Anti sissy hypnosis

Men can do work better than women. I cant respect someone if there is a copy of them that is stronger and more smarter than them. If you had a male scientist and a female scientist the male scientist would be better since he can make choices logically and not emotionally

You wouldn't make this thread if you wanted to be confident.
You want someone to tell you you're weak. You want to feel anxious. You want to feel helpless. You want to be crippled by your emotions. And you want to masturbate.
If you wanted to stop being a sissy, you'd change the above. You have not changed the above. You want to be like this.

that's what equal access to education is meant to resolve

Just out of curiosity, how old are you? Please don't say over 20.

Just apply the methodology of "Critical Theory" to everything they assign you.

>Explicitly reject the principle of intellectual charity
>Exert great effort to intentionally find the worst possible interpretation of every claim and every argument offered
>Explicitly reject any claim by the writer or speaker that they get to declare what their intention was or what their meaning was
>Assume comprehensive bad faith on the part of the writer or speaker and all of their defenders
>Explicitly assume that any and all arguments offered are attempts to use rhetorical trickery to oppress you

Just treat them the way they assert it is appropriate to treat white men. Easy peasy.

that's not what critical theory is supposed to be about, ideas are not popping up in a vacuum

That's exactly what Critical Theory is supposed to be about.

Or are you going to stand there and try to tell me that Critical Theory doesn't explicitly reject the principle of intellectual charity?

come on now
marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/help/finintro.htm#m078

Simply don't read the book and use sparknotes to pass the class
>marxists.org
Into the trash it goes

I'm simply refuting his misconception straight out of the horse's mouth

Lemme guess your "argument" is
>You described critical theory correctly but you didn't use Marxist meme terminology so it's actually wrong

misconceptions have nothing to do with terminology, your can use whichever word you please

Men still have the ability to think more logically than women, whereas women make decisions emotionally. If you are asking to change your very biological nature then that is impossible. Men will always be attracted to women no matter their view on them, and i take no shame in saying i find women attractive despite not seeing them as human

Thank you user, i appreciate it, finding a concrete answer on Dab Forums is a rarity

Hegel is not the theorist whose work is most relevant to the state of Critical Theory as practiced in the United States today.

I'm talking about Critical Theory as employed in Critical *Race* Theory, where the principle theorists are nearly all Americans, and nearly all work was published post-1985.

but this thread isn neither about race or america user

>NNNNOOOOO YOU SHOULD ONLY JUDGE WOMEN USING MY RETARDED METRICS
>WOMEN ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL IN THE SPIRITUAL ARTS, CRYSTAL HEALING AND WITCHCRAFT
>IT'S THE PATRIARCYS FAULT FOR NOT APPRECIATING THAT

Attached: 1588049390110.png (785x2000, 330.42K)

women were put to use as communist soldiers during the chinese civil war, which they won and where this quote is coming from

Logistical work, secretaries, nurses and cooks. Same thing in the Korean war. Of course it is true that women are good at being homemakers and their skills, if necessary, can be used for the good of the community. That doesn't mean they do well in actual combat or industry. Your negative fiscal impact on the economy should agree

Could you see yourself dating another man? There is so much love that you can experience

>people can't do well unless their entire demographic has the best average.
>all americans are a net negative on the economy

God damn it user you are based, keep being based.

>but this thread isn neither about race or america user

We don't know that OP is not in the United States.

If he is in the United States, it is virtually certain that any educator assigning him The House on Mango Street to read is doing so either as part of an explicit attempt to smuggle intersectional theory into a literature class, or as part of a broader curriculum that was selected by someone whose aims were involved by Critical Theory of the type I am describing.

>aims were involved

aims were informed, sorry.

Read it to get in their heads. When you're reading it, think WHY someone may have this perception of the world and WHY someone may be writing like this. In the same way a Jew may attempt to understand your nature better to get into your head so he can get you to pay more at the store.

in any case, actual critical theory would be infinitely more accurate for dealing with such nonsense

What fucking college class are you taking that's making you read feminist fiction novels

I'm getting a bachelor in arts and I'm only reading basic technical textbooks WHAT are you doing OP