/lit/ - Literature

>men want the 1950s suburban consumer life
that's a yikes from me dawg

>>14687717
But it was peak comfy, anon.

Why bros?

Culture of Critique

Women do want to settle down, you're just a subpar mate in one or more regards. Can you really blame them for choosing the best available partner when they invest so much into a potential marriage+children arrangement?

>>14687706
fuck em' who cares? i'd rather focus on my physique anyway.

>>14687772
cuck mindset

>>14687717
>owning a 2 story house, a car or two and providing for your wife and childrens.
All that on a single income.
>yikes

>>14687706
Not to be incel-posting, but they do. Just not with you.

>>14687785

>>14687706
Stop being a fucking beta white knight that put women on a pedestal loser they will cuck you with a nigger in 2 seconds.

I, like every great thinker, hate woman.

>>14687795
every day my desire to settle down with a beautiful woman in a comfy house with many children wanes and my desire to settle down with Christ in His kingdom be waited on by angels and enjoying eternal fulfillment waxes. even the "good things" on earth seem more and more shit the longer i'm here. everything seems weird and off and i just want to get on with the real mode of existence even though i have no idea what its even like, all i know is everything here feels wrong.

Woman should be kept on farms and treat as livestock used only for breeding and milking.

>>14687706
>Needing a book to understand this.
What are you, 14?

>>14687833
I swear the faggotry on here rivals r9k sometimes

Welcome to life the married envy the single and the single envy the married.

>>14687830
I truly know that feel, brother.

>>14687706
they would rather fuck random guys and pop birth control for 10 years

>>14687807
>developmental milestone
What milestone is this referring to? What is its basis? Can someone provide me some arguments/studies supporting it?

>>14687854
But why?

>>14687706
The Mirror

>>14687854
Consider it from their perspective. Imagine you could get one night stands/casual sex with girls quite a bit hotter than you all the time, or you could settle down with one girl who is about as attractive as you are.

>>14687886
What’s the appeal in meaningless casual sex with strangers? You sound like an NPC consumerist.

>>14687869
>>14687886
>>14687901
the answer is simple. all women are whores

>Swallow so many female hormone pills you need androgen blockers to stop your body from involuntarily transitioning when you stop

>"EVERY other civilization in space and time was wrong about women"

>>14687706
DESPITE ALL MY RAGE I'M STILL JUST A RAT IN A CAGE

>>14687886
i would choose the latter and so would anyone who isn't a degenerate

I want this life honestly, the Anabaptists have it good. Low crime, big families, mutual aid, religiosity and separation from modernity. Fuck soulless 1950s consumerism.

I want to settle down, marry me plz

>>14687901
This. I've been to bars and clubs with friends and spoke to some woman to kill time there, but the idea of fucking or even kissing a girl I just met sounds disgusting to me.

>>14687944
ar u a grill

>>14687944
ar u a grill?

>>14687737

>>14687737
)))Aryeh Cohen-Wade(((

And this post basically answers it. Normies who think they can have it all will try for it. You know better, so will these women when they realize both their looks and their age have a shelf life.

Don't worry frens, stay fit, try to stay employed and keep learning and improving your social skills, and starting around late 20s the game changes.

Time is on the side of men, if you play your cards right, you'll have good, worthwhile women to choose from.

>>14687848
Underrated

>>14687706
You're a fucking idiot, there are tons of women who do want a family, you're just looking in the wrong places you stupid fuck

>>14687717
Why the fuck not? Have a family, raise them. Every organism has a desire to reproduce. And the nuclear family ensures the best outcomes for the kids; divorce has negative effects upon kids.

Also, men and women are different. We evolved to have different roles, and that's why our biologies are different. There must be an evolutionary reason why men are stronger than women. It must have been beneficial to have half the population going out and hunting, protecting, all of that shit, while the other half were baby-making machines, who reared the children and did domestic duties. It's specialisation, isn't it. And specialisation can clearly be effective - that's why every military in the world is composed of many different roles. Same with every company.

So the 1950s life was a good one.

>>14687706
The fun thing is that most women still want this.

The reason you think they don't is because you both think you can't have it (and in the case of women, that they shouldn't even want it), and that itself is due to two main phenomenon:

1) the cultural and sexual liberation of 1968, and
2) a shift from a high-inflation, financially local, consumer-and-salarymen oriented economy with few retired people to a low-inflation, financially global and crisis-prone, asset-and-investment oriented economy with a massive number of incoming retired people.

And guess who is responsible for both of those? The people born between 1945 and 1965, that is, the little children in your lovely photo.

>>14687830
And you wonder why we call you christcucks

>>14687737
This is very milquetoast, do you think the women in the 50s didn't fool around? Anon please, they did it even in the 20s.

Read lady Chatterley's Lover and see how it paints the post-WWI people. It's not just about smut, it's about postwar mentality. Read and you'll understand.

>>14687807
I had a girlfriend as a teenager before most of my friends, yet I turned out way worse than all of them.

Age doesn't mean shit. The things that matter are your willingness to succeed, and your ability to adapt to new circumstances.

>>14687864
Virginal love with someone exactly or within 1-2 years your age.

>>14687959
>Don't worry frens, stay fit, try to stay employed and keep learning and improving your social skills, and starting around late 20s the game changes.
>Time is on the side of men, if you play your cards right, you'll have good, worthwhile women to choose from.

Can you expound on this, anon? I’m asking as a 25 year old. Do things really get better, even easier?

>>14687807
Lmao incel life perspective is so pathetically narrow. Literally just underage, low iq, consumerfag projections

>>14687830
Sounds like peak cope but whatever floats your boat. Just remember people in the middle ages would renounce wealth, love and sometimes kingdom for Christ, while you are renouncing only what you thoroughly failed to attain.

But eh, as I say, suit yourself. You might even turn into a fulfilled believer in time.

>>14687917
I sense a nasty crash incoming n about ten years.

>>14687998
No shit it happened, but it was infrequent, shamed, and hidden. Now it's open, common, and even celebrated.

No one should pretend twitter represents anything like majority public opinion, but at least among millennial women this type of garbage is routinely peddled as praiseworthy behavior.

>>14687936
>Low crime, big families, mutual aid, religiosity

>>14687981
The fun thing (in a way) is that in primitive societies women do a solid 60% of the work when it's not 80%. The primitive men were geared towards fooling around, having fun and dying a violent early death.

>>14688011
basically the older you get the more desperate the whores get to settle down so when you're old and wrinkly you'll get a nice used up axe wound that spent the last 30 years fucking around and when she's not angry at you for not earning enough money for her to spend you may be lucky enough to fuck once a month
enjoy

>>14688023
and when all those bubble houses crash in price by half the people who will be able to bid highest for them are those already rich who KNOW that within 5 years those houses will be worth more than what they payed for and the cycle continues

>>14688011
From what I've heard/seen anecdotally 30 is an alarm bell in the heads of most women such that whatever lifestyle they've been living they start to examine bc something something death of youth. I also had a friend in hs who seemed to sleep around a lot there and in college and now that she's getting a taste of real life she seems to be having an authentic change in perspective.

Tldr I don't think you'll find virgins necessarily among your age group but probably someone with very low partner count who wants the right thing. Also with women + sex a lot of them are ok with it in relationships bc the stereotype of them having sex to elicit love from the partner is true, if they did it for a reason like that they're probably of better character than someone who wanted to sleep around for indulgence etc.

>>14687795
Absolutely none of those material things guarantee true happiness. If I was to settle down, it would ideally be in the country away from the suburbs and their consumer habits.

50's culture was cancerous.

>>14687706
Motherfuckers this isn't r9k go discuss your retarded and mediocre incel-problems somewhere else.
This board's blood is in your hands, you hideous autistic faggots.

>>14688014

>>14688011
Don't drink alcohol, don't smoke, don't be a poorfag, apply sunscreen/moisturizer, stay fit, get a hair transplant if needed and your 25-45 years will be easy af to pull pussy

>>14687717
first post is NOT the best post

>>14688034
>tfw

>>14688011
women get more desperate

>>14688024
>infrequent, shamed, and hidden
Please. It was the biggest open secret ever. You should really read more literature from before the 20th century, adultery is everywhere especially wherever you have a lot of people of both sexes who know each other in a small aread (small rural town, aristocratic and royal courts, any kind of entertainment business where girls can perform).

The only thing right in that sentence is that it was shamed, but only for women (but since gay were almost a negligible minority those men must have been fooling around with girls right? so surely the implicit consequence that many girls were not virgin at their wedding, or that they would cheat with their husband was tolerated or at least understood).

And even then it depended on eras and places. In XVIIIth courts with lots of intrigue and socialization-based status being faithful might have made you look like a chump actually. Again, depending on the country and the king.

>but at least among millennial women this type of garbage is routinely peddled as praiseworthy behavior
The only two differences I see (but they are actually the same) is that this behavior is both publicly declared and treated as civically responsible in some way. But again that's the same thing, the idea is that it is in public interest to do that.

Unpalatable as it is, I see it as a sign that adultery is still very much frowned upon in our culture, hence why certain progressive types feel the need to proclaim they're not burdened by the stigma. It's at least 50% a reaction against the reactionary. How much are you willing to bet that there are as many facebook mom making teenage-tier posts against adultery? And facebook strikes me as closer to the mainstream than twitter, twitter is or the hipster and the rich, pretty much the people who would have spent their time intriguing in a court in the 18th century.

What would really bring a light to the debate would be carefully collected nation-wide statistics on the practice. Unfortunately we don't have much in the way of factual comparison with earlier eras, but I wouldn't be surprised if we turned out to be less adulterous than earlier generations despite our bragging.

Think of the enduring rumor that "kids these days" are more sexually irresponsible and promiscuous than earlier generations, while teenage pregnancies are actually down and by all account teenage intercourse is down or stagnating.

TL;DR: Look at history and older literature, study anthropology, get into the specifics, and you would get quite a different picture. Not only is twitter unreliable, as you said, you idea of realier eras and other places rests on misinformation.

>>14688034
I thought everyone knew that girl are big into the daddy fetish and that 40 is when the door of the twentysomething kinky girls open. You just have to build you skills and confidence over the years, make some decent money and not look too much like a creep and voilà, sustained streak of girlfriends under 25 incoming. When you're getting to 50 and tired of it you can still choose a 40 year old milf for your old days. It's so common it's tired even as a comedy routine.

>>14688084
idk, I'm with the anon you're responding to in that given over-socialization and technology the pragmatics of the situation are categorically different even if the attitudes on the level of the individual correspond to those during the 19th - 20th century.

