Post: #1

My brother was trying to read a book and I asked him about it. He said it's a summer assignment and he must read it. I took a look at the summary and was immediately disgusted.



And people wonder why males are opting out of college. When you give them female literature, how do you expect them to stay interested? How is teaching boys about female empowerment going to help them in any way?

Relevant: http://www.returnofkings.com/12529/you-g...n-feminism

Post: #2

Have him read it but interpret it properly. The Left has stolen literary analysis, it's time to take it back.

Post: #3

We could do a group read of the book and each write a part of the paper your brother has to write.

Post: #4

(06-29-2013 04:24 PM)JimNortonFan Wrote:  Have him read it but interpret it properly. The Left has stolen literary analysis, it's time to take it back.

Might have to explain afterwards why the teacher gave him 0% and the principal expelled him from the school... Shit's fucked.

Perhaps, if you're his "guardian for the summer," you could write a letter to his school and ask about alternative options. If they don't offer any, perhaps try explaining to them, in fine detail, that their equallity based misandric policies have no place in the school system, and that they should go sodomise themselves with a soldering iron. They're here to teach them about the future of sexuality, after all, aren't they?

Post: #5

Romance "novels" are so formulaic.

Whether getting them into bed or selling them literature, you can play women like fiddles and get them to dispense like vending machines with the right input (thanks Trace, for the metaphor).

This shit's like mad-libs.

Quote:In the [time], [the protagonist and any accompaniment] spend(s) [the duration] in [location], an idyllic [description of location]. Away from [her normal, easy life where everything is provided for her], [protagonist] releases herself to her deepest yearnings, plunging into an illicit liaison that reawakens her long dormant desires, enflames her heart, and, eventually blinds her to all else.

Written nearly [some amount of time] ago, [novel] is the compelling story of an extraordinarily modern woman struggling against the contraints of [make-belief constraint #1] and [make-belief constraint #2], and slowly discovering the power of her own sexuality. [Protagonist]'s search for her own individuality touches the hearts of women who've learned the value of [vapid neologistic value #1] and [vapid neologistic value #2] and her story is now regarded as a classic in American fiction.

Let's try this with 50 Shades of Grey:

Quote:In the late noughties, Anastasia "Ana" Steele spends her college-years in Vancouver, Washington, an idyllic college town. Away from her hometown and the watchful eye of her parents, Ana releases herself to her deepest yearnings, plunging into an illicit liaison that reawakens her long dormant desires, enflames her heart, and, eventually blinds her to all else.

Written nearly two years ago, 50 Shades of Grey is the compelling story of an extraordinarily modern woman struggling against the contraints of societal slut-shaming and male sexual pressuring, and slowly discovering the power of her own sexuality. Ana's's search for her own individuality touches the hearts of women who've learned the value of coming-of-age and self-actualization and her story is now regarded as a classic in American fiction.

Post: #6

You could have your brother read Bang and Day Bang then have him write a detailed book report explaining and comparing the two. He could turn it in to his teacher when he returns as a sort of beneficial extra credit assignment. Although, I can imagine the hamster now

Post: #7

This is absolutely disgraceful. Trash like this is being promoted as an American classic while legitimate works of classic American literature like Huckleberry Finn and Catcher in the Rye are dropped from from the curriculum for being un-PC and having overtly pro-masculine themes. It's really fucked up on so many levels. This is a major reason why young boys these days have atrocious reading and writing skills. It's hard enough to get a boy to pick up a book with all the distractions he has from sports, video games and girls, and then when he does, you're going to give him some trash novel about some stupid bitch who cheats on her husband? That's supposed to interest him? On top of that, what the fuck kind of message is this sending to young girls? That cheating on your husband is the cool way to find yourself? What's next, a book about how much fun it is to have an abortion?

This is intentional, and it's brainwashing. Period. This shit is not seeping into our schools by accident. There is a coordinated effort to promote this kind of trash and completely destroy traditional American culture and values in the minds of youth. Anything that features traditional gender norms, family values, masculine themes, etc... is out. What's in: every conceivable kind of racial minority literature, women's literature, homosexual literature, etc...

The end result? If you go to public school in America today, you could be forgiven for having the idea that no white man ever wrote a book at all.

We're in danger of raising an entire generation of men who would be practically illiterate if not for their text messaging and Facebooking. Without reading, the mind closes. Men no longer question. They have no historical or cultural perspective. They don't even understand that things could be different, have been different, from the way they are now. They become little more than slaves. That is exactly what is happening, and it's by design.

Post: #8

Catcher in the Rye was actually a mandatory reading assignment for me in high school. How long has it been removed from schools?

Post: #9

After thinking about it - I see lots of benefit in this assignment.

Heartiste wrote about reading a few female pulp romance novels as a glimpse into female desire. So your brother does that with this book and gets school credit.

In the book write up, there is lots of scope for manosphere level analysis.

You could do a fantasy vs reality interpretation. Making a counterpoint with how you envision the female protagonist five years after the close of the novel.

"The male love interest eventually reached the point of diminishing returns with their carnal encounters. He saw no moral impediment to leaving her - after all, she had railed against the constraints of her marriage vows and elected not to be faithful to her husband. So her new partner saw no obligation to repay her with lifelong fidelity.

Faced with the desire for heirs of his own family blood, he moved on in search of a woman who could one day raise his children with gladness in her heart. He learned to feel disdain for a woman who would cast aside her own children while she went on an Eat, Pray, Love journey to search for her own individuality."

TL;DR - ho got pumped and dumped"

I see nothing wrong with this assignment, as long as it's part of a broader reading list that includes masculine writers like Hemingway (and maybe even 30 Bangs by Roosh V, an exploration of male desire and self-actualization).

Post: #10

Spoiler Alerts Below.

American school kids have been reading this shit for decades. In fact, I had an ex-girlfriend who read it. And, if memory serves me well, the protagonist is shamed for being the slut that she is and, in the end, commits suicide by walking into the ocean and drowning herself. Naturally, the feminists ignore that part of the story or read it as even more victimization. I distinctly remember my dumb ex-girlfriend eating that shit up, and me hating the little bit that I read of it with all of my soul. This propaganda affects real lives. This shit is part empowerment anthem and part black-and-white pornography for women.

The selection of this book over the hundreds upon hundreds of superior works of fiction is perfect example of feminist infiltration. The bored housewife who has everything but still feels "trapped." It was written by a feminist for feminists.

Your brother should read the one-star reviews on Amazon and base his essay on that.

Post: #11

Although this is bothersome, it's not all that different than when I was in high school.

I came to a conclusion recently you might want to tell your bro about. Almost all of my learning after eighth grade did not come from the classroom, but from the library.

I needed real books to learn about everything from politics to popular music to pop culture (Tom Wolfe, Hunter S. Thompson) to sex. And I needed the library to read real American classics, the kind they wouldn't let you go near in school because they're banned.

Funny story: in my senior year of high school I was a teacher's aide. I was stocking a storage room with books when the (male) teacher I was working with pointed to some titles and told me to take them home. "Why?" Because they were banned in the district and the school was going to dump them. These included "Huckleberry Finn" and "The Catcher in the Rye," and a few C.S. Lewis titles. He thought I should read them on my own time, though.

What does that tell you about the American educational system?

Post: #12

As a foreigner, I don't understand why The Catcher in the Rye and Huckleberry Finn are banned in US high schools. What's wrong with these books? I really like The Catcher in the Rye - read it a couple of times recently. As for Huckleberry Finn, the Russian translation of the book was assigned to me either at middle or high school. I think I read some parts of the book but was too young to appreciate it, or probably had other things on my mind at the time. It's funny, but I don't think i even paid attention to the fact that Huckleberry Finn was black. At that age, I had never seen a black person and had absolutely no idea about the race issues in the US.

Post: #13

If I found a lamp with a genie in it (Middle-Easterner allusions not intended), I would burn one of my three wishes to temporarily shape-shift into Roosh's little brother and lay down a seering demolition of that book. I would bring all of my (adult-level) intellectual might to bear on that presentation/essay. I'd drag every post-structuralist, feminist writer into the conversation, from Judith Butler to Michel Foucault. That teacher wouldn't know what hit her/him.

Roosh, tell your brother to read the "Gender" chapter in Steven Pinker's, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature (pp. 337-371) for powerful-rebuttal material for the "oppression" tropes in Chopin's book. It wouldn't hurt him to read the whole book, but I know high schoolers read at a snail's pace.

Post: #14

Can't your bro just game the system by reading some summary, read some other people's take on the book, and cruise through? Spend as little time as possible to get a B? And spend mental energy learning useful subjects and reading real literature?

That's what I did in high school.. no problem

Making all the students read these types of romance novels is part political brainwashing, part result of feminization of the school system. But this is a very light form of brainwashing. If you're aware of it, there is no problem for you personally.

As much fun as it is to rebel against high school English curricula, spend that energy and potential blowback elsewhere..

Post: #15

(06-29-2013 06:46 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  Although this is bothersome, it's not all that different than when I was in high school.

I came to a conclusion recently you might want to tell your bro about. Almost all of my learning after eighth grade did not come from the classroom, but from the library.

I needed real books to learn about everything from politics to popular music to pop culture (Tom Wolfe, Hunter S. Thompson) to sex. And I needed the library to read real American classics, the kind they wouldn't let you go near in school because they're banned.

Funny story: in my senior year of high school I was a teacher's aide. I was stocking a storage room with books when the (male) teacher I was working with pointed to some titles and told me to take them home. "Why?" Because they were banned in the district and the school was going to dump them. These included "Huckleberry Finn" and "The Catcher in the Rye," and a few C.S. Lewis titles. He thought I should read them on my own time, though.

What does that tell you about the American educational system?

Growing up poor, the library was my outlet for fun. I didn't always read what was good or what I was supposed too, but I read a lot. It amazes me how some people haven't read shit in their lives. And I've often heard chicks say, "I hate reading." As if its some badge of honor.

In high school, a couple of teachers in particular foisted this fem-lit crap on us. It's why I always did any "you choose book reports or book reviews" on serial killers or sports or Fulgencio Batista or Augusto Pinochet etc. etc. -- something I knew they would hate or be insanely bored with.

Post: #16

(06-29-2013 07:01 PM)Brodiaga Wrote:  As a foreigner, I don't understand why The Catcher in the Rye and Huckleberry Finn are banned in US high schools. What's wrong with these books? I really like The Catcher in the Rye - read it a couple of times recently. As for Huckleberry Finn, the Russian translation of the book was assigned to me either at middle or high school. I think I read some parts of the book but was too young to appreciate it, or probably had other things on my mind at the time. It's funny, but I don't think i even paid attention to the fact that Huckleberry Finn was black. At that age, I had never seen a black person and had absolutely no idea about the race issues in the US.

1) catcher in the rye - dude ditches school, talks about trying to lose his v-card, gets a prostitute, gets very drunk - you don't want students emulating Holden.

2) huck finn - Huck finn is white.

Why Huck Finn is banned?

It depends on who you talk to.

People that don't really understand the story think it's banned because of Mark Twain's fucked up characterization of Jim. Throw in the rampant use of the N-word, and call it a wrap.

Now you talk to black folks about Huck Finn....

Huck plays Jim for a fool throughout the novel.
Jim, being purposefully written to be obedient and subservient, sticks his neck out for Huck more than a few times.

So at some point in the story Huck has the opportunity to give Jim his freedom from slavery.

What does Huck Finn do? Return the favor? Plead Jim's case? Defend Jim?

Huck doesn't do a god damn thing for Jim.

Huck Finn, like most novels involving white people and black people, says a lot more about white people than anything else - and that's why it's so dangerous to teach.

It's a good thing that most literature in High School is impossible to understand in High School, because otherwise High School would fail in it's main purpose - to create ignorant but obedient workers and consumers.

WIA

Post: #17

(06-29-2013 07:46 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  And I've often heard chicks say, "I hate reading." As if its some badge of honor.

I've heard plenty of guys say that too. In fact, I'd argue that it's more common for women to be readers than men.

I'd say the men I know who read tend to read shit that means more in the big scheme of life but they're few and far between.

Post: #18

I had to read this in 2nd year of college. It seemed like utter crap back then too.
I seem to recall it was 'rediscovered' sometime in the 60s (?) after being ignored for a long time.
William Blake it is not.

I recommend Sailing around the world by Mr. Joshua Slocum

You can move on to Nabakov in due time.

Post: #19

I had to read not only "The Awakening" but also "The Home-maker" and some other feminist turd. "The Awakening" is basically a story about a selfish woman deserting her children and well-heeled upper class husband to paint shitty paintings in an art studio and get fucked by some dandy. Then she realizes that "society" is not yet ready for women to have "freedom", even though she was hilariously bourgeoisie compared to nearly all women at the time, so she decides to kill herself the most passive way possible, by swimming out into the ocean and taking a deep breath underwater. We had a class discussion about this and I basically said that she was a selfish loser, and that her needs were secondary to her children. Shit, the book barely mentions her children's names.

"The Homemaker" was a tentative women's rights book written a hundred years ago about how in extraordinary circumstances - in this case it was a husband who hated his job and ended up a paraplegic, and a housewife who hated cleaning but had great business sense - should swap roles. Both of these books suck, period.

Post: #20

I'm not sure I care anymore about what kids read in school these days. It's just a small piece of a societal influence that people are being conditioned with. What you see on TV, read on the internet, what their parents talk about, their friends. In a different society the kids and parents themselves would be disgusted but instead most people in the states just swallow it up. I say let them. They aren't my kids.

Post: #21

Huckleberry Finn isn't banned across the country. Some school districts have banned it, but others still teach it.

Still other schools use an expurgated version without the "n-word" that was published a couple years ago, to some controversy.

It's almost impossible to find out what proportion of schools ban the book, because it's more a matter of it not being included in approved book lists. I'd be curious to see if most school districts teach it or not.

Post: #22

"What does Huck Finn do? Return the favor? Plead Jim's case? Defend Jim? Huck doesn't do a god damn thing for Jim."

Yes, he does. It just takes a while.

The book starts with Huck being condescending towards Jim but as he gets to know Jim, he realizes the humanity in Jim and begins to question why people think of slaves as non-human. It had to start with Huck being insensitive and immature, though, so we could see how he changes.

One profound passage has Huck realizing that Jim has feelings about his family, like the rest of us. This was a pretty bold statement to make in an era when most people thought of African-Americans as little more than property. Slavery had only officially ended two years before the book was published in the US. The concept of African-Americans as people who deserved freedom was not widely shared. In its time, all of this was heavily controversial.

Back to the book: later on when Jim is captured in Arkansas, Huck frees him (so much for Huck not doing a damn thing for Jim). Huck does this despite thinking he'll go to hell because at the time, churches taught such things were a sin. Huck would also have been breaking the law.

By the time the journey ends, the two have formed a bond beyond the bounds of race. Huck didn't "sell Jim down the river."

The novel is banned for one reason: it uses the n-word. Jim is referred to as Ni**er Jim. This is the way blacks were referred to in that era.

I can understand thinking this view paints whites in a negative light. It does. But the point was that people can change themselves and the way they see others -- Huck was a metaphor and I think he still stands as a good one.

Post: #23

I enjoyed the play Pygmalion from a red-pill type of perspective (and as a work of literature basically.) The main male lead Higgins is a pretty strong example of MGTOW ideals, and Pygmalion was published in 1912!

Post: #24

Catcher in the Rye was required reading when I was in school and I recall enjoying it at 17. I re-read it at 28 and recalled thinking Holden was a whiny little bitch. I wonder how my perspective would change if I picked it up again.
As I went to high school in Canada, I enjoyed Robertson Davies' Deptford Trilogies. But pretty much most of my reading was done on my own time. I prefer Fitzgerald to Hemingway and the Russian greats to anyone else.
I too cannot abide people who take pride in not reading...

Post: #25

(06-29-2013 09:28 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  "What does Huck Finn do? Return the favor? Plead Jim's case? Defend Jim? Huck doesn't do a god damn thing for Jim."


The novel is banned for one reason: it uses the n-word. Jim is referred to as Ni**er Jim. This is the way blacks were referred to in that era.

This, mostly.

Its one of the finest works of American literature.

Roosh, why don't you have him read The Landmark Thucydides instead?