3. He told Random House that he’s not really interested in female authors, other than Virginia Woolf.
I’m not interested in teaching books by women. Virginia Woolf is the only writer that interests me as a woman writer, so I do teach one of her short stories. But once again, when I was given this job I said I would only teach the people that I truly, truly love. Unfortunately, none of those happen to be Chinese, or women. Except for Virginia Woolf. And when I tried to teach Virginia Woolf, she’s too sophisticated, even for a third-year class. Usually at the beginning of the semester a hand shoots up and someone asks why there aren’t any women writers in the course. I say I don’t love women writers enough to teach them, if you want women writers go down the hall. What I teach is guys. Serious heterosexual guys. F. Scott Fitzgerald, Chekhov, Tolstoy. Real guy-guys. Henry Miller. Philip Roth.
4. Needless to say, the Internet is super excited about his comments…
By saying he doesn’t like women writers, David Gilmour has finally stirred up a controversy as boring as his prose.
“Where are we going to find someone to mansplain heterosexual lit?” “Well, David Gilmour’s resume just says NO WOMEN, NO CHINESE in crayon.”
Sadie Berlin â“‹
Martin Amis said his father stopped being a good writer when he turned away from women. A good writer is male & female #davidgilmour
This is probably the most attention from women that David Gilmour will ever get!
8. With users calling him a misognyst and a racist for not wanting to teach literature written by “Chinese, or women” authors.
So is it fair to conclude that David Gilmour is at least a casual misogynist, racist, and homophobe?
So @UofT employs and @RandomhouseCA publishes this misogynist, proto-racist jerk? Why? http://t.co/EShXdloWnB