/lit/ - Literature

>>8119715
Is this thread dumb yes Are you dumb for making it Absolutely

>>8119715
>i don't read
it's terrible how the gays are underrepresented too isn't it? :^)

yes, patriarchy and specifically phallogocentrism elevate male thought and enable them to be in positions to be lauded for their thoughts in the first place

>>8119715
No, estrogen just rots their brains.

>>8119720
>>8119723
>empty and meaningless replies
Thanks for outing yourselves roasties.

I am a woman and I will be the most relevant author of the 21st century. Nobody has ever tried this idea before, and I am a genius for attempting such a monumental feat of social engineering for literature.

>>8119731
>No, estrogen just rots their brains.

Is that why all /pol/ posters and people who continually drive doqwn the zeitgeist here like you do religiously suicidal mentally ill people?

>>8119720
>>8119733
>>8119736
Samefag.

>>8119731
>roasties
>implying only women are better read than you
why are you so hard on the faggots, anon? it's not like if we let them write books they'll only write about that time they had a really good tea cake, or that time when they were fucking all the ass in berlin before the war came, or something about pedophilia in tangiers. i'm sure if we let them write something and get it out there, we'd find out they have other things on their mind than faggot shit. canon needs to listen.

>>8119742
Truuuu

>>8119746
Shut up now

>>8119736
>Is that why all /pol/ posters and people who continually drive doqwn the zeitgeist here like you do religiously suicidal mentally ill people?
Haha your post doesn't even make any sense. Good luck with the author thing, maybe you'll con a few other dumb roastie whores and nu males into buying your drivel.

>>8119746
Embarrassing.

>>8119753
I will not be oppressed. Literature needs my faggotry; you have shown me the way. #firstfaggotauthor #first #faggot #author

>>8119757
>Haha your post doesn't even make any sense.

Let me rephrase myself.

If men are so smart a majority of the time in a group, statistically speaking, explain /pol/, and the unemployed mentally ill suicidal people who populate it.

>>8119762
>explain 4chan

>>8119757
what? did some faggot steal my idea and write a book about tea cakes already? what if i made it french and called it a madeleine to really push the faggot angle, so literature can finally wake up and remember faggots are real too? i'll throw in a dyke if you think i'm being too male orientated. i really appreciate your critique

>>8119765
A majority of the men of the internet, especially those whit,find themselves in the position to make themselves seem as smart as possible with egos engorged to the skies, leading to much suffering.

>>8119769

>leading to much suffering

muh feefees

>>8119839
Isn't that what men get angry over most of the time? Annoyance comes from somewhere, doesn't it.

>>8119846
silly, fefe is never angry. you're mistaking him for a different animal.

>>8119723
>reads and writes
>claims to not be a huge fag

>>8119852
Yeah, an animal like you lol.

>>8119862
i'm not a faggot. i'll have you know i wear a skirt when i fuck men or use my literacy skills in order to prevent becoming one tyvm

>>8119733
fifty shades of grey has already been written

>>8120533
fuck off twilight reader

>>8119715
what am i looking at

>>8120557
average roastie who posts on 4chan

though more men are fucked up, the degree of their issues are minuscule compared to those of roasties

>>8120573
what the hell is a roastie

>>8120583
let me refer you to the image in the OP

>>8120583
english people. frog posters like to rip on them and roast beef is an insulting term for english person in french

>>8120591
give me some context. assume i know nothing about this issue.

>>8120597
It's what virgins with undeveloped humor glands call women.

>>8120597
Women who don't care of their vagina (i.e. those who post on 4chan) end up with their insides hanging out.

>>8120601
Fuck off cunt.

>>8120604
I know that picture is just a sandwich, but it's still making me horny.

>>8119715
All masterpieces have been written by women (9 of them).

>>8120604
How tiny is your dick.

>>8120625
>dancing and looking at stars is writing too
it's seven, you tit

>>8120604
This sounds like it was written by a grumpus wumpus desu senpai

Middlemarch is a masterpiece in ever sense.

>>8120630
9 inches. What's the diameter of your cumhole?

>>8120601
>>8120630
The roastie sounds a bit angry.

>>8120639
>he has a big dick
>he brags about it like he hasn't even read the romans, let alone the greeks
kek, i love when the plebs try to get by on looks alone. when did you last shit, dorian?

>>8120645

>>8120647
>>8120639
Off my board. Shoo Shoo. Stop lying about your dick.

>>8120649
>tumblr
I raise you.

>>8120652
>h-his dick is twice the size of mine, h-he's lying
Loving Every Laugh
Every
Laugh

>>8120649
Do you have a blog, darling?

>>8119715
why don't you read some literature on the subject and find out?

>>8119731
Empty and meaningless OPs get empty and meaningless replies. You establish the precedent of quality for a thread.

>>8120652
I'm >>8120647 and I'm not lying about my dick, i'm just checking out the damage i'd do to priapus here >>8120639's if i taught him greek from the dorian era of sparta

>>8120676
>asking a question is meaningless
You think you're being cute but you're just betraying your dropout status.

>>8120671
Yes.

>>8120653
White dudes are ugly more news @ 11

>>8120658
I wish my dick was that big. I do.

>I'm >>8120647 and I'm not lying about my dick

pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

>>8120683
Don't be disingenuous.

>>8120685
Post the blog.

>>8120691
no

>>8120685
>insult the guy talking about his 9 inch cock
>some retard thinks i'm talking about my cock
puns and classical lit aren't your strong point, are they?

>>8120701
Come on, I want to see how fat you are.

>>8120703
what does someone lying about their dick have anything to do with "classical lit" in this turgid thread

I just want an answer

>>8120706
I stopped exercising but I'm around 133 last time I checked. I used to be really stronk.

You don't have to project.

>>8120716
>133
skeleton or manlet?

>>8120716
A lot of tumblr girls are fat, I just want to see if you are too.

>>8120708
because this retard >>8120685 can't quote chain, and i'm writing posts about literature on a literature board because i guess i have standards for myself even when discussing sex.

>>8120722
Futa.

>>8120723
Yeah. So are a lot of internet boys.

>>8120725
This thread isn't about literature. We can talk about Alain Badiou if you want.

>>8120732
Come on just post the link, chubby.

>>8120732
>This thread isn't about literature
Keep dodging the reality, roastie.

>>8120737
It's not happening.

>>8120738
Ok.

This thread isn't about literature. I did it.

>>8120743
You didn't.

>>8120681
post dick

>>8120732
>roast beef trying to derail
delicious

>>8120732
>are books sexist
>not wanting to go with the range that gives you from all the fucked up shit books can give you
>wanting the thread to be about dicks only instead
>badiou
>out of all the literature of getting it on in humanity, you picked truth procedures stop you from ever in2 love as love, but we should concern ourselves with truth procedures
I see why you're into 2d, I won't force an authentic human relationship on you, I apologise as a social formality.

>>8120744
Nah. I did it compellingly.

>>8120759
We Must Become the Pitiless Censors of Ourselves

>>8120767
I didn't read this post. It didn't have content.

>>8120772
Do I have to Venn diagram the content sets which overlap the post for you? Or did you just try to drop Badiou like nobody reads him to someone who has?

>>8120781
No I just don't see the point in seriously responding or discussing why I like Alain Badiou somewhat. This isn't the thread for that.

This is really, at its core, a thread about me.

>>8120790
Anon, how long have you thought you were a sexist book? I'm interested now.

>>8120794
>how long have you thought you were a sexist book?

God, it's been ages since it started

>>8120794
I'm not.

When I was 18 I noticed that my arms were book jackets.

>>8120790
On due consideration I have more questions:
Do you have a title?
Are you finished or a manuscript?
If the latter, are you a fair copy or early draft or what? Are you going to be a happy story or are things a bit Myra/Myron in there?

>>8120813
>Do you have a title?

The Autobiography of Connie Marble

>Are you finished or a manuscript?

I'm always being written :)

>If the latter, are you a fair copy or early draft or what?

Who's to say. I'm just a book.

>>8120822
>not answering the sexist question
Anon, I trust you on this book shit, but I think you're lying about being a sexist to get published, which is some serious cryptoNazi bull.

>>8120828
>cryptoNazi
don't use terms you don't understand k thx

>>8120828
I am actually a live lizard being.

>>8120831
you are though. whatcha gonna do about it?
>>8120833
how did you fuck up the nepotism to not even be able to get published then? you have to be a seriously bad writer or dick to fuck up being a lizard person.

>>8120838
On the contrary, I've never been as powerful as I am now. I have diamond encrusted scales. Give me a year or two I think.

>>8120840
with diamond encrusted scales you should be able to pump out at minimum a novel and sketch the trilogy over the course of november and be considered a respectable writer with a major advance and film deal. if it's taking you a year or two, you fucked up being a lizard person.

>>8120848
>>8120848
>with diamond encrusted scales you should be able to pump out at minimum a novel and sketch the trilogy over the course of november and be considered a respectable writer with a major advance and film deal

All good things take time desu.

>>8120854
Time is a social construct. All heavy things take time is a material construct. You fucked up in any rational construct of lizard people tho

>>8120856
Not really I disagree.

>>8120864
>I disagree
awbaaaaaw write me a book about it.

>>8120870
sssss ok sssss

I think it has more to do with the social function of writing. Being reductive I'd say that writing is a form of pea-cocking, a sex seeking behaviour, as is all art. Obviously the product of the impulse transcends its origin and we end up with great works of lit but I'd say that impulse is more commonly found in men, at least in traditional gender dynamics, hence the discrepancy. Also obviously individuals are not trends, so we have accomplished, brilliant female authors. I think to call it phallocenterism is maybe partially true in some cases but not really a good explanation. Wuthering Heights is a great novel addressing universal human themes, it is not a "women's book" in the same way many great novels are not "men's books".

>>8120936
Or it's because through most of modern history women weren't listened to, and we couldn't vote. Pre-Modern history was worse. Post-Modern history is where all of that has ended though.

I think that's fine enough. Occam's Razor.

>>8120936
>>8120939
>Hipparchia laughing at housewives with her hubby.mosaic
Or, you know fuck all about female authors and thinkers from those eras, and believe some bullshit because you like to lie to yourself you know about male writers from those periods too and the only reason you're missing females is the world doesn't have any. Human vanity's been the simplest explanation since forever.

>>8120939
Yeah, a big contributing factor. Although I think we see this trend persisting into the modern day, isn't there that stat about men submitting x times more manuscripts than women. To establish whether women currently are denied a voice we have to establish whether they're attempting to be heard as much. Also I think women dominate in many areas, romance and such?

Also you can pretty much say anything in few words and then chuck Occam's Razor at it.

Group B don't make as much nice cheese as group C

Group B are crap at making cheese...

>>8120980
>To establish whether women currently are denied a voice we have to establish whether they're attempting to be heard as much

Many things are new to a people only valued for what could be extracted from them.

I think there's more fact based explanations then "women are biologically inept at writing" or "genes say women don't get into writing", because they're getting into writing much more.

I know I'm writing.

>>8120970
>>Or, you know fuck all about female authors and thinkers from those eras, and believe some bullshit because you like to lie to yourself you know about male writers from those periods too and the only reason you're missing females is the world doesn't have any. Human vanity's been the simplest explanation since forever.

What on earth is this even trying to say.

>>8120986
History has a history of a lot more great published women than you think it does. You like to think it doesn't because you like the story where those women don't exist. I think the reason you like this story more than reading great women writers is ultimately going to be a blinding vanity like the Greeks used do so well.

>>8121002
>History has a history of a lot more great published women than you think it does

I know, but many popular authors that could have been weren't, for very obvious reasons.

>You like to think it doesn't because you like the story where those women don't exist.

I...don't? I never said that?

>I think the reason you like this story more than reading great women writers is ultimately going to be a blinding vanity like the Greeks used do so well.

Do you ever reread your sentences and go, hm this isn't very coherent I should revise them. I know I got that problem. You should work on it.

>>8119715

Read 'A Room of One's Own'.

>>8120649

>I spend a lot of time thinking about why idiots think that whoring is "empowering"

Conforms to Foucault's rejection of the repressive hypothesis tbqh

>>8120653

>1st Wave Feminist

kek

requesting more dank strawman memes

>>8121005
>>8121002
you're both fucking retarded, do us all a favor and lurk more

>>8121009
mra

>>8120984
Yeah your right I suppose. I didn't mean women weren't well disposed to writing though, I meant they weren't disposed as much to writing as a sex seeking behaviour. I'm doing pub talk now but I'd imagine that at it's root female lit arises from a biological impulse much as male writing does. I just meant that previously we have valued the former kind.

>>8121014

Haha what? How so?

>>8121015
no no, I didn't mean any of that implication, I was just quoting the generalized bullshit you see these days here. I mean this is a bait thread and it's nice you wanted to actually engage with it.

>>8121005
>I know, but many popular authors that could have been weren't, for very obvious reasons.
Their hands got chopped off? I guess you could read the Lives of Saints about women martyrs whose writings didn't survive or died young, but that's an even more twisted story to go looking for in history than women aren't well represented through history. Also
>popular
by great I mean very good not popular, you depraved little eichmann
>I...don't? I never said that?
then why do you tell the story when history tells a different one? why rub out the greats? especially on the basis of their sex? you like the story or you wouldn't have avoided counterexamples of which there's plenty. especially when you compare the greats of men and women on the quality of their work, and some times you'll be hard pressed to make up the male equivalent in the same time period to a female great. all that goes out the window for your story about how women are underrepresented. they're not. great writers are rare and special, and either sex being overrepresented outside of greats just means you're reading dreck instead of something good.
>Do you ever reread your sentences and go, hm this isn't very coherent I should revise them. I know I got that problem. You should work on it.
Well, you seem to think there aren't many great women writers when they're about as common as great male writers. I think you include the dregs of male writers as well as ignoring great females because something about a world where that's what happened comforts you.

>>8120984
>Many things are new to a people only valued for what could be extracted from them.

I'm not sure if I can make you understand how stupid the above sentence is.

maybe if I just let you know it's really bad you'll figure it out on your own.

Next sentence
>then
nice try

>I know I'm writing

female writers, everyone.

>>8121029
>by great I mean very good not popular, you depraved little eichmann

Wow one sentence and you're already calling me something I don't understand.

>then why do you tell the story when history tells a different one?
It doesn't? What we're saying isn't mutually exclusive I hope you realize this.

The existence of great women in history doesn't suddenly make everything ok and everyone was having a great old happy time.

>Well, you seem to think there aren't many great women writers when they're about as common as great male writers

No I don't. I think human beings are capable of writing some good shit. imho

>>8121031
Hey, there's no need to be rude about things you don't fucking understand.

I can assure you that my writing's ongoing and is going to eclipse everyone's here actually.

>>8121009
>strawman
Refrain from using terms you don't understand.

>>8121045
I could say the same to the people who use the strawman fallacy more often out their ass t b h

>>8121048
Nonsensical reply.

>>8121022
What did I say from which you could infer without question something which you would consider bullshit?

>>8121042
>Hey, there's no need to be rude about things you don't fucking understand.

believe me sweetheart, I understand more than you know.

>I can assure you that my writing's ongoing and is going to eclipse everyone's here actually.

loud laughter

>>8121055
>believe me sweetheart, I understand more than you know.

No you don't.

>loud laughter

Is it any more, or less likely, then our future genre fiction cadets of present /lit/ :v)

>>8119715

>>8121055
>I can assure you that my writing's ongoing and is going to eclipse everyone's here actually.

Actually I think you'll find that's MY WRITING. Christ some people are deluded.

>>8121059
you're embarrassing yourself

>>8121042
>Wow one sentence and you're already calling me something I don't understand.
It's a phrase from Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem. She's an example of a great female author, and a pretty recent one too, with a large impact on literature and philosophy. Like I said, the simplest explanation is that you're ignorant of these things and too vapid to see it.
>The existence of great women in history doesn't suddenly make everything ok and everyone was having a great old happy time.
The existence of great women in literature is on topic, that shitting in a cess pool isn't a wonderful experience for anyone is kind of off point. Or do you want to tell me how life was great for men in the days when war had given women a 3:1 population and wealth advantage like in Ancient Rome because being dead was probably fun for the men who left everything to their wives?
Maybe you had some fiction you thought happened instead where you could pretend history is consistently antiwomen because it won't let you erase the talented and great or advantaged ones?
>No I don't. I think human beings are capable of writing some good shit. imho
Then why are you pretending the female ones don't exist for most of history? Do you think their shit isn't good enough to be counted, or are you just ignorant of them?

>>8121072
>>8121072
>Or do you want to tell me how life was great for men in the days when war had given women a 3:1 population and wealth advantage

And a larger increase in domestic abuse.

>like in Ancient Rome

I'm not reading the rest of this nonsense. It's almost L Ron Hubbard.

You're saying men have always been the ones who suffered and women have always been equal or some shit. I'm getting buzzed I have bigger things to worry about than high school freshmen.

>>8121062
>answer doubles as reaction image

Because men write them

>>8121077
this bitch is so fucking stupid

>>8121088
Care to explain why bitch? :)

>>8121045

I understand the term quite well. I don't give a shit about the little dickwaving contest that led to the pictures being posted, nor am I attempting to insert myself. I just want more obnoxious caricatures if you prefer that description.

>>8121077
>And a larger increase in domestic abuse.
So? That's made a lot of great writers of any sex or orientation, and we're talking about if books are sexist.
Does domestic violence affect the quality of writing by sex? Considering the Reage/Sade affair, I'm thinking the answer in this case would be a resounding, Non.


>I'm not reading the rest of this nonsense. It's almost L Ron Hubbard.
>baaaaah history hurts me when it's not stories about female oppression
You should read Reage. Yes, I know you don't know who the fuck she is, but what you like in your stories is very similar


>You're saying men have always been the ones who suffered and women have always been equal or some shit
No, I'm saying that need for it to be a black and white one sex always has ruled in all societies and definitely in literature is so simplistic, I don't know how you can't see it's dumb. The only reason I can think of is that you really really like the idea that women haven't been good writers and have always been kept in cells and beaten. You want things to have happened that way, and it's kinna twisted, but you will really like Pauline Reage.

>>8121098
>and that's lead to an increase in domestic abuse
>So?

>>8121102
You're right, we need to ban Stoner. You're totally not a fuckwad who wants to erase good books because you only like the stories where the chick gets beat.

>>8121109
You're disgracing all those fucking authors and treating their legacies like shit when you say they were all but their abuse they suffered, and they weren't fighting against it.

You're a piece of shit lol

>>8121111
your quads are nice which i guess is why your post is word salad and you can't quote.

>>8121092
how the fuck can you weigh (non-documented ancient) "domestic abuse" (which is a modern concept) against the horrors of warfare, and decide that the fucking meatgrinder of war (which killed 2/3 men) isn't as bad as maintaining a home.


Need i explain more, you stupid myopic unsympathetic ungrateful cunt

youre unbelievable

>>8121117
Then be more coherent. Nothing your saying actually is connectable and either most of the stuff you're agreeing with me.

Either be clear or stop.

>>8121120
>how the fuck can you weigh (non-documented ancient) "domestic abuse" (which is a modern concept)

>>8121120
>daily reminder women weren't allowed in court normally in athens because radishes up the ass was standard punishment

>>8121120
None of you will ever fight in a war, the closest you have is your grandparents, at least they had a right to bitch lmfao.

It's just your baby boomer parents and you ceaselessly bitching about whatever new social problem exists, whether it be anger at feminists for existing or faux worry about culture or morals. Whatever you gotta do to vent that anger. Comparing your suburban struggles if you gotta.

>>8121125
>judging ancient civs by modern standards

not very open-minded of you

also that's still not as bad as being killed in war.

>>8119715
women write mistresspieces

>>8121124
I'm not agreeing with you because you're an ignorant fuck who thinks half the great writers of history are going to disappear so you can keep your fantasy world where Sappho was too busy being tortured by men to get any lyrics down.

It's not that I'm unclear, it's that you're fucking delusional and into scenes of women in pain more than books.

>>8121137
>being killed
>bad

>>8121136
I'm literally in conversation with military recruiters currently you stupid cunt

way to not address anything in my post though I'm sure nobody will notice

>>8121142
>I'm not agreeing with you because you're an ignorant fuck who thinks half the great writers of history are going to disappear so you can keep your fantasy world where Sappho was too busy being tortured by men to get any lyrics down.

You're struggling to write coherently and come up with a central point and I'm still laffin

>>8121137
i'm not judging, and it's not like ancient history would change if i did judge it. radishes up the ass seems like a good deterrent 2bh if i am going to judge it

>>8121144
>I'm literally in conversation with military recruiters currently you stupid cunt

That explains it, you're utterly moronic.

>>8121143
i accept your admission of defeat

>u cant b mad @ me u cunt...u stupid cunt..im volunterring myself in warfare...but im probably going to get a desk job...and words...they hurt..stop ;_:7

>>8121149

completely inconsistent

you are a crazy person

>>8121151
i'm not the guy you were talking to but idk man you need to qualify your statements. no one can read your mind

>>8121077
You shouldn't dismiss "male oppression" out of hand. There's simply too much data. I'm not going to get into it but I think that the idea that either men or women are oppressed in the west us fucking lunacy, excluding those from lower working class backgrounds. If you actually wanted to work out who was "more oppressed" you'd be at it with crime stats and economic reports on wage gaps and IPV data for fucking years. At uni I got into the whole third wave thing and ended up writing my dissertation on Barthes and patriarchy, I then started watching Janice Fiamengo and all that shit. Society is actually really complex and both groups face issues unique to them. Anyone with half a brain can spin it either way but it would take a genius and someone with no vested interest to describe accurately in whose favour the pendulum currently swings.

>>8121159
look, you're acting like a cunt. I call it like I see it.

>>8121163
how am I inconsistent. I'm telling you women suffered injustices and I'm getting the two most incoherent muffin heads attacking me for it. And you for saying I can't say shit or something because you're signing up for a secretary position in the air force

This is fucking ridiculous lmfao

I'm almost thinking it's intentional.

>>8121168
And you're acting like someone who would be dumb enough to join the US Armed Forces probably for benefits

>>8121167
what does that have to do with literature?

>>8121180
You're on the wrong board mate, this is /pol with DFW memes

>>8121191
ok but what does that have to do with literature?

>>8121145
You're struggling to read comprehensively because you have no fucking clue about literature. Do you need smaller sentences? Greentext?
>great women writers are as common as great men writers
Telling someone women writers are underrepresented in great writing outs yourself as a pleb who has missed out on many of the greats. You're ignorant because you don't know women are adequately represented in the great writers of all time.
You like to pretend history happened differently, because you need to justify your ignorance instead of admitting you're ignorant and fixing it.

It's kind of hilarious that you're condemning yourself to mediocrity at best while also blaming others.

It'll be very hilarious if you spend your life telling yourself the reason you're reading stories about terrible things happening to women, and reading none of the great women writers you pretend don't exist, is because you like women. You like stories where women are beaten so badly they can't write, which is why you're telling me a story about that and why you aren't able to talk about any of the great female writers I've mentioned like someone who reads.

>>8121180
were you not paying attention? read the OP and see if you can put the pieces together, stupid

>>8121174
keep acting like a cunt, cunt

>>8121172
You'd talk less shit if you pulled your head out your ass.

>>8121200
>You're struggling to read comprehensively because you have no fucking clue about literature. Do you need smaller sentences? Greentext?

No because you have no central point. You're just saying shit that I'm understanding but it's not really clicking because you're being obtuse as possible about it, and it's making me want to try to read it less.

>>8121200
>women are adequately represented in the great writers of all time
You will not name a single one that rivals even one of the second rate male greats.

>>8121209
thisx1000

>>8121209
Hateful little gnome boy.

>>8121203
wow i've never encountered someone so rude in my life. forget you buster

>>8121214
u mad

>>8121203
>keep acting like a cunt, cunt
It's so unfair!

You're only a man, and you just do what you can ;_;

>>8121214
I am 6'3.

I really can't believe that people here actually put those characteristics as a fact in women. I always think they are just so fucking boring and start trolling here but it is pathetic at the same time. In the country where I live , women see men as the one who is a complete idiot. Which I'm not agreed. And if you believe any of those I would recommend to get along with another kind of social circle because they are just giving you the bad looks of the person, not their genre.

>>8121209
there's no real point in doing this because a) you wouldn't have read them anyway on the basis that they are women and b) you can easily weasel out of it with meme arrows
>(female author)
>good

and not qualify anything you say

>>8121180
absolutely nothing.

>>8121218
Most male authors throughout the past are irrelevant today and reading them gains the same result as eating them. Nothing.

>>8121205
>IT'S EBERYONE ELSE'S FAULT
>THEY'RE WHY I DON'T KNOW SAPPHO OR ARENDT OR EVEN THE STORY OF O
You're a revisionist who likes the idea that women never made it in literature. It's like trying to claim faggots never made it in literature. I'm not being obtuse, you're just such a basic bitch that you can't hack reading anything of worth. You'll spend hours reading about women being beaten though. =/

>>8121220
I did something bad, maybe I was wrong
Sometimes people say that I'm a big time bomb
But I'm only a man and I do what I can

:v)

>>8121209
Start by posting your list of the male greats and why they are great.

>>8121223
Seems like my prediction came true. You could not name a single female that even approaches a second rate male great. Nice mental gymnastics.

>>8121225
please tell me english isn't your mother tongue

>>8121228
I can hear the keys you're smashing and I'm not anywhere closer to actually finding my time to respond to you the way you want me to.

I just don't have a point to.

>>8121209
HD>Pound
Christina>Dante
Sei Shonagon>her dad (there's really not a lot of even second rate male Henian writers)
Sappho=Pindar

>>8121235
withholding from naming them doesn't mean it is impossible. what are your problems with murasaki? oh, you never read genji?

>>8121232
shakespeare

if you don't know why he's great you can kill yourself

>>8121237
Most old genre fiction of the past can be gained more through eating it instead of reading it, at least fiber is valuable.

>>8121239
Seriously read Reage. It's filled with the type of thing you like, and it would give you a female author to talk about instead of pretending they don't exist.

>>8121228
you're equivocating "never made it in literature" and "are severely underrepresented in literature"

did you do that out of stupidity or are you being malicious?

>>8121245
>shakespeare was his choice

>>8121232
Chekhov, Pushkin, Tolstoy, Dostevsky, Nabokov. Those are first rate, compiling a list of second rate greats would take hours.

you homos should quit arguing and go read a book, jesus christ

>>8121245
your list has one great?

try after about 1750 since before then literature wasn't really a thing

>>8121249
they're not underrepresented at all in good literature.
if you're reading shitty male authors so you can say there aren't enough shitty female authors, that's your problem
you think they're underrepresented because you can't think of any, which is also your problem

>>8121251
You can't say why they're great?

>>8121250
>>8121253
>still no female authors named

as expected

go back to baking pies, ladies, that's where you shine

>>8121251
I like Tsvetaeva more than Mayakovsky.

>>8121258

>>8121244

>>8121254
ahahahaha 3/10 trolling, donald trump level rhetoric, expect nothing more from me than abuse, that's all you deserve

>>8121257
I am not your undergraduate literature TA.

>>8121258
>implying women are better at cooking than men
Explain why nearly all Michelin stars are held by male chefs.

>>8121248
Thanks but no.

>>8121254
That anon isn't me. I just said that the potential to be an author for women was suppressed in the past, because it was suppressed in the past.

And so far I've got a guy saying I'm a cunt because he's joining the air force. A guy who's demanding I respond to every woman who's ever been an author throughout the past, who I really do need to read instead of more non-fiction, and about 90 different people mobbing me.

it's like.

fuck off. You, everyone, quietly and calmly fuck off. You could go on all night doing this

>>8121262
sorry are you the one who wanted me to write in smaller sentences so it would be on your reading level? i should have known trump was your reading level.

Why are men so god damn sensitive holy fuck

>>8121263
>I am not your undergraduate literature TA.

I don't even think you've made it to undergraduate level. What memes do you have for me? The prose... of the translation? Second-rate philosophy?

>>8121267
>implying nu males are men

FACT: 4CHAN WAS FUNNY WHEN WE WERE ALL 12 LIVING IN THE SUBURBS LISTENING TO LINKIN PARK WATCHING DRAGONBALL Z DRINKING PEPSI WHILE PLAYING HALO CO-OP ON THE EASIEST SETTING DURING WHICH WE CONSUMED DORITOS AND LOOKED AT PAINTBALL GUNS ON EBAY IN INTERNET EXPLORER CONNECTED THROUGH AOL ON A 56K MODEM BEFORE HOPPING INTO OUR BALDING FATHERS' LATEST MIDLIFE-CRISIS-IMPULSE-SPONSORED JAPANESE-BUILT SUV TO HEAD TO THE MALL AND GET MORE SKATEBOARDING SHOES AND THIRD-RATE IRREGULAR LEVIS AND MOUNTAIN BIKE PARTS BEFORE HEADING HOME, VOTING DEMOCRAT AND MASTURBATING TO THE LATEST SEARS CATALOG WHILE HUFFING PAINT IN YOUR GARAGE BEFORE TALKING TO PEDOPHILES ON AIM PRETENDING TO BE WHATEVER CAMWHORE THEY'RE RANTING ABOUT ON MYSPACE WITH A MATRIX QUOTE/ANIME CHARACTER NAME/TRIPLE SIX-ASTERISK-PARENTHESES-SURROUNDED SCREENNAME BEFORE HEADING TO YOUR SUPPOSED "GOOD SCHOOL" IN THE MORNING TO BUY MORE POT TO SMOKE DURING YOUR COUNTER-STRIKE LAN PARTY WITH JIMMY AND THE REST OF HIS FRIENDS TAKING RITALIN AND ADDERALL AND PROZAC EIGHT TIMES A DAY BEFORE TAKING A CASUAL PASS AT LOCAL, STATE OR NATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL FIGURES, LEGISLATURE, OR STRUCTURE TO APPEAR EDGY AND INTELLIGENT IN FRONT OF YOUR BUDWEISER-SNEAKING, LIMP-WRISTED, NEAR-TO-COLUMBINE SOCIOPATHIC "DEEP" FRIENDS WHO PLAY THE VICTIM WHEN THEY START LOSING ARGUMENTS SIX DAYS BEFORE THEIR BOTCHED SUICIDE ATTEMPT SIMPLY BECAUSE SCHOOL TRAMP NUMBER TWELVE WOULDN'T GO UNDER THE BLEACHERS WITH THEM TO LET THEM GET TO SECOND BASE BEFORE THEIR THIRTEENTH BIRTHDAY.

>>8121244
shakespeare's better

murasaki would murasuck shakespeare's shaft on the off chance some of his talent would rub off if she could

>>8121272
I'm implying everyone who's the opposite of that definition including them. You, every dude posting in this thread right now.

>>8121271
Content, undergraduate.

>>8121275
>shakespeare's better

ok but put those goalposts back my man

>>8121275
Shakespeare wasn't that talented honestly. There were and have been better playwrights. He's good at generalization of complex themes into simple plays, and he's really good at that. But nothing of complex depth.

>>8121276
>ask a question about women in literature
>y-you're so sensitive!!

>>8121277
Female authors also fill their books with 'content'. What about it? Their male content resonates with you because you are also male? Is that it? Masterpieces only focus on male issues and women can't write about male issues?

>>8121264
>That anon isn't me
Those are both me, you retard, learn how to quote chain.
>blog posting blah blah everyone else is being mean to me on 4chan and the same person disagreeing with me with facts is a mob
stop being shit, learn about good books, and get good you whiny idiot. if you want to continue reading your stories about women being slapped senseless that's fine, but we don't have to pretend you know shit about the history of literature when you don't.

>>8121284
hilarious post

>>8119715
No, air conditioners are sexist.

>>8121286
Every dude in this thread is overly sensitive, yes. More so than me, but they'll likely say I am. That is my point.

>>8121292
This wasn't blog posting this is me telling you to confront ideas rationally, stop getting mad at them, and stop being a little bitch.

You could have discussed them but you didn't because you couldn't handle what I was saying, and had to give me little bitch tears about how I didn't read enough authors who are woman and used that as an argument or some shit.

God just shut the fuck up, you're miserable and pathetic.

>autistic NEETs larping as roasties successfully baiting other autists

Congrats?

>>8121307
Get off your mobile phone.

>>8121310
don't fucking tell her what to do

>>8121284
>There were and have been better playwrights.

I would just like to highlight how ugly the above sentence is

>tfw no matter how much women whine about misogyny and sexism on the internet, they will literally NEVER, EVER do or create anything truly great
>tfw a century of whining like little children and the best have done so far is on the level of male mediocrities
>tfw literally every single activity that doesn't directly involve "having a vagina" is utterly monopolised and dominated by men, even traditionally feminine ones
>tfw feminists could spend the next ten thousand years angrily tweeting and it will wouldn't change any of this
>tfw every truly great accomplishment, invention, and innovation for all time will be made by men
>tfw not one woman in history has ever known what it is like to have the mind of a kant, plato, or shakespeare

HAVING A PENIS FUCKING RUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUULES

>>8121310
I was checking my favorite board on the train home and saw this thread.

>>8121319
>tfw no matter how much women whine about misogyny and sexism on the internet, they will literally NEVER, EVER do or create anything truly great

your mom sure didn't with you lmfao

>>8121322
this same guy stopped replying to the posts where he got btfo

>>8121322
finally, a post I can agree with

fucking christ
>>8121326
>>8121322

>>8121322
SHUT UP YOU TINY DICK FAGGOT

>>8121330
why do you type like that

>>8121322
>inb4 this anon kills himself because he can't find a smart woman and he is severely depressed that he will never become one of the male greats

>>8121327
Nah that was me m8 took a break to hit the bong, but now I'm back to call you a cunt again

>>8121322
this cunt's some other cunt

>>8121338
saved

>>8121342
shut up you retarded good-for-nothing retard

>>8121338
stfu fag

>>8121298
>This wasn't blog posting this is me telling you to confront ideas rationally, stop getting mad at them, and stop being a little bitch.
>says the guy who thinks that female authors are underrepresented amongst the great because they're too busy being raped and beaten and shit
Sorry anon, it's not rational to say women are underrepresented in good literature, because history disagrees and there's this whole canon thing we'd have to disassemble and loads of female authors we'd have to burn for that to be true.
>couldn't handle what I was saying
I'm okay with you being wrong. It's quite fun to point out how you think you're not ignorant and why. It's also great fun to point out you wish history had less good women and more beaten women than it did, and speculate on reasons why you like that fantasy better than reality. I mean, how is that bad for me?

I don't think you're actually going to get every female great since the Greeks burnt out of history, so it's not like your fantasy telling of history is a threat to the greats of literature. I mean, you can't even name any of the ones you'd have to get rid of for females to be underrepresented, so I don't think you're much of a danger to that.

>>8121348

>>8121354
who is xe?

>>8121354
>640x427

can you even be even more stupider?

>>8121354
shut up your cuck

>>8119715
no opportunity to hone their talents throughout history has been one reason

>>8121360
>>8121359

>>8121369

>>8121375
A little .gif,
From a little man,
With a little dick,
In his little hand.

>>8121369
The vast majority of great writers have come about during and after the Renaissance.

Anything else?

>>8121379
ren my asshole shithead

>>8119715
Brontë
Austen
Woolf
Lee
Rand
Dickinson

>>8121378
wow yr poetry is like so great
who are your influences? hopsin?

>>8121382
Are you 4chan staff or do you sit in their IRC all day? It's unbelieveable that you haven't been banned yet.

>>8121396
haha that wasn't even me faggot

>>8119715
But women have written masterpieces. I think some of the concerns raised in Mrs. Dalloway and Sense and Sensibility are still relevant to a modern audience.

>>8120685
whats your tumblr?

>>8119715
I wish I was a qt girl 2bh

>>8119715
Is sex bookist? Why do so many choose to have sex when they could be reading a masterpiece?

>>8119715
Is that a fucking JC Denton body pillow

Where can I get one (no homo)/spoiler]

>>8119862
underrated truth