Are all great writers either womanizers or homosexuals? If so - why?

They aren't.

>>8369255
you can know how terrible a person is by how highly they speak of bukowski, it's amaizing

>>8369267
What bukowski should I start with?

>>8369275
Ham on Rye

>>8369727
This is also where you should end with him. A few of his novels are pretty good and I would say that is the best of them. But, on the off chance that this isnt bait,

>>8369255
Bukowski is not a great writer. Wouldnt even say he is a good one.

>>8369255
Bukowski is absolute garbage

issues with women is common

File: 1401287302393.png (1MB, 780x1198px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 780x1198px

some die kissless virgins

File: twisted world tuttle.jpg (2MB, 1240x1754px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1240x1754px

>>8370486

>>8369727
read ham on rye, really helps you understand the guy. its one thing to say he was a bad writer and a dick, but its better if you understand him. i liked it overall

only other thing i read by him was some short stories and they were pretty terrible.

I've never read Bukowski, but two of my pseud friends in HS read him, independently of each other, at the same time. Despite both being pseud, they were otherwise opposites in every way. Decided not to read Bukowski.

>>8370472
True.
On one side a feminist touts anti-religious rhetoric.
On the other side the same feminist endorses religious anti-sex puritanism, and uses substitute words for "heresy", "blasphemy", "devilry"; in the form of "sexism", "misogyny", "patriarchy", to justify and excuse their own brand of inquisition.

It's tough to deal with women when they are such masters at being bitches.

>>8369255
There's a lot of examples that would prove your case, but then there's a whole bunch that go against it and you just choose to ignore.

Kafka, an almost-kissless virgin who had the worst case of one-itis for some dumb broad. I might be wrong, but Kafka's only sexual contact was with whores.

Joyce - just kinky as shit, but on the whole stuck to one woman his whole life.

Faulkner - married and stuck to his wife.

Melville - married and mostly stuck to his wife.

Now, a great idea for a thread would be "writers who covered up their homosexual impulses by womanizing as much as posible". Ernie, I'm looking your way.

>>8370578
Damn, I forgot about Borges, top-notch autist, kissless virgin (even though he had two wives!) who struggled with serious mommy issues.

>>8370578
>Kafka, an almost-kissless virgin who had the worst case of one-itis for some dumb broad. I might be wrong, but Kafka's only sexual contact was with whores.
This is patently false.

>Kafka was never married. According to Brod, Kafka was "tortured" by sexual desire[55] and Kafka's biographer Reiner Stach states that his life was full of "incessant womanising" and that he was filled with a fear of "sexual failure".[56] He visited brothels for most of his adult life[57][58][59] and was interested in pornography.[55] In addition, he had close relationships with several women during his life.

[...]

>Kafka feared that people would find him mentally and physically repulsive. However, those who met him found him to possess a quiet and cool demeanor, obvious intelligence, and a dry sense of humour; they also found him boyishly handsome, although of austere appearance

He did just fine; he was just incredibly neurotic and shy.

no great writers have been either womanisers or homosexuals.

>>8370578
Actually kinks aside I'd say Joyce was fairly well-adjusted. He adored one woman and they appear to have had a good relationship. The fact he had some weird fetishes hardly matters.

>>8370568
Kys.

>>8369255
Fuck off /mu/.

Maybe if you're an edgy american high school student.
The actual GREAT authors were all people of immense compassion and empathy for all people, and held modest lives. See: Tolstoy.

>>8370728
If i wanted to kms, i'd paint my hair in an unnatural color and buy glasses with thick rims.

>>8370581
>kissless virgin
No, he had a very traumatic first time when he was a teenager iirc.

>>8371002
Did some fat feminist rape him when he was little and scream "FAT SHAMING REPARATION" in the process?

>>8371013
Are you retarded?

>>8371022
I don't know. Only another retard can diagnose me, and you seem to be up to the task.

File: 1448093038089.png (150KB, 340x442px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 340x442px

>>8371036
I'll take the bullet if that makes you a retard.

About being faggots, I dunno know.
About being womanizers, it's because they have personality and experience Life to a full extent and are able to use it. That's why worthless neets/virgins are shite at writing and sterotyped with muh emo poetry

>>8370900
Did you read his diary? I

>>8370900
>See: Tolstoy

You're literally retarded. Tolstoy's youth was full of womanizing.

>>8371059
>"I'll take the bullet"
>that pic
Clever

>>8369255
dykes are better than faggots and womanizers are further down the line. i think it's just they get them fine motor skills and less relationshit.

>>8369255
No, but most are because listening to/caring about women's thoughts are a sure path to mediocrity.

>>8371090
>I dunno know

>Proust: gay
>Mann: bisexual
>Rimbaud: bisexual
>Witman: bisexual/mostly gay
>Shakespeare: possibly bisexual
>Rumi: gay
> Basho: gay
>Cheever: bisexual

Most seem to be bi desu

>>8370656
get a load of this nerd