Wonder why reddit is generally badmouthed and unpopular among anons

>Wonder why reddit is generally badmouthed and unpopular among anons
>It's probably just the contrarian hating machine meme
>Perhaps I ought to check r/books and disprove the general consensus

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/literature/
reddit.com/r/AskLiteraryStudies/
reddit.com/r/classicliterature/
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c1.htm
philpapers.org/rec/MIZWSB
web.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/web publishing/aquinasfiveways_argumentanalysis.htm).
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

fucking LOL

you've just now discovered that reddit is for plebosaurs of the lowest common denominator?

Everyone in the Harry Potter thread proceeded to sperg out because OP suggested they read something beyond children's books

Go to /r/literature. Posters put 10x more effort commenting there than they do here, and the tastes are similar.

DESU, it's hard to find books in my preferred genre (fantasy, but NOT high fantasy or really even sword and sorcery) that aren't labeled as YA. The few that I've found that are marketed for "mature adults" tend to be a bit on the pretentious side.
I like a simple, clean narrative built around relatable characters going through extraordinary and mythical adventures. I find that as a general rule, such books are marketed as YA, even if I'd personally disagree with that classification.

>likes plastic shiny things but doesnt want them to be marketed as "children's toys"

you speak a right user, but r/literature is embarassingly much better than here, sorry.

And then remember these people think they are more intelligent than the average person who doesn't read at all. They might be right

>check r/books
>Harry Potter is the best book ever written
>[your favorite author] is a racist, sexist, cis-scum shitlord.
>intersectional feminism reading 101
>black woman authors you need to read right now
>John Green's new sequel to 'Cancer Tweens 2'
>His Dark Materials and why Christianity is bad

They have like two threads a year and say nothing in them but the most basic bitch pasted from A Cambridge Reader safe opinions

Just read epic poems you fucking faggot

>Posters put 10x more effort commenting
This is not a good thing

>fantasy, but NOT high fantasy or really even sword and sorcery

Ooh, aren't you a big boy

At least those are threads about books instead of /pol/ bait and unfunny memes.

they also believe that listening to an audiobook is the same as reading.

Then why don't you go there instead Chaim

It's hard for me to find many books I like that center around female protagonists in Adult Fiction. And even if they are marketed as Adult Fiction people will refer to them as Young Adult. Even when there's sex, extreme violence, murder, etc.

Most of my favorite books of late are by authors who started in Young Adult and now have the opportunity to write Adult, such as Jay Kristoff and V.E. Schwabb. And people will still wrongly classify those books as Young Adult.

>Even when there's sex, extreme violence, murder, etc.

No that Tarantino tier plebshit is exactly why its still YA

oh my god this is hilarious.

...

It's disgusting how everyone on there makes sure to show they're SO TOLERANT.
Even the guy who made the thread about adults not reading anything beyond hp had to to write line after line to prevent triggering fags.

Try NK Jemisin' novels. She's won the past two Hugo awards for best novel (first non-white and non-male to do so). She writes fantasy about women of color and did an interview on 1A a couple weeks ago

That's... good? How far does debate actually go when you're sitting there triggering emotional reactions over rational ones.

Actually, don't answer. I'll check Twitter and figure it out.

Not true

As if the front page of Veeky Forums at any given time is any less embarrassing.

If you enjoy discussion, it is. All we do here is spam authors' names, simplify their ideas into greentext, and have beginner-tier arguments about politics. Once in a blue moon, someone with actual knowledge pops in, and it's remarkable enough to get several replies in its praise. Such posts happen every thread there.

>inb4 go back there then
I'm not from reddit. I barely even visit /r/literature, because user-posting is wonderful, and the place has its own issues. I just know that Veeky Forums can be vastly better than it is now, and perhaps if people like you wipe off your stupid, detached ironic grins, it will be.

There's no frogposts at the moment so its not doing too bad

These retards also believe that Hemingway is high literature. I love Papa but come on. They act like he's on the level of Dosto or Tolstoy when it comes to the difficulty of interpretation.

Fave thread about Hem, summing up /r/books

>idk they just drank in Paris and then drank in Spain
>I hate the book because Brett was slutty. Not that I slutshame or anything
>there was war and shit
>they were a lost generation cuz many died
>he said so much with so few words
>M I N I M A L I S M
>V I G O R O U S W R I T I N G
>not that I can understand it lol
>the fish is actually bipolar disorder, right? Because I am bipolar and I fight it sooo
>idk I prefer hobbits and saurons

Oh and if you dare to read a Catcher in the rye thread:

>I don't read books with unrelatable protagonists
>I hate Holden he was a dick, shitbook
>I'll let you know that Holden suffered from PTSD, ADHD, OCD, autism, schizophrenia, clinical depression, and a few more mental illnesses that are hip today
>I have all those why u hate Holden why u hate me
>cue 20 users who collect disabilities as a hobby
>thread becomes a support group for the wannabe-disabled
>they pat each other on the back
>it randomly evolves into a conversation about A song of ice and fire


Some days I just want to end it all.

>>I'll let you know that Holden suffered from PTSD, ADHD, OCD, autism, schizophrenia, clinical depression, and a few more mental illnesses that are hip today

I hate this one the most, psychology was a mistake

It's not psychology but the practitioners who diagnose character flaws as mental illnesses. These illnesses do exist, but these hacks would diagnose every single person on Earth with at least 2 of them. That's just bullshit.

>These illnesses do exist
>PTSD, ADHD, clinical depression
No they don't

Yes they do

Sure they do..

They quite clearly do. Some idiots going overboard and self diagnosing doesn't change that.

There's a difference between recognizing there is behavior that would be diagnosed under one of those headings, its another to believe they are "illnesses" and not simply individuals with their own rational relationship to reality
How is depression of any kind an illness or disorder? Or even PTSD for that matter?

Everyone in society is depressed, everyone has ADD, and everyone is Bipolar.

(this last one doctors will actually tell you)

I can't believe in a God and this crap at the same time.

...

Are you arguing that "disorder" and "illness" are not fit for these conditions, or that these conditions do not exist in the first place?

I can halfheartedly agree with the former, but not with the latter.

Where I live most reputable profs stick to this rule:
A patient is mentally "sick" (in lack of a better translation I can think of) if:
-His condition differs from the norm (deviance)
-His condition causes distress, it's bothersome, unpleasant and/or causes unhappiness
-His condition renders him disfunctional in his personal, social and worklife
-His condition endangers himself and/or others (suicidal/self destructive/violent tendencies or extreme disfunctionality)

If all 4 are present, the patient is mentally ill. If less than 4 are present, the patient "simply" deviates from the norm but is not mentally ill.

Examples of "simple" deviations include most personality disorders, as they do not hit all the marks on the list. This way, illnesses and disorders are separated. Mental illnesses are handled differently than disorders.
Sticking to this avoids pointless arguments about semantics in academia and practice, locally at least.

Afaik most English language literature considers disorders a subcategory of mental illnesses though, so this isn't an objective truth by all means.

guys i think we'd all do well to take this advice from the harry potter thread on board:

>putting people down because they're happy with one thing, just because you prefer something else isn't really cool

:^)

can't tell if the posts ITT are ironic or not Tbh

You know how we joke about each other being underage (and some of us are)? Reddit is filled with children. That alone accounts for at least a third of the shitty opinions in that thread.

>I like a simple, clean narrative built around relatable characters going through extraordinary and mythical adventures
Ulysses

It's horrible to think about but it's true. Everyone on Veeky Forums as well as r/books and r/literature actually does have an intellectual advantage to some degree, just because they sit down and read.

>I can't believe in a God and this crap at the same time.

Speaking of Reddit

dont even try user, it's clear these guys are the pathetic "MUH needless contrarianism" that plaques this site, they are literally arguing ptsd doesn't exist because they read complaints on image boards about mid 2000s ADD over diagnosis

more like
>0.00001% of fantasy and sci fi is literature

This nigga knows what's up

To be honest - I read a lot, have a large personal library, and have mamy varying books from travel, travel stories, history, science, and different types of fiction.
YA is just so enjoyable to read when done well. I work hard all day. Im using my brain all day. Sometimes I just want to kick back a read a nice cheesy book, irrespective of what category it is.
Reading should be an enjoyment. It doesn't always have to be about furthering knowledge or reading harfer/morr complex books.
With the amount of differing entertainment options out there, I think its fantastic if someone DOES take time to read. More people shoukd read - doesnt matter what.
No need to be so judgemental about what they are reading.

well no shit, you picked the subreddit that only talks about pop books. That would be like coming to Veeky Forums's /pol/ wanting good political discourse.

These exist too you know
reddit.com/r/literature/
reddit.com/r/AskLiteraryStudies/
reddit.com/r/classicliterature/

go back

>tfw you copy/paste comments from reddit here all the time

I don’t understand how this comment is constructive, or encourages the reader to think more deeply about anything. It appears to me that this comment’s only purpose is to display the cleverness of the author. Unfortunately, despite the collective efforts of the commentariate, we do get infiltration from those who are apparently determined to give the impression that they are incapable of parsing an entire piece of writing and reading it as a whole.

As has been previously noted (regular readers will be aware) we (that’s the “Royal we” — fellow commenters, occasional contributors such as myself and the moderator team) are engaged in an ongoing attempt to keep the quality of comments at its former impeccably high standard. Sadly, this is more of an effort than it should be.

And as a writer, it is rather tiresome having to try to explain to the occasional numpty who happens across a post basic reading comprehension skills, how to follow an argument when it is constructed long-form and the ability to master data interpretation.

And I’ve just caught up on all the subsequent comments on this page. All the other commenters have managed to make coherent and intelligible contributions that furthered my understanding or gave me something to think about, because they took the trouble to type more than a single sentence. I don’t agree with everything that’s been said in other comments. Quite the opposite in a couple of cases. But at least I understand what was expressed and the intention behind it.

It's slow as fuck

It's packed to the gunwales with libruls

Nobody ever comments on the threads

They shadow banned me

0/10

Did someone here write this?

>I totally agree. I get annoyed when anyone over 16 years old calls themselves a “reader” when all they read is YA fiction. I started reading Stephen King in 6th grade and never looked back. I’m a high school senior now, and I enjoy reading Thomas Pynchon, DFW, and other postmodern authors. I know that last sentence drips of pretentiousness and ego, but English and reading are two of my biggest passions (I’ve got perfect scores in both subjects on the ACT, if you know what that is) so naturally I’ve graduated to more profound books over time. There’s just too little being said in YA for it to “count” in my opinion. After all, some books literally say “For Ages 8-14” or something on the back cover. Can 20+ year olds read those constantly and still consider themselves passionate literature fans? Nah.

Do you really want to have a debate with people triggered by the notion that HP might be a children's book?

iliad and odyssey
aeneid
greek myths

play d&d with friends

ugh i hate harry potter

i've read it 3-4 times, all while in middle-high school. never really thought it was as great as people made it out to be.

>that one redditor who says stephen king called it literature
pot calling the kettle a saucier when in reality both the pot and the kettle are piles of shit

>come to Veeky Forums
>its a bunch of people complaining about Reddit, J Peterson, Rupi, John Green, politics, stephen king, rk rowlling
>b-but its ok we also mention these same 6 authors over and over!

kys redditor

I don't recognize as static categorizable conditions to begin with. There's talk in Psychology or umbrella diagnoses but I believe all diagnoses are umbrella diagnoses
The four criteria you list are vague and nebulous enough to be worthless, literally everyone can be called mentally ill under them

I believe in Post-Traumatic stress, I don't believe in Post-Traumatic stress disorder. There's no disorder in being traumatized by some of the traumatic shit that's out there, its a perfectly reasonable response to the horror of war and the world

...

I read literotica fapfiction with better prose than Red Rising.

honestly, which do you think is worse: /pol/ or reddit's political board?

It's kind of sad that advocating free speech in 2017 makes you some kind of reactionary.

but user, /pol/ is reddit's political board

are you the dinesh d'souza of Veeky Forums?

>thinks /pol/ is bad

Gas yourself kikeboy

What intelligence referencing The Simpsons with no commentary on the actual thread

I dare you to actually form an legitimate argument against any of this short of mindless contrarianism with nothing to support it

Forgot the image

>pop culture is bad
>come to Veeky Forums

What did Veeky Forums mean by this?

>Anyone agree or disagree?

There's something about this hollow begging for attention that curdles the breath in my lungs and makes the world taste wrong. At least here people will bait, highlight the pathetic need in a facetious way by going "pls respond", or most often by simply making something interesting enough to be worth responding to.

Anonymity is a gift.

What's going on with that hobbit thread?

Give examples of reddit opinions without visiting reddit to find them.

>dude lolita is such a beautiful book but like, the protagonist is so disgusting I didn't know if I could continue reading through it. I don't know if I could recommend it honestly

>Can confirm. Stephen King is fucking epic and its a travesty that the recent movie didn't capture the cool post apocalypse western majesty that was the Dark Tower. At least IT was the horror mo

>Despite the racism, Lovecraft is a great writer

>I'm trying to get my boyfriend to read more books but he's having trouble making it through American Gods. Should I have him read something easier like the Star Wars prequel novels or would that give him a bad impression of the book world? Please help!

>Are there any other authors like Dawkins?

This is a good one. Thanks friend.

>How the FUCK hasn't haruki murakami won the noble prize yet?

Nowhere's perfect.

At least on reddit you get more than one opinion

>Not just that. OP stated HP is a "solid children's story", but that's misleading. It doesn't paint the whole picture. HP started that way, indeed, but it deviated and got more serious. I am re-reading the saga and the different between the first book and third one is notorious. And I am not even talking about the other books, in which things got more serious, with Voldemort getting stronger and its many allies, and some adjacent villains, like Umbridge Dolores, who Stephen King considered her one of the worst villains of all times, comparing her to Hannibal Lecter.

What the fuck

Are you being serious, user? At least your post will be seen on Veeky Forums, even if people tell you you're opinion a shit.

This desu

I have an IQ of over 140 and work a very taxing, intellectual job. When I come home I don't really feel like taking the ol' noodle box for yet another ride: I want to chill with a simple story or play videogames or see what's up on r/funny. You gotta relax sometimes, you know? Even geniuses eventually run out of brain fuel

>Cormac McCarthy feels like he has something to say, but come on, does he have to try so hard to sound smart? We get it.

I do wonder if the ability to silence unwanted voices online leads to people wanting to in real life.

Yeah Veeky Forums's format is a lot better. I am just saying that /pol/ is a lot more one sided than reddit.

I don't mind Reddit but it's a major time-sink compared to Veeky Forums. Here you're instantly reminded not to take things too seriously. There you can easily end up in a long-winded debate and realise you're wasting your life by achieving literally fucking nothing by the end of it.

I prefer proper forums. They have a genuine social essence to them.

Yeah but you have to deal with retards who read Zadie Smith and Junot Diaz and don't realize why they should be ashamed of themselves

I suspect they're actually the average person who got caught up in reading purely accidentally.

Progressives became so progressive they left freedom and free speech in the dust and now such things are conservative, not liberal, values.

> atheist

There’s any number of proofs of god, Aquinas had a bunch, but I’ll quote the Catholic Catechism(book there they define their beliefs):
> Created in God's image and called to know and love him, the person who seeks God discovers certain ways of coming to know him. These are also called proofs for the existence of God, not in the sense of proofs in the natural sciences, but rather in the sense of "converging and convincing arguments", which allow us to attain certainty about the truth. These "ways" of approaching God from creation have a twofold point of departure: the physical world, and the human person.
> The human person: with his openness to truth and beauty, his sense of moral goodness, his freedom and the voice of his conscience, with his longings for the infinite and for happiness, man questions himself about God's existence. In all this he discerns signs of his spiritual soul. The soul, the "seed of eternity we bear in ourselves, irreducible to the merely material",9 can have its origin only in God.
> The world, and man, attest that they contain within themselves neither their first principle nor their final end, but rather that they participate in Being itself, which alone is without origin or end. Thus, in different ways, man can come to know that there exists a reality which is the first cause and final end of all things, a reality "that everyone calls God".
> Man's faculties make him capable of coming to a knowledge of the existence of a personal God. But for man to be able to enter into real intimacy with him, God willed both to reveal himself to man and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith. The proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

tl;dr for ledditors, man can understand the nature of god, but this understanding must be internal and cannot be properly expressed.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c1.htm

> belief in science

philpapers.org/rec/MIZWSB
Even Hacker News understood this paper.

> transgender rights

Dysphoria is a mental issue, and transitioning is not an effective treatment(hence the suicide rates). You don’t give people with god complexes unlimited power.

> medical marijuana

In cases where the FDA found it effective, it was approved. It shouldn’t be normalised for recreational use tho, we still haven’t eradicated tobacco.

user, for the last time, getting fired for screaming nigger at people in your checkout line is not a freedom of speech issue.

[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]

>very taxing, intellectual job
ar-are you an intellectual?

Your "proof of god" isn't a proof.

Another temporary triumph soon to be washed away, just like real life.

It’s an explanation of the nature of a true proof, in that it needs to be internal. Read Aquinas. (Or just go to web.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/web publishing/aquinasfiveways_argumentanalysis.htm). I will not argue for these proofs, but that is the easiest set of brainlet-understandable proofs.

>Read Aquinas

>I don't actually have any proof, go read some philosophical religious shit.

into the trash it goes as always