/lit/ - Literature

>>16529897
Garden of Eden by Hemingway. This is the book that Hemingway wrote while he was transitioning into a woman.

>>16529897

women are the niggers of the gender

>>16529897
>>16529918
men are not all they crack themselves up to be

>>16529951
yes - love Millay

>>16529897

>>16529966
I know! Is Lawrence’s good? I don’t see it mentioned much.

>>16529918
Go be a monkey somewhere else

>>16529951
Consceintious objector brilliant poem

>>16529897
I live in Canada and can't for the life of me find this available in any shop at all. It's so odd

>>16530548
thanks anon, that was a good read

>>16530447
good read. also pic related

>>16529897

>>16529897
Trips and she wins the Nobel

>>16530739
It will be Carson or Ernaux.

>>16529897
Why would there be any books men will never understand?

>>16530780
Men can't understand some parts of the female mindset just like women can't understand some parts of the male mindset.

>>16530784
Some of us understand them, but are appalled.

>>16530780
because the books ITT speak to a female experience of embodiment, consciousness, and being in the world that men might be able to rationally comprehend but never fully grasp. venus, mars, etc.

>>16529897

>>16530816
actually based

>>16530816
Is this pro-TERF or anti-TERF?

>>16530872
Anti but it was meant to be pro. Ever notice how there is far more Turf hate than actual TURFs.

>>16530819
I don't think I've ever seen a pair of eyes more palpably insane.

>>16530897
Something alluring about it.

>>16529938
just got this, looking forward to it

>>16530819
solanas fuckin whips - getting shot was the most interesting thing warhol ever did

being female should be a bannable offense on this board imo

>>16529897
i want a gf so bad

Have been rereading. It's so lyrical, nuanced and dark. It reminds me of the way she talks if you've ever heard a recording of her voice.

>>16530893
TERFs don’t really exist far outside of academic or literary circles (including pleb lit). But trans tend to also gravitate towards those circles so that’s where the conflict mostly comes from

>>16530819
My God, does she look like an annoying, nagging bitch.
I can basically hear that picture nag.

>>16529918
Women are to men as jews are to mankind.

>>16531622
She sounds like any other old bougie bitch with a stick up her ass.

>>16532102
https://www.etsy.com/uk/market/terf
Yeah TURFs are so not a stawwoman for crazy tranny's and there faggot crew.

Surprisingly good thread.

>>16532158
>>16532170
>>16532173
Low IQ samefagging moid. Pathetic

>>16532204
I agree, blessed thread. thank you to all the femanons who contributed.

Eileen Chang- works

The retard book that only retards understand and want to read.

>>16529897
This was great. I remember the part where the fly died sending me into the foetal position for a while. And generally loved the combination of modernist mythical method and the po-mo “discovered documents” thing as framing devices. The other work of Carson’s that I‘ve tried to approach did seem woven especially for women, but this one did not. It is kinda faggy, I’ll give you that.

>>16529897
What is the appeal of this book? I read it after hearing she was one of the most renowned Canadian writers, and honestly I found it terrible. What was the reason to break sentences? Just so that she could say a badly-written novel is a "poem"? Sentences are hands down bad, they sound like the short, minimalist sentences an undergrad would write in his first writing workshop. I got most of the classical references, but beside winking to ancient culture does this book have any good qualities? I am open to the idea that I am not getting something, here, because I also saw two presentations from this lady, one where she read her poems, and another one on "stillness", and both of them were quite terrible. The poems had the same poor quality of the Autobiography of Red (which I bought anyway, because it was recommended to me multiple times), and the lecture of stillness was a series of patched-up ramblings on the idea of pauses in sentence, verse and fragments, which ended up on some vague ethical consideration concerning how people should not "pause" or "still" immigrants in Canada (which I also found sort of hypocritical, giving that the thing was hosted by UofT and, as a foreign student, the burocracy to get in is horribly complicated).
I don't want to sound like a 4chan word-buzzer, but the general experience of seeing Anne Carson as a foreigner, hoping for a literary scene of some sort to be active in Toronto and having been recommended her work multiple times, I have to say she delivered two of the cringiest presentations I have every witnessed and sells for 20 canadian dollars one of the most terrible books I ever had the poor judgement to buy.
If I was filtered, could you help me understand why, and maybe see why she's good, if you think she is?

>>16532237
good pick anon
I have been reading Love in a Fallen City

>>16532321
>Books men will never understand
read the title

>>16532373
I did, but I'd still be curious to hear what women who understand it think of it :(

>>16532321
>Just so that she could say a badly-written novel is a "poem"?
>burocracy
>low grade, autistic read, blind to the nuance, emotion, synthesis of ancient and modern, tragicomic melancholia, dense allusions to art and literary history
filtered.

>>16532321
Even though the book is from the "male" perspective of Geryon it sort of reads like a walk-through of the mystery of female embodiment. The vulnerability, the pain, the resilience, romance, strength, what women carry in our bodies, this sense of being monstrous, alien to yourself. The way that Carson weaves these themes directly into the textual structure of the novel, which reflects her deep research and translation of ancient Greek poetry, such that the form and content become inseparable, is a moving feat of creation in itself. It makes sense to me that a man, especially a hetero man, would not be able to grasp these on an intuitive and conceptual level.

>>16532376
There isn't really anything to address. You are just saying "it is bad because it is a novel written as a poem". How am I supposed to respond to this? The structure is used for various reasons. Do you just want an example?

What do you guys think of the Neapolitan novels? I think they're a bit too plot-driven and fast-paced, but the friendship between Elena and Lila is probably the best description of female friendship I've ever read, especially in the first book. It manages to be full of 'negative' emotions like jealousy, competitiveness and resentment without negating the genuine love they have for each other. As someone who has always felt like a huge cunt for having negative feelings towards my friends, it has helped me deal with it a bit better and I think made me into a better friend.

>>16532378
>nuance, emotion
Those are way better achieved through non-minimalist means. Minimalism is often a way to conceal the fact that author cannot (rather than prefer not to) properly express content regarding nuances and emotion. Which is why this is the most recommended way of writing: short, incisive sentences, where you do not elaborate on anything, mostly because most people have nothing clear to say on emotion. With very few exceptions, among which are maybe Carver and Hemingway, minimalist writing is simply a mask for the inability to elaborate, verbally, on emotions. I think that this is what she was doing here, because most of the interactions (e.g. lover - refused lover) where rather banal, and finding something new to say on these things is more difficult than cladding them in classical references to give yourself a sense of importance.

>synthesis of ancient and modern, dense allusions
Noticed: but not necessarily a merit! Referencing other things is pointless if the work is not incisive in other sense. There is a lot of neoclassical literature from the 700' that tops Carson in terms of how much it references other works, but they are entirely derivative and shallow.
The point of referencing is this: why is it relevant to your work to reference Stesichoros? Synthetizing ancient and modern for the sake of it does not have any literary merit, beside showing that you have read books. What was the point of referencing the fragments to a story between two lovers? Is it really important that the story maps into an interpretation of an ancient myth, or is it just a way to give value to your work as a reference to something ancient and authoritative?
Take Ulysses, which also references an ancient work. The difference is that characters such as Bloom and Stephen stand out even without their mythological counterparts, as do their narratives. Even if one has not read the Odyssey at all, Ulysses is enjoyable as an independent work of art, because of its intrisic qualities (good prose, innovative structure, well-done characterization, etc.).
Could Carson's work stand independently from the material she references?

I am sorry if any of this came out hostile, I really don't want to attack. These are more or less my opinions, and I don't have much to add. I'd just like to read a nicely argued opinion on why she's good.

>>16532471
>Minimalism is often a way to conceal the fact that author cannot properly express content regarding nuances and emotion
stopped reading. go back to r*ddit and finish your undergraduate

>>16532102
The whole Rowling thing might make some women conscious of their terfness. I great number of women are terfs, they just never thought of it that way because outside of 4chan people are rarely ever confronted to the tranny issue.

>>16529918
I see it more as niggers being the women of race.

bump

>>16530788
You'll never understand the female mindset

>>16532577
lol

>>16533826
We’re all complex from one degree or another. But the kind of males around here are very stunted and underdeveloped, so quite easy to get.

>>16533883
Get help schizo

>>16533883
butters is right, 4chan males tend to be incredibly underdeveloped and thus easy to parse

>>16533893
I exhibit zero schizophrenia.

there are no threads on books women will never understand because that would include 99% of literature

>>16533910
>nooooo noooooo everything must be 100% rational
the eternal midwit

>>16533900
Have you actually met average young men in real life? I mean, 4Chan users aren't geniuses, but they're definitely above average in terms of intelligence, especially on /lit/

>>16530819
millie bobby brown is a radfem activist?!

>>16529897
I was going to make this thread today but you beat me to it

>>16529918
this thread isn't for you. you're too dumb to even get the lyric right.

>>16529951
One of my favorite poets. What's your favorite by her?

>>16529958
I loved moderato cantabille but hated the lover. not sure if I should try anything else she wrote.

>>16529897
why does no one bring this woman up when discussing canadian lit?

>>16530761
I was hoping Carson would win the nobel this year. I'm okay with Gluck though. I recently read Ernaux and she's wonderful.

>>16532237
what would you recommend as a good introduction? thinking about picking up half a lifelong romance

>>16532461
yeah, I mostly agree with all of that. I think they capture the experience of girlhood very well. I prefer days of abandonment though, it's more self-contained and relatable.

>>16534038
>My favorite? Why, Euclid alone has looked on beauty bare, of course.

Euclid alone has looked on Beauty bare.
Let all who prate of Beauty hold their peace,
And lay them prone upon the earth and cease
To ponder on themselves, the while they stare
At nothing, intricately drawn nowhere
In shapes of shifting lineage; let geese
Gabble and hiss, but heroes seek release
From dusty bondage into luminous air.

O blinding hour, O holy, terrible day,
When first the shaft into his vision shone
Of light anatomized! Euclid alone
Has looked on Beauty bare. Fortunate they
Who, though once only and then but far away,
Have heard her massive sandal set on stone.

>>16532549
>>16532552
>>16532557
>>16532565
>>16532577
filtered samefag

>>16533915
there is a thread actually

>>16532461
I love Ferrante specially for the way she portrays female relationships, specially friendship and mother-daughter. How wild and ugly it can be without it being a stupid version from a male imagination. I also really like the way she writes liberal male characters, that subtle condescending tone when she shows how they think recognizing a woman's intelligence is making them a favor.

Why are all books in this thread written by literally whos?
What is a classic that "men don't understand"? (and no, anything written after 1800 isn't a classic)

>>16534132
I guess the closest thing to that is Sappho, but since almost all her work survived in fragments women technically can't understand her either.

>>16534132
Almost all of them are classics, they're literally whos to you just because you don't read or know anything about literature

>>16534156
this

>>16534132
how to spot a midwit

>>16534156
I checked all of them and except for like 3 authors, all of the mentioned books were written by women who were born in the 20th century. Those are not classics.
How can you claim a book is a classic when it's not even 100 years old?

>>16534261
not an argument

>>16534310
>>16534156
>>16534132
i'll take
>women's writing suppressed, demeaned, and excluded from the canon for thousands of years
for 500, Trebek.

>>16534132
>>16534147

>>16534361
Shitty excuse, Socrates and many other men were suppressed as well and still managed to be relevant, because of the quality of their thoughts/writings.

Also, even if this were true, it still doesn't increase the quality of women's literature.

>>16534397
Finally.

I'm fine not understanding some of these books. Nothing wrong in acknowledging the female perception of life as fundamentally different.

>>16534515
finally an intelligent male take

>>16534515
What a good and sensible boy you are. You may smell my pussy, as a reward for this behaviour.

>>16532170
Always claiming other's accomplishments as their own.

>>16534598
>>16534581
>>16534515
>noooooo gender isn't real everybody is the same there are no categories

>>16534631
Who are you quoting?

>>16534631
schizo

itt: trannies

>>16534515
>not "understanding" middlebrow fiction and poetry
Why ?

>>16534679
Wittig, Kristeva, Irigaray and Cixous are not middlebrow, seething pseudmoid.

>>16534598
lmao femcels are lovely
>>16534679
To be honest, I'm not really interested in most of this stuff, except Clarice. In any case, if they can take something out of it because of their condition of being born a woman, I can't complain. There's enough good literature that speaks to me.

>>16532189
Sounds a little bit like you’re being a TERF right now

What is it about Lispector that enthralls women so much? I mean, I read her and I can intellectually grasp what she is getting at and why she chooses to write like she does, but it never quite resonates with me as much as it does to women, and that applies even to the books she writes from a male POV, though I guess I kinda could relate to the narrator of Hour of the Star to the extent he isn't read as a closet tranny.

>>16534725
>Wittig, Kristeva, Irigaray, Cixous
All destroyed by Judith Butler

>>16534885
How so?

>>16534885
butler has destroyed absolutely nothing tranny

>books men will never understand
>thread is full of men LARPing as women

>>16534931
Kek, fair enough. I'm the Millayposter and I'm a man (male).

>>16534725
>Wittig, Kristeva, Irigaray and Cixous are not middlebrow, seething pseudmoid.
Minable. That cope lol.

>>16529897

>>16532409
I read it 3 times over the last decade and, much as I enjoyed it as a ride rich in highly specific images & persons, was at the same time estranged from the theme of self-estrangement, or nature as a monstrous menagerie, since I've always been comfortable in my own skin, content with my own nature, "secure in introspection" as Elizabeth Bishop remarks of reflective poets in The Unbeliever. But that is exactly why I enjoy both of those poets--to see how they see, which includes what introspection can't. Yet there's one thing about a charismatic egotist that remains always invisible to such lovable freaks, a complete vision of nature's perfect indifference, the freedom to make of it whatever you will in the moment according to the mood's slightest movement, improvising outrageous fantasies with a lightness of almost unlimited supply, rich beyond recording even if you cared to one way or another--no project other than the instant of projection--the incalculable value of surface lustrousness--a certain height of saturation. There is nothing to be done about it, gardening excepted.

>>16534931
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/transgender-men-pain-menstruation-more-just-physical-n1113961

have any of you read the setting sun? I found it genuinely more painful to read than no longer human and I think it's the best writing of a female character I've read from a male author

women are retarded lol

>>16529897

reminder that 99% of female lit is coom brain

>>16535294
>Unique women's fiction story packed with emotion, humor and sexiness...

The greats could not even hold a candle to the eloquence of this review

i dont understand any books because i dont read them

>>16534147
anyone who legitimately enjoys greek lyric arises great suspicion in me

>>16530819
On June 3, 1968, she went to The Factory, where she found Warhol. She shot at Warhol three times, the first two shots missing and the third wounding Warhol. She also shot art critic Mario Amaya and attempted to shoot Warhol's manager, Fred Hughes, point blank, but the gun jammed

Hahahah women

>>16535249
Says the spaz with the romance garbage saved to his hard drive

>>16535379
it's useful for whenever the next time some castration thread pops up

>>16535379
It fits the thread. Only women like and understand this garbage.

>>16535417
Ut a male is the one collecting them and masturbating to them. Look above your post. He’s only here to troll and keep people from discussing literature.
You people don’t belong.

>>16535417
But a male is the one collecting them and masturbating to them. Look above your post. He’s only here to troll and keep people from discussing literature.
You people don’t belong.

kys buttertranny

>>16535561
Hi butters are you at all sexually active? Have you thought of getting with a younger male?
Maybe you would like to go on a date with me?

>16535709
>He said to his imaginary enemy

>>16535716
>are you at all sexually active?
Not recently.
>Have you thought of getting with a younger male?
Oh fuck no.
Can we get back to the thread topic now?

I'm gonna slit your throat tranny

>>16533883
"I'm a man but I like to wear panties and a wig" is not complexity, sweaty.

Honestly, I would consider you more mentally ill if you turned out to be a woman than if you were a tranny.

>>16535784
>>16535716
>>16535709
>>16535395
>>16535330
>>16535294
>>16535286
>>16535278
>>16535249

See all, this is the brain of the moid. simplistic, combative, brutish, “rationality” and “superiority” vaguely concealing a fragile subjecthood. A good thread with lots of interesting (and unfortunately lesser known) writing by women is derailed by pathetic men. You have the whole rest of the board to spam your coping sexism and anti-intellectual nonsense.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread in good faith ( de bonne foi ) It’s important.

>>16535862
Go back to your Djebar, honey.

>>16535829
butters is a real woman, newfag.

>>16535862
>unironically avatarposting

>>16535872
Then she is perhaps the biggest loser on Earth.

That's including curries.

>>16535053
> lines of flight into the monstrously beautiful
yes what else is to be done but to embrace its enveloping beauty and
> gardening
here is a golden beet from my garden, with wild grapes harvested from my woods, in a ceramic bowl i made :)

>>16535862
The thread could have just started by recommending/having a discussion about literature, instead it opened with hostility and you wanna cry about moids being mean to you, de bonne foi(d).

>>16535872
Then she should know the rules.

There are already more great books than a person could ever read in a lifetime and you choose to read female authors?

>>16535980
>There are already more great books than a person could ever read in a lifetime and you choose to read female authors?

>>16535932
The thread was started as a foil or counterpoint to
>>16525628
As usual, the hostility begins with men - men with inferiority complexes, many no doubt resembling the neanderthal in your pic.

>>16532170
>>16529918

Maken (The Husband) by Gun-Britt Sundström.

>>16535862
>that pic Ultimate pseud tier. Most women writing are essentially pretentious and boring shit. With a few exceptions, they don't have anything meaningful to say. Also, quite ironic that you talk about rationality when the female brain is less rational than the female. The male is essentially better in mathematical and scientific fields in average. Men can be either complete idiots or geniuses, but women are constantly mediocre/average. As Schopenhauer said
>Women might be talented, but cannot be genius as they are also subjective

>>16535862
>that pic Ultimate pseud tier.
Most women writing are essentially pretentious and boring shit. With a few exceptions, they don't have anything meaningful to say. Also, quite ironic that you talk about rationality when the female brain is less rational than the female. The male is essentially better in mathematical and scientific fields in average. Men can be either complete idiots or geniuses, but women are constantly mediocre/average. As Schopenhauer said
>Women might be talented, but cannot be genius as they are also subjective

>>16535330
Probably the least dishonest post in this whole damn thread

>>16536073
>obvious brainlet projection

>tfw you want to impress the mean boys but you only read entry-level midwit college rubbish so you share pictures of Lispector and Plath instead

>>16529897
The red is period blood.

>>16535999
Stop avatarposting you fucking tranny, you can LARP as a woman as much as you want, but you'll never be a real woman.

>>16535999
>As usual, the hostility begins with men
From a biological perspective. Hostility isn't a bad thing.
>More pseud pics
Cope. Feminist ideology is just pure slave morality and envy. They don't have anything meaningful to say more than muh vagina.

>>16535999
That makes more sense, but regardless your response to people coom posting was a bit over the top.

>>16535901
>Posting images. On an image board!?
>>16535932
>it opened with hostility
>That's OUR department!
>>16535953
>Then she should know the rule –of /b/


Fragile children.

>>16529897
>>16529932
>>16530498
>>16534004
>>16532313
> I remember the part where the fly died sending me into the foetal position

>>16534901
>waaah le feminine mystique
BTFO BY BUTLERIAN NOMINALISM, women are not special

>>16536118
>muh vagina
you came from one moid. and you will return to one when death's cold cave swallows you.

>>16536142
>Fragile children.
>Get hysterical when menstruation

>>16536179
>you came from one moid. and you will return to one when death's cold cave swallows you.
I was born by c-section, but ok. Even if it wasn't the case it yet doesn't justify women's narcissism to put and talk about their vagina every time can.
>Death's cold cave swallows you.
>Implying might death won't involve fire.

Only a weakling hates what he really fears he needs

>>16536294
>you came from one moid. and you will return to one when death's cold cave swallows you.
I was born by c-section, but ok. Even if it wasn't the case it yet doesn't justify women's narcissism to put and talk about their vagina every time can.
>Death's cold cave swallows you.
>Implying my mighty death won't involve fire.

>>16536179
>you came from one moid. and you will return to one when death's cold cave swallows you.
I was born by c-section, but ok. Even if it wasn't the case it yet doesn't justify women's narcissism to put and talk about their vagina every time can.
>Death's cold cave swallows you.
>Implying my mighty death won't involve fire.

Women were a mistake.

>>16534038
Conscientious objector

>>16536142
>>Posting images. On an image board!?
Yes, on an ANONYMOUS image board so why are you tripfagging and avatarposting?
Don't pretend like you know this place gutter

>>16536777
Tell me about it. Trips of truth.

>>16537604
>>>/b/

>>16537725
Don't tell me where to go tranny. How about you fuck off to a website where you can set yourself a nice user name, set a profile picture and farm some upboats :)

>>16535862
>fragile subjecthood
What is this meme about being secretly "fragile"? That's been a feminist talking point for some time and now it infects other area with white fragility or whatnot.

>>16537803
They call men fragile but it's clearly projection. Call a woman fat or ugly and then you can see how fragile they are.

>>16530447
Unfortunately it's the exact opposite for this book. Women can't possibly hope to understand this work, at least the women today. Source: I've tried to show The Passion to tons of women and they never get a thing out of it

>>16537857
>tons of women
So, like three. You don’t know many

He died from it after years of suffering and wearing a corset to keep his guts from spilling out

>>16537842
yeah but atleast they won’t shoot up their school like men will lol

>>16537999
This is actually a valid point. Men should not punish innocent people or children, they should punish women for being women aka whores aka women

>>16529918
Kek

>>16538004
lash out incel, i’ll be looking for you on TV

>>16537895
post your asshole

>>16538016
I’m not that “type” of dangerous

>>16537975
Nineteen years later. Yeah I wouldn't want to die at 58 of gun wounds
She died at 52 though. Of pneumonia. I’ve had that.

>>16538059
that’s 2 decades of mental and physical suffering, he deserved a drawn out death

her death was sad but she already told the world what they needed to be told. it’s up to us to destroy the male sex now

>>16529918
Woman is the nigger of the world
Yes she is, think about it
Woman is the nigger of the world
Think about it, do something about it
We make her paint her face and dance
If she won't be aslave, we say that she don't love us
If she's real, we say she's trying to be a man
While putting her down we pretend that she is above us
Woman is the nigger of the world, yes she is
If you don't believe me take a look to the one you're with
Woman is the slave to the slaves
Ah yeah, better scream about it
We make her bear and raise our children
And then we leave her flat for being a fat old mother hen
We tell her home is the only place she should be
Then we complain that she's too unworldly to be our friend
Woman is the nigger of the world, yes she is
If you don't believe me take a look to the one you're with
Oh woman is the slave to the slaves
Yeah, alright
We insult her everyday on TV
And wonder why she has no guts or confidence
When she's young we kill her will to be free
While telling her not to be so smart we put her down for being so dumb
Woman is the nigger of the world, yes she is
If you don't believe me take a look to the one you're with
Woman is the slave to the slaves
Yes she is, if you believe me, you better scream about it

>>16538143
Why isn't there a national monument to Mark David Chapman?

>>16532170
such eloquence

>>16538098
>her death was sad
Nope, it was hilarious. One whore less in this world. Also, one interesting thing is that her mother burned her belongings after her death. I could say at least her mother was based.

>>16538769
youre male, youre a genetic mistake and your opinion has been discarded

>>16538811
>youre male, youre a genetic mistake and your opinion has been discarded
Nope, learn biology. Just because the Y chromosome is a mutation doesn't mean it necessarily bad. Mutations can essentially provide advantages over other organisms, in this case males having more physical strength and logical/mathematical skills than women.

>>16538843
yeah but now males are obsolete bc of civilization we don’t need caveman chimpanzees to scavenge calories, the mutation is vestigial and read SCUM

>>16535999
Hostility begins with us? I did not realize men were a monolith, guess I missed the memo, it's not like we sacrifice ourselves -- sparing you -- for warlike traits inherent to humans.

>>16538868
>men are barbaric and murder eachother for dumb reasons
wow

>>16538859
How do you differ the behavior of men and women. Men and women both share the same base instincts, women simply lack the strength relative to men to act on them as violently. In a world without men physically stronger women would take the mantle of violence, a behavior which you incorrectly attribute as inherent to men.

>>16538878
Men aren't barbaric alone, all humans with enough strength are.

>>16538927
>>16538918
of course not all women are pacifists but testosterone and male socialization are the main drivers behind violence, world without men would be objectively more peaceful

>>16529897
>Women are emotional creatures, completely different from the rational male
>we'll never be understood
is what i'm guessing, just from the title and the blatant misandrism of OP

>>16538937
You again believe that somehow violence only arise as a result of male socialization or testosterone. Beyond the fact that you have Dunning-Kruger'd your self into a wall with your ideas about hormones that not even scientists in the respective field fully understand, you disregard that violence is a trait inherent to all humans regardless of phenotype, common sense can tell you as much and even your own ideas about socialization do to.

>>16538954
Why would males and females just happen to have the exact same propensity for violence 'regardless of phenotype'. You can't disregard phenotype

>>16538954
testosterone causes aggression and male upbringing encourages it, it’s common sense

>>16538937
Yep we are barbaric, but we also created most of the useful inventions. We are objectivily better at science and logical. Your meme society would a boring place with not achievements besides muh peace.

>>16538967
Same brain buddy

>>16538941
it's a gay love story set in mythic Greece.

>>16538976
Would be*

>>16538969
Dunning-Kruger, unless you show me studies with 95% CI that exactly that is the case you are talking out your ass. Listen socialization, male socialization specifically only encourages violence because you are physically stronger than those who you can impose your will on through violence. In a world without men, stronger women would do the same things we do as they would be socialized to do so in much the same way we are. I feel bad because you are no doubt a trans woman with a deep level of ingrained hatred for the fact you were AMAB, and even now I feel like I'm punching down when I point out your mid-wittery but realize that if you are going to make the conclusions you are making you need the evidence to back it up. Unfortunately any evidence you do find will either prove you wrong or come back with inconclusive results, this shit is complicated and your one sentence arguments will be especially lacking in offering any meaningful solutions.

>>16538979
No it is not the same brain, and the brain is not the only thing relevant, again hormones.

>>16539006
k buddy why don't you show a study showing that men and women would commit the same amount of crime if they were the same size. Since clearly you have total proof of that right

>>16539013
You don't understand hormones, not even the scientists which study them would make claims as bold or even remotely close to the ones you are making. Please think before you type unless you are just bait posting, in which case don't fool yourself about how fired up people are about what you are saying, you just are good practice for the blue haired girls I will no doubt hear making the same arguments in my classes.

>>16538976
Inventions science and logic are cool but you just use it to kill and dominate eachother, the new womyn society will use past inventions made by men to have a reasonable quality of life and then pursue emotionally meaningful goals that even the most genius men are incapable of doing

>>16539006
blah blah blah i’m not reading all that shit

>>16539029
Hormones like testosterone affect aggression, so they're a relevant variable, you midwit.

>>16539022
And now you run with the goalposts. To answer you no, unfortunately I can't snap my fingers and make another dimension to prove to you what intuition should already let you conclude.

>>16539033
You call STEM kids brainlets yet you fail to implement their simple empirical reasoning in the conclusions you come to. I guess this is what overdosing on esotericism does to your brain.

>>16539037
>what intuition should already let you conclude.
LOL. 'bro just use your intuition', are you not fucking ashamed.

>>16539044
>you fail to implement their simple empirical reasoning i
You're the one who stated an empirical idea, that men and women would commit the same amount of violence if they were the same size, with absolutely no evidence backing it up, and refuse to admit that men and women both have different brains, and different hormone profiles, hormones having evidence linking them to aggression.

You're either actually retarded or so incredibly dishonest it's just amusing

Not gonna bother with all the crap itt, but by default the men are right and the objects need to shut their fuking mouths and be enslaved again

>>16539052
You're the one who made an insanely similar broad claim about hormones, I hate to say it but the burden of proof doesn't belong to me here. I'm sorry if I hit a nerve, I really am hon, the trans comment was a low blow.

>>16539055

>>16539062
The burden of proof lies on you if you claim that they would commit the same amount of violence, you can state that you simply don't know.

All the evidence we have suggests that men commit more violence for a combination of reasons- size, socialization, and brain and hormone structures. It would make no sense for males to be larger than females and therefore more violent for millions of years and not also adapt their behavior to this situation

>>16539045
yeah, violence is not unique to men, it only expresses itself more in men because they have the strength to act on it. If men vanished women would organize themselves in the exact same hierarchy. It's a simple idea, you even see it in men right now, stronger men can and sometimes will dominate weaker ones.

>>16539088
>it only expresses itself more in men because they have the strength to act on it.
that's the part you have to provide evidence for. All you have is that it's a factor, you have in no way provided evidence that it's the only or even the most important factor. Not to mention humans use weapons and small males are often violent as shit too

>>16539077
Back up the claims you make, link some studies, it's not that hard. Go against broad scientific consensus and hit the wall, I'll be waiting to hear the crash.

>>16539088
>If men vanished women would organize themselves in the exact same hierarchy.
no evidence for this either, and all-male and all-female environments usually have very different social organization

>>16539094
You have yet to provide evidence that there is any other reason, and since there is a lack of scientific evidence one way or another you're going to have to do this wonderful thing called critical thinking.

>>16539102
You haven't linked a single fucking study either lol. Here's one about testosterone and violence in men
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1988-17191-001

>>16539110
Critical thinking informs us that they are all likely variables, not just the one you have randomly assigned the entire causal link to for no reason.

>>16529897
Great post OP, watching tranny's hate on men is entertaining as fuck. All that loathing directly springing from there autistic revolt of there own body, idolising there adopted gender the same way white libs idolise blacks.

My condolences to women, men have fucked you from the beginning and now with the comming resource shortages we will see a roll back on all existing woman's rights bringing in a new age of male dominance before the world ends. Oh well

>>16539114
That's an abstract, not a conclusion, got to work a little harder than that. More over a sample size of 89 people with a predisposed bias of already having been in jail is a pitifully low standard for any conclusion that study may have came to.

>>16539118
My one sentence conclusions are no more useful than yours, just better thought out.

>>16539127
Well since you have posted...oh right nothing, that's still better.

>>16539133
SImply stating they are better thought out is not an argument lmao. You have zero reason to think it's purely due to physical size, you even admitted there is no study remotely indicating this. Why do you believe it? Why would males not have evolved violent behavior, especially since males both hunt and compete physically for mates

>>16539135
My one sentence conclusions are no better than yours, but stay mad about the fact that no data will support either conclusion. It would help you a lot to realize the complexity of what we are discussing and to stop allowing your emotions to cloud what could otherwise be a passionate field of study for you to pursue.

>>16539151
Well then you should retract your statement that it is only physical size that matters, and admit you don't know. Since we both don't know the specifics I'll continue to reasonably assume that other factors may play a role, since there is evidence for them.

>>16539142
You're right, I have zero reason, you also lack that. Referring to a point I made in my very first post, this shit is complex, try harder and be better than just sperging yr emotional arguments.

>>16539156
You lack conclusive evidence, I lack conclusive evidence, accept that while your poorly evidenced claim (if evidenced at all) about an incredibly complex and broad topic stands, so does mine.

>>16539168
It's direct evidence that testosterone is a factor in at least some environments. Testosterone generally increases dominant behavior which is also going to relate to violence.

>>16539158
You said they'd have the same overall propensity for violence because 'same brain buddy', which again is not even true.

>>16539182
My one sentence conclusions are no more valuable than yours.

>>16539178
Generally is the key word, some is another key word. These words don't mix well with the overarching claims you are making about an incredibly complex topic.

>>16539209
>>16539198
My claim was that something that had evidence for it is likely an additional factor. Your claim was that only the one factor matters because...? Right you had 'same brain buddy' and then there was 'use your intuition'.

jesus you faggots are still at it?

>>16539230
Again, your minimally evidenced overarching claim about something that is incredibly complex has the same validity as my smirking remarks.

>>16539292
I post on 4chan, what makes you think I have something better to do with my time.

>>16539297
No, my very obvious claim that something that has evidence for multiple factors...probably is caused by multiple factors(and even others we aren't aware of) is much more valuable than your claim that an issue, which remember you've repeatedly called 'incredibly complex' is due entirely to only one factor, a claim which you believe for no reason, since you know there is no evidence indicating it.

You can continue to act like a retard if you want I guess

>>16539326
You made the claim, if I remember correctly, that a variety of factors (including testosterone) lead to objectively increased male aggression. That claim alone is shaky at best as you cannot establish a causational relationship between being a man and violent tendencies, no one can as that is incredibly hard claim to make regardless of how much evidence you may have, even considering it entirely isolated from any context. What's more is that you also made the assertion that men have become obsolete on the basis of this claim, an even further jump from the already i n c r e d i b l y c o m p l e x topic you addressed in a single sentence.

>>16539354
>a variety of factors (including testosterone) lead to objectively increased male aggression
yes
>>16539354
>you cannot establish a causational relationship between being a man and violent tendencies, no one can as that is incredibly hard claim to make regardless of how much evidence you may have,
then you can't establish one between physical size and violence either, and you just can't say anything at all can you.

I never said anything about men being obsolete.

>>16539360
That was an argument being made by another anon then, but nonetheless I made the claim about physical size in part because that is the conclusion I have come to in lieu of any meaningful conclusion with the evidence we do have. It later became an illustrative point on the futility of any claim made about this subject, this in some respects is moving the goal posts on my part but any conclusion either of us came to would be the exact same with respects to their validity, and any difference between them would be so marginal as to be negligible.

>>16539384
And I disagree with your conclusion, both on grounds of evidence, like the testosterone, and physical size only imperfectly correlating with violence, and theoretically, it doesn't make sense for males and females to have totally different patterns of violent behavior and not have an adapted behavioral component to it. I don't see why you accept as valid the evidence for physical size and not the evidence for testosterone, while also denying there could be any other factors, when you are aware of the ambiguity of the situation.

>>16539360
>"[Historically,] researchers expected an increase in testosterone levels to inevitably lead to more aggression, and this didn't reliably occur," says Frank McAndrew, a professor of psychology at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill. Indeed, the latest research about testosterone and aggression indicates that there's only a weak connection between the two. And when aggression is more narrowly defined as simple physical violence, the connection all but disappears."

>>16539396
>For example: regardless of their gender, the most violent prisoners have higher levels of testosterone than their less violent peers. Yet scientists hypothesize that this violence is just one manifestation of the much more biologically and reproductively salient goal of dominance.

>>16539396
>It makes sense—in the short-term, testosterone helps make both males and females bigger, stronger and more energetic, all of which would be useful for winning a physical or even mental contest. Testosterone is also responsible for libido in both sexes, and if researchers like Josephs are correct, it powers our drive for social dominance, which is one way that humans decide who gets to mate with whom.

>>16539402
That would not surprise me, but a)that wouldn't change it being an additional factor, and b)it would be very hard to separate behaviors 'for dominance' from general aggression and violence.

>>16539414
The causal relationship you establish is where the problem with your arguments lie. It's tempting to tackle concepts with broad claims, but especially when they have their base in science, you will very quickly run into a wall of inconclusive evidence which makes any conclusion shaky at best.

>>16539431
Then be consistent in your desire for rigor, instead of claiming you know yourself what the one cause is. Use the same level of rigor for each claim and factor being evaluated.

Once again, I said that there were likely additional factors to why men were more violent, that I thought it was unlikely it was purely physical size. This is exactly being tentative about assigning causal relationships, about looking at multiple variables. Something as complex and evolutionarily important as violent behavior is probably not solely some kind of accident of larger male size.

>>16529897
this is a lovely novel btw, please read it

>>16529897
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqSosWb3FCE

>>16539452
>"For instance, in their discussion of women’s historically limited involvement in warfare, they note that in most hunter-gatherer societies, men engaged in warfare more than women because men are physically larger and stronger and unable to nurse infants. Moreover, essential practices such as nursing, childcare and vegetal food production made it unlikely that women would travel far to engage in warfare (Wood and Eagly, 2002). This division of labor becomes reflected in social norms and values which are transmitted via socialization practices."

are there actually women on /lit/?

>>16539592
How convenient for their religious dogma that requires men and women are exactly the same mentally. How exactly are they studying the causal relationship between male size and the formation of social norms in hunter-gatherer societies, and how are they sure there are no innate male behavioral tendencies contributing to the disparity in violence? If men are larger(and have been for millions of years) and have therefore been hunting and engaging in warfare, do they really think there has been no selection for aggression in males to suit their more violent lives?

>>16539597
Yeah, some.
I keep thinking there’s less than there used to be, but I have no way of knowing.

>>16539597
I try to scare them off before they can get comfortable.

>>16539625
based

>>16539713
>Thanks captain! I’m a’scared o’ wimin

>>16539597
Yes. I feel like it’s one of those boards where gender doesn’t really matter and it’s not as openly misogynistic as the others.

>>16539750
There is less 'fuck you roastie' but the tendency towards classics does bring along...'antiquated' views on women

Why do modern women try so hard to be like men?
"I want to do STEM, I want to work 8h a day and not see my children, I want to go to the gym and be strong, I want to make money and live alone in a tiny apartment, ..."
Why can't they embrace femininity instead of going against biology and trying to become like men?
This is exactly what this capitalistic globohomo system wants women to do, become another mindless drone just like, indistinguishable from their male counterparts.

Men and women should live in a symbiosis, not in a competition. A men fills one part and a women fills another part, together they are great.

>>16539739
Yes.
Doesn't count for old trannies like you though.

>>16530811
Women aren't original. They can only imitate so no, men can understand women but women not men.

>>16539922
>Why do modern women try so hard to be like men?
>"I want to do STEM, I want to work 8h a day and not see my children, I want to go to the gym and be strong, I want to make money and live alone in a tiny apartment, ..."
>Why can't they embrace femininity instead of going against biology and trying to become like men?
>This is exactly what this capitalistic globohomo system wants women to do, become another mindless drone just like, indistinguishable from their male counterparts.

>Men and women should live in a symbiosis, not in a competition. A men fills one part and a women fills another part, together they are great.
Women had been doing that since the beginning of our era. There was never a moment when there was no group of females being smart, literate and such.

>>16539922
>Why do modern women try so hard to be like men?
Because modern men are gigantic faggots and someone has to do the job.

>>16540016
Okay, I agree. Some women are made to be like that, because they are born with the personality of a typical man, but majority of them aren't. Modern civilization is pushing women to be like men even though it doesn't match their personality and biology.

>>16540022
Men are becoming more like women and women are becoming more like men, this is a sign of a dying civilisation.

>>16540016
A restricted number of women did it, out of genuine personal choice, without being pushed to it. If anything the contrary (and that's a good thing).
The woman of letter or, even rarer, the woman of science was an object of curiosity, often overrated in their own time.
Nothing comparable to the current situation.

>>16539922
they were brainwashed into thinking that generating income and consuming is the definition of freedom

>>16540232
The American Dream™ amirite?

>>16540263
More like Arbeit mach frei.

>>16530788
A tranny can only truly understand a tranny's mindset.
If you could understand being a man, you wouldn't be a tranny.
Same goes for ftm trannies, but int he other direction.

>>16540023
Most men don't study STEM, want to work 8 hours a day or go to the gym.
Men are just easier to socially shame and easier to bind by "duty", which makes it easier to turn them into resource-producing drones.
I am not MGTOW, but I find it the most interesting social phenomena because the underlying philosophy is exploiting our current social system whilst contributing as little as possible to it.

Anything from Virginia Woolf