/lit/ - Literature

>>16968526
Women are generally worse at everything, even things they're stereotyped to be good at (Cooking, Poetry, Fashion etc).

In fact men are starting to realise that women are also bad at being women, and are turning to what are called "traps" as a viable alternative.

>>16968537
fpbp

I don't think that, as I'm an adult with an ego centered in things besides edginess.

>>16968555
Are you serious right now? Anne Fucking Radcliffe as an example of a good writer? This is bait. I have baited. Here's a (you).

>>16968567
Trips do not lie.

>>16968555
No one cares what you're thinking. Typical women

Where do incels get all these energy all these energy to hate on women

>>16968666
not ur business satan

>>16968666
guilt from wanking to porn

>>16968526
Nothing an all female draft couldn't improve. That's an ugly trap, BTW.

>>16968526
We take you now to Burgerland, where the water is turning the frogs gay--what's that? This just in, Americoozes have lost so much value that straight men are experimenting with traps. What do you make of this Chuck?

>Well Skip, it doesn't change the fundamental dating dynamic. You see, traps get so many cocks tossed at them, that they often charge money for their services. Trannies rarely have a stable partner and suffer from high rates of mental illness and suicide. You'll find no viable solutions here. Back to you, Skip.

>>16968526
They haven't been through the Darwinian Great Pussy Filter. Chris Hitchens said that funny women tend to be lesbians; I think this is because they have been through the DGPF.

>>16968526
>why do you wome
I feel attacked

>>16968526
I really don't think they do. But if you're wondering why the historical canon of literature reflects better on men as writers, it's because patriarchy does not allow many women to develop confidence in their ideas, nor have they historically been given resources to write and publish.

>>16968526
this isn't true. I don't know how you could read George Eliot, Virginia Woolf, Emily Dickinson, Edith Wharton and Flannery O'Connor and not think that they are on par with the best male writers, save for Shakespeare, Goethe, Dante, etc.

>>16968666
Sexual frustration.

>>16968537
Cringe. Women in my high school regularly scored higher than me, and most are doing better in university for STEM majors.

>>16968526
Why did you read all of Harry Potter, OP?

>>16968809
>Chris Hitchens said that funny women tend to be lesbians
I couldn't source the quote, but a Scientific American article reached the same conclusion about women comedians.
This explains so much about why so many of the women I'm attracted to legitimately turn out to be lesbians (like have a girlfriend or exes who are women).
I guess I'll never have a funny girlfriend.

>>16969149
I also don't. Jane Austen is excellent.

>>16968537
Dudes rock

>>16969192
That's because school is an inherently feminine experience.
>Hey, teenage boys full of testosterone, sit completely still 5 hours a day and listen to this 50 y/o roastie tell you a load of shit that's gonna turn out to be bullshit when you go to college.
Of course women are going to do better in this scenario. A woman's brain has spent the last few tens of thousands of years evolving to spend the entire day doing menial, boring shit.

>>16968526
solipsism and general mediocrity in terms of imagination and life experiences. women value safety. safety and the middle ground. in the arts this is mediocrity

>>16969307
Unironically this. Not to mention the fact that they go through all the way to tertiary education just to pop a kid out 3 years later and spend their remaining days on Facebook ignoring what could've been.

>>16969192
School grades based on conformity to existing dogma and political bias. Very few academics are notable in any discipline

>>16969307
oh my god, you need to go outside

>>16969818
You're not my real dad.

There aren't as many female geniuses as men. But I like plenty of female authors, JK Rowling not included.

>>16969192
thats because you are a useless cuck

BOYS RULE AND GIRLS DROOL!

They’re more likely to write in passive voice.

>>16969307
Extraordinarily based.

>>16968526
Imagine a life where you have never been great at anything, never felt the urge to be great at anything, never felt that magnetic admiration to someone who was great at something, wanted to imitate and ultimately defeat him. Just nothing. Literally all you do in life is exist. Occupy space. pass the time. You're a chick.
You're bored, as usual, tweeting about your fucking hair and not even feeling any kind of happiness from it, just soothing your constant need to be bitter and cunty and petty toward other women. Every single thing you've done in the past year was mundane, shallow, and boring. You spent the last six hours reading kinda-interesting Reddit stories about people who made interesting Halloween hats for their kids or some stupid bullshit that you think is interesting and you may say is interesting but you're not really sure if it's really interesting. You're just fucking sitting there, gestating, fermenting, with a moist hole between your legs that guarantees you'll at least never have to get up and move around and work to support yourself.
And then you see men, over in some corner, having fun. You've never seen this before. What are they even doing? Instead of their consciousnesses merely sitting in their thick skull and revolving around itself, they are imbuing their conscious energy and intentionality into external objects, crafts, goals, projects. All the bitterness and cuntiness you feel nonstop seems to be absent, as they congratulate each other for being victorious, and happily learn from someone who defeated them. These creatures are truly content to be alive. They have found purpose in a purposeless universe.
And your gaze turns back on itself, on your self, and you realise you've never had that. You can never have it. You're just a stupid cunt. So you get up, you walk over there, and you fucking ruin everything. Just ruin the whole fucking thing. The five seconds of attention you get will be worth destroying it. Because you're a woman.

>>16970203
Cringe thread

>>16969307
I wouldn't say it's an inherently feminine experience, more that boys and men are being left behind. Case in point: this website.
Funding for women's causes is massively greater than men's causes, and it's starting to show in the form of university demographics and the pay women receive after college.
You're getting passed up by women because you are underperforming. But when there's a demographic shift of men and boys underperforming then that's indicative of a larger problem.
> and it's going to get worse before anyone notices, since the current prevailing theory is that "toxic masculinity" is keeping boys out of college

>>16968526
I'm going to share my experience on this.

I've been severely emotionally neglected by my parents, and that means that I never got any validation or support. This means that if I failed at something, I was left alone afterwards and had to figure shit out by myself. I learnt how to change myself so I could overlap with what something needed to be done.
Women on the other hand, and bear with me, it might be a relative cold take, are more showered with attention and support. Even if it is just talking to them, women get their internal world validated. This has more than one consequence:
>Because whatever happens, they get validated and attention after doing anything at all, so they never learn to actually *do* things. They can emotionally feel good about keeping to do what they do so they don't learn to do stuff.
>The world tells them they're okay the way they are and that's what they believe, so they don't have a reason to change.

I don't believe that women are intrinsically worse or better at things, they're just as much human as men are, so by definition they might possess the same tools as men do in their heads. They might need to develop skills just as much as men except the difference is that just existing as a woman exonerates them from doing bad.
You're a dude and you failed? Man up and get better, life's a bitch. You're a woman and you failed? It's not a problem honey, I'm sure you'll get there if you believe in yourself.

Also, I believe the 'sitting in class is better suited for women' meme is true. Maybe it's my personal experience, but sitting in class and listening to someone blab on is terribly boring without actually experimenting with what's going on in my head.

less likely to be self aware

>>16968526

They’re made to be mothers and nurture and nothing else because the men are supposed to fill the other roles.

>>16971111
Charlotte Bronte is good too
Virginia Woolf is good for brain-bending modernism

>>16969307
>here’s your excuse for ADHD bro

>>16968526
There are many women who were fine authors (some examples: Austen, the Brontes, Woolf, Wharton, Cather, Shelley, O'Connor).

>>16968526
The short -and on the surface, slightly polemic- explanation is such:
They don't need to excel to make a good living.
Men either excel or get swiped under the rug.

To use a phrase:
It's pressure that makes the diamond

>>16969192
but were they better at everything?
Are they really better programmers, mathematicians and whatnot?

Or do they just get higher scores?

>>16971234
Yeah but then you get medicated and the joy of being a child escapes you forever

>>16971296
Remember the distribution of intelligence - women are *on average* likely slightly more intelligent than men, but men have a much 'longer tail' and consequently in the super-high IQs you are more likely to find a man than a woman.

>>16971296
Do they get higher scores or are researchers told to give them higher scores so the state can undermine the family

>>16970765
Pretty much this.
And if they turn to writing they usually do so with an image in mind. The image of the writing woman. Without the real desire to create good literature for good literatures' sake.

They write to be part of the Dark Academia gang, because they aren't like the other girls. It's their tippy-toes into the individuation process.

>>16970765
Holy shit off yourself. Imagine being such a miserable shit you write or share this load of crap.

>>16968526
1) Good literature has to abandon all used-up phrases, metaphors, modes of saying, and reinvent the very instrument which is used to transmit itself, i.e., language.
Women are herd animals even more than men are. Therefore, very few women can truly abandon those clichés which we all involuntarily absorb into our idiolects.
In poetry it is no wonder that women have fared much better than in prose, because the necessity of abandoning the useless is very clear when you write a poem, though not at all when you write prose. Thus, even the female poet is conscious of the necessity of invention. This is also why there are great teenage poets, but very few teenage novelists: a poet only needs invention, while a novelist needs a scheme, a certain knowledge of the world (for instance, Balzac had to know about money; Tolstoy had to know about agriculture etc.), and a lot of patience, all of which are things that teenagers usually lack.
Thus, on the one hand we have great poets like Emily Dickinson, Elizabeth Bishop, Inés de la Cruz, Anne Carson, Wislawa Szymborska, and on the other we have entirely mediocre writers who produce glorified kitsch, such as Emily Bronte, Jane Austen, George Eliot, up to modern ones like Ugresic and Ulitskaya...
The only really good female novelist I have ever read is Virginia Woolf - who was very conscious of the need to create anew. I admit I haven't read Lady Murasaki yet.

2) Another reason is that men naturally take more risks and more frequently produce works that they know will be disparaged by their contemporaries. This is why we have Holderlin, the late Beethoven, Lautreamont, and others. They aren't afraid of rejection. Nor are they afraid of going against whatever the current status quo is. This is also why you find few women in fringe movements (fascism, real communism, libertarianism etc.)

3) Those who take more risks live more intensely. It is chiefly among men that you will find the great experiences: those who fight in war, those who belong to gangs, those who commit heinous crimes or think about doing so, those who know what it feels like to be beaten up, those who have been beggars, those who have been drunkards, those who have been unfairly persecuted, those who have had their lives ruined, those who were too ugly to have sex, those who were mistreated by the police, those who nearly drowned while fishing or surfing, those who have almost been killed by a bear when hunting, those who have been mislead by unfriendly faces, those who have been treated like shit because they don't have a pretty face and big boobs.
It is usually these people who have suffered enough to reflect deeply and create new ideas. Not only them, of course, and there are many great writers who never left their bedroom, but can you imagine anyone but a sailor writing Moby Dick and Heart of Darkness? Anyone but someone who had seen war writing the Iliad or the Chanson de Roland?

>>16971343
Hit a little close to home huh?

>>16971343
roastie detected

the only cure for sexism is the bullet

>>16972532
Indeed, women should be shot for their insolence. Wallah brother.

>>16972620
well, that's not what I meant, but to be entirely frank, nobody deserves to live

>>16971343
Stop womanposting.