>feminist theory >female """intellectuals""" Not even once.

File: 97 KB, 1969x1105, HMMMMM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 15:49:56 2017 No.9879023 [Reply] [Original]

>feminist theory
>female """intellectuals"""
Not even once.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 15:55:23 2017 No.9879053 Feminist women (like here) dominate the publishing and agent world, which is probably why so many good books are going unpublished nowadays. That's why we get Hunger games ripoff #1167, and Milk and Honey

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 15:56:25 2017 No.9879058 File: 36 KB, 460x793, ottom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Heh

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 15:59:35 2017 No.9879075

>>9879053
I just don't understand it, man. I am reading these feminist theory texts, theses, and articles, and all I see is the same stuff (like in the OP) repeated all over again. I thought it was a meme before I started reading it, but it's all true.

I swear to god, it's all about sex, vaginas, rape and these mystical female interpretations of the world which are linked to their lack of voice under the patriarchy.

It must be so easy being a feminist critic. You just learn these few points and apply them to every text you read...

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:00:54 2017 No.9879085 File: 49 KB, 793x410, modern academia.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:02:18 2017 No.9879092 >>9879085 Yeah, absolutely what I had in mind.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:02:43 2017 No.9879093 Neat, yet another woman-bashing thread. Big guys! Big brains! Big swinging Dicks! Ha ha! No man has every wrote anything preposterous are ridiculous! Ha Ha! Nope!

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:04:55 2017 No.9879103 >>9879023 post the article I love Women Hate Threads, /lit/ Edition

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:05:26 2017 No.9879106
File: 95 KB, 444x640, Harawaybook.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9879023
I am reading pic related right now and it is extremely interesting. bell hooks is unironically a good feminist theorist if you are one of those brainlets who insist that everything be written in so-called plain English and require no prior knowledge (which, by the way, is in fact a politicized claim but we won't get into that). If you want an actual way in to feminist theory, don't read fucking Irigaray. Start with de Beauvoir. Not that you will, because this is just another pointless misogyny thread most likely started by a /pol/ refugee.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:07:07 2017 No.9879115
File: 18 KB, 700x338, 1486159899213.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>/lit/ is afraid of feminist intellectuals
In the words of one of the smartest persons alive, Judith Butler:
The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.

I bet none of you idiots can even understand feminist phenomenology.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:07:08 2017 No.9879116 >>9879085 This would be perfect if one of them was just "Um I have a bf"

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:08:37 2017 No.9879124 >>9879115 That reads like a parody of continental philosophy written by an analytic. Horrendous writing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:08:38 2017 No.9879125 File: 11 KB, 220x258, 1502047916038.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9879085 I warned you

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:08:57 2017 No.9879128 >>9879103 https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/handle/11375/13808 >>9879106 >>9879115 >>9879093 I am sorry you got triggered, girls, but the truth is, all I've read so far has been nothing but regurgitation of the same few key topics I listed above.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:09:46 2017 No.9879130 Feminism died when dykes became a thing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:10:31 2017 No.9879138 >>9879115 >I bet none of you idiots can even understand feminist phenomenology. Because it is multitudinous, labyrinthine, simultaneous, unlike the narrowly-focused, phallocentric male one?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:10:59 2017 No.9879142 >>9879128 What have you read so far?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:12:24 2017 No.9879151 >>9879106 But Irigaray is perfect if you want some bullshit to laugh at, which is what this is obviously all about

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:13:10 2017 No.9879154

>>9879128
>I am sorry you got triggered
It's funny to me that "anti-feminists" use this kind of language. You made a lazy topic bashing women clearly because you are, in fact, the one who is "triggered". Also, I am a cis straight white man.

>all I've read so far
What have you read so far?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:13:46 2017 No.9879158 >>9879124 >That reads like a parody of continental philosophy written by an analytic. Horrendous writing. >Woman oppresses me with them big words and I have no reading comprehension the post I bet you didnt even get into college.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:16:21 2017 No.9879172

>>9879142
>>9879154

Last 3 essays I read:
>“Not to Die, but to Survive”: The Construction
of Female Voice in Isabel Allende’s The House of
the Spirits by Emily Thomson
>Studying the Hyphen: Mother-Daughter Relationships in Selected Works by
Amy Tan by Nicola Adcock
>Women, a Dark Continent? The Poisonwood Bible
as a Feminist Response to Conrad’s Heart
of Darkness by Héloïse Meire

I can list more of them. I haven't read any ''top dogs'' or anything, just theses, articles, and essays from various people, like I said in the OP. It was all the same thing just repeated over and over again.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:17:15 2017 No.9879176 >>9879138 It's because no one here has even tried it. I mean the vocal majority of woman haters of course.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:17:42 2017 No.9879177 >>9879172 I read The Poisonwood Bible; what a shit book desu

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:18:07 2017 No.9879178 >>9879154 >using word cis You mean normal, though? Neck yourself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:19:00 2017 No.9879181 >>9879158 Using big words is meaningless of you have nothing to say, or if you could be clear and concise instead.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:19:19 2017 No.9879184 File: 50 KB, 610x540, spurdde.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9879172 >Adcock

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:22:01 2017 No.9879192

>>9879172
>I can list more of them. I haven't read any ''top dogs'' or anything, just theses, articles, and essays from various people, like I said in the OP.
Feminist theory is a specific category of academic discourse. Would you attempt to learn about philosophy of language by reading random articles and essays by various people while ignoring significant and foundational texts? What are you trying to accomplish with your reading and also with this thread? (Honest question because I didn't actually expect you to have read anything at all desu.)

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:22:23 2017 No.9879194 >>9879181 I meant normal, of course. It's just that that word has recently been thrown around me a lot and has unfortunately seeped into my vocabulary.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:23:25 2017 No.9879199 >>9879181 Just admit you don't get it pal. I can spoonfeed you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:24:04 2017 No.9879200 >>9879192 cont. Also, just wanted to concede that LOTS of feminist criticism is extremely lazy and unnecessary but that doesn't mean none of it is worth reading. Some of it is genuinely really fucking cool.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:24:33 2017 No.9879204 >>9879172 The vast majority of literary criticism is garbage, especially when it's motivated by academic publish-pressure. This is not restricted to women.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:27:12 2017 No.9879212 >>9879199 There's nothing to get, that paragraph is just an academic fart. You shills are only making feminist theory seem even more contemptible.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:27:34 2017 No.9879214

>>9879192
>Would you attempt to learn about philosophy of language by reading random articles and essays by various people while ignoring significant and foundational texts?
Most of them cite, quote, and reference previous works anyway. I can just go to them and check it. And the essays I read and listed were all done within the academic circles and published in collections like Bloom's Modern Critical Interpretations and other collections of essays. I don't see the issue.

>What are you trying to accomplish with your reading and also with this thread?
I am trying to see for myself if what I heard on /lit/ is true, by reading it. I don't want to be a total pseud.
And by making this thread I am saying that the memes not that far from reality.

>>9879204
I guess so. Academia gone to shit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:30:30 2017 No.9879224 http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2011/08/grade_inflation.html This is the reason OP, it's not just women indeed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:36:38 2017 No.9879245 >>9879212 Your display of anti-intellectualism is typical for a nu/pol/fag fresh off the boat from the stormfront and r/TheDonald, always demanding for things you already agree with.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:37:39 2017 No.9879250

>>9879214
>Most of them cite, quote, and reference previous works anyway. I can just go to them and check it. And the essays I read and listed were all done within the academic circles and published in collections like Bloom's Modern Critical Interpretations and other collections of essays. I don't see the issue.
To this point I'll only say that this is true for the vast majority of literary criticism feminist or otherwise.

>I am trying to see for myself if what I heard on /lit/ is true, by reading it. I don't want to be a total pseud.
And by making this thread I am saying that the memes not that far from reality.
I admire your effort, but I don't think you've given feminist theory a fair shake. The theory is a toolkit which you then apply to the text via criticism. You are reading the application without first understanding the tools. It's not as simple as googling the references for some vague understanding of the theoretical framework being applied.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:40:27 2017 No.9879263 File: 28 KB, 292x257, 1441158783335.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9879245 HAHAHAH >Oh no, he called out on the bullshit some modern sophist wrote, therefore he's against all forms of knowledge! Better start calling him names!

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:41:11 2017 No.9879266

>>9879250
>To this point I'll only say that this is true for the vast majority of literary criticism feminist or otherwise.
Well, yeah. I never said otherwise.

>>9879250
>You are reading the application without first understanding the tools.
And what are the tools you speak of?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:43:17 2017 No.9879272 >>9879266 Just stop man, he's just messing with you like a Marxist saying actual communism was 'never tried' and people just to 'understand'.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:43:48 2017 No.9879275 >>9879263 Just calling it bullshit is not enough though. You should be able to explain why you reject it or retire in your humiliation.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:48:27 2017 No.9879296
File: 33 KB, 480x480, bedwich.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9879272
I just want to know what the tools are besides those I can deduce from reading their application. I guess he could be fucking with me ayy.

>tfw it's almost 10 PM
Gotta sleep, mango.
I-I'll read the archived thread tomorrow at least.

Good night, /lit/.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:50:26 2017 No.9879304

>>9879275
She's just using fancy words to describe the transition of money from a neutral, machine-like tool towards.. something else, it's indecipherable. There's nothing but academic 'uhmms' and 'ahhhs'.
I'm not going to waste any more time with your shilling, have a good night.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:51:40 2017 No.9879308

>>9879085
God it's so true. I have good relationships with the women in my life, but it's still so painfully true

Maybe it's because they're all taught from a young age whenever these kinds of projects came up that they were "supposed to" talk about gender or had some kind of weird duty. That's certainly the way it was presented in my high school and I think it carries on into higher education.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:53:28 2017 No.9879318 >>9879296 That the application reflects poorly on the tools doesn't make it less representative of the drivel academia puts out, which is what anyone means when they mention critical theory desu

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:55:28 2017 No.9879331 >>9879304 Sure, stay uneducated. Also its actually talking about the transition of society and relationships between the societal classes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 16:58:44 2017 No.9879340 >>9879331 It could actually be talking about Superman, who knows

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:05:58 2017 No.9879369 >>9879130 In other words, when the Jews took over the movement.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:10:02 2017 No.9879388

>>9879158
Academese isn't characterized by verbosity. It's characterized by verbosity in combination with poor control of the language. This is why writers like Foucault and Lacan are a delight to read if you enjoy a challenge, but their descendants are a completely pointless headache, because they inanely copy the style of the masters without any kind of insight into why the structuralists and post-structuralists wrote in the way they did.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:10:42 2017 No.9879393

>>9879142
>Deframing the Paradigm: Queer Reoperationality in Saussurean Socio-Diachronism by Patricia Ellard
>Phallic Territories: Navigating the Microtopology of Sexual Syncretic Hierarchies in Goethe's Faust by Michelle Hoffman Till
>Erotic Instantiations: Cultural Anti-Articulation, Exogendered Immanence, and the Economy of Bioterritorialization by Susanne Zaman al-Hashim

Highly recommended 2bh

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:18:13 2017 No.9879427

>>9879075
>members of a movement against female oppression talk about female oppression
Are you surprised that capitalists talk about value, supply and demand or that KKK talks about whitness and niggers?

>>9879085
>doesn't actually name the projects the males choose for comparison

>>9879184
Kek.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:26:38 2017 No.9879461 >>9879115 >Judith Butler What does he know about feminist intellectuals, he was a presenter on top gear.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:28:25 2017 No.9879468 >>9879308 >have good relationships with women Why? Serious question, what do you hope to get out of it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:45:59 2017 No.9879533 https://jacobitemag.com/2017/07/11/humanities-against-humanity/

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:49:29 2017 No.9879544 >>9879023 thank god for social constructionists today denying all of this bullshit

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 17:54:20 2017 No.9879563

>>9879023
>>feminist theory
its not that i dont want equality, but a lot of feminist theory is hypocritical. like, you arent supposed to include biological differences when you hire someone, which is stupid but whatever. but then if i say im a feminist and ill punch both men and women in the face, they get mad.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 18:03:47 2017 No.9879590

>>9879468
I don't hope to get anything out it, I have generally terrible relationships with the women I want to have relationships with, because of jealousy and neuroticism. Which I think is what you're getting at, which is fair enough.

But I've got a lot of good female friends that I respect and who have perspectives on a lot of problems that I, being male, might not have considered.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 18:13:01 2017 No.9879622

>>9879158
Proponents of feminist theory, for all their railing against social frameworks that engender unjust hierarchies and arbitrary elitism, really like to shame people for their lack of formal education. I see this shit all the time. I swear if you shocked one part of their brains they'd go full /sci/ and start quantifying human value with IQ scores.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 19:01:01 2017 No.9879792

>>9879622
Do they really? Or rather are tired to defend themselves from attacks from people who absolutely have no idea what they are talking about? Can't blame them that formal education is pretty much considered synonym for intelligence.

Though it's ironic too, given how women were robbed of the opportunities to acquire it for centuries.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 19:25:23 2017 No.9879900

>>9879792
> Though it's ironic too, given how women were robbed of the opportunities to acquire it for centuries.
Wow that is SO unfair! Those mean old white men just weren't getting any pussy, so they barred them from their schools out of spite and fear of the emancipated female mind! That must be the reason! It is pure coincidence that studying the humanities is now a joke amongst both the educated and uneducated due to the massive surplus of useless (predominantly female) """arts""" grads!

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 19:28:29 2017 No.9879915

>>9879792
>Or rather are tired to defend themselves from attacks from people who absolutely have no idea what they are talking about?
Attacking someone from the position that they haven't done adequate research to draw coherent conclusions is a long ways away from attacking them because they didn't go to college. You can't really conflate them, so when you say "I bet you didn't even go to college," the message that comes across is nowhere near "You clearly aren't familiar with the subject you're attacking." It reeks of elitism instead of being a call for intellectual honesty, because the implication is that you could only know what you're talking about if you've traversed the orthodox channels.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 19:34:02 2017 No.9879939 >>9879023 I'm going to go on a limb and guess that the Allende here is for Isabel Allende in which case, no shit, do you seriously expect a good analysis on an author for teenagers. Also I could bet real money on this being a high-school paper.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 19:51:02 2017 No.9880010

Don't much care for next level feminist theory desu but this nonsense about multitudinous female phenomenology reminds me of something I read in Russ Hurlburt's book about phenomenology and psychopathology in which he found out bulimic women do have a literally multitudinous inner experience. Interesting coincidence.

Book is called Investigating Pristine Inner Experience. It's fascinating.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 19:55:28 2017 No.9880027 >>9879053 To publish a book in this day and age is easy; to have it noticed is where the industry dies.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 20:01:43 2017 No.9880055 >>9879115 >her name is butler >i can tell her to get back in the kitchen without it necessarily being construed as sexist

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 20:02:46 2017 No.9880059 >>9879115 >her name is butler >like hitler only instedad of hit she has a butt haha wow i bet she poops too

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 20:31:38 2017 No.9880151 >>9879115 BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPPPPPP

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 20:38:34 2017 No.9880192 >>9879915 You're right just it's not a very realistic expectation given the average tone of such discussions that are between "you're a slut because you had a boyfriend before marriage" vs "you're an idiot without a college degree".

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 20:51:19 2017 No.9880259 >>9879023 does she need to invoke the authority of former feminist literati with every sentence? what kind of cult are these people running?

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:18:20 2017 No.9880368

>>9879158
>>9879199
>>9879245
>>9879275
>>9879331
>get called out that the paragraph is meaningless trite
>"you don't understand, it's very deep"
>proceeds to name call without denying anything said

I dont usually do this, but this is clearly not an argument

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:40:45 2017 No.9880443 >>9879023 Not even reading anything ITT but feminist theory has radically influenced the direction of the social sciences and humanities It has largely been accepted in these fields and isn't going anywhere. Quit complaining and get used to it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:44:23 2017 No.9880463 >>9879115 love butler

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:45:01 2017 No.9880466 >>9879023 The fuck did I just read?

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:45:14 2017 No.9880467

maybe if feminists would change their approach. i can read nin or woolf and enjoy their art. but there are feminists that want to prove themselves so bad they harden up to be harder than a dudebro. every discussion has to feel like youre doing a mexican standoff. it doesnt matter how much more versed you are if you cant lighten up to even joke or take the ideas less seriously. that means youre all fancy academic words and no synthesis. that means you dont understand what you study too well.

also wouldnt being manlier than a man be considered detrimental to feminism from the start? to not realize the strengths of the feminine is a lost cause imo. most make up for this by trying to belittle men, theyre not being a feminist at that point, theyre being a pseudo-man. same goes for the opposite

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:46:46 2017 No.9880470 >>9880467 >manly >feminine Nigga, this ain't the 18th century.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:46:59 2017 No.9880472 >>9879023 Is this like an introduction to a body of essays or something? It's not particularly bad.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:50:16 2017 No.9880486 >>9879115 >hate men >try your damnedest to look like a man What do they mean by this

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 21:52:12 2017 No.9880496 >>9880470 its not that different. explain then

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:00:38 2017 No.9880532
File: 33 KB, 460x276, Jorge-Luis-Borges-008.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Truth is I have never been interested in anything written by a woman. I don't get out of my way to reject female writers, it's just that all of their writings is too particular to their own experiences. Women can only write about being women, they are either unable or more probably too lazy and complacent to write about universal things.

I have the same issue with most black writers, the only exception is Machado de Assis, who, though he was black, didn't write about being black.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:04:02 2017 No.9880548 >>9880532 Universal things, like being a man?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:04:59 2017 No.9880554 >>9879115 >and, of course, it's a Jew Every time

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:10:20 2017 No.9880574 >>9880470 I don't think you know what you're talking about

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:11:47 2017 No.9880584 >>9880443 Nobody cares about social "sciences" and feminist theory hasn't made a profound impact in philosophy at all, it will probably be lost in the archives of short lived movements

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:16:29 2017 No.9880603 File: 631 KB, 460x259, 1473540533562.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9879023 >This assessment No.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:16:31 2017 No.9880604 >>9880470 18th century man here. waiting for a reply from the 21st century perspective.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:19:28 2017 No.9880614 >>9880584 people do care, just not the people in your weird echo chamber. It has definitely had an impact on philosophy, it may just not in your area. Or you may not read much 'new' stuff.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:20:23 2017 No.9880620

>>9879214
So did you actually go and read the foundational text or not? Because not then do you actually believe you know what you are talking about? This would be like me saying I know all about Lacan but I've never read anything he wrote, neither have I read the universal interpretation of his work, I've read some meme articles online or in compilation books and I know everything Lacan had to offer.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:21:10 2017 No.9880623 >>9880584 >short lived movements national women's day, feminist social services places on every destitute corner, a hegemonic seat in academia, a domination of current popular culture...go to bed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:22:33 2017 No.9880629 >>9880584 Modern philosophy is dead. it lives on in the other fields

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:26:32 2017 No.9880642 >>9880548 how does it feel being completely hopeless? do you like mudkips?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:39:58 2017 No.9880674 Has /lit/ been invaded by sjws from tumblr? What the hell is this thread? Good God.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:42:07 2017 No.9880685 >>9880674 Abandon hope, all ye who enter!!!!!

