Any Nihilists here?

[Belacqua]

I guess the issue is that I never saw nihilism as requiring one be nihilistic on everything.  

As far as I could tell from my limited reading nihilism is just a family of viewpoints that hold to certain positions, and that if you hold to a set of those positions you are a nihilist.

As far as I can tell, the set of nihilistic positions I hold are consistent and coherent, and make me a nihilist.

As I understand it, one of the main issues among different nihilists, and a difference they have with absurdists, is the status of the meanings that we create for ourselves. 

That is, we're all atheists now we accept that the universe is cold and meaningless. There is no telos and in the end everything we know will just crumble away. But existentialists seem to think that a meaning created by people counts as real. Not detectable by microscopes in nature, but also not just a mirage on the horizon. 

Like people talk about "social constructs." Marriage, for example, is a social construct put together by tradition and culture. Marriage might be completely different, or even absent, in a different society, and it isn't written into nature -- but that doesn't mean that marriage is meaningless. Mine, for example, has a hell of a lot of meaning for the two people who are in it.

It was Kierkegaard who started the whole existentialist thing, and started talking about the absurd. But he also wrote about how the commitments we make construct meaning, and this meaning, for those who make the commitment, is very real. 

What's your take on this? Would you say that someone who holds the universe to be nihilistic also dismisses the meanings that people construct for themselves?