Sep 2, 2022·edited Sep 2, 2022Liked by Classical Wisdom
Hi, I like the information about Artemis’ mythology, but I don’t think she’s a “feminist icon” at all and tells me more about the writer’s own views and interpretations than it does about her “influence”. This is evidenced by the fact the writer thinks there was a “feminist” movement in the early 20th century (there wasn’t until the 70s, and there were/are many problems with the movement/ideology, but that’s a story for another day) and the fact she doesn’t seem to know the difference between the suffragist and suffragette movement: the former was a movement including both men and women to get both women AND working-class men the vote in the UK, the latter was a counterproductive “movement” that didn’t achieve anything, much like BLM and Antifa today. The fact that history books focuses mostly on the suffragettes thing is one the great errors and misconceptions of history, no doubt helped by “feminists” who aren’t above trying to change history to suit their ends.
Anyway, I’m going on a tangent but the point is one of the reasons I read this newsletter is to get away from this kind of cliched, subjective writing and expected better from it. This is exactly the kind of PC stuff it’s supposed to be against but obviously not. And as a final note, these new lunar missions are not “historic” as it’s just copying what they already did 50 years ago and still think the name is silly. Perhaps they should have a program where they send men to Mars and women to Venus instead, at least that would be fitting.
I still like CW, but would prefer more mythology-based writing that doesn’t attempt to fit it in a modern context where there isn’t one, thanks.
Hi Claudio - yes, we have a WIDE range of writers who certainly come from all angles/spectrums. I think you make some excellent points and there is a lot to be said about the different 'feminist' movements. I would agree some have been 'actually' progressive and others retrogressive (though perhaps thats fitting for an entirely different and independent article). As for historic, one could contend that just because it's been done before, doesn't mean it's historic. simply that it's an important moment. But please expand on why you think the name is silly?
I don’t mind writers with different views, but I’d like it to be more fact-based than what is clearly just the writer’s own subjective thinking. I agree that feminism may have done some good things for women, but it’s done some bad things for men too and don’t know why it still exists as it became pointless a long time ago.
It might be important, but you know that the next moon landing is going to be wildly overhyped as they’re planning to land one or more women on the moon this time, clearly a big part of the reason why they called it Artemis and one of the reasons I think it’s silly. Another reason is that the name of the mythological Artemis has nothing to do with these missions, unlike Apollo, apart from being related to him. Although perhaps I’m wrong and the name has something to do with “hunting” the moon or something.
Hi, I like the information about Artemis’ mythology, but I don’t think she’s a “feminist icon” at all and tells me more about the writer’s own views and interpretations than it does about her “influence”. This is evidenced by the fact the writer thinks there was a “feminist” movement in the early 20th century (there wasn’t until the 70s, and there were/are many problems with the movement/ideology, but that’s a story for another day) and the fact she doesn’t seem to know the difference between the suffragist and suffragette movement: the former was a movement including both men and women to get both women AND working-class men the vote in the UK, the latter was a counterproductive “movement” that didn’t achieve anything, much like BLM and Antifa today. The fact that history books focuses mostly on the suffragettes thing is one the great errors and misconceptions of history, no doubt helped by “feminists” who aren’t above trying to change history to suit their ends.
Anyway, I’m going on a tangent but the point is one of the reasons I read this newsletter is to get away from this kind of cliched, subjective writing and expected better from it. This is exactly the kind of PC stuff it’s supposed to be against but obviously not. And as a final note, these new lunar missions are not “historic” as it’s just copying what they already did 50 years ago and still think the name is silly. Perhaps they should have a program where they send men to Mars and women to Venus instead, at least that would be fitting.
I still like CW, but would prefer more mythology-based writing that doesn’t attempt to fit it in a modern context where there isn’t one, thanks.
Hi Claudio - yes, we have a WIDE range of writers who certainly come from all angles/spectrums. I think you make some excellent points and there is a lot to be said about the different 'feminist' movements. I would agree some have been 'actually' progressive and others retrogressive (though perhaps thats fitting for an entirely different and independent article). As for historic, one could contend that just because it's been done before, doesn't mean it's historic. simply that it's an important moment. But please expand on why you think the name is silly?
I don’t mind writers with different views, but I’d like it to be more fact-based than what is clearly just the writer’s own subjective thinking. I agree that feminism may have done some good things for women, but it’s done some bad things for men too and don’t know why it still exists as it became pointless a long time ago.
It might be important, but you know that the next moon landing is going to be wildly overhyped as they’re planning to land one or more women on the moon this time, clearly a big part of the reason why they called it Artemis and one of the reasons I think it’s silly. Another reason is that the name of the mythological Artemis has nothing to do with these missions, unlike Apollo, apart from being related to him. Although perhaps I’m wrong and the name has something to do with “hunting” the moon or something.