/lit/ - Literature

qué cojones, women don't realize what books are about. Fucking feelings that don't let them think properly

>>20335312
>t. has probably read 50 pages in 2022

>>20335300
>adding notes to what's probably a pop-memoir
>adding notes at this density
>adding notes at all
Sad. Also, what book?

Does anyone actually read books and take notes like that? Did she have to explain to herself what mentally means? Oh my

>>20335300
why she underlining everything?

>>20335300
>using a pen on a book
making women literate was a mistake

>Book about a bastard emotional terrorist
>Incels think of ways to blame women
Back to your containment board, please.

>Mentally, not physically
on the inside
>Loved it
He enjoyed it

wow such amazing analysis there

>>20335316
what does it has to do with anything?

>>20335328
kek

>>20335300
>on the inside

>>20335319
It'll be like that for any pages she's taking pictures of, she's trying to show what a deep thinker she is by dissecting this 4th grade level bullshit to pieces.

>>20335320
It's deranged. Useless as nothing underlined but with an added distraction.

>>20335300
is her account deleted ?

>>20335300
What book is this? It reads like some awful YA garbage targeted for women.

>>20335414
>>20335318
Diary of an Oxygen Thief. Idk why she's acting like a cunt about it since I think many reputable newspapers and book reviewers and literary publications gave this book glowing reviews.

>>20335300
>spelling 'manipulator' wrong

>>20335320
Women do that. It makes them think they've understood something.

>>20335440
I'm so fucking shit at spelling, lads; I type out complex words like 3 times before finally resorting to auto-correct.

I think it's because I've no one to actually read my bollocks; I'd be too scared not to put in the effort to actually memorise particular spellings if I knew someone was going to mentally judge me for them.

>>20335455
Idk, a word just looks wrong to me when it‘s not written right. Maybe you should read more to get more visual memory of words.

>>20335455
filtered by basic vocabulary; you may have an illness, check it out

>liked
> = past tense

>>20335438
Amazon reviews are mixed

>>20335550
this. what the fuck is she gaining from writing that?

>>20335322
not my hecking bookerinos

>>20335566
wouldn't you like to know

>>20335328
lol

>>20335300
Anybody else buy their college books used and have this shit all over it? BRB getting my classical oxfords from college out.

>>20335558
>4.5/5 stars
>mixed
Absolute retard.

>>20335550
>>20335566
I think she's trying to imply that the narrator doesn't feel that way anymore. Otherwise he would've said "I like hurting girls." While this may be inherently obvious, this nuance is lost on most women. They would read that sentence "I liked hurting girls" and think the narrator still feels that way.

>>20335550
I actually think that she’s hoping that he has changed. Because she has to rationalise getting wet somehow.

>>20335328
big if true

>>20335329
It's an explanation for why your opinions are so bad.

>>20335455
I don't think I've spelled "necessarrily" correctly even once in my life

try right now w out looking anything up

>>20335300
>Past tense
>Loved it - He enjoyed it
Truly piercing insight

>>20335319
Women do. If you buy a used book, never buy it from women

>>20335329
>>20335649
Note that the post doesn’t make any sense, this is due to it being written by a woman.

>>20335300
Why do women do this shit?

>>20335649
a man can read zero pages of text in his life and be wise

>>20335300
>Past tense
>He enjoyed it
She's a fucking meme.

>>20335300
Any other male manipulator books?

>>20336018
Infinite Jest

>>20335999
Trips of bastë

God tier image

>>20335689
I like philosophy and thus have 'necessarily' down pat, it's everything else I struggle with.

There was a joke, I can't remember where from: 'He knew how to spell bananaana, its just he didn't know how to stop spelling it'.

>>20335328
It makes it seem like she is unable to intellectually process what she's reading because of the emotional content. I wonder how much sexual arousal is contributing to the confusion of her thought process. Because the book is essentially the statement of a fundamental contradiction to her understanding of the world, that a man can be loved by lots of women despite intentionally manipulating and hurting them. To a woman, men who hate women are supposed to be lonely and unhappy.
Actually, I think it's more like trying to understand something dangerous, like how men watch videos of street fights and stabbings.

>>20335300
Nothing about this is /lit/. The prose is shit. The premise is derivative. The comments are banal. And the counter reaction it is fishing to appeal to is repulsive. Everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves for this waste of space.

>>20335455

Don't worry, it's just an IQ thing

>>20335606

>>20336280

>>20336288

>>20335328
>Loved it
>He enjoyed it
this is huge history happening, isn't it?
it's bigger than that, chris, it's large

>>20336280
>>20336288
>>20336290
revolting.

>>20335319
I just write !, !!, ?, ??, !?, and ?! on important points in the margins, then re-read just the marked passages when I'm finished. If I try to make "notes" I never understand what they mean when I come back to them, and it wastes time and breaks up the flow to write notes that will actually make sense later.

>>20335320
They've no inner mental process where they actually contemplate or integrate what they're reading, so in order to feel like they're doing something they just squiggle and highlight because that's what they were praised for doing in high school and their shitty general education literature courses at X State University. In the most puerile way possible, it's a declaration: "Look! I am engaging with the text!"

>I really enjoyed it.

>He enjoyed it.

>>20336147

>>20335319
i'll highlight things i find relevant to one of my little pet theses if i'm reading an academic text. no desire or need to mark up fiction this heavily.

i keep a separate composition book where i take note of words i only have a loose sense of definition for - mostly because the act of writing a definition solidifies it in my memory.

What in God's name is a male manipulator?

>>20336464
A woman who is really good at giving head

>>20335977
shameless bastardization of a norm joke
have a word with yourself mate

All of women's problems and all of the world's problems with women can be summed up by Toynbee's dynamic of "challenge and response." He posited that civilizations thrive as they rise to meet successive challenges that are dangerous enough to need overcoming, but not so dangerous that they crush the fledgling civilization entirely. Civilizations grow to be great through a steady ramping up of stakes and difficulties leading to new and higher syntheses, what Hegel (with more rigidity) called the movement of negation followed by negation of the negation.

This logic applies to human beings just as well as to civilizations. Character develops through successive syntheses or integrations of initially novel situations confronted as problems. People grow by discovering wisdom latent in their confrontations and conflicts with the world around them, which wisdom becomes part of their character and helps them confront more complex situations. "Wisdom" is not just knowledge, the word suggests a vertical dimension of integration and transformation, it suggests growth and not mere accumulation. Someone with wisdom is more than the sum of his parts.

Men have continuously evolved tens if not hundreds of thousands of years worth of unconscious practices, discourses, and institutions that select for the growth of character. Disdain for men who lack character or who have no will to the development of character, and fear of being a man like that, despite being an acquired instinct, is just as instinctive de facto as the instinct to eat or copulate, and it is just as subtly interwoven with all other aspects of male behavior, culture, society, and politics.

Women have similar biological instincts, but they have either no innate will to character, or their innate sense of character is so different as to be unrecognizable. They also have no continuously evolved tradition or complex of traditions promoting and selecting for the development of character. Worst of all, huge sectors of the complex of masculine character development are interwoven with practices and discourses founded in objectifying women, e.g. by treating them as the rewards for being a highly developed, bold, or otherwise impressive man. This objectification also dovetails tragically all too well with the biological instinct of women to desire being a superior object of desire (as opposed to admiration).

The most women can do in this situation is to take on and try to participate in aspects of the male culture of character formation, which is not only form-fitted to men through thousands of years of evolution but began by being form-fitted to innate male instincts, which as I said probably differ fundamentally from female innate conceptions of character.

>>20336483
The result of all this is that women come to maturity only pseudo-morphologically, in a fundamentally male society, constituted continuously over thousands of years by and for men, that tells them they are "people" (men), and thus incites them to develop character like all "people" should, while half-consciously suspecting that they can't succeed, because they're not men; while also secretly not wanting them to succeed or not caring if they do, because it prefers to see them as objects (rewards and status symbols for successful men); while also feeling guilty about the former suspicions and desires, and thus doublethinking even harder de iure that "women are just as good as men!" while continuing to see women as de facto incompetents. The same gauntlet of challenges (embedded in cultures, discourses, and practices) is presented to them, as to all men as a matter of course, but for women the pitch is queered from the start. They are crushed by the normal male sequence of formalized challenges and expected responses and overcomings, and as they fall behind it becomes easier to fall behind and more expected that they will continue falling behind.

Women respond to this by living in the margins and gaps created by inconsistent male exhortations, desires, and doublethink. As they fail to run the same gauntlet of self-actualization and self-discovery expected of even mediocre men, they pragmatically "lean on" male desire and male condescension (driven by both pity and sublimated desire), thus reifying and justifying their status as objects and incompetents; this further enervates them and makes it exponentially easier for them to fall off the gauntlet of character development altogether, which almost all of them do.

Simone de Beauvoir gestures to this early in The Second Sex when she says that boys at a certain age are told to stop being crybabies, and this sudden responsibility for the respect one receives (respect is no longer given but earned, and can be lost) is initially felt as a shock, but that shock is then integrated and the boy gradually becomes a man. But girls are permitted to remain frivolous, weak, and stupid for far longer, and only conditioned to stop insofar as it negatively impacts their "acceptability," which is not character, and "attractiveness," which is entirely incidental to character; men regard men whose renown or success relies on their physical attractiveness as effete and "feminine," which itself indicates how the essence of femininity is perceived (naturally "spoiled" with gifts, but passive and weak, like an oriental monarch). This is what Mary Wollstonecraft refers to when she says:

>>20336491
>Taught from their infancy that beauty is woman's sceptre, the mind shapes itself to the body, and, roaming round its gilt cage, only seeks to adore its prison. Men have various employments and pursuits which engage their attention, and give a character to the opening mind; but women, confined to one, and having their thoughts constantly directed to the most insignificant part of themselves, seldom extend their views beyond the triumph of the hour.
>The human character has ever been formed by the employments the individual, or class, pursues; and if the faculties are not sharpened by necessity, they must remain obtuse. The argument may fairly be extended to women; for, seldom occupied by serious business, the pursuit of pleasure gives that insignificancy to their character which renders the society of the great so insipid. The same want of firmness, produced by a similar cause, forces them both to fly from themselves to noisy pleasures, and artificial passions, till vanity takes place of every social affection, and the characteristics of humanity can scarcely be discerned.
>Mankind, including every description, wish to be loved and respected for something; and the common herd will always take the nearest road to the completion of their wishes. The respect paid to wealth and beauty is the most certain, and unequivocal; and, of course, will always attract the vulgar eye of common minds. Abilities and virtues are absolutely necessary to raise men from the middle rank of life into notice ... Men have thus ... an opportunity of exerting themselves with dignity, and of rising by the exertions which really improve a rational creature; but the whole female sex are, till their character is formed, in the same condition as the rich: for they are born ... with certain sexual privileges, and whilst they are gratuitously granted them, few will ever think of works of supererogation ...

The same sentiment is expressed much more polemically and bitterly (and thus even more honestly) by Esther Vilar:
>In general, a woman ... opt for physical well-being, a place to breed, and an opportunity to indulge unhindered in her breeding habits. It is also a fact that potential left to stagnate will atrophy. Women do not use their mental capacity: they deliberately let it disintegrate. Why do women not make use of their intellectual potential? For the simple reason that they do not need to. It is not essential for their survival. Theoretically it is possible for a beautiful woman to have less intelligence than a chimpanzee and still be considered an acceptable member of society. By the age of twelve at the latest, most women have decided to become prostitutes. Or, to put it another way, they have planned a future for themselves which consists of choosing a man and letting him do all the work. In return for his support, they are prepared to let him make use of their vagina at certain given intervals.

>>20336497
None of this is present in feminist discourse, which is really not feminist at all, but a reaction to the post-feminist complex of male objectification of women and condescension toward women, both of which stem partly from male sexual desire (condescension is flattery which may lead to copulation), but even more significantly from sublimated confusion on the part of men as to why women are so lazy, weak, and incompetent.

Of course, all these structures and dynamics are dialectically interwoven and have evolutionary and morphological histories of their own, remaining synchronically (structurally) stable as they are recapitulated diachronically by individuals acting on their desires within narrow social and cultural contexts.

Once you have a dialectical view of the totality, you can see it playing itself out, ramifying and reifying itself, just under the surface of any social situation. Women not knowing how to read books is simply a subset of the more general problem that they don't know how to take any hobby or interest seriously, because they weren't able to "ratchet up" the hierarchy of typical male character formation by learning to receive criticism / overcome criticism, by degrees, until they form healthy behaviors like elitism, gatekeeping, the admiration of one's superiors, the ability to balance the hazing of neophytes with gentle mentorship, the manful desire to overcome the hazing process and "fit in" (not just "be accepted"), etc.

As women failed to do this across a variety of domains, they tended toward less structured feminine domains, which allowed them to stagnate and eventually atrophy further, which made them tend toward less structured feminine domains, etc., until nothing was left but a mushy blob of feelings and desires, with a veneer of vague feminist slogans about women being equal to men.

Invoking the slogans is painful because they obviously make no sense, and on some deep level awareness of this can never be completely effaced. But invoking them is simultaneously necessary, for cajoling men to make special exceptions and let women into spaces they haven't earned entry into (as a man would have to), and pleasurable in a roundabout way, i.e. insofar as it brings petty social advantages (unearned self-esteem).

On an unconscious level, women feel like children among adults, and men see women as children among adults. This was only incensed by repressing it with state propaganda and late liberalism's "false consciousness" and lack of self-confidence. As the propaganda becomes more brittle and less effective by becoming the orthodoxy of a visibly decrepit, desperate oligarchy, and as illiberalism prepares to "slay the father" of late liberalism after decades of slow but steady waxing, there are exponentially more and more opportunities for venting the tension caused by this cognitive dissonance.

>>20336504

As with every other vital urge or movement in the last hundred thousand years, the complex of male character formation behaviors absorbs and transforms ironic misogyny as yet another synchronically stable practice (e.g. involving the masculine virtue of getting away with saying forbidden things, slaying the fathers, etc.). Women are left out of this too, and once again their fate will be decided for them by men. Nietzsche wasn't even right when he said the process has a definite ending:
>Women's period of Sturm und Drang.
>In the three or four civilized European countries, one can in a few centuries educate women to be anything one wants, even men--not in the sexual sense, of course, but certainly in every other sense. At some point, under such an influence, they will have taken on all male virtues and strengths, and of course they will also have to take male weaknesses and vices into the bargain. This much, as I said, one can bring about by force. But how will we endure the intermediate stage it brings with it, which itself can last a few centuries, during which female follies and injustices, their ancient birthright, still claim predominance over everything they will have learned or achieved? This will be the time when anger will constitute the real male emotion, anger over the fact that all the arts and sciences will be overrun and clogged up by shocking dilettantism; bewildering chatter will talk philosophy to death; politics will be more fantastic and partisan than ever; society will be in complete dissolution because women, the preservers of the old custom, will have become ludicrous in their own eyes, and will be intent on standing outside custom in every way. For if women had their greatest power in custom, where will they not have to reach to achieve a similar abundance of power again, after they have given up custom?
The pendulum is simply swinging back. It is now a fun, well-established male discourse to mock the "bewildering chatter" and "shocking dilettantism" of women and the few dupes still enabling them. There is no natural negation of this negation on the horizon.

>>20336384
I agree with your post, but puerile is such an odd word to use for a woman. It should be called puellite or something.

>>20336483
Basically, women are lost because they have no culture of character development, so their actions are either trying to copy men ones or opposing to them, right?

>>20336483
>>20336491
>>20336497
>>20336504
>>20336512
Ok incel

>>20335328
>>I really enjoyed it
>he enjoyed it
Room temperature IQ

I do the cleaning around the house sometimes, and found on my sister's room (Close to 30, bitter fat femcel) a book named "Why men love bitches"

Bitches is a loose translation though, since the word meant more about troublemakers than whoreing around.

So, I ask you, /lit/.

Why?

>>20336568
She walled herself before she had a chance to ride prime dick. Imagine being an unattractive woman. It's like being an unattractive man except you will never be able to make money or status to make up for it. You will always be worthless no matter what and you are getting more worthless by the day. At least ugly guys can make money or learn to play guitar or something. Women with a career are LESS attractive to us. I have no interest in a woman who makes more money than me or thinks she knows more than me.

>>20335300
>pen in a book
this is my biggest gripe about purchasing used books
FUCKING CUNTS STOP DOING THAT, AT LEAST USE PENCIL

>>20336599
I write in my books with pen and I read them in the sauna and sweat all over them. It's a fucking paperback bro.

>>20336568
tell us more about her, sounds interesting

>>20336474
>>20335977 was written by a woman.

>>20336608
>We are three brothers that stem from one mother and all from different fathers.
>Mom has always been the one that rules because she used to make every man who lived with her miserable.
>Sister's dad was a junkie, died because of health complications, she ended up raised mostly by my father, a man who has worked ever since he was a kid.
>Mom was overprotective of each one us, crippling us socially.
>Sis grew up being naturally moody, never had a boyfriend during her teens, as far as I know, she lost her virginity in her mid twenties.
>Used to be the bottom feeder of her friend group in high school.
>Incredibly self-destructive, self-indulgent and inmature.
>A few years ago, looking at her was like seeing a 13 year old in an adult's body with her mood swings, retarded outbursts and terrible opinions about men.
>She dropped her uni career for reasons I don't know, hasn't gone back to school since.
>Like many femcels, she indulged too much on feminism and became toxicly feminist, something spouting some of the dumbest shit you could ever hear.
>Used to work at starbucks with rotative turns, made decent money but didn't help with anything around the house, also hated cleaning and cooking, her room used to be a fucking JUNGLE of garbage, mom had to clean it for her for the most part.
>Spent I think 2 years as a neet, should my memory not fail me.
>Nowaways she has her shit together, but I feel it's more of a "I gave up" sense rather than a "I'm happy" sense.

In the end I feel sorry for her because I know she just wants to feel loved, but she's incapable of shedding that those last scrupules she needs to be able to.

I fear that she might die depressed and unrealised, be it as a woman or as a person in general.

>>20336694
I have a weeb friend who is broken and alone but male as well. He makes up stories about him being bullied. He got 3/4th through a major and will not go back to school.

>>20335319
Thats how I learned to analyze books in my english classes

>>20336288
Had to Google whetstone? Pathetic.

>>20335320
Its fun, like doodling. You guys should learn from girls. They exist in the now and enjoy their time

>>20336694
Wow she's literally a female incel

>>20335606
You wouldnt believe how many used books Ive had that were heavily annotated for the first 5 pages and then totally untouched for the rest.

>>20336769
These were annotated for the sections we had to write essays over.

>>20336779
Im not talking about textbooks

>>20336799
All of these are oxford world classic paperbacks. It would be like last of the mohicans having its shit marked up but ONLY in the sections that are heavily racial.

>>20335689
Even the greats, my fren. Dave Barry once said he made it all the way through college without spelling "renaissance" correctly once.

>>20336694
i can fix her

i think all men should kill themselves

Authors shouldn't write females. All literature should have male only cast. No named females should be in books. I've almost finished Timeline and I hate almost all the characters.

>>20337063
chill virgin

>>20336290
What compels a person to do this?

>>20337011
I'm working on it

>>20335300
Kekking
>>20335312
>>20335623
>>20335633
>>20336147
I think these explain it.

>>20335300
kill your local women. NOW. eat raw meat and eggs too. you heard me. find your vril.

>>20336521
Roastie hands typed this post

>>20335300
>>20336280
>>20336288
>>20336290
I don't feel all that smart most of the time, but reading these makes me feel like a goddamn genius.

>>20336325
This bloke gets it

>>20336512
>all the arts and sciences will be overrun and clogged up by shocking dilettantism; bewildering chatter will talk philosophy to death; politics will be more fantastic and partisan than ever; society will be in complete dissolution
Good thing we don't live in a world like that haha

>>20335328
Based synonym connoisseur

>>20335300
>writing in books
WHY?

Science has proven that if you want to remember something, you should just question yourself after a paragraph/page/chapter about what you have read.

The only reason to mark something in a book is if you need it for court or other very legal senses (like marking an important sentence in the law). But in all of those cases it's less about "remembering" and more about actually using as proof.

>>20336512
So many examples you can fill this in and it proves right.
Reminds me of Philosophicat saying "I'm a Rad Thot" in her superchats and then AA's girls all shitting on Molyneux's eggs and lipstick polemic. There is also Lauren Southern getting BLACKED. These moments are the highest fidelity capture closest to a confession that can be formulated to their involvement in leading public thought. Public thought is lowered to their feminine incapacity. Public speech is neurotic and all erudition is swept away by the whims of dilettantes.

>>20335300
>underline 25% of the page
>text clearly says "I enjoyed it, loved it"
>note: he enjoyed it
>text clearly says "i liked hurting girls mentally"
>note: on the inside
Is this what life is like for a mental midget?

>>20335300
This is a first-person narrative. Can use dependent clauses….weird criticism on loved it

>>20337876
>science has proved...
Is writing down observations not a form of responding to questions you ask yourself? If you underline something, are you not questioning why it could be important? You are a pseud who doesn't even understand what you are saying.

>>20335610
I was looking at the individual scores not the average. Fuck off faggot

Women are living proof that reading doesnt make you smart.

>>20335316
yeah... of Hegel

>>20335300
It's about the art more than the logic of it. I of course made that up based on the stereotype that the right brain is the woman brain and the left brain is the man brain.

>>20336521
you never made it on the ramp did you

>>20336512
That last quote described the current state of integrated-sex society with shocking accuracy. How much longer can this possibly go on?

>>20336512

>>20336483
>>20336491
>>20336497
>>20336504
>>20336512
The best reply to any thread ever

>>20336521
>typical female response

>>20337157
based

>>20338127
It is also using a chinese spyware application.

>>20335328
Kekd

>>20336483
>>20336491
>>20336497
>>20336504
>>20336512
This kills the roastie.

>>20336483
>>20336491
>>20336497
>>20336504
>>20336512
And don't forget, women become fat and are as soon forgotten in man's preference for their younger, more nubile and simple-minded peers.

>>20336280
>>20336288
>>20336290
Fucking STOP

>>20339018
That can't be her, please tell me it's not...

>>20339018
THAT PICTURE ISNT REAL! TELL ME IT ISN'T!!!

>>20335335
TAAAAAAKE EVERYTHING
FROM THE INSIIIIIIIDE
AND THROW IT ALL
AWAAAAAY
CUZ I SWEAAAAAR
FOR THE LAST TIME

every day I wake up and thank god that I was not born a woman
I feel very sorry for them

>>20336310
based Day Today enjoyer

>>20335320
it's for tik tok

>>20339018
Za warudo...

>>20336483
>evolved tens if not hundreds of thousands of years worth of unconscious practices
stopped reading right there

>>20335689
It took me an embarrassingly long time to learn how to spell embarrassing, which is kind of funny when you think about it

>>20335999
A man can also read thousands of pages and still be stupid

>>20338347
the same 50 pages of Hegel

>>20336729
Like a dog ?!