Dostoyevsky

I have never met a woman who has read dusty save a Russian literature professor

Because he can be easily read on a superficial read (both Veeky Forums and SJWs do this)

Where are you from?

I think you're exaggerating there but I've noticed a trend like that. For example, one of my dipshit former coworkers from the NGO I worked out made a Facebook post asking for recs. I recommended "Demons" because I think most young people today should read it, and a guy liked the comment. That guy is a literal communist, social justice warrior who would often randomly exclaim "gender is a social construct" (I'm not memeing even though this sounds way too good to be true). Like how dense can you be to like Demons and have the message go completely over your head? Maybe they like Dosto for his psychology or his style (which doesn't translate well into English imo). Supposedly Demons was one of Lenin's favorite works so maybe cognitive dissonance is a definitive feature of the pseud Leftist.

>superficial read
what exactly do you mean by "superficial" read ?
Are you reading the thing and thinking about the philosophical implications of every second sentence or what ?

Muttistan

All my favorite Russian language/lit professors have been women. I say that as a literal misogynist.
t. Russian studies grad student

I guess you're right. You know, kind of blogging here, but I'm considering to drop college because I see no more hope in the circles I'm seeing myself included. It's the kind of course you would mostly go to make contacts, and it's just not working for me.

Never understood how commies liked Dusty
He literally takes them to task multiple times in every book he wrote, Notes From Underground's first section is basically a manifesto against socialism

Agreed, Russian women are generally pretty fucking great

For example: most retards on Veeky Forums read Notes and what they get out of it is: LMAO HE WAS LE AUTISTS JUST LIKE US
>you have to agree with book to like book
brainletwojak.pjg

>literal misogynist.
How ugly and short are you?
I've always wanted to make a study tracking the correlation between a man's height, looks, body type, and their views on women.
My hypothesis is that, there will be great correlation between a man being physically ugly, weak, and short, and him having negative views of women.

Because
>i am le wicked nihilist feminist gurl and just like raskolnikov :))) wiked sense of humor lololol

You know, the same goes from most feminists. It is always a matter of social determinism, these ideologies.

5'11. OK looking imo (some have called me handsome but idk). Have a bretty gud physique. I mainly hate women from being in three shit relationships over the past four years with three literal sociopaths of women, so I'm not saying I'm being rational about this. Just can't help feeling that way, not proud of it.

He's unarguably the greatest critic of modernity. The internet far right is largely based around the rejection of modern liberal and socialist values that have reached a head in the past 4 years.

why would you like Demons though? it's very specifically a polemic against Nechayev-tier nihilists and socialists. It literally BTFOs Lenin before he was even born. Why would a pseudo commie enjoy reading that? Btw I'm not even right wing.

>why would you like Demons though?
No idea because I haven't read it, but if you think about it isn't that strange. I'm an atheist and my favourite book is Inferno, the vast majority of classicfags are unathletic yet they enjoy the Iliad, etc etc. In the same way it's possible for a leftist to enjoy Demons. I think you're committing the mistake of thinking that, in a sense, people are their ideologies (or more specifically: that there is a single type of person for every ideology). Personhood precedes ideology.

I'm a 5'4" frumpy, mediocre looking dude and I think women are by and large far more pleasant to be around and associate with than men. I think your hypothesis has issues.

*correction it was released 1-2 years after Lenin was born. In case anybody wants to nitpick.

>one piece of data negates the data set
>what is correlation

Well actually that other dude doesn't fit your hypothesis either so that's 2 pieces of data mister. I mean I was more so saying that just because it's blatantly obvious that you're basing that off of some really tenuous and superficial assumptions but whatever.

If I were to carry out the experiment, I would use thousands of men from different backgrounds and regions in the USA. So the fact that two anecdotal accounts contradict my hypotheses literally amounts to nothing.

what's the point of that study? To make short, ugly men feel worse about themselves? To establish that attitudes about gender are tied to deterministic factors out your control? What good would that do? That's no better than the eugenicists who want to use Racial IQ averages to make policy. Like even if that was the case why would you want to draw attention that?

So I can laugh at mgtow and women hating losers on /r9k/.

>with 2500 comments by guys with names like MAGA1488 saying "DUH!"
>implying the the maga1488 guys won't be screaming in support of muh mgtow

there it is! Stop projecting friend, you're not one of the "good ones."

>muh mgtow

fair enough, u rite

i never get laid, but i don't blame it on or hate women, i never understand those kind of dudes who are all angry at women or feminists or whatever for their own lack of ability to get laid, then again i'm 6'1, maybe it's a short thing

What are you talking about, you autist.

He was an autist just like us
That's not a good thing btw

I think Dosto is getting popular cause of this fucker

I'm the guy you first responded to and as I said it didn't arise from "not getting laid." I agree that it is dumb to blame "not getting laid" on women. That doesn't change the fact that I find most women unpleasant. Sleeping with women isn't the be all and end all of how you feel about them jfc. And it sounds like you're projecting your insecurity at not being able to get laid onto a bunch of people who are more definably a "loser" than you are. You also seem obsessed with height, in which case it makes sense that you don't get laid because you don't understand what women are attracted to. It's all just appearance or it's all height is an r9k tier worldview that will reinforce your lack of ability to fuck random girls because they will be repulsed by your self hatred and lack of confidence. Outside of Tinder there is a still a real world where personality and confidence matter much more.

You seem very unpleasant and pompous. You should take your nose out of your arse crack.

Correct. Same thing with Jung

Sort of. Lots of the pseuds I know who have hopped on the Dosto train (Dostoevsky is my favorite novelist btw so don't think I'm calling him a pseud) unironically hate Peterson and anything they perceive as "right wing." I honestly don't understand how that level of cognitive dissonance is possible.

One can take Dostoevsky's lessons about humanity without subscribing fully to his traditionalism and religiousness, especially since his religiousness is so deep in him that he gives little time to justifying it.

I disagree, I feel like all of his insights into humanity are firmly linked and rooted within religiosity

I agree with this but given how repulsed many people are by religion and traditionalism (never mind "not fully subscribing") it does seem a bit peculiar. His lessons tend to hinge a lot on his conservativism too, but of course his plots are still engaging.

You are extremly out of touch with the real world.

It's really hard for me to do that because I study Russian cultural history of the 19th c. onward so for me texts like Demons and even Notes from the Underground are firmly entrenched in their historical contexts, i.e. polemical responses to figures like Chernyshevsky and Nechayev. You're right though that in Notes from the Underground, TBK, C&P etc. there are universal and timeless insights into humanity, or at least the European and European-influenced part of humanity (which is almost everybody nowadays). I can totally see how if you have no idea of the historical context you can still enjoy Dosto even if his main purpose in writing certain texts was to refute your modernist worldview. Notes from the Underground is a great example of a text that is timeless and can appeal across the ideological spectrum in making you realize you're too much like the Underground Man for your own comfort. I stand by my original point that, unless you read it in Russian for the style, contemporary leftists should have no business enjoying Demons and if they do they either didn't get it or must get something from it I can't fully appreciate (maybe it's just to seem hip and intellectual and Dosto has paradoxically become a status symbol has literature enters its final stage of commodity fetishisation)

I don't get how you could read that huge screed where he literally calls out leftists in Notes and not see it as a repudiation of leftism even if you don't know about history, unless you're a true brainlet and don't think the crystal palace refers to your ideology.

Yeah right. Thanks Peterson, for showing this underground author to the public.

I would go with The Brothers Karamazov, but I don't see why you wouldn't read Notes from the Underground too. It's less than 200 pages.