Robert Snower (rs219@IDIR.NET)
Fri, 31 May 1996 21:44:15 -0500

At 08:42 PM 5/31/96 -0400, Cynstrong wrote:
>I have a question. Why do you say "biology" has thrust the role of devoting
>most of her energies to bearing and raising children? Isn't somewhat our
>culture that has thrust the majority of these "jobs" on women?

Sociobiology, following Darwin, says that, since the female can have only a
few children, and the male can have an almost unlimited number, behavior has
evolved. and prevails, as a biological imperative, which involves investing,
by the female, a great amount of time and energy on each child, and
investing, by the male, very little time and energy per child. This isn't
the way it has to be, but it is the way we are by nature; not necessarily by
culture. It is why men and women feel and play out sex roles quite
differently, mirroring exactly the same differences to be found in all animals.

Also, why are their only two roles for women? Is this an either or prospect?
> Why must we think in such binary terms all the time?

This seems to me to be a purely logical matter. Logic, like computers, is
binary. Either a woman spends most of her time and energy bearing and
raising children, or she doesn"t.

>Additionally, when you talk about "sex roles" wouldn't it be better to refer
>to them as gender roles? That way you include not just two roles but many
>other roles that are played out by many other people.

I do not understand. Are there more than two genders?
>I new to this and hope that I have sent this message to the correct place?
Welcome. R. Snower