Its interesting that people are willing to plant seeds in these womens heads to revolt and shed their blood but not actually help them in liberating themselves. How are women, going to liberate themselves in a nation where they could easily round up 1000 of them and squash them into dust just to make an example and all the men be ok with it?
Is Islam Misogynistic? (Muslim woman answers and provides sources)
- Thread starter Type Username Here
- Start date
Not a doomsday scenario. Its society before it became modernized. How have women been treated historically? Before human beings had cars, constitutions, a million laws, etc. How can you come to the conclusion that women are equal without first going through the motions it takes to realize, that they should be treated equally. Without law, when a woman speaks her mind and a man doesnt like it, he raises his hand and smacks the shyt out of her. She falls back. A man feels he can use these methods to mandate his will and women cant do anything about it because force can be such a powerful tool of influence. Law, presents consequences for that hand. That hand has to be used, for that law to exist. I say all this to say that we are the end result of these cause and effects. A cycle that without modern society would be started again. So its not unrealistic to speak on the natural order because history shows what men are are like without laws and the natural order of societies that get along peacefully, without laws..
I don't want to intervene in the sense of just jumping into the fray. But when there is already a movement, and they clearly need help, and are asking for it, I think that's the time when all notions of "us" and "them" are tested. Help can take many forms, and I think what you've described would definitely be a big part of it. Basically, they need to be allowed to speak and to be heard, and if we can help them acquire the means to do that, we should.
I don't think Mowglis doomsday scenario is all that unconvincing it's just that it's very specialized. The family objection misses the point cause the power is still in male hands. The thing is once the situation gets settled then what? What happens in a Hobbesian breakdown is not a guide for the future.
It's worse than that. The problem with his scenario is that it doesn't represent a "baseline" for humanity. His claim is that the possibly-empirical truth of his scenario reveals the necessary "truth" of humanity, from which goals concerning an ideal organization of society can be deduced. There is no scenario which could provide us with that kind of knowledge, and the irony here is that this level of abstraction and hypothetical is necessary in order to make a point about a supposedly self-evident, essential truth about the human condition.
History isnt a good enough baseline?
We didnt just press start and appear in 2012 bruh.
History isnt a good enough baseline?
No, history isn't a good enough baseline, because history itself is contingency, not a guarantor of any particular absolue. There is nothing necessary in history. The pioneering historian Vico was making this point back in the 1700s.
PartyHeart
All Star
Fixed for you. African societies didn't operate that way before they came into contact with Europeans. This is why I asked the question about who in here is Black and who isn't, because those who are are subscribing to a lot of European principles that didn't exist in society until they were brought to the Americas in chains and Africa colonized.
I also don't think Black men would like the implications of a natural order based on history either
Basically your posts give the impression that every man is deep down angry and/or threatened by the idea that a woman has the same rights as him. I see no reason to believe this, not even historically. Because in those same (Euro) societies of old, the majority of men were oppressed by a tiny amount of men with more power and resources than them as well.
Finally, as far as your example that a man will beat a woman who doesn't agree with him, the family issue still stands against this. If men would not like to see other men hurt the women in their family, why would we then assume they would resort and feel compelled to hurt them themselves? You seem to have a very violent view of male/female relations.
Fixed for you. African societies didn't operate that way before they came into contact with Europeans. This is why I asked the question about who in here is Black and who isn't, because those who are are subscribing to a lot of European principles that didn't exist in society until they were brought to the Americas in chains and Africa colonized.
I also don't think Black men would like the implications of a natural order based on history either
Basically your posts give the impression that every man is deep down angry and/or threatened by the idea that a woman has the same rights as him. I see no reason to believe this, not even historically. Because in those same (Euro) societies of old, the majority of men were oppressed by a tiny amount of men with more power and resources than them as well.
Finally, as far as your example that a man will beat a woman who doesn't agree with him, the family issue still stands against this. If men would not like to see other men hurt the women in their family, why would we then assume they would resort and feel compelled to hurt them themselves? You seem to have a very violent view of male/female relations.
Great post. There have been and still are various matriarchal and matrilineal societies all over Africa (and elsewhere, too,) which our twisted friend Mowgli has ignored in favor of a particular Eurocentric version of history. As for Mowgli's angry, reactionary description of gender relations, it's his personal baggage and nothing more.
Type Username Here
Not a new member
Don't forget out friend is 50% European and slave master blood. That fantastic post you laid out yesterday showed that the Cape Verde Islands had more in common with Portugal than Africa.
No one he advocates enslaving women. It's a natural instinct.
PartyHeart
All Star
I figured as much. I was like, I could be wrong, but I don't think the majority of men are tempted to go into a violent, slapping rage whenever a woman disagrees with them
One could even argue that when it has happened historically its more about control for the ruling class within the confines of a society than it is any natural instinct
dont act ignorant, The stuff alot of these people do, particularly in Afghanistan and Saudi dont have to do anything with Islam. The only modern country created in the name of Islam (Pakistan) had a women prime minister before most western countries, including ours.Well i guess you got the wrong impression. History shows that women have always been under men and either know their role as delegated by men or they get humbled, by men. Over time, men loosen their control and give women more equal footing in society. I dont see whats hard to believe about that. You have a violent view of my view but that, isnt my view. Its just the way it is and has beenFixed for you. African societies didn't operate that way before they came into contact with Europeans. This is why I asked the question about who in here is Black and who isn't, because those who are are subscribing to a lot of European principles that didn't exist in society until they were brought to the Americas in chains and Africa colonized.
I also don't think Black men would like the implications of a natural order based on history either
Basically your posts give the impression that every man is deep down angry and/or threatened by the idea that a woman has the same rights as him. I see no reason to believe this, not even historically. Because in those same (Euro) societies of old, the majority of men were oppressed by a tiny amount of men with more power and resources than them as well.
Finally, as far as your example that a man will beat a woman who doesn't agree with him, the family issue still stands against this. If men would not like to see other men hurt the women in their family, why would we then assume they would resort and feel compelled to hurt them themselves? You seem to have a very violent view of male/female relations.
Wars were being waged in Africa before contact with Europeans. Africa, pre colonization has a history of great kingdoms. How do you think kingdoms are established? With arm wrestling contests?
All nations on Earth have this in common. Africa wasnt a land of rainbows and sunshine and equality for all human beings before the european. Im kinda surprised you're suggesting it was.The thing with Africa as it concerns women is, they know their role. In Africa, women know their place and the ones that step out of it, get disciplined or get ostracized. I dont believe women are getting slapped up for the indulgence of violence but the women respect the power of the men enough to obey them, mostly.
I say that a collapse of modern society will bring about violence toward women because women, in modern society, in particular the west, dont know their role and without law, violence will be brought upon them to bring them to whatever role men deem useful for them, if they meet resistance. If the men are out gathering food and the women are standing around not doing shyt waiting to get fed,
when the men return, not o please honey will you please make yourself useful while im gone.