>>14688037
Depend how overpriced they are and how informed the buyers were. If they are already rich no pb. If they'e stacking all their earnings into it right now it could get ugly. If the crash is severe enough the house won't be worth much. Again, it's a mortgage specific-issue,but look how it turned out in 2008.

>>14687706
https://discord.gg/3UH89UV

>>14688034
>>14688070
If you really think in such a self-defeating way that ignores the emotional reality of others no wonder no one wants to fuck you, let alone get into anything long term.

>>14688052
I didn't want to be mean anon, I'm sure you'll manage to truly believe eventually. Not that I care, I'm Jewish and I meet Satan evey night, but to each his own.

>>14688109

>>14688104
Do you also think that the Amish aren't sexual degenerates

>>14687843
Post brapper and feet, whore

>>14688104
Perhaps you're right, and perhaps we don't fundamentally disagree, I just think the technological aspect is superficial in terms of changing the actual sexual behaviors, because it's mainly about narcissistically broadcasting existing behavior (or even imagined ideal behavior). People get a kick out of promoting promiscuity or condemning it online, meawhile they enforce very little promiscuity or chastity in themselves.

So in my view the issue is social-media-fuelled narcissism and hysteria and obsessing over issues (quite like what we do here on 4chan actually) more than the fucking around which is mundane and in all likelihood comparable to before if not tamer. We engineer ourselves into mass neurosis but imo this is a separate issue from adultery. So pragmatically different yes, but it's not so much a matter of sexuality as ideology (and the narrowing of ideological perspective).

Now if you're talking about fucked up fetish developing over the internet (especially pedophilia), I agree that while it is numerically fringe, it's really scary.

>>14688147
False equivalence, this example ties in more with the situation described in small highly connected rural communities

>>14688147
>degenerate modernfag thinking he has the right to call anyone degenerate
The Amish shouldn’t be romanticized but they’re much better off than us in many, many ways

>>14688171
if only they weren't filthy heretics.

>>14688147
Don't the Amish have this coming-of-age ritual where they must go in the outside world, enjoy themselves and perhaps even break a few rules regarding alcohol and sex so that when they return a few years later they've gotten the urges out of their system and are ready to settle down?

It's a pretty sound system, I have a few married friends who were horndogs in age 14-24, and they all tell me they're glad they partied their heart out so they feel no regret about staying committed. Obviously not everyone is going to need and a scant few should perhaps completely avoid it, but for most people the logic bears out.

>>14688171
>its ability to largely avoid most of the social proble-

>>14688162
Hadn't even thought of the fetish aspect, I think what you describe in terms of social media makes sense although given dating apps and text messaging/direct messages/snapchat that tends to add to promiscuity. Maybe less so in those latter cases since those tie in to what you're saying with narcissism/attention grabbing.

Basically I think I'm with you on most of these points, just between how technology changes the interaction and who has access to the data and how it's being used I have bad feelings about where it all might go even if I have little idea where.

>>14688182
The real redpill is to want to establish a community of Christians in a similar spirit of simple living, strong community, pacifism and semi-anarchism along whatever theological line one believes is proper.

>>14688051
no one cares about your books faggot

You continue to pursue whores and cunts.

>>14688189
>one example = all
Amish are rapists!1!1!1!
I expect better of /lit/.

>>14688109
t. roastie

>>14688203
>one example

>>14688185
Yup, Rumspringa. 90-95% rejoin the church, but that’s not too surprising since the community is essentially a big support network and literally everyone you’ve grown up around or interacted with is in it.

>>14688193
Literally more than 99% of people today are deep down fucked by the capitalistic mindset of individualism, so a community like this will never be successfully established, even among the "christians".

>>14688208
Ten bucks says a kike wrote this shit, fuck off

>>14688193
>Christianity
Christianity has some useful moral ideas, but how can any rational human being bring themselves to believe in a fucking magical sky wizard for which there's no evidence?

If your reply uses words such as "fedora" or "autist", or contains an image with a similar ad hominem theme, then you are just admitting that you are too stupid to provide a rational and logical rebuttal to my post, and thereby admitting that I am right.

>>14688218
Cope

>>14688215
I know, it’s blackpilling to think about. At least there’s still becoming a recluse in the woods, r-right?

>>14688222
>fucking magical sky wizard for which there's no evidence?
This is literal fedora strawmanning though so I’m gonna call you a fedora

>>14688226
I don't know you so I can't tell, but you're probably too weak and spoiled by the comforts of civilization to go full reclusive in the woods.

>>14688235
I’m going to have to prove you wrong, anon, but I’ll be hanging out in the woods so you’ll never know.

>>14688246
I hope you do, anon. I really do.

>>14688253
Thanks, anon, I hope you can escape as well.

>>14688198
Where do I meet pure women?

>>14687954
I am a female yes

>>14688222
by saying that you are underestimating humanity for its entire existence simply because you don't understand the hermeneutics of the celestial-creator figure

i. man is a religious being
ii. every culture has in its beginning a celestial god (that's due to the edenic nostalgia - read mircea eliade and wilhelm schmidt)
iii. jesus is truly God made flesh (read the new testament)

>>14688336
would you be ever so kind to show us a picture of your precious feet madam?

>>14688033
That's patterns we see today in surviving primitive societies, not the high-calorie megafauna hunters Europeans descend from. Women do most of the work in places hunts aren't essential, where men are nigh-vestigial and do the peacock thing against each other, but even there it's the men that saddle up when bandits come around.

>>14688356
Only after marriage, my sweet

>>14688371
the real question is, can you knit? i don't even care if you're a virgin or not, but if you won't knit me a sweater with love in every stitch you are not for me.

>>14688222
oh, right, evidence, that's the most useful standard for humanity, that's what causes happiness and flourishing, is empiricism
>muh iphones
>muh sanitation
oh nice there is a cute pattern in my necrotic flesh, this is certainly worth dying alone

>>14687981
Having a family is fine but I dont want to become Mr and Mrs stencil. Like my wife needs the new hoover vaccum because all the other ladies in my cul de sac got one

>>14688356
>>14688388
>replying to a larper

>>14688388
I can sew, but I have no knitting experience yet. I'm willing to learn and knit the comfiest sweaters for you every winter my darling, and little gloves for our children too

>>14688032
>400 years ago

>>14688394
There were plenty of less-conforming families then and now, slightly eccentric, maybe some junk in the yard, ideally living a little ways out in the country near close friends.
>ywn have buddies with wood, metal, and auto shops in a 2-minute walk that you trade raw milk and fresh eggs with

>>14688405
what about a little baby hat?

>>14688321
Try heading east of Finland, in Karelia.

>>14688321
Gender Studies majors

>>14688401
it's all we have left...

>>14688192
>dating apps and text messaging/direct messages/snapchat that tends to add to promiscuity
I wonder about this. Clearly it changes things, but I figure it's more about expectations (people enhance their apparence on social media, leading to high standards and regular disappointments). In reality the kind of girl you meet on dating app as a teen are exactly the girls you would have met without them. And if you weren't confitable havnig sex without an app, I hardly see how even more exposure would make things easier. But perhaps it adds to the peer pressure for early sex. That might make a difference yes.

> I have bad feelings about where it all might go
I'm with you on this, I'm not expecting a surge of unwante babies anytime soon but a rise in mental illnesses wouldn't be too surprising.

>>14688208
This is pretty sad, it seems the same dirty bargain is recurring up everywhere: trade physical personal boundaries for togetherness and peade and vice-versa. Well I suppose since cover-up of sex abuse is not an Amish-exclusive thing they still have it better overall, but this feels nasty.

>>14688218
What does that change, Ultra-orthodox Jews live similarly as Amish and have the same issues with child abuse.

>>14688226
No escape from the world anon, even in a monastery. Read The Dialogue of the Carmelites by Georges Bernanos. It'll strengthen your spirit.

>>14688222
> but how can any rational human being bring themselves to believe in a fucking magical sky wizard for which there's no evidence
I get your point anon, but when you get down to it most of what we do or think rests on a manifold things that come without supporting evidence and without understanding on our part, and the ultimate outcome of our actions is out of our hands. Rational or not we all rely on mythologies (ie elaborate copes) to survive.
If the Christian God provides a good cope to some, all the better to them. That's not giving a pass to the fanatics and the pedo, of course, but the decent folk have earned their cope I think.

>>14688336
Marry me, anon, I want lots of children

>>14688456
>What does that change, Ultra-orthodox Jews live similarly as Amish and have the same issues with child abuse.
Extra blackpill: absolutely everyone has huge issues with child abuse, huge portion of kids are raped, a lot of them are rescued by social services and raped by someone else, you have drove past houses that are child brothels in the last month, the world lies in grievous sin and we deserve everything that happens to us.

>>14687706
>settling down
Fuck off, those days are never coming back. Its not healthy for anyone to live that way. I'm not saying the child free bug man shit is good (its even worse) , but your less than a mid-wit if you want that kind of life.

>>14688347
Not the other anon, I can get behind the gist of your reasoning, but the claim that all culture begin with a celestial god seem anthropologically dubious. The sky god (and likewise the sun god) are generally later developments compared to animistic beliefs.

>>14688368
>That's patterns we see today in surviving primitive societies, not the high-calorie megafauna hunters Europeans descend from.
Yes, unfortunately the life of the truly primitive men can only be a matter of conjecture. But the amount of labor necessary for maintenance is staggering and almost universally shouldered by the women.
Men aren't useless far from that, but they're to women what in early Middle Ages soldiers were often to farmers: stronger and more daring and not one bit inclined to work, and more regularly exposed to physical threats.

>>14688393
I agree with you but sanitation is pretty useful, and it doesn't need to be very advanced to make a huge difference.

>>14687721
>>14687795
>>14687981
>>14688061
Read Epicurus

>>14688531
Exactly, teaching doctors to wash their hands wasn't a scientific revolution and would have had just as positive of an effect if it had been presented as a religious ablution.

>>14687864
>Can someone provide me some arguments/studies supporting it?
hello bugman

>>14688471
>Extra blackpill: absolutely everyone has huge issues with child abuse, huge portion of kids are raped
Yes I know anon, and the more I read about it the bigger and the more helpless it seems. I always found the idea of the blackpill a bit corny but on that particular count I really wish I knew less about it than I do. If I really end up killing myself one day this will probably factor in quite a bit.

>>14688528
>stronger and more daring and not one bit inclined to work
Again, Ice People males don't share the patterns found in Sun People. The semi-autistic "the hunt" obsession finds expression in all kinds of hobbies and craftsmanship all through history, with a common theme of a wife caring for the homestead broadly while the husband plays a specialized role as a potter blacksmith miller etc. in his community, even in more ancient societies (Otzi couldn't have crafted all his gear himself).

>>14688528
mircea refutes the point that animistic/totemistic beliefs precede the celestial god. read his book "the quest". he cites other anthropologists and ethnologists (one of them wilhelm schmidt). the primordial sky god comes before the second primordial (yes, two primordials) phase of eden like abundance. the celestial god becomes historically forgotten in favor of deities for agriculture/hunt

>>14688550
I'm the farthest thing from an anti-natalist but if I could be convinced that would be it. I wonder if this is another side-effect of government monopolization of violence; it seems pretty obvious that (same-race) lynchings and vigilante violence were anti-sociopath measures, where no amount of debate could logically dislodge someone except for everyone in town agreeing that there's something creepy about him; I wonder if that would be effective against molesters, or if they profited from it and the past was even more rapey than the present.

>>14687721
No it wasn't. The men who managed to have it were as stressed, competitive, and degenerate as the suits in the cities that you so despise today are. You only think there's a difference because you came after it ended.

>>14687998
Lady Chatterley is a Forward Independent New Woman because she's had sex with her one (1) boyfriend before getting married, and she only cucks him when he's literally an impotent cripple.

>>14687721
>women being sluts is comfy

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

>>14687737
Nigga what the hell is that screen

>>14688208
>>14688189
>yeah sure, but you never hear em asking for a welfare check

>>14688229
>claims it's a straw man
>provides no reasoning to substantiate his claim that it's a straw man
And thus your post is rightly ignored. All you have done is admit that I am right, since you were unable to counter my assertions (well okay I posed a question, but there was an assertion contained within the question - namely that there's no evidence for a sky wizard).

Enjoy being a moron, faggot.

>>14688347
>every culture has in its beginning a celestial god
Correction: "every pre-scientific civilisation that didn't have the tools to understand the universe properly came up with creation myths, which are obviously a bunch of bullshit, but it's the only way they could make sense of the world"

>>14688393
You're proving exactly what I said, that you can only come up with ad hominem, because you are a moron.

All you're saying is "my magical sky wizard stories comfort me, like a comfort blanket".

That doesn't make them true. Which you would know if you weren't a moron.

Also, empiricism does not entail materialism, you fucking moron.

>>14688394
Then don't buy the Hoover, make your own goddamn decisions.

>>14688051
Based
This has nothing to do with literature, the people perpetuating this awful thread killed /lit/

>>14688456
>I get your point anon, but when you get down to it most of what we do or think rests on a manifold things that come without supporting evidence and without understanding on our part, and the ultimate outcome of our actions is out of our hands. Rational or not we all rely on mythologies (ie elaborate copes) to survive.
But most of what we think is actually true and supported by evidence. Example: even if you haven't seen Donald Trump in the flesh, you have evidence to show what he looks like. TV footage, YouTube videos, all that stuff. And you could say that isn't CONCLUSIVE evidence necessarily, because the TV could be lying to you (but then again even seeing him in the flesh could involve some sort of deception) - but it's highly, highly unlikely that every single TV station (globally) is collaborating to lie to you. There's no good evidence to say they're all lying. The evidence supports that they're showing accurate images.

So humans absolutely form our beliefs upon evidence. Although humans have also, unfortunately, formed beliefs based on superstition, throughout the centuries. Like witchcraft, ghosts, that sort of shit. And religion falls into that category.

We would be better off for believing in the truth. For the truth is real. And the truth gives us things like medicine, computers, cars, food, buildings, plumbing, electricity, etc.

>>14688097
This shit disgusts me

>>14688032
Fuck niggers

>>14688996
>That doesn't make them true.
literally who cares, your desire to impose this on the world is just autism
take your meds

>>14689010
>And the truth gives us things like medicine, computers, cars, food, buildings, plumbing, electricity, etc.
So we value truth because it gives us things to consooom?

>>14687737
>>14688982
this is how you separate the pseuds from the actual readers, anon is so used to books that he makes his screen look like one

>>14689121
Some people read books that have not been soaked in tea.

>>14689132
I prefer reading under warm lighting, so all my books have this appearance. Who tf reads with a massive blue light illuminating their pages?

>>14689137
What kind of a lamp makes your paper look like coffee stain?

>>14687717
>Being in love and raising children, as countless generations have done before you
>yikes
>Fuck bitches buy products die young instead

The most simple animal instincts are to breed and continue your line. That's it. That we added the beauty of love on top of that is the most simple addition to the most simple instincts. There's little else that matters.

>>14689152
I have no idea why these people aren't focused on vagus nerve taps, it's the ultimate masturbation.

>>14689160
Give it 15 years - VR + Haptic feedback will entirely separate all those who only seek pleasure. Maybe everyone else will be better for it.

>>14689148
Have you ever bought or used a lamp bulb under 3000k or used a lampshade ever?

>>14687825
You should go back, you don't belong here. You are not wanted.

>>14689183
My monitor is literally backlit with candles and my pages still don't look like that.

>>14687864
You must be fun at parties

>>14689204
Yet we are not at a party. The validity of concepts discussed are important on this board. You can't just make shit up from your ass.
>>14688549
Hello retard. I asked for arguments in case there wasn't any studies so as not to be a scientisist bugman but if you rather believe in anything you see on 4chinz, be my guest.

>>14689217
Bugman mad

>>14687721
It sure sounds cozy.

>>14687998
>milquetoast
It's not the fact that women in there 20s are having several sexual partners. The other poster seems to be referencing the rather casual and public nature of her comment. One could say it reeks of entitlement and shows how shallow people in the West currently are. Also using unnessary long words does not make you sound smarter. For most people all it does is make your point less clear.

>>14688189
One example. Noice.

Just so you know.
1 out of every 4 American girls are sexual abused before they turn 18

>>14689195
Have you ever considered the possibility you’re blind?

>>14688558
>with a common theme of a wife caring for the homestead broadly while the husband plays a specialized role as a potter blacksmith miller
Interesting, I didn't know this thread was widespread.

>>14688569
I'll read his book (have meant to read Eliade in a long time). But how up to date do you think his antrhopology is? It's a science that has changed a lot in the pst 50 years.
As far as representation (through carvings and sculptures for instance) it seems all the oldest we have are about men, women and animal, and representation of celestial bodies only appear much later. I imagine the celestial god is a more abstract (or rather unmanifested in a simple form) and thus do not lead itself easily to representation, not to mention the possible taboo around that practice. But how would you then assert he as worshipped, he he was later forgotten and no representations are left?

>>14688570
>government monopolization of violence
Possible but you have to consider that many pedophile are vey good at appearing innocuous or justifying themselves. See how many of them turn out to be priests, elder, community leaders that on the face of it do not appears the least bit creepy. The first factor in escaping retorsion in my understanding is staying unnoticed (including by the victims) or, barring that, silencing the victim and witnesses, and it is in that ability of silencing that the distinction between lynched pedophiles and thriving pedophiles lies. A very disturbing thing, a woman who used to work as teacher ina school for mute-deaf children told me they are often very promiscuous (and violently so) very young. The reason is that they are dispropotionately victim of abuse and, in turn, the reason for that is that being mute-deaf it is extremely hard for them to communicate their abuse to adults.
So while the government suspends the spontaneous popular reflex of lynching the pedo, I'm inclined to believe the worst pedo are in little risk to be lynched at all, unless a testimony and inquiry expose them (and in this the government is supposed to be playing a massive enforcement role).
My conclusion would be that the past was marginally more rapey, when it comes to children at least. But only marginally, we don't expose pedo that often, yet we know there are lot of them.

>>14687706

they want sex literally all the time

>>14689047
Those are burnt Germans fucktard

>>14689333
Good. It should be 4 out of 4, the fucking whores.

>>14689426
>It's a science
Let me stop you right there

>>14689426
I wonder if there were certain heresies etc. that tended to proxy well to pedophilia and developed harsh penalties as an immune response.

Oh, something I hadn't thought of before, it was common in premodern societies for nobody to be alone ever. Kings would be piercing some princess's maidenhead and their exchequer and master of horse would be sleeping on the floor. Lots of peasant societies would all sleep in the same big room. I guess some East Indians still do.

>>14688693
You clearly haven't read the book or very superficially (perhaps you've skimmed the wikipedia page). It's about finding a renewal in vitality in a broken an machine-like world.
Regarding adultery the point is precisely that Lady Chatterley's adultery, in this book, is commonplace and boring.

>>14689010
>every pre-scientific civilisation, etc
This applies to every scientific theories except the most up-to-date, and even then it's debatable.What do you tink of the phlogistic theory? Of the inability of string theory to produce a single actually testable prediction in 30 years? Of the scientific community clinging to dark matter despite unclear understanding of its nature and despite most mechanism for this dark matter having been essentially disproven?

What do you make of the emphasis, among cosmologist, on naturnalness, which brings them to ask themselves why cosmological parameters have the value they have even though there is no possible empirical way to adress the question?

Most of science relies on a hefty combinaison of fundamental but unverifiable intuitions ("ideas", "insight", "hunch", "reasonable assumption" whose reasonableness is of course rarely ever explicited), hearsay cemented by repetition and authority but artificially compounded by fashion, trends, ambition, petty rivalries and unexamined bias (ie peer-review, verification, impact factor inflation, bad faith, dogmatic blindness and asinine statistical tests very often) and tentative replication in the best case (this one is legit but very rarely performed, and when it is more often than not the replication fails), and that's just what I can be bothered to enumerate off the top o my head.

Yes, science does accumulate some limited and somewhat coherent set of truths, and it's perhaps what we have best in tems of accuracy (but then again accuracy is only half the battle), but you have no idea how conditional, fleeting and dubious those truths are, more importantly how minoritary they are compared to all the shit, or how shitty scientists themselves are at self-criticism and actually understanding the scientific method. Science nowadays is a publication industry with an oversize sensitivity to fads, a strong element of salesmanship and a endless hunger for increasingly scarce funding. TV doesn't need to show wrong images to mislead you, in fact they most often mislead themselves before anything else. Even if the images are there, you have to ask what images aren't there that should be. And images are nothing without interpretation. And I'm not going illuminati on you, mainstream sources tend to be better than fringe sources, but that's about their only virtue. You're better off without TV information wise.

>humans absolutely form our beliefs upon evidence.
Yes, and that also applies to the religious. But evidence is only a very small part of it. I work in statistics applied to epidemiology. You wouldn't believe the bullshit that go make it to into good journals.

