/lit/ - Literature

>>6180109
because they're thick as shit but like to feel smart and better than other by "reading"

The same reason they enjoy Dr. Who and The Walking Dead, I imagine.

>>6180109
Capitalism.

>>6180113
PROJECTING

>>6180121
oh god kill yourself

It's their porn.
>paying for the same exact wet-dream story again and again
>paying for masturbation material in the first place

Because our educational system is outdated and useless, which means they're raised seeing it as a burden and believing that in the job market, which doesn't value intellectual knowledge at all, there is "salvation" and "freedom"

>>6180109
it's accessible

They are social readers, they will read what their friends read.

>>6180113
>>6180118
>>6180144
>>6180148
These

>>6180121
What do you study/work?

because we as a society taught them to be skeptical of anything that doesn't immediately make sense

>>6180139

Women are dumb.

That's honestly it. They are. Try finding real connoisseurs who are women in anything. Vanishingly fucking rare. Even intermediate knowledge or depth is rare among women. The vast, vast majority of them are at the absolute bottom of any hobby, whereas men at least try to advance and create hierarchies of ability.

the world tells them what they want to want

>>6180163
Feminism: When women do something bad, it's literally "the world's" fault

sigh

why can't we have a normal discussion about how women are fucking children without /r9k/ and /pol/ shitting things up?

>>6180189
Kek

>>6180189
Women are fucking children? That really should be taking our primary concern.

men far exceed women in intellectual pursuits. it's not that men are as a rule smarter, just that they are more likely to be. see chart. it's more advantageous for man to be on the extreme end of intellect. a smart man can gain power and resources. but a woman, so long as her uterus works, doesn't have to worry about abstract ideas or systems. so they tend to cluster on the median in intellect. there are female intellectuals but they decrease in number much less gradually than men the further you go into 'connoisseur' territory. so if a book appeals to a person of average intellect and ambition, there is simply more women in that category

>>6180109
I had an internship with a big publisher. Obviously I was only on the edges of things but the impression I had was that 20 something girls are actually THE target demographic for most YA now. But there's the belief that sales would drop if they marketed the stuff too directly at this audience. As it stands they can pick it up 'ironically' and read books 'intended' for a younger audience without being insulted that their immature tastes are so well known and calculated against. The current state lets them feel like 'free spirits' who can enjoy books aimed at younger people without having to admit their own minds aren't the least interested in or suited for more serious matter.

>>6180240
They do have nice tits though

>>6180240
lol @ that retarded graph

>>6180295
lol @ your retarded life

>>6180295

I know. #misogyny #epicfail

>>6180109
Because YA is marketed to them? I mean 'young adult' is basically the standard term for someone in their early 20s.

>>6180310
>>6180316

>men-v-women.jpg
>credible source

lmao

inb4 trying to shove me into the SJW category and ad hominems

>>6180316
>>6180310
>>6180295
>>6180253
>>6180240
INTERESTING AS FUCK

>>6180330
It is actually an accurate graph of IQ distribution and "achievement" distribution according to peer reviewed metrics

>>6180109
They internalize the patriarchal-capitalist males' desire to infantilize women.

>>6180240
>all that broscience
it hurts to be on 4chan sometimes

>>6180347
can you just some things that women have done that aren't secretly because men made them do it

do women have agency/responsibility or..? isn't it kind of infantilizing in itself to say "everything bad i do is the fault of bad nurturing by the world i was born into"

>>6180335
the graph is the most amateur thing i have ever seen

>saints
>geniuses
>note the difference
>sinners
>ignoramuses
>note the difference

>IQ distribution
>"achievement"

Toss achievement out the window buddy, whether you care or not, only very recently women can be seen as having equal opportunities

as for IQ, no one outside of america cares about IQ

>>6180109
because they're the target group?

>>6180353
What I said doesn't imply that all women take part in the activity, nor that those who do aren't responsible for what they do.

>>6180359
>no one outside of america cares about IQ
this
t. my gf's IQ is 145

>>6180140
>not paying for masturbation material

You're missing out son.

