>author has never been in a committed long-term relationship
>writes about interpersonal relationships and feelings
>author has never been in a committed long-term relationship. >writes about interpersonal relationships and feelings
Comments are closed.
>author had never built and used a time machine
>writes historical fiction
hey, you can't see the forest from the trees right? i would take a third party's insight seriously if they were telling me about my own relationship, regardless of who they were, so if they wrote based on what they witnessed i see no flaw. can a guy write about a philanderer if he's never cheated? why not?
This, but I generally try to avoid any feelings or sentimentalities in my work.
▶
>author is a woman writing in current year
>writes any story that isn't autobiographical or about one of her exes
kek, sorry, this doesn't exist
>author has never had interesting life experiences
>tries to write about interesting life experiences
has never been in a committed long-term relationship
about interpersonal relationships and feelings
why is this bad? A science fiction author has never lived in 5000AD colonized mars either
Do autists actually think like this? It's not the same thing.
You can transfer your knowledge of living in one kind of society and just change the architecture, social mores, language, technology etc. It's simple. But you can never come close to actually knowing what it's like to be in a loving relationship unless you have been in one, no matter how hard you strain your imagination to try to imagine the profound significance of a passing touch of skin on skin, the intimate late-night conversations under the duvet cover, the days of walking side-by-side swinging your joined hands and just experiencing the flood of noumenal forces surging through you both because you have both opened the portal of transcendent love. Will never know in any meaningful way the vast variety of emotions that you unlock once in a committed long-term relationship, as if you've just completed the training levels and now get access to a ton more emotions and stuff. Will never know what it's like to introduce your loved one to your parents and to look at her and know she is the one you want to spend your life wife. A stunted tabletop gamer will never know, whether he is playing with concrete blocks or super-special-Pluto-titanium spaceships. See ya later kid, hehe.
cringe. i'm in a 5 year relationship currently so this isn't some cope dude but if you actually think this you are moronic. paul mccartney wrote songs about being elderly when he was like 19. it's a simple concept called empathy.
>You can x. It's simple. But you can never y.
You provided zero arguments. You just repeated your initial opinion.
>step on one stone
>see another stone of a different colour
>hmm, I guess I can reasonably assume what standing on that other stone will feel like
>be alone, with no experience of romantic intimacy, love and any of the immense feelings that come with being in a committed long-term relationship
>see other people your age smiling, laughing, touching, talking and generally experiencing love and life together
>y-yeah bro, I know exactly what that would feel like haha
Being in love and not being in love is like being alive and being dead. Do you know what it feels like to be dead? No, exactly. That's my trump card.
If one can extrapolate architecture into fantastic fantastical architecture, why not their basic human interactions into more complex human interactions?
Your distinction is completely arbitrary.
Bro, this is literally Hume 101. You can picture a medieval castle wall (probably because you remember visiting one) and you can picture a rifle, in which case you can imagine a futuristic metal castle with computer-controlled rifles on the turretts.
You may be able to watch people and/or movies in and the romantic relationship that takes place, you may be able to *picture* yourself experiencing a vast variety of deeply, profoundly, incomparably amazing experiences with a loving romantic partner, but you will never actually know what that feels like in all its numenous complexity.
Love is not a stone.
You ever reflect on why the best writers of war novels tend to have been soldiers? Or why the best writers of erotic fiction tend to have had very passionate and intense eroto-romantic lives? Now, let's guess who the best writers of novels which contain romantic relationships will be.... hmmm.... I guess there's no way of knowing!
>You can picture x but you can only *picture* y.
What the frick are you even saying?
You can't just picture love the way you picture an aeroplane-industrial laser-combo bro. How is that so hard to comprehend?
Love is literally a gift from the noumenal realm, not just a differently coloured cluster of atoms.
As a spiritual person, I have to tell you that romantic love is just some neurochemicals squirting. It's good, yeah, but let's not get carried away here.
Holy frick you are dumb and must read dumb literature if you think making engrossing Sci fi is just about pasting a thin coat of paint over our society.
is this what 0 pussy does to a mf
The thought of someone straining to write all this meaningful poetry over what is almost without a doubt some garbage brained tiktok scrolling dumbass will never cease to crack me up
>But you can never come close to actually knowing what it's like to be in a loving relationship unless you have been in one
Yes, you can. Romantic love is just superficial chemical reaction which can be recreated with drugs, particularly MDMA.
I swear people who glorify romantic love are just as cringe as weedbros. They have have similar cultures like their own symbols (heart and cupid/weed plant and smoking bong), holidays (14th February/20th April), etc.
Soulless automaton.
I'll remember your words and chuckle as I take photographs of my girlfriend pulling faces in a field of sunflowers later this year.
Sure. I will see you in a few months when you eventually break up and ask for book recs about how to move on.
My work was infinitely more romantic when I was an incel. Pussy ruins a man.
>frogposting OP moron too moronic to seperate the artist from the art
Guy who has never been a frog posts a picture of a frog…