I refuse to read women authors.
This is a flannery o'connor board buddybro
>>24831612Barely a woman.
french lit-wise, you're not losing shit
>>24831610It would be based but you’re just repeating a popular crowd sentiment for (you)s/attention, which is feminine, therefore you are a tranny.
I have to wonder what it was that compelled you to make a thread announcing this. Is it simply because in doing so, you had nothing to lose?
anons made me read robin hobb, I NEVER FORGET
>>24831610this thread convinced me to finally read iris murdoch
>>24831610I don't really get how stuff like this isn't just the flip side of libwomen screeching about dead white males.
>>24831610I dont do this actively, but the funny thing is, I dont read women anyways cause they never seem to write about the subjects Im interested in or rent the definitive writers on such subjects.
I want to hear "female" as an adjective. "Women authors" sounds clumsy—no one says "men authors."
>>24831618OP: absolutely demolished
>>24831649I like reading gay porn too, anon, but I hear fujoshis are making a lot of headway. Maybe we should do our due diligence.
To be fair, an awful lot of femoid authors are hostile little shits.OrCorny little faggot gooners
>>24831678how is that not a 4chan post, just in the other direction?
>>24831683Not sure that helps
>>24831683It is. The difference is her shitpost is something you hear across campuses daily, find in newspapers and even roughly something said by politicians and their operatives (to use a specific recent example Roxane Gay on Pod Save America a week ago). Saying “I don’t read female authors” in a public capacity will unleash a torrent of shit on you. If you’re a teacher you risk your career. Being a lefty is learning to shut up and take their insults. Most men have been born into hearing all this shit about inequality and how great women are since birth now.
OP will never get to read The Bell Jar, which is a real shame.
>>24831781That wasn't the case when she said it though, was it?
>>24831786Oh, no, the ramblings of an insane BPD chick.. I think I'll be fine. She should have put her books in the oven instead of her head.
The problem is that when literature was still good, there were not enough women writing to begin with. Dorothy B. Hughes is pretty great, not one of the writers you’d always see getting pushed like O’Connor
>>24831795
>>24831610I flatly refuse to take people like you seriously.
>>24832070Now don't get hysterical, lady
>>24831648>calling for an entire group of people to die is the same as saying you don't want to read certain kinds of booksAlright nigga
>>24832106They're just saying they don't want to read dead white males (...already dead white males like Melville and homer). Retard
>>24832106Man, this was a dumb post. Maybe one of the dumbest.
>>24832160>we don't want to read Melville and Homer, we want werewolf rape smut
>>24832187If you can find a syllabus with werewolf rape smut, please tell me because I would sincerely like to audit that class.
>>24831648The honeymoon has been over for a whileNo point sticking around in a loveless marriageBetter to cut toxic people out of your life
>>24831678Yeah well I don't want to read simpering and overly sentimental internal monologues for 500 pages either.
>>24832218What if you just want to read anything that's good, regardless of the immutable traits of the writer?
>>24832218Whoops forgot pic
>>24832221Read whatever the fuck you want. Once you’re out of school, you can read whatever you want. Or not read whatever you don’t want to read.
>>24832227I do, but you guys keep announcing what you want to read (or don't want to read) so I'm wondering. Maybe I'll make my thread too. Or not.
>>24832171>that pictureAustralia really is a cultural wasteland.
>>24832237Please.
Currently reading O, Pioneers! And it's very good
>>24831610so what? want a medal chud?
>>24831610
Dickinson in your pathinson. In response to a thread of discussion ITT, I understand why, on a superficial level, women would be reticent to read the classics of the literary canon. To them these works represent a regressive mode of gender relations, often written from the perspective of men who they believe to have actively upheld this dynamic. Unfortunately, this has contributed to the decline of literature across successive generations, where women are more likely to read popular fiction with less reverence for the greats, and go on to produce writing that is even more trite, on and on in a feedback loop of collective infantilisation.
I am desperate for good women authors to readI think the last women authors I've read are Jane Austen, I enjoyed Pride and Prejudice and Persuasion, as well as Sei Shonagon and Murasaki ShikibuI thought about reading some Colette
more fool you…
>>24831618fpbp
>>24831781>Most men have been born into hearing all this shit about inequality and how great women are since birth now.I wonder if that's why there's wall to wall promotion of women's "sport"
>>24833070Sport is good for women, as well as men, it's just absurd to assume it's as entertaining and thus as profitable as men's sports.Still not reading any women authors.
>>24831610imagine thinking orson welles would endorse this sentiment
>>24833289Not sure. He said things like "guilt are an entirely masculine invention, no woman has ever felt guilt" and that you have to "lie and play games" to win with them. He also produced negro Shakespeare, though, so who knows..
>>24832212I mean. I had an entire class on Wuthering heights. And that whole book is basically smut for a supernatural creature and slavery and people taking turns cucking each other. Were I a NTR cuck, I would have jerked off to the entire thing.>>24831650Man wife. Man child. Man tits. Man explaination(mansplaining). Man spread. Man eyes. Man cave. Man name. Man woman. Man actress(on stage). Man milk. The main reason woman is more popularly used this way is because men were considered genderless and women gendered(or sexed) for a long time.
>>24831618advocating male stoicism here is also attention-seeking meme sentiment, you are a tranny by your own retarded cope logic. Since men and women aren't fundamentally equal, so there is no "imagine if the roles were reversed" double standard to call out. The only people seeking to reverse the roles are subversive kikes and it's because they profit from the chaos it creates. If you think pointless contrarianism is based and masculine perhaps simply go b𝖺ck to reddit, it seems to be going out of fashion these days
>>24833429>Empty headed inbred royal
