are women to blame for tyranny?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

11011
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 4:42 pm

are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by 11011 » Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:41 pm

women elect men who embody their will - and only such men - that is one half of the human population at any given era, to be their group's 'government'.

yes, other men have a 'vote' but who raises boys in at least the first few years of life in almost every society? who shapes their will through 'love'? even the father's love is usually just the will of the mother's in most societies. and how many boys subsequently escape this grasp/blindfold to see clearly and have a will/love-to-give of their own? not many, and they are readily labelled deviants and usually thrown in jail or ostracized as women see them as threatening.

and they are easy to spot moreover, if they carry themselves honestly, as they have no instinctive 'respect' for women, as 'socialized' (women's will embodied) men do.

so the government at all times has at least half of the population supporting it, since the government, regardless of era, is most responsive to the will of women, not men. and the men that are present, the vast majority have been infused with women's 'love' (will), so they won't really challenge said government, no matter how tyrannical, will more readily support and accept it as women do, and even invent clever rationalizations like 'human nature' to defend it, since they love women so much, and you know don't want to be thrown in jail.

i cannot say for sure whether this is universal - across time and space - i know in some societies boys are raised by their fathers much more, they are taught to hunt early, etc. and the daughters are likewise raised by their mothers to housekeeping and the like, but how do we untangle the will of the mother from the will of the father, extending back to our earliest predecessors as a species?

does a father even have a desire to extend his own unique masculine will into a child, or better yet guide a child to discover a will of their own? and perhaps this discovery is what it means to have a man's will? a will of their own? a will entirely self-discovered, with no blinding or lies by anyone.

while this does sound a touch misogynistic, and i sympathize with women's condition as far as life strategies and desires of their unique own, i cannot say that women or mothers desire the same for their children. they are more 'practical' - they want the child to survive and succeed in the world, and teach them accordingly, because that is their mode to extending their own sense of self into the future, through the child, that is their instinctive power at work, but insodoing, in adopting the mother's will and desire to symbolically live on, the boy and subsequent man never discovers a will of his own, and can only pass on to his own children his mother's will, and if this happens en mass, from generation to generation, across time and space, it is no wonder we have tyranny, and a lack of clarity about the world and human condition and our real choices in life.

as far as how the daughter's will is affected by the mother, i haven't cared enough to think about this so i won't bother speculating, and it's partially remote to tyrannts, although it's obvious daughter's quickly get the memo and basically support the whole thing, acting like their mother's and such. how it all unfolds might be slightly different to how it happens for boys, how the 'love' is internalized and will meted out - or maybe just a practical recognition that this is what they have to do to survive as females in the world, or perhaps even out of resentment/revenge toward boys. after all they will be the next generation of mothers.

but i can say with more certainty it is not in men's nature to elect any sort of government. moreover they cannot cooperate enough amongst themselves - because they don't want to, and don't need to to survive or be happy even as a group - to even support such a thing, i imagine guys acting according to their own unique self-discovered will function like little nations, each one of them, because that is what preserves their autonomy and independence of will, which is their happy place, assuming no infusion of mother's will.

uwot
Posts: 4399
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by uwot » Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:57 pm

You need to get out and meet some actual women.

commonsense
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by commonsense » Sun Apr 28, 2019 6:19 pm

11011 wrote:
Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:41 pm
women elect men who embody their will - and only such men - that is one half of the human population at any given era, to be their group's 'government'.
It is doubtful that women elect men who embody anything, since the majority of women (58%) who voted in the 2016
US Presidential Election voted for the loser. Women are not to be blamed for tyranny.

User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3264
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by HexHammer » Sun Apr 28, 2019 8:02 pm

11011 wrote:
Sat Apr 27, 2019 4:41 pm
are women to blame for tyranny?
You sure sound like a "high functional"

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:38 am

When did collective blame/guilt ever solve anything?

Dachshund
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:40 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Dachshund » Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:04 pm

Women should never have been given the vote in the West.

Let's use the United States as an example. What happened when women were given the vote in the US is that they automatically, instinctively voted for the political left (Democrat). This is because the universal equality, peace, love, justice, communitarian, pluralist, "rainbow coalition" themes/vibe of Leftist rhetoric have an innate/inherent appeal for them. The want to believe that life is intended to be a walk through a rose garden, so to speak, and we can make it happen, we can make everyone's live all sweet and sun -shiny and luvverley, simply by voting for socialist politicians. When they are elected they will implement policies that will make all the nastiness, misery and suffering of human life progressively disappear with their clever policies. Everything will be sweet and caring and gentle and fair and sensitive and beautiful the world will smell like French perfume - Yipee !

This is how women think; they are primarily driven by their emotions and implicitly averse to confronting reality and what we know about the truth of human nature ,which is, admittedly, not much, but most men understand that all human beings have a tremendous capacity for profoundly immoral behaviour. There is a Hitler, a Stalin, a Ted Bundy, a "Jack the Ripper", a generic "blood-thirsty psychopath" lurking in the souls of every human being, and it's best to be aware of that at all times, especially in the realm of politics.

The ancient Athenian thinkers like Aristotle warned against allowing women to become involved in politics, likewise their rulers like Pericles, who basically thought that they should be - first and foremost - dutiful/attentive wives , mothers and efficient home-makers, and when in public "seen but not heard." Kant, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer likewise believe that granting women the right to vote would be madness.

Kant believed that women were morally deficient because they naturally possessed a inadequate capacity for the kind of rational cognition that sound moral understanding and moral behaviour demanded (He was referring to what is variously called prudential wisdom or practical reason, what Aristotle termed "Phronesis") I think Kant is vindicated by events in the modern history of America. In the 1960's and 1970's we saw the rise of a hair-brained, hard-Left feminist movement in the US, this movement played a substantial role in the passage of "No Fault" divorce legislation across America, marriages and families began to break up at an exponential rate, and there was every kind of disastrous social fall-out one could imagine. And guess who pays for the mess in terms of unemployed single mothers and children with psychiatric disorders due to family break ups ? Yes, that's right the bloated Welfare State; and how did the Welfare State get so huge and costly? Through successive Democrat (Leftist) administrations; and who voted these Democrats into power? Women. With respect to what Kant said about (irrational) moral deficiency, do you remember the early 1970's ? Do you remember how American women used their collective political clout to have liberal Supreme Court Justices legalise abortion ("Roe vs Wade", 1973) across the US (One of the most controversial rulings in American legal history !). Well, how did that turn out ? I'll tell you how it turned out. If we look at JUST ONE of the many organisations that proves abortion "on demand" in the US , namely, (the Federally funded :shock:) group called "Planned Parenthood", they perform 300,000 abortions per year; many of which are carried out on women in the 2nd or 3rd trimester of pregnancy. There's no way that's not cold-blooded, premeditated murder. If that's not appalling and horrifying enough for you, then know this: there is even a abortion Bill on the table right now in the US that allows a new-born infant to be "aborted"/murdered if that's what the mother wants. Funny how women, who are so averse to physical violence (especially male physical violence) and so moralistic about the evils of war, who are so soft and kind and gentle have no problem - no qualms about putting abortion on Mastercard and having the arms and legs and head torn off the child they are carrying with a pair of surgical pliers. The whole thing just mortifies me. I mean, what can you say ? To rub salt in the wound groups like "Planned Parenthood" LIE about what they are actually doing. They give out misleading statistics about the abortions they perform: the total number, how many are carried out in the third trimester of pregnancy, ages and ethnic groups of women who have been through their "clinics" for abortions each year, and so on. Why? Because they know full well that what they are doing is profoundly immoral and if the American public knew the truth about what was really going on, there would be rioting in the streets.

None of this would have surprised Nietzsche. As he pointed out in his philosophy on numerous occasions, women are essentially like big, naughty children who require the supervision and firm discipline of males at all time to prevent them from becoming a danger to themselves and others. Good advice, Friedrich !! He advised any man who was intending to get himself involved with women to, metaphorically speaking, make sure he took a WHIP with him (to keep them in line). As for Schopenhauer thought that women were, amongst other things exceedingly artful ( devious) implicitly treacherous and not to be trusted under any circumstances.

My own experience of modern women is that they are very hard work. One of the biggest issues in handling them is that what they REALLY want (if they are normal, average women) is for the male in a relationship to take control of the important day-to-day, bread-and-butter decision-making, to set the boundaries for the relationship, to take the initiative in most matters, to be a lover, but also to be someone they can rely upon to be firm , strong and decisive when it matters most.Unfortunately, what has happened in the West since the late 1960's is that the official mouthpieces of mainstream culture/morality/politics/the academy/the workplace have been pumping out a counter-narrative that tells women they don't need men ( because men are oppressive, abusive pigs, etc.), that marriage is essentially slavery, they should be totally independent and put having a career before having children, that there is absolutely no difference (physiological or psychological) between women and men, and such like. In short women have been more or less coerced into living out the tenets of a unnatural and false ideology of femininity. Many of them, in particular, well educated, white women are not. IMO, consciously aware of their predicament, rather they experience a tremendous existential confusion and sense of dis-ease. In case, I've found with modern women, that if you aren't careful you can find yourself in this impossible situation of having to live with and manage a woman who does not really understand what is and is not in her best interests in the relationship.

In conclusion, I have some parting advice for young, single men who are reading this post. Here it is:

Dude... when you decide you want to get married (you need a decent job and some money saved up, BTW, before you even think about it). Remember, a good marriage works like this.... When it comes to the really important things in your relationship, in your married lives together - not the little, inconsequential, trivial stuff, but the CRUCIAL stuff that MATTERS, that makes a big DIFFERENCE, it's YOU who calls the shots and your wife supports you and backs you up 100% no questions asked.. So when you're looking for a future wife, (you know, testing out different girls), at some point in the relationship you need to say them what I've just said.That is, you need say to a girl that you think might be marriage material:"There's something I have to know if you're serious about being with me long term. The way our relationship would have to work is that I would in charge of the big stuff (moral, political, financial stuff, etc.) in our lives, and when I made the big calls, (and it will be me who makes most of them, but NOT all) I would be expecting you to support me, 100%, automatically, no arguments , no ifs or buts, no BS. What do you think about that."



Kindest Regards


Dachshund (GO THE ARSENAL - WOOF, WOOF !!!)
Last edited by Dachshund on Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:28 pm

Dachshund wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:04 pm
Dude... when you decide you want to get married (you need a decent job and some money saved up, BTW, before you even think about it). Remember, a good marriage works like this.... When it comes to the really important things in your relationship, in your married lives together - not the little, inconsequential, trivial stuff, but the CRUCIAL stuff that MATTERS, that makes a big DIFFERENCE, it's YOU who calls the shots and your wife supports you and backs you up 100% no questions asked.. So when you're looking for a future wife, (you know, testing out different girls), at some point in the relationship you need to say them what I've just said.That is, you need say to a girl that you think might be marriage material:"There's something I have to know if you're serious about being with me long term. The way our relationship would have to work is that I would in charge of the big stuff (moral, political, financial stuff, etc.) in our lives, and when I made the big calls, (and it will be me who makes most of them, but NOT all) I would be expecting you to support me, 100%, automatically, no arguments , no ifs or buts, no BS. What do you think about that."
I have a woman next to me who is slowly (but steadily) learning to make the tough calls herself.

I wouldn't settle for anything less. I don't want a subordinate - I want a partner.

There is time for stoicism and time for aesthetics. The balance of both is what makes us human.

Dachshund
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:40 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Dachshund » Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:00 pm

Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:28 pm
Dachshund wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:04 pm
Dude... when you decide you want to get married (you need a decent job and some money saved up, BTW, before you even think about it). Remember, a good marriage works like this.... When it comes to the really important things in your relationship, in your married lives together - not the little, inconsequential, trivial stuff, but the CRUCIAL stuff that MATTERS, that makes a big DIFFERENCE, it's YOU who calls the shots and your wife supports you and backs you up 100% no questions asked.. So when you're looking for a future wife, (you know, testing out different girls), at some point in the relationship you need to say them what I've just said.That is, you need say to a girl that you think might be marriage material:"There's something I have to know if you're serious about being with me long term. The way our relationship would have to work is that I would in charge of the big stuff (moral, political, financial stuff, etc.) in our lives, and when I made the big calls, (and it will be me who makes most of them, but NOT all) I would be expecting you to support me, 100%, automatically, no arguments , no ifs or buts, no BS. What do you think about that."
I have a woman next to me who is slowly (but steadily) learning to make the tough calls herself.

I wouldn't settle for anything less. I don't want a subordinate - I want a partner.

There is time for stoicism and time for aesthetics. The balance of both is what makes us human.
David Niven was British actor who often played the role of the "perfect English gentleman", kind of like James Bond, but a lady's man instead of an assassin (007 - licenced by HM to kill) you will be too young to remember him, but he was a very big movie star in the 1950's and 1960's.

Women idolised David Niven for his good taste, charm and wit. That and his effortless mastery of arts of romance re the fairer sex. I watched an interview with him once, where the interviewer turned the tables on Niven and asked what is was about WOMEN that he most admired.

He said: "What I love most about women is their sensitivity.

Same for me.

NB; In a good marriage the husband and wife are very different, of course, ( because men and women are very, VERY different creatures) but they relate to each other in a manner that allows the differences to mutually complement each other. The two become one - a fluid, dynamic gestalen where the whole is greater than the parts. It's like the sound of a violin duet (Chamber music) performed by two masters of the instrument. There' are 2 violins ( i.e. a pair like a husband and a wife) but the melody you hear is more than just the sounds that are given off by each individual violin as it is played. The separate scores the two violinists are playing complement each other in a beautiful way, despite being very different.

Dachshund

Age
Posts: 3569
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Age » Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:39 pm

Dachshund wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:00 pm
Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:28 pm
Dachshund wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:04 pm
Dude... when you decide you want to get married (you need a decent job and some money saved up, BTW, before you even think about it). Remember, a good marriage works like this.... When it comes to the really important things in your relationship, in your married lives together - not the little, inconsequential, trivial stuff, but the CRUCIAL stuff that MATTERS, that makes a big DIFFERENCE, it's YOU who calls the shots and your wife supports you and backs you up 100% no questions asked.. So when you're looking for a future wife, (you know, testing out different girls), at some point in the relationship you need to say them what I've just said.That is, you need say to a girl that you think might be marriage material:"There's something I have to know if you're serious about being with me long term. The way our relationship would have to work is that I would in charge of the big stuff (moral, political, financial stuff, etc.) in our lives, and when I made the big calls, (and it will be me who makes most of them, but NOT all) I would be expecting you to support me, 100%, automatically, no arguments , no ifs or buts, no BS. What do you think about that."
I have a woman next to me who is slowly (but steadily) learning to make the tough calls herself.

I wouldn't settle for anything less. I don't want a subordinate - I want a partner.

There is time for stoicism and time for aesthetics. The balance of both is what makes us human.
David Niven was British actor who often played the role of the "perfect English gentleman", kind of like James Bond, but a lady's man instead of an assassin (007 - licenced by HM to kill) you will be too young to remember him, but he was a very big movie star in the 1950's and 1960's.

Women idolised David Niven for his good taste, charm and wit. That and his effortless mastery of arts of romance re the fairer sex. I watched an interview with him once, where the interviewer turned the tables on Niven and asked what is was about WOMEN that he most admired.

He said: "What I love most about women is their sensitivity.

Same for me.

NB; In a good marriage the husband and wife are very different, of course, ( because men and women are very, VERY different creatures) but they relate to each other in a manner that allows the differences to mutually complement each other. The two become one - a fluid, dynamic gestalen where the whole is greater than the parts. It's like the sound of a violin duet (Chamber music) performed by two masters of the instrument. There' are 2 violins ( i.e. a pair like a husband and a wife) but the melody you hear is more than just the sounds that are given off by each individual violin as it is played. The separate scores the two violinists are playing complement each other in a beautiful way, despite being very different.

Dachshund
HOW are men and women supposedly very, VERY different creatures?

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:15 pm

Age wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:39 pm
HOW are men and women supposedly very, VERY different creatures?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscie ... ifferences
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_diffe ... psychology

Age
Posts: 3569
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Age » Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:18 pm

Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:15 pm
Age wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 1:39 pm
HOW are men and women supposedly very, VERY different creatures?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscie ... ifferences
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_diffe ... psychology
Non-sequitur.

You would have to define the word 'men' first, and then define the word 'women', or vice-versa. But you are completely incapable of doing that, so any reply you give could NOT logically follow from the previous statement or question.

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:20 pm

Age wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:18 pm
Non-sequitur.

You would have to define the word 'men' first, and then define the word 'women', or vice-versa. But you are completely incapable of doing that, so any reply you give could NOT logically follow from the previous statement or question.
Bullshit. Why do I have to define the words YOU are using?

Age
Posts: 3569
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Age » Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:29 pm

Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:20 pm
Age wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:18 pm
Non-sequitur.

You would have to define the word 'men' first, and then define the word 'women', or vice-versa. But you are completely incapable of doing that, so any reply you give could NOT logically follow from the previous statement or question.
Bullshit. Why do I have to define the words YOU are using?
Considering you are the one asking me to define the words that YOU use, I find what you ask here more than hilarious.

Also I did ask the VERY SIMPLE clarifying question: HOW are men and women supposedly very, VERY different creatures? So, it would go without reason AND explanation that the words would HAVE TO BE 'defined' in the answer anyway.

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Logik » Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:31 pm

Age wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:29 pm
Considering you are the one asking me to define the words that YOU use, I find what you ask here more than hilarious.
Have you no shame, filthy liar?!?!

You used 'men' and 'women' first.

You asked: HOW are men and women supposedly very, VERY different creatures?

Age
Posts: 3569
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: are women to blame for tyranny?

Post by Age » Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:47 pm

Logik wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:31 pm
Age wrote:
Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:29 pm
Considering you are the one asking me to define the words that YOU use, I find what you ask here more than hilarious.
Have you no shame, filthy liar?!?!

You used 'men' and 'women' first.

You asked: HOW are men and women supposedly very, VERY different creatures?
But I did NOT say "in this thread", did I?

You were asking that "in another thread". But I still find it hilarious in the context of this thread.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests