>>131948
>What's the matter?

Women don't write good books is the matter

Nice troll.

Stephanie Meyer is the greatest living female author.

>>131948
Of course not ALL women writers are bad. The best ones include Jhumpa Lahiri, Edith Wharton, and Virginia Woolf

>Alice Sebold
>good

I heard some liked JK rowling's little books, maybe they thought she was a man

>>131948

SHUT UP FAG GO BACK TO THE KITCHEN XD

>>131972
Don't forget Agatha Christie.

Hey OP, I noticed you gave an example for a shit female author but didn't give one for a good female author, why is that?

... Oh right, because there isn't any.

Toni Morrison disapproves of your faggotry.

>>131962
Susanna Clarke would like to have a word with you.

>>131948
It's not that women writers are bad, it's just that the best female writers have never matched up to the greatness of the best male ones. This was explained rather eloquently in another thread a day or two ago.

Oh, I shouldn't have used Alice Sebold as an example.

I forgot she didn't write any books on existentialism that take place in a dystopian world so naturally you guys hate her.

>>131994
Horrible defense.. Song of Solomon..

Its not so much that we hate women writers as it is that a shitload of women writers either write bad romance, bad romance that disguises itself as genre, or offset their skills by going around talk shows going "HEY EVERYBODY I AM A WRITER WITH A VAGINA, WATCH ME SUBVERT THE MALE DOMINATED PATRIARCHY BY DARING TO BE A FEMALE WRITER"

they're are plenty of good women writers, its just that a lot of modern writer women are too caught up in trying to act like some sort of feminist icon.

>>132012

Oh. Well that's understandable. I just see a lot of "BOOK IS SHIT BECAUSE A WOMAN WROTE IT LOLOL XD".

Then again I don't go on /lit/ very much anymore. It started off so well, then it just became the book version of /mu/.

MAI WAIFU

>>132038
Indeed. And I agree with you, one does see a lot of that. You seem pretty cool though...for a woman. :P

Kathleen Ann Goonan wrote the Nanotech Cycle, with the standout novel being Light Music. That book captured something for me that I have not read elsewhere. I dunno, I don't think there's any difference in the writing abilities of men and women. I think it's a case by case basis.

>>132034

This.

Looking back on the list of books read, I notice that I never enjoyed one that was written by a woman. Part of me is disappointed in myself for thinking this, but the way it is is the way it is.

I'm not of the opinion that ALL women writers are bad. Just that there people need to see the difference between a "WOMYN'S WRITER" (Fucking picoult) and a writer that is a woman (fuck yeah Woolf).

>>131972
This guy is right, but

>>131992
ahaha

There are what, ten notable female authors in the history of forever (being very generous here).
The rest have been shallow cunts.

>>132064

It's posts like this that make me wonder how all the misogynists became so lonely

>>132017
>Dystopian world

FUCK YEA

>>132056 Just that there people need to see the difference between a "WOMYN'S WRITER" (Fucking picoult) and a writer that is a woman (fuck yeah Woolf).

ITT we have never read Virginia Woolf

>>132012
Thread should've ended here, fags.

Publisher's Weekly Best Books of 2009:
*only 35/100 were women writers
*no girls in the top 10

My thoughts? Women are too busy having periods and buying shoes to write something of importance.

Posting in troll thread

inb4 Ayn Rand

>>131948
Danielle Steele called to say hi, OP.

>>133394

FUCK YEAH

>>133348
inorite. Wolf's writing can easily match up to or better her male contemporaries.

>>131992

troll

I don't hate most women writers because they are women, I hate them because the vast majority of known female writers right "mean girls"-esque crap. And the ones that don't are either virtually unknown, or crappy in some other way.

I think it just comes down to psychology and social habits. It should stand to reason that men and women are different. It just so happens that the things women write about are a load of bullshit to men, and often vise versa.

Also, women are much more dependent on society then men. One key psychological difference between men and women, women tend to be way more dependent on groups and social circles then men. Girls are pack animals, even if they don't realize it.

The best writers criticize society, they don't try to join it.

>>133323
>>133323
>>133323

<3 atwood, love beaton.

margaret atwood is the greatest living author (writing in the english language)

I'm a woman and I hate most female writers. I also hate most female artists. It's like we aren't capable of range of concept. Everything has to do with courting or babies.

I keep wondering whether I should pretend I'm a male when I submit my first novel to publishers because they'd probably scoff at a woman NOT writing about other women being women. Bleh.

What I hate most about women writers: THEY ALWAYS DESCRIBE WHAT KIND OF CLOTHING THEIR CHARACTER WEARS.

"Guilty Pleasures" from the Anita Blake series, in particular, does this. Every time a new character is introduced: here's what they're wearing. Even if they're just going to be on one page and then never be heard from again, you have to know what kind of shirt and shoes s/he is wearing. Every time the main character changes her wardrobe? We have to read it. God damn, just stop it.

It's no fucking wonder people think female writers are shit when you have Austen and the Brontes touted as the best. Fucking hell if they are. It also doesn't help that a lot of literature written by women is simply ignored. I mean really, how many of you have read Aemelia Lanyer, or know of any significant female authors before the 18th century? It's not necessarily a reflection on your own intelligence or what have you, but rather ~*society's view of women*~.

>>133485
Why the hell are you reading Anita Blake?

>>133502
I just read the first one, and I have to say it was entertaining in the "so bad it's funny" sort of way. I'm never going to read another one, though.

>>133480
Or, if the world of female art is such a cesspool to you, you could try to improve it by illustrating that you're the lone bright star among all that lack of talent and those irrational, broken dreams?

>>133531
Yeah I was half-kidding. But really, it's sad to not see Orwell-ian tier concepts and creations from female writers. I'm really wracking my mind and it's hard to come up with much of anyone.

>>131962
>>131993
>>132012
these people and the people the OP are describing have clearly never heard of mary shelley author of motherfucking FRANKENSTEIN

I'm a female and I have to agree... most female authors suck. There are exceptions, of course.

margaret atwood is another good author. but the vast majority of decent authors are male.

I'll tell you why I always put a book back in it's shelf if I see it was written by a woman. Women do not have the mental capacity to write books. Plus, I would rather do math than read a book written by a woman because books written by women today are badly influenced by Feminism with their misandrist ideas and narcissistic, self-absorbed, self-righteous, delusional beliefs. I'm not going to tolerate hypocritical ideas or beliefs that women write about in books because it's just plain stupid, inane, and asinine.

>>133623 I'm a female and I have to agree... most female authors suck. There are exceptions, of course.

90% of everything is crud.

>>132034
>bad romance

>>133623
To be fair, don't MOST male authors suck too?

I could care less about the gender of an author, I usually don't even know what they look like nor do I care.

But in all honesty, most women write shit. Just like most men write shit.
But there is a massive difference in tone. Men tend to write about things falling apart, relationships, society, what have you. Women write about things coming together and working out perfectly in every way, usually. Basically, your typical female writer writes wish fulfillment crap. Men write about crushing your dreams and optimism.

Keep in mind I am speaking in general terms. There are exceptions.

But yeah, stories written by women always have a perfect ending, they are usually not insightful or even that witty, and they tend to have boring plots revolving around shit that most men very simply don't give a fuck about.

Edith Templeton is good and she is also a self proclaimed "female misogynist"

One of my favorite authors when I was a teen.

>>133439
>margaret atwood is the greatest living author
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAH

alison croggon is quite good

>>133703
Someone has never read 'Lucky'.

>>133744
>Looks up summary.
>Sees "gossip girl", wants to stop reading but doesn't.
>Inane story revolving around crap I thought was retarded in high school and that I think is even more retarded now
>Ends with a text message.

That post was meant to agree with me, right?

This is exactly why some women authors go under male pen names. I mean, I didn't know J.K Rowling was a chick until one of my friends told me.

This is, don't judge a book by the gender of it's author. Just enjoy or don't enjoy the story. Simple as that.

It's like I'm really in r9k

>implying being a misogynist is something bad

>>133703
To be fair, IIRC the 'Animorphs' books were written by a woman (K.A. Applegate) and the ending of that series wasn't exactly perfect. In general terms you may be right tho...

>>133830
>implying you've somehow found your way to /lit/ from /b/

>>133608
While I did enjoy Frankenstein, it came across as incredibly melodramatic at times. Sometimes I wonder how she got so much praise while Lovecraft is continuously shunned.

>>133845
Common misconception. Off topic, but I feel like commenting..

Animorphs itself was written by K.A. Applegate and several ghost authors, including her husband. Fun facts 4 u.

>>133781
No, it's by Alice Sebold. She's raped and presses charges and they finally bring her rapist to court and he sends one of his gang members to rape and beat her best friend. Her friend spends weeks in the hospital due to injuries and refuses to press charges because the gang members warned her they would send someone different to rape her each time she tries to press charges and begs Alice to drop her charge against her rapist so the gang will stop attacking their friends and family members

>>131948
>SHUT UP WOMAN GO BACK TO THE KITCHEN XD
>GO BACK TO THE KITCHEN XD
>TO THE KITCHEN XD
>XD

>read a book
>think the author is male
>SURPRISE
>feels indifferent

>>133885
Oooh, I remember hearing about that, thanks. Still, I think the first few books were all her, right?

And aside from that, hmm...Christie Golden wrote some Ravenloft novels and the whole point of that D&D setting is that everything has an unhappy end. Does that count?

>>133887

There is a difference between a memoir and a novel. A memoir documents reality, reality is brutal and uncaring.
When I say "general" I mean REALLY general. It is not that women are incapable of being depressing or critical, it is that they are more often not. And when they are it usually comes off as pretty insincere because the story revolves around stupid Gossip Girls-esque crap. Even when it doesn't, there is an undercurrent of stupidity.
Of course, this is a matter of opinion. I am a man, the things women find important are bullshit to me. For example, how many men really give a crap about valentines day or their anniversary?

It is not that women are universally stupid or write universally bad books, it is that the things most known female writers write about are centered around mundane bullshit nobody except teenage girls and housewives cares about.

Only a few women writers are, I can personally say, good. Writers like Virginia Woolf, Margaret Atwood, and Jean Rhys.

Since males have repressed women during most of the world's history, it's no surprise there are very few great female writers.

Let's give it another century.

Laura Ingalles Wilder was my favorite author growing up. I'd be kinda surprised if anyone knows who she is.

>>133999
That woman should have just stayed in the prairie

>>133980

Oh please, women have always been getting published. Harriet Beecher Stowe, Mary Shelly, Emily Dickinson, Jane Austin, ect.

Oppression in politics does not mean women did not know how to read or write.

>>133999
Little House in the Woods is one of my favourites!

>>134008
>Implying women were allowed in schools

>>133883 While I did enjoy Frankenstein, it came across as incredibly melodramatic at times. Sometimes I wonder how she got so much praise while Lovecraft is continuously shunned.

I often wonder why Edgar Allen Poe is more melodramatic than Lovecraft. I hope someone will untangle this complicated mystery.

>Ursula K Le Guin
>C. J. Cherryh
>Mercedes Lackey
>Andre Norton

An author's talent is in no way liked to gender. There ar more "good" male authors because there are probably more dudes looking to get published to begin with, and they probably have a bit of an easier sell (style and content wise) to the mostly dude editors and publishers.
But while we're on the subject, Mercedes Lackey needs to get over her issue with writing about lesbians. I read through some of the Valdmar series back in high school, and DAMN but were there a lot of very gay men and not one gay woman. For some reason that always bothered me.

>also, inb4 someone point out home big of a fag I am for science fiction / fantasy.

>>134104
Holy shit, Andre Norton is a chick?

>>134031

>Implying most school teachers in the 1700's were not women.

>>134008
Women have always been discouraged from being published. Beatrix Potter's childrens books were published after great convincing because publishers assumed they were just silly children's book. Everyone refused to publish her scientific books because they assumed women couldn't understand science. When her father brought her work forward under his name, it was only then that her work was respected because people assumed a man wrote it.

>>134031

Schools as we know them have only existed for maybe a couple hundred years. Most upper-class women were quite well educated in classics, foreign languages, and the arts.

>>134139
Only enough to get them married off.

>>134123
>implying they were

>>134008 Oh please, women have always been getting published. Harriet Beecher Stowe, Mary Shelly, Emily Dickinson, Jane Austin, ect.
>Emily Dickinson
>getting published

Point invalid.

>>134139
>Most upper-class women

That was a very, very small demographic group bro.

>>134187

Pretty much only the upper-class was writing literature. They were pretty the only ones who could write at all.

>>134131
>Beatrix Potter's childrens books were published after great convincing because publishers assumed they were just silly children's book.
They are just silly children's books.

>Take any novel that has been judged as great by history.
>Now imagine that it had been written by a man.
>Realize how mediocre it really is.

>>134155

Which was actually quite a lot. An accomplished woman was a desirable thing.

Too Many FemNazies.

Geez /lit/, you hate women, ok.

Just don't pretend they had the same opportunities men had.

>>134212
*novel written by a woman.

>>134208
She changed the publishing and marketing world. Publishers didn't realise how much money a children's series could make, nor the money they could make off merchandise like toys and dolls. She lectured at the London School of Economics for a reason.

>>134171

Wait, Emily Dickinson was never published? Then how the fuck did I get this book she wrote?

>>134254

posthumously bro

>>133425
>implying men don't act like they are in some sort of pack

>>134254
I'm not the guy you're arguing with, but unless I'm mistaken, she was only published after her death.

>>134254
After her death someone went 'Holy shit she can write! I guess we should publish her now instead of ignoring her more!'

>>134273

She wasn't really ignored, she only tried to be published like, twice.

>>134262
lol women could only publish if they were dead.

"bitches and whores" is something anon parrots across every single board

it's part of the 4chan mentality

um, Gunlord? what are you doing out of /m/ old chap, haven't seen you in a long time seeing as i haven't been there in forever.

>>134123
>>134139

Lies. Schoolteachers/tutors - the few of them that existed - were all male until the middle 1800s, when the Reform Acts mandated increasingly mandatory schooling and made it necessary to employ women in the field. Often Victorian books - Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights, for example - are set pre 1800 in order to avoid the option of "governess" for any female protagonist.

Wealthy women were not educated in the classics until that time because none of them were prospective university students, being illegible for clerical or governmental posts.

>>134269

>Implying men stick to the pack with the sheer fanaticism of women.

When you were in high school, did you ever hear guys say "And then he said this, and I was like this, and then he said, this, and I was like FUCK YOU, and then he was like WE AREN'T FRIENDS ANYMORE, and I was like GOOD. Anyway, how do I get back at him?"

I have heard women talk like that many times in my life, but never once a man. For the simple fact that guys don't give a fuck. And if they do they usually just beat each other up and never think of it again.

Women write about that bullshit. Men generally don't because their personal conflicts don't drag on and don't contain the same level of backstabbing.

Poppie was here.

Stephanie Meyer is a faggot.

>>131948 I'm just confused as to why everyone hates female writers.

Too many female authors are published because more because they're female and less because they're authors.

You can say the same for any other so-called "minority" authors be they dwarfs, black, hispanic, gay, lesbian, or dwarf blatino gaymen who've had gender reassignment surgery to become lesbians, they are all published more due to their "minority" label and less due to their actual skill as an author.

If you're worth publishing, you should be published. Having a cunt shouldn't give you extra points.

>>134332

Bullshit. Men backstab as much as women do.

>>134340
You're shit too.

>>134314

>Wealthy women were not educated in the classics

Yes, yes they were. Learning Greek and Latin and then being able to read the classics _in those languages_ was a big part of being an accomplished woman.

>>134262

No shit. The person I was responding too claimed Emily Dickinson was never published. And she was, she just so happened to be dead at the time.

>>134332
>>134332
No, but I've also never heard a woman going on silly conquest stories or talking about some dumb stunt they did the other day. I've never once heard a woman say "lol, I jumped off of my roof last night and I broke my ankle am I hardcore nao".

>>134332
Some gay men are like that.

>>134341

Also bullshit. Maybe white men publish a lot because they're ~white men~ and think that this somehow makes their point more valid because durr hurr white man's viewpoint > all other viewpoints. Publishing validates this thought because, guess what, founded by white men. Why? Because they had money and therefore access to education.

For kids who supposedly value innovation and teh intarwebs, y'all have bought pretty heavily into the status quo.

>>134363
>she just so happened to be dead at the time.

You are a fucking idiot.

>Now I realize many of you are serious. Wow.

>Proceeds to argue her point like a woman (I.E. just ad hominem the shit out of everything and ignore anything actually relevant to the merits of female vs male authors.)

>>134301
I hang around /lit/ every now and then too.

>>134341
I think it might also have to do with the sort of stuff women themselves read. Aside from the obvious example of Twilight, every time I go to the bookstore I tend to see a lot of, not just romance novels, but these funny vampire/werewolf romance novels that strike me as...Twilight in "urban" settings with more sex. The fact that these books seem to appeal to women so much means that many female writers will write those sorts of books, which obviously doesn't do much for the reputation of female writers generally.

>>134365

Rly? Go find a women's roller derby league. Not some shitty TV movie version, a real one.

>>131948
Wollstonecraft.
Mary Shelly.

Shut up, your argument is invalid.

>>134386
Bullshit. White males dominate literature because thet are smarter, not because they have, throughout history, oppressed women, blacks, asians...

Oh wait.

>>134405
this
/lit/ loves its shelley

>>134362
Okay, so a very tiny minority of them were educated. But all the while they were taught this 'to get a nice husband' and were told to be a 'nice, pretty lady' their whole lives. When you are raised to believe that something is of the upmost priority, then obviously you're not going to try and do some other thing.

Environment does affect a person. That's also why in the technology age so many women are dumb cunts. It's because we treat them like they're children ('it's okay that you were bitchy, you were on your period' and 'I'll let you just stand here so you can have sex with me/make me look like I care about women to gain a female audience').

>>134394

Aw, Gunlord, and I thought we had so many likes in common. Men write them too. Just under women's pen names.

>>134394
One of the bestselling romance authors is a 60 year old man from Canada.

>>134352

Never said they don't.

I like how you are taking this shit and assuming I mean EVERYBODY when I am trying to make it clear I don't.

But lets get real here, guys don't give a fuck who their best friend is going out with(usually) and they don't give a fuck about gossip unless it is funny.
Women are more prone to give a fuck about both of those things.
Like I said, you never hear guys going on these long tirades about stupid shit that somebody said or stupid factoids about somebody else's relationship.

>>134365

>Implying girls do not do stupid shit.
HA! I have heard girls talk about doing stupid shit, and having one night stands.

Lets just be honest here, there IS a psychological difference between men and women, as well as a sociological difference. The mindsets are different, the concerns are different, the problems are usually different. What is considered an actual problem is usually different to.
I am not trying to claim one group is stupid and the other isn't, I am just stating a fact.

>>134404
So wait... we both talked about average men and women and then you disregard my arguement by bringing up a minority?

What? There are definitely minorities of men who act they way you describe, I just didn't bring it up because I figured it was obvious that there are always exceptions.

>>134426
>>134437
Yeah, I've heard about that, but I thought women predominated the field. I remember reading an article in Time a few years ago that said something about 80% of romance writers being female, with the remainder being men. It was a few years ago and I don't recall too clearly, I might be wrong or those demographics might have changed, though...

>>134456
There is a sociological difference. But not a psychological one. But surroundings obviously affect the psyche so you are right as long as society treats men and women differently.

How about we stop the men/women arguments and just get rid of the niggers?

>>134485
It's mostly men using pseudonyms

>>134485
Well, considering that in every society on Earth women are either mother figures or sex objects, their writing about romance and sex isn't that surprising.

I like Isobelle Carmody, but I wish she would finish a series before starting a new one

>>134492
>There is a sociological difference. But not a psychological one.

I'm not the guy you're arguing with, but you are wrong. Carl Jung's writings on the human psyche say there IS a difference, the most obvious being his writings on the anima/animus. Hell, every complex he wrote about he had to write a second time for the other gender.

>>134492

I am going to be blunt with this.

Women are expected to be shallow idiots by our society. It is not that they are shallow idiots by nature, it is just that our culture encourages it. There is a predominating message in our culture that if a women breaks the mold of what is considered normal, she will be lonely and miserable without any exception.

Men on the other hand, are encouraged to fuck chicks and not much else, in my experience.

The result of all this is a sector of our society expected to act like childish morons. If you are trained subliminally to do this from birth, you eventually become this. People like Kim Kardashian are held up as shining examples of womanhood, everything else is stupid and unpopular.

And so, this prevailing attitude seeps into the literary world, and most women end up writing shallow crap meant to appeal to a base of people with the mentalities of idiots.


There you go, why men and women are different.

>>134362 Yes, yes they were. Learning Greek and Latin and then being able to read the classics _in those languages_ was a big part of being an accomplished woman.

You should read Rousseau and then Mary Wolstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Women, because its clear you don't have a clue.

Name one good female author.

>>134587
Agatha Christie.

>>134569
you should take everything you said in your argument, put it all together, and post it as an essay on deviantART.

I say that because it would save me time copy/pasting it into a text file.

>>134569
Thank you.

>>134612

That made me feel smart...

But I am way too lazy and apathetic to do that. But please, go right ahead, feed my ego.

>>134386

Sorry kitten, but that herp derp white man keeps us down shit doesn't fly anymore. Cunts have had the vote for 90 years, niggers for nearly 50, and both preferences in education and employment for 40, yet men generally and white men specifically still produce more and better literature than any minority you care to name.

Why?

Because white men are simply writing. They're interested in telling a story and not in making a statement. Generally speaking, cunts and niggers haven't left their mental ghettos yet. Instead of seeing themselves as simply people, they still see themselves as cunts and niggers. That self imposed mental segregation limits their perceptions which limits their work which limits their audience.

>>134418
All I'm seeing is >say idiotic statement, >be proven wrong, >use backup statement based on speculation.
Guess what, feminist women/pussy whipped men on this board? No matter what debatable point you attempt to bring up, the undeniable fact is that the number of great male authors outnumbers female authors by several times. Now go read the Victorian equivalent of Twilight and Gossip Girl books and leave real literature to the rest of us.

>>134638

>lol having the vote for 50 years undoes centuries worth of harm

>>134587

How about three? Sands, Woolf, James.

>>134645
>implying people live for centuries
And I bet you think that everyone should have to pay for whatever mistakes their great grandparents made.

>>134638
I wasn't even the anon who you were arguing with before. So, it's sort of impossible to have a pattern.

Learn to argue, fag. I'm totally fine with being completely wrong, I'm considering every post on this board sincerely. Not just 'I'm going to label someone stupid without arguing back' or 'I'm going to give a fact without understanding or offering any explanations to it's context' bullshit either.

>>134587
Read the thread. Moron.

>>134684

>implying that grandparents don't influence the current generation

The main problem I have with female writers is that for the most part, they always paint their female characters as noble. I can't stand it. I like characters with vulnerability, with clear flaws that give authenticity to the character. Most women don't write characters like that. Obviously some do, but it's lacking in most of the female authors I've read. I like Natsuo Kirino because she doesn't bullshit her audience by pretending women aren't above selfish ambitions.

>>134702

>Implying my grandfathers far right politics and paranoia has influenced me in any way

>>134702
>still implying that people should be punished for crimes their forebears committed

>>134724
I agree with this. I love flawed characters. And a female character with flaws, opinions (especially ones that disagree with the authors!) and skills are just so awesome and engaging.

>>134741
>>134747
>Implying that years of oppression don't create counter-cultures or stigma in all groups involved.

>>134692
>I wasn't even the anon who you were arguing with before
>Learn to argue, fag
Oh ho, the irony. That was my first post in this shitty thread. Also, it was addressed to everyone arguing for GURRRRRLLLL POWER. Seemed fairly obvious given the context, but given the opinions you hold, I can't really expect you to read past the ham fistedly obvious.

>>134767

>Implying I have anything to do with any of that.

I am on 4chan, do you really think I have been around long enough to oppress ANYBODY

>>134702

> implying that because your grandparent was denied an education you should ignore your own.

Face it. Whining about injustices decades in the past is nothing but an excuse. Rather than saying "I am a person and when I fail it is entirely on me", you prefer "I am a cunt/nigger/fill-in-the-blank and when I fail it is because people used to be mean to cunts/niggers/fill-in-the-blanks decades ago."

While this sad mindset allows you neatly sidestep all responsibility, it is ultimately self destructive.

>>134767
>not denying that you think that we should be punished for crimes committed by our parents/grandparents/etc
That's nice. I'll be awaiting my apology note and compensation money in the mail, as I'm sure one of your ancestors wronged one of mine at some point.

>>134779
>State fact
>Give made up explanation of that fact

There are more black people in American prisons, I could just say all niggers are violent, too. Doesn't mean I'm right.

>>134804
Are you a white male, by any chance? I'm not saying you're not completely wrong, but if you don't think the system is somewhat biased to the white male, you're dreaming.

I read Mary Sue fanfiction and vampire novels. Women writers are stupid.

>>134804
This is true. You can't just justify your personal failures on fomr er oppression without being a complete dick.

But it's just downright ignorant to say that racism/sexism/prejudice do no exist and that they do not oppress people in our world today.

>>134816
I stated no fact except that there are far more great male authors than females ones. But hey, if you don't consider that fact, I guess we're done and you can go back to reading what you call "literature".
Also,
>irrelevant racism parallel
>Learn to argue, fag
If you ever get one wish, I recommend you wish for hypocrisy to become money; you would be one wealthy man.

>>134810
>Can't think of rational argument to explain idiocy
>Compares the individual to a massive social movement that targeted another group of people for no reason other that fear and ignorance

One person fucking another person over is different than an entire population being brutalized for centuries and you know it.

>>134645

My great granddad was oppressed by British people in Ireland. Should I be asking the UK parliament for reparations? No, because I am fucking American and because that shit happened long before I was born.

And don't even get me started on what Both my Italian grand parents, as well as my Irish ancestors, went through when they got to this country. And you know what? I STILL DO NOT EXPECT ANYBODY TO GIVE ME ANY DAMN PITY FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED BEFORE I WAS FUCKING BORN!!!

CRUISE CONTROL FOR RAGE!!!!!

>>134856
You were making an implication. If I got ahead of myself, sorry. But if I am right and you were implying something with that statement, then I'm perfectly justified and my argument stands.

But yeah, personal insults to me are great fillers too.