[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]

/meta/ - Meta

Suggestions and Feedback

  [Go to bottom]   [Catalog]   [Return]   [Archive]

File: 1545195343675.png (200.3 KB, 1056x908, 264:227, 2018-12-18 22_23_03-Warnin….png) ImgOps iqdb

a5add No.47878

we see here an unequivocal harbinger of stockholm syndrome in the censorship of lamentations on the novel social contract which cauterizes the individual and her vehemence, her jovial jubilation where amidst great multiplicity unity shines forth, and the whole of moral nature exhibits beauty and dignity.

This noble tragedy i have conjured up has been tarnished by censorship and moving it to /b/ 2.0. My threnedy was a passionate lament of the misery and strife of the individual in the name of progress (an oxymoron, since the more we "progress", the further we are from our origin). As an example i gave one of the most evident portents of social anarchy: the abolition of traditional gender roles and the nuclear family, the staple of civilization since people started believing the imposter who stuck a flag in the ground and said the land was his. At no point did i imply i felt deprived due to my lack of (3d) romance. The empirical ramifications are self evident; take the wife, the grail, out of the social contract and the rate of depression, suicide, antidepressants, etc. skyrockets.

cf498 No.47879

>>What "inalienable rights" are you talking about
>the right to come home after a long day of (meaningful) work to a hot meal ready to eat and a hot cunt ready to fuck

ab904 No.47880

>>47878
lol modhurt

dff41 No.47881

There is a sentence in that long rant that blatantly breaks the rules.
You live and you learn I guess.

38f4f No.47882

>>47878
If you are indeed as clever as you pretend to be with that posh posting style of yours, then you should clearly understand the reason why that post got deleted.
Also notice how mods neither banned you nor removed your thread.

612bc No.47883

Maybe hotcunts are wizardly

013d6 No.47887

Are you really trying to say you were lamenting that other men don't have wives to fuck? I seem to recall your OP having a more personal gripe with the loss of your "inalienable rights," but I can't find it now.

a5add No.47888

>>47887
Yes because since this right was revoked we are all crabs. If we were verily volcels we would have the right to get a wife but humbly decline it in favor of a solitary lifestyle

013d6 No.47889

>>47888
Here's how I see it: If you don't want a relationship, you're a volcel. It doesn't matter whether it's actually possible for you to have a wife or not. Being a crab would mean you want it, even if it's impossible. Which isn't true for any of us (in theory), but it seemed like it was true for you. Am I wrong?

I mean, you make it really hard for yourself when you say things like "we are all crabs." That makes it seem like you consider yourself a crab, meaning you desire a relationship, meaning it's a rule 2 violation. Just an example. I feel like I can get the gist of what you're saying regardless, and maybe it's not like what it seems on the surface. But you're leaving a lot up to interpretation and your flowery vernacular isn't helping matters.

eca88 No.47890

why is it only teenage white male virgin who spend most of their time on the internet whine about the good ole' days of kings and TRUE men?


oh, I see

e75fb No.47891

>>47878
Your post is dangerously lacking Anime content wich is fundamental for Wizardry even more so than virginity.

58d50 No.47892

>>47878
Traditional family is dead because of neoliberal economy first and foremost, there is no way 1 man can support entire family these days. When people point it out the right just says don't have kids if you live on min wage, reproductive rights is a privilege to them now, enjoy peak capitalism.
>>47879
LMAO

38f4f No.47893

>>47892
>Traditional family is dead because of neoliberal economy first and foremost
Exactly. Our ancestors have already "smashed the patriarchy", killed the traditional family, and what's most important" severed the lineage of tradition itself. Therefore any traditionalism-related whining nowadays (like the one demonstrated by OP) is nothing but LARP and indicates low self-awareness.
>the right just says don't have kids if you live on min wage
And they are completely spot on with that.
>reproductive rights is a privilege to them now, enjoy peak capitalism
Reproduction SHOULD be a privilege tbh. Ideally poor and trashy people should not be allowed to reproduce at all.

a5add No.47898

File: 1545556273005.jpg (370.25 KB, 771x1834, 771:1834, 1545374094989.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

>>47891
my bad my wiz, let me fix that
>>47889
ok fine i'll stop decorating my sentiments with my erudite lexicon.

Hitherto to the napoleonic code, the right to a (virtuous) wife was bestowed upon us not by the succubus; it was doled out to us by the gods (if you survived to maturity), with the dowry paying fathers as the media. In the wake of the merit system, this power was placed in the hands of the fickle callous impulsive and short sighted succubus. One only needs to turn to history to affirm this just reproach. This means to get that hot cunt that used to be a god given right you need to conform to the succubus's arbitrary irrational desires, which, as history shows us yet again, has proved disastrous for our society morally. Thus, deprived of our right to a wife, we all start off as crabs, and only those who conform to her every whim get access to her holes to fulfill their biological desires, but the virtuous wife is forever out of the equation
>It is always men who go off in search of the Grail, because succubi, by nature, already possess it. Thus in all versions of the legend, only succubi are referred to as carriers of the Grail. But as Helen Luke believes, expressing a Jungian perspective, many succubi today have contempt for the spiritually, psychologically, and physically nourishing Grail function of their womanhood, since they are striving for the same positions as men in areas that, until now, were purely masculine domains. In so doing, these succubi outgrow their own essence and no longer have any counterbalance to their now overpowering masculine sides. In other words, they have lost their own Grail, and have to go off in search of it again, just as the men do, in order to find spiritual harmony.
To answer the first part of the question,the right to a wife has been revoked from us without our consent. we had no choice in losing this god given right. whether we wanted it or not, it was taken from us without us having a say in it, so being a "voluntary" celibate is an oxymoron

013d6 No.47899

>>47898
Indeed, upon reading your words, I believe that I have come to a truer understanding of your perspective. But alas, my dear wiz, I fear you must bow down your head in shame - for in your very post lies a contradiction most dire. Follow me, if you will, as I lead you along the pathway of my thoughts; tarry not, lest you fall fatally behind.

Firstly, you make the following claims, both of which sharing a common strand of logic which I will outline further in my reply:
>This means to get that hot cunt that used to be a god given right you need to conform to the succubus's arbitrary irrational desires, which, as history shows us yet again, has proved disastrous for our society morally.
>Thus, deprived of our right to a wife, we all start off as crabs, and only those who conform to her every whim get access to her holes to fulfill their biological desires, but the virtuous wife is forever out of the equation

The common thread between these quotes is purely this: that in order to find sexual pleasure with his female counterpart, a man must conform to her desires. Keepeth this in mind, for it will surely be of utmost import later on!

The second key to this foul contradiction is this quote:
>To answer the first part of the question,the right to a wife has been revoked from us without our consent. we had no choice in losing this god given right. whether we wanted it or not, it was taken from us without us having a say in it, so being a "voluntary" celibate is an oxymoron

Here, as I am sure you can now plainly see, lies the problem: that celibacy and marriage are being equivocated in a manner most false! First, you say that "the right to a wife has been revoked from us without our consent," but your conclusion is that "being a "voluntary" celibate is an oxymoron." However, the latter does not follow from the former, meaning that your posting was, sorrowfully, wholly in vain - but this is only the first problem. Recall, if you will, the strand of logic which I outlined above, which clearly presented itself numerous times in your expression of thoughts: "in order to find sexual pleasure with his female counterpart, a man must conform to her desires." Note that according to this sentiment, it is possible (although undesirable for some) for a man to have sex with a succubus in our modern society - on this point, I am sure you would agree most heartily. Now, observe: this is in full contradiction with the conclusion of your post, i.e. that "being a "voluntary" celibate is an oxymoron"; et c. For as it is possible for a man to have sex with a succubus, it is equally possible for him to make the opposite choice - therefore negating your assertion that no celibate can be such of his own volition. Hear me now, as I cry out in victory, your post lying shattered in pieces around my conquering feet! Hear me, and quail in fear - at my masterful skill, at my prowess in the art of debate - and realize once and for all your own failing, in posting a sequence of words riddled with such errors! Verily, I crow, victory is most assuredly mine!

99aaf No.47921

It's because you included hot cunt obviously.

>>47890
They don't for the most part, it's just that whites have these things called books and education which gives them a deeper understanding of the world and it's history, as opposed to the apish third worlders and their pathetic thug culture.

541f3 No.47986

File: 1546361386288.jpg (3.05 MB, 3177x3236, 3177:3236, throne.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

>>47878
In your post you recognize the Enlightenment as the fountainhead of modern dystopia, but then you go on to write about individualism and thinkers like Locke and Hobbes who are the very embodiment of the Enlightenment.

Natural inalienable rights is also an Enlightenment idea. Before rights were divinely mandated within a coherent system of monarchy and the church who both share God at their apex.

07787 No.47995

>>47986
Thomas Aquinas



[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]