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 22:59:17 2017 No.9880744

>>9880623
isnt the strains of pop culture what feminists are railing against in the first place? commodification of women and so on. so in a way you are saying that for as long as you see women as leading roles on movies and media, its good enough because in actualization of these roles it falls short. you hold capital as deliverance for the shortcomings of women in history? perfectly content with the lie of CGI and photoshop?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:07:48 2017 No.9880763 >>9880584 >it will probably be lost in the archives of short lived movements is this a real post on the board for literature where people actually read stuff or at least i'm lead to believe they do through leisurely skimming wikipedia articles

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:08:23 2017 No.9880767 Feminist here I live in constant fear of the dick. Sometimes I'm worried I can't win against it. That's why I became a lesbian.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:12:23 2017 No.9880782 >>9879115 who is the guy in the pic?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:15:15 2017 No.9880795 >>9880763 >reading implies you're smart >/lit/ doesn't seem very smart because these opinions exist... >maybe no one on /lit/ actually reads, instead they skim wikipedia >yeah that's the rationalization I need! I hope the Lord has mercy on you

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:15:52 2017 No.9880797
File: 889 KB, 663x868, 1501530190713.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9879093
>>9879115
>>9879106
>>9879154
>>9879158
>>9879176
>>9879192
>>9879245
>>9879275
>>9879331
>>9879427
>>9879792
>>9879915
>>9880443
>>9880470
>>9880548
>>9880614
>>9880620
>>9880623

Right on cue, the Angry Hymen Brigade. Enjoy the (you)s, ladies

jk they're actually all fat friend-zoned fedora-wearing beta orbiter neckbeard whiteknight pseuds desperate to be hugged by their cuckqueans before their dates with that sexist neanderthal, Chad, lel

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:19:19 2017 No.9880811 >>9880797 Pretty awkward projecting dude.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:22:18 2017 No.9880822 >>9880797 >>>9879915 But I was criticizing the invective feminists use against their critics online.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:26:37 2017 No.9880846 >>9880797 holy shit that is a lot of buzzwords.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:26:48 2017 No.9880848 >>9880822 collateral damage is expected

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:29:36 2017 No.9880863

feminism does nothing to liberate the talk about psychological violence on men from women

feminism does nothing to liberate the talk of raped men inside a household

feminism favorizes the abortion whithout even the requirement to inform the father

feminism does nothing against coerced paternity

feminism does nothing about the inequality favouring women on the dating game

feminists actually do not promote intellectual independence as a men is considered a sexist scumbag as soon as he disagrees with them or even try to nuance their positions

do you still believe that the feminists fight for equality ?

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:30:59 2017 No.9880869 >>9880863 I see you're an unbiased observer looking for rational debate.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:38:57 2017 No.9880894

>>9880863

>feminism does nothing to liberate the talk about psychological violence on men from women
>feminism does nothing to liberate the talk of raped men inside a household

Any man that lets a woman get away with this is an absolute cuck and deserves to be put down like a rabid dog. I've run into a lot of women in my line of work and every single one that has dared to cross me has suffered my wrath. These "men" need to gain some self-respect.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:41:04 2017 No.9880904 File: 37 KB, 326x499, 51XxjlfX-yL._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Hasn't even read Judith Butler

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:42:14 2017 No.9880906

the 18th century man's journal account of 'feminists' is they are like little kids who suckerpunch someone in the playground and then hide behind their parents, and when confronted they go "bla bla cant hear you". they favor fantastic narratives of glowing screens as if living a symbiotic life with such an entity that is bent on the eradication of their very own essence. peculiar as it may seem, the plight of their ontology is focused on subsuming what is destructive to themselves in a false narrative of never being able to think outside the bounds of vanity, self-corrupting and misguided revenge...

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:42:31 2017 No.9880908

>>9880863
>feminism does nothing to liberate the talk about psychological violence on men from women
>feminism does nothing to liberate the talk of raped men inside a household
>feminists actually do not promote intellectual independence as a men is considered a sexist scumbag as soon as he disagrees with them or even try to nuance their positions
That's simply wrong when talking about mainstream feminism. Simply the abolishment of gender roles would help with all of these. Why making statements without informing yourself?

>feminism favorizes the abortion whithout even the requirement to inform the father
Why should it? The woman is carrying all the burdens and risks of pregnancy. Until the kid is actually there, you're just a sperm donor.

>feminism does nothing against coerced paternity
Don't stick your willy in every hole.

>feminism does nothing about the inequality favouring women on the dating game
There is none. It simply works different for both genders with focus on different attributes and skills to find the partner. Men have to do more initial work while women have to do more screening. Go make a female dating account and see how crazy the shit women have to deal with is.

When it comes to casual sex, they do have a slight advantage though.

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:43:42 2017 No.9880910 >>9880908 >Why should it? The woman is carrying all the burdens and risks of pregnancy. Until the kid is actually there, you're just a sperm donor. >Don't stick your willy in every hole. lol

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:44:16 2017 No.9880915

>>9880674
It is pretty weird, 4chan has had more tumblr-tier people migrate here over the past few years. But /lit/ especially. Probably tumblr Wittols who got sick of seeing just Harry Potter under the book tag, so they went to find somewhere more focused on books

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:45:42 2017 No.9880918 >>9880915 4chan started out pretty progressive m8

>>	Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:46:15 2017 No.9880922 >>9880915 The better question is why /pol/ is bothering to spam a board where people occasionally read books instead of tweets and memes.

Anonymous Fri Aug 11 23:49:23 2017 No.9880933

>>9880910
The only other sensible way to deal with death beat fathers would be the state covering his child-support if he was against the baby. Which adds the issue of higher taxes. Do you seriously want to pay more because some idiot banged some crazy chick without a condom?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 00:33:41 2017 No.9881096 >>9879085 The same could be said about blacks. The amount of blacks in these fields who think we need another person studying black culture and discrimination is nothing but eye rolling.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 00:46:18 2017 No.9881137 >>9881096 Exactly! We had centuries of literature and research about niggers and bitches already, I'd love some variation and being able to find something about white people.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:07:24 2017 No.9881185 >>9880894 Delusional creep.

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 01:21:22 2017 No.9881222

>>9880908
The problem men face is that the very same women who want to abolish gender roles assume that the characteristics traditionally associated with a particular gender are culturally-imposed as opposed to biologically instantiated. Every man notices the hypocrisy of the fact that the very same women who claim to want to abolish these gender expectations sexually select for men who embody traditional male characteristics. For example, stay at home dads have a higher divorce rate than traditional bread-winning fathers. And women claiming that men need to be more emotionally open to their partners needs to explain this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/6s1lmx/men_who_opened_up_to_their_so_about_their_fears/

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:41:34 2017 No.9881279
File: 20 KB, 560x187, camille_paglia_quote-560x187.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9879023
Feminist theory works as descriptive. The second they prescribe changes, they fuck everything up. They don't understand that culture isn't just a random system imposed on human beings that's at least equal to any other artificially constricted system; it's something that evolved naturally over time. You mess with it at your own peril.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:47:17 2017 No.9881297

>>9881222
> assume that the characteristics traditionally associated with a particular gender are culturally-imposed as opposed to biologically instantiated.
Well, it's both, and biology is a shitty excuse either way when we moved from hunter gather society thousands of years ago.

> For example, stay at home dads have a higher divorce rate than traditional bread-winning fathers.
Sounds like economical factors. It's easier to replace a stay at home dad or take over his role than finding another bread-winner. Not like it'll matter in couple decades after there is almost no work.

>And women claiming that men need to be more emotionally open to their partners needs to explain this:
They need to explain anecdotal evidence? A shitty one at that, where do you get the idea that the women are feminists?
Also a bit off topic but many people just suck at finding the balance between opening up and bitching.

>>9881279
> it's something that evolved naturally over time
Naturally being "people standing up and crushing/guillotining the other side"? Just look at Iran and Afghanistan, both were relatively liberal countries and turned into illiberal shitholes in few years. Or look at Murica, the ivy league didn't accept women just couple decades ago, now it's the most normal thing ever.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:47:57 2017 No.9881300 >>9881222 fuck off back to /plebbit/

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:52:24 2017 No.9881313 >>9881222 kys twink

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:52:42 2017 No.9881314 >>9879085 It's funny how feminists are pathetic anywhere in the world. Here at my university/country it's exactly the same thing.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 01:56:26 2017 No.9881323 >>9881222 >the characteristics traditionally associated with a particular gender are culturally-imposed as opposed to biologically instantiated Reminded me of this lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dialectic_of_Sex

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:00:41 2017 No.9881337 >>9881222 >namefag >Uses Reddit Kys faggot

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 02:02:32 2017 No.9881341

>>9881297
>and biology is a shitty excuse either way when we moved from hunter gather society thousands of years ago.
How does this make any sense? Millions of years of evolutionary history (hundreds of thousands of them as modern homo sapiens) are suddenly erased and superseded by a couple thousand years of civilization? The inherent psychological structures developed over that time cease to be?

>Sounds like economical factors.
Sounds like women don't like a man who isn't capable of hunting and distributing game. Also, even if it is purely economic, all this proves is that men shouldn't put themselves in a situation where they aren't needed or they open themselves up to being abandoned.

>They need to explain anecdotal evidence?
Anyone who has any sort of real-world relationship experience instinctively understand that how men act is heavily mediated by female selection. Sexual attraction isn't subject to philosophical or political influence. A society telling men to be more vulnerable is how 50 Shades of Grey exploits the collective feminine unconscious need for male dominance and becomes the fastest-selling book of all time.

Again, debate isn't going to change what women find attractive. And men don't want to end up alone, so we oblige.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:06:48 2017 No.9881349

>>9881297
>Naturally being "people standing up and crushing/guillotining the other side"? Just look at Iran and Afghanistan, both were relatively liberal countries and turned into illiberal shitholes in few years. Or look at Murica, the ivy league didn't accept women just couple decades ago, now it's the most normal thing ever.
Look at the social alienation and atomization that exists in modern America. Watch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVEHeY8sY5Q

This isn't normal. Which is why Westerners aren't having children and are committing collective suicide through demographic replacement.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:12:53 2017 No.9881361 >>9881313 twink?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:19:55 2017 No.9881373 >>9881361 Do you not know what that is, or what?

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:22:14 2017 No.9881382

>>9881341
>Millions of years of evolutionary history (hundreds of thousands of them as modern homo sapiens) are suddenly erased and superseded by a couple thousand years of civilization?
Just the opposite. Our biology is still stuck way back but the fact that we've adapted to civilization so disconnected from out biology, shows that's it's not a big deal.

>all this proves is that men shouldn't put themselves in a situation where they aren't needed or they open themselves up to being abandoned.
Nobody should. It's pretty silly to put yourself at someones mercy.

