[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 135 KB, 570x760, 1407943556191.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5284819 No.5284819[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Good books on patriarchy/women's emancipation? I didn't see anything in the wiki.

>> No.5284836

>>5284819
Ain't I A Woman? Black Women and Feminism by bell hooks.

>> No.5284852

Is that seriously all this woman has to complain about

>> No.5284853

the victim complex and you: a tale of internet hardships- Tumblr

>> No.5284857

holy shit isn't she ugly mother of fuck send help here i'm terrorized

>> No.5284859

>>5284819
Nietzsche - ecce homo

"“Emancipation of women” — this is the
instinctive hatred of the dysfunctional, that is, unfruitful woman,
toward one who is functional — the struggle against “man” is always
only a means, a pretext, a tactic. By elevating themselves as “woman per
se,” as “higher woman,” as woman “idealist,” they want to bring down
the general rank and level of women; there is no surer means for that
than higher education, trousers, and political voting-cattle rights.
Basically, the emancipated are the anarchists in the world of the
“eternal feminine,” those who have missed the boat and whose
deepest instinct is for revenge...A whole species of the most
malevolent “idealism” — which, by the way, also occurs in men, for
instance in Henrik Ibsen, that typical old maid — has as its goal the
poisoning of good conscience, of the natural love between the
sexes..."

>> No.5284860

>>5284852
shitlord detected

>> No.5284862

>Girl STOPS me on my way to work
>"Can I ask you a question?
>...
>Are you single?"

are you fucking kidding me? i'd be flattered as fuck. it's disgusting how they turn a moment like that into a bad thing.

>> No.5284879

"Are the Lips a Grave?: A Queer Feminist on the Ethics of Sex" was a recent, pretty significant release. I was impressed by it, at least. On the same thread, I read "Orgasmology" by Annamarie Jagose which complimented Huffer's work nicely. Credits to Amazon's "similar books" section for that one.

>> No.5284889

>>5284879
I can also do some other recs. if find yourself in want of a serious answer. I doubt you'll get one from anyone else here.

>> No.5284896

Dear god someone press The Big Reset © button now... we are so fucked up

>> No.5284913

>>5284862
women get a lot of positive sexual attention but sometimes have to deal with too much unwanted attention

men dont get a lot of unsolicited and unwelcome sexual attention but sometimes have to deal with less attention than they'd like

>> No.5284916

>>5284819

>wants books on 'patriarchy'
>surprised to not find any

well duh, next thing you're going to tell me that you actually believe it exists

>> No.5284919

>>5284862

He was probably ugly.

>>5284913
>but sometimes have to deal with too much unwanted attention

Just imagine the horror.

>> No.5284920

>>5284819
>I didn't see anything in the wiki.
Probably because it isn't worth talking or reading about

>> No.5284924

>>5284819
There are no good books about it, because no one takes any importance to the double standard that feminist imposed, as far as I know, when it's literally the source of all the problem for feminism.

>> No.5284930
File: 24 KB, 396x360, 1364049854433.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5284930

>> No.5284940

>>5284919
>He was probably ugly.
eggs-fuggin-zaggly

>> No.5284944

>>5284919
>Just imagine the horror.

yeah thats my point. its a trade-off.

>> No.5284948

>>5284944

I'm not sure if you are serious, but given the chance that you're a feminist, I'll try to explain: That was sarcasm.

>> No.5284951

>>5284944
it's not at all. keep thinking that though. you'll be sure to impress.

>> No.5284952

>>5284860
butthurt feminazi detected

>> No.5284957

>>5284819
Sorry to be a shitlord, but you should first of all fight against being constantly lumped with all other women under this very label. I haven't read it myself yet, but I think Gender Trouble by Judith Butler would be pretty relevant here. The problem with identity politics is that it keeps existing classifications of people in place, perhaps only changing a bit ideological rationalizations for them.
Also, 1st part of Foucault's History of Sexuality has a pretty interesting conclusion about moving beyond concepts of sex and sexuality, so maybe check out that.

>> No.5284968

>>5284919
>>5284948
>I have no sociological imagination.

>> No.5284972

>>5284879
>>5284957

Toss the rest of the thread out, OP; these are the only two to read here.

>> No.5284976

>>5284819
false flag?

>> No.5284978

>>5284862
She was on her way to work, so he interrupted her from getting to her job by doing this. She also didn't specify how he stopped her, but the word suggests some force. He was ultimately communicating that his interest in her was more important than whatever she was doing.

Also, it isn't a compliment to be asked if you're single if all the guy has seen is your body. It reinforces the idea that your body is all a guy wants, personality be damned.

>> No.5284980

>>5284968

>STOP RAPING ME!
Oh, I can totally imagine the oppression you face every day, you disgusting bitch.

>> No.5284983

>>5284978

>so he interrupted her from getting to her job by doing this

I can imagine, that whole minute of oppression and misoginy, he should be jailed and prison raped.

>It reinforces the idea that your body is all a guy wants, personality be damned.

It is like that. I don't even want to understand why you would believe otherwise.

>> No.5284988
File: 52 KB, 834x542, 8149afa6a7[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5284988

>feminism

not even once

>> No.5284990

>>5284983
Mademoiselle, don't bother with this guy, huh? There's nothing to be said at the present moment for the sort of justice necessary here.

>> No.5284993

>>5284978
lel. I say the guys must've done that because of her personality. I mean look at that!!
>>5284819

>> No.5284995

>>5284980
Kek, look at you getting angry. What's wrong anon? You can't express your opinions more coherently? Or you don't have much of an opinion in the first place? Poor, poor anon, can't create anything of value, not even a simple argument on 4chan.

>> No.5284996

>>5284988
>Reddit
There's your problem. Good job cherrypicking anecdotal evidence, by the way.

>> No.5284999

>>5284990

>I shall protect you, m'lady
>what's that? you want a massage while you tell me about that assh-I mean your boyfriend that fucked you silly? Right away!

>> No.5285001

>>5284988
>>5284996
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarzan#Critical_reception

>> No.5285004

>>5284819
Only a privileged woman could complain about such minuscule matters.

In Chinese factories, for example, women don't talk much about the Patriarchy, unlike teenage daughters of rich Chinese businessmen you can find mumbling about it on Twitter, Tumblr, etc.

Either this, or books about the Patriarchy don't exist because women are too oppressed to write them.

>> No.5285006

>>5284995

I'm not angry, you don't have to be angry to insult people. On the other hand, keep believing that you're oppressed, first world white bitch.

>> No.5285012
File: 191 KB, 512x384, Smithers gets harassed by hetero rape enabler.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5285012

What's wrong with this country? Can't a woman walk down the street without being offered a date?

>> No.5285020

>>5285004
Is it possible that feminists who tweet about patriarchy do so on electronics fabricated by women, or rather, teenage girls, working in chinese factories under terrible conditions?

>> No.5285021

>>5284951
what do you mean. women receive more wanted attention and more unwanted attention. men receive less wanted attention and less unwanted attention.

>> No.5285023

>>5284999
>Taking general care and consideration for those with a marginalized opinion and conforming it to whatever trope necessary to further your "epic rampage" of this dead-on-arrival feminist lit. thread

Can you even conceive of an ethic that prioritizes the stranger?

>> No.5285025

>>5285020

Why yes, feminists love to hate men on twitter via their tablets bought by daddy, complain about academia while studying thanks to daddy's money, etc

>> No.5285032

>>5285023
To be fair, I should take that and extend it in equal part to you.

I'm sorry for responding to you as someone lesser.

>> No.5285034

>>5285023

>parroting so many buzzwords that it's not even funny

Holy fuck, you really are the worst beta white knight I have seen in about a month.
You should be shot.

>> No.5285035

>>5284990
I'm not bothering with him, and will continue hoping that he is a troll. Thank you.

>> No.5285036
File: 63 KB, 480x600, 1362428723025.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5285036

>most third-waver feminists are young, and therefore are stupid knee-jerk reactionaries as young folks tend to be
>the internet has only been exposed to third-wavers
>and so, the internet thinks all feminists are stupid knee-jerk reactionaries based on a few bad examples
feels bad man

>> No.5285039

>>5285036
But second-wave feminism is inherently sexist.

>> No.5285040

>>5284819
Hmmmm, tasty bait.

On the off chance that OP is not a /pol/tard cherry picking his favorite hate week material and sharing it with us, I will say that there is an image concerning recommended books on gender studies. It's floating around /lit/ somewhere. I think. We should probably post it on the wiki.

>>5284978
Any serious effort put into this post is negated by your tripcode.

>> No.5285051

>>5285039
How so? There will always be extremists who make movements look bad, no need to take them seriously. It would be like discounting the civil rights movement because Five Percenters believe white people were created by eugenics 6,600 years ago.

>> No.5285053

>>5285025
>Why yes, feminists love to hate men on twitter via their tablets bought by daddy, complain about academia while studying thanks to daddy's money, etc
Where's the problem here? You think genders are teams or something? Or that some money and social status automatically bring immunity?

>> No.5285058

>>5285053

>You think genders are teams or something
Uh, that would be the feminists. Add racial and sexual orientation profiling too.

>> No.5285067

>>5285020
That is quite likely; but I'm sure those girls from the bourgeoisie are just as oppressed as their working class counterparts, because having a vagina (or not) is the only thing that defines people's degree of oppression. O vagina, hole of oppression! The world is so cruel with you!

Now, my question is: are women from the bourgeoisie (the ones who tweet and complain all day) oppressed by men from the proletariat (the ones who shut it up and make smartphones all day)? Or is the Patriarchy oppressing everyone, including poor men, who are also victims just like women, and even more than women given they're going to prison, dying early, working harder, suffering from homelessness... all in larger proportions?

>> No.5285069

>>5285034
I love the idea that anyone who sympathises with a woman on the Internet must be beta and have an ulterior motive. It's almost impossible to /not/ be an asshole. Keep thinking that your misogyny makes you an alpha chick-scorer; I'll keep laughing.

>> No.5285070

>>5285034
>buzzwords
Nice raising of the stakes by proposing an exit from my buzzwords via the meta-buzzword of 'buzzword' snobbery. You've taken one step forward to go two back.

Also if you actually think anything in my post represents 2014's steaming pile of linguistic capital, I think you are way off the mark, although who could be surprised?

>> No.5285073

>>5285069
Well, you are a tripfag.

>> No.5285075

fuck this thread

>> No.5285076
File: 681 KB, 3000x1956, 1407795578283.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5285076

>>5285036
I'm pretty sure the internet is slowly driving us mad. You will always find someone on the other side of the planet who disagrees with you. You will never know if this person is serious, not serious, fifteen years old or smoking crack right this instant. The time you spend on interacting with this individual is lost forever.

>> No.5285084

>>5284978
it is amazing how people like this can extrapolate something like "you're pretty" to "all you care about is how i look!". you don't know anything about the other person, and yet you assume they are shallow. fucking kill yourself.

>> No.5285089

>>5285069

I bet you probably think that friendship between males and females is possible, and you're actually surprised when lil' beta John confesses his love for you.
I'm not a misogynist, I hate retarded white first world bitches that honestly think they have it though. And betas that support those retards. Nothing against their gender.

>>5285070

How do you even look at yourself in the mirror? Go away, beta fag.

>> No.5285096

>>5284853
lel

>> No.5285097

>>5285039
I definitely agree that third-wave feminism is the only thing defensible in the philosophical present. Third wave might have a public face of tumblrites, but as far as I'm concerned it has undoubtedly produced some of the most critical, sublimely radical thinkers of the movement thus far.

>> No.5285102

>>5285084
It /isn't/ just "you're pretty". The guy was interested in getting into a relationship with her solely from a passing glimpse of her. How is that anything but shallow?

>> No.5285104

>>5285097
Name one good philosopher in third wave feminism, pro tip you can't

>> No.5285107

>>5285089
Friendship with a woman is possible, if the woman is old, ugly... or if the man already has too much sexual satisfaction in life.

That's not a common case though.

>> No.5285110

>>5285104
Slavoj Zizek

>> No.5285112

>>5285102
because fuck human sexuality right? i bet you believe true love exists.

>> No.5285113

>>5285097
>Third wave might have a public face of tumblrites
Heh, those are not third wave feminists. Unless there's actually a fourth wave feminism that I'm thinking about here.

>> No.5285115

>>5285089
I have plenty of friendships with guys. Are you so desperate that you project your sexual and romantic desires onto every girl you come into contact with?

>> No.5285116

>>5285110
You're joking. Judith Butler is a better answer.

>> No.5285117

>>5285035
Might as well quit while you're ahead (before you reply to yourself again and forget to remove the tripcode). Hilarity aside, there are probably better ways to spend your free time.

>> No.5285118

>>5285102
"are you single?" asking this question means "do you want to go on a date?". if you've ever been on a date (which i doubt) you know that this is the time when you get to know the other person, and afterwards you decide if you want to be in a relationship with them.

>> No.5285119

>>5285110
Did you forget good was a prerequisite?

>> No.5285120

>>5285102

>he finds me pretty
>OMG what a fucking pig

and they honestly wonder why everyone laughs at them

>> No.5285121

When you go to woman, take the whip along

>> No.5285124

>>5285104
Stock answer: Judith Butler
My answer, randomly generated out of dozens of worthy mentions: Erin Manning (has worked with Brian Massumi if that helps legitimize her for you)

>> No.5285125

>>5285120
it's obvious that people who think like this are predisposed to ill feelings towards men

>> No.5285126

>>5285067
I'm pretty sure you have no idea what feminism is about.

It's not supposed to be about blaming people, it's about removing things that make life unfair for woman.

Just because there are things that are unfair for women does not mean that everything is fair for men. Men also have their own set of problems, but, generally, this is not what feminism concerns itself with, although, on some occasions, it can.

>> No.5285128

>>5285112
I don't have to believe in "true love" to think that there's more to a romantic bond than sexual attraction.

>> No.5285129

>>5285115

I'm sorry to break it to you, but they want to fuck you. That's the only and unique reason. They think that by treating you 'right' and listening to you, they will get to fuck you. That's why they're your nice friends and not guys that you fucked.

In the case that they honestly don't want to fuck you, it's because they don't find you even the least bit attractive, and probably use you as leverage in order to fuck one of your friends.

>> No.5285132

>>5285076
Agreed, anon, agreed.

Although you might be on crack.

>> No.5285134

>>5285126

Name 3 things that are unfair to women today as compared to men.

>> No.5285136

>>5285115

>I have plenty of friendships with guys

Translation: "I am surrounded by betas."

Just tell one of your male "friends" that you feel desire for them, and see their reaction. I bet your altruistic friendship with them won't last long.

>so desperate that you project your sexual and romantic desires

U DESPERATE, U NERD, U NO LIFE LOL

You're a female faggot who doesn't know shit about males. Weird for someone who has "plenty of friendships with males".

>> No.5285137

>>5285129
>having a sexual politic this uni-dimensional

It makes sense that you questioned how I could look at myself in the mirror, as it seems you could never pass that depthlessness in your own thinking.

>> No.5285138

>>5285128
Its honestly the biggest part. And even if it is not for, you why judge someone else for it.

>> No.5285139

>>5285128
like what?

>> No.5285145

>>5285126
>for woman
Feminism is more inclusive than that these days; it is at least dedicated to the ever polymorphous OTHER (!!!!) and that's as limited as they come.

>> No.5285147

>>5285136
Im fairly anti-third wave feminism, but i disagree with you on this, i have female friends I'm not attracted to

>> No.5285148

>>5285116
>>5285124
Why Judith Butler?

She's notoriously difficult and obscure and rides off the legacy of Derrida. Unless you have the time and money to study her in university no one will understand her writing.

You're championing a writer who is only known and only influential within the ivory tower.

I don't for a second believe that Butler, who earns well over 200k a year, is truly radical or emancipatory.

>> No.5285149

>>5285137

>the beta faggot with buzzwords again

Listen you retard, I don't give a fuck what a sub-human white knight has to say, don't even bother replying. You're late to your feminist meeting, gotta learn new words today.

>> No.5285155

>>5285145
How is feminism inclusive if it still doesn't have a gender neutral name?

I mean, it's year 2014.

>> No.5285156

>>5285115
>>5285129

You're being obtuse by saying that sex is the only reason to be friends with a girl. However it is true that most men would have sex with their female friends if they find them at least a little attractive.

If an all right girl offered herself to a man, he'd be very likely to accept especially if there are no repercussions or strings attached. I know I would be tempted even just out of curiosity or boredom.

Unless you're just disgustingly ugly, and even then, most men would have sex with a girl if given the chance (unless they are a monk or something).

>> No.5285157

>>5285120
For the record, even /I/ think this girl shouldn't be complaining (assuming she didn't remove something from her story). I was just explaining her point of view to you unsympathetic fuckers.

>>5285125
I'm not at all, I'm just against misogyny.

>> No.5285158

>>5285147

Well, that's the point. The logic(lesness) of life dictates that, since you don't find her as attractive, she most likely finds YOU attractive, and possibly would fuck you first chance she gets.

>> No.5285167

>>5285157

I'm sorry, I really am, but I will NEVER be sympathetic for a bitch, whose only problem in life, is that some guy found her pretty.
She can get fucked. 'People' like that shouldn't exist.

>> No.5285172

>>5285147
It is possible for a man to have a female friend because he doesn't find them attractive.

However, a girl "having plenty of friendships with guys" can only mean three things:

1) She's downright ugly,
2) Or she's only attracted to men who find her ugly,
3) Or she's surrounded by betas in camouflage who pretend to "be friends" with her, in order to spend more time with her... hoping she'll magically fall in love with them or something.

3) is the surest bet, then 1) because few people are really ugly, then 2).

>> No.5285176

>>5285155
It is about, to put it through the filter of an Irigaray book title, "This Sex Which Is Not One." Feminism is more a vestige of the limited outlook of its founders who mistook the sex as one, to a two. Almost every feminist theorist writing today is at least involved in animal studies, queer theory, or posthumanity.

>> No.5285182

>>5285129
Half of the friends are online and uninterested, and the other half are in real life and /also/ uninterested. I'm not ugly at all (do I need to repost that picture of myself?), I'm just not their type. Almost all of them have been interested in me at one point, but none of them are anymore. I also have no female friends, so the leverage theory is out.

>> No.5285187

>>5285182
Talk shit. Post fit

>> No.5285190

Woman are so oppressed they can make 100,000 dollars a year writing about how oppressed they are.

>> No.5285191

>>5285182
>she has no friends

lol, what a loser.

>> No.5285192

>>5285176
so it's not important and has no affect that they continue to use a name for their movement that is loaded with gender/sex connotations? It has no implications?

What's the point of using gender neutral language at all? Well, I use "man" instead of "human" but I also write about dogs!

So language determines culture only when its convenient. That's the message third-wave feminists send.

>> No.5285194

>>5285182
>Almost all of them have been interested in me at one point, but none of them are anymore
>but none of them are anymore

Do you really delude yourself like this? They just want to fuck you, it's simply the truth, no shame on it.

Also, post pic.

>> No.5285196

>>5285167
>he found me pretty
>my world is exploding
>life is insufferable now
>that's my biggest problem ever
>will complain on internet

WC stands for Weak Chicks

>> No.5285199

>>5285190
The figure is actually around 200,000, for the truly "radical" ones.

>> No.5285200

>>5285172
I've been friends with multiple females who I found attractive. I don't know how you wouldn't be able to. Sure, sometimes you want to bang them, but then you don't. Or you do. Either way.

>> No.5285201

>>5285182
I didn't agree the person you were responding to until
>i have no female friends

>> No.5285202

tfw no feminist gf to debate with then hatefuck eachother

>> No.5285208

>>5285136
One of my male friends was having trouble with a girl and I walked to his house and hugged him, telling him it was okay and that I cared for him. Want to know what happened next? Nothing. Nothing changed at all. If anything, he talked to me even less than usual for a few months.

>> No.5285211

>>5284978
Could you please leave and never come back?

>> No.5285212

>>5285192

Well, they are similar to the whole
>equality! we are all the same! race doesn't exist! love one another!
>ugh, all christian white straight males should die

people

>> No.5285215

>>5285134
Women have more expectations on them to marry/have children.

Women make less money doing the same work.

Women have less mentorship opportunities for fields like STEM and whatnot.

>> No.5285222

>>5285215
> Women make less money doing the same work.

Let's get a source on that. Every time this is said it's always without context.

I'm willing to wager that women take less dangerous jobs and get paid less as a result.

>> No.5285223

>>5285208

Because he's a beta. The reason why he didn't talk to you as much, was because he was replaying the event again and again in his head, telling himself how stupid he was for taking advantage and fucking you in that very moment.

That's just how men work. You may want to delude yourself into denying this, but it's just the truth.

>> No.5285226

>>5285208
Wow, that's pretty gay.

>> No.5285228

>>5285223
Okay, you're being pretty absurd at this point. How exactly would you know this?

>> No.5285229

>>5285208
Are you an ugly girl or an ugly guy who gets off on pretending he's a cute girl?

>> No.5285233

>>5285208
What would you expect him to do if he liked you in that situation? tear off your clothes, tell you he likes you? thats not how betas roll

>> No.5285237

>>5284978
>She was on her way to work, so he interrupted her from getting to her job by doing this.
Use: Delayed her
>She also didn't specify how he stopped her, but the word suggests some force.
if it had been forceful she would have specified, stop is the word use use for stopping someone. Cease might be used if he had be aggressive.

>He was ultimately communicating that his interest in her was more important than whatever she was doing.

This point was actually well delivered. Bravo. You get a C+.

>> No.5285239

>>5285138
>>5285139
Would either of you want to get married to the hottest woman you could get, personality be damned? If not, then romantic attraction must play at least /somewhat/ of a role. This being said, I don't want to universalise my ideals of attraction; I know everyone is different. I just find it very sad when men/women can't have a true relationship with a woman/man.

>> No.5285240

>>5285228

If that scenario seems outrageous to you, I fear that you don't understand men.