ITT: post instant turnoffs >Ask guy if he likes what he read

>>8541931
>ask a guy if he reads
>he says yeah

Ugh. MEN.

>>8541934
Too close to home, pseud?

>>8541931
I don't get it

For me, it's when someone "hates philosophy" despite not being able to name a single philosophical text they have read (I encounter this all the time).

>>8541933
lol

>>8541931
>Asks why

>he thinks things have a reason or meaning

>>8541931
That's a valid reason to like a book. Decent prose and an interesting topic.
It's probably about how he said it
Now my turn:
>ask a girl if she likes what she reads
>she says yeah
>asks why
>"well you know it's just like the movie haha"

>>8541959
This thread is about plebs not your male fragility lmao

>>8541953
Agree on this. When people mention philosophy they only mean using big words while sounding contrarian

>>8541933
kek

>>8541964
I see, but how is this related to my reply?

>>8541972
>b-but g-girls are dumb t-too
Pure virginity

>>8541979
Hmm I see. The thing is that I'm straight so I can't be turned off nor on by a guy, so I'll naturally mention a girl when discussing things which turn me on and, in this case, off.
>girls are dumb too
Yes some are, just like some guys.

>>8541964
>>8541979
T. Numale

>Fiction is a waste of time
Every time

>how did you hear about that book?
>it kept getting spammed on a mongolian stamp collecting forum, so i figured there must be something to it

>>8541995
>male

>>8542009
I can relate. A friend saw me reading V. and asked how I'd find that book (mind you, I'm from Bosnia -- Pynchon is unknown here) and I told him dead serious

>You're a pleb -- It's from a Taiwanese Knitting and Weaving forum

But it's cool, he knows I'm fucking autistic at times.

>>8541931
>spiritual, but not religious
>reading is my life
>I'm a vegan
>oh my gosh those dumb clerical fascists
Generally any form of leftism. It's a signal that she isn't worth your time, in the long run

>>8542186
Svi studenti engleskog znaju Pynchona.
Doduše, svi studenti engleskog su plebejci koji za faks u 5 godina pročitaju manje klasika nego ja u godini dana.
Neironično imaju "feministički distopijski sf".
Filozofski je govno.

>>8542172
we had no doubt you were woman dont worry >>8541979
>pure virginity

>Ask a girl what her favourite book is
>She answers Harry Potter

>>8542239
I consider myself a left inclined person, and find it amusing to talk to right wing girls, even more than with girls that share my political/economical views.

Why are right wingers so uncomfortable to be around better ideologies they don't have the mental capacity or kind heartedness to join?

>>8542241
Ovo je u Bosanskoj Krajini, vukojebini sela blizu Banja Luke -- a ne Beograd/Zagreb.
Jbg, tesko je biti patricij kad ti mama ne da da se umotas u plahte i hodas bez gaca po selu.

>>8542265
Talking to a person is different than being turned on by someone. I can talk to persons with different opinions just fine, but I could never imagine myself to be in a relationship with someone whose very concept of one is completely different than mine.
Being progressive is associated with promiscuity and failed marriages for a reason.

>>8541931
>>8541933
>>8541934
>>8541935
>>8541937
>>8541953
>>8541954
>>8541959
>>8541964
>>8541968
>>8541969
>>8541972
>>8541979
>>8541986
>>8541995
>>8542001
>>8542009
>>8542172
>>8542186
>>8542239
>>8542241
>>8542258
>>8542264
>>8542265
>>8542268
>>8542277
>virgins

File: ill cut u.png (52KB, 186x148px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 186x148px

>>8542290
this BETTER be a fucking SHITPOST friendo

>Infinite Jest
>Joyce is the best Irish writer
>Joyce is the best stream of consciousness
>Ayn Rand
>how can you judge it if you haven't read it? very well
>Byron's my favourite poet
>TS Eliot's my favourite poet because The Wasteland
>Haruki Murakami
>there's another murakami???
>BNW/1984 is literally now
>oh you read philosophy you must be smart
>poetry is for fags
>what's it about?
>Sylvia Plath is my favourite poetess
>poetess
>Clockwork Orange the movie is better than the book
>Clockwork Orange is good
>Clockwork Orange was hard
>nadsat dictionary
>reading Lolita for pedoshit
>reading things as left and right when even Stalin had better taste
>Huxley writes good stuff about drugs
>HST is only a drug writer
>thinking Nietzsche is atheist
>trying to talk about Schopenhauer without reading Kant
>trying to talk about Schopenhauer without namecalling
>abridged
>philosophy divides into analytic and continental
>dead white males as though half of them aren't faggots
>Kerouac
>the Lombardo translation

>>8542332
What do you like? Reading-wise. I don't mean that in a douchy way. I'm legitimately curious.

File: CARLOS.png (491KB, 485x616px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 485x616px

>>8542001
>Friction is a waste of time
Every time

>>8542239
>implying political inclination of any kind isn't spooked, and a sign that she is beneath you

>>8541931
The biggest turn off is in the facial expression.

You can tell when a girl is instantly bored by the topic of literature even if she tries to pretend she cares.

And when they try to pretend... that's the biggest turnoff of them all.

>>8542377
There's no such thing as an apolitical person.
Or rather, person without a worldview. It's not as much about politics as it's about where it comes from.

>>8542386
Better, though your persistent belief that people can truly have completely different worldviews to yourself does you no credit.
>>8542378
It's a pretty big turn on when you know they don't care about literature but they care about what you're saying, because they care about you.

when she uses "creative" as a noun, as a job title

>>8542378
Best /lit/ conversation I ever had with a girl was a stripper. Somehow a Columbia English grad ended up on the pole in Austin (although she was very good looking and at the best club in town).

She comped all my dances at the end of the night so I didn't even have to pay. It was p cool. Wish more strippers were well read qts.

>>8542378
If they're trying to pretend and you're just trying to hook up, it's a huge turn on because they care enough about you to not want to annoy you. It means you can probably fuck them.
In the context of a relationship or dating seriously, HUGE turn off.

>>8542407
>Somehow a Columbia English grad ended up on the pole in Austin
It's pretty common. You make a decent amount of money, and the hours are desirable.

Why the dicks would you go to a strip club though.
>>8542420
It's a turn off on your end, more than anything else. You're basically the sperg that never shuts up.

>>8542369
Some of it should be obvious from that list. Things that are fine:
>[anyone but Joyce] is the best Irish writer
>[Faulkner/Woolf/Hamsun/etc] best SoC
>almost any other Romantic poet though I'll think you're boring if you like Keats and a prancing pretentious faggot homoman if you like Shelley even if you've girl parts
>TS Eliot because cat poems
>Ryu
>Huxley or Orwell that isn't 1984/BNW
>you read philosophy let's exchange dick jokes
>poetry is life
>Sylvia Plath has some good poems
>Anthony Burgess is underrated
>reading for prose
>reading for philology
>Huxley and HST for social commentary and historiography
>thinking Nietzsche is a godtier prose stylist
>reading Kant
>reading Schopenhauer
>unabridged
>dividing philosophy at Scholasticism or anywhere else really
>reading for depraved faggotry
>not being a hipster
>Butler/Lattimore/Homer
I should have put Austen in the first list too. Doubly so if you mention her as a great female writer. Women can do better.

>>8542444
>almost any other Romantic poet
What a pleb.
>Huxley or Orwell that isn't 1984/BNW
What a pseud.
>you read philosophy let's exchange dick jokes
That's rude.
>thinking Nietzsche is a godtier prose stylist
That's right.
>Butler/Lattimore/Homer
That's just good sense.

All in all, 3/10 you're mostly a clueless poseur.

>>8542407
How did /lit/ even come up in a conversation?

>>8542452
>he like byron
The worst part of this is I know you probably pronounce Don Juan the same regardless of context.
>he doesn't like comfy discourses on tea and cigarettes or stories about lesbian nuns or indian contraception
yeah pretty sure we're not going to be having sunday conversations together
>dick jokes are rude
confirmed for not reading philosophy
>only two he got right are babbytier
we'll not be fucking, kid

>>8542467
>he like byron
No, he don't. The romantics were unnecessary. Keats had some value, because he had a some real thoughts. Others, not so much.
>comfy discourses on tea and cigarettes
>>>/reddit/

Or >>>/kerouac/, if you would prefer it.

I mostly just wanted to rhyme with pseud.

You are too mistaken to consider serious. You have some babbytier right, as you said, but you twist contrarianism and pseudishness into everything. You seem to judge by the appearance of taste rather than consideration, so I will not consider you.

>>8542502
>No, he don't. The romantics were unnecessary. Keats had some value, because he had a some real thoughts. Others, not so much.

lol

Protip: don't talk about what you haven't read.

>>8542554
You've read every Irish writer?

>>8542332
Please kill yourself, you fucking pseud.

>>8542502
>No, he don't. The romantics were unnecessary. Keats had some value, because he had a some real thoughts. Others, not so much.
You know fuck all about meter, because Coleridge is particularly important
>>>>/reddit/
kek. I expect this from someone who knows fuck all about poetry. >>>/pleb/
>>8542502
>You are too mistaken to consider serious. You have some babbytier right, as you said, but you twist contrarianism and pseudishness into everything. You seem to judge by the appearance of taste rather than consideration, so I will not consider you.
lol, you've just told me you know shit about even English poetry, and you want to try whipping your cape. You're not even doing pretension right; you're an insult to pseuds.

>>8542587
: )

If a character does anything 'sardonically', then I'm fucking done.

>>8542561
>futile action is demanded by me for futile reasons
keep striving
>>8542593
fucking masochists, you're almost as bad as Austen fans

>>8542463
I was there to take some time off from writing an essay for my Economy of China course. Had been working on it for eight hours and was kinda hopped up on adderall so I figured why not. She asked why I was there and it just kind of spun off into books from there.

>>8542428
See above. Strip clubs can be pretty fun if you go to the right ones - generally the more expensive the better, the guys aren't complete degenerates and the girls actually want to be there because they're getting cash.

Just thought a Columbia grad would have more lucrative career options, I suppose. Life happens though, she looked about late twenties so I doubt stripping was her life plan.

>>8541931

I really don't think is so bad. Plenty of people read and enjoy literature but don't spend enough time reading criticism etc to be particularly discerning in their critique or praise of a book. That doesn't mean they can't enjoy it, even if there is less depth to their pleasure than their might be for other people.

All this approach is is a kind of pointless elitism. So some people spend less of their time on literature than you do, who cares really?

>>8542604
:^)

>>8542609
>[s4s]
>can't even philosoraptor
smdhtbh

>>8542606
>I was hopped up on adderall
>so I went to a strip club
Why.
>>8542607
Fuck off casual.

>>8541931
Why do YOU like to read OP?

>>8542558
I don't care. But saying "Keats is the only good romantic because he had real thoughts" is absolutely pants-on-head backwards, since 1. Keats' quality is the sensation of his imagery and artistic technique, and 2. all his thoughts are tremendously influenced by that other Romantic, Wordsworth, who is the greatest and most influential philosophical poet in English this side of Shakespeare. Like, the artist as an Artist wouldn't even exist in our cultural currency without Wordsworth.

>>8542617
I have an unfortunately placed penis. Speaking of:
>>8542628
>Keats' quality is the sensation of his imagery and artistic technique
And his ability to use it.
>Wordsworth
Onomatology's cruellest joke.

>>8542639
>Onomatology's cruellest joke.
>turdsworth
knew you liked byron, faggot

>>8542663
Byron is matched only by Shelley in mental incompetence.

If you think it's hard trying to find decent boyfriend material as a semi-pleb, try finding one as an actual patrician. I'm in the fifth year of my PhD program and still haven't found any men who aren't cryptoplebs. I haven't been fucked in four of those years.

>>8542671
>shelley worse than byron
you just jelly he got to suck byron's dick, come on, admit it. it's the only reason to be this retarded

>>8542681
You're probably pretty ugly. But that's okay. I still like you.

If you are under 6'1, none white. Low iq. Ugly. Poor.
If I ask questions and he's tried to explain instead of telling me to know my place

>>8542779
What if he's Asian American and 6', but he's handsome, goes to Princeton University and was valedictorian of his high school?

If the author is a fascist, and released within the last 30 years, their work is almost entirely likely to be shit and because of the likelihood of shittiness right off the cover I'm probably not going to read it at all.

>>8542332
>Clockwork Orange the movie is better than the book
This guy gets it

>Clockwork Orange is good
what the hell

>>8542290
Good post. Shit thread.

>>8542681
Do you want to be fucked or you want a bf?

>>8542786
Minus the valedictorian bullshit. He should he brooding and love the emperor.
If he was a simple sweetness. Then it's okay.

>>8542795
Half the editions got butchered, and it's really not Burgess' best work. He wrote it fast for a laugh. If there's not a "but" immediately after "Clockwork Orange is good" it probably means their standard of "good" is pretty low and their range of reading kind of small.

>>8542790
>I'm a cuck

Jog on Wanker

>>8542807
Hello social welfare 501(c)4 non-profit Nimble America. I expected you.

To name a few

>Conflates early and late Marx
>Mispronounces the names of non Anglo Authors
>Reads abridged books
>Reads primary or secondary sources exclusively
>Handwaves the literary tradition of countries and continents
>Uses excessive quotes and references in the place of a considered opinion
>Their views are always copies of the last book they have read
>Doesnt read footnotes/endnotes
>Only reads fiction or non fiction and not both
>Only reads a book once
>Confuses basic and accessible symbolism for profundity
>Thinks complexity = or is a requirement for quality
>Has a to read collection larger than their read collection
>Unable to express their views and opinions on books they have read coherently
>Automatically dismisses theology and religion/ religious thinkers
>Uses drugs as a crutch to understand mysticism
>Is still a virgin in his mid 20s
>Thinks there are no quality female writers or that reading some Beauvoir or Austen makes them special
>They genuinely empathise with the underground man or see Werther as a hero
>Are logical positivists

>>8542806
Well it was a laugh. What would you consider to be Burgess's best work?

>>8542816
Earthly Powers

>>8542816
My personal favourite is M/F, but if you don't call the ending /b/tier, I won't respect you.
>>8542826
is a usual answer, as are Dead Man in Depford or Nothing like the Sun, both for obvious reasons, but I think a lot of people overlook his non-fiction and criticism

>>8542812
>Has a to read collection larger than their read collection

Nothing wrong with that.

>>8542832
Its intellectual obesity and vanity and unless they are a collector or trader in books signs of poor character

>>8542876
>vanity
Not it's not, you're just making conjectures. No one cares or fawns over you for having a 'to-read' list.

>>8542832
if you're in any way well read it means you're storing thousands of books you haven't read. unless you're an e-book hoarder afraid the internet will one day die, it's a sign you're underread or incontinent.

>>8542889
A sign of vanity, imo, would be to mark or boost as something you read a book you haven't actually read.

>>8542892
Sure, but no way I see vanity in this, specifically.

>>8542876
a man's reach must exceed his grasp

>>8542900
little read or incontinent aren't really turn ons m8. i think the other anon is construing it as vanity, which i suppose i could understand in that you're building some odd kind of monument to your future reading which obviously indicates your success at that reading to be very distant and unrealised.

>>8542908
>little read or incontinent aren't really turn ons m8
I wasn't implying that, otherwise I'm inclined to agree.

>>8542889
>No one cares or fawns over you for having a 'to-read' list

Vanity doesnt require others, its just narcissism, when a man starts buying books at such a level that they outnumber what he has read it is clear that he values the trappings of being well read more than actually being well read.

File: 0c7272313e6d04d798869c080c3f95ab[1].jpg (7KB, 200x195px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 200x195px

>>8542908
>little read or incontinent aren't really turn ons m8


>he doesn't have a poo fetish

>>8542907
Such "men" are no different than fat women who buy gym memberships and equipment which they never use.

Theres no intrinsic problem with having unread books but once they start to outnumber read books questions of character arise.

>>8542926
>Such "men" are no different than fat women who buy gym memberships and equipment which they never use.
nailed it

>>8542926
I have just started reading. My list is massive and I'm about 5 books in. Do you question my character for having just started?

>>8542954
The fact that you have only just started reading now (which best case scenario is your late teens) is a far bigger character fault/red flag.

>>8541953

I think people who don't read much philosophy just associate it with those jackasses who sit there going "what's the meaning of life.......? WHY are we here?????"

They basically assume philosophy is about asking worthless questions.

>>8542954
just stop reading shit green text by sad people (who want to prove that they are not unnessecary by amassing hollow knowledge and displaying it as deep convictions)

>>8542779
>low IQ
How do you determine this from talking to someone? I think this is the part where you try too hard, because you have no real way to tell. You meant to say something else.

>>8543015
If you can't tell someone is an idiot by talking to them, then you're an idiot.

>>8542290
true

No one cares what you think, old hag.
>>8542265
The left is not kind-hearted, it postures kindness to draw the masses.

File: $_57.jpg (44KB, 459x1000px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 459x1000px

>>8543370

>>8543376
nice meme desu ne

>>8543093
I'm sorry, we are talking about IQ here. Then just say 'idiot' instead of 'low IQ'. It makes you sound like one.

File: COM.TAB1.gif (15KB, 360x579px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 360x579px

>>8542265
>kind heartedness
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

>>8543396
Sorry I insulted you. I didn't know you wouldn't like it

File: 1469480714204.png (202KB, 373x345px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 373x345px

>>8543590
>using the black book of communism seriously and not exaggerated and faux to hell and back
>at the same time probably thinks the holocaust was exaggerated just as well

File: 1470526968308.jpg (77KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x500px

>>8543602
1. It's not from the Black Book of Communism, it's from Statistics of Democide (1997) by emeritus Political Science professor Rudolph Rummel who devoted his life to study war, conflict and State-sponsored genocide including Nazi Germany as well as the Soviet Union and China.

https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE5.HTM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Rummel

2. I do not believe the Holocaust was exaggerated. Strawman much, leftard?

>>8543636
It takes into account atrocity the United States and the West itself also committed in similarly horrifying numbers. It is industrialization and urbanization from rural that kills thousands. Russia wasn't the first time, and it's moronic to buy into propaganda every single soviet was a murder machine looking to nuke the world and commit war crimes.

History is a lot less black and white.

File: 1446021152855.png (198KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 640x360px

>>8541933

File: SOD.FIG23.4.gif (5KB, 441x330px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 441x330px

>>8543672
Most Western atrocities were in wartime or before universal suffrage, not to mention it gives a 20th century 1 million high estimate for the US compared to a 126 million high estimate for the Soviet Union.

Your argument basically boils down to the "Two Wrongs Make a Right" logical fallacy trying to justify the genocide in the Soviet Union by pointing to the West when in fact the statistics show over 95% of 20th Century democide victims occured under the orders of totalitarian regimes and not liberal democracy.

You are the worst kind of dangerous idiot unable to recognize the sacrifices made by countless generations so that we could have democracy in most of the world today, and not much different from the /pol/ poster you were strawmaning me for.

Going back to my original argument, extremism is bad and to assume everything to the left is automatically "kind hearted" and anything to the right is "evil" is the kind of manichean idiotic thinking that led to these things happening in the first place.

>>8543695
>>Most Western atrocities were in wartime or before universal suffrage, not to mention it gives a 20th century 1 million high estimate for the US compared to a 126 million high estimate for the Soviet Union.

I didn't know genocide and forced labor camps had an expiration date for nation founding. Can you tell me why you did it longer is more acceptable? Why the horror of long term 3 plus century colonialism and spreading of disease, and slavery was fine. But ten years of gulags is truly reprehensible. Our presidents had their own fucking gulags on their private property, and one fucked his own slave. Don't give me this moralizing crocodile tears bullshit.

>>8543706
>Why the horror of long term 3 plus century colonialism and spreading of disease, and slavery was fine.
Who said it was fine?
Keep building strawmen Iosif.

I'm also not from the US. You could even say I'm a victim of "colonialism" but I'm not interested in guilt tripping.

>"xenophobic"

Go look at the Google trends and see how searches of it have skyrocketed in the last year. Why? Because no one used it at all and people were looking up the definition. Social media faggots are desperate to make their pitiful offended selves seem valid by using big words. No I am not getting mad just thinking about it...

>>8543706
because whites won......can you tell me why its wrong that whites became superior? through science, technology etc.

>>8543709
I'm not him, but you are definitely trying to paint a positive picture of the West and democracy compared to the USSR.

Maybe you wouldn't say what the US or others of the West did in the past could be described by the word fine, but that doesn't matter does it? You are arguing that the anon you are responding to should be paying respects to the past generations of democracy and not the USSR, which means they were doing something akin "fine" in contrast to the USSR, which is exactly your point when looking at democide.

>>8542790
Well no shit. It's invariably going to be conspiritard-tier.

>>8542812
>Reads primary or secondary sources exclusively
What else is there?
>Uses excessive quotes and references in the place of a considered opinion
>Their views are always copies of the last book they have read
You leave my Montaigne alone!

>>8542954
His concern is with bought books. If you have not done the standard stupid thing of buying all the equipment you'll never use, you're fine.

>>8543695
>Most Western atrocities were in wartime or before universal suffrage
Backpedal backpedal backpedal backpedal.

>>8544052
>What else is there?
I meant people who either only read all primary and no secondary or people who only read secondary sources with the first being a bigger issue in literature and the latter being a bigger issue in philosophy and religion.

>You leave my Montaigne alone!
You know he is always the exception

OPs

>somone asking me if i like what im reading while im only in the middle of the book

>>8541931
>Yeah, I read quite a bit.
>I actually managed to read 4 whole books last year.

>>8541933

Quoted post probably meant as a joke, but there might be a grain of truth. Reading books is not something women of our generation in general will find interesting or worth discussing. Almost all my girlfriends have been uninterested in books and kind of derided this hobby. And I'm not young anymore, in my thirties.

On the other hand, I've had interesting discussions about books with women older than me. Just now, I was flying back from a work trip, and was reading Nostromo in the plane, the french lady beside me was happy to translate the few french sentences Conrad's had in the book.

Don't know if it's a good or bad thing. Probably neither. In a way social media and mobile devices in general have taken over that seat of portable entertainment books used to be. Nowadays the only people who read books are people who are honestly interested about them.

>>8541953
I can't imagine anyone would ever say that. Who?

>why

god i hate when people ask this

>what?

it just brings my piss to a boil

>>8544063
I linked him to a study of democide showing 95% of 20th century atrocities were victims of totalitarian regimes and another 4% by authoritarian regimes, he is backpedalling by pointing to the remaining 1% and saying "b-b-ut the west did it too".

I'm interested on defending democracy, not "the West". And democracy has a much better record than communist mass murder.

>>8544002
We can only speak of democracy in the West from the 1920s onwards when universal (male) suffrage was introduced, and in the USA specifically from 1965 onwards.

And yes, it obviously is the better system.

>>8544869
Those Vietnam deaths seem kinda higher than North Korea for us to be discounting war dead.