Thus Spoke Zarathustra

[Anonymous No.14051986]

>"A woman's love contains injustice and blindness toward all that she does not love."
>"Woman are still not capable of friendship: women are still cats, and birds too. Or in the best case, cows."

How could one man be so based?

[Anonymous No.14052002]

>>14051986
>Or in the best case, cows

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14052019]

Unconditional love contains injustice and blindness.

The second charge is just as skewed. Nietzsche has never been a woman. But the women of his day had one business and that was love and family building. Things have changed.

[Anonymous No.14052025]

typical incel

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14052026]

>>14052002
Seems Friedrich liked ‘em big, no?

[Anonymous No.14052041]

>>14052019
Idk. I think he has a point, to a degree. He goes on later to talk about how men are capable of friendship, but few every actually experience it.

I don't think women will ever be able to experience what it's like to be friends in the same way men do. Just like men will never experience love the same way women do.

[Anonymous No.14052075]

>>14052025
Yeah just have sex Freddy boy

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.14052313]

>>14051986
By founding his basement on sexist identitarianism.

>One day Hilda brought a book to the train which I simply had to read. It was
Nietzsche's Zarathustra. I immediately tried to absorb the entire work, but something
about it struck me as alien. That was, as I realised later, the overly pathetic, even
theatrical element which, to me, appeared wilful rather than perfect. I then read two
books about the author. Even these did not enlighten me any further. So I returned
Zarathustra somewhat shamefacedly.

Alfred Rosenberg, "Memoirs of Alfred Rosenberg".

>>14052019
>Unconditional love contains injustice and blindness.
Contrarily: all Love is unconditional, the basis of justice, and opens vision. "Conditional" "love" is an euphemism for "gratification" and/or "lust".

[Anonymous No.14052321]

>>14052025
>INCEL INCEL INCEL

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.14052323]

>>14051986
By founding his basement on sexist identitarianism.

>One day Hilda brought a book to the train which I simply had to read. It was Nietzsche's Zarathustra. I immediately tried to absorb the entire work, but something about it struck me as alien. That was, as I realised later, the overly pathetic, even theatrical element which, to me, appeared wilful rather than perfect. I then read two books about the author. Even these did not enlighten me any further. So I returned Zarathustra somewhat shamefacedly.

Alfred Rosenberg, "Memoirs of Alfred Rosenberg".

>>14052019
>Unconditional love contains injustice and blindness.
Contrarily: all Love is unconditional, the basis of justice, and opens vision. "Conditional" "love" is an euphemism for "gratification" and/or "lust".

[Anonymous No.14052325]

>>14052026
Are you really a lesbian?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.14052401]

>>14052041
Filial love has fallen on real hard times, I know. Capitalism, both industrial and technological periods, alienate people so much. People blame individualism, but these loners are not my idea of individualism. They’re just fragmented people.

I disagree with your second thought completely.

>>14052323
Sometimes the best love is unconditional. But it can be a pain and side with the unjust. Say a mother’s love for a psychotic killer son, or a woman falls in love with an abusers and never gives up on him to the detriment of everyone. Love can be crazy sometimes. You have to be sober enough to put conditions on it. Conditional love isn’t about sex specifically.

>>14052325
I’d like to play with that woman’s breasts, if you know what I mean.

[Anonymous No.14052460]

>no!!! women aren't like that at all!!

[Anonymous No.14052512]

>>14051986
I think the reason people primarily on 4chan believe in this sort of stuff is because they are venting their frustations about women in a male space. You can see this type of outlook reflected on twitter in female spaces, the 'men aint shit' type rhetoric. It's all too exhausting. I feel sorry for anyone who starts a sentence with 'women are X' because it shows how little experience they have with people.

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.14052541]

>>14052401
In the examples that you mentioned, one may potentially either: suppress/sublimate, repress/pervert, or occlude/forget one's Love for someone, not conditionalize it. Love cannot be conditionalized because it is affinitybased, and constant, meaning that it can only be modified via ontological modification.

>Conditional love isn’t about sex specifically.
Neither is gratification.

[Anonymous No.14052560]

>>14052512
>>14052460

[Anonymous No.14052585]

>>14052541
>love can’t be x
noun
1.
an intense feeling of deep affection.

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.14052613]

>>14052585
Love propels/substantiates Affect, regardless of degree of intensity of the latter.

[Anonymous No.14052627]

>>14052613
>Love propels/substantiates Affect
What did they mean by this?

[Anonymous No.14052749]

>>14052025
Post body

[Anonymous No.14052854]

>>14052512
I hope she sees this bro

[Anonymous No.14053070]

Felicitations, fucking faggots! I’m a honking nigger named Javadaquarius, just got my log of a cock nommed by a pert little snow bunny (taken lmao), sweet aryan lips to suckle my fuck nuckle and gulp the milk therein.
Where do you think you are—/pol/? This is real nigga territory. Keep this Nietzsche altright shit out of my sight, or maybe I need to go into more detail?