Straight homosexuals: a breakthrough in amateur e-sociology

[carcinoEugenicist]

Here goes. The fantasies are highly diverse, coming as they have from half a lifetime. The mild ones are mostly about the idea of 'servicing' a female companion, mainly thoughts of kneeling and kissing her body while she stands, lies or sits upright...

 You're taking yourself way too seriously. The only cringe here is the apparent insecurity you feel at yourself and your tastes. Plain PIV missionary is hylic anyway, a higher sense of eros will always be a bit different in what it explores.

Science says that plain missionary is the most efficient for conceiving children - the Amarnite Central Committee for Political Morality will be BANNING everything beyond this.

[Zed]

You're taking yourself way too seriously. The only cringe here is the apparent insecurity you feel at yourself and your tastes. Plain PIV missionary is hylic anyway, a higher sense of eros will always be a bit different in what it explores.

I don't have a dead-enough ACKjak for this.

Going past death then: Anyone who is inclined to have a remotely aesthetic (as opposed to purely carnal) experience of sex will be naturally at least somewhat more deviant. The formation of such things straight up tracks with both intelligence and sensitivity, with such types more closely attenuated to various specificities of the experience. The true eros-enthusiast is a fan of word and thought, not of pictures or video. Low-class brutish male (nigger) sexuality doesn't think - it just fucks.

[carcinoEugenicist]

Going past death then: Anyone who is inclined to have a remotely aesthetic (as opposed to purely carnal) experience of sex will be naturally at least somewhat more deviant. The formation of such things straight up tracks with both intelligence and sensitivity, with such types more closely attenuated to various specificities of the experience. The true eros-enthusiast is a fan of word and thought, not of pictures or video. Low-class brutish male (nigger) sexuality doesn't think - it just fucks.

Your first point is true regarding the types of people who feel attraction along more complex vectors and are therefor more prone to deviance. It is exactly the problem - that people of higher intelligence and sensitivity are burning man-hours on increasingly elegant and complex forms of (sometimes multi-party) masturbation. It is an IQ shredder worse and more immediate than any urban agglomeration. These people need to be designing missiles and public art, rather than getting fed through one of various mimetic woodchippers.

[Haruspex]

Zed is kind of right; the rule is generally that the more intelligent you are the more sexual gratification is abstracted away from the purely physical elements, but like most things that scale with intelligence this usually comes at the cost at an increasing possibility for the development of paraphilias, especially those which are reinforced either through self-perception or daily interactions with the world. I dont think a desire to be sacrificed by a gynocratic cult is particularly healthy.

[Zed]

Your first point is true regarding the types of people who feel attraction along more complex vectors and are therefor more prone to deviance. It is exactly the problem - that people of higher intelligence and sensitivity are burning man-hours on increasingly elegant and complex forms of (sometimes multi-party) masturbation. It is an IQ shredder worse and more immediate than any urban agglomeration. These people need to be designing missiles and public art, rather than getting fed through one of various mimetic woodchippers.

Humiliating/shaming people for this shit just crushes their spirit and cultivates neuroticism. Insecurity, combined with neuroticism, is also an IQ shredder. A confident dude who owns being a pervert is always going to be sexually succesful than an insecure/neurotic one that wants to hide it.

[parsifal]

The male and female angels of the Worlds of Desire come constantly up to one another; but the angels of the third world are content to hold hands, of the fourth to exchange thoughts, of the fifth to exchange glances, of the sixth and highest to exchange words.

[carcinoEugenicist]

Humiliating/shaming people for this shit just crushes their spirit and cultivates neuroticism. Insecurity, combined with neuroticism, is also an IQ shredder. A confident dude who owns being a pervert is always going to be sexually successful than an insecure/neurotic one that wants to hide it.

I can see your point here on the level of an individual, but I think it discounts the mimetic nature of a lot of these phenomena. If all the people with X fetish choose to be confident perverts and own it, they probably are gonna do a lot better than if they were neurotic and insecure about it, but then X fetish begins to develop as a social organism of its own. From here, I would expect that it begins to spread through social networks of such confident perverts with some R0 (although R0 isn't quite the right term, as mimetic phenomena aren't such discrete variables like infection by an actual pathogen). The point is, there is some 'R0' high enough where it is socially optimal to suppress X fetish among the initial 'infected', even if this lowers expected value of those people. 

Now admittedly, all of this hinges on a fairly Homo Economicus / D&G understanding of how these things get into people - and obviously, networks of social relations can't account for where such fetishes ultimately originate. But this is generally how I think about it.

