Re: Patriarchy: Re: What Matriarchy?
10 Sep 1996 14:34:54 GMT
email@example.com (Karl Kluge) wrote:
>, Susan <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Look at homosexuality. If it turns out that there is a biological
> >component to it, that will make it much more acceptable for some people,
> >who would otherwise condemn it if it seen as a "lifestyle choice."
> >"Well, they had no choice." Do you really find it far-fetched to think
> >that at least some people will buy the same argument about rape?
> Unlike homosexuality, rapists pose a threat to the community (a serial
> rapist has been attacking women in my neighborhood in the student ghetto
> for over a month, now, so the issue's on my mind). Threats to the
> community, and people who seriously harm others, cannot be forgiven or
> let to roam free based on their "urges."
>Not to mention that the comparison of homosexuals with rapists was
I apologize, you're right-- I didn't mean to compare the two, only to
compare people's reaction to a biological attribution of the two. My
point was that many people assume that something which is "biologically
based" automatically means that it is both inevitable, and that it is bad
for you to go against it. I think many people would see the same
argument applying in both cases.
I cetainly did not mean to imply any connection between these two groups
other than that, and I'm sorry if it was somehow implied in what I said.
"Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps."
-- Emo Phillips