Excuse me, Mr. Naipaul. Female Gender has something to say

A foolish words, deaf ears, the saying goes. It must be conceived that the saying someone much higher than me, because since I heard the renowned writer and Nobel Prize for Literature VS Naipaul noted that no woman who can write as well as him, I have been working on a response in my head. What else would you say if I had the opportunity to respond, all the female gender? Are there even words can express all that we understand and that dear Mr. Naipaul seems to be very far from understanding?

My "narrow world view" prevents me. Maybe just the fact that "inevitably, a woman is the boss at home, and that translates into writing." I have no answers, not because they exist, but because I'ma woman. Gender weak, according to tradition, and although that tradition, this passing into history, Mr. Naipaul remembers. Want to hold on to it.

Misogyny is defined usually as the "hatred of women." But it is very easy for men to deny this definition Naipaul excuses like "I do not hate women! The contrary, I love women. As evidenced by the fact that I'm married to one."

What Mr. Naipaul, however, goes further. It has to do with a lack of respect, not a particular woman, but feminine in general. There is a new mindset. For centuries leading men, philosophers, religious and cultural authorities have dismissed women a par with men deficient and incomplete. Freud's theory of "penis envy" is a clear example of this.

I do not pretend to speak for the female gender. Not for me to do so. But I can say with certainty that I speak for five women, who we have this blog. And I have one thing to say to Mr. Naipaul: Do not believe that his statements make it original. You are just another in a long list of men who had denigrated women.

Perhaps, if the insult had been in general, without names, it would be easier to forgive and forget. Specific mention of Jane Austen, that is not alive to defend themselves, is the straw that breaks the camel. Mr. Naipaul notes that "could never share their sentimental ambitions, his sentimental vision of the world."

I ask you, Mr. Naipaul, not only from the female, but from all the writers in this world: Is it not our job to portray the human race? And if we start from this basis, is not this female rejection proof how little he understands, not only women but also to the vast majority of men?

One thing is clear. Not find in his writing a strong woman character. You may not find a real man. Failed to move me, fall in love, make me laugh. In my own skin feel what he feels his character. Not because she is a woman, and my vision is narrow, but because it is you who do not understand. And you do not understand, does not attempt to understand, can not really express themselves.

Perhaps, therefore, my conclusion is that in a world where there is an endless list of books that enrich, worth, in more languages ​​than that life would give me the opportunity to learn, from you, more technically wonderful they are, are not necessary. There's nothing to read an author who does not understand what is intended to convey. And that is why, Mr. Naipaul that his words, in the end, produce more than it hurts me. There is no anger. Loentiendo. These are the words of a man that can never be the brilliant writer he thinks he is.

...