Re: Patriarchy: Re: What Matriarchy?
Mary Beth Williams (mbwillia@ix.netcom.com(Mary)
10 Sep 1996 11:42:37 GMT
In <511gjf$p4q@argo.unm.edu> mycol1@unm.edu (Bryant) writes:
>
>In article <510rn3$hmd@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
>Mary Beth Williams <mbwillia@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>stephen said:
>>>Another flippant reply that mocks Bryant. How do you think an
ethical
>>>man feels when someone accuses him of sanctioning rape?
>mb replied:
>>Perhaps similar to how an *ethical* anthropoligist feels about being
>>accused of supporting sociobiology?
>
>It now seems evident that Mary Beth misread a critical part of the
>earlier thread. Nobody has suggested that she or other marxist,
>postmodernist anthropologists have come around to support evolutionary
>views of human behavior.
Bryant, now be careful <g>... Sociobiological and evolutionary
(selectionist) frameworks are not at all one and the same... Just ask a
guru of the latter, Dave Rindos (whom I count among my friends, even if
he is *misguided* <g>). Or check out Dunnell. Even at UNM, known for
its emphasis on selectionism, few anthropologists would accept the
extremes of sociobiology (certainly my conversations with Ann
Ramenofsky and Jane Buikstra (though not a selectionist herself) would
lead me to that conclusion.)
As I work with a number of *hard-core* scientist types (including
Buikstra) who do not see my theoretical framework as antithetical to
their own, the respresentation of evolution (data) and Marxist theory
(framework) as being incompatible is really mixing oranges and
bicycles.
Cheers,
MB Williams
Dept. of Anthro., UMass-Amherst
|