3 ms·

So what? Plenty of women write from their perspective, which could be taken as misandry. There's something to learn by putting yourself in someone's shoes, an

• danans 6y ago
  > Plenty of women write from their perspective, which could be taken as misandry. Women writing from their perspective != misandry any more than men writing from their perspective is misogyny. Those words have specific definitions that you are abusing to make a false equivalency. And what's wrong with calling out historical misogyny when it is presented as wisdom? That's not to say Schopenhauer has nothing useful to offer, but his misogyny isn't one of those things. It's no different from calling out racism in a similar historical context - like acknowledging that Winston Churchill was a great statesman and also simultaneously a very racist person. Schopenhauer's misogynistic perspective has long been the default of much of society, so it doesn't need to be treated with kid gloves. > seeing from their perspective (e.g. the current protests, and Black Lives Matter). 18th century misogyny doesn't deserve the same hearing out as BLM protests against contemporary police brutality. That logic would also excuse the presentation of 18th century racism as a valid perspective today.