The relationship between the male and the female is by nature such that the male is higher, the female lower, that the male rules and the female is ruled: Aristotle

[Ed Cryer]

Does Aristotle's view have anything to do with the fact that our world
has fallen into such a bloody mess since we enfranchised women?

[Simius]

Il giorno venerdì 12 aprile 2013 15:49:51 UTC+2, Ed Cryer ha scritto:
> Does Aristotle's view have anything to do with the fact that our world
>
> has fallen into such a bloody mess since we enfranchised women?

Dear Ed,

The fact that we "emancipated" women, if I may use that word, has certainly had a profound impact on the fabric of our society. It has meant that men are becoming marginalized, it has opened the flood gates for divorce, thereby, making a mockery of that fine institution called marriage, and it has meant that other minority groups (not to be listed) are now demanding a forum. Where shall all this end?

The workplace environment has also changed dramatically since we allowed women to enter it.

Unfortunately, the God-given laws of nature do not exist in the workplace. Here it is possible to have cretins, who would normally be hunted or cast out, to become the hunter. This is no place for the fairer sex!

To answer your question, yes, the world is becoming a mess because we have enfranchised women. However, it is also becoming a mess because we are losing sight of our moral values.

Regards
Simon

[Ed Cryer]

I find it very strange how long women went without the vote. Very hard
to explain.
In ancient Greek society, perhaps not too difficult to understand. But
Roman women had quite strong social power, while having zero political
power. And then Christianity; centuries of it, but no votes for women.

In the UK we had centuries of political reform; barons v king,
Parliament v king, cutting king's head off, Reform Bills, free
education, unions, and lots more, before female suffrage came along.

Strange, very strange.

Ed

[Simius]

Il giorno venerdì 12 aprile 2013 15:49:51 UTC+2, Ed Cryer ha scritto:

> Does Aristotle's view have anything to do with the fact that our world
>
> has fallen into such a bloody mess since we enfranchised women?

But I do not see why women should automatically have the vote just because men do. It is not a God-given right and will not necessarily make the world a better place.

To be honest, no-one (man or woman) should automatically have the vote, it should be earned, in that each person who wishes to vote must pass an exam to ensure that they fully understand the consequences of picking a particular candidate/party.

What we have now are members of society not having the slightest clue about politics voting for some-one purely based on their public self image (Tony Blair, for example).

We must desist from all this pampering to minority groups and support the majority with education, morals, and, above all, social skills.

These elements of teaching were the privileges of the male in the past, setting them naturally above females.

So, Aristotle was not far from the truth.

Simius

[Ed Cryer]

Nature doesn't work like God.
God creates a world and peoples it with his chosen flock.
Nature creates the selfish gene, loves biodiversity and creates niches
for life wherever it can; and it doesn't care if one life form has to
suck the brains out of another in order to survive and thrive.

You could create a society like Sparta; enslave the surrounding peoples,
march up into Attica and destroy the crops there in the new year, and
then march back home in autumn to supervise the harvest taken in by the
helots.
But nature would be plotting to implant alien life forms in you; and the
best laid plans of mice and men would be toppled.

The best political constitution to handle that, to deal with change, is
democracy; a democracy that represents every mutation from the norm that
nature can throw at us. It's a mishmash, an ideological non-starter,
something that God would never have dreamed of; but it works.

We live on a violent planet; with violent weather; with meteorites that
could wipe us out; in the corner of a minor arm of the Milky Way Galaxy.
Our existence as thinking beings appears as unlikely as a mountain made
of chocolate and topped with meringue; but here we are.

Beware of human nature. We are beasts. And we are far more numerous than
those rational philosopher kings.
Build a palace of glass for the best, and we the excluded will rip it down.

Ed

[Simius]

Il giorno venerdì 12 aprile 2013 15:49:51 UTC+2, Ed Cryer ha scritto:

> Does Aristotle's view have anything to do with the fact that our world
>
> has fallen into such a bloody mess since we enfranchised women?

It is true that God created the world and peopled it with at least two of his flock;

These were "Man", created in God's own image and from the dust of the Earth, and "Woman",
created from a piece of man's anatomy (rib or side depending on which translation), thereby, putting the postion
of a woman behind man.

This "hierarchical" structure is clearly explained in Genesis ;

God (Creator)
Heaven (God's dwelling)
Earth (One of his World's)
Nature (His world's environment on Earth),
Man (His representantive on Earth)
and then Woman (Man's companion).

So, right from the start, man was on a higher footing, as woman was merely seen as a companion and instrument for assisting
man with his reproduction command given by God.

I am not sure I agree with your comment about democracy being the best we have. Perhaps in its orginal
Attican form (district rule), yes, but then perhaps Aristotle soon saw the perils that lie within man governing
man on a larger scale. Nevertheless, my views on democracy shall be placed on your other thread.

Simius