/lit/ - Literature

>>17459679
word salad

Are you shilling some other system? It is important to know this before answering.

>>17459683
Cope
>>17459686
No. I don't believe in ideology.
If I were to shill anything it would be Catholic monarchy, though.

>>17459679
>people being able to have sex is a global conspiracy according to christcucks
holy fuck you tards are so fucking cringe and mentally ill. you are literally enemies of humanity.

we're not going back to your pathologic patriarchal LARP, get over it. you lost.

I'm looking forward to all of the new ways that liberated sexually will branch out into, if only to see the seethe that it causes in christcucks.

How are the cathoshits going to cope with the fact that by 2030 it's predicted that over 60% of all women will have an OnlyFans account? lmao

>books about extremist opinion I have picked up
>anyone know any books about thing I already agree with
>can someone recommend books defending my latest zinger against well-adjusted people
>looking for books about the made up thing I want other people to buy into

>>17459956
>by 2030 it's predicted that over 60% of all women will have an OnlyFans account
sure it is dipshit.

>>17459956
Yeah how dare they want to be healthy.

Degrading yourself for money hurts yourself and everyone around you. Get a real job producing something tangible. Stop being a fucking parasite.

>>17459956
>How are the cathoshits going to cope with the fact that by 2030 it's predicted that over 60% of all women will have an OnlyFans account? lmao
By 2030 every fertile woman will be in a harem

>>17459956
>there are no negative effects to porn!

You're very stupid.

>I'm looking forward to all of the new ways that liberated sexually will branch out into

The more they do, the more their birth rates will drop. The only people reproducing will be the religious. Globohomo's real goal atm is just reducing global population.

>>17459956
Cope Seethe Dilate

>>17460141
>The more they do, the more their birth rates will drop. The only people reproducing will be the religious. Globohomo's real goal atm is just reducing global population.
The only people reproducing will be brown people

>>17459679
Why do termites eat away at the foundations of a house if it will ultimately result in the house collapsing?

>>17460167
I'm OK with this. White people are prideful.

>>17459956
>women whoring and being raped on cameria is sex
Porn is pure evil and a form of social and psychological warfare. If someone is still denying this by now they are massively coping or being paid by the Jews.

>>17459956
You are lost.

>>17459956
>I'm looking forward to all of the new ways that liberated sexually will branch out into

>>17459956
yeah this christianity is retarded myth cult garbage and more whores means having sex is easier

>>17460309
One of the few times a basedjack is truly appropriate

>>17459683
Did we not just have this exact same thread with this exact same top comment. But it isn't this thread because all the other posts are different.

>>17460316
Jerking off in front of a computer screen isn't sex.

>>17459679
>Does anyone else find it strange that the left seems to be ignoring the ongoing weimarification of America as oligarchs steal money due to the coronavirus collapse and women begin working as only fans whores?

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.

>>17459956
>reddit spacing

>>17459679
God the sexual liberation movement is such a psyop. You're only embracing if you become sexually promiscuous, there's no room to be a woman who embraces traditional sexuality. I asked this question to my girlfriend and never got a good answer
>"our culture praises women for embracing their sexuality by becoming more promiscuous, but nobody points out that the companies pushing the material out are still heavily controlled by men. What's so special about being slutty in response to men's permission and encouragement?"

>>17459679
>Why do supposed socialists champion sexual liberation if it makes it impossible for humans to maintain complex social structures?
Absolutely. It destroys ties of trust and love within a community. It is not sustainable and never was. I don’t know where this will go, but the only possible outcome I see is humans becoming more and more atomized and dependent on the state rather than on each other. We are already seeing this, as people increasingly prefer living with pets.

>>17461133
>It destroys ties of trust and love within a community.
all of that is just chemicals and can be stimulated/regulated with the proper advances in biochem + technologies like Tesla's Neuralink.

quit being a luddite who thinks "OlD tHiNgS GOOD NeW ThInGs bAD". the old systems served their purpose but now evolution is selecting for a more efficient means.

now instead of having to go through all the inconvenience that used to be necessary to prompt tye neuronal activity that creates sensations like "daddy loves me!" (i.e. actually needing a biological father, the social structure required for this familial configuration, specific temporal series of events etc.) you will be able to just pop a pill or press and app and bam!, you've got the reality instantaneously beamed into your brain. Same thing with stuff like curing loneliness or depression.

it'll be awesome.

>>17459956
>freeee up sexuality against the evil value holders!
>something is possible so it must be done
>living through uncontrolled affirmation of your animalistic desires empowers humanity
>haha I sure got them christcucks seething
the hedonist lifestyle is universally never a worth living, not in Christianity and not outside of it. It's an active rejection of reason as our fundamental human principle and should be avoided and shunned.

>>17459956
>How are the cathoshits going to cope with the fact that by 2030 it's predicted that over 60% of all women will have an OnlyFans account? lmao
By reproducing.

>>17461205
This is bait

>>17459709
>I don't believe in ideology
Only morons and hucksters say this. Everyone has an ideology.

>>17460128
Honestly working in a warehouse and being told when you can piss is way more degrading than being a camwhore

>>17460135
my harem tbdesu

>>17461205
Top-tier bait. Best part is that thousands of 115 IQ Reddit atheist would unironically sign off on this.

>buzzwords

>>17461469
What is that teapot supposed to mean?

>>17461631
Betrand Russel's teapot, Anglo trash

>>17459679
Your post wasn't very coherent anon. You could had just posted the book and asked if anyone read it lol

>>17461637
Why is the anglo so opposed to God?

>>17461686
It's historically been a bulwark of materialism

>>17459679

>>17462038
based as fuck

>>17459679
>oligarchs steal money due to the coronavirus collapse
Not happening on a broad scale.

>women begin working as only fans whores
Also not happening on a broad scale.

Yet another dumbass thread from the literal retards over at /pol/. Thanks for your contribution to the board.

>>17462038
This reads like someone with schizophrenia wrote it.

>>17462448
this post is made by a schizophrenic person

the person reading this is a schizophrenic person.

we are one

>>17459679
Because the argument that there is disparity in sexual activity that mimics neoliberal wealth disparity is bullshit simply on its face

>>17459679

>>17462479
I don't think the writer of that essay would be so keen on the "smallest molecule of society is the family" rhetoric if women were made head of the family and given authority over that family's vote lol.

>>17462479
Holy fucking based

>>17459679
@Butters

>>17460128
>Degrading yourself for money hurts yourself and everyone around you. Get a real job producing something

your total lack of self awareness is so embarrassing, i feel second hand shame just reading your post.

>>17462038
this is not even worthy of being called midwit, its straight up idiocy.

>>17459709
>If I were to shill anything it would be Catholic monarchy, though.
Well that's awkward given that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church disagrees and would actually chastise you/consider you a heretical extremist for shilling this. And not just Pope Francis, but every pope and college for the past 60 years.

Talk about cognitive dissonance!

Why are almost all right wingers on 4chan of the full retard variety

>>17462823
because catholicism larping.

>>17459679
this book is from the 18th century, they didn't know dick.

>>17459956
>How are the cathoshits going to cope with the fact that by 2030 it's predicted that over 60% of all women will have an OnlyFans account? lmao
i started looking into islam

>>17462757
The Catholic has hardly been Catholic for the last 60 years.

>>17461117
>there's no room to be a woman who embraces traditional sexuality
Yes there is retard. They don't exist en masse anymore because they realized what is better for them than living under some man's boot.

>>17463957
It wasn't really 'living under some man's boot', bit of an exaggeration. It's also not clear if it was better before or now. Not that I'm criticizing them, I'm a degenerate too.

>>17462479

I really like the part where he tried to use a chemistry analogy and failed miserably by using the wrong words for literally the FIRST chemistry concept they teach you in elementary school.

>>17462757
Why would the pope do that when he himself is the monarch of Vatican city?

>>17462598
Who is saying that one being above the other is ideal? The ideal is what the family and marriage is: harmony. Perhaps this mentality of yours shows how brainwashed by identity conflict dichotomies propaganda you are.

>>>17464063
I really like how your post makes absolutely no point at all about the essence of his. Try saying something substantial for once.

>>17461637
rebuke it then

>>17464198
But anon? The man has the voting power, ergo the final decision lies with him. He could, if he wants, pay no attention to the opinions of his wife. And in the Bible and most classical texts they say, the woman shall submit to the husband, and so on.

>>17462757
vatican 2 was a mistake

>>17464842
Then why would you want a catholic monarchy you stupid larper?

>>17464811
Yes, mand should be in the front and lead the family.
>He could, if he wants, pay no attention to the opinions of his wife
Again you are giving a bad, disordered instance as the rule. An individual if he wants could pay no attention to the law.

>And in the Bible and most classical texts they say, the woman shall submit to the husband, and so on.
Submission is not being a slave. The wife must not rebel against the husband.
There are, however, more than this verse in the Bible:
>However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

>Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,

>Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.

And many others.

>>17464911
>Again you are giving a bad, disordered instance as the rule.
So you will have no problem if we revert to this previous arrangement, except with women as head of the family instead of men?

>>17464950
And man will not defend and provide to his family but will wash the dishes, clean the house, cook while the woman goes to hard working jobs? The relation between man and woman is a relation of reciprocal sacrifice and servitude you can complain but you can't change the natures of men and women.

>>17464979
If you were a based tradcath wife and ur husband was a basedboy libtard, then what

>>17462757
no.
gratuitously asserted and gratuitously refuted.
goodbye.

>>17465033
Show me a magisterial document or papal statement from the past century saying catholic monarchy is desirable or even acceptable.

pope paul vi actually encouraged italy to stop being an officially catholic country and applauded when it happened.

>>17464979
>cooking and cleaning is the immutable nature of women
Uhh I thought it was frolicking in wheat fields in Ukraine?

>>17465032
then we would have a woman conforming to her nature and a man dissipated in vices, going against his nature; i don't even think it would be possible to start and preserve a family between these two. still will you keep giving hypothesis of disorder to invalidate a rule?

>>17465077
but once they are married they cant be divorced
>still will you keep giving hypothesis of disorder to invalidate a rule?
disorder is more rife than order. original sin anon

>>17465066
it is organization and taking care, we are speaking of the common average woman, just like the average man must work and provide. of course there will be women and men that will be above these common duties.

>>17465077
The nature of man is vice.

>>17465087
>but once they are married they cant be divorced
so they will meet, notice their opposite inclinations and still be married?

>disorder is more rife than order
sure but all is on account of the will, and there must be will to the better and what is good.

>>17465099
people can change a lot. plus in traditional days people got married quicker and younger.

>>17465111
yes, and? i really don't see your point, how it invalidates what is natural and necessary.

>>17465090
Everyone works to provide for themselves and their families. Are you underage or just a tradzoom?

>>17465127
well if you want to put the duties of woman and man under the single word ''work'' then yes. so what?

>>17465121
what if the man & woman married as catholics - then the man lost his faith while the woman remained catholic (common scenario: women are more religious than men). and now the woman's religiosity is not represented in vote, while the man is voting leftist parties.

>>17459679
lol idk any leftist that actually champions sex work, most leftists are in agreement its the result of capitalism commodifying everything, including women. i don't know about "weimarification", but why pretend like leftists haven't realized this crisis? of course we have.

>>17465137
Where do all of your "duties" come from and who decides immutably and eternally what they are? By holding to your outmoded beliefs about production and reproduction you will actually fail to attract a mate in modern society and have children. Which means your entire value system will have failed to do what it was supposed to do, because you liked old mannerist paintings from Holland more than having sex.

>>17459956
I'm not a Christian but they are correct that sexual liberation is a weapon of capitalist control. Even Marcuse recognized this in One Dimensional Man. Those of us who get married and have large families will win in the end because the future belongs to those who show up. It's unlikely but I hope I live to 2100 so I can see the tradcaths, Nietzschean atheists, Muslims, protestant fundies, and nationalist pagans duking it out for control of the west while a dwindling progressive population looks on in horror. Schizoposters shall inherity the earth. Globohomo is going to get far worse this century but it plants the seeds of its own undoing.

>>17465198
Yeah I can't wait for the Singularity-Caliphate Wars when the Autonomous Defense Forces lay waste to France to secure its uranium supply.

>>17459956
OP here, i'm muslim
Anything to say now?
we're outbreeding you, we're winning, atheists will cease to exist in a few decades inshallah

>>17465185
from both ontology and anthropological conditions.
>who decides
nature and society

>By holding to your outmoded beliefs about production and reproduction you will actually fail to attract a mate in modern society and have children. Which means your entire value system will have failed to do what it was supposed to do, because you liked old mannerist paintings from Holland more than having sex.
Should I even respond to this? They are not outmoded, production and reproduction function under the same laws. The fact of attracting a mate and having children is already what this ''system'' upholds and from what modern society deviates. Without any of what I said society decays and destroys itself.

>>17465159
what if what if what if...
what if you go outside and stumbles? guess we should not leave our places.

>>17465344
>The fact of attracting a mate and having children is already what this ''system'' upholds and from what modern society deviates. Without any of what I said society decays and destroys itself.
Go tell whatever women you know that they should be cooking and cleaning because it is their eternal human nature and see how far you get. They will probably not agree to breed with you.

>>17465248
Ideologies don't actually spread through breeding

>>17465399
Yeah I was reading a great article the other day about how the college educated youth of Turkey all want to emigrate or protest since they don't like political Islam.

>>17459956
BAAAAAAAASED

>>17461282
Most so called "hedonistic" lifestyles are hedonism done wrong. All it takes is a little moderation in the interest of maintaining oneself to avoid the pitfalls of unrestrained pleasure seeking. Also, the pursuit of more advanced, complex pleasures. Ultimately, must have a foundation of contentment with yourself and your life at any moment in order to be able to pursue these pleasures without becoming a slave to your own desires. But I think you could still call this a moderated form of hedonism.

>>17465373
I'm not talking about anything rare. most marriages are imperfect. most men and women have disagreements. many wives are more religious than their husbands.

The problem is that people have been sold the lie of casual sex and been conditioned to be afraid of "settling down" too early, when in fact it's much more beneficial to find someone devoid of serious problems and become attached emotionally, financially, and sexually as soon as possible. People in committed relationships have more, higher quality sex even some of the most prolific tinder swipers.

>>17462038
jones is really far gone. holy shit.

>>17459956
Repent.
There is still time.

>>17462479
Utterly unconvincing. Also, libertarians like to make fun of leftists for "being bad at economics," but holy fuck, this guy takes first place.

>>17465476
most marriages are imperfect yes but today even more where divorce is available, marriage de-sacralized. people want the better and the purpose of marrying is this, harmony and friendship, that's why there is no reason to marry someone who is your opposite (if this leads to the conflicts you are saying here).

>>17465389
Why are you so dishonest? This is not what they should be doing, what they should do is noble and it is to keep the house and the family organized, harmonized, you know this implies things like taking care of the children and their education, if there are people who don't value this it is simply going against nature and civilization.
And I know most people are brainwashed and totally empty, they seek nothing but what gives them immediate pleasure. It would be a blessing not to have contact and pass the gene of these people on. There still are, however, normal women in the world, leave twitter.

>>17465532
Why do you think it is unconvincing? I think that the economic reasons he gave concerning women inserted in the job market was not necessarily how he dictated, that is, the average remuneration of working man would not necessary double without women available. But go on, what do you think is unconvincing? I'm curious about any criticism regarding the instrumentalization of women rights as voting to the depreciation of family in favor of the individual.

>>17465344
>nature and society
well society already disagrees with you
and nature hasn't done a whole lot to make itself relevant.
Can you tell me one consequence to the modern state of things other than some "total decay of society" which is actually caused by people like you mad at others for not following the rules of nature?

>>17465747
Your values system makes you repulsive to most potential mates. I don't care about if it is true or based or redpilled or the bedrock of civilization. You will likely fail to reproduce for as long you ignore the preferences of women. And then of course there was no point to your fixation on upholding the continuity of nature because nature actively removed you from the succession of life.

>>17465780
How do you think order is achieved? What do you think people needed to pay to achieve culture and its civilization development? Nature dictates through violence and society through the control of this violence. See the incestual interditions as form of controling violence in the minutest and essential unity there is, that is family. You people are always deluded by the order achieved after much pain, but after the paroxysm of violence a necessary calmness is ubiquitous, thus they fall into their own ingenuity and keep the process on. Constructing to destroy, destroying to construct.

>>17465788
These were the values that gave humanity continuity, and be sure that they are much more fit to continue being ubiquitous than those that destroys what it has constructed.
No women will reproduce with an unprincipled, unnatural, aberration of modern indulgent in vices who can't offer them the basics that they need: safety. Specially during pregnancy. You are so brainwashed that you can't see how nature itself dictates the roles of men and women and the dependence of the latter on the former for the sucess of the most biological purpose, reproduction.
Some people today can indulge themselves in aberrant behaviours, dehumanized beliefs because they have the protection of a corrupt system that enforces everything you consume and distorts your mentality (as you are proof). Nature itself would have resolved it with its sacred nature: Violence. Violence would be more than justified against people like you, without principles, chaotic, vicious and violent.

>>17465878
>Violence would be more than justified against people like you
Don't you have some federal insurrection charges to face in court, where your beloved civilization will decide to house you with all men for the rest of your virile years?

>>17461469

I just went and browsed this for like 5 minutes....

Jesus Christ- it is worse than I could have possibly imagined

>>17460035
>well-adjusted people
>shoving a dragon dildo up your ass for tips on Onlyfans

>>17465895
Jokes aside, that is why I am not your average tradcuck, times like ours shows how Sade was right, and how people are too blind to understand him.

>>17465878
>throws a shitfit and starts waxing poetic about how violence is justified against whoever he's debating with
>can't decide whether he's religious (which is at least rational) or (god forbid) ascribes moral teleology to nature
>says other people are the ones without principles

>>17459679
It used to acknowledge it, but not anymore.
>Today the sexual freedom of the majority is in fact a convention, an obligation, a social duty, a social anxiety, an essential feature of the consumer’s quality of life. In short, the false liberalization of prosperity has created a situation that is as bad as and maybe even more unhealthy than the one that prevailed during the times of poverty. In fact, first of all, as a result of a sexual freedom “bestowed” as a gift by power, there is a real and authentic generalized neurosis. Ease of access has given rise to obsession; because it is an “induced” and imposed availability, deriving from the fact that the tolerance of power concerns only the sexual demand expressed by the conformism of the majority. It only protects the couple (not only, of course, the married couple): and the couple has therefore ended up becoming a feverish, paroxysm-stricken condition, rather than becoming a sign of freedom and happiness (as it was in the democratic hopes).

>>17465947
Maybe (and I hope for it) if you read this post of mine here >>17465819 you will understand better how you are emphasizing and giving primacy to the violent nature of sex and how this leads to the endless game of dissipated reciprocal violence. You put the mere act of achieving sex above the principles, interditions, the very order, that make the fruits prosper. Destructive, chaotic and irrational violence. I'm not ascribing moral teleology to nature but ascribing tragic cyclical violence that is inherent in it, and because of that, sacred. Morality is the field of religion, namely, controled violence.

>>17462757
since when supporting monarchy is heresy lol

>>17465788
>most potential mates
most potential mates are not worthy of pursuit

>>17466045
Imagine being this overcivilized

>>17464198
>I really like how your post makes absolutely no point at all about the essence of his.

I read about half and then I was bored. It has internal consistence, and that's it.

>Try saying something substantial for once.

Not that I really care about arguing about women's voting rights. Voting is not that meaningful anyway, but I'd rather have the right to do it than not. Still, my point is

How can you try and make an analogy with extremely basic chemistry to make your opinion look like it's scientifically accurate and STILL get it wildly wrong? For fuck's sake, mistaking atoms and molecules, elements and substances? Come on, dude. That's like the first paragraph of a "It's amusing to mix salt and water!" book.

>>17465997

"Do as I say, not as I do"

Still an influential dude, I must admit

>>17466002
Easy, anon. The anons that you're arguing with will endlessly refuse to see the bigger picture.

>>17459956
>t. takes three different medications and about nine yards dick each week just to feel human

>>17459956
Excellent bait, look at all those replies you caught!