From: "John T. Duryea" <jtduryea-AT-dmv.com>
Subject: Re: Nietzsche's meaning of Woman after Victorianism
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 22:19:35 -0500




>
>hi all :)
>
>Dan Dzenkowski wrote:
>
>> First the role of woman
>> during Nietzsche's time was very different.  I think people often fail to
>> put Nietzsche in a correct historical perspective.
>
>hmm not sure about one. Nietzsche was way ahead of his "historical
>perspective" on almost everything else. He completely demolished the value
>of christian morals. And yet, his writing on women looks like it is coming
>from another man.
>
>I like to think his thoughts on women come from the man who has rejected by
>Lou Andreas Salome, and not the brilliant "philosopher". Why not see him as
>a "man".
>
>am i being silly? maybe.
>
>kathryn
>*******************************************************************
>Out of the ash/ I rise with my red hair/ And I eat men like air.
>- Sylvia Plath "Lady Lazarus"


Nietzsche was totally correct about women as far as he went, he simply never
got as far as F. Scott Fitzgerald. Both had tremendous respect for women,
but FSF had a more powerful pysignomic insight into a woman's nature.

And yes, woman is closer to nature than man which in the long run makes her
the stronger. Most asuredly they are psychically much the stronger and
within the pair bond always wrest control. However, woman needs man, as
Stendhal put it, if they don't take a lover they become imbiciles.

John T. Duryea



	--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---