/lit/ - Literature

>>11266376
Are we going to get Oprah.com's bookclub opinion on this? I feel I can't draw a conclusion until I know what Oprah thinks is the problem and titles I should be reading this week. Books for this feel?

>>11266376
>I’m not saying that we need to divest entirely from the mid-century authors like Pinter, Bellow, Updike and Roth who have so shaped American literary culture (though I’d personally be cool with letting Hemingway, Ellis and Wallace drift into obscurity).

dumb guardinaniggers

I mean they are correct. Having a perspective of human history that extends further than your nose will help you decondition yourself to the bullshit ideology of the day

>>11266439
Having perspective of upper middle class, ressentiment fulled guardian hack, will make more of a fucking idiot than you already are. Read through this, she clearly lives in some solipsistic world and want other retards to join her. They are the ideology.

>>11266390
Ok, but what is your opinion?

>>11266456
Thats what I'm saying. She's correct for the wrong reason. If all we had access to how life should be is what people like her tell us it should be there would be no anger.
These people are reaching book burning levels of anti-life

>>11266458
i'm sure it's on oprah.com

>>11266376
>>11265423
Please kill yourself

>>11266376
It's all so tiring...

>>11266376
Already got a thread about this.

>>11266493
There's certain atrocities against the human soul that can't recieve enough criticism

>>11266376
This. This is the first step to shoving literature down the memory hole.

*plop*

>>11266497
So a literally who writing about some left-wing ideology is an atrocity

>>11266513
left: chads of /lit/ who read nothing but clickbait articles and twitter posts
right: bookcucks

>>11266520
Its the Guardian. This is the most cited newspaper on Earth

>>11266529
The opinion of one journalist isn't indicative of the left wing as a whole, even though it's quite assbackwards

>>11266529
This is what a pultizer prize looks like.

>>11266554
>The opinion of one journalist isn't indicative of the left wing as a whole

It really is, thats what they get payed for. If they were some fringe free thinker they wouldn't be hired as a journalist

Holy... I want more

>>11266554
m8 it is exactly representative, these people dont have their own opinions, they all ahve to think exactly the same thing

>>11266376
I don't like incels but I don't understand how the author can be this retarded:
>their sense of their own alienation from women and their (almost always deeply misogynistic) conviction that this alienation has negatively affected their lives in myriad profound ways.
It obviously has affected their life in an extremely negative way. Humans are social, sexual animals, to be isolated from the reproductive process whether through one's own choice or not is very disheartening to the average person. Our entire biological complex rebels against it. This whole debate is fucking retarded and it just goes to show how profoundly damaging the internet has been to social cohesion and public discourse. I would gladly push this shit back into the shadows if it was possible. I can't go on any discussion board, whoever populates it, without seeing this shit.

>>11266597
>these people dont have their own opinions
They say the same about you.

>>11266633
And for the most part they'd be right. What's your point

>>11266621
also while ripping on what they call "white male rage" the author then tells us we should read I Love Dick, described by author Chris Kraus as "lonely girl phenomenology." If I shouldn't care about some thirsty beta losers why should I care about some thirsty thot? lmao

>>11266376
This will be an interesting issue going forward. It's not a surprise to me that his Guardian piece was written directly after Roth's death -- implicit in this discussion is a fight over his legacy. Consider Zadie Smith's little eulogy here, which also serves as a defense of his misogyny: https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/philip-roth-a-writer-all-the-way-down

There's no question that the past hundred and fifty years or so has an overabundance of sexually frustrated male characters, and their glorification in art is perhaps out of step with their actual number or presence in society.

Smith would likely argue that it's simply portraying (some) men how they truly are, and that it's art whether you like it or not. Spampinato seems to be arguing that this art encourages violence against women. The former is being too soft on flawed work, while the latter is just ridiculous.

Just spitballing though

>>11266554
nothing is indicative of the left wing as a whole, it's a constructed bullshit arbitrary political designation like anything else. What it is indicative of is where mainstream pseudo-progressive discourse is headed. Or rather where it has ended up.

>>11266597
M8y there's a lot of ideas that liberals share, but thinking that classic literature causes inceldom isn't one of them

she's clearly projecting her own inceldom

>>11266641
Because listining to the other sex could help you develope some empathy.

>>11266633
the difference is that my opinions are extremely unfashionable, whereas their opinions are literally required for their job.

There is no group of people i can point to and say 'i agree with them about everything' but if Ta nehisi coates says something they have to agree with it, they have no choice. and Coates himself has to follow the script as well, he can't become a republican or he's uncle tom.

the left inherently functions in this sort of group consensus fashion, it's how they organize in the first place without any real leader

>>11266668
the irony of which is lost on her, I think. Who cares what any lonely loser has to say though, I agree with that point of hers. There is definitely a contemporary fixation on sexual frustration that I think doesn't correlate with the average person's experience, things haven't changed significantly in the past 20 years just the accessibility and openness of communication which enables things like "incel" identity to emerge. And if "I Love Dick" was supposed to make me empathize with women it failed drastically, if anything it reinforces cultural stereotypes about female sexuality.

>>11266674
People make careers out of disagreeing with Coates. Every time he publishes something there are a half-dozen responses in Atlantic, Esquire, LARD, NYRB, et cetera explicitly saying he's wrong.

I don't know where you got this impression of a homogenized left, but it's simply not reality. This isn't to say that leftist groupthink doesn't exist, but the Coates example is a particularly laughable one.

>>11266376
This has to be the stupidest fucking premise I've come across in all my years. No exaggeration.

I bet 9/10 self-professed incels haven't picked up a book since one was was assigned to them in school.

>>11266376
If you can't tell that “incel” is an umbrella term for a fresh take on school shooters in attention-hungry media, and that the fad will stop after some time, you are not wise yet. Read some books.

Moreover, this article made me laugh. It is exploding van tier analysis, and you should have fun as another thing has been globally memed into existence.

Trucels are too depressed and degenerate to read for pleasure. I should know, I am one.

>>11266692
The factions of the left have a tendecy to clump together in moments of weakness and to utterly fray apart into mindless pedantry in times of strength and prosperity. The worst thing that could happen for left wing purity and unity is for them to get into power.

>>11266705
This. Another article by a dumb cunt babbling about toxic masculinity.

>>11266692
not on the essentials of what Coates says though, his basic outlook is not up for question. The arguments are of the form 'we all want the same thing and have the same premises but disagree on how to move from a to b'

>>11266652
>criticizing a writer for his feelings

Fake
And gay.

>>11266795
Don't reply to the special needs poster

>>11266529
>Its the Guardian. This is the most cited newspaper on Earth
It's also notorious for being completely leftarded, which is widely known.

>>11266513
based

>>11266929
True but so is a good half of the West

>>11266795
When did i criticize a writer?

>>11266668
>wants men to read literature written by members of the opposite sex in order to develop "empathy"
>doesn't read literature written by members of the opposite sex herself, but in fact firmly advocates against doing so if the opposite sex is the male one
>thinks she can tell others to be more "empathetic"
This is why everyone only pretends to like you and why the majority of men will never get on board with your Cult Of Vagina™.

>>11266950
Yeah that's pretty much how politics work in 2018

so what is /pol/'s response to her point that it is only white cuck bois turning mass shooters when their sexual advances get rejected?

do blacks and browns have that same sense of entitlement to sex as the whites and do they resort to terrorism to cope with it?

>>11266641
The problem with liberals is their moral pedestal is ultimately grounded on nothing more than narcissism. Their love affair with difference is purely skin deep, restricted to the most superficial characteristics, beyond that they have problems even imagining the existence of other minds. When they talk about 'empathy' what they really mean is conformity, everyone should think like them and become a perpetually aggrieved narcissist hedonist.

>>11267104
>so what is /pol/'s response to her point that it is only white cuck bois turning mass shooters when their sexual advances get rejected?

what's her sample size?

>>11267104
>do blacks and browns have that same sense of entitlement to sex as the whites and do they resort to terrorism to cope with it?

Nah, they just commit way more rape.

>>11266795
The whole end game of the left is to legislate male feelings.
They unironically think they're entitled to outlaw any expression of hate done by a man (no matter if verbal, written or physical), but at the same time mandate that every emotion felt by a woman be met with the utmost respect.
It will get to the point where they'll claim that men need to ask women's consent before falling in love with them, lest they'll be accused of "emotional sexual assault".
Fucking screencap this.

>>11267104
east asians do it as well actually. I think it must be a high IQ thing, blacks and assorted brown people seem to just rape or become terrorists

>>11267104
Sexual harassment and assault are the norm in many parts of MENA. Many of my women friends who have visited places like Morocco, Egypt and Jordan had numerous bad experiences or near assaults. Also their religion requires women to be covered up because they can't handle uncovered women, when my friends didn't go out covered up they were catcalled endlessly by thirsty dudes. If you want to see real creepy incel-tier delusion spend some time around thirsty middle eastern or south asian dudes.

>>11267137
oh I'll screencap it alright...

Congratulations! You have once again succeeded in posting a thinly-veiled 'literature' thread with the intention to gossip like a schoolgirl!

>>11267104
What percentage of white men commit mass shootings?

>>11267160
This

>>11267104
White people love freedom and human life and won't accept being treated like animals like the lesser races have always done

>>11267235
What is capitalism

>>11267241
>capital cares about race

>>11267241
Its the greatest invention God ever gave mankind

>>11267164
white men commit most mass shootings. but they don't get othered and demonised like muslims are. this is an obvious racist double standard. gee maybe you should try being self critical for once. maybe you are sick with entitlement

>>11267261
Most of those Black and Latino ones are probably drive bys

>>11267261
whites wouldnt happen to be the majority of the population or anything would they, making this an unremarkably statistic

>>11267164

why did the creators of mass shootings decide on 'white men' to be the performers of most mass shootings?

>>11267261
adjust to population percentage dumbass.

not to mention they ARE demonized.

>>11267282
They're not, they're literally building a statue celebrating Adam Lanza in Sandy Hook

>>11267261
>56%
you cannot make this shit up

Yes burn all the books! Feminism rules!

>>11267261
What if I told you.... not everything can be boiled down to one's racial identity?

>>11267261
So your demonisation of young white men is an act of revenge on your part? Is resentment the best place to start political action from? Cleanse yourself of hate and see the world as it really is.

>>11267293
It can actually

Oh wow a political thread, so /pol/tards are just going to yell about how some random fuck makes a dumb opinion and assume that everyone on the opposite political spectrum is like that. just fucking kill me right now

>>11267305
/pol/ didn't write the article you hysterical mongoloid

>>11266513
based

what the fuck is the incel "MOVEMENT"??
are virgins out there waving flags and lobbying congress for a universal basic pussy program? ffs

>>11267311
read it again you illiterate, mouth breathing, imbecile, i didn't say they did. but they sure as fuck are going to complain about it

>>11267305
>anybody who disagrees with Guardian champagne socialists is a /pol/tard
btw it sounds like you're the one who's out of touch with mainstream "leftist" discourse.
>opposite side of the political spectrum
>believing in the political spectrum
>2018
1789 wants you back kiddo, you're a little out of step with the times.

>>11267325
you're complaining about pol complaining. pol's complaints are actually well founded since a very popular paper is publishing this opinion. your complaint is that anonymous posters on 4chan are saying things you dont like, which is much less rational

>>11267287
>literally building a statue celebrating Adam Lanza

Based.

>"incels" are literate.

most are bitter gaymers

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/oct/06/newsweek/are-white-males-responsible-more-mass-shootings-an/

>Newsweek said, "White men have committed more mass shootings than any other group."

>Newsweek based its claim on data from Mother Jones, which defines a public mass shooting as an incident in which the motive appeared to be indiscriminate killing and a lone gunman took the lives of at least three people. Under this definition, Mother Jones found that non-Hispanic white men have been responsible for 54 percent of mass shootings since August 1982.

>Another tally, with a longer timeline and a different definition of mass shooting, found non-Hispanic white men make up 63 percent of these attacks. Under both definitions and datasets, white men have committed more mass shootings than any other ethnicity group.

>Newsweek's claim is literally accurate. But it's worth noting the imprecision of this data, and the percentage of mass shootings by white men is lower than their share of the male population, according to Mother Jones.

>We rate this Mostly True.

she's right, 56% of the mass shooters are white cuck bois and that percentage keeps going up by the day

>>11267325
The Guardian is an influencial paper and the opinions expressed in the article about literature are representative of a wide class of people in powerful and influencial positions.
You might not like the fact shit is actually going on in the world because you have low stress tolerance but the rest of us are interested in protecting art

>>11267337
screeching about dumb journalists being dumb is old. can't you guys just ignore opinions that should fade into the abyss and let them not get clicks?
>>11267336
I called them fucking stupid too, but giving an idiot attention only validates his opinion and gives his shit newspaper more views

>>11267305
>le evil /pol/ boogeyman shitting up my board reeeeee
Neck yourself

>>11267358
>goyim just ignore whats going on around you, smoke some medical(TM) cannabis and watch some cartoons

>>11267358
journalists are the closest thing we ahve to a ruling class. Journalists along with academics and the people who write public school curriculums essentially control the entire culture, if staggered by a generation or so.

They are literally the handlers of information, they create the socially defined reality we live in.

>>11267323
>are virgins out there waving flags and lobbying congress for a universal basic pussy program? ffs

that's actually exactly what is happening

>The group has since evolved into a sort of male supremacist movement, but Peterson has offered a radical solution on how to fix this matter to prevent them from committing more crimes.

>During the interview with journalist Nellie Bowles, Peterson suggested that 'enforced monogamy' could solve the problem. Peterson is quoted as saying:

>He was angry at God because women were rejecting him.

https://www.indy100.com/article/jordan-peterson-enforced-monogomy-violent-crimes-new-york-times-incels-men-8359431

the JBP shit posting isn't coming from liberals nor are they the ones buying his tripe to #1 best seller lists

>>11267376
>journalists are the closest thing we ahve to a ruling class.

To clarify that, a voice for the ruling class. Thats literally what they get payed to do.

>>11267380
you're delusional if you don't think both sides who feed this insidious "debate" aren't two sides of the same coin. It's advantageous to both to keep it going.

>>11267353
le 56% face has a whole new meaning

>>11267104
You're like 900x more likely to die from a lawnmower than a mass shooting.

>>11267366
no you fucking braindead moron, just don't give them the light of day and they will realize that they will lose their job or at the very least get scolded by the editor for being inept at writing
>>11267376
If you think that journalist who live in their shitty apartments in a dying medium where an even ripples through social media before thy have a chance to even learn about it, then you're fucking stupid.
>>11267382
do you honestly think that rich people will agree with the extreme liberal agendas of the modern journalist who hate capitalism with the fury that hell cannot even imagine rivaling?

>>11267403
event*

>>11267403
get the fuck off this board nigger

>>11267413
U 2 bby :^)

>>11267403
>do you honestly think that rich people will agree with the extreme liberal agendas of the modern journalist who hate capitalism with the fury that hell cannot even imagine rivaling?

Obviously. Why else would they consistently pay them to do that?
Of course they don't believe this shit themselves but its in their interests to make the goyim believe it

>>11267376
>journalists are the closest thing we ahve to a ruling class
who is paying those ruling class journalists?

They really have it in for DFW.
They even forgot how much they Hate Franzen.

>>11267419
>it's in the interest of capitalists to breed sympathy for anti-capitalism.
how many Ds of chess we talking here?

>>11267421
journalists dont do it for money, which they make basically none of. They do it for power

>>11267444
Journalists is so broad though, the real problem is that all these major publications really would suck and swallow a HIV dick for maybe a thousand clicks, they also seem to have been runover by these psychopaths who manage the recruitment process however they like, which #metoo is also an example of.

>>11267437
They're not just Capitalists, they're Jews

>>11267510
there it is

>american journalism

>>11267539
>the guardian
>american

>>11267518
Its obviously the truth. Whether you take Jews as a metaphor or a racial actuality there is a biological component to the seperation of the ruling class that renders a simplistic Marxist reading of society as inadequate. We are psycho-social creatures not classes

>>11267376
>Journalists along with academics and the people who write public school curriculums essentially control the entire culture
>The kid that delivers my paper has supreme control over information.

>>11267647
this has got to be the most uncharitable interpretation of what i posted possible. Sort of impressive i guess

>>11266376

reminder that a certain mr dreyfuss rammed the term 'anglo-american' into our common lexicon

>>11267704
I have no idea what you're talking about

>>11267631
Relevant.

>>11267655
Cut him some slack. You have no idea how hard it is to post on /lit/ as a factual retard.

>>11267754
>God, nations, morality, manners, race, ethnicity
spooks
> Culture, science, beauty, class
real
>heritage
real but every generation has the duty to re-evaluate the wisdom of the antecedents.
>edginess
??

>>11267797
>>nations, morality, manners, race, ethnicity
>spooks
>> Culture, science, beauty, class
>real

>>11267797
Are giraffes a spook?