[Zed]

I can see your point here on the level of an individual, but I think it discounts the mimetic nature of a lot of these phenomena. If all the people with X fetish choose to be confident perverts and own it, they probably are gonna do a lot better than if they were neurotic and insecure about it, but then X fetish begins to develop as a social organism of its own. From here, I would expect that it begins to spread through social networks of such confident perverts with some R0 (although R0 isn't quite the right term, as mimetic phenomena aren't such discrete variables like infection by an actual pathogen). The point is, there is some 'R0' high enough where it is socially optimal to suppress X fetish among the initial 'infected', even if this lowers expected value of those people. 

Now admittedly, all of this hinges on a fairly Homo Economicus / D&G understanding of how these things get into people - and obviously, networks of social relations can't account for where such fetishes ultimately originate. But this is generally how I think about it.

I can partially concede to certain aspects of that perspective with some caveats. I tend to be inclined to think that most fetish formation starts as early as 4-5 and ceases around 15-16. It is possible to 'catch' them later, but they'll never be as strong as they were if they were incubated in you as a child. Aside from that, not all of them are particularly infectious, and I'm also not convinced their formation is really avoidable, as rooted in modes of thought/character inclinations are they tend to be.

Somewhere between "all non-missionary PIV sexual attraction is broken and should be stigmatized" and "lets trade fetlists" is the sweet-spot of understanding and exploring these things within the context of a relationship with a lover, in secret world that belongs to you and her alone.

[parsifal]

no it isn't, the "golden mean" is a retarded anti-concept. there is nothing desirable about vice in moderation, if there is a "sweetspot" it lies in the other direction entirely.

[Zed]

no it isn't, the "golden mean" is a retarded anti-concept. there is nothing desirable about vice in moderation, if there is a "sweetspot" it lies in the other direction entirely.

Temperance is not abstinence, asceticism and self-denial can twist the spirit in its own ways. Beyond that, the moral norms designed for peasants are not the same as those for the gentry. Trying to police the sexuality of sensitive young men does not serve them, just stirs further alienation. The ideal society encourages them to get young wives and socially conditions women to the expectation of pleasing their husbands --- in the most spiritual and sacrificial sense. Female sexuality is naturally conditioned to already desire this.

And I disagree on vice - the goal should not be the elimination of vice, but the quiet control of it. The Yakuza in Japan is a near ideal model of how a state should interface with the underworld. Safetyism is itself a sin.

[parsifal]

who's policing sensitive young men here? am i meant to be policing myself? some of us are not innately drawn to ugly paraphilic acts and it takes no special effort for us to abstain from them. in fact, it is a pleasure not to demean ourselves.

[carcinoEugenicist]

I can partially concede to certain aspects of that perspective with some caveats. I tend to be inclined to think that most fetish formation starts as early as 4-5 and ceases around 15-16. It is possible to 'catch' them later, but they'll never be as strong as they were if they were incubated in you as a child. Aside from that, not all of them are particularly infectious, and I'm also not convinced their formation is really avoidable, as rooted in modes of thought/character inclinations are they tend to be.

Somewhere between "all non-missionary PIV sexual attraction is broken and should be stigmatized" and "lets trade fetlists" is the sweet-spot of understanding and exploring these things within the context of a relationship with a lover, in secret world that belongs to you and her alone.

I agree with your point around the age range for fetish formation. if there are gonna be any social attempts to "stop the spread", you're probably just wasting time digging firebreaks outside of this age range. Then again, that probably won't get much traction either under the current zeitgeist, which isn't really aimable to thinking about these phenomena in terms of social organisms that grow across interpersonal networks, anyway. This may change going forward, and more rigorous study of these things through such a lens is something I hope for in the future. Digital marketing firms will be inclined to Get It, at the very least.

As for any sweet-spot along the spectrum you described: I would say that such a thing should be very private and situational like you say. IMO, it's mainly when such things get wrapped up in social assemblages that things become more likely to go off the rails. I guess my main point is that this happens to people pretty often nowadays, and it's under-examined.

[Haruspex]

no it isn't, the "golden mean" is a retarded anti-concept. there is nothing desirable about vice in moderation, if there is a "sweetspot" it lies in the other direction entirely.

Temperance is not abstinence, asceticism and self-denial can twist the spirit in its own ways. Beyond that, the moral norms designed for peasants are not the same as those for the gentry. Trying to police the sexuality of sensitive young men does not serve them, just stirs further alienation. The ideal society encourages them to get young wives and socially conditions women to the expectation of pleasing their husbands --- in the most spiritual and sacrificial sense. Female sexuality is naturally conditioned to already desire this.

