Mfw 1984 is literally cuck-porn

She was prego? I always just read it as fat.

How the fuck is that cuckholding? Read a fucking dictionary

>How the fuck is that cuckholding? Read a fucking dictionary
Thanks. Finally a voice of reason pops up! I think everyone should watch this video before they keep mis-using that word:
youtube.com/watch?v=SE6jy78tV78

Same situation here only i dropped out of college.
I*ts interesting that I havent heard or seen this typew of thinking about issues from anyone else till now.
It seems such a simple deduction to make and yet I have not seen it before after thinking about it myself.
I wonder if us drop outs who non the less enjoy knowledge have a certain somewhat different perspective on issues than actual academics or simpletons that dont value knoweldge.

Its still absolutly shit taste.

Hell me getting 2k elo in some games is more impressive

Cuck's meaning is somewhat more general within internet xculture circles.
Your respect of centralized authority is at odds with the hetrogenous nature of internet culture and your comment's only value is in showing exactly that.

>I wonder if us drop outs who non the less enjoy knowledge have a certain somewhat different perspective on issues than actual academics or simpletons that dont value knoweldge.
This idea is the subtle difference between KNOWING a THING, and UNDERSTANDING PROCESSES.

The more things you know, the more smart you can feel, but those who understand just a few processes, often "dumb rednecks" understand just enough processes to get through life. Though they may often get by on INTUITION which is knowing on an automatic level without any solid information or understanding. The red pill is that sexism and racism make sense, because they are good heuristics for understanding people. Obviously exceptions apply and Not All [X] Are Like That.

The plague of KNOWING without UNDERSTANDING is the problem of liberal golf-clap humor where they can take some facts and present them in just such a way as to make their opinion look like it makes sense, and they usually do so in a very professional manner, but they have to be well prepared to do this, because they don't UNDERSTAND anything. They only KNOW things and look for information that validates their opinions, so they can use that to build their case. This is why there are far more conservative talk shows with people off the cuff, and it's also why Maddox ended up losing his fanbase on his podcast. His opinions were never meant to be held to scrutiny, and he never realized this. I've looked hard for literal socialist podcasts, and the only ones that exist are super-gussied presentations or interviews of book authors. They can't do casual shit, because their opinions come from a relatively shallow worldview that would quickly run into inconsistencies if left to run on too long.

It represents rebellion in a state where sexuality is looked down upon and discouraged.

His wife wouldn't have sex with him except for when it came to trying for a child, and that was a horrendous experience. He had been reduced to having sex with old prole prostitutes for gratification, which echoes Orwell's understanding of sexual exploitation by the colonial class with native women in the British empire. And on top of this he is constantly confronted with the Junior anti-sex league, which celebrates and parades chastity in front of him on a daily basis.

Julia wouldn't even look twice at Winston in a normal society. They are two very different people, and unlikely lovers, bound together through their silent rebellions.

Ok, I have no idea what you are trying to say.
Perhaps aother difference between academics and non academics is that the former know how to explainthemselves in writing.

Alright. The difference between KNOWING and UNDERSTAND can be like this:

What is 5432 * 4321 = ?
a) 5433 b) 424 c) 231 d) 2341672

Now KNOWING is if you see the answer key tells you it's d), but UNDERSTANDING is the ability to write the problem down and work it out, where INTUITION tells you that the last answer "feels right" because the other numbers seem too small.

Academics spend so much like learning facts (which can be described as the smallest most petty units of information). And be learning fact after fact after fact, they INTUITIVELY expect that learning will lead to them being SMARTER but smartness doesn't really exist. People are either skilled in a specific area, or skilled in another specific area. You can't really objectively measure these things.

What I'm trying to say is you are correct. Academics spend so much time being educated that their egos over inflate around people who didn't receive an education. This is usually regardless of what they were educated in, or how prestigious the place where they were educated.

This is also the problem of nerds. Nerds are people who KNOW alot about how computers work, and if they write code they can even build some WISDOM on how to develop programs and how programs are often developed. But they usually don't have developed people skills, and since they KNOW so many things normies don't KNOW, they think of normies as inferior, which is not necessarily untrue, but it's a limiting world view if left at that.

>tfw just finished this

I'm so sad now

You just finished reading 1984? Why are you sad?

You guys could start a new lit theory you know.

It was just a sad and depressing book. And yes.

Don't feel sad. You are now more worldly person who understands the world far better.
Now you just need to focus on improving your station in life, and ensuring you have profitable job prospects.

That's how I feel, amazing read though. I'm reading the cave and the light by Herman now as an intro to some philosophy.

Meant for

This has absolutely nothing to do with cuckolding you redpilled faggot

>redpilled
>faggot
pick one

>actually being this delusional
you crack me up, please reply to this post

The left is incapable of actual arguments. They are only capable of laughing arrogantly with indignation, they frequently say "wow...just wow" or "really?....REALLY?" in response to a challenging argument. This video explains why "really" is weak.
youtube.com/watch?v=WUJFuRoWyWc

They only excel at asking shallow "gotcha" questions.

>you crack me up
Glad to hear it.

>please reply to this post
No problem.

Consider that you're not making any arguments to be refuted. Your argument is: "I'm redpilled so I'm not a faggot!" Well, I don't agree. The fact that you get so up in arms about someone insulting your precious redpill proves to me that you are indeed an easily offended faggot. I hope that's enough of an actual argument for you, friend.

>Your argument is: "I'm redpilled so I'm not a faggot!"
Your original argument is that a woman who has sex with many men and a man who admires a woman for having sex with many men other than himself is not technically a cuckhold.
The primary characteristic of a cuck is that he enjoys his chosen woman fucking other men, so yes, this is essentially cucking.
>lol u mad
You're making an emotional statement. This is natural because humans are emotional beings. Strict logic seems weird and those who practice will probably frighten you so you will call them "spergs" "nerds" or "autists" and this is not unfounded because nerds and the autistic tend to have very poor social skills and very low social competency, but in the arena of strict logic, we excel!

there are many cucks in famous literature. especially us literature with authors like faulkner, hemmingway, ken kesey.

just shows the whole thing is run by jews.

>there are many cucks in famous literature. especially us literature with authors like faulkner, hemmingway, ken kesey.
I'm not sure this is a jewish problem necessarily.
The skill of writing good compelling literature can be somewhat isolating and it takes time to develop the skills of writing.
Once you learn those skills, you know things other people don't know, and you might fancy yourself smarter then those people because you have the skill of writing books, and they don't, so you might deny basic normie wisdom, like "don't let other men fuck your woman" and since they already know they are skilled at the difficult task of writing good books that normies often agree are quite good, they can easily become emboldened with an arrogance that blinds them.

>Cuck's meaning is somewhat more general within internet xculture circles
In a sexual context i.e. in the above paragraph it has a very specific meaning. The paragraph does not reflect cuckholding in any way shape or form

Do you know how I can tell that you're all the same guy? Because you're constantly trying to attack the invincible red-pilled narrative, and every time you're hit with a question you can't answer or a response you weren't expecting, you retreat from the specific exchange and try your hand at another approach, but all of your approaches are doomed to fail.

You are relying on a strict dictionary definition of cuckholding, but like any word it has a more general meaning that strays from the literal cut and dry definition. Like this one:

Cuckhold:
(of a man) make (another man) a cuckold by having a sexual relationship with his wife.

Now if you are NOT technically married then you are NOT technically a cuck by this definition if you following the letter rather then the law, and pedantically treat unmarried sexual-relationship couples as significantly different from married sexual-relationship couples within the context.

A cuckold is, by definition, someone who raises someone else's kids without knowledge or someone who, as a fetish, is complicit in his significant other partaking in sexual "infidelity" and gets off on this. He derives pleasure from being humiliated. Obviously Winston does not fit in the first category, you're referring to the second category. It's true that Winston enjoys his partner's sexual infidelity, but he's not complicit in it. He admires the fact that she undermines the party. She's an escape for him, a proof that a different world still exists. It's never about humiliation.
Only the first post is mine, friend.

>It's never about humiliation.
He might not consciously take joy in the humiliation, but if you read the book, you see that he's constantly talking about how inferior he feels compared to this woman. Humiliation IS an important aspect.

Cucking very generally means letting someone else fuck your woman. You can point to a very specific stone-set definition, but that words very often change their meaning so this just shows that you're intellectually lazy, with a very pedantic attention to unimportant details that leads to intellectual conceit.

colloquially cuck is just a white dude who uses his political will to work against his own interests.

>colloquially cuck is just a white dude who uses his political will to work against his own interests.
Indeed. This is an even more broad meaning that strays from the dictionary definition.

Whenever a black dude who uses his political will to work against his own interests he is called an "Uncle Tom". Most people don't literally think he is the Uncle Tom character from the fictional novel, but they like to draw that parallel when it suits them.

>Do you know how I can tell that you're all the same guy?
This is why you don't swallow the redpill

>Now if you are NOT technically married then you are NOT technically a cuck by this definition
Yeah exactly. Same as if you don't raise any kids or lend your girlfriend out to other guys. In this context, a SEXUAL CONTEXT, it doesn't fit the definition

>He derives pleasure from being humiliated
Is it humiliation or the fact that he likes how slutty and dirty i.e. against the morals of the state (the whole fucking theme of the book) that he enjoys this relationship? I swear /pol/ finds black cock around every corner.

Also why are you taking credit for MY posts?
see:

The fact that he feels inferior to Julia doesn't mean he gets off on humiliation. As for me being intellectually lazy, well, I'd argue that you are the intellectually lazy one if all you can do is shape and bend definitions to take on the meaning you want them to have.
For an actual cuck, it'd be both.
Excuse you

>Is it humiliation or the fact that he likes how slutty and dirty
Both. As the saying goes "cucks love sluts"

>I swear /pol/ finds black cock around every corner.
This is a fair criticism. Most normies hate sjw's and /pol/ the same amount, and while /pol/ hates to admit that it has anything in common with sjw's they do.

sjw's and /pol/ are both essentially critics.
sjw's complain about mainstream media being subtly sexist and in subconscious levels that are accidental men seem to write with sexist themes and treat women in sexist ways that they don't understand.

The /pol/lack does not directly contradict this argument, but asserts that this "unconscious sexism" is simply a good understanding other the opposite sex.

/pol/lacks tend to have solutions to their problems. Some of these solutions are radical but most of them are proven.

sjw's only complain, and they are not a unified group so some sjw's will complain and lash at other groups of sjw's.
A clear example of this is how mainstream feminists despise Gender-Critical feminists.

>I'd argue that you are the intellectually lazy one if all you can do is shape and bend definitions to take on the meaning you want them to have.
It's not the arbitrary meaning I CHOSE to give it. It's the meaning that's already used. Do I need to cite examples of other people using it these specific ways? Would that convince you? Any argument about "true definitions" is masturbation because language is constantly evolving.

Being a cuck is genuinely one of the last radical lifestyle options available to my demographic

And what demographic is that?

>It's not the arbitrary meaning I CHOSE to give it. It's the meaning that's already used.
You're referring to cuckolding as a fetish. Cuckolding is a generally well researched phenomenon with certain characteristics. You're using part of the definition that's currently in use while willfully ignoring many important characteristics of this fetish that Winston does not exhibit i.e. you're saying that one thing is another because they share a few characteristics.