Modern masculinity is slave morality that believes itself to be master morality

[Anonymous No.19838613]

When speaking of "modern masculinity", there seems to be two definitions depending on which political discourse you belong to. One of judeo Christian tradition, and the other arising from liberal individualism.

My observations will however be limited to war like masculinity of the 50s, since this kind of masculinity is more intertwined with judeo Christian slave morality.

The topics I will cover are the control of female sexuality, homosexuality and effeminacy, and war loving.

As Foucault put it, woman is considered simultaneously inferior to man yet threatening. From that arose various forms of discipline arising from Christianity.
The anxiety of female sexuality plagues that of lower men, while it is of little concern to higher men. Contrapoints covered this topic in "envy", where just like how religious slave morality paints the higher men as evil, incels and those with little luck with females paint men with sexual success as evil. "I am the nice guy, she only chases bad boys" is no different than the cry of the slave who thinks himself as good because he has no claws.
Women also gain power by flaunting their sexuality, hence Christianity promotes modesty which mostly benefits the weak man.

On effeminacy, Aristocratic men, and men of higher class across cultures beautified themselves since it symbolized leisure time.

The oldest record for men wearing makeup came from China & Japan. It could be the reason why Asian culture still considers beautiful, feminine looking men more desirable than masculine men, because Asians had realized early on that no amount of physical strength and aggression can compensate for the lack of masculine intelligence. This is so ingrained in Eastern cultures that the women in Malaysia and Indonesia prefer kpop idols over bearded musalman for decades despite the protests of imams.

Men would powder themselves since dark skin and blemishes was a sign of the lower classes. In the age of western Hollywood masculinity, its the opposite. The farm worker and the man *forced* to embrace war is seen as superior to the higher men who are free from such duties.

A more shocking aspect of the Triumph of slave morality in masculinity is how the suit and tie came to denote class. It is no different from the uniform of a waiter in a 5 star hotel. If a man decides to flaunt his wealth through clothing and body art like the upper class ancient Egyptians, he is denounced as a homosexual and pressured to conform to mediocre herd values.

My solution would be to identify femboys as the true harbingers of master morality. It's not about the femboys who are weak, pathetic, & rely on slave morality; but feminine men like David Bowie and Prince who do not require judeo Christian masculinity to display power.

[Anonymous No.19838636]

[Anonymous No.19838641]

okay so i should fuck lots of pussy and wear makeup

[Anonymous No.19838647]

I agreed with the first sentence and didn't read the rest. Hope you didn't write some dumb incel shit down there or you'll embarrass us both!

[Anonymous No.19838651]

>>19838613

To add another note on war loving, men who love war are unironically adhering to slave morality. I don't understand what mind space did Nietzsche have to be in to assume men who go to war due to the orders if higher men is somehow worthy of pursuing.
There are those who are afraid of war because they cannot fight, and there are those who can but choose not to due to their high status. Men who are forced to war will find pride in their suffering like any slave does, because slaves don't have choices. Now you'd say that war is an opportunity to be part the higher men, but there aren't any great warrior socities still existing today, only merchant societies. Greatness comes from intelligence and money, and war like men will never be considered equals of higher men to the rich.

[Anonymous No.19838666]

>>19838651
War is a game. Men love games. It's that simple. If you cannot see how war is fun, you're not a man.

[Anonymous No.19838697]

>>19838666
children love games, not men

[Anonymous No.19838725]

>>19838697
No, ludo is universal. You cannot escape games.

[Anonymous No.19838817]

>>19838697
You are saying men don't have a inner child?

[Anonymous No.19838849]

>>19838613
this is literal feminist propaganda on /lit/. Well done.

[Anonymous No.19838930]

Yeas but does Nietzsche mean war as warfare against another army or war as the inescapable daily struggle for life?

[Anonymous No.19839063]

>>19838613
>My solution would be to identify femboys as the true harbingers of master morality.
Absolutely based, 10/10 post, fantastic thread.

[Anonymous No.19839294]

>>19838641
Yes. As a lover of femboys I'm not joking when I say masculinity is slave morality and femboys are the true ubermensch.

[Anonymous No.19839320]

[Anonymous No.19839324]

[Anonymous No.19839370]

>>19838613
>My solution would be to identify femboys as the true harbingers of master morality.
This aligns with my Manifest Destiny; to have self-loving men who are sexually valuable and valid, who can love one another and themselves, and women are but a bonus.

The FEMBVLL.

>>19838849
Feminists just want all humans to be ugly Shrek apes, but men being weaker so they can be punched. Because feminism is a value-system identical to Conformism / Hollywood / Advertisements; slave morality.

[Anonymous No.19839384]

>>19839320
Discarding morality for machiavellianism, lies and slander... are not morality.
Pretending that blue is red does not make it so. Pretending that this is 'master colors', is retarded. It's just jargon for power. Babbling for power. A nuisance, dirt to be cleaned.

[Anonymous No.19839395]

Gender is slave morality

[Anonymous No.19839419]

>>19839395
Imagine if women would breed this. Gender would perish; humanity would turn beautiful and sensual, wonderful and lovable.
Men, being the slave gender, seek to breed this into existence, as it is the form of the master/mistress; the mother-father. Divine.

[Anonymous No.19839440]

>>19838613

[Anonymous No.19839688]

>>19838613
this is the biggest pseud post on /lit/ currently, congratulations
what your post shows is that it's not enough just to read, as you need to have the adequate brain capacity to interpret things properly

[Anonymous No.19839732]

Not sure whether this is a joke or not. Slave morality seems loosely defined here; I would argue that slave morality is a response internalised repressio of one's instincts, and dealing with meaningless suffering, and impotence in the face of supreme power. This doesn't necessarily mean that being warlike = master morality, but it definitely doesn't mean that being pathetic, submissive, decadent is master morality.

Analysis is very trivial, especially as Nietzsche basically accepted that master morality cannot return due to "bad conscience". Nor did he fully develop the idea of the overman/new philosophers.

[Anonymous No.19839854]

>>19838666
So sayth Satan.

[Anonymous No.19840004]

>>19838613
>Contrapoints
Stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.19840016]

>>19838613
You raise some good points. I would also add that modern masculinity (which includes "boomer bravado" al a John Wayne) is promoted exactly because it is shallow and can easily be revoked by women or other men in response to violated of social convention. A man seeking self-actualisation must, nowadays, do so alone or else risk being treated with contempt. Doubts are seen only as weakness and not as a path to greater understanding. The admission of weakness, even if it is already apparent, is seen as weakness in itself rather than a sign of honesty and ego-control.
>In the age of western Hollywood masculinity, its the opposite. The farm worker and the man *forced* to embrace war is seen as superior to the higher men who are free from such duties.
I've always thought it was retarded for men to "pride" themselves on coming from a low-class background when all of their actions indicate a desperation to escape their class. The problem is that with modern masculinity - just as with slave morality - there is always something to "prove". You must consistently prove that you are a man, even though your biological nature is already proof enough. I think women have basically overthrown western man as a result of capitalism through Germanic-Christian culture. In Germanic tradition women are revered, treated as arbiters of masculinity and their council is taken seriously. In Christianity, the focus of struggle is entirely on the man and women are never really responsible for anything. Capitalism has resulted in consumer bases being the de facto voting blocks of the economic democracy in which we now live, of which women are the most numerous and most powerful. All media must in some way tailor to women if it is not to be outcompeted by one that does. The result is the reinforcement of female power in the way that is totally unprecedented in history. Men no longer have any place in which they are actually safe. Contrary to popular imaginings, boys and men actual feel the least self-conscious when they have successfully integrated into a group of men who spend a decent amount of time away from women. This is the only place where men can actually be themselves so long as "traditional masculinity" is enforced. The breakdown of male spaces means that men are more psychologically dependent on superficial validation than ever. I think femboys are an interesting phenomenon in that men are giving up on being traditionally masculine altogether, whilst the parallel trend, "prettyboys" is a subtler form of this wherein young men are seeking to be adored in the way that they envy women for. They secretly think that it is incredibly unfair for women to be allowed to express their preferences, thoughts and emotions far more openly than them simply due to gender. The emphasis on "prettiness" is perhaps a subconscious attempt to communicate that it is only the sexual part of the female (and not, say, their looks) which causes them to be adored.

[Anonymous No.19840026]

>>19838613
TL DR

[Anonymous No.19840171]

>>19838613
>If a man decides to flaunt his wealth through clothing and body art like the upper class ancient Egyptians, he is denounced as a homosexual and pressured to conform to mediocre herd values.
I'd say the conflation of personal expression with homosexuality will be looked back on as on of the most incredible aspects of our society. The hyper-focus on technics (of which the system of capitalist production is a part, not the cause) means that all eccentricity must be treated with an almost cult-like distrust. Only very wealthy people can afford to be "eccentric" because it is assumed that they must possess some stroke of genius and that their eccentricity is therefore a nessecary byproduct of this. However, an ordinary man who works an ordinary job could never display one iota of the "eccentricity" that was displayed by ancient nobles, 18th century dandies or even a Harlem pimp in the 1970s. Even the subcultures of the 90s and 2000s, such as Goths and emos are considered youthful indiscretions and as ridiculous if they continue into adulthood.

Modern man has more "wealth" than Medieval kings in terms of access to material goods, and yet he has an extremely limited means by which to express this. A man who wears decorative rings, necklaces or earrings is considered low class, even if he's rich. Meanwhile, a man who remains minimalist in his stylistic choices, with his greatest eccentricities being a brightly-coloured tie, is considered more civilised.

[Anonymous No.19840280]

>>19838613
This is why The Joestars are the pinnacle of masculinity.

[Anonymous No.19840283]

>>19839370
femenists believe men are bound by masculinity. no different to what you're saying. stop larping feminist.

[Anonymous No.19840303]

>>19839324
The more I read the more I realize how gay war is.

[Anonymous No.19841111]

>>19838613
reminder that nietzche (idk how spell) is for pseud faggots and unironically literally nobody else

[Anonymous No.19841519]

>>19839395
Based and true

>>19839419
They do. Western masculine slave morality prevents such from happening. Countries infested with abrahamic religions the longest have the ugliest men and women.

[Anonymous No.19841606]

op faggot

[Anonymous No.19841641]

>>19838613
>If a man decides to flaunt his wealth through clothing and body art like the upper class ancient Egyptians, he is denounced as a homosexual and pressured to conform to mediocre herd values

Master morality as an objective system is the biggest scam in existence. It's quite literally just a way for people to cloak resentment and emasculation. Or a way to say "Might makes right but only for me. It's unnatural when you hurt me.". It's a wistful illusion, giving pathetic fucks the balm of reminiscing over some imagined warrior aristocrat golden age. One which of course the reader assumes they will be part of instead of the pissant class. Similarly it's seen as noble for said aristocrats to throw tantrums and appeal to metaphysical authority once the peasants get tired of their shit.
In short it lacks the nihilism to rebel and struggle against fate out of sheer spite like actual Greek or Mesopotamian heroes. Created by various chiefs and lords in luxurious environs unused to suffering. True master morality is not giving a shit, staying consistent to your beliefs and looking good while doing it. Crowley, Ghandi, Tally Rand, Diogenes and Julius Ceasar are good examples.

[Anonymous No.19841650]

>>19838613
>contrapoints
stopped reading there,
delete your post

[Anonymous No.19841664]

Neechee was literally a deranged drug addicted coping incel and is now burning eternally in hell.

[Anonymous No.19841674]

>>19838697
>something something a camel, a lion, and a child

[Anonymous No.19841679]

>>19838613
Okay. And ...?

[Anonymous No.19841798]

>>19838613
good post OP. so sick of hegemonic masculinity

[Anonymous No.19841824]

>>19838613
I thought this would be interesting. Disappointed.

[Anonymous No.19841834]

>>19838613
>Contrapoints covered this topic in "envy"

[Anonymous No.19841838]

>>19838613
I'm not gonna pretend to humor the insane (inane?) ramblings of a tranny but my thesis is that mate selection in regards to such things as evopsych is short-sighted.

I will quote my friend here, who explained it better:

"we will deal with the assumption that women choose the men best suited to their environments, which, if we are correct in saying that holes do not even know about their own desires, is already a fortiori incorrect. We can see obviously that this is not the case by looking at modern life. Electricians and bugman programmers, who properly lay the foundation for so much of the current system and ensure its smooth operation, are certainly not our modern-day Don Juans. Instead holes whore themselves out to various hominids and Yidstagram celebrities who abandon them with bastard children even a touch less intelligent and civilized than themselves."

so yeah, it offen correlates with the global drop in intellectual capabilities, which is well documented. when women mean "strong, alpha male" they mean someone who is smart enough to know how to swindle people but not smart enough to run the system, which we as humans, like it or not, have to live and serve under. in the far future, this will have disastrous consequences as it will create a population of numb nuts who fling feces at each other like monkeys, effectively putting us several epochs in reverse to the pre-bronze age. but leftists will say "its fine, Daddy Schwab will make our boo boos all better" like it fucking matters. good job.

[Anonymous No.19841858]

>>19841838
This is untrue. Even though young women may prefer good looking Instagram models, in the corporate world it's generally the intellect that determines who is at top, unless the system is corrupt. On the other hand, electricians and construction workers have the highest testosterone among all professions, and men with high testosterone are generally low status and low IQ since they're most prone to violence and criminality. It makes the case that high testosterone individuals with low IQ are being weeded out by nature.

So in the end, if Richard Wrangham is right, our socitey is heading towards androgyny and our intellect will be the most prized possession.

https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/70/3/813/2232541?redirectedFrom=PDF

[Anonymous No.19841862]

>>19838613
>Women also gain power by flaunting their sexuality, hence Christianity promotes modesty which mostly benefits the weak man.
Yes, a major function of Christian morality is to level the sexual playing field in order to increase cooperation between males. Whether or not that's a good thing depends on your point of view. Nothing destabilize society like millions of rootless men.
>incels and those with little luck with females paint men with sexual success as evil.
You're over generalizing. Most of them simply recognize the game is uneven and influenced by things like genes. They recognize there's no reason to participate in society because they'll never gain access to reproduction. They become rootless destabilizers because it's in their best interest. Instead of recognizing this, most people write off this phenomenon as random and meaningless when it's anything but.
>In the age of western Hollywood masculinity, its the opposite. The farm worker and the man *forced* to embrace war is seen as superior to the higher men who are free from such duties.
Ostensibly. The media intended for mass consumption seemed to be so. You could also interpret this as a half hearted pat on the back from the elite to the people who do their dirty work.
>the suit and tie came to denote class. It is no different from the uniform of a waiter
Not true, servants' outfits were decidedly different.
>If a man decides to flaunt his wealth through clothing and body art like the upper class ancient Egyptians, he is denounced as a homosexual and pressured to conform to mediocre herd values.
I know you're talking about 1950's masculinity, but even just one decade later, when hippy culture took over, this was no longer true. Look at the attached image: extravagantly stylish clothing and body art. He's generally respected and not considered a fag.
>My solution would be to identify femboys as the true harbingers of master morality. It's not about the femboys who are weak, pathetic, & rely on slave morality; but feminine men like David Bowie and Prince who do not require judeo Christian masculinity to display power
Kek good point. I'd argue that they're still cucks because they have you decorate themselves for attention, and the real masters are dad-bod intellectual types like Elon Musk.

Also.... contrapoints? Why would you watch that thing?

6/10

[Anonymous No.19841885]

>>19841858
I think it just boils down to individual perspective and totally foreshadowed by experience

[Anonymous No.19841911]

>>19841862
>Yes, a major function of Christian morality is to level the sexual playing field in order to increase cooperation between males. Whether or not that's a good thing depends on your point of view. Nothing destabilize society like millions of rootless men.

With all due respect to neech, his ideal society would just produce violence and bloodshed. No way anything could ever be stabilized. I think he lacked foresight.

[Anonymous No.19841916]

>>19841911
Agreed.

[Anonymous No.19841978]

Good and gay thread

[Anonymous No.19842013]

>>19841911
What was his ideal society? I haven't read all of it, but the theme seems to be from an individual point of view. Meaning an established society, maybe full of rot and decay is prime material for an individual to subvert and use to his own goals. Obviously, from his point of view, the hierarchy in Antichrist makes sense, since someone born of a shoe-maker is not suited for anything else than a shoe-maker right? The 5th generation shoe maker should be happy with his position as a shoe maker, and definitely shouldn't threaten the 5th generation nobleman full of rot and decay due to not having struggle in his life.

[Anonymous No.19842047]

>>19842013
that begs the question what if the shoemaker was unhappy with his lot in life and decided to take up arms because people decided being barefoot was better than wearing shoes. since there is a shortage of demand for shoes, that puts the shoemaker at risk of losing his job so it makes him angry and he gets violent, what should society do? put shoemakers out of their misery so people can walk around barefoot in peace? that view promotes that life is disposable at the whims of social change. I don't buy it.

[Anonymous No.19842050]

>>19838613
>Foucault
>contrapoints
I'm not reading past this.

[Anonymous No.19842052]

>>19838613
>If a man decides to flaunt his wealth through clothing and body art like the upper class ancient Egyptians, he is denounced as a homosexual and pressured to conform to mediocre herd values.
Someone being "fruity" is seen as a heuristic for them being a 'weak and pathetic' homosexual type because it usually works. This muddies the waters for flashy men like David "I believe very strongly in fascism" Bowie. If you go back in time 100 years ago when homosexuality was much more restricted it gave normal men more leeway for being "flashy" with showy suits and haberdashery without fear of appearing gay. There were funny satires of men with opulent powdered wigs during Baroque times or of the dandies during victorian times but the mockery came from them looking ridiculous as opposed to being gay.

>My solution would be to identify femboys as the true harbingers of master morality. It's not about the femboys who are weak, pathetic, & rely on slave morality; but feminine men like David Bowie and Prince who do not require judeo Christian masculinity to display power.
I haven't read Nietzsche but if master morality really comes down to ignoring social pressure to not be a fag then so be it, I think traits like whether ones behavior is prosocial or personally constructive (as opposed to destructive like a lot of homosexuality) are more important. The point you bring up about Christianity affecting the perception towards leaders is interesting, but there's no upside to them being homosexual unless you consider mastery morality the highest goal. As an aside your use of the word "femboy" in a positive sense makes your critique seem very transient and sexually motivated, as well as anyone honestly admitting to watching hontrapoints.

>>19841858
Your friend put it very well.

[Anonymous No.19842085]

Modern masculinity is actually a symptom of a culture that has lost catholicity, and personality has been homogenized as a result. In our country it has been a long standing tradition for people to seek out a church community that is essentially full of people who are exactly like them, eventually the personality of everyone degrades and becomes smoother as a result. It's not so much that having long hair and writing poetry is gay or effeminate, but this vocation and many like it have no place in America outside of the lgbt and dead subcultures which tried to reintroduce catholic vocations in a protestantized world.

[Anonymous No.19842089]

>>19842052
>David "I believe very strongly in fascism" Bowie
pretty cringe

[Anonymous No.19842091]

>>19842047
>that view promotes that life is disposable at the whims of social change
I think Nietzscheans would find that to be a good thing.

[Anonymous No.19842101]

>>19842091
well then I kindly disagree. seems barbaric. I'll stick with atavistic thinkers from now on. "On The Genealogy Of Morals" is an entertaining read, though.

[Anonymous No.19842154]

>>19838613
Plenty of men aren't forced to be in a war and still fight. Although such instincts are used to protect women and children, which is gynocentric and dumb.

And not all aristocracies were dandies, that's specifically a phenomenon of decadent aristocracies. Also most Chinese and Japanese aristocrats were masculine men. Feminine men were just sex objects.
>>19838651
"Forced" does not imply that men love war because they have nowhere to turn to. There's a difference between "might as well like it" and "I never knew I liked it".

Warrior societies don't exist because of simple matters of economics, being a higher man doesn't amount to much in material reality.
>>19841858
Testosterone is a cognition enhancing chemical. Lowering test levels will just mean dumber men.

[Anonymous No.19842164]

>>19842154
Explain black dudes then, if you will

[Anonymous No.19842179]

>>19842164
>Explain black dudes then, if you will
Lowering their testosterone is just going to make them unmotivated and even more retarded than they already are.

[Anonymous No.19842229]

>>19842091
Re: who took up the opposite proposition, hence "your lot in life is sacred and society has no right to remove it"?

[Anonymous No.19842246]

>>19838613
The why-does-everything-have-to-be-so-masculine crowd are just all in on Team Women and claim otherwise for the contradictory attention it brings.

Men who are foolish enough to join the pyramid scheme a leader guru like bowie promotes can never achieve anywhere near the same level of success with women that is being offered. That is unless he can repeat the false values (weakness is strength) louder or get noticed for bringing it to more unsuspecting victims.

[Anonymous No.19842319]

>>19842246
Perseverance is strength, not weakness. Intelligence is however far more important than physical poweress, which gives way to a more feminine form but masculine function.

>>19842154
>Plenty of men aren't forced to be in a war and still fight. Although such instincts are used to protect women and children, which is gynocentric and dumb.

That doesn't make it any less of slave morality. You belive self mutilation is honorable like the shiaites do during muharram. You doing it for men doesn't change this.

>And not all aristocracies were dandies, that's specifically a phenomenon of decadent aristocracies. Also most Chinese and Japanese aristocrats were masculine men. Feminine men were just sex objects.

Embracing more feminine aesthetics is a hallmark of the upper class. Perhaps that's why young women are still attracted to pretty boys and kpop idols. Besides the study, any rational person knows the strongest man will lead an army to ruin but a weak man with wisdom will help you win.

So Seethe. Cope. Dilate.

>Testosterone is a cognition enhancing chemical.
Lmao.

[Anonymous No.19842361]

>>19842319
This sounds like it was written by a closet pederast

[Anonymous No.19842383]

>>19842319
>Perseverance is strength, not weakness.
Perseverance is also slave morality. "I'm better because I endure my lot without complaint, my reward is coming some time in the indefinite future (possibly thousands of years)"

[Anonymous No.19842462]

>>19842319
Self-harm for religious reasons is not "slave morality" either.
>which gives way to a more feminine form but masculine function
All intelligent men throughout history have been masculine. Not a single one was a "femboy".
>Testosterone is a cognition enhancing chemical.
It literally is though, for the vast majority of men as long as you aren't some roider.
>Embracing more feminine aesthetics is a hallmark of the upper class. Perhaps that's why young women are still attracted to pretty boys and kpop idols

You were talking about aristocracies, which throughout history have always preferred masculine aesthetics. Posting pictures of 21st century pretty boys isn't going to change this and neither will posting about the tastes of Asian women. Even modern rich fags don't try to have feminine aesthetics.
>So Seethe. Cope. Dilate.
That is what you'll be doing in 5 years before you become part of the 41%.

[Anonymous No.19842477]

>>19842229
this wasn't answered. come on people...

[Anonymous No.19842488]

>>19842383
it's a banal platitude seeping in, "strive to be the best" is stupid if you are cleaning toilets in a restaurant.

[Anonymous No.19842498]

>>19838613
>judeo Christian
no such thing lol, midwit

[Anonymous No.19843517]

Refuted by Carlsbad (PBUH)

>The bourgeoisie, of course, valued thrift and saving. In this regard, the gold standard and the balanced budget were the applications of the same principles of private household accounting to that great “public household,” the oikonomia of the state. Joseph Schumpeter referred to the gold standard as “both the badge and the guarantee of bourgeois freedom — of freedom not simply of the bourgeois interest, but of freedom in the bourgeois sense,” and this due to it being “extremely sensitive to government expenditure and even to attitudes or policies that do not involve expenditure directly, for example, to foreign policy, to certain policies of taxation, and, in general, to precisely all those policies that violate the principles of liberalism.” The level of debauchery in the present is in complete contradiction to the bourgeois ethos of sexual continence, thrift and stoic demeanor (it was the bourgeoisie’s great charge against the nobility that they were all effeminate fops who lived a life of sensual luxury, preferring hunting and banquets over diligent work). Today, female hysteria and public displays of the basest emotions are not merely tolerated but openly celebrated, it is indeed a badge of honor to scream and cry as a weapon for political gain. There is nothing “bourgeois” about any of this.

[Anonymous No.19843617]

>>19838613
you started strong and quickly turned to shit

[Anonymous No.19843620]

>>19838697
Everything you've ever done in your entire life is participating in some form of game

[Anonymous No.19843875]

>>19838613
not gna read all that bro

[Anonymous No.19843886]

>>19838613
>As Foucault put it
stopped reading there

imagine quoting a literal aids-faggot when trying to say something about masculinity

[Anonymous No.19843895]

>tfw this thread reignited my faith in 4chan and by extension humanity
Thank you anons for so resoundingly rejecting faggot OP.

[Anonymous No.19843913]

>>19838666
It's not a game. Games are fun and don't involve getting hurt or hurting others

[Anonymous No.19843984]

>>19842052
>I think traits like whether ones behavior is prosocial or personally constructive
Can you elaborate on this? Would that mean submitting yourself to the hierarchy vs transcending it?

[Anonymous No.19844027]

>>19843913
A game can be nothing more or nothing less than a game. Who are you to say what a game is? Stop talking and observe. A game might be fun if you're winning, but start losing and it stops being fun.
Some games not only hurt but stake human lives on them. Life itself is a game.

[Anonymous No.19844632]

LFM dressing up as touhou girls to crush the gynocracy. Heterosexual males 6ft+ only, must never fap to 3DPD or cheat on your waifu

[Anonymous No.19844988]

>>19838613
Hyper masculinity is low class trait and a sign of arrested development. It's also a defense mechanism to cope with prolonged suffering. All it takes a quick glance at the world around you to really see the truth. It's a very hard truth to accept that most of the world's true elites aren't hard boiled warriors. They're usually fairly "soft" and not intimidating at all (high-level politicians, bankers, lawyers, now tech-founders, etc.). They aren't sitting around bragging to their contemporaries about how they don't put any sweetener in their coffee, only drive cars with stick shift or only listen to Led Zeppelin or some other arbitrary goal line. People do not like this truth. They'd rather reason that they could "kick their asses" because they need a way to cope with their inferiority. The path to enlightenment is realizing the overtly portraying signs of robust masculinity in the real world just invites others to capitalize on your willingness to prove yourself to others.

>source, found out the hard way

[Anonymous No.19845966]

>>19844988
Hyper masculinity combined with actual superiority is impressive, though. More so than the smooth, reasonable higher class businessman type. Most of the hyper masculine types you're talking about are fat middle aged dudes whose entire life is a cope. But a "hyper masculine" handsome 30-50 year old guy who has his shit together, is mentally and physically healthy, not whipped by a female, etc. is appealing to everyone.

[Anonymous No.19846214]

>>19845966
I can't name any off the top of my head that would fit into the realm of the elite. I don't consider athletes elite just high upper class.

[Anonymous No.19846251]

I love how no one read OPs blog post, good work everyone

[Anonymous No.19846635]

>>19844027
That's dumb and I don't want to play those games

[Anonymous No.19846649]

This thread confirms it, everyone on /lit/ is a discord tranny, everyone but me

[Anonymous No.19846773]

>>19840016
I'm a pretty feminine guy and I'll admit that I have a dislike for women partly out of jealousy. It's complicated because I find it easier to talk to women than men irl, but at the same time in my head I am pretty misogynistic. I don't resent women for being how they are, I just dislike how I get judged for liking it doing things that they get to do judgement free.

[Anonymous No.19846816]

>>19846773
Whatever babe, post twink tum

[Anonymous No.19846892]

>>19838613
kneechee is a tard. try doing some actually philosophy instead of this incel social commentary. hurry up before you're cursed with syphillis of the brain like your boyfriend friedrich.

[Anonymous No.19846972]

>>19846816
No

[Anonymous No.19847120]

>>19838666
>If you cannot see how war is fun
Sure it's fun looking at the strategy of it on a screen. But I don't think most people actually enjoy combat.

[Anonymous No.19847137]

>>19838666
t. never been on a battle field
nice try merchant of death

[Anonymous No.19847138]

>>19844988
>that most of the world's true elites aren't hard boiled warriors. They're usually fairly "soft" and not intimidating at all (high-level politicians, bankers, lawyers, now tech-founders, etc.).
Who tf cares what lawyers and bankers think is classy lol

[Anonymous No.19847144]

>>19838666
>666
>"war is fun"

[Anonymous No.19847150]

>>19839395
What does this mean? Affirming a biological reality would be an honest thing to do, not slavish

[Anonymous No.19847162]

>>19838613

What is it with you guys and coming up with elaborate ways to justify acting like a girl within the context of masculinity?

>pic related

[Anonymous No.19847166]

>>19847162
they're zoomers. they want an excuse to behave like women, because women are based and men are cringe. and they're pretty much indoctrinated into nihilism by their reality, so they reach for the low hanging kneechee.

[Anonymous No.19847259]

>>19847162
End stage civilization type thought. Men are confused and are expendable. They sit around with nothing to do, except consume media. They're consumed by TikTok content, the majority of which is hot women dancing and showing off their bodies. They're consumed by Instagram "influencers," a vast majority of which are women. They have no concept of masculinity, because they never had fathers. Zoomer women are all lesbians and pansexual, whatever that means. For men, what reason is there to work? They're just falling behind, with little to do.

[Anonymous No.19847279]

>>19847259
Why should men be expendable? Is it so horrible that men could sit and think to themselves that maybe there's more to their existence than being a work horse or a piece of war meat? I fundamentally reject the notion that I'm just currency to be spent as needed. I have emotions beyond aggression and sexual arousal. I'm perfectly comfortable with myself being sensitive, not liking violence, and not being a tough guy. You're either a woman or a simp with that kind of thinking.

[Anonymous No.19847314]

Recently I heard the historical difference between eastern (particularly Chinese) and western masculinity is the following.

Western masculinity stems from the desire to achieve through conquest. Figures who conquer through war, business, sex, the wilderness are idolized. Someone such as Trump (sans your political pov) is viewed as manly while taking part in society, while someone like Ted K is also viewed as manly while trying to isolate/destroy society.

Eastern masculinity stems from the act of civilizing and being civil. A masculine man is idolized for taking part in society, mastering the rules, and expanding on them. Someone who is dumb, a loner, or brute typically isn't regarded as masculine.

[Anonymous No.19847502]

>>19847314
Under that framework didn't a more Eastern masculinity exist (to a much lesser extent) in the West around a century ago with the 'gentleman' archetype? Seemed to be a balance of sorts, between the vigor of conquest (stereotypical victorian gentleman would go on a grand tour or go big game hunting) and the civility of social life.

[Anonymous No.19847515]

>>19844632
>6ft+ only
dealbreaker, sorry

[Anonymous No.19847541]

>>19838613
This post satirizes the fundamental faggot essence that is exuded when an academic basedboy tries to comment on masculinity. Well done.

[Anonymous No.19847543]

>>19847502
Certainly I think you're right. Perhaps the balance tips in one way or the other in regards to things like the zeitgeist, general standard of living and economic status of any place.

Even in the eastern example, I think the northern tribes that repeatedly invaded "China" were originally more oriented towards the 'conquest' pov but as society settled and they integrated, they had stronger preference to civilizing as show for masculinity instead of conquest.

[Anonymous No.19848133]

>>19845966
You're describing a man in touch with his feminine side. Hypermasculine men consider compassion and empathy as the least desirable traits, which makes you an undesirable leader. No one likes a pitbull.

>>19843895
Good. I exist to present truth.

>>19844988
This is pretty obvious once you step out into the real world. Men who have high success aren't that bothered by their masculinity compared to lower status males. I found this out by a study on gaming harassment and it pointed out that highly skilled male gamers are less threatened by female competitors than low skilled gamers.

[Anonymous No.19848274]

>>19842164
>>19842154
>>19842179
blacks dont have highers level of testosterone than whites, but they do have higher levels of estrogens

[Anonymous No.19848398]

>>19839294
Liking dick is gay bro lmao

[Anonymous No.19848411]

>>19838613
>modern
>bases his opinion on writings of a philosopher from at best 1970's referring to his idea how the world looked like in 1950's(that he spent getting bullied by communist secret police for being gay until he fucked off back to Gayrance)

[Anonymous No.19848435]

>>19848274
Whatever you say doesn't change much for these people because they've been under GAE propaganda for so long they only perceive stuff through the lense of propaganda. And if you haven't noticed, GAE wants to think blacks are hypermasculine badasses who are also all rocket scientists and doctors.

[Anonymous No.19848834]

>>19847279
Based

[Anonymous No.19849234]

>>19843895
There are 3 dudes in that room. What in the fukcing hell, moot?

[Anonymous No.19849244]

>>19843913

>hurting others

Hey loser, that's precisely what makes anything "fun"

[Anonymous No.19849294]

>>19844988
I AM superior to many upper class types. They have more money than me though…

[Anonymous No.19849354]

>>19849244
No it doesn't. I don't like when people hurt me, so I don't want to hurt other people.

[Anonymous No.19849561]

Homoromanticism is the foundation of all social progress and stability. Women are the absolute first to call two male friends gay if they demonstrate the slightest bit of emotional connection or intimacy.

The issue is that all people who recognize this and seek to overcome it are also faggots, but not in the homosexual sense. Just like, they get one taste of genuine emotional support and they collapse all over you and its embarrassing to deal with. But anyway, this is why the greeks viewed sexually attractive women as divine and why you should as well. Its the ultimate objectification and they fucking hate that shit.

[Anonymous No.19849579]

>>19838613
Kill yourself you fucking sodomite

[Anonymous No.19849604]

>>19849561
Good example would be the mainstream social discourse surrounding AOC. You would note that the vast majority of internet commentators are always in a big hurry to insult her appearance, making a big effort to make sure everyone knows they're not sexually attracted to her. When in reality, she's a reasonably attractive woman and her acidic personality speaks volumes about her bedroom passion. It would be a rare man who would not want to sleep with AOC.

So if people would just start acknowledging that, it would cut the wind out of her sails immediately and put her on the defensive. Given that the office of the presidency is already a sad joke, I think we could probably fix America simply by starting a campaign to elect AOC to the White House for being sexy. It would trigger a wave of jealous women spouting off on social media about how they deserve it more, and AOC probably isn't as secure in her looks as she would like everyone to believe. She wouldn't even know if we were serious or not, and it would be impossible for her to formulate any kind of serious rebuttal. We'll respond to every policy proposal from the POV of a dom/sub relationship. Trust me, women hate that shit. It'll break the collective female mind of America.

[Anonymous No.19849947]

>>19849561
>litcon 2022
lets make this a reality

[Anonymous No.19850493]

>>19849579
N I G G E R

I

G

G

E

R

[Anonymous No.19850640]

>>19849604
i legitimately think she looks like a walled tranny

[Anonymous No.19850749]

I think few of those who endorse the 'misery pride' camp of pure masculinity would admit in a hypothetical scenario that there is a button which can change one's biological gender, from male to female without complications or invasiveness such as in a tranny surgery, that they would instantly push it.
One needs to be aware that the MtF trannies, are themselves great reasoners even if as we all aware, a twisted kind of reasoning. When the balance of advantage tilts heavily towards the female side within the male-female dichotomy, it is a rational thing to do to simply switch sides. Yes, I believe they came to the conclusion to troon out based on this reasoning, bulldozing away things like biological limitations.
And it is also a measure of great intellect to weigh in the hypothetical scenario of pushing such button. We see the advantages of the female sex to participate in contemporary society but we impose our male views into the female being. Such that it is rational to think that a male being endowed with female privileges, it is necessarily the case that the male is living a good 'male' life. But this is certainly not true, as it is impossible to put a male perspective into the position of the female because of course, biology has its impact on the mind, whether they're separate or not is not in the goal of this discussion.
I don't think the 'misery pride' camp thought about this in depth, but the conclusion that they get is to stretch essentialism into its breaking point. "You only suffer as a male if you're average or undesirable, but not if you're chad or hypermasculine" is a form of glorification of essentialism or the male essence. Yet I doubt it is really the case that the worship of essentialism is not a byproduct of coping with reality and I'm more inclined to believe on the hypothesis that if there's a button that can instantly make a female out of a male with no medical consequences, then the misery glorifiers would immediately push it, 90% of them, the 10% would probably be aware of the problem of human consciousness and choose the life of coping.

[Anonymous No.19850801]

Certain animal species have "sneaker males", males that look like women so that they can gain trust with other males and impregnate their females with their higher than average spermcounts.

Sounds like what OP talks about.

[Anonymous No.19850848]

>>19840026
bussy b poppin fr fr

[Anonymous No.19850930]

>>19839294
I could crush an average femboys' head like a watermelon, so I think farmhand masculinity still comes out on top.