"Men can't write woman"

[Anonymous No.18258292]

How do you respond to comments like this?

[Anonymous No.18258313]

“Some can”

[Anonymous No.18258317]

>>18258292
If it is wrong to stereotype it is wrong to view a fictional character as representative of anything but itself.

[Anonymous No.18258326]

>>18258292
>complains about female characters all being indistinct, unrealistic, and a shadow of preconceptions
>never names a single real author as an example, lumps everyone into "France"

[Anonymous No.18258330]

Tolstoy could write women like no one else, not even women.

[Anonymous No.18258340]

>>18258292
Real women arent particularly interesting, I want beautiful descriptions of tits, not a "realistic" look at the female psyche

[Anonymous No.18258347]

>>18258326
You mean the last paragraph? Yea, I think is one is my fault for not mentioning, she's "reviewing" Anatole France's The Red Lily.

[Anonymous No.18258348]

>>18258292
I wonder if that poster has read Stendhal, his female characters are very well written imo, better than his male characters actually who are often a bit over the top.

[Anonymous No.18258363]

>>18258292
the fantasy is more interesting than the reality. can you blame them?

[Anonymous No.18258371]

I chuckle and say "i'm a registered sex offender"

[Anonymous No.18258386]

>>18258340
Kek

[Anonymous No.18258391]

>>18258340
Any books that have beautiful descriptions of tits?

[Anonymous No.18258392]

>>18258340
this

[Anonymous No.18258393]

>>18258340
Lol, this

[Anonymous No.18258394]

>>18258392
Some women are interesting though.

[Anonymous No.18258397]

>>18258391
my diary desu

[Anonymous No.18258401]

>>18258394
yeah, ugly ones

[Anonymous No.18258408]

>>18258401
Is this an American Psycho reference?

[Anonymous No.18258409]

>>18258394
The severely mentally ill schizo ones, yes. Even then, schizo men are more interesting

[Anonymous No.18258416]

Women are just men without reason.

[Anonymous No.18258425]

>>18258416
Than men are just women without empathy.

[Anonymous No.18258427]

>>18258394
Emmy Noether was interesting because she was like an autistic male.
>Biographers suggest that she was mostly unconcerned about appearance and manners, focusing on her studies. A distinguished algebraist Olga Taussky-Todd described a luncheon during which Noether, wholly engrossed in a discussion of mathematics, "gesticulated wildly" as she ate and "spilled her food constantly and wiped it off from her dress, completely unperturbed".[46] Appearance-conscious students cringed as she retrieved the handkerchief from her blouse and ignored the increasing disarray of her hair during a lecture. Two female students once approached her during a break in a two-hour class to express their concern, but they were unable to break through the energetic mathematical discussion she was having with other students.[47]

[Anonymous No.18258429]

>>18258394
Only when they're old and have stories to tell.

[Anonymous No.18258436]

>>18258416
>>18258425
Where did this meme of reasonable men and empathetic women come from?

[Anonymous No.18258437]

>>18258427
>spilled her food constantly and wiped it off from her dress, completely unperturbed".[46] Appearance-conscious students cringed as she retrieved the handkerchief from her blouse and ignored the increasing disarray of her hair during a lecture
based emmy

[Anonymous No.18258444]

>>18258425
No, men are actually more empathetic. Women just project, then get savage when others don't match their projections.

[Anonymous No.18258446]

>>18258436
Woman being man without reason (in modern times) is from As Good as it Gets, MC states this before he realizes how wrong he is. My response is just generic non-sense as far as I know, but it served the purpose of my response.

[Anonymous No.18258447]

>>18258436
>reasonable men
reality
>empathetic women
femoid delusion

[Anonymous No.18258448]

>>18258401
>>18258409
These are both juvenile opinions, ugliness causes splits in women’s personalities, the same as mental illness. They crutch themselves on something else which all the other women are crutching themselves on.
The only interesting women are women who are whole people without insecurity (rare, but you’ll know it when you see it), or women so naturally beautiful they make even the mundane seem sensuous and new.

[Anonymous No.18258452]

>>18258444
>t. missed the point
Not a surprise.

[Anonymous No.18258455]

>>18258446
It's older than that you zoomer mongoloid.

[Anonymous No.18258458]

>>18258452
I care little for whatever onions game you're playing, I simply responded to your cringe.

[Anonymous No.18258460]

>>18258292
I think this lady should take a look at Amazon’s kindle store or go to her local supermarket and look at the romance paperback section, because how female writers imagine men is absolutely hilarious and really not all that much different from what she’s complaining about. This is just another one of those pearl-clutching complaints women have where they complain about behavior in men that they themselves actively engage in without any hint of self awareness to reinforce their victim complex.

[Anonymous No.18258464]

>>18258455
Notice I said "in modern times." Also, not even remotely a zoomer, older than the movie by a fair amount.

[Anonymous No.18258467]

>>18258448
>ugliness causes splits in women’s personalities, the same as mental illness. They crutch themselves on something else which all the other women are crutching themselves on.
... What?

[Anonymous No.18258470]

>>18258464
Indeed, I apologise.

[Anonymous No.18258474]

>>18258394
wrong

[Anonymous No.18258477]

>>18258292
There's one man who wrote women pretty well...

[Anonymous No.18258479]

>>18258447
Women are extremely empathetic when they like you(or if they are family), much more than most men are. Women's empathy though is less universal than men's in my experience, it just shuts off for many people. Maybe it has to shut off specifically because they empathize so much, their empathy serves a different kind of role than male empathy. If I had to define the difference it would be that women empathize to form strong emotional bonds with people, while men empathize to understand acquaintances to achieve productive cooperation at tasks that require division of labor. Obviously men and women both do both of these things, it's just a tendency towards one or the other.

[Anonymous No.18258481]

We really have to fight against the idea that being a perpetual victim is a desirable personality trait.

[Anonymous No.18258486]

>>18258467
These things make them insecure, and insecure women align more with other women the more insecure they are. If they dont rank high in a hierarchy, they’ll maybe become “alternative” or one of the other few mainstream personalities women take on.
Women who have few insecurities and know who they are don’t need to adopt these personas, they’re able to be much more socially.

[Anonymous No.18258490]

>>18258486
The same shit applies to men.

[Anonymous No.18258500]

>>18258479
Being empathetic is usually bad and almost always ends up causing worse outcomes.

[Anonymous No.18258503]

>>18258391
Here are some. This thread needs more beautiful booba descriptions.

[Anonymous No.18258507]

>>18258503

[Anonymous No.18258510]

>>18258507

[Anonymous No.18258515]

>>18258510

[Anonymous No.18258516]

>>18258500
I don't agree, women really do create strong bonds between people that unite communities, specifically because of how they empathize with people. Feminists actually started complaining about this female virtue, they call it 'emotional labor' and claim women are forced into doing through socialization. Male empathy creates different sorts of valuable bonds as well of course.

[Anonymous No.18258518]

>>18258490
Maybe, but the people I originally replied to we’re saying the opposite

[Anonymous No.18258524]

>>18258515

[Anonymous No.18258547]

>>18258524
It looks like something written by Homer Simpson

[Anonymous No.18258561]

Women can't write nor men nor women. Women are subhumans

[Anonymous No.18258569]

>>18258394
just like our male counterparts, traumatized females are interesting

[Anonymous No.18258574]

If a man really understands women he becomes either gay, misogynistic or both

[Anonymous No.18258583]

>>18258427
based kek

[Anonymous No.18258588]

>>18258458
not too reasonable, anon

[Anonymous No.18258737]

>>18258503
If the author was a woman she would have written: "The young bitch has shamelessly exposed her overgrown boobs."

[Anonymous No.18258748]

>>18258588
Very reasonable actually.

[Anonymous No.18258772]

I've never read a realistic man written by a woman, but then again I've never read anything a woman's wrote.

[Anonymous No.18258805]

>>18258479
I think men's empathy is more heroic while women's empathy is kinda selfish.
This is why we strongly have the image of the succubus or the gold digging woman because we know women have an extremely volatile nature while they can be the most beautiful creatures they can also be downright vile.

Contrast this with say women complement each other but dont mean it while men insult each other but dont mean it. You get the gist of the differences between sexes.

[Anonymous No.18258809]

>>18258748
Nah, anon is right, it is unreasonable to ignore what was said in favor of what suits you. Just don't respond if you need to play such games.

[Anonymous No.18258814]

>>18258809
I ignore nonsense. Why are you midwits trying to catch me out? She isn't going to fuck you bro.

[Anonymous No.18258820]

>>18258814
You seem to be implying that anyone who does not agree with you is speaking nonsense and saying you do not reply to nonsense but keep replying to this supposed nonsense. Do you make any effort to make sense?

[Anonymous No.18258826]

>>18258805
No women and men are similarly selfish. the women close to you are frequently less selfish thn the men close to you

[Anonymous No.18258838]

>>18258820
I'm not implying that at all, try again.

[Anonymous No.18259195]

>>18258292
Why would anybody write about women realistically, if I can put in a sense of comfort and fascination through an unrealistic female character of course I will. When was the last time a real women ever interested you for more than a minute?

[Anonymous No.18259222]

>>18258391
Here’s one of 14-year-old booba

[Anonymous No.18259324]

Women have written men and men have written women for ages and have both been accurate in their descriptions. If you believe one gender can't accurately depict the psyche or personality of the other gender, this is actually you acknowledging that you're a sociopath who lacks empathy.

[Anonymous No.18259349]

>>18258292
I agree. Honestly can't think of a female character in a man's work that wasn't either poorly written or very male-behaving.

[Anonymous No.18259360]

>>18259349
Emma Bovary is neither a poorly written character, or "very male-behaving". You should read more.

[Anonymous No.18259376]

>>18258427
Tfw no based schizo gf

[Anonymous No.18259568]

>>18258427
Based.

[Anonymous No.18259589]

Madame Bovary was pretty realistic desu (ie. a whore)

[Anonymous No.18259596]

>>18258292
>knig
Based

[Anonymous No.18259610]

>>18258292
Women can't either

>>18258427
>"gesticulated wildly"
>"spilled her food constantly
>completely unperturbed
>they were unable to break through the energetic mathematical discussion she was having with other students
She was a female Chad

[Anonymous No.18259625]

>>18258292
Admit its probably true, continue on your merry way.

[Anonymous No.18259631]

Men writte better at everything, this sole fapping manuscript of a coomer has more philosophical depth than all romantic pulp fiction books that cat ladies wrote in the past 200 years.

[Anonymous No.18259674]

>be some dude
>write a story with only men, or at least no prominent women
>"noooo you must include women as well"
>write a story with both prominent men and women
>"nooooo men can't write women"
It's hopeless

[Anonymous No.18259791]

>>18259222
>flesh strongly.

What?

[Anonymous No.18259799]

>>18259610
"Chad"
1. is not a compliment
2. means male normalfag

[Anonymous No.18259804]

>this thread is not deleted
>every other literature thread is deleted

[Anonymous No.18259889]

>>18258292
And what pray tell does she mean by a “real woman”? Did it never cross her mind that any of these male authors could have been closeted trans women expressing their true hidden feminine selves through the female characters of their written works? Roastie btfo as always

[Anonymous No.18259957]

>>18259222
>her breasts were small and new-looking, capped with large changeable nipples
What is he fondling, a lego set? This is the opposite of erotic.

[Anonymous No.18260309]

>>18258292
But can women write men? Does anyone have any examples of women writing men correctly?

[Anonymous No.18260321]

>>18259804

I noticed that, apart from Theology and Philosophy threads, the threads that get deleted the fastest are the "misogynistic" ones, i.e. threads discussing women in any capacity other than innocuously "romantic". HOWEVER, the worse and the more intellectually-bankrupt the discussion is, like this thread, the more likely it is to stay up indefinitely. Probably so that the COCKSUCKING jannies get off on "exposing" "misogynistic" discussion as intellectually-bankrupt.

[Anonymous No.18260323]

>>18258292
Ignore them. It basically translates to “men don’t make women the main characters”. The same things they point to which display that “men can’t write women” are the same attributes you’ll find for side characters in any novel. Meanwhile, authors like Osamu Dazai were known for making their main characters and narrator women, simply writing them exactly as he might write a man but making clear that they’re women and he was praised for it. They just want women to be the main characters. That’s it.

[Anonymous No.18260335]

>>18258292
>”presides like an automaton” at work
>shows her human side in intimate situations
This is 50% of humanity, male and female. Professionals put their emotions aside on the job. It’s actually quite the compliment to the characters this reviewer is referencing.

[Anonymous No.18260411]

If a man could write a woman it’d be a turn off. When men write women it’s only hot when they get in wrong but more importantly HOW they get it wrong

[Anonymous No.18260422]

>>18259791

Still waiting for an explanation.

[Anonymous No.18260437]

>>18259222
>>18259791
>>18260422

Never mind, I read "like a dot. flesh strongly." and was so confused that I didn't realize I skipped a row.

[Anonymous No.18260471]

>>18258292
There is nothing actually interesting to write about women, obviously it's all make-believe, those authors did it as a personal literary challenge. If anything women should be grateful that they were even given such generous portrayals, because the reality of a woman's mind is just grim. That's why they only complain about those "false" portrayals and never write "accurate" ones, because,
A) they are incapable of self-reflection
B) they are incapable of honesty
C) they know it would leave men completely dumbfounded

[Anonymous No.18260473]

>>18258292
I find it interesting when women say this. I can certainly cede that there are some terrible writings on women penned by men (Murakami is recommend endlessly but his writing is insufferable), but I find the statement a little suspect. Ask any woman for a list of her 'favourite women' in media, be it film or literature, and surely the majority of them will have been written by men? Unless they are being obstinate and obtuse just to prove a point. Statistically I feel that this is the only outcome, at least in present times. Hundreds of years down the line, it could certainly hold truth, but right now I'd be doubtful.

[Anonymous No.18260493]

If men can’t write women then how did James Joyce wrote the single most realistic look inside the mind of a woman in the history of literature with Chapter 18 of Ulysses (Penelope)?

[Anonymous No.18260929]

>>18258460
this

[Anonymous No.18260947]

>>18258292
"Ok I won't."

[Anonymous No.18260968]

>>18260493
It's a bit generous to call James Joyce a "man," isn't it?

[Anonymous No.18261023]

>>18260493
Those are some big boobas

[Anonymous No.18261041]

>>18260493
>first I put my arms around him yes and drew him down Jo me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I said yes I will Yes.
It's fitting that the greatest insight into the mind of a woman in world literature climaxes with evoking the sights and smells of boobs and perfume.

[Anonymous No.18261112]

>>18258292
> How do you respond to comments like this?
By not femoids in the story at all. A few cunts show whom the protagonist pounds from time to time.

[Anonymous No.18261123]

>>18259625
It's kinda true, but what makes it cringe is women whining over it

[Anonymous No.18261132]

>>18258292
tits are the most interesting thing about women. men go to war and die for good tits.

[Anonymous No.18261138]

Honestly when I look at the works I have enjoyed most, they rarely contain women in important positions. Unless you count Greek gods.

[Anonymous No.18261143]

>>18261132
This

[Anonymous No.18261146]

>>18261138
I can think of a few very important positions for them...

[Anonymous No.18261174]

Ursula LeGuin on 2001: A Space Odyssey
>If you haven't got something to put it in, food will escape you--even something as uncombative and unresourceful as an oat. You put as many as you can into your stomach while they are handy, that being the primary container; but what about tomorrow morning when you wake up and it's cold and raining and wouldn't it be good to have just a few handfuls of oats to chew on and give little Oom to make her shut up, but how do you get more than one stomachful and one handful home? So you get up and go to the damned soggy oat patch in the rain, and wouldn't it be a good thing if you had something to put Baby Oo Oo in so that you could pick the oats with both hands? A leaf a gourd a shell a net a bag a sling a sack a bottle a pot a box a container. A holder. A recipient.
>"The first cultural device was probably a recipient .... Many theorizers feel that the earliest cultural inventions must have been a container to hold gathered products and some kind of sling or net carrier."
>So says Elizabeth Fisher in Women's Creation (McGraw-Hill, 1975). But no, this cannot be. Where is that wonderful, big, long, hard thing, a bone, I believe, that the Ape Man first bashed somebody with in the movie and then, grunting with ecstasy at having achieved the first proper murder, flung up into the sky, and whirling there it became a space ship thrusting its way into the cosmos to fertilize it and produce at the end of the movie a lovely fetus, a boy of course, drifting around the Milky Way without (oddly enough) any womb, any matrix at all? I don't know. I don't even care. I'm not telling that story. We've heard it, we've all heard all about all the sticks spears and swords, the things to bash and poke and hit with, the long, hard things, but we have not heard about the thing to put things in, the container for the thing contained. That is a new story. That is news.

[Anonymous No.18261195]

Okay so I'm looking at /r/menwritingwomen and do women really not realize that men have way more sexual vigor and indeed cannot help but see women as sexual? Like, it's not a choice, when I walk on the street I can't help but think "I want to fuck her" with every women I see. Do they not realize that?

[Anonymous No.18261215]

>>18261195
Matthew 5:28
>Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

[Anonymous No.18261218]

>>18261215
lol that's gay

[Anonymous No.18261223]

>>18261215
Well God, I am not happy about it, I do not act upon it, but I do feel it. What to do?

[Anonymous No.18261228]

>>18261195
They know deep down all they're good for is their sexual value, you don't have to be Weininger to notice that. Hell, a man won't even care to befriend a woman unless he wants to fuck her. That subreddit is just a cope.

[Anonymous No.18261231]

>>18261174
>but where's muh vagina

[Anonymous No.18261238]

>>18258427
>she spilled her spaghetti
one of us

[Anonymous No.18261271]

>>18259799
>>"Chad"
>1. is not a compliment
Only incels think it's an insult.

[Anonymous No.18261386]

>>18258292
All femoid characters should either be antagonistic, annoying, or nonexistent

[Anonymous No.18261431]

>>18258477
What do you think he was right about?

[Anonymous No.18261435]

>>18261431
Why do you ask this every time Weininger is mentioned? Are you a bot?

[Anonymous No.18261437]

>>18261228
People aren’t “good for” something, they have value in and of themselves separate than what they can do for others

[Anonymous No.18261464]

>>18261437
Le epic intellectual conflating meanings of words has arrived. You of course know that value has different meaning in different contexts, right? And the context in question is the feminist framing of men writing women as sex "objects", which is supposed to be problematic or something. Women are sexual RESOURCES and are inseparable from this natural role. Women are valued for existing, men for doing things. And women are mostly boring. The only reason why men humor them is sexual desire.

[Anonymous No.18261475]

>>18261435
What? No I just saw you post that image before and I was still confused from when you responded

[Anonymous No.18261482]

>>18261437
>People aren’t “good for” something, they have value in and of themselves separate than what they can do for others

I bet you a vegan hedonist if you think that
Go ahead then, plug into the experience machine, bugboy.

The fantasy of the hedonists is that hedonists will hug each other once all their desires are met.
This is why marxism is materialism, ie reducing everything to material conditions and money, and why they push for more and more cheap goods.

Hedonists get acclimated to their current situation, but they need more and more pleasures and less and less hardship to feel happy, otherwise they get depressed.

This is why atheists (who are hedonists) confuse happiness with having free stuff, free goods and services.
According to marxists, people are happy only they have the material conditions for it.

Liberals define freedom and happiness with an opulence of goods, an orgy of sense pleasures and they call this progress.

Okay, but since hedonists need bigger and bigger breakthrough to ease their life, they get depressed when those breakthroughs do not happen, like it has been the case since the 80s.
They freak out when there is a recession and they whine that progress stagnates.

[Anonymous No.18261516]

>>18261482
No. Actually I find the idea that people are valuable only if they give pleasure to others disgusting. This is why I took issue with the framing from earlier, because I shouldn’t only be valuable insofar as I support some bitch in a relationship or am interesting to other men, which seems like the only two systems of valuing men that anyone knows right now. I think mankind has value in and of themselves because are made in gods image. I hold the exact opposite of the views you are telling me I have fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.18261541]

>>18258292
Palpable resentment of fictional characters, pathetic - as if the more elaborate male characters are "stealing" depth axiomatically owed to the female - the antithesis of imagination. Unfortunate, as there's a well-established and defensible line of similar thought stemming from Hegel's Aesthetics, where he criticizes French drama for its abstract, sterile characterization compared to the more concrete vigor of German & English ones. She could try leveling the accusation against other literary forms but it seems quite weak.

[Anonymous No.18261549]

>>18261541
>German drama characters
>concrete vigor
???

[Anonymous No.18261560]

>>18259222
As someone who fondled a 14-year-old girlfriend when I was 16 this is accurate. It's like a cup of fat each held tightly to their chest by the skin and almost slides around a little. She was also very skinny and smoked a lot too and her nipples were really small I remember as well.

We never went all the way and only dated for like 2 months one summer back in 2015.

[Anonymous No.18261580]

>>18258479
agreed, it seems to be a much more focused and partial empathy for women.

[Anonymous No.18261585]

>>18261195
Do you think that when you see a child or an elderly lady? I can understand teenage, adolescent and even 30-40 year old women but certainly not EVERY woman you see.

[Anonymous No.18261601]

>>18261585
Admittedly it's only women my age. As I am approaching 30 I'm strangely fascinated by young mothers. Sex is weird.

[happiness !!5I6j9kLHLQc No.18261606]

>>18258292
Flaubert.

However it is significant that most often, when they say "men can't write women", they are in fact saying "men can't write for women": Women in literature, even when they are the object of complain of female readers, are not bad constructed according to the male gaze.
While a lot has been written about the author, the reader in literary studies has been mostly ignored, and having this object of study arose in the XX-century, a common critique is that literary works, which nearly always are written with reader in mind (a process that can be conscious or unconscious), has been mostly written to be read by a man.
The social reality between men and women are significant, and it is to be expected that these will play out a role during reading, which will affect severely the judgment they pass to the construction of men and women.
Most men can portray women in a way that the reading-experience is perceived as significant by a man; writing women for women is harder unless they are reduced to the purely sexual (as in erotica) because it implies comprehending a psychological reality, a world, highly difference from the crude experience of men.

[Anonymous No.18261706]

>>18261606
I think that is a decently good veiw of the phenomenon
>>18261580
going off of this. To me, as a general thing, men tends to have a broader, but less intense sense of empathy.
a lot if times going
>yah, i kinda get that different view, or that scenario, but i still am going to do x anyways.
while women tend to have a more narrow, but more intimate focus, going either
>god, I totally ubderstand that and jive so muchwith it
or
>I dont get that at all, makes no sense to me.

Like my adult sister is really into animals, and hates when they are hurt, but the moment she sees a spider or a rat, she yells for me to kill it without a second thought. While im more mellow on both ends, like i will kill a rabbit if its eating my shit, kinda sad that it died, but i care about my shit more, and ill kill the spider, but I will also feel a little sad about it. not enough to not do it, but enough hesitation for the idea of killing itself that its distinctly different to my sisters immediate negative nonempathetic reaction.

[Anonymous No.18261743]

women complain that "men can't write women" in order to place a hand on one hip and frown. The truth remains that novels, short stories, poems, great works, philosophy etc, are better written by men on every single subject except for one. Women cherrypicked the one thing they could hold over the head of men as if to say, "see daddy, you're not perfect after all! You fucking scumfuck bastard, if you're so great you could write about women's experiences, but you're not, so I win!."
Men, not to be outdone, have started to become trans en-masse.

[Anonymous No.18261782]

>>18258292
blacks can't write Whites

[Anonymous No.18261935]

>>18261223
God made you horny and will punish you for it because it amuses Him greatly.

Haven't you played The Sims?

[Anonymous No.18262004]

>>18258292
" good, I don't want to read about them"

[Anonymous No.18262125]

>>18258292
I'm amazed how according to women nobody can write women accurately, except the guy that writes their horoscopes.

[Anonymous No.18262202]

>>18258292
i dont write woman i fuck woman

[Anonymous No.18262257]

>>18258292
Like this:

"thot detected"

[Anonymous No.18262274]

Why would anyone want to write real women? They suck

[Anonymous No.18262277]

>>18260493
that's why they hate this monologue. they're jealous it wasn't written by a woman

[Anonymous No.18262464]

>>18258292
All women are whores

[Anonymous No.18262775]

>>18258460
To add to this modern media as a whole has taken a dive in quality because neither gender/sex/whateverthefucklabelitisthisweek is written well. Both are written like dumbed down caricatures of themselves. Empowered women and emasculated men just make for shitty cardboard characters. When it was so male dominated and female characters were nonexistent at least there was diversity in the male characters rather than shallow empowerment as a requirement. Obviously there is a better ideal to strive for, but women really need to get the fuck over their insecurity if we are ever going to produce anything worthwhile ever again. As it stands you can pretty much write off about 25 years of human artistic expression in the West. There is nothing of value to be missed. Hopefully this is growing pains and future women will be able to tolerate a flawed protagonist without seeing it as a personal attack.

[Anonymous No.18262805]

>>18258292
>wright male charter
>change gender and pronoun use to female in editing
done

[Anonymous No.18262850]

>>18258503
You do understand the context of this, correct? Her body is somewhat grotesque and at odds with her face. We've all seen people with a mismatch between body and face. For the record I am a straight male and did not find this passage in TULoB arousing in the slightest.

But what a monstrous soul it would have to be if it reflected that body, that rack for four pouches.

The bitch was a fatty who didn't gain fat in her face.

[Anonymous No.18262853]

>>18258292
Jesus fucking christ how can women be so inefficient at writing?

[Anonymous No.18262862]

>>18258340
The female psyche is like a whirlpool of shit. Sure it has a lot of movement. Sure it's very descriptively complex. In the end it's still shit and you don't want to look at it.

[Anonymous No.18262892]

>>18258460
>go take a look at gay romance because faggot
>female writers legitimately don't understand how male sexuality works
>legitimately think a male would go on to be celibate with his boyfriend for 3 fucking years
>no clue what boners are
>no clue what morning boners are
>think ejaculation and orgasm can be stopped by closing the urethral with a finger

[Anonymous No.18262901]

>>18262125
kek

[Anonymous No.18262903]

>>18261215
Yeah, yeah, we all know the scam here. Invoke shame and guilt for natural human reactions and charge a fee to absolve the created guilt. Excellent grift running smoothly for thousands of years. The founding principle upon which all advertising is based.

[Anonymous No.18263129]

>>18261743
Great post anon, loved the punchline

[Anonymous No.18263654]

>>18258292
Only men can write at all.

[Anonymous No.18263673]

>>18258292
>see this review of my book
>Come out as a transwoman the next day

see ya terf, get cancelled

[Anonymous No.18263908]

>>18258292
Just wait until they try to write a men and point it out.

[Anonymous No.18264093]

>>18262775
Did you ever wonder why things were the way they were?

[Anonymous No.18265429]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18266092]

>>18261560
>Age 16 in 2015
>stupid underage posters
>wait thats 22 now
>fuck I'm old

[Anonymous No.18266101]

>>18259799
While it is true that chad began as robot lingo for successful normalfags, in the chad memes, 'chad' referred to bizarre but selfconfident behaviour, whereas 'virgin' referred to normal yet selfconscious behaviour.
Normalfags could not understand this, so they corrupted it to mean chad good, virgin bad.

[Anonymous No.18266111]

>>18258394
Yeah - my mom, my gran and my sister

[Anonymous No.18266128]

>>18261706
Women have stronger in group out group preference. That can be flipped pretty quickly under the right circumstances but tends to be stuck in one configuration. It allows them to bond with a group faster (to get protection) providing as much empathy and emotional resources as they can to that group while not spilling any on outsiders. This is then projected onto the in group out group of pets vs vermin.

[Anonymous No.18266145]

>>18262853
Their goal is not efficiency.

[Anonymous No.18266149]

>>18263654
but muh Jane Austen

[Anonymous No.18266153]

>>18258408
a very subtle reference if so

[Anonymous No.18266156]

>>18258292
This woman's review is a perfect example of why women should not speak about anything except love, gossip, and care giving

[Anonymous No.18266160]

>>18258292
The only woman worth writing in depth are those past menopause.

[Anonymous No.18266597]

>>18258292
what a hideously overwrought set of paragraphs

[Anonymous No.18266859]

>>18262862
In opposition to a psyche of someone who writes like this? kek

[Anonymous No.18266944]

>>18258292
Most women don’t understand how men view them from a male perspective. Men are nowhere as romantic as you think.

[Anonymous No.18267139]

>>18266101

[Anonymous No.18267215]

>>18267139
OUCH indeed!

[Anonymous No.18267304]

>>18266859
Seethe more roastie.

[Anonymous No.18267311]

>>18262892
>think ejaculation can be stopped by closing the urethral with a finger

This works if you squeeze it at the base

[Anonymous No.18267326]

>>18267311
But not orgasm. Worse yet, the ejaculation did happen at most you might get a retrograded ejaculation where the thing goes into your bladder.

[Anonymous No.18267332]

>>18258292
women can't write anything

[Anonymous No.18267354]

>>18258292
Tell that to Flaubert. What an illiterate opinion.

[Anonymous No.18267928]

>>18258292

[Anonymous No.18267945]

>>18267928
dangerously based

[Anonymous No.18267991]

>>18267928
was hoping for this to get posted.

[Anonymous No.18267998]

>>18258391
the entirety of Wheel of Time by robert jordan

[Anonymous No.18268006]

>>18258427
aspie gf pls

[Anonymous No.18268036]

>>18261782
they say simplicity is genius. Let me simplify your great post some more!

blacks can't write

[Anonymous No.18268102]

>>18258479
if women are so empathetic, then why are they so clueless and crude in regards of the psyche and society? I doubt that they can understand even those they love- they can care for them, though. Yet they can not imagine being in the skin of another.

[Anonymous No.18268136]

>>18258425
I claim the opposite. I think it would make a fine area of research, though

[Anonymous No.18268148]

Same argument is said about Haruki Murakami for writing modern women like boring and vain basic bitch whores who ride the cock carousel and then stacies get pissed off because it describes them perfectly

[Anonymous No.18268198]

>>18262125
Underrated

[Anonymous No.18268440]

>>18258292
"How do you know?"

[Anonymous No.18268487]

>>18266153
"There are no girls with good personalities"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvqeeOKs9Bw

[Anonymous No.18268545]

>>18258427
Based

[Anonymous No.18268636]

>>18258425
Sympathy, not empathy.

[Anonymous No.18268654]

>>18258330
Anna Karenina proves it

[Anonymous No.18268740]

>>18261174

L I T E R A L L Y:

>ask classmates what they're researching
>male classmates are all researching fascinating, unique, or at least ambitious things
>woman: "Misogyny in Rome"
>woman: "Misogyny and Hamlet"
>woman: "The intersection of misogyny and periods in Hamlet"
>woman: "Women"
>woman: "Opinions about women having sex in Weimar newspapers"
>woman: "Women in the work of Robert Musil"
>woman: "Vagina"
>woman: "I have a vagina"
>woman: "I'm a woman btw. Vagina here"
>woman: "Sex and periods in gender"
>woman: "Woman perceptions of woman, ,vagina, cooters breasts woman period I'm on my period clitorises in the work of the band Oingo Boingo and Hamlet's Perception of Clitoris Vagina Gender Studies"
>woman: "Queering Gender in Medieval Manuscripts: Your period or MY period?"
>woman: "Misogyny, Periods, and You: Ernst Cassirer on Substance, Function, and My Gay Love Affair with Gender Studies"
>woman: "Women in 'Woman's Work': Gendering Gender in the Social Sciences"
>woman: "Prostitution and Gender in Antebellum Calcutta"
>woman: "Gender"
>woman: "Sex and gender studies"
>woman: "Tampons, pads, and ironclads: Stonewall Jackson and Freebleeding"
>woman: "Einstein contra Bergson: Who rapes me more by having existed?"

[Anonymous No.18269282]

>>18268740
Women are obsessed with using sexism and racism and lack of manhood as a weapon in the most disingenuous of ways. Any time they are starting to lose an argument they will use one or more of these tops to character assassin are you even though racism and sexism might be completely irrelevant to the topic. Do not argue with women. Back off and let her cool down. She is gonna call you small duck for not talking back but know this is a bait so she can use the sexism card later.

[Anonymous No.18269291]

>>18268740
Women are obsessed with using sexism and racism and lack of manhood as a weapon in the most disingenuous of ways. Any time they are starting to lose an argument they will use one or more of these topics to character assassinate you, even though racism and sexism might be completely irrelevant to the topic. Do not argue with women. Back off and let her cool down. She is gonna call you small dick for not talking back but know this is a bait so she can use the sexism card later.

[Anonymous No.18269904]

>>18258292
They're right. Can women write men? Not really.

[Anonymous No.18269940]

>>18268740
Kek best thing I've read today