Thursday, March 26, 2009

bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla


image of fetuses in the womb, medieval/renaissance




image of medieval female anatomy


p. 217
"Nature always plans and aims at absolute perfection she would, if possible, constantly bring forth men; and when a woman is born this is a mistake or defect, and contrary to nature's wishes. This is also the case when someone is blind, or lame, or with some other defect, as again with trees, when so many fruits fail to ripen. Nevertheless, since the blame for the defects must be attributed to nature, who has made them what they are, we ought not to despise them or to fail to give them respect which is their due. But to esteem them to be more than they are seems to me to be manifestly wrong."

Interesting that Nature is considered a feminine force, and this feminine force makes mistakes by making women.

Really interesting that it is manifestly wrong to give women more esteem than they deserve because they are just blatant mistakes, when what seems to me to be real effin manifestly wrong is that women are mistakenly created and nature would like to constantly bring forth men. Okay, so nature wants to constantly bring forth men eh? I guess this would happen by men impregnating each-other right? Of course we all know that men have wombs and ovaries and are TOTALLY capable of reproducing all by themselves. YES, SINCE THIS IS POSSIBLE, IT WOULD SEEM THAT WOMEN ARE TOTAL MISTAKES AND HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PURPOSE ON EARTH, NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER IN THE BIOLOGICAL REASON FOR LIFE WHICH IS PROCREATION!

I just can't understand this justification. Just can't understand it. I want to go back in time and slap all of these "manifestly wrong" men with a biology book- or wait, no- plain common sense. It would behoove them to use (at the very basic level) their eyes and brain. Maybe, men in this time period were mistakenly born with partial eyes and partial brains. Perhaps they had a lot of neuron misfires making thoughts unable to cross the synaptic cleft rendering this whole reason and logic movement stagnant and useless. And their eyes were unable to transmit images to the corresponding lobes of the brain, so they were immediately faced with a problem on their views...

BUT what the hell would I know??? I'm just an effin mistake.

1 comment:

  1. What interests me is that this very sentiment is voiced with those who disagree with Gaspare. But you wonder...which is the "truth" and which is the point made just to play devil's advocate?

    ReplyDelete