In this groundbreaking episode of Walt Right Perspectives I moderate a debate between my beloved friends
and on the topic of whether Robert needs to stop talking so openly about his fetishes on substack dot com.About five minutes in it stops being a debate so much as a free-flowing convo about women / sex / fetishes / feminism, but IMO we still had a lot of interesting insights so I am going to upload this anyway.
Hope you fellers enjoy.
Topics include:
Rob explains why he talks very openly about sex: we’ve all grown up in a pornbrained society, and fetishes often reveal truths about subconscious psychological motives / power dynamics
John pushes back on the psychoanalytic aspect of Rob’s worldview because he sees it as deeply tied to Wokeism
Why does Robert’s fetishpoasting focus so heavily on Jewish girls?
Is Robert merely “dressing up” his fetishes with DR buzzwords?
How legit is microchimerism?
Is giving oral inherently submissive and receiving oral dominant?
Is there a link between autism and femdom (or fetishism in general)?
Arcto explores the connection between autism and his intense dislike of weaponized female vulnerability
Rob is ruining femdom for John by making it too overt
Walt ties their divergent attitudes to British vs. Californian attitudes re: privacy (Meghan Markle offended Brits with her emotional incontinence)
Why is heterosexual fetishism more taboo than homosexuality?
Is “locker room talk” decreasing in prevalence because men have more hyper-specific fetishes these days?
Are Wokeists more sex negative or exhibitionist? Arcto argues they are the latter so long as it’s not the traditional heteronormative dynamic.
Dominant men have less leeway to be openly fetishistic than subs
Does the Manosphere offer anything useful to submissive men?
How do we even define private vs. public spheres when adjudicating where locker room talk is acceptable?
What is the social class coding of Sydney Sweeney and her big boobs?
Why is it more socially acceptable to be gay than to have a foot fetish when the latter outnumber the former 5 to 1?
- ’s essay Traditionally Horny and how it influenced John’s thinking
Can Substack be considered an esoteric art / intellectual scene that should tolerate sexual eccentricity?
Walt sees Robert Stark as a metapolitically useful “Malcolm X” figure—Rob is to candid sexual discussion what Andrew Anglin was to race
Walt suggests that Robert offer John some “sub game”
Robert idealizes rich women whereas John is into artsy cool girls
Walt suggests that weird autistic guys need to play for variance instead of expected value and emit a bright signal amenable women will flock to
If a girl is into you then nothing you do is “weird”, but if she doesn’t like you then everything you do is “weird”
The toxic feminine tendency to rewrite history and dehumanize men
Womyn are the ones enforcing gendered behavioral norms
John respects women who consistently apply their feminism in their dating behavior but abhors hypocrisy
The terrifying ability of feminine power to manufacture public opinion and resulting inability of men to hold women accountable
It’s cringe how many guys in the manosphere are obviously low-to-mid status but the meta is still to pretend you are high status and have no vulnerabilities
The inexorably nested nature of power/vulnerability and dominance/submission
Does being more dominant as a guy make it easier to leverage age gaps?
Walt argues a good reason to date younger / poorer / less educated women is they have more tolerance of you occasionally acting like a faggot
Walt explains to Robert how theatrical simpiness and a fondness for irrumatio are actually two sides of the same coin
Attractive women usually hate being complimented because it means nothing to them but creates an uncomfortable social debt
Women always have covert power—ESPECIALLY in brutally patriarchal societies
Arcto points out that feminism can actually serve as a release valve for the longhouse and in that sense benefit men
Did female suffrage actually impact politics? Walt argues no.
Arcto praises Mary Harrington’s account of feminism as a reaction to industrialization and its material impact on sexed labor dynamics
Walt maintains that Rob is actually laughably vanilla
Walt argues that Rob is topping from the bottom with his fetishpoasting
Robert agrees and argues “there is a Nietzschean will to power to imposing your psychosocial imperative on others”
The word “Jewess” is inherently sexual and provokes an erotic response
Walt sees Jewesses as elves, and suspects he feels the same way when he seduces a Jewish woman that black guys feel when they seduce a white wahman
Read Rob’s latest:
Share this post