>how men act is heavily mediated by female selection
Weak men who mold themselves in attempt to get liked by females. The beta orbiters and "nice" guys who don't get any.

>Sexual attraction isn't subject to philosophical or political influence.
Who said it is? It's very similar to any other kind of attraction. The same skills that make you an attractive mate, usually make you an "attractive" employee, friend and whatever else.

>A society telling men to be more vulnerable is how 50 Shades of Grey exploits the collective feminine unconscious need for male dominance and becomes the fastest-selling book of all time.
It clearly has no connection with the already established fanbase, it being an adult version of another popular book or the edgy content? Besides, where the fuck do you get the idea that feminists like it? Or anyone else, really. Amazon has some funny stats related to it, maybe people bought it but it's not really read by many. A bit like Ulysses.

After 3 sec of google:
>http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/02/18/review-watching-50-shades-of-grey-is-torture/
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenny-trout/fifty-shades-of-grey-and-the-antifeminist-critique_b_6630178.html
>https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2015/02/13/review-fifty-shades-of-grey-is-abusive-gender-roles-disguised-as-faux-feminism/

>debate isn't going to change what women find attractive.
Obviously not, just your understanding of it seems to be clouded by memes and not actual experiences with women. Or at least experiences with women who still buy into gender roles.

>so we oblige.
Which isn't very attractive. People generally want what they can't get and trying to appease them usually ends with loss of respect, not a pityfuck.

>>9881349
Anon, this is /lit/. Sum up the points in the video.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:23:36 2017 No.9881385

>>9881297
>biology is a shitty excuse either way when we moved from hunter gather society thousands of years ago
Areas of fitness and specialization favor men biologically. Pregnancy is a vulnerable state.
A female is always a collective because of the womb. Individualism has them harming themselves for social status.
Women can't manage equality.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:25:19 2017 No.9881387 >>9880811 When did /lit/ realize that "woah, projection LMAO" was just a thinly-veiled "n-no you ;_;"?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:26:53 2017 No.9881388 >>9881385 >Pregnancy is a vulnerable state. When food is scarce and you're surrounded by predators, not nannies and nurses and professionals in a hospital, where they even figured out the concept of hygiene.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:30:51 2017 No.9881394 >>9880908 >all problems caused by feminism are your problem, don't blame me >all problems caused by sexism are also your problem, and I blame you

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:32:05 2017 No.9881397 >>9879192 'feminist theory' is Ressentiment and power-fantasies by the weak, for the weak.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:32:39 2017 No.9881398 >>9879245 Intellectualism is bullshit, mate.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:34:09 2017 No.9881400

>>9879915
The difficulty is that these issues and discourses have a direct effect on the lives of nearly everyone society. The uneducated have a meaningful stake in this discussion. To isolate the discourse to academic spaces (both by using the language of continental philosophy and dismissing anyone not versed in the terms of the discussion) is nothing but the elites using their position to bludgeon those under them.

>>9879106
>if you are one of those brainlets who insist that everything be written in so-called plain English and require no prior knowledge (which, by the way, is in fact a politicized claim but we won't get into that
The politicized nature of obscuring the discourse if far worse. When you consider the impact of the discourse on those living primarily outside of academic spaces, you realize that people have every right to demand academics speak to them in a way they understand.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:35:17 2017 No.9881403

>>9880908
>Why should it? The woman is carrying all the burdens and risks of pregnancy. Until the kid is actually there, you're just a sperm donor.
Who finances them? The man. Single mothers are universally terrible parents too concerned with 'helping' their children financially that they neglect them in every other way.
>hithout even the requirement to inform the father
Why should it? The woman is carrying all the burdens and risks of pregnancy. Until the kid is actually there, you're just a sperm donor.
>feminism does nothing against coerced paternity
It's entirely possible to be blamed as the parent, shamed away from DNA testing, and shamed into paying child support. Why is this sort if shaming and blaming allowed?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:35:26 2017 No.9881404 >>9881400 Bludgeon them with what? Books they don't read?

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:35:47 2017 No.9881405

>>9880918

No, it started out libertarian in the "taken to its logical and therefore insane conclusion" sense. Contemporary "progressivism" was largely reserved to the women's studies departments of "alternative" universities, and scandinavia, until about half-way through Obama's first term.

I realize you were still in middle school then, so it's ok that you can't remember the Before Times

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:37:56 2017 No.9881409 File: 50 KB, 748x377, DGk0U6lWAAAwHom.jpg large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9879023

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:38:18 2017 No.9881410 >>9881397 this guy gets it

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:40:44 2017 No.9881414 File: 285 KB, 255x654, ayo hol uppus mah negus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9881409 I genuinely cannot tell if that is satire

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:40:49 2017 No.9881415 >>9880908 You say "simply" a lot. Do you think this makes you sound more authoritative? You're simply a silly twit.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:43:55 2017 No.9881417

>>9881404
Legislation that effects them and cultural changes that harm them. Just because the discourse itself remains in academic spaces doesn't mean that it only effects academic spaces. The common man deals with the effects in such a wau that they have far more of a right to participate than thr jargon spewing hacks that currently dominate it.

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 02:46:19 2017 No.9881423

>>9881382
>Our biology is still stuck way back but the fact that we've adapted to civilization so disconnected from out biology, shows that's it's not a big deal.
A, civilization wasn't the end point of our evolutionary trajectory. And B, civilization evolved in order to either appease or sublimate the inherent psychological needs we developed in the African savanna. The process of civilizational development was in itself an evolutionary process, with certain beneficial qualities (like monogamy, gender roles, and sexual self-control) winning out.

>Nobody should.
My mom did. She turned out fine. Her kids are all healthy and make good money. A stay-at-home is fundamentally different from a stay-at-home dad.

>Weak men who mold themselves in attempt to get liked by females. The beta orbiters and "nice" guys who don't get any.
Notice what you're saying here. Men who display a particular set of characteristics that aren't perceived as being traditionally masculine (nice guys and beta males) are attacked and selected against. This isn't because they're morally repugnant, but because they're sexually unattractive to the female psychology. A nice guy who uses his niceness to try to get laid isn't morally less defensible than the asshole alpha male who fights in order to establish his sexual dominance. Yet the former gets attacked endlessly, while the latter causes more harm in the world but is actually capable of sleeping with women.

>The same skills that make you an attractive mate, usually make you an "attractive" employee, friend and whatever else.
Fuck off. I don't want Kate Upton to sit on my face because she'd make a good friend. Male sexuality is fundamentally different from female sexuality. And there is such a thing as male sexuality and such a thing as female sexuality. Our biological mating choices are different because our reproductive roles are different.

>Besides, where the fuck do you get the idea that feminists like it? Or anyone else, really.
One of the best-selling books of all time, yet no one likes it? Get real. And I never said that feminists liked it, I said that the women in general do. Feminists who write for Salon don't represent the average woman; and female sexual rhetoric often doesn't match female sexual behavior.

>Or at least experiences with women who still buy into gender roles.
THIS IS ALMOST ALL WOMEN. I'm going to forgo all gender expectations because like 3 short-haired women with college degrees wouldn't mind? Come on. It's either follow the role and get laid, or stay weak and jerk off alone.

>People generally want what they can't get and trying to appease them usually ends with loss of respect
This is a perfect example of female sexual psychology. If a woman did her best to try to please a man, almost all men would be grateful. It's women who don't want a partner who cares what they think of them, BECAUSE WOMEN WANT AN ALPHA MALE WHO DOESN'T CARE WHAT THEY THINK. Thank for confirming my point.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:46:34 2017 No.9881424 File: 74 KB, 450x450, peerweb-450x450.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9881414 Search New Real Peer review, it's not even close to the most ridiculous.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:46:39 2017 No.9881425 >>9881417 *affects them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:47:12 2017 No.9881426 >>9881423 tl;dr;kys

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:47:51 2017 No.9881427

>>9881403
>Who finances them? The man.
Who willingly participated in an act knowing that it could have these consequences.

>Single mothers are universally terrible parents too concerned with 'helping' their children financially that they neglect them in every other way.
That's not what studies say. The only relevant factor in success of single parents are the economical means available.

>shamed away from DNA testing
What kind of meming is this?

>shamed into paying child support.
Again, wut? Either you're the parent and have to pay (something you could've easily avoided) or you aren't and it's not your problem.

>>9881417
You're not wrong but what's your actual suggestion? Even if you dumb down the wording, some topics need excessive reading to get a decent understand, something many people are not willing to do and sometimes can't due time restrains. Take something much, much more basics like climate change, when there isn't even a discussion in the scientific community anymore, yet some people are still refusing to accept the facts.

Fuck, try something even more basic like evolution or the earth being flat.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:47:54 2017 No.9881428 >>9881417 To what legislation are you referring?

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 02:49:38 2017 No.9881432

>>9881382
>so we oblige.
>Which isn't very attractive. People generally want what they can't get and trying to appease them usually ends with loss of respect, not a pityfuck
I just wanna highlight this again. For all you kids out there, this is a good example of how women think.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:50:39 2017 No.9881436 >>9881423 Evolution doesn't happen. Checkmate, attention whore.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:51:32 2017 No.9881439 >>9881423 What was the last book you read on human sexuality? Be honest.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:52:34 2017 No.9881442 >>9881388 It's a resource intensive state that can not be ignored, and many activities are barred from pregnant women. Rollercoaster? Artillery? Stunts? Fighter jets? Slalom? Work? Depends.. Most activities are not available become of the risks.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:53:17 2017 No.9881443

>>9881427
Yes, consequences, but no authority over the matter. if they are financing the mother and child, they ought to have authority over the child as well.
>That's not what studies say.
Studies are piss biased to the highest bidder.
>Either you're the parent and have to pay (something you could've easily avoided) or you aren't and it's not your problem.
Are you blind? Plenty of men are scammed into paying child support for children they either are accused of fathering, or are tricked into caring for despite not being the father.

Why do you even think you have the authority to speak? You don't have a child and never will.

>>	Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 02:53:18 2017 No.9881444 >>9881439 my diary and tinder responses desu

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:55:42 2017 No.9881452 File: 21 KB, 333x500, 41EkOxsj-7L.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9881444 quit stealing all the trips and read this

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 02:58:21 2017 No.9881460 >>9881442 Because of the risks *. Damn autotune.

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 02:59:11 2017 No.9881462

>>9881452
I vaguely remember Sex at at Dawn from some NPR article or some shit. I was about comparing human beings to bonobos and how we're all wired to fuck new people constantly, right? What's the thesis of Sex at Dusk?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:01:08 2017 No.9881470 >>9881443 Plenty of men don't pay child support

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:04:32 2017 No.9881486

>>9881423
>A, civilization wasn't the end point of our evolutionary trajectory
There is no endpoint nor any trajectory. Shit is mostly random.

>The process of civilizational development was in itself an evolutionary process, with certain beneficial qualities (like monogamy, gender roles, and sexual self-control) winning out.
Sure but once civilization evolved our social development exploded while the biology remains unchanged. Basically, we're not "made" for our current world. Yet things still work pretty well for millennia.

>My mom did. She turned out fine.
She still took a risk. Daddy could've always left. Same for a single dad.

> This isn't because they're morally repugnant, but because they're sexually unattractive to the female psychology.
I used nice in quotes for a reason. Also calling "alphas" assholes is just silly. Nobody is attracted to assholery. They tend to be daring, confident and the likes. Basically the opposite of the guy who tries to change for others and these people are generally perceived as unattractive. Nobody loves a clumsy asskisser at work either.

> I don't want Kate Upton to sit on my face because she'd make a good friend.
Hence there is no chance it'll ever happen.

>Male sexuality is fundamentally different from female sexuality. And there is such a thing as male sexuality and such a thing as female sexuality.
Citation needed. Specially that it's not affected by environmental factors but by sex.

>One of the best-selling books of all time, yet no one likes it?
That's what the Amazon stats says. Surely there are people who do and given the success there are many.

>And I never said that feminists liked it, I said that the women in general do.
Then it's extra irrelevant. It started with gender roles. Women who are against gender roles, don't like it. Women who like gender roles because they have no other skills and want a Chad to treat them like an object of pleasure do.

>female sexual rhetoric often doesn't match female sexual behavior
Citation needed.

>THIS IS ALMOST ALL WOMEN.
In bumfuckville maybe. Besides, what are we talking about now? It's a thread about feminists, who gives a fuck about other women. There r9k to discuss them.

>If a woman did her best to try to please a man, almost all men would be grateful.
Beta men. Even Chad likes the chase.

>BECAUSE WOMEN WANT AN ALPHA MALE WHO DOESN'T CARE WHAT THEY THINK.
Making a big jump there. Nobody finds people who worry how others perceive them all the time attractive. There isn't any connection with caring what the partners thinks, which obviously matters.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:06:47 2017 No.9881493

>>9881443
>they ought to have authority over the child as well.
They can always sue for that. Gender roles fuck them up when it comes to actually winning.

>Studies are piss biased to the highest bidder.
So instead of science we're going to discuss our opinions and anecdotal examples? Doesn't sound too fruitful.

>Plenty of men are scammed into paying child support for children they either are accused of fathering, or are tricked into caring for despite not being the father.
Scams are a crime by itself and not part of the topic.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:08:12 2017 No.9881498

>>9881470
So what, many of them aren't given the right to be in their child's life directly. If women want to be petty, then they can be petty on their own dollar.

My wife tried working (clothes modeling) for a few months after she became upset over me giving her an allowance. She hated the responsibility, hated being bossed around and demeaned, hated all the fittings, bad hours, and having to be 'fake' in general. She was being petty. Now she is perfectly happy going to school and being given an allowance.
It's not childish as she claimed, all sorts of respectable people are given, essentially, an allowance for doing very little. Senators, for example.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:09:59 2017 No.9881503

>>9881493
They are shamed out of suing. Courts also don't favor men in these situations.
Studies aren't scientific, as I said they are biased to the highest bidder.
How isn't the criminality of it irrelevant? It may be criminal for a man not to pay child support when relevant, and that is something I doubt you would ignore. Similarly, scamming a man into paying child support is a crime. Why is that now irrelevant?
You're avoiding the actual problems.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:14:53 2017 No.9881516

>>9881503
>They are shamed out of suing.
That's their choice. Also quite the meme, at least I don't have to bother to find a study of how often it actually happens.

>Courts also don't favor men in these situations.
Getting the kid, yes. Proving whether it's his or not, nah. It's very basic procedure and it'd be silly to expect anything else from the man.

>Why is that now irrelevant?
Because neither is really a gender issue. People are getting scammed because they are assholes, not because of they gender. A man not paying child support for their legit kid would be obviously a criminal issue too and not a relevant question here, which was complaining about the need to.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:16:26 2017 No.9881520 >>9881498 Your wife sounds lazy and pretty dull, mate.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:20:07 2017 No.9881527 >>9881516 Again, you're avoiding the actual issue here. Inequality effects everybody, not just women. Men are forced into a bad situation, too. >>9881520 She was a minor at this time. She's not dull but really dislikes being on a schedule.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:22:04 2017 No.9881532 This sounds even more mental gymnastics and word plays than your average pomo shit.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:25:33 2017 No.9881546

>>9881520
Not him and not a big fan of the idea of "stay at home mom" but that's a lazy judgement on your part. I know couple very intelligent and dedicated women who chose to stay at home despite promising careers. Most people dislike their jobs, why having extra stress if you don't have to?

>>9881527
>Inequality effects everybody, not just women. Men are forced into a bad situation, too.
Nobody denies or argues against that, anon. Most of these inequalities are caused by the gender roles, which is something feminism is against. We're talking about mainstream version, not some "cut off their balls" shit, man.

Just your points are suboptimal. Child support is generally pretty fair. It gets really unfair when it comes to rapes and domestic abuses, where a man is fucked from all sides if he is the victim. Custody is another big issue. A decent dad will have a much harder time to win it, even against some crackhead mom.

One more would be paternal leave but that's more of an American problem and Burgers can't even get vocation right.

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 03:26:12 2017 No.9881549

>>9881486
>Shit is mostly random.
It isn't random. Survival and sexual selection aren't random.

>Basically, we're not "made" for our current world. Yet things still work pretty well for millennia.
You don't understand what i'm saying. What i'm saying is that culture evolved in tandem with and to the benefit of our inherent psychology. The civilizations that didn't do a good job of molding themselves well to human psychology collapsed. Which is what's currently happening in the West.

>She still took a risk. Daddy could've always left. Same for a single dad.
In a culture where monogamy is respected, a daddy who leaves for no reason has his entire reputation destroyed. It's not a decision he would take lightly in the ideal system, which is why illegitimacy used to be relatively rare in the West.

>Nobody is attracted to assholery. They tend to be daring, confident and the likes.
I grew up the baby brother of two alpha males. They are daring and confident, but those qualities manifest themselves as aggression towards people who stand in the way of their daring and confidence. In other words, they're dominant. Men don't find this quality to be attractive in women. And this is because, and let me reiterate it for the hundredth time, male a female sexuality are inherently different.

>Hence there is no chance it'll ever happen.
Did you understand my point? The reason I couldn't fuck Kate Upton is because i'm not either a 10 or a millionaire. It's not because I don't respect her as a person. And any guy who does get to fuck her isn't fucking her because she has a beautiful soul, he's fucking her because she's hot and has giant tits. If you can't imagine this, it's because you don't have a male brain.

>Citation needed. Specially that it's not affected by environmental factors but by sex.
Literally all of biological anthropology. Just google "sexual selection."

>Women who are against gender roles, don't like it.
I've met these women. If you're fucking them missionary then flip them over and fuck them from behind while you're choking them, they get so wet that it sounds like you're fucking a grapefruit. Very equality. Much empowered.

>Beta men. Even Chad likes the chase.
Fucking lol. Men will fuck a hot woman if she's borderline retarded and is wearing a potato sack. We jack off to pictures of people we don't even know. Chad chases because he wants to fuck, not because he likes it.

>Nobody finds people who worry how others perceive them all the time attractive
It has absolutely no bearing on whether I find a woman attractive. If she's clingy and I don't want a relationship with her, i'll ignore her. If she's clingy and I do want to form a long term relationship with her, I will. Either way, her insecurity is only an issue if manifests itself as her attacking me. Male insecurity isn't like that though. Women find it unattractive because they don't find weakness and submissiveness to be attractive.

>>	Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 03:30:31 2017 No.9881564 >>9881520 Fuck off. My mom created and shaped human life. These modern women let their ovaries rot just to become middle managers and HR specialists, and somehow this is a more fulfilling life.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:33:23 2017 No.9881575 >>9881564 >My mom created and shaped human life No, she had You.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:33:36 2017 No.9881577

>>9881546
Then why do you deny that men are victimized, and the criminality of that is often ignored?
So much paternal and maternal leave is a huge investment. Only those in secure, well-paying, 'important' jobs have access to that.
A single parent working as a construction worker or waitress won't get leave. They're too expendable. Considering that these sorts of jobs aren't exclusive to single parents, that low-income families often require that both parents work these sorts of jobs, and that low-income parents tend to have more children, the idea of parental leave being viable for most is unrealistic.
A new father petitioning for paternal leave can be easily replaced with somebody that will work and not complain.

>>	Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 03:34:04 2017 No.9881579 >>9881575 Woe is me I'll never recover

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:34:46 2017 No.9881581 >>9881549 I find dominant women hot. Until they start emasculating / shaming. Men are adept at creating fetishes,though. You are correct on all points. Just saying.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:35:05 2017 No.9881582 >>9881579 better kys, i guess

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:35:26 2017 No.9881584 >>9881520 You still haven't explained how she's lazy or dull by the way. I don't have a job either (quit my 'cushy' job in engineering after 5 years of essentially being moved to the side from any active role). She'll be going to university next year.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:37:56 2017 No.9881589 >>9881486 >Beta men. Why do women hate weak men so much? If you want men to respect strong women, don't shit on weak men.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:39:15 2017 No.9881595 >>9881584 For what? What was the last thing she said that brought you up short, befuddled you, made you see her as a person with a unique and complex inner life?