>>14689012
Who cares? If fucking disgusts you that much, if you think women who have sex befoe marriage are whores, but if they are virgin but over 30 they're spoiled, but of course virgin women under 30 wouldn't date you for some mysterious reason, then might as well go all the way through and become priest.

My only point above was that complaining about non-chad men above 30 not getting laid is simply retarded. Or rather, I should say any man that is not a complete moron and takes care of himself becomes a chad in the eyes of younger women at age 40. It's one of the most common platitudes of dating.
If you want to find anothe reason to complain, feel free, but don't use such a blatantly inaccurate pretext to do so. It defeats the purpose entirely.

>>14689512
>y any man that is not a complete moron and takes care of himself becomes a chad in the eyes of younger women at age 40

bullshit dude

>>14687706
The Second Sex

>>14689152
>countless generation before you lived the consumerist live of a the stereotypical Americain middle-class white male in the 50s
This is what >>14687717 wht objecting to. Why not picture a traditional family in the 1600 (or whenever before 1830) instead of the already alienated and commodified postwar American Dream? Why idolize a fucking a lifestyle ad?

>>14689512
It's a cope. No man over 40 in the real world is banging 20 yo. Every man I've ever met in their 40s has a fat ugly wife.

>>14689486
That's an interesting hypothesis, but I wonder how sensitive people were to this kind of child suffering at the time. Sure nobody wants to see his child being mutilated, but if he get to be in bed with a powerful man, doesn't bleed, doesn't cry and is perhaps even rewarded for it, maybe a more ancient morality wouldn't have thought it bad.

Well it probably depends on the civilisation but most ancient culture didn't put as much emphasis on the feeling of children as we do.

There also how children were taken care of. In some culture they would not see their parents or an adult man until their teenage years at least.

>>14689530
>put as much emphasis on the feeling of children as we do.

society doesn't give a flying fuck about children or their lives, much less their feelings or ensuring their healthy development. ancient cultures were equally as callous, but their callousness was a function of preparing their children for the suffering of premodern times, not because they saw children as... things to be exploited. American society is anti-infant.

>>14689526
>Every man I've ever met in their 40s has a fat ugly wife.
Never heard of a man in his 40 or 50s leaving the wife for their younger secretary? Or a tribe chieftain or king taking a 18 year old third wife? Or a middle-aged company executive cheating on his wife with a naive debuting actress?
Have you not been exposed to fiction, history or journalism written in the past 300 years? Have you never heard of 40, 50, sometimes 60 years old men being accused of having slept with teenagers and confessing but saying the attraction was mutual? And do you think all those cases only apply to teenagers, never to girls who are 20 or 21?

Or are you simply delusional?

The first time I've seen a 40 y-o guy date a younger girl I was fresh out of highschool, his girlfriend was actually a 19 years old former classmate of mine. Stories like this are everywhere. Of course you can choose to believe everyone is making shit up (including the guy who are not 40 and have not reason to brag), or that all those old guys are waiting for their girlfriends to turn 30 before fucking them.

Whatever makes you feel better (or worse if that's you aim). You won't change the fact that this pattern is as common as dumb teenagers getting pregnant, perhaps even more so.

>>14689549
>14689486
There's a lot of anxiety about how children perceive their environment and what is best for us. At least in the Western world. We still are a long way to not treating children a bit like our toys sometimes, but psychopediatry is a thing (if only a fashionable thing), and past age 6 parents in upper middle class self-conscious neighborhood try to hear what they children want to say. It sometimes even makes it harder for them to discipline their kids.

As an indisputable expert in women allow me to contribute. The truth is: women never wanted to settle down, they had to. Or rather they only want to settle down on their terms rather than have it be an inevitable consequence of being financially dependent on men. Much of the discussion and criticism of feminism comes from the sexual liberation of women, and this itself is a male-driven assumption. Women view sex as a connective, a pleasurable act in itself but also able to connect with other, more lasting, pleasurable and valuable things. A good man especially, because a good man is a nice thing to have. In conceptualizing the female sex drive this is often a detail men, who typically view sex as an end in itself, overlook.

More than sex (and having a lot of it which is what men think feminism made women pursue) is a basic control over one's life. If "settling down" becomes an option than an absolute necessity, women will delay it until the strategic conditions are optimal. Settling down is deeply satisfying and many women would be happy to do it, but there are practical considerations that go into it, it's a strategic life decision of great importance, rather than a pressure that is force on them because they aren't allowed to experience other possibilities.
There's more to say about this and I anticipate several criticisms but I think this is a big part of the issue.

>>14689591

>>14689565
>At least in the Western world.
>advertise sex, drugs, and consumerism ad mortem
>the women believe abortion is a right
>the men too cucked to oppose this

No.

>>14689591
Pretty expertful take anon.

>>14689598
Expertful criticism as well.

>>14688034
based and blackpilled

>>14687795
single income was double before women entered the workforce, retard

>>14689604
The fact that you see those two as incompatible betrays your superficial thinking. Traditional societies are governed by commitment to rules deduced fom an understanding of natural order (even if they rely in practice on a lot of age-old compromises). Modern society are governed by regulations deduced from a stipulation of individual rights (even if they rely in practice on a massive alienation of the individual).

