/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6407931]

Why do women receive such better marks in /lit/?

[Anonymous No.6407946]

>>6407931
based tumblr

[Anonymous No.6408012]

>>6407931
>Why do women receive such better marks in /lit/?
Women are continuously trained in social discourse for sexual purposes from about 8.

Also women don't receive better marks in /lit/. The average woman receives better marks than the average man. Exceptional men still perform better. Probably due to trained aggression.

[Anonymous No.6408042]

>>6408012
A day will come when life will be a eat-what-you-catch once more, and I ask, where will YOU be then, my fair lady?

[Anonymous No.6408055]

>>6408042
Probably coordinating the shooting of the rich.

[Anonymous No.6408060]

>>6408042
getting fed by suitors lol

[Anonymous No.6408081]

>>6408060
ding ding ding

[Anonymous No.6408094]

>>6408060
You'd be raped eight ways from Sundown. The only thing you'd be "fed" are the never born halves of Jamal, Tyrese, and Laquisha III.

[Anonymous No.6408102]

>>6408042
>implying life isn't already a eat-what-you-catch

[Anonymous No.6408120]

>>6408012
A better question, albeit more general:
>Why are there differences between men and women's academic achievement?

[Anonymous No.6408132]

>>6408120
different priorities, different interests. that's about it.

[Anonymous No.6408146]

>>6408120
>>Why are there differences between men and women's academic achievement?
gender, patriarchy, possibly the testosterone system

[Anonymous No.6408153]

>>6408120
brace for braindead essentialists

[Anonymous No.6408158]

>>6408153
Everyone in this thread go look up this word and take notes right now

[Anonymous No.6408164]

>>6408153
Well it is a braindead essentialist question.

[Anonymous No.6408167]

>>6408120
One is absolutely, no holds barred in service of the professor, the other might challenge the professor now and then.

[Anonymous No.6408170]

>>6408120
Gender roles.

[Anonymous No.6408172]

>>6408120
because teenage boys give less fucks than teenage girls

[Anonymous No.6408181]

Why do we have to have +5 threads every day about women?

>>>/r9k/

[Anonymous No.6408188]

>no matter how much the feminist-vs.-misogynist Great Internet Debate goes back and forth about whether women have souls, they still objectively don't have souls
>the debate will go on for ten thousand years as women refuse to even treat of the possibility that they might not be awesome, and beta male white knights lend credibility to their biases by defending him
>meanwhile men will still be in all positions of real power, hogging all the great "firsts" in human history, and inventing everything awesome, forever
>women will be constantly butthurt for eternity

[Anonymous No.6408189]

>>6408012
Is skill in social discourse more important for academic credit than whatever men are trained to do?

[Anonymous No.6408194]

>>6408188
>>>/r9k/

[Anonymous No.6408196]

>All my literature classes in college
>Read a book, answer questions about the book, and do a short, subjective analysis on what certain passages mean

How do you not get an A in that shit? Have any of you seriously performed poorly in literature classes?

[Anonymous No.6408203]

>>6408188
Found your bedside book

[Anonymous No.6408204]

>>6408196
*tips fedora*

[Anonymous No.6408206]

>>6408181
Anon, think of it like this:
>It's not a thread about women
>It's a thread about why we have the gender roles we do
>You're obviously interested in having a relevant discussion; why don't you contribute instead of referring us to another board?

[Anonymous No.6408211]

>>6408204

>I got a C in a literature class

[Anonymous No.6408214]

>>6408211
My gf's IQ is 150+
What's yours Anon?

[Anonymous No.6408216]

>>6408188

[Anonymous No.6408224]

>>6408196
>Have any of you seriously performed poorly in literature classes?

Nope, and the men who do perform poorly (and tried) are fucking idiots, but there is something to the criticism that the classes are *too* easy, perhaps since the integration of women into the classes...

But then again, you can just as easily replace "women" with "the poor."

[Anonymous No.6408225]

>>6408214

I don't measure my IQ because I'm not an insecure faggot.

I'm not even trying to sound smart. Literature classes were some of the easiest classes I took in college. That's saying something about your level of stupidity if you performed poorly in those classes, because I am not a smart guy, or a big reader.

[Anonymous No.6408226]

>>6408189
>Is skill in social discourse more important for academic credit than whatever men are trained to do?
It is in fields of discursive analysis.

[Anonymous No.6408228]

>>6408188
Why do you say such things anon

[Anonymous No.6408232]

>>6407931

[Anonymous No.6408236]

>>6408216
This guy could be a legitimate badass, but because you retards expect chiseled jaws and abs everytime you bow down to this type of awful verbal horseshit, you just make fun of him. A generation raised on biopics expects the actor from the biopic instead of the man himself.

[Anonymous No.6408237]

>>6408232
This is what all that "patronizing" feminists go on about actually is

[Anonymous No.6408240]

>>6408236
shh

[Anonymous No.6408242]

>>6408232

Not a feminist, but you'd think it'd be the opposite. Boys are usually thought to be stupider than girls in grade school, so you'd have lower expectations for them, so you'd give them higher scores for being above the average boy.

Where as girls are expected to be good at school, they'd have a higher level of expectation, and be graded more severely.

[Anonymous No.6408243]

>>6408189
You'd be surprised. Primary education is feminised as fuck right now, so young boys are dropping out at record rates, and manifesting all kinds of weird problems that both sour them on the idea of classroom/academic learning in general and make them feel excluded and unwanted there. Girls and boys have different psychology and the overwhelmingly female teachers and education policy administrators have been making assumptions about pedagogy for a long time that really only reflect or are conducive to female psychology.

If you're interested, Christina Hoff-Sommers writes about this stuff. She's kind of a Meme Dissenting Feminist now, but this stuff was WHY she was discovered for it.
Short video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFpYj0E-yb4
Longer version, good vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqOTj9NDv80

Also in academia the same thing is enforced, just more subtly. Universities are becoming more and more 'holistic', social, group- and creativity-oriented, etc., in their teaching methods. Nothing wrong with this, but it's chick shit, honestly. There isn't a lot of room left for the old pure autism --> scholarly output formula at the undergraduate level these days.

Also of course academia has been converted into a leftist political platform in certain studies, so a lot of funding and departmental interest and just focus in general is flowing toward 'progressive' research topics and 'underrepresented minorities' and crap like that. There are a lot of chick theses in the social sciences and humanities that are basically journalistic human interest stories.

[Anonymous No.6408250]

Why does it matter what grades females make? professors know this and therefore just give them any old grade. The only thing a woman show know how to do is make a steak, iron a shirt, and birth a baby.

[Anonymous No.6408251]

>>6408243
CHS is great
I hope the fans don't ruin her for everyone else like they did with DFW and Vonnegut on this board

[Anonymous No.6408255]

>>6408216
>>6408203
>>6408194
>someone criticises women
>every single reply is implying he is invirile/virgin/laughably undesirable to women

Go back and reread:
>the debate will go on for ten thousand years as women refuse to even treat of the possibility that they might not be awesome, and beta male white knights lend credibility to their biases by defending him

Remember: Coerce every critic by attacking them and not their argument. That's the way to agency and self-discipline!

[Anonymous No.6408256]

>>6408250

>The only thing a woman should know how to do is make a steak

Well then they've failed at their one job, because women make the shittiest overcooked steaks.

[Anonymous No.6408269]

This thread explains all the fucking frog pictures I keep seeing.

[Anonymous No.6408279]

>>6408243
Meh, whatever dude. Education can't be "feminised." That doesn't make any fucking sense.

And it's not like college was anti-social before all this group work. Universities used to be elite to the point of 5-6 student classes. And neither is group work associated with femininity. But, if anything, I've noticed more of a rise in the promotion of the "entrepreneurial" type, ie "business leaders." Well groomed, maxims in their pocket, fuck everybody else types.

[Anonymous No.6408288]

>>6408243
>I am a failing undergraduate.

That's nice. None of them are leftists. I can count my colleagues who believe in the emancipation of the proletariat using the three fingers I fuck women with. They're liberals. They're selling the integration of the female proletariat into service work capitalism as ideology, not the emancipation of the class.

>Groupwork
Is cost effective. That's it. There's no feminist agenda. Group work is about 4 times cheaper than individual assignments.

>chick theses
There are a lot of theses without academic rigour, including instrumentalist reductivism, because it reduces the price of academic labour.

[Anonymous No.6408290]

>>6408255
But Anon, you are invirile and laughably undesirable to women. Your hormones are speaking for you and you can't help it. On top of that you're dumb enough to blame half the population instead of yourself. As for the discussion, you don't have an argument to speak of, for god's sake you believe in souls! Did you actually expect to be taken seriously here?

[Anonymous No.6408303]

I think men are better in achieving new heights for whatever humanity you conceive is because, for biological reasons, men are at their best trying to prove their worth through competition, seeking how to achieve better than his adversary.

On the other hand, girls are all about survivability. They have more fat, better senses, better smell, live longer, whitstand cold temperatures. They also compete, just as fiercely, with each other, trying to ascertain their safety by, in mast cases, appearing better, seducing better, wearing favorite colors of pink because..uh, you go after that cherry.


Maybe what men and women are able to do is of little difference between each other, but women usually don't achieve such great feats because it's out of their natural field and predisposition. They already make the greatest achievement in their lives, they make men, afterwards it's only a searching for safety.

[Anonymous No.6408304]

>>6408279
Oh yeah, feminist cuck.

/pol/ here to red pill you on women and feminism.

The world is being feminized, all men are systematically being pussified by institutions. We are no longer allowed to be REAL men. We are false men now.

Women are our property. They have no self-consciousness, they're like rocks. They can't be ethical, and are lying deceiving whores, each and every one of them.

Don't like it, feminist cuck? Well, look up their IQ. They're dumber. And who build civilization and technology? Men did.

Women never did anything to improve lives. They have contributed zilch, squat, nothing. They are leeches destroying REAL men and masculinity. I can't be a man anymore. I am forced to sit here and complain like some hysterical woman.

It's because we're raised by women now, no masculine figures to help me become strong.

Not only that, but women are less rational, science confirms this unequivocally. They also cheat more than men, hence are immoral (as I said earlier).

They are incapable of love too. Only a man can truly love.

Women are literally garbage.

[Anonymous No.6408310]

>>6408251
She is great and I'm glad she's riding this whole fourth-gen dissenting feminism upsurge to get some prominence. She was obscure as fuck for a long time.

>>6408279
>Meh, whatever dude. Education can't be "feminised." That doesn't make any fucking sense.

Well, the important thing is that you discounted the sources/arguments linked without actually consulting or considering them.

>But, if anything, I've noticed more of a rise in the promotion of the "entrepreneurial" type, ie "business leaders." Well groomed, maxims in their pocket, fuck everybody else types.

This has actually been discussed recently as well, usually by the same types of people as Sommers. The problem here isn't just that boys are being excluded or fucked over, it's that women are getting totally artificial accolades and prestige.

The problem is that prestige exists for a reason, and that reason is utility and respect for power (social capital). You can pretend all you want that you respect these woman PhDs who will never produce seminal scholarship to save their lives (meanwhile, the shrinking minority of men continues to dominate in this respect), or all the female politicians who don't do shit, but at the end of the day, the basis for that respect is phony. It's progressive 'let's all clap for the big strong girl'. Meanwhile, because those loci of power and prestige have been diluted by phoniness, the real power shifts to elsewhere - the business world, e.g.

This has been observed by recent feminist authors: the more women get into positions of 'power', the more the power shifts to regions where they have negligible presence, because (surprise) that's where the exceptional people, mostly men, are thriving.

>>6408290
I'm gay.

[Anonymous No.6408312]

>>6408279
CHS talks more about how education is becoming more congruent with feminist psychology; she mostly stays far away from a literary definition of femininity

[Anonymous No.6408313]

>>6408304
>/pol/ here to red pill you on women and feminism.
Stopped reading here

[Anonymous No.6408318]

>>6408304
Lol pretty good.

[Anonymous No.6408324]

Because they have the inside track on lesbian sex scenes.

[Anonymous No.6408332]

>>6408310
>Well, the important thing is that you discounted the sources/arguments linked without actually consulting or considering them

I mean, I agree with the rest of your post, but regardless of what your links state, the idea that something can be "feminised" is absurd. There is no "feminine." How could a source possibly prove that there is? Rough population studies that (are interpreted to) say "boys perform well in these environments and girls perform well in those environments" don't cut it.

[Anonymous No.6408334]

>>6408158
>>6408153
Right. Now how many did you spot? I'm at 6.

[Anonymous No.6408346]

>>6408332
>>the idea that something can be "feminised" is absurd. There is no "feminine." How could a source possibly prove that there is?

>there are differences in female/male psychology
>overwhelmingly female administrators of a given institution are subtly tailoring it more for their psychology than male

But frankly it's not my job to explain things you won't read/watch to you. If you want answers to your objections, objections made before actually consulting the thing you're objecting to, consider consulting the thing you're objecting to.

[Anonymous No.6408353]

>muh essential differences
>muh biology
>muh male/female psychology
>muh nature
And how many of you are actual experts in the field? Where are your peer-reviewed publications?

[Anonymous No.6408354]

>>6408288
>>Groupwork
>Is cost effective

but it sacrifices quality
(not the guy you were answering, btw)

[Anonymous No.6408356]

>>6408354
do you know what cost effective means?

[Anonymous No.6408361]

>>6408346
In order for that to be true, you'd have to prove both that the "psychology" (vague, non-rigorous word) of female and male brains are different and that there is a way to "subtly tailor" education to that fixed* psychology. And it must be fixed since if it weren't, it couldn't have been so totally named the absolute "female" and "male" psychology.

It's just utter fucking backwards horseshit on the level of "women think more like X, hence they thrive in arts and crafts."

[Anonymous No.6408362]

>>6408353
>Why
>Why
Why are you asking for qualifications on an anonymous imageboard?

[Anonymous No.6408366]

>>6408356
I suppose so
unless you're using some alternate definition I'm not aware of

[Anonymous No.6408371]

>>6408354
>>6408356
Well, you need to remember that higher education was transformed into a component of labour's wage sometime in the 1970s. Just as with tobacco, bread, potatos, culture, sex, the quality will decline under mass production because the standard commodity will be reduced to the minimum embodiment of necessary labour possible. If you ask why you're doing group work, ask instead why your tutors and lecturers are casual, and why there are a quarter of the staff needed to conduct "luxury" education.

[Anonymous No.6408373]

>>6408304
You use generalizations and absolutely dismiss what autistic, lying, not to mention cheating, fucks we men are. You are just picking sides and act like you are superior.

But, yes, I do believe women are less incapable than men. We are pathetic cucks that have ideals, which are always ruined by the perpetual change the time brings.

You are spooked to the bone of you think our furthering of "humanity" means jack shit. Embrace women for what they are, and if you are a man as you say you are, get out there and make women the way you like, be that 18C shy and timid angels to sing and put roads to, or red haired feminist whores to get sucked in their activities to.

[Anonymous No.6408379]

>>6408188

[Anonymous No.6408384]

>>6408353
Becky Francis is a good place to start. Here are some other starter texts.

>Becky Francis and Christine Skelton, Reassessing Gender and Achievement: Questioning Contemporary Key Debates
>Wayne Martino, Michael Kehler, and Marcus Weaver, eds., The Problem with Boys' Education: Beyond the Backlash
>Becky Francis, Boys, Girls, and Achievement: addressing the Classroom Issues

[Anonymous No.6408393]

>>6408384
Are those actually peer reviewed or did you skip that part?

[Anonymous No.6408396]

Because they have scented diaries.

[Anonymous No.6408407]

>>6408304
>It's because we're raised by women now, no masculine figures to help me become strong.

if you need "help" to "get stronger" you're probably not capable of doing so in the first place.

[Anonymous No.6408410]

>>6408373
I mean I do believe women are less capable to love than men

[Anonymous No.6408412]

>>6408396
and scented assholes <3

[Anonymous No.6408424]

Because they already know they're whores, like all writers should.

[Anonymous No.6408432]

>>6408361
You're misinterpreting
>men and women react differently to the same stimuli and strategies in classrooms
as
>I HAVE DISCOVERED THE METAPHYSICAL ESSENCE OF FEMININITY AND MASCULINITY VIA NEUROPSYCHOLOGY!!

The former is a fundamental assumption of pretty much ALL pedagogical theory and educational psychology. The latter is irrelevant.

Again, if interested, actually watch the videos (or consult the scholarly sources that informed them). If not, keep setting up arbitrary goalposts and kicking balls through them.

>>6408393
They are major academic works in the field, anon.

I find it funny that you know just enough about academic rigour to pretend you're its guardian, but you know little enough that you can't recognise by their titles alone what they are. Or at least know to check very quickly that they are.

What's weirder though is that you think there needs to be hard proof that the MASSIVE field of educational psychology takes gender into account. It's like 80% of the fucking work in the field.

[Anonymous No.6408435]

>>6408361
>"women think more like X, hence they thrive in arts and crafts."
Put that backwards.

It is us trying to make assumptions based on the way women act and in what they thrive in. Trying to find something that will appear the most logical.

[Anonymous No.6408437]

>>6408410
And you call yourself an anti-feminist, fucking cuck faggot? Otto Weininger is the best theorist on this and he famously asserts that man's relation to his object of desire is entirely one of narcissism, i.e. what he comes to love is not the woman but his own idealized self-image.
Woman is the sin of man.
Woman doesn't come into existence until man turns away from his ethical pursuits and becomes sexualized and hence compromises his true nature.

Man's love is fake.

Lacan agrees somewhat

[Anonymous No.6408445]

because it's better to believe their stories

[Anonymous No.6408448]

ITT: victim mentality

[Anonymous No.6408458]

Because they know why the curtains were blue and which interior decorator killed the victim. They also never liked him but you never asked.

[Anonymous No.6408473]

>>6408458
>They also never liked him but you never asked.

Is this true?
hold me pls @____________@

[Anonymous No.6408480]

>>6408473
omg it's always about you isn't it?

[Anonymous No.6408487]

friendly reminder that psychology is not a hard science

[Anonymous No.6408498]

There, there.. No need to be so sharp here. I already said that what men love the ideal, which of course generates from his own mind.

Why ignore women, isn't it that love comes from the same narcissistic ideals? It's evident that most men choose to lose their heads trying to prove their worth achieving their ideal in the shape of a women, but there is no good reason why not to choose doing that for another meaningless ideology.

You should read Darconville's Cat by Alexander Theroux

It's wonderful book, at parts pretentious, but still have good moments. It's a masterpiece in misogyny.

[Anonymous No.6408501]

>better marks
Because nobody's going to believe the female character is chasing the guy with no money or talent

[Anonymous No.6408511]

>>6407931
Because the majority of teachers are female and the subject has no concrete method of grading so the female teacher can simply give higher marks to girls without any rebuttal.

[Anonymous No.6408536]

There's only one reason I know it can't be, and that's that women do better. There's simply no way.

[Anonymous No.6408542]

>>6408288
Watch out everybody, we've got a purebred socialist over here.

[Anonymous No.6408546]

>>6408511
>concrete
You don't understand the use of that metaphor, do you?

[Anonymous No.6408548]

Because they're natural dissimulators.

[Anonymous No.6408622]

>>6408353
>we are all the same height
>we are all the same color
>we are all the same intellect
>we all have the same genitals

It's great that you understand that the environment shapes behavior but maybe you should consider sex to be part of this environment so you don't act like a know-it-all?

[Anonymous No.6408626]

Because they stroke your hair while they read to you?

[Anonymous No.6408637]

>>6408622
What does individual variation have to do with global single-criterion group variation and what does that have to do with their being "natural" based you uneducated dolt

[Anonymous No.6408671]

>>6408304
I Lol'ed

[Anonymous No.6409081]

>>6408153
dogmatist

[Anonymous No.6409088]

>>6408188
Thank you based anon.

[Anonymous No.6409180]

>>6408373
>>6408407

I think you are responding seriously to a satire

[Anonymous No.6410056]

>>6408310
> This has been observed by recent feminist authors: the more women get into positions of 'power', the more the power shifts to regions where they have negligible presence, because (surprise) that's where the exceptional people, mostly men, are thriving.

Can you give me any sources? This sounds like an interesting observation.

[Anonymous No.6411214]

>>6408012
I like how kafkaesque social constructivist fags are

"Literally there's this magic power socializing people"

Lol

[Anonymous No.6411235]

>>6408432
looks like this anon won the thread

[Anonymous No.6411622]

>>6408304
Men even create better bait.

[Anonymous No.6411669]

>>6408288
>Is cost effective. That's it. There's no feminist agenda. Group work is about 4 times cheaper than individual assignments.
It also serves to teach cooperative skills and tendencies that end up being integral to membership in the modern workforce.

[Anonymous No.6411905]

>>6411669
>It also serves to teach cooperative skills and tendencies that end up being integral to membership in the modern workforce.
it is shit mate
gorup work is litteral nightmare by forced cohabitation

[Anonymous No.6411963]

>101 replies

Jesus fuck guys stop obsessing over women and get a life.

[Anonymous No.6412697]

>>6407931
Less time spent masturbating furiously. This is it. There is no other reason. Double check it!

[Anonymous No.6412707]

>>6411963
Easier said than done when you're not a virgin and think about pussy at least 3 hours everyday.

[Anonymous No.6413574]

>>6407931
What's the name of this painting?
I have exactly pic related on my wall.

[Anonymous No.6414182]

>>6408304
Is this pasta?

[Anonymous No.6415445]

>>6414182
It might as well be