3 ms·
> there's no overt sexism - he manages to bypass that by having almost no female characters at all. That is true for much of classical literature, going all th
by dotancohen 1y ago
> there's no overt sexism - he manages to bypass that by having almost no female characters at all.
That is true for much of classical literature, going all the way back to the Greeks.
- watwut 1y agoFemale characters are not exactly exceptional in classical literature. And that statement includes fairly sexist works. Even Odyssey has multiple female characters - you do not get older then that. Shakespeare has them and that is as English language classic as it gets. Women are literally all around classics.
- dotancohen 1y agoYes, that's why I stated much classical literature. Not all classical literature or most classical literature. Much classical literature.
- watwut 1y agoI dont buy it. You have to cherry pick among classics hard to come with the "much of it does not have female characters" conclusion. Much of it do have women in it. As I go through them in my head, almost everything has some women in it, at least existing in larger world. Except "Old Man and the Sea" one character against the world kind of things. Hemingway has women in other books tho.
- dotancohen 1y agoYou invented a quote that does not quote anything I said, so I won't defend it. I suggest that you notice the word "almost" in the text I quoted in my original comment.
- watwut 1y agoFrankly, you are just wrong about content of classical literature.
- esperent 1y ago> That is true for much of classical literature, going all the way back to the Greeks. It is not, in fact.