Milk and Honey

Quit getting so pissy over the fact that two similar threads exist, it isn't the end of the world

You really are unnecessarily tiring your brain here. Let me simplify:

People write pretty stanzas = good poetry

People write shit stanzas = bad poetry

People write shit stanzas but have vagina and dark skin = still bad poetry

Your """""friend""""" is a simpleton and a harlot, and if she is not wilingly spreading her lower appendages for your carnal usage, then it is past time to break off mutual contact with her in all due haste

>pretty=good
you're just as bad. you're like those shitters who want all painting to be realistic

this. if your female friends do not occassionally have sex with you and serve as mistresses you can share camraderie with (which is the only acceptable m-f friendship bond) you shouldn't interact with them. they're using you for attention and emotional support. Women and men are not meant to be friends outside of friednly sexual liasons where you can share some kind of bond that is temporary but still wholesome. Hook up culture and extreme protestant sexual repression have removed this. Studying the Hindus and Chinese, every nobleman had a favorite concubine he would talk philosophy and poetry with, this is the proper format for m-f friendships, anything that is platonic should be between same sex members. Women are incapable of providing healthy friendship outside of this, its either just an acquaintanceship or is basically abusive manipulation.

People like you reduce art into derivative, unimpressive piles of shit that people are expected to adore "because it's art". Painting is an entirely different format, beauty manifests itself in many different styles on a canvas. Whereas the written word requires more thought, lest it turn into shit like this moron writes.

Dude, its a book for girls that are sad. Let them go. They're not going to like Whitman or Yeats.

Let people enjoy things, even if it doesn't appeal to you. Chances are your experiences have been different than theirs, and it resonates with them, or at least lets them feel "cool."

Would you let a child admire a pile of dirt and praise it as something fantastic that deserves everyone's attention? Because it sounds like you would.

If my teenage daughter wanted to read a book her friend's are reading, and it helps her work through emotions of adolescence and early adulthood, then yes, I'd let her read it. I'm not going to tell my child they can't read something because it isn't muh classics.

>inclusion
>important

y tho?

You're thinking too small, if you let people consume, enjoy and create objectively bad content, then it becomes the norm and nobody is trying as hard to create anything decent, letting a kid read this shit makes them think they can write like that and be successful.

the cult of the victim the blue haired transgender screechazoid is merely the latest incarnation of christian slave morality. the genderqueer victimblob is christ on the cross for the new milllenium. the masses must be kept docile through the cult of the victim.

Different voices should be heard, but not at the expense of decent writing

>("i" instead of capitalised)
Congrats, you just outed yourself as a someone more stupid than fucking rupi kaur

i for one, am sick and tired of the ceaseless screeching of marginaliszed voices relishing in their own righteous victimhoood. how about we shut them up for good, eh?

Nondiscriminatory tolerance is not how you should approach child-rearing. Encouraging sentimentality that responds to bad behaviour and pathologies isn't going to build your teenage daughter's self-esteem, but encourage her to walk the path of her own destruction. To give someone affection when they are merely using it to fuel what you consider bad behaviour is to enable them. Rupi Kaur's book betrays an aestheticisation (a bad one at that) of self-indulgent narcissism and self-victimisation, which are present in all teens, but pathologised, unquestioned and glorified in these terrible poems.

What you should do is discuss them with your hypothetical daughter and figure out why it is that she responds to them, then try to address the underlying world-view that is exciting her sentimentality towards these poems. Hell, maybe even recommend her some literature to challenge that teenage angst.

Don't fuck up your hypothetical children Anons.

>I for one, am sick and tired of the ceaseless screeching of marginalized voices

Yeah and I'm sick of screeching from assholes like you that hate people that aren't white and straight

Wow, someone who isn't an utter dunce. Thank you.

I refuse to bow down before the screechers, the snivellers and the victims. Bring down the screechocracy, by any means neccesary. The cultural marxist establishment worships weakness, disease and perversion. Us revolutionaries, the black shirt vanguard, strive to restore the primal values of our ancestors: Honor, Power and Brutality.

poopoo peepee
braaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaap
peepee poopoo
brrrrrraaaaaaaaa AAAAAAAA
AAAAAaa aAaaaa aAAAAAAAAAP
POOPOO PEEEPEEE
brap brap
! brap brap
brap

brrr AAAP

BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

ap

poopoo peepee

>you see that the moody moron who wrote it just jots down whatever quick things pop into her head, without any effort to make it interesting.
Interesting, when white people do this, it gets its own entire literary genre, many entries into which are considered revolutionary strokes of genius.

drive.google.com/file/d/0B1eSErMeetAhYlhJajhzR1E2aEk/view

use this. its written by a Veeky Forumsizen

>Would you let a child admire a pile of dirt
what are you going to do beat them?

Because those entries aren't usually completely unfiltered shit, they have thought behind them, I admit that the confessional nature of her work is interesting at times, but without any attempt to make them interesting to read, they're just dull

this. I can't believe anyone could be as devoid of empathy as to be unable to apprecciate the vibrancy of the diverse and marginalised homosexual culture.

...

>THIS!!!!!

That is the 21st century.

>, I admit that the confessional nature of her work is interesting at times
this is an example of how cultural marxism is killing art. all aesthetic criteria have been eliminated for the sole criteria of Victimhood and victim worship. It's a bizzarrely inverted version of victorian moralist literature, faith and chastity replaced by sodomy and multiculturalism

>Because those entries aren't usually completely unfiltered shit, they have thought behind them
I didn't realize taking a fat shit in an outhouse is genius distinctly separate in many multiple ways from somebody else's personal experiences of life. Wow. You've opened my eyes to the true nature of literature and criticism.

Listen pal, it's not really hard to discern why you don't like the book, but at least try to form a reasonable dislike when you post your shit opinions.

you can't even disagree, as all aesthetic disagreements are now political disagreements refering to the fundamental political nature of our society. Rupi Kaur's Milk and Honey is a religious text designed to mass produce a specific kind of subject, ie. politically correct narcissist cat ladies, think of it as Mao's little red book for the21st century. But middlebrow drones don't realise it, NYT told them Rupi Kaur was Good for You and Good for Society, and they are unable to listen to reason. They have lost their critical faculties to their cancerous liberast progessive morality. Believe me, these freaks will probably praise this book as 'great literature'

The issue is that what lies behind these poems, is self-victimisation and self-indulgent narcissism like this user said. These are otherwise normal signs of teenage angst, but Kaur's poems are anthems that justify them unquestioningly with a self-righteous sentimentality. She truly pathologises these character traits that are bound to surface in almost everyone's developmental journey. This cannot go unchallenged. The poetry itself is bad too, but I think what it sings to is a more pressing issue.

Why do you reduce everything to race identity. No one here is condemning soliloquies or ad-libbing, most people who engage in it, regardless of race, are awful at it. And retards will cling to retarded shit regardless of race, while others will see through it. What you seem to claim here, is that the only reason people are seeing through Rupi's shit is because she's not white. Your are delusional and I advise you meditate on that for a while because the net result of such an attitude will only bring upon you bitterness, hate and self-pity.

thaat was sfw wth mods

The problem with Rupi's book isn't that its shallow; its reflective of an entire generation that is shallow. It is no deeper than a puddle because all of our generation, and the generation before us, has inherited this great, amazing, beautiful world that our fathers and grandfathers built, and we have added nothing to it. So, instead of making busy with our hands to fight off suffering, we have to invent our own. Since we've no tools to actually build and create great things, or discipline ourselves so that we are able to, we split ourselves into two groups: ones who study relentlessly and never create, and ones who create without the study. I do not need to tell you where Kaur falls, because it remains self evident.

That's a really good point, the quality of her work really is just representative of the current lack of creativity and overall laziness in creative mediums.

>KILL YOURSELF!!!!!

>Would you let a child admire a pile of dirt and praise it as something fantastic
Why isn't a pile of dirt fantastic?

not him, but it can be an object worthy of fascination as it's ultimately benign as a value object. However, why the fuck are you autistic NIGGA? he clearly meant it as an imperfect symbol for something that's shit, but regarded as virtuous and transcendental. Listen to this nigga - why isn't a pile of dirt fantastic? Nigga, please.

>ITT t. virgins detected

guys i just had sex for the first time and gotta tell ya this book is GREAT!

it feels like a mouth with only cheeks by the way

Ive fucked hotter women than you’ll ever touch and this poetry is subhuman garbage you massive faggot

MEMES ASIDE I can't hate the book for being successful. I doubt RK is aware enough to be doing it intentionally but she's nailing an open market with shit that takes zero effort to make. It's hard to pin down but the "aesthetic" beloved by a certain class of normies who consider themselves artistic and somehow above the other depth-grovelers is a meek and childishly simple style. All lowercase words, unnecessary enjambment, and obtuse attempts at "profound metaphor" are cruise control for cool. Same way that posting a heavily-desaturated picture of a girl's bare back is the easiest way to become a "photographer". When you're attuned to this aesthetic, and what these people want, it's easy to profit. What surprises me is that it took so long for someone to have this idea, and that it seems to be genuine (instead of an outsider taking advantage of them, like /pol/ users selling "male tears" mugs on tumblr a while back).
While reading anything of hers makes me grit my teeth due to how bad it is and how cheap it is that such a neckass is now a celebrated "poet", it doesn't bother me that much. If someone gushes about her, realize that they're an image-obsessed tumblrite and move on.
The only people to blame for this wave of inauthentic art are those who create a demand for it. If I was a proud WOC with a cult following I'd certainly publish book after book of garbage.

>he clearly meant it as an imperfect symbol for something that's shit, but regarded as virtuous and transcendental
>he thinks i didn't know that

Something about the fact that that is your response unprovoked by an anonymous stranger tells me that you're lying.

im not lying, im not a virgin, every woman ive slept with was above a 7/10 and i resent the fact that having a problem with feminism or inceldom or the m-f relations issues and how the mainstream handles them automatically means im ugly or a virgin or stupid. im none of those things at all. i actually want to discuss these topics and the constant attacks which are always personal in nature are infuriating. I think its interesting that most of the people who say this stuff are themselves ugly and not sexually prodigious