| Member Info | | Status: | Offline | | Joined: | | | Gender: | N/A | | Age: | | | Posts: | 13 | | Location: | N/A | | Reputation: | 0% |
| | The second sex (10th Jan 23 at 5:14am UTC) | Quote Reply | It is fair to say that if other women fail to impress the world, it is because they are constrained by their own circumstances. There are few ways in which they can intervene other than passively and obliquely. Judith (like a mountain): Charlotte Corday and Vera Chasurich are assassins; the stonecrafts are conspirators. During the Great Revolution, during the Commune, women and men worked together against the established order. A woman is allowed not to accept and resist the freedom of not having rights and power, but she is not allowed to share positive and constructive results. At most, she can smoothly intervene in a man's career in an indirect way. Aspasina, Madame Manteuil, and the princess desursins were all advisers whose opinions were listened to — and some dignitaries had to listen to them. Men like to exaggerate the impact when they are willing to convince a woman that she has chosen a good role. But in reality, women's voices are not heard when concrete actions are taken. They can start a war, but they can't come up with a war strategy; their domination of politics is almost to the extent of turning politics into a conspiracy. Women have never exercised God's dominion over the world, nor have they exerted influence over technology or the economy. They have not made nations that have not been destroyed, nor have they discovered new worlds. Although some incidents are triggered by women,tannic acid astringent, they are excuses rather than actors. Lucretia's suicide has only symbolic value. Martyrdom is always open to the oppressed; in the Christian persecution, just after the defeat of a society or a nation, women play this witness role; but martyrs never change the face of the world. Even when women provoke unrest and stage demonstrations, these activities have an impact only when they are effectively expanded by men's decisions. The American women who gathered around Harriet Beecher Sun aroused strong public opinion against slavery, but the real cause of the Civil War could not be explained by emotion. Women's Day in 1917 may have triggered the October Revolution in Russia-but it was only the trigger. Most heroines are eccentrics: they become famous adventurers and original people not because their actions are important,fenugreek saponins, but because their fate is extraordinary. Therefore, if we compare Rendak, Madame Roland and Flora Tristan with Richelieu, daton and Lenin, we will find that their greatness is mainly subjective: they are models rather than historical actors. Great men are born of the masses and are driven by circumstances; the masses of women are on the margins of history, and circumstances are obstacles rather than springboards for every woman. To change the face of the world, one must first be firmly fixed on the world; but women who are firmly fixed on society are the ones who are dominated by society; unless their actions are directed by divine authority (in which case they will prove to be as capable as men), ambitious women and heroines will become monsters. It was only when women began to feel at home on earth that Rosa Luxemburg and Madame Curie figures appeared. They prove eloquently that it is not the inferiority of women that makes them insignificant in history, pumpkin seed extract ,ghana seed extract, but their insignificant position in history that makes them destined to be inferior. This fact is evident in the area where women express themselves very well, namely, the area of culture. Their fate is the same as art. Letters are closely related to the fate of literature. Among the ancient Germanic people, the duties of seer and priest were already appropriate for women. Because of her position on the edge of the world, men turn to her when they try to reach beyond their universe through culture to something they don't yet know. The court mysticism, the humanist curiosity, the aesthetic taste that prevailed in the Italian Renaissance, the affectation of the 18th century, and the progressive idealism of the 18th century all aroused praise for women in different forms. As a result, women become the star of poetry and the theme of artistic creation. She is leisurely, so it is possible for her to devote herself to spiritual pleasures: as the writer's inspiration, critic, and reader, she is his rival.
It was she who became popular with the sentimental model, the ethics that nourishes the hearts of men, so she intervened in her own destiny. Women's education is largely a victory for women. However important this collective role of educated women may be, their individual contributions are generally of little value. It is because the woman has not acted that she has a privileged position in the field of thought and art. But ideas and art have their own vitality, and being on the sidelines of the world is not an advantageous position for those who seek to recreate: the problem remains that to go beyond the established scope, one must first be deeply rooted in it. Individual achievement is almost impossible in the human category of collective inferiority. Marie Bashkirchev wanted to know, "Where can you send a man when he is still on the edge?" Stendhal said, "All the genius that is born a woman is obliterated by the public good." Actually, a person is not born a genius: a genius becomes. And that situation of women has so far made this evolution virtually impossible. Anti-feminists draw two contradictory arguments from historical studies: (1) women have never created great things; (2) women's circumstances have never hindered the growth of great women. There is a falsity in these two propositions: the success of a very small number of privileged people cannot be balanced or used to justify the general low level of the collective, and these successes are rare and limited, which just proves that the environment is unfavorable to them. As Christine de Pizan, Poulain de la Barre, Condorcet, John Stuart Mill, and Stendhal insisted, women never actually had a chance in any field. This is why quite a few women today are asking for a new status; what they are asking for is still not a celebration of their own femininity: their own transcendence,naringenin price, like that of ordinary people, can trump their inwardness; they hope that at last there will be abstract rights and concrete possibilities, and that the freedom that comes with them will not be a fool. prius-biotech.com | |
|
