ILovePhilosophy.com

I think Pandora is very typically female in the traditional sense; either uncompromisingly judgmental and utterly unreasonable when she doesn't value, or completely in service to a purpose she does value.
I somehow seem to experience this as a true sort of femininity. Maybe I spent many lives as a knight dealing with kings daughters. But Im sure of my judgment here.

So here is a thread to investigate what a woman is, in terms other than her reproductive organs.

Maybe a good way to get this started is to collect profiles of what posters consider to be ideal women of this time.

I read 'woman' is literally Wife Of Man.
Thus the ideal woman is the ideal wife of man?

Perhaps that the reason why the term 'woman' is seldom use these days.

A displayer of empathy for others including that of total strangers
A free spirit and an inquisitive mind and a generous lover as well
Also a good listener who is slow to judgement less it is deserved

any attempt to understand women must involve an examination of the critical importance of their relationship to the poodle...

surreptitious75 wrote:A displayer of empathy for others including that of total strangers
A free spirit and an inquisitive mind and a generous lover as well
Also a good listener who is slow to judgement less it is deserved

Sounds about right for the best women I know.
When it is deserved she will be very harsh in her judgment.
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Prismatic567 wrote:I read 'woman' is literally Wife Of Man.
Thus the ideal woman is the ideal wife of man?

Perhaps that the reason why the term 'woman' is seldom use these days.

Since man isn't putting up much of a fight other than the Magnanimous 5 of course, I expect that the Woman will be in control in the coming centuries.
But right now she is definitely not in control.
She has the power, she's been given the power by the retreat of men from the foreground, but she doesn't seem to really know how to pick it up and wield it.

She needs to put her best foot forward and leave the heartless tarts in the dust. Feminism will be for her to slay.

https://imgc.allpostersimages.com/img/M ... 880733.jpg
Your ideal woman, used as an excuse to justify your own weaknesses and failings. She’s your kind of woman, a saint patroness of the weaklings. And like breeds more like.

barbarianhorde wrote:

Prismatic567 wrote:I read 'woman' is literally Wife Of Man.
Thus the ideal woman is the ideal wife of man?

Perhaps that the reason why the term 'woman' is seldom use these days.

Since man isn't putting up much of a fight other than the Magnanimous 5 of course, I expect that the Woman will be in control in the coming centuries.
But right now she is definitely not in control.
She has the power, she's been given the power by the retreat of men from the foreground, but she doesn't seem to really know how to pick it up and wield it.

She needs to put her best foot forward and leave the heartless tarts in the dust. Feminism will be for her to slay.

If women or the females want to control the males, they should paint the whole world pink and that has an evolutionary basis.

Drunk Tank Pink got this nickname in the late 70’s after a psychiatric study asked 150 men to look at a pink or blue board then take an isometric strength test. Those who stared at the blue apparently amplified their own strength by doing so, while the others seemed weakened by gazing at pink.
https://www.joachimstraining.com/pink-m ... -dominate/

I believe this has an evolutionary basis because what is striking within the males mind i.e. between the legs [internally] is pinkish [of various shades]. The color pink will soften the males mind to court the female while hardening a certain part.

This is the reason why within history it is well known and written, the most macho of men could 'easily' be led-by-the-nose by females who know how to take advantage of her 'pink' ace cards.

I believe most males at present are still being driven by 'pink' but some may have overcome those primal impulses.

Hahah, the Pink Halls.

Pandora wrote:https://imgc.allpostersimages.com/img/Mounting/posters/diego-velazquez-the-coronation-of-the-virgin_a-G-2574835-8880733.jpg
Your ideal woman, used as an excuse to justify your own weaknesses and failings. She’s your kind of woman, a saint patroness of the weaklings. And like breeds more like.

Settle down now child. Your hissyfit has been noted.

Women seem in general bouncier, fluffier, more dramatic, and wild than men. They also seem more social, more pulled by societal ties, less independent. And they obsess over physical appearance. I've also noticed that women dress in more extravagant ways. I don't find it appealing, but some girls, shockingly, can actually be into things like Pokemon cards, so there are exceptions.

i think the ideal female is a sexy, nerdy chick. of the various capitalist/consumerist subcultures, i find these to be the most enticing and prepared for the future. i was hanging out with one such chick recently - a conversation got sparked up about music - and in trading favorite prog-metal bands, she told me her favorite one was affiliated with a comic book or something. there it was; this chick was a nerd. probably been to her share of conventions, too. but you can always tell nerds when they're in a group. the interaction consists almost entirely of clever, witty quips and exchanges. this demonstrates the importance of intellect to the nerd group... a behavior you don't observe as much in other contemporary subcultures. think of a typical scene in 'the big bang theory'. like that. but this isn't to say the conversation isn't dull, only that the group is well equipped, if ever encouraged, to advance beyond such parlance and actually sustain an interesting conversation if someone gives them the opportunity. other subcultures usually don't have this potential. nerds are basically primed and ready to become philosophers. they just need the proper stimulation.

I recently read something similar on 4chan, where I've not looked for 12 years but you reminded me of it by talking about 8chan. I used to know some of these people there who were Anonymous, I mean I went to school with one of them and there were a lot of leechalongs friending with him - only, there were no nerdy chicks. There were just a few bland and stuckup posh chicks getting their adoration fix with the chanceless.

On the other hand my most longstanding relationship was with an ultra bookish girly who however was hardly nerdy since she was the hottie of the city's quarter which consisted of musicians and entrepreneurs and people who bowl ironically and such. She might be a nerd if she was male and not so very hot but... see my point? My point is a hot chick is just a hot chickaloid and if she can read all much the better. I agree.

Ah but now I know wha u mean.

You said it, about the opportunity of a chick who doesn't believe in the world order and knows it is all a shitheap infested by rodents anyway and if it is lucky will fall apart in a big cataclysm where the realities of being an existent entity are enhanced.

You say you meet these at libraries? Im tending to meet my chickens dancing because Im like the only white man who can dance in the space and its easy that way. But true often not a lot of talking ensues. Once I even forgot to mention my name and she had to admit to her girlfriends she was ignorant of it, hahaha. Funny but not nerdy. A nerd might not kick ass but definitely takes names.

Shit I realize I didn't fuck enough women who were wearing glasses. One though, oomph. She had thighs and glasses and a blonde bun. She won't go away from my memories.

What is a woman?

So many types of definitions.

We will start with the organs. She is organically receptive. A women cant have a penis. Well though Ive seen pictures but hmm.

Then we will start with the behaviours. A woman is always interested, or supremely bored. A woman can yawn very well.

Then we begin with the attitudes and proclivities. Mostly, well... they differ.

Prosperously, we come to the final beginning which is of her talents.

Prosperously, we come to the final beginning which is of her talents.

Prosperously is in the eye of the beholder here.
One of those talents is having the ability to ignore men when they are in their "standing on the corner like teenage boys" mode saying those silly things off the top of their heads about women.

A woman is a human with a womb, and the kind of physique and neuropsychology being a human with a womb necessitates + a few evolutionary happenstances.

A woman is not a social or self-construct.

You can't separate the womb from the physique and psyche.

It's the key to unlocking what women are.

Gloominary,

You can't separate the womb from the physique and psyche.

Is a woman lesser than when she has had a hysterectomy?

Perhaps as to the second thought though you may be correct. Perhaps in a sense, a woman who has had one (H) kind of maintains it psychically speaking.

It's the key to unlocking what women are.

No, that key would be paying loving attention to your woman; listening honestly with empathy and compassion to what she is saying and trying to understand what she means. Women are complex creatures.

Arcturus Descending wrote:No, that key would be paying loving attention to your woman; listening honestly with empathy and compassion to what she is saying and trying to understand what she means. Women are complex creatures.

What's interesting is that your answer is a motherly one...
Human infants and children can't speak very well and need to be lovingly cared for, paid close attention to and understood, perhaps that might explain this impulse in you, this approach.

Evolution has molded our species into what it is... understanding that mold might lend us insight into our nature, permit us to better know ourselves and each other.

Arcturus Descending wrote:Gloominary,

Is a woman lesser than when she has had a hysterectomy?

I think so.
A woman has less value than she otherwise would have if she were pregnable.
She may still have more value than a woman who is pregnable, she may still have tremendous value, but less than she otherwise would have.

Perhaps as to the second thought though you may be correct. Perhaps in a sense, a woman who has had one (H) kind of maintains it psychically speaking.

Regardless if a woman had a hysterectomy, nature has designed her physique and psyche with a womb in mind, sort of speak, just as nature has designed men's physique and psyche without one.
This is the essential difference between man and woman, nearly all of the other differences are a product of it.

No, that key would be paying loving attention to your woman; listening honestly with empathy and compassion to what she is saying and trying to understand what she means. Women are complex creatures.

I'm not denying women's indivdiuality.
I can affirm thier individuality and what makes them different from other women, while still affirming what makes them all the same and different from men, their primary sex characteristic, their womb, and all the secondary sex characteristics both physical and neuropsychological directly and indirectly derived from it.

Hello baby boy, Mad Man P

No, that key would be paying loving attention to your woman; listening honestly with empathy and compassion to what she is saying and trying to understand what she means. Women are complex creatures.

What's interesting is that your answer is a motherly one...
Human infants and children can't speak very well and need to be lovingly cared for, paid close attention to and understood, perhaps that might explain this impulse in you, this approach.

I might have said and visa versa. But since we were speaking of the key to the woman...
It is odd but I was not even, at that moment, thinking in terms of children but simply of how a man's behavior (among other things) toward a woman can be that "key". I know how I am. It must be the little child within me.

Evolution has molded our species into what it is... understanding that mold might lend us insight into our nature, permit us to better know ourselves and each other.

But do we all necessarily come from the same or the exact same "mold"?

Gloominary,

Is a woman lesser than when she has had a hysterectomy?

I think so.

Ouch. I still have my so-called womb as you put it but I am not sure how many women would think of their selves in those terms.
I cannot say if you are being objective here or if this is just a product of how humans value other humans and see things these days.

A woman has less value than she otherwise would have if she were pregnable.

Do you know what this just reminded me of -- the female slaves on the auction platform. I am not comparing you to a slave owner, Gloominary.
I suppose these girls and women would have had far less value than those who could get pregnant? Right? But they had no "real" intrinsic value.

She may still have more value than a woman who is pregnable, she may still have tremendous value, but less than she otherwise would have.

You seem to be a bit contradictory here.

But I suppose that that might depend on who (the individual) it was who is looking at her, valuing her. I wonder if a man who was deeply in love with his wife would think that after she had to have a hysterectomy and they had no children at this time.

Would a man with one testicle be less valuable to his loving wife than a man with two?

Regardless if a woman had a hysterectomy, nature has designed her physique and psyche with a womb in mind, sort of speak, just as nature has designed men's physique and psyche without one.
This is the essential difference between man and woman, nearly all of the other differences are a product of it.

Of course. It just seemed to me as though you were thinking of women in terms of commodities but I may be wrong. This might just be me.

I can affirm thier individuality and what makes them different from other women, while still affirming what makes them all the same and different from men, their primary sex characteristic, their womb, and all the secondary sex characteristics both physical and neuropsychological directly and indirectly derived from it.

Good.

Arcturus Descending wrote:Is a woman lesser than when she has had a hysterectomy?

Gloominary wrote:I think so.

Arcturus Descending wrote:Ouch. I still have my so-called womb as you put it but I am not sure how many women would think of their selves in those terms.
I cannot say if you are being objective here or if this is just a product of how humans value other humans and see things these days.

Women have a power men lack, and that is that they can give birth.
While it goes without saying both women and men are needed to conceive, only women can give birth.
Likewise, fertile women have a power barren women lack.
Now I'm not reducing all women's value to motherhood, women have a tremendous amount of value in addition to it, I'm just saying its an important part of what makes them valuable, a way they can add value to their own lives and society.

Of course men and women both have strengths and weaknesses, women can give birth and men are physically stronger in many ways, but not all.
Mentally we each have strengths and weaknesses, for example men tend to be more visually spatially intelligent and women linguistically.

Gloominary wrote:A woman has less value than she otherwise would have if she were pregnable.

Arcturus Descending wrote:Do you know what this just reminded me of -- the female slaves on the auction platform. I am not comparing you to a slave owner, Gloominary.
I suppose these girls and women would have had far less value than those who could get pregnant? Right? But they had no "real" intrinsic value.

I'm not sure why it reminds you of that, I guess it has something to do with feminism, which I don't subscribe to exactly.
What it reminds me of is a young mother, wife and homemaker.
I'm not sure why you think me pointing out that part of what makes a woman valuable is her ability to give birth, means I'm denying her intrinsic value, or her other abilities.
Women are just as intrinsically valuable as men, their health and happiness is every bit as important for both themselves and their families, as men's is for themselves and theirs.

Gloominary wrote:She may still have more value than a woman who is pregnable, she may still have tremendous value, but less than she otherwise would have.

Arcturus Descending wrote:You seem to be a bit contradictory here.

But I suppose that that might depend on who (the individual) it was who is looking at her, valuing her. I wonder if a man who was deeply in love with his wife would think that after she had to have a hysterectomy and they had no children at this time.

To her husband, who may not want any (more) kids, it may make no difference if she had a hysterectomy, but to society and more objectively, a woman has more value if she can give birth or if she's a new mom, so long as she's also a good woman.
It's like all other things being equal, from a societal standpoint, a fertile woman or new mom has more value than an infertile woman.

Arcturus Descending wrote:Would a man with one testicle be less valuable to his loving wife than a man with two?

That depends on if she wants to get pregnant or not.

Gloominary,

Women have a power men lack, and that is that they can give birth.
While it goes without saying both women and men are needed to conceive, only women can give birth.
Likewise, fertile women have a power barren women lack.

Objectively speaking this is true. You do realize though that animals can also give birth.
I wonder if this perspective might in some way be responsible for the ways in which women have been held back through time?

Now I'm not reducing all women's value to motherhood,

At least not ONLY to motherhood.

women have a tremendous amount of value in addition to it,

Off the top of your head, what is the next in line that is most important insofar as a woman's value goes?

I'm just saying its an important part of what makes them valuable, a way they can add value to their own lives and society.

This is true.

Of course men and women both have strengths and weaknesses, women can give birth and men are physically stronger in many ways, but not all.

You really do seem to like the idea that women can give birth, Gloominary.

Mentally we each have strengths and weaknesses, for example men tend to be more visually spatially intelligent and women linguistically.

Can you tell me how that betters society? Which do you think is more valuable ~~ the man's attribution or the woman's as you stated?

I'm not sure why it reminds you of that,

I suppose that I just could not be so objective there. I am a woman after all.

I guess it has something to do with feminism, which I don't subscribe to exactly.

So what are you saying here ~~ that women ought not to do their best to evolve and become everything which they possibly could become?

What it reminds me of is a young mother, wife and homemaker.

Yes, I can see that. Does this woman have the ability to go out and work, to help the man in bringing home the money and the bacon lol or must she putter around in the kitchen with her heels and her pearls around her neck?

I'm not sure why you think me pointing out that part of what makes a woman valuable is her ability to give birth, means I'm denying her intrinsic value, or her other abilities.

No, you are correct there. It does not mean that at all. I suppose that I am just not sure that that is the most important thing where a woman's value is concerned albeit without that our species would die out.
We are all individuals. Perhaps what I am actually thinking and feeling is that each woman's value can be different and at the same time equal depending on the circumstances and who she is? Ought women to be put in the same pidgeonhole? Perhaps I did not express that well.

Women are just as intrinsically valuable as men, their health and happiness is every bit as important for both themselves and their families, as men's is for themselves and theirs.

True though I am sure that there are men out there who would think otherwise. But you do appear to have a healthy respect for and value women.

To her husband, who may not want any (more) kids, it may make no difference if she had a hysterectomy, but to society and more objectively, a woman has more value if she can give birth or if she's a new mom, so long as she's also a good woman.

But to a man who wants children does that woman who is loved by her husband become less valuable ~~~ in his eyes?

It's like all other things being equal, from a societal standpoint, a fertile woman or new mom has more value than an infertile woman.

True...I suppose but that might depend on other things happening, no? I am still not sure if that ought to be the case though and I am not sure why.


What is a Woman?

Kind of like a diamond in the rough with many aspects to her. We have been a process for the longest of times since we were pieces of coal.
Would a woman warrior off fighting somewhere in the world who just saved ten men because of her fierceness, courage and intelligence be more or less important than the woman who stayed home and just gave birth?