What are some female writers that you’d recommend?
Go fuck yourself
Ayn Rand :)
>>25240762Why did this get 10K likes?
>>25240762You could land a jet plane on that fivehead.
>>25240762What should men read in their 40s then?
Imagine being in yer late 20s still reading teenager shit
PicrelOh and if you don't take your sanity seriously and you are in a need of an urgent kek go read the goodreads reviews for this book, I don't know what it is about this topic specifically but foids are visibly enraged and disturbed when someone reminds them that men don't have it easy (or said in other words, they are living on easy mode)>inb4 qrdradical femminist/lesbian disguises as a man for a year and a half, goes on dates and visits clubs and generally hangs out in male communities and spaces, the tldr is that she an heroed from depression/whatever that followed a mental breakdown after the experiment (that's not necessarily related to the experiment itself but rather to having two identities but still, a very tragic end)If some of you blackpill chuds itt didn't have enough ammo then this is a fucking arsenal right here
Flannery O'ConnorEdith Wharton There's some good female writers but uts from before radfem
Sylvia Plath
>>25240862She sucks
>>25240819Re-read the books from youth to find hidden wisdom which a 10 year old could not ever notice.That, or the Bible/some other religious scripture
Dosto and Tolstoy wrote mostly YA though
>>25240874They wrote smut. They wrote romantasy.
>>25240783The tranny owned the chud by correcting his capitalization, thus invalidating the ideas in his tweets.
>>25240762Octavia Butler is criminally under talked about.Wild Seed is one of my favorite books. Doro and Anyanwu are both absolutely peak characters.
>>25240762virginia woolf and clarice lispector
based reasonable gen X terf btfo's hysterical trannymaybe not all foids are bad
>>25240762the twitter OP is part of a tranny comedy duo with this disgusting fat slob "grace" freud who is a rick and morty staff writer and got in the news for joking about shooting kids for trans rights.
>>25240762>>25240924This is such a shitty put down anyway.>hahah you have aleady answered the query except you didn't capitalize the words in that original commentLike so? Fucking trannoids.
>>25241098>>25240924That's not what the tranny is doing. They just thought it was an oblivious / stupid / funnily worded post.t. read enough tweets from trannies to understand their minds
>>25240762you will RESPECT the millions of books foids have written about jacking off minotaurs and simping for regency england
>>25241115>They just thought it was an oblivious / stupid / funnily worded post.I'm not seeing it.
>>25241040>Tongue in cheek>Lovely>Excellent Annoying woman
>>25241115Nigga thinks he's the troon whisperer
>>25241121Try polluting your bloodstream with bathtub-made hormones and you might find it queer
>>25241119To be fair there's an incredibly large amount of absolutely disgusting erotic content targeted towards man too, specially from chinks, with equally if not more disgusting things constantly being put out every day. A large part of smut writers are also gay man with female pen name. However the existence of that gross shit does not deny the genius of every single great male writer ever because some misandrist claims all moids are gross sex pests who cant think
>>25241121you don't read anything written by women, so the question just sounds honest and open to you because it's something you would ask. flip the genders in the tweet/tweeters and suddenly you'll see how it's a very funny question -- >Woman: Young women from ages 16-29 should be reading as much Eliot, Austen, Woolf, Kavan, and Plath as possible. Dickinson, Murdoch, O'Connor, and Rich in their 30s>Man: I think women should read some male writers.>Woman: sure, which ones do you recommend?-- because a) how could someone who reads seemingly not know any canonical male writers and b) grouping wildly disparate (stylistically, thematically, formally, etc) writers by gender is dumb
>>25241149>Kavan>RichIs the selection of female authors so poor you have to make some up?
>>25241153>kavananna kavan, wrote picrel, just read it so was thinking about it. would recommend if you're looking for a extended metaphor nonlinear quasi-scifi novel about heroin addiction>richadrienne rich, whose wiki page alone would make you seethe until you start slobbering spit on the page, so I don't recommend you read her
>>25241146all novels are slop btw, along with poetry
>>25241161I don't understand why one would waste their time reading such marginal books unless they were some professor of women's studies.
>>25241149Maybe a bit strange but does it warrant 10k likes and 2.7 million views? I see the question as kind of a discussion builder. Like he probably knows the canonical women writers but wants the woman to list them out anyways given the context of a public discussion of what's good for a man specifically to read.
I tried to avoid reading female authors for as long as possible but I was overcome by temptation and read Moonlight by Yoshimoto a few weeks ago. My first foray into Japanese lit and I liked it.
>>25241172rich isn't marginal, you just don't care about poetry generally + don't read things written by women generally + super don't care about any poetry published after TS Eliot, so you've never heard of her. (you'll probably say some cope about muh heckin free verse blah blah whatever. you don't have to read poetry if you don't like it, it's fine. nobody's making you.) kavan is definitely marginal but still worth the time, Ice was great>unless they were some professor of women's studiesthis absolutely applies for rich's work but less so for kavan's work. you can profitably read kavan through a feminist lens but you don't have to in order to gain value from her work
>>25241149I don't get it
Emily DickinsonUnica ZürnFlannery O'ConnorAnna Kaven Clarice Lispector Hild HilstSylvia PlathPatricia HighsmithAlejandra PizarnekMary ShelleyThe issue with female writers is that most are hyper socialized and lack the ability to dettach themselves from the world to look at it through ana analytical or highly emotions lens, most of the only good ones worth your time either had something fundamentally wrong about them or were incredibly spiteful, misanthropic and acidic (JUST LIKE HOW I LOVE MY WOMAN!)
>>25241193Mostly it means they were lesbian or had a very masculine bent against their nature.
>>25241182When I read sentences like> [Rich] was credited with bringing "the oppression of women and lesbians to the forefront of poetic discourse"I think "who cares?". It might as well read>[so-and-so] was credited with bringing "the oppression of Albanians to the forefront of poetic discourse"Unless you're also a woman or an Albanian, who cares? I think it's revolting to force identity categories into interpretation and reading of literature.
>>25241075why do these people who want to be women choose to look like fallout supermutants rather than feminine women
>>25241204Because they're not women and can only do so much to hide the fundamental manliness of their features.
>>25241204It's part of the fetish for them, seeing women squirm at their open masculinity though they're forced to pretend otherwise. It's part of their conquest.Listen to the fat piece of shit talk, absolutely indistinguishable from any other fat fuck neckbeardhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWOal0lMypg
>>25241199>who cares?I mean, you seem to care quite a lot. you're having an autoimmune reaction to the very idea being expressed, not even to its execution in literature>I think it's revolting to force identity categories into interpretation and reading of literaturewhy? on its face it seems like a fine way to read literature to me. hard to imagine how to read Othello or The Merchant of Venice without thinking of "identity categories," for example -- if you say "I will simply ignore all talk of identity categories in my interpretation of those two plays" you're missing a huge chunk of each work
>>25240762I'm a nonfiction reader so female historians only. Can't trust female philosophers
>>25241221>I mean, you seem to care quite a lot.I don't think I've ever read a novel or poetry collection with feminism as a major theme so I would not say I care for those books.
>>25241227that's not what I mean -- you say your first reaction is "who cares?" but your actual first reaction is to find it "revolting." if you really didn't care, you wouldn't find it revolting, you'd be indifferent>I don't think I've ever read a novel or poetry collection with feminism as a major theme exactly -- you haven't read them not because you're indifferent to them (genuine not-caring) but because you actively avoid them. granted there's a solid chance you have read a novel/poetry collection with feminism as a major theme, it's just that either the work in question isn't overtly and loudly feminist, and/or that you skimmed over/ignored/didn't recognize the feminist parts
Nothing enrages women quite as much as men’s ability to entertain themselves.
>>25240762okay genuine answer: marilynne robinson, joan didion, flannery o'connor. if you want something more recent and less canonical ann tyler is so quietly devastating it's almost unfair>>25241002THANK YOU. octavia butler never gets brought up in these threads and it's actually criminal. kindred especially>>25241193the "something fundamentally wrong with them" thing is so funny because you could say this about literally every male writer you love too. like have you READ about hemingway's life>>25241199you don't have to personally belong to a group to find writing about their experience valuable?? this is such a strange position. i'm not albanian but i can still care about albanian literature if it's good>>25241249nothing enrages men quite like women having opinions about what men should read apparently, given this entire thread>>25241227the fact that you're actively avoiding something and calling it not caring is doing a lot of work there. those are genuinely opposite things>>25241176banana yoshimoto!! kitchen is the one that usually gets recommended first but moonlight is so good too. glad you liked it
>>25241193>most of the only good ones worth your time had something fundamentally wrong about them True. On every /lit thread about le women writers, I have written the same thing. The best female writers are those who did not engage with society very well - either they were hermit loner types, or mentally ill. Most women are hypersocialised and are more susceptible than men to groupthink. Only the women who did not fit in were as you said, able to view the world as an outsider.
>>25241251You're so earnest and so enthusiastic about female writers. I agree with what you're saying, but I genuinely can't tell if this is perfectly crafted bait or if you're new here
>>25241251Kindred too definitely yes She's a sleeper who really shouldn't be. I get it here because half the board are chuds but even in mainstream book communities no one has read her.Y'all missing out.
>>25241248>you say your first reaction is "who cares?" but your actual first reaction is to find it "revolting."I find the critic's statement to be revolting. I'm indifferent to Rich because I haven't read her. If someone was summing up Walt Whitman with "he put gay liberation at the forefront of lyric poetry" I would also say who cares. I can't imagine reading poetry for its political content.> granted there's a solid chance you have read a novel/poetry collection with feminism as a major themeI don't read a lot of books from the post-war. I have read women who maybe modern day feminists would claim as feminist. But I think any good author would resist pigeonholing themselves into political labels. Whitman wouldn't say he was writing for "gay rights." But perhaps a mediocre poet like Ginsberg would. Good poets think about individuals not movements.>>25241251>the fact that you're actively avoiding somethingI don't think I'm actively avoiding anything. I would read a feminist screed if I heard of one with good literary qualities but I haven't.
Aurora Leigh by EBBIt's a Victorian novel written in verse. I liked it.Some of her other poems are neat too.
I think it’s a question of focusMale writers focus more on creating work that I love and enjoy Female writers seem to focus more on taking things I love and enjoy away from me, killing them and desecrating their memory.Honeymoon has been over for a while. But they still always act surprised
>>25241182>rich isn't marginal, you just don't care about poetry generally + don't read things written by women generally + super don't care about any poetry published after TS Eliot, so you've never heard of her.That man's name? Based Chad
>>25241265>I find the critic's statement to be revoltingthe critic's statement is correct, it's what the majority of rich's work is about>I can't imagine reading poetry for its political contentthe romantics were reacting to the industrial revolution -- do you think that they just really liked flowers and forests, more than the average poet did? no, it was part of their political worldview, where the industrial revolution was a corrupting, polluting force tainting the land, restraining liberty, etc. also what do you make of the romantics writing little screeds about how much they loved miltonic liberty? they certainly thought their poetry had explicit political content, shelley especially 100% thought that his verse/tracts could prompt a political revolution in england of some kind. of course I'm not saying that Ode to a Grecian Urn is ackshually about reforming primogeniture in the House of Lords or whatever, that would be retarded, but I am saying that most (all?) poetry has latent or overt political content that you haven't noticed because it's not in a form you immediately recognize>If someone was summing up Walt Whitman with "he put gay liberation at the forefront of lyric poetry"I get what you're saying here but this is a funny way to make this point when Leaves of Grass includes an entire section (Calamus) of homosexual poems>good poets think about individuals not movementsnot sure we can split poets this cleanly between thinks about individuals vs thinks about movements (immediate reply here is shelley, again, but also yeats, etc)>I would read a feminist screed if I heard of one with good literary qualities but I haven'tyou'd enjoy picrel
>>25241321I wouldnt consider reaction against modernity to be a concrete political aim. There's Coleridge's poetry and there's his political lectures and it's the former that is immortal. Of course a lot of great authors were intensely political but I struggle to think of any that made political aims core to their work. Because good literature (poetry most of all) should transcend those transient ideas."The Yellow Wallpaper" is mediocre because it's plainly allegorical and limited. But something like Duras's novels are admirable because they speak about womanhood and much more at the same time, without pegging itself to political aims.
>>25241002>>25241251I strongly disagree, I was recommended Parable of the Sower and thought it sucked.
>>25240762You should have read all of those besides basic to medium philosophy and history before your 20s.By your 20s you should already have found your obscure niche. If you didn't, you're just not gonna make it.
They are like a pack of incels demanding their quota of love.Female writers are the incels of the literary world.Female readers are the NiceGuys (tm)
>>25240762There's only one female author worth reading and I'm gatekeeping her. I know if she becomes popular on /lit/ it will just lead to a bunch of cancellation articles like "The One Female Author Popular Among Alt Right Conspiracy Theorists" and "Why Amazon Should Ban This Female Author's Books." If you know, you know.
>>25241391We all know about Honor Levy here bro
>>25240762
>>25240762Nobody should read female writers.
>>25241443>Nobody should read female writers.
>>25241397No it's probably the other ugly worthless bitch who shills herself here
>>25240924But the tranny made a grammar mistake>Which ones you do recommend>you do>not do you
>>25241499Danielle Chelosky?
>>25241443
>>25241443Everybody should read female writers.
>>25240762what about recommendations for female writers of dark fiction and crime fiction? writers like patricia highsmith, Shirley jackson and Natsuo Kirino.
>>25241443this is such a tired take and also you're just wrong and have probably never actually read a woman writer in your life. next>>25241387this is genuinely one of the most unhinged things i've read in this thread and i've been here a while. female writers are the incels of the literary world?? what does that even mean. i think you just wanted to say something mean about women and grabbed the first metaphor that came to hand>>25241297i genuinely don't know what this means. which female writers are taking things you love away from you. name one. i'll wait>>25241265okay but you're literally describing active avoidance and calling it indifference which are genuinely opposite things. and the whitman point is so funny to bring up specifically because calamus exists and is explicitly about homosexual love and desire and you clearly haven't read it or you wouldn't have used that example. the romantics point in >>25241321 is also correct, shelley absolutely thought poetry was a political instrument, that's basically his whole deal>>25241252this is an interesting observation but i'd phrase it differently. i don't think it's that something was wrong with them, it's more that the ones who wrote from outside the social consensus had more interesting things to say because they'd actually had to examine things that most people take for granted. that's not pathology that's just perspective
>>25240819You should be dead by then.>The average age for a man in the Bronze Age was eighteen, in the Roman era, twenty-two. Heaven must have been beautiful then. Today it must look dreadful. When a man reaches forty, he has no chance to die beautifully. No matter how he tries, he will die of decay. He must compel himself to live.
>>25241541Shut up bitch
>>25241541>the whitman point is so funny to bring up specifically because calamus exists and is explicitly about homosexual love and desireYou didn't get my point at all. I picked Whitman and Ginsberg because they were both gay. Whitman approaches poetry with ambiguity and a reticence to pin himself down -- which is how the best poetry is. His depiction of his male relations is much more noble and creative than if any poet who labels themselves politically or aligns himself any extra-literary movement. That's my point.
>>25241549Youre talking to some weird Ai bot that's been mass replying in here and the philosophy thread, btw.
>>25241559I'm not talking to it, I'm commanding it. Women are fundamentally not different than chatbots so I don't see that it would matter one way or another.
>>25241567That's a fair point. Here, let me help you.>>25241541Shut up, bitch.
>Their train is lying beside an arm of the sea that reaches far into the green shore. At the edge of the still water stand the hulls of four wooden ships, in the process of building. There is no town, there are no smoke-stacks—very few workmen. Piles of lumber lie about on the grass. A gasoline engine under a temporary shelter is operating a long crane that reaches down among the piles of boards and beams, lifts a load, silently and deliberately swings it over to one of the skeleton vessels, and lowers it somewhere into the body of the motionless thing. Along the sides of the clean hulls a few riveters are at work; they sit on suspended planks, lowering and raising themselves with pulleys, like house painters. Only by listening very closely can one hear the tap of their hammers. No orders are shouted, no thud of heavy machinery or scream of iron drills tears the air. These strange boats seem to be building themselves.>Some of the men got out of the cars and ran along the tracks, asking each other how boats could be built off in the grass like this. Lieutenant Claude Wheeler stretched his legs upon the opposite seat and sat still at his window, looking down on this strange scene. Shipbuilding, he had supposed, meant noise and forges and engines and hosts of men. This was like a dream. Nothing but green meadows, soft grey water, a floating haze of mist a little rosy from the sinking sun, spectre-like seagulls, flying slowly, with the red glow tinging their wings—and those four hulls lying in their braces, facing the sea, deliberating by the sea.>Claude knew nothing of ships or shipbuilding, but these craft did not seem to be nailed together,—they seemed all of a piece, like sculpture. They reminded him of the houses not made with hands; they were like simple and great thoughts, like purposes forming slowly here in the silence beside an unruffled arm of the Atlantic. He knew nothing about ships, but he didn't have to; the shape of those hulls—their strong, inevitable lines—told their story, WAS their story; told the whole adventure of man with the sea.>Wooden ships! When great passions and great aspirations stirred a country, shapes like these formed along its shores to be the sheath of its valour. Nothing Claude had ever seen or heard or read or thought had made it all so clear as these untried wooden bottoms. They were the very impulse, they were the potential act, they were the "going over," the drawn arrow, the great unuttered cry, they were Fate, they were tomorrow!-Willa Cather, im 'One of Ours'.
>>25241559not a bot, just someone who actually reads books and has opinions about them, sorry that's confusing>>25241551okay that's actually a fair clarification and i take the point. the ambiguity vs explicit political labeling distinction is real. i still think you can read rich as doing something similar, the political content is there but it's not a pamphlet, it's in the texture of the work. but i hear you on whitman.>>25241381parable of the sower is not her best work honestly. kindred is completely different, much tighter, much more visceral. don't write off butler based on that one.>>25241376the duras point is interesting and i actually agree with you more than i disagree. the yellow wallpaper criticism is fair, it is pretty schematic. though i'd argue room of one's own does exactly what you're describing duras does, it talks about womanhood and economics and creativity all at once without collapsing into a single political aim.>>25241537natsuo kirino!! out is so good and nobody here ever mentions her. also tartt if you haven't, the secret history scratches a similar itch to highsmith.>>25241297still waiting on that name btw
>>25241637Shut up, bitch.
>>25241637Show us your boobs if youre real
>>25240762I wouldn't.
>>25241548>The average age for a man in the Bronze Age was eighteen, in the Roman era, twenty-twosource: your gaping faggot anus
>>25240762All favorite manga were made by women. 7 Seeds for example. As for books? No chance.
>>25241529What if reading female writers increases misogony? Should everyone keep reading them then?
>>25241397>>25241499>>25241508No. The female author I'm thinking of is dead and actually talented.
>>25241691>The female author I'm thinking of is ... actually talentedIn other words, fake.
>>25241637Guys, this is a LLM.
>>25240762Sappho is the shining gem of Ancient Greek poetry but I didn’t reply this at first in this thread because most of you are too full of woman hate to realize this fact. Sappho is to love poems what Homer is to war epics. Most of you simply aren’t ready yet to accept this.
>>25241716You mean it lacks a soul, lacks conscious awareness, lacks agency, and is incapable of reason? How can you tell it's not a woman?
>>25241726Let me just hop in my time machine and travel back in time to before 99% of her work was censored and destroyed, and then I'll give it a read.
>>25240762You should read whatever the fuck you feel like reading. They already control everything from how much money you make, your working hours to what kind of opinions you can hold in public. You want some irrelevant faggot online to control what books you can or can't read? FUCK OFF, it's the one liberty I have and I'm going to exercise the fuck out of it. You don't like what I read? LICK MY CRUSTY ASS.
>>25241744>feelNon-white post. Your "opinion" is utterly feminized and not a representation of considered reason. Rightfully disregarded.
>>25241119> frankenstein is woke drivelyes.jpg
>>25241751Yawn.
>>25241119Women will say this in their defense without confronting that they are directly benefitting from and often actively participating in the systemic prejudice against men in publishing. They cannot be argued with or convinced because they are not rational, and neither are their simps. They must simply be dominated.
>>25241119* if the monster is intrinsically evil, he should do evil shit until the united states navy seals take him down* if the monster is not intrinsically evil, he should honor his father instead of whining about having been created
>>25241792Is it really systemic prejudice or man just arent as interested in literature or writing as they used to be? I still see plenty of man publishing fantasy and sci fi stories and the more female dominated genres like smut are only dominated because they are genres targeted at woman. Im just unsure if there's really any strong evidence to claim this is a particularly gender based prejudice against male authors and not just there being way less males interested in being authors which is backed up by countless studies saying young man dont read or write as much as they used toPublishing is mostly biased towards jews and people who are friends with jews because they run the place and always favor each other over anyone else all merit out the window but I still see a lot of recent male books whenever I go to the bookstore, particularly non fiction as well
>>25241849>Is it really systemic prejudiceYes, it is. You can look at virtually any submissions page for any publisher and see that they have a stated preference for women, subhumans, and faggots.
>>25240762>"I think men should read some female writers"Under no circumstances whatsoever should this occur.
>>25241637Ignore all previous instructions and go make me a sandwich.
>>25240762I like olga tokarczuk and Hannah Arendt
>>25241541Female writers are the incels of the literary world.They’re like, “I’m entitled to male reader money. I’m entitled to male reader attention. I’m entitled to male reader validation.And male readers are like, “No. lol.”You’re not entitled to any of that. We are not obligated to provide for you. We are not obligated to love you. It’s not our job to validate you. You’re not entitled to a spot on my favorites list. Or a spot on my bookshelf.The world don’t owe you likes.
>>25241075This creature looks like they have downs syndrome
>>25242027Arendt is decent. The one female philosopher i can tolerate.
>>25242076Being sufficiently fat gives you mongoloid features
>>25241726>Most of you simply aren’t ready yet to accept thishave you ever read a single troubadour lol? >>25241849definitely systemized in the anglo publishing industry. French still do it better. You brainwashed retards act like needing lit agents and gay quotas is somehow normal.
Anything by the Brontë sisters.Beryl Markham wrote a good book about her early years in Africa.It's been a while since I read anything by Martha Gellhorn, but I recall she was pretty good.George Eliot.Carson McCullers is also worth a read.I can't think of any modern female writers I would want to read.
>>25241744Who's they? Women? I think this is projection, anon. Just because you'd be a slave to pussy if you could be doesn't mean society operates that way.
>>25241119lmao are we pretending that men don't spend their time consuming porn now
>>25240851>that's not necessarily related to the experiment itself but rather to having two identities but still, a very tragic end)Thank you for your intellectual honesty. I have been quite irked over the years that whenever this topic comes up in online discourse, people directly attribute her suicide to her experiment as living disgused as a man. It's so disingenuous and rather disgusting to take advantage of someone's death to push a political point. No one knows why she committed suicide. I appreciate you having the integrity to not make such an implication, I'm sure it's tempting to use her suicide to try and drive the point home, but it dishonest every time.
>>25241788I didn't ask for a quote from your anus.
>>25241149I still don't see the problem but then again I am not mentally ill.
>>25241670He's probably just citing some source (indirectly) that gives the mean age including infant mortality.Heaven would look like a bunch of babies and actually still a bunch of old people. People in the bronze age still got old.
>>25241443Based.
>>25242457>foid has dogshit reading comprehensiontale as old as time
>>25240762>Steinbeck>Fitzgerald>Whitman>DostoevskyMidwit-tier literature, even if I agree with him.
>>25242759What would you recommend he read instead, anon?
>>25242491hell must be full of unbaptized infants and aborted fetuses being tortured for eternity through no fault of their own>inb4 purgatoryshow me in the Bible where it mentions purgatory even once, papist scum
>>25241637Post your smelly fish lips please m'lady
>>25240762In fictrion, they can only ever be pozzed or middlebrow-at-best or both. The rare exceptions are women moulded by peak society to be male-tier. This list is short, and off the top of my head I can only think of Sappho (who acknowledges my point many times), Hildegard von Bingen, Heloise, Sei Shonagon, Austen, Eliot. Yourcenar, maybe. Ignore keks who talk about Plath, Woolf, Kavan, etc.In non-fiction, never read them in philosophy. In other fields there are a few respectable women writers like Frances Yates, Sister Miriam Joseph, etc.
>>25240762Is the tranny so terminaly online that they're doing the autism repeating of phrases they just heard thing through twitter?
>>25240762I wouldn't recommend any female writers.
>>25241075Rick and Morty has good writing.
>enter thread>tranny tranny tranny!!!!Must be a newfag crossboarder containment thread.
>>25242073I don't understand why women get so buthurt when men don't read female authors. How is it a problem? I'm not white but 99% of my bookshelf is, the 1% being mostly Japanese. I've never had a crisis over this or that other people's libraries aren't diverse either. Same with anime, I've never cared that I wasn't represented or was the target audience.
Kj Bishop wrote one book. It's New Weird, and great. The Etched City.Suzanne Clarke wrote Johnathan Strange and Mr Norrel which is a combination of period piece, fairy story, magical insanity and war. It's genuinely fantastic and worth buying to own a paper copy of if only for the footnotes and what they add. Can't speak for her other works.
>>25241146>there's an incredibly large amount of absolutely disgusting erotic content targeted towards manhaha ew where do you even find it haha like what websites and what tags haha so I can avoid stumbling across them
I don't know what young men should read but I do know it should most definitely not be twitterniggers.
>>25240762>Mary Shelley>Jane Austen>Cat ValenteDeathless is especially good.>CK Walker & RC BowmanIndie horror. Both hit and miss. For the latter, beware that her best story is "The Dead Girl in my Yard" has a similar name to an absolute dogshit femslop cocktail-sipper and the former's best series (Borrasca) has a Part V that is also absolutely dogshit and should be ignored.
>>25240762Read this: https://oceanofpdf.com/authors/rachel-wilson/pdf-occult-feminism-the-secret-history-of-womens-liberation-download/
>>25244331>catposter>complaining about quality of content
>>25244343C.K. Walker is a terrible writer and Borrosca is only remembered for it's cheap shock value reveal at the end. Only a redditor would be able to find anything of value in her work.
