Re: Evolution of Sexism
Bryant (mycol1@unm.edu)
11 Aug 1996 20:33:00 -0600
In article <4ultcn$o77@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Robert Snower <rs222@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>mycol1@unm.edu (Bryant) wrote:
>>In my opinion, we might profitably take an behavioral ecological
>>perspective, which involves not just viewing abusers in a social vacuum, but
>>also the environmental and inter-personal cues which trigger aggressive
>>instincts. I repeat: Men in no way should be relieved of the burden of
>>curbing their baser instincts; "I really wanted to" is no defense for
>>rape!!! (Or cuckoldry.)
>
>The last 2 sentences are OK. The first one sounds like garbage
>sociology.
Then let me rephrase it, as I am not a sociologist: Currently, most
feminists and psychologists seem to view abusive males as defective
personalities acting in a vacuum instead of responding to social
situations. I suggest that many abusers might actually be responding to
social situations (i.e., cues that trigger jealousy: a wife spending late
nights with another man), and that figuring out what those cues are might
benefit those who would reduce the incidence of domestic violence. Or
rape. Because, if we know what those cues are, women can avoid sending them.
>Now you are talking about something else entirely, namely domestic
>abuse. It has nothing really to do with rape. Another problem.
I disagree, but nevertheless, both are part of the problem of "male
coercion," are they not?
[...]
>of society. The initial stage was accomplished via matriarchy. The
>dominance of the female characterized early pre-historic culture, but
>later this changed to patriarchy, which still prevails.
There is no evidence I know of that matriarchy ever existed in humans.
This is one of Smuts' better points, I thought: that patriarchy outdates
humanity.
bryant
|