/lit/ - Literature

>>11730606
i have no idea if this is true, but maybe bisexual men are just generally more receptive to different forms of experience

Yes.

>>11730606
almost certainly the opposite and he probably wanted to believe this to be true

>>11730616
I started to think and I don't understand how he came to this conclusion. What great gays was he talking about?

>>11730606
tennessee william was a gay

You don't have to be gay to appreciate the aesthetic beauty of the same sex. Woman are leagues ahead of us in this aspect.

>>11730616
actually i reject what i have said. that is merely my own opinion and i posted it impulsively. i cannot delete this post. please disregard it.

>>11730619
there are probably great gay men. there are gay or slightly gay men who i would consider great.

>>11730606
>Michelangelo, Socrates, Wittgenstein, Whitman, Tchaikovsky, Rimbaud etc. etc.
Yeah sounds about right

>>11730606
Simply trying to justify his faggy taste and proclivities. Nothin to see here.

>>11730625
Not what the thread was about, but thanks for chiming in

>>11730632
Not just this, most people have actually had a fascination with homosexuality and it’s effect on the soul. It actually makes sense that homosexuality, or the transfixing on the idea of homosexuality, is prevalent in “great” men because of 1. The constraints on it pre-21st century I.e. the taboo nature of it, and 2. The simple curiousness of sexuality and the human mind. Pretty based letter for Lawrence desu >>11730606

>>11730643
Fair enough. I'll contribute more concisely.

I think men of greatness are able to appreciate the beauty between the sexes, regardless of their personal orientation.
Now, pertaining to the quote, this does sound like someone generalizing to justify their own self loathing attractions.

>>11730606
I think there's some truth to it. Back in the day when someone was gay he was euphemistically referred to as a "creative type".

>>11730606
DH Lawrence was a degenerate whose entire corpus is an attempt to justify his own execrable personal behavior.

>>11730606
Femininity is defined by petty and superficial interests. All too commonly, great men are corrupted by the influence of women, unable to flourish. This has been exacerbated by the modern notion of love. Homosexual men by contrast--at least the masculine variety--are unlikely to be pulled down to the level of women. They are quick to learn the absurdity of convention. They can maintain focus on their art, free from a culture of decadence and feminine temptations.

>>11730861
Good insight.

>>11730606
Well none of the U.S. Founding Fathers were gay so that blows that thesis right outta the water doesn't it

i'm not sure if homosexuality is necessary, but at some point some level of sterility and asexuality is likely required. chicks take up too much of your energy. you spend energy trying to get them, you spend energy thinking about what they're thinking about, you spend energy trying to keep them. they are a waste of time

>>11730619
idk how gay was neetchie?

>>11730861
>Femininity is defined by petty and superficial interests. All too commonly, great men are corrupted by the influence of women, unable to flourish
i really don't want this to be true, but well it just gets harder to deny every fucking year

Homosexuals are usually more decadent than normal guys though, so idk about that. They dont have the ridiculous meme ideas about women that most heterosexual men have, but they act like complete savages, the combination of male sexuality with male sexuality is explosively fucked up.

I do maintain hope for women though, they have created some genuinely amazing things, Hildegard von Bingen for example, or for modern examples Woolf or Duras.

But the way they just sort of are, it's like... really this is what you are, what the fuck is this, am i supposed to take care of you, am i supposed to acquiesce to your insanity or just control you, should i just avoid you except when i need you, like what the fuck are we meant to do with them?

It genuinely perplexes me because they're like little bundles of volatile emotion that overwhelm their reasoning faculties whenever an issues touches on things they care about. even the smart ones are like that, it's actually trippy.

So like as men, what do we do with this situation, with this chaotic half-person we have to interact with socially, and we are intensely attracted to, but we can never see eye to eye with them about fuck all, whenever you think they get it, well they don't, they are just putting into their meme female perspective of things, where everything is coloured by vague feelings and associations with their own self.

How the fuck do we take that situation and make a coherent thing out of it? Do we just accept that it is going to be extremely messy and nonsensical, or do we opt out, or like what. I don't want to just manipulate them, but being with someone who just doesn't get shit feels like intrinsically manipulating them in a way. Like just interacting with them is controlling them becaues theyre so goddamn deluded.

It's like there are no answers at all. Just conflict, and harmony, but intertwined. I wonder if women think similar things about men, if we are also idiotic uncomprehending things from their perspectives sometimes.

do we just accept that we will never get each other except in the vague intimacy of love and understand that we both think the other is retarded, is that what being a human is, like what even is this

>>11731047
Solid satire

>>11731111
thanks I intended for it to be taken as such but as a real conservative i actually meant it

That would explain why so many “great” men die young

>>11730606
It isn't that nearly every great man was homosexual, it's more that nearly every great man hated women.

>>11730606
This was only true in the past and for one reason only: social repression. The homosexual was forced to conserve his seed, while the heterosexual found a wife and drained his power into her. Masturbation was less common in the past and so the homosexual kept his seed and his powers as a brahmin grew and shot off into a million direction. CONSERVE YOUR SEED, BOYS. NO NEED TO BE GAY.

>>11731209
This is also the reason you see no great fags anymore. Society is letting them be fags and now they scatter seed (fruitlessly, of course) more than anyone and all their powers as a class have dissipated.

>>11730632
>anywhere near Beethoven, Hamilton, Nietzsche, Descartes, Mozart, Turner
Only truly great person there is Michelangelo imo

Although Lawrence is on to something. The explanation can be found in a little volume entitled "Sex and Character" by Otto Weininger.

