/lit/ - Literature

thats a commercial

I really need to have a peek into other people's lives, know if I'm overrating their life or if they lead a similarly boring life like I do.
I feel it's crippling me, the thought that a huge chunk of people lead much more interesting lives than me

but how can you if you have

>>7139699
I can absolutely sympathise with being presented with links I have no intention on clicking.

lol this is so degenerate tbh

>>7139699
You think that

>writing from the point of view of a disgustingly normal person who has casual sexual encounters and lives their life like an advertisement

is preferable to

>writing from the position of caustic bitterness and impotent rage?

Wrong.

>>7139791
this, if you live like a pleb, you will write like a pleb.

there are places that people like that will never reach, mountains that they will never summit

it's poor consolation (writing is only, after all, a substitute for living), but it has to suffice

>>7139699
I appreciate the effort, but you're not being efficient here. On /lit/, you'll get maybe 50 replies at most, whereas you could post something analogous on /r9k/ and have a several-hundred-reply monster of a thread. Get it together, anon, you can do better than this.

>>7139827
>(writing is only, after all, a substitute for living)

Explain science fiction.

>>7139791
>>7139814

lol u guys sound so bitter and cynical, but don't worry i'm sure you both contain the talent of houellebecq in there somewhere. i mean assuredly so - your moments of bitterness and impotent rage will not go to waste. i have faith in u anons

>>7139699
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>7139853
what's the difference

you think plebs are actually happier/more fulfilled?

>>7139853
I'm not cynical or bitter at all, but arguing that you can only write good if you have experienced some mundane bullshit like in the video OP posted is retarded.

>>7139849
substitute for being able to go into space and live in differently structured societies

>>7139865
they actually are, in general

It's actually noble, imo, to adopt a kind of perennialism of unhappiness (we are all equally unhappy), but I've found that, as far as beliefs go, it's actually TOO noble. Most people self report generally high happiness. 4chan is DEFINITELY not the norm

>>7139865
Fuck yeah they are. Friends and love are really all you need for happiness unless you're some nihlist NEET. I got like six close friends and they bring me all the joy in the world.

>>7139699
>write a book that resonates with today's generation
why?

>>7139841
This
You can post just the link on r9k without even a comment to it and you will get 5-6 times the anger/amount of replies/whatever you are looking for

>>7139901
this. do you think fucking dante, proust or Kafka stuck their thumb up their ass and said "Hmm, I'm going to resonate with my current generation!" Many didn't, many still don't. That doesn't mean that they're not geniuses, though

>>7139753
How is experiencing the world more degenerate than just reading about it, fam?

>>7139908
didn't resonate with their entire generation, I mean. none of them did the thumb thing (maybe proust)

I've been on plenty of holidays but it's never anything like that.

Mostly I just spend the entire time drunk, and by day 3 I'm generally physically incapable of functioning during the day time because I've been up all night on a load of speed or MDMA.

This seems to be how it works for most people my age.

>>7139866
arguing the opposite as constitute is just as retarded. why can't we accept true talent transcends experience? even if it does not reflect our own perspective

Ah, yes literaly the only thing our generation does is going on holiday in europe at the expense of local males in their twenties

Even as a "normie" I find Tinder repulsive.

>>7139925
>why can't we accept true talent transcends experience?

But it does not m8. The true genius writers, spent days, weeks, months and years, to become good, even if they had a knack for it to begin with. Writing quality literature is not like singing, nobody is born with the ability to write like Shakespeare.

So, SOME talent can transcend experience, but not writing. Writing requires work.

>>7139941
I'm not up on the newest trends, what is tinder?

>>7139878
Statistically speaking an average Western country is going to report being about a 7 on a scale of 1-10 for happiness/life satisfaction.

I don't know about you guys, but unless you're going through trauma like depression or chronic unemployment, 7 is more likely "I suppose I'm pretty happy" than "I'm routinely happier than average."

These self-reported measures suffer from major bias: They don't work like IQ, where if you're more happy, you're more happy than other people. Rather, they measure it independently of others, like you would rate a movie or a book, and so you're not getting a real picture of how happy anyone actually is. You might think that (hypothetically) both Forrest Gump and The Birds are essentially equally good films because they both score 8.5 on Metacritic, but it's comparing apples and oranges. The same with measuring happiness. A 5 on the happiness scale for you is probably much different from a 5 on the happiness scale for someone else. Like a movie review, it undoubtedly suffers from "inflation."

Absolutely disgusting

>>7139951
Basically an app that removes all of the work from casual sex. I only used it twice and uninstalled it, but some of my sleazier friends are able to fuck someone new virtually everyday if they really want to.

>>7139896
This. The happiest life someone of moderate to high intelligence could lead is learning to balance their love of literature and learning/studying with a live filled with productive work, love interests, and close friends. It's the blance that's hard to reach that makes life the most fulfilled.

Get it together plebs

>>7139699
Fuck, I hate this generation so much.

>>7139909
>Tainting your being with experience
I'm vomiting irl rn tbh

>>7139978
Why?

>>7139922
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False-consensus_effect

>>7139980
A generation of apathetic hedonists. The values of today's society are all messed up.

I guess that's the consequence of a prolonged peace time.

>>7139878
>he hasn't realised that this is suffering

normies don't read

>>7139909
not him but even the broken clock of /pol/ buzzwords

>>7139699
More like this one, those are the nowadays standards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOHDkIxyu2A

>>7139984
so your argument is that it is better for a culture to have its young men be killed in combat, or kill others in combat and return all pstd rather than for the young people to fuck more easily and more often?

you realize how that makes you sound, right?

>>7140017
>so your argument is that it is better for a culture to have its young men be killed in combat, or kill others in combat and return all pstd rather than for the young people to fuck more easily and more often?
Yes.

>you realize how that makes you sound, right?
Reactionary? Sure. I don't expect my contemporaries to understand me.

>>7140017
As long as I don't have to go to war, sure. Let the normies die in combat while I protect the home front and fuck all their bitches.

>>7140022
You're a bitter misanthrope, what's there to understand? Of course I assume you yourself want to go to war and die, correct? Why haven't you done this already? Are you posting on /lit/ from Afghanistan?

>>7140022
>I don't expect my contemporaries to understand me.
The problem is we do understand you. Get help.

>>7140025
>as long as I don't have to go to war
Any war not fought against literal barbarians would probably have you drafted; I even think academia could save you with today's anti-intellectualism.

>>7139978
every generation is the same anon, always have been always will be

My generation is a generation that grow up unemployed or with some worthless education, stuck in a infantile relation with our parents and other authorities until way in our 30s.

>>7140033
>You're a bitter misanthrope,
I don't think I am.

>, what's there to understand?
...proving my point.

I realize how foreign my ideals are to the average millenial.

>Of course I assume you yourself want to go to war and die, correct?
It's not so much as the fighting which forges the nation as much as the war spirit. Take any country during WW2 : war spirit made them do great things. Never was America as unified around a common goal as it was during ww2, and that includes those who stayed behind.

Once again, I don't expect you to understand. Your idea of a successful life is getting drunk and having casual sex. It's fun, I agree, but it's a sad way to go through life.

>Why haven't you done this already?
The government doesn't represent me.

>>7140038
>The problem is we do understand you. Get help.
I don't need help. Society needs help.

>>7140057
No, that is not true. History is cyclical and every civilization goes through a period of decline characterized by a loss of morals, apathy and rampant hedonism. We are currently in the decline of western civilization.

>>7139699
>actually wanting to resonate with today's generation
>not being a miserable reactionary

>>7140067
you sound like youre from /pol/

>>7140076
Perhaps because I frequently post on /pol/

>>7140067
Have you been reading Spengler and Evola by any chance?

>>7140085
No, I've never read either.

>>7140022
>Reactionary?

no, I meant psychopathic.

>>7140093

>>7140067
My idea of a successful life is not being hopelessly spooked. You, my friend, have failed miserably at this.

>>7140097
I can understand how the two might be confused by the hedonist

>Whaaat? He doesn't submit to his primal animalistic urges? He must be crazy!

>>7140100
I'll get around to it eventually. It's just that there's too much excellent literature and too little time.

>>7140103
I can't take anyone who uses the "spook" meme seriously.

I get it, everything you disagree with is a "spook".

>>7140067
>My ideas are so foreign to the average millenial
If you think like that, you might as well die your hair purple, slap some Bernie Sanders stickers on your laptop, and you'll be nearly indistinguishable from the people you hate.

>>7140103
Yet, so is apathetic hedonism, if it's not a conscious decision, no?

Fuck we're fighting spooks fighting spooks that reject spooks. I'm getting confused. Even then we're supposed to accept spooks, but not allow spooks to rule our lives. Which spooks do we accept, or is accepting spooks a spook?

>>7139699
>Tinder
How about no? This is /lit/, and if it doesn't takes some hours of preparation and after work, then it's bad sex beyond contempt. Casual doesn't enter the equation.

>resonate
>today's generation

And we are not Lena Dunham. If you're not writing book about about syphilitic widows in 1840s Bremerhaven, the nex Tolkien-killer or gayniggers in space, then it's not /lit/.

>>7140117
I thought the average millennial WAS turning their hair purple, and slapping Bernie stickers everywhere?

>>7140132
>I thought the average millennial WAS turning their hair purple, and slapping Bernie stickers everywhere?
Write that book. Hurry-hurry! It will be the book of this generation until the next president is sworn in.

>>7140117
First of all, it's spelled "dye".

And leftist ideals are actually painfully mainstream. It always makes me kek when I see antifas parading as some kind of revolutionaries when all they're doing is repeating exactly what is the dogma of today's society.

>>7140017
>so your argument is that it is better for a culture to have its young men be killed in combat, or kill others in combat and return all pstd rather than for the young people to fuck more easily and more often?
>you realize how that makes you sound, right?
I DIDN'T WRITE THAT!

>>7140022
>Reactionary?
No, you're not. You're a fucking modernist that thinks that war is good in itself. Look what it did WW1 & WW2.

>>7140147
Why are you so offended?

>>7140149
I could say the same of fascists.

It would be wrong. But if you're going to take the liberty of equating tepid liberalism with the left, I may as well equate cuckservatism with the right.

>>7140123
"Hedonism" isn't a spook, it's just doing what you feel like, which is the opposite of being spooked.

>>7140116
You're right, it's not my place to say whether it's good or bad to want people to die unnecessarily. However, I personally dislike it. As you were, soldier. I find hypocrisy funny, but to be categorically "against" it would make me a hypocrite as well.

>>7140097
violence is not a primal animalistic urge?

it is the obverse of the sexual urge, just as primal. I'm saying to promote pain, suffering and misery above ecstasy and joy is psychopathic.

>>7140175

meant for
>>7140110

>>7140161
I gave you a writing pitch and you are retarded.

>>7140163
>I could say the same of fascists.
...What?

Fascism is the dogma of today's society?

We must not be living in the same country...

>It would be wrong. But if you're going to take the liberty of equating tepid liberalism with the left, I may as well equate cuckservatism with the right.
A lot of historically leftist ideals, such as minimum wage, progressive tax rates and the like now have the status of ineliable rights.

Prove me wrong.

>>7140170
>You're right, it's not my place to say whether it's good or bad to want people to die unnecessarily
Why would they be dying unnecessarily? Do you think that every single war was in vain?

>>7140175
I'm assuming you meant to quote me.

I wouldn't argue that the current lifestyle of this generation leads to "ecstasy and joy". Just look at the amount of depression and the high suicide rates.

Violence is indeed a primal animalistic urge, but the whole point is to control those urges. I see you're in favor of controlling violence, why not control sexual desire as well?

>>7140170
Not what I mean. Like how being "good" is a spook, hedonism has become an unspoken moral, where "doing whatever you want" isn't doing what you want. Think "Brave New World". Where you were given "Everything you want", but not everything you want.

>>7140211
You're just butthurt that you aren't taking part in the "apathetic hedonism".

>>7140211
>I see you're in favor of controlling violence, why not control sexual desire as well?

so I'm supposed to advocate self-control over hedonism of my own body, but you advocate state control over violence over other people's bodies; this from a guy who abstains from what he preaches because "my government doesn't represent me."

sure thing, faggot.

>>7140237
I am

>>7140241
>so I'm supposed to advocate self-control over hedonism of my own body, but you advocate state control over violence over other people's bodies
What? Where did I ever advocate for forced conscription?

You've got me completely misrepresented. I'm not a fascist.

>>7139699
Man those sharks are awesome, and the hagia sofia.

Why does she meet the same guy in paris as in Istanbul? He doesn't look like a Frenchie tbh.

>>7140234
I sort of disagree, but I'd be interested to hear more about what you mean by this. Are you referring to the idea that "doing whatever you want" must equate to some great passionate or rebellious action, rather than just living comfortably? If so, I'd agree that hedonism as it's seen now could be considered a spook.

>>7140211
I think humanity could have gone its entire existence without violent conflict, and been (in my humble opinion) much better off for it. As for controlling sexual desire, what benefit would that have?

>>7140270
>I think humanity could have gone its entire existence without violent conflict
Are you a Rousseauist?

I don't understand how one could hold such an opinion after a cursory analysis of history.

>As for controlling sexual desire, what benefit would that have?
Free love destabilizes society. The most stable societies are those with low rates of promiscuity and high rates of monogamous marriage.

Also there's the whole social science aspect. Falling birth rates, etc. Of course if you don't care about the future...

>>7139699
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qafe_FqKb88

>>7140286
I'd consider myself a Rousseauist for the most part, sure. I acknowledge that people are inherently violent to a degree, but I don't think violence is or ever has been more constructive than destructive to our prosperity.

And I don't see the need for a stable society. Why would such a thing be necessary?

>>7140256
you said the shared experience of war is better for a culture than sexual liberty. war is committed by the state, not individuals. we've been at war for the last decade on a non-conscription basis, so you're obviously not talking about that. you're talking about the esprit-de-corps that came out of WW1 and 2, i.e. conscription.

>>7140333
>but I don't think violence is or ever has been more constructive than destructive to our prosperity.
You don't think it was worth stopping Hitler?

>And I don't see the need for a stable society. Why would such a thing be necessary?
Well, for a start, an unstable society leads to an increase of violence, which you don't seem to be fond of.

To answer your question, I think social stability is a requirement for the pursuit of happiness, which is really the purpose of life, don't you think?

Sooo.. OP is saying we should write books about going vacation, seeing tourist attractions, eating ethnic street foods and doing other tourist things as well as meet someone to have a "summer flirt" with?

>mfw there are actually someone who would write a book about that and think it important

>>7139715
Soon you will be properly grown and will leave things belonging to the unproperly grown aside

>>7140342
>you said the shared experience of war is better for a culture than sexual liberty. war is committed by the state, not individuals.
That's not true. See the american war of independence.

>we've been at war for the last decade on a non-conscription basis, so you're obviously not talking about that. you're talking about the esprit-de-corps that came out of WW1 and 2, i.e. conscription.
Once again, I'm not talking only about the soldiers. I'm talking about the war spirit back at home too.

Furthermore, conscription doesn't guarantee a war spirit. Look at the Vietnam war for a counter-example.

>>7139905
Someone do this already

>>7140347
If no one committed violence, there would not have been a Hitler to stop.

Why is social stability necessary to pursue happiness? Also, I'd be interested to see an outline of the progression from sexual freedom to violence, because it doesn't seem obvious to me.

>>7139791
This. Writing about happy people is so boring.

>>7140350
He's a socially conservative leftist who wants you to agree with him that bourgeois culture is decadent and consists solely of commodities and cultural images.

He wants you to encourage him to write a new Communist Manifesto

>>7140380
>If no one committed violence,
But people will always commit violence. You said yourself that "people are inherently violent".

>Why is social stability necessary to pursue happiness?
Because it creates favorable conditions. I'd argue that the child who is reared by two loving parents will have a better chance at living a fulfilling life than an abandoned baby in a crack den.

>Also, I'd be interested to see an outline of the progression from sexual freedom to violence, because it doesn't seem obvious to me.
Sexual freedom correlates a lot with promiscuity, out of wedlock marriage and divorce. Those things in turn correlate with childhood abandonment, child abuse, and all sorts of anti-social behavior.

Stefan memelyneux did a video about single mothers (a consequence of free love) and their negative effect on society. You could check it out.

>>7140364
so… you advocate for war because it can potentially generate a nationalist rally, but you realize that this doesn't always happen. you think we should roll the dice on war--both winning AND generating spirit--at the expense of our citizens lives, getting limbs blown off, psychological horror, etc. instead of conceding that our culture needs to not be so puritanical when it comes to sexual liberty?

bro, it hardly seems worth it.

>>7140395
Let me elaborate -- people can be inherently violent, but they can also be made nonviolent. The paradox herein, of course, is that to make people ready for freedom, they must be controlled to a certain extent. A difficult problem, but one worth solving.

Most of the social ills you just listed are caused not by promiscuity and individual freedom but by poverty, mental illness, and lack of education. And widespread birth control and abortion would prevent single motherhood completely.

>>7140417
They're outbreeding whiteness as part of a Jewish plot to subvert Western civilization and enslave and kill all non-Jews. The only way to counter this leftist notion is to create a pure, white nation where women are the property of men.

Hats off to the glorious bastard who capitalized on casual sex, may you shine forever in the constellation of silly business models that actually worked.

>>7140427
See a psychologist

>>7140458
I have redpilled jpg's and infographics to back it up. Don't wanna risk getting banned though

>>7140393
Oh. Well, shit.

>>7140449
Silly? I dunno, it's just following the tradition of alcohol, which has been pretty successful thus far. These things market themselves.

>>7140211
Minimum wage is leftist like right to work is fascist. Don't be a dolt.

The left, anticapitalism, is far from popular. Small policies which anaesthetize the negative impact of capitalism are far from left wing.

>>7140465

I'm curious, what kind of books do you like?

>>7140465
ahaha

>>7140470

Surely it is a risky business model due to potential moral clashes between different segments of society. I'm quite surprised that no major Christian or conservative rallies or attack ads have flourished against Tinder, or at least some Fox News fear mongering campaign due to STD's.

Shit, even Uber has received more flak due to sexual violence than Tinder, it's pretty impressive how their business is going so smoothly when it should be a honeypot for perverts.

>>7140495
Evola, Mein Kampf, Schopenhauer on women, and the culture of critique series, hollebeck , anything written by Peter "Based" Hitchens

>>7140417
>so… you advocate for war because it can potentially generate a nationalist rally, but you realize that this doesn't always happen
No. I don't say we MUST go to war. If you go back to my first post, you'll realize that I was just answering someone who asked me whether I preferred a society which went to war over a degenerating society. Of course, if war could be avoided it would be great.

To be honest this whole discussion about war has gotten out of hand. All the worse since I wasn't the one bringing it up in the first place.

By the way, those two posts are not from me, but from a hilarious prankster :
>>7140427
>>7140465

>>7140423
>Let me elaborate -- people can be inherently violent, but they can also be made nonviolent
Barring an icepick lobotomy, I fail to see how that is possible.

>The paradox herein, of course, is that to make people ready for freedom, they must be controlled to a certain extent.
I don't like the direction this is going. Sounds Orwellian.

>Most of the social ills you just listed are caused not by promiscuity and individual freedom but by poverty, mental illness, and lack of education
That's factually untrue. Once again, I encourage you to watch the Stephen Molyneux video. Poverty and lack of education are a symtom of single motherhood, not a cause.

> And widespread birth control and abortion would prevent single motherhood completely.
Except that it clearly doesn't work, as rates of single motherhood are off the charts. Your ideology is in direct conflict with facts.

>>7140510
HOUELLEBECK

>>7140493
>Minimum wage is leftist like right to work is fascist. Don't be a dolt.
You ignored the progressive tax rate. It's one of the goals in the communist manifesto.

>The left, anticapitalism, is far from popular.
Probably has something to do with the fiascos of the last century.

Anyways, leftism, true leftism, is purely ideological and cannot be put into practice, ever.

>>7140528
>Poverty and lack of education are a symtom of single motherhood, not a cause.

Kill yourself.

>inb4 watch my youtube video!!!

>>7139699
Having used Tinder and enjoyed meeting some really impressive girls there, that commercial still freaked me out. The idea that a romantic fling and the accompanying emotional turmoil is an enhancement to a brief vacation in a fascinating city like London or Istanbul is gross to me. That stuff has its place but to me that place isn't everywhere I go.

>>7140510
I know you think you're funny but you're reinforcing the stereotype of the intolerant progressive.

>>7140548
I was suggesting a youtube video because it's entertaining. Of course you can google "single motherhood and poverty" if you want to read the studies directly.

Of course I'm afraid that would exceed your intellectual capabilities.

>>7140510
kek

>>7140506
Moral outrage doesn't hurt business in the 21st century.

>>7140495
>falling for obvious bait

>>7140528
I'm not necessarily in favor of totalitarianism. Like I said, it's a difficult problem. And it doesn't take a lobotomy, look at MLK or Gandhi. Societies are capable of removing their violent impulses in perfectly humane ways.

The fact is that if every potential single mother got an abortion, there would be no single mothers. If people don't do it, then they're either slaves to spooks (Christianity, "family values", etc) or they feel capable of supporting a child. If the spooks are removed, then all that's left are those who have the means to properly raise and educate a child on their own.

Molyneux seems like a fraud tbh, but I'll watch the video since you seem reasonable. I agree that >>7140510 is doing nothing but hindering discussion for both sides.

>>7140010
This is disgusting, I bet they haven't read a page of Joyce

>>7140603
>I'm not necessarily in favor of totalitarianism. Like I said, it's a difficult problem. And it doesn't take a lobotomy, look at MLK or Gandhi.
What about em? By the way MLK beat up prostitutes, I don't think he's the best example.

>Societies are capable of removing their violent impulses in perfectly humane ways.
3 million indians were massacred in riots following the partition of India. It was a bloodbath.

>The fact is that if every potential single mother got an abortion, there would be no single mothers
I'm just as in favor of eugenics as you, anon.

But do you know what is an even better way of preventing single motherhood? Refraining from having sex outside of a marital status.

I know what you're going to say to me. "What's wrong with having sex and then aborting the baby? It achieves the same ends as refraining from having sex". To make an analogy, this is like claiming that there is nothing wrong with Heroin use, because it gives a lot of pleasure, ignoring the fact that it rots the body away.

Free love is rotting society.

> If people don't do it, then they're either slaves to spooks (Christianity, "family values", etc)
God, I hate this "spook" meme. Makes you look like a fucking retard. Family values are not a spook, they're biologically ingrained in humans.

>Molyneux seems like a fraud tbh
He's a serial memester. Most of his videos are shit but this video in particular is just him relaying facts from various studies he collected.

>>7140535
holla back, player!

>>7140560
>can't handle banter
>takes soft science seriously
>>>/tumblr/

>>7140350

>Hemingway

>>7140643
Maybe MLK himself isn't a good example, but many of his followers were. Gandhi was a shit in his personal life too, but his followers too managed to achieve large-scale change without violence. The vast majority of people I know personally are never violent, the fact is that most people are capable of controlling themselves or never have the impulse in the first place.

As for the partition, the "spooks" you hate so much are completely responsible for it. That was completely separate from India gaining independence, it was a primitive tribal conflict between religious groups.

Why is that a better way of preventing single motherhood? What makes the loss of potential humans (the same loss that occurs every time you use a condom or masturbate) worse than the loss of pleasure in real, already-born humans?

Not a fan of the analogy, since heroin doesn't cause lasting damage to the body, and I'm all in favor of people using whatever sort of drugs they want whenever they want.

What are you referring to when you say it's rotting society? The only concrete negative I see mentioned in your post is the "eugenics", which seems like an attempt at triggering more than anything else. If you choose to call that eugenics, I have no problem with it. If anything that results in the loss of potential people is detrimental, does that mean you're against birth control? You do realize that overpopulation is a thing, right?

What do you mean when you say it's "biologically ingrained"? Personally, the only things I want to do from a basic biological standpoint are eat food, drink water, have sex, and avoid pain. The body doesn't need family values to maintain homeostasis.

Started watching Molyneux and he seemed utterly insufferable, so I'm currently reading through a study. Once I finish that I'll tell you what I think about it.

>>7140270

What if...

Like Religion, Or A dogmatic set of principles Hedonism, or the encouragement of apathetic hedonism was the set of "principles".

Think like how "The only rule is that there are no rules" kind of thing. Wouldn't this mean that hedonism has become a spook in contemporary use? Would using spooks, therefore, become anti-spook in the face of the contemporary hedonism spook?

I want to vomit now, why would you show me this, OP?

>>7140769
see >>7140393

>>7140764
So a non-spook, used as a spook?

that woman is stunningly beautiful
anyway if you can't write about an experience without directly having had it you probably shouldn't be a writer anyway

>>7140764
I think freedom from spooks is recognizing that you can choose to impose rules upon yourself (aka, you don't have to consider yourself a hedonist), but those rules are still there by your choice, and they don't exist as an objective truth independent of your decision to see them as true.

>>7139720
This tbh
>>7139791
Please let's not engage in false dichotomying.

>>7140804
I understand that.

I mean, what if "non-spooks" can be spooks for nefarious purposes?

>>7140787
Yes. Weaponized spooks.

>>7140816
What purposes would those be? Capitalism? That could be the case, although my personal brand of hedonism involves very little consumption, and I imagine the same is true for many on /lit/.

Capitalism is degenerate

Interesting how she travels around the world and has sex with many guys, but still works a dead end depressing office job at which she is so bored she needs to be distracted by a person she hardly ever speaks to -didn't talk to said friend all summer-.

Her "experiences" are fantasies, all she remembers is looking at her phone, making "selfies" and fucking guys. She only remembers the fights she had because those fights lead to her fucking the new guy.

I have had my fair share of fantasies/memories at my mundane workplace of summers past. Her life's going nowhere. She's never going to write that novel either, she'll be texting Caroline.