GENDER
DIVISIONS
1. The meditating man
is a subman, for his ego is subhuman, and thus
metaphysical. He is deeper than
man. For man is human-all-too-human in
his vegetative sinfulness, his physical knowledge (whether carnally or
intellectually), whereas the subman is a God, is 'God
the Son' in his airy gracefulness, his metaphysical truth (whether aurally or respiratorily).
2. There is nought deeper and higher than the subman, especially the meditating subman,
who meditates - transcendentally.
3. Imagine the term 'superman' being applied to
such a person - would it not be implausible to equate that most calm and
profound of states, centred in being, with anything 'super'?
4. For the prefix 'super' generally connotes
with something dynamic, imposing, quick, strong, proud, even brash and
slick. There is a suggestion, moreover,
of something if not exactly superficial then, at any rate, artificial and ...
large.
5. No, I can no longer conceive of the ne plus ultra of human
- and particularly male - maturation in terms of the 'super', much less
superman, à la Nietzsche. Only in terms of the subman,
who is as much beyond man, in his metaphysical subhumanism,
as the superman is behind him - that is to say, anterior as opposed to
posterior to man. And then as a creature
who is kind of at cross-purposes or loggerheads with his gender.
6. Now if it is more natural to be a man than a
superman, it is more supernatural to be a superwoman than a superman, to be superfeminine than supermasculine,
and thus properly of strength in the chemical phenomenality
of watery punishment.
7. If men are more usually masculine (and
knowledgeable) than supermasculine (and strong), then
women, by contrast, are more usually superfeminine
(and strong) than feminine (and knowledgeable).
8. For whereas the supermasculine approximates, in vegetative paradox, to the
supernatural (of which the superfeminine is per se), the
feminine approximates, in watery paradox, to the natural (of which the
masculine is per se). The strong
man is as much the male exception as ... the knowledgeable woman the female
exception. Generally men are
knowledgeable and women strong.
9. But not a few women,
more fiery than watery, are what may be called unfeminine, and hence beautiful
- the gender antithesis of that which, being submasculine,
is true, like the subman.
10. For if supernature and nature constitute a phenomenal, or worldly,
antithesis, as between water and vegetation, strength and knowledge, woman and
man, then unnature and subnature
constitute a noumenal, or supra-worldly, antithesis,
as between fire and air, beauty and truth, the Devil and God.
11. Now if the masculine is more genuinely natural
(and vegetative) than the feminine, and the superfeminine
more genuinely supernatural (and watery) than the supermasculine,
it can be argued that, where the noumenal options are
concerned, the unfeminine is more genuinely unnatural than the unmasculine, while, conversely, the submasculine
is more genuinely subnatural than the subfeminine, conceiving of the latter as the female
antithesis to the unmasculine.
12. In fact, so much more so would this be the
case ... that one might be forgiven for disposing, on all but an academic
basis, with notions of unmasculine and subfeminine, so that only the unfeminine and the submasculine were countenanced ... the better to do proper
justice to the absolutism (comparatively speaking) of the noumenal
planes of space and time, in contradistinction to the relativity, or greater
relativity, of the phenomenal planes of volume and mass, wherein man and woman,
the masculine and the superfeminine (in general
terms), have their worldly places.