by the exact same comparison, there are plenty of dead broads that are much better than a fuck ton of alive men

Most readers just want to be entertained by fiction they enjoy, their goal is not to find the highest-quality books possible.
And for those who want to look beyond the commercial mainstream and not miss any gems, there are book critics, rankings, recommended reads and so on.

The truth simply is that a high literarily quality and mainstream appeal are not the same thing. Whether we're talking about books, comics, TV or music, most people are perfectly happy consuming mediocre, vapid material.

Most classics were once "vapid material". Are you aware of the number of vagina jokes in Shakespear?

"brilliantly" contrarian yet clearly contradictory. i'm not even sure if you can read english

The standards in this regard have shifted over the centuries as cultural activities like reading and music became accessible to larger parts of the public. Back when most writers and componists relied on an aristocratic patron, they were of course producing more highbrow stuff.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 13 2021 09:14pm

But they weren't. Even over 200 years ago theater was propped up by the masses. They had rich patrons but still sold cheap seats to the masses to make ends meet.

And for which audience did they produce their work, whose tastes did they cater to - the rich patrons or the unwashed masses?

it’s easy for one to blame capitalism for everything when they failed to wield their privilege to their advantage

sure, but I did not see alive men complaining about dead women stealing their shine