>>6180359
the graph itself is just some actual amateur making a colloquial version of real graphs and statistics

http://edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/debate05_index.html

>Finally there's a sex difference in variability. It's crucial here to look at the right samples. Estimates of variance depend highly on the tails of the distribution, which by definition contain smaller numbers of people. Since people at the tails of the distribution in many surveys are likely to be weeded out for various reasons, it's important to have large representative samples from national populations. In this regard the gold standard is the Science paper by Novell and Hedges, which reported six large stratified probability samples. They found that in 35 out of 37 tests, including all of the tests in math, space, and science, the male variance was greater than the female variance.

>>6180379
so, colloquially, "more geniuses but more dunces"

paglia also says the same thing in sex & character by the way

>There is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper.

and baumeister says it about crime/aberrant behaviour as well, there are far more male politicians but also far more men in prison, far more homeless, etc.

>>6180353

Come now, I like to think all of us are ultimately robbed of agency by the nebulous but malevolent machinations of the power that be by means of the zeitgeist.

I'm an egalitarian, after all.

>>6180395
>sex & character

sorry sexual personae, s&c is otto whiny

>>6180395
Paglia is a sophist hack who thinks George Lucas is the great artist of the 20th century

>>6180418
irrelevant

>>6180395
>There is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper.
What is this even supposed to fucking mean?

ITT: SJWs and feminists posing as men.

>>6180418
>implying he isn't

>>6180442
why is it that whenever people defend something like this people always throw buzzwords around?

maybe sometimes people just want to refute idiotic statements and opinions, regardless of their connection to the topic

>>6180434
It's relevant because she has atrocious judgement and doesn't back up her assertions with research.

>>6180435
It's meaningless because there was no 'male Mozart' either.

>>6180461
>It's relevant because she has atrocious judgement and doesn't back up her assertions with research.

implying >>6180379, >>6180240
is credible research

>>6180454
>why is it that whenever people defend something like this people always throw buzzwords around?
Because only the kinds of people being described ITT like these kinds of things.

>>6180118
TWD is primarily a 20-something dude thing, let's be fair in our gender based stereotypes

>>6180494
I can tell you're not a male.

>>6180497
smh

>>6180512
this is a white only board

>>6180519
smh

Wouldn't the book Battle Royale be YA. I mean not all of it's terrible.

>>6180497
...because I point out that guys are the primary demo for hamfisted post-apocalyptic zombie shit?

>tfw no matter what internet feminist argument you're stuck in, you can always remind yourself that in 50 years men will still be running and inventing everything cool and women will still be whining like children

Penises win

Penises always win

>>6180530
>Battle Royale
>not terrible

I've seen better prose from seventh graders, and I'm not shitting you. I don't know how much of it can be attributed to shitty translation, but you can tell it was terrible in the original language too. Shit is cringe-inducing.

>>6180537
You sound troubled.

>>6180535
TWD has hamfisted zombie shit and shitty romance all at the same time. It's the perfect trash hybrid and thoroughly enjoyable for everyone. Pushpin2k15.

>>6180535
Because you think The Walking Dead is marketed at males.

>>6180494
20-something dude here, I actually know more girls who like that show than guys

>>6180547
hahahahhahahahhahahhahahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhaa

>>6180109
The same reason males enjoy Storage & Pawn shit I suppose.

>>6180551
wicked shiteposte

>>6180555

Pawn shit is fun. It's like Antiques Roadshow but appeals more to my blatant retardation.

>>6180563
YA is fun. They're like soaps but appeals more to my blatant retardation.

>>6180574

Lol, fuckin' women.

>>6180512
>>6180529
>>6180551
>>6180555
>>6180574
>not knowing how to refute a fact
I will not even waste my time. Stop posing as men and replying this thread.

>>6180109
because cognitively there is no discernible difference between a 12 year old girl and a 20-something girl.

>>6180589
*tips fedora

>>6180606

smh

>>6180606

smh

>>6180589
Fedored

>>6180609
>>6180619
smh

*schlicks*

>>6180113
totally projecting

>>6180253
>liking women's disgusting fat sacks
>not aappreciating the beautiful sculpted make physique
Dude, gross

because women are the niggers of gender

>>6180109
Because they're vapid, brainless whores.

>>6180121
Hey it's the one tripfag on this board who actually reads! How are you?

>>6180351

Its a legitimate observation. And it makes sense. Men having more genetic variably, its known. Almost all genetic diseases affect men more, in people with IQs over 145 men outnumber women 8 to 1. Its due in some part to women having two X chromosomes. I mean seriously ask yourself why no woman has become a Grandmaster at Chess even though they have been playing with men over 50 years now.

>>6181158
I got soaked a while ago, but I'm good.

>>6181222
>I mean seriously ask yourself why no woman has become a Grandmaster at Chess even though they have been playing with men over 50 years now.

Obviously patriarchy and institutional sexism.

>>6181158

No, that would have been Deep&Edgy.

I miss that brilliant sonofabitch.

>>6180353

Women litterally do not have responsiblity in our society.

>man gets drunk and drives and hurts someone
>send that fucking scum bag to jail! he shouldnt have made the decision to drive when he was drunk!

>woman gets drunk and has sex
>SHE WAS RAPED, SHE CANT MAKE THE DECISION TO GIVE CONSENT CAUSE SHE WAS DRUNK

>>6181246
>soaked
>southparkcopnice.jpg

>>6181264

take a look at the functioning of a human mind operating with zero intelligence or clarity

it's interesting to see the gymnastics people will voluntarily go through to deny feeling love for their mother

>>6181252

Not sure if you're trolling but ill go ahead and answer.

Thats not how logic works, you find the simplest solution, then consider more complex solutions if the simple one is disprove. The burden is on you to demonstrate that women are every bit as capable of producing grand master chess players.

>>6180109

Because it's relationship porn.

>>6181270

Point out the error in what I said with that intelligence and mental clarity of yours instead of bringing up unrelated shit about me mum

>>6181299

> a woman having sex is somehow related to a man hitting someone with his car

I'm not even sure what this retard is trying to say

>>6180171
It is though. Women are just a product of their biology in response to their surroundings. Any fault they might have could have been prevented had the world been different.

Possible mental equivalency? comeatmebro.jpg

>>6181306

>dat female abstract thinking

laws are contradictory in order to protect women. If intoxication causes the woman to lose the ability to consent to sex it should logically follow that the man also lost his ability to consent to his drunk driving.

>>6181307

lel but their biology is inferior in almost every important way

>>6181338

when women drive drunk and hit people with their car, should it be said they couldn't consent to drunk driving? I fail to see what that has to do with men/women

>>6181367

In a society that didnt constantly cater to feminists someone be responsible for any and all decisions they make while drunk. The contradiction exists because feminists want it.

>>6181388

people don't have control over ANY of the decisions they make

the issue is much more problematic than your reductive worldview would have us believe

Was /pol/ always in /lit/?

>>6180461
>there was no 'male Mozart' either

>>6181395
Oh please, let's stop this "society made me do it" bullshit.

Here are TWO non hypothetical situations, both happened to me:
>drinking
>friends call me to party
>find crazy ex at said party
>she fucks me
>people tell me I used our old relationship to get some and I shouldnt have preyed in her weakness and that's wrong

>get drunk (again)
>ugly as fuck weeaboo climbs on my lap
>starts to bite my neck and touch my dick
>people laughing
>end up fucking her 'cause I'm drunk
>people mock me for climbing that mountain

So, should I just stop drinking?

>>6181420

/pol/ has permeated all boards

it's kind of the same thing as how victorian housewives played the piano. art is good to indulge in but it's kinda sad how it works like that

>>6181420
It's a bit uncomfortable there, so many of them cross post, and a sizable portion have always been here. The religious threads, Evola, and in the beginning there were more Rand threads than DFW. It was once a bannable offense that shit got so thick.

For some reason, Sundays at around this time, the misogynists come out in droves.

>>6181420
Hating on woman has been a thing even when 4chan was said to be a far-left website, by a certain USA news corporation. It's the one that binds old and new 4chan.

>>6181429
Yes because drinking is bad for your health and society's stability

>>6181465
4chan is mysoginistic by nature.

>>6181158
saw that bitch call on of the 14 black paintings propaganda in another thread so I'm not sure about that whole "reading" assertion.

>>6181510
Goya, famous for his smear campaign against noble Hellinism.

>>6180435
supposedly the male brain is far more prone to autistically fixating on one type of thing.

The idea is that a man in general can find extreme success by doing one thing really well.
If you are out hunting and you are autistically throwing spears all day you get more meat, people love you and you get more pussy.

Its genetic.

and this oppression can take many different manifestations. Sometimes its positive, as in music or art. And sometimes its fucked, as when a man is obsessive about women or hurting people or feeling powerful.

The improper expression of male autistic obsession is usually bad.

sauce the male brain

>>6181540
and this expression*

>>6181510
You're making too much of it.

>>6181538
Seriously? I think he must have just misread it or someone told him wrong. You can't chew to death one of your immortal children. Metis lived on inside Zeus.

>>6181538
>muh special brand of Hellenimos

*Agamemnon sacrificing Iphigenia*
Hey Agamemnon, watcha doin there?
Hellenismos?

*Herakles killing his family*
Hey Herakles, watch doing there?
Hellenismos

>>6181582
>Seriously? I think he must have just misread it or someone told him wrong. You can't chew to death one of your immortal children. Metis lived on inside Zeus.


it was a joke.

and immortal != invincible for the ancient greeks. Beings of great power could murder each other.

kronos castrated his father, so dividing the body of gods was certainly possible. Its not clear if some of the children eaten were reassembled or if some truly died and were never heard of.

some were swallowed whole, maybe the later ones because kronos was tricked by a stone for zeus' birth.

>>6181582
>I think he must have just misread it or someone told him wrong. You can't chew to death one of your immortal children. Metis lived on inside Zeus.

the painting is better the way it is, artists aren't obligated to portray myths in a literalistic manner

>>6180240
I can't even disagree with this.

Its amusing watching SJWs try to defend themselves when deep down they know, that even if us misogynists are illogical, men will always hold dominance. All they have is words. It must suck . Like the small dog yapping.. we'll let them think they have power, its cute in a way. But put that dog in the wild without its master (society) and what would happen...

>>6181637
Gods could be torn to pieces, Zeus had his hands chopped off by the Titan. Dionysus was torn to shreds and eaten by the Titans. But you can just put them back together again.

>>6181659
Most of the dominant people are men, but most men are not dominant.

>>6181637
The children ate where Hera, Poseidon, Hades, Hestia, Demeter, and Chiron.

But old legends are famously mixed up, so whatever.

>>6181705
Since Greek myths didn't have copyright, you could make up any version you wanted just so long as it became popular.

>>6180109

Because YA is entertaining but only girls have the concentration required to read books. Most 20 year old males mainly play video games.

>>6182269
actually this is Interesting as fuck point

>>6182269
video games require more concentration than books
video games actually punish you for losing concentration

>>6180368
AND she's a tiger in the sack
Bada bing!

Why do old women buy more books in general?

>57% of book buyers are female and they buy 65% of books (e.g. women buy books and they buy in volume)
>67% of books were bought by people over 42; Gen Xer bought 17% of books; Gen Y bought 10%

https://followthereader.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/bowker-reveals-new-book-buying-realities/

>>6182340
too bad it's wrong

>>6182269

>she needs to concentrate to read YA

Its okey, im sure its somehow the patriarchy's fault.

>>6181252

Not that I'm some kind of SJW but Judit Polgar is a GM you fucking fedoralord

>>6180156
You're not sceptical of something that doesn't make sense?

Late to the partty so I assume my answers have been said

>>6180113
>>6180144
>>6180148


and then the later half of the thread is full of ironic shitposting which is funny anyways

It's fine to be perfectly honest, when I bring up books to talk about and the inevitable YA titles start being mentioned, usually they're so excited to talk about them that I can't hate that genuine enjoyment. It's like the easiest way the start a conversation which adds merit to the post I quoted about the social aspect

>>6180395
Mozart sucks even Clara Schumann was a better composer than him. Seriously, that man can't feel for shit. If you want to insult women at least use Beethoven though he was an EQUALIST.

>>6183201
>Clara Schumann
This is exactly as when there is a thread like
>there are no good female writers
(but about music)
There are dozens of female authors mentioned that nobody has ever heard of, who are supposedly better than all our "dead white males"

You give them the benefit of the doubt and read something their.
>They are still shit.

Mozart was producing better music than Clara Schumann before he turned 7

>>6183201
>this post

Because most women are scum cunts.

women are bigger consumers of all forms of literature. low and high. go to any "literary" event and women will outnumber men as well.

In my country, women are considered way smarter than men. And women tend to read a lot more than them. I only know two guys that read frequently.
We, however, didn't get hit by the YA hype/trend, the average reader likes Paulo Coelho and Camus.

>>6183683
wow, where do you live?

>>6183689
Algeria. People like Camus because of his closeness to the country. The same goes for the Sartre and de Beauvoir, I actually know an old bookstore in Algiers that was supposedly frequented by these two. At least, that's what the owner swears by.

Also, women outnumber men in universities and high schools. Young men usually quit school early on and end up selling fruits or other goods. Women are known to be more serious and rigorous.

>>6183683
>Paulo Coelho

don't fucking trigger me

>>6183638
this.

>>6183739
>Young men usually quit school early on and end up selling fruits

>>6183763
I'm not, I was being informative. I think Coelho is as bad as YA garbage. But people here LOVE his books.

>>6183766
Is that why so many have joined Salafi movements? To put women back in the kitchen?

>>6183739
Wow. How does this affect marriages? Do the women all have to settle for dumbasses?

>>6183815
Well usually, dumbasses marry dumbasses. The uneducated men end up with modest, uneducated women, there are a lot of them.
Also, women feel lucky to marry, if the guy has some ways of providing for her, she'll marry him, regardless of his education, she's not going to talk to him much anyway.

The thing is, reading does not make them more educated or open to the world, a lot of readers just read for the "story", they don't try to understand the meaning behind it. They are not curious about the world. They're also very attached to our arabic culture and they mainly read that.

>>6183815
>>6183900
You also have to understand that marriage is mandatory to the lower classes (can't find a better way to put it). Reaching a certain age, mothers find a man or a woman for their child.
It does not happen that way in more privileged environment. One can find a decent educated man. But here, education is not mesured by literature, people don't care about that, it's considered a hobby. Just so you get me : I stayed at school until I was 24, and I have never been obligated to read a book for a course. Never.

>>6180121
>not enjoying capitalism
jej

>>6183949
>>6183900
These are actually very nice informative posts and you saved my reading of this thread from being 100% pointless, which it is not because of your posts.

Society teaches females to value aesthetic over intellect. Thus, most women construct their 'tastes' around a sense of cultural fashion.

mainstream media doesn't really cater for them. films are for men, tv is for grandparents and anything designed for women is patronising to them

>>6180109
>It is American women who are responsible for the degradation of best sellers: these books are only intended to please, and worse to please idle women who need escape.

It's because they need escapism.

>>6183638
Shit, it's like this in the /co/ scene as well.

How come women read more than men?

>>6185026
because they don't play video games or watch sports

>>6185043
yeah that's why so few support players in dota, all the potential supports read ya instead

>>6181510
Man, I missed a Goya thread? Fuck.

>>6185046
also support is the hardest role to play, so people are less likely to play it.