GENIUS FORUMS

Ok..i always hated being manipulated...and i hate manipulating people...i like things to happen naturally...i've never forced a man to marry me or be with me...never dated multiple people...never speed dated....wait a minute...is cooking for a guy manipulating ? LOL...maybe a little i did... :)

yes...i think we are naturals at manipulation...sometimes it's so obvious...the subtle manipulations are subconcious...instinctive...i guess i tried every trick in the book to get a man to love me...

Dan Rowden wrote:There's an essay on romantic fatalism by Alain de Bottom here. It's not exactly what I'm speaking of, but not far off: Romantic Fatalism

Carmel wrote:Kelly: In reality, "liberal-minded" women dislike prostitutes, according to their views on sexual behaviour. Simply, because their opinion hasn't been asked for, they keep it private. But silence speaks.

Carmel: I just told you my view. If you don't believe me, so be it. I can't speak definitively for other liberal minded women, nor can you. Silence says nothing, nothing at all. :)

Kelly: It may be subtle, but the contempt or envy is definitely a part of virtually every non-prostitute, in relation to a prostitute. The envy may be a sudden springy jauntiness in her step, a little more expansion in her hip movement, a little more poise in the angle of her head, for instance. Her contempt may be subtly expressed in her extra-lavish hug to her children, a little more attention to her husband or boyfriend, as ways to indicate that her form of exchange (love, affection, emotional bonding) is superior to the straightforward financial transaction between a sex worker and a client.

Carmel: It's not a matter of superior vs. inferior. whether marriage or prostitute/client, they're both forms of attachment.

Kelly: If you can't see this dynamic in feminine psychology, well, then, I think you're in denial.

Carmel: Well, sure, but it's no less prevalent in masculine psychology than it is in fem psychology.

With regards to prostitutes,
I already acknowledged it amongst a certain portion of women, particularly conservatives, but then again I can't read every womens mind, so unless there has been a comprehensive sociological study on the matter, we can only speculate.

Kelly: You may not experience these things,

Carmel: no, I really don't.

Kelly: but if you can't recognise them in most other women, even the so-called liberal-minded ones, however subtle it may be, then there's a blockage there worth thinking about.

Carmel: I only know what they tell me(liberal minded friends). If they feel contempt for prostitutes, they hide it well, but it's possible that I'm projecting my own lack of judgement of prostitutes onto them to some degree(?)

Kelly: The woman who really doesn't experience this stuff is extremely rare; more often, feminists tend to suppress it, because they believe they ought not to feel that way. They don't actually want to root out the source of those feelings, only pretend they're above it, which is again a form of contempt.

Carmel: maybe, but it is possible that you're projecting your own contempt for women onto these "so-called liberal minded" women.

Dan Rowden wrote:Some interesting interpretations of the events of my anecdote. Mine is breathtakingly simple: by my "rejection" I offended her female vanity, her attachment to being desirable, if not irresistible.

Carmel wrote:He [Dan] uses modifiers to allow for exceptions.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:

Carmel wrote:He [Dan] uses modifiers to allow for exceptions.

And you see what happened! Now you think you were one of those exceptions while evaluating his fair-mindedness. This is one reason I stopped using these modifiers, most of the time :-)

Otto Weininger wrote:Emancipation, as I mean to discuss it, is not the wish for an outward equality with man, but what is of real importance in the woman question, the deepseated craving to acquire man's character, to attain his mental and moral freedom, to reach his real interests and his creative power. I maintain that the real female element has neither the desire nor the capacity for emancipation in this sense. All those who are striving for this real emancipation, all women who are truly famous and are of conspicuous mental ability, to the first glance of an expert reveal some of the anatomical characters of the male, some external bodily resemblance to a man. Those so-called “women” who have been held up to admiration in the past and present, by the advocates of woman's rights, as examples of what women can do, have almost invariably been what I have described as sexually intermediate forms. The very first of the historical examples, Sappho herself, has been handed down to us as an example of the sexual invert, and from her name has been derived the accepted terms for perverted sexual relations between women. The contents of the second and third chapter thus at once become important with regard to the woman question. The characterological material at our disposal with regard to celebrated and emancipated women is too vague to serve as the foundation of any satisfactory theory. What is wanted is some principle which would enable us to determine at what point between male and female such individuals were placed. My law of sexual affinity is such a principle. Its application to the facts of homo-sexuality showed that the woman who attracts and is attracted by other women is herself half male. Interpreting the historical evidence at our disposal in the light of this principle, we find that the degree of emancipation and the proportion of maleness in the composition of a woman are practically identical. Sappho was only the forerunner of a long line of famous women who were either homo-sexually or bisexually inclined. Classical scholars have defended Sappho warmly against the implication that there was anything more than mere friendship in her relations with her own sex, as if the accusation were necessarily degrading. In the second part of my book, however, I shall show reasons in favour of the possibility that homo-sexuality is a higher form than hetero-sexuality. For the present, it is enough to say that homo-sexuality in a woman is the outcome of her masculinity and presupposes a higher degree of development. Catherine II. of
Russia, and Queen Christina of Sweden, the highly gifted although deaf, dumb and blind, Laura Bridgman, George Sand, and a very large number of highly gifted women and girls concerning whom I myself have been able to collect information, were partly bisexual, partly homo-sexual.

I shall now turn to other indications in the case of the large number of emancipated women regarding whom there is no evidence as to homo-sexuality, and I shall show that my attribution of maleness is no caprice, no egotistical wish of a man to associate all the higher manifestations of intelligence with the male sex. Just as homo-sexual or bisexual women reveal their maleness by their preference either for women or for womanish men, so hetero-sexual women display maleness in their choice of a male partner who is not preponderatingly male. The most famous of George Sand’s many affairs were those with de Musset, the most effeminate and sentimental poet, and with Chopin, who might be described almost as the only female musician, so effeminate
are his compositions.*

[* Chopin’s portraits show his effeminacy plainly. Merimée describes George Sand as being as thin as a nail. At the first meeting of the two, the lady behaved like a man, and the man like a girl. He blushed when she looked at him and began to pay him compliments in her bass voice.]

Vittoria Colonna is less known because of her own poetic compositions than because of the infatuation for her shown by Michael Angelo, whose earlier friendships had been with youths. The authoress, Daniel Stern, was the mistress of Franz Liszt, whose life and compositions were extremely effeminate, and who had a dubious friendship with Wagner, the interpretation of which was made plain by his later devotion to King Ludwig II. of Bavaria. Madame de Staal, whose work on Germany is probably the greatest book ever produced by a woman, is supposed to have been intimate with August Wilhelm Schlegel, who was a homosexualist, and who had been tutor to her children. At certain periods of his life, the face of the husband of Clara Schumann might have been taken as that of a woman, and a good deal of his music, although certainly not all, was effeminate.

When there is no evidence as to the sexual relations of famous women, we can still obtain important conclusions from the details of their personal appearance. Such data support my general proposition.

George Eliot had a broad, massive forehead; her movements, like her expression, were quick and decided, and lacked all womanly grace. The face of Lavinia Fontana was intellectual and decided, very rarely charming; whilst that of Rachel Ruysch was almost wholly masculine. The biography of that original poetess, Annette von Droste-Hülshoff, speaks of her wiry, unwomanly frame, and of her face as being masculine, and recalling that of Dante. The authoress and mathematician, Sonia Kowalevska, like Sappho, had an abnormally scanty growth of hair, still less than is the fashion amongst the poetesses and female students of the present day. It would be a serious omission to forget Rosa Bonheur, the very distinguished painter; and it would be difficult to point to a single female trait in her appearance or character. The notorious Madame Blavatsky is extremely masculine in her appearance.

I might refer to many other emancipated women at present well known to the public, consideration of whom has provided me with much material for the support of my proposition that the true female element, the abstract “woman,” has nothing to do with emancipation. There is some historical justification for the saying “the longer the hair the smaller the brain,” but the reservations made in chap. ii. must be taken into account.

It is only the male element in emancipated women that craves for emancipation.

There is, then, a stronger reason than has generally been supposed for the familiar assumption of male pseudonyms by women writers. Their choice is a mode of giving expression to the inherent maleness they feel; and this is still more marked in the case of those who, like George Sand, have a preference for male attire and masculine pursuits. The motive for choosing a man's name springs from the feeling that it corresponds with their own character much more than from any desire for increased notice from the public. As a matter of fact, up to the present, partly owing to interest in the sex question, women’s writings have aroused more interest, ceteris paribus, than those of men; and, owing to the issues involved, have always received a fuller consideration and, if there were any justification, a greater meed of praise than has been accorded to a man's work of equal merit. At the present time especially many women have attained celebrity by work which, if it had been produced by a man, would have passed almost unnoticed. Let us pause and examine this more closely.

If we attempt to apply a standard taken from the names of men who are of acknowledged value in philosophy, science, literature and art, to the long list of women who have achieved some kind of fame, there will at once be a miserable collapse. Judged in this way, it is difficult to grant any real degree of merit to women like Angelica Kaufmann or Madame Lebrun, Fernan Caballero or Hroswitha von Gandersheim, Mary Somerville or George Egerton, Elizabeth Barrett Browning or Sophie Germain, Anna Maria Schurmann or Sybilla Merian. I will not speak of names (such as that of Droste-Hülshoff) formerly so over-rated in the annals of feminism, nor will I refer to the measure of fame claimed for or by living women. It is enough to make the general statement that there is not a single woman in the history of thought, not even the most manlike, who can be truthfully compared with men of fifth or sixth-rate genius, for instance with Rückert as a poet, Van Dyck as a painter, or Scheirmacher as a philosopher. If we eliminate hysterical visionaries, such as the Sybils, the Priestesses of Delphi, Bourignon, Kettenberg, Jeanna de la Mothe Guyon, Joanna Southcote, Beate Sturmin, St. Teresa, there still remain cases like that of Marie Bashkirtseff. So far as I can remember from her portrait, she at least seemed to be quite womanly in face and figure, although her forehead was rather masculine. But to any one who studies her pictures in the Salle des Etrangers in the Luxemburg Gallery in Paris, and compares them with those of her adored master, Bastien Lepage, it is plain that she simply had assimilated the style of the latter, as in Goethe’s “Elective Affinities” Ottilie acquired the handwriting of Eduard.

There remain the interesting and not infrequent cases where the talent of a clever family seems to reach its maximum in a female member of the family. But it is only talent that is transmitted in this way, not genius. Margarethe van Eyck and Sabina von Steinbach form the best illustrations of the kind of artists who, according to Ernst Guhl, an author with a great admiration for women-workers, “have been undoubtedly influenced in their choice of an artistic calling by their fathers, mothers, or brothers. In other words, they found their incentive in their own families. There are two or three hundred of such cases on record, and probably many hundreds more could be added without exhausting the numbers of similar instances.” In order to give due weight to these statistics it may be mentioned that Guhl had just been speaking of “roughly, a thousand names of women artists known to us.”

This concludes my historical review of the emancipated women. It has justified the assertion that real desire for emancipation and real fitness for it are the outcome of a woman's maleness.

-- anonymous translator's version.

pierdog wrote:Kelly, I do not regard myself as being above woman-bashing at all bc women want & need to be violently put in their place without saying it. Caramel & Kunga WANTED someone to dissect their motivations bc they feel they deserve it, they WANT to be dominated but in a way they understand & deserve even though society deems it inappropriate. Now they know to keep out of my threads.