Really anon? A guy who can't write convincing female characters

Name a particular book you have in mind.

>>9422536
>uses virgin as an insult even when unprovoked
we've got a roastie here, boys.

>>9422509
I never thought much of Virginia Woolf's male characters. A bunch of stuffed shirts to be desu with the odd author insert in male drag like Septimus.

Females have no character.

>>9423598
>implying mods don't deserve everything they get

how much could a cuckold like you cuck, if a cuckold like you could cuck cuckolds?

Men are for the most part incapable of writing female characters. They do not understand us, and female characters are only written in relation to men because men cannot think of women in any other way. >>9423767 is a prime example.

>>9422509

>his favorite writer uses a genre with characters

>>9424220
>implying women live seperate from men
Yeah, to write believable characters they have to be completely isolated from everything around them and have no real social relationships

>women live lives that revolve around men
>women wonder why they are generally written in relation with men

>>9422509
Ovid is my favorite and his understand of women is profound (like his understanding of the nature of the universe)

At this point women feel like some sort of alien creature to me. If I ever see one behave in some sort of human way that I can relate to (this only happens in fiction) it gives me cognitive dissonance.

Women dont write men any better desu

Half the time it's either chad, some slick dude they want a fingerbang from, or a weak fuccboi who is functionally female.

>>9422509
who is this semen demon

she look like my seester

>>9424269
That perfectly describes the male race...

the only archetype missing is the fedora, but they don't socially interact with anyone so their absence is in itself realistic

>>9424283
If you ever wonder why people say that women are childish, this is why. Women think about the world like it's fiction, and people like they're archetypes.

>>9424283
just like the only female types are dumb roastie and a businesswoman who tells herself she is strong and independent 100 times a day to stop herself from breaking down and blaming all her problems on sexism

>>9424290
This guy gets it. Listening to women readers/writers use literary terms to describe/categorize people and real life situations makes me want to jump off of a bridge.

>>9424290
>>9424310
Do women actually do that? I don't spend much time with them so I have no clue

>>9424325
The women in my writing/reading circle don't so I'm surprised at this too.

I think the fact that they're all adults may have something to do with it.

I hate women

File: 1444509391465.jpg (18KB, 245x238px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 245x238px

>>9424269
>Women dont write men any better

This. I'll admit most male writers' female characters are bad, but female writers' male characters are absolutely atrocious.

There are exceptions, though. Patricia Highsmith did great male characters.

File: 735.gif (27KB, 290x189px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 290x189px

>>9424340
>mfw "feminists" write male characters who abuse the female protagonist

>>9424220
Really don't get this meme.

>>9424244
You just think that because you're a man who believes the world revolves around you.

File: jack.jpg (15KB, 340x227px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 340x227px

>>9422509
Writing convincing female characters is easy. Just think of a man, and then take away all reason and accountability.

>>9423589
Cormac Mccarthy, DFW, Pynchon, De Lillo, Murakami, etc
Its' a huge blindspot in most of lot faves.

>>9423769
This is so bad, kys, and the anon who was banned too

>>9424256
They are classics fora rreason.
There are more rounded female characters in a boy's adventure like the Illiad than in most post war American literature

What is a convincing female character? One who acts like a woman? Isn't that sexist?

>>9424290
Yeah, they do this all the time actually, good catch.

>>9425603
>What is a convincing female character?

One written by an author that feminists approve of; actual character traits are irrelevant.

>>9425286
Which Murakami?

>>9425684
Dave

Women don't even really exist on an ontological level, so it's difficult to write a 'convincing' female character.

>>9425629
Eh, no doubt partially true but not in all cases

Tolstoy for example had very conservative views about women but women like him because his female characters were as good as his male characters.

So some writers do write female characters so convincingly that even feminists are willing to disregard the opinions that the author actually had

>>9422509
You only read books written either by women or men with a slavish devotion to women and how special and especially empathetic and deep they are despite toxic masculinity's attempt to keep them down? How can you be so limited? Is it offensive when any woman is portrayed in a negative way? Is it offensive when any woman character is merely scenery because they have no real opinions except what they take from pop culture and boyfriends? Is it really so terrible to think it wrong that women trap so many men in monotonous lives of marriage and children to secure comfortable existences because they can't imagine any other life except a parasitic or vicarious one?

>>9422536
>hurr durr I'm so triggered I made this post

>>9425744
>You only read books written either by women or men with a slavish devotion to women and how special and especially empathetic and deep they are despite toxic masculinity's attempt to keep them down? How can you be so limited? Is it offensive when any woman is portrayed in a negative way? Is it offensive when any woman character is merely scenery because they have no real opinions except what they take from pop culture and boyfriends? Is it really so terrible to think it wrong that women trap so many men in monotonous lives of marriage and children to secure comfortable existences because they can't imagine any other life except a parasitic or vicarious one?

Yep, you understand what is meant by 'convincing character'

>>9425720
This guy knows the score.

>>9425304
Because women had stable gender roles then. It was easier for men to understand them in such a context, or understand their desire to defy/subvert those roles. Now all that has been disrobed and we're left to stare at the naked, primitive void of chaotic darkness that is the female mind.

>>9422536
>so confused when reading a believable female women

Grammar, what is it?

File: rht0IQT[1].jpg (88KB, 540x720px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 540x720px

>>9423767
>>9424244
>>9424264
>>9424290
>>9424310
>>9424338
>>9425040
>>9425629
>>9425711
>>9425744
>>9426948

>These are people who are recommending books

>>9427007
Finally, a (you)! Thanks anon! Here, have a (you) of your own too!

I don't have a favorite author though

>>9425720
So the measure then is that female characters are merely as "good" as male characters? That doesn't explain anything.

>>9427271
I think he means Tolstoy's women are as richly drawn and psychologically complex as his men.

Many male writers struggle with this technical challenge, and as you can see from this thread, many /lit/izens run away from the problem by pretending it doesn't exist.

>>9424220
I hope you're excluding Joyce because Molly Bloom and Gerty MacDowell alone are enough to prove that men can write female characters. Not to mention Shakespeare and Tolstoy.