And I disagree on vice - the goal should not be the elimination of vice, but the quiet control of it. The Yakuza in Japan is a near ideal model of how a state should interface with the underworld. Safetyism is itself a sin.

Sensitive young men are much more susceptible to self destruction and degeneration than the normal population is on account of their greater interaction with their immediate environment, accepting every behavior and inclination that comes to them is just going to lead to ruination and a great loss of potential. There is in all of us an element of decadence and war of the instincts, and the conquering of this decadence and its transmutation through a unification of will and purpose is the prerequisite to every great man. I do not accept the idea that the elite should not be subject to discipline, if anything they are the ones who really need it because they, more than anyone else, have the ability to meet the standards required to build something greater than themselves and therefore have a responsibility to do so.

Vices are not equal and how they should be treated depends on their nature, since many vices are simply virtues which have not been given the proper context to develop. In the case of extreme sexual paraphilias, there really is no healthy manifestation of them which can be used as a release valve. Public suppression is all that is really needed.

[Zed]

who's policing sensitive young men here? am i meant to be policing myself? some of us are not innately drawn to ugly paraphilic acts and it takes no special effort for us to abstain from vice. in fact, it is a pleasure to not demean ourselves.

The implications are not on you, as much as a general remark on culture. I've grown weary of seeing these kinds of insecurity in people. I see it everywhere, in every circle. Ours is a weird age of extreme insecurity/neuroticism existing side-by-side with far ranging normalizations. 'Age of consent' is a notable example of the extreme instability present. I dislike kink culture, not because it is disgusting, but because it neuters the potentiality of transgression. Such transgression can be spiritual, or it can be cheap, mass-market, and filthy. Bataille's Erotism: Death and Sensuality is always close to my heart on these matters, bringing the fore the fundamental relation between sacrifice and sex. One has to resist attempts to diminish and sanitize the act: taboos should remain taboo. Yet the right response is not psychosexual castration and freudian pathologization, yet a quiet warning to take care when dancing in darker waters.

---

Sensitive young men are much more susceptible to self destruction and degeneration than the normal population is on account of their greater interaction with their immediate environment, accepting every behavior and inclination that comes to them is just going to lead to ruination and a great loss of potential. There is in all of us an element of decadence and war of the instincts, and the conquering of this decadence and its transmutation through a unification of will and purpose is the prerequisite to every great man. I do not accept the idea that the elite should not be subject to discipline, if anything they are the ones who really need it because they, more than anyone else, have the ability to meet the standards required to build something greater than themselves and therefore have a responsibility to do so.

Vices are not equal and how they should be treated depends on their nature, since many vices are simply virtues which have not been given the proper context to develop. In the case of extreme sexual paraphilias, there really is no healthy manifestation of them which can be used as a release valve. Public suppression is all that is really needed.

Call me an optimist, but I believe many of the things you object to naturally retreat when external forces of spiritual suppression collapse. We live in a asocial age where loneliness and isolation acts as the forge of sexuality. Healthy sexuality is produced by generating environments where men can thrive, and feel a natural sense of power and control over their destiny. Deviance will still exist, but the IQ shredder won't be burning away the best and brightest - and paraphilias can naturally retreat to their proper place within private sexuality, rather than as a perverse selection criteria for potential mates.

[anthony]

Finally, something interesting in this thread.

[parsifal]

Bataille's Erotism: Death and Sensuality is always close to my heart on these matters, bringing the fore the fundamental relation between sacrifice and sex. One has to resist attempts to diminish and sanitize the act: taboos should remain taboo. Yet the right response is not psychosexual castration and freudian pathologization, yet a quiet warning to take care when dancing in darker waters.

so that's why it sounds like pomo nonsense--it is. much as french-jewish perverts might like to imagine everyone who's repulsed by sodomy is some lowly peasant goy the identification with gentry is nonsense wishful thinking. quite the opposite any aristocracy is subject to much stricter mores while the commoners are often left to their own devices. "fetishes" are plainly a mass-cultural phenomenon and should be viewed more like a mental parasite whose effects are a result of being introduced externally to an already-compromised individual and which can be healed with proper intervention.

indeed there are higher expressions of love than sex but they are completely different from paraphilias.

---

in fact the very idea of "privately transgressing taboos" is self-contradicting. if romance is to take place in some private world shared only by lovers then it should be entirely indifferent to the laws of that other world. if what others might think enters into consideration at all, you have already admitted that you are part of the outside world.

