Recommend good literature featuring dominant and strong women

Recommend good literature featuring dominant and strong women
Love interest, antagonist, etc. doesn't matter
thanks

Attached: ilKcO.png (761x601, 677K)

Other urls found in this thread:

shakespeare.mit.edu/macbeth/macbeth.1.7.html
youtube.com/watch?v=iLQzaLr1enE
youtube.com/watch?v=iJM0rbUbzyk
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Venus in furs.

moby dick

(the whale represents feminine chaos)

Torture Garden by Octave Mirbeau
Juliette by Marquis de Sade

Preferably where she dominates the male protagonist.

José de Alencar's "Senhora"

Divine Comedy, Paradise.

Here's a recommendation. Get over being abused by your failure of a single mother with borderline personality disorder and learn to regard and treat women as the natural inferiors to you that they are. Doing so has the added benefit of making you actually attractive to women because that's how normal, psychologically healthy men behave, you pathetic, effeminate waste of manhood. Grow a spine.

How?

I am self-improving, but the fetish remains.

It seems like I can't help what I'm attracted to.

>Not opening yourself up for a good pegging

Wew, what a cuck

Preferably where she calls the men "weak little boys" and makes fun of their penis size.

>in a board about literature
>being this much of a dumb cunt

>Projecting
S&M is about trust and power dynamics, not maintaining your sociology hierarchy. You're really telling on yourself here user

the bible

Humans develop sexual prefences when they are very young. While it is possible to overcome, it is not easy. Just like how while I may not harbor any anger to most people, my annoying ass mother will rub me the wrong way. Some things go very deep and have a stake in our subconscious.

then release yourself from your desires, user.

Im sad that people from /pol/ and /b/ can get in here, too, user :(

Euripides - Medea

I wish I could recommend something as I find this topic very interesting but I don't really know anything to recommended. Easily the best thread right now thank you for making it.

Being dominant does not require treating women as inferiors, it requires you to take the primary position in the relationship, realizing that female sexuality is cthonic, irrational and must be mediated by a gate keeper, you, the proud and virile male lover. You needn't abuse her or neglect her emotional needs just because you feel she's a child and you can brainwash or exploit her for pleasure and status with your clan. For fuck's sake we're not iron age or bronze age nitwits anymore, you can incorporate old conceptions of masculinity, exclude most sex positive feminist claptrap and retain a semblance of civility and even love between the two of you. I've talked about this with RED PILLED women and men, they all agree one needs to strike a balance between men leading and men listening. Men should in fact restrain themselves as much as women need to learn to close their legs and get a hint that they are not fit to LEAD, but this does not mean that we need to add insult to injury by constantly denigrating or manipulating them. Trust is important for all social ties, women become bitter, resentful, and thus open to suggestion by other women or outsiders, or males who are competing with you, if you neglect their souls. The femdom shit is disgusting but what you are prescribing is equally tasteless.

Antigone, because Oedipus was a useless motherfucker in the previous two plays

Is this scene from Macbeth relevant?

shakespeare.mit.edu/macbeth/macbeth.1.7.html

Odyssey because fuck what this cuck has to say.

Lay me down
thrust inside
I want to surrender to you

Attached: 73092F6C-402F-440B-AFC8-0E7CE3E4F0D9.jpg (310x499, 57K)

I want to read this too it sounds interesting,

>(the whale represents feminine chaos)
nice

Attached: halal.jpg (531x471, 282K)

The fuck are you saying? The very nature of what you are saying implies that women are inferior, and that's all that user said. Yeah we can't be violent anymore but there's nothing wrong with what you call "manipulation". You really do need to understand her psychology and control it's nature, and no woman lets you do this with full knowledge (besides maybe truly Red Pilled women). So by definition, not telling them what you're doing for their own good IS "manipulation". But it's natural, needed, and good. You manipulate your dogs and children too. Trust is important, but truthfulness isn't.

>feel she's a child
she is
>brainwash or exploit
loaded words

Truck, Katherine Dunne

Attached: the_kiss.jpg (225x346, 16K)

GM Remix by Hiroe Rei

Just look up femdom on whatever erotic lit site you like. Good literature featuring this doesn't exist, for good reason.

east of eden, but if trump extends making anime real to making steinbeck real, you're in line behind me for getting sexmurdered by cathy/kate/whatever she calls herself while choking me in a compromising position to evade the law

>Here's a recommendation. Get over being abused by your failure of a single mother with borderline personality disorder
That is the worst literary advice ever. Next you'll be telling him to sober up. Fuck you, you are the death of art.

What drugs are you on dude

>The very nature of what you are saying implies that women are inferior, and that's all that user said
They're not inferior in the same way he was suggesting. The female is not a doormat nor a fuck hole. Manipulation is a form of coercion which is unskillful and forced behavior, you're either bad essentially or weak willed and slow witted if you have to coerce people. Your presence and aura should draw them to you naturally. And all shows of strength will lead to exhaustion. You will exhaust yourself restraining her, even with manipulation. One cannot have trust without truthfulness, this is a noble lie of the social contracts from most cultures. If the intelligence agencies say to trust them, but they lie constantly and do things without our knowledge that cause harm to us and abuse this trust inevitably, which bankers, the State, the Military, business, educators all do, then there was no trust to begin with. Truthfulness and trust correlate nearly 1:1 except for where truth cannot physically be attained like trusting that there will be a solution to Standard Model-QM disparity which isn't a lie, its a promise we believe in and no one can manipulate us because of the nature of the subject. Women are by definition not children, they would not be capable of making executive decisions if they were, we know from studying their behavior, and I know from my personal experience that many women have more agency than their male counterparts. A subculture of infantile narcissists does not indict an entire species, my mother has more self control than my father does and is infinitely more educated and thoughtful than he is. You can call it loaded words but when you arrange someone's mind for them without their consent, if you take advantage of power disparities in a violent way, you are exploitative. The only people who would want to remove those terms from our discourse are people who intend to deprive the public of the ability to name what it is that they are doing which they do not consent to and which is harmful to the species. A banker who packages mortgages into derivatives that are worthless, speculates on their value, hedges against their worthlessness and then sells them to their clients is a fucking exploitative manipulator. When the government tells you that all people are equal in ability from birth, and you don't have any room to seriously question this, its enforced with herd thought, you are being brain washed.
impotent rage doesn't work online, only mockery and vicious refutation have any power here

>impotent rage
You didn't understand his joke, lmao.

it could be just as easily applied to the user he was responding to and my reply could be seen as in agreement with the sentiments of the joke

No because in the end Macbeth died raging against his fate while Lady killed herself.

my diary desu

>bad essentially
what does this even mean?
>unskillful and forced behavior
it's only needed when it's needed. an RPwoman wouldn't need to be """manipulated""". modern women however, you can't tell the truth to. they've been brainwashed by leftist media too much for that. who cares if it's "unskilled". it is, it's extremely easy. it's not something that takes up your life or anything, it's a good thing it's easy most of the time.
> The female is not a doormat nor a fuck hole.
obviously not, they have a mind. but in terms of function to society, the only function above this is producing children. inb4 edgy, yo
>they would not be capable of making executive decisions if they were
they aren't, the ones who truly can are exceptional, and don't know how to be women otherwise
>infinitely more educated and thoughtful than he is
Then your father is an idiot. Your mother is still a women, her education and "IQ" doesn't change anything about her mind being little above that of a child.
>without their consent, if you take advantage of power disparities in a violent way, you are exploitative.
who cares? it's for the greater good of the relationship, and for both parties. stop moralizing.
> which is harmful to the species
lul, says who? taking what you want when you CAN is how men always did things. that's how any non-cucked society functions.
> exploitative manipulator.
keep whining
>One cannot have trust without truthfulness
you trust the government, but the government isn't truthful. a mob boss isn't truthful (in everything) with his subordinates. this is what differentiates masculine organizations from feminine ones.
obviously you don't lie about everything to a woman. just about the parts that might trigger her outer feminist. it's not a lie in the deepest sense, you're actually being truthful to nature by not treating her as an equal, and it's this fundamental truth that her inner feminine will recognize.

I see. You are right.

yo --> *you know it's true

How would you go about learning if your partner was interested in this too? Do you just talk about it openly or would it already be known based on the power dynamics that this is something that is of interest?

Slan looks like ~THAT~?!?

>what does this even mean?
you cause disharmony and create antagonisms in the community which will lead to resentment and reprisal, you're basically a disruptive aggressor not a coordinator
>it's only needed when it's needed. an RPwoman wouldn't need to be """manipulated"""
By her father she probably would, this whole business extends from the cradle to the altar to the death chamber.
>who cares if it's "unskilled"
Natura does, Kamma does
>it's extremely easy
then why don't we find woman tamers everwhere and why does it not work when taught to most men? why do Chads get cheated on and constantly fight with their undomesticated gf's and wives? You seem to be posturing now
>obviously not, they have a mind. but in terms of function to society, the only function above this is producing children
They also cook, they also clean, they also fetch resources, they also teach basic rudimentary skills, they create textiles and fabrics and linens, they can serve as copyists and secretaries, and be taught many of the arts that men take part in. You wouldn't not use a computer program if a more qualified and skilled woman made it if the only alternative was a half-qualified and unskilled program by a male would you?
>Then your father is an idiot
Perhaps his counterpart is just more intelligent? He has like a 120 IQ, that's hardly idiot tier
>Your mother is still a women, her education and "IQ" doesn't change anything about her mind being little above that of a child.
I don't think I've met any children who would get multiple masters and run a household, but when I do I'll inform you of it.
>who cares? it's for the greater good of the relationship,
its for your good, at least that's what you believe and you are moralizing. And most women would disagree, I'm not even sure most men would agree. I really don't want a half-mute retarded cum dumpster following me around the house like a robot.
>ignores the argument because he's an exploitative manipulator
criminals don't like being called criminals, the military and bankers don't like it when they get called manipulative or exploitative
>you trust the government, but the government isn't truthful.
then its misplaced trust
>its like a mob boss
then its a bad arrangement as criminal syndicates are held together by fear and mutual violence
> this is what differentiates masculine organizations from feminine ones.
what? Masculine organizations lie and are predicated upon fear and deception and feminine orgs are what? the opposite? I don't think either of those are true.
> just about the parts that might trigger her outer feminist. it's not a lie in the deepest sense, you're actually being truthful to nature by not treating her as an equal, and it's this fundamental truth that her inner feminine will recognize
What kind of lie? Like the lie that you think she's not a fleshlite-incubator?

My question
may be for you if you are the op.

youtube.com/watch?v=iLQzaLr1enE

Honestly, the vast majority of women are. Talking about it sounds like a bad idea, never done that myself, it ruins the mystery and fun of it for her (which is what you NEED to offer her). You can generally tell from the girl's personality tho, how to be subtle about it so she's comfortable and most importantly, having fun.

t. predator

Ok thank you I wasn't sure if you were suppose to say out loud in particular what you were interested in. I have no idea how these things work. I think she would already have a sense. The important thing is to have fun and trust each other unconditionally.

Autism

> you cause disharmony and create antagonisms in the community
t. communist
> By her father she probably would
No. Are you saying women need to be "trained" to be submissive? It's in their nature, it's part of us just like everything about the natural social dynamics. A good father teaches her how to turn her nature into something enriching and harmonious for her man, and how to control the bad aspects of it.
> Natura does, Kamma does
Can you explain what you mean by this?
> why do Chads get cheated on and constantly fight with their undomesticated gf's and wives?
fighting and cheating is part of the nature of relationships. by "easy", I don't mean "taming" her, sorry. I meant that lying isn't hard, and acting like a man (which helps her act like a woman) isn't hard either. Whether it works or not depends on all sorts of other factors. Bluepill or Redpill, relationships are unstable. That's why it's far better to always have a few options, or just not do LTR at all.
> They also cook, they also clean, they also fetch resources...
Because it's free labor. Men do these things just as well, we just shouldn't need to. Nothing wrong with women working, but on a fundamental level their purpose is to have and raise children, and do simple tasks that take time and can be done at the home.
> 120 IQ
Doesn't matter. You said he's less responsible. Very few women are more responsible than the average man. They can pretend with a template for order (written by men) given by a good upbringing, but on a fundamental level they are chaotic and irresponsible.
> I don't think I've met any children who would get multiple masters and run a household, but when I do I'll inform you of it.
When I say "women are children", you should know what I mean. Don't play dumb.
> I really don't want a half-mute retarded cum dumpster following me around the house like a robot.
Nice strawman. And yes, it's for the good of everyone for the man to lead. If the woman rejects this leadership on a superficial level, it's no sin for the man to still guide her in a subtle way. That's "manipulation" but it's not bad. That's my point.
> because he's an exploitative manipulator
nope.
> then its misplaced trust
> criminal syndicates are held together by fear and mutual violence
A woman should fear you leaving her. Relationships with power dynamics always have an undercurrent of fear, whether between men or between women. The only ones that don't are true friendship, which can only happen with another man.
> Like the lie that you think she's not a fleshlite-incubator?
You could put it better, but that's one I suppose. I more meant that you need to lie if she rejects male leadership. You might also need to lie about your own emotions to comfort her, or about spinning plates. This is normal shit dude. Yeah it's lies, but it's normal.
You seem to think I don't hold the feminine in high regard. I do. It's fundamental to the universe just like the masculine.

I think the concern should be why aren't you autistic?

WRITE

YOUR

OWN

PORN

>if you were suppose to say out loud in particular what you were interested in
I mean if she comes out and says "I want a dominant, alpha man" then yeah you can respond confidently (but obviously don't be too cocky, women like that should see you by action, not words). But I have no evidence myself that this ever happens. Most women are slightly feminist these days, even though they understand in their subconscious what they really want. So just be a man, and that part of her, the more fundamental emotional part, will (ideally) make her a good woman.

>trust each other unconditionally.
NO. Even with the best woman, you should not have unconditional trust. And with most women, you shouldn't have any trust - except trust that they'll act like a woman. That's the only truth. Just like the only constant in chaos is the fact that it's chaos. Always be prepared for shit she'll throw at you, for cheating, hypergamous yearnings, etc. Have fun, enjoy the ride, but realize the likely fleeting nature of things.

In the same way i'd be nice for her to trust you, and in this sense, she should and will. But she should also trust you to be strong - and this means if she can't keep her nature in check, you'll move on or not progress with her.

This is the whole order/chaos dialectic. Order can only trust chaos to be chaos, and to make use of chaos, order must understand it's nature and bring it under the domain of order in a sense. Chaos has no real foresight or deep consciousness. It just exists, like women just exist in the moment. Order on the other hand, needs to be self-aware and environment-aware. Hence the role of the man.

Not a communist at all, just contradicting you because you're an unbalanced thinker and this is how one deals with unbalanced people by being as extreme as they are. Yes, a large number of women need compulsion to consistently be submissive because the disparity in behavior between them is not so significant that they won't be domineering, curious or aggressive without social dynamics and selection pressures that demand that. Hence, Spartan vs Chinese women have totally different dispositions and the same goes for matriarchal and strict patriarchal cultures. You just said what you think a good father does, to me a good father provides food, shelter, teaches her the basics of being a member of society and then fucks off so she can learn the rest for herself or from educators.

Nature is based upon equilibriums, if you cause a disequilibrium you will have a natural reaction. Lashing down a tree causes it to snap back or break or develop tensions, Karma is just that, a tension, and it needs to release. 10,000 years of abusing women and now they've snapped which is ugly for us to witness, you'd agree yes?

So, people who do not fight and have never cheated are not part of a relationship then? Lying could be hard if someone has a truthful nature, I don't lie to my friends I just ignore them or suffer the consequences of truthfulness. Acting like a man means whatever you want it to mean, there are people on Veeky Forums who think it means ruining your endocrine system and sipping carcinogens at your sales job. Other people think it means being prolific in mathematics, still others think it means making a large sum of money and others on lookism think its just looking manly regardless of wealth or strength. Not all relationships are unstable all the time, and in fact if they were most of the time they would not self-propagate as they would dissipate their natural order too quickly. Are you saying that the Law, which is a relation between man and ideas, should be unstable? You don't think there are immutable laws that cannot change? You just told me that Submission is a law for women.

How does free labor disqualify them from having more functions than bredding, women do the things men do as well and there's no good reason in my mind that they should have to stop. Something can't be fundamental to someone's existence and not demonstrably harm them if they deviate from it, nor should it be so easy for them to do so.

Yes relative to my mother he is irresponsible, but far more so than the average human that withstanding. And when you say women are children, I think you're relying on a colloquial folk psychology wisdom that I don't hold to. I know what you meant I'm deconstructing and rejecting it.

Manipulation in a subtle way can still be bad. You proceed from here to say a series of things that I think are just your opinion but you haven't thought about deeply. Something being normal or efficacious doesn't make it good or sustainable.

> being romantic instead of creepy is predatory
kek

A Brother's Price by Wen Spencer.

>If the woman rejects this leadership on a superficial level, it's no sin for the man to still guide her in a subtle way. That's "manipulation" but it's not bad. That's my point.

>you're an unbalanced thinker
strong words buddy
> they won't be domineering, curious or aggressive without social dynamics and selection pressures that demand that.
women have never been these things or can be (barring exceptions). are you assuming Spartan or Chinese women were?
> matriarchal
outliers that haven't amounted to anything. so now you're saying that women's nature depends on the culture?
> teaches her the basics of being a member of society
That's exactly what I said though.
> 10,000 years of abusing
Yeah in some places for sure. But what I'm arguing for isn't abuse, it's exactly what women and women want. Empirically, even feminists want to be led by men in a relationship, even with their upbringings. So there's a backlash, but it makes them unhappy on a deep level to deviate from their natures. All you do by not being totally upfront by rejecting their feminist structure, is talk directly to their subconscious nature, which they in fact, enjoy. I might be wrong about the exact psychology of this, but the results are clear - making sure a girl has fun, you'll go further by "manipulating" sometimes when needed. It's like the longer-term version of dealing with LMR, sometimes you just need to say the right thing. And it's not like she's going to care if she's having a good time. At least that's what I've found - sometimes you gotta lie to keep the "romance"
> Lying could be hard if someone has a truthful nature
Again, I only said lying is needed when dealing with modern, feminist women. It's not something we're evolved for, but it's a necessary thing if you want to enjoy yourself. If you just want a single, LTR with a "strong" women, enjoy it I guess. But it's far better while your value is high, to enjoy time with women before they hit the wall too hard.
> . Acting like a man means whatever you want it to mean,
I just meant it means being masculine. Yeah it varies in aspects. With respect to women it's always the same - leading her. There's no culture in which women have been equals in relationships with men, because they quite literally can't.
> You don't think there are immutable laws that cannot change? You just told me that Submission is a law for women.
Submission is just as part of a woman as her chaotic emotional nature, or her sexual strategy. It's just part of the biological programming and psyche. Not everything is relative.
> women do the things men do as well
kek
> I'm deconstructing and rejecting it.
You're just claiming to do so.
> Something being normal or efficacious doesn't make it good or sustainable.
Well, it's not harmful to you or her. If women actually submitted and practiced proper monogamy men wouldn't need casual sex and alternative strategies like """manipulation""". Western culture is already not sustainable, there's nothing wrong with just enjoying the ride. And at some point you can get married and have kids and all that, men don't get used up like women do. So you tell me, what's "bad"?

Saying things out loud is the worst thing you can do I am convinced. It seems so obvious now.

I have no response

I am perfectly comfortable dominating women. Hell i scared my father at 14, i was charged with domestic assault because my father thought i was threatening him

Lmao dad i was threatening to kill myself, cutter at 13, i had zips up and down the arm, bleeding, a form of freedom

Scars all over my body years later, arms legs stomach, im not afraid of you, im not afraid of myself (i love pain)

Her at 19, user why do you like to choke me when you fuck me, shut the fuck up.

She never asked questions then, she liked it from then on

Women were meant to be dominated. Domination is about not being afraid yourself; once you can do that you are free

Everyone is insecure. Some of us are just able to overcome our insecurity through insanity

Does the male always have to initiate in relationships? I don't understand male female relationships.

From the way you write this out you sound like you still have some brooding insecurities tbqh.

What makes you think i think im not insecure? I know i am, i embrace it

yeah, what's the issue? if you do it blatantly then it's creepy and boring, literally won't get you anywhere.

Honestly it's tumblrinas who are the most liable to enjoy being "lied" to because they can't enjoy a relationship with a real man anyway else. Self-aware and enlightened women don't need this. To be honest, I actually enjoy the challenge, or maybe where I live is full of hipster girls with daddy issues. But after a month or two you really sober up to how shitty these girls are and get higher standards. So if you're trying to moralize here, just realize that the only reason men "manipulate" women ever is because it works. Immoral? maybe. Needed if you want a fun sex life.

I don't think this shit works if you want to train a woman to be a good wife. As the other guy said, THAT starts with her father. I guess my advice is really more oriented towards short-term relationships and building attraction. But a lot of it is definitely still true for LTRs, you just hopefully choose a good woman so you don't need to do this as much.

It becomes obvious if you've been in a few relationships. Even smart, educated women get pissed if you put the relationship in rational, verbal terms. It's about the feels, man. The tingles, the feels.
It's like that with some male relationships too, you just get along and don't need to verbalize it. So all humans seem wired for this type of nonverbal understanding. However, women really dig the "unscripted romance". maybe it's partly media, but it's also definitely due to their deeply emotional, yielding nature - you provide the structure, they fit into it comfortably. But it can't seem planned, the man has to BE the structure, not create it.

Men are stronger with symbols, logic, and by extension written and rational language. Women just simply don't deal well with communication along these lines, at least in regards to relationships.

Sort your problems out man. You sound angry and incoherent. being insecure won't help you attract women.

Initiate the relationship itself? No, sometimes (but rarely) women do. Take the lead in decisions within the relationship? Absolutely.

Women don't really need to search for men so they don't. To optimize your chances, you do need to initiate relationships/hookups.

>being angry and incoherent wont attract women

lol

Friend i havent had to come on to women since i was 13, she was 17 i was 13, ever since then its been semi cougars reaching down for a dong, i am insecure about some things but women feel conflicted and want to fuck me no matter what

I didn't say that. I said being insecure (outwardly) won't help. I guess if you fake it or cover it up then it's cool and the brooding and anger definitely attracts a lot of women.

The issue with insecurity is that you'll hurt yourself.

Do you read before you type? I admitted to cutting myself

Besides everyone is insecure. Some of us are just honest

Yeah I know. I mean you'll continue to hurt yourself, on a mental and emotional level. Just concerned for you is all.

> just honest
Sure, but some of us try to limit it's effects.

Is this song relevant? Bob Dylan received a Nobel Prize so I think song lyrics are literature.
youtube.com/watch?v=iJM0rbUbzyk

Read the Decameron by Boccaccio. Lot's of powersluts scattered throughout (mostly by trickery though.)

>Get over
I HAVE BEEN JUST WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO TELL TO "GET OVER"
OH YOU THINK WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT THAT, THANKS FOR THE TIP YOU STUPID NIGGER.

Could you listen to this song
and tell me if it is what you are looking for?

The fuck?

Sorry I thought you like it. I thought it was relevant I was wrong I guess. Please excuse me.

Is this some next-level trolling or a legitimate, mysterious post? I can't understand the lyrics, how are they relevant?

Attached: 1519256908244.jpg (450x355, 11K)

Ignore the title. It is about S&M. It is a love song about intimacy and connecting with another person at a certain level of awareness.

Are the lyrics written out somewhere?

I shouldn't have posted that sorry it is my interpretation I don't know if that is what the artist meant.

I like how Deleuze would read a philosopher and interpret it differently then was intended I think this is a correct method. To mind I was thinking of the relinquishing of control through a bond formed of trust which results in being able to attain a level of awareness and recognition. I think this is what the interplay between dominating and submitting is about. I will have to think about it more as I don't know anything about it.

Naomi by Tanizaki

Though it might be a bit different from what you're expecting