Martin Luther On Foolishness
Martin Luther (the German Protestant, not the Black American leader) was quite an interesting figure in the history of the Church. He started his life as a monk, but later 'protested' against Rome, and got married to an ex-nun, Catherine.
No wonder then that this rhyme (in German) is often attributed to him :
He who does not know Wine, Women and Song
Remains a fool his whole life long.
What I am curious about though is what Luther would have written if he had been a woman.
She who does not know X, Y, and Z
Remains a fool her whole life long.
What would X,Y and Z stand for in this case?
posted by The Transparent Ironist @ 9:30 pm
8 Comments:
At 27.4.05,
The Transparent Ironist said…
Oh my God! I dread to think how many women will --- on your reply --- remain fools their whole lives long.
At 27.4.05,
Anonymous said…
She who does not know Men, Women, and their mutual song (if the songs will pardon me for this effrontery)
Remains a fool her whole life long.
At 27.4.05,
The Transparent Ironist said…
Ahem. But here is a dissenting voice for you. In her article 'A Framework for Feminist Ethics' from Lois K. Daly edited "Feminist Theological Ethics" (Lousiville : Kentucky, 1994), Carol S. Robb writes : 'As long as the majority of adult women allow themselves to be linked in intimate and emotionally sustaining relationships primarily with men, it will be difficult for us [women] to engage in a long-term struggle to destroy male supremacy.' (The quote is from p.20)
At 27.4.05,
Anonymous said…
Woman is a born philosopher, she is a feminist psychologist by nature, she is wise because she is a woman as Wisdom is the essence of Womankind.
Oh my FEMALE GOD! Enlighten the mankind.
At 27.4.05,
The Transparent Ironist said…
Indeed! My only worry in this connection is whether I will be forced by my enlightenment to give up my brooding masculine habit of studying books under candle-light.
At 27.4.05,
Anonymous said…
Curious about why candle-light reading is a male thing?
At 27.4.05,
Anonymous said…
'As long as the majority of adult women allow themselves to be linked in intimate and emotionally sustaining relationships primarily with men, it will be difficult for us [women] to engage in a long-term struggle to destroy male supremacy.'....
I agree with this if the word 'primarily' be highlighted.
However, I should be able to explain my answer to your question in the post better if the word 'primarily' be ignored for the moment. As I see it, the whole issue (or rather phenomenon) of male supremcay and more importantly that of the 'struggle' against such supremacy arises because women do not 'know' this mutual song. Indulging is one thing, knowing it is another. While many indulge, few come to know (only because not many want to know). So although indulgence does not necessisate knowing, the former is the essential first step towards the latter. And once she knows this song then the whole concept of 'struggle' disappears, no Y-chromosomer can dominate her and that comes about very naturally. And she will never dominate a man (yes, this too happens, less visible, very subtle, but it happens). This holds true for men too - a man who knows (which is not to be synonymated with who has sung) this song will not dominate any woman.
So I shall revise my answer:
Men and Women who do not KNOW/UNDERSTAND Men, Women, and their mutual song
Remain fools their whole life long.
At 27.4.05,
The Transparent Ironist said…
Amen!
Post a Comment
<< Home