's getting cucked.

[Anonymous No.8388893]

>>8388884
>The reason why they called you a very close friend is because they want to make you feel better, show you they cherish the relationship and make it clear that you are just friends...
Except I put my penis in a lot of those. And a lot of them go insane when we cool off, because they thought it was something more than it was.

>If they're actually flirting they're obviously into you,
Yes. That is why I flirt back, and occasionally have sex with some of them. Being "into" each other is exactly what I am talking about here. It's not friendship.

>Just because you are told that you're "muh closest friend" doesn't mean it's fucking true.
I said "close," not "closest." But a lot of girls these days are genuinely lonely as fuck, for exactly the reasons I mentioned in my first post. They know that men only like them for sex, and they hate their fake-ass female friends, so they get stuck in a spiral of trying to get the feeling of being wanted and appreciated from men who are getting casual sex or the possibility of casual sex out of them.

>The fact that you think you can only really have deep friendships with men is just sad.
I had one with a woman after about ten years of searching. I'm pretty sure she's a genius and she has all kinds of weird personality disorders that force her to have actual depth somehow. But even then, she's self-admittedly boring and a basic bitch, and acknowledges that women don't have real hobbies that lend to mutual striving, the way guys do.

>>8388885
I tried that. It ruined my first relationship because she thought my wanting to bang other girls meant that she was unattractive or something.

Now I just don't date.

[Anonymous No.8388897]

>>8388841
>Are you a woman?
No.
>Is that why you think the gross sex-acquaintanceships men have with women are "close friendships?"
Are you an idiot? Is that why you read things people didn't write? Or why you seem to be unaware of women having female friends?

[Anonymous No.8388901]

>>8388897
>Are you an idiot? Why aren't you aware that I'm right and you're not?!

How will I ever recover?

[Anonymous No.8388903]

>>8388901
>you're an orange, am overrated fruit

How will I ever recover?

[Anonymous No.8388905]

>>8388884
you are a woman
opinion discarded

[Anonymous No.8388945]

jesus christ why do I come here. I really made a mistake somewhere along the line somewhere in 2004. Fuck

[Anonymous No.8388955]

>>8388905

Sorry to disappoint, but you're wrong.

>>8388893

So just because some hoe told you that females can't have hobbies that 'lead to mutual striving'?

You're generalizing, you're using anecdotal evidence and you're wrong. You know it.

The way you just assume all girls have 'fake ass friends' reveals your delusion. You like to think men have more 'genuine' friendships in order to feel superior.

Maybe the reason you are surrounded by vapid, basic as fuck hobbyless bitches is because you're part of the club my dear friend.

[Anonymous No.8388957]

>>8388571
jesus fuck, the new statesman has fallen so far

every time laurie penny publishes an article, the ghosts of george orwell, james joyce and virginia woolf cry out in anguish

[Anonymous No.8389052]

>>8388571

Christ. I'm a radical leftie and agree with polyamory in theory (kissless virgin so can't say for sure), but she is making me reconsider. There's something so smug and self-assured about the young liberal/left that is so off-putting that I want to run in the opposite direction.

[Anonymous No.8389064]

>>8388955
Your post could have been one short sentence and had the same (null) content level.

Go change your tampon and come back.

[Anonymous No.8389065]

>>8389052
>that I want to run in the opposite direction
As you should.

As a radical leftie, what you should ask yourself is: what would Jesus do?

[Anonymous No.8389087]

>>8389065
>my employer is extracting my surplus labor and ignores safety concerns
>better turn the other cheek

[Anonymous No.8389095]

>>8388571
>There’s something profoundly millennial about polyamory, something quintessentially bound up with my fearful, frustrated, overexamined generation, with our swollen sense of consequence, our need to balance instant gratification with the impulse to do good in a world gone mad.

Couldn't continue passed this bit of sentimental sick. This is a classic penny trope, to situate her experience at the centre of an angsty moment of generational self-examination, the voice of which she elevates herself to be. Absolute fucking rot.

Sometimes I think she must take such nonsensical rhetoric even half-seriously, and that's when I find her most insufferable. She's not as bad as Lindy West (who is the absolute worst for smug self-righteousness), but this shite is still difficult to take.

Getting a working class job would do a world of good to moderate such writing, I think.

[Anonymous No.8389102]

>>8388571
Is this ironic?

[Anonymous No.8389104]

the unbearable lightness of being by Milan kundera

[Anonymous No.8389109]

>>8389087
More like unionize.

[Anonymous No.8389115]

>>8389087
>I'm 18 years old and just learned a bunch of meme-phrases in my mandatory Introduction to Marxism module

[Anonymous No.8389125]

>>8389052
Wait like 10-15 years before making your decision on polyamory. Watch as a billion 30-50 year old women who were raised on "free love" bullshit have mental fucking breakdowns as they age.

The way women have worked for a long time is that they are daddy's little girl when they're a kid, then they're the toast of the town when they're a pretty young maiden, then they're their husband's special treasure, then they're a mother, then an old crone overseeing a large family. In every phase, women are important, but more importantly they are wanted and taken care of by some kind of family.

The thing is, women aren't very bright. They don't know about this cycle. It just happens to them. They think any one phase of the cycle that they happen to be in is "life." A young pretty woman thinks that YOU are living the same life she is, that you feel wanted and worshiped all the time, because that's just "life." That's the way "life" is.

Capitalism came along and told them that they don't need marriage, that they shouldn't have kids until they're 57, etc., because capitalism was interested in creating perpetually adolescent mindless consumers of Forever 21 fashion. They think that they have a lifetime of being pretty and exciting and desirable and worshipable, so they can afford to wait until they subjectively feel like having a kid or getting married, never mind prudence or foreplanning.

The thing is, nobody gives a fuck about women after their youth and beauty fades aside from their husband and children, which they are no longer having. They are trying to live forever on credit that is only good for a few years, that was given to them just so they could invest it in a family.

Seriously, just wait and watch. A billion ageing hags with hipster tattoos are going to be subtly coming apart at the fucking seams because they are starting to clue in that they aren't getting 65,000 messages per week on Tinder anymore. Go on any dating site and look at the oceans of unhinged over-the-hill broads who are trapped halfway between
>I'M STILL SEXY AND ATTRACTIVE EVEN THOUGH I'M 38. I'M TIRED OF BOYS. I'M READY FOR MEN. DON'T EVEN FUCKING THINK ABOUT MESSAGING ME IF YOU AREN'T RICH AS HELL AND SUPER HANDSOME. I DESERVE THE ENTIRE WORLD. I WILL FOREVER COMMAND THE SAME SEXUAL CAPITAL THAT I DID AS A 16 YEAR OLD. GIVE ME MONEY RIGHT NOW!!!!
and
>Please :( I can't take it anymore someone please just love me :( God I fucked up so bad by not having a kid oh god I'd give up all these ironic Pokemon tattoos just to have had a baby before my womb shrivelled up

[Anonymous No.8389137]

>>8389125
>meganboyle.mp4

[Anonymous No.8389144]

>>8389109
That's not giving the emperor what belongs to the emperor.
>>8389115
No.

[Anonymous No.8389148]

>>8389125

This sounds like a character I'm writing. Could anyone please direct me to spaces on the internet where I could read the inner thoughts of women like this?

[Anonymous No.8389149]

>>8389125
Why is antiwoman shitposts so fucking long.

[Anonymous No.8389155]

>>8389149
*are

[Anonymous No.8389161]

>>8389144
>That's not giving the emperor what belongs to the emperor.
No, that would be refusing to pay taxes.

[Anonymous No.8389170]

>>8388777
Pretty much. It's one of those meaningless tumblr buzzwords like genderfluid.

[Anonymous No.8389183]

>>8389052

we'll be waiting for you over on /pol/ m8

[Anonymous No.8389201]

>>8389149
That is actually pretty reasonable and makes a lot of sense.

[Anonymous No.8389240]

>>8389125
This is true but I don't think the results will be subtle at all. This sort of shit already happened to the hippies after the 60s but it was different in that their expectations weren't quite as insane as those 38+ year-old bitches on dating apps/sites who think they deserve the world for having a used up old cunt, so a lot of them were still able to eventually live normal lives. Now all bets are off.

[Anonymous No.8389310]

>>8389148
Tinder bios

[Anonymous No.8389340]

not surprising this article came out now by Laurie.

lately people have been calling her out constantly as a chic that jsut needs to get fucked, and her replying she does just fine.

she needed an article saying 'i am wanted i am wanted i am wanted' as much as possible so we know and she knows.

