/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16133997]

Although none of their books have survived, there were a lot of great Greek female philosophers that loved ( philo– ) the wisdom ( -sophia). There are clear references to their existence and the influence they had on the works of some of the most famous Greek philosophers like Plato, Pythagoras or Socrates.
Philosophers in Ancient Greece were the first to attempt to rationalize their perception of nature and the world. Until then, the human kind used mythology and magic to explain the physical phenomena and how the world had been created. In the 7th century B.C. in all Hellenic cities of the Mediterranean and especially in Athens a quite radical approach to explaining the world began; one that used reason and evidence to do so. Their thoughts, experiments and work remarkably changed the way that people understood the world and themselves and became the introduction of scientific thinking for the Western Civilization.
As wise as these Ancient Greeks were, we can’t deny that, there was one major fault that they all had in common. They believed that women were inferior creatures compared to men and that their prospects were extremely limited. Women were excluded from social and political life and the majority were confined to a life at home and bearing children. Very few women philosophers managed to defy all conventions and pursue knowledge for themselves. Apart from their natural curiosity and intelligence, they had to be audacious, persuasive and persistent.

[Anonymous No.16134468]

cringe

[Anonymous No.16134484]

You have to dominate only if you can not get voluntary love and loyalty.
You have to objectify in order to be able to dominate.
You have to feel superior in order to objectify.
Thinking women are inferior is the weak man‘s mental gymnastics to justify trying to force females to be close to them.
Intelligent and capable men know that the true sign of maturity is realizing how inherently masculine and feminine characteristics complement each other instead of comparing them.

[Anonymous No.16134491]

>>16133997
>Philosophers in Ancient Greece were the first to attempt to rationalize their perception of nature and the world.
This was written by an absolute retard

[Anonymous No.16134507]

ok

[Anonymous No.16134508]

Plato actually had two female students in his academy. One, called Axiothea of Phlius, dressed like a man to avoid scrutiny. I mention this because i think reverse-trap stuff is hot and i wish there was a story about an Athenian pederast courting on her thinking she was a boy, and her getting all flustered at experiencing true eros for the first time. Then there would be hi-jinks around attending the gymnasium together where Axiothea has to make up a bunch of excuses not to strip nude and slather each other in olive oil. And it all culminates in them drinking a bit too much wine at a banquet where they make out and the older man bends Axiothea over, prepared to pound some boy-butt only to find out she's a girl! haha, it would be such a fun story.

[Anonymous No.16134513]

>Although none of their books have survived, there were a lot of great Greek female philosophers that loved ( philo– ) the wisdom ( -sophia). There are clear references to their existence and the influence they had on the works of some of the most famous Greek philosophers like Plato, Pythagoras or Socrates.
>Philosophers in Ancient Greece were the first to attempt to rationalize their perception of nature and the world. Until then, the human kind used mythology and magic to explain the physical phenomena and how the world had been created. In the 7th century B.C. in all Hellenic cities of the Mediterranean and especially in Athens a quite radical approach to explaining the world began; one that used reason and evidence to do so. Their thoughts, experiments and work remarkably changed the way that people understood the world and themselves and became the introduction of scientific thinking for the Western Civilization.
>As wise as these Ancient Greeks were, we can’t deny that, there was one major fault that they all had in common. They believed that women were inferior creatures compared to men and that their prospects were extremely limited. Women were excluded from social and political life and the majority were confined to a life at home and bearing children. Very few women philosophers managed to defy all conventions and pursue knowledge for themselves. Apart from their natural curiosity and intelligence, they had to be audacious, persuasive and persistent.

[Anonymous No.16134523]

>>16134508
Wtf

[Anonymous No.16134526]

>>16134508
The one flaw here is that the academy taught there to be no Homofaggotry between philosophic lovers.

[Anonymous No.16134533]

>>16134526
Also that people below 30 shouldn't drink to a stupor, the older you are the more you should drink, but the drinking is to praise the gods.

[Anonymous No.16134632]

>>16134526
>>16134533
She would be courted by someone outside the Academy, maybe a playwright or wealthy citizen. And she would put up her guard and try to follow the teachings of the academy but the persistence of her lover would eventually wear down her high-minded resolve as she gradually falls in love with him. It's true that it was a sign of pride in greek society to be able to stay sober and witty during banquets, but since she's secretly a girl she would be unused to drinking and would get drunk easier. Maybe the pederastic lover lures her there, confident in his ability to out-drink his lover and then convinces her right when her reason has been overcome by the sweet ambrosia of alcohol and eros. Maybe it could also feature Aphrodite intervening from time to time to push them together.

[Anonymous No.16134649]

>>16133997
Why do people make up schizo delusions about the past like this? What does it even accomplish?

[Anonymous No.16134652]

>>16134632
>>16134508
Your story is missing the most important part - when he realizes she's a girl would he smash or would he pass?

[Anonymous No.16134719]

>>16134526
fanfiction and cope

[Anonymous No.16134749]

>>16134649
History revisionists do this in order to cope

[Anonymous No.16136007]

>>16134484
Nice.
From any book in particular?

[Anonymous No.16136027]

>>16136007
No, it‘s just my personal take on it.

[Anonymous No.16136063]

>>16133997
My younger self would have gotten mad about revisionistic we wuzzing this blatant, but nowadays I can't muster anything more than a slight sense of annoyance and disappointment before clicking away.

[Anonymous No.16136111]

>>16134484
But science literally proves females are inferior. Are you insane?

[Anonymous No.16136129]

>>16136111
Science proves females inferior in inherently masculine traits, yes. They haven‘t even bothered to look at feminine traits. That‘s pretty telling.

[Anonymous No.16136152]

>>16136129
Men are better than women on average at everything besides getting fucked and giving birth. To deny this is to cope.

Hell, the recent uptick in TERF popularity could be said to be a prime example of how women are afraid that men are better even at being women than contemporary women are.

[Anonymous No.16136154]

>>16133997
That's cool revisionism and all, I've never heard the "women didn't make anything of worth because men were evil and kept them chained at their dungeon" trope ever before.

Now, care to mention any relevant, groundshaking or useful female philosopher from the last 5 decades? I'm sure another excuse is coming. Perhaps that they don't because they feel uneasy or insecure about their thinking abilities because of the patriarchy and that's why they don't try because if they tried the whole world would split in two and the true meaning of life would be revealed?

MALEY KEEPIN DA WYMYN DOWN
WE
WUZ
KWEENZ
N SHEEEEEEEIT

[Anonymous No.16136174]

>>16136129
Superiority is your ability to enact your will, to bend the world to your liking, to stand your ground against another entity. Women can not compete with men in these regards. Whatever bullshit femenine abilities you name count for nothing once your head is smashed on the pavement.

[Anonymous No.16136175]

>>16136154
It would seem that women were the true gods of the gaps all along. It seems that the more obscure and poorly documented an era, place, or culture is, the more likely is it that women were the ones doing everything in it.

[Anonymous No.16136182]

>>16136175
*goddesses of the gaps

[Anonymous No.16136207]

>>16136175
It's like we wuz kangz but with women, truly fascinating how both are so similar. Coming next up germanic warriors were female and the suebian knot was just the ponytail of the time.

[Anonymous No.16136209]

>>16134649
There's this funny property about Modernity, wherein because of Whig History the past is codified. That is to say, there is a "canon" to Ancient Greece, and nothing can be added to it. The past is the past, it's set in stone, nothing can ever change it. A similar phenomena happens with dinosaurs: our understanding of the past is perfect, complete, and time is a real objective thing. Any disagreement with the consensus on the past is for purely immoral reasons.

This is of course horseshit. What we have are fragments in the present that we attempt to piece together in a manner that is understandable to us. Because we can only use the fragments we have, our understanding is of course going to be flawed as we do not have every piece. While we can assume that there are a finite number of pieces, we have no way of knowing if we have all of them (indeed, given that these pieces can be destroyed, it is actually possible to know LESS about the past as time goes on, which flies totally against the aforementioned Whig History).

So when someone says "there were Ancient Greek female philosophers", people get mad. Why? Because this disagrees with their Liberal priors about Whig History. Everyone knows that women did absolutely nothing except get beaten, oppressed, and make children in Ancient Greece, the only reason to suggest otherwise is because you're inherently immoral and trying to undermine the foundations of Liberalism by attacking Whig History. If the past wasn't Bad, then Liberalism isn't Good.

[Anonymous No.16136228]

>>16136152
The fact you think inherently female traits are limited to getting fucked and giving birth is a very sad and destructive legacy of humanity. I won‘t argue that modern women almost completely lack those valuable inherent female traits because they have been guided to neglect or even despise them in favor of trying to imitate masculinity. Which leaves women with no other distinct traits than being able to give birth since they have let the world rob them of their feminine qualities and have failed to establish masculine traits. Which isn‘t a sign of their inferiority since that was never meant to be. Women aren‘t men. Forcing them to try to be like men was the worst idea humans ever had.

[Anonymous No.16136239]

>>16136228
>the worst idea humans ever had.
Umm, sweaty, pretty sure it all began with a female aristocratic paedophile jew. No humans were involved.

[Anonymous No.16136241]

>>16136228
Are you a tranny?

[Anonymous No.16136245]

>>16136174
No that is power and strength you mean. If your only measurement of who‘s worthy and who isn‘t is „who can kill everyone else“ then i pity you for the the world you think you live in. Humans are capable of more than raw strength and force. We‘re not just cave men anymore but we still have a long way to go as it seems.

[Anonymous No.16136266]

>>16136239
Pretty sure that idea is a lot older than any aristocracy.

>>16136241
Why would you think that?

[Anonymous No.16136276]

>>16136209
Schizo/10.

Besides, whig history is the exact opposite of what you described it as - it's not the calcification of history, but the subjection of it to the whig narrative of eternal Progress towards Equality and Freedom. Whig historians would've loved to find evidence of women doing something, anything in Ancient Greece, exactly because it would've supported their narrative.

[Anonymous No.16136286]

>>16136245
>No that is power and strength you mean.
Which is superiority.
>Humans are capable of more than raw strength and force. We‘re not just cave men anymore but we still have a long way to go as it seems.
Every being who cannot exert that "power and strength" as you call it will always be subject to the will of those who can, therefore they are subjugated, inferior.

[Anonymous No.16136288]

>>16136209
Which is all the sillier because we do actually know that there were Ancient Greek female philosophers. The following is a list of some of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ancient_Greek_women_philosophers
A few of these could be argued about. Did Hypatia, who anyone who has read Plato would know about (tsk tsk /lit/! You still haven't started with those Greeks!), really exist? Good question, we have no idea, none of these female philosophers' works have survived in whole to us. None of them were probably all that groundbreaking. A few of them were mathematicians (it's more proper to call Diotima a mathematicianess than a philosophoress, in my opinion), and a few of them were alchemists (several of whom actually obtained the philosopher's stone!). We have no idea if Aspasia had any good ideas herself, but then it was her good idea to get a bunch of smart men together so that they could discuss their good ideas, so I would say that yes, she did in fact have at least one good idea (well, no, two, the second was shacking up with Pericles).

Which is sort of a moot point because when people say "there were no Ancient Greek female philosophers" what they're actually saying is "women were mistreated in the past, the way we treat them now is better, we do this because Liberalism, so you're a bad person if you disagree with Liberalism". If you were to argue that women WEREN'T mistreated in the past, you're arguing that Liberalism is unnecessary (at minimum) or even outright immoral (at maximum).

Which is, on its face, silly, because if there were no female philosophers, what did they do all day? Barred from sports, philosophy, politics, business... actually, we know they did all three things. Sports is another fun one, as we have attestations of female athleticism (Septimus Severus actually imported an enormous number of Greek athletesses to replace the bloodsports of the colosseum, who we are told continued traditional Greek female athletics since times immemorial) at various points in Greek history.

So, what does it accomplish to say "50% of the population were just magically 'oppressed', whatever that means, until our ideology came along"? Why, it reinforces the necessity of the ideology. After all, BAD THING was done to women before Liberalism, only a bad person would want BAD THING to happen!

[Anonymous No.16136304]

>>16136286
Smashing someone‘s head is a sign of physical superiority, yes. But it is simultaneously a display of mental and emotional inferiority, so it‘s a draw.

[Anonymous No.16136312]

>>16136288
Hypatia lived almost a millenium after Plato, what are you talking about

[Anonymous No.16136316]

>>16136288
How do I become deluded enough for my view of the world to not crumble under their the weight of its own absurdity, tranny-kun? You sound like you would know how.

[Anonymous No.16136326]

>>16136304
What you subjectively think of it is irrelevant. The superior o ne enacts his will and continues living, the inferior one disappears.

[Anonymous No.16136328]

>>16136276
Whig History is the calcification of history because it demands history be calcifiable. The myth of progress also expands our view of the past backwards. Half of progress is shining a light in the dark corners of history and finding The Truth of what happened. This REQUIRES history be calcified, as it requires there to be a firm "the past" that we can look at and hold in our hands. It requires you to be able to have a bucket of "the past".

Another thing that the Myth of Progress requires is things to be shit in the past. That's the entire point of progress: an eternal progression. Things are always getting better, forever. Big line always goes up. Why would Whig Historians want to find out that things were good in the past? That would go completely contrary to Whig History. Yesterday was shit, today is better, tomorrow will be even better. Finding out that women had it good (or even worse, BETTER than they do today!) would fly completely contrary to the narratives of Whig History because that would mean that the past wasn't bad. The past being bad and the future being good is the entire point of Whig history.

[Anonymous No.16136339]

>>16136326
Maybe that was the case a few thousand years ago. In modern reality it‘s not such a clean cut anymore.

[Anonymous No.16136343]

>>16136152
Cope, tranny.

>>16136027
I like it.

[Anonymous No.16136347]

>>16136328
>Finding out that women had it good (or even worse, BETTER than they do today!)

Holy fuck

[Anonymous No.16136353]

>>16136312
I'm made a typo and confused Hypatia and Diotima. Did Diotima really exist? Who the fuck knows. Was Hypatia a philosopheress? Probably not, by all accounts she was a mathematician.

>>16136316
Pack back another bottle of s()y. Don't worry numale, the next Avengers movie will be EVEN BETTER! With even more sparkly lights and pretty colors! No need to ever open a book in your life.

[Anonymous No.16136363]

>>16136339
Extreme cope, behind the SJW smokescreen, human nature will ever be present.

[Anonymous No.16136372]

>>16136363
Yes it will. But you and i have a vastly different idea about how that human nature looks like.

[Anonymous No.16136380]

>>16136347
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying that yes, Liberalism is correct, the pod feels nice and the bugs taste good, Womyn's Liberation was the best thing to ever happen to them because the past was shit, and that you're a bad person for not voting for Hillary?

[Anonymous No.16136385]

>>16133997
>there was one major fault that they all had in common. They believed that women were inferior
this meme again... even now women get subsidies and affirmative action quotas to enter in stem, but they don't.... women are by any measure of intellect or brawn inferior to men. doesn't mean men get it better as there is far greater evolutionary strain on men

[Anonymous No.16136393]

>>16136372
The past is a reflection of our nature, the deeper you delve on it, the closer you get to who we really are. And once we are too far gone, like nowadays, then another people who are not that far gone will overtake us and destroy us, which is exactly whats happening with trad muslims increasing their files and numbers in Europe and negroes and trad spics in USA.

[Anonymous No.16136408]

>>16136380
No, I'm laughing at your retarded idea that there was a time or place on Earth ANYWHERE in the past where it was better to be a woman than it is in a contemporary first world country. The contemporary situation of the first world woman - zero responsibility or accountability, MASSIVE push from every institution under the sun, MASSIVE halo effect from basically 99% of society - is 100% unprecedented.

[Anonymous No.16136422]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB7qKbZWoWk
>>16134484
see >>16136385

[Anonymous No.16136431]

>>16136129
science has no bearing on gender, sweetie

[Anonymous No.16136434]

>>16136393
I don‘t think humans have yet managed to go back to their deepest nature. I also don‘t think this is achievable in this world or that it is even the goal. But it seem like you would think human nature is inherently destructive and cruel whereas i think human nature is inherently innocent and pure.

[Anonymous No.16136439]

>>16136431
I had to go there for the sake of the argument, honey.

[Anonymous No.16136442]

>>16136408
So then, exactly what I said in >>16136380. Women have it good, things are getting infinitely better, the past was shit for women, Liberalism came along and made things not shit for women (great, in fact), that's good and moral and just, and only a bad person would disagree. So instead of realizing the system is shit and that Whig History is just flat out wrong, you agree with Liberalism 100%, and just say "well, looks like I'm the bad guy!" and act exactly as Liberalism says bad guys do.

[Anonymous No.16136449]

>>16136439
well then your argument is fallacious

[Anonymous No.16136452]

>>16136434
If human nature was inherently innocent and pure, nobody would have ever done anything wrong to anyone, your argument is self-refuting.

[Anonymous No.16136486]

> Theano was born in 546 B.C. in Croton, a Hellenic city in South Italy. She was already known for her theories and lessons when she met the then thirty-year-older, Pythagoras. She was fascinated by his mysterious and wise teaching so much that she became his student and wife.

>She was a great mathematician, astronomer and cosmologist of the 6th century B.C. She is considered to have formulated the Theorem of the Golden Mean, of the golden number “φ” which had a capital role in the discovery of physical laws and is frequently used in the construction of buildings. She is also credited with the development of the theorem of the Harmony of Numbers.

>Theano and Pythagoras were the most important spiritual couple of the 6th century, and even after her husband’s death, Theano continued her teachings and her search for wisdom. She left the Magna Graecia (meaning Great Greece = South Italy) and with her five children settled on the island of Samos. She kept on the Pythagorean tradition with her lessons, her research and the administration of Pythagorean schools.

[Anonymous No.16136498]

>>16136422
You can not take modern day femininity at face value. It is a distorted and poisoned femininity, not what it is meant to or could be. I agree that it does look like females are inferior and need crutches at every turn, but that is only the case because humanity has decided that women can not be women, they have to try to be men and ofc they will fail horribly at that and won‘t be able to get to the level of actual men. But that‘s like saying that birds are inferior to fish because they drown when they have to dive for long periods of time and that they are weak for needing oxygen tanks to be able to even get somewhat near the vicinity of the fish‘s ability to swim unter water. Instead of forcing birds to swim underwater one should let them fly in the sky and instead of trying to evaluate what is more majestic, one could marvel at both and enjoy their differences. Because fish would also die if they were forced to fly without aid. None of them is superior or inferior, they are just different. But it is hard to see how that applies to men and women since humanity has never had a phase where we did not try to force women to be men or vice versa. There‘s no reference for how it would be if women were encouraged to be women and men would be encouraged to be men. Right now we‘re at the verge of changing from trying to force women to be men to force men to be women.

[Anonymous No.16136518]

>>16136452
Then life would be utterly meaningless. It‘s not meant to be a smooth ride, it‘s meant to be difficult to arrive at that purity and innocence again and despite the world. If it was easy and everyone could do it, we would have zero reasons to live.

[Anonymous No.16136522]

>>16136449
That is true but sometimes you have to tread carefully and give some in order to not lose someone.

[Anonymous No.16136528]

> Hipparchia, the Cynic, was the first liberated woman in history.

>She was born on 328 B.C. in Maroneia, a city of Thrace in Northern Greece. Her brother was a cynic philosopher and she also attended the Cynic School of Thebes. She was the first female student of the School and it was there she met Crates, her brother’s friend.

>Crates was also a philosopher whose style of living was very simple; he owned nothing but the absolute necessities required to live by. Although he came from a wealthy family he lived poor and hardy, anticonformist to all social conventions of his time. Hipparchia adored his philosophy and his lifestyle . She fell madly in love with him and wanted by all means to follow him. In vain her parents tried to change her mind. Eventually she married him and followed him into his unconventional lifestyle.

>We could say that Hipparchia with her free spirit was the first feminist. She lived in total equality with her partner. She even threw away her feminine clothes and they both lived like hippies of their time.

[Anonymous No.16136540]

>>16136498
>humanity has decided that women can not be women, they have to try to be men
umm sweetie, your gender is irrelevant to study STEM, idk why you keep bringing this fallacious argument everytime. no one actually believes it...
>species analogy
ill skip reading your post from here

the only thing of value you have is your maternal instinct, and it's only of value in a familial setting. giving you rights to vote ultimately subverted europe and america because you're like an NPC with your leftist inferiority complex, and wanting to import every subhuman niggeroid to europe because you're effectively not conscious of your own maternal instincts and how to keep them in check. when everything inevitably implodes you'll have no rights ever again be it by the authority of arabs or if by a miracle europeans don't go extinct

[Anonymous No.16136547]

> Leontion was a beautiful wise lady that lived in the 4th century B.C. and was a student of philosopher Epicurus.

>Her writings have all been lost except from a fragment of one of her letters addressed to her teacher, the great Epicurus, which is a testament to her importance in his Philosophical School.

>Very little is known about her. Some sources claim that she was an Hetaera – the upper class of well-educated prostitutes that kept company to wealthy citizens and had a lot of privileges compared to other women- and she may also have been the companion of Epicurus or another philosopher named Metrodorus. Whatever her status may have been Leontion remains famous after her death for criticizing the great Theophrastus the successor of Aristotle at the Lyceum.

[Anonymous No.16136568]

>>16136540
You really don‘t go far enough. Ofc women should focus on tending to their families and communities. Ofc women shouldn‘t be involved in politics because their feminine traits will interfere in those areas. But that is all part of trying to force women to become men. Also studying stem. It is not female nature to do that. In order to do so a woman will have to do a lot of mental gymnastics and even then it isn‘t going very well.
I also never said that it was men forcing women to become men. It could very well be women forcing themselves led by some very poisoned females.
But you still try to tell me that women are inherently inferior based on them failing in male disciplines that were never meant for them to dabble in.

[Anonymous No.16136596]

>>16133997
>>16134513
Contemporary academica is one giant COPE by women and minorities for their historical inferiority

[Anonymous No.16136607]

>>16136568
>science is a male discipline
if you fail at any conceivable discipline then maybe you are actually inferior? again science has no bearing on gender, it's the most objective measure of intellect. virtually no women are in stem doing hard science

you made this thread arguing women aren't inferior yet admit that by any meaningful measure they are?

[Anonymous No.16136621]

>>16136209
FUCK FEATHERS

[Anonymous No.16136638]

>>16136486
So she is famous for being married to Pythagoras? Wow. The patriarchy has clearly been suppressing this hard.

[Anonymous No.16136651]

>>16136528
Stunning and brave. I can’t imagine why she isn’t taught in philosophy classes. Literally Plato Tier.

[Anonymous No.16136703]

>>16136607
I didn‘t make this thread.
The fact you do not see any other conceivable disciplines where women would thrive if they hadn‘t tried to kill those qualities since hundreds of years is pretty sad.
Is empathy meaningless? Is tenderness? Is being perceptive and accepting? Is compassion and intimacy? Ofc men also possess those traits, but they can‘t reach the heights in those areas that women could if they would let themselves. Just like women could never be as good at logic, assertiveness, or justice to name a few, as men could. But you will have to agree with me that not every man on this planet succeeds in those inherently male areas either. Just as not every woman succeeds in being a women. That doesn‘t mean the ideal aren‘t worth striving for or that just because only few reach those heights they don‘t exist.

[Anonymous No.16136750]

>>16136703
>>16136703
>disciplines where women thrive
such as?
>Is empathy meaningless? Is tenderness? Is being perceptive and accepting? Is compassion and intimacy?
ah yes, good old infanticide due to psot-partum ""depression"", idk why but women seem to me much more sociopathic than men but i really don't know why
>not every man on this planet succeeds in those inherently male areas
no obviously the point is in relation to women

[Anonymous No.16136783]

>>16136750
Again, things like ppd aren‘t human nature. They are a symptom of the poison. Ppd is what happens when a woman‘s femininity clashes head on with her trying to go back to „trying to be a man“ after nature has forced her back into her feminine nature by pregnancy and child birth.
Yes, so? Not every woman is capable of cleaning out the filth of the world to uncover the pure and innocent femininity beneath it just as not every man is capable of doing the same with his masculinity.

[Anonymous No.16136800]

>>16136783
i think the discussion has shifted a lot, i'll concede your final point and leave it at that

[Anonymous No.16136816]

>>16136800
Well then, take care anon.

[Anonymous No.16136827]

>>16136154
care to mention any relevant, groundshaking or useful male philosopher from the last 5 decades?

[Anonymous No.16136882]

>>16136827
don't listen to this retard, if you want to see an intellectual disparity look no further than the natural sciences and their demographic makeup

[Anonymous No.16136914]

>>16136408
Spartan women had it good. All the property, gold and spoils of war. Fit warrior husbands and a training regime for themselves so they don't get fat and kill themselves at 40 with a bottle of wine and a handful of pills.

[Anonymous No.16136951]

>>16134484
cringe

[Anonymous No.16137042]

itt, bugmen mock the divinity of the human being before smartphones brought us to borg sentience. Fucking pussies.

[Anonymous No.16137152]

>>16136827
nick land

[Anonymous No.16137420]

>>16133997
>there were a lot of great Greek female philosophers that loved ( philo– ) the wisdom ( -sophia).
Fucking idiot child, the women loved the PHILOSOPHERS which were wise.

[Anonymous No.16137487]

>>16136228
Alright but what are these inherent female traits of such value that women of former had and present lack? I agree with you but I myself don't really have a pin on more than a few, like the raising and nurturing of children.

[Anonymous No.16137527]

>>16137487
I too struggle to put it in words. I‘d say the feminine aspect they would bring to this world would balance out the assertive And valiant power of masculinity. So tender, empathic, accepting, intimate, compassionate, pure, innocent, joyful, selfless, things like this.
In my theory, if there is unchecked masculinity running wild in the world, humanity is suffering. If there‘s unchecked femininity running wild, life will be pain too. We need each other to find a sane balance. As long as humans can not do this, the world will be hell.

[Anonymous No.16137559]

>>16136442
you don't acknowledge that the following is possible
>women have it "better" today in the sense of more physical opportunities (better in an objective sense is arguable however, you could argue women aren't cut out for the societal responsibilities of a man, don't really know what they want and have bitten off more than they can chew, womens lib was in fact a massive farce)
>our "classic liberal" conception of history is the closest we'll get to correct
>modern liberalist thinkers "big line go up" types have still gone too far and are incorrect in their re-imagining of history along post-social justice nu-academia thinking
>just because they demonize you doesn't make you bad
your reasoning is childish and relies on false dichotomies

[Anonymous No.16137634]

>>16137527
>So tender, empathic, accepting, intimate, compassionate, pure, innocent, joyful, selfless, things like this.
but do you imply that these are inherently female traits? I would agree that these are things that are forbode in the modern world in it's endless pursuit of vanity, but these are all absolute goods that I would expect and want in women and men alike. Maybe that's just because I'm gay or something.

[Anonymous No.16137659]

>>16137634
No i completely agree, those are traits men ideally would also have. Just like there are no inherent masculine traits that a woman wouldn‘t also benefit from having. Bravery and logic for example, strike me as more masculine, yet it‘s definitely not wrong for a woman to also be brave and able to think logical. But the whole point is that each gender has things they would be naturally better at in an ideal world and thus we could help each other develop those traits that do not come AS natural to us.
Ofc there are women who are more assertive than some men and ofc there are men who are more tender than some women. It‘s not as black and white, but in order to be able to talk about it one has to draw a few lines or it would become too complicated for a /lit/ discussion.