Search Results
7/25/2025, 7:52:11 PM
>>937576475
/r/ing a gen of Kier Starmer being murdered by the Statue of Liberty with a knife
Optional: His office with a copy of the Communist Manifesto on his desk
/r/ing a gen of Kier Starmer being murdered by the Statue of Liberty with a knife
Optional: His office with a copy of the Communist Manifesto on his desk
7/25/2025, 5:22:42 PM
>>280899235
Dumb frogposter
Dumb frogposter
7/18/2025, 5:50:09 PM
>>715792673
>feminists
>bible thumpers
>both a variation of filthy malevolent Altruism
As an Objectivist I remain consistent by hating both
>feminists
>bible thumpers
>both a variation of filthy malevolent Altruism
As an Objectivist I remain consistent by hating both
7/1/2025, 7:13:43 PM
>>280151969
>the idea that people who say things you dislike aren't mad and that your fetishes are objectively bad?
Yes to both, actually.
Seething puritanism is a philosophic perspective that does not need to held in the emotion of anger. It can be held in cold apprehension for instance. But still wrong.
I also, yes, have floated the idea that my fetishes are objectively bad but quickly trashed the notion as fallacious. Supposed "societal effect" or supposed "psychological effect" would not be a valid philosophy to hold on any art EVEN IF those effects were shown to have some negative correlation to men's characters and society's zeitgeist. No fetish itself can be good or bad, even gorefaggotry, being that there are as many ways of internalizing and operating upon art and one's own digestion of aesthetic matters as there are stars in the sky. What matters is whether one does so in a philosophically inconsiderate way. Horror movie goers are not, in fact, psychologically dangerous people. If you grasp the absurdity of calling a Horror movie goer a dangerous or deleterious person you can grasp the absurdity of calling one who finds titillation in having a harem a dangerous or deleterious person.
Being that the sorts of people that propagate this drivel are social determinists and/or psuedo-psychiartic pearlclutchers. That should give you pause on wanting to parrot it. Get off your faggot armchair.
>the idea that people who say things you dislike aren't mad and that your fetishes are objectively bad?
Yes to both, actually.
Seething puritanism is a philosophic perspective that does not need to held in the emotion of anger. It can be held in cold apprehension for instance. But still wrong.
I also, yes, have floated the idea that my fetishes are objectively bad but quickly trashed the notion as fallacious. Supposed "societal effect" or supposed "psychological effect" would not be a valid philosophy to hold on any art EVEN IF those effects were shown to have some negative correlation to men's characters and society's zeitgeist. No fetish itself can be good or bad, even gorefaggotry, being that there are as many ways of internalizing and operating upon art and one's own digestion of aesthetic matters as there are stars in the sky. What matters is whether one does so in a philosophically inconsiderate way. Horror movie goers are not, in fact, psychologically dangerous people. If you grasp the absurdity of calling a Horror movie goer a dangerous or deleterious person you can grasp the absurdity of calling one who finds titillation in having a harem a dangerous or deleterious person.
Being that the sorts of people that propagate this drivel are social determinists and/or psuedo-psychiartic pearlclutchers. That should give you pause on wanting to parrot it. Get off your faggot armchair.
Page 1