/lit/ - Literature

>female orgasm
Lmao

The female perspective on any subject is dumb and irrelevant, so no.

>>18472463
Why?

>>18472463
https://googlethatforyou.com?q=feminist%20literature

The Handmaid's Tale duh. It's just a 1984 rehash mixed with an otome game though.

>>18472463
Luce Irigaray. Maybe start with "Thinking the Difference" even though it's boring compared to her other work.

Or read some Evelyn Reed, especially her anthropological work.

>>18472463
>life aspirations
What could be more desirable in life than having kids? Why are these women so obsessed with being a wagecuck for Schlomo?

There are thousands of these books, but I’d never be so cruel as to recommend one to you

>>18472463
>The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar
>Women as Sex Vendors by Mary Marcy

>>18472503
Because Prof Schlomo and Schlomo.TV told them to.

Women have no agency and think what authorities require of them. It is incumbent upon men to remove authorities that will lead them to unhappiness.

>>18472463
Sure - start with Freud's Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), from there check:
>Benjamin's The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (1935)
>Horkheimer/Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947)
>Berger's Way of Seeing (1972)
Once you have that background, you can tackle Mulvey's Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema (1973). That's the backbone of most modern feminist (film/art) criticism.

http://nomistolzenberg.usc.edu/documents/Catharine-MacKinnon-Feminism-Marxism-Method-and-the-State-toward-feminist-jurisprudence-_000.pdf

A hefty excerpt.

>>18472502
Kek do you actually bother reading these books?

>>18472463
Anna Karenina.

>sole purpose in life is to bear children
>other aspirations

>>18472474
Spbp

>patriarchy

If you think man-resentment-esoterica is going to solve your problems you get what you deserve.

I wish r9k would leave

>>18472463
Fake and gay. Women can't orgrasm, since "orgasm" by definition implies ejaculation.
The clitoris is a kind of micropenis, so by diddling it a woman can reach something a bit similar.

Still just a very pale imitation of real sex, of course.

>>18472463
The "we won't have kids" argument makes no sense to me. You won't, sure, but the populations where the women are either suppressed (Salafi Islamic, for example) or where they buy into the idea of having more kids for the sake of growing the population (certain fundamentalist Christian groups in America) will. And over time as they become the majority, their views of women will win, and feminism dies as the share of the population which believes in it shrinks.

In my view, a "real feminist" would have as many kids as possible, teaching all of them feminist ideology and the like. That way feminist views would be cemented in society. Of course, people will point to rates of feminist belief and falling birthrates in populations which immigrate from repressive to Western societies as proof that a feminist society does not have to play the demographics game to survive. But I am not so sure. We are in the early days of demographic transition, and this "memetic conversion" will only last as long as the bulk of the population is feminist to some degree. 21st century Europe will be the test for whether my thinking is right or wrong.

(Be the way, If you are a woman reading this and you are mad at me, I don't see why. I'm pretty much saying women, not men, are the ones who determine whether the societies/civilizations in which they live will survive. Now that's girl power for you.)

>>18472569
Usually this image is used as a shitpost but it's spot on here.

The market if flooded with these types of books and you're a retard if you voluntarily read one.

>>18472582
Found a recent pic of you.

>>18472603
I’m not a liberal. I didn’t ever support Hillary, much less wear a stupid pussy cap

>>18472590
> feminist belief
No such thing. Feminism is pure resentment and "issues".

>>18472590
The best way to spread your politic views is to have 8+ kids that will also have 8+ kids. A former Clinton campaign staffer told me this.

>>18472503
I talk to a woman on the train regularly that is open about how she doesn't want any children and prefers spending time on her career. You can always tell she harbours some resentment for women that stay at home to raise children, and it's amazing to me that she thinks her job in advertising is even slightly important.

>>18472542
>Claims Schlomo TV is the reason why women won't take his watery spunk
>Posts the Schlomo TV article as evidence for his claim
when will you learn?

>>18472613
>I’m not a liberal.
Yeah, you're much worse and even more delusional.

>>18472634
I mean, I genuinely agree with this. After 5 generations, you'll have 32,768 descendants who hold your values. If 100 feminists did this, in 100 years you'd have 3.2 million people who are feminists.