fluvicola_nengeta
fluvicola_nengeta t1_j2b5n89 wrote
Reply to comment by Anathos117 in Does Don Winslow introduce endless female characters just to write explicitly about their bodies and sex lives? by hammnbubbly
Fair enough. But in my defense it wasn't too much of a reading comprehension thing. As soon as I read statements like that I skip the rest of the comment and move on with my life because after a while it gets exhausting. That's my bad either way.
fluvicola_nengeta t1_j2b0kya wrote
Reply to comment by owarren in Does Don Winslow introduce endless female characters just to write explicitly about their bodies and sex lives? by hammnbubbly
On this very thread we have someone calling Nabokov a pedophile. It's just insane.
fluvicola_nengeta t1_j2afb3b wrote
Reply to comment by King_of_Cold26 in Does Don Winslow introduce endless female characters just to write explicitly about their bodies and sex lives? by hammnbubbly
It's honestly a concerning issue how so many people no longer seem capable of differentiating character from author, and not enough people are talking about this. The number of people who can read and write perfectly fine but aren't literate is growing alarmingly, and this has a much bigger chance of putting literature in a bad place than "those damn phones and the internet" ever did.
fluvicola_nengeta t1_j2dluld wrote
Reply to comment by Anathos117 in Does Don Winslow introduce endless female characters just to write explicitly about their bodies and sex lives? by hammnbubbly
I don't think he is. Lots of people have been saying that he is, though. The very people I was complaining about in my original comment, in fact, so we both need to work on our reading comprehension. Despite my apology, you seem intent on nitpicking things to object to, though, so I'm peacing out of this exchange. Happy new year.