[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 14 KB, 220x263, 220px-Schopenhauer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11403130 No.11403130[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Why were most western philosophers misogynists? What is the quality of philosophy that makes men hate women for being women?

>> No.11403161

>>11403130
Gay men hate women the most, so much so that they won't even fuck them.

>> No.11403172

You know why

>> No.11403177

>>11403172
is >>11403161
why?

>> No.11403181

>>11403177
nah

>> No.11403184

>>11403181
why is it then

>> No.11403189

somebody had to do it

>> No.11403191

>>11403184
Probably because they're all sluts.

>> No.11403198

>>11403184
Because until 75 years ago syphilis was for life

>> No.11403203

It stems from the inability to reconcile the fact that they would abandon all their principles and fall to their knees if the sultry maiden of their dreams appeared before them.

>> No.11403209

>>11403130
What an odd coincidence that these brilliant men that spend their lives thinking about life and people would come to the same conclusion about women hmmmmmmmmm

>> No.11403217

>>11403198
so they all had syphilis?

>> No.11403224

to be a great philosopher, or artist, or intellectual of any kind really, generally requires some degree of social inadequacy, particularly with women. this is because the desire for sex, for friendship, for community, for convention success in which one's position in society can be gauged by approval from one's peers, these are things that human beings desire in themselves. whereas there is no innate desire in humans to seek truth or to create great works of art, both of which require long periods of isolation and strained effort and carry with them the risk of extreme ridicule and contempt. these are sublimation of other desires, typically frustrated desires that cannot be satisfied by the traditional means. otherwise, why seek gratification through circuitous and treacherous paths rather than simply going after it directly?

>> No.11403235
File: 60 KB, 680x457, 3F3EC849-0457-4A71-9D18-05DA37CFC5A2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11403235

>>11403224
>*blocks your path*

>> No.11403237

>>11403224
>no MOM I don’t have any friends and haven’t left my room since high school because I’m a true intellectual!

>> No.11403256

>>11403130
It was just nerd rage. Chad philosophers like Nietzsche called them out on their bullshit when he said that philosophers knew as much about truth as they did women.

>> No.11403272

>>11403235
The qualifier "great" was added for a reason.

>> No.11403299

>>11403256
>chad
>nietzsche

nietzsche died a virgin

>> No.11403308

>>11403256
>>11403299
he was also just if not more misogynistic than schopenhauer.

>Women are considered deep. Why? Because one can never discover any bottom to them. Women are not even shallow

>Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent.

>When a woman has scholarly inclinations, there is usually something wrong with her sexuality.

>You are going to women? Do not forget the whip!

>> No.11403315
File: 737 KB, 709x810, latest.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11403315

>>11403308
>that
>misogynistic
There's nothing misogynist about knowing when to give a woman a good shmack occasionally, boy.

>> No.11403317

>>11403256
Schoppy was a chad though

>> No.11403342

>>11403315
This! Women belong in the fucking kitchen or with a cock in their mouth. No your place, bitch

>> No.11403346

if antisemitism (or at least extreme antisemitism) is the plebeian prejudice, hence why it's adopted by limited minds, misogyny is the patrician prejudice, hence why it's adopted by great intellects.

>> No.11403354

>>11403315
cease with the friendly fire, anon. i didn't mean it as a negative.

>> No.11403396

>>11403342
>t.incel

>> No.11403409
File: 36 KB, 437x513, OttoWeiningerspring1903.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11403409

>No men who really think deeply about women retain a high opinion of them; men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them.

Weininger said it best.

>> No.11403436

>western

>> No.11403439

>>11403342
Excellent bait

>> No.11403486

>>11403130
Sour grapes

Femininity is by far the most sought after and low-supply emotional force there is.

>> No.11403493

>>11403486
Schopenhauer was a player as a young man though, so how was it sour grapes?

>> No.11403496

>>11403203
At least men are capable of having principles.

>> No.11403504

>>11403493
True femininity is something like putting a butter cup behind your hear and skipping through a field. Playing the mating game is something else entirely.

>> No.11403506

>>11403308
>When a woman has scholarly inclinations, there is usually something wrong with her sexuality.

This is objectively true desu.

>> No.11403514

>>11403130
Bait detected. There has never been 'misogyny'. Very few really 'hate' women.

>> No.11403518

>>11403308
One of his notes defended sluts from Christ morality. Something along the lines of dudes only chastising her for not being controlled by fear like them. Doesn't seem mysoginist to me.

>> No.11403527

>>11403237

not the same guy, but they aren't necessarily wrong. I had a lot of friends growing up, have money, etc. And guess what? I'm genuinely disinterested in most of those things that are supposedly "normal" and I would rather spend my time on intellectual pursuits. It isn't absurd to assume that there would be a correlation between true intellectual ambition and lack of interest in pedestrian pursuits.