Nietzsche vs. Feminism

File: 506 KB, 1280x1280, Nietzsche-e1353955245351.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Nietzsche vs. Feminism Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:41:17 2015 No.6205644 [Reply] [Original]

Has anyone actually properly disputed Nietzsche's claims against feminism? I mean... in only a handful of pages he utterly destroys the entire movement and its proponents (as well as takes a jab at the failing masculinity of our age and "white knights") in Beyond Good and Evil. See below:

1/3

>Women want to be autonomous: and to that end they have begun to enlighten men about 'women per se'—that is one of the worst signs of progress in Europe's overall uglification. For look at all the things brought to light by these clumsy experiments in female scientific thinking and self-revelation! Women have so much reason for shame; there is so much hidden in women that is pedantic, superficial, carping, pettily presumptuous, pettily unbridled and immodest (just notice their interactions with children!), so much that has heretofore been most effectively repressed and subdued by their ultimate fear of males. God forbid that the 'Eternal-Boring' in women (they are rich in it!) ever dares to come out, or that they begin completely and by conviction to forget their cleverness and their arts, those of grace, playfulness, bidding care begone, easing our burdens and taking the world lightly, their subtle readiness for pleasant desires! Already we hear female voices that frighten us, by holy Aristophanes! with medically precise threats about all the things that women WANT from men. Doesn't it show the very worst taste when women set about being scientific in this way?

>Until now, thank goodness, enlightenment was a man's business, a man's gift—and so men remained 'among themselves'. And ultimately, whenever we read something a woman has written on 'women', we can reserve our mistrust about whether women actually want to be enlightened about themselves—whether they can want it... Now, if women are not doing it to get themselves some new adornment (self-adornment is part of the Eternal-Feminine, is it not?), then they wish to instil fear: perhaps they want to dominate. But they do not want truth—what do women care about truth! From the beginning, nothing has been more alien to women, more repellent, more inimical than truth—their great art is the lie, their highest concern appearance and beauty. Let us admit it, we men: it is precisely this art and this instinct that we honor and love about women: we who have it difficult in life and are glad to relax in the company of creatures with hands, glances, and tender follies to make our seriousness, our difficulty and depth seem almost like folly. Finally, I would ask whether any woman herself has ever conceded that a woman's brain can be deep, a woman's heart just? And isn't it true on the whole that until now 'women' have been disdained most of all by women—and certainly not by us men?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:42:20 2015 No.6205647 Nietzsche wrote before truth tables so there's no reason to take his claims seriously. Modern epistemology obsoletes everything pre-Frege.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:42:32 2015 No.6205649
File: 152 KB, 1199x1600, Nietzsche.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

2/3

>In no other age have men ever treated the weaker sex with such respect as in our own—it is part of our democratic inclinations and basic taste, as is our irreverence for old age. Is it any wonder that this respect is already being abused? They want more; they are learning to make demands; they end by considering that modicum of respect almost irritating, preferring to compete, or even to battle for their rights: let's just say women are becoming shameless. And let us add at once that they are also becoming tasteless. They are forgetting how to fear men—but a woman who 'forgets how to fear' is abandoning her most womanly instincts. It is fair enough, even understandable enough if women dare to assert themselves when the fear-inducing elements in men (let's put it more definitively: when the man in men) is no longer desired or cultivated; what is harder to understand is that this is enough to result in—the degeneration of women. This is happening today; let's make no mistake about it! Wherever the industrial spirit has triumphed over the military or aristocratic spirit, women are striving for the economic and legal independence of office clerks: 'Women as clerks' is written over the entrance-way to our developing modern society. While they are gaining these new rights, aiming to become 'master', and writing about women's 'progress' on their flags and banners, it is terribly clear that the opposite is happening: women are regressing.

>Ever since the French Revolution, women's influence in Europe has decreased to the same extent that their rights and ambitions have increased; and thus the 'emancipation of women', in so far as women themselves (and not only shallow males) are demanding and encouraging it, turns out to be a curious symptom of increasing weakness and dullness in the most womanly instincts. There is stupidity in this movement, an almost masculine stupidity, which a truly womanly woman (who is always a clever woman) would have to be utterly ashamed of. To lose the scent for which battleground best leads to victory; to neglect the practice of her true defensive arts; to let herself get ahead of a man, perhaps even 'up to a book', where she had earlier been well behaved and subtly, cleverly humble; to work with virtuous audacity against man's belief in a fundamentally alien ideal, cloaked in the shape of woman, in some Eternal- and Necessary-Feminine; to disabuse men volubly and emphatically of the notion that women should be kept, provided for, protected, indulged like delicate, strangely wild, and often pleasant domestic animals; to gather indignantly painstaking evidence of everything about the position of women in our own and earlier social orders that suggested the slave or bondman (as if slavery were a counter-argument and not rather a condition for every higher culture, every heightening of culture)—what does all this mean, if not a disintegration of womanly instincts, a defeminization?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:43:30 2015 No.6205652 >'Eternal-Boring' lol what a fucking hack

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:43:49 2015 No.6205654
File: 216 KB, 1200x1800, f1-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

3/3

The part about "white knights":

>To be sure, there are enough idiotic women-lovers and female-corrupters among scholarly asses of the male gender who are advising women to defeminize themselves in this way and to imitate all the stupidities that are infecting 'men' in Europe, European 'masculinity'—those who would like to bring woman down to the level of 'general education', or even to reading the newspaper and politicking. Some of them would even like to make women into freethinkers and literati, as if a woman without piety were not something wholly repellent or ludicrous for a deep and godless man. Women's nerves are being destroyed almost everywhere by the most pathological and dangerous kinds of music (our modern German music), making women every day more hysterical and less competent for their first and last profession, the bearing of healthy children.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:44:16 2015 No.6205655 "woman is truth" - my nig nietzsche

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:44:33 2015 No.6205656 File: 6 KB, 162x213, 1420650349236.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6205647

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:46:40 2015 No.6205663 >>6205647 autism speaks

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:48:03 2015 No.6205665 Nietzsche lovers dislike women because they want ol' Freddy all for themselves. Discuss.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:48:16 2015 No.6205666 Embarrassing thread

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:48:43 2015 No.6205670 >>6205652 >english rendition of german compound words for which there is no direct translation >implying nietzsche is the hack

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:51:15 2015 No.6205674 >>6205666 So you're a feminist I gather?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 10:57:37 2015 No.6205697 >>6205663 >>6205656 U mad, irrationalists?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:02:57 2015 No.6205714 Kierkegaard despised it too.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:04:13 2015 No.6205719 >>6205670 who cares what the original word was? it's a dumbfuck idea from a middlemind

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:04:29 2015 No.6205720 >>6205644 shitty pop feminism =/= feminism in general This is like criticizing the left because of liberals.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:06:19 2015 No.6205725 >>6205720 Nietzsche addressed both though.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:18:43 2015 No.6205741 >>6205720 >This is like criticizing the left because of liberals. You Americans and your fucked-up political terminology...

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:20:12 2015 No.6205746

>>6205725
No, Nietzsche addressed slave morality of what he perceived as feminism and gave a few resentful opinions on "women" that go against his philosophy of perspectivism and truth-production. It is with these opinions that Nietzsche perhaps shows not only his inability to fully escape slave morality but also his reactiveness in reducing too many things to that one category of slave morality, not seeing the important differences and variations within each phenomenon or thing.
I suggest you to read more about what feminism and gender theory is. There are also quite a few books about relation between Nietzsche and feminism since he is such a positive influence on the latter.
http://www.psupress.org/books/titles/0-271-01763-5.html

Not to mention that feminism changed a lot anyway and now isn't a single thing more than ever. This is like taking his critique of anarchism as something more than a critique of classical anarchists of his time.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:20:30 2015 No.6205748

Why do females need to be "feminine", what good is that to anyone?

Why shouldn't a woman have any other profession than bearing children? Even if a woman bore ten children she would still have time to do something else. It would be stupid and ineffective if she were to sit around doing nothing for the rest of her life.

He also seems a little biased. It is true that some women are shallow enough to spend most of their time prettying themselves, but that only happens because some men are shallow enough to do anything to impress those pretties.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:21:13 2015 No.6205749 >>6205741 I'm not an American but people often think like Americans. Get it m80?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:29:53 2015 No.6205768 >>6205748 Do you believe humans should be... more "human"?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:31:54 2015 No.6205777 >>6205768 >either everybody is divided into two classes of people >or they are grouped into one class of people yeah, no...

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:33:16 2015 No.6205783

>>6205746
>resentful opinions on "women"
Did you uh... even read what was posted here? What here was resentful towards women at all? Everything was in fact in high appraisal of women—real women that is. The same type of women that many feminists seem to consider preventive of their sense of progress: the traditional portrayal of woman as a dainty, graceful, submissive, motherly creature.

>>6205748
>what good is that to anyone?
See this part here in the OP:

> Let us admit it, we men: it is precisely this art and this instinct that we honor and love about women: we who have it difficult in life and are glad to relax in the company of creatures with hands, glances, and tender follies to make our seriousness, our difficulty and depth seem almost like folly.

Womanly women are most desired by manly men, and the problem today is that there are less and less manly men by the year. And this was a natural change, but it is a dangerous one that needs to soon be fixed because it leads us towards mediocrity across the board and the Last Man.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:33:43 2015 No.6205787 >>6205652 It's a mocking reference to Goethe's "Eternal-Feminine" at the end of Faust II

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:41:42 2015 No.6205797 >>6205647 Nice will-to-truth you fucking nihilist

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:43:48 2015 No.6205804
File: 287 KB, 1047x1131, NietzscheonSJWandAmerica.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6205746
You can't just string randoms words together with slave morality and resentment in there and expect ppl to take you seriously.

I know doing that in your feminist class with racism and misogeny get's you an A+, but in the real world that doesn't work.

>This is like taking his critique of anarchism as something more than a critique of classical anarchists of his time.

Umm my pic disagree with you, he doesn't even mention anything related to his time....

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:46:12 2015 No.6205810 >>6205644 >>6205649 >>6205654 jesus christ, that's nothing but angry rambling about how "women are stupid"

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:47:00 2015 No.6205813 >>6205783 So women need to be womanly so that men can be manly and men have to be manly so that women can be womanly? What's the point in any of that?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:51:08 2015 No.6205827 >>6205813 A society with strong character is a greater society than one without.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:52:05 2015 No.6205828 >>6205813 because women are primarily attracted to masculine traits and men are primarily attracted to feminine traits. it's biological, not cultural. if you want to stand any chance at getting laid you better conform to your gender role

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:55:54 2015 No.6205844 >Nietzsche >essentialism shiggy diggy

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:56:02 2015 No.6205846 >>6205827 character based on what? greater according to what? why are Nietzsche fags so obsessed with bullshit vague telos

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:59:11 2015 No.6205861 >>6205846 >why are Nietzsche fags so obsessed with bullshit vague telos because they feel insecure about themselves without having firm guidelines

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 11:59:21 2015 No.6205862

Nobody intelligent thinks that feminism is really true on a deep level. It's one of those philosophies "for the children" that mediocre people (who are basically big children themselves) can feel good about. Of course there are masculine and feminine poles of humanity, and while everybody is a mix of the two, it's extremely rare for a woman to be more than 50% masculine and vice versa. Gender roles are *largely* grounded in nature, and while social factors compound and strengthen them in perhaps injust ways, there's no doubt that the current type of equality that third wave feminists want is unsustainable.

As for Nietzsche, a lot of this is just bitter rambling but I liked this part:

>Ever since the French Revolution, women's influence in Europe has decreased to the same extent that their rights and ambitions have increased; and thus the 'emancipation of women', in so far as women themselves (and not only shallow males) are demanding and encouraging it, turns out to be a curious symptom of increasing weakness and dullness in the most womanly instincts. There is stupidity in this movement, an almost masculine stupidity, which a truly womanly woman (who is always a clever woman) would have to be utterly ashamed of.

I think that the "brand name" of feminism will always be around, but in the long run society has a vested interest in promoting those versions of feminism that celebrate femininity, like that of Christina Hoff Sommers or the sex positive feminists. I think Nietzsche underestimates how broad the spectrum of feminism is, but nonetheless, this piece is accurate as a description of its worst elements.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:00:32 2015 No.6205868 >>6205827 [citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:01:33 2015 No.6205874 >>6205828 And the overwhelming majority of people who want to break gender roles are aware that they won't be having sex with people who don't want them to break gender roles, and they don't care.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:03:11 2015 No.6205879 >>6205862 >implying feminity is somehow inherently valuable Why do people read this hack lel

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:04:14 2015 No.6205880 These quotes have legit made me realize how valueless this guy's philosophy is. So many assumptions are made that have little to no verifiable ground in reality

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:07:53 2015 No.6205886
File: 25 KB, 250x375, uber.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

"“Emancipation of women” — this is the
instinctive hatred of the dysfunctional, that is, unfruitful woman,
toward one who is functional — the struggle against “man” is always
only a means, a pretext, a tactic. By elevating themselves as “woman per
se,” as “higher woman,” as woman “idealist,” they want to bring down
the general rank and level of women; there is no surer means for that
than higher education, trousers, and political voting-cattle rights.
Basically, the emancipated are the anarchists in the world of the
“eternal feminine,” those who have missed the boat and whose
deepest instinct is for revenge...A whole species of the most
malevolent “idealism” — which, by the way, also occurs in men, for
instance in Henrik Ibsen, that typical old maid — has as its goal the
poisoning of good conscience, of the natural love between the
sexes..."

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:08:12 2015 No.6205887 >>6205880 His philosophy isn't a monolith. Not to mention that his relation to the notion of reality is complex and is actually ignored by himself in these quotes.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:09:07 2015 No.6205889

>>6205846
If you honestly can't comprehend what I said, then try basing it on the opposite truth:

A society with no character is a mediocre society.

Mediocre as in, it outputs no one exceptional—it promotes the masses, produces art only for common interests, and fails to make substantial advances in the sciences, politics, or philosophy in general. A mediocre society is a bland melting pot where very little distinguishes anything and it is all reduced to similarity.

So men should be made and kept manly and women should be made and kept womanly because they not only complement and desire one another, but because having these strongly distinctive personalities in society give the society overall a stronger sense of personal character, which in turn reduces the chances of mediocrity invading the higher echelons of said society. Those higher echelons will then proceed to make much more substantial advances in the sciences, the arts, etc. The principle at work here is the same as the one that states that a hero cannot exist without a villain, or that pleasure cannot be recognized without pain: in the same vein of rationale, master morality needs slave morality in order to exist, and greatness needs weakness to rule over. Remove this fundamental hierarchical structure from society and what you are left with is neither master nor slave, but a grey blob of something in between: a.k.a. the last man.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:11:08 2015 No.6205891

>>6205783
> The same type of women that many feminists seem to consider preventive of their sense of progress: the traditional portrayal of woman as a dainty, graceful, submissive, motherly creature.

this right here is the issue. people want other people to fit in clean boxes categorised by shared traits. the feminists Nietzsche describes look down on any females whose behaviours and desires do not match their own aggression, and Nietzsche himself looks down on women and men who do not match the traditional values that had long been enforced.

the only solution is to stop giving a fuck. there aren't any clean boxes into which "all X" can fit. people are different; treat them like individuals.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:11:34 2015 No.6205892

>>6205879

> Implying air and water inherently valuable.

LEL

But seriously,

Anti-essentialism like all other intellectual tools has its range of utility. If you go around making post-modern critiques of the need to eat, for instance, you're "doing it wrong" and arguably missing the point of anti-essentialism.

Why is femininity valuable?

Well look at all that the world is missing without it. As far as I can tell, this is like asking why water or air is inherently valuable, because the benefits are so obvious. Why should we preserve femininity? Because it's healthier, it makes both men and women happier, and it's a fuck you to retarded intellectuals who want to turn society into a giant laboratory for their retarded ideas.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:12:45 2015 No.6205893 We have to keep in mind this guy got denied at marriage once, possibly twice. I wonder if he ever even had sex.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:16:18 2015 No.6205905 >>6205810 it's almost as if you didn't comprehend anything from what you read.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:17:02 2015 No.6205907

>>6205644
>>6205649
>>6205654

>women should be feminine and men masculine otherwise society will degenerate abloobloo

Even though I despise modern feminism with every cell in my body I also despise these almost /pol/-tier arguments that don't depend on anything more than a naturalistic fallacy and what you "feel" things should be like.

Provide actual evidence not emotionally charged rhetoric if you want to make a case for the validity of an idea. Nowhere in this diatribe did I see hard facts about why it's a bad idea to let women have the same rights as men.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:17:39 2015 No.6205910
File: 260 KB, 354x367, 1422024707274.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6205889
the cultural and scientific output has never been higher than today, yet you ramble on about transfigured, nostalgic history which basically comes down to "le born in the wrong generation" face

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:19:59 2015 No.6205916

>>6205910
To be fair that's actually because there's so much degeneration everywhere. As weakness increases by the number greatness increases by the magnitude. So we aren't actually in a bad way these days, but we COULD be in the near-future, which is the real problem here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:21:53 2015 No.6205922 >>6205910 Don't worry, Nietzsche criticizes science and will to truth, but you won't hear that from these fuckwits on /lit/ that try to read him in order to justify their own stupidity.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:22:58 2015 No.6205925

>>6205891
I don't think he's talking about traditional values in the sense of traditional European customs on X and Y issues related to childrearing or menstruation. He's just saying that women should use their instincts instead of following made-up enlightenment ideals, and that we shouldn't fault them for doing it.

As for the existence of "feminine instincts," I know there are plenty of post-structuralist types around here who would doubt whether those exist at all. So let me put this question to you. There are differences in male and female behavior in almost every other species. In some insect species the female are up to 5 times larger than the males. In most mammalian species the males are larger than the females and much more aggressive. In mammals, in sexual matters, males usually pursue and women usually choose. And among humans, these exact same patterns can be seen across Asia, Europe, Africa, and Latin America.

The question then, is, why is the gender differentiation that's generally seen in mammals, not a biological thing when it comes to humans? Why, when we talk about humans, do gender differences suddenly have to be based on artificial social constructs?

You guys act like you're "deconstructionists" but the truth is you have a vested interest in promoting constructs of your own. Namely, in the realm of gender, a kind of sterile individualism that insists that because there are individual exceptions, the general tendencies of men and women have to be denied. But as Derrida himself would say, you can't deconstruct external realities, you only deconstruct constructs. So specific regimes of gender-based ideology may have tons of flaws that are open to deconstruction, the general tendency of gender differentiation in the human species does not.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:23:55 2015 No.6205928 >>6205922 >in order to justify their own stupidity Nothing of Nietzsche's is being warped here if that's what you're implying. This is what he said and the thread is discussing this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:24:11 2015 No.6205930 >>6205892 >look at what the world is missing without it What exactly is the world missing?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:24:44 2015 No.6205932

>>6205892
>Well look at all that the world is missing without it
Well, what exactly is it missing?

I know that you're baiting but we all know that humans need water and oxygen to live. Humans die without them. However, now that gender roles are diminishing, humans fare better than ever before. How do you explain this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:26:41 2015 No.6205938 >>6205907 >Nowhere in this diatribe did I see hard facts about why it's a bad idea to let women have the same rights as men That's because you are an effeminate male.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:28:04 2015 No.6205943 >>6205938 I want pol to leave

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:28:31 2015 No.6205944 >>6205893 He was cucked to kingdom come. You can imagine him scorned, walking home thinking 'wait'll they read what I have to say about them'

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:29:09 2015 No.6205946 >>6205777 That's not what I'm asking you.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:29:42 2015 No.6205949

>>6205892

It might very well be that femininity in women in the grand scheme of things contributes to human flourishing.

But that is not an argument for why we should be encouraging or discouraging a person from behaving in a certain way because of their gender. People should be free to choose a path in life without facing discrimination and scorn from society, whether that path is being a housewife or an engineer. Tendency in many women toward feminine qualities will remain just purely because of biology.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:30:06 2015 No.6205951 >>6205907 Letting women get the same rights as us would devalue our male privilege.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:30:09 2015 No.6205952 >>6205938 Please do point it out, oh manly king of all things aggressive and insensitive.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:31:28 2015 No.6205957 >>6205943 That's a legitimate argument though. The "hard facts" are too apparent if you weren't effeminate, because everything that feminism takes AWAY from women is ultimately harmful to the desires of the masculine.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:32:31 2015 No.6205960 >>6205874 That's what they tell themselves. Then the majority of them finds themselves old and miserable. And their mental hurdles becomes an unnecessary burden on others.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:33:06 2015 No.6205963

>>6205932
>now that gender roles are diminishing, humans fare better than ever before. How do you explain this?

Easy. We are living in a mature civilization. Our wealth has been built after hundreds and hundreds of years of war and scientific progress, and now we can afford certain bourgeois luxuries like a relaxation of gender roles. The same is true near the end of every empire that becomes wealthy; it's followed by a decline of the military and the rise of more feminine elements like women and court eunuchs. This is just a phenomenon of the late state our civilization is in. The empires of Asia and the Middle east, which have younger populations and higher economic growth rates, still rely on traditional gender roles to keep their societies strong. Once everyone in those countries is a multiskrillionaire like today's upper middle class whites are, they'll probably have less gender roles as well. But again, once that level of wealth is attained, it's usually a sign that the civilization has matured and will die out--see low fertility rates, etc.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:33:51 2015 No.6205965 >>6205957 There are people in this world who actually think like this. There is no hope for the future

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:34:50 2015 No.6205967 >>6205965 Thinking like this is a hope for the future.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:34:51 2015 No.6205968 >>6205957 So you're just afraid that women won't be hot if they get to choose? Possibly an even dumber reason since not one of you is willing to name or justify your opinion.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:34:57 2015 No.6205969 >>6205949 Sure. But Nietzsche doesn't say that individual exceptions shouldn't be allowed, he's saying that women shouldn't be pushed in a particular direction just because some enlightenment philosophers said it was a good idea.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:34:58 2015 No.6205970 >>6205932 Gender roles have only further propagated other forms of hierarchy in society, THAT'S why we're doing better than ever before.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:35:30 2015 No.6205971 >>6205960 >I have no argument so I'll just say they'll die alone

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:36:26 2015 No.6205977 >>6205971 >I have no argument so I'll just take a statement out of context

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:36:35 2015 No.6205978 File: 180 KB, 640x572, dawkins.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6205647

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:37:38 2015 No.6205983 This thread is legit as embarrassing as lit gets. I'm finna forward it to my mom. She read this guy in high school and laughed at him then, so she'll laugh at you virgins now

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:37:49 2015 No.6205984 >>6205910 ill give you scientific but you'd be hard pressed to show me a culture worse than today's

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:38:39 2015 No.6205985 >>6205984 I'm legit dying right now. How can people say shit like this unironically

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:39:36 2015 No.6205987 >2015 >not being gay masterrace

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:39:53 2015 No.6205988 >>6205985 Browsing /pol/ would help.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:40:45 2015 No.6205990

>>6205968
>So you're just afraid that women won't be hot if they get to choose?
No, I'm afraid that they will, just like Nietzsche was saying, forget how to be womanly. With feminism, women have less reason to feel weak, less reason to cling onto stronger beings: and it is ultimately this fear, this need, that creates in them a sense of deep humility and fear, which actually in turn creates something positive: a passion for children. What came out of their weakness, their lack of education and control over common situations, was a very subtle meekness that manifested itself in their intense devotion to their children, which made them more beautiful mothers to their children. Feminism takes away this potential beauty from them by giving them "choice," masculine opportunities by the whole, distractions from their roles as beautiful mothers and wives... slaves, in fact. Yes, the strengths of a real feminine woman are, paradoxically enough, her capacity to be a good slave. But good masters have always loved good slaves.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:41:03 2015 No.6205993 >>6205985 I'm just Justin Bieber and tumblrcore shit is great cultural output...

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:41:04 2015 No.6205994 >put properly in front of a sentence >get to deny anyone who actually disputes his claim

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:41:21 2015 No.6205995 >>6205985 well reactionaries and Nietzsche is the worst possible combo

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:42:41 2015 No.6205998

>>6205970
Are you saying that discrimination is what truly makes science and culture thrive?

Either way, I live in one of the world's most feminist countries and I've never witnessed any sort of "privilege" or gap between individuals from different backgrounds.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:43:26 2015 No.6206001

The translation uses the word "instincts", but does anybody know what word was used in the original German?

As usual, there's plenty of upbuilding ideas among the polemics, especially if you're familiar with his larger body of work. But the talk of "instinct" throws a wrench in what is usually nuanced about N's criticisms.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:44:51 2015 No.6206005 >>6205998 landet lagom ? :^)

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:45:21 2015 No.6206009 >>6205998 Yet your country has a lesser scientific output than America. How do you explain that? Gender disparity in the sciences isn't having as much negative impact on science than you think.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:45:23 2015 No.6206010 >>6205787 >>6205652 Shut down

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:46:47 2015 No.6206015 >>6205990 this boils down to some real twisted thinking and hatred for women

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:48:02 2015 No.6206022 >>6206015 There's no hatred in that at all. But you want there to be because it'd be easier to dismiss the argument, right?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:48:17 2015 No.6206024

>>6205928
>Nothing of Nietzsche's is being warped here
From Nietzschean perspective you can't read him without warping him, the whole world is the process of warping shit. That's one of his major points. Another important point is that there's no truth nor should, yet people talk here as if there are some morals that dictate how the world should be and as if there are some eternal truths about the world.
>This is what he said.
He says his text is always yet to be interpreted. What he said is not some simple this or that.
>the thread is discussing this
This thread is discussing a limited passage that is taken out of the context of the rest of his writings. I've said this sooo many times before on this board, but the biggest mistake people make when reading Nietzsche is to take every aphorism in isolation, and/or thinking that every passage fits nicely together into a single system at the same time. You need long legs to read Nietzsche. The above passage is actually quite in conflict with the rest of his writings and presents a major challenge in interpreting him. But this does not mean at all that the above passage can be reconciled with the rest of his writings in the first place. His philosophy itself is against reconciliation. In other words, there's no single Nietzsche, and consciously so.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:49:23 2015 No.6206030

>>6205990

>forget how to be womanly
They won't because sexual dimorphism exists.
>less reason to cling onto stronger beings
But they legitimately do have less of a reason to cling onto strong men in this day an age, our society is much safer and just generally different from the society our ancestors evolved in.
>What came out of their weakness, their lack of education and control over common situations, was a very subtle meekness that manifested itself in their intense devotion to their children, which made them more beautiful mothers to their children
Your idea that parental love is somehow diminished if women are allowed to participate in the workforce is just patently absurd and not based on evidence. Try using facts next time.

Also formulate an argument for why it's ethically justifiable to deny billions of people something that we consider a basic human right in first world countries on the basis of potentially achieving a system that is more in tune with our natural instincts (which is bullshit anyway because modern society is automatically against them in many ways but whatever).

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:49:29 2015 No.6206031 File: 26 KB, 436x337, 1425065110780.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206024 Is Nietzsche the greatest riddler of our time?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:49:46 2015 No.6206032 >>6205880 >Nietzsche >valueless kek'd

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:50:19 2015 No.6206033 nietzsche was a pathetic virgin, so no

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:50:39 2015 No.6206036

Did women used to be different? I mean, Nietzsche is describing how women are playful, kittenish creature whose silly, joyous nature eases the burden of the serious man, but oh boy, for one week of the month that sure as shit isn't true and for the rest of the time they're complaining as well. Feminism is just the natural extension of female entitlement. Nietzsche never had a girlfriend, pretty glaringly. That ideal of women doesn't exist and I don't believe it ever has existed. If women were all that, homosexuals and prostitutes wouldn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:51:23 2015 No.6206037 >>6206022 you give them this romanticized, motherly role because you can't think of them being capable of anything else also there are some real sexual issues with this whole slave thing going on

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:52:20 2015 No.6206041 >>6206031 He is a great riddler, yes, a philosopher of masks. Behind every cave is a further cave, as he says. It's hard to find any other philosopher that was this ambiguous.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:52:27 2015 No.6206042 >>6206033 >t. pathetic virgin

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:52:29 2015 No.6206043 >>6205910 >the cultural and scientific output has never been higher than today That's because of WW2 and old americans... Show me those cultural and scientific advance made by 300 pounds purple haired feminist who don't need no man.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:52:46 2015 No.6206044 >>6206033 Who cares? Sex is about a 4/10 on the scale of shit you can do in your life. It's overrated rubbing.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:52:57 2015 No.6206046 >>6206036 >homosexuals and prostitutes wouldn't exist. Homosexuals were born gay at that time as well and men are guided by the invisible hand to frequent prostitutes. Women were as Nietzsche described them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:53:01 2015 No.6206047 >>6206024 >The above passage is actually quite in conflict with the rest of his writings so it actually is angry rambling?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:53:08 2015 No.6206048 >>6205985 >facebook exists >selfies are acceptable >disliking selfies is implicitly misogynist >identity politics >representation of women in consumer media is an issue worthy of attention >coca cola

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:53:11 2015 No.6206049

>>6205944
his "don't forget the whip" comment comes across as spiteful.

the comments that OP posted are just calm reflections.

>>6206015
it's the instinct of a "beta male" that perceives any kind of authority a man might wield over a woman to be "insensitivity"; in other words, he's just as afraid of the man as the woman is, except that the woman turns her fear into admiration whereas the beta turns his fear into resentment.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:54:19 2015 No.6206052 >HE USED TO FUCK PROSTITUTES SO HE MUST BE WRONG and i thought /b/ was the dumbest board lmao

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:54:55 2015 No.6206056 >>6206044 saying this proves my point tbh

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:54:56 2015 No.6206057
File: 111 KB, 960x720, mpv-screenshot0168.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206024
>The above passage is actually quite in conflict with the rest of his writings and presents a major challenge in interpreting him.

Nietzsche is human and humans are not always consistent. He is not infallible.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:56:02 2015 No.6206060 >>6206044 What's a 10/10 on your scale?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:56:13 2015 No.6206061

>>6206049
also, it's not just fear of the man, but envy.
when he sees another man having authority over a woman he secretly resents it because he wants that authority, and then he lies to himself and calls his emasculation and lack of authority over woman a virtue under the name of "sensitivity" or something like that, when his "sensitivity" is really just bashfulness/timidity that causes him to fear a woman.
You know this because when the beta male does get a woman he isn't necessarily a better companion; he can be even more wicked and spiteful than the so-called "insensitive brute".

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:56:21 2015 No.6206063 >>6206049 oh now the 4chan alpha beta armchair psychology circlejerk finally comes fully around

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:57:03 2015 No.6206065 >>6206049 >using beta and male together unironically

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:57:05 2015 No.6206066

>>6206024
Your full of shit, there's no out of context here.

>The above passage is actually quite in conflict with the rest of his writings and presents a major challenge in interpreting him.

Your talking out of your ass. see from another book. >>6205886

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:57:30 2015 No.6206068 >>6206057 Conflict isn't something negative for Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:58:15 2015 No.6206074 >>6206065 beta male is a widely enough used concept on this place that it should be easy to understand what he means

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 12:58:55 2015 No.6206077 God damn, this is my first time back here in about three months and you guys are still posting about the same things in exactly the same way. BREAK THE CYCLE AND LEAVE 4CHAN.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:00:10 2015 No.6206082

>>6206063
>>6206065

yeah, I don't like using the alpha/beta terms. I think they are crude. But I just stated it in the easiest / most familiar terms because of laziness.
The point is that proud men will call their flaws virtues. So if a proud man is timid/cowardly with woman he may call it "sensitivity to her feelings". I actually share a disgust for the insensitive brute who treats every woman like a whore. But there is an ideal masculinity which knows how to command a woman while also respecting her soul, which is superior to the man who respects a woman so much that he crumbles before her.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:00:41 2015 No.6206085 >>6205983 >finna fuck off hipster nigger lover

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:01:12 2015 No.6206086

Alright you bourgeois dillwads listen up,

For an illustration of what Nietzsche is saying, consider these two scenarios.

1) A hot summer day in a Mexican town where a bunch of Latin American teenagers are hanging around out outside.

2) An anarchist conference full of feminists and men who consider themselves feminist allies.

In the former scenario, you would find a lot of things that go against what our modern ideology tells us to believe. Many of the men would display "machismo," wearing flashy clothes and perhaps even getting into fights to impress the women. The women would dress seductively. Men would hit on the women aggressively, in fashions that would horrify the bourgeois morals of our modern feminists to no end. But beneath all this unthinkable Pagan behavior, you'd notice a core humanity, a naturalness, a wholesomeness. People would laugh and smile if they meant it, they would frown and cry if they meant it. There would be none of this fake laughter, fake sadness, fake feelings, fake humanity of modern (feminist) white society.

Now consider the other example. The feminist anarchist conference at an American university. Here, you would find a very different set of circumstances. The place would be outfitted with thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment. The attendees would flaunt MacBooks that would be the envy of our friends over in Mexico. The skin of the conference goers would be eminently white, and they'd all be properly embarrassed about it. But despite the more comfortable and expensive amenities of this latter setting, you would find something missing. The speeches would reek of inauthenticity. The way the liberated women and the enlightened men interacted would puzzle you. If you came from a working class background, you'd wonder why everything seemed so put on. You'd wonder why the men were so scared to make sexual advances on the women. You'd wonder why the women seemed so sexually impotent, so unaware of their seductive potential.

This contrast I think helps show what Nietzsche was getting at. Our society with all its wealth and gadgetry is not the meaning of the world. As someone who has travelled a lot I can tell you there are ways in which this society can't fucking TOUCH less privileged countries where those disgusting, Pagan gender roles still haven't been legislated out of existence. The people are more honest, more real, there's a twinkle in their eyes and a certain easy disposition. They don't have MacBooks, but they don't have a permanent stick up their ass and a permanent sense of shame either. They are REAL people, REAL men, and REAL women. But tell me about how their marginally lower life expectancy and lack of access to proper first world brainwashing universities and gas guzzling SUVs makes our society and its stinking feminism "superior."

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:01:29 2015 No.6206089 >>6206009 My country has less than 2% of the population the US does and very little resources. Not all girls want to become scientists but that isn't a reason to discriminate the ones that do.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:01:34 2015 No.6206090

>>6206030
>Try using facts next time.
Actual events aren't facts now?

>Also formulate an argument for why it's ethically justifiable to deny billions of people something that we consider a basic human right in first world countries on the basis of potentially achieving a system that is more in tune with our natural instincts
>ethically
My ethics are not your ethics. Why do you care about an "ethically justifiable" argument then? Such an argument would be valid in my eyes and wouldn't be valid in yours. To be frank, you possess the ethics of the mediocre while I possess the ethics of the exceptional. So in the ethics of the mediocre, sure, there is no argument to be made against it: it's absolutely preposterous to deny billions of people these so-called rights. But under the ethics of the exceptional, this situation is only acceptable insofar as it helps develop a greater hierarchical structure in the society that adopts it; if it grows uncontrollably past its usefulness, it then has to be restrained if the higher echelons of that society are to NOT sink into mediocrity with everyone else.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:01:55 2015 No.6206091

>>6206066
That passage belongs roughly to the same will in Nietzsche, whether it appears in this or that work is not so important unless you still believe in works being single atomistic units. And of course it's out of context. We don't have his whole bibliography before us. We don't even know where his bibliography begins and ends.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:01:57 2015 No.6206092 >>6206068 >Conflict isn't something negative for Nietzsche. Okay but if conflict isn't something negative why should I take anything that Nietzsche says seriously?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:02:24 2015 No.6206095 >>6205644 >Nietzsche's claims against feminism >Implying Nietzsche wasn't a butthurt /r9k/ Elliott Rodger tier virgin.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:02:41 2015 No.6206096 >>6206082 knows how to command a woman = is an attractive +8/10 in looks jock

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:03:18 2015 No.6206100 >>6206086 Nietzsche would hate both of those scenarios I'm sure

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:04:30 2015 No.6206107 >>6206100 why would nietzsche hate a bunch of teens doing teen shit

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:04:38 2015 No.6206108

>>6206096
not really
it's more a matter of bravery than handsomeness.
there are handsome men that are complete cowards (the Paris archetype).
You know that old, "how did HE get such a good looking girl?" And it turns out that though he is ugly he is actually has a very calm and assured demeanour which is attractive.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:05:59 2015 No.6206113

>>6205965
>>6205968
It's like I am on reddit

>>6206015
That's been the traditional attitude towards women on the part of men who actually love them very much. In fact going to accusations of misogyny is one of the most hideous defenses conjured by feminism. Can you justify in what ways is that twisted or anger-filled?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:06:11 2015 No.6206114 >>6206089 >Not all girls want to become scientists That's due to your culture discriminating women to please males first. Slutdom is hard work.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:06:16 2015 No.6206115

>>6206095

for all these types of shitty posts let me just say: Who is remembered now? Nietzsche or the women who apparently turned him down? Nobody gives one fuck about the latter. It reflects more on the mindset of women than it does on him that possibly the most acclaimed philosopher of all time couldn't make it with them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:06:27 2015 No.6206117 >>6206092 You can take him as just an aggregate of wills that you might try to dance and fuck and experiment with and see where that takes you. One of the points of his works is to intensify life.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:06:29 2015 No.6206119 >>6206108 he has money and status

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:07:17 2015 No.6206120

>>6206086

I understand you're using that dichotomy to illustrate the general point but I really hope you aren't implying that those are the two options we have.

There's nothing preventing a society from becoming honest and realistic about human nature while retaining the idea that men and women should be allowed to choose whatever path in life without facing discrimination.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:07:43 2015 No.6206121 >>6206108 Look at the ugly dudes and the hot girls. You'll realize the dudes are only ugly by comparison. And besides, those chicks are hanging out with Chad on the weekends.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:08:06 2015 No.6206122

>>6206082
alright I get your point but giving women more than being housewives doens't automatically rule out masculinity in men
it's ok for men having power over their women as they have power over them, why do all the neckbeards have to see relationships as onesided power plays and not as being a team, it's that mindset which annoys me which at its core has some real weird personal issues

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:08:09 2015 No.6206123

>>6206086
>Our society with all its wealth and gadgetry is not the meaning of the world. As someone who has travelled a lot I can tell you there are ways in which this society can't fucking TOUCH less privileged countries where those disgusting, Pagan gender roles still haven't been legislated out of existence.

I wouldn't call them pagan, I would just call them traditional. Catholicism had the same thing going on. The attitude you describe has been the attitude of "bad Catholics". A good Catholic has the authenticity you describe but applied to purity rather than to lasciviousness.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:08:38 2015 No.6206125 >>6206115 >Who is remembered now? Nietzsche or the women who apparently turned him down? >implying Nietzsche himself wasn't an obscure figure for some time

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:08:57 2015 No.6206128

>>6206086
>invoking the concept of authenticity

Newsflash: there is no "authentic" you. There is barely even a you, the ego is just a coping mechanism. What you're dealing with is a bottomless hole. Coronas and wife-beating aren't going to fill it either.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:09:06 2015 No.6206129 >>6206115 Oh and now the virginismos come out of the woodwork. Excellent.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:09:09 2015 No.6206130

>>6206117
So people can take his views on women and experiment with them. Okay then, let's intensify life for the many by making everyone experiment with his idea. Nothing wrong there, right? Afterall the other Nietzsche doesn't believe in truths no morals. Let's just fuck around for the sake of it and see where it takes people just out of sheer curiosity.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:09:13 2015 No.6206131 >>6206123 I'm using Paganism as a term of art here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:09:27 2015 No.6206132 >>6206125 I don't think the nobodies which Nietzsche liked are suddenly going to burst onto the philosophical scene anytime soon

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:10:35 2015 No.6206139

>>6206122
>it's ok for men having power over their women as they have power over them, why do all the neckbeards have to see relationships as onesided power plays and not as being a team, it's that mindset which annoys me which at its core has some real weird personal issues

>why do all the neckbeards have to see relationships as onesided power plays and not as being a team

This is EXACTLY why traditional gender roles are so important. A team is made up of different roles where one member excels wherever another member lacks. A traditional couple is a team.
The modern feminist couple is not a team. It's the modern feminist couple that is constantly living in a state of "power play", a struggle for power.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:11:07 2015 No.6206142 >>6206130 Lol, reductive views on sex don't intensify life m8.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:11:53 2015 No.6206145

>>6206120
>There's nothing preventing a society from becoming honest and realistic about human nature while retaining the idea that men and women should be allowed to choose whatever path in life without facing discrimination.

How can hope to become honest if you are deliberately setting up barriers against honesty by discouraging discrimination?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:12:00 2015 No.6206146

>>6206090

>Actual events aren't facts now?
What events?
>My ethics are not your ethics. Why do you care about an "ethically justifiable" argument then? Such an argument would be valid in my eyes and wouldn't be valid in yours.
Obviously in a discussion such as this I expect you to make a logical argument for why I too should adopt the ethical creeds you have. Are your creeds based on evidence? Do they have anything to do with human flourishing? What are they based on?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:12:02 2015 No.6206147 >>6206086 got any youtube videos where I can this authenticity on display?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:12:29 2015 No.6206151 >>6206128 >the ego is just a coping mechanism. That's a load of outdated pseudoscientific bullshit.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:13:15 2015 No.6206153 >>6206151 the ego is a pseudoscience you fucking moron

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:13:15 2015 No.6206154 >>6206125 Georg Brandes started to give lectures on his work a little bit before he went crazy. He blew up pretty soon after he died, tbh.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:13:47 2015 No.6206157 >>6206086 underrated post This is fucking brilliant

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:14:30 2015 No.6206160 >>6206142 Why not? Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:15:40 2015 No.6206166 >>6206153 So is the ego being just a coping mechanism. Now go educate yourself instead on scientific texts of lurking /lit/ all day like a pseudointellectual.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:16:12 2015 No.6206168

>>6206139
>This is EXACTLY why traditional gender roles are so important. A team is made up of different roles
>A traditional couple is a team.
well yes, I see that

>A team is made up of different roles where one member excels wherever another member lacks
but here we fucking go again, you automatically assume that a man is better than a woman, which again leaves her nothing but being as a mother, because she has to do her part

I'm not trying to defend modern feminism btw, just making sure

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:16:55 2015 No.6206172
File: 131 KB, 1261x914, konstantin_vasilyev_1971_11.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206120
Yes but Nietzsche wants you to know it is you who retains these ideas out of a sense of nobility when the de facto hierarchy, what since antiquity has been 'honest' and realistic', is a continuum of authority from the bottom rungs to the top. Your notions toward gender is cultivated from the Enlightenment.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:18:09 2015 No.6206173 >>6206168 >but here we fucking go again, you automatically assume that a man is better than a woman i'm not gonna comment on his argument in general but there it's pretty obvious that he's saying that they excel and lack in different areas

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:18:47 2015 No.6206178 >>6206168 >you automatically assume that a man is better than a woman, He's also assuming that they're both better and worse than the other.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:18:48 2015 No.6206179 >>6206151 It cannot possibly be outdated because it cannot be falsified. But if you want to use your comfy little TED Talk words, substitute "self" for "ego" and go back to lying to yourself about loving science.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:18:52 2015 No.6206180 >>6206139 >A team is made up of different roles where one member excels wherever another member lacks. That's got nothing to do with gender roles. Why is a team suddenly broken if it's the man cooking and the woman changing tires?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:19:00 2015 No.6206182

>>6206160
In a limited form, e.g. as a single artwork, yes, sometimes. We're talking about broader culture here though. Nietzsche likes constant creativity, flux, richness, complexity. Inventing ever new wills and desires (not the same as pleasures) is closer to his style.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:19:50 2015 No.6206186 >>6206086 This is... Boy. I hope you don't consider yourself to understand philosophy as a concept

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:20:33 2015 No.6206187 >>6206166 >scientific texts >psychology dying

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:20:53 2015 No.6206188

>>6206179
Outdated and falsified are not mutually inclusive.

>comfy little TED Talk words, substitute "self" for "ego" and go back to lying to yourself about loving science.

Here's a hint: The "science" that deals with the self is unfounded empirically. It's not a science that should be taken seriously...

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:21:50 2015 No.6206191

>>6206145

You're conflating being honest about human nature with being honest in every day life. All being honest about human nature entails is the scientific facts about evolutionary biology and psychology.

That's not to say I don't agree with being honest in every day life. Everyone should have the right to say that gays or niggers are disgusting etc. When I said people should be allowed to live without discrimination I was imagining a society where people aren't stuck to stone age morals and aren't ostracized based on intellectually bankrupt ideas but I guess I got a bit carried away there.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:21:54 2015 No.6206192

>>6206086
>The women would dress seductively.
>There would be none of this fake laughter, fake sadness, fake feelings, fake humanity of modern (feminist) white society
>The speeches would reek of inauthenticity.
>You'd wonder why the women seemed so sexually impotent, so unaware of their seductive potential.
citation needed

>they are REAL people, REAL men, and REAL women
why are the struggles of 3rd world shitholes more real?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:22:18 2015 No.6206195 File: 1.60 MB, 2560x1440, 1389326259543.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6205644 >>6205649 >>6205654 >can't get laid >blame women >better post some half baked 19th century philosophy to justify my beliefs to a bunch of other autists

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:22:23 2015 No.6206196

>>6206168
>, you automatically assume that a man is better than a woman, which again leaves her nothing but being as a mother, because she has to do her part

A man is not a woman's superior in everything. If you look at what you've written you'll see it shows a great disrespect for motherhood which if not the noblest profession in the world is pretty close.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:22:30 2015 No.6206197

>>6206182
>>6206182
>Nietzsche likes constant creativity, flux, richness, complexity. Inventing ever new wills and desires (not the same as pleasures) is closer to his style.

Easier to start with simplicity and let the experiment start as you suggested. Then if things go wrong, change and adopt a more complex take.

That's intensifying life. You're trying and trying.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:23:09 2015 No.6206200

>>6206146
>What events?

This:
>What came out of their weakness, their lack of education and control over common situations, was a very subtle meekness that manifested itself in their intense devotion to their children, which made them more beautiful mothers to their children
is an event, one I witnessed in my own mother, and have witnessed in plenty others. No, I don't have documented evidence of these events, but I am a first-hand witness of it happening. Maybe at the end of the day this is really why there's such a divide here in opinions, since society is so massive there's millions of different subcultures you can be born into being surrounded by and have a totally different view of it all as a result.

I'm not sure I really care to convince you to "adopt" my opinions, I'm just discussing this. I was reading Beyond Good and Evil this morning and came across these passages and thought, "well this is a popular topic these days, I might as well make a thread on it since I'm just sitting here in my PJs relatively bored and eating a bowl of Special K with berries and a sliced banana." I also got a raise this week at my job and felt pretty good about myself. Make of that what you will.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:23:32 2015 No.6206201 >>6206187 Right. Most of psychology shouldn't be taken too seriously.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:26:18 2015 No.6206206 >>6206195 >all dat projection Fedoras are the white knights like you who jump to defend women anytime you get "triggered" while reading "misogynistic" posts.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:26:59 2015 No.6206208 >>6206196 I even admit that, women who are nothing but mothers/housewives are terribly boring people

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:26:59 2015 No.6206209

>>6206120
Of course not.

Like I said a few posts back, I think in the modern era it's best to just favor sex-positive and gender non-denialist versions of feminism, rather than to go around being some reactionary "red piller" or whatever. I also think that rants like Nietzsche's are not advisable because they are offensive and prone to inspire more women to join the more toxic feminist movements. Nevertheless I do think his core idea--despite the insensitive rhetoric--is true. I think specifically trying to groom women to emulate men is mistaken, I think individual women can do what they want, and I don't believe in men or women telling the opposite sex, even their own children of the opposite sex, what it means to be a man, a woman, or an otherkin. I do, however, support fathers teaching their sons about the basics of masculinity and mothers teaching their daughters whatever they need to because I believe you're doing your kids a disservice if you don't prepare them for the expectations of the mating game. Again, no matter how feminist we become culturally, men and women will always ultimately desire the same things they always have and I feel that parents should educate their children of the same sex in what these realities are and how to deal with them.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:28:15 2015 No.6206213

>>6206200
I've seen several OPs shitpost. Shitposting makes OPs more beautiful to the posters in their threads. I can't prove this to be true in any way, but I find OP's shitposting to be beautiful thus all OPs should shitpost. I have a feeling that it, somehow, makes the community more real.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:28:25 2015 No.6206215 >>6206172 >Your notions toward gender is cultivated from the Enlightenment. Wherever these ideas ultimately spring from is irrelevant to me. I'm only interested in maximizing human flourishing.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:28:38 2015 No.6206217 >all these wks when did tumblr and reddit migrate?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:28:52 2015 No.6206218
File: 1.25 MB, 895x1276, Odin_Nors_Mythology_by_Javid77.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206195
>devoting time to inform other autists of their autism
>resorting to attacks on sexuality
>all on the /scriptorium/ board of a Mongolian throat singing website
>better post fedora and euphoric

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:29:18 2015 No.6206224

>>6206197
But there is no neutral or actual simplicity already available. Simplicity proper does not exist for Nietzsche, he believes neither in atoms nor in God. Everything is already an aggregate and everything wants or demands something. Nietzsche is a philosopher of suspicion, he asks this: what does this or that thing want, what is it made of, where does it come from (instead of asking whether it is true or false).
So for Nietzsche there is no building up from simplest elements to higher complexities but instead a transformations of always already existing hierarchies.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:30:11 2015 No.6206226

>>6206209
>if you don't prepare them for the expectations of the mating game
It's not just a disservice, it's bad parenting akin to parental negligence. Doing something that's highly detrimental (like teaching them to imitate the opposite sex) to their "sexual value" (for a lack of better term).

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:30:29 2015 No.6206227 >>6206195 How many times are you going to post this ITT?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:31:47 2015 No.6206237

>>6206208
But there's only two kinds of women. The boring housewives and the interesting dilettantes / whores. The part in women that's interesting is the evil part. The boring/tame part is actually the best. I don't think women are here to entertain us (I agree with the feminists here).

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:32:55 2015 No.6206241 >>6206201 If I were burning with that much castration anxiety, I wouldn't want to take psychology seriously either. Best sweep it under the rug and stick to cold, comfy "facts." They don't judge.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:34:28 2015 No.6206247

>>6206200

>No, I don't have documented evidence of these events, but I am a first-hand witness of it happening.
Anecdotal evidence is useless in any debate that concerns the well-being of human beings on a grand scale.
>Maybe at the end of the day this is really why there's such a divide here in opinions, since society is so massive there's millions of different subcultures you can be born into being surrounded by and have a totally different view of it all as a result.
My opinion is not divided from yours because of my personal experiences, as I don't consider my personal experiences to be relevant to the topic at all. I value scientific inquiry over making conclusions based on emotion.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:34:40 2015 No.6206248

>>6206224
So what's the threshold between simplicity and complexity when you're claiming that his views on women are simple?

You're claiming Nietsche doesn't think there are indivisible elements making up things. But in his views on women, he's talking about changing hierarchies without pointing to any irreducible element. He doesn't claim women are nothing but this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:34:40 2015 No.6206250 File: 50 KB, 321x446, 1424989686429.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206237 >But there's only two kinds of women. oh come on now, it's not even funny anymore

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:37:02 2015 No.6206258
File: 93 KB, 960x720, mpv-screenshot0144.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206241
>burning with that much castration anxiety
You're projecting.

>I wouldn't want to take psychology
Oh I'm not sweeping all of it, just a big part.

Facts don't judge but you won't ever find them with this delusion that's blinding you.

Your hands are reaching for more than you can grasp and you don't have the sense to know better.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:38:00 2015 No.6206261 >>6206247 If you value "scientific inquiry" you would honor my observations of real psychological events by looking for them yourself.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:40:42 2015 No.6206274 >>6206250 It's true and it applies to men as well. There are kind and boring husbands and dangerous, exciting manwhores.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:43:45 2015 No.6206286

>>6206248
His views on women seem simplifying when interpreted in a straight-forward manner. That is not to say that any views can be absolutely simple, it is instead a will to simplicity and homogeneity, a try to limit the inherent playfulness of the world and views themselves. And that's what's so funny about it. Whenever people try to say "women this, men that" there's always something in what they themselves say that laughs back at them, that shows their impotence in trying to make it so simple.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:44:53 2015 No.6206294

>>6206261

Such inquiry would be hard because I'd have to find a study that shows a causal link between women entering the workforce and women becoming worse mothers and wives and such a study would be impossible to find for several reasons, not the least of which being that it would have had to have controlled for countless other variables and the fact that "bad mother" and "bad wife" especially are not qualities that can be objectively defined without presupposing some specific morals.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:48:26 2015 No.6206308

>>6206286
>Whenever people try to say "women this, men that" there's always something in what they themselves say that laughs back at them

You know what's funny? That your statement itself is simplifying. As you put it, you're trying to limit the inherent playfulness of those views by claiming that there's always something that "laughs back at them, shows their impotence in trying to make it simple". What may look simple at first glance, can very much be complex, including the "women this, man that" views.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:55:38 2015 No.6206328

>>6206247
The topic happens to be Nietzsche's attitude towards women. These appeals you are making to science, to objectivity, is why Reddit is so repulsive, because it seems to me you are more interested in data from a n=400 survey than hearing about OP's intimate observations about his mother because it is not according to scientific method.

The next Nietzschean exercise for you is to evaluate the worth of truth itself. You will discover that the objectivity promised by science is itself a conviction.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 13:58:29 2015 No.6206335 >>6206328 Talk about it all you want, but to imply there's any reason to take it seriously is laughable.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:06:01 2015 No.6206353

>>6206328

>These appeals you are making to science, to objectivity, is why Reddit is so repulsive, because it seems to me you are more interested in data from a n=400 survey than hearing about OP's intimate observations about his mother because it is not according to scientific method.

Why is it repulsive? Why should I pretend to care about his intimate observations when they aren't relevant to the argument? OP is clearly making claims in the realm of "society should be like this because that would be best for human beings" without providing any reason to believe his claims. And I'm repulsive for demanding evidence that support his claims?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:06:37 2015 No.6206355 File: 39 KB, 361x649, 1425150397624.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Is this really nietzsche?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:07:51 2015 No.6206361

>>6206308
>What may look simple at first glance, can very much be complex, including the "women this, man that" views.
The problem with these views is that they create oppositions and identities right from the start, that is, they try to divide worlds into separate units and fix down the flux. It seems similar to dividing life into a soul and body, or dividing experience into reality and fiction. And you the question is: what do these conceptions want to achieve? What is their worry, what do they care for?
>That your statement itself is simplifying.
I didn't imply it's limited to those views.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:08:19 2015 No.6206367

>>6206353
>Why should I pretend to care about his intimate observations when they aren't relevant to the argument?
Perspective is always relevant in Nietzsche, it's appeals to "scientific inquiry" and "logic" (code words for your personal dogma being unconsciously elevated to the position of objective truth) that are irrelevant here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:10:19 2015 No.6206371 >>6206355 Doesn't matter, I want to know what happens to that coy look on her face.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:19:39 2015 No.6206399

>>6206367

What is this perspective you're talking about? Does this magical perspective give its wielder the power to bend reality to fit its needs? If OP made claims about women being fundamentally stupid because of his intimate observations am I in the wrong if I consult any literature on IQ tests among genders to find if the claim is reasonable or is that just too dogmatic and oppressive towards his perspective?

It's like you're asking me to respect his opinion just on principle when he has yet to give me any reason to do so.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:26:17 2015 No.6206425

>>6206361
>they create oppositions and identities right from the start, that is
Who said that? There are thoughts and views that differ for some and those previous views could very well lead to "women this, man that".

Sure the flux is fixed but it's still a flux. There are infinite possibilities albeit that doesn't mean there all the possibilities happen.

>what do these conceptions want to achieve
>What is their worry, what do they care for?
Telling people what's up before reality hits them. And when reality hits, it hits pretty hard. It can be unforgiving.

It's the same reason people make many conceptions. Science makes them as well. Sure it backs them up with empirical evidence that's more "likely"to be accepted by a body that people today generally regard as authority on its subject but they're still conceptions.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:28:49 2015 No.6206433

>>6206399
Not that anon here, but shit like IQ tests are shit. Black people in US have on average lower IQ. Does this mean black people are inherently dumb? Yes, if just stop here. But if you expand your interpretation (and there's nothing but the interpretation) then you start inspecting how those IQs are produced in the first place, and you come to see that black people on average grow up in much poorer conditions and don't have the means to train their IQ scores.
And I won't to make this point specifically: in these debates people forget to inspect how things come to be, which is of BIG importance to Nietzsche. And to do that, to practice genealogy, you have to look at history.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:40:32 2015 No.6206468 >>6205910 The thread should have ended here Also, I hate being the hardcore empiricist type but everything he says here is unfalsifiable ramblings that ultimately fall apart when confronted with reality

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:40:52 2015 No.6206469
File: 310 KB, 842x881, minnesota.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206433

>and you come to see that black people on average grow up in much poorer conditions and don't have the means to train their IQ scores.

That's one hypothesis. There's evidence towards the other ones too.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:42:07 2015 No.6206478 >>6205813 Even if somebody cannot provide a positive answer to your question, how is your ideal of a society where women act like men and men act like women any better?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:49:15 2015 No.6206508

>>6206478

>ideal of a society where women act like men and men act like women

What? Point to any post ITT that claimed that would be an ideal society. At most people have claimed that men and women should be free to act as they please according to their individual preferences.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:53:58 2015 No.6206530 >>6205949 >People should be free to choose a path in life without facing discrimination and scorn from society, whether that path is being a housewife or an engineer. What if they choose to be a murderer, for example?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:54:31 2015 No.6206535 >>6206508 what if my and the majority of other mens individual preference is to treat women like garbage

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 14:59:42 2015 No.6206559

>>6206530

Then they should be locked up in a facility for the well-being for others.

>>6206535

Don't know what "treating people like garbage" entails exactly but it doesn't sound very nice and conducive to the flourishing of human beings so I would be against it. Thankfully your hypothetical scenario is nearly impossible in reality due to peoples natural instincts.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:00:56 2015 No.6206565 >>6206030 >muh humin rites fuck off

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:06:28 2015 No.6206584 >>6206565 >average differences between groups of people justify discriminating against individuals in a given group fuck off

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:06:42 2015 No.6206585

>>6205810
No, he's saying women are intelligent and should find joy in their femininity rather than attempting to dumb themselves down and become masculine women.

He believes masculinity is shamelessly bold, while femininity is humble.
>>6205910
Science is overrated.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:10:36 2015 No.6206594

>>6206353
>>6206399
Hi I am the poster you are responding to.

There is nothing repulsive about demanding evidence to support a logical claim, but something deserves to be said about the value of truth. Have you ever considered when falsehood may be desirable? The fact that a belief is false is not and has not in the past been a reason for people to abandon it; rather, beliefs are abandoned based upon whether they serve the the goals of preserving and enhancing human life.

And so the difficult statement for you to accept is probably that there are no facts, merely interpretations. N's critique of scientific thinking stems from it's faith in truth, which I think must be quite unacceptable for you because the very point of doing experiments is to believe in a claim without faith. A succinct explanation can be found:
http://atheism.about.com/od/philosophyepistemology/a/Nietzsche_2.htm

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:12:18 2015 No.6206600 >>6205644 Nietzsche is pro feminism. If you don't understand, you haven't read Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:12:35 2015 No.6206603 >>6205644 How is that more than baseless rambling from a guy who couldn't get a gf?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:14:27 2015 No.6206611

>>6206168
>you automatically assume that a man is better than a woman
Of course, because a man is better than a woman. When discussing the central case, where focal meaning is found, the man is stronger, faster, more intelligent, more creative, more enterprising etc than the woman.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:20:26 2015 No.6206633 >>6206584 >thinking abstract universal rights aren't completely retarded >being ignorant of the insights of Edmund Burke topkek

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:23:47 2015 No.6206646

>>6206594

>Have you ever considered when falsehood may be desirable?

Sure I have, that's where the notion "ignorance is bliss", something I've felt myself strongly at times, comes from.

>rather, beliefs are abandoned based upon whether they serve the the goals of preserving and enhancing human life.

Ok, let's take this view (although I think there are more chaotic reasons for why beliefs are abandoned). I don't see how this view clashes with anything I said. I never claimed scientific facts on this subject should be respected simply because they are "true", I referred to science because we were talking about human well-being and I don't know of anything else that could measure that specific thing as well as science. I'm referring to it because it's practical in this instance.

>N's critique of scientific thinking stems from it's faith in truth

I never exclaimed a belief in "truth at any price", there may very well be truths that do not help maximize human flourishing. But I do not see how what I've discussed ITT belongs in that category.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:25:39 2015 No.6206652 >>6206633 Elucidate why holding such rights as important is "completely retarded". Dazzle me with your intelligence.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:26:54 2015 No.6206656 >payiung any attention to Nietzsche when he's just a shit pussyfied version of Stirner

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:26:57 2015 No.6206658 File: 109 KB, 374x384, 1419723923127.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6205647

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:27:43 2015 No.6206663 File: 50 KB, 940x352, feminism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6205644 >And isn't it true on the whole that until now 'women' have been disdained most of all by women—and certainly not by us men? this is called getting blown the fuck out

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:29:35 2015 No.6206678 File: 66 KB, 913x855, 1375895737334.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206656 Explain

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:33:07 2015 No.6206696 >>6206678 Because Nietzsche is spooky. He wants to be a nihilist, but he still lets his grievances and society control him. Stirner just goes all out and says what people don't want to hear, and then he actually did it.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:34:07 2015 No.6206701
File: 478 KB, 1124x660, valentines-day-the-year-of-love-and-the-greek-god-eros-hori.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6206663

Feminism is a conspiracy against women.

The feminists have never aimed to promote healthy women in the world, on the contrary. They saw these women as too well provided for and sought to depose them from their place at the top of the female hierarchy. To this end they have poisoned the healthy woman with false ideas about her identity and slandered her enthusiasm so as to make her adopt their own. The crowning piece of malice was the invention and widespread distribution of hormonal contraception. This is the tool with which the feminists have tried to destroy all healthy, fertile women. They perverted social perceptions of a woman's role in society, created the lie of patriarch oppression, and turned the healthy women away from precisely that lifestyle which for thousands of years has guaranteed her security and prosperity in the world. And while this has been taking place, the feminist have gone to great lengths to find ways of correcting their own sterility, even while defaming the institution of motherhood.

There are two things that a feminist will defend to the death. Can you guess what they are? The full weight of this conspiracy becomes apparent when you understand this.

Firstly: A woman's 'right' to abortion
Secondly: A woman's 'right' to infertility

Credo experto

There is also no such thing as genuine misandry. Misandry is only a more covert form of misogyny. Feminists who claim to despise men are lying: what they truly despise are healthy, fruitful women. But in order to give a discreet vent to this hatred (which otherwise would reflect badly on them and discredit their thesis that men are the entire problem and women are helpless victims) they choose to despise men, who are responsible for empowering these better types.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:34:20 2015 No.6206703 >>6206584 They should do that when they come into conflict. To make a conflicr of civilizations an issue of individuals is rather foolish.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:36:10 2015 No.6206713 >>6206696 I thought Nietzche wanted to escape nihilism through his own thoughts and will?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:36:44 2015 No.6206715

>>6206399
Your argument asks for a scientific explanation as to why the patriarchal hierarchy benefits humanity. Another poster gave a personal account onto how the establishment not only benefitted him, but others as well. His subjective account, including emotions and all, is proof in itself of the system's effectivity. As a result of his own experiences, his beliefs and morals have been shaped in a way to support the ideas he presented. Therefore his existence and beliefs in themselves are proof of the system.

Strangely enough, the argument began with you asking why the establishment should be left intact. When the opposition argued his beliefs based on both personal account, you have provided no reasoning yourself. What birth "right" does a person have to power, or "rights" in themselves?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:38:03 2015 No.6206720 >>6206086 This is fucking hilarious. Can this be a new copypasta?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:38:59 2015 No.6206726 >>6206703 They should do what? What conflict are you talking about? What civilizations?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:40:26 2015 No.6206731 >>6205647 I like this post a lot. I'm going to say this next time I'm discussing a pre-"truth table" philosopher.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:40:34 2015 No.6206732 >>6206658 >4chan filename >not I'm_fucking_enlightened.jpg

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:40:51 2015 No.6206736

>>6206713

The Stinerite would say that "escaping" Nihilism is admitting it has possession of you. The correct method would be rejecting Nihilism's "right" to possess you. You can escape your Master, but he's still your Master; you've simply "gone missing". If you don't recognize your Master's authority, then you're no longer his.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:40:55 2015 No.6206737 >>6206086 a much starker contrast can be seen by simply comparing the interactions of middle and high school aged boys and girls to interactions of college aged men and women

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:43:22 2015 No.6206749 File: 117 KB, 751x923, equality.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6205644 >>6205649 >>6205654 Some refreshing commentary. These lines alone are worth more than all the feminist literature ever printed. Based Fritz

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:45:36 2015 No.6206760

>>6206611
No one cares who's strong or fast nowadays. Humans didn't evolve to outrun or rip their opponents apart.

Also, smart men are smarter than smart women, but dumb men are also dumber than dumb women. Men's intelligence has more variability, you can't possibly compare the top 10 smartest men to the average woman and claim that women are dumb based on that.

I know that you're baiting but the only thing your post would make clear is your own stupidity.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:48:15 2015 No.6206774

>>6206715

>Your argument asks for a scientific explanation as to why the patriarchal hierarchy benefits humanity. Another poster gave a personal account onto how the establishment not only benefitted him, but others as well. His subjective account, including emotions and all, is proof in itself of the system's effectivity.
It's proof that he feels the system benefited him. It's not proof that the system benefits humanity.
>What birth "right" does a person have to power, or "rights" in themselves?
"Rights" are simply moral creeds people have come to agree with on a general level for different reasons. The reason I believe in a woman having the same individual liberty to operate in society as a man is because I value a life form based on it's cognitive capabilities and in this regard men and women are both capable of complex cognition including self-awareness etc. therefore in this framework there is no logical justification for restricting the freedoms of women and not men as they are life forms on the same cognitive level. In addition the existing differences between men and women are just averages and do not justify discrimination on an individual level in the same way discriminating against all black people is not justified just because they might be dumber/more violent on average.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:48:39 2015 No.6206776

>>6206760

> Humans didn't evolve to outrun or rip their opponents apart.

Actually, we did. The whole reason our shoulders are positioned so is to throw spears and javelins. Ther Neanderthals, who shoulders were much broader, couldn't throw spears because their shoulder didn't pivot the same way, so they had to get close to their opponant to fight which led to greater risk of injury. In fact, pretty much everything about the human body is designed for attack and run tactics, I'd even go as far as to say its a throwing machine. What other creature do you know of that can throw things like we can?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:52:17 2015 No.6206788 File: 100 KB, 446x576, Alexander_the_Great_Bust.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Daily reminder that both misogyny AND philogyny were considered aberrant mentalities by the Greeks

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 15:57:09 2015 No.6206804 >>6206701 /thread /feminism

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:02:37 2015 No.6206822 >>6206701 >The crowning piece of malice was the invention and widespread distribution of hormonal contraception. abortion is worse. think how contrary it is to every female instinct to rip your unborn child out of your womb.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:02:54 2015 No.6206823 File: 10 KB, 200x237, a stirn talking to.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Am I playing Luigi's Mansion? Because this thread is 2spooky4me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:03:56 2015 No.6206827 >>6206822 but abortion had been around long before feminism

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:05:25 2015 No.6206830 >>6206827 you mean when poor women did it out of shame in back alleys because they thought they couldn't put up with another child? contraception has been around before feminism too.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:06:07 2015 No.6206832 >>6206822 What's wrong with abortion? Assuming it doesn't cause the female in question any severe mental stress.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:07:06 2015 No.6206837 >>6206822 How is it any worse than men mass-murdering their children by ejaculating into a piece of plastic instead of impregnating women?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:07:14 2015 No.6206838 >>6206832 >implying it ever doesn't

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:07:28 2015 No.6206839 >>6206832 >What's wrong with abortion? If you have to ask you'll never know.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:07:52 2015 No.6206841

>>6206830

Mechanical contraception and various abortives have always been around, but 'the pill' is a relatively recent invention.

IUDs are superior in every way, but backwards countries like the United States and Great Britain continue to prefer the pill.

Hormonal contraception together with pro-fertility treatments have caused the bearing age and the barren age to invert in Western society. This is a crime against humanity.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:08:05 2015 No.6206842 >>6206822 HERE WE GO WITH THIS INSTINCT THING AGAIN

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:08:08 2015 No.6206843 >>6206838 Now you're just being ridiculous.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:08:30 2015 No.6206844 >>6206837 come on the ejaculation of semen is as much the murder of children as menstruation is the murder of children.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:09:06 2015 No.6206845 >>6206832 It robs the nation of a possible future taxpayer.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:09:07 2015 No.6206846 File: 9 KB, 230x230, 1417909404249.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206838 >>6206839 >>6206822 Let me ask you something, have any of you had abortions? Oh, wait, probably not, because you're obviously men.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:10:40 2015 No.6206850 >>6206846 Yeah, I've never raped anyone either but I still think rape is disgusting.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:10:55 2015 No.6206852 >>6206846 I've known many girls who've had abortions, and it affected all of them in some way. Granted, they were actually all feminine young ladies, not butch lesbians with demented sexuality issues.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:12:45 2015 No.6206858 File: 12 KB, 227x224, 1359656085807.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206850 Terrible analogy, bro. >>6206852 Maybe you just happen to live in a particularly retarded area of the world.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:13:18 2015 No.6206859 >>6206852 >not lesbians gee i wonder why lmao

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:16:05 2015 No.6206864

>>6206846

Don't be dense. Abortions are universally considered to be traumatic experiences for a woman.

Firstly there's the superficial "oh my god should I do this/I'm committing murder" trauma, then there's the "hold still while we suck your fetus out with a vacuum" trauma.

In addition to this, there's the much more obscure, physiological trauma of the body trying to account for and recover from a miscarriage that was not its fault.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:16:18 2015 No.6206865 >>6206846 you haven't either so drop your reaction images and dumb arguments

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:16:24 2015 No.6206867

>>6205957
If the "desires of the masculine" involve essentially making women slaves to men, then this brand of masculinity certainly needs to be destroyed. Your personal sentiments about the position of women are entirely subjective and by no means reflect the desires of most men or to a larger extent "masculinity".

>>6206113
This attitude of "I love women, that's why I want them to be subservient and unlearned" is horribly corrupt. You don't love women, you love your idea of what a woman should be. If you truly loved a woman, you would have utmost concern for her own personal endeavors and feelings, instead of treating her as an animal to be trained and to stay obedient.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:17:00 2015 No.6206871 >>6206852 Would've they been affected less if they were forced to give birth and raise those babies?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:18:24 2015 No.6206877 >>6206865 I'm merely pointing out the burden of proof, do you have a problem?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:19:41 2015 No.6206882 >>6206871 If we're talking the lesser of two evils, abortion is probably preferable. But that doesn't mean it lacks negative consequences, or that these are insignificant.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:20:04 2015 No.6206885

>>6206867
>You don't love women, you love your idea of what a woman should be.
And you are any different?... on top of this, you deny the possibility that most women actually want to be good servants to their husbands or children. Protip: the healthy women really do want to be that. They ARE that by nature.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:23:31 2015 No.6206890 >>6206871 My hunch is yes. They were troubled by the abortion precisely because, secretly, despite their financial/family situation, they wanted to have the baby.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:26:46 2015 No.6206903 >>6206890 So those women should've been denied their right to abortion because they may have secretly wanted the babbies anyway. I'm sure those babies would've grown into happy, healthy citizens.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:28:43 2015 No.6206910

>>6206903
I never said that. But I did suggest that only unhealthy women are genuinely okay with an abortion. And it's unhealthy women that fought so hard for that "right"; the rest really didn't care, because they would never think to have one on their own.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:30:46 2015 No.6206918 File: 35 KB, 793x494, 1358564002954.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6206910 >no true scotswoman

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:34:13 2015 No.6206928 >>6206237 I think women can be entertaining without being maximum whores. I'm thinking of a woman who can play the piano for example.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:37:08 2015 No.6206936 >>6206918 Is there a fallacy where people assume a claim is wrong simply because they can contrive a fallacy from it? Because if so, you're committing it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:37:11 2015 No.6206937 >>6206928 women who can sing and dance are great tier

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:37:17 2015 No.6206939 >>6206928 Or tell purposefully inappropriate jokes at just the best (see; worst) moment, or do a keg-stand, or perform card tricks, or recite only the most bawdy segments of Chaucer verbatim.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:42:33 2015 No.6206963

hes got a point on some things. ive really never met or seen a truly intelligent and insightful woman. sure they can be incredibly book smart and memorize things worth while, but when it comes to reason they are just leagues lower than men. and i mean certain men, not all men.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:44:57 2015 No.6206974 >>6206963 I think Nietzsche considers women more intelligent, but less driven than men.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:45:50 2015 No.6206978

>>6206937
Obviously.

>>6206939
No, I'm not into clowns, sorry.

I really don't care about feminism, I'm fine with women doing whatever they want as long as I don't have to pay for it.
If women want to be single mothers, it's their body their choice, but it's also my body and my choice not to be forced into work to pay for these children.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:46:32 2015 No.6206979 >>6206974 Yeah, he said women had more intelligence but men had the stronger impulses.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:52:08 2015 No.6207000 >>6205654 >>6205649 >>6205644 100% true

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:53:08 2015 No.6207005 >>6205720 lol no true scotsman, every time

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:55:08 2015 No.6207012 >>6205746 >that go against his philosophy of perspectivism and truth-production NIETZSCHE DOESN'T HAVE THIS AS 'HIS PHILOSOPHY' YOU HACK "LOL NIETZSCHE ONLY SAID THINGS I AGREE WITH"

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:56:56 2015 No.6207022 >>6205813 >>6205827 >>6205846 nietzsche liked powerful nations, like the spartans and romans, more than the faggy athenians in their later years

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 16:59:03 2015 No.6207030 >>6205910 >cultural and scientific output in terms of quantity, but 99.99% of the media today is pure fucking consumer garbage

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:00:04 2015 No.6207034 >>6205922 he also criticizes not science and speaks of truth passionately, fucknuts

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:00:12 2015 No.6207038

>>6206885
>And you are any different?
Most definitely, I don't presume a woman wants to be either or. If she wants to be a servant, then let her. If she wants to be an independent thinker who's actually given an ounce of freedom, then I think she should be able to do so.

>you deny the possibility that most women actually want to be good servants to their husbands or children.
not once did I say that all women were against this. But you have this idea that women, by their nature, do want this. This argument should be blatantly false to anyone with a sliver of rational ability. If women truly wanted this, then they would happily comply in their subservient positions. But that's not what we see, we see women going to university and getting jobs, in some cases they even lead their households. Men complain that women are stupid and irrational but they don't want to stop treating them like children.

>the healthy women really do want to be that. They ARE that by nature.
If you'd like to maybe provide a scholarly article to support this rather than your sentimental opinions then I'd be more than happy to consider the idea, but until then you look like an idiot because reality doesn't reflect your assertions.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:01:04 2015 No.6207040 >>6206024 >Another important point is that there's no truth nor should THIS IS NOT NIETZSCHE'S STANCE STOP REPEATING IT YOU RETARD

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:02:04 2015 No.6207044

>>6206024
>The above passage is actually quite in conflict with the rest of his writings and presents a major challenge in interpreting him. But this does not mean at all that the above passage can be reconciled with the rest of his writings in the first place. His philosophy itself is against reconciliation. In other words, there's no single Nietzsche, and consciously so.
except for the 'single nietzsche' you just laid out

god you're a fucking moron

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:02:29 2015 No.6207045 >>6206559 >flourishing harrisee detected

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:04:23 2015 No.6207057 >>6206086 so basically, the "truth" of feminism is irrelevant because feminists and feminist men are disgusting pigs?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:05:50 2015 No.6207065 >>6206788 yes because i'm sure the greeks were talking exactly about what we have today

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:06:54 2015 No.6207071 >>6206871 abortion is still hugely traumatic

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:08:17 2015 No.6207074 >>6206936 fallacy fallacy

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:41:49 2015 No.6207184

>>6207038
>If you'd like to maybe provide a scholarly article to support this rather than your sentimental opinions then I'd be more than happy to consider the idea, but until then you look like an idiot because reality doesn't reflect your assertions.
If you're so bent on only taking claims with "scholarly articles" backing them up into consideration, why aren't you providing any for your own arguments? Hypocrisy much?

> But you have this idea that women, by their nature, do want this.
I have this idea because this is what I have seen. Even when women go to university and get jobs, what I see is them doing these things precisely so they can be better servants for their husbands or children.

If ever I see a woman making these choices because she actually wants to be in control, and not to better take care of someone else in her personal life or because her financial situation forces her to, what I also see is some flaw in her sexuality, or some psychological hang-up she has with herself, other women, or with men... that, or I see young naive girls who have succumbed to the fact that 1) there is a distinct lack of healthy men around them and 2) there is an abundance of deranged feminists with megaphones in their hands these days, both of which combined have morally corrupted these girls and confused them into adopting personal responsibilities and duties they otherwise wouldn't be adopting (an act which, at bottom, is STILL in order to become a better servant for someone)... in short, they have become less womanly by adopting these values, and their interests now are no longer representative of women.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:48:18 2015 No.6207206

>>6207184

> in short, they have become less womanly by adopting these values, and their interests now are no longer representative of women.

holy fucking shit dude
your mind is poison
please go public with your opinions and hope someone takes the time to destroy you

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:49:21 2015 No.6207210 >>6207206 If you think that's poison you must think Nietzsche is utter cancer.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:52:50 2015 No.6207222 >>6207210 i tend to keep him at a distance, yeah, but at least he's brilliant at times

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:55:43 2015 No.6207234 >>6207206 How about you act on something yourself for once instead of begging society, you fucking faggot?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:56:06 2015 No.6207236 >>6206978 Mate, parlour tricks are a vital component of any entertainer's repetoire. Man woman, human or chimpanzee. Everybody respects the Keg stand. From Carl Sagan to Cesare Borgia.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 17:56:44 2015 No.6207242 >>6207222 I tend to wade only to waist deep, too

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:05:16 2015 No.6207282

>>6207234
ok

>we used to live in a society where women were economically and socially dependent on men
>now more and more women are becoming, and wanting to become, independent human beings
>these women are therefore no longer women (because they're no longer dependant/wanting-to-be-dependant on men)

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:07:35 2015 No.6207289

>>6207184
I hope you aren't forgetting that men go to university and get jobs to impress women. Women ultimately get to choose, so there's no harm in them becoming corrupted. That only means that they're more likely to choose people like you and I.

Women don't need sex, they need attention, and women always get attention from men no matter how fat, deranged and unwomanly they are. Men do need sex and for sex they need women. Men are the ones who have always been forced to please and impress women, so if they cease to do so they'll only be harming themselves. If women cease to be womanly, it'll be nothing but a minor turn-off for a man, who will still take any woman because of his high libido.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:09:26 2015 No.6207296 >>6207242 all in all it's pretty impressive how you pretend to be pretending to be projecting

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:11:06 2015 No.6207305 >>6207282 Aren't 40% of single mothers in the US on welfare? Women might stay away from men but they sure don''t stay too far from their wallets.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:13:44 2015 No.6207312 >>6207305 yeah man i wish someone invented an ideology to change that

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:13:47 2015 No.6207313 >>6207305 As if 3rd world countries matter.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:15:19 2015 No.6207321 >>6207313 Stay eternally insecure while your borders and trade lines are protected for free, we'll just be eating burgers and laughing.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:16:46 2015 No.6207325

>>6207289
>like you and I
I don't appreciate the assumption that I'm anything like you. I in fact have always chosen the girls I'm with and have denied plenty in my life that were into me but I had no interest in. I would never settle with someone I didn't fully respect and desire in all ways possible; I barely even give these girls the time of day.

It sounds like what you speak of are these desperate effeminate males with no dignity or honor who would gladly take anyone just to have someone, as if it's the most important thing in the world... tasteless "men" with shallow self-absorbed goals.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:44:13 2015 No.6207424 >>6207282 A function of our social conditions, which are inherently unhealthy Why don't you look at the comparative sperm counts of men

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:46:18 2015 No.6207432 >>6207282 >we used to live in a society where women were women >now more and more women are becoming, and wanting to become, men >these pseudo-women are therefore no longer women (because they are more like men) ftfy

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:47:35 2015 No.6207436 >>6207296 Wut

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:50:52 2015 No.6207447

>>6206086
A culture forms when one value is traded for another.
Spanish people probably think English people are cold and unloving. English people on the other hand probably think Spanish people are weird as hell and exhausting to deal with. All of this stuff depends on what values the culture (the collective I...) chose to qualify more highly over others.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:55:01 2015 No.6207467 >>6207321 >subjecting your ego to a spook for comfort You're cattle, existing only to consume How fucking pathetic

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:57:01 2015 No.6207478

>>6207289
>I hope you aren't forgetting that men go to university and get jobs to impress women. Women ultimately get to choose, so there's no harm in them becoming corrupted. That only means that they're more likely to choose people like you and I.

I'm going to university to get a good job and be in an environment I enjoy lol

>doing things because of women

Women like to come to your party, they aren't the party in themselves

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 18:59:59 2015 No.6207491 >>6206206 thats only one kind of fedora m8. There are more Niceguy fedoras than there are Whiteknights. I mean, feminists may use the term misogynist a bit too much, but shit, Nietzche just said the only thing women are good for is childreaing

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:01:28 2015 No.6207496 >>6206237 this is literally madonna-whore complex

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:03:14 2015 No.6207502 >>6206701 >Feminism is a conspiracy against women. no.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:07:54 2015 No.6207515

>>6207491
That's true though

People like you never comprehend just what life was like for most of human history. The only reason women even CAN be different is our massively destructive economics and destructive farming methods, unsustainable growth.

Women used to have real need, say, if you lived an agricultural lifestyle. Collect chicken eggs, grind grains, both the man and the woman needed to work to survive. This is fine, as it gives everyone purpose.

Eventually women had less and less purpose, and eventually men followed. Today everyone has markedly less purpose than ever.

Feminism is just retarded because it's deeply ignorant of history and has completely fucking retarded conceptions of human motivation and happiness.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:23:40 2015 No.6207575

>>6207515
>implying I don't realize society hinges upon unsustainable growth
>implying post-menopause women are worthless
>implying meaning isn't subjective, and that reality itself has a meaning detatched from human perspective
>muh nature

BTW, I know plenty of women that find having children to absolutely terrifying. And I also know women who would be terrible mothers. Have you actually talked to women?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:32:51 2015 No.6207622 >>6207491 Child-bearing is what they're best at, everything else man can do better. And they are only the best at it when all other possible skills are forsaken in the process.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:35:19 2015 No.6207632

>>6207622
>Child-bearing is what they're best at, everything else man can do better. And they are only the best at it when all other possible skills are forsaken in the process.
oh my god. Do you actually believe this? How many women have you worked with, or at least talked to?

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:44:29 2015 No.6207675

>>6207575
What? I'm not saying any of that isn't true, inherently. Post-menopausal women are worthless as fuck in today's society.

The problem is feminists want the economic growth and flourishing and also want purpose. The two are inherently incompatible.

And no, I don't think women should literally be baby farms, and neither does Nietzsche you sophist. The point is it is there primary function, PRIMARY, not exclusive. Don't mince words.

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 19:47:55 2015 No.6207689

>>6207632
I work with women all the time. I spend more time talking with women than with men, actually. You're just so disincluded from any aspect of society that matters that you could never get a true perspective on efficiency

Men are patently more efficient at anything they try. Take any random man and random woman, and who's better at any random job is never ABSOLUTELY biased, it's a matter of statistics.

Literally every argument against antiequalitarianism is a deliberate misinterpretation of the views to reductio as absurdum. Debate someone intelligent for once, and stop mincing words

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:03:48 2015 No.6207746 >>6205910 I'll give you scientific output but >cultural output has never been higher than today good lord man

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:07:20 2015 No.6207755 >>6207746 I'd like to see actual data that'd show an increase in scientific output as a ratio of population.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:08:12 2015 No.6207758 >>6205983 >finna We don't speak Ratchet here man.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:11:03 2015 No.6207768 >>6207755 I'm not scientifically minded so I just answered from my basic knowledge of recent 'output' (ie Mars Rover, Quantum Theory) but I share your interest.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:13:17 2015 No.6207777 >>6205925 Great post.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:34:00 2015 No.6207853 >>6207502 great argument m8 I really like the part where you disproved the central proposition with sound reasoning and solid evidence

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 20:48:57 2015 No.6207914 File: 181 KB, 398x339, 1343142226317.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6207777 check'd

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 21:20:27 2015 No.6208035 >>6207632 >Do you actually believe this? I definitely believe the first sentence. It is supported by thousands of years of evidence.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 22:50:20 2015 No.6208398 >>6207768 Actual scientists state very directly that the Mars rover has almost zero scientific significance, and is mostly a show for the American public. It's very obvious

Anonymous Sat Feb 28 23:24:41 2015 No.6208508

>>6205925
But one could perceive all of male/female dynamics as a kind of chemical, pheremonal dance and interplay, an interplay through which life reproduces and thus flourishes. The emergent duality of this process is just a necessary formation or incarnation within the network of a larger process. Then take into consideration that each creature, including us, has their own unique chemical blend that affects their body and psyche, and gives them a unique chemical blueprint within the larger dance.

To me, it just seems to make more sense to examine sexuality in the philosophical sense of sex as the regenerative or continuative aspect of life. Then the two bodily genders and personal gender identity of individuals are all just varying degrees of emergent properties, emergent properties still subservient to the whole.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 28 23:32:36 2015 No.6208531 >>6207746 higher in terms of volume, for certain

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature