Ir reads more like something written by a turbo soicuck like John Green who knows it's false but wants to appeal to his female readers by reaffirming their misconceptions of men.
The willing sexualization of women stokes feelings of lust and desire but the opportunities to realize those desires have only been reduced. I can walk on major college campus in America and invariably witness large groups of scantily clad women accentuating their hips, chest, etc. but if I stare for just a little too long then apparently I’m the evil pervert who deserves to be euthanized.
This is so stupid, the responsibility is on us both. If women know that men are driven by sexual desire, then they should know that if they dress revealingly they are going to get certain looks from some men. Even nowadays. Maybe the problem is that many women nowadays genuinely DON'T know that or in denial of that simple fact about men, which, if so, is very depressing. It seems that nobody can be sexual anywhere anymore, unless you're A) at a pride parade or B) you're a woman and you're dressing like a stripper because you're in "your bawd era" (assuming you're not in some rural red area, then all of this goes out the window of course) Everywhere else, sexuality and desire have been disneyfied and scolded into deafening, bitter silence.
Women mostly don't know and don't care. They aren't very empathetic, they don't understand men's experience and they feel strangely annoyed at the suggestion that they should, I think because it inverts a primal conviction on their part that the meaning of life is for men to be trying to figure them out and chasing after making them happy, not the other way around. Women are also very naive and childish in their perception of the world, because they outsource worldliness and having knowledge of things in general to men.
I always try to talk to gfs/hookups about their perceptions of the male experience and you see some really interesting things. I would say the vast majority don't know or (if they do know in some technical way) don't allow themselves to "see" or absorb the fact that men don't have the same experience as women, of being able to get a date with a person they're attracted to on demand. Women have an extremely naive perception of how easily and frequently men can get dates. They typically weave together an interesting combination of naive/childish/not well thought through notions, like "there's somebody out there for everybody / everybody is somebody's type," and just a plain lack of interest in examining social dynamics beyond their immediate situation. Even if you show them those stats showing that women rate 80% of men as below average, again, it's like they resent seeing something that contradicts their naive and "easy" reflexive "just world fallacy" type worldview, where everybody is fine (therefore they don't have to change their own behavior). So they do acknowledge it just for a moment, but only to say "don't burst my bubble, I like my bubble."
They do the same thing with titillation. It's a mixture of selfishness/lack of care for how it affects men, genuine naivete, lack of empathy (assuming male arousal is just as optional and fun as arousal is for themselves), and ideologies and buzzwords they picked up from contemporary culture. When one part of this system fails, the other parts rush in to fill the hole until you stop applying pressure. So if you show them some proof that men are suffering they will "lean on" one of their "lol frick men, women have it harder" memes, e.g.
Overall they just do not know much about other people's experiences and do not mind this or care to change it. Especially men though.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>it's like they resent seeing something that contradicts their naive and "easy" reflexive "just world fallacy" type worldview, where everybody is fine (therefore they don't have to change their own behavior). So they do acknowledge it just for a moment, but only to say "don't burst my bubble, I like my bubble."
Correct. Ultimately what a women believes or feels to be correct is the final point of all discourse. She "knows" she's right no matter what.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>it's like they resent seeing something that contradicts their naive and "easy" reflexive "just world fallacy" type worldview, where everybody is fine (therefore they don't have to change their own behavior). So they do acknowledge it just for a moment, but only to say "don't burst my bubble, I like my bubble."
Correct. Ultimately what a women believes or feels to be correct is the final point of all discourse. She "knows" she's right no matter what.
I don't share your overly pessimistic outlook on women, I just want to make that clear. I think a lot of it is just ideology giving them license to be their worst selves. This
This is so stupid, the responsibility is on us both. If women know that men are driven by sexual desire, then they should know that if they dress revealingly they are going to get certain looks from some men. Even nowadays. Maybe the problem is that many women nowadays genuinely DON'T know that or in denial of that simple fact about men, which, if so, is very depressing. It seems that nobody can be sexual anywhere anymore, unless you're A) at a pride parade or B) you're a woman and you're dressing like a stripper because you're in "your bawd era" (assuming you're not in some rural red area, then all of this goes out the window of course) Everywhere else, sexuality and desire have been disneyfied and scolded into deafening, bitter silence.
is me by the way, I just want to make that clear. I just want the average woman to take more accountability.
For the record, I had a female patient in her early 80s-late 70s a couple months back (I'm in nursing school) who opened up to me and told me she was almost raped in Greece when she was younger. After she told me that, she paused and said "but that one was basically my fault", and she said it with an expression and tone of voice that didn't belie any "self-hatred" or "internalized misogyny" or whatever, just a knowledge that (I'm guessing) she got herself into a situation where she knew she shouldn't have been and narrowly escaped a rape. Really cool old bag, she was. I liked her.
>the responsibility is on us both
How are they responsible for where you look
9 months ago
Anonymous
My point is they're responsible for living outside of their subjective POV and knowing that there will be men who gaze at them. It's not complicated. And it's not a question of "is" or "ought", it's a question of the way things are. It's not even really asking that much, it's just an acknowledgement of "I am going out dressed like a bawd, I know there will be men who will look at me, maybe even say things, I am aware of this and am prepared for this". Just like I, as an American man, feel it shouldn't be the case that a cop gets violent with me just because I talk to him rudely, but I know there's a much chance of a cop doing so if I'm rude, so I choose to just be polite and make the interaction smoother when they pull me over. It's just about being aware of realities, consequences, and taking some accountability for what happens to you.
9 months ago
Anonymous
If you do something you know will have negative consequences, then you're partly responsible for the negative consequences. For example, someone who instigates an aggressive person and is attacked, the person shouldn't have attacked, but the person who instigates is an idiot. Women are being idiots.
that's victim blaming to the extreme
9 months ago
Anonymous
I'm not interested in your bad faith accusations. Just say you don't want to have a conversation if you don't want one.
9 months ago
Anonymous
And? Why is victim blaming bad?
9 months ago
Anonymous
Shit, you know what, I actually fell for this bait. Frick you and frick me.
9 months ago
Anonymous
If you do something you know will have negative consequences, then you're partly responsible for the negative consequences. For example, someone who instigates an aggressive person and is attacked, the person shouldn't have attacked, but the person who instigates is an idiot. Women are being idiots.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Pretty much what I was trying to say yeah. I think part of the problem is that many feminists, and often leftists by extension, work within a mental framework (even if they don't think of it in these terms) that privileges freedom FROM as opposed to freedom TO. I think they assume everyone else is working under that same mental framework of sociopolitical ethics.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Could you explain this more? It’s an interesting thought but it’s put so vaguely so I don’t fully understand it. As far as I see, they’re both equally pretty privileged and interdependent in much of the modern progressive worldview (e.g. freedom FROM “the oppressive patriarchy”/restrictive abortion laws, which coincides with, again just as an example, freedom TO abort your fetus; or more generally, freedom from oppression, freedom to do what oppressors want to stop you from being able to do).
If I had to explain one of the most salient (and irritating) features of modern progressivism, it’d be as a paradoxical mixture of people thinking themselves both to be much more victimized than they really are, as well as, narcissistically, to simultaneously be much more “strong”, impressive and gifted than they really are, for “overcoming the barriers societal oppression placed in their way.” E.g. “I’m a successful upper-middle-class female professional who made it in a misogynistic man’s world, I’m an icon of female empowerment!” while being born to rich parents and even having many special booms like female-only scholarships and affirmative action in some fields.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>even having many special booms
special boons**
9 months ago
Anonymous
I'm just kind of spitballing anon, but I think it's basically like what you said about "freedom from 'patriarchy'". It's "freedom from harassment", "freedom from an unsafe environment", "freedom from judgment", which yes as you said, coincides with corresponding freedoms TO do certain things, but it's just a question of framing and priority (the priority here being freedom FROM oppressions and repressions of various kinds, imo). In other words, it's on everyone else to NOT do these things to them, because they've enshrined freedom FROM these things as a right.
I think one of the issues I have is that people think "freedom to harass" and "freedom to judge" is an endorsement of harassment and judgment, which I don't see as being the case necessarily. I'm taking the Camille Paglia line on this one I guess, "it's not about making sure men can't harass or assault women, it's about making sure women have the knowledge of how to prevent it and how to defend themselves". I might be a bastard for this though, what do I know.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Freedom “from” should not be a guarantee in a decent society
9 months ago
Anonymous
I agree on freedom from some things of course, but it depends on how micro we're getting here dawg. At a certain point, freedom FROM invites a kind of totalitarian mommy state to come into our lives and start whining about "safety". I think you can see this in the fallout from 9/11. There has been an increasing emphasis on safety and security since then, to our detriment I would argue. I don't want to live in a Mad Max world or a shithole ghetto, of course, but certainly there is some in between.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Freedom “from” should not be a guarantee in a decent society
Shit I just realized you said freedom from should NOT be a guarantee in a decent society. Sorry lol. Yes I agree with you there
9 months ago
Anonymous
You have the freedom to be my friend
9 months ago
Anonymous
You have the freedom to find joy, peace, and a sense of belonging, my friend. I hope only that you find them.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Shit that was awkwardly written, I should've said
*I hope only that you do
9 months ago
Anonymous
there is no such thing as “freedom from.” only “freedom to.” attempts to implement “freedom from” can only be authoritarian dystopias. “freedom from murder” just means they lock everyone in a nation-sized prison to try to prevent anyone from killing anyone. “freedom from misinformation” or “freedom from propaganda” just means government censorship of media. the only freedom is “freedom to” including the freedom to defend yourself against someone else who is doing you harm.
That, and they just simply get annoyed whenever ugly fricks give them the attention that they're looking for. But when it's a 6'3 chad giving said attention, that's when they feel like they've accomplished somehing.
Look the big picture is that women sit at the top of the sex market. Women are sex capitalists. It's women who organize the competition . It's men who compete for women and not women who compete for men. So they are right to be very strict about the rules. And since they are the queens, and 99% of men just live to provide for them, they have the luxury of rebuking any male quest they want and imposing on men various duties.
Literature is a bourgeois and female activity, this means women have indeed all the legitimate power to impose their views on the products they consume.
men will capitulate and they don't like it, what are they gonna do? nothing they live to please and serve, being inherently betacucks.
>You can just say no to women
HA! And who are we going to turn to for succor, companionship, romance, and the erotic then? Other men? Like some kind of homo?
No, you can just chill by yourself, not needing any of those.
The fact that you crave any of those is a marker of weakness, not that being able to get then means you have strength.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>The fact that you crave any of those is a marker of weakness, not that being able to get then means you have strength.
>No, you can just chill by yourself
Unrealistic. Living in isolation and celibacy is life denial and might as well be starvation.
9 months ago
Anonymous
I don’t hate women enough to want to live without them. I just wish I could get pussy whenever I want with little effort, and wish loyalty was possible from a woman (it’s not).
9 months ago
Anonymous
>I don’t hate women enough to want to live without them.
I don't hate women either. I love them. It's just that I love myself more than the trouble of going through getting to the point where I can love women.
9 months ago
Anonymous
This.men do it to themselves by being shamelessly needy for emotional validation from women. I turn down women all the time, and they literally have no idea how to process it. They immediately go for the gay accusation because other men are such pathetic simps
No, you can just chill by yourself, not needing any of those.
The fact that you crave any of those is a marker of weakness, not that being able to get then means you have strength.
And do what exactly? Become a genetic dead end and play precisely into the hands of private interests and corrupt politicians as they import blue third worlders who outbreed and outvote you? The corrupt will stay in power forever because of people like you who’ve given up and refuse to fight for a family.
You need to grow stronger and direct these women with firm but gentle authority. Females are incapable of thinking for themselves properly as they are beholden to the whims of popular opinion, and the result of their placement into positions of status and power has resulted in one of the biggest catastrophes of modern civilization. Young men are killing themselves and girls are ruining their bodies with drugs and rampant sex. Feminism has rendered the west almost entirely incapable of sustaining itself without the importation of foreign nationals - a practice which functions effectively like cancer. Young men are too busy smoking weed and jerking off to care, and young women are too stupid to see the bigger picture.
You need to have sex and produce children in a stable family environment. Please, I beg you.
>You need to have sex and produce children in a stable family environment. Please, I beg you.
Begging suits you. Keep begging. You're definitely a man who's stronger than a man who doesn't have to beg for the things he wants.
9 months ago
Anonymous
You two are missing the point I'm trying to make
9 months ago
Anonymous
What's the point you're trying to make?
9 months ago
Anonymous
You're not making a point. You're pleading for compliance.
9 months ago
Anonymous
I’m begging because it’s for your benefit, not mine; I already did my part. But by all means, continue with your current existence if you think it upholds some kind of value (or twisted virtue).
>It's men who compete for women and not women who compete for men
Uh, yes they do - chiefly by dressing in revealing clothing that attracts the male gaze ...
I find women extremely boring and any man who finds sex or love interesting enough to write about seems like a moron to me. Yes, yes, presumably the protagonist satisfies or will satisfy at some point his biological needs and presumably he will marry and so on and so forth. Why do I need to hear about it? It's like telling me when he uses the restroom.
