/lit/ - Literature

What does /lit/ think of Mr. Weininger and his thoughts on women?

>"The most inferior man is still infinitely superior to the most superior woman, so much so that it seems hardly permissible to compare and rank them.
>Woman’s mind is neither deep nor high, either acute nor direct, but the precise opposite of all this. As far as we can see at present, she has no “mind” at all: woman as a whole is mindless, or mindlessness itself.
>The desire to be the object of sexual intercourse is the strongest desire of woman, but it is only a special instance of her deepest interest, indeed her only vital interest, which aims at sexual intercourse as such—her wish that there should be as much sexual intercourse as possible, no matter by whom, where, and when.
>Now it is possible to answer the question which was formulated as the central problem at the beginning of this second part, the question about what it means to be Man and to be Woman. Women have no existence and no essence, they are not and they are nothing. One IS Man or one IS Woman, depending on whether or not one IS somebody."

"Sex and Character" - Otto Weininger

Who was right on Christianity? Nietzsche or Weininger?

>>22659252
Sex and Character by Otto Weininger

>>22518504
Wrong pic.

>>22331022
do you perchance look like this?

ENTER

What books argue that women ought to be subjugated?

>Communism must be distinguished clearly from socialism, the former being based on a community of goods, an absence of individual property, the latter meaning, in the first place a co-operation of individual with individual, of worker with worker, and a recognition of human individuality in every one. Socialism is Aryan (Owen, Carlyle, Ruskin, Fichte). Communism is Jewish (Marx).
It's so simple. Why has no one else been able to explain it to me this way?

Otto Weininger
Actually an underrated genius for being so frank about the true nature of women and Jews, and doing
so without hating them. Of course, his natural conclusion was to become an hero. Uncle Alf called him the only good Jew.

.

>All women currently striving for emancipation, and all truly talented women across the ages, Weininger asserts, display numerous masculine traits, including anatomical ones. Sappho, he declares, was a lesbian, and lesbianism, as an expression of masculinity, is a sign of distinction. Catherine II of Russia, Queen Christina of Sweden, and George Sand are other examples that Weininger deploys to support his equation of lesbianism with talent. Even heterosexual women desiring emancipation were unmistakably masculinized in their features and in their penchant for effeminate men.

>>22034754
Forgot to mention the King.

>solves women

/thread

>solves incelism forever

>>21872344
your kind of reaction is probably why that is the case
don't get me wrong I'm always suspicious of the chosenites too but consider the general problem of someone who espouses ideas that are heterodox for its own ethnic group, at least in the eyes of others; if you straight up admit it, you may lose appeal ipso facto even if you are bringing forward ideas that are not hostile, certainly not explicitly, to your target audience of people you find more community with; if you don't, maybe you don't get caught but have that sword of damocles perpetually hanging over your head

>develops a complete theory of the sexes and obviates feminism

>solves the woman problem

I must confess.
All my life I have read his name as whiny nigger.

He could’ve gotten some black bitches doe

>Finally, I come to the question as to whether there exists a complete parallelism or a condition of reciprocal interaction between mind and body. In the case of the female, psycho-physical parallelism exists in the form of a complete co-ordination between the mental and the physical; in women the capacity for mental exertion ceases with senile involution, just as it developed in connection with and in subservience to the sexual instincts. The intelligence of man never grows as old as that of the woman, and it is only in isolated cases that degeneration of the mind is
linked with degeneration of the body. Least of all does mental degeneration accompany the bodily weakness of old age in those who have genius, the highest development of mental masculinity.

>It is only to be expected that the philosophers who most strongly argued in favour of parallelism, such as Spinoza and Fechner, were also determinists. In the case of the male, the free intelligible agent who by his own will can distinguish between good and evil, the existence of parallelism between mind and body must be rejected.

Otto Weininger Sex and Character
> Woman can really never be quite unhappy, for happiness is an empty word for her, a word created by unhappy men. Women never mind letting others see their unhappiness, as it is not real; behind it there lies no consciousness of guilt, no sense of the sin of the world.

> A man has in himself the possibility of being the absolute something or the absolute nothing, and therefore his actions are directed towards the one or the other ; woman does not sin, for she herself is the sin which is a possibility in man.

> The fall of " form " is the corruption that takes place when form endeavours to relapse into the formless. When man became sexual he formed woman. That woman is at all has happened simply because man has accepted his sexuality.

>Man created woman, and will always create her afresh, as long as he is sexual. Just as he gives woman consciousness, so he gives her existence. Woman is the sin of man.

> Whence otherwise would come the generosity of love, which can never be satisfied by giving ? How is it that love is so anxious to endow woman with a soul, and not any other creature ? Whence comes it that a child cannot love until love coincides with sexuality, the stage of puberty, with the repeated forming of woman, with the renewing of sin ? Woman is nothing but man's expression and projec- tion of his own sexuality. Every man creates himself a woman, in which he embodies himself and his own guilt.

> The erotics of the Jew are sentimentalism, and their humour is satire. Perhaps examples may help to explain my interpretation of the Jewish character, and I point readily to Ibsen's King Hakon in the " Pretenders/' and to his Dr. Stockmann in " The Enemy of the People/' These may make clear what is forever absent in the Jew. Judaism and Christianity form the greatest possible contrasts; the former is bereft of all true faith and of inner identity, the latter is the highest expression of the highest faith. Chris- tianity is heroism at its highest point; Judaism is the extreme of cowardliness

> Chamberlain has said much that is true and striking as to the fearful awe-struck want of understanding that the Jew displays with regard to the person and teaching of Christ, for the combination of warrior and sufferer in Him, for His life and death. None the less, it would be wrong to state that the Jew is an enemy of Christ, that he represents the anti-Christ; it is only that he feels no relation with Him. It is strong-minded Aryans, malefactors, who hate Jesus. The Jew does not get beyond being bewildered and disturbed by Him, as something that passes his wit to understand.

>Souls, individuals, are not the ultimately real: they, too, are still the expression of vanity, the attachment of worth to the person. Only the Good, which contains all individual elements within it, is of the highest reality

Otto Weininger - Sex and Character. Pretty much the only real psychological book out there. This is true psychology. Pretty much every part of Weininger’s work will alarm anyone in its timelessness and foresight. This book fix brain
>The reason why madness overtakes so many men of genius—fools believe it comes from the influence of Venus, or the spinal degeneration of neurasthenics—is that for many the burden becomes too heavy, the task of bearing the whole world on the shoulders, like Atlas, intolerable for the smaller, but never for the really mighty minds. But the higher a man mounts, the greater may be his, fall ; all genius is a conquering of chaos, mystery, and darkness, and if it degenerates and goes to pieces, the ruin is greater in proportion to the success. The genius which runs to madness is no longer genius; it has chosen happiness instead of morality. All madness is the outcome of the insupportability of suffering attached to all consciousness. Sophocles derived his idea that a man might wish to become mad for this reason, and lets Aias, whose mind finally gives way, give utterance to these words :
iv rig <f>pov£iv \ap firiStv nSiorrog j3/o£.

>This relation is, however, manifested in the most curious manner in the man of genius. No one suffers so much as he with the people, and, therefore, for the people, with whom he lives. For, in a certain sense, it is certainly only " by suffering " that a man knows. If compassion is not itself clear, abstractly conceivable or visibly symbolic knowledge, it is, at any rate, the strongest impulse for the acquisition of knowledge. It is only by suffering that the genius understands men. And the genius suffers most because he suffers with and in each and all; but he suffers most through his understanding

> A man is himself important precisely in proportion that all things seem important to him.

> There is an uninterrupted gradation from the man whose mentality is unconnected from moment to moment, and to whom no incidents can signify anything because there is within him nothing to compare them with (such an extreme, of course, does not exist) to the fully developed minds for which everything is unforgettable, because of the firm impressions made and the sureness with which they are absorbed

> The ego of a woman is the cause of the vanity which is specific of women. The analogue of this in the male is an emanation of the set of his will towards his conception of the good, and its objective expression is a sensitiveness, a desire that no one shall call in question the possibility of attaining this supreme good. It is his personality that gives to man his value and his freedom from the conditions of time. This supreme good, which is beyond price, because, in the words of Kant, there can be found no equivalent for it, is the dignity of man.

>The only thing which has any absolute and ultimate value in the world is the soul. "Ye are better than many sparrows" were Christ's words to mankind.