Are you guys trying to turn me into a cuck?

Masculine anxiety has been a crucial element of western literature at least since the creation mythos. When a writer tells a story involving men and women that also seeks to uncover some aspect of l'humaine condition, this subject will be approached in some way, in some cases more explicitly than others. Humans are social and sexual creatures, and also existential creatures. Think of Adam and Eve. They live without shame or sin in the Garden of Eden until Eve partakes of the fruit. This is her sin, but Adam sins before he ever eats. His sin is his concern with Eve's opinion of him instead of God's. His fear is that Eve should die alone, leaving him alone; that Eve should suffer alone, leaving him to suffer alone as well; that Eve should sin alone, leaving him to live virtuous, but again, alone. And so he bites as well. Like Eve, Adam is relegated to a world of suffering, death, sin, mayhem, torture, labour (of one of two kinds), fear, darkness, despair, anxiety, and terror, but this is a good thing: God would not allow it otherwise. In this instance of sin, Adam becomes human, capable of genuine worship, genius works of art, true love, feats of strength and unconquerable will. His life is imbued with meaning. But his sin also leaves him self-conscious.

Think of stories about men devoid of the presence of women. Moby Dick, for example. This is a story of animalistic man. Queequeg is not self-conscious. Ahab is not self-conscious. Ishmael is not self-conscious. Nor is Starbuck, Stubbs, nor Pip, nor Daggoo, nor any other member of the crew. It's positively Nietzschean in its rendition of man. Also think about Blood Meridian, a bit darker than Melville's masterpiece, but in many ways the same story. The men are not concerned at all with their atrocities, they are not even questioned, until in Chapter 18, Sarah Borginnis arrives. She is not sexualized, not even attractive, yet, the only named woman in the story is the only figure who makes these characters feel any sense of shame or guilt.

When you read cuckoldry in so many of the great stories of western literature, from the Illiad to Ulysses, what you are reading is the feminine reaffirming masculine subjectivity. Without at least a hint of this interplay, some small anxiety at the very least, man cannot truly be man.

In some sense, the neofascistic fascination with cuckoldry is a rejection of human nature and human freedom in favour of those most animalistic traits. Those (men) predisposed to the slavishness of this rigidly and profoundly hierarchical social structure seek a way to strip themselves of their anxiety. When man is free from his self-consciousness and anxiety, he frees himself from woman and from free will. Instead, meaning must be found within the structure that perpetuates the hierarchy, usually within the individual or the cabal at the very top of the ladder, but also in the goals of those faux-übermenschen.

Sheeet man, what have you been reading? That's bretty good

...

>Sharpening his pen for Ulysses

kek'd hard

are there any Literature that are completely unrelated to cuckoldry?

Learn proper English.

not a Literature i've ever heard of

> Thinking language actually exists

There! Are! No! Rules!

Lately? Don DeLillo, Hume, and Gerard Manley Hopkins, but I don't think any of those authors/philosophers/poets are particularly concerned with what I was talking about in

nice

The message of all of these books is not to be a cuck. So quite the opposite.

Book of the New Sun. Wait, fuck. Severian cucks his dead grandad.

Yes there are rules you illiterate sea-cucumber. Descriptivism doesn't mean write like a fucking spastic, it means that so long as language is mutually-intelligible, it's language -- and the same language at that. Language is also heavily contextual. There is formal academic English, AAVE, Scots, the Queen's English, my own Canuckistani dialect, medical jargon, Jamaican patois, RP, various pidgins, Saxe-Ænglisch. All of these are English, but none of them are meant to be used in the same context. Shit, some of them aren't even mutually intelligible.

This user's meaning was more or less clear, but on a forum specifically set aside for the discussion of literature, we can afford to be snobs about formal grammar. His schizophrenic capitalization and lack of coherent tense makes his post a pain to read. He deserves the flagellation. I've seen better communication from a gibbon.

But hey, at least he's asking a question. It's not a particularly insightful question, but he's trying to learn. I can't say the same for you.

>His schizophrenic capitalization and lack of coherent tense makes his post a pain to read.
it's called stream of consciousness you pleb

i don't remember any cucking in storm of steel

Woolf is stream-of-consciousness. The word you're looking for is illiteracy.

you just don't GET it kid

See the relevant section of >In some sense, the neofascistic fascination with cuckoldry is a rejection of human nature and human freedom in favour of those most animalistic traits. Those (men) predisposed to the slavishness of this rigidly and profoundly hierarchical social structure seek a way to strip themselves of their anxiety. When man is free from his self-consciousness and anxiety, he frees himself from woman and from free will. Instead, meaning must be found within the structure that perpetuates the hierarchy, usually within the individual or the cabal at the very top of the ladder, but also in the goals of those faux-übermenschen.

I really like it when I see somebody put legitimate effort into a post on Veeky Forums
Good job

No, I get it, I just don't care. Pretending to be retarded is still being retarded.

>he didn't GET it
all i did was replace "books" with "Literature" because the name of this board is Literature and not books

was that so hard

Awwwww. You're not pretending. Now I feel bad.

there's nothing retarded about using language in new and creative ways

I didnt get that out of the sun also rises. But then again the wors cuck has become a meme so i might not really know what youre talking about. Never read anna karenina tho

If there is, it misses an essential part of the human condition.

excellent meme thread to be honest

Not bad. What about women? Most classical renditions of Eve give us a female narcissus who prefers her own image to Adam. Is her life imbued with meaning?

I deeply recommend you this novel

Authors are often fags. Wouldn't surprise me if there's also a bunch of cucks.

great thread desu

I'm just gonna go ahead and say that "being cucked" is something like being powerless or impotent. Like when you come up against an insurmountable limit, you're being cucked. So like, everything that is about an individual is about these limits, because every individual is limited. It doesn't have to make you feel helpless necessarily, literature is (in one sense) just about discovering the limits that every individual will inevitably face.

If you don't want to read cuck stuff, do what the far right has always done: don't read anything that isn't either totally literal in its aesthetics or is completely ideologically driven.

is it better to have loved and been cucked than to have never loved at all?

Wow, a thoughtful post on Veeky Forums. Been weeks since I've seen one desu.

Perhaps it's because last semester I focused quite heavily on him, but Milton's Paradise Lost presents us with an inextricably human Eve. Take this passage from Book VIII:

Under his forming hands a creature grew,
Manlike, but different sex, so lovely fair,
That what seemed fair in all the world, seemed now
Mean, or in her summed up, in her contained
And in her looks, which from that time infused
Sweetness into my heart, unfelt before,
And into all things from her air inspired
The spirit of love and amorous delight.
She disappeared, and left me dark.

(470-478; please continue reading past 484)*

The passage is too long for me to quote in its entirety, so I settled for a few representative lines. Eve is more beautiful than Adam, and recognizes her own beauty. She requires divine command to bring her to her husband. This would seem to affirm your idea of a "female narcissus." However, when we read the next Canto, dealing entirely with the Fall, Eve, in her newly fallen state, is concerned with her relationship to Adam more than she is about her impending death.

Now, one distinction between female subjectivity and male subjectivity that we can draw is that Adam is deeply self-conscious prior to his sin (". . . and left me dark.) while Eve does not experience her moment of self-consciousness until after the Fall. Even still, Milton was writing in the birth-throes of the Enlightenment, and he was caught between gender-radical egalitarianist groups such as the Levellers and Quakers, while gender-radical hyper-hierarchism was the dominant force. What I mean to say here is that Milton is weird when it comes to gender.

Now let's read a less obvious but more-representative-of-the-main-vein-of-Western-literature instance of the myth of the Fall of Man -- Macbeth. Shakespeare's depiction of Lady Macbeth as Eve has her less concerned with her own appearance and wellbeing than with an almost Homeric idealization of historical remembrance. Lady Macbeth places extreme priority on her husband's legacy and position -- while it's true that she, as a woman, does gain some power from her advanced position (historically speaking, more than Shakespeare gives her credit for), it's not nearly enough to justify itself as the sole motivator for her actions throughout the play. There's a reason why all my professors through my undergrad described Macbeth and his wife as having the only good marriage in all of Shakespeare's works.

(1/2)

(2/2)
However, these are instances of female subjectivity represented through the lens of a masculine author. While we can cast all sorts of aspersions on the feminist project (especially here), I don't think that it's unreasonable to expect that male writers will take a different view of woman than will, well, women. Unfortunately for the answer to this question then, women have only been writing for the last 250 years (with some obvious exceptions, though I don't think that Hymn to Athena gives us much to work with here), and women have only been writing in quantity comparable to men for the last 100 years or less. Our pool of literature from feminine sources is thus less full than our pool of literature from the masculine.

Now, for almost its entire history, women's literature (by which I mean literature written by women for both men and women) has been closely tied to the feminist project, and a major aspect of the feminist literary program is to draw hard distinctions between the experiences of men and those of women. Women must then be represented as women. They cannot be represented as human, or as universalized in any way. This is a sad by-product of feminist literature -- the particularization of women -- but sadder for us is that it obscures the answer to the question of Eve's existence.

However, a few notable pieces of writing have swum against the current of normative feminist discourse (mainly thanks to intersectionality and the third-wave): I'd list Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's Americanah, Zadie Smith's White Teeth, and Beloved by Toni Morrison as examples of texts primarily from a female perspective (although they all take a male perspective at some point or another) which, from that perspective, deal with the same sort of anxiety dealt with by Leopold Bloom, Menelaus, or Adam (or at least something quite like it). I also don't think it's a coincidence that all of the authors I've listed here are *black* women. I don't think that white women in Europe or America have yet reached the stage where they can freely attach themselves to l'humaine condition in their writing, at least without some serious reaction (though Plath and O'Connor come very close).

So, to answer the question "Is [Eve's] life imbued with meaning?"

When written by men: probably not, although it varies.

When written by women: usually not, unless they can free themselves of the constraints of feminist discourse.

*Taken from the Kerrigan, Rumrich, Fallon edition of the poem.

Truly cuckoldry is the thinking man's fetish/revulsion.

I don't know if you're a regular, but if you aren't will you please stay with us here, or at least post more? You improve Veeky Forums :)

I'm a semi-regular. I never make my own top-level posts and only contribute when I feel I have something unique to add to the conversation. Thanks though.

i'm fucking dead

Christian theology is grounded in a cuckolding.

Hemingway

Achilles also gets cucked by Agamemnon

Garbage post. Kill yourself pseud, you'll always be a pleb.

He declared that he never fucked her though, even though it's the natural thing for mankind, men and women joined.

Shut the fuck up you useless piece of trash. People like you make me sick. Go swallow your dad's cum you fucking pathetic faggot.

do you mean instinct?

>TFW someone actually makes a good Veeky Forums post and I'm too dumb to understand it

So are you saying the interest in being cucked is a natural result of how men today are rejecting the historical societal structure? The bit at the end made it sound like the true man simply accepts the burden of his reality, and seeks to deal with it anyway?

Meaning the cuck tries to escape the reality by having another man take it on for him, because the woman would no longer have to affirm his subjective masculinity?
To be man is to be stoic?

>Authors are often fags
so, that's why, for the love of God, i can't seem to make myself write anything.
time to find good dick, i guess.
>oh but >KEK
well, time to find a good dick, and then have that penetrate some other guy's ass. i hope that makes me a great writer.

nothing beats cucking someone.

>>KEK
i wrote c.uck, not k.ek.

>liberal sjw mods don't want to allow such words to be posted here now.
fascism, anyone?

You'd be fun at parties.

Jerk-off.

>i dont understand it
>its good

this is how people become cucks, they rotelearn things given accolades by jewish tastemakers who want to wipe out whites

>You must understand something in able to appreciate it

Lol I hope you don't seriously beeleive that.

Regardless, I wasn't saying I agree with him, I simply wanted to see what he meant, and from there conclude if I agreed or not. I have not exactly spent my time contemplating the perspective of cucks, and therefore have yet to have any opinion

Don't fucking assume so much

this is spot on. driving force of man is to procreate and the fear of his validity of procreation being stifled by another who would do so in his place. that would explain a lot of the breakdown of this generation, what with birth control becoming more and more prevalent, the aspect of procreation is less of a necessity in the social mind, giving rise to a type of male less intent on matrimonial interests, and more on petty hobbies that never require the type of striving invention that brings sustenance to a family. i really like your analysis of moby dick, and really never noticed the lack of women in the book, (aside from the chowder lady in the beginning).

there's really nothing left to be said about the topic, you've addressed it so well. it's a shame you didn't leave a bit for discussion.

is this a seed question to give you an excuse to post this: ?

You didn't know Bloom was getting cucked until the very end?

must have been quite a twist

No one is gonna respond to this? Fine take it from a /pol/ack:

>In some sense, the neofascistic fascination with cuckoldry is a rejection of human nature and human freedom in favour of those most animalistic traits. Those (men) predisposed to the slavishness of this rigidly and profoundly hierarchical social structure seek a way to strip themselves of their anxiety. When man is free from his self-consciousness and anxiety, he frees himself from woman and from free will. Instead, meaning must be found within the structure that perpetuates the hierarchy, usually within the individual or the cabal at the very top of the ladder, but also in the goals of those faux-übermenschen.

>human freedom
>free will

The problem with this argument is these things don't exist. We are machines. We are our brains and our brains are complex systems that are structurally similar to the animals we see around us. Just because we evolved some extra neural networking doesn't mean we're any different. We are animals. Yet you use the term animalistic like it's a bad thing.

Neofascism embraces the natural world, the natural order of things. Things that work in harmony with and work like the natural world do work better. It's the same reason why the design of the needle tip is based off the mouth of the mosquito. It's why our bloated consumerist society creates so much mental illness. It's why all the fad diets come and go but paleo works for everyone who uses it.

Your ideology is a fad diet.

Get over it.

is you being sick something that shakes the world? is supposed to affect me from all the way over there? I'd recommend a healthy dose of being the pathetic faggot you project for 500.

>post-cuck era refutations
get over yourself, aftermath man. you're resting on a chair made of the shackles cast off by men restricted by feminimity.
>we are machines
>we are animals

well, which are we, user?

>well, which are we, user?

I was using those terms to illustrate a point. Ultimately there is no distinction between animals and machines. There is no magical difference between the logical and natural processes that make an animal work and the logical processes that make a machine work.

>free will doesn't exist
>we are animals and machines and there is no difference between animals and machines
wow you're quite possibly both autistic and stupid.

then why do we have a word for either instead of just one word for both of them? why is there a distinction in our language, (at least in terms of specificity, not necessarily the definitions themselves) between animals and machines, if there is no ultimate difference? besides, on what grounds are logic and nature even remotely the same? are all things that are natural by definition logical?

Brilliant discussion, top tier rhetoric like this is what keeps me coming back to Veeky Forums time and again.

>what is an analogy

I did not know you could functionally operate on so little brain power. Tell me, what is it like?

>top tier rhetoric
you mean like we're both animals and machines and there's no difference between animals and machines?
you have this gigantic fucking blind spot of stupidity that you're unwilling to address with yourself and to engage with you on the basis that you're not a total moron would be a disservice to anybody with a handful of brain cells.
oh so it's an analogy now. lmao you're a classic retard.

>free will doesn't exist

Yea it doesn't. Your mind makes your decisions before "you" become conscious of them. There is no "you". The "conscious mind" and the subconscious are one in the same. This has been hinted at (some say proven) with developments in neuroscience and the data keeps pouring out every day.

>we are animals and machines and there is no difference between animals and machines

The only difference between animals and machines is once a machine becomes complex enough it can be considered an animal. Viruses appear to be living yet they aren't classified under the animal kingdom because they're too "simplistic" in their structure. The distinction exists only in complexity.

>why do we have a word for either instead of just one word for both of them? why is there a distinction in our language, (at least in terms of specificity, not necessarily the definitions themselves) between animals and machines, if there is no ultimate difference?

Okay David Foster Wallace fan boy, what if I told you our language developed in a time period where the extent of what a machine could do was keeping wooden carts rolling?

>besides, on what grounds are logic and nature even remotely the same? are all things that are natural by definition logical?

I'm using the term logic a little too loosely. A computer (a machine) is at it's core little bits of electricity traveling around and interacting in a really complex way to make the text on your screen. The human brain (and the "animal" brain) is at it's core a series of small electrical pulses interacting in a really complex way to make your fingers move the way they're about to when you type your response.

Good post, however I disagree about the last paragraph, the goal of fascism and national socialism isn't to blindly worship the hierarchy and the system for its own sake, or to supplement some lost "free-will", the goal is to imbue a healthy respect for the natural order (which is hierarchical), and to use said hierarchy and order to build and maintain prosperous human societies, which should be, in part, free from the anxieties you mentioned.

The neofascistic ideologies' fixation with cuckoldry is a natural human response to the unwanted possibility of being not only bereft of progeny, but to the even more unwanted possibility of rearing others' yourself. The disdain that such people feel for cuckoldry is very easy to understand because it is in defiance with the biological imperative to reproduce, and it goes against the imposed social order of such societies. And although, these ideologies respect and revere the natural, they follow it as scripture, they weren't hippies after all, this would explain the disdain for the animalistic side that humans posses, and its efforts to suppress it by discipline, training and by counter-balancing the need to indulge in base activities against proper actions which should benefit society rather than one's self.

they don't follow it as scripture.

>The first time I came here I said I wanted to read the great Russian novelists. I was told, "Read Anna Karenina. It's the finest Russian novel there is." I read it. It's about a guy who gets cucked.
I was going to say read the brothers karamazov but come to think of it there's actually a logt of cucking in it too.

i guess women and unrequited love are just pretty ubiquitous motives for men, and this comes out in their most personally crafted and powerful artistic expression.

his post had nothing to do with ideology

Your post is like a reacting to the discussion of the divine by saying hurr durr, God doesn't exist

Get over yourself.

>and to use said hierarchy and order to build and maintain prosperous human societies, which should be, in part, free from the anxieties you mentioned.

I would say that no hierarchy is free from stress

>his post had nothing to do with ideology

he commented on neofascism. Why are you surprised a neofascist commented back? I get it's a great post and everything but you can't misrepresent people and expect them to take it up the ass.

By the sound of it you've been taking it up the ass for a long time. Wake up white man.

>your mind isn't you
lmao.
>simple lifeforms are machines
please stop embarrassing yourself.

lol did a black guy fuck your girlfriend or smash your face in?

I didn't imply that it was, it was free from stress of the "lower" kind, such as is my wife getting railed by the milkman, and more concerned with stress of the "higher" kind, such as is my work going to better my country etc. I mean, in theory at least.

You think this qualifies as a smart post? It's just your average pseud babble enriched by a plethora of loanwords.

weak should suffer amiright eh?

No meme answer: cheating is a top source of drama, of course it's featured in a lot of stories.

>your mind isn't you

That's not even what I'm saying.

lol did a white guy fuck your girlfriend or smash your face in?

>weak should suffer amiright eh?

a simplistic view of the natural world and order of things might lead you to conclude this. but a more natural environment for humans means one closer to our evolutionary roots, which means a more tribal environment. i think you'll find compassion comes much more naturally when you can identify with the sufferer. We have people in a globalized world yet we expect them to be compassionate to those their primal brain initially identifies as a member of the enemy tribe.

>going to work and serving my country is more important than my wife getting railed by the milkman
spoken like a true nationalist
>anything i'm too stupid to get is pseud babble

but i'm not the one chain-posting pics about how whites are bad? lmao which one was it buddy?

>Your mind makes your decisions before "you" become conscious of them. There is no "you".
that is what you're saying.

My obsession with the negro stems from my fascination about how easy it is to convince their women to have sex with me

Why is that niggers always insist people are racist because they got "out-manned". Don't you understand your race's brutality coincides with it's failures?

Othello doesn't get cucked though.He just gets insanely paranoid and jealous and ruins his life because someone convinces him he is. Hey maybe there's a lesson in that for you after all.

I put "you" in parentheses because I'm using the word in a very abstract way. The point I went on to make is that "you" and your mind are one in the same.

i can only imagine what kind of loser would save pics like that lmao which one it was buddy xD

>xD

Kill yourself nigger.

Hate image related.

T R I G G E R E D

97 replies to this thread? you guys are fucking sick

Othello fucked Iago's wife.