Does the gender of a Main Character ever make or break the deal

>>8667738
I don't have a preference. Good literature is good regardless.

>>8667738
Personally I refuse to read books with male protagonists, they're just so two dimensional and always want the EXACT same thing
Yawn

>Tranny MC

Drop it like an ugly baby.

>>8667738
What kind of a retard would refuse to read something generally seen as a classic on the basis of the sex of the protagonist?
The inclination to read things which are close to your views is of course natural to everyone so repulsion based on overly ideological elements of the novel is something different.

the last story i wrote, i deliberately didn't specify the protagonist's gender.

nobody noticed.

>>8667778
fanatical SJWs? feminists who are being out-feministed by more radical outliers? "Well, *I* don't read ANY BOOKS because they were invented by MEN." sort of thing.

I was going to say it doesn't matter until I saw this
>>8667767
A tranny would probably be indicative of some sort of faggy "progressive" politicized bent to the book so yeah, that'd be a hard sell.

>>8667738
Id never read something with a roastwhore protagonist.

Women are vile, inferior, dumb, and superficial. Only a braindead numale cuck would read such drivel

>>8667738
I don't think about it consciously, but now that you bring it up the differences between a female voice and a male voice in literature are noticeable. I feel more at ease with a male narrative voice and most fo the books on here are with predominately male protagonists.

Mrs. Dalloway for me was quite an uncomfortable read because its narrative voice was so in tune with that of a middle aged woman. An uncomfortable reality and a rather bleak condition that exposes the reality of female thought and internalisation. I think there's merit to both, but a male voice is just easier to rationalise and listen to authoritatively.

>>8667887
>a male voice is just easier to rationalise and listen to authoritatively

Plen

>>8667902
Middle aged women do tend to be pretty insufferable.

>>8667909
All women are insufferable. They should be seen, not heard.

Try the redpill

>>8667887
Probably one of the many reasons why you should keep yourself to writing from the perspective of your own gender.

>>8667751
>>8667778
these

I think it's pretty idiotic to not read a great book because of the gender/race of the main character, although great books with female main characters are rare.

>>8667738
I drop anything that doesn't have a male MC because everyone else has some serious highschool drama issues. Men are stoic, men have bantz, men are active...

>>8667738
I'd just be more likely to drop something that has an MC, although that isn't a deal breaker.

If it's a classic work then I'd be much more likely to read it. However, if I was handed some unknown book, having a female main character would be strike one. There's just too many badly written women due to progressives and women writers trying to shoehorn them in, regardless of whether or not they have a place. Not that a female main character is automatically bad, it's just that it's so often bad due to bad writing.

>>8667738
Don't care about a charakter but I noticed that female authors are way worse in making realitistic male ones.

Also male charakters are much more diverse, simply because no one will bitch about some dude being portrayed as retarded/ autistic/ fat/ ... while female ones just beg to be fucked over for something "sexist".

>>8667767
A tranny MC could probably actually be interesting if there wasn't any political angle to it. Unfortunately that's next to impossible.

>>8668838
It already exists, Breakfast on Pluto

>>8667738

Nothing makes me drop a book in regards to character/perspective UNLESS it's a short story that takes place exclusively in the first person, and a lot of the time a novel that takes place exclusively in the first person. If it's a frame narrative told from a first person perspective then it's tolerable/good, but a flat first person narrative is dog-shit.

Why is David Mitchell so cute, lads?

>>8668916
He's the ugliest motherfucker on television.
2/8