I am a virgin per my religion but the art of love is not something to be glossed over, how could one be so pessimistic towards the purity of attraction?
Cover them up then, no? Women intentionally wear bras that make their breasts bigger and shirts that best reveal their cleavage, then they complain men look at them.
I look at their breasts because I see eye contact as a primal challenge, not because I want their breasts (sometimes I do). Other times I stare directly into their eyes until they look away.
It’s based on an error in reasoning due to egalitarian ideas. The gaze is meant to shame men, in a Marxist neo-puritan way, for objectifying and daydreaming about controlling and dominating women’s bodies. Back on planet earth, a woman’s body is an organic, very physical, baby factory and a bottleneck of reproduction. Men value women’s bodies due to natural causes not capitalist causes. Women don’t value men’s bodies in the same way because men do not produce babies. If men were the bottle neck of reproduction and their bodies created babies women would value the make body and inspect it for its fertility the same as men do now. The male gaze is absolutely real and it’s just basic biology. Women also know how to divert it by wearing baggy clothing that hides their assets, instead they —choose— to wear tight dresses, crop tops, low waisted pants that show their butt cracks or high waisted denim shorts yanked up their ass crack. If the gaze truly were an issue for women it would be reflected in their clothing options. We would see women wearing baggy shorts like men, oversized black t-shirts they would try to downplay their appearance to diminish and counter this gaze, yet we see the opposite, decade after decade, women relish in the gaze and obsess over how to bring as much attention to themselves as possible. I would argue that the male gaze itself, as well as attention in the abstract, is fetishized by women. They obsess over it like a form of currency. It’s why they all became addicted to social media when women were repulsed by computers and technology in the 80s and 90s as geeky nerd hobbies. The instant they could get endless attention they dropped everything to obsess over their phones.
Agreed but note that the clothes people wear are not generally individual, conscious choices. An individual, regardless of taste, is limited by the range of acceptable clothes, clothes available, and fashionableness. So it's not like they really go out of their way to dress like that, they just haven't thought about it and when confronted with that realisation would be offended but also aware that it is to some extent flaunting their assets, which is done as a point of pride and advantage. The women opposed to this are not against using their assets as such, but see (heterosexual) sex and men as evil in some way, so tend to be unwell and reactive. That doesn't mean they dress in baggy covered clothes though, it depends how principled or conversely deep in hate they are.
Of course there are healthy women who knowing use their assets yet also dress more covered up. They do this more for personal or subcultural stylistic reasons. They consider it more elegant or mature, and like that perception of themselves and from others. Furthermore it's an easy feeling of moral and status superiority when you can say you alone dress appropriately and elegantly.
Male gaze only exists in cinema, where it obviously excels at making that medium what it is. Kind of moronic to apply it to novels where there isn’t anything to look at but words.
Nothing wrong with the male gaze as long as you balance it out. Describing every woman's body is crude. A male character describing their love interest is okay, but they should also mention other qualities outside of her body parts. Women love reading and watching smut, almost as much as men do, they just like a different kind of smut. I've found that writers and artist that have a good mix of what both sexes prefer usually do good for themselves.
What else are you supposed to be interested in as a man when it comes to women? Their humor, or interesting, unique opinions? Their personality? The reason why sexuality is the only thing men are interested in getting from women is that in a general sense women are far inferior to fellow men for any other purpose...the satisfaction of the heterosexual male libido and desire for sexual intimacy is the only thing a man cannot get from other men, so it only makes sense that it would be the only reason why men bother with women. It's not a bug, it's a feature, it's the niche women possess in the lives of men.
Functional women don't have real personalities, because they never had a need for one, nor are they ever put in a situation where they would have developed one as a consequence.
>their personality
wow, dudes don't have those at all. That's a totally unique thing that woman have that is not easily found in anyone I don't want to have sex with. what an amazing point
all great artists are guilty of the male gaze. You have to be a complete talentless hack to neuter your own art of its sexuality and think it's for the better.
Over simplification of the male gaze makes me think this is a female writer.
hard to tell if this was written by a fat woman or by pic related
Ir reads more like something written by a turbo soicuck like John Green who knows it's false but wants to appeal to his female readers by reaffirming their misconceptions of men.
The willing sexualization of women stokes feelings of lust and desire but the opportunities to realize those desires have only been reduced. I can walk on major college campus in America and invariably witness large groups of scantily clad women accentuating their hips, chest, etc. but if I stare for just a little too long then apparently I’m the evil pervert who deserves to be euthanized.
It's on you not to stare, not on them to dress in a way that doesn't tempt you
This is so stupid, the responsibility is on us both. If women know that men are driven by sexual desire, then they should know that if they dress revealingly they are going to get certain looks from some men. Even nowadays. Maybe the problem is that many women nowadays genuinely DON'T know that or in denial of that simple fact about men, which, if so, is very depressing. It seems that nobody can be sexual anywhere anymore, unless you're A) at a pride parade or B) you're a woman and you're dressing like a stripper because you're in "your bawd era" (assuming you're not in some rural red area, then all of this goes out the window of course) Everywhere else, sexuality and desire have been disneyfied and scolded into deafening, bitter silence.
Women mostly don't know and don't care. They aren't very empathetic, they don't understand men's experience and they feel strangely annoyed at the suggestion that they should, I think because it inverts a primal conviction on their part that the meaning of life is for men to be trying to figure them out and chasing after making them happy, not the other way around. Women are also very naive and childish in their perception of the world, because they outsource worldliness and having knowledge of things in general to men.
I always try to talk to gfs/hookups about their perceptions of the male experience and you see some really interesting things. I would say the vast majority don't know or (if they do know in some technical way) don't allow themselves to "see" or absorb the fact that men don't have the same experience as women, of being able to get a date with a person they're attracted to on demand. Women have an extremely naive perception of how easily and frequently men can get dates. They typically weave together an interesting combination of naive/childish/not well thought through notions, like "there's somebody out there for everybody / everybody is somebody's type," and just a plain lack of interest in examining social dynamics beyond their immediate situation. Even if you show them those stats showing that women rate 80% of men as below average, again, it's like they resent seeing something that contradicts their naive and "easy" reflexive "just world fallacy" type worldview, where everybody is fine (therefore they don't have to change their own behavior). So they do acknowledge it just for a moment, but only to say "don't burst my bubble, I like my bubble."
They do the same thing with titillation. It's a mixture of selfishness/lack of care for how it affects men, genuine naivete, lack of empathy (assuming male arousal is just as optional and fun as arousal is for themselves), and ideologies and buzzwords they picked up from contemporary culture. When one part of this system fails, the other parts rush in to fill the hole until you stop applying pressure. So if you show them some proof that men are suffering they will "lean on" one of their "lol frick men, women have it harder" memes, e.g.
Overall they just do not know much about other people's experiences and do not mind this or care to change it. Especially men though.
>it's like they resent seeing something that contradicts their naive and "easy" reflexive "just world fallacy" type worldview, where everybody is fine (therefore they don't have to change their own behavior). So they do acknowledge it just for a moment, but only to say "don't burst my bubble, I like my bubble."
Correct. Ultimately what a women believes or feels to be correct is the final point of all discourse. She "knows" she's right no matter what.
I don't share your overly pessimistic outlook on women, I just want to make that clear. I think a lot of it is just ideology giving them license to be their worst selves. This
is me by the way, I just want to make that clear. I just want the average woman to take more accountability.
For the record, I had a female patient in her early 80s-late 70s a couple months back (I'm in nursing school) who opened up to me and told me she was almost raped in Greece when she was younger. After she told me that, she paused and said "but that one was basically my fault", and she said it with an expression and tone of voice that didn't belie any "self-hatred" or "internalized misogyny" or whatever, just a knowledge that (I'm guessing) she got herself into a situation where she knew she shouldn't have been and narrowly escaped a rape. Really cool old bag, she was. I liked her.
>the responsibility is on us both
How are they responsible for where you look
My point is they're responsible for living outside of their subjective POV and knowing that there will be men who gaze at them. It's not complicated. And it's not a question of "is" or "ought", it's a question of the way things are. It's not even really asking that much, it's just an acknowledgement of "I am going out dressed like a bawd, I know there will be men who will look at me, maybe even say things, I am aware of this and am prepared for this". Just like I, as an American man, feel it shouldn't be the case that a cop gets violent with me just because I talk to him rudely, but I know there's a much chance of a cop doing so if I'm rude, so I choose to just be polite and make the interaction smoother when they pull me over. It's just about being aware of realities, consequences, and taking some accountability for what happens to you.
that's victim blaming to the extreme
I'm not interested in your bad faith accusations. Just say you don't want to have a conversation if you don't want one.
And? Why is victim blaming bad?
Shit, you know what, I actually fell for this bait. Frick you and frick me.
