Jim

Simon Paynton wrote:
Complete egalitarianism gives women freedom from patriarchy too, for the same reasons (mobility, independence from individuals, lack of power structures, etc.), and since men aren’t competing, there’s no need for patriarchy anyway.  These days, since patriarchy has returned with the dawn of “civilisation”, inequali…

[Read more]

So the gist of the, what should be an utterly non-controversial statement in a non crazy universe is:

Women being raped is a problem, it is not a small problem, this shouldn’t happen, we can all do our part to stop it.

But I am Yet to read a person agreeing rape is a problem, not a small problem, that we should do what we can to stop it (except…[Read more]

Gigantopithecus was a much more recent one, that presumably was not part of the lineage that self-domesticated and became egalitarian: not “one of us”.

TheEncogitationer wrote:
Nacholapithicus

Yes, he was very fierce.

Simon,

“Nacholapithicus”? Were they the predecessors adept at using the “Quest for Fire” to make tortilla chips topped with spicy meat, refried beans, jalapeño peppers, green onions, salsa, and melted cheese?
😉😁

I’ll salute them with a burrito next time I “Make A Run for the Border!”™. 😋😁

Unseen wrote:
I think, as a general rule in nature, animals that work cooperatively in groups are either matriarchies or patriarchies, are they not?

Social animals nearly always live in some kind of dominance hierarchy, it’s true.  Ants and bees I’m not so sure.  They’re a special case of everything, socially.

Why should humans be any d…

[Read more]

@Jakelafort – That line was in Chaucer.

🙂 from me before 8 AM……...choice or reason 🙂

Unseen wrote:
@ Simon I think, as a general rule in nature, animals that work cooperatively in groups are either matriarchies or patriarchies, are they not? Wolves, chimpanzees, hyenas…even bees and termites. Why should humans be any different? Seems like these are patterns species fall into naturally. What is unnatural is trying to reason it a…

[Read more]

Here is what i wrote.

On the other hand if you use the word to denote the actual departure from ideological thinking or patterns of thought that analyze all ideas with greater or lesser objectivity then i am cool with it. Those with patterns of thought that are closer to objectivity in evaluating even beloved ideas or beliefs are freethinkers.

@ Jake

The “free” in “free will” is different from the “free” in “free thinker.” A free thinker is someone who thinks outside the majority echo chamber, not someone who thinks free of the workings of his/her nervous system.

That line was in Chaucer.

Great article Reg.

I know or knew part of Paglia’s family. When my family moved into the ‘new street’in an affluent town in MA the Paglia’s were the first to knock on the door and make us feel welcome. I hung out with one of the boys and later went out once and should have been more with one of the girls. Nice family.…[Read more]

@ Simon

I think, as a general rule in nature, animals that work cooperatively in groups are either matriarchies or patriarchies, are they not?

Wolves, chimpanzees, hyenas…even bees and termites.

Why should humans be any different?

Seems like these are patterns species fall into naturally. What is unnatural is trying to reason it away.

I like Camille Paglia.

I would have some respect for her academic work. However when Sinead O’Connor tore up the picture of the Pope on Saturday Night Live in the early 1990’s she commented that the abuse O’Connor suffered was justified.  Very weird for a feminist and professed atheist to side with the Catholic Church.

_Robert_ wrote:
You can’t have it both ways.

I can see your point – “double standards” works both ways.

However, there’s no getting away from biology.  All organisms experience a pressure to reproduce.  Bateman’s Principle states that while females’ reproductive success depends on resources, males’ reproductive success depends on access to fem…[Read more]

You can’t have it both ways. Equal pay for equal work, but women are still expecting a man to earn more. You can’t exclusively have males getting slaughtered in foxholes and declare we have egalitarianism. Why are men still expected men to carry the burden of courtship? To be the rejected ones. Are women really attracted to their equals or do they…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
If I were to take the position that “There is no such thing as patriarchy in a democracy” as long as women are free to participate in the process, what could you offer as proof I’m wrong?

I could offer the argument that patriarchy isn’t voted in or out.  It’s a cultural phenomenon.  It has to be defeated by cultural means, not dem