Take a photo of a barcode or cover
Reviews tagging 'Sexism'
How to murder your Boss – McMasters Handbuch zum Morden by Rupert Holmes
36 reviews
adventurous
dark
funny
lighthearted
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Easily one of my favorite reads this year. I love the tone and found all of the twists to be fair and enjoyable.
It scratches a very petty, not-super-christian itch in my brain.
It scratches a very petty, not-super-christian itch in my brain.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Suicide, Murder
Moderate: Homophobia, Sexism, Sexual content, Transphobia, Sexual harassment
Minor: Sexual assault
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Picked this up based on a random post that came up on my feed and entirely based on the title. Clever and steady paced. Not exactly suspenseful more methodical including the plot, enjoyed the idea of training people to become better killers/how to get away with murder.
Content Warnings
Minor: Bullying, Cursing, Death, Infidelity, Misogyny, Sexism, Suicide, Toxic relationship, Violence, Forced institutionalization, Grief, Stalking, Car accident, Suicide attempt, Murder, Toxic friendship, Abandonment, Alcohol, Sexual harassment
dark
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Misogyny, Sexism, Suicide, Toxic relationship, Violence, Death of parent, Murder, Sexual harassment
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
"Doria Mays was late for Alibis and she had no excuse."
If you begrudgingly chuckled at that, you will enjoy this book. It's silly and surprisingly cozy for a book about murder. The character are well defined enough that you will hope they successfully, Ahem, delete their targets, who all have it coming. The 1950s setting is nice though some of the research is sketchy (a nurse practitioner predating the profession by a decade for example, but what book doesnt mess up medical stuff?)
A fun read!
If you begrudgingly chuckled at that, you will enjoy this book. It's silly and surprisingly cozy for a book about murder. The character are well defined enough that you will hope they successfully, Ahem, delete their targets, who all have it coming. The 1950s setting is nice though some of the research is sketchy (a nurse practitioner predating the profession by a decade for example, but what book doesnt mess up medical stuff?)
A fun read!
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexism
Minor: Violence
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Content Warnings
Graphic: Racism, Sexism, Murder
adventurous
challenging
dark
lighthearted
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I'd give it one star, but by the time I wanted to DNF it, I was already halfway through the book and decided to begrudgingly commit to finishing the rest of it. ("But there's a half/quarter star rating feature!" don't piss me off more than this book already has. Let me make life simple for myself.)
I'll start this off kindly: I wanted to read this book because the cover is gorgeous and I found the morbid title entertaining. The premise of failed/aspiringmurderers "deletionists" attending a homicide school is fascinating in a gothic, almost comical way. It's an interesting and refreshing story idea that I've personally never seen done. Also, the world-building and mapping of the McMasters college itself is very cool! Every location is described just enough to both instill the intended and evoke a personal description of what everything looks like, which is perfect for someone like me.
However, as many other reviewers have mentioned, there were problems--which were in a grand MAJORITY of the book--that instilled a fury that I myself cannot even begin to fathom.
It's very obvious that Rupert Holmes as a bit of an ego complex, in which he inflates and translates to every, single male character introduced throughout the narration. Dean Harrow. Cliff Iverson. Merrill Fiedler. Simeon Sampson. Jud Helkampf. These are like the first examples I can come up with from the top of my head, but this urge to find Holmes and strangle him was deeply ingrained in me, because why does every single male character have the exact same douchebag attitude? Like, I get it, the time period in this is set post-WW2 when sexism was much bigger than it is now, but Holmes can take the stick shoved up his tush and beat himself with it because he does not do characterization well AT ALL.
I'm almost inclined to say that he (somehow) wrote the women better, but the other two POVs--both of which were women--were insufferable in their own "special" ways. Doria Maye has an incredibly sexualized personality and character: despite her being the most tolerable POV between her, Cliff, and Gemma, I was still eyerolling at her evidently "I am a woman who is sexy, promiscuous, and will use that to manipulate men" trope. Very sexist character trope. Gemma Lindley, on the other hand, was almost written to be as important as diet water, which is to say that Holmes evidently did not have enough going on in the plot (sarcasm) and decided that Cliff needed a romantic love interest or, as my manager called it, a "side-quest." HE DOES NOT NEED THIS SIDE-QUEST. HIS PREVIOUS LOVE INTEREST COMMITTED KYS AND DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE GOOGLY EYES OVER A GIRL HE JUST MET AT THIS HOMICIDE SCHOOL THAT EVIDENTLY HAS NO INTEREST IN HIM IN THE SLIGHTEST! Speaking of which, there is genuinely no hint of Gemma returning his feelings at all until her point of view a third into the book, and her returned feelings during that exam felt cringily forced. And then at the end:"Cliff! You're alive! :D" "Gemma! You're not dead let's go out on a date! ;D" THE STICK, HOLMES. USE THE STICK.
And, oh my god, for all the living things in the world, this book literally treats us like we're stupid. Of course, it doesn't help that the narrator is Dean Harbinger Harrow, one of the most insufferable characters of the book who tries to be morbidly funny and fails to. Every. Thing. Is. Explained. Over. And. Over. Again. Then it's explained IN ELABORATE DETAIL A SECOND TIME when something is just "so clever." Holmes (Holmes...), I hope both sides of your pillow and your bed is a little too warm for comfort every night.
And, of course, the cherry on top...
I'll start this off kindly: I wanted to read this book because the cover is gorgeous and I found the morbid title entertaining. The premise of failed/aspiring
However, as many other reviewers have mentioned, there were problems--which were in a grand MAJORITY of the book--that instilled a fury that I myself cannot even begin to fathom.
It's very obvious that Rupert Holmes as a bit of an ego complex, in which he inflates and translates to every, single male character introduced throughout the narration. Dean Harrow. Cliff Iverson. Merrill Fiedler. Simeon Sampson. Jud Helkampf. These are like the first examples I can come up with from the top of my head, but this urge to find Holmes and strangle him was deeply ingrained in me, because why does every single male character have the exact same douchebag attitude? Like, I get it, the time period in this is set post-WW2 when sexism was much bigger than it is now, but Holmes can take the stick shoved up his tush and beat himself with it because he does not do characterization well AT ALL.
I'm almost inclined to say that he (somehow) wrote the women better, but the other two POVs--both of which were women--were insufferable in their own "special" ways. Doria Maye has an incredibly sexualized personality and character: despite her being the most tolerable POV between her, Cliff, and Gemma, I was still eyerolling at her evidently "I am a woman who is sexy, promiscuous, and will use that to manipulate men" trope. Very sexist character trope. Gemma Lindley, on the other hand, was almost written to be as important as diet water, which is to say that Holmes evidently did not have enough going on in the plot (sarcasm) and decided that Cliff needed a romantic love interest or, as my manager called it, a "side-quest." HE DOES NOT NEED THIS SIDE-QUEST. HIS PREVIOUS LOVE INTEREST COMMITTED KYS AND DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE GOOGLY EYES OVER A GIRL HE JUST MET AT THIS HOMICIDE SCHOOL THAT EVIDENTLY HAS NO INTEREST IN HIM IN THE SLIGHTEST! Speaking of which, there is genuinely no hint of Gemma returning his feelings at all until her point of view a third into the book, and her returned feelings during that exam felt cringily forced. And then at the end:
And, oh my god, for all the living things in the world, this book literally treats us like we're stupid. Of course, it doesn't help that the narrator is Dean Harbinger Harrow, one of the most insufferable characters of the book who tries to be morbidly funny and fails to. Every. Thing. Is. Explained. Over. And. Over. Again. Then it's explained IN ELABORATE DETAIL A SECOND TIME when something is just "so clever." Holmes (Holmes...), I hope both sides of your pillow and your bed is a little too warm for comfort every night.
And, of course, the cherry on top...
"...We are not going to help someone commit murder."
(pg. 260, Chapter XXXVI)
...in a book about murder.
I almost threw this library-owned copy out of the car when I was on the highway. Look, I love ironic statements where it's a character going "It surely can't be that bad." with the starting quote of the next scene being something along the lines of "It was that bad." I love irony. I love humor. I love everything about these when it's properly executed. Note how I say "properly" before executed. This also ties back to my point about the "Holmes's main character syndrome" I was on about. This is a high-ho, smart-alec CEO saying this line, sure. Would it have made me laugh in any other circumstance? Absolutely. But after the rest of the rancid vibes I had to face from pages past, I unironically found myself considering murder. Best find you your Sherlock, Holmes. Whatever contaminated that stick up "there," eat it. Probably tastes better than what you dished for us.
All in all, let me summarize this in the best way I can: I was ranting to my manager about how bad this book was while I was reading it. Am I going to be murdering my employer anytime soon? If I was, then not anymore. That's how bad the book was. It couldn't even manager to make murder cool in a book about cool, "good" murder.
I think I'll find myself a good stick and hunt down Holmes myself...
...in a book about murder.
I almost threw this library-owned copy out of the car when I was on the highway. Look, I love ironic statements where it's a character going "It surely can't be that bad." with the starting quote of the next scene being something along the lines of "It was that bad." I love irony. I love humor. I love everything about these when it's properly executed. Note how I say "properly" before executed. This also ties back to my point about the "Holmes's main character syndrome" I was on about. This is a high-ho, smart-alec CEO saying this line, sure. Would it have made me laugh in any other circumstance? Absolutely. But after the rest of the rancid vibes I had to face from pages past, I unironically found myself considering murder. Best find you your Sherlock, Holmes. Whatever contaminated that stick up "there," eat it. Probably tastes better than what you dished for us.
All in all, let me summarize this in the best way I can: I was ranting to my manager about how bad this book was while I was reading it. Am I going to be murdering my employer anytime soon? If I was, then not anymore. That's how bad the book was. It couldn't even manager to make murder cool in a book about cool, "good" murder.
I think I'll find myself a good stick and hunt down Holmes myself...
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Sexual content, Violence, Murder
Moderate: Sexism, Sexual assault, Suicide, Alcohol, War
Minor: Gun violence, Misogyny, Medical content, Kidnapping, Stalking, Car accident, Death of parent, Toxic friendship
There is a part about 3/4 into the book where a character pretends to be trans on multiple occasions in order to commit their murder. Each instance is slightly exaggerated, but IMO not enough to consider transphobia.
dark
lighthearted
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
If you like sexism and transphobia and having everything overexplained ...
This book seemed like it would be right up my alley. It wasn't.
The premise was interesting, but the writing isn't nearly as funny or clever as it pretends to be. So much of it is ridiculous in a bad way. Every event is recounted in a formulaic pattern: 1) someone does a thing 2) someone launches into a villainesque monologue explaining what was just done and how "clever" it was.
But the reason for the super low rating instead of just an average one is the bigotry throughout. Every woman is described by whether she's attractive to a man, and the men--even the "good" ones--are constantly objectifying them. At one point, a woman is referred to as "an elderly female" while her counterpart is referred to as "an elderly man" and "an elderly gentleman."
There are no queer characters in the book, buttrans people are used as a plot device and scapegoat in a way that isn't social commentary about their struggles. A cis woman, one of the "good" characters, pretends to be a trans woman while committing a crime so the police will suspect a trans person instead of her. This is praised as clever by the people in charge (also "good" characters) instead of condemned as victimizing already marginalized people and harming innocents. Trans women are assumed (again, by "good" characters) to be "men with certain...interests," "not real women," and tricking men into having "nonconsensual" sex with them. That is also never challenged but instead treated as a given.
There was also brief homophobia and racism, but it's used to show how terrible one of the bad characters is.
I would usually nope out of a book I'd rate under 3 stars. And if I hadn't made a promise to myself to finish all library books I check out, this would have been one of them. I almost did it anyway, but the worst of it came within a hour of the end. The one silver lining is that I don't have to say "I'd give it zero stars if I could" because I can.
This book seemed like it would be right up my alley. It wasn't.
The premise was interesting, but the writing isn't nearly as funny or clever as it pretends to be. So much of it is ridiculous in a bad way. Every event is recounted in a formulaic pattern: 1) someone does a thing 2) someone launches into a villainesque monologue explaining what was just done and how "clever" it was.
But the reason for the super low rating instead of just an average one is the bigotry throughout. Every woman is described by whether she's attractive to a man, and the men--even the "good" ones--are constantly objectifying them. At one point, a woman is referred to as "an elderly female" while her counterpart is referred to as "an elderly man" and "an elderly gentleman."
There are no queer characters in the book, but
There was also brief homophobia and racism, but it's used to show how terrible one of the bad characters is.
I would usually nope out of a book I'd rate under 3 stars. And if I hadn't made a promise to myself to finish all library books I check out, this would have been one of them. I almost did it anyway, but the worst of it came within a hour of the end. The one silver lining is that I don't have to say "I'd give it zero stars if I could" because I can.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Misogyny, Sexism, Transphobia
dark
funny
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Murder
Moderate: Homophobia, Sexism, Transphobia, Sexual harassment
Minor: Racism, Suicide, Pregnancy
adventurous
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Overall enjoyable! Definitely requires some suspension of reality, but does a good job justifying the excuse of an Ivy-esq school that teaches murder. I do think the pacing was a little uneven (the first half dragged a little, while the second half flew by). Really witty and each of the man three students had very distinctive voices and POVS. I found essentially of the journal entries in Cliff’s first journal to be a slog, and wish we had seen more of Gemma and Dulcie while at McMasters.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder
Minor: Homophobia, Sexism, Suicide, Sexual harassment
adventurous
dark
funny
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
What a clever, hilarious, and riveting read.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexism, Sexual violence, Murder