See, you wouldn’t even use the term “patriarchal conspiracy” if not for Millet.
If it’s so unreadable, how can you tell what style it is in?
Wow.
You guys learn all this in college?
didn’t you have any real classes?
and finally…does knowing all this make you guys any money?
How do you know a homeless guy is crazy?
No.
I didn’t, but I was a business major.
Smart people generally don’t have too much trouble getting a comfortable income regardless of the classes they took in college.
So you think Plato was a bad philosopher? You have just completely discredited the rest of your statements in this thread (which were already wrong).
Plato was an asshole - as a philosopher he was just so-so (if we’re talking about the big philosophers) and is totally overrated, not unlike Freud. Aristotle was way, way, way better than Plato. Hume, of course, is the best.
I’d be interested in hearing why you don’t think he’s an asshole/is overrated.
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out consume
Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
who was just as sloshed as Schlegel.
There’s nothing Nietzsche couldn’t teach ya
‘bout the raisin’ of the wrist.
Socrates himself was permanently pissed.
John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
after half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.
Plato, they say, could stick it away,
'alf a crate of whiskey every day!
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle,
and Hobbes was fond of his Dram.
And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart:
“I drink, therefore I am.”
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he’s pissed.
Say what you want about your inability to comprehend my glorious moral rectitude, I’m not about to let Anders Hallin win a default victory against the tenets of Radical Masculinism just because Shift and Rimbo refuse to show up and play.
P.S. I don’t even know who that woman is, or what she even advocates, I was just stepping in for Radical Masculinist theologians until they got their shit together. In all honesty, the only thing I took from the parts of her book that I read was, the idea for a rather blue Sunday morning journal comic strip, “Norman Mailer, Titillater.”
Doh. :(
How does it feel? Wait. Wrong day.
No, you’re not. You aren’t really interested in anyone else’s opinion about anything, except as a catalyst to random cursing. So just use this post to incite your rant. It’ll save me the trouble.
My post boiled down to “big deal, where’s the news?” The response to my post from the most pro-feminist male on this forum, by far, was that not all of Mailer’s stuff was written before 1960, and why do I deny the validity of this POV? A date correction and a strawman. Big yawn.
Sorry to disappoint, Flowers. If it’s any consolation, I just adored you in Silver Spoons.
I think he denied it was interesting. Is that the same as “weight”?
I cannot imagine what would impel one to read this.
I just couldn’t believe you gave up like that. When all the neighborhood kids believed in you! Coach Petersen was right, you are a loser. We’re all losers. Now we’re going to lose Camp Kitchkawnakee and it’s all my fault.
Fine.
As a side, my psychology textbook is the only textbook I have ever had that spent the first two chapters defending its right to exist as a science. It promptly disproved all that rot by explaining that the root of most mental disorders was biological, not mental.
Freud viewed the human being as a brain with a mouth, an anus, and some genitals.
And I really liked the poem.
Gross oversimplification. Have you read Freud, or just taken a 101 psych class?
Meh, she has nothing on McKinnon, Dworkin or Solanas.