Prior to reading this article, I never really thought of math to be this universal thing that could be applied over such a large horizon. I was knowledgable that, of course, everyone and everything could be eventually linked in some way or fashion to mathematics, but I was oblivious to how large of a spectrum it all really sits. Overlooking all of the sexist and biased opinions stated by Edwin A.Abott in this piece, he really opened my eyes to a different perspective of this thing called "math".
I thought the way Abott thought up this civilization of geometry was inovative and creative at the most. Reading a perspective of someone viewing something similar to this 3 dimensional world in which we live reduced to a compressed plane, two-sided and monotonic was rather interesting. However, whilst indulging into this "wonderland" of shapes and lines it was impossible to ignore the condescending tone towards women it gives off.
The sort of "caste system", if you will, is like an oppressive blueprint. Everything is set higher than the woman. SHe is at the very bottom of the barrel. Everything is full polygon and the woman is a mer line segment. I found it this to be offensive. I'm not to make a big fuss over it because I know how long ago this piece was written and I realize that, yes, at one point in time this world was a strong, collective patriarchal society, but just reading these remarks and being reminded of how backwards his opinion of women is is just repulsive.
Overall, I think of Flatland as yet another set of eyes to view math, inyeresting and intricate. However, I also view Flatland as a measuring rod to show how different the world was back then compared to how it is now and the positve enlightenment that has taken place since then.