Neoliberal here—with inspiration from Bernard-Henri Levy especially after his debate with Aleksandr Dugin, Eric Kaufmann, Friedrich Hayek, Guy Verhofstadt, Karl Popper, Matthew Goodwin, Milton Friedman, Nassim Taleb, Peter Thiel, Talcott Parsons, and Thomas Sowell, among others; a realist school bent that I would like to see applied at a micro level to culture, economics, elites, high and main street, hegemonic and power blocs, and value systems, primarily their breadth/internal diversity, cross-links, origins, pressure points, and talk; and socially liberal tendencies—I guess I will finally make a semi-serious post on this forum.
First, we need to define conservatism. If I had to guess, OP likely used it in the political sense. When most people use this term—especially mainstream media outlets—it refers to on-brand center-right ideologies: conservative liberalism (like liberal corporatism, or even social democracy, but with socially conservative ethics; libertarian conservatism; and neoconservatism (excluding foreign policy, it is paternalistic, qualified market interventionism in the spirit of one-nation conservatism). These ideologies are, in my view, unexceptional and unremarkable and easier than other streams of the popularly conceived right to broker deals with. Adherents within the national-populist—not one to ignore as mere fascism and not necessarily far right—school of thought are who I would view as the main focus under such a definition.
As a purely idiosyncratic tendency, I would forego using the term conservative and opt for the following terms: aloof, assertive, headstrong, opinionated, politically incorrect, or posh. Personally, these are the terms that I think of when someone invokes conservative in this sexualized context.
One of my fantasies is to make love to a tall woman—i.e., ≥5'10" and primarily of white European ancestry, but could also be East Asian, Indian, or Middle Eastern/North African—who fits into the Amazonian ideal of strong thickness—wide hips, thick thighs and calves, and a ≥45" buttocks, while she breathily calls me a black buck or n----r. Indeed, this is quite controversial, but it is precisely so delightful because it occurs in a passionately romantic context. What an ego tease!
Raceplay of that sort is always hot because it is complete historical nonsense. Consider this: you are on a plantation as a fieldhand; a voluptuous female mistress or, even better for the sake of fantasy, plantation owner takes a liking to you, privately because she has to maintain appearances, and routinely rendezvouses with you at night for a pound-out session, while hurling verbal abuse during passionate
strokes. Of course, we cannot romanticize this too much as the price for such reckless behavior was a castration or lynching, BUT still.
To better put things in perspective, imagine a voluptuous white woman, like HarlotsWebb or Kalgirl_up, who explicitly identifies with white nationalism but has a black boytoy on the down-low for sensual meetups on the weekends. There is no way that can be right. However, the possibility of it is a bit erotic, granted you can tolerate the obvious inconsistencies. Officially, she holds you in complete contempt, yet, for a couple hours each week, she will kiss your neck, wrap her arms around your back, caress your hair, squeeze your buttocks, and lock her Amazonian legs around your pelvis when she knows you are about to bust, all in missionary. It is almost like you are cheating/subverting history.
Also, note that there are some liberal, in the popular sense, and socdem women who you can tell subscribe to critical race theory but privately, maybe even publicly, fetishsize black men; even more interesting are the ones who, in one way or another, intimate that they like black men and view support for BLM as a logical extension, sort of like peacocking. Fetishization is not a problem in my view as it is necessary for all desires; quick experiment, imagine something that you are very fond and then remove all of the likeable qualities it possesses to check if you would still care for it. It likely helps that sexual prowess is not the core of my identity—but I claim pornography, not the BDSM, hyper-humiliation, rough stuff, can be a source of romantic inspiration, work of June Lovejoy or Shay Thomas being good examples—so I can easily shrug off such views on grounds of indifference.
As a final note, and in the interest of self-awareness, such a fantasy probably stems from a desire to please and earn and nurture erotic sympathy, respect, and trust. I grew up on R&B, and happen to be millennial (Gen Y) or Gen Z depending on who you consult, so that could be why I am the way I am, lmao.
View attachment 3927670View attachment 3927673View attachment 3927674View attachment 3927675View attachment 3927677View attachment 3927678View attachment 3927679View attachment 3927680View attachment 3927681View attachment 3927682View attachment 3927707View attachment 3927708View attachment 3927792View attachment 3927793View attachment 3927796
