Was he Elliot Rodger if he was actually smart?

Was he Elliot Rodger if he was actually smart?

It's true. But it's also true because I don't think about dudes. If I did, it would likely be the same.
Really you can sub 'people' in for women. Most men get closer to women than any of their male friends. It's just the way of things.

>I spent more time studying the world, seeing the world for the horrible, unfair place it is. I then had the revelation that just because I was condemned to suffer a life of loneliness and rejection, doesn’t mean I am insignificant. I have an exceptionally high level of intelligence. I see the world differently than anyone else. Because of all of the injustices I went through and the worldview I developed because of them, I must be destined for greatness. I must be destined to change the world, to shape it into an image that suits me!

who are you quoting?

*whom

Pretty sure that's Dylann Roof

>Wittgenstein writes to G. E. Moore: "It isn't necessary or rather not possible to agree with him but the greatness lies in that with which we disagree. It is his enormous mistake which is great."
>Elsewhere Wittgenstein put the same point by saying that if one were to add a negation sign before the whole of Sex and Character, one would have expressed a great truth; that is, he did not disagree with Weininger point by point but as a whole.

I dont get it, what would be Wittgensteins position then?

I recognize that prose!

I never got it either.

exactly

that definitely isn't Dylann Roof

>I began to have fantasies of becoming very powerful and stopping everyone from having sex. I wanted to take their sex away from them, just like they took it away from me. I saw sex as an evil and barbaric act, all because I was unable to have it. This was the major turning point. My anger made me stronger inside. This was when I formed my ideas that sex should be outlawed. It is the only way to make the world a fair and just place. If I can’t have it, I will destroy it. That’s the conclusion I came to, right then and there.

well you see Wittgenstein sometimes went back on his own thoughts.

That Weininger was an A hole.

Notice how he emphasizes "retains a high opinion". We're indoctrinated from birth to believe that women are the fair and kind sex when this is false. From my experience, only men are capable of being truly kind and fair, and that's because of biology which emphasizes the man's ability to work well in groups. Groups need social cohesion and justice so that all parties feel the group is fair.

Women on the other hand were suited for picking berries and chatting with other women. The purpose of this? I'm not sure. I do notice that women magic remedies, like pills, astrology, etc. Which if you think about it, sort of resembles the assortment of wild berries one would find in a forest. Women in the medieval age were expert herbalists.

>biology emphasizes men's ability to work well in groups
>women, on the other hand, were suited for communicating with others

wat

When people become depressed and nihilist, they seem to think the rose-tinted glasses have fallen from their eyes and now they can see how the world really is. I used to be like that myself.

I personally either think they need to go outside and meet with some new people. The rose-tinted glasses haven't fallen, rather these people have found some new glasses that make them needlessly cynical and edgy. Maybe I just hope that's the case.

What do you guys think?

>I do notice that women magic remedies, like pills, astrology, etc.

Thanks to shitlords like you they have no agency so they look for power in magic. Same reason they are more likely to attend church.

Not who you're responding to, but my understanding of recent research on gender is:

Men are good at cooperating with other people they have little relation to. This makes them better at building things, playing sports and fighting wars when compared with women.

Women are better at socialising. This is to be taken to mean that they're better at being both bitches and caregivers simultaneously. They're also better at connecting with other people that they are related to, which is why women tend to be closer to their parents when compared to men. This makes them suitable homemakers.

this man is so based.

I think you're mostly shitposting, but I feel there's some truth in the beginning of your post.

We're raised believing that women are in some way more caring/kind/virtuous than men, but in reality they're just as shitty as men.
Maybe that disappointment is what makes some dudes bitter about women?