>>11817571 /pb

>No mortal has figured out women.

I disagree. It's simple really, but even women have a problem figuring themselves out. The basic gist is that the feminine essence is a motif on yin/emptiness/context but all of the attempts to describe the essence of women come up short because they try to describe some essential content or thing you can point at.

There is a similar situation in the half-full/half-empty glass idea between optimism and pessimism. Say you have a glass of water and an empty glass. What is the latter? Just an EMPTY glass OR a complete GLASS itself. Don't miss the forest for the trees. That's not only the essential aspect of understanding women, but also of understanding the feminine in men.

>>11820655

>children control women, women control men, men strive to keep Humanity alive

it's a two sided coin. individuals get fucked…species/evolution wins.

humanity gives children purpose, children give women purpose, women give men purpose

>>11819754 /lb

>The (rejected) 2001 Monolith is on display by Tower Bridge

The stone the builders rejected…

>>11820745

Yours is kind of a feminist rant. Women CAN do these things, but they are not indicative of the feminine. Men can raise kids with or without a mother too, or is that too offensive of a statement? Men and women have both masculine and feminine qualities, but nature and nurture drive strengths in specialization in one or the other…across all sexual species. There are crossovers and outliers, but the generalization holds and always reverts to the mean despite temporal dislocations.

I'd have to disagree with the concept that there are "awesome liberal women". At this point, while I think it's fine to be more open to change and advancement of society, I think there are some fixed givens are that non-negotiables. And if at this point, these "awesome liberal women" still haven't woken up but still voted for Biden, then there is nothing awesome about them, IMHO.