How does he want us to react to this book? What does he want us to do with the information he gives us?

why did he chose a homoerotic cover? he could esily have put in a venus. therein lies your answer

>>24570434 (OP)
some guy in the last thread said he wants you to act from your own desires not the ones you borrow from others. (he said besides porn, also marketing are the most obvious representations of fetishizing the desire of the 'other')

>>24570448
How does one know which desires are his own?

>>24570557
It's been a while since I read his shit but I think it goes like this
>all our desires are formed by media
>media is bad
>if you try to come up with desires that aren't formed by media on your own you are deluding yourself into falling into the trap of individualism also sold to you by media
>so JUST B UR SELF until you start enjoying life without the things media tells you to want

i wasnt able to quit porn until i had my first relationship. porn filled the hole that was a woman's esteem, evem though the relationship was nothing so wonderful. now i just jerk off to mental images and don't feel the slightest need for porn.
>>24570445
maybe to highten the feeling of shame.

>>24571427
How did people form desires before media?

>>24571701
they wanted the same stuff their neighbours had

>>24571701
The example in the beginning of the book twists the Oedipus story saying he didn't want to kill his father and fuck his mother, he fucked his mom because the king had to fuck the queen by convention in that society, etc. It's deeper than that. I get the feeling you have to be pretty intelligent to understand the book

>author shares a name with a notorious pirate from the 1700s
>the cover of his book imitates a frontispiece of the time

>>24572434

Whatever the man is looking at will always be less dangerous than whatever the man is thinking about

>Porn is le bad
>Because it just is, okay?
literally every anti-porn book

>>24571701
that has to be one of the saddest things i read in a while

>>24573118
>disconnects people from what actually feels good during sex
>numbs the mind

>>24571427
Basically media supplies grammar that we use as "outlines" for our desire (think what is "sexy" - blonde, high heels, etc.. its very generation based (heroin chic, after that Kim K, now goth mommy.. Shaved or non shaved? - that's how he shows that the desire is not your own, its demographics.)

Instead of owning desire as something that is our own and playing around with it, fantasizing and building your actions on that we use grammar which only mirrors our desire on medias cue, instead of realizing its only a mirror. Due to that we start investigating the mirror and imagining like we are learning about ourselves, while in actuality moving away from our own desires, fantasies and ability to act on it.

Since we are trapped in grammars and shapes of media, our actions are made to position ourselves in a way to gain favor to medias / societys logics, making us people who attempt to be right/desired, instead of moving towards our own specific desire, which makes us unable to experience satisfaction. And due to lack of satisfaction, we are filled with envy over people we project are experiencing satisfaction or luck "unfairly" and start creating ledger based logics, which allow us to "get even" in a "sanctioned" way without having to face the fact that we are "evil".

Its a great and very deep book, but requires putting in the work. My summary is very light, it is a very intricate framework, you can't really summarize it, that's just what was on the top of my head.

>>24573132
>disconnects people from what actually feels good during sex
u wot?

>>24573132
>disconnects people from what actually feels good during sex

>>24573191
>minimal foreplay
>shoving a dick into a mostly dry pussy (sometimes lubed up if a director is generous)
>balls deep gets portrayed as the greatest bliss in existence when it hurts a lot of women, especially with oversized porn dicks
>constant switching of positions to keep a scene visually interesting

>>24573166
I felt like I was being dissected under a microscope reading this summary.

>>24573221
>minimal foreplay
not that big on foreplay either
>>constant switching of positions to keep a scene visually interesting
>>balls deep gets portrayed as the greatest bliss in existence when it hurts a lot of women, especially with oversized porn dicks
ballsdeep is literally based af, I try to do it as often as I can
but I do this irl with my girls too, I like it

>>24573292
im not saying its bad, i enjoy it very much - its all about angle, though, and people often dont seem to get that when watching porn or talking sex

>>24573118
Detaching one's self from the real through simulacra is mad

>>24571427
what if my desires were actually formed first by mommy issues and then by my first girlfriend, both without any relevant exposure to media, and I much later began looking for porn to relive, vary and expand on those experiences and preferences

i hate this hack. no, actually, I didn't feel or think the way you're describing in reaction to the scenario you just painted, and your overaggressive psychological takedown holds no weight to me

>>24574909
Your mom and girlfriend got their desires from media, checkmate

>>24574909
you are a fucking moron, how you position yourself as having "mommy issues" is already their grammar, also if you have the fantasy why use porn anyway? Because you do not want to engage honestly with your fantasy and its easier on your pitiful conscience to engage with porn which you can disown. YOUR "mommy issues" and what is considered "mommy issues" at large ARE NOT THE SAME. The similarities are imagined, or better say projected so you could continue your charade and forsake your own involvement and volition in it all.

In addition to that, there's no substantial difference if its "real" or from "media", it is all projection anyway. By learning to control your media grammars and projections you might learn to control your own "automatic" "personal" fantasies, which all go one direction anyway same as any media "porn". But no you are unique flower, not living in the same society and culture as all of us, untainted and dandy. The book is about the rhythm and structure of the fantasy, not the content, no one got better from learning about their dream content, its a sham. And the structure is mostly structed like this: anxiety -> someone's else's fantasy -> satisfaction which does not satisfies - since it is actually a relief from autonomy, not pleasure from the fantasy.

Of course its easier to screech instead of making any actual effort to understand the subject matter and stay a fucking faggot. Go fuck yourself.

>>24572809
One of my favorite books.

>>24575921
whats your main takeaway? how do we radically embrace autonomy

>>24575895
Christ, anon. Yeah, I'm the one screeching, for sure. Their grammar? Fine, how would you phrase emotional neglect as a child possibly leading to a later obsession with trust and shows of caring and validation? I haven't ever used the term myself before now outside of the few psychology classes I had on Freud, and this isn't even my language, so I'm sure it's someone else's grammar, but the media's? I know -I- didn't get it from media, at least. If I have the fantasy, why use porn? Because it provides new angles, poses, mannerisms etc. to use in the fantasy, and the more intense stimulation gets one going. I shut it off after a few minutes.

Projection, from the media onto me? Well, most of what I like I got from my girlfriend, like I said, and without going into details, she would have seen literally none of it elsewhere or gotten it from anyone else. It's not automatic and personal, but interpersonal and basically by accident of the other's person and how we interacted. I'm not claiming to be a unique snowflake, or flower as you put it, but that Alone projects a model without confirming how many it actually applies to. I'm not a rare exception or outlier, I just don't think what he says applies in general in the first place. I read pretty much all of his blog and tried to take it as seriously I could, but it really was 100% bullshit, all of it.

Well, fuck you too then, hysterical fucking nigger.

>>24576083
god damn you are a huge fag

>>24570434 (OP)
To explore your own fantasies by yourself and not looking for a label to define it.

>>24570445
>why did he chose a homoerotic cover?
If you're reading it, it's for you

You were given knowledge but chose the spread it in most evil way possible