>>11267834
giraffes are an edge case, hovering on the boundary of plausibility

This spook shit is such a load of wank. Stirner is a joke

>>11267160
Is this supposed to be the new "back to /pol/?"

>>11267304
Race is a social construct.

>>11267874
It really isn't

>>11266376
Yes, straight white male writers are to blame with their straight white male point of views. What an original perspective anon. Bravo.

>As a recent grad with a B.A. in English Literature
My condolences

>look mom I posted it again!

>I had read many fictional accounts of men’s rape fantasies long before I had ever read a literary account from the woman’s perspective of rape, or even of consensual sex.
This intrigued me. You got any recommendations for sex written from a woman's perspective? Acclaimed female authors with literary merit?
So far I've only read some short novel by Simone de Beauvoir about her mother's death and a German book by Else Buschheuer.

>>11267951
she probably made that up

>>11267996
So? I'd still like to broaden my horizon.

>>11267797
your distinctions are completely arbitrary

>>11267951
who reads literature for sex scenes anyway, there are much more interesting ways to portray sexuality than just describing the act itself

>>11266376
I'm pretty sure women are behind the misogyny of the incel movement.

>>11268105
Based

>And these are just the books I read in high school. Don’t even get me started on DH Lawrence, W Somerset Maugham, Ernest Hemingway, Harold Pinter, Henry Miller, Saul Bellow, Vladimir Nabokov, John Updike, Norman Mailer, Bret Easton Ellis, or the patron saint of elevating male bullshit: David Foster Wallace.

>>11267797
>real but every generation has the duty to re-evaluate the wisdom of the antecedents.
Nobody has a “duty” to do anything. Human rights and entitlements are spooks as well.

>>11268158
I love how much they hate David Foster Wallace, he's so non-offensive it makes me love him even more

>>11267849
>”I personally happen to disagree with Stirner, so he’s obviously a joke.”
The only joke here is you thinking anybody gives two shits about your opinion.

>>11268278
why do they hate DFW, he's like the nicest guy out there

>>11268158
This is now the official /lit/ reading list

>>11267874
So are equality and human rights, but I mysteriously don’t see anybody working towards abolishing them.

The notion “X is a social construct, therefore we should just get rid of it” is unironically retarded.

>>11268292
Thats why they hate him. He showed how to be an authentic masculine guy in the 21st century and they can't stand that because they're doomed to be living memes

>>11266376
>I had read many fictional accounts of men’s rape fantasies long before I had ever read a literary account from the woman’s perspective of rape, or even of consensual sex.
Boo fucking hoo.

>>11268040
Pic related is exactly what you’re looking for.

>>11267382

>Journalists as the voice of the ruling class

You do notice most papers aren't exactly praying to Trump's Republican administration and Britain's tory government, right?

>>11268336
Thats because politicians are far from the most powerful class of people. They're a mere cog in the works at best to where the real power is centered

>>11267149
you sound like you're an american and you've never been around the world

>>11268346

>Actually thinks journalists are more powerful than politicians

Trumpian who believes in le "fake news media conspiracy" meme detected

>>11268306
This. They say shit like: “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”, but get mad when a man says, or proves with his conduct, the same thing to them.
Feminism is nothing more than the sublimation of the female victim complex. They want to be martyrs so bad, they see enemies everywhere they look.

>>11268336
>implying the US is ruled by the people holding elected office
Even leftist don’t think this.

>>11268336

Are you seeking to prove him right? The ruling class of the late 20th and early 21st century lies in finance and not in politics. Wolfgang Schäuble who was minister of finance for Germany until recently has literally claimed that "elections cannot alter economic policy" during one of the many conferences discussing the ongoing Greek crisis, and he is pretty much correct in that the only actual power of most contemporary governments lie in their ability to spark the financial sector to move their asses and invest in things (also bailouts of course). And they are increasingly worse at doing even this as time goes by.

>>11267380
>>11267382

Jesus Christ, you guys. Journalists are not the most powerful caste. They are at their best a counterhegemonic check on the excesses of the elite.

The downside is that this means journalists are sometimes tempted to use the kind of Gramscian philosophy that supports their counterhegemonic mission of checking power to troll the audience. See linked article and most clickbait sites.

>>11267149
this is ignorant

>>11267104
>do they resort to terrorism to cope with it?
This post is b8 but do you seriously believe that terrorists aren't incels? Or online pajeets aren't incels? Or gang raping African refugees aren't incels? If anything the incel problem is worse non-white societies because sexual access is caste or wealth based

>>11268355
Not what I said. Though as a class journalists used to be far more powerful than politicians.Its only since the rise of the internet that their power has been quickly extinguishing and made Trump possible

>>11268336
Do you think in 10 or 20 years we will be closer to the world journos want, or the one Trump wants?

>>11268355
He didn’t say that, though. He said journalists are working for the people wielding ACTUAL power, not that they themselves are those people.
You’re pretty retarded, you’re aware of that, right?

>>11268390

What Trump wants is to be remembered the same way as Reagan. So probably the one Trump wants.

>>11268399
This is true, a better way to have phrased that is the world Trump voters wanted

>>11266689
> things haven't changed significantly in the past 20 years
What a stupid thing to say. Feminism completely altered the male-female dynamic, and moreso in the last 20 years than ever before.

>>11268382
its factual

>>11268381
They have the most power in proportion to the consequences they suffer and the actual personal responsibility they take. I remember when Michael Jackson got off from the child sex abuse charges I thought until a couple of months ago that the evidence against him was overwhelming and that he got off on a technicality and just having expensive lawyers. But that was complete nonsense perpetuated by omitting, manipulative journalism.

>>11268381
>They are at their best a counterhegemonic check on the excesses of the elite.
lol what a retard. They're literally employed by the elite.

>>11266376
>>11266376
>>11266376
I don't think it's *the* thing that's treated with prime importance but I do think that generally white dudes dominate literature and that white and/or dude problems including sexual frustration are treated much too seriously

You can clearly tell who to avoid by their favorite authors. Bukowski, Hemingway, Palahniuk, Tucker Max, etc

>>11268403
we'll always get the world capital wants, and never the world desired by any particular set of humans

>>11268472
Its resentment. White males are highly over-represented in genius. Women are of higher average intelligence but the vast majority of highest intelligence are men. They're angry that people who achieve the most have their wants and desires talked about the most. Its all rage against basic facts, a system of rage built up against facts.

>>11266376
Sexual frustration doesn't disappear by perceiving it as illegitimate. What is she suggesting that romantically alienated men do? If "nothing" is the answer, then that exposes the ideology behind the incel hysteria: giving women maximum selection power without them having to deal with the emotional consequences of hearing the men they select against complain. They want it to be less acceptable to refuse to date chubby women than it to refuse to date Asian men.

>>11268472
This might come as a shocker to you, but no woman is forced to read a book written by a male, if she doesn’t want to.

You’re basically complaining that books written by male authors deal with male problems.

Meanwhile, I expect you would find it at least a LITTLE problematic, if I came out complaining that books written by women only deal with problems faced by women.

But I never complain about that, and you know why? Because I only read books I am personally interested in. You should try it, too, sometimes.

>>11268472
>You can clearly tell who to avoid by their favorite authors.
I couldn’t agree more. De Beauvoir, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Toni Morrison, Margaret Atwood, etc

>>11268555
well big boy, no woman is forced to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to, no matter how much of a ""nice guy"" he thinks he is
if only bitter men who like to play the victim would stop trying to blame "female nature" for their shortcomings maybe nobody would be having this discussion in the first place. "oh i'm sexually frustrated and it's everyone's fault but mine".

>>11268585
>no woman is forced to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to,
No one is saying that they are or that they should be. What we're saying is that articulating your frustration over not being able to have sex is also fine.
>stop trying to blame "female nature" for their shortcomings
There are circumstances where women's inherent sexual preferences can keep a guy from getting laid, and that the quality that they select against is genetic and unchangeable. In those cases it's literally not the guy's fault that he can't get laid.

>>11266513
based

>>11268585
>no woman is forced to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to

They objectively are actually and if I don't get the girl I feel entitled to I literally will start dabbing on niggas. I am to be feared and my desires are to be met

>>11268585
>big boy
Dude, stop the LARP.

>>11268585
>no woman is forced to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to, no matter how much of a ""nice guy"" he thinks he is
Never said I disagree with this. I am of the firm conviction that women owe nothing to men. I also believe men owe nothing to women, or is that a controversial thing for me to say?

Actually, even if it is, I don’t care. I don’t owe women my respect, no matter how “oppressed” they think they are.

>”oh i'm sexually frustrated and it's everyone's fault but mine".
The problem is that you think EVERYBODY thinks like that, when the truth is that some do and some don’t.
When I was a virgin, I too was occasionally sad that I couldn’t get laid. But guess what: me saying “Man, being unwanted sucks” does not equal to me saying: “Women should be forced to give me sex.” It’s like you think you’re entitled to men’s emotions, because you don’t want them to feel sad for being unwanted. But here’s the thing: I don’t need your permission to feel sad or happy, for that matter.

You are entitled to jack. fucking. shit,

>>11266376
it's the women's fault

inb4: t. incel

>>11268668
>I am of the firm conviction that women owe nothing to men.

Why would you agree with him on this. They owe us everything, every comfort they possess is from the labor of men. This prissy bitch writing about the literary tradition men created on technology created by men. If it was not for the male mind we'd have still been apes getting ripped alive by lions
Fuck this logic women don't owe us anything, men are to be treated with the admiration we deserve

>>11268469

That depends on how you define the elite

If you run the most successful pawn shop in town some dickhead might decide you're "elite" in their small world

>Male sexual frustration
Am I reading this correctly? Men get sad because the woman they want to fuck won't fuck them. At what point did this become a controversial observation?

If anything classical literature might be of some use to a man who feels as if he's unlucky in love. The males of classical literature, which this author seems to think is American or British lit circa 19th century, were either resigned to the fact that they would continue to be unlucky in love (Hemingway) or that they had to actually develop a personality in order to attract women to them.

>>11268585
WHATS GOING ON BIG GUY? YOU JUST TRIPPED MY WIFE

>>11268710
>At what point did this become a controversial observation?

We live in a society of people who aspire to be insects. People should only feel what the hive wants them to feel and anything less is unacceptable

>>11268688
>Why would you agree with him on this.
Because I think we should segregate the sexes. Women get the West Coast, we get the East Coast. No man is allowed in women’s territory for no reason whatsoever and vice versa. There will be an intermediary territory where people wanting to reproduce can met for certain periods of time. However, boys will go with their fathers and girls with their moms. Let’s see who will fare better.

And if you’re a feminist, it would be pretty misogynistic of you if you’re not on board with this.
This is literally your chance to prove that women are the better sex and live free from rape, sexual harassment, oppression etc. You’d have to be pretty dumb to refuse this as a woman.

>>11266513
based

>>11268710
no, it's the part where incels are being portrayed as potentially violent, entitled individuals who are also supposed to be tied to the "politically incorrect"/"alt-right" "movement" and the "women destroy civilization" rhetoric. rationalization of misogyny turned into an excuse for violence.

>>11268555
>>11268583
y'all have awful reading comprehension. just terrible

>>11266376
How's it feel to know you wasted time and money on a degree you easily could have taught yourself if you weren't such a fucking sub human. The only thing your degree gives you is the ability to say 'As a BA in english'. The worst part is you've obviously not learnt a single fucking thing in your degree because here you are proclaiming that your degree gives your thoughts some special authority to comment on things, all the authors you read and loved in uni would be rolling in their graves, they would see you as an utterly ordinary shlum with no redeeming qualities, you are the everyday man they hated.

>>11268747
Why do people think that they're entitled to not experience violence?

>>11268747
But that isn't happening. This is like that pizzagate thing, just a faraway post to try and tie your horse on. The literature this woman cites does the opposite of what she claims. It portrays loveless men as pathetic and lonely, not entitled.

>>11266439
Which would mean completely ignoring ideological bullshit spouted by the guardian.

>>11268747
Wanting men to not feel sad for being virgins is just as entitled as wanting women to give you sex just for being nice.

>>11268753
Even if that was true, nothing I said here >>11268555 is actually wrong.

>>11268765

The Guardian is inspired by the Fabian Society who drew on Marxist thought that acknowledged the social and class divisions of the Industrial Revolution. There is an ideological lineage there, even if they've turned from it with their nasty establishmentarian centrist bias against Jeremy Corbyn.

>>11268765
We need to pay attention to them to be able to defend ourselves and our children from their horseshit

>>11266792
a good point (not the poster you were talking to).

>>11266668
apparently not

Do you think that this article's book list was based partly on this board (or the macros/memelists it produces)? y/n

>>11266513
based

>>11269105
I don't know but it confirms we're on the right track

female isolation is a shit subject to write about because it hardly exists

men must fight in a way that women don't have to for attention

I like how the article made sure to specify WHITE men. As if romantic longing and unrequited love aren't archetypal stories that exist in the literary tradition of every culture.

>>11268488
This is questionable. I mean that women have higher average intelligence. There was a study that showed men in fact have higher average intelligence. The reason I remember this is because it angered feminists so much they made a big scandal over it. The hypocrisy of these people is so blatant that it's difficult not to believe that feminists journalists and academics have a serious personality disorder. They LOVE to gloat about any study that shows women are better at something. But God help you if the results of your study demonstrate a male advantage. Also they condemn the use of the term genius, unless of course such a designation is being bestowed on a woman.

I stopped using /r9k/ after I started using /lit/. I got into the classics, philosophy, as well as some more historical psychology. I find it helpful to learn about stories and ideas from the past that I can apply to modern day thinking. Many classic books are popular among acquaintances, friends, and women i like to know.

Incels are an issue BECAUSE of male sexual frustration, social isolation, lack of romantic success, and not being able to achieve their life goals. You can't just wipe depressed sexually unsuccessful men from the pages of fiction and literature and they will cease to exist. These books exist because they describe real problems and experiences, getting rid of them will just cause society to cope with those problems WORSE.

It just seems like somebody can't cope with the fact that if the men are doing badly, women will suffer as well (and vise versa) when their entire belief system is based around women's victimhood and rather than changing their views to understand the importance of making sure everybody is doing well in society regardless of gender, they call for a book burning because incels are books fault.

>>11266529
The guardian is one of my top-three favorite papers in the world because they break huge stories and flip the bird to the establishment, that's why it gets the Pulitzer. I hate the guardian being so profoundly ignorant of Men's issues that they would write an article like this. Yeah, the Great Gatsby is why incels keep killing themselves. Okay, you're really got your finger on the pulse there Guardian.

>>11268725
>we live in a society.

>>11268585
>well big boy, no woman is forced to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to, no matter how much of a ""nice guy"" he thinks he is

Seriously. Are you on drugs? What the fuck does this mean? You mean "no woman *ought* to be forced to have sex...." Please write intelligently.

>>11269242
There's an unreasonable optimism at the heart of the activist left that thinks that problems that are inherent to the human condition can be ameliorated through changes in our culture. Many of these people genuinely believe that if you teach boys who can't have sex that it's okay to be alone, then they'll never experience life-destroying sexual frustration. The really absurd thing is that they don't even want those boys to be taught that it's okay to be alone, or they'd work on making it less taboo to be an adult male virgin.

>>11266475
>These people are reaching book burning levels of anti-life

This guy is on to something.

Note the ugly, degraded language in pic related and elsewhere in the piece. I read a piece on North Korea a while back where some NK wonk said that the most striking thing about reading North Korean media is the relentless use of profanity and vulgarity: Reading their state newspapers is like seeing the phrases "cocksucking faggot" or "fucking retard" every couple of lines in a New York Times article. The language of humourless thugs is deliberately set at a maximum level of vulgarity so as to psychologically brutalize the population.

So its striking that the woman who wrote this thought it perfectly normal to use so many swear words in a piece intended for publication. Profanity keeps the readers' level of consciousness low, and this kind of unironic, non-literary conversational profanity in published media is corrosive to the language, contaminates it and the readers’ minds with inarticulate anger – hence profanity has been verboten in respectable media outlets since time immemorial. Not so anymore.

Thanks for that, the Guardian, cause fuck the English language right? We might as well throw away our patrimony, courtesy of Shakespeare, Milton, Dryden, Keats, Coleridge, Tennyson, Joyce, etc., they're just a bunch of white male assholes anyways.

>>11267305
The Guardian is a big league left-leaning media company and can legitimately be taken as representative of the Zeitgeist. Nice try.

And honestly your foul mouthed bilge is completely in line with the article's tone so who are you to complain?

>>11269275
What's ironic is that progressives like these have contributed far more to stigmatizing male virginity and the socially isolated.

>>11268094
>>11268320
yawn

>>11266376

>>11266513
based

>>11269367
Reasons for incels killing people:
>books about old men catching fish and bullfighting.

Reasons for incels NOT killing people:
>Social degeneration and the normalization of harmful behaviors.