She has found friends I guess? Friends of the opposite sex? Is this what semi-autisitc people shut out by the world b/c they are rich finally figure out when they turn 30? That friends are pretty great to have?

It is fun to speculate what kind of girls laurie is into.

[Anonymous No.8389353]

>>8388571
The Genius and the The Goddess, Aldous Huxley.
She Came To Stay (L'Intvitée), Simone de Beauvoir

In other things that aren't new at all, god, Penny is a vapid cunt.
>>8388623
kek. She really doesn't realise that. This view of polyamory usually stems from an inability to commit to anyone rather than a desire to commit to several people. The reason she finds it less work than a single commitment is because she is doing less work and not committed to any of her partners. She'll only care for a lover who's ill if it brings her social acclaim, while alleviating their pain would mean nothing to her.

[Anonymous No.8389354]

do any other marxists other than me feel really sad about people like Laurie, and her ilk, it just really makes me feel bad. what does marx call this?

[Anonymous No.8389358]

>>8388783
IVF when she needs a kid to replace the adulation that men used once afford her but now spend on twenty-somethings.

[Anonymous No.8389366]

>>8389340
>It is fun to speculate what kind of girls laurie is into.

Ones like this apparently.

[Anonymous No.8389373]

>>8389366
they sleep together? really makes you think.

[Anonymous No.8389375]

>>8389354
its called lifestylism/bohemianism and its not a new thing being tacked on to left wing thought. look at women like Kollantai. shes far superior to penny but there are similar thought processes.

[Anonymous No.8389387]

https://manyfesto.org/2014/07/15/the-weaponized-naked-girl/

[Anonymous No.8389649]

>>8389125
>Wait like 10-15 years before making your decision on polyamory. Watch as a billion 30-50 year old women who were raised on "free love" bullshit have mental fucking breakdowns as they age.
>10-15 years
>as they age

Man, you can watch it happen right now in real time. Strictly anecdotal, but the 3 poly women I've met so far have all been nervous wrecks, claim to have depression and anxiety, can't work unless held by the hand 24/7 by coworkers or employers, and have attempted suicide. It's for crazy folks, as far as I am concerned.

[Anonymous No.8389671]

>>8389649
they took away the ten thousand year old support system of husbands and sons, people beholden to love them, and tried to replace it with chads

ch-chad will love me more than the other 7 girls he fucks! i know he will!

[Anonymous No.8389696]

>>8389340
>She has found friends I guess? Friends of the opposite sex?

she's not bad looking and she scrubs up pretty nicely when she can be bothered. i wouldn't kick her out of bed.

[Anonymous No.8389702]

>>8389052
It's the labelling game. I'd rather we were a generation that just does this shit instead without writing bothering to tell everyone how great and interesting we are. It's the same with all this "gender fluid","non-binary" etc. shit - just fucking do whatever you want and shut up about it!

[Anonymous No.8389743]

>>8389649
You can see it happening now, but your post sparked something in my memory. There used be women who were polyamorous (and scandalous), who despite, and, in some cases, because of, their unconventional approach to relationships were successful. These women are and were incredibly rare.

However, since they were successful and exceptional, even compared to their contemporary men, they became models for exceptional success. Much like a small girl will assume that Madonna's success was choosing her own clothes, not endless shilling to the lowest common denominator, and so young girls copy her clothes for decades, like totems to bring them exceptional success, polyamory is also taken as a key to success when often it is merely a totemic independence of will instead of an actual refusal of the mainstream.

These are the same women who "can't understand how they could be so regressive" while watching every episode of Sister Wives, but also think that other forms of polyamory, without the "regressive" trappings of religion, will somehow bring them success.

These are not Jezebels commanding kingdoms and planning tactical overthrows of monarchies to their own advantage, nor any of the other women who knew the mechanics of power and how to scale them, with sex or without; these are women who have not left the stage of magical thinking and still believe Madonna's gloves will make them into a financial force equal to Madonna and the shilling part is unnecessary to that end in comparison to the magical force of the totem. It's a secular religion, filled with its own blasphemies [misogyny] and rites of passage [I kissed a girl and I liked it], and those only serve to make the hierarchy, not the practitioners, powerful and rich.

Penny is Salome, dancing for her father and the death of her lover, but at her mother's request and unaware of the true consequences for herself or her success.
/op-ed

[Anonymous No.8389745]

>>8388664
lol memester incoming

[Anonymous No.8389764]

>>8389696
this.
all memes and debate and shitflinging aside, I'd fuck her. not even like a hatefuck, just a regular old one-nighter.

[Anonymous No.8389765]

>>8389743
>Penny is Salome

[Anonymous No.8389864]

>>8389743
>the hierarchy,
The nomenklatura, pleb.

[Anonymous No.8389876]

>>8389864
>nomenklatura
>not sure if dyslexic classics student /r/ing names, or retarded Russian who thinks Stalin invented power
i cubitum

[Anonymous No.8389881]

I'm close to a girl who's into the whole polyamory or free love thing or whatever. She's really bad at making friends, and she's told me herself about guys that she had sex with because she thought it would make them closer. Then she would wonder why it just made things complicated and dramatic. What a surprise, having sex with people isn't the best way to make friends and it complicates existing friendships.

[Anonymous No.8389939]

>>8389764
I would too, but I'd be fighting the urge to laugh in her face pretty hard while doing it if she honestly thinks being boned by random dudes "empowers" her.

[Anonymous No.8389949]

>>8389881
Women are literally retarded if they think what men want is to be friends with them.

[Anonymous No.8389956]

>>8389764
I'm worried she'd corner me and rape me.
Three women have coerced me into sex.

[Anonymous No.8389960]

>>8389956
you should take a chaperone if/when you meet her. she does seem the type.

[Anonymous No.8389969]

>>8389949
i wish i could psychically blast you with the memories and experiences of a thousand hookups, every single one of whom thought she was the coolest shit in town and that i saw her as a fantastically interesting nuclear physicist with amazing opinions

i'm fucking an 18 year old dipshit art school student right now, as a 28 year old doctoral student in the field she actually wants to go into, and i constantly bombard her with infinite conversational content that she finds infinitely interesting. she responds with absolutely nothing, but you can tell she just assumes we're on par.

there's no appreciation whatsoever. they take it completely for granted that they are amazing. every single chick thinks she's richard fucking feynman. i could land the space shuttle in her driveway to pick her up and she'd feel just fine prattling about some fucking cartoon her sister watched recently for two hours.

[Anonymous No.8390087]

>>8389969
Maybe you should find someone else then, instead of a 18 year old vapid cunt.

[Anonymous No.8390100]

>>8390087
there have been many others and there will be many others

[Anonymous No.8390107]

In a self-defence situation I could take her down in one hit. Literally one punch to the head would be sufficient, because she's a woman.

[Anonymous No.8390295]

>>8388571
At this point Islam may be the lesser of two evils.

[Anonymous No.8390308]

>>8388697
Oh fuck, this post hit pretty hard, because it's spot on and these people are winning.

It's the same people who are fighting nationalism, religion, family and gender actually having a meaning. The result of their ideas will be a world completely devoid of soul where humans are just resources to use and throw away with no home or identity or true connections. Just plastic bag humans on the side of the road.

[Anonymous No.8390317]

>(((Laurie Penny)))

[Anonymous No.8390326]

>>8390308
>Just plastic bag humans on the side of the road.
great turn of phrase. stolen.

[Anonymous No.8390362]

>>8388945
this made me laugh way more than it should

[Anonymous No.8390394]

>>8389969
Why would you get a doctorate in art? Don't know when to stop?

[Anonymous No.8390583]

>>8389702

Agreed wholeheartedly. I tend to believe in the Buddhist theory of the self, so all these identity politics and especially coming up with labels for oneself and clinging to them as a key part of one's identity strikes me as sickening and counterproductive. It seems like the internet is a big part of this and I wonder where it went so wrong when compared to its early promise. There's this very narrow idea of "I am x because I call myself x and I deserve to be celebrated for that", which gets back to what I was talking about self-assuredness. It's like none of these millennials or the older people who cater to them have ever experienced doubt. I'm an anarchist but I question myself constantly and can even find common ground with fascists in my low regard for human nature, but everyone else around me is so rigidly stuck up their own asses it's absurd.

[Anonymous No.8391087]

>>8390583
>which gets back to what I was talking about
The phrase of a true douchebag

[Anonymous No.8391362]

Yeah well who would tie themselves to her, it would be unbearable. The only sensible thing is if you have a lot of girls and you can add her in every second Tuesday or whatever just to catch up on gossip

[Anonymous No.8391377]

Anyone noticed smart girls nowadays equating victimhood with empowerment. They try to socially normalise bullshit and find a way to justify the unpalatable.

[Anonymous No.8391380]

>>8391377
Those girls aren't smart.

[Anonymous No.8391387]

>>8389240
They decided to adopt the entire third world like cat ladies and blamed the pre-existing patriarchy for their situation. Who knows what will be next.

[Anonymous No.8391678]

>>8389702
That is definitely the most healthy- and scientific- approach one can take to sexuality, if you ascribe to sexuality. We've known since the time of Kinsey that humans do not have binary sexuality, and that a scale- vaguely from from totally hetero to bi to homosexual- is far more accurate. People like Gore Vidal sensibly concluded that giving themselves the title of homosexual or hetero was just another pointless chain, instead deciding to love whomever they want. This whole decision by millenials to describe themselves as "gender-fluid" etc etc and basically making it your entire identity must be extremely emotionally straining. Just fuck whoever you want, jack off to whomever you want, be happy. It's also wholly inadequate for labelling past figures as homosexual in the situation that some vague acquaintance may or may not have witnessed the aforementioned figure taking a side-long glance at a catemite's pert ass.

[Anonymous No.8391693]

Always disregard the opinions of women with boyish haircuts, they are emotionally crippled.

[Anonymous No.8391695]

>>8388571
>emotional labour

what's that?

[Anonymous No.8391702]

>>8390583
How could you be an anarchist with low regard for human nature, that's absurd. Anarchism is noble savage thinking incarnate.

[Anonymous No.8391704]

>>8391695
It's what psychologists do.

[Anonymous No.8391709]

>>8391704
are all women psychologists?

[Anonymous No.8391715]

>>8391709
They were before they left the household. Rapid increases in incidence of diagnoses of emotional disorders from 1980's onward is because of a functional shift from women doing the emotional labor in the family to the marketplace. Or to speak in republican: broken families are the cause.

[Anonymous No.8391716]

>>8391715
i.e. it's part of their traditional gender role

[Anonymous No.8391785]

>>8390308
But that's what the world is already like.

[Anonymous No.8391814]

>>8388697
I don't agree with this, but it shall be assimilated as a view. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.8391821]

>>8390308
welcome to capitalism

[Anonymous No.8391865]

>>8388836
Even THINKING about polyamory makes me feel incredibly jealous and anxious.

[Anonymous No.8391883]

>>8388627
>It's only a very rigid and very ancient and outdated form of patriarchal restraint which tells a woman that she must be everything to a single man.
0/10

[Anonymous No.8391907]

>>8388571
>Laurie Penny made me think

Welcome to the double-digit IQ club then

[Anonymous No.8391911]

>>8388571

which one do you prefer
-the whore who loves to show she is a whore but hates to be called a whore
-the whore who tries to hide that she is a whore and hate to be called a whore

[Anonymous No.8391926]

>>8390583
>>8337511
emotions matter to hedonists who think hedonism is a good life style. Even better, hedonists will do anything to think that they are as hedonistic as they are and they even arrange moments in their life where ''it is wrong to display hedonism'' and where ''it is right to display hedonism'', so that they can feel both like saints and animals regularly.

But of course, most people love hedonism far too much to stop being scared of leaving hedonism. Most people are not meant to be something else than hedonist.

In fact, the whole humanity is here because people love to cling to what they feel and think and refuse to do something else with their life.

for people saying that hedonism is relevant,
>life=what you feel+what you think+what you expect from your desires from what you feel and think
therefore,
>grade your desires
and
>non acting on your favorite desires = non life = death


hedonism is not an effective doctrine to be happy. Hedonists believe that you literally die if you ''do not think nor do feel''. They have faith that 'no moving' is death.

of course, doing the opposite brings you a better life:
>perpetual evanescence and lack of control of what you think and feel, therefore cannot be taken seriously (to be happy) => stay still towards what you think and feel.

Once you try to reach stillness, you are more equanimous and benevolent.

[Anonymous No.8391931]

>>8391911

Some ungainly combination of both.

[Anonymous No.8391934]

>>8391865
it just makes me angry. cuckolding and open relationships and all that other shit where you let other people fuck your girlfriend/wife makes me angry.

[Anonymous No.8391937]

>>8390583

emotions matter to hedonists who think hedonism is a good life style. Even better, hedonists will do anything to think that they are as hedonistic as they are and they even arrange moments in their life where ''it is wrong to display hedonism'' and where ''it is right to display hedonism'', so that they can feel both like saints and animals regularly.

But of course, most people love hedonism far too much to stop being scared of leaving hedonism. Most people are not meant to be something else than hedonist.

In fact, the whole humanity is here because people love to cling to what they feel and think and refuse to do something else with their life.

for people saying that hedonism is relevant,
>life=what you feel+what you think+what you expect from your desires from what you feel and think
therefore,
>grade your desires
and
>non acting on your favorite desires = non life = death


hedonism is not an effective doctrine to be happy. Hedonists believe that you literally die if you ''do not think nor do feel''. They have faith that 'no moving' is death.

of course, doing the opposite brings you a better life:
>perpetual evanescence and lack of control of what you think and feel, therefore cannot be taken seriously (to be happy) => stay still towards what you think and feel.

Once you try to reach stillness, you are more equanimous and benevolent.

[Anonymous No.8391964]

>>8388771
Well since Nietzsche said it, it must be true.

[Anonymous No.8391996]

>>8389052
current "liberalism" is not leftwing in the least, its the most unalloyed representation of capitalism as psychology, the worship of the self. All identity politics is about informing one's own identity whether it is genetic or otherwise and then identifying with some wayward group in order to get things for yourself. The primary difference between the conservatives and liberals are that the conservatives are actively capitalistic while the liberals are passively so. Someone like Donald Trump is the worst of all aspects of capitalism.

Vlad wouldn't have had any of this shit.

[Anonymous No.8392052]

>>8388664
I would physically attack you if I knew who you were.

[Anonymous No.8392169]

>>8389125

>Go on any dating site and look at the oceans of unhinged over-the-hill broads who are trapped halfway between

Why do you think they're on dating sites? The normal ones settled down in their late 20s and got (and stayed) married. A lot of anons are young, and this is giving you guys a biased view. You're looking at college girls and wondering why they're all "sluts." Well guess what it's because they're young. I guarantee that men, or to be more accurate boys, in their late teens/early twenties are doing stupid and impulsive things as well. Humans don't fully mature until about 25-30 or so. I'm 27, and the women I went to college with are a lot more calm and sober. Some of them are already married. I've slowed down as well, the thought of drinking half a bottle of gin and putting my hand up a stranger's skirt makes me feel a little queasy just typing it. I went on a date a few months ago and she asked me if I smoked weed, and I shook my head. She said, "good, me neither." I knew she was a keeper then.

My parents told me all of this would happen and I didn't believe them, but they were right. I know there are some serious problems with society right now, but we're dealing with a young generation and I think a lot of this will fade as Gen Y approaches thirty.

[Anonymous No.8392496]

>>8388571
>emotional labour

lmao

[Anonymous No.8392613]

>>8389125
I worry when I read posts like this because people are so invested in the idea that women are going to be having mass mental breakdowns in the future and you wonder what will happen to the posters when this never comes about.

The weakest way you can criticise something is to say "in the long run, it will lead to societal collapse" or some similar shit because it implicitly leaves open the idea that other than collapse, there's nothing wrong with it. It's also a really weak way to defend something (i.e. monogamy is good because anything else leads to collapse) because it sounds like the sort of thing an abuser would say.

Anyway my advice for people reading the post and agreeing is to "free yourself" of women/relationships/whatever (don't go full MGTOW or anything daft) because if you spend your days waiting for others to realise you were right all along then you will die wrong and unhappy.

[Anonymous No.8392644]

>>8392613
>I worry when I read posts like this because people are so invested in the idea that women are going to be having mass mental breakdowns in the future and you wonder what will happen to the posters when this never comes about.
It's because they imagine women as men: a) rational beings, b) not having societal support regardless of what they do. In reality, they'll just invent justifications for their predicament in their heads (or grab the ready-made ones from the propaganda they're immersed in, and there's quite a lot of them), and they'll get all their shit fixed to a high level of comfort by the society, government, men around them etc.

Why would they ever engage in any kind of self-reflection when they don't and never will have to?

[Anonymous No.8392848]

bump

[Anonymous No.8393021]

[Anonymous No.8393265]

This shit makes me so depressed. Do you think most women want open relationships?