Notoc

Yes, dear child, since women are rational creatures, they can be held accountable for their actions. That is what I said. You are the one denying that women may be held accountable — and yet at the same time trying to hold them accountable. Only one of us has a coherent position. And Aristotle says that all human beings are rational, by nature, but not typically very good at it. There is neither a contradiction here nor any kind of special marking out of women. Human beings possess, by nature, the power of reason, λόγος. In actual human beings, most human beings are bad at reasoning. You are bad it, for example, since you are both denying that women have moral agency and yet want to held them accountable for their moral actions. You are bad at reasoning at reasoning because you think you have discovered a "special exception" for women in my previous post, which does not exist. You are bad at reasoning because you think it is "funny" for me to "give women credit" using Aristotle, when I am saying the same thing that Aristotle did. There is clearly nothing contradictory with giving women the same credit Aristotle does ... within Aristotle's framework. You have failed the very basics of reading comprehension. Even your original response was a failure of reasoning, showing again, that you are bad at it: You argued that "because women often behave irrationally as human beings, they cannot be said to be rational according to their nature." But that is false, and the opposite of what Aristotle says and what I explained to you: nothing about having a rational NATURE makes one skilled at reasoning, no more than being a MORAL AGENT by nature, one who deliberates and choses and acts according to good and evil, makes one VIRTUOUS. Do you understand this basic truth? Being rational beings doesn't mean people are good at reasoning, only that it defines their nature. Even fools and idiots think and reason (if badly). Animals do not. Being moral agents doesn't mean all people are virtuous, only that moral choice defines their existence. Even villains and reprobates make moral choices (badly). Animals do not. You have said something manifestly foolish every time you have engaged me so far. I would take the L and quit if I were you.

Fortunately, women are rational creatures, not rabid animals, and can be morally expected not to murder someone to get them out of her way.

It isn't that confidence or tallness are, in themselves, traits that women find sexy. The truth is that their absence often causes a man's entire psyche to warp around this lack, like a sucking black hole. And that malformation of the mind is decidedly unsexy.