I think there has been progress

In how society views women but maybe not. I am reading this book and I came across this statement

The economic value of a girl to society is gauged by the extent to which a man maybe excused his debts on the ground that after his daughter’s marriage he will be able to pay them.

Whenever I have argued, like Solon before me and others, that bride price is an exchange between males, I have gotten push back that it is tradition or that the groom is showing his appreciation to the parents of the girl for bringing her up. I think in actual fact, it creates a power imbalance.

Monday reads

Concern about sexualization of children misses the point

Mark Greif has something about this. As I wrote a while back he argues

the sex revolution of the 60s and 70s did not liberate sex but led to a liberalization of sex. He argues we will be able to talk about sex liberation only when it is thought of as we would a coffee date. On the subject of pedophilia he asks why the allure in youth when all the adults who engage in it were once youth?

His book Against Everything is quite a good read

On women

It’s a shock that these brilliant minds of the enlightenment period did not see the link between denying women opportunities for leadership and their absence from those posts. Almost all of them argue women are not fit for leadership because there have been no women leaders. I however believe had they lived long enough to see that when given opportunities, women can and have made good leaders.

With that, we can listen to Spinoza

But, perhaps, someone will ask, whether women are under men’s authority by nature or institution? For if it has been by mere institution, then we had no reason compelling us to exclude women from government. But if we consult experience itself, we shall find that the origin of it is in their weakness. For there has never been a case of men and women reigning together, but wherever on the earth men are found, there we see that men rule, and women are ruled, and that on this plan, both sexes live in harmony. But on the other hand, the Amazons, who are reported to have held rule of old, did not suffer men to stop in their country, but reared only their female children, killing the males to whom they gave birth. But if by nature women were equal to men, and were equally distinguished by force of character and ability, in which human power and therefore human right chiefly consist; surely among nations so many and different some would be found, where both sexes rule alike, and others, where men are ruled by women, and so brought up, that they can make less use of their abilities. And since this is nowhere the case, one may assert with perfect propriety, that women have not by nature equal right with men: but that they necessarily give way to men, and that thus it cannot happen, that both sexes should rule alike, much less that men should be ruled by women. But if we further reflect upon human passions, how men, in fact, generally love women merely from the passion of lust, and esteem their cleverness and wisdom in proportion to the excellence of their beauty, and also how very ill-disposed men are to suffer the women they love to show any sort of favour to others, and other facts of this kind, we shall easily see that men and women cannot rule alike without great hurt to peace. But of this enough.

on men and brains

Someone tell me how H. L Mencken got away with such all gloves off war on men? Writing about intuition, he finishes that chapter by writing

Men, too, sometimes have brains. But that is a rare,rare man, I venture, who is as steadily intelligent, as constantly sound in judgement, as little put off by appearances as the average women of forty-eight.

H. L Mencken in his book In defense of women

Has this question been answered

when men contend for their freedom, and to be allowed to judge for themselves respecting their own happiness, it be not inconsistent and unjust to subjugate women, even though you firmly believe that you are acting in the manner best calculated to promote their happiness? Who made man the exclusive judge, if woman partake with him the gift of reason?

Maria Wollstonecraft to M. Talleyrand-Perigord

Leviticus 12

I have skipped chapter 11 since all it talks about is what food is unclean and the what one does when they come into contact with them. Just dip whatever it is in water and after one day you are good to go.

I have written elsewhere that Christianity is life denying. This chapter is the embodiment of the christian dream.

Listen to the Lord’s command

The Lord said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: ‘A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period.

You all must remember that this good book tells us this god created the universe and then created man and after doing that, he puts a curse on the only way man can reproduce. Any Christians who are here, have you felt the need to petition this god of yours to revise some of these curses? Now tell me, why should a woman be unclean after childbirth? What does this do to children being told their mothers had to be purified after childbirth!

Just listen to this and tell me you are not irked

On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding.

Here we have two problems; Moses god obsession with foreskin of little babies and a further punishment of women for extended days for giving birth. Where are those Christian mothers, do you touch your bibles after childbirth? Or the bible ain’t sacred, just asking. Worse still with this chapter, we have discrimination from the time of birth. A son she is impure for 7 days and a girl for 14 and waits double the time to be purified. Where are the ladies? Can I hear the Christian women clap :-D.

And the priests are real opportunists. It seems they haven’t moved far off, they have only changed the trade

“‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the tent of meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the Lord to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.

So unless this was used as a birth control measure, that is, only those with pigeons and flocks of sheep should have babies then it would make sense. Or else, this is the time to tell the priest to F-off!

And listen to more of this madness

“‘These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. But if she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”

Please tell me how this is life affirming! I need to know and real quick!

Will the sexes ever be reconciled

Fellow sufferers, a few days ago we looked at Arthur Schopenhauer’s views of the fair sex and most if not all of those who read the post found them to be wanting. Whether it was the dominant view then or are his personal views, it appears the general agreement is that he was wrong.

In a chit-chat with one of my friends, I was told, in majority of women’s opinion, men behave like 5 year olds or rather it appears to them that we reach maturity at age 5 and don’t get any better.

On the other hand, while having a similar discussion with the menfolk, some of them think women are mad or mature babies and should be handled with care.

Lastly, there is that group of men and women who hold the view that we are all equal.

Given the above, I have a few questions

  1. What is the extent of equality being sought or advocated?
  2. Are the sexes really equal in any sense?
  3. At what point does an observation or opinion made regarding the sexes become misogyny or sexist?