My own thoughts on the thing, as I always say, lean more towards Esther Vilar,ġ) women possess equal intellectual potential but their potential is atrophied because men subordinate themselves to women and hold them back by making excuses and doing everything for them.Ģ) women do understand this and are quite happy with the situation of being lazy elites where they consider 'work' is beneath them and enjoy manipulating men or male society into providing for them for no reason. since so much effort is spent on make-up and unimportant socialization, for instance, which is probably equal in brain power to a useful discipline but is just not a useful discipline. This 'does' require a great deal of intellectual capacity, which is a good argument for women possessing the capacity 'for' reason. To over complicate it, unnecessarily, would be to say that they perform higly detailed judgements based upon superficial objectification of things as they immediately appear. He didn't realize he was making that argument, of course hahahaĪ Woman sees a shabby dressed person, they don't think in context "wow, poor guy, he's really down on his luck and is going through a hard time," they think "shabby dressed person" because that's how he appears in the immediate present. The person, arguing that women were fa more intelligent, made the argument that women are far more socially and visually orientated to think in terms of (superficial) outward appearence and immediate presence, and to struggle with contextual or big picture thinking. Idk, there was a good thead here last week about the different focuses of men and women in their everyday thought processes which made sense:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |