/lit/ - Literature

I wanna fuck Sasha Grey so hard.

>>1986821

I didn't read the OP, but I'm with this guy. She could get both our dicks in her arse at the same time. That takes talent.

>>1986821

you'd need chemwarfare garb

>>1986821
I've never found Sasha Grey very attractive. I've always been attracted to the really skanky pron stars, the ones who know they are carrying around diseases but don't even give a shit anymore.

Posting the OP is like wearing an "I'm with stupid shirt" while you're alone.

>>1986827
hahaha

>>1986827

I like those ones as well. Especially when you get one of those rare moments when the camera catches their eye as they're getting spat on or forcing themselves to puke, or being pissed on and you can see that for just a moment, it's got through even to these hard-core fuckholes, and they actually want to cry or something, and all they probably want at that moment is some kind of simple human emotion that's been denied to them. Then someone starts throatfucking the whore while someone else fucks her in the ass and then it's just back to work.

I love it when they cry.

>>1986831
If I get the opportunity to hit that, I wouldn't even care about the consequences. Even if my dick shrivelled up and turned green, it wouldn't matter.

Can't I like both? I like the LOLSODEEPANDEDGY shit, but not because it makes me look smart. I just find it enjoyable to read. At the same time, I enjoy Lord of the Rings and Discworld and simple fun horror stuff like Lovecraft.

I don't get the status quo with literature. With movies, you are allowed to appreciate DEEEEP movies and still enjoy the mindless action flick. Whereas with books its like you have to pretend to only like extremely smart existentialist philosophy from before 1600 or else your credibility is in danger. Thats fucking retarded.

A little off-topic but most of /lit/ is English undergrads with to much free time.

But anyway Sasha Grey is so fucking awesome, she makes me want to do porn, it sounds like mad-cash. and for what? Getting your dick sucked? Count me in!

>>1986827

Wow. When Sasha Gray isn't skanky or diseased enough for you, you've moved onto some next level shit. You got any links, you magnificently perverted bastard? I want to see weeping skanks with the HIV getting donkeypunched and throatfucked.

I'm not really a fan of Sasha Grey. She's too anal-focussed.

>>1986850

She talks too much, but she's kind of hot, and she's pale. You don't get so many pale pr0n0 skanks these days. It's basically her and Audrey Hollander. And they're both pretty anally fixated.

Sasha never shuts the fuck up either - I wish someone would really slap her about in a movie, make her really fucking cry.

>>1986849
>>1986841
So I herd you leik facialabuse.com. But seriously though, this is a gentleman's board, and I put the site in spoilers for a reason. You have been warned.

>>1986843
What the crap are you talking about. Oh yeah, you're addressing OP's remarks.

>>1986850
that's the part i like

>>1986819
>OP makes a troll thread
>Turns into a casual discussion about the fuckability Sasha Grey
All is as it should be.

However.

Say what you will about Salinger, Kerouac or Trotsky, Dostoevsky or whoever. You do NOT talk shit about Kurt Vonnegut in front of me, and expect to get away with it. You ass.

5/10.

There is nothing wrong with reading fantasy. The writers you mentioned while defining the second group are not bad, none of them, especially the russians (it's a huge group of writers, and not all of them are Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, the latter of whom is great).

Of course, liking only canonised classics is, if not retarded as you put it, narrow minded at least.

>>1986841
Yes. I know that feel, bro. I kind of feel like a hypocrite, spending most of my day thinking about the wonders of literature, its almost magical attributes of defying time and its testament to our human urge for transcendence, then watching pron that is barely legal, and in any case morally reprehensible. feels bad, man.

>>1986879

>morally reprehensible

Is it really morally reprehensible to enjoy watching women being degraded for money? They're earning a decent wages for getting slapped about a bit and fucked in the arse while they puke all over some stranger's dong, and I get a few minutes of physical pleasure as I pull my pud. It's a win win situation, surely?

> Is this accurate?

No.


Sasha Grey is the perfect woman.

>>1986850
>>1986856
>She's too anal-focussed/anally fixated
You don't know her. She's more into deep-throating and gagging.

Didn't she say she's retiring from porn? I wonder if she was just using it to save up money for something more important, like when she worked as a waitress for a long time to save up money to move to LA.

>>1986879

>the wonders of literature, its almost magical attributes of defying time and its testament to our human urge for transcendence

>in any case morally reprehensible

Jesus H. fucking Christ, you can't possibly be for real.

>>1986894

She was in that Steven Soderbergh movie. I bet he fucked her in every hole.

>>1986895
Are you disturbed by how ostentatious his turn of phrase is, or by what he's saying?...because he isn't wrong

>>1986895
No, I am for real, though, after making an inventory of the clutter in my head, I think I might be broken. Also, Ponies are cool.

>>1986879

What version is it of literature that edits out the sex drive?

>>1986885
You're probably right. Though I feel that in a healthy society people wouldn't have to resort these kinds of things just to make ends meet.

On the other hand, working in the pron industry is probably on the whole safer than walking the streets, though shit still happens. Also, I feel that people who actually consume pron, generally poor people who can't afford mistresses, don't turn their noses up to pron stars. The community, as a whole, seems at peace with itself. In a way, the pron stars are almost analogous to the temple prostitutes in ancient Babylon.

I guess what really makes me squeamish is the reality that people, man to woman, inevitably hurt one another. I dunno.

>>1986916
hehe, D.H. Lawrence. For some reason I find him the least erotic of authors. Not that his work is bad, it just gets creepy when he goes into maximum overdrive, like in 'Lady Chatterly.'

pic related, it's OP

Yo dawg, don't be droppin' no trash on my Dostoevsky ya nig nig

>>1986925

I like this analysis - the people of pr0n are separate, but not reviled. They're not actors, not prostitutes, and they live in their own sealed world. You never meet pr0n workers. They don't have friends outside of the business, and yet unlike whores, we don't hate them.

>>1986819
Accurate, but incomplete.

I, myself, have read Harry Potter, LOTR and a few Stephen King novels, among lots of others you probably don't know (not hipster; I'm brazilian and just a few of our writers are internationally famous, like Paulo Coelho. The other just sell books nationally and don't get much international recognition); I'm a huge Neil Gaiman fan myself. But, I also love the hell out of Bernard Cornwell, chronicles, mythology from everywhere, history and historical books (I have a Malleus Malleficarum edition within arms reach right now), etc.

I like having a large array of writers, styles and genres. Some people I know just obsess over one author or genre like a teenage girl obsesses over Twilight, and that's kind of depressing.

But I'm probably out of the curve, I was raised as a bookworm and would rather read than play with other kids when I was young.

>>1986966

I don't hate prostitutes. What kind of maniac hates prostitutes?


>>1986925

People in relationships hurt each other more in real terms than two professionals having 'rough' sex. Think of it like pro wrestling.

>>1986975

Well, pic related, but in a wider sense, society does. They're generally considered the lowest of the low. Not by me, for what it's worth, but generally, your mum wouldn't want you bringing one home for dinner and announcing your engangement.

I read a lot of Russian literature etc, but I go out of my way to attempt to understand it by reading criticism etc. I don't consider myself well read or having an excellent understanding of literature, but I hope to one day be satisfied with my level of understanding. Do I fall into the second group still?

>>1986975

>Think of it like pro wrestling.

Pro wrestling where one participant gets a cock so far down their throat they puke, then is spat on and sodomised and then forced to once again take the penis, recently in her anus, down her throat once again (that can't be healthy).

I'm not complaining, I love this degrading filth, but pro-wrestling it is not.

Also, wrestlers get really badly hurt - collarbones and knees and elbow joints popping like lobster shells. Porn it is not.

>>1986986

There isn't only one society. There are several. I'm not part of the society that actually thinks it has an opinion to express on how someone else has to live, and neither are you, so, y'know, fuck 'em.


>>1986992

> Pro wrestling where one participant gets a cock so far down their throat they puke, then is spat on and sodomised and then forced to once again take the penis, recently in her anus, down her throat once again (that can't be healthy).

> Also, wrestlers get really badly hurt -

I think you've answered your own question, but I would say two things. 1: Actually, ass-then-cunt is unhealthy, but ass-then-mouth is perfectly safe. 2: In the past I occasionally fucked a girl who was into that shit. Does the fact that choking on cock turns her on, whereas porn stars who do it regularly probably don't find it massively thrilling, make her less degraded or more degraded?

I do think the last taboo is the power game in which the woman is the originating author of her own subjection. There are many women who are into this stuff, and I think it makes a lot of men uncomfortable.

>>1986869
I'm a Vonnegut fan and I think he's a bit superficial and kind of a tryhard.

>>1987064

He couldn't write, but he's useful when you're graduating from Harry Harrison to books for vetebrates.

>>1987090
Good point.

What ever happened to liking a book simply because you find it entertaining? Why does there have to be some underlying motive?

Am I the only one who sees this as ridiculous or do I have a severe misunderstanding of the internet?

>>1987552
You have a severe misunderstanding of the retards burfed by the internets.

If you're not insulting posters based on wild half-assed assumptions and demanding everyone read The Great Gatsby, then you're not a hardcore internetter.

soooo aside from the hilarious sasha-grey mods,

new topic,

motherless links

>>1986869
>Say what you will about Salinger, Kerouac or Trotsky, Dostoevsky or whoever.
>Trotsky

Do you happen to mean Tolstoy? He WAS more prolific of a writer than Trotsky, after all.

>>1987582
Trotsky actually did do some literary criticism and theory, and it wasn't as shitty as you'd expect. He delivered a savage broadside on the Russian Formalists. I happen to disagree with him, but it was still legitimate.

/lit/ consists of two categories of user:

1.) Those who like to read and will read whatever they damn well plase.

2.) Elitists fucktards that jizz over a small selection of authors regardless of their actual skill with the written word.

They're like matter and anti-matter, really.

>>1987589
>1.) Those who like to read and will read whatever they damn well plase.

>2.) People who really enjoy things that I don't.

FTFY

>>1987587
Link?

>>1987684
Zelda?

I read books for fun, not for study. I strive to understand what I read, but I'm not going out of my way to read boring shit just because.

Frankly I like writing more than reading. When I see a book I think why did that book become notable and how I can write better.

>>1987710

LICK CUM OFF A TOILET SEAT

CONTEMPLATE THE MEANING OF EXISTENCE

>>1987640
1.) Those who like to read
2.) Those who get mad when people like things they don't like
FTFY. Again. This must be very embarrassing for you, not being able to read without getting things backwards.

>>1986886

I like the bareentsein Bears.

>>1987684
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1924/lit_revo/index.htm

>>1986885
not when you are ostracised and nothing you say is ever taken seriously. See: this thread.

>>1986819
Seriously? Is this woman somehow proud that she's reading a beginner philosophy? I would make that face holding up fucking Principia Mathematica or A Critique of Pure Reason or some 300+ year old book, this bitch is just pretentious.

What do you call it when the women has the black bowl-ish haircut and red lipstick and all the leather? Not dominatrix. it think it's something betty from like 1950 or something.

>>1989413
beginner philosophy book*

>>1989413

>>1989413

You mean Bettie Page? And if so, what's that got to do with anything?

Indeed.

Harry potter and LOTR are the only fantasy I've really enjoyed.
And I've read works of the authors you mentioned, but I don't pretend they're huge favourites to make myself seem more intelligent
Actually I don't like them at all. I'm more of a Nabokov, Calvino, wodehouse, Fowles, Murakami fan c:
I

>>1989604
Offensive.

>>1989413
You would probably be less mad if she held up Twilight, but because she is trying to learn something you are mad. So angry. Not everyone can be you my friend. At least she is starting somewhere.

> Salinger
> Kerouac

You have the wrong board. No one here likes those.

>>1986819
Ivory tower English major, who strives to look intelligent by reading translated works. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

Why can't a woman show people what she likes to read without you guys flipping shit? Take a deep breath and realize how you are turning something utterly non offensive into something offensive.


If she's read any fucking book on philosophy, she is far more enlightened than the majority of humanity. That is not something to scoff at, especially in a position where everyone expects her to act like an airhead all of the time. I admire her for going against the norm. She's enlightening herself when she's not *supposed* to. That drive is pretty absent in a lot of you.

>>1989687

Have you seen that movie where they treat her like a dog and make her lick the toilet then this guy just starts fucking her in the arse?

Disgusting. I was shocked.

What if I have the same tastes as the second category but I realize that I am stupid and I want to become more intelligent?

>>1989687
Wanting to read isn't what is offensive. Its the "oh yeah, look at me I'm hot shit" attitude when its a fucking beginners guide to the dumbest philosophy to exist.

Its like script kiddies calling themselves haxx0rz

it was so lol how every straight male alternative weekly journalist totally fell for sasha grey and took her "gonzo gangbangs are a feminist act" schtick seriously when she was doing the publicity rounds for the girlfriend experience a couple years back. try assigning a mean second-waver dyke to interview this chick, middle-aged dinosaur jr. fan newspapermen of america

>>1986869
You sound like this faggot I went to High School with who thought anything that disagreed with his world view was a troll and thought Joyce was a literary 'troll' because he didn't understand Ulysses or Finnegans Wake.

>>1989755
seriously. it's like, let's just ignore that she's completely entrenched in the porn industry. just gonna not question anything she says, now all this porn i watch is totally progressive

>>1989743
You mean like what 95% of /lit/ is about?

>>1989720
While you were masturbating? Sounds kinky.

Man I forgot how bad meta-threads could be on /lit/

1) Sasha Grey is probably kind of a poseur but the people who get real worked up about Sasha Grey are also probably pretty dumb

2) Some people on /lit/ are dumb, some people aren't. Read shit you like and be thoughtful and stop talking about all this dumb shit.

>>1989781

Not that kind of shocked, silly. Morally outraged. It almost put me off my masturbation.