The discussion is about a novel whose main appeal is described as "scenes one can imagine themselves in" with "more style than substance". That's a valid thing to enjoy, but not for everyone.
The idea that it appeals to boys and not girls was conflicted with further nuance: while girls might be hard pressed to see themselves in it, so too would some boys.
While one can make the argument that the beats' values and writings are at least complimentary to misogyny, that wasn't the discussion happening here previously.
> while girls might be hard pressed to see themselves in it, so too would some boys.
That's the same thing, in this context. Saying "only some boys could see themselves in books where men mistreat women" is basically the same thing I'm criticising.
The discussion is about a novel whose main appeal is described as "scenes one can imagine themselves in" with "more style than substance". That's a valid thing to enjoy, but not for everyone.
The idea that it appeals to boys and not girls was conflicted with further nuance: while girls might be hard pressed to see themselves in it, so too would some boys.
While one can make the argument that the beats' values and writings are at least complimentary to misogyny, that wasn't the discussion happening here previously.