Re: Patriarchy, evolution, etc.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Matthew Hill: "Re: Patriarchy, evolution, etc."
• Previous message: Ruby Rohrlich: "Re: The nature of definitions (was: Swyer's questions on Power)"

On Fri, 15 Mar 1996, Ruby Rohrlich wrote:

> Ronald: It is Peter Junger who defined a society ruled by old men as a
> patriarchy. He is apparently not familiar with the word "gerontocracy",
> but as his post reveals, his ignorance is equal to his arrogance.
> What he has got, though, is a big blustering mouth, a perfect example of
> the way cowards become bullies on this list.
> He attends a school that is notorious for its vile treatment of women.
> But he and his ilk are not really important.
> What is important is the fact that the newspaper printed your letter, and
> a couple of others like it. Congratulations, and I hope more of those
> appear. Best regards. Ruby
>

I never thought of a "gerontocracy" as gender specific. Does it have to be?
rh

• Next message: Matthew Hill: "Re: Patriarchy, evolution, etc."
• Previous message: Ruby Rohrlich: "Re: The nature of definitions (was: Swyer's questions on Power)"