[BillyONare]

I would like to bring a dose of reality to pierce through these ideological thoughts. Some things are objectively disgusting, and those are bad. And some things, that are not procreative sex, are not particularly disgusting, and not bad. Fetishes and sodomy are disgusting. Fellatio and being called "daddy" are not particularly disgusting, are not fetishes, and are not something that has to be brainwashed into people by Mindgeek. Saying that a blowjob is literally the same as getting fucked by a man because they are both non-procreative sex sounds like The Truth if you are impressionable reactionary tradcath, but actually this is a denial of objective reality. They are saying that some arbitrary categorical distinction trumps the natural preferences of healthy heterosexual white people who have not been brainwashed into various oversimplifying ideologies. Even mainstream Catholics say you can do pretty much whatever sexual act you want as long as you finish in the way that God wants you to. Maybe there are many Catholic scholars who dissent from this.

[parsifal]

actually, fellatio is disgusting whether or not catholics say it is. please refer to the seminal tweet on the subject.

[Haruspex]

who's policing sensitive young men here? am i meant to be policing myself? some of us are not innately drawn to ugly paraphilic acts and it takes no special effort for us to abstain from vice. in fact, it is a pleasure to not demean ourselves.

The implications are not on you, as much as a general remark on culture. I've grown weary of seeing these kinds of insecurity in people. I see it everywhere, in every circle. Ours is a weird age of extreme insecurity/neuroticism existing side-by-side with far ranging normalizations. 'Age of consent' is a notable example of the extreme instability present. I dislike kink culture, not because it is disgusting, but because it neuters the potentiality of transgression. Such transgression can be spiritual, or it can be cheap, mass-market, and filthy. Bataille's Erotism: Death and Sensuality is always close to my heart on these matters, bringing the fore the fundamental relation between sacrifice and sex. One has to resist attempts to diminish and sanitize the act: taboos should remain taboo. Yet the right response is not psychosexual castration and freudian pathologization, yet a quiet warning to take care when dancing in darker waters.

---

Sensitive young men are much more susceptible to self destruction and degeneration than the normal population is on account of their greater interaction with their immediate environment, accepting every behavior and inclination that comes to them is just going to lead to ruination and a great loss of potential. There is in all of us an element of decadence and war of the instincts, and the conquering of this decadence and its transmutation through a unification of will and purpose is the prerequisite to every great man. I do not accept the idea that the elite should not be subject to discipline, if anything they are the ones who really need it because they, more than anyone else, have the ability to meet the standards required to build something greater than themselves and therefore have a responsibility to do so.

Vices are not equal and how they should be treated depends on their nature, since many vices are simply virtues which have not been given the proper context to develop. In the case of extreme sexual paraphilias, there really is no healthy manifestation of them which can be used as a release valve. Public suppression is all that is really needed.

Call me an optimist, but I believe many of the things you object to naturally retreat when external forces of spiritual suppression collapse. We live in a asocial age where loneliness and isolation acts as the forge of sexuality. Healthy sexuality is produced by generating environments where men can thrive, and feel a natural sense of power and control over their destiny. Deviance will still exist, but the IQ shredder won't be burning away the best and brightest - and paraphilias can naturally retreat to their proper place within private sexuality, rather than as a perverse selection criteria for potential mates.

Firstly I agree with the point about kink culture not allowing for real transgression, which makes actual eroticism and intimacy impossible (though it also a problem because its disgusting, and not all forms of transgression are productive or desirable). When everything is open and celebrated, it becomes exhausted and impersonal. Ideally, a society cultivates a strong sense of taboo and social constriction when it comes around sexual interactions which can be transgressed in specific forms when certain requirements are have been met, elevating the lovers through it in a meaningful way. Im particularly fond of the Japanese trope of lovers saying each other's first name without honorifics for the first time, transforming something we take for granted into a great moment of intimacy and bonding. I have much to say about Japans ability to cultivate intimacy but I will save that for another post.

Concerning your second point, it is true that many deviances come from the inhibition of agency, which is actually one of the things I wanted to get at in the OP post. A big part of the RSH is that he eroticizes his own imprisonment and also gives it an implicit moral dimension. Even in the case where modern spiritual poisons are removed, it would still be important to impose on the elite the discipline and the morality for self-cultivation, as well as to give them the power and resources to meaningfully actualize their will. This means that extreme paraphilias would still need to be discouraged and suppressed, even if they would appear in much smaller quantities. Either way, we are not in substantial disagreement I believe.

[BillyONare]

actually, fellatio is disgusting whether or not catholics say it is. please refer to the seminal tweet on the subject.

"Don't do anything with your wife that you wouldn't do with your sister."

Is that the one?