I went ahead and read the article (pic related) on this debate in the 1500s about whether women are human.

It has it all: anon shitposters, feminists, equalist libtard simps, equalist professors, women literally getting away with murder, and a shitpost which was reprinted for nearly 200 years (your shitposts will never).

Here are some excerpts:

In early 1595 there appeared anonymously in central Germany... "Disputatio" [which] professed to be a satirical mimicry.

If some of the dissenters in Poland, the author contended, could believe on the basis of the Bible that Christ, the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit were not divine, he was free to conclude, also according to Scripture, that women were not human

During procreation, man was the causa efficiens; woman, merely the causa instrumentalis. If a smith forged a sword with the help of a hammer, the hammer remained his tool. It did not become a member of his body.

This headline was countered at once by Simon Gediccus (1551-1631) with a broadside entitled Defensio... He subtitled his Defensio a "refutation of the most trashy tract in which an anonymous jester assaults the human nature of the feminine sex."

In public pronouncements the professors warned their students and the young that the mere thought women were not human was poison to the mind, and Lutheran preachers denounced the Disputatio accordingly.

The publisher of the pamphlet, Heinrich Osthausen, was subpoened and testified that the manuscript had been sent to him by Valens Acidalius (1567-1595).

By 1639, the dispute had "passed from the schools into the conversations of the best companies" in Holland, where the physician John Beverovicius (1594-1647) wrote another Defensio sexus muliebris in which he 'verified by a thousand examples, that women were not inferior to men in any qualities, either of mind or body.'

But the exchange between Acidalius and Gediccus did not only stay in print for 174 years. It also was widely imitated and plagiarized.

An impudent student at the University of Cologne tried to repeat the arguments of the Disputatio before an audience of outraged mothers, who are supposed to have beaten him to death with the chairs on which they had been sitting. This cruel and unusual punishment was declared just and deserved by an expert on criminal court procedures professor Johann Harprecht

Adrian Baillet counted Acidalius in 1688 among the child prodigies of poetry and scholarship.

In spite of his intense devotion to his male friends..., Acidalius was not a misogynist.

What then prompted Acidalius to get involved with raising publicly the question whether women were human? It was the pestering of his publisher. Acidalius sent him a hand-written copy of the Disputatio, which had been circulating among his friends.

he was confronted with its leading question by the female attendants of a banquet. Acidalius disarmed the ladies who were waiting for an answer with their plates in both hands ready to break them over his head with the whisper that they were angels.

The threat of theological ostracism is supposed to have driven Acidalius into a state of frenzy (phrenesis) in which he committed suicide.

Late Humanist scholarship as a way of life which minimized women was evidently the cultural corridor through which the Disputatio passed from study to study, amusing the learned behind closed doors.

source: https://sci-hub.se/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539503

@augustus @MechaSilvio