/lit/ - Literature

>>17595013
That's not how you make these threads, newfag. You need to be arrogant and smug.

>>17595106
What?

I pity the fool that gets memed into reading this trite.
That said, in case you're genuine:
Read the fucking book and figure it out. Don't ask for biases before even reading it you midwit neuron leech.

>>17595122
Here's some examples:
>David Benatar once again BTFOing all natalists
>*Makes you question the morality of having a baby* - nothing personal, kid.
>Your move, /lit/
>David Benatar, irrefutable to this day
>I think we got too cocky, Natalist bros
The appeal to antinatalism threads is not the topic of natalism, but the posters themselves who cry constantly and impotently about babies, sex and pain. Otherwise, this is only a book which can only appeal to those who have never read any real philosophy.

>>17595198
Kek really hard

The title only, in my,. opinions is fucking irrefutable, like, how could ever say that not fucking been is not better then been? Why? You don't exist then you don't suffer, why does this point make people angry?

On average, people are very comfortable with the idea of life reproduction being a harm in some way, it goes against deepest nature of being human, reproduction, almost all of way of life and culture is at its core about sex and reproduction, once you start to get away from the idea of reproduction or view as bad, it's natural the people will react in a strong way, deny reproduction is almost equals to deny life, in the end antinatalist are very right, and "breeder" can't deal with a logical fact that Benatsr points, it may well "cope" with it, or call antinatalist "depressed fag"

>>17595286
>Aren't comfortable with the idea

>>17595195
Cope
>>17595198
Cope

I thought I clicked /lit/ and not /tv/ but even books can't escape reruns I guess.

>>17595013
A waste of your time and pompous moralizing

>>17595013
FUCK YOU FAGGOT HOW'S THIS FOR A NON SHITTY REPLY

>>17595013
It's true

But it only applies to you

>>17595013
>(((Benatar)))