This emphasis on the individual and his liberty to enjoy gives us consumerism but also excessive worry about what a child wants, desires and feels. This leads to what French call the syndrome of the child-king (enfant-roi) where a kid becomes unhinged because his oversensitive parents are afraid to hurt him by putting limitations on his wants.

I swear people on /lit/ are getting dumber by the thread. They cannot understand a simple relationship, they have to plaster they simplistic understanding of what they think is morality onto everything. This place is the reddit of the edgy kids, same unwarranted smugness and one-dimensional thinking, only with reactionary belief instead of progressive ones. Go read some Lasch and stop embarassing yourself you fucking simpleton.

Apologies to the thoughtful posters itt.

>>14689598
Throughout history the lives of women have been subject to the violent imperatives of tyrannical men. Their insatiable lust, their obsession with excitement and violence, and their sexual tastes have been bred into them by the psychopathic men they constantly came in contact with. This is why it is so difficult to find a good woman; because good men are also hard to find. Women are what history has made them to be. Men are what history has made them to be. At the end of the day, psychopaths rule the world and their sickness seeps into the genome more and more as the ages pass. This is why 2020 is the way it is.

>>14689628
>implying men haven't been subject to imperatives of mothers-in-law

>>14689618
By that count a couple earning equally should be able to get a two story house, one or two cars and as many children with a run-of-the-mill office job each. Clearly salaies have fallen even lower than that.

>>14689626
Infanticide is not a "right", sophist.

>>14689630
The relationship between mother-in-laws and son-in-laws accross culture is a pretty fascinating topic.

Some cultures see the mother-in-law as antagonistic and resentful.

Other understand the normal relationship to be that of light, flirty friendship, since because of the age difference and marital relation there is no risk of an actual affair.

Some take the exact opposite stance, that a mother in law is almost like a mother, that in consequence even joking with her is a gateway into incestual thoughts (if not actions), and that such a crime is so horrible that it's better to avoid direct interactions entirely.

Consequently, in those cultures, if a mother-inlaw and a son-in-law are in the same room, it's better that they do not talk or even meet eyes, and if the mother-in-law wants some errand to be made, instead of asking the son-in-law, she will make an audible but undirected comment like "we could really use some wood in the fireplace" or "it would be nice if the trash were taken out", and the son-in-law is to take the clue and perform the deed, all without eye contact of course.

>>14689638
If you are unable to distinguish description from advocation, why do you even bother coming here? Or perhaps you're trying to "troll"? Well I ain't baiting anymore Mr. Wholesome Jesus.

>>14688996
Isn't your false equivalence of deity to sky wizard a straw man in itself? Nobody can actually know whether God or some primordial force really exists, there are arguments that I think point towards a justified skepticism of both God and Empirical reality. Either way, you will never get Empirical evidence for God, nor will you ever get any justification for your adherence to Empirical evidences. I reccomend you read Kant and Hegel if you haven't, they both provide a good middle ground between blind belief on the one hand, and arrogant assumption on the other.

>>14688039
>tldr is longer than the first paragraph

>>14688039
>if they did it for a reason like that they're probably of better character than someone who wanted to sleep around for indulgence etc
Categorically False.
A woman whose sexual history consists of four one night stands with four different alpha chads is of higher character and virtue than a woman whose sexual history consists of a single long term relationship with one beta cuck. In the former case, the woman was simply responding to the dictates of her biology. It is nature in its most pure and innocent form. Moreover, she only had sex four times in her entire life. In the latter case, the relationship and sexual intercourse was some inauthentic and manipulative contrivance in order to extract resources or to procure some sort of social end. It is a reprehensible display of bad character that is at once devious and contrary to nature. Moreover, she would have had sex hundreds of times, possibly thousands of times depending on the length of the relationship, and to a meek low testosterone peanut skulled beta cuck no less.
Lmfao at any cuckold who thinks the latter is preferable.

>>14687706
mein kampf

>>14687833
this

>>14688336
GTFO MY BOARD RRRRRRRRRRRROASTIIIIEEE REEEEEEE

>>14687848
Søren Kierkegaard? Is that you?

>>14687717
No, fool.
What you see in the picture reveals you, not OP.

>Property
>equal/10 Mate
>noncuck Progeny
>By age 30
Strip away the 1950s (as you peg it) cosmetics, thats an enviable state of comfy.

How many here can boast half of those?

>>14688575
Oi, he just wanted the fruits of that life, not the process.

>this is the first thread i go into after waking up
>valentine's day is also near
you know, i really didn't want to enjoy myself today too :)

>>14687944
let's see some pics

>>14689063
>civilizations literally being created and destroyed upon the sturdiness of religious beliefs
> "literally who cares"

>>14689072

consumption is just one way of using applied human knowledge

>>14689634
they have and how would you care for children with both parents working

>>14689956
Sturdy religious beliefs lead to sturdy civilizations, but anon rejects those as unfortunate superstitions, since once we're all on the same rational materialistic page we'll be able to build stable civilizations... right?

>>14688471
Lmao that pic

>>14689748
God is directly in front of your face! Tat Tvam Asi friend, you’re really retarded here

>>14687998
>My historical anecdote prove the norm of the moral fabric of the past

>>14687869
Idk. Maybe if people actually read philosophy for a second they could understand. But no, it's completely useless m9 it gives you no riches after all. Drone along in confusion, little one.

>>14689434
Really?