/lit/ - Literature

>>21301551
An autistic attempt at actually answering:
Suppose that phenomenological experience between men and women are actually distinct, in some part. Suppose then, only women writers can express this phenomenology clearly. The only way to glean a glance at these facets of the manifold of experience you don't have access to then, is to read works by women.
If we grant this, let us suppose another thing.
Suppose that policy should be fair. Suppose then that policy can affect different phenomenological points of view differently. Here comes the impact:
If policy makers don't read works written by women then those policies risk being unfair. Now let us bring it into the real world.
Without reading women, congressmen will make laws that don't consider the female perspective and thus will not be fair to the female perspective. One example policy would be the one of abortion, without understanding female perspective, we can only imagine abortion from the point of view of the prospective child and prospective father, and not from the prospective mother. Thus our policies may favor women unfairly as children are half/half women/men and fathers are always men. So we have 3:1 men:women honoring policy (at worst)
Other things that may be affected: technical standards being defined in accordance with the typically stronger and taller men, leading to cupboards having shelves potentially inaccessible to the primary kitchen worker. Women having greater access to disposable income in single income homes, leading to consumer products development targeting female only insecurities, such as skin clarity, or cultural expression through clothing, or camera technology developed to manipulate women more strongly to gain power over their culture.
Some of these things are less impactful as a whole than others, but I hope it's clear here that if the above suppositions are correct, even somewhat, there are downsides at the individual organism level and new avenues to exert power at the organization organism level. Bad for you, good for The Man.
Picrel: me

Noticed this thread last night but didn't want to post anything so it wouldn't get bumped. Glad to see it wasn't another circlejerk over the most pseudointellectual artist in popular conscious, at least.

also
>>20566334
unequivocally based

Books on being a TIRM (Trans Inclusionary Radical Misogynist)? Trans women are women, but also I fucking hate women.

>The man who the boy who the students recognized pointed out is a friend of mine.

>>20127848
He’s beginning to believe.

>>20125605
Correct, I am that single person. You’re welcome.

>>20117920
Yes, and? Imagine needing logically sound propositions to prove that matter exists. While you’re stuck inside toying with abstractions, I’m busy making my bellend pound the “matter” that is the back of your gf’s cervix.

I wanted to spend more time reading as a way to maybe get my life back in order. I am a depressed person but I hate whining about it. I hate to even admit I am depressed because it makes me feel like I cannot overcome it if I acknowledge it. Anyway, what are some books that might be able to help me out? I enjoy learning things I can actually apply to my life. Maybe dig myself out of this hole I am in. A friend suggested I read that Meditations book by Marcus Aurelius and I considered it. However, how helpful of a read is it?

>>19446761
I don't read books. I only read /lit/.

How can I reconcile my fascist views with the fact that I take bbc in the ass each weekend, any books on this?

>>19123693
I don't know my man, I've seen tons of academics ranging from doctors to engineers that can parrot a ton of shit, create widely cited papers and yet still have no capacity to work in the industry in the domain they're supposedly experts in.