If a book is sexist, does it lower it's value?

Not unless a major theme of the book is directly related, and even then, the work maintains it's historical value.

Was there even a girl in Lord of the Flies?

t. numale

That's why it's perceived as sexist, Golding tries to describe humanities nature with only one sex.

Any honest observation of female behavior is going to irritate their sensitive little vaginas and get labeled "sexist".

Women tend to have an utterly phony self-image. Salome lops off John the Baptist's head than probably giggles like a little bitch later. Gertrude sleeps on incestuous sheets and forgets her dead husband after less than two months. Helen of Troy drags an entire civilization to war over her infidelity and wantonnes. The overriding message being: Women are destructive and evil sinners but somehow they remain completely shameless and oblivious.

Note how whimsical and phony the female self-image is in women-oriented and authored fiction. Garbage like Sex and the City or Broad City. They're horribly flawed in the perception of their actions and consequences, like the closet scene in Hamlet, whenever life holds up a mirror and thrusts this truth in their face they cry out abuse and cover their ears.

This.

Women are simply inferior to men and their rightful place is subordinate to an authoritarian, disciplinary male who decided how she should live - preferably a life devoted to domestic life.

A woman cannot create art; a woman cannot truly be ethical; a woman cannot truly love; a woman cannot truly be loyal.
These are all facts, but will be labelled 'sexist' by liberal brainwashing society because it doesn't fit the narrative of equality.

Women simply aren't as ontologically 'there' as men, they're shallow and lack depth, they're not as self-conscious as man. They aren't properly inscribed into the symbolic text which is why they can only think about Chad cock instead of true good matters and subjects.

Women are an embarrassment. They should stay at home where they belong; they don't deserve power or rights, because they are driven by emotion and will never be anything but inherently evil and destructive qua their inferior natures.

Take
The
Redpilled
Already

Without their festering mackerel-reeking cunts, they would have been killed off by man a long time ago.

I don't think that the lird of the flyes is sexist at all. And for your question, it depends obviously

>If a book is sexist, does it lower it's value?
That depends entirely on each person. Literature doesn't have a fixed value, it's only as valuable as society and culture decides it is. And really, there's no reason their value has to be diminished just because something else valuable exists parallel to it. I find this zero-sum mentality that feminists have to be tiresome and counterproductive. It is entirely possible for literary works to be important and treasured even while they are critiqued by feminist theory. One is not raised up at the expense of the other, there's not a finite amount of value in the world.

If that doesn't satisfy you then you'll just have to decide whether feminism is more important than the literature it critiques. If you insist on clinging to the zero-sum mentality then you'll have to make a zero-sum choice.

>If a book is sexist, does it lower it's value?
Depends on what you value

>If a book is sexist, does it lower it's value?
You're on Veeky Forums.

>Can sexism ruin a work?
Not entirely, unless the book tries to make a point based on a flawed — or even false — premise because of it.

You can still get a lot from a flawed book.

Now that's pushing it.

Are you trolling or just living in your own batshit crazy echo chamber world?

Seriously, you can't reach that kind of conclusion by interacting with people. Not if you're sane. What you posted is even worse than the shit you can see on Tumblr, just at the opposite end of the spectrum.

How is Lord of the Flies sexist? There aren't any girls to begin with

Underrated post

Adding girls to Lord of the Flies would bring a whole theme of underage, and most probably nonconsentual, sex. I think author preferred to avoid that on purpose.

this. Is that why people have accused it as sexist?

Genuinely? I think it matters only when the work genuinely takes it into consideration. For example Catch-22 features the pursuing fury girlfriend as an attempt at feminist allegory but falls flat on its face when you consider the female characters, in comparison to the two dimensional male characters, are one dimensional blips hardly recognizable as people. This is yet another aspect of an already bloated and ill conceived novel, so the fact that the question of women is so poorly thought out is only symptomatic of the larger problems of the novel. So I guess to consider sexism in a novel you need to consider the context of the work, and see what works and what doesn't about matters entirely tangential to the question of sexism. It's not a make or break aspect on its own but considering it can lead you into greater critical questions so it would be nonsense to discount it entirely just because many critics wield the accusation clumsily most of the time.

How is Lord of the flies sexist?

Good post

It really doesn't matter.

Explain how Huck Finn is sexist

He uses the word nigger

>If a book is sexist, does it lower it's value?
not to me, im a white male

to a woman, probably

It depends on if the sexism is diegetic or not

If it is diegetic (e.g. sexist characters in antebellum South, or say Huck calling the nigger a nigger), then of course it will contribute to the work's value as an art piece, in that it helps to portrays truth

If the sexism is not diegetic, it's a tossup.

If the prejudice manifests itself in a way that distorts reality (e.g. unrealistic cartoonish characters - like Uncle Tom, say), then clearly it detracts from the work as a piece of art, in that it does not portray truth.

The work ceases to be an artform, and turns into a historical artifact. Think colonial era literature written by wanderlust-ridden White men who never stepped outside of Massachusetts - laughable as art, now, but extremely valuable for understanding their zeitgeist.

>racial slur
>sexist

Nice dubs

To make such a blanket statement about all women is telling of your pea-sized intellect

>he actually describes a heterogeneous populations with 1 point statistic

there are women smarter than you, period. if you haven't met them, i'm gonna guess you're indentured-servant-tier White

Newsflash all the clever and smart women in your social class have fucked upward

Don't you know, any white man that is racist is also de facto sexist.

I don't get why it would "lower it's value".

If people think a book is bad simply because of sexist, racist or violent content they can go fuck themselves.

Christ, /pol/ is leaking

> muh reverse racism
> muh can't secure middle class lifestyle as a white male in a first world country
> muh cultural marxism

Why the fuck did you include my post?

> muh why do these Jews keep ruining my white male protagonists and mildly sexist media

Where did I say that? In fact, where did I even imply it?

Clearly I read you pessimistically, my bad, I guess.

Basically, your comment could be construed as an echo of the banal "WHY DO THESE FEMINAZIS KEEP CRITICIZING MY WHITE ACTION FIGURES" shit that /pol/ is obsessed about for neurotic reasons

but if you're defending diegetic sexism/prejudice in works of art fine i'm all for it

I believe it increases its value. reality is highly 'sexist' as Science and Reason teach us there are proven differences between the sexes as well as between the races of mankind. True Creative Genius is and has always been the sole prerogative of the White Man. A sexist book can therefore be said to be more true to reality than a SJW or Leftist book.

I am defending a writer being able to use whatever means he wants to write a story, and that no subjects should be "taboo" in that regard.

I mean, what would be the point of a book like Blood Meridian, if it didn't include the violence? The violence is the whole point of the book, as is the racist undertones within it too.

You can judge the merits of the book without having to be butthurt about sexism or racism, or consider it topics that shouldn't be written about other than through the eyes of writers with minority background for example.

Ok White Man are YOU yes you, not people who have once lived and share your genetic haplotype, are you a creative genius?

No?

Then you're pathetic for claiming the achievements of others to prop up the shitstain that is your life

Yeah I agree with you man. Wish more of the censors had this predisposition

>can't secure middle class lifestyle as a white male in a first world country

this is why neoliberalism is doomed. Cosmopolitan Jew/White/AZN elite keeps telling the proles it's all their fault for being racist and not working hard enough, all while they get richer and richer and congratulate themselves on their tolerance expressed through media consumption

Intellectual value, obviously. Artistic one, no.

Not why he wrote it desu

Then why did he write it?

Why should we privilege White folks over the browns? In America, where we're founded on the religion of individualism, of all places

Are you so pathetic you can't play that game except on the easy mode of White crony capitalism?

I agree there should be no punitive actions against them, but removing systemic privileges is a-ok famalam

But anyway go over to /pol/ if you want to keep on whining whiteboi

Everything is sexist unless it completely eliminates sex. i.e. a novel with no description, implication, or relevance in terms of gender or sex or whatever.

lol why are there so many people with cuckold fetishes on this site?

yes.

>t. someone who's never read Heller.

> muh "alt-right" views means i'm manly
> no no more skilled brown people to compete with me
> no no more women to compete with either
> also make them subservient to men so i can leverage the basic fact of my gender to finally get laid

fuck off

hey no judgment. If you like watching POC skeet on your wife that's between you and her

> muh we need to protect da white wymnzz
> c-can't get cucked by da bbc

the american system = death factory. sure, place a token black guy on top. you can diversify the management, but the death factory remains true to its nature. muh empowered individual is its credo.

>mentions Salome
>doesn't mention Judith
;)

>there were no female protagonists to speak of and all men ran the show, that's a blatant flaw in the work.
No it isn't. It's just a story about men.

damn I don't remember writing that. I was really hungover this morning, I didn't recognize who you were quoting.

anyways,
>It's just a story about men
No it isn't. It's a quasi-historical fantasy series involving multiple generations of families and like a dozen kingdoms. if you manage to write over 8,000 pages of that without incorporating any female interaction in a realistic manner, that's a sexist bias.
Granted I've never read the series, it's just an example.

Name one book where women are useful and not just a cum dumpster/annoying shit/mary sue.

it's yr average Walter Scott via Tolkien soap opera wank if you want 'deep, realistic characters' look somewhere else. The Strong Empowered Woman in the pop culture sense is merely just another cliche which bears little relation to reality.

atlas shrugged

i thought the pig they ass raped with the spear represented womankind

East of Eden

>if you manage to write over 8,000 pages of that without incorporating any female interaction in a realistic manner, that's a sexist bias.

Says you.

This is exactly as retarded as implicit racial bias psychology tests. Even if implicit racial bias exists, the test itself makes people think they are justified in calling and judging someone a racist.

The exact same thing as you are doing, by judging an author and book as sexist, simply because he "left out" something that you think "should" be there, you feel it justified in the same way.

It's really retarded, and it really shows how people are fanatically looking for a reason to hate someone.

...

if you actually have to ask this, i doubt you've read many books.

Literally any Hesse book proves you wrong.

...

This can't be a serious question

>hurr durr this is a good book but it has sexist/racist moments which is problematic and cant be overlooked

Eve is the prime example.

Nope.

Additionally, ascribing modern notions to books in the past in silly and counter-productive.

Additionally, the term 'sexism' itself has different meanings depending on the discipline a person is from and the time period they are looking at. Sexism as an idea has no uniform meaning, making it just a little bit above meaningless.

> no no more skilled brown people to compete with me

Nice fallacy kiddo. Try understanding the argument you are against.

uscis.gov/eir/visa-guide/h-1b-specialty-occupation/understanding-h-1b-requirements

With great authors who portray women it becomes less about muh sexism and muh not understanding the female and more how does the author personally feel about the role of women in society and their general behavior. Guy de Maupassant is a good example of this. He often saw women as feeble evil creatures who are often times manipulative but he loved them for their sex and what they could fulfill for him and often times its displayed in his works.

If you can't get over the fact that a particular author was potentially suffering in life in some way or another or saw women as disposable or weak and feeble when throughout society they were not seen as intelligent but mothers and nuisances in society for men then stick to YA fiction. We read authors for their perspective not for society's view on life.

If they're willing to work for lower wages, so should you.

If those wages aren't enough for you, then tough shit. Get better, or live with it.

> b-but that's unfair

Are you some kind of crony capitalist aka socialist aka manbaby?

>The exact same thing as you are doing, by judging an author and book as sexist, simply because he "left out" something that you think "should" be there, you feel it justified in the same way.
That's why I said "sexist bias" and not "sexist" in the sense of a personal sentiment of the author. By creating a world with a purposefully high level of verisimilitude at such a large scale, if grrm hypothetically left out females completely from his series, the work would be fundamentally flawed. It's just bad writing, reason being is a sexist bias, but that says nothing of the author and isnt a sexist affront towards females, just the label by which one would categorize that artistic shortcoming. But it is my opinion that if you write an 8,000 page sausage fest of 100+ characters you've got some explaining to do, it has more to do with the scale of the work.

For instance, 2001 A Space Odyssey is one of my favorite movies. Cast is all middle aged white guys. In fact you could scramble up the actors and it would change nothing of thr story. That's not racial bias. There are only a few characters and its a short work.

No.

It is clear that you did not read / understand that link and that you are creating a strawman argument.

The problem is not the low wages, the problem is that H1b visas (and similar) create a serf caste of foreign workers who will never adopt the host culture, cause social problems which will then cause economic problems.

IF YOU MANAGE TO WRITE OVER 8000 PAGES WITHOUT INCORPORATING ANY REALISTIC 21ST CENTURY AFRICAN INTERACTION IN THIS MEDIEVAL FANTASY SERIES, THAN YOU CLEARLY HATE BLACK PEOPLE!

IF YOUR SPACE OPERA SERIES DOES NOT INCLUDE VARIOUS REFERENCES TO THE RAPE AND MURDER OF THE NATIVE AMERICANS, THEN YOU ARE JUST BIASED AGAINST THEM HOLY SHIT ITS 2216

please refrain from posting until after puberty

Talk to the babby he's replying to

imagine caring this much about bullshit

I'm 28.
I don't care at all, it's just ridiculous and borderline historical revisionism.

I am the baby he's replying to. Talk to me.

>Im 28
yeesh. I was going to ignore you but goddamn. I'll just dissect your strawman. You probably know it's a strawman but Jesus Christ.

>IF YOU MANAGE TO WRITE OVER 8000 PAGES WITHOUT INCORPORATING ANY REALISTIC 21ST CENTURY AFRICAN INTERACTION IN THIS MEDIEVAL FANTASY SERIES,
first, you're just blowing past the crux of our original argument of accurate representation of sexes. Race and sex are two completely different things. You say "people" you are, by default, referring to both males and females. You cant have one without the other, especially if your story incorporates royal families (still referring to a hypothetical female-less ASoIaF) and multiple generations of multiple kingdoms. If you do, you're going to get called out on it, because something at that scale becomes purposeful ignorance. No author who has ever been taken seriously in their portrayal of humanity has made an oversight of that magnitude. Race never came into the equation.

>THAN YOU CLEARLY HATE BLACK PEOPLE!
You either didn't read my post or have terrible reading comprehension. I specifically said that sexiat bias in a work does not make the author sexist.

>IF YOUR SPACE OPERA SERIES DOES NOT INCLUDE VARIOUS REFERENCES TO THE RAPE AND MURDER OF THE NATIVE AMERICANS, THEN YOU ARE JUST BIASED AGAINST THEM HOLY SHIT ITS 2216
at this point your dick is out of your pants and I cant stop you from waving it around looking stupid.

>it's just ridiculous and borderline historical revisionism
In what way is an accurate portrayal "historical revisionism"?
How does that line up with, say, anti-western, the genre that purposefully portrays a more accurate representation of the west vs it's "historically revised" counterpart that is just white guys with six-shooters

if you're actually 28 you need to get your shit together man.

>muh 450 pages of the same abbott and costello bit repeated ad nauseum with added edge each time

>if you dont hold my opinions then you need to get your shit together man its 2016

If you're the user they are replying to then you are not fooling anyone

They went through and explained why you should adopt their opinion. Stop acting like this

Yeah, but see that's just semantics.

You are just using the word "sexist bias" to sound more politically correct, but in reality you want to judge someone for not producing works of art conforming to your worldview.

>Oedipa Maas

The Lord of the Flies isn't sexist. It doesn't have any female characters because the main characters are students at a British private school, and British private schools are gender-segregated.

The pig scene could easily be read as another sign of their loss of "civilization", with rape being a "savage" act. This point in the novel appears to mark the point of no return in regards to the boys' descent, so it could be argued that the book portrays rape as not only a savage act, but THE savage act.

No. The value of the book is on it's plot/prose/characters/story/message not in the way the authors depicts any type of social group.

What if the book's plot, characters, and/or message revolves around the supposed inferiority of other racial groups or of women?

>characters/story/message
These things are very hard to combine with ignorant attitudes from the author. Say we have a sexist...

>characters
How is he going to write believable and interesting characters of the opposite gender? Even if he/she somehow manages to exclude one gender from the story, given his/her shitty understanding of people of any gender, they are unlikely to be believable so at best they will be interesting.

>story
How is he/she supposed to tell a story worth reading without believable characters? Again the writer needs to rely on his/her ability to make in interesting, making the job harder than it needs to be. Humor is all that's left at this point.

>message
For a message to have impact, the story telling the message is supposed to be believable, due the points mentioned already, it won't be the case, so again, at best the message can be something unrelated to human interactions.

>wages of native workers are too high
>increase labour supply via immigration
>wages go down
>if you complain you're a racist xD

I don't like shit-flavoured coffee but apparently every other worker at Tim Hortons is some sort of migrant who can be paid less than a Canadian.

a book cannot be sexist. it is an object. readers might derive a sexist message from it, but not at the books fault, just as writters might writte sexist messages into them, again, not at the books fault.

it takes a sexist to take a sexist message from a book, and claim the book is lowerin value, or unworthy because of it. or even worse, to criticize a readers work simply because the reader shared diferent points of view.

Lovecraft was incredibly racist. yet his works stand tall in the horror fiction genre. the fact that the man was racist doesn't influence the volidity of his works, only his works do that.

>A post cannot be retarded, only the poster can be

Why not fight to ensure that immigrants get equal pay like natives then? Thus ensuring wages stay as they are and people are chosen based on how well they get the job done. I never understood this "crabs in a bucket" mentality.

because there are no girls i guess