>Gilman called herself a humanist and believed the domestic environment oppressed women through the patriarchal beliefs upheld by society. Gilman embraced the theory of reform Darwinism and argued that Darwin's theories of evolution presented only the male as the given in the process of human evolution, thus overlooking the origins of the female brain in society that rationally chose the best suited mate that they could find. >Gilman argued that male aggressiveness and maternal roles for women were artificial and no longer necessary for survival in post-prehistoric times. She wrote, "There is no female mind. The brain is not an organ of sex. Might as well speak of a female liver." >Her main argument was that sex and domestic economics went hand in hand; for a woman to survive, she was reliant on her sexual assets to please her husband so that he would financially support his family. From childhood, young girls are forced into a social constraint that prepares them for motherhood by the toys that are marketed to them and the clothes designed for them. >She argued that there should be no difference in the clothes that little girls and boys wear, the toys they play with, or the activities they do, and described tomboys as perfect humans who ran around and used their bodies freely and healthily.
The more I learn about lefty garbage, their movements and idols, the more I love the Tanakh, thousands of years ago we were warned >Deuteronomy 22:5: "A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.
But it gets worse, it's eye-opening how so much of the problems we see today were caused by these people and how much bullshit they believed
>Gilman argued that women's contributions to civilization, throughout history, have been halted because of an androcentric culture. >She believed that womankind was the underdeveloped half of humanity, and improvement was necessary to prevent the deterioration of the human race. >Gilman believed economic independence is the only thing that could really bring freedom for women and make them equal to men. In 1898 she published Women and Economics, a theoretical treatise which argued, among other things, that women are subjugated by men, that motherhood should not preclude a woman from working outside the home, and that housekeeping, cooking, and child care, would be professionalized. >"The ideal woman," Gilman wrote, "was not only assigned a social role that locked her into her home, but she was also expected to like it, to be cheerful and gay, smiling and good-humored." >When the sexual-economic relationship ceases to exist, life on the domestic front would certainly improve, as frustration in relationships often stems from the lack of social contact that the domestic wife has with the outside world.
Women are really happy now that they're pampered by the State and independent thanks to their careers aren't they?
Robert Young
it paved the way for women in sports right? can't be too bad
>In 1908, Gilman wrote an article in the American Journal of Sociology advocating hatred of African Americans and the reestablishment of slavery in America. Calling Black Americans "a large body of aliens" whose skin color made them "widely dissimilar and in many respects inferior," Gilman claimed non-whites' presence in America was "to us a social injury."[54] oh uh fellow kikes
Dude it's unreal how much of modern leftism was there, these people defend everything against what is good since the past century and maybe earlier
>Gilman's feminist works often included stances and arguments for reforming the use of domesticated animals. In Herland, Gilman's utopian society excludes all domesticated animals, including livestock. Additionally, in Moving the Mountain Gilman addresses the ills of animal domestication related to inbreeding. >In "When I Was a Witch", the narrator witnesses and intervenes in instances of animal use as she travels through New York, liberating work horses, cats, and lapdogs by rendering them "comfortably dead".
This is exactly like PETA
I believe this is just talk to gather votes, her actions showed the opposite of what she said about niggers
The creator of this fucking insane "morality" system we see today was the fucker called Kant >Immanuel Kant provided the underpinning of the humanist narrative. His theory of critical philosophy laid down the foundations the world of knowledge, defending rationalism and grounding it, along with his anthropology (his study of psychology, ethics, and human nature) to the empirical world. >He also supported the idea of moral autonomy of the individual, which was fundamental to his philosophy, deducing that morality is the product of the way we live, it is not a preset of fixed values.
>Humanists support sex education to help people to understand and express their feelings; physical education to promote health, and moral education by sympathy and tolerance. Some consider the culture of examinations, which does not let children focus on their passions and does not promote deeper thinking, unhelpful. Humanists are opposed to religious education in schools. >humanists reply parents do not own their children and hence do not have such a right.
I am all for it, as women should actually be scared of equality, but the jews didn’t liberate women for darwinism
Aiden Fisher
it's always about dismantling the system. so fucking annoying
Ian Parker
It’s not about replacing the system, they don’t want no system, in fact they actually want more system
Michael Ward
Based and underrated. And thanks for your screengrab here . Enjoy your double(You).
Liam Gomez
>I believe this is just talk to gather votes, her actions showed the opposite of what she said about niggers I hate to be "democrats are the real racists!", but we know lefties harbor feelings of intense superiority towards niggers and have always had a desire to control them (although, to be fair, they have a desire to control everything). But leftist niggerworship today is largely an act of absolution, to atone for their superiority. The feeling is still the same, just channeled differently.
Cameron Rogers
I think the theory the nephilim are trying to exterminate most of humanity but most of all, all the Israelites, and enslave the rest to be food to them or something, is growing stronger by the day genesis6conspiracy.com/
Why would all those "humanist" movements coincidentally always impose things against the laws given by God? Not even one of those "enlightened" (I guess that's were "woke" comes from huh) respects a single commandment or law, even theft, which should obviously wrong, is increasingly being legalized (see San Francisco, California and now Brazil if a certain leftist here passes her law proposal), are those the "rationalists", the "independent thinkers"?
>Humanism is strongly based on reason. For humanists, humans are reasonable beings but reasoning and the scientific method are the means of finding truth. >Science and reason have gained widespread approval due to their tremendous successes in various fields. >Appeals to irrationality and invocation of supernatural phenomena have failed to coherently explain the world. One form of irrational thinking is adducing hidden agencies to explain natural phenomena or diseases; humanists are skeptical of these kinds of explanations.
But I guess white privilege and the patriarchy are highly rational, scientific concepts, since the humanist groups all believe in them to be the cause of all aliments in the universe
