/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1779159]

>mfw when I post in /lit/ and contribute to intelligent discussion about literature
>mfw when I see all the misogynistic threads and realize I am a girl

It's the Internet and it's 4chan so obviously you guys will be extra dicks cause who gives a fuck on here, but it's only the fact that some of you genuinely believe women are inferior and you hate them and they should've never gotten rights blah blah blah that is shit. There are some really stupid men out there and I've met a lot of them in my life but I don't hold their penises responsible for their lack of brain whereas having a vagina--whether consciously or subconsciously--changes a man's view on a woman's capacity for intelligence.

Now let's discuss peer-reviewed essays. Who here reads essays for fun? Would you count them as literature? I think they're great food for thought. Admittedly, I don't read them often but when the occasional research paper comes up, I tend to stray a lot reading unrelated essays.

[Anonymous No.1779163]

>yes, i'm a girl on the internet, don't hit on me you silly boys.

[Anonymous No.1779165]

>Now let's discuss peer-reviewed essays.

As in SCIENCE!?!

[Anonymous No.1779171]

>girl
>contribute to intelligent discussion

[Anonymous No.1779169]

>>1779165
I see someone's just heard of the Sokal affair and takes it far too seriously.

[Anonymous No.1779172]

I'm always reading essays for fun. And don't worry, /lit/ has a pretty high female userbase. It's generally better to just ignore the misogyny threads. They're only going to increase with the onset of summer.

[Anonymous No.1779174]

>>1779169
Maybe you take it too seriously, because >>1779165 isn't related to the Sokal affair at all.

[Anonymous No.1779175]

Why aren't you wearing a chador?

[Anonymous No.1779178]

>>1779171

But you wouldn't know that had I not said anything, correct? Had I just made a thread asking if the same question without stating I am a female, perhaps you would've answered intelligently.

>>1779165
Yes, as in science but it doesn't have to be only since. You know, anything you can find on a library database.

[Anonymous No.1779181]

>>1779175

Because it's hot today.

[Anonymous No.1779182]

>>1779181

That's not really an excuse, go put it on.

[Anonymous No.1779184]

>men and women are equal
>Who here reads essays for fun?
2 dumb threads packed into one

[Anonymous No.1779191]

all essay's outside of your diary are peer-reviewed. Wikipedia is peer-reviewed.

btw, that doesn't mean it has any authority at all.

[Anonymous No.1779195]

>>1779178
I'd probably figure it out after a while but for the best part, no.

However, I would probably be seen as a sexist. Mainly for my opposition to most modern feminist movements due to their absoulute corruption of the concept 'equality', along with most of societies completely erroneous idea of what 'equality' actually means.

On a more personal level I find myself thinking misogynistically - the result of, a majority, of bad experiences with women. From my mother (Freud, get in here), to my ex's, to those I barely know but bump into. I live in a shitty town, full of, it seems, shitty women. Hopefully that'll change once I leave this areshole of the world.

[Anonymous No.1779209]

>>1779195

Now see that is a proper response.

I am going to say something that will immediately make you judge me but stick with me: I am in a Gender Studies class this semester but ONLY because I was placed into it by a program at my uni and I /have/ to take it otherwise, I wouldn't. I could give a damn about gender studies, it's a shit tier subject anyway. My professor is a feminazi mega-lesbian and if you disagree with her on anything, you're on her shit list. We've had our disagreements because she is downright a feminist and an advocate for the "equality" you mentioned and I am a realist where I recognize the fact that most women /are/ dumb in that they take no interest whatsoever in scientific fields or anything remotely valuable in life. The point I was trying to make is that a man, say you who initially responded in such a way, will immediately judge a woman based on her sex. It's equivalent of 18th century thought where men would gather in their clubs at universities and circle jerk each other while discussing Descartes or whatever was their fancy. The thought that women were inferior immediately knocked any chance of a woman with actual capacity for scholarly thinking to make a name for herself. Marie Curie, Emmy Noether, Inge Lehmann--all contributed valid things to science but you never hear of them, do you? That's because neglect in history has not allowed women to achieve great things.

tl;dr: feminism sucks but some women can actually think, just give them a chance.

Also, this has turned more /sci/ than /lit/.

[Anonymous No.1779213]

>>1779209
>neglect in history has not allowed women to achieve great things
ohboyhere_wego.bmp

[Anonymous No.1779223]

How can you say that women are equal to men when less than 1% of professional female basketball players can dunk?

[Anonymous No.1779225]

mfw she actually believes men are not just being sexist because it's funny

at least on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.1779240]

>>1779223
but...but female basketball players have strong fundamentals

STRONG FUNDAMENTALS

[Anonymous No.1779241]

>>1779223

What do you say about the fact that white men can't dunk?

[Anonymous No.1779244]

>>1779241

They should be injected with female hormones, castrated and turned into sexual objects.

[Anonymous No.1779247]

>>1779241

[Anonymous No.1779251]

>>1779247

But Mavericks.
>nope.jpg

[Anonymous No.1779259]

>>1779251
i quit watching basketball 7 years ago

doesn't sound like a lot has changed

check out larry bird:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaKRghcLQSY

[Anonymous No.1779261]

I'm an engineer, so most of the papers I read are scientific. The last social science paper I read was Understanding Libertarian Morality: The Psychological Roots of an Individualist Ideology. It described me pretty accurately, pretty interesting overall.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1665934

I also read some paper on Nietzsche and existentialism a little while ago, can't remember what it was called.

[Anonymous No.1779266]

>mfw when
>my face when when

>/lit/
>No one notices

Classy

[Anonymous No.1779269]

>>1779266
Or we just don't care about stupid shit like this.

[Truman Capote !!cO9KVBDtkqQ No.1779270]

>>1779159

Orwell's essays are definitely literature.

For me it's his essays more than his fiction which show his real genius.

Feminists often go too far and ends up damaging it's own cause. The general differences between men and women go beyond the existence of a penis.

I'm not saying women can't be great thinkers, I'm just saying nature pushes us in different ways. For some people genes are quite deterministic.

To say otherwise is just ideological nonsense. Wait until extensive biogenetics comes along and we can bend nature to our ideological fantasies.

[not OP No.1779280]

First of all:
>>1779163

Second:
Women are largely inferior intellectually. It's biology. Women are emotional, men are logical. Exceptions don't make the general concept untrue.

[Anonymous No.1779285]

>>1779261
Want to read so will bookmark. Thanks for sharing.

>>1779270
Amazing choice. Orwell has always been a favorite of mine. I definitely agree. I've read a lot of his essays and almost all of his books. You can see his writing style change throughout his novels. I think his essays incorporate more of the man himself than say, 1984 does.

I'm not for feminism at all and the problem is that most men don't notice the very fact you just mentioned, "The general differences between men and women go beyond the existence of a penis."

[Anonymous No.1779288]

>>1779280
>implying emotion = intellect
Huh?

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1779292]

>>1779280
>Women are emotional, men are logical
so by this logic autism is extremely masculine?

[sage No.1779297]

>>1779270
is it possible that a low voter turnout could mean that people are satisfied. and that regardless of which leading runners are running, the country will be okay? that's a possibility besides apathy, right?

[not OP No.1779298]

>>1779288
When did I imply anything like that?
>>1779292
Yes.
http://www.google.com/search?q=autism+testosterone&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mo
zilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[Anonymous No.1779301]

>>1779270
Orwell is actually kind of a moron. His most basic thesis is that technology promotes fascism. The only thing I can say to that is lol what? Fascism as a word was only coined in the 20th century, yet 20th century fascism didn't even approach the totalitarian regimes of 18th century Russia etc. The world has only become freer and more difficult to reign over unilaterally since the advent of digital media equipment. Orwell is in short completely fucking wrong about everything he has ever said and used completely contrived plot elements to support technological scare mongering that distracts people from much realer abuses of power. His whole psychoanalysis of power structures is inaccurate and just plainly silly. People within a modern empire do not have to fear their governments so much as people without do. It makes me really fucking angry that the literature community just accepts Orwell as political science gospel when if you actually evaluate his claims against history, they make zero sense.

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1779308]

>>1779298
oh i totally forgot about that

[Anonymous No.1779487]

that feel when young women don't want to be tarred with the brush of icky feminism and then get surprised that men treat even super cool girls like them as inferiors

[Anonymous No.1779515]

It's a good thing OP was never on /r9k/ if the level of misogyny on /lit/ bothers her this much.

[Truman Capote !!cO9KVBDtkqQ No.1779526]

>>1779301

You best be trollin me, nigga.