What is the consciousness of a woman really like?

[Steven Coyle]

It's like, we're all on each other's parabola, and that's what affects IQ.

[jupiviv]

When I said "academic institutions", I was speaking of all the people in those institutions.

all of them?

Exceptions are possible. I myself am a student, and I think I'm an exception.

Though the evidence for the intellectual oppression of women is overwhelming, I certainly can't force you to seek this information out.

If you mean the evidence provided by feminists, then I won't seek it out, partly because I know it will be wrong, and partly because I've already seen enough evidence. You can go on telling me that the evidence is overwhelming ad infinitum, but that still won't make it true.

As I said, everyone is oppressed in one way or another. Men were as intellectually oppressed as women, and even more in some areas. And oppression isn't something that is inherent to anyone. It can be overcome, given the will to do so. In fact, the term intellectual oppression doesn't even make sense of me. Writing a bunch of books or mugging up textbooks isn't what I consider to be "intellectual". Being barred from doing so(for whatever reason) doesn't in the least hamper intellectual development. I solved some of the deepest mysteries of the universe without any books, paper or pens. I just thought deeply and sincerely enough.

[jupiviv]

Dude, do you have any idea how stupid you're making yourself look?

[Jamesh]

Carmel,



Personally, I think some people were rewriting history to some extent earlier. I for one do believe women were significantly oppressed, and given limited opportunity to develop their mental masculinity.



There were times that they were not, times when they had opportunities, but prevailing throughout that was threat of violence from men. This is the sort of strong violence we still see in the less developed world. Women had to develop survival traits against selfishness from both sexes, while men really only need learn how to deal with the threat or actual violence from males.



The problem is that the threat was so consistent. For those rather limited periods where women were allowed some degree of public freedom of political expression, war would always call an end to that, and males would again more frequently inflict severe violence upon women. There was never a sufficiently lengthy period where the environment was conducive to intellectual freedom for women, for the majority to gain sufficient personal freedom, to prevent going back to square 1. 1 step forward - 1 step back, 2 steps forward - 2 steps back. That is until business decided it could risk using women. It was a change of heart that came about due to print media.


This doesn't mean that David's viewpoint is wrong. It isn't.


Bearing in mind that we all possess degrees of masculinity and femininity, then all he is suggesting is that you might consider having a closer look at what is masculine within you.


You do need the acknowledge that when females do "achieve significance" in the commercial or personal world, then it is the masculine side of them that creates the drive for this achievement. Now that doesn't mean that they'll be noticeably bitchy or butch, in looks or personality, although they often are, but it does mean they will have utilised a "general mentality" more commonly demonstrated naturally by (non-hopeless) males.


It is the same with philosophy, the facts must be laid bare. One doesn't make the exceptions an excuse not to accept observed facts about the greater whole.

[Carl G]

Dejavu: You great ape! I love my jokes! Seriously though, why have a deletion option then??

The deletion option is for when you write a post and then have a second thought and want to kill it before the next post appears. Once the next post appears though, it is considered published. You can't delete the post then, all you can do is edit out the content.

[David Quinn]

dejavu: You're not really echoing what Nietzsche has described here. For all the intellectual advances of men, it is women who possess the inherent capacity for the 'life' of the intellect, ie. its intelligence.
Where men find the intellect a tool to achieve certain ends, women understand how to experience its height, its inherency.

David: Even though you always remind me of a prancing girl, I believe that you are a bloke. So I would be interested in hearing how you've come to know how a woman understands and experiences the intellect in this way. Moreover, you could try and explain what experiencing its "inherency" means.

I don't think my love life should really concern you.

Ah, I see. The source of your assertions is your girlfriend, and you believe her. You really must be in love.

Concerning the inherency of the intellect; I mean the thing itself as opposed to its consequences. What did you imagine I meant? A disembodied 'presence'?!

I guessed that you meant the standard feminine desire to live in the moment, much like a child, and I see that I was right. It's true that if you focus purely on the moment, while blocking everything else out, a kind of vivid, blissful form of consciousness can arise. It can give one some interesting insights and a sense of freedom, but it is very limited in scope.

Is that what you think wisdom is all about? Regressing back to childhood?

David: The intellect is just as passive in women as it is in men.

Not so. Women embody the intellect to a far greater extent than men.

I have no idea what you are saying here. What does "embodying the intellect" mean in this context?

In woman it can be a drive, whereas in man, it cannot ultimately sublimate his feeling. In short, woman is wiser than man in their most perfect aspect.

In what way?

You're the kind to confuse prancing with dancing.

No, you're definitely a prancer. Dancers don't preen and act maliciously like you do. Dancers are sincere in their movements.

-

[jupiviv]

There were times that they were not, times when they had opportunities, but prevailing throughout that was threat of violence from men.

Yes, I should have remembered the famous dictum in the Quran - "no woman shall think, or else she shall be slapped three times by her father or husband." They still do that in Afghanistan, but the Muslims here in India are more civilised. They slap women only if they try to read and write.

[Steven Coyle]

All because of a dip.

[A.R]

Because you are writing about woman .....I've two questions for male specially:
*what do you think better or what do you like more..graet woman ,clever woman,beautiful woman or kind woman...give us your reasons?
*is the tall hair one of the signs of beauty in women?

[Tomas]

Because you are writing about woman .....I've two questions for male specially:
*what do you think better or what do you like more..great woman, clever woman, beautiful woman or kind woman...give us your reasons?
*is the tall hair one of the signs of beauty in women?

The ones who will cook, set the table, wash the dishes, cleans the house, does the laundry, waters & mows the lawn, breastfeeds the babies, washes the car, trims my nose hair, brings home the bacon, cleans the garage, feeds the dog, takes out the trash, does the shopping. Hmm, can't recall everything they must be. I'll get right back with a few more thoughts .. when I need them for something else.

Oh yeah, long (tall) hair is a plus when my feet need drying - after she washes them - with her hands. Beautiful is ok as long as when she is giving me a massage, she uses cornstarch, any store brand will do.

Great? Clever? Kind? Those broads are a dime-a-dozen..

[David Quinn]

Because you are writing about woman .....I've two questions for male specially:
*what do you think better or what do you like more..graet woman ,clever woman,beautiful woman or kind woman...give us your reasons?
*is the tall hair one of the signs of beauty in women?

It's not clear why you are asking these questions.

-

[Kelly Jones]

There were times that they were not, times when they had opportunities, but prevailing throughout that was threat of violence from men.

Yes, I should have remembered the famous dictum in the Quran - "no woman shall think, or else she shall be slapped three times by her father or husband." They still do that in Afghanistan, but the Muslims here in India are more civilised. They slap women only if they try to read and write.

Women's "silent treatment", the nagging, lassitude, subtle sneering, and other forms of emotional manipulation, is how they slap men. Tiny little slaps every day, that are so quiet and insignificant that it can't be taken as a revolt. Just something to complain about to other men. But just that passivity, the dragging weight, the wet blanket, the inactivity, is women's domestic torture. Their refusal to get involved, to start burning with revolutionary passion and violence, their refusal to engage in dialogue except to spout emotionalisms and idiocies, is precisely how women assert their superior power.

Women have countless opportunities, but they can't be bothered to do anything but what they please. Woman = saboteur, frustrator, dampener, grumpy bum, sour lemon, dud. They are similar to feral anarchists, whose motto is "fuck the system", and who regard it as honorable to articulate smug philosophies, and create alternative systems, which are always parasitic on the one they want to destroy. Where is the sincerity, the individuality, the honesty, the refusal to take cues from other people, the resourcefulness from within the inner garden, the courage to throw everything to the wind but the one value?

To keep making excuses for women is self-serving sabotage. Don't fritter your energies away. Step over her, and find a better attitude.

[Tomas]

Because you are writing about woman .....I've two questions for male specially:
*what do you think better or what do you like more..graet woman ,clever woman,beautiful woman or kind woman...give us your reasons?
*is the tall hair one of the signs of beauty in women?

It's not clear why you are asking these questions.

-

My understanding is that she is from Dubai (or the UAE) and she is here to improve her English skills. She's 16-years old.

[Nick]

Even though you always remind me of a prancing girl, I believe that you are a bloke. So I would be interested in hearing how you've come to know how a woman understands and experiences the intellect in this way. Moreover, you could try and explain what experiencing its "inherency" means.

I don't think my love life should really concern you.

Ah, I see. The source of your assertions is your girlfriend, and you believe her. You really must be in love.

The sad part is, this girlfriend or "love life" from which he gains his insight and wisdom, is an illusion of his own creation. He stated in another thread, (while I was having a discussion with skipair) that he has created for himself in his mind some vaguely defined woman whom he loves and cherishes. So what he's doing amounts to nothing more than self deception and mental masturbation.

[David Quinn]

So he doesn't actually have a girlfriend, and is merely honing his seduction techniques.....?

-

[Kelly Jones]

Only dreary, common 'plebs' try to divide consciousness into masculine and feminine. The 'aristocrats' would never do that, because it's indiscreet. A noble-born lord hides his knowledge (after dividing consciousness into masculine and feminine) then uses it to exploit and manipulate 8 year old girls, into becoming his very own Lolita.

[Nick]

So he doesn't actually have a girlfriend, and is merely honing his seduction techniques.....?

Well, yes, actually. That kind of hits the nail on the head. The flirting with pye and carmel makes it a little more obvious. I think it's being done on a subconscious level though; at base he doesn't really have a clue what he's doing. This would certainly explain why he never really fleshes out the reasoning and logic behind his statements. It's so bad that it makes it difficult to distinguish him from your common "forum-troll" at times.

[Kunga]

This is starting to sound like gossip.

[Kelly Jones]

She embodies her thinking more than man does. It is inborn to a greater degree.

Here's an example of her inner conversation (probably what you mean by 'thinking'):

Sees a couple kissing on a bus
--- oooohh, look at his sloppy mouth! He's got his tongue in her mouth! exciting! Tingly feelings!!
(She embodies her thoughts literally: her excitement ripples through her body, she becomes sexually aroused.)

Ignores the hunched-over bearded man reading a newspaper
---- boring something over there. Nothing to look at. Bored.
(She embodies her thought naturally: she slouches a bit, she scratches her nose, she licks her lips and sucks at her teeth.)

Sees a woman wearing summer sportswear and jogging along the pedestrian way
---- her thingies are bouncing too much. Ergh. Her bum is too big. Her calves are too thick. How embarrassing. Feel sick.
(She literally feels a sludginess in her abdomen and her saliva thickens.)

Ignores the sound of the wind and the movement of the treetops
--- ugly messy and uninteresting. Nothing up there. Horrible restlessness. Stupid. Boring.
(Her face becomes thick and stupid-looking, the dark patches under her eyes look a bit greasier. An itch forms on her back, between her shoulder blades.)

Hears a couple laughing
--- errr, they're laughing at me. They're whispering about me. They're happy because I'm alone and have no one with me. Bitches.
(The muscles of either side of her neck clench up a little, and her face flushes. The expression on her wonderfully symmetrical face becomes studiously blank and indifferent.)

Ignores the flickering of her shadow, the dry, curling leaf that rolls past her foot
---- absolute nothingness everywhere, nothing interesting. I'm hungry. I'm bored. Where's my MP3 player?
(She embodies her thoughts to a deep extent, and a tiny crease forms on her beautifully well-kept forehead, where the skin is gleaming with health and the shiny residue of an expensive Jurlique cream.)

Yes, she really does embody her thinking much more than a man does. Talk about natural intellectual strength, and ease of profound spiritual insights! Wowie.

[Kelly Jones]

This is starting to sound like gossip.

It's exposing the reality of feminine consciousness in a deeply personal way. That's what philosophers do. A study of feminine consciousness is critical to philosophical growth. It's fundamental, because women display so well and so naturally the cunning ways that the human mind averts itself from the emptiness of reality. That's how philosophers of any worth attack delusions, never daring to keep things at an academic distance. They don't dare speculate and quibble and never let their thoughts turn into a judgment on their own lives.

This realm of study is like entering into the richest philosophical gold-mine. There are rich veins of precious metals everywhere, literally everywhere. If one cannot see them, and be delighted at the opportunities unfolding at every glance, then one cannot have a philosophical bone in one's body.

Anything other than this is chatter and gossip, quite literally. For this is not about woman: it is and has always been about men: the spiritual man. Woman is really nothing but a judgment on man and his intellectual errors.

[Kunga]

Kelly....your satire is ingenious !!!

_/\_

[Kelly Jones]

Kelly, your love for the creativity of men is marred by your petty observations of women.

But I recognise that men's creativity is responsible for the pettiness of women's minds. How could I love that?


You remind me of Nabokov. He too thought girls were magical and endlessly fascinating creatures. He projected his image of perfection, poise, purity, sweetness, and mystical innocence onto them. He was enraptured with his own imagination, as you are. That's why you think I'm being petty, bitchy, biased, and plebian. You know everything that I say, but you don't like it. You don't think any of this information is useful, except insofar as it supports your imagination of your lovely imaginary female friend. You want life to enchant you, lift you up, and concoct a fabulous mythical tale full of tickles, allusions, play and double entendres. Just like a paedophile, wanting to escape from the boring lives of stupid, pedestrian mammals and their maggoty mores.

Woman observing the thinker:

Look at that man. He seeks the truth! He doesn't know what he wants, and so he shall want me.

This sounds like Lolita's view of men (his own view of what girls imagine him to be). But you're right. Women have no idea about thinkers realise.

In his peace he will love me, though he would hate me for having the better love of his children.

Sounds again like Nabokov. Lolita was drawn to Nabokov's paedophile like a moth to a flame. Like him, you want your lovely girl-lady to love you of her own will, it'd remind you too much of your solitude to realise she were an automaton operating by your own dextrous fingers.

Kunga: This is starting to sound like gossip

Kelly: It's exposing the reality of feminine consciousness in a deeply personal way. That's what philosophers do.
A study of feminine consciousness is critical to philosophical growth. It's fundamental, because women display so well and so naturally the cunning ways that the human mind averts itself from the emptiness of reality.

Nabokov: That's not philosophy, that's religion! What emptiness of reality? Delusion.

That's not reasoning, that's a content-free aspersion designed to rejuvenate your little fantasy.

Kelly: That's how philosophers of any worth attack delusions, never daring to keep things at an academic distance. They don't dare speculate and quibble and never let their thoughts turn into a judgment on their own lives.

Nabokov: ??!!

Surprised?

Kelly: This realm of study is like entering into the richest philosophical gold-mine. There are rich veins of precious metals everywhere, literally everywhere. If one cannot see them, and be delighted at the opportunities unfolding at every glance, then one cannot have a philosophical bone in one's body.

Nabokov: You actually sound like David! Good dog! Not just religious, practically austistic. My first thought on seeing you speak on youtube was of giving you a hug! I could feel the emptiness. Kelly, a word in your ear: You are not built for the cold like I am!

I'm sorry to hear that. You've mistaken truth for the cold of a deadened spirit. Nabokov was also a ghostlike man whose mind had become confused and dizzied by breathing in too much stale air. He was sickened by the boring lives of humans, their stultifying rules, their lack of imagination. He wanted his own individuality to be recognised. He wanted to assert his own Rule. But instead of entering into the icy cold of philosophy, he pinned himself into a brothel of unsatisfiable mental need. He couldn't see any alternative to living as a heavy-breathing man whose expiring vapours smelt of vaginal mucus. Lack of imagination on his part.

I'm sorry to hear you feel built for such an environment. But like Nabokov, I suppose you feel happiest in cynical, self-pitying, self-glorifying missions of escapism.

Kelly: Anything other than this is chatter and gossip, quite literally. For this is not about woman: it is and has always been about men: the spiritual man. Woman is really nothing but a judgment on man and his intellectual errors.

Nabokov: Come back down to earth space-case!

I don't see anything of worth in your version of earth. The demoralised and bored, being spiritless, are heavy and stodgy. And absurd to boot, because only a little bit of thinking can reveal the sane alternative to a mystic's or a misanthrope's escapism from the boring zoo.

Kelly: Only dreary, common 'plebs' try to divide consciousness into masculine and feminine. The 'aristocrats' would never do that, because it's indiscreet. A noble-born lord hides his knowledge (after dividing consciousness into masculine and feminine) then uses it to exploit and manipulate 8 year old girls, into becoming his very own Lolita.

Nabokov: You really don't see, do you? It's not just like with David, where I suspect him of not wanting to. What is your true conception of nobility Kelly? I asked this of jupiviv, but he wasn't up to it.

Not seducing 8 year olds, or deceiving myself about how the feminine mind plays.

[Kelly Jones]

Kunga: This is starting to sound like gossip.

Kelly: It's exposing the reality of feminine consciousness in a deeply personal way. That's what philosophers do. A study of feminine consciousness is critical to philosophical growth. It's fundamental, because women display so well and so naturally the cunning ways that the human mind averts itself from the emptiness of reality. That's how philosophers of any worth attack delusions, never daring to keep things at an academic distance. They don't dare speculate and quibble and never let their thoughts turn into a judgment on their own lives.

This realm of study is like entering into the richest philosophical gold-mine. There are rich veins of precious metals everywhere, literally everywhere. If one cannot see them, and be delighted at the opportunities unfolding at every glance, then one cannot have a philosophical bone in one's body.

Anything other than this is chatter and gossip, quite literally. For this is not about woman: it is and has always been about men: the spiritual man. Woman is really nothing but a judgment on man and his intellectual errors.

Kunga: Kelly....your satire is ingenious !!!

It is no satire. It's the direct truth that women's egotism is the product of men's spiritlessness. The critique of feminine-mindedness is a direct critique of men: the inadequacies of the more conscious ones. It has always been that way. Woman is the sculpture in the studio of man the artist.

[Kunga]

This is like reading a foreign language to me ! i honestly never even heard of the word misogyny until i came to this form...i've never been a feminist...never hated men...never thought of women as inferior to men...this is all new to me..i guess i've been busy living my life....lol

The portrayal of how the feminine mind thinks ...to me is rediculous...i guess i am realizing i do not have much in common with this woman....maybe that's why it angers me to read these characterizations and portrayals...i thought i was just an average woman....i really never even think about being a woman...i just took it for granted i guess....

today i read that Plato considered the sexes to be equal....it really seems like a waste of time to degrade any human being...it's a waste of intelligence....and in my estimation...rediculous. People are people....yes we are all conditioned in many ways...men are conditioned by men & women...women are conditioned by women & men....our thinking is conditioned because we are not fully Enlightened. i bet Enlightened people have no issues with femininity or masculinity.

Aren't philosophers concerned with world peace and more important things other than trivial gender issues ? But i guess it's not trivial anymore if it has become an obstacle that stagnates the mind in derogatory dualistic conceptions of illusional metaphors.

[Carmel]

David:
The evidence is all around us. It's there in the way nearly all women and girls speak - randomly, gushedly, nervously, giddily, incoherently, emotionally. It's there in the content they focus on - clothes, fashion, furniture, ornaments, children, relationships, boyfriends. It's there in what they do with their time - their desperation in competing with other women and aping the mediocre aspects of men. It's there in the music and art they make - bland, narcissistic, self-piteous, victimized, or sometimes the other extreme: loud, brash, sexually-shocking. It's there in their lack of achievement in the realm of higher matters......

Carmel:
Certainly some girls and women exhibit some of these behaviours and attributes, but it would be just as easy for me to compile a list of the negative traits of boys and men and call it "evidence", but I have no inclination to do so. I'm guessing that you don't either.;)

David:
Also, being bright, I like to think that you are not taking my comments about women personally.

Carmel:
No, not all. You could call women every last horrible name in the book and I still wouldn't be personally offended. Words only have power over a person if they allow them to.

David:
If a woman wants to be an exception, then she needs to know how to separate herself from other women

Carmel:
What makes you think I don't do this already? ...but, I don't discriminate. I separate myself from the C grade men as well, and even many of the B graders.

David:
That's a good question. I believe it ultimately boils down to fear. To strive for genius is to strive away from the norms of humanity and to suffer the alienation and persecution this entails. It thus becomes a question for the individual male of whether the ideal is worth going through that kind of suffering. In a social environment where mediocrity is emphasized and rewarded and the values of genius are mocked, if indeed they are talked about at all, it is easy to see how the potential for genius in most boys is quickly nipped in the bud.

Carmel:
I agree with that, but I think this only applies to men who have an innate aptitude for genius. Most people(both genders) don't possess it. This premise might be giving the ordinary C-grade boys false hope.

David:
Another interesting thing to consider is the way in which the cerebral cortex becomes relatively inactive between the ages of 16 and 25. In other words, a boy's ability to reason is hampered by a lack of activity in his frontal lobes and easily usurped by his hormones and his emotional need to find his place in society.

Carmel:
That's makes sense, but I also read something once that contradicts this...that most great works of men reach a pinnacle when they are young, in their 20's usually. For example, Einstein had established most of his theories by the time he was 25. Maybe he inadvertently found a way to sublimate all that hormonal energy into his work.