Why can't /lit/ discuss the works of Flannery O'Connor

>>9744434
Q T

>>9744434
Maybe it's because each time a woman is brought up /r9k/ posters come scurrying out of the woodwork.

>>9744462

Well what I find particularly saddening is that people who do this just make sex figures out of female writers, are only concerned with the material aspect of literature. It's not unlike /pol/ Christian larpers who put on a guise of the Church's "reactionary" doctrine by posting that anime Christian chick having negative opinions of blacks or gays. Sure, you could say the Catholic Church has/had been historically reactionary but that's not at the forefront of their teachings throughout Christ. It's just people who only view things like commodities.

>>9744504
>make sex figures out of female writers
Is that the dominant response? I didn't notice that in the last thread about her. I mostly remember posters asking "why would anyone read this useless hole" and shit like that. Munro, Lydia Davis, Zadie Smith, etc. usually get that sort of response.
Calling them "cute" seems tame in comparison

>>9744550

I would say the waifs shit is the dominant response. The r9k types are probably more polarizing and memorable for it. But I think they're both sides of the same coin in that they don't allow for actual discussion around literature.

>>9744550
But Smith does suck you autist.

>>9744434
Because this website is a fucking cesspool where you can't talk about women outside of a sexual/demeaning context

Implying anybody actually likes female shit
Implying you don't keep one or two female authors on the shelf to deflect your own internal allegations of sexism
Implying women are good at things that aren't making babies

>>9744434
beacause /lit/ is mostly prividleged white males who lack empathy

>>9744586
Prime example >>9744605

>>9744434
She may be a horsefaced woman but she's our horsefaced woman!

I love Flannery's work. I just reread a bunch of it recently. Will happily discuss.

Favorite story, OP? I like "The Lame Shall Enter First." Do you like her novels?

>>9744610
>muh stereotypes
>muh bait
back to >>>/tumblr/

>>9744434
I think we probably could easily discuss Flannery O'Connor if the discussion didn't start with "why can't you discuss this proud WOMAN author???"

>>9745161
Not OP, but there was a thread yesterday that ended in that unfortunately.

>>9744434

I have never read a female author who was anything more than competent. The vast majority of those held in highest esteem don't even meet that low standard

>>9745196
Iris Murdoch is one woman who I would say is an excellent writer, woman or man.

And she never gets talked about here which sucks.

>>9744434
Lurker bump.

>>9745161
Unironically this.

>>9745130
I liked the violent bare it away, but her shorts are much better.
The main problem I have with discussing her stories is that I can't remember any of the names.