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:40:39 2017 No.9881600

>>9881549
> Survival and sexual selection aren't random.
Actually they are. A lot depends on environment.

>What i'm saying is that culture evolved in tandem with and to the benefit of our inherent psychology.
But it didn't. Our biology is suboptimal for civilization. We're biologically "not meant" to live in such huge groups.

>Which is what's currently happening in the West.
Oh jeez. Have a look into a history book.

>In a culture where monogamy is respected
Aka. almost in none if you look at our history.

>a daddy who leaves for no reason has his entire reputation destroyed
If it's a group of 20 people. Not 200 000 like a medium sized city.

>In other words, they're dominant.
There are many variations of that. An intelligent dominant person dominates in a way that isn't perceived as aggression.

>Men don't find this quality to be attractive in women.
Yeah, no.

>let me reiterate it for the hundredth time, male a female sexuality are inherently different.
You'd give the message a lot more power with a study confirming it.

>The reason I couldn't fuck Kate Upton is because i'm not either a 10 or a millionaire.
It doesn't matter. You could be a billionaire, she still wouldn't want to be near you unless you'd also have the intelligence and social skills to mask your reason ... and if you'd had the intelligence and skills to do it, you wouldn't need the money either, just an opportunity to meet her.

>Just google "sexual selection."
>that it's not affected by environmental factors but by sex.

>I've met these women.
Doubtful but oh well.

>If you're fucking them missionary then flip them over and fuck them from behind while you're choking them, they get so wet that it sounds like you're fucking a grapefruit.
And how is that related to gender roles or feminism?

>Men will fuck a hot woman if she's borderline retarded and is wearing a potato sack.
Low value, desperate men will. Desirable ones do have standards. Unless they are drunk.

>We jack off to pictures of people we don't even know.
Which is a completely different thing altogether.

>Chad chases because he wants to fuck, not because he likes it.
He could call 5 chicks for that. Yet he'd still go for the one he can't have.

>Male insecurity isn't like that though.
How is it not?

>Women find it unattractive because they don't find weakness and submissiveness to be attractive.
Most people do to a point. The more desirable, the higher their standards, obviously.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:45:15 2017 No.9881611 >>9881595 Liturgical Arts How does pseud behavior determine if one is 'not dull'?

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:45:22 2017 No.9881613

>>9881577
>Then why do you deny that men are victimized, and the criminality of that is often ignored?
But I don't. The specific case I disagreed with was child support.

>the idea of parental leave being viable for most is unrealistic.
It works just fine in every other first world country, and the fact that fathers are discriminated against is indeed a problem.

>>9881589
Nigga, I am not a woman and I doubt a strong woman gives a shit whether you respect her ... that's like the opposite of being strong.

Weak men and women are simply annoying to deal with even as friends due the constant attempts to get validation from others and the amount of work you have to do to get something genuine out of them. Actually dating them is a pure horror if you have a life on your own.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:46:49 2017 No.9881618 >>9881613 I'm not American. Paternal leave isn't a thing here for blue-collar jobs. Nor is maternal leave.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:47:07 2017 No.9881619 >>9881611 Nevermind, you two are clearly fit for each other.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:47:58 2017 No.9881623 >>9881619 Are you just baiting, or are you intentionally vague?

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:48:28 2017 No.9881626

>>9881613
Eh, to specify, I mean the weak doormat, stalk-y types. The type of chick that follows you after uni without saying a word every day or pretends to like the same shit you do to get approval. Nothing wrong with being shy or shit like that, as long it's not overly stunning.

>>9881618
What country are you from?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:48:55 2017 No.9881628 >>9881626 Canada

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:50:25 2017 No.9881635 >>9881623 Did you need me to explain the jibe, or...?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:50:51 2017 No.9881638 >>9881628 What the fuck. I thought you guys were copying the European model at most things. Not even couple weeks?

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:53:21 2017 No.9881647

>>9881635
Yes, please do, learned intellectual.
>>9881638
Not as far as I know. I'm mostly going by anecdotes. Nobody blue-collar I know has access to parental leave. Only a few have access to health plans, and that usually requires a year of service.

And when I mean 'few', I mean those in jobs that could potentially injure or kill them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:57:12 2017 No.9881657 >>9881647 You're a dullard. Your wife's a dullard. Two dullards deserve each other. Go in peace, now. Plow your empty field, you empty-headed ox.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 03:58:40 2017 No.9881660

>>9881647
Maybe they didn't work long enough at the company or something. Sounds messed up. It fucks the men obviously but also the women since they have to deal with all the shit alone and the entire family by adding more pressure at a crucial time.

It's considered low here when the fathers only choose to stay off work for two months instead of twelve. Guess your employees got inspired by the companies over the border.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:00:50 2017 No.9881665 >>9881657 Why are we dullards? Why do you presume people are dullards without knowing them?

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 04:02:04 2017 No.9881667

>>9881600
>Actually they are. A lot depends on environment.
If something molds itself to a particular environment, it's trajectory isn't random by definition.

>Our biology is suboptimal for civilization.
I agree, hence the prevalence of so many neuroses and mental pathologies. My point is that the civilizations that thrived were the ones that BEST adapted to human psychology, not the ones that adapted to it entirely (which would be impossible).

>Oh jeez. Have a look into a history book.
I have. The West isn't dying metaphorically, it's dying literally. As in almost every European country is having children well below replacement, and has to import Muslims from the Third World in order have workers that pay into the welfare system when everyone retires. Unless you think that this will level out (no indication that it will), we are seeing a particular civilization wilt before our eyes.

>Aka. almost in none if you look at our history.
This statement doesn't mean anything. You being a slut wasn't acceptable until very recently.

>If it's a group of 20 people. Not 200 000 like a medium sized city.
People form their lives around a particular social circle. A man wouldn't just leave his entire life behind for no good reason.

>There are many variations of that. An intelligent dominant person dominates in a way that isn't perceived as aggression.
I'm glad you're finally admitting that dominance is an attractive trait in men. I'll just tell you that dominance plays absolutely no role in male attraction apart from a small minority of men who fetishize it. Again, you're proving my point that men and women have different inherent sexual preferences.

>You'd give the message a lot more power with a study confirming it.
There are literally thousands. Literally. They're a google search away. I'm not going to pick one out at random and have our entire discussion form around it.

>she still wouldn't want to be near you unless you'd also have the intelligence and social skills to mask your reason
You're just confirming my point. I wouldn't deny that social skills and social capital play a role in female attraction, but the role they play in male attraction is almost non-existent. Kate Upton's tits would get me hard if she worked at McDonalds and had Asperger's. Men and women are different.

>that it's not affected by environmental factors but by sex.
This is the problem with picking out a study. Feminists will always claim "muh environment" and "muh socialization" even when Simon Baron-Cohen shoes gender differences in week-old infants.

>And how is that related to gender roles or feminism?
Dominance is attractive in men in ways that aren't in women. This discussion is about whether differences in sexual preference are inherent, or culturally imparted. My point is that even women who use feminist rhetoric find male dominance to be attractive. They're acting out a contradiction.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:06:52 2017 No.9881677 >>9879085 I can imagine norm macdonald going "tampons pads and ironclads!"

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 04:09:46 2017 No.9881681

>>9881600
>Low value, desperate men will. Desirable ones do have standards.
A man's standards are almost entirely physical. A woman's standards are a matrix of preferences that include physical, personality, status, wealth, intelligence, etc. This is why women generally can't understand what men like and vice versa. A woman ideally wants a hero. A man ideally wants a fertile young women.

>Which is a completely different thing altogether.
No it isn't. It's an indication of how male sexuality differs from female sexuality. Women masturbate to erotic literature; men masturbate to a 19 year old taking it in every hole.

>Yet he'd still go for the one he can't have.
Men want to fuck as many DIFFERENT women as possible. It's about novelty. It's not the chase that attracts him, it's the reward.

>How is it not?
Because it's not. When men get insecure they dote on the woman and let her do whatever she wants. When a woman gets insecure, she tries to lower your estimation of yourself so you'll settle and stay with her.

>Most people do to a point.
FUCK NO. A submissive woman is the most sexually attractive thing in the world to a man. Are you kidding me? Have you ever been in a relationship?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:15:16 2017 No.9881685 >>9881613 >Weak men and women are simply annoying to deal with I hate this mentality so much. People who are weak are already vulnerable. They don't deserve the scorn of people like you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:18:25 2017 No.9881690 >>9881657 No answer. Stop baiting, Anon.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:19:51 2017 No.9881692

>>9881600

>It doesn't matter. You could be a billionaire, she still wouldn't want to be near you unless you'd also have the intelligence and social skills to mask your reason ... and if you'd had the intelligence and skills to do it, you wouldn't need the money either, just an opportunity to meet her.

That's very optimistic.

>>	Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 04:22:37 2017 No.9881697 >>9881692 I hope anon's a woman. A man being that clueless is too pathetic to bear

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:30:51 2017 No.9881725 >>9881697 It's solipsism. Women observe how they themselves feel and then project that onto men. Either that or dismiss the male experience entirely.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:33:30 2017 No.9881730 >whiny numale pajeet named after primo numale indeh folk rationalizes why is he a virgin episode why did you decide to emigrate from /mu/ you heinous goblin

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:38:03 2017 No.9881740

>>9879115
I see this 'feminists are deep' meme more often. Butler is not deep, she's full of dreck. What she means in this quote is this: there are two views of hegemony: one is the Althusserian view, in which the power relations are inflexible. The other view imagines power relations as subject to change.
The language she uses serves no purpose at all. Kant and Hegel are difficult too, but to some extent, their difficulty is irreducible: you cannot explain it without writing more text. When you explain Butler, you will need less text than the original.

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 04:38:32 2017 No.9881742

>>9881725
Everyone, men and women, tend to be pretty myopic. Contemporary third wave feminism is just women acting out the apex fallacy. They surround themselves with successful men, then compare their own situations to those men and conclude that men are especially privileged in society. They don't know that female teachers actively discriminate against boys, or that men commit suicide at a much higher rate, or that men are far more likely to be homeless.

>>9881730
>pajeet
This genuinely triggered me. I'm feather not dot you fucking faggot

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:39:50 2017 No.9881745

>>9881667
>My point is that the civilizations that thrived were the ones that BEST adapted to human psychology
Thrived by what definition? Our living standard is unprocessed. When it comes to longevity, Rome and Egypt didn't do too badly.

> Unless you think that this will level out (no indication that it will), we are seeing a particular civilization wilt before our eyes.
Most work will be gone at worst in three decades either way.

>being a slut wasn't acceptable
It was crazy popular in Rome and their attitudes to genders when it comes to sexuality was probably more progressive than what we have now. Egypt had a thing for prostitutes too although the sources about them are pretty shitty.

>A man wouldn't just leave his entire life behind for no good reason.
Not paying child support sounds like a decent one.

>'ll just tell you that dominance plays absolutely no role in male attraction apart from a small minority of men who fetishize it.
Once again this big claim without any proof.

> I'm not going to pick one out at random and have our entire discussion form around it.
Surely it's better how have discussion around actual data instead of claims.

>when Simon Baron-Cohen shoes gender differences in week-old infants
The question is not whether they are differences between genders but how they actually affect things. It's only logical to exclude other factors to claim that they do have a big part or that men and women form attraction based on their gender entirely. And like 50% of your post relies on it, anon.

>They're acting out a contradiction.
There is no contradiction when most women find a trait attractive, that most people do find it attractive. Most women won't find a 500kg whale attractive either, and shockingly most men won't either.

>Women masturbate to erotic literature
Ahahah. Hahah. Ha. Even with our current culture of suppressing female sexuality and the conflicted attitudes about the porn industry, at least 30% watch porn. Sure, it's not quite as high as with guys and they are more into story telling stuff but give it a generation or two.

>it's the reward
What reward is there is something you obtained without a challenge? Does winning a race against a quadriplegic feel rewarding? Of course novelty also plays a part but simply getting some drunk easy girl feels cheap and isn't nearly as rewarding.

>When men get insecure they dote on the woman and let her do whatever she wants. When a woman gets insecure, she tries to lower your estimation of yourself so you'll settle and stay with her.
Yeah, no. The first thing is what usually happens for both. The latter when there is a domestic abusers, who are more often than not, male.

>A submissive woman is the most sexually attractive thing in the world to a man.
To you, anon.
#notallmen

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 04:47:05 2017 No.9881760

>>9881685
You are not wrong but isn't it a bit too much to talk of scorn? I can empathize with them perfectly well, offer my support when it seems appropriate and always did my best to protect them from bullying of wannabe alphas I was there too and know how it feels. Just it's still a fucking pain to deal with them and tires you down.

>>9881692
Optimism is hot. Try it from time to time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:03:01 2017 No.9881800 >>9879058 kek

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:04:03 2017 No.9881803 >>9879125 why didn't we listen ... I'M SORRY, OTTO!!!

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:05:14 2017 No.9881805 >>9879115 as impenetrable as dyke pussy

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:05:16 2017 No.9881806 If women didn't want me to hate them then why do they do these things

Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 05:07:53 2017 No.9881816

>>9881745
>Thrived by what definition?
Longevity and the spread of their particular values. I don't mean to judge the efficacy of individual civilizations per se, but of certain customs and institutions. Like, say, monogamy, marriage, religious belief, writing, mathematics, etc.

>Most work will be gone at worst in three decades either way.
If a population shrinks and is replaced by a different one with different values, then you've ostensibly created a new civilization. That new civilization wouldn't be the one that gave us Shakespeare and Wagner.

>It was crazy popular in Rome and their attitudes to genders when it comes to sexuality was probably more progressive than what we have now.
Holy shit you're ignorant. Romans perceived women and gay bottoms as being inferior, and they only accepted female promiscuity among a particular class of women. Sort of like the Greek ἑταῖραι.

>Not paying child support sounds like a decent one.
Men are legally compelled to pay child support even if they leave the woman. I don't get what you're trying to say here.

>Once again this big claim without any proof.
Men find dominance attractive? Really? Which is why they lust after CEOs and MMA fighters, as opposed to young fertile women? You need scientific proof that demonstrates that?

>It's only logical to exclude other factors to claim that they do have a big part or that men and women form attraction based on their gender entirely.
Reformulate this statement in order to make it clearer. Maybe i'm tired, but I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

>There is no contradiction when most women find a trait attractive, that most people do find it attractive.
They don't. We don't live in an androgynous society. This reads like it's written by someone who doesn't interact with other people on a regular basis. Women don't find big tits, wide hips, and extreme empathy to be attractive in men. This isn't hard to get.

>Even with our current culture of suppressing female sexuality
HOLY
SHIT
>tinder
>Kardashian culture
>all of women's fashion since the 70s
>the fastest-selling book of all time is BDSM porn marketed towards women
>the movie based on that book made hundreds of millions of dollars and had ads on the Today Show
If this is suppressing female sexuality, what the fuck would its acceptance look like? You're being insanely ideological.

>at least 30% watch porn
It's not about what percentage of women ever watch porn, it's the frequency and intensity with which they watch it. Porn is a compulsion for men in ways that it could never be for women.

>but simply getting some drunk easy girl feels cheap and isn't nearly as rewarding
You don't live in the real world. A hot chick is a hot chick. A girl you've already fucked doesn't play hard to get because she understands that the novelty of her vagina has already worn off. His African Savanna brain is telling him that he's already inseminated her, so it's time to move on

>To you, anon
to real men

>>	Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 Sat Aug 12 05:17:30 2017 No.9881835 >>9881816 btw i'm going to bed. Too tired to argue. If this thread is still up tomorrow i'll respond to any reply to this.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:25:44 2017 No.9881849

>>9881423

>This is a perfect example of female sexual psychology. If a woman did her best to try to please a man, almost all men would be grateful. It's women who don't want a partner who cares what they think of them, BECAUSE WOMEN WANT AN ALPHA MALE WHO DOESN'T CARE WHAT THEY THINK. Thank for confirming my point.

This. I dunno if it's about being an 'alpha male' but attraction is borne from having strong conviction in one's own actions. I've been here long enough to come to the belief that a lot of people's issues concerning women (including my own) stems from a general insecurity. It leads them towards criticising external elements of the world rather than focusing on they themselves, which women don't like. It's fine if you have success and wealth; less fine if you're just a normal bro. Women don't like it. It looks weak. They won't admit it but all they need is tacit support.

It's not rocket science but I guess in today's world it's a bit fucking hard sometimes.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:30:00 2017 No.9881852 >>9879115 desu id rather read tje tunnel

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:34:55 2017 No.9881860 >>9880532 >woolf >austen >lispector >o'connor >mccullers >adler >moore >bishop >HD >stein >inb4 not liking austen death to pleb

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:36:49 2017 No.9881864

>>9881849
It sucks for guys because we get insecure when we get rejected, but then we're more prone to getting rejected when we feel insecure. It's a downward spiral. And then women complain when men are stoic and unemotional. What are we supposed to do? If we weren't stoic and unemotional we would cry ourselves to sleep every night.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:37:54 2017 No.9881866 >>9881860 Austen is the most overrated person to ever live.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:38:03 2017 No.9881867 >>9879023 De Beauvoire wasn't bad, nor was some of the 70s work like The Cinderella Complex. It's just this modern shit.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 05:46:41 2017 No.9881889 >THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF /LIT/ RIGHT NOW

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:22:56 2017 No.9881961

>>9881864

I try to think this way: if you never try, you never succeed. Like smiling, you could smile at 50 girls and only get one who smiles back. The goal is that one who does. It's the only one you'll remember anyway.

I think guys are insecure because we secretly hate failure. We're taught to think that we're worse people if we fail (insert criticism of capitalism here). Like failure isn't some natural human characteristic or something. Really, failure isn't bad or abnormal.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:27:07 2017 No.9881972

>>9881961
Failure can either indicate that you did something wrong, or it can indicate that there's something wrong with the way you are. It's the latter that scares the shit out of us because we can't change it. Sexual rejection is rejection for something about that you can't change, your genes. Women rejecting you is like nature saying you're not good enough to procreate.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:27:37 2017 No.9881974

>>9881137
Most people just, you know, try to find an author they like and write about the themes that are prominent in their work.

Oh wait, all of the black writers you're introduced to in university talk almost exclusively about race and the impact it has on their life - or about class struggle, and the female writers chief topic of discussion is the role given to them by society because of their gender, or, again, class struggle?! Well shit, guess if you want to analyse something other than race, class and gender you'll have to make due with a dead, white guy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:33:54 2017 No.9881993 >You are virgins like those old white men with little dicks, which is the real reason they oppressed women!!! Haha, deal with it! GIRLS ARE SLAYING! YASSSSS!

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:36:23 2017 No.9882002 File: 175 KB, 825x729, 1502483492989.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] fuck m*nogamy

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:42:13 2017 No.9882015 >>9882002 It's also in our animal nature to fuck 15 year old girls and engage in tribal warfare

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:45:01 2017 No.9882027 >>9882002 >I have over 500 confirmed fucks

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:49:35 2017 No.9882041 >>9882027 lol

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:52:04 2017 No.9882046

>>9882002
Good for him, though it's way more fun to keep regular fuckbuddies. Maybe it's just me but doing random people takes way too much effort and then the sex just isn't as good.

Serial monogamy is indeed the way, not some 500+ confirmed fucks shit.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:53:31 2017 No.9882047 >>9882015 Have you ever heard a 15 year old girl talk? That shit kills any boner.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 06:55:16 2017 No.9882055 >>9881974 >reading some white guy bitching over his privileged life Totally different, rite?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 07:02:23 2017 No.9882065 >>9882055 Go ahead then, try to spin Novalis, Twain or Nabokov into 'just some white guy bitching about his privileged life'.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 07:11:25 2017 No.9882081

>>9882065
Nabokov is the definition of a privileged white guy and all of them are analyzed to death, so hardly any better. Though Novalis could use more airtime, the nigga was way too clever for his time and misanalyzed by idiots even worse than Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 07:18:22 2017 No.9882095 I hate summer

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 07:22:21 2017 No.9882101

>>9882081
Sure, I was just trying to give some classic examples so we'd be able to discuss whether authors we have both read fit the description you've given.

>Nabokov is the definition of a privileged white guy
So what? The question is what kinds of topics his work deals with. And if you honestly try making the case that his core themes consist of bitching about how hard it is to be white I'll virtually slap you.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 07:36:14 2017 No.9882124

>>9882101
> The question is what kinds of topics his work deals with.
Honestly, it's mostly jerking himself over his mastery of language, just not doing it in your face and disregarding plot like Joyce. Sounds quite white to me. How did his works (only read Lolita, Pale Fire, Podvig and way too many criticism pieces, that were probably the highlight) address any struggle around the world?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 07:45:58 2017 No.9882141 File: 26 KB, 339x381, 1502479783796m-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9880055 Underrated. Shame (((lit))) is infinite times dumber than /pol/ so they have to read it at least twice to get it.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 08:28:11 2017 No.9882207

>>9882124
>how did his works address struggle around the world
You're still thinking too politically. I think may well reject the argument I'm about to make on the grounds that it's too universalist, but I'll still try.
Nabokov deals with abstract topics, the kinds of topics that could be discussed under any guise, as a fantasy epos or a historical story set in Africa 2000 bc and still be just as relevant to you or me, and he does this in a performative way, for instance by weaving all kinds of philosophical, psychological and outside (political, health, social circumstance) factors into the fictional coming-into-existence of his narratives to make a point about what authorship is, or by having characters act in ways they reject emotionally while trying to justify themselves intellectually to portray the duality of ones sense of self and ones true identity. Of course many authors have tried to do this, but I'd say the ones whose work is still relevant have universally approached these topics in their own way, rather than simply regurgitating clichés, and yet their positions are not arbitrary.
What makes Nabokov stand out to me is how his construction blends together all kinds of external and internal struggles into something that still feels like a coherent whole, rather than simply being a disjointed mess of competing influences (and of course doing all of that with great literary style, using the greatest heights and lowest lows of language not simply to show off, but to illustrate the abyss which exists between those elements of the human mind.)

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 08:32:36 2017 No.9882213 >>9882207 Oh, and excuse any grammar mistakes I might have made, I'm not a native speaker and I'm writing on a tiny screen, which means I can't even look at any one sentence as a whole at once.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 09:05:32 2017 No.9882307

>>9879115
A good writer would have been able to make this more understandable. The underlying subject really is not as complex as the writer wants to make you think.

What is more interesting is the question why she didn't just break up this fat mess of a Frankenstein freak sentence into smaller sentences. Asking this question especially makes sense considering the fact she is a "brilliant" academician.

The message that such horrible academic writing inherently sends out to potential readers is that it is not actually worth the reader's time since the writer herself didn't even care about making it more reader friendly. The author is in fact dismissing their own work by inexplicitly saying they did not invest any time into making it a readable text for other possible, interested readers.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 09:32:11 2017 No.9882370

>>9882207
Despite being a dirty phone poster ... you make solid points, specially about his ability to blend things together (I meant that when comparing him to Joyce, though you worded it much, much better) but, and of course there is a but, I find the majority of his topics themselves mostly banal. Abstraction or not. I have no idea how to say it any better and I don't mean it in an elitist neckbeard way. Say with Joyce or Nietzsche or heck, even Hugo I had moments of absolute wonder and amazement at times. They provided new ways of looking at things, with Nabokov it's just "yeah, yeah, okay, obviously." It's not like anything is wrong with his topics or God beware the way he presents it, I often get it with writers from Russian background, guess that comes with being part of the culture. It's even more extreme with Tolstoy or Dostoevsky, as much as I like them, they appear a lot more groundbreaking from the point of view of Western audience.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 09:45:21 2017 No.9882420

>>9879115
She is literally just saying that capital commands power-structures and their way to reaffirm themselves "reboot" if you want over time.

Academia is really in a sad state if these base level observations with some decorated jargon can impress you.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 10:48:15 2017 No.9882671

>>9881974
I see Lefties, especially feminists try to invalidate accomplishments or important works by saying "they're dead white men" so much, I'm starting to think it should be given a name. The "dead white men" fallacy or something similar. A book is good? No, a dead white man wrote it. These people made art? Fuck it, it was made by dead white men. It's like that video with the nog in the Scottish art museum yelling a slam poem at paintings because the people depicted are "dead white men" and thus he is superior to them because he is alive and black, he even says this to King George III's portrait, a man who, if it wasn't for his reign, he'd probably still be on a tobacco plantation in the indies. I wish I could post it, but the original video got deleted because people saw that it was a bunch of bull.

Oh yeah, and go back to tumblr summerfag

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 11:01:59 2017 No.9882724

>>9882370
Fair enough. There are plenty of authors that were insightful to me that other people have found to be banal - I think it mostly comes down to the philosophical proximity between author and reader. You just have to be a decent writer to give someone an insight into what is foreign to them, whereas you have to be pretty amazing to make them see an idea they've gotten to know all their life in a new light. Then again, you're definitely right about Nabokov not being on the same level as Nietzsche.

So, what were you getting at with the whole "that author is an example of whiteness, and they're not even dealing with struggle around the world" thing? It's honestly kind of depressing to me that literary critique has been mostly reduced to the critique of political and social structures under the pretence of talking about a work of literature, the content of which is dictated not by the text but by the method being used and the political climate in which it is being written.
I've tried to give the explanation that the underlying problem here is that the minority/women's authors which are taught at universities are people who speak about minority, gender and class-issues. The only option left for someone who wants to write about worthwhile constructions of trust and betrayal, friendship and love, dealing with death, chaos and order, aesthetics and morality and similar topics that aren't primarily political in nature are the authors they have been made aware of who actually put those things at the forefront of their concerns, rather than shoving them to the side-lines to push some kind of political message.
Sure there are authors that talk about "the life of a certain subgroup of white people", authors like BEE or DFW, and their work is actually fairly well suited for the kind of literary analysis the politically minded, socially responsible kids these days like to do, but it seems to me like they are trying to deny the relevance or even the existence of literature that isn't about a subgroups particular experience of a political situation. To them, who ever the most prevalent characters of a novel may be are designated as representatives of their group, and whatever the situation may be it is described in political terms. Frankly, I think that kind of approach is so reductive and cynical it's insulting. Why can't we just push the identity politics off to the side a bit and make some room for teaching a more balanced curriculum dealing with questions concerning the human condition instead? No quotas, no "but you can't teach a course about white authors without talking about how they were shaped by white culture". Just let professors do seminars on whichever books they want if they can give a good enough reason as to why they are /lit/. The younger ones especially are going to push for minority authors all by themselves, so I don't think you need to worry about a return of the traditional notion of the canon, which I find pretty spooky as well.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 11:13:07 2017 No.9882770 >>9879093 Women aren't born like that. They are the recipients of massive amounts of toxic propaganda and they are affected by it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 11:15:25 2017 No.9882781 >>9879154 I hate shills

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 11:19:16 2017 No.9882799

>>9882724
There's also Pure land buddhism, which is the practice of buddhism but with the aim of reincarnating into buddha's pure land to then afterwards return into Saha world (earth) to deliver beings from suffering.

A master once gave his opinion on what it means to be a buddha vs bodhisattva.

Bodhisattva: Delivers beings from suffering, from thought.
Buddha: Delivers beings from suffering, without thought.

Even after Buddha transcended and left Saha world he will go to other worlds to deliver more beings from suffering. It seems the universe can't get enough of this. I could tell allot more but it is one's own journey and I'd be demystifying it.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 11:19:33 2017 No.9882800

>>9879563
>implying the feminist movement ever had anything to do with equality
It's about sameness. Denying that women are not the same as men, and then requiring that female performance be measured in male parameters, and screaming foul when they inevitably fall short.
It's not a real ideology, it is a weapon to divide a people, separate its women from its men, just like at other times they tried to separate classes to undo unity.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 11:23:07 2017 No.9882816 >>9882799 Ah, yes. I'll try doing that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 15:13:45 2017 No.9883619 >>9879023 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0309132515623368?journalCode=phgb& i-is this the power of feminism?

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 17:13:15 2017 No.9884015 >>9882015 Old hag >>9882047 Autism grapes

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 17:20:02 2017 No.9884037

>>9881740
It's sad that your accurate criticism of Butler is swamped by the dozens of meme responses that attack her gender, race, or appearance instead of actually attacking her ponderous meme writing, which is well deserving of being attacked.
I thought /lit/ was better than this.

Anonymous Sat Aug 12 17:24:44 2017 No.9884051

>>9882015
Abstaining from fucking 15 year olds and killing members of other tribes because you are a civilized man is very different from forcing yourself to fuck your sex partner for the hundredth time, even though you're incredibly bored of her, because you have some sort of idea that you're supposed to. The former involves abstaining from committing acts of violence or acts that may have potentially dangerous psychological consequences to the other person. The latter involves deceiving another adult, living a lie around them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 18:12:47 2017 No.9884252 >>9884051 MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH CIVILIZATION!!!!!!! Eat shit, /pol/tard.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 18:33:37 2017 No.9884335 >>9881860 try something less generic man

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 18:34:45 2017 No.9884339 >>9884252 The fugg are you going on about? Read the comment chain.

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 19:25:54 2017 No.9884550 >>9879224 I love him so much

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 21:13:32 2017 No.9884940 Has anyone found out where TLP went

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 21:28:26 2017 No.9884987 >>9882002 cringe

>>	Anonymous Sat Aug 12 21:40:53 2017 No.9885022 >>9884940 Probably died

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature