I really don’t understand why we don’t just state the obvious, that the female mind of reproductive necessity biases heavily to that which she can control: infatilism. And this is why women take such great fascination with babies, and prefer their children are born with properties that make them pliable and their ‘friends’ rather successful competitors. Because women must be strong and possess agency to raise those who are strong and with agency. And women who are weak an lack agency wish children who they can control despite their weakness and agency.
Abrahamism, Marxism, Feminism, Postmodernism: they advocate infantilism.
Because their followers have infantile minds.
And I suspect that like everything else, that’s because in 80% of cases they have infantile brains.
And that during the great transformation, buddha came close, but only Epicurious, Zeno and Aristotle got it right.
Meaning, living in correspondence with reality without submitting to it, by making the mind as strong as the body, ether by Achilles/Alexander(aristocracy), Zeno/Aurelius (Middle class), or Epicurious (Working Class), but never by abandoning reality to a fictionalism (underclass).
These are adulthoods. Agency. Whether for the powerful, the influential (middle class), or the valuable (Working Class).
And just as we can train people in reading, writing, math, accounting, and physics – we can train people in stoicism, epicureanism, and heroism.
But that is counter to the infantile: because all of them require agency, and the infantile is still an undomesticated animal, neither genetically able, nor sufficiently trained, to be included in that label of sentience and agency we call ‘Human’.
The infantile, is equal to, the animal.