If you do something you know will have negative consequences, then you're partly responsible for the negative consequences. For example, someone who instigates an aggressive person and is attacked, the person shouldn't have attacked, but the person who instigates is an idiot. Women are being idiots.
Pretty much what I was trying to say yeah. I think part of the problem is that many feminists, and often leftists by extension, work within a mental framework (even if they don't think of it in these terms) that privileges freedom FROM as opposed to freedom TO. I think they assume everyone else is working under that same mental framework of sociopolitical ethics.
Could you explain this more? It’s an interesting thought but it’s put so vaguely so I don’t fully understand it. As far as I see, they’re both equally pretty privileged and interdependent in much of the modern progressive worldview (e.g. freedom FROM “the oppressive patriarchy”/restrictive abortion laws, which coincides with, again just as an example, freedom TO abort your fetus; or more generally, freedom from oppression, freedom to do what oppressors want to stop you from being able to do).
If I had to explain one of the most salient (and irritating) features of modern progressivism, it’d be as a paradoxical mixture of people thinking themselves both to be much more victimized than they really are, as well as, narcissistically, to simultaneously be much more “strong”, impressive and gifted than they really are, for “overcoming the barriers societal oppression placed in their way.” E.g. “I’m a successful upper-middle-class female professional who made it in a misogynistic man’s world, I’m an icon of female empowerment!” while being born to rich parents and even having many special booms like female-only scholarships and affirmative action in some fields.
>even having many special booms
special boons**
I'm just kind of spitballing anon, but I think it's basically like what you said about "freedom from 'patriarchy'". It's "freedom from harassment", "freedom from an unsafe environment", "freedom from judgment", which yes as you said, coincides with corresponding freedoms TO do certain things, but it's just a question of framing and priority (the priority here being freedom FROM oppressions and repressions of various kinds, imo). In other words, it's on everyone else to NOT do these things to them, because they've enshrined freedom FROM these things as a right.
I think one of the issues I have is that people think "freedom to harass" and "freedom to judge" is an endorsement of harassment and judgment, which I don't see as being the case necessarily. I'm taking the Camille Paglia line on this one I guess, "it's not about making sure men can't harass or assault women, it's about making sure women have the knowledge of how to prevent it and how to defend themselves". I might be a bastard for this though, what do I know.
Freedom “from” should not be a guarantee in a decent society
I agree on freedom from some things of course, but it depends on how micro we're getting here dawg. At a certain point, freedom FROM invites a kind of totalitarian mommy state to come into our lives and start whining about "safety". I think you can see this in the fallout from 9/11. There has been an increasing emphasis on safety and security since then, to our detriment I would argue. I don't want to live in a Mad Max world or a shithole ghetto, of course, but certainly there is some in between.
Shit I just realized you said freedom from should NOT be a guarantee in a decent society. Sorry lol. Yes I agree with you there
You have the freedom to be my friend
You have the freedom to find joy, peace, and a sense of belonging, my friend. I hope only that you find them.
Shit that was awkwardly written, I should've said
*I hope only that you do
there is no such thing as “freedom from.” only “freedom to.” attempts to implement “freedom from” can only be authoritarian dystopias. “freedom from murder” just means they lock everyone in a nation-sized prison to try to prevent anyone from killing anyone. “freedom from misinformation” or “freedom from propaganda” just means government censorship of media. the only freedom is “freedom to” including the freedom to defend yourself against someone else who is doing you harm.
Based stoic. If you are tempted by women, just pluck out your eyes like Jesus says.
Dimwit. Women deliberately dress that way to attract attention. But they only like it when it comes from Chads.
Not my problem
Women love it. They only complain because they love victimizing themselves even more.
That, and they just simply get annoyed whenever ugly fricks give them the attention that they're looking for. But when it's a 6'3 chad giving said attention, that's when they feel like they've accomplished somehing.
The specific sexual distinction to which sexual actions and motives can be reduced is that between chad and incel.
Look the big picture is that women sit at the top of the sex market. Women are sex capitalists. It's women who organize the competition . It's men who compete for women and not women who compete for men. So they are right to be very strict about the rules. And since they are the queens, and 99% of men just live to provide for them, they have the luxury of rebuking any male quest they want and imposing on men various duties.
Literature is a bourgeois and female activity, this means women have indeed all the legitimate power to impose their views on the products they consume.
men will capitulate and they don't like it, what are they gonna do? nothing they live to please and serve, being inherently betacucks.
>and they don't like it
and if
They can rape. The problem is, the state exists. Without cops men can truly be themselves.
>It's women who organize the competition
You can just say no to women. Then they have no power anymore.
>You can just say no to women
HA! And who are we going to turn to for succor, companionship, romance, and the erotic then? Other men? Like some kind of homo?
No, you can just chill by yourself, not needing any of those.
The fact that you crave any of those is a marker of weakness, not that being able to get then means you have strength.
>The fact that you crave any of those is a marker of weakness, not that being able to get then means you have strength.
>No, you can just chill by yourself
Unrealistic. Living in isolation and celibacy is life denial and might as well be starvation.
I don’t hate women enough to want to live without them. I just wish I could get pussy whenever I want with little effort, and wish loyalty was possible from a woman (it’s not).
>I don’t hate women enough to want to live without them.
I don't hate women either. I love them. It's just that I love myself more than the trouble of going through getting to the point where I can love women.
This.men do it to themselves by being shamelessly needy for emotional validation from women. I turn down women all the time, and they literally have no idea how to process it. They immediately go for the gay accusation because other men are such pathetic simps
I know how you feel brother
And do what exactly? Become a genetic dead end and play precisely into the hands of private interests and corrupt politicians as they import blue third worlders who outbreed and outvote you? The corrupt will stay in power forever because of people like you who’ve given up and refuse to fight for a family.
You need to grow stronger and direct these women with firm but gentle authority. Females are incapable of thinking for themselves properly as they are beholden to the whims of popular opinion, and the result of their placement into positions of status and power has resulted in one of the biggest catastrophes of modern civilization. Young men are killing themselves and girls are ruining their bodies with drugs and rampant sex. Feminism has rendered the west almost entirely incapable of sustaining itself without the importation of foreign nationals - a practice which functions effectively like cancer. Young men are too busy smoking weed and jerking off to care, and young women are too stupid to see the bigger picture.
You need to have sex and produce children in a stable family environment. Please, I beg you.
No to everything you said, for different reasons.
>You need to have sex and produce children in a stable family environment. Please, I beg you.
Begging suits you. Keep begging. You're definitely a man who's stronger than a man who doesn't have to beg for the things he wants.
You two are missing the point I'm trying to make
What's the point you're trying to make?
You're not making a point. You're pleading for compliance.
I’m begging because it’s for your benefit, not mine; I already did my part. But by all means, continue with your current existence if you think it upholds some kind of value (or twisted virtue).
>You can just say no to women.
Yes you can. Your dick, however ...
Houellebecq?
>It's men who compete for women and not women who compete for men
Uh, yes they do - chiefly by dressing in revealing clothing that attracts the male gaze ...
It’s non-existent. Women are naturally narcissistic and are masters of projection.
Really? Explain this. What is it if not male gaze
Hi anon. Thank you for sharing.
Sauce?
NTA but Hell’s Angels by Hunter S. Thompson
you missed the point by idolisint the writing
As a person who processes a great deal of romance novels, I'd love for you to explain how he is wrong.
Women are only terrified if he’s ugly.
Rape is the most popular sexual fantasy among women.
proof?
lmgtfy
https://www.healthyplace.com/sex/psychology-of-sex/womens-top-ten-sexual-fantasies
I find women extremely boring and any man who finds sex or love interesting enough to write about seems like a moron to me. Yes, yes, presumably the protagonist satisfies or will satisfy at some point his biological needs and presumably he will marry and so on and so forth. Why do I need to hear about it? It's like telling me when he uses the restroom.
plotcels whining about sex scenes are going to kill our society
I am a virgin per my religion but the art of love is not something to be glossed over, how could one be so pessimistic towards the purity of attraction?
Cover them up then, no? Women intentionally wear bras that make their breasts bigger and shirts that best reveal their cleavage, then they complain men look at them.
>liberate women
>"Finally I'm free to be naked and in heat all the time"
Mistake. Accident
I look at their breasts because I see eye contact as a primal challenge, not because I want their breasts (sometimes I do). Other times I stare directly into their eyes until they look away.
IQfy - Incel discussion
lol yeah basically, but you gotta be able to blow off that steam somewhere. Might as well do it here.
>/every place where men can speak freely after generations of feminism/ - emergency patriarchy restoration chat
What kind of Black personhomosexual writes like this? If women don't want their boobs to be stared at they should just cut them off.
have a nice day
People deserve to live with freedom from strangers telling them to kill themselves on the internet, you monster.
Explain
https://www.instagram.com/leggingstrackers
Male gays in literature? Why, start with the Greeks of course.
no idea what's going on in this thread but lmfao
It’s based on an error in reasoning due to egalitarian ideas. The gaze is meant to shame men, in a Marxist neo-puritan way, for objectifying and daydreaming about controlling and dominating women’s bodies. Back on planet earth, a woman’s body is an organic, very physical, baby factory and a bottleneck of reproduction. Men value women’s bodies due to natural causes not capitalist causes. Women don’t value men’s bodies in the same way because men do not produce babies. If men were the bottle neck of reproduction and their bodies created babies women would value the make body and inspect it for its fertility the same as men do now. The male gaze is absolutely real and it’s just basic biology. Women also know how to divert it by wearing baggy clothing that hides their assets, instead they —choose— to wear tight dresses, crop tops, low waisted pants that show their butt cracks or high waisted denim shorts yanked up their ass crack. If the gaze truly were an issue for women it would be reflected in their clothing options. We would see women wearing baggy shorts like men, oversized black t-shirts they would try to downplay their appearance to diminish and counter this gaze, yet we see the opposite, decade after decade, women relish in the gaze and obsess over how to bring as much attention to themselves as possible. I would argue that the male gaze itself, as well as attention in the abstract, is fetishized by women. They obsess over it like a form of currency. It’s why they all became addicted to social media when women were repulsed by computers and technology in the 80s and 90s as geeky nerd hobbies. The instant they could get endless attention they dropped everything to obsess over their phones.
Agreed but note that the clothes people wear are not generally individual, conscious choices. An individual, regardless of taste, is limited by the range of acceptable clothes, clothes available, and fashionableness. So it's not like they really go out of their way to dress like that, they just haven't thought about it and when confronted with that realisation would be offended but also aware that it is to some extent flaunting their assets, which is done as a point of pride and advantage. The women opposed to this are not against using their assets as such, but see (heterosexual) sex and men as evil in some way, so tend to be unwell and reactive. That doesn't mean they dress in baggy covered clothes though, it depends how principled or conversely deep in hate they are.
Of course there are healthy women who knowing use their assets yet also dress more covered up. They do this more for personal or subcultural stylistic reasons. They consider it more elegant or mature, and like that perception of themselves and from others. Furthermore it's an easy feeling of moral and status superiority when you can say you alone dress appropriately and elegantly.
Male gaze only exists in cinema, where it obviously excels at making that medium what it is. Kind of moronic to apply it to novels where there isn’t anything to look at but words.
Nothing wrong with the male gaze as long as you balance it out. Describing every woman's body is crude. A male character describing their love interest is okay, but they should also mention other qualities outside of her body parts. Women love reading and watching smut, almost as much as men do, they just like a different kind of smut. I've found that writers and artist that have a good mix of what both sexes prefer usually do good for themselves.
What else are you supposed to be interested in as a man when it comes to women? Their humor, or interesting, unique opinions? Their personality? The reason why sexuality is the only thing men are interested in getting from women is that in a general sense women are far inferior to fellow men for any other purpose...the satisfaction of the heterosexual male libido and desire for sexual intimacy is the only thing a man cannot get from other men, so it only makes sense that it would be the only reason why men bother with women. It's not a bug, it's a feature, it's the niche women possess in the lives of men.
>Their personality?
yeah? It's not that hard dude
What personality?
Who they are as a person
Functional women don't have real personalities, because they never had a need for one, nor are they ever put in a situation where they would have developed one as a consequence.
>their personality
wow, dudes don't have those at all. That's a totally unique thing that woman have that is not easily found in anyone I don't want to have sex with. what an amazing point
Yh I'm bit of a nazi whoops
>Yh I'm bit of a nazi
It's okay anon, we all are.
>cutting your pool of personalities in half for no reason
have a nice day
all great artists are guilty of the male gaze. You have to be a complete talentless hack to neuter your own art of its sexuality and think it's for the better.
artists are just hedonists glorified by hedonists
My thoughts are women are schizos who don't know what they want and I'm not going to waste my life trying to make the schizos happy.
Women spiritually subsist on the male gaze. What do you think social media is. It's only a question of if it's Chad or incel's gaze.
bodega disrespector was actually a psyop to highlight food deserts in poc neighborhoods
i obviously stare at a womans big breasts for several seconds if she walks passed me
what the frick is she gonna do
If you're mildly observant as a man, you notice women trying to gauge the size of your penis. I catch it quite often.