Stoner - when you go ham right out the gate

Would you read No Longer Human? He gets cucked hard but it's still a great book, and you'd be missing out if you didn't read it just because of /pol/ memes.

>not liking cucking is a /pol/ meme
I mean, you're not wrong about reading things regardless of its content, but not liking cuckolding isn't something exclusive to /pol/.

journey to the end of the night he gets cucked and does the cucking spread out through the sections

The really ironic thing here is that now the infinite jest is flipped. The once-joker is now the jester, and the rest think they're fine, but they're just the sons and daughters of the architects. Children, really. They have no idea what happens, what REALLY happens, when you remove the keystone. The most ironic thing of all is that they keystone was removed during the foundation of the building.

fuck wrong thread pls ignore

i don't like the idea of cucking because i'm afraid of it happening to me. at one time, i even masturbated to cuckold porn, but realized what i was doing as i grew older. now i am incredibly afraid of the horrifying mental trauma that would come if someone i loved were to do something of that nature to me, so i avoid it in the sense that while reading, if i identify as the protagonist (or what have you) then i don't want to be cucked as that person, it truly pains me inside. I'm trying to overcome this phobia to the extent of allowing myself to enjoy the full cast of emotion as I read a book. Anyhow, at the moment I'm working on repugnance and disgusting scenes in literature, especially pomo stuff, there's a lot of graphic and overwhelming content that I am typically averse to because either i've experienced it in life, or am riding on that moral highroad, and not able to distinguish myself from the events in a novel as entertainment, and what happens in the real world. It's the sense that "i shouldn't be entertained by the rape of this person, or this person eating a toilet bowl full of donkey shit", that my time feels cheapened when i'm enjoying reading horrifying things. it's a hard habit to get out of and i'm not so sure even now that i wish to. what do you think?

no one wants to toss a pie in my face over this post?

I'll read it in a bit. It's a bit long hehe.

but be nice. I'm girl. hehe

Oh, child. Sex is not the end all be all.

But this doesn't make sense in the context of infinite jest? Does it? Maybe I should actually read the book all the way through.

MY LOVE FOR YOU IS LIKE A TRUCK
BERSERKER
WOULD YOU LIKE SOME MAKING FUCK
BERSERKER
MY LOVE FOR YOU US TICKING CLOCK
BERSERKER
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SUCK MY COCK
BERSERKER

WOULD YOU LIKE SOME MAKING FUCK?

not to say that sex is the end all be all, just that that exact part of my psyche is tender, i'm nothing but a juvenile in that respect, so vulnerable to the emotional damages that would come of such an event. even then, it's not the sexuality, but the relationships and emotions bound to it that are the powerful aspects there, obviously sex would be utterly meaningless if there weren't ties there emotionally. at least in my experience that's how sex is. so it's betrayal that's horrifying. not the sex itself.

Oh lol no that was my bad I posted in the wrong thread.

No I was just referencing infinite jest and how it seems that the one who was being jested upon begins to be the jester. He completely turns the tables and pays a bit of a price for it but he is objectively winning a long jest. He has opponents that try to joke back at him but they are simply ignoring that their trivialities have nothing to do with what he's figuratively taking a sledgehammer to, while everyone has to openly cheer him on, but inside they know he's destroying them. At least that was my interpretation.

>mfw I work at a convenience store and the customers are actually the worst part of the job

plebs, the lot of ye

Not liking is one thing. Completely avoiding any literature that involves cucking because you think it makes you a cuck is another.
I don't judge literature based on how sexy (or, converesly, repulsive) I find it, user. Except for Lolita.

>thinking the indulgence of hedonistic tendencies is "objectively" bad
>proving Plato's point this hard
Kek

>the lot of ye
Somebody's been playing too much Witcher 3. Only a turbopleb would say "ye" when he means "thee."

>Stoner

well excuse me for trying to have some semblance of morality in my life.

i guess i explained myself poorly, looking through that stuff, in the end, i just don't like reading about rapes or cuckoldry or murder or gore. i'm fine with allusions to them, or discussions of them, but graphic scenes describing them at length seems more like there is revelry in the very idea of say, rape. not that there is, but some authors treat it so flippantly, distantly. that distance is grating, i like my authors to be really close to me and breathing on my neck, otherwise it feels like i'm just being toyed with and they're not even dealing with the shit they're writing about, they're just shitting on a page and want me to sniff it while they're long gone huffing perfume.

It's not about moral high ground. Reading about things like rape can make women uncomfortable you turd, especially when it's pretty much ignored as in this book.

What job is there where customers are not the worst part?

>rape happens alot in real life, everyday to alot of people and is a highly dramatic and impacting event when it happens
>I don't want it to happen in books

The redd/lit/ philosophy of books.

Can you actually provide ANY substantiated evidence that Stoner actually rapes Edith in this book? I've read the book, she seemed pretty consenting to me. I wonder why there is so much controversy over this passage. I really don't get it. Is it because Edith is just a psychopath who knows she holds a degree of power over him simply by being his wife?

It's not even rape. They're married.

Mind rape.

Mind rape? I thought the big issue was always an actual rape. Like, you know, a crime. Forcible rape. Not consenting.

I don't really think "mind rape" fits the bill, its not a real thing.

there's a little book called the hierarchies of cuckoldry or something similar by charles fourier. it's essentially a list of types of cuckolds and works on the premise every man is one to some extent, and it's your reaction to it that matter more than getting cucked.
there's also two susan sontag books that deal with images of suffering, called On Photography and Regarding the Suffering of Others, which have different viewpoints but might deal well with the cheapened by enjoying looking at horrible things feel you're feeling.

Yeah, I didn't read Ulysses for the same reason. Shit book obv.

maybe you should read the book and find out.

You see, that's funny, because in my post I specifically stated that I had read the fucking book.

>Veeky Forums can't read

wtf

No, I think its just implied, but there's really no empirical evidence. Edith obviously goes apeshit, but that could be considered for a variety of reasons. It is ironic that Stoner actually attempts to make her feel better, as if he were a fucking loving husband or something.

that's it that's the perfect description

She may have the reasons wrong, but Stoner was indeed a completely shit book.

I used to subscribe to her because she had mentione some classics, but over time all her cringy neolib shit started to show. Things like OP said "not agreeing with the main character" and such, "I cant relate to the main character!" fuck that.

>implying she EVER read it

>mfw in 40 years people will stop reading the Odyssey and the Illiad because they were taught postmodern deconstruction in their literary criticism class at university and have bookburnings because of the disgusting phallogocentrism in it

you obviously didn't read it very closely. the allusions about rape are pretty obvious. stoner himself, as bumbling as he is, even recognises that he hurt her on that wedding night.

that fucking cunt Edith deserves much worse

why is Stoner such a pussy?

This.

Women's suffrage was a mistake.

>rapes his wife
That's like saying someone steals his own bicycle. It's not possible.

i read Ulysses, actually. that book wasn't soul crushing for me in any way, except the revelation that i'm pond scum in comparison to joyce.

That's a nice way of saying some words without really saying anything. Can you cite text that actually explicitly states that he actually committed marital rape? I'm not seeing it.

so no events occur in literature without explicit description? you must have a very superficial understanding of a lot of literature.

SAD she can't realize that since society is putting the expectation into stoner that he MUST consummate his marriage the night of the ceremony, he cannot consent to the action EITHER. society itself is the rapist, and edith and stoner are only its unwitting victims!

For something like rape? Yes. If it's going to be a hugely discussed plot point and justification for Edith's actions, absolutely. Edith wasn't raped, she was use fucking insane. Cases for rape require explicit allusion or outright stating or its just another case of bullshit perpetuated by damaged Edith.

How can you not recognize this?

You're not excused

What about Holden raping his sister, Phoebe?

What does that have to do at all with Stoner and Edith?

>he's not only justifying rape of an insane woman, but also demanding there be explicit descriptions of rape in literature before he'll believe in it
so, what's /pol/ like?

>HAHAHA this /pol/tard needs evidence from the text to prove Stoner raped Edith L O L
Kill yourself female

>justifying

how? show me where

>demanding explicit descriptions

if rape is going to be a topic of discussion and hammered on like this, yes I'd like it to be fucking mentioned instead of "hurr durr everyone can infer this hehe"

>/pol/

>For something like rape? Yes.
that's not how literature works.

It wasn't explicit either, but it's a known fact.

That literally provides no insight. You've effectively said nothing.

Those circumstances are completely different. Look, I know yadda yadda Stoner raped Edith that's why she's so crazy yadda, but seriously? He did what he really could for her, on top of that, the chapter that depicts the "rape" doesn't really say its technically rape.

She never said no. She was his wife. Its basically her hurt feelings, which I'm pretty fucking sure the book highlights that she's extremely emotionally unstable before this guy even gets involved.

I think he raped her, but I don't think that's why she's a crazy bitch. Or at least it's not the main or only reason.

Ok, I get it, that's the common theme. Maybe that's even what the author intended the reader to infer. But my point still stands when I say its highly plausible that she was just batshit insane beforehand and had some PTSD-like trauma from engaging in sexual activity.

Hardly a rape on Stoner's part imo. Literally fucking together and consummating their marriage. Is this just like a meme or something?

he raped her but that's not why she's crazy. there are also allusions to her father abusing her. she didn't say "no" in the scene because it explicitly states that she freezes up which stoner interprets as her just being frigid. then lays there semi-comatose, almost like someone who has past-trauma hmmmm.

>allusions to her father abusing her

And how the fuck does this make it Stoner's fault that her father was a huge jackass?

There was no "no". There was "freezing up", but that's not something that immediately cue's a guy to think "hey I'm raping this girl right now".
The whole idea is asinine. There was no rape, Edith is just damaged, and Stoner was an idiot for thinking he could fix her.

>kys womern
so, you really are from /prole/
you dismissed the possibility of her being raped as her being insane. sounds like you're clutching at any straw to avoid the concept of her being raped. it's almost as though you're a rape apologist at this point, some sort of vendetta.

>/prole/
Cringe

>There was "freezing up"
you have a hard time with the whole allusion thing, huh. is this what a culture of biblical literalism does to Americans or are you just special?

Have you read the fucking passage? I mean I want to believe this is bait. I'll go dig it up if I have to. You're wrong, and I'm discussing this in literary context of my interpretation. I could easily conversely say that you sound like a person who is clutching at any straw to prove rape, almost as if you have some sort of vendetta.

>he uses "cringe" unironically
repugnant.
at this point you may as well say she can't be raped because they're married. jesus christ.

There wasn't even freezing up though she was totally into it. It was her Daddy issues that ended up pushing her off the edge.

okay now I know you jus trolling. gtfo. lol

At this point you may as well say she was raped because they were married. Jesus Christ.

See? I can do it too. Ironically they wouldn't have even been in the same bed if they weren't married.

he wouldn't have raped her if they weren't in the same bed either.

Well I'm content with this retarded impasse.

He neither raped nor didn't rape, apparently. And Edith is nuts because of her past, not her experience. I'm done here.

he did rape her though. i was just mocking you.
who cares if you're done or not? the truth is that despite your incompetent interpretation of a very simple work, she was still raped, no matter how much you whine rhetorically.

While I don't entirely agree with your viewpoint, its also hard to argue that it was his intent to rape. Crime requires intent, which he didn't have. He was just one aloof fucker.

>women are kept at home, denied the right to vote, treated in a patronizing manner by men who see them as innocent children unable to deal with the pressure of the real world
"oppression!" *fast forward five or six decades*
>women behave like innocent children unable to deal with the pressure of the real world and condemn everything as "making them uncomfortable"
"oppression!"

>I don't think oppression is a legitimate concern because some people are overly sensitive
what's it like being yet another of the many anti-sjws that are nearly indistinguishable in their bitchy remonstrance?

Well why not?

Shouldn't we strive to be as comfy as possible at all times?

Your post is oppressing me and it's making me uncomfortable. Apologise right now or you are legitimizing rape.

BITCHY REMONSTRANCES AGAINST BITCHY REMONSTRANCES AGAINST BITCHY REMONSTRANCES

guys stop. user is just a troll who can't understand allusion. unless you can point to the literal word rape, ~bitch iz jus crazy~!

Yes, yes. The dream is to live in a world in which we are swaddled by soft clothes and baby food. Individuation is oppression. Sink back into the primordial womb of unconsciousness.

very similar to the
>there's no way tolstoy is a rapist
trolls

>Both men and women do this though.
its mostly hipsters

It wasn't rape. Just because you don't want to do something, doesn't you don't want to not do it. She didn't want to have sex but she did it anyway to fulfill her marital duties, thus it wasn't sex against her will. Anyway, Stoner didn't exactly enjoy it either. It was a bad moment for both of them.

Now knowing that Stoner is about rape, I guess I'll read it after all. Thanks!

This.

you've never had a sexual encounter with an abused girl, have you? typically they're fucking broken, and you really have to pay attention to subtle cues like rigidity or even a look. their spirit is oftentimes so destroyed that they oblige without responsible consent because they're going through the catatonic state of being abused before. especially child abuse situations, the idea that they can even say no is often not even a mental possibility.

you act as though sex isn't a complex and difficult relationship. it really really is. it may not have been rape in the sense that she was physically forced, but there is clearly mental forcing that can be even an unintentional sex drive on the male's part. some women are highly susceptible to that sort of manipulation.

she was raped. there was no intent to do so, but she was so mentally unhealthy that she could never truly consent without some sort of therapy.

can someone explain the allusions to edith's pre-Stoner abuse? it was clear she was unwell mentally, but i don't recall thinking she was abused.

its been awhile since I read it but she reacted badly going through the things in her old room after the funeral. there is also her over-the-top freaking out about her daughter being in stoner's study with the door closed. the way she kept her daughter close, which stoner interpreted as a hatred of him. etc.

>at least in my experience that's how sex is. so it's betrayal that's horrifying. not the sex itself.
betrayal of what ?

>>there's a little book called the hierarchies of cuckoldry or something similar by charles fourier. it's essentially a list of types of cuckolds and works on the premise every man is one to some extent, and it's your reaction to it that matter more than getting cucked.
that's golden kek

betrayal of trust.

>This is a 8/10 in bongland