A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:17 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:59 am
So true. Calling all soldiers 'brave heroes' is a brilliant piece of war marketing because the implication is that those who choose not to be political pawns are by default 'cowards', not 'heroes'.
What truly galls the warmongering class is that real heroes don't give a damn what the political pawns call them.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:55 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:20 am
... unlike the woman RCSaunders describes who make men happy.
You presume too much. If you read carefully, you would notice I wrote, "I love all women, but especially those who love themselves, and love being a woman." All women includes all the Xanthippe's in this world, and if you knew my wife you could never had made that comment.

Perhaps you can only love a certain kind of woman, but I know no such limitation. One cannot be a phylogynist about only some women, and a misogynist about all others. Isn't that what you have implied?

The most feminine women are strong, fiercely independent, and self-confident who require neither belligerence or crudeness to be all they can be. (The same is true of the most masculine men.)
Nick_A wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:20 am
The question becomes a role model for whom? From the man’s point of view the role model that makes you happy is not the same as the one who makes you a good philosopher.
Read again, I said, "No real woman needs a, 'role model.'" If you think they do, you are presuming to know better than a woman what she should be.

A philosopher is one who has discovered what the purpose of his life is and how to achieve it. It is not to be the sacrificial animal of all others, as Socrates implied, but to be and achieve all one can as a human being and to fully enjoy one's life. Everyone's different. Perhaps Socrates, the original hippie, enjoyed a shrew. I think it is presumptuous to assume what the best kind of wife is for others.

Belinda
Posts: 2808
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:13 pm

The most feminine women are strong, fiercely independent, and self-confident who require neither belligerence or crudeness to be all they can be. (The same is true of the most masculine men.)
If they are reared by wild animals their initial role models are their wild animal parents.If they are reared by humans their initial role models are their human parents.

Skepdick
Posts: 1867
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Skepdick » Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:56 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:55 pm
A philosopher is one who has discovered what the purpose of his life is and how to achieve it. It is not to be the sacrificial animal of all others, as Socrates implied, but to be and achieve all one can as a human being and to fully enjoy one's life. Everyone's different.
But is there such thing as achievement without sacrifice?

It seems there's a tension in your narrative between Epicureanism and Stoicism. It was the Stoics who ultimately valued purpose and self-sacrifice. The Epicureans settled for pleasures of the senses.

A nation is born stoic, and dies epicurean. At its cradle (to repeat a thoughtful adage) religion stands, and philosophy accompanies it to the grave. --Will Durant

In a way Epicureanism is seen as the feminine curse - great sensitivity and active avoidance of negative emotions. The Stoics interpret that as "weakness".

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:15 pm

Belinda wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:13 pm
The most feminine women are strong, fiercely independent, and self-confident who require neither belligerence or crudeness to be all they can be. (The same is true of the most masculine men.)
If they are reared by wild animals their initial role models are their wild animal parents.If they are reared by humans their initial role models are their human parents.
So what? No one is required to follow a role model and those who know what it means to be a human being don't.

Everyone is whatever they choose to be.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:56 pm
But is there such thing as achievement without sacrifice?
Of course. Giving up something of lesser value for something of higher value is not a sacrifice.
Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:56 pm
In a way Epicureanism is seen as the feminine curse - great sensitivity and active avoidance of negative emotions.
If you think femininity is a kind of inferiority, that sensitivity is a weakness (which has nothing to do with avoiding negative emotions, whatever those are), then you do not understand women at all. In many practical ways women are generally stronger then men, are able to endure more pain, have more patience, and will work harder for what they truly value. Of course no generalization characterizes any individual, but to suggest femininity is a curse is just misogyny.

Skepdick
Posts: 1867
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Skepdick » Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:32 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm
Of course. Giving up something of lesser value for something of higher value is not a sacrifice.
But giving up something of infinite value for something else of infinite value is sacrifice. Especially when you deeply cherish both!

You wouldn't give up your daughter's life to save your son, would you?
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm
If you think femininity is a kind of inferiority, that sensitivity is a weakness (which has nothing to do with avoiding negative emotions, whatever those are), then you do not understand women at all. In many practical ways women are generally stronger then men, are able to endure more pain, have more patience, and will work harder for what they truly value.
Way to mis-understand!

From your very own definition "Giving up something of lesser value for something of higher value is not a sacrifice."

To an Epicurean the highest value is the pursuit of happiness/ataraxia/eudaimonia.
Therefore, to an Epicurean giving up happiness/ataraxia/eudaimonia for emotional pain would be a sacrifice.

If you do choose hardship over happiness/ataraxia/eudaimonia then you can't call yourself an Epicurean.
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm
to suggest femininity is a curse is just misogyny.
But I didn't suggest that? "Femininity is a curse" are your words, not mine.

What I said was "In a way Epicureanism is seen as the feminine curse.". Just like emotionless Stoicism is seen as the masculine curse.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:14 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:32 pm
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm
Of course. Giving up something of lesser value for something of higher value is not a sacrifice.
But giving up something of infinite value for something else of infinite value is sacrifice.
No it isn't.
Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:32 pm
You wouldn't give up your daughter's life to save your son, would you?
Another's life is neither mine to "give up," or to, "save." There is no possible situation where such a choice could come up.
Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:32 pm
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm
to suggest femininity is a curse is just misogyny.
But I didn't suggest that? "Femininity is a curse" are your words, not mine.
What I said was "In a way Epicureanism is seen as the feminine curse.".
Yes, I know what you said. What is a, "feminine curse?" To anyone else it would mean femininity itself is a kind of curse, else it would not be a curse at all.

You still don't know what disingenuous means?

Skepdick
Posts: 1867
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Skepdick » Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:17 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:14 pm
Another's life is neither mine to "give up," or to, "save." There is no possible situation where such a choice could come up.
It's a daily occurrence for doctors. Soldiers. Police officers. People who have skin in the game.

Maybe it's a foreign concept to philosophers, but just because you play ostrich and pretend it doesn't happen in real life, it doesn't make it true.
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:14 pm
Yes, I know what you said. What is a, "feminine curse?"
You tell us. It's your phrase.
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:14 pm
To anyone else it would mean femininity itself is a kind of curse, else it would not be a curse at all.
Is that how you've chosen to interpret my sentence?

It says a lot about you.

Skepdick
Posts: 1867
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Skepdick » Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:39 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:14 pm
Skepdick wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:32 pm
RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:28 pm
Of course. Giving up something of lesser value for something of higher value is not a sacrifice.
But giving up something of infinite value for something else of infinite value is sacrifice.
No it isn't.
Yeah. It is. It's right in the word "giving up".

Not giving up ANYTHING is better than giving up something. It's the difference between an actual and a false dilemma.

Nick_A
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Nick_A » Mon Jul 29, 2019 5:23 am

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:55 pm
Nick_A wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:20 am
... unlike the woman RCSaunders describes who make men happy.
You presume too much. If you read carefully, you would notice I wrote, "I love all women, but especially those who love themselves, and love being a woman." All women includes all the Xanthippe's in this world, and if you knew my wife you could never had made that comment.

Perhaps you can only love a certain kind of woman, but I know no such limitation. One cannot be a phylogynist about only some women, and a misogynist about all others. Isn't that what you have implied?

The most feminine women are strong, fiercely independent, and self-confident who require neither belligerence or crudeness to be all they can be. (The same is true of the most masculine men.)
Nick_A wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:20 am
The question becomes a role model for whom? From the man’s point of view the role model that makes you happy is not the same as the one who makes you a good philosopher.
Read again, I said, "No real woman needs a, 'role model.'" If you think they do, you are presuming to know better than a woman what she should be.

A philosopher is one who has discovered what the purpose of his life is and how to achieve it. It is not to be the sacrificial animal of all others, as Socrates implied, but to be and achieve all one can as a human being and to fully enjoy one's life. Everyone's different. Perhaps Socrates, the original hippie, enjoyed a shrew. I think it is presumptuous to assume what the best kind of wife is for others.
You are confusing concepts. I said from a man's point of view and you wrote of a woman's point of view.

Pursuit of the love of wisdom is not the same as striving to enjoy life. From a man's point of view, the woman that makes a man happy is not the same as the pain in the ass who furthers pursuit of the love of wisdom as Socrates described. Different qualities of men need different qualities in women.

Belinda
Posts: 2808
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:46 am

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:15 pm
Belinda wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:13 pm
The most feminine women are strong, fiercely independent, and self-confident who require neither belligerence or crudeness to be all they can be. (The same is true of the most masculine men.)
If they are reared by wild animals their initial role models are their wild animal parents.If they are reared by humans their initial role models are their human parents.
So what? No one is required to follow a role model and those who know what it means to be a human being don't.

Everyone is whatever they choose to be.
Where did you get the notion that you know "what it means to be human" ? You got it from role models.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Mon Jul 29, 2019 2:24 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2019 5:23 am
Pursuit of the love of wisdom is not the same as striving to enjoy life.
That is the crux of our difference. I do not know what you have chosen to live for, but I have chosen to live as the best human being I can be and to enjoy that life (which are really the same thing). The ultimate alternative all human beings face is to live to enjoy one's life, achieving and being all one can be, or to suffer and die.

The whole purpose of wisdom is to know how to live successfully in this world and to enjoy it.

Others may choose some lesser purpose, if they like, but if they do, it is to be something less than a human can be, something dull and pointless and of no value at all.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Mon Jul 29, 2019 2:54 pm

Belinda wrote:
Mon Jul 29, 2019 9:46 am
Where did you get the notion that you know "what it means to be human" ? You got it from role models.
Belinda, it is a mistake to assume that others come to their views in the same way you do. I know you cannot even imagine that others actually think for themselves without role models. Perhaps all your views are based on role models you have been exposed to and if you are happy with that, good for you.

I know what a human being, a dog, an apple, a problem, and a purpose are, which is the same as saying I know what it means to be a human being, a dog, an apple, a problem, or a purpose. If you mean by, "role model," an actual existent (a human being, dog, apple, problem, or purpose), it is not necessary to actually see or experience something to know what it means to be that something. I know what it means to be a turritopsis dohrnii, though I've never seen one or a model of one. It is a small jellyfish found in the Mediterranean and in the waters of Japan and is genetically immortal, that is, it changes its form to survive changing conditions but returns to its normal genetically identical form and can do this perpetually.

Now you know what it means to be a turritopsis dohrnii too, and without a role model. A concept is not a role model.

Belinda
Posts: 2808
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Mon Jul 29, 2019 6:19 pm

RC Saunders, indeed you know what it means for you yourself to be a human being.

It seems very likely that you were reared by humans not monkeys or wolves. it is from these humans who reared you that you learned to be a socialised human being. These particular humans who reared you , whoever they are , are 'role models'. I guess you must be using the term 'role models' in some way that I am not familiar with.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests