Were there any outspoken ancient or medieval feminists who engaged in activism to achieve gender equality or is that a uniquely modern phenomenon?
>>17412288>medieval feministsthis board spits out some gems sometimes
>>17412295or maybe your ignorance is contagious? we have had proto-feminists (although not with a defined movement or even a formed group) since the middle ages at least. and some who are literally misandrists like those feminists who write books about men being trashFeminism is based in the (somehow) female nature
>>17412295>this board spits out some gems sometimesMalleus Maleficarum.
>>17412301>feminism is when misandryRetard. You don't even have a grasp on feminism beyond TV tropes for normies. Was every woman that complained about her husband being a fat retard, a "feminist"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_woman_question
>>17412288In the Middle East and further East yeah
>>17412395examples?
>>17412363>Retarded I accept your concession.>You don't even understand feminism beyond TVyou don't even know what proto-feminism is and how the ideas were prepared, which is why you were offended by what I said. proto-feminism is extremely old and we have restrictions that today we would only find in female groups. > tropes for normies. or retards like you? >All the women who complained about their husbandexactly. You're less retarded than I thought. In fact, that's exactly what feminism is in a sense, women complaining about men. >be a fat retard, a "feminist"?Yes.
>>17412301Can you give examples?
>>17412363>Was every woman that complained about her husband being a fat retard, a "feminist"?Yes.the same way it is today anonalthough in the past it wasn't necessarily for husbands but for men in general. men were the breadwinners and could not lose their livelihood>>17412395Sources? I only know example in europe.
>>17412408>In fact, that's exactly what feminism is in a sense, women complaining about men.No, it's advocacy for the equal rights of women.
>>17412409Of course!Read about Christine de Pizan the first "gender warrior" or Modesta Pozzo the 1590 radfem (of couse, feminism is radfem itself) etc etc
>>17412408nta, you are in damage control, and are a retard.
>>17412414Kekyour memeflag died in this post. try next time and be more memeticIn order not to make you look like an ass, the right to women and equality necessarily makes men inferior, as the Greeks warned, but yes. Feminine direct is like taking a deadly pill for a healthy body
>>17412424Don't answer me again, I accept your defeat, you damned wretch. I hope you don't make it to 40
>>17412425>the right to women and equality necessarily makes men inferiorHow do you figure? If men are inferior then women aren't equal, they're superior. Equality is equality.
>>17412429thread full of idiots....donkey, first of all you need to accept the reality that dimorphism is beyond muscles and voice and synchronizes with society. With this in mind, making men equal to women, who in turn are inferior in their own way, makes men necessarily inferior. It is not possible for there to be equality with essentially different things, one of the parties will have to adapt to the other in some wayas regards the sexes, the male is by nature superior and the female inferior. deal with it.In Politics 1.12, Aristotle:>The slave is completely lacking the deliberative element; the female has it but it lacks authority; the child has it but it is incomplete
>>17412408This >>17412414 is correct. Whatever you might say about the charecter of feminist authors or the real unconscious roots of such ideas, the actual political significance of feminism is in the liberal bourgeoise state and the purport to a universal citizen endowed with negative rights. All feminism does is extend those rights to woman as they would be extended to blacks and other designated inferior subjects
>>17412288>medieval feministsWomen whining in writing about the condition of women in society have been a thing since antiquity but I'm not aware of anything that could be construed as activism until the 19th century, unless you consider whining about it while drinking tea with other intellectuals as activism.As for the middle ages specifically you want to look up abbesses and nuns in general. Cristina da Pizzano comes to mind.
>>17412408Imagine being this confidently retarded.
>>17412403>>17412410You could argue that the Mongolian empire had the most "equal" women on earth.
>>17412450Obviously men and women are DIFFERENT. But the point is that neither is intrinsically more morally deserving than the other. My objection to patriarchy is not that it treats men and women differently, per se, but that it subjugates women and makes them miserable.
>>17412288Otto Weininger claims in Sex and Character that there was a feminist movement of sorts during the Renaissance, but I've never looked into the details. He argues female emancipation currents have risen and fallen with the ebb and flow of history, but it's only with the most recent wave that men have been sufficiently emasculated to grant it legitimacy.
>>17412288There were none. Because without the industrial revolution, they knew they had no need for men's rights (and the responsibilities along with it), and because they didn't have rights, men were free to treat them like shit. And since women only love those above them, their opinion on men was more positive than we see today. Andrea Dworkin doesn't show up in cultures of domestic abuse, marital rape, and FGM, but when a men give the world to them.
>>17412288Maybe you should look at Christine de Pizan. She wrote Le Livre de la Cité des Dames (The book of the city of ladies) were she "she defends women by collecting a wide array of famous women throughout history", against the quite mysoginistic Roman de la Rose by Jean de Meun.
>>17413139>And since women only love those above them, their opinion on men was more positive than we see today.Many women called men out for being entitled to their wife's time and labour.
>>17412288The idea behind feminism is that women should be independent of their men and instead become dependent on employment as labor units by international finance capital. Feminism wouldn't have made sense until women had the option and obligation to become sterile worker drones for capitalism.
So here's an overview of this thread ->>17412288>Were there any outspoken ancient or medieval feminists who engaged in activismTranny OP anon pretends to ask a question when in reality they just want to bait people into talking to them so they can talk about their completely fictitious medieval feminism.Since they are an autistic transsexual they watch alot of weird Japanese hentai anime and think it is some historical insight into the middle ages.Watch as they samefag themselves endlessly with not a single credible sited piece of evidence.This thread should help mental health practitioners with understanding low functioning autism
>>17412716fucking dumb imbecilethe 'patriarchy' is just the natural order maintained by women as much as by menif you want the true origins of feminism, go on wikipedia and filter feminists by religion/ethnicity
>>17413247>the 'patriarchy' is just the natural order maintained by women as much as by menSource: my ass
>>17413252fucking all of historywhat do you think human civilization is?I swear I'm going to lose it
>>17413252souce:sports...ywnbaw
>>17412288Well, she studied medicine when in her time being a doctor was only for men, and she was saved from execution, since the wives of all the judges made it clear to her that if she died, they would too.And yes, that sounds like it's from the 20s, but that was in the 4th century BC.I think that would be like proto-feminism.
There were Christian sects like the Gnostics and Waldenses that preached greater freedom for women.
>>17413281>Well, she studied medicineOh my god you fucking moron. Who the fuck are you talking about? What time period? What part of the world?>in her time being a doctor was only for menIt wasn't you idiot. They didn't have affirmative action or DEI back then to give them jobs no matter how bad they were. Also "doctors" didn't exist then. What in the actual fuck are you talking about?>and she was saved from execution, since the wives of all the judges made it clear to her that if she died, they would too.>And yes, that sounds like it's from the 20s, but that was in the 4th century BC.>I think that would be like proto-feminism.Tranny playing with ChatGPTHoly shit are you stupid.No, you're not a proto-idiot. You're an actual Idiot.>>17413310>There were Christian sects like the Gnostics and Waldenses that preached greater freedom for women.small sects created and led by men lol.
>>17413247>>the 'patriarchy' is just the natural order maintained by women as much as by menA society is always matriarchal and never patriarchal. This is because in any society, 99% of men are disposable cucks happy to compete for women. In any society women control men.This is why all societies are flawed inherently. And it doesn't help that all men are eager to please women sexually and non-sexually. democracy is even worse. Even young and old cumbrains enjoy being paypigs to post-menopausal women. The paypigs literally fight eagerly to picked up by a dried up cunt lol.
>>17413856Stop watching porn transsexual mentally ill anon and cite a fucking source, date, location and primary-source text for once.Wow, you are so stupid.Get a job please.ywnbaw
>>17413263>Women have less societal rights because they can't run as fast as men.Dude...
>>17413995>>Women have less societal rights because they can't run as fast as men.Because they lose all physical and mental confrontations with men..."dude".
>>17413865Deranged post
>>17414017Transsexual anon is mentally incapable of citing sources and will never be a woman.
>>17412288>Were there any outspoken ancient or medieval feministsAlso OP...
>>17414037That chick was a pussy, she should have at least fought even if she ultimately losthttps://youtu.be/iVOp5YdPLbg
>>17413856what kind of fucked up society do you live in buddy?
>>17414055>That chick was a pussyNo shit transsexual anon. She actually has a pussy. You don't.>she should have at least fought even if she ultimately lostYou've never been in a fight your entire life autistic transsexual and you will never be a woman, or a feminist. You're just a mentally ill freak.
>>17414012>Because they lose all physical and mental confrontations with men...When was the last time you had to physically fight to get an augmentation? Do you go around punching women? Duuuuuude...
>>17414341>to get an augmentationLol, mate. Learn to speak English first or just speak in your native language instead.
>>17413247To my understanding, patriarchy is first and foremost the product of plow farming, with hoe farming cultures being much more egalitarian.
>>17412288This is gonna sound like some prog bullshit but people literally didn't have the strict sex roles you are picturing in your head.I swear, people just think that history was a drunk husband with a pipe in his mouth and a fedora coming home from work in his cadillac to beat his wife for 4000 years.99% of people for 99% of history lived the EXACT same way, being subsistence farmers in a ~100 population village and I'm lucky enough to have talked to my grandparents about their life in their isolated ass village in the middle of some mountain that only learned WWII was happening when some germans came by to make sure there really was a village there and stole a few chickens before fucking off.There were pussywhipped, timid guys and there were guys who beat their wives and kids. There were prudent tame women and women who got drunk and loud or fucked around and were the centre of gossip. Women worked the fields just like everybody else and arranged marriages were forced on both sexes. There was no separation. There was no such concept as unladylike. Feminism wasn't necessary in a time with no institutional and social repression.
>>17414936usually feminist propaganda is about either the extreme upper class in any point in history, or western civilization after the industrial revolution. aside from clearly insane and discredited thoughts that men conspired to help each other and put down women as much as possible, there are more credible ideas in feminism, but OP didn't really mention anything. It's hard to describe feminism outside of its time period anyways.
>>17414936>This is gonna sound like some prog bullshit but people literally didn't have the strict sex rolesUhh, yeah, thats because it is progressive bullshit.Your brain on works on binary extremes of -pseudo islam or feminism. Feminism didn't start until the 20th century and only reached its modern form in the 1970s. "Feminism" literally didn't exist prior to the 20th century. Without government intervention women do women things and men do men things. The birthrate plunged everywhere feminism was introduced, that includes Japan. A direct correlation.>There was no such concept as unladylikeYeah, you're completely full of shit anon.
>>17415049>The birthrate plunged everywhere feminism was introduced, that includes Japan. A direct correlation.Or, you know, they both originated in reaction to the same material conditions?
>>17414952>It's hard to describe feminism outside of its time period anyways.It's no different than USSR theoreticians claiming that stone age people were secretly marxists.
>>17415058>Or, you know, they both originated in reaction to the same material conditions?Or, you know, the only condition was in the introduction of feminism from America...
>>17415064What about, you know, industrialization and the introduction of the Pill?
>>17415068>industrializationCan't be that. Japan was already heavily developed.>introduction of the Pill?That's feminism anon...
>>17415068Also you will never be a women anon.
>>17415078You think technological progress is feminism? The Pill was discovered by scientists, not feminist activists.
>>17415097>You think technological progress is feminism? The Pill was discovered by scientists, not feminist activists.Lol, holy shit you're stupid.According to you -" Hitler gassing the Jews wasn't Nazism because hydrogen cyanide wasn't discovered by a NAZI! it was discovered by Carl Wilhelm Scheele in the 18th century!""In 1951, reproductive physiologist Gregory Pincus, a leader in hormone research and co-founder of the Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology (WFEB) in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts, first met American birth control movement founder Margaret Sanger at a Manhattan dinner hosted by Abraham Stone, medical director and vice president of Planned Parenthood (PPFA), who helped Pincus obtain a small grant from PPFA to begin hormonal contraceptive research.""Sanger remains a prominent figure in the American reproductive rights and feminist movements."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_oral_contraceptive_pill#Historyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sangerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Wilhelm_Scheele
>>17415114And you think someone wouldn't have discovered it eventually without that explicit motivation? After all, the discoverers of hydrogen cyanide were, as you pointed out, not Nazis.
>>17415127>And you think someone wouldn't have discovered it eventually without that explicit motivation?Lol, "There's nothing wrong with ChrisChan raping his mother because someone else would have raped his mother anyway"."Another feminist called Margaret Sandler would have provided funding for scientists to develop the pill and then promote it as female empowerment!">>17415127>After all, the discoverers of hydrogen cyanide were, as you pointed out, not Nazis.Lol, so you think Hitler gassing the Jews wasn't NAZISM because he didn't invent hydrogen cyanide haha. You're so stupid.
>>17415127Are you mentally disabled OP?
>>17415144Are you saying you object to the existence of birth control itself or how it's currently used?
>>17415155Are you saying that Gassing Jews wasn't Nazism because NASZIS didn't invent hydrogen cyanide?Because it's a technology, right?If I shoot you with a gun it isn't murder because I didn't invent the gun right?
>>17415157I'm saying that technology can be used in the service of ideology but tools themselves are neutral. Hydrogen cyanide has other uses than gassing Jews.
>>17415155Feminists are well known for hating birth control right?Birth control is well known for increasing birth rates right?Are you a genius anon?Are you a heterosexual woman anon?Are you "neurotypical" anon?
>>17415166Answer the fucking question.
>>17415160>I'm saying that technology can be used in the service of ideologyNo, you explicitly said the opposite.>>17415097>You think technological progress is feminism? The Pill was discovered by scientists, not feminist activists.>>17415160>but tools themselves are neutral. Hydrogen cyanide has other uses than gassing Jews.Oh yeah!! birth control pills are like vitamin snacks you see!!! and you can use them to flavor orange juice!!! Birth control pills make kids grow tall!!! Birth control pills can treat depression and when you bury them in the ground grass grows better!!!Wow, You can even use birth control pills to increase the chances of women getting pregnant!! So the birth control pill is actually the anti-birth-control pill !!!>>17415168>Answer the fucking question.I don't appreciate your micro-aggressions anon. Stop being heterophobic okay?This is your first warning.
>>17415202Are you saying you object to the concept of contraception carte blanche, even in cases such as a couple who already has several children and can't afford another?
>>17415215Are you saying you want Africans to stop having children because you hate Africans?
>>17415219Certainly not. I think people should have children if and when they are able and willing to raise them.
>>17412363It's the woman. She was give power to rule the nations.... Until now.
>>17415222Ok, so you are going to force millions of Africans to take contraceptives when you decide they don't meet your requirements for having children.
>>17415230When did I say that?
>>17415225>It's the woman. She was give power to rule the nations.... Until now.What the fuck does that even mean transsexual anon lol.
>>17415237>When did I say that?Here V>>17415222>I think people should have children if and when they are able and willing to raise them.
>>17415243And when did I say I thought myself capable of judging their ability better than they are?
>>17415245Here >>17415222>I think people should have children if and when they are able and willing to raise them.
>>17415253You have not quoted me saying I think I can judge people's ability to raise them better than they can. Indeed, the default assumption is that I can't.
>>17415240Sam's Whore.
>>17415260Right, so your opinions on contraception should be disregarded completely because you don't know anything about what is required to raise children. You can't judge anything. You don't know what you're talking about.
>>17415282Do you object to people who don't feel they're able or willing choosing not to have children?
>>17415284Do you object to Africans and Jews being born?
>>17415290A, no, why would I? B, answer the question.
>>17415292Right, so you object to Africans and Jews being born.
>>17415296I just said I don't. Answer my question.
>>17412408>I accept your concession.Stopped reading here.
>>17415297So you object to Africans and Jews being born. So you want to control the exploding African population? The fastest growing population in the world?Interesting.
>>17415303I want to let individual Africans choose how many children to have, since generally the couple themselves knows best in that regard.
>>17415306Do you educate Africans about birth control to stop them from having kids Transsexual anon? Are You scared of Africans becoming too numerous?
>>17415307I think it would be bad if the population grows too fast for their agriculture to feed, because that would result in people starving to death.
>>17415313Why would you allow them to starve to death?Why won't you provide them with food?Sounds pretty bigoted really.
>>17415315No one wants to intentionally let anyone starve to death, but sometimes production and logistics of transportation are limited.
>>17412425This is not /pol/ you dementia patient
>>17415325>No one wants to intentionally let anyone starve to deathOk, so Africans will never starve no matter what because you will feed them for us. Thanks anon.>but sometimes production and logistics of transportation are limited.So you will allow Africans to starve to death if the logistics/economics are inconvenient to you.Never knew you were a cold calculating capitalist transsexual anon.
>>17415325Are you mentally disabled anon?
>>17415313Why do you hate Africans anon.
>>17412288When were you first diagnosed with autism anon?
Humanity is such a gay species. It'd be cool if we had extreme sexual dimorphism like gorillas instead.
>>17415464>gay androgynous autistic anon thinks he's humanity...
>>17415514Wrong, faggot. I'm more Gorilla-like than you are in appearance and mannerisms. I'm speaking holistically.
>>17415519No, you're an effeminate femboy gay bottom that whishes they were a "top".
>Literal hoe who rose to power of the x party who wiped husbands if their wives cheated on them, leading to the decay of the nuclear family while imported foreigners as distractions of the y party, replacements, & cheap labor which paved the way for the Arab conquestAs good as it gets, baby.
>>17415763>nuclear family
>>17415770>>17415763Yakub the black astronaut discovered atom bombs in 25,000 BC.
