In which women have too many positive role models; and are only permitted to exist in positions of authority be being judges, teachers, doctors, and CEOs. 

The object and its opposite living in a whole. Or three objects describing the famous Borromean knot. The exclusions sustaining the explicit contradictions. And all this embodied in the toilet bowl!

In which the answer to the question has no relation to the question being asked because the question is unsatisfactory.

Should the answer to this question characterise the power dynamic between the asker and the asked? Leave or I take an early Witgenstien view that language is a means to describe the world. Remain or I take a late Witgenstien view that the bulk of language is performative and game-like. I really should go home after this pint.

In which all discourse between the UK government and its population takes the form of an exam.

Do you conform to the doctrine of being different? To what? That which everything is not. Rebelliously ignoring the law of the excluded middle. The last words of the sentence are vulgarised faeces*.

*shit.

In which itself and its opposite mean the same thing.

How are we to reconcile Ricky Gervais’ comment that “the men are the children, the women the adults” with Kant’s that all women live in a state of “self-imposed nonage”.

Each appears sexist yet they are each other’s complement. Each sentence should further the aim of the paragraph. But these are unruly sentences and paragraphs are passé.

In which I have the realisation that meta-argumentative analysis is applicable in all contexts.

Irony is just a first order dialectic. A dialectic for babies.

Obviously I don’t care about other people, I’m just worried about my own wrong ideas. But, if I’m completely dishonest, my feelings about these wrong ideas are not ambiguous. Oh you wrong ideas. You darlings!

In which women are denied the radical freedom of inherent self worth not derived from a position of power, success, influence or authority. Available even in destitution and failure. Jesus the ultimate loser. Terrorists the fake losers. Loser winner, winner loser.

The only original idea: that gender being a ‘social construct’ makes it harder to overcome than any natural limitations imposed by mere biology. It took a hundred years to overcome the speed limit imposed by mere biology. It will take eternity to end the use of men running as propaganda instrument. Eliot’s perceptive line:

“It was as if a woman’s ignorance was of a lower quality than a man’s.”

Is there a difference between no apples and no oranges? Yes, because no oranges in a box means there might be apples there. A description of a description. A false description in one sense, a declaration in another.

Those acts which are permitted by the two exclusions ‘don’t be evil’ and ‘don’t be good’. As close as evil to possible without entering that morality space.

In which we fight the battle for the origin myth.

It is important to remember that the state of nature is not a real object to be inspected but a performative one to be created. The argument over the qualities of the real object is entirely synthetic. Like an artist’s impression of the prevalent description of cosmological origin in an ironised tabloid science article. Presenting its claim to higher understanding as a modest lack of understanding.

A series of unrelated thoughts bungled on to the page.

In which we pretend to believe in some set of minds with lower instrumental and epistemic rationality to our own. The other readers. Dear everyone other than reader.

As if reason didn’t act on axioms to be chosen by whim. Euclid’s fifth postulate was thrown away by whim. And this they called genius.

In which I show a selfish concern for my own mind above other’s bodies damaged and degraded by Hollywood’s film industry practices.

Searching around my brain for all the little structures erected by Harvey Weinstein. Erected to sustain a particular form of zero. Erected by pathetic fallacy. The stage contains more information than the play on it. The space-space-time cube containing the producer’s work. I once had my wages to drive some props around London haggled down by a producer and have distrusted them ever since.

In which we see the last humanities department.

In which academic text books are the seat of propaganda.

In which satire is the instrument of the powerful.

In which I didn’t notice the inversion.

In which I fail to imagine a female in permanent adolescence.

In which technology alters language.

In which we disobey Steven Pinker’s request to omit unnecessary words.

In which we only include unnecessary words since necessary words are implicit.

Only include superfluous words.

Hypersuperfluousity.

I, malevolent.

In which the category wife sustains the category prostitute (Engels).

In which the guilt sustains the lust.

In which categories both describe and cause (Peter Hitchens).

In which the world is a yes or no question.

In which it all appears as one whole wrongness.

In which the world is turned upfide down.