>the western cannon was written by straight white men. >the western cannon has no mention of feet fetishism

>the western cannon was written by straight white men
>the western cannon has no mention of feet fetishism
What's the deal? We have Joyce and Pynchon being scat fetishists, we have Jean-Jacques Rousseau who liked being spanked
Whole Lotta creeps in the cannon, but not footcreeps?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the western cannon was written by straight white men
    Not necessarily
    >the western cannon has no mention of feet fetishism
    Plenty of sensual descriptions of feet.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Not necessarily
      Yes necessarily

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not really. There are non-heterosexuals, non-white, and females in the western canon.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Only recently
          And without good reason

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Vergil and Shakespeare are not very recent.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Who wrote the Bible?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Satan

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the greeks
            >the hebrews

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Vergil and Shakespeare are not very recent.

      >Not necessarily
      >Vergil and Shakespeare are not very recent.
      Another moron that thinks extremely ambiguous textual details that got past puritanical historical censors is LE PROOF!!!! that someone is non-binary LGBTQ+ xeno-genderqueer trans-woman wolfkin.

      https://i.imgur.com/efVs20n.jpg

      >the western cannon was written by straight white men
      >the western cannon has no mention of feet fetishism
      What's the deal? We have Joyce and Pynchon being scat fetishists, we have Jean-Jacques Rousseau who liked being spanked
      Whole Lotta creeps in the cannon, but not footcreeps?

      >Of Pallas beautified with various art,
      >And braced it with a zone fringed all around
      >A hundred fold; her pendants triple-gemm’d
      >Luminous, graceful, in her ears she hung,
      >And covering all her glories with a veil
      >Sun-bright, new-woven, bound to her fair feet

      >Ate, pernicious Power, daughter of Jove,
      >By whom all suffer, challenges from all
      >Reverence and fear. Delicate are her feet
      >Which scorn the ground, and over human heads
      >She glides,

      >Arise, O Thetis! Jove, the author dread
      >Of everlasting counsels, calls for thee.
      >To whom the Goddess of the silver feet.
      And Homer describes grandeur and beauty with "of unsullied feet."

      And Plato quotes Homer, with his own addition. Quite interestingly, feet become a theme in the discussion of Love:
      >Love is young and also tender; he ought to have a poet like Homer to describe his tenderness, as Homer says of Ate, that she is a goddess and tender:—
      >'Her feet are tender, for she sets her steps, Not on the ground but on the heads of men:'
      >herein is an excellent proof of her tenderness,—that she walks not upon the hard but upon the soft. Let us adduce a similar proof of the tenderness of Love; for he walks not upon the earth, nor yet upon the skulls of men, which are not so very soft, but in the hearts and souls of both gods and men, which are of all things the softest: in them he walks and dwells and makes his home. Not in every soul without exception, for where there is hardness he departs, where there is softness there he dwells; and nestling always with his feet and in all manner of ways in the softest of soft places, how can he be other than the softest of all things?

      Or what about Edmund Spencer?
      >(Of Minerva)
      >The dashing of the waves, that up she took,
      >Her dainty feet, and garments gathered near
      And when Lord Byron wanted to describe a lady beautiful?
      >She stood superior to them all,
      >Hath swept the marble where her feet
      >Gleamed whiter than the mountain sleet
      And even Proust had the tendency to involve feet with lust:
      >while her feet under the table sought those of the old banker's friends that appealed to her
      >...
      >When a woman is doing her hair or wiping her face, or warming her feet, she knows she is not being seen, she executes a number of interesting movements...
      >...
      >And caress her with her tongue along the throat and arms, even on the soles of her feet...

      And we all know of Alexander Proust and Fitzgerald. I am not saying that foot fetishism was the norm, but that an appreciative association of feet with love was all pervasive in Western culture.

      I don't mean to say that foot fetishism was the norm, but feet and love were intertwined since the foundational texts of the Western canon.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why, precisely, there is a connection with love, lust, and feet is not going to be clear. In my opinion, it relies on two factors: That they are thought unclean, so the acceptance of that perception of uncleanliness out of love or reverence (i.e., in foot-washing) is considered especially intimate, and that the feet are the natural object of supplication, as can be seen in Homer and the Greek sources, and which continued until the life Western Canon was ended permanently in the 20th century.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Foot academic

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Aw, shoot me in the head. Just end it all. I wrote "Alexander Proust" instead of Alexander Pushkin. I need to go to sleep.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I was wondering who Prousts feet loving brother I never heard of was

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I also included the edited last sentence and unedited one in the text.
            >Your brain on all nighter