>>11731082
Ecce Homo, The Gay Science...

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/06/books/is-there-a-gay-basis-to-nietzsche-s-ideas.html

>>11731215
>>11731209
So the lesson here is to stop fapping and stop lusting over women to achieve greatness.

>>11731292
Yes, between me and this guy >>11731176 I think we pretty much got it down. Conserve your seed and don't let women distract. By the way, all sacred texts are in agreement on this point.

>>11730606
actually great minds tend toward repressed transsexuality, but Lawrence was close enough

Not even slightly true. Just look at nearly every artist (painter) pre mid 20th century. Almost all heterosexuals.

Scanned a writers list out of curiosity

>Kenneth Anger
>John Ashberry
>W. H. Auden
>James Baldwin
>Roland Barthes
>William Burroughs
>Truman Capote
>Jean Cocteau
>Dennis Cooper
>E. M. Forster
>Michel Foucault
>Federico Garcia Lorca
>Jean Genet
>Allen Ginsberg
>Brion Gysin
>Langston Hughes
>Tony Kushner
>Marcel Proust
>Rene Ricard
>Raymond Roussel
>Andy Warhol
>Tennessee Williams
>David Wojnarowicz

Some big names though I'm sure I could think of just as many great 'straight' ones. Lawrence's claim is intuitive via stereotypes of aesthetic appreciation and subtlety, and even ideal inner worlds, being tied to ideas of femininity, but these kind of identifications feel much more deeply complicated in 2018 than Lawrence is delving.

>>11731398
ty anon

>>11731398
literally all degenerate trash, holy shit

>>11730861
You're confusing the anima or "other-I" with how anti-culture/media portrays, and how you are negatively projecting, effeminacy.

>>11730619
The Greeks

>>11731230
Decartes and Nietzsche were brainlets hardly fitting of the term philosopher, to be quite sincere. Tchaikovsky is also the thinking man's composer.

>>11731230
>Only truly great person there is Michelangelo imo

>>11731532
>Decartes and Nietzsche were brainlets
Imagine thinking Cartesian math was invented by a brainlet holy shit

>>11731107
Good post Anon. You articulate a very general frustration I think we all feel. The answer is probably that connection to a woman (or women) isn't sufficient for happiness, but it may be necessary for it.

>>11731082
he was an incel classicist, so very.

>>11731107
You're giving the average man way too much credit.

>>11731398
not a terrible list but too americunted, filled with people someone into the cinema of jarman would be most likely to recognise. you missed a lot of giants that are almost too obvious it feels plebby to list them
>William Shakespeare
>Arthur Rimbaud
>Paul Verlaine
>Thomas Mann
>Andre Gide
>Henry de Montherlant
>Gustave Flaubert
>A.E. Housman
>Siegfried Sassoon
>Evelyn Waugh
>Robert Musil (perhaps)
>James Baldwin
>Christopher Isherwood
>Gore Vidal
>Yukio Mishima
>Oscar Wilde
the list goes on...
Beside, homoeroticism is scattered everywhere... like pollen... beyond concrete identification, odd little branches that don't affect the botanical classification of a certain plant as a whole

>>11731107
You're an angry incel and you know it.
Men and women are not better or worse than each other, you're just trying to paint men in a brighter light.

>>11732566
not at all dude. those were things that i really struggled with in my first serious relationship(as in moved in together, made plans for the future, etc.) for so long i thought i was just doing something wrong, because of how she reacted to things, until i slowly realized her mind is just incredibly different than mine. Not to say i didnt do bad things, of course i did, but it's not that, it's about the basic different ways of seeing things we have that just do not align

and i wasn't trying to say men are better, i get that women maybe see us in a similar way, it is just the disconnection between us that is really hard

im not angry about this it just upsets me, it feels very alienating that the people i have loved and who loved me, we never really understood each other at all, and none of it even meant the same thing to us

>>11731107
Damn I feel you

>>11730606
no, fags are worthless in every aspect and have never embodied or produced anything of note.

>>11732566
The masculine is superior to the feminine even if the world can't function with the masuline alone. they occupy entirely different domains,The moment a woman plays at masculinity or a man at femininity they become animals.

>>11731532
>Tchaikovsky is also the thinking man's composer.
He's the audio equivalent of saccharine syrup.

>>11732868
(You)

>>11731107
>the combination of male sexuality with male sexuality is explosively fucked up
You speak truth. Maybe God (or nature, or whatever you prefer) intended for Man and Woman's conflicting sexuality to create balance or a certain stability that just doesn't form in homosexual relationships. Note the nearly suicidal behavior of the average homosexual: hundreds of sexual partners, near indifference toward disease, rampant drug use, etc. They are consumed by lust when they are without Woman to keep them in check. They are without the balance that is the natural way of things.

>>11732958
It also explains why dykes are eternally miserable and their relationships invariably lead to frigidity and violence

No such thing as gay or straight

Because he thought himself great and was a homo thus transfering his self on to other 'greats.'

>>11732968
woke post

>>11732958
cringe. Conceptually the idea of compatible sexual dimorphism has plausibility, but every time some faggot who isn't even religious capitalises words like Man and Woman and attaches pics of neoclassical sculptures to give their gay little opinion moral weight it makes me want to rape them like the submissive hetero breeder cuck they were born to be.