Are there any male philosophers before the 19th century that aren't misogynous?

Youll never know unless you shoot your shot user, I think you'll make it. Best of luck to you.

>oppress women for thousands of years
>don't let women contribute
>complain that they don't contribute
>women still contribute, but that's anecdotal
>come to modern age
>bitter men who romanticize the past despite not having any contributions of their own still complain that women aren't contributing

Of course you're going to either now assume I'm a woman or say I'm a soyboy or whatever you want to fall back on.

Daily reminder that there were women in history just as important as men, and men and women worked together in the family unit for the good of the tribe/nation

Daily reminder that women were always a part of the workforce when your economy was still based around the family unit

Holy shit will mgtow autists read a book about family life pre industrialization. Even when wen and their dowries we're seen as de facto property they we're still regarded as being competent, especially in certain intellectual pursuits when they were women of higher classes.

In fact in many societies, high class women outranked low class men in any scale.

Of course they won't do that. They're too emotional and only know objectivity as a tool to prove their emotional response as valid.

As a male teacher in a university in my early 30s, I can assure you none of my colleagues my age would be interested in dating a 20-year old neckbeard.

>oppressed women for thous--
Stopped reading.

Why don't you go explore the finer points of the Critical Theory of auto-erotic asphyxiation and neck yourself?

Well no shit there is a pretty serious age difference. Stop stomping on my dreams, user.

Le opression meme, muh partiarchy, le men so ebil beast! Omg!

You mean opressed like "I go hunting,build a hut and protect our territory jyst for you to be comfortable and love our children" opressed?

Is it not curious that chivarly was the ephitome of sacrificial love from men to women and women started "awakening" of their opression once men, in the pursuits of making life better for women and children, created machines that made the hardest tasks easier and easier?

Men are the builders, the warriors and the resource gatherers, yet are disposable.Women need only to exist.

I could go all day lads

>I'm saying that women were oppressed n shit
Not even a little, in fact I openly defend traditional gender roles it's just that you don't know anything about traditional gender roles. Yes the role of the men was to pursue more dangerous paths while women tended to the homestead and family, that does not mean being a wen was a comfortable existence. Women had to work grain fields just like men, and they had to serve the community at large and raise the children as well.

Is that an easier life than what men had to deal with? Yes, but it was not an easy life either, simply slightly better than what men had. This is only in one class based regards, the entire situation is far more complicated when it comes to different classes, ages, time periods, and cultures.

>le
>meme
Why do you talk like this? Talk like a fucking man.

Chivalry is a general code of conduct. How a knight was to conduct himself to women is a small fraction of the overall code.

Explain:
>hunter gatherer tribes
>male hunter
>female gatherer

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_inventions_and_discoveries_by_women?wprov=sfla1

>be comfortable

How can you be comfortable if not only you don't have what you want, you are also and most importantly denied the possibility to get what you want if your husband can't give it to you or refuses to? That's why women fought to get out and take what they wanted themselves rather than wait for someone to give it to them.

>love our children

Nothing to love, everything to hate if those children weren't wanted. The little boy needs a beating for being annoying to mommy.

>chivarly

The only reason "nice guys" romanticize chivalry is because back then there wasn't the technology that allowed women to voice their opinions about it. If there was, "nice guys" would have been exposed for their shittiness a lot earlier.

>making life better for women and children

Industrial inventions were made for the pursuit of profit, not comfort. Comfort is how you sell them to people, but you still make them for profit, that's why people sell them at a price. If they were made purely for comfort as you say, they would be given out for free.

He means chivalry in the nice guy sense of the word.

It is important to understand that the origins of this claims for equality came initially by high class women that were kinda bored doing nothing all fucking day.

Working class men and women didnt had time for that shit.Both were busy on their tasks.That I agree with you.

holy shit

Hahahaha holy shit. These conversations are gold.

As in the modern sense of the word? The modern sense he accuses of being overly feminized yet can't seem to escape its terminology?

Yeah, they could busy themselves the same way high class men did but were unfairly prevented to if they fell for the trap of marriage.

It was indeed.But the sacrificial dragon slayer , damsel rescuer, gate opener bullshit started later.It was a manouver for court women to hold some cards via the trvadours and poets.Romanticism was the final nail on that coffin.

Romanticism was about gloomy landscapes and gothic ruins you retard.

> women getting what they want by their own hard work

I never said I disagree.Problem is, women had been pulling the opression bullshit when in fact I think they were pretty fucking comfortable on having a myriad of cucks doing hust that for them until modernity

> unloved children
Beating a child for being born? Lol what
> the romantic version of chivalry was a womens move, not men.Who raises young boys on what women want? Mommys.See Eleanor of Aquitaine

The machine stuff
Why do you make profit? For comfort

Romanticism is literally the opposite. It was an attempt to escape the squallor of urban life into everything but gloomy landscapes. Hell, the goths and gothic culture were seen as the symbol of the dark ages and the end of the Roman empire and romanticism was seen as a further revival of it.

They stopped getting married or laid

Where the hell do you get the idea that life for anyone pre modern was at all fucking "comfy" except for a tiny portion of the wealthy class which was comfy for men as well?

You are aware that during wartimes, women at home were working factories so as to keep supplies rolling out, right? Sure it's not the front lines, but that's not comfy at all.

Face it, billions of women have lead lives far tougher than your spoiled ass has. You're just a butter cunt because you are slightly less spoiled than your image of modern women.

>I think they were pretty fucking comfortable on having a myriad of cucks doing hust that for them

Not at all. Self-proclaimed nice guys like you expect a woman to do everything for you in exchange of nothing, and you show their true face when she asks for something of substance like money or material goods, so there's no reason to think women back then had a myriad of anything doing anything for them. You too hate prostitutes, no? At best they had a husband they were forced to depend on, and if said husband was not King Chad guaranteeing you comfort and abundance in all situations with his threat of violence on others, then life was going to be shitty indeed.

>Beating a child for being born?

Beating a little boy for being annoying and not shutting up and making himself invisible when you're stressed and want absolute silence. Happens today too. Unwanted children cause stress and depression and are a burden on the parent that is forced to care for them against her will, which causes mothers to snap.

>Who raises young boys on what women want?

Who raises young girls on what men want?

>the romantic version of chivalry was a womens move

The first romance novel written by a woman, The Sheik, had a bad boy with a heart of gold protagonist who acted like the bad boys "chivalrous" nice guys always whine about, only to turn sweet and complying when the authoress wanted. Don't see any chivalry in it.

>Why do you make profit? For comfort

Yeah, your own comfort. I don't see Jeff Bezos making profit for the comfort of Amazon workers.

Niggah, you dont even know me.

I can recognize the work of womankind but I wont put up with the sistematic demonization of men in culture, courts and etc.

> Self proclaimed nice guy
Whatwhen (?)

> Prostitutes

Most honest women on the face of the earth if they do it by will.

> Child
See single moms are a plague this days.Sorry not sorry.You have like a thousand birth control methods

The other shit im too tired to answer.Interesting data, the novel stuff.But it was via male artist that women made their moves.

Plus just because King Chad was guaranteeing comfort and abundance for himself with this threat of violence on others, doesn't mean he was also granting it to you, that was up to him. Could have given it you, could have not given a shit, there's lots of selfish men out there. No reason to think comfort was granted in the least.

>single mom
Who's talking about single moms? Beating the shit out of your children to force them into silence and obedience was the standard for households and schools until modernity took over.

>it was via male artist

Edith Maude Hull wrote her novel herself.

You are the reason women should be kept in their place. Not to silence your "truth" but to keep you from destroying the common traditional values that made our society, which women of today seek to replace with individualistic materialism.

"Opression" of women is neccessary for their safety and the safety of society

is this cringe thread nao?

>(Your lack of experience with fine women is disturbing, grow a pair and talk to a girl worth talking to)

>Daily reminder that there were women in history just as important as men, and men and women worked together in the family unit for the good of the tribe/nation
Kek this, when will those virgins learn.

FPBP

Common traditional values that hurt women and deprived them? And you're shocked women don't want them anymore?

Not him, but they didn't entirely though. Patriarchal traditional morality infantilized women and considered them without agency, but being infantilized also means that you are taken care of by others, and it also means that people are willing to lay down their life for you like they would children.

So, lets be clear, traditional morals makes women less free perhaps, and harms them that way, but it also made it necessary for men to have responsibility for women, to the point of death.

>muh soggy knees
Fuck off already.

So they harmed both men and women unnecessarily, and harmed women too when they rebelled and reclaimed their agency for themselves. Why are anons so shocked at the idea of women wanting to take care of themselves? Chad has no problem having a working wife. Of course Chad being high class, his wife will also have a good, satisfying, high call job, but he's still more than okay with her earning good money from it.

This is a high tier b8 thread. Excellent set up and delivery. OP is a true masterb8er

>So they harmed both men and women unnecessarily, and harmed women too when they rebelled and reclaimed their agency for themselves.

Sure, I don't disagree. What I do disagree with however is your moral indignation about it. It makes perfect sense to have traditional morals in relations between the sexes when birth control and other contraceptives don't exist.

I had this GORGEOUS Art History professor a while ago who immigrated from Russia. Red head, early 30s and was so intelligent and intuitive. I'm 19 and she had a husband so I knew it was never gonna work out but GOD did I have a huge boy crush on her.. Central and Eastern European women tend to be so sophisticated from my experience. I talked with an Austrian au pair from Austria a while back I met on the train, and in addition to being stunning, she knew more about geography, politics and science then most men I know, let alone women. American women are worthless by comparison desu.

Deprived them of what? Feminism? Feminist really are a joke

Because fuck roasties lol

>Haha an ugly person said this so it's not true XDDDD

In your experience what kind of guys do historyfus go for

>>Haha an ugly person said this so it's not true XDDDD

>men judging women to male standards
>women judging men to female standards

>You are the reason women should be kept in their place.

>literally suggest that women should be oppressed
>yet deny that they ever were

That's great, but you aren't responding in a manner that is at all helpful. You're trying to fight fire with fire with people trying to fight fire with fire.

A) because women are shit B) because of the times

>misogynous
>hatred of women
Were there philosophers who hated women?

Guys who speak 3 languages, have lived abroad in at least two third-world countries for longer than a year each, who read a lot, and don't consider Dan Carlin the best thing ever. Otherwise, you know, tall, fit, rich, etc. Disproportionately into 'exogamy', probably just 'cause when you know a lot about a certain type of history, you're going to end up going there, talking to those people, etc.

Saying women's nature is to do A and B is not misogynistic, because they don't like to hear it.

In average women are better. But what matters is lies on the extremes, the right side of the bell curve. That part is composed almost exclusively by men. to anyone who gives me the myth of male and female equality I say: "Go to your bookshelf or any bookshelf and count the amount of female and male authors" And yes, the production of books is good criteria.

Not that I disagree but wouldn't someone just say that there's less female authors since they were second class citizens/couldn't publish?

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_inventions_and_discoveries_by_women?wprov=sfla1
that's a pretty pathetic list desu

That's what happens when you don't allow a group of people access to education and research opportunities. Still, it's not exhaustive by any means. Off the top of my head there lacks Barba McLintock or Jane Goodall.

It took Emma Noether her entire life to be recognized and paid as a professor despite being on par with Hilbert and Artin.

You do notice a trend where now that women don't have as many barriers, the contributions are beginning to reflect that.

Birth control and other contraceptives have always existed in one form or another, to the point bitter, hateful, controlling old always bitched about women who used them. Because continuing a pregnancy you can't afford is the desirable thing in their eyes.

Sounds like a stupid haughty bitch. Seems right up your ally, faggot.

>so sophisticated
Anything is more sophisticated compared to you.

a female typed this

Uh, because they were steeped in the prejudices of their times?

Just tell the person to count from any determinate decade he/she considers appropiate. But we both know where it's going. Just say "Reality is against you", "is culture yet no fair enough for you? When would that be?". Then you can say that educational system is biased towards females...and then go to your house and jerk off because you are not going to fuck that bitch (the person you are arguing with is probably going to be a female).

>the contributions are beginning to reflect that.
ok i see this a lot but any actual examples?
i don't mean just academic papers because anyone can churn them out but actual innovation

It's not the same tbqh. The birth control pill allowed women to have the power over their reproductive system, which essentially gave them power over men, which in turn made traditional morals impossible to enforce.

define productive

How many have you churned out?

/thread

Muh misogyny

Telling the truth isn’t any of these buzz words you came up with in recent times to psychologically shut off your opponent.

>It's not the same

Educate yourself on abortion in the Roman Empire.

Women are well represented in the medical sciences including research positions.

Notice how most of the awards are concentrated in an era where women are actually allowed to have research positions?

Of course you're going to cast this aside and not see it as "actual innovation" and keep moving that goal post further and further.

society was still quite brutish

Well, now women have had those opportunities for hundred years in western world.
Why are they still minority when you talk about achievements in society?

>butter cunt

Women aren't allowed to have research positions in physics?

oooooh, someone's a salty NEET.

I'm not historian, it's not my faculty, so whatevs. I do share a building with them though.

It's not a linear growth model. The intial momentum was slow (and against the pushes of people like you, mind you), but the trend is there. It needs time. I'm personally one that does not advocate political legislation that favors women/people of color for this very reason. Without external influences (including those of your kind) things will trend towards evening themselves out.

I also don't know how you can't see the obvious self fulfilling prophecy that you're falling into.

They can now. Honestly of all fields for women get into, STEM is the most opened right now. Although it would seem that they gravitate towards Medicine, Biology, and Mathematics rather than Physics or Engineering.

Emma Noether had to teach under Hilbert's name for 10 years in the early 20th century because no institution would allow a female professor. Luckily many bright minds of the era and in the region (Einstein, Klein, Gordon) noticed that she was incredibly talented and helped her out. And good thing too because her contributions were great and she had a tendency to raise up great advisees.

Kierkegaard.

I think both sides of this are right, there are some aspects of women that are better than men, and some aspects of men that are better than women. It's like race, they are different but their differences are what make us all whole.

Well, In the beginning of 20th century there were so much things happening - Right to vote, right to educate yourself, right to run your own businesses, that there should have been explosive growth in female influence in society. What we see is that they have succeeded only in taking over bureaucracy. All things that require creativity and taking risks: Startups, new inventions, new forms of art... they are still men-only. And I think that there are no other reasons left but biology.

women are things. they should never been incorporated into the political system in any way and they should never have been given rights at all full stop. it is destroying society as it has EVERY time it has been tried (that we know of)

misogynous men have sexual anxiety about the female body and mind and thus project hateful speeches and action against women as a way of dominance.

they're just insecure men who hate their mothers pretty much.

i would not hold it against them or their body of work since everyone is a little Freudianly fucked up anyway. seperate work from person is what i always say.

Shut the fuck up faggot.

The ancient Greeks hated and distrusted women. Too them love was a curse. I suspect that they pursued pederasty which wasnt gay like we think now for that reason.

I heard that the Greeks said that once women are equal they seek to destroy men like they are doing now, although i havent found the quote

*to

this
not this

>but the world just HAS to be fair and balanced there couldn't be something fundamentally wrong with a certain group of people

Is this the larping thread?

>misogynous men have sexual anxiety about the female body and mind and thus project hateful speeches and action against women as a way of dominance.
>they're just insecure men who hate their mothers pretty much.
>i would not hold it against them or their body of work since everyone is a little Freudianly fucked up anyway. seperate work from person is what i always say.

Unironically there's nothing wrong with muh soggy knee.

Schopenhaeur got rejected by too many women and he got bitter
He disguised it as philosophy but he was just mad