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >extremely ambiguous
        Vergil's ancient biography by Aelius Donatus literally says he was a gay. Vergil's Eclogues are completely unambiguous in expressing male-male sexual interest. Shakespeare's sonnets may be more on the playful side, heavily stylised, but they certainly do not express ordinary male friendship no matter how you look at it.
        >that got past puritanical historical censors
        What the frick are you talking about? We have the texts, the original edition of Shakespeare's Sonnets, etc.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          If they were homosexual in their time, they wouldn't have made it. Besides that, no, Shakespeare was not a gay and you have to put your psycho-goggles on to see what you want to see in the sonnets. You don't read anything but Reddit TILs and youtube pop-phil shorts. You're a permanent midwit that assimilates whatever top comment wisdom into a brain-reservoir of HIV-infected cum from which you can continuously drink and, whenever someone is unlucky enough to be near your bilious spew, share. I doubt you've even gone to college to hear what your pink-haired genderqueer pedophile professors eternal copes are.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >If they were homosexual in their time, they wouldn't have made it.
            You're just making shit up now.
            Do you mean to say Donatus was trying to discredit Vergil by mentioning his homosexuality? Why else would he mention it?
            Do you have any actual proof Romans would prevent a gay poet from "making it", whatever the frick that means?

            >You don't read anything but Reddit TILs and youtube pop-phil shorts.
            I've read the Sonnets cover to cover, and I doubt you have.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I've read the Sonnets cover to cover, and I doubt you have.
            Then you wouldn't be wrong.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Aw, shoot me in the head. Just end it all. I wrote "Alexander Proust" instead of Alexander Pushkin. I need to go to sleep.

        Pushkin literally never uses the Russian word for "feet" when talking about women. He uses "нoги/нoжки", which means legs, not feet.

        It's the translators who are footgays, which once again proves the undeniable idiom that foot fetishists are pathetic wretches with 0 creativity who are only capable of corrupting creations of others.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Noga and Nozchka can both mean foot. I don't know Russian and neither have I read Pushkin in the native Russian, but by context it makes sense for it to be feet. If that is the translator's warping of the entire passage, then maybe you are right.
          But the point still stands even if Pushkin was mutilated in translation, because that is only one example out of the countless from Western literature.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Noga and Nozchka can both mean foot
            There's no word "nozchka" in Russian.
            >Noga and Nozchka can both mean foot
            >I don't know Russian
            So how do you know that's what the words can mean? 'Foot' in Russian is 'cтoпa'.

            >I've read the Sonnets cover to cover, and I doubt you have.
            Then you wouldn't be wrong.

            At least you're honest.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B0#Russian
            >So how do you know that's what the words can mean? 'Foot' in Russian is 'cтoпa'.
            I can read the Cyrillic but I don't know the Russian language past the bare minimum for tourism. When I first heard about Pushkin's foot fetishism, I had the same critical approach because it was in a discussion in which the same topic was brought up, so that's where I learned that noga and (what I transliterated as nozchka) could mean foot. The dual meanings for a body part is similar to a language that I do know, because in Japanese 手 means both hand and arm, and 足 means both foot and leg. Just as there is "stopa" in Russian (as you cite) there is also 腕 in Japanese which is different from 手 in that it refers specifically and only to the arm.

            You are pointless to argue with because it's clear that you have an extreme emotional attachment to an indefensible position, not helped at all by you being a midwit or plainly moronic.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            -sh- and -k- make it an diminutive term of endearment/familiarity

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            Pushkin literally never uses the Russian word for "feet" when talking about women. He uses "нoги/нoжки", which means legs, not feet.

            It's the translators who are footgays, which once again proves the undeniable idiom that foot fetishists are pathetic wretches with 0 creativity who are only capable of corrupting creations of others.

            russian guy here. you're a moron. russians use Noga and Nozchka to mean foot all the time

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            is wrong and

            https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B0#Russian
            >So how do you know that's what the words can mean? 'Foot' in Russian is 'cтoпa'.
            I can read the Cyrillic but I don't know the Russian language past the bare minimum for tourism. When I first heard about Pushkin's foot fetishism, I had the same critical approach because it was in a discussion in which the same topic was brought up, so that's where I learned that noga and (what I transliterated as nozchka) could mean foot. The dual meanings for a body part is similar to a language that I do know, because in Japanese 手 means both hand and arm, and 足 means both foot and leg. Just as there is "stopa" in Russian (as you cite) there is also 腕 in Japanese which is different from 手 in that it refers specifically and only to the arm.

            You are pointless to argue with because it's clear that you have an extreme emotional attachment to an indefensible position, not helped at all by you being a midwit or plainly moronic.

            is right but the passage in Onegin is genuinely ambiguous between legs or feet

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Sir, I literally learned the Russian language to watch Russian lesbian foot worship porn and I can assure you, they say nogy when they mean just feet. Usually it sounds something like OBLYZA VY MOY NOGY CYYYYKA, TIBI NRAVYTSA? LOOOSCHA LOOSCHA MOLODYETS CYKA, PIZDYETS GRYAAAZNA CYYYKA

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Casanova had a foot fetish

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Opium > feet

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >cannon

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Footbros, why do women's feet smell sweet in the morning

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      she has diabetes

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This picture reminds me of my story "An Innocent Game."

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It was in one of his short stories or essays I read online but David Foster Wallace wrote something that immediately made me think he was footchud wanting to write about his barely disguised foot fetish.

    I don't read his stuff often enough but maybe someone else here knows what I'm talking about.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *