/lit/ - Literature

>>16799662
you only think that because you are a man.
the way women love is different than the way man loves. women want to be possessed, to be an object of desire.

>>16799662
Women are not better at anything. They cannot write anything without falling to their stereotypical shite.

I'm reading this non-fiction book about engineers making a computer in the 1970s and within a few pages she starts writing about some mother-hen secretary acting like a wet blanket. Jesus christ who cares?

Women are actually incapable of romance. Only men can feel romantic passion. Women only pretend to do so to play into the fantasies of men and get access to their resources and protection.

>>16799662
women don't experience love they only understand lust and greed

>>16799662
Women don't think of romance in the same way as men, of course. Same reason women's hero's journeys are boring to watch for guys.

God this bitch has no ass. Deadass thought they had only shown her legs.

>>16799662
>Why are men so much better at writing romantic literature and women at realism?
Example?

>>16799860
mayonnaise bitches are as curvy as walls

>>16799860
>>16799884
Niggers

>>16799893
Go take some estrogen and fap to hentai, bitch ass white boy

>>16799906
Nigger

>>16799909
ask your mom how my dick tastes cracka

>>16799921
Nigger

>>16799921
lmao look this this pathetic subhuman nigger

>>16799662
Yeah, man, this George Eliot guy writes the best women characters I've ever read. Females btfo

>>16799923
>>16799927
low verbal iq autists
finna run a train on some white hos with my niggas tonight and bust a fat ass nut in their pink pussies and make you crackas raise my mutts

>>16799662
Women are really good at writing gay romance, just look at Mary Renault and Marguerite Yourcenar. For some strange reason, many of them seem to idolize love between men as some kind of superior force.

>>16799953
Nigger

>>16800063
>this is what fujos actually believe
Lmao. Back to /y/ and /cm/ with your pathetic fujo fiction. IRL gays jerk off to strongfat bearded rednecks sniffing each others armpits in a locker room and suchlike gross and mundane shit. Romance? What romance? They ain't got time for all this flowery prettyboy prince shite. Real gays like men not girly boys and being conventionally attractive is in fact much less important to them than being kinky and dtf. Fujos will never understand this, in all fujo fiction at least one character has to be 11/10 young girly fuccboi. And twink+older man is just female fantasy about capturing a successful, experienced alpha male, only the fujos are so insecure they're intimidated even by fictional hotter and more succesful females, so they self insert as twinks and escape in the world of unrealistic pseudohomo fantasies, just not to be reminded of what they'll never have and be.

>>16799953
Black people don't write like this, let alone on 4chan/lit

This is a jew.

>>16799662
In my experience the exact opposite is true, but i havent read that much romance. Im curious though, please post some good romantic novels written by men. (i assume you mean romantic as in love, not as in the romantic art movement)

Everyone saying that women can't write romance has not felt the love and touch of a woman. Women are as capable of romance as men are, there are simply fewer examples of good female-written romance and realism. I hesitate to say this, but Charlotte Brontë does a decent job at this.

>>16800265
based fujodestroyer

>>16800063
>Marguerite Yourcenar
the good shit there
why arent men capable of good lesbo romance?

>>16799679
>Women are not better at anything.

They seem like they may be better at getting over older, flamed out romances.

>>16800736
Men are more visual and more satisfied with only sex (hence the popularity of porn). Women want sex too, but they also want domestic romance, that's why they write a lot of the genre.

>>16799662
>stands in your path

>>16801071
the blackest of all pills: you'll never get over her, but she will absolutely get over you

>>16799662
whys she tryna warm her ass

>>16802931
Nigger

>>16800265
fucking shit, /lit/ puttin these hoes on blast

>>16799841
>women's hero's journeys
this doesn't exist.

women say the opposite. what do you think?

>>16800265
I don't know. I was a skinny pretty boy type and gays tried to woo me as much as fujos. I settled for the fujos. One thing is true: no actual woman wants a pretty boy. It's suffering.

>>16799662
>Why are a subset of people who have to take the active role in romance so much better at writing it?
>Why are the people who expect to be pursued worse?
Do you think before you post?

>>16799662
Men want to stick their dick in something pretty, while women want a burly man's hairy dick shoved into them. Their respective sexuality complements the desires that show in their imagination.

>>16803066
>no actual woman wants a pretty boy. It's suffering.
Why not?

>>16799662
Anya is such a babe. Such control over her facial emotes. You would think it was a flat affect but she oozes with subtle notes of emotion. It really is a treasure to watch her work. Especially on a webm on 4channel.

I'm not so sure it's undeniable. Though it certainly is interesting.

>>16803084
why would a woman want someone prettier than her? That just begs festering resentment for the typical narcissistic woman. I'm not anon and only half joking.

>>16803108
>why would a woman want someone prettier than her?
to show off to her friends

>>16799662
The difference stems from the fact that men are constantly engaged in realism and use their romantic fantasies to escape from the hell that is realist. On the other hand women are constantly engaged in romanticism and their romantic fantasies are about escaping this mundane romantic existence in something real.

This manifests in two ways:
Men basically imagine that their romantic interest is going to be an extremely beautiful, feminine, caring, somewhat shy and reserved chick who will not see him as a collection of resources and skills (as the real world sees him) but will instead see through this "veil", see him for what he *really* is and fall in love with him, with his innermost being (that is beyond the realist notions of resources and skills and abillity to provide value to society) and turn out to be a perfectly loyal extremely attractive somewhat reserved partner who is of course also somewhat whore-ish in bed for him.

The female romantic fantasy is completely the opposite. Living in a totally unreal world, the world of the feminine. Their appearance is fake, their manners are fake, their behavior is fake, everything has to be subdued and pretty and the only way to impact the world is through subdued social manipulation and double meanings, living in this kind of world women desperately want the access to the Real. And they can only get this access through the man who is going to possess them, who will turn their life from romantic artifice to reality. The ideal romantic fantasy of women then is an extremely powerful, inconsiderate, unromantic (except when he uses romanticism to contrast his otherwise totally emotionally distant figure) man who is completely submerged in the world of the Real and in fact dominates the world of the Real. What is the Real? Brute ambition, competitiveness, physical strength, murder, money, drugs, forecfullness, rape. The female fantasy is that her man will be the master of the Real at all times, a brute murderer and tyrannt towards everyone else, EXCEPT her and even this only in very specific moments of romantic affection displayed for her. In this way woman though being possessed by this man, can access the Real through him. In fact, she finally reaches her desire, the possession of the Real through the Real man. The female ideal is precisely the moment where she makes her wish known to her supremely powerful partner that she would prefer that someone like John the Baptist's head would be brought to her on a platter. In this way she for a brief moment experiences the Real and that sends her into a lustful frenzy, her penis envy is finally satisfied. Though her partner has to keep her in constant suspension that she will in fact lose access to this Real at any moment, otherwise if her man would become domesticated, she would no longer have access to the Real as a domesticated male has no access to the Real himself.

>>16803084
Normie girls don't like skinny ephebic guys, at best they want someone who has a lot of dry muscle. Unless they read manga and think the guys in manga are hot, but that also means they're fujos. Older women will look at you like a young boy and if they actually want you for that they are inevitably fujos. I was a magnet for twisted women specifically because of how I looked. It doesn't make sense but that's how it is.

>>16803177
This makes a lot of sense to me. Also, checked.

>>16803108
Same reason anyone would want someone prettier than them.
>>16803206
Normie teen girls love kpop boybands though and they are the personification of pretty boys.

>>16803084
Twink masterrace

>>16803177

>>16803177
Based analysis

>>16803177
This alone explains the romantic letters to serial killers. This alone explains why women are even more attracted to their partner upon learning that he cheated on her. This alone explains the rape fantasies.

Furthermore in light of this the entire feminist movement is about taking away this abillity of women and replacing it with direct access to the Real. This can only be done by shedding femininity itself and turning women into man which is where we are currently at. The ultimate fantasy of feminists is the inversion. That women have direct access to the Real and that men are the unreal, socially subdued part. The feminist fantasy is the woman as a power broker at the top of power hierarchy, a female Steve Jobs or a female Henry Kissinger. Brokering deals with third world corrupt politicians to have their populations enslaved in production of gadgets, the Real, or genociding third world shitholes as Realpolitik (aptly named) demands it. The feminist fantasy is that Jen after a long day gets off phone finally arranging a genocide in Palestine or Rwanda or wherever and driving home to her villa where a Chad or Tyrone or both will wait for her as chained domesticated tigers, the only thing remaining of their testosterone reflected purely in their jaws and muscle, that is reflected purely and solely in the aesthetic. The inversion of roles par excellence.

>>16803230
>Normie teen girls love kpop boybands though
They do today. But today I have a beer belly and I hate dating.

>>16803177
pretty fucking much

>>16803177
Furthermore, once one realizes this one can correctly see that the real temptation of Eve was not that by eating the apple she would be like God, no, the real temption was far more temptful to the woman than that. The temption was that she ALONE could lead a perfectly just man to perdition. This is the lust and frenzy she felt at the snake's suggestions. The promise the snake made was the access to the Real. The Real she would experience if she managed to doom Adam. And so woman became an accomplice of the snake who she judged to possess the access to the Real. Eve's entire lust was precisely in the promise of damnation, that she could bring this upon Adam, that would give her access to the ultimate Real.

>>16799676
isn't that kind of the problem. women reduce it to a childish schlick fantasy.

>>16803177
All women need to do is get nurtured and clean the house and teach kids some thing and don't let them make the mess. Rest time is for hobby and rest.

Completely isolated from any real danger, even if enemy came to burn the village, women would get just raped while mean butchered.

Ironically such carefree life is ultimate pinnacle that man struggles to reach in his old age with his family. Women take it for granted and want to suffer, and so they should suffer.

>>16803299
To understand a woman's attraction to man is then to understand that a woman's attraction to man is possible only through the access to the Real. And the access to the Real is only possible by a hierarchical connection between her man and another man.

Yes, I am very much claiming that women are incapable of feeling attraction for men in a vacuum. If only one man and only one woman existed, she would never be attracted to him. She would lightly be attracted to him if this man displayed qualities of being able to manipulate the world skillfully. Interacting adeptly with tools and materials in the world. But this would still not be attraction, merely a curiosity about a possible provider. In reality, at all times, there needs to be present a "third man" for a woman to experience attraction. The third man that her man can exercise power upon. This alone gives women the access to the Real and in this alone is her penis envy and subdued desire for domination satisfied.

>>16803332
Also man that want to be girls, aside from fetishes (that make them mostly gay), what pushes them over the line to "transition" is social treatment of a female. Something they will never get.

men have a soul and a heart.

>>16803437
so do women. you can't blame them for their natural inclinations. most men would fuck a supermodel given the chance, there is a female equivalent to this. some rise above this basic natural tendency some don't, this goes for both genders.

>>16803455
I'd have sex with a supermodel if she was my wife.

>>16799662
is anyone gonna recommend some good romance lit or not lol?

>>16799662
Why is she airing out her butt like that?

>>16803472
Justine by de Sade

>>16803455
how is that an argument? men can fuck a supermodel like a piece of meat, and also marry and love her more than anything, same as an ugly 4/10. women are incapable of this kind of love. They either "love" your resources and are enchanted by beauty and confuse it with love.

>>16803084
VERY few women actually like pretty men or twinks. And those that do either basically want a son or a pet, or are really mentally fucked, afraid and hateful of men but also still like them so they need some not-man man (this is how they reason it subconsciously). These ones might be ok with effeminate-looking men but when it comes down to it no woman is ok with a man who doesn't act like a man, actually women don't even like that, they like the ooga booga caricature and condition men towards it while in reality men are more inhibited and have feelings. Women are very sensitive to the baser biological relationship of men and women, so as a twink you'll probably have to overcompensate a bit. Not overcompensate in that insecure way, women can see that very easily it's a big turn off.

There are also many women who are just afraid of men fullstop so it is impossible for them to have real relationships. They like men and have a biological requirement for men to act like men, but men doing so makes these women scared/spiteful so it just can't work.

Don't mistake women liking the fantasy of anime pretty boys and models and whatnot as relevant, this is just something they never grew out of as teens and has no bearing on reality outside of their lack of self-awareness and self-sabotage.

I'm said pretty boy btw but luckily naturally more masculine than these neurotic zoomers around me.

>>16802009
>>16802009
>domestic romance
not really. they just want to be desired and pursued, that gets them off. popular romance is written by women for women and it is not really romantic at all. men are certainly not only satisfied with sex, don't be silly, and a good chunk of the people who watch porn as-is are women. porn isn't just passionless sex either, some of the most popular are real couples.

>>16803235
eh, not a fan.

>>16803513
This guy speaks the truth. I knew many bitter /cgl/-browsing fembots when I was growing up since I used to be fairly into conventions and anime/manga.

They would proclaim their hatred of men going to the gym and building muscle while schlicking to VNs with gayboy 11/10 twink faggots. If you probed them hard enough, you'd reveal that they were, without exception, complete and utter wrecks who bordered on femcels, and genuinely believed that all men were trash.

>>16803650
I had trouble understanding this post

>>16803666
Was just thinking this myself. Then I realized I understood too much of it. Then realized I need to get off 4chan.
>schlicking to VNs with gayboy 11/10 twink faggots.
Not 100% on that one. I'm going to take a shower.

>>16799884
>>16799906
>>16799921
>>16799953
I genuinely wonder what miserable, self-hating, misanthropic mongrel would lower himself to posting this kind of drivel online.

Why is it backwards? Men are the romantic gender. We put onto women what we want them to be. And vice versa.

>>16799773
This

>>16803480
She's warming herself against the fireplace I think

>>16803713
mmhm, i guess it depends on the romantic perspective. Men are the dancing birds... peacocking around making ridiculous sounds. Women are the courted, the wooed, the judge. Perhaps it isn't so ironic that men know what women want more than women know what women want. They are the gender that actively forms and adapts to the "apple of the eye" of women.

>>16803713
Because 95% of men are emotional wrecks and bottle their feelings up.

>>16799662
Because romanticism is a masculine trait and naturalism is a feminine one.

>>16803859
What the fuck are you on about this time, you man-hating dyke?

>>16799662
Men are better at literally everything. Why would literature be any different?

>>16803752
However, the most sold "romantic" novel ever was written by a woman. Forget what it's called but they made a movie about it a few years ago. Every woman worldwide loves it. Was about some 25 year old billionaire who fucked his secretary.

>>16803940
X shades of grey?

Men are obsessed with women. It's pathetic. The state of this thread, kek. I recommend all of you to go outside and actually talk to people.

>>16804055
>go outside
>both lesbian and straight female friends tell me the exact same shit you see ITT
GGs faggot

>>16803983
Yes

>>16804055
You haven't had sex, most likely.

>>16800265
>>16803066
>>16803513
>>16803650
Fag hags exist. Never had much use for them, except for the dish they furnished friends. But writers like Renault or Carson are another matter, though to be honest I find them to be at best competent rather than compelling at the homoerotic and the homoromantic. Romance in any case is more about the substitution of place for person, which is the case even for guys, whether or not particularly literary, in everything from /b/ comfy threads to 19th century landscape to the poetry of Wordsworth.
>>16803230
Normie teen girls, when they become normie women, respond to power as a thing to tame and tap, and lust after guys with the kind of big rectangular head that whispers "politician".

>>16799662

>>16805147
*person for place

The selection of a man is by far the biggest choice a women must make. Thus her vision must not be clouded in her social pursuits (which is her domain of excellence)and so she is finely tuned to the characters of men.

>>16802924
I'm over everyone, even my wife

>>16800334
>Black people don't write
True.

>>16805155
Everyone knows you are, at the least, bisexual, butterfly :3

could someone please reccomend me a big on how women/romance works?

>>16803177
Damn, what is this Lacan or something. Either way, can't deny it...

>>16799662
Bcs men are more romantic and women are realists. However, women are not better at any form of writing than men, you are wrong there. All the best realist works have been written by men.

>>16799662
Dugin has a very interesting hot take on this issue. Basically, women naturally excel at “Cybele” activities and men excel at “Apolo” activities. I can expound on this but he explains it pretty well in Noomahia

>>16803177
Butters couldn't even try to refute it.

>>16803177

Pretty good.

>>16803177
What is the Real?

>>16808443
Oh wait nvm

women are incapable of experiencing romantic love the way men do

>>16807648
>Dugin
No, thanks, Ivan, you can keep that alco-schizo.

>>16808999
men are incapable of experiencing romantic love the way women do

>>16803177
yeah... that's basically it

>>16809062
not true, men are fully capable of sinking to that low

>>16799662
They're not, incel.

because you're a fag, op

>>16803177
From a biological perspective almost all men are expendable. Our existence is intended by nature to be one of struggle and, more often than we'd like to admit, failure. The male biological predetermination to suffer is why men produce the most beautiful art because suffering begets beauty. To quote one Mr. Lindybeige:
>"80% of all the women who have ever lived contributed to the current gene pool. So, looking at very broadly, if you're female (then regardless of your status) you're probably going to breed. Only 40% of all the men who have ever lived have contributed to the current gene pool. Most men died childless. Most men failed in the basic evolutionary mission of passing on genes. So men really have to struggle to breed. And the main thing which defines how likely a man is to breed is status. High status men bred a lot and low status men usually didn't breed at all. So status is vital for men."
And from Wikipedia:
>"With a 30% difference between humans and chimpanzees, the Y chromosome is one of the fastest-evolving parts of the human genome."
Males are the test subjects for human evolution. Unfortunately for us, that means many of us will fall short of worthiness.
If you want to feel extra Blackpilled on this lovely Monday afternoon, this series explains how our species is fundamentally built around the goal of protecting and valuing women at the expense of men. Fortunately it's not incel-y: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUYg5FwtPXo&list=PL0_NDS-d7r8sDdayDiareTeurd92Q7nsD

>>16803177
Thank God I didn't miss this thread.

>>16809124
I would still never want to be a woman though desu.

>>16809184
It is delightful to be a woman; but every man thanks the Lord devoutly that he isn't one.

>>16805155
Buttershit... that's a transvestite

>>16809124
Related Question: Why are so many men in the lower classes cohabitating with women rent-free, leeching off of their income/healthcare, stepping out to have trysts, and continuing to indefinitely postpone marriage -- all while providing virtually nothing in return? Is it exploitation of the woman's behavioral psychology? Is there anything I can read or watch to better understand the "pimp" evolutionary subtype?

>>16809221
kek this reminds of a joke from Chris Rock on how bum niggas leech off fat white woman. I'd say this is due to their motherly nature, to nourish, whether it be a child, a man child, or a multitude of cats and dogs.

>>16809244
pic related

>>16809255
kek

>>16809255
lmao

>>16809221
Because women also want to be mothers and have families. Women have a dual strategy - they want to get the best genes for their kids but they also need safety and a dad to help raise the kid and protect them. If all women go to only 20% of men for breeding purposes then there simply isn't enough men in the world to date all the women that want to also date them. Ideally women would love to be impregnated by the alpha and also have him commit to her, but which guy who can pick between 100 of supermodels with no effort will choose exactly *her*? So they need to find some guy who can satisfy their biological urge to be the "dad" and provide some stability. The reality is also there are a lot of men who simply don't give a shit anymore because having a job, working 10 hours a day and grooming yourself is not enough anymore to appear attractive to women (except as a provider) and now its probably not even enough ot buy property, be in charge of your life and create a family, you're basically a wage-cuck. So you end up capitalism reflecting social dynamics. The middle class is gone. Winners take all. The rest simply do the least possible to get by because even if they tried harder it would have minimal effect, no woman in 21st century would be excited about bureaucrat Joe working 10 hours a day, being responsible, and grooming himsefl. Their vaginas dry up, but he is ok as a provider when they're lonely. So what is it in it for bureaucrat Joe? It makes no difference whether he tries or not the end result is the same. There aren't enough winners in the world for all the women that want them. And to them it makes virtually no difference if you're a responsible average Joe, or a do nothing video game player who isn't serious about life, you're the "cope" for females for when they miss out on their dream guy and don't want to end up alone as a catlady. The fact that men now leech off women like this is simply an adaptation to the fact that these women are never actually sexually attracted to them in the first place.

This is why I wish I wasn't born.

>>16802924
>but she will absolutely get over you
She wlll not.

First girl I fugged twenty years ago, who then broke up with me, tried to friend me on FB last year.
She was married but still wanted... something. Probably to rub her marriage in my face and her look-at-me-having-a-fulfilled-life tryhard social media profile. I could see from some of her posts that she'd become even more insufferable, and a political SJW. So I didn't bother to answer her request.

Point being, you may be bitter, but if you were intimate for more than a month she's got an issue too.

Being human is overrated.

>>16803177
rope soon

>>16799906
hahaha i'm sorry you're a nigger anon
holy fuck being black must be awful

The only way to conquer the Woman Question is to abandon it entirely. It's a dead end. If you spend more than 10 minutes a day thinking about why women do or don't do something you've already lost. Your singular pre-occupation as man has to be something larger than the woman. You need a transcendent goal that you work towards and that subsumes your being to the point that if you say to yourself "I will never have a woman love me, I will never have a female partner" you feel absolutely nothing because it is entirely secondary to your life-purpose. Then and only then are you ready for a woman and to integrate her as a part into your overarching Life Mission and the mystery lies in the fact that this is the natural place for her and exactly what she desires herself. But until you have a Life Mission, a passion that is bigger than the woman, perhaps even bigger than your own life, you will be constantly entangled in the Woman Question and not make any progress in spiritual maturity. Do not think that men who have a lot of women purely as a byproduct of their physical looks, finances, social status and so forth have anything at all on a man who has none of this and no women but has a Life Mission. A man is in the world primarily to carry out work and to act and shape the world and through this act, shape and sculpt himself. Do not waste time on frivolities and do not be jealous of a man who is losing his soul in his own harem, he will always remain a juvenile, infantile slave.

>>16809221
These anons >>16809244 >>16809291 gave decent answers. You don't want to hear it but women subconsciously want to be involved with exciting, oftentimes high-risk men. Conversely women naturally want to mother and nurture. A man who does whatever he wants and fells no qualms about treating his woman like shit is both exciting and in need of, as she sees it, her care and attention. Women are so quick to deny this while simultaneously writing off instances where women leave ostensibly GOOD men because "the fire was gone", "I'm not attracted to him anymore", "I still want excitement", etc.

>>16809399
based

>>16807972
Bitters is exactly who he's talking about.

Forget her political lesbianism and dumb wannabe womens-studies-dean persona. She is here looking for a big male provider who will validate her ego and entertain her on an over-educated midwit level. That's why she tripfags. She wants chad moneybags to support her and read middle class commie lit with her. She is fishing here.

First anon to do it will free us of her presence. Fucking Christ please somebody step up to the plate. She has okay tits so you'll get that. Take one for the team goddamnit.

>>16809255
hot, i wish my grandma would play video games too.

>>16809399
Good take but what do you do if your only overarching goal in life is to have a little cabin in the woods where you spend your days gardening and reading with a beautiful and loyal wife who loves you more than anything? When you don't want to build an empire; you just want a warm bed at night.

>>16809472
Being comfortable is not a goal. You don't have to build an empire but you have to be striving for something.

>>16809472
If the woman is the biggest part of that equation, it is pure cupe and unacceptable. If a woman is just a part of your overall journey: of having a little cabin, of living in the woods, of gardening, of reading, then it is acceptable. But if your life is unthinkable without a woman, then it is not acceptable.

>>16809484
>you have to be striving for something
I strive... to be comfortable.

>>16803177
I never asked for this...

>>16803343
Men only want this today because the social value of being male has been destroyed. Trannies exist because only women are considered people.

>>16809494
you want freedom and time and human love in Satan's accelerated slave society
good luck

>>16803177
I don't feel so good, bros...

>>16809522
>Satan's accelerated slave society
Yes I suppose that's right. All I want is the tender love of another human being and the freedom to eke out of this life what little enjoyment I can. And that's too much.

>>16809508
>>16809527
What part of this hurts you?

Fuck this thread. Thread theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlTmDeJq23s

>>16809557
>what part of women valuing the thrill of danger and power over male infantile romanticism hurts you
I in particular had bad experience with girls confessing their love to me while I appeared quirky and mentally unstable to them but quickly leaving me the moment I started to shower them with my love. At least the last girl had the decency to admit that she grew bored of sweet talking and lovey-dovey behaviour. The women surrounding me in my life exhibit the same behaviour proving the written above, my own mother cheated on my stepfather, a good albeit weak and submissive man, with my biological father who is a murderer, rapist, thief, misogynist and egoist that spent more money on booze and whores than on supporting the family.

>>16803177
So if you happen to like slow, cuddly sex, you're bound to get cucked? Life truly is hell.

>>16799676
>women want to be possessed, to be an object of desire.

50 shades demonstrated they want to get abused and humiliated.

>>16799662
Checking in on a based thread with based analysis. These threads are why I come to /lit/

>>16809557
The parts that make me hate existence for putting my in this predicament and the parts that make me resentful of female nature which subsequently makes me hate myself for desiring female companionship. The summation of this is that men must constantly maintain a facade of control and power despite this being the opposite of the pure, almost infantile (as >>16809613 puts it) love that we crave and must ultimately go without.
>men are constantly engaged in realism and use their romantic fantasies to escape from the hell that is realist
>Men basically imagine that their romantic interest will not see him as a collection of resources and skills (as the real world sees him)
>[Will] fall in love with him, with his innermost being (that is beyond the realist notions of resources and skills and [ability] to provide value to society)
>turn out to be a perfectly loyal extremely attractive somewhat reserved partner who is [still sexually desirable]
>Though her partner has to keep her in constant suspension that she will in fact lose access to this Real at any moment, otherwise if her man would become domesticated, she would no longer have access to the Real as a domesticated male has no access to the Real himself.

>>16809627
>50 shades demonstrated they want to get abused and humiliated.

And purchased like a whore.

>>16809508
It's called adulthood. Doesn't mean you can't have a fruitful relationship with a woman. But you can't be a manchild, that's all. Give up the Disney fantasy. FInd a reasonable woman who is self-aware and had good upbringing. Build a family together. Lead her. Your relationship will grow to be something much stronger and more fulfilling than the Disney-love fantasies.

>>16809672
>a reasonable woman
>reasonable
>woman
>self-aware
>good upbringing

>>16809696
for real lol where tf are you supposed to find a woman like this? I was raised Catholic but stopped giving a shit about Catholicism years ago; I've honestly been thinking about going back to church just to find a woman who is actually worth marrying. Time to start reading some Aquinas I guess lol.

>>16809627
>>16809655
By the hundreds of millions.

>>16809640
You are not on this Earth to engage in infantile romantic love. It's not even love.

Love is sacrifice and work. You need to find a woman who is self-aware, of good upbringing and moral character. Go to Church (yes, not all of them will be good even there). Have a plan for your family.

You live in a world tranished by sin. Things get wacky all the time. You have to aspire to the things of the spirit not of the flesh, and you have to find a woman who has the same goals.

You have to realize that men and women have a fleshly nature. Yes things are more depressing than ever because people now follow only their fleshly lusts and act as degenerates. And to be honest, don't we do it too? Have you not fapped to degenerate things? Imagined degenerate things? Perhaps even been to a prostitute?

This world is no picnic. It's a battleground. Your ego will get bruised, you will get bruised, you will be offended, embarrassed and mistreated. You are here on a teleological mission that is much simpler and much more worthwhile than what you might believe. You're here to work, you're here to try to be a good man or woman, you're here to contribute to the good in the world and grow as a person until your time is up and you die. This is the whole thing. There is no Disneyland out there where you will come to a state of stability where you are perfectly happy with your situation and even if you were it could be taken away from you by circumstance in a blink of an eye. The life is a marathon battle. Seek God. Carry your cross, ask Jesus for help and soon you will not feel the weight of your own cross. You're following in His footsteps. Everything else is superflous.

>>16809731
Can I just kms instead?

>>16809640
You are craving unconditional love from your mother. It's time to grow up. The relation of your woman to you will be either of respect or disrespect. The motherly love will be reserved for your children, as it should be. When you enter adulthood, you should realize that life isn't about you. It's about doing a job, sucking it up and in enjoyment looking at the fruits of your labor, the fruits that you produced despite being beaten, mocked, and intimidated.

>>16809613
>>16809640
These desires represent the lowest nature of people, but they can be risen above. Chasing these fantasies ruin both men and women. Women want the hyperreal more than they desire the real, for the real is actually quite mundane and unthrilling. A man who chases his fantasies will end up disappointed and alienated. A woman who chases her fantasies will only wind up being abused, and contrary to what some may say, women don't actually enjoy being abused, and this is a very negative female outcome. These women you meet are also damaged. Most people are in modern society, but happy marriages are the result of people who have risen above their base fantasies and made a stable connection and partnership with one another.

>>16809722
There are only few of them. Newsflash: there are only a few guys like that too. Although a lot of guys are barred from acting degenerate simply because they don't have the option to do so. Doesn't mean they won't do it. Study the girl's parents and family. Study her friends. They are a reflection of her. Study her behavior. Seek them out in Church, library, through hobbies. When you meet them check out their social media (no slutty pics obviously is a plus, no crazy social life constant drinking constant travelling etc. is a plus too) They are out there, but not that many of them. Also don't expect them to be fairies. They still have tendencies for degeneracy (just like you do, don't lie to yourself), the key is that they had a good upbringing, have a degree of self-awareness and can act morally. Their sense of morality has to overrule their innate degeneracy. Most of all they should also judge you, whether you are a good man. With some luck you will find a good partner.

>>16809731
>Love is sacrifice and work
Okay
>You need to find a woman who is self-aware
Uhhhhh
>Go to Church
Lost me. I wish I could convince myself that God is real but that's just not gonna happen. Thanks for the reply though.

Women aren't funny. That's my biggest problem with them. I've never known or known of a genuinely funny woman. It's just not there.

>>16809782
No problem. One day you might convince yourself otherwise.

>>16809798
Some are because they don't have the supermodel looks to carry them in the dating market.

>>16809806
True. The only women I've known who approached some level of funniness or for that matter, excellence of any kind, were uggos and dykes, and yet they still somehow fall short.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NRzqD8jA80

>>16809749
>Life is about suffering and licking up the crumbs
I'm just going to rope instead.
>>16809752
>but happy marriages are the result of people who have risen above their base fantasies and made a stable connection and partnership with one another.
What percentage of the ~50% of marriages that don't end in divorce are "happy"? TRULY happy? 10%? 5%? How many of those 50% of divorced couples thought anything other than "they are the right one, this will be a happy marriage, I am confident"? Surely less than 1%. So basically I need to stake my life (and realistically the lives of any children who may be unfortunate enough to be born) in the hopes that I hit a one in ten (maybe a one in TWENTY) shot? That sounds fucking horrendous.
>No anon, it's not your LIFE
Divorces crush souls. It may as well be death.

>>16803037
Not in the sense that men care to read. The heroine's journey is usually about women fixing their own fucked up minds.

>>16809731
>>16809776
Not that anon but while I have considered taking the Christpill and trying to force myself to be religious, I know the Catholic environment here and I doubt that I'll find different people in it. The most promiscuous and slutty girls I have met or had sex with were doing church stuff. I don't know if religion is taken more seriously in the US but here it's taken not seriously at all and I can barely associate it with moral fiber, while instead it's a guarantee of rock bottom intellect and generally shitty character. Women who display their religiosity do it exclusively on social media to show they're daddy's good girl looking for well-off old-fashioned guys while they actually love to suck strangers' cocks in a back alley. Catholicism is completely rotten here.

>>16809627
>abused and humiliated.
How are they abused and humiliated in these books?

>>16809830
There are rare exceptions but they tend to be older

>>16809798
Humor is overrated, a lot of humor you experience in your life comes in the form of essentially in-jokes with the people you are close to, and any woman who is even slightly capable of playfulness is capable of this level of humor. If you are in a relationship with a woman whose company you enjoy you will probably be able to make each other laugh with ease even if she's as unfunny as a sack of bricks to anyone else.

>>16810015
I think that anon was more so referring to situational and observational humour made in a group/social setting. I actually laugh in a group of all men. I do a socially-accepted chuckle with women to mitigate the awkwardness. In mixed groups, men are the ones being funny. Of course, that final group is a little different because it's usually men trying to be attractive.

>>16809806
This applies to men too. I had a friend in high school who was average looking and chubby but was the funniest one in the group. Lo and behold, the fucker would talk to chicks with ease and make them laugh, i.e. he got laid a lot.

>>16809864
Women LARPing to cultivate male attention is nothing new. They see things through the lens of utility rather than appreciation for the thing as it is. And it's not limited to tradthot bullshit.

>>16809621
You can indulge in it, but occasionally you have to go balls to the wall in her ass so she knows who's boss.

>>16809621
>you're bound to get cucked?
Only is you go for sex advice to incels

>>16803331
This. Women are perverts

>>16810909
Both men and women believe their own brand of perversion is somehow beautiful and meaningful while being disgusted by the perversions of the opposite sex.

compiled for posterity

>>16799773
/thread

I'm so fucking lonely, bros.

>>16812276
You and me both, lad.

>>16799662
men are idealists, women have no interior life.

>>16799662
>Hemingway
Hahaha it's the middle of a war let's fuck lmao
>Austen
You stood up to your bitch aunt and covered up for my slut sister, you are truly an honorable man and I would love to be your wife.

>>16803177
I feel the ultimate longing a man feels for a woman is likened to the longing one feels for God. This being that gives your life meaning, whom you don't approach because you feel unworthy of its love. Only after taking a leap of faith is it possible for this longing to be fulfilled, that Love will keep loving you even when you fall, and is there to help you back up. "Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh" exclaimed Adam after seeing his helper.
The married couple is an image of God.
The whore-ish part is just your brain on coom. Sex is only necessary because of our fall.

>>16799662
Men are and have always been the true romantics. Women are much more realistic and practical.

>>16812391
>Also Austen
Furthermore I'm self-righteous and not particularly attractive. Now that you've already thrown a lot of money at my low-born family because you're a simp I will allow you to be my beta provider. On condition that you will always put up with my shit.

No wonder this shit is so popular with women.

>>16812635
Was Adam the first incel?

>>16809494
>I strive... to be comfortable
good man

>>16800074
>>16799923
>>16799909
>>16799893
This is truly pathetic. That guy is almost certainly white. Oldest form of trolling on /lit/.

>>16799773
False. Women reciprocate romance. Although none of us have a choice about who we love, we can still choose to engage in it. To detach, or detach. Letting yourself be loved is a required part of being loving. Women and men share this. How they go about romance is different, but the base level of love is there even if it blossoms in different ways.

>>16799773
This
>>16814401
Stfu and cope faggot

>>16814487
Have you never known what it's like to say something loving to a girl and to see her respond with joy? My girlfriend goes quiet and I can tell she's happy. We both feel that nervous butterfly feeling because we're making ourselves vulnerable expressing our feelings toward each other. Her excitement and joy is matched by mine. There's a certain level of melancholy to our love, because the world is harsh and our love somehow feels like it might be a temporary beautiful thing in a sea of disappointments.

The song 'Bat out of hell' has a great line that sums it up:

>Baby you're the only thing in this old world that's pure and good and right, and wherever you are and wherever you go, there's always going to be some light.

Most women are not worth your time. But a good woman who loves you as much as you love here is what makes life worth living.

>>16814509
If you are happy and in love you shouldn't be here, other anons will only try to tear you down with their bitterness and cynicism. You won't convince them that loving women exist by showing off that you think you have one.

Call me a nigger, but it is actually astounding how much of a profound lack of ass she has. Like, how is that even possible?

>>16814509
that's fucking cringe bro

>>16814509
>My girlfriend goes quiet
She's thinking about Tyrone's dick bro

>>16799773
This is one of the hardest pills to swallow.

>>16799773
Please go outside

>>16799773
Romantic passion isn't real, you do not feel it either.

>>16799662
women are not romantic. they like romance, but they are not romantic themselves. the guy is traditionally always responsible for any romantic gestures. the best you get from a woman is a birthday blowjob. they arent that clever

>>16814509
Ok, now tell me where to find those "good women" you talk about. So far, all women I've met have been utterly materialistic, no matter how "trad" they appear to be. Most of them ended up cheating on their boyfriends when a better man (read one with a higher SMV) appeared in her life. The others just stopped caring and made of their relationships an embarrassing wreck. So yeah, just tell me where to find these women you talk about and I'll make sure of doing all hard work

>>16814727
I'm a Christian. She's a Christian. I'm a writer, she's an editor. We have shared faith, shared interests, and we both like each other. We found each other through our interest in writing.

>>16814756
No one cares that you have a good woman, we want single available women who meet that criteria

>>16814756
Thanks for replying. Ignore the other anon

I am a good woman, AMA

>>16803177
>Men basically imagine that their romantic interest is going to be an extremely beautiful, feminine, caring, somewhat shy and reserved chick who will not see him as a collection of resources and skills (as the real world sees him) but will instead see through this "veil", see him for what he *really* is and fall in love with him, with his innermost being (that is beyond the realist notions of resources and skills and abillity to provide value to society) and turn out to be a perfectly loyal extremely attractive somewhat reserved partner who is of course also somewhat whore-ish in bed for him.
God, this is so accurate.

>>16803177
Unironically based

The love of a woman is conditional.
The love of a man is unconditional.

>>16816456
Unconditional love is not real

>>16816606
It's an ideal and men get orders of magnitude closer once they've selected an object for their affections.

>>16814509
That sounds nice, anon.

>>16814538
You are right. There is some truth to what people are saying, that women tend to be attracted to masculine and high status men, but much of what is being said here is far too pessimistic. There are good women out there just as there are good men out there. Both good men and good women are necessary to carry on the race.

>>16816714
I have doubts about this. Why does hating the opposite sex always involve pretending your own is amazing? Is it because you couldn't live with yourself otherwise?

>>16803177
Interesting generalization, however this distances the mind from the body. It only focuses on the gain a woman gets and none of her costs.

>>16811830
and posterity judges you an incel

>>16817475
>haha i said the word

>>16799773
tfw my gf buys all my meals when we go out because I'm poor and spoils me in all other aspects too

>>16817618
tfw no mommy gf

>>16817618
Some women would rather gratify the man first before themselves. These women tend to become a bit jealous, however.

>>16817639
A little jealousy in moderation is healthy.

Ok, you women scholars, can someone explain to me why women pay for me in the drive thru?
I even tell when it's going to happen, because I will catch them staring at me in their mirrors.

...But they get absolutely zero out of it because I can't exactly thank because they have driven off

Is it all motherly instinct. Do I have a face that looks pathetic enough to where they pity me?
It has been happening with increasing regularity, especially at Starbucks.

>>16817659
I agree. Just be sure to see where the line in the sand is.

why do womens clothes make me so horny

>>16817831
>if they make you want to fuck the woman
You are a normal heterosexual male
>if they make you want to wear the clothes
You are a tranny

>>16817692
The same reason why men might do it for a cute young woman they will never see again. Women are also capable of being simps.

>>16799773
Uh based?

>>16817831

>>16799860
>>16799884
>>16799906
>>16799921
>>16799953
Based

>>16803698
Have sex, incel

>>16799781
Based.

>>16803177
damn...

>>16799773
Do people actually believe this shit?

>>16816759
>what if you were someone else, HUH?!?!
Categorical error.

>>16818617
Who are you quoting?

>>16803177
Fuck. I cant be loved. And I cant be who Im really are. I rather be alone man...

>>16813229
I will flee my country to make this more attainable. Just made an autism chart. Canada is litmus.
>NM: Name
>C/L: Cost of Living (lower is better)
>CRM: Crime Rate (lower is better)
>S/I: Safety Index (higher is better)

>>16803177
>man who is completely submerged in the world of the Real and in fact dominates the world of the Real.
>tfw realizing I'll never be this kind of man
>it's extremely unliekly I'll ever find a woman who legitimately likes me

I find it funny that >>16799773 and >>16803177 are fundamentally making the same assertion (love for a man is necessarily different than it is for a woman; it is affection for the other in the man and attraction for a way of life/something completely unrelated to the other for the woman), yet people all seem to praise >>16803177 while complaining about >>16799773 simply because the former is better worded and explained than the latter.

Anyway, I think, in spite of all the praise, and even including some accuracy, >>16803177 is overly simplistic. This might have made sense 50 years ago when only men were in the labor market, but that is not true anymore. More women go to Uni than men, and the percentage working is growing increasingly similar for the two. Yet, if anything, the desire for the "real" has only grown stronger among women in the past 50 years (I don't think 50 shades would have sold so many copies in 1960). If the response is, "well, service work is the same," then you would expect male service workers to desire masculinity in their women.
That is not to say that I disagree with this analysis but merely to say that I think there might be some influence beyond the sociological that at least partially explains female desire, such that even if women live in the world of the "real" they desire a man even more real than they. I'm not quite sure what this desire would be (perhaps genetic as >>16799773 seems to imply).

>>16804055
Cope.

>>16809317
Same.

>>16818793
>>C/L: Cost of Living (lower is better)
>>CRM: Crime Rate (lower is better)
>>S/I: Safety Index (higher is better)
Considering you want >>16813229 this might be the most naive post I've seen in 2020.

>>16811830
Based.

>>16814598
She's white.

>>16818871
nonono- if I lived in a cheaper country and worked online I could only work like 10 hours/week and survive on that and savings. That's cozy.

>>16814710
This.

>>16818606
>>16818847

>>16818824
It's because female equality is basically affirmative action for women. Women can feel that they didn't really earn their positions and it eats away at them, even if they don't consciously realize it.

t. female

>>16819013
as a female what do you think about: >>16803177

>>16814509
Your "gf" is getting dicked down on the side

>>16819013
So then if there is a hypothetical genius-woman who is valuable entirely independent of their gender, like, say, Marie Curie or GEM Anscombe or Joan of Arc, would that woman be included in this or would they not desire the "real?" Because I'm not sure the greats are significantly less perverted than the rest of us.

>>16803177
Haha not even close... heh...

>>16814509
Kinos for this feel?

>>16803177

>>16803177
I don't want to live in this fucking gay earth anymore
I can't become what a woman wants

>>16819182
TRIUMPHANT NIHILISM, ANON!
THERE IS BEAUTY IN OVERCOMING!

>>16819182
good. what women want is soulless as fuck

>>16803177
Literature that portrays this?

>>16819252
all of it

>>16819057
Lol this

>>16803177
I'd rather die an incel if I have to become that to in order to please women. I made out with a woman last year so realistically I can find one to fuck, but after that I'm done.

>>16803177
Glad to see that we have some based anons browsing this board.

The juice isn't worth the squeeze despite what normies tell you about how wonderful their romantic experiences are, yet conveniently omitting the anguish it always ends in. Then they have Stockholm syndrome to say it was worth it until you sit down with them over a few glasses of whisky. Nature knows that in our right minds we wouldn't bother any of this. It must play the trick on us that ending up in the arms of woman is the pinnacle of existence. And how powerful that trick is.

>>16819394
>The juice isn't worth the squeeze
No but every biological indicator is telling us to run full speed in whichever direction is likely to yield pussy. Logically every man knows that it's a raw deal, but logic rarely triumphs when it comes to coom.

>>16819413
Indeed. Hence why I acknowledged how powerful that trick is.

>>16814509
>humblebrag
no hate; I would too.

>>16814756
Oh, so a common scenario. Please, do continue to share your experience, advice, and homespun wisdom.

>>16803177
Tfw normies would read something like this and just wave their hand calling you bitter

>>16819528
Don't want to sound like a pseud but Ligotti went over this in TCATHR. It's easier for people to maintain a facade than it is for them to address an uncomfortable reality.

>>16811830
updated

>>16819331
Based. Same.

>>16803177
I have a fashion model friend who is in the 99.9th percentile in looks easily, and he came to this same conclusion.
During car rides, he would rant about women and I would try to calm him down as he almost begins to weep over the impossibility of finding love.
My fondest memory is me getting drunk at a party and spouting an innocuous joke about women and having some normalfag berate me and call me an incel. He swooped in and defended me and the guy couldn't even talk. It's hard to when a guy mogs you so hard.

I wish I could save him. He has a good heart. I'm not gay, unfortunately.

how do we solve the femcel problem bros

just look at this
www.asherahsgarden.net/am/

>>16819593
That was a very nice read anon. You and your friend sound like people I'd like to grab a beer with.

>>16819554
Nice

>>16819593
>My fondest memory is me getting drunk at a party and spouting an innocuous joke about women and having some normalfag berate me and call me an incel. He swooped in and defended me and the guy couldn't even talk. It's hard to when a guy mogs you so hard.
Holy fucking based

>>16803177
fucking hell man

>>16819593
What was the joke?

>>16819593
I have a friend who has model tier looks but who has mild tisms and is still a virgin at 24, afaik. He's had plenty of opportunities over the years to get laid but he is completely and utterly blind to social cues and flirting. A girl came up to him and started hugging him and playing with his hair in high school one time and he thought she was just being friendly. It's actually mind boggling how clueless actual spergs can be.

>>16819660
I wouldn't say that I have model-tier looks but I have gotten lots of attention from girls since high school. Unfortunately I am completely shackled by autism and never notice until someone tells me after the fact.
>A girl came up to him and started hugging him and playing with his hair in high school one time and he thought she was just being friendly
This one time in high school I was staying at a family friend's cabin and their daughter had brought a friend. They'd built this secondary structure so quests could have their own space. I was on the main floor and they were up the ladder in the loft. When we were all getting ready to sleep her friend threw her bra down at me and it landed beside me on the bed. She asked me if I wanted her to come down and get it but I just said "nah it's fine" and threw it back up. I didn't realize that she was making some kind of move until years later.

>>16819051
It's not exactly inaccurate but pretty obviously biased towards the uplifting of the male experience and disdaining the female one. Note how little detail is given in the male paragraph as opposed to the female one. It's written with the aim of demoralizing males by confirming their preconceptions about women. That's to be expected though considering where we are. I also thing romance vs realism is somewhat of a false dilemma to begin with, they don't really work as total opposites in the sense that anon uses them.

>>16819766
>It's not exactly inaccurate
all you had to say desu

>>16819771
Lmao for real

>>16819766
>>16819771
>>16819797
JUST BE HONEST FOR ONCE PLEASE!!!!

>>16819810
?

>>16819771
Most perspectives are not exactly inaccurate. If someone comes to a conclusion they have come to that conclusion for a reason based on. I can think of very few situations in which I would not think this in response to someone's social observation, regardless of what it was or how extreme it was in any particular direction.

>>16819810
So you just want to be told exactly what you already believe?

>>16819771
Exactly.

>>16819823
>anon asks to be honest
>So you just want to be told exactly what you already believe
>so you want me to tell you that what he said is the truth, because that's the truth
God I hate women
No more women for me lads, only bussy

>>16819720
fuck bro

>>16819869
I do not think it is the truth. Truly no room for relativity here in any answers it seems. I would say this is why I hate men in response to you, but women are not different.

>>16799662
Where is this webm from ?

>>16819903
If you dont think it's false why not refute it directly instead of dancing in circles.

>>16803177
Well i guess imma check them dubs tho

>>16820037
Not her, but I just wanted to say my own two cents:
A large number of young men do not work. Men in college, men in academia, young boys, etc. are not part of the "Real" and do not know what the "Real" is. Why are these people not desire a strong, Real woman who will dominate them.
Many women work actual, real jobs. They have a definite relationship with the real. (Not, of course a majority, but a not insignificant percentage). Do these women not desire masculine men as much as housewives? Neither young men nor "powerful" women defy the behavior which he attributes to men and women in general. If the assertion was correct, then this would not be true. Therefore, we can safely assume that this is not perfectly correct.

>>16820123
*Why do these people

>>16819720
Based

>>16818630
Fuck niggers.

>>16820123

ITT femanon proves the point without realizing it or comprehending >>16803177

>>16819231
MORE LIKE OVERCOOMING AMIRITE

>>16819145

The Crossing

>>16820176
I don't know how my post proves that. I think it brings up a significant counterexample to it. Could you please explain to me why you think my counterexample proves their point?

>>16803037
It does. It's usually a virgin woman who gets entangled with a bad boy and fixes him.

I.e. Beauty and the Beast.

>>16820123
I have a cat and an empty aquarium. My cat goes to hide in it sometimes for some reasons unknown to mere humans. Does he become a fish? Is there a change in his chromosome?

>>16820193

Your laughable conflation of "real" with the labor market. You know nothing beyond whatever is capable of providing you with the illusion of convenience; are not in fact capable of comprehending that anything might fall outside of that bubble. That is your "Real"

Which proves >>16803177
beyond any reasonable doubt.

>>16820208
Kek'd and based

>>16820208
But my understanding of the post I was responding to was that it was fundamentally replying to a sociological phenomenon. Certainly Lacan's views was that what he was talking about was purely sociological. For you to then say, "No, no, this is biological." My question then becomes: "Is your assertion that the real is something which is always and only accessible to biological males and never to biological females?" If the answer is yes, then the logic of the original post starts to break down rapidly. If you put a female in the world of the masculine, then there is no falsehood, no subjugation to the "pretty," and they can live through things other than "social manipulation." So, then, how can this person be considered female as per the original post?

>>16820213
What is your "real" then? Their conception of real is the violent, ambitious, competitive world of the labor market. They specifically list, "brute ambition," "competitiveness," "money." Indeed, the labor market does not include violence, but certainly some parts of the real are included in the laboring woman, as per >>16803177
You seem to be projecting a viewpoint on him which he doesn't seem to say or hold. What is your definition of the real?

>>16820213
Also, I'm a man. A college man who hasn't worked a day in his life, but still a man. I am attracted to the concept of a woman >>16803177 says, but I have never experienced anything with any resemblance to what he describes as the real, and I shouldn't have this attraction according to him or you.

>>16820230

You missed the point of their post entirely.

>>16814509
It will hurt so much when she cheats on you.

>>16820245
What is his point if I have missed it?
"The woman desires to control a version or conception of the real, for they are incapable of achieving it, for sociological reasons."
This is basically what I took from that post's analysis of feminine attraction. What have I missed?

>>16820249
Can confirm.

>>16820222
>>16820258

>My question then becomes: "Is your assertion that the real is something which is always and only accessible to biological males and never to biological females?"

From the perspective of biological females, the real is only perceived to be tentatively accessible through a tiny keyhole. The keyhole is fairly well described in the referenced post.

Nobody here is talking about what "Real" means. We're discussing access, and more specifically we are discussing how people WANT to gain access; how they actually do or do not is not at issue.

>>16820292
Okay, here's what I think you're saying:
>men constantly access the real, women do not. Therefore, women try to access the real
That is certainly what OP says when he says
>>men are constantly engaged in realism and use their romantic fantasies to escape from the hell that is realist. On the other hand women are constantly engaged in romanticism and their romantic fantasies are about escaping this mundane romantic existence in something real.
But anyway:
To know whether this is a generalizable statement for men and women, we must know whether all men are capable of accessing the real and if all women are incapable. Therefore, we have to have a clear idea of what the real is. If I define the real as being tangible objects, ie, a table or a chair, as, then everyone has access to the real. If I define it as something, then we can discuss that. We must define the real before we can deem whether the op is correct. Otherwise, all we're saying is, "men are capable of accessing a mystical, undefinable phrase and women are not. Therefore, women want this mystical idea and try to achieve it by having sex with murderous etc. men," which is a statement that is nearly meaningless.

>>16820333
>men constantly access the real, women do not.

Nono. Again, this is all about HOW men and women WANT to gain access to the real.

As I said, you seem incapable of comprehension on this point.

>>16820346
>Men are constantly engaged in realism and use their romantic fantasies to escape from the hell that is realist
This is the first sentence of the post. I honestly think you're trolling me at this point. What you're saying is so clearly not what he was saying. He literally said he thinks men are constantly engaging with the real. What are you talking about?

>>16820367

Don't quite your day job fren

>>16820380
This is the greatest gaslighting I have ever experienced. Am I literally illiterate. He says the words, "men are constantly engaged in realism." Does that not mean that they are constantly engaged with the real in day-to-day life? What else could it mean?

>>16820390
>Am I literally illiterate

It's more like you're aphasiac

>>16820413
Are you saying that the poster makes a distinction between realism and the real? Because if he does, he's a faggot for writing it that way, and my objection holds.
He says, "Men live in a realist world, women in a romantic world. Both believe the real lies in the other kind of world. That is where attraction comes from."
And yet, there are men who live in cushy universities, doing nothing to do with the real all day and existing in a world of fakery. Shouldn't they desire a strong, violent woman similar to the strong, violent man that you say women desire? They don't.
And shouldn't women who work in the real (woman soldiers, for instance) desire shy, feminine men. They, again, don't. Replacing the vague "real" with "realism" seems to only prove my skepticism true.
Any, that guy is a faggot for using the term real and realism so poorly without making a clear distinction and just hoping we'd follow along with it.

>>16799893
>>16799909
>>16799923
>>16800074
This dude was wasting less moments of his life than the other guy

>>16820436
>Are you saying that the poster makes a distinction between realism and the real?

No.

>that guy is a faggot for using the term real and realism so poorly without making a clear distinction and just hoping we'd follow along with it.

114 other people in the thread cracked the code. What's stopping you?

>>16820457
Can you explain to me the code? Here have been my guesses:
>women cannot access the real and men can
>women cannot access the real and men cannot
And have objected to both
The only two other options are:
>men cannot access the real and women can
and
>both men and women can access the real
Besides that:
How do I know if person x can access the real if I don't know what the real is?

>>16820474
How do I know whether women can access the real on their own or only through a keyhole if I don't know what the real is?
Is that a more understandable version of the question to you?

>>16820474

I mean like... I was half-joking about the aphasia but now I'm not so sure?

>>16820493
This is meant for
>>16820457

>>16820500
>>16820493
>>16820474

For the last time. The originally referenced post is about how people FEEL and what they WANT.

None of the shit you have posted is relevant. You're off on a tangent.

>>16820508
The original presumes two things.
1. The desire of a man for a woman is caused by a desire for "romantic fantasies to escape from the hell that is realist"
2. The desire of a woman for a man is caused by a desire for "escaping this mundane romantic existence in something real"
Therefore, we must presume that OP is saying that men are normally experiencing the real and desire to experience the romantic whereas women normally experience the romantic and wish to experience the real. If women normally experience the real, it wouldn't make sense for them to want to experience more of the real and if men normally experienced the romantic then it wouldn't make sense for them to want to experience more of the romantic. This is the underpinning upon which the entire rest of the post relies. If men desire the real just as much as women, then the post doesn't make sense. Therefore, women must desire the real more than men for the argument to make sense.

You keep saying vague generalities about what OP meant, but you haven't quoted him or really given a coherent explanation of what you actually think his point was (either the particular parts of it or the point overall). Indeed, "feel and want," neither of which really explain what you think the post is saying, is the closest you've gotten. I'm starting to think you don't know what you're talking about and have wildly misread the post to mean something entirely different (if anything at all; you might have read it as poetry).

>>16820536
just a quick addendum:
1 is man desiring woman
2 is woman desiring man
I just realized that I did not make that properly clear

>>16803177
>>16803339
>>16803299
You write like a tryhard community college student who really thinks he’s going to transfer to Brown but is going to have to settle for a job at the mall. Learn how to make an argument that isn’t made of straws before you make sweeping judgements like this.

>>16803177
Is there biological root behind this? Women are more sexually selective because their reproductive capacity is much more limited and the costs of reproduction much greater, this makes their sexuality more "realist" and ruthless because it must be. But because they're passive judges in the game of attraction and don't actively engage in the brutality of competition themselves, they don't live by this competitive principle in their conscious daily life, instead they live through fakery and manipulation and can trust their greater sexual value over men will always guarantee them social coddling. The clash between their conscious and unconscious lives is why they may claim to want a kind, civilized man while unconsciously desiring an uncivilized brute.

Men, as the active competitor in sexual attraction, have a romantic fantasy of a woman who represents the opposite of of this competitive principle. They want relief from the struggles of ruthless competition, or the "real". So their ideal woman is not a stoic judge but instead loyal, caring, nurturing, easily submits, and loves him for "himself", in a way that transcends the impersonal laws of natural competition. At the same time, these traits also imply a good mother and less risk of infidelity, so they're also biologically attractive.

>>16820645
Makes sense

>>16819968
Emma (2020)