/lit/ - Literature

One thing I noticed in both L-Word and Orange is the New Black is that both shows are incredibly fatalistic. An uprising against the bad conditions of the world is usually done in the form of verbally hurting someone and openly embracing who you are. So mostly, it isn't the world that changes, you yourself change in reaction to it or refuse to change in spite of it.

Compare that to the classical Conan-stories. Part of what makes this guy so manly is that he just doesn't give a fuck. Something that's a sign of major character development in a women's show, like telling your adversary he sucks, is the course of action Conan takes when he's being lazy and trying to avoid trouble.

>>10725

Yep. Confrontations tend to be not as intense as in male lit. But the emotional consequences and spending seems to greater in chick lit

I think of writing for a man, and I take away reason and accountability.

>>10727

>>10722

seriously though, i can tell you the one common line/trope in pretty much every chick-flick in existence.

>you are unlike every other woman i ever met

>there is only one of you in the world

or something along those lines…

i still haven't found a piece of fiction aimed specifically at women in which that concept is not expressed implicitly or explicitly.

also sex and the city is terrible. and the characters are terrible people.

also the book it came from is not that great. but it has the peculiarity of containing a surprising array of concepts you could find on /pol/ when discussing relationships. all this written by a woman for women.

>>10731

>I'd like to see an exposition of those four bulletpoints against each of the fictions OP alludes

OP here. Sure. Wall of text incoming.

4 bulletpoints, being: 1. Conflict between Structured security and chaotic security. 2. Competitive relationship between female protagonist and female secondary characters. 3. Garments become important in the story structure. 4. Feelings.

I'm going to relate the concepts like this:

1. Conf: as in conflict between x & y

2. Relat: as in competitive relationship with 1,2,3…

3. Garm: As in garments.

4. Feelings. I'm going to skip this one. It should be obvious enough for anyone reading this stories. I think.

Ok? Ok:

>The hunger games (I haven't read the novels but I saw some movies)

1. Conf: Thor's bro (chaotic security) & the other short guy (Structured security)

2. Relat: All of her female friends are either trying to kill her, betray her, use her or all of the above. The ultimate villain is her motherly figure

3. Garm: Any plot point is punctuated by a change of dress. Look: http://www.mtv.com/news/2000821/every-hunger-games-katniss-outfit/

>Sex and the city

1. Conf: Mr. Big (Structured) & Aidan Shaw (Chaotic)

2. Relat: Those bitches fight over anything and everything. It's the end of the world every time. Then they drink martinis and is great again.

3. Garm: The protagonist's wiki page has a 'wardrobe' section. Just after history and personality.

>Like water for chocolate

1. Conf: Pedro (Chaotic) & Staying single (Structured)

2. Relat: The protagonist's mother is the main villain. The sister is her main competition.

3. Garm: This one replaces the clothes for food. Clever twist!

>Story of O

This ones s very telling. Feminist loathe it, but it was written by a woman and I've met a couple of girls that are conflicted by liking this novel. It has the same concepts but it changes the tone and intensity of the treatment.

1. Conf: Being a slave to rene (Structured) & being a slave to everyone (chaotic)

2. Relat: The main baddy is her female roomie. A girl she loves and ends up loathing. Her roomie's sister is also a source of drama.

3. Garm: Every time O crosses another indecency border, she is given a new dress. The last one is a mask, a hot iron mark and vaginal lip's ring.

>>10731

>On the other hand, women that write crime fiction don't fall into this trap. What say thou, OP?

I say you are right. My post, as you can see up there, says FOR women. Crime fiction is not exactly what it comes to mind as literature for women, right? Even if it was written by a woman. In fact, I'm pretty sure Patricia Highsmith hated women: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/20/little-tales-of-misogyny-by-patricia-highsmith-review

(If you are referring to cozy mysteries, I think they fall right in the 4 bullet scheme)

BUT

Gillian Flynn's Gone girl, while being crime fiction written by a woman, manages to sort of fall in the same 4 bullet points mentioned above:

>I'm talking about Gone Girl's co-protagonist Amy Elliott Dunne.

1. Conf: Staying with her husband (Structured) & Being an insane fucking bitch (Chaotic)

2. Relat: She only relates to two other women (If I remember correctly). Which she hates. One of them prompts her downfall.

3. Garm: Flynn's is very specific on the outfits she wears. They match her character's arc: The sharp and smart outfits as the perfect bride. The untidy sloppy second hand clothes as she flees. The sexy lingerie as she murders.

I think Flynn's onto something there. She subverts some of the genre's tropes and twists them to their logical conclusion. Feminists hate it, of course: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nile-cappello/how-gone-girl-is-misogynistic_b_5572288.html

And yet she hit the nail… I think.

>>10731

>IT WAS A BOOK?!?!?!

>What form of vapid human being would have lived this life enough to write about it?!

Candace Bushnell

The worst part? The book is a collection of autobiographical columns she wrote for the new york observer, FOR TWO FUCKING YEARS.

You know what's even worse?

>Her father was one of the inventors of the Air Cooled Hydrogen Fuel Cell that was used in the Apollo space missions in the 1960s.

This bitch is the definition of inane.

>>10728

>you are unlike every other woman i ever met

>there is only one of you in the world

Isn't that equivalent to the 'chosen' one in hero's journey?

>>10725

>L-Word and Orange is the New Black

Are those any good?

>both shows are incredibly fatalistic

I think it has to do with security. Women look for security. Just look at jezzebel and that kind of shit. They make a buck by scaring women. "Now this is what you have to be afraid of" And stupidity also.

>>10738

L-Word starts out mediocre and becomes pure shite by season two. From there on, it goes downhill. Characters vanish from the plot almost without a trace, the entire cast are whores and all-around horrible people, and the feminism is as blatant as it gets. There's an entire episode of the cast having a charity run against breast cancer. It's that kind of show.

Orange is the New Black is like a better L-Word. The flashbacks are used perfectly and actually change how you view characters, making them more sympathetic and complex in hindsight. Still, the fatalism annoys me. I stopped watching it when I realized that the situation won't improve for anyone in that show, nor that anyone could ever become someone I could look up to. I'd say it's too much like real life, but my life at least isn't that bland. I went through playing suicide watch, trying to become proficient in four different fields at once and watching a comatose friend wake up against all odds, all within the last year. And I'm still far from being that crazy jap with scuba-gear who saved people 24/7 during a tsunami, or this millionaire dressed as Batman who gives presents to ill children. Or that construction worker putting a life-sized Waldo outside a children's hospital, changing its positon every day, to cheer these kids up.

So, my point is: Orange is the New Black is alright. It captures the complexity of people really well, but not their capabilities. It also offers some interesting insights into what prison is like. After that show, I was more convinced that locking people up is generally a shitty thing to do and something we should be far more careful about.

>>10741

>how others wish they were as unique as the hero.

That's basically jealousy. Which I think falls into what op said:

>2. The relationship between the principal (female) character and secondary (female) characters is one of veiled competition. Women hate even their closest friends.

Or is it different?

>>10742

>the entire cast are whores and all-around horrible people

That's the second time someone says that the cast is terrible people in two different show for women. So what? Women like terrible character or what?

>>10743

Might just be that women read more stories with ordinary settings and scenarios. The only way to make those more interesting is by adding in ten sociopaths.

Also, there's this thing with women being not so inclined to solving their issues through force. Unlike men, who prefer direct approaches, even when they are cowards.

So, with these kinds of shows being ordinary, you need the characters to cause conflict through ordinary means. So no big ideological battles or fights against overwhelming forces of nature. And with women being less direct in their problem-solving, you'll have this conflict caused and responded to by petty backstabbing.

Two more things, by far not all women are snakes, but if you showed the reasonable women in shows, they would be even more devoid of action and the feminists would claw you to death because they mistake politeness for servility. Second, I've got no clue why women don't read as much sci-fi. Really, not a fucking clue. But they should.

>>10744

>women read more stories with ordinary settings and scenarios

>I've got no clue why women don't read as much sci-fi. Really, not a fucking clue. But they should.

This two things are the same. It would be great if we knew why is that the case.

> The only way to make those more interesting is by adding in ten sociopaths.

That ain't completely truth. Also, women like unnecessary drama both in real life and in fiction. Why? No fucking idea

>by far not all women are snakes

Yeah. In my experience, only 85 to 93% of womten are snakes

>>10737

sort of. but male heroes, even the "ones", are usually the product of hard training.

chosenness or whatever you would call it in chick flicks is usually more inherent to some intrinsic je ne sais quoi that makes the female protagonist irresistible.

at best, instead of seeing neo getting the shit beaten out of him by morpheus or agent smith or batman brawling in a prison in his quest for having and understanding of the criminal mind, at most you usually see a makeover.

btw, i'm not trying to disparage womankind, just discussing fiction and media aimed at it…

>>10743

>Or is it different?

yes, men tend to get inspired by that kind of thing.

if anything i find this

>The relationship between the principal (female) character and secondary (female) characters is one of veiled competition. Women hate even their closest friends.

very counterintuitive and illogic.

>>10752

interesting webm.

keep in mind that i was talking about fiction. as a reader/ spectator you don't need to be convinced of anything since most likely you already know what's going on and usually the love declaration comes in the so-called third act.

but if you want to read an insane book about dissimulation and manipulation in relationships you can read this.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/418517.All_the_Rules

also written by women for women.

also. i feel this is relevant to the thread.

>Write stupid shit that's just a power fantasy or something.

That's the same for men isn't it? Bourne and James Bond and shit like that, isn't it?

What form do the female fantasies take?

>>10777

>>10777

what follows comes from the thoughts of a wizard, so take it with a grain of salt as my understanding of female behaviour and tastes might be a little off.

i'd say the difference is very much qualitative.

as i said before the heroes who are the object of male power fantasies usually do something to become that. hard training, difficult trials, sacrifices and so on. and the effect on the male audience is also different. many men picked up a discipline and succeeded because they left the movie theater or closed a book fired up about what they just saw/read.

if the twilight or the fifty shades books are to be taken as an example of female power fantasies, i'd say they involve attracting and keeping a man that is superior to the others in one or many ways i assume with their "uniqueness". and that's about it. but maybe it's also more complicated than that. and the reasons of it also elude me. is it nature? is it nurture? a combination of both? i don't know.

and since the subject is pretty much political i doubt we'll have an honest discussion and examination of the subject soon…

i'd be glad to hear someone else's opinion about it.

>>10782

here's a better article

https://journals.ala.org/rusq/article/view/3319/3535

>The most frequently cited category of preferred books in Schultheis’s study was “realistic fiction that deals with contemporary problems of people,” chosen by 57 percent of the females and 50 percent of the males. Genres of books most frequently cited by males as preferable were adventure (81 percent), humor (64 percent), and horror and science fiction (57 percent each). The most frequently chosen genres by females were romance (68 percent), realistic fiction dealing with relationships (65 percent), mystery (59 percent), realistic fiction dealing with problems (57 percent), and humor (51 percent).

The cited paper is from 1990, and it's only one, so take it tentatively. Another citation is this article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-pinter/why-men-dont-read-how-pub_b_549491.html

>Nobody can deny the fact that most editorial meetings tend to be dominated by women. Saying the ratio is 75/25 is not overstating things. So needless to say when a male editor pitches a book aimed at men, there are perilously few men to read it and give their opinions. Not to mention that, because there are so few men, the competition to buy books aimed at men is astronomical. I was once shot down in an effort to buy a sports humor book because I couldn’t get the support of a senior editor. The reason? This editor had written a similar book proposal on submission and didn’t want to hurt his chances of selling it.

>Men read. Tons of them do. But they are not marketed to, not targeted, and often totally dismissed. Go to a book conference, a signing. Outside of a Tucker Max event, what percentage of attendees are men?

>>10781

>hard training, difficult trials, sacrifices and so on

All of these are absent in Bond and Bourne, compared to action that is not power fantasy, see Rocky.

>>10761

The necessity of the second part is correlated to the mundanity of the first. Bragging about stealing the moon requires you to act like it's nothing, but bragging about your new shirt requires acting like the king of the world.

A very good choice for someone who is much better at being enthusiastic than inventing incredible feats is the cliche. The notion of uniqueness makes sense if it is an common quality given much importance.

>>10785

>>10785

>All of these are absent in Bond and Bourne

maybe it's unrelated but, they do very little for me. you can add the mission impossible series to that bunch while we're at it.

the only, maybe, kind of movie like that coming to mind, that i really really like is commando, because it's so much fun.

>>10785

>The necessity of the second part is correlated to the mundanity of the first. Bragging about stealing the moon requires you to act like it's nothing, but bragging about your new shirt requires acting like the king of the world.

true, but what if it's what your listener wants to listen.

self delusion is a very powerful agent, on men and women.

you're right when you say that as a statement is not much. but just look at all those movies with extremely predictable plot, sometimes extremely predictable lines.

don't you think that the reason people goes to see them is because they really just want more of the same?

>>10777

This too

If you want to sell

write stupid fucking shit

>>10792

i was referring more about the dynamic and structrure of a story rather than actual quality.

you can follow a formula and still fail miserably.

>>10799

While the arrangement of scenes is important, most of the books I read that fail have no memorable moments at all.

>>10810

i guess i agree, in that i think that something truly original is very very hard to come by and that the secret to the good stuff lays in execution rather than what, after summarization, is no different in form and purpose to an inferior work.

>>10833

I cited those specific scenes because they are original. They don't contain original ideas in the sense of ideas vs execution, but rather they contain original ideas.

I think the better you understand compliments, the better you will both pick the best idea and carry it out.

>>10722

The girl is entirely wrapped up in her own problems. Her relationships, especially of the romantic variety, are the most important things in the world. This had to be played straight.

The protagonist should love a man and be uncertain if he loves her in return. His attitude toward her has to be ambivalent. At first she finds him infuriating, then she can't stop thinking about him, then suddenly she's anxious about what he thinks of her.

It tears her up inside. It's anguish for her. You don't have to go on for pages upon pages about this, but it has to be present, it has to be played straight, her depression, or anxiety over it is shown as being the worst thing in the world, not state explicitly as such, but by her actions, with the implicit understanding that she's a sympathetic character and her responses to her situation are proper and make sense.

Also, a second love interest never hurts. He can be Mr. Security to the first one's Mr. Bad, OR he can be another Mr. Bad, just of a different flavor. Maybe a little more or less wild than the other alpha male she's attracted to.

Give her a cat, a closet full of shoes, and describe the food she eats in delicious detail. Make her frustrated with her job, show her boss or someone else reprimanding her from her objective failings, and have her spin it as him just being an asshole (even though he's right), have her go out and mock the guy, making jokes about him with her friends while they all get drunk together. She goes shopping with her friends to cheer her up, list inventories of all the shiny clothes and other things they buy.

She should express anxiety about her weight, with her friends giving her moral support and telling her she's great. Some guy should say something innocuous that she interprets as being sexist - don't do this constantly, once or twice is enough. There should be something she's always wanted to do - like speak French, or learn to dance - but never actually put in the effort and just prefers to sigh wistfully about it, like it's somehow forever out of reach - until the man she falls in love with starts teaching her how to do it.

In the end she gets together with the guy, it's portrayed as a happily-ever-after thing, the entire universe is suddenly sunshine and rainbows because she got the man she wanted, her feelings are the most important thing in the universe and should be portrayed as such.

>>10927

so tsundere, anon-kun.

>>10927

Wow.

>>10927

That's the general formula, yeah. I'd hate to say that's how one would write for women in general though. Because that's like saying one should write as generic a harem anime as possible for males.

A portrayal of self importance as a given is a majorly valued trait though. The world doesn't necessarily have to revolve around the girl, but the story definitely should.

Internal, emotional conflict must be given value over logical. As logic and rationality in conflict is seen as cold and inhumane, thus only desirable for an antagonist.

In male oriented stories it's usually morals or justice rather than emotion itself. But still quite similar. It's humane and realistically serves to drive the plot.

I must also point out that in your plot, she doesn't really want to learn French or to dance. But rather wants the experience of being taught by a person she could use them with. There's no motivation to learn such things in a school or self study setting, especially given the prospect of using it as motivation to chose a mate.

Which is a realistic truth, really. It's far easier to learn and be motivated to learn, in the context of use. And using that potential use as a motivation for a choice to learn is also valid.

>>10782

>Sexism in the publishing world is unfortunately still very much a thing, with female authors often not getting the respect […]

Now this is my own rant on a word, so feel free to ignore it. But I always stop right there anytime 'respect' is used in such a context. Even in the middle of a book, if it's given importance or attention.

To respect is to hold higher than others. Not to be shown value, equality, manners, or be given appropriate treatment at all. Just to be held higher, thus treated better.

Treating woman authors better simply for being female is quite in line with the very definition of sexism.

It may be appropriate to treat them better for an audience assumed to be majorly female, for reader sympathy's sake. Much like it's appropriate to treat advice from elder's better due to experience or wisdom implied.

But as is stated, I do believe most of the things that are dismissed are things like those.

Many, many authors are dismissed of serious consideration regardless of gender. The 'struggling writer' has become quite memetic for a reason. Publishing is difficult for risk:effort:reward.

>>11073

>. Because that's like saying one should write as generic a harem anime as possible for males.

but that doesn't even compare in terms of popularity with the male audience, with the popularity of stuff that follow >>10927 with the female audience.

but i guess you could say that stuff like shounen mangas can be just as formulaic.

>>11073

>Treating woman authors better simply for being female is quite in line with the very definition of sexism.

really? i call it…

SMASHING THE PATRIARCHY!™.

>>11073

>Treating woman authors better simply for being female is quite in line with the very definition of sexism.

What a very niggardly attitude

This is NOT what anon >>10782 said or was quoting.

If one hundred men publish novels, and one hundred women do, yet only ten of the men get accolades and awards, you've either got to assert and justify the claim that women are shit writers, or it is sexism.

I, for one, welcome our alien overlords, but I also reckon there is sexism. Rowling was told to publish her shit not as "Joanne" but as "J.K." to hide her feminine name. That said, publishing is a fuck-ass game: her novel published under a man's name won all the fedora-tipping reviewers could give it, but it sold for shit until it leaked she was that dude. So, you're right here:

>Many, many authors are dismissed of serious consideration regardless of gender.

But, that said, romance novels are shit, cannot be considered anything more than heart-porn for women, and should die in a raging fire. But, that's just a man talking.

>>10722

If you mean as a character in your writing: Just write a male but remove anything interesting about them.

If you mean what women want in writing: Make sure it's comfortable and doesn't challenge any notions about the world they might have.

>>11385

this hurts me in the heart anon.

I curse you and thank you in the same breath.

>>10728

Women are incredibly narcissistic and attention-seeking. Part of why rape fantasies are so common is because women fantasize about being SO attractive to a man that he absolutely cannot resist her charms and HAS to have her then and there.

So yes, a man being obsessed with a single woman over all others is the female equivalent of the man's "you are the chosen hero of destiny". Rather telling, isn't it. Men fantasize about being divinely chosen to perform heroic acts on behalf of others, women fantasize about being more desirable to men than every other woman.

They're shallow, narcissistic, and, if we couldn't fuck them, uninteresting. Hence, why books like Twilight and 50 Shades (which started as Twilight fanfiction; no, seriously) are so damn popular with women. The main female is shallow and uninteresting, and a man becomes obsessed over her and claims she's special and different from all the other women, despite the fact that she is super generic and dull.

There. That's how you write for women.

>>10746

>women read more stories with ordinary settings and scenarios

>I've got no clue why women don't read as much sci-fi. Really, not a fucking clue. But they should.

>This two things are the same. It would be great if we knew why is that the case.

As a general rule, women are not especially burdened by imagination and prefer to live out their fantasies in a more limited box than men.

There's a reason you've never heard of a female philosopher, very few great female artists or authors, etc. Men will devote their lives to imagining entirely new worlds; women will devote their lives to imaging how many rich, attractive men they could attract if they had that new dress and cute pair of shoes…

Thus, women's fantasies are much tamer and more limited than men's. Again, they are essentially shallow, narcissistic, and uninteresting, and therefore their imaginations follow suit.

>>10747

Again, a fundamental difference in male and female psychology. A man thinks "I could be special if I worked at it really, really hard"; a woman thinks "wouldn't it be cool if everything was just handed to me and everyone acknowledged me as special and awesome?"

Similarly, men don't get offended at how 'unrealistic' the buff, muscle-bound heroes in comics are or their skintight uniforms, because deep down they all fantasize about becoming just as manly by working out and eating right. Women get pissy over big-tittied female superheroes in revealing outfits partly because they don't have the looks to be that attractive, and partly because they're lazy and think everything should be given to them, so they're not going to work out and put in the effort to become that attractive like a man would. This ties in to the fatalism and general acceptance of status quo others have noted within female-oriented fiction; men can become just like their heroes if they try hard enough, whereas women are either born with it or not.

>>10781

Men wield power directly. Women are indirect at best, and if they wield power at all it's by manipulating a man with that power. Most women seem more concerned with flaunting to other women how they can attract a powerful man, rather than being powerful themselves.

Which again ties into their laziness and wanting everything handed to them on a silver platter: a female CEO has to claw her way to the top through years of hard effort, then work hard to maintain her prestigious and powerful position. A woman who marries a CEO enjoys the benefits of his position, while expending none of the effort involved in achieving that position.

>>12268

>>12269

the first and the last two posts are mine.

thank your for replying and adding your opinions.

btw women of /lit/ i think i must put it clearly that i don't think you're useless, intrisically incapable of greatness or meant just to have children and stay in the kitchen.

i just think that you're supposed to be the other side of the coin. take it as you will.

>>12329

try it.

what's the worse that could happen to you?

>>12332

Mental dissonance leading to gender dysphoria after anon finds he likes thinking about taking dicks?

>>12332

Well, worst case scenario I've just wasted my time writing some schlock that no one will read.

>>12359

Joke's on you, I already like traps!

>>12372

>>12372

>>12372

>Joke's on you, I already like traps!

why not simply say "i'm gay"?

just because it looks like a woman…

but seriously, write a book about that.

maybe you can have some critic praising it for the "bravery" of it.

>>12380

>why not simply say "i'm gay"?

Look up the Ogi Ogas & Sai Gaddam vids on YT if you want to know why.

A trap protagonist could work, but I think that if the book is to appeal to as many women as possible, the protagonist must be someone they can easily identify with – a blank slate they can imagine being themselves. Having the main character be a trap will likely alienate a lot of potential female readers.

>>12382

You should write the story about a trap main character, but never explicitly state anything that shows >she has a dick. You know, because he just like any other woman and saying otherwise is transphobic and propably bigoted too.

>>10733

> Mr. Big (Structured) & Aidan Shaw (Chaotic)

if you are talking about the series it's the other way around.

not that it matters…

>>12386

you could keep the surprise for the end of the book.

or even better, retcon it later like j.k. rowling…

>>12395

Bonus points for involving actual sex scenes that have vague enough prose to obfuscate that fudge packing is happening.

>>12396

That’d be easy enough, just stick to blowjobs & handjobs.

I can’t write sex scenes I find hot to begin with, so writing sex scenes for women would be even harder…

>>12386

Whatever brings in the green… I’m not above aiming for a Tumblr audience. It might be fun to drop a few, sweetened redpills into the mix as well – nothing too obvious of course.

>>12399

>so writing sex scenes for women would be even harder…

just do some research and pick an harlequin novel or two, they're very short and with a large font. it won't take you long.

"Think of a man, and take away reason and accountability."

>>12414

>explore the rape fantasy?

i'm pretty sure that it's already featured in plenty of romance novels, not just in the form of rape, but in the form of the absurdly handsome olympian athlete vampire billionaire that just cannot contain his burning desire for you and keep his hands off your body.

and unless you have notapenis i don't reccomend you to "explore" such a thing.

it could really have very adverse consequences for you.

>>10722

can you please not use the word "tropes"

Can you please say "motifs" instead

>>10722

The unobtainability of Chad.

The inadequacy preventing one from being Chad's Stacy

The power tripping of Chadding lower status males as their Stacy

Treating pets as surrogate children, and sometimes as dildos

Increasing dread of periods as one approaches and eclipses 30yo and childless

Being alcoholic with the physiological disadvantages of lower muscle mass and smaller bladder

Having to wage proxy wars constantly on an individual and group basis with other women; hating oneself and other women resulting therefrom

Close association of same sex envy and arousal

>>12426

But a motif is something completely different. I think it's ok to say tropes here because we're not separating them from their intent.

Fixing this thread.

>>12269

On the topic of female philosophers this is true, besides surface level political philosophy I've never heard of one. In fact I just woke up so I cannot even begin to ponder if one has existed. Hannah Arendt maybe?

Also on the topic of sci-fi, pretty sure a few of the Warhammer writers were women

>>10782

>women read more

Maybe in the anglosphere.

>>12310

Knowing that the vomit is shooped, what's really disturbing about that pic is that the duck is just screaming at the ground for no apparent reason

>>12433

>Treating pets as surrogate children, and sometimes as dildos

Oh, you better believe I fucking lol'd

your post is so pretentious, but good god I truly fucking hate women. My hatred for women was flared up so intesnely reading your post it distracted me from your gross pretension

>>10742

How does Orange is the New Black compare to OZ?

>>14174

How much of that is the female version of the Warlord or Capitalist that is willing to destroy everyone and everything in order to get what they want, but having attained what they desired, merely seek out more of what they cannot have?

>>12386

That could be a great troll novel idea. The entire book having never mentioned that she is a >she, with the final sex scene having a :"then he started sucking my dick". Could be funny.