[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 61 KB, 480x640, deliciousnipples.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1273954 No.1273954 [Reply] [Original]

Do women just generally have shit taste in literature/books?

Not a troll thread, just curious.

>> No.1273955

>>1273954
Those truly are some delicious nipples. They're also very nice breasts in general.

Sorry, what were we talking about again?

>> No.1273956
File: 45 KB, 675x540, 1288019690428.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1273956

yes they have

>> No.1273957

Women generally have shit taste in, well, everything.

>> No.1273959

>>1273957
Including their taste in men, otherwise I wouldn't be a 28-year-old virgin.

>> No.1273962

>>1273955
Did you hear that? That's the level of discourse taking a crashdive and my erection doing the inverse.

>> No.1273974

>>1273959
Yeah. It's not your fault.

>> No.1273983
File: 159 KB, 769x563, 001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1273983

>>1273974
It really ain't.

>> No.1274000

I find that nearly everybody has shit taste in at least one thing, except for me of course. Weird how everyone else thinks the same thing. Deluded plebeians.

>> No.1274024

daaaaamn, source on OP chick? those are some nice titties

>> No.1274031

Women are shit except for their tits, I find.

>> No.1274292

lol a men-hating-women thread. Wonder how many of these posters are virgins.

Most women who claim to be into reading read shitty stuff like Twilight. You have to look at it this way. Twilight is very, very popular. Many girls who rarely read have read Twilight. Those women who claim to be "readers" usually have started with or include things like Twilight and other books of similar quality. Because of Twilight (and other stuff but mainly Twilight) when you see women who claim to be "readers" they have shitty taste in things like Twilight.

Now look at men. Most men who are "readers" aren't swept into it my books like Twilight, because there isn't anything (at in literature terms) like Twilight for guys. Because of this, there isn't a huge group of male "readers" that have only read one level of shitty book. Most men who have become addicted to their own version of Twilight have done so in other things like vidya games, or... vidya games.

Therefore, there are less male "readers" and more female "readers" for you to whine and bitch and moan that females have a shitty taste in literature.

Also, just to point out, a lot of men have a shitty taste in books as well because they read only vidya game books or really bad scifi books. It's not just women. You're picking out one type of woman and using her to describe all women. I could pick the stereotypical nerdy/vidyagame/scifi guy and say the exact same thing.

>> No.1274310

That depends on if you mean "perfectly acceptable average reading," or "a strong appreciation and fascination with those considered classics." I would say there's a world of difference between someone who only reads Russian lit and someone who only reads Harry Potter/Twilight.

We know the lower tier exists, and while I'm not sure of the upper, I'm sure it does somewhere. But more importantly, that middle area? Those who consider reading a worthwhile investment of time, but still has "some," standards? Yes. They exist. And aside from their odd fascination with Sedaris as the second coming? Many of them are perfectly acceptable as reading buddies.

>> No.1274327

I personally don't think I have horrible taste in books. I wouldn't go so far as to call it great, but I think I'm getting there at least. /lit/ has really been a help in exposing me to better literature.

>> No.1274338

Just because you don't know any women IRL doesn't mean generalizing a whole sex, half the earth's population is correct.

>> No.1274346

> boobs on /lit/
Reported and saged.

Thought I'd let you get away with boobs on my /lit/? THINK AGAIN OP

>> No.1274351

Books popular among women do tend to be pretty god awful.

And chick lit is a horrible genre with few if any acceptable entries.

That is all I will say on the matter

>> No.1274353

>>1274346
ahahaha you report boobs because you are a fan of the penis. fucking owned faggot

>> No.1274358

>>1274351
Because there are more women that read today than men that read. Guys are into video games. Women are into shitty romance novels.

>> No.1274362

>>1274351
What books are popular among guys (non-/lit/ gentlemen)? They're usually shitty scifi.

>> No.1274364

>>1274358
...so you agree that women have shitty taste in literature?

The fact that something has a reason doesn't change the fact that it is well a fact. I am well aware there are factors that contribute to popular women's novels being unreadable drivel for the large part...but that doesn't stop it from being unreadable drivel. So to answer the OP honestly the answer has to be yes.

>> No.1274368
File: 74 KB, 320x320, 207651_main.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1274368

Women have terrible taste in literature because women are seldom able to think beyond the politics of physical appearance. This is also why most women are shallow self-obsessed children.

On a related note, this is a blue 'burichan' board. That means work-safe. If you're oging to post delicious funbags, you must make sure the nipples are covered in order to avoid being banned and subjected to the general faggotry in here against sex and images of hot little whores like this one.

>> No.1274370

>>1274362
Just typical light reading. Dan Brown, the Bourne guy, Stephen King, Elmore Leonard. Hell, I even like the last two.

>> No.1274372
File: 413 KB, 1920x1440, hot-babe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1274372

>>1274368
Here is another example of an image that could be considered work-safe. Just in case there was any confusion.

>> No.1274371

>>1273954

My gf likes Neil Gaiman, Lev Grossman, and stuff like The Kite Runner, so I can't complain

>> No.1274373

>>1274362
I don't believe so, it is usually books like Fight Club and such. Casual male readers don't read Science fiction, science fiction is more geared toward the nerd/geek group. Casual male readers are the people who prop up Stephan king and John grisham and Dean Koontz

While casual female readers make Eat pray love a success

>> No.1274375

>>1274353
I report boobs because I like my /lit/ safe for work.

>> No.1274377

>>1274371
I hated the Kite Runner and the only thing from Gaiman I have read that wasn't a comic was American Gods...which also sucked.

So women have bad taste confirmed.

>> No.1274378

I dunno, if you'll check out the /lit/ Goodreads group, the majority of the women on there do not read stereotypical shitty woman books. They seem to have just as great of taste as the guys.

>> No.1274379
File: 43 KB, 299x422, string-bikini.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1274379

>>1274375
And also because you like to suck nigggercocks. But I digress.

Here's another work-safe picture, so fuck you and all of your faggotry.

>> No.1274381

>>1274377
Guy here, you're crazy; Gaiman is great fun, though all his books are "road stories," so if you don't like them, you're fucked.

>> No.1274382

>>1274377

My gf's tastes > your tastes

prove me wrong

>> No.1274383
File: 187 KB, 450x675, nereida_gallardo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1274383

>>1274375
Also, for every boob you sage, I will post an image of the beauty of the female form, just to piss you off while simulaneously highlighting what a douchebag faggot tool you are.

>> No.1274385

>>1274378
The ones in the tinychat also have pretty alright taste in books.

>> No.1274386

.>>1274364
ITT: One example (Twilight) = most literature women read

For your information, I have never read and never will read Twilight (or any shit tier romance novel for that matter). My close female friends who are also avid readers have also never read and deride Twilight. But sure. Women are stupider than men. You have convinced me, OP.

Why don't the majority of /lit/ users (who are males with low self esteem) just beat the boobed "straw man" and have a field day.

>> No.1274388

/r/ that /mu/ pic of the guy saying he doesn't really care about his gf's taste when his penis is thrusting in and out of her mouth, vagina, and ass

>> No.1274390

>>1274386
It's funny cause even though I'd say Twilight is more of a girl book, two of my guy friends love it and none of my girl friends do. lmao

>> No.1274399

>>1273954
Yes, as do men.
People in general have shit taste in most things.

>> No.1274400

>>1274386

I never mentioned Twilight (in fact I think you are the only person who has in this thread).There is more than just Twilight I am talking about Oprah's book's of the month and stuff like Eat Pray Love and garbage of its ilk.

Also saying one group has worse taste than another group doesn't mean that their aren't exceptions in each group. Also having worse taste in literature doesn't make you stupider

>> No.1274410

My boyfriend reads Star Wars and Star Trek books. Also, Michael Crichton. He is vaguely interested in reading Fight Club.

My favorite writers are Anton Chekov, Italo Calvino, and Natsume Soseki.

But I don't try and force my boyfriend to read the authors I like, because he just doesn't like that sort of thing. He likes Star Trek and Crichton, and I'm okay with it.

>> No.1274412

>>1274410
Different strokes for different folks.

You hold a reasonable stance. Thus, I must conclude, you are not a woman.

>> No.1274415

>>1274410

>Crichton

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeww

And this is pure projection because I remember a time when I used to love that shit

>> No.1274417

Sure is /r9k/ in here.

>> No.1274438
File: 19 KB, 270x270, gary-coleman-arnold-stripes_l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1274438

>>1274412
>Different strokes

>> No.1274448

>>1274400
These people mentioned twilight before me, bro:
>>1274292
>>1274310
Before them, no one gave any tangible examples.

>> No.1274463

>>1274400
>Oprah's book's of the month
I ordered The Road on a friend's suggestion. By the time I got it from backorder from Amazon, it had both "Soon to be a major motion picture!" and "Oprah's Book Club Selection!" stickers on it.

I called up said friend and said "What the fuck have you gotten me into?"

I was just being a pretentious douche.

>> No.1274467

>>1274463
That was by far his worst book...I am not surprised Oprah liked it

>> No.1274471

>>1274467
You do know Oprah's book club does things like Anna Karenina as well, right?

>> No.1274477

>>1274471
I've given up trying to reason with them. They're just looking for more reasons to justify their misogyny.

>> No.1274478

>>1274471
Yes I am well aware that every single book she has ever included on her list hasn't been horrible. I am also aware that the large majority of them are horrible.

>> No.1274480

>>1274478
And I'm supposed to believe you've read every Oprah's book club book in order to make that assessment?

>> No.1274481

>>1274292
>there isn't anything (at in literature terms) like Twilight for guys.

how about michael chrichton, steven king, tom clancy, james clavell, ian fleming, john grisham, etc?

also, most people have shit taste in everything. most 4chan users are losers/introverts who spend a lot of time idle and alone, which they use to trawl through mountains of books, music, art, etc. most people just grab whatever is most readily available or distributed because they can't be arsed to spend so much time and effort on whats seen as a hobby.

also, reading things like harry potter and twilight lets you participate in an enormous culture/discussion. if all your peers are reading harry potter in 8th grade, well, that's going to make a person curious to see what all the buzz is about.

>> No.1274483

>>1274477
It might help if you actually used reason and logic in your arguments to begin with. Maybe it would have a greater effect than just saying "my friends like good books" and not addressing that the majority of readers are women and the majority of commercially successful books are critically not well received so obviously there must be some correlation.

>> No.1274491

>>1274480
You are right...if only newspapers had BOOK REVIEWS, but unfortunately no one has ever reviewed a book in print.

>> No.1274496

>>1274481
>steven king

womenz b staright up stupid yo

>> No.1274501

Those are boobs.

I like boobs.

>> No.1274502

>>1274491
Generally you would read the books yourself, before making a statement that none of them are good. As it is, you're just copying what other people have told you to think.

>> No.1274512

I agree that more reasoning is necissary. Why do you think all girls have bad taste in literature? What are said girls reading that is so bad? I'm a Stephen king fan myself.

P.S. BOOBS

>> No.1274517

>>1274512
>all girls

No. A majority, yes, but not ALL. You are condemning half the world's population based on your experiences with two or three countries.

>> No.1274522

I've met one girl who enjoyed reading Steinbeck and Conrad, but most girls I know read the usual Stephen King or Meyer trash or simply just don't read literature at all. My mom has a couple of Umberto Eco books, but other than that her entire book collection is made up of Agathe Christie and Scandinavian crime novels.

>> No.1274529

My girlfriend likes Nicholas Sparks QQ

Although I did get her to read Walden when we were teenagers (we've been dating for ~3-4 years), and she received it surprisingly intelligently. I think, like it most aspects of life, it's more important for most women to feel emotional satisfaction in their reading than it is to feel intellectual enlightenment, whereas most /lit/brarians are the converse.

CAPTCHA: accusers. gurning.

>> No.1274532

All of my female friends have drastically better taste in books than my male friends (who are your basic Stephen King, Crichton, Koontz type people). I have a pretty much equal amount of friends from both genders, so I'm not sure how all the girls ended up having so much better taste overall.

>> No.1274537

>>1274502
Generally you don't go into a bookstore blind and just pick random things. You usually have an idea in mind of what you want to read based off someone or something you figure to be a credible source. There are millions of books published maybe you have the free time to read them all but I need some help determining which ones are worth my time.

I understand for the sake of your stupid argument you are trying to suggest critically panned books should be read and not written off as badly received...but I don't agree.

>> No.1274550

>>1274537
Which ones are critically panned? Tolstoy, Faulkner, McCullers, Buck, Marquez, Steinbeck, Allende, Oates?

Now I can get behind Toni Morrison not being awesome, but you claimed there were only a few exceptions to the 'horrible' rule. There seems to be much more than just a few.

>> No.1274586

ITT: People assuming everyone on /lit/ is male.

>> No.1274817

>>1274378
Where is this goodreads book how do I join.

Also, dudeanon here. I started out with King and shit. I still read stuff that isn't high lit, like Dresden Files/Steve Brust/Pratchett/Gaiman. I also have Neruda, Dostoevsky, Heidegger, Hegel, Marx, Marcus Aurelius, Plato...etc. The shit got me into the good, so to speak.

>> No.1274833

>>1274817
Goodreads.com, it's a book cataloging site.

http://www.goodreads.com/group/show/29373._lit_

^ the /lit/ group there

>> No.1274841

>>1273983
>rightfully complains

nope.jpg

>> No.1274844

>>1274833

thanks!

>> No.1274852
File: 61 KB, 500x626, TyBrax4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1274852

>read TBK for a few hours, make good progress towards finishing it tonight
>come back to my lit
>click frontpage, see this thread
>62 posts and 7 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view
Yet again you guys show that you are -not- superior to any of the other boards. In fact you might even be inferior for thinking so!

also notice how a tripfag is one of only 4 people that has saged this thread so far. thanks for reassuring me, freaks.

>> No.1274863

When I started reading lit a couple of months ago, one of the first things I picked up was Ulysses (I found it googling 'greatest books'). Some chick came up to me when I was reading it and started going on about Virginia Woolf, but I had nfi who that was at the time. I ended up being all "derp derp JK Rowling". I dunno, just a counter example where a male had terrible taste and a fem was superior.

P.S. reading Ulysses when the only books you've read are The Hobbit and Harry Potter is a terrible idea.

>> No.1274867

Where the fuck am I? I could have sworn I was on the /lit/ board, but I must have mistakenly relocated to /r9k/.

>> No.1274899

Female here.

I suppose one could say that my taste in literature is more feminine, though all of the authors/poets I like are pretty well respected in the literary world. Among my favorites are Angela Carter, Virginia Woolf, Jeanette Winterson, Oscar Wilde, P.B. Shelley, and John Keats. Though I'm sure that since half those writers are women /lit/ already hates them out of principle. After all, I don't think any of the writers I mentioned ever wrote a single thing that would be of masculine interest, that is, they've never written any post-apocolyptic bullshit about zombies or cryptic, unintelligible ramblings, fraught with phallic symbols.

>> No.1274902

oh my god, ban these threads to /r9k/

titty pictures paired with a bitchfest about women from someone who's never had a meaningful relationship with one who didn't breastfeed him do not deserve to take up space on my precious /lit/

>> No.1274903

>>1274902


These dudes would be more well-adjusted if their mothers had bothered to breastfeed them.

Bunch of bottle-fed maladjusted dudes.
Just because you Mom didn't love you enough don't go taking that out on the rest of the female sex.

>> No.1274910

in all (post-)agriarian societies woman have to with the ideological baggage of property so books about the woes and sorrows of women in such for such tend to be as exciting as would be the personal life of a sock. that said, I am not a misogynist. In fact, i would totally fuck dat Medea.

>> No.1274919

>>1274899
Shelley is masculine. Masculine as shit.

>> No.1274923

>>1274910
You wouldn't read a story about the personal life of a sock? That actually sounds kind of badass...

>> No.1274940

>>1274919
Fuck your shit. Shelley was a hardcore Romantic and a champion against the oppressive values of the patriarchy.

>> No.1274956

I think the biggest difference is not gender, but taste. Some people may not like to read, and only read magazines or the super-popular crap like Twilight (one of my female friends reads these, literally the only books she has read since High School D:) Some people love to read for the sake of reading; my mom reads so much, she pretty much has to go to the New Arrivals section of the library to find something she hasn't read yet. She even read Proust, for bragging rights, although she said it was an exercise in masochism. I really like to read, so I prefer to spend my available reading time on good stuff, am willing to give most authors a chance but once I discover you suck, never again. Loved Steven King as a teenager; since the early 90's, not so much. Read DaVinci Code, now want to burn every Dan Brown book I see. Read Twilight, one passage was so awful I groaned and threw it on the ground . I did finish it, though, to better be able to advise interested parties how and why it sucks. My favorite books are: The Hours, The Road, The Color Purple, White Oleander, Shibumi, Song of Solomon, The Pillars of the Earth, Danse Macabre, It, Catch-22, Joy Luck Club, She's Come Undone, 100 Years of Solitude, The House of the Spirits

>> No.1274960

God, I hate men.

>> No.1274976

>>1274960
If you h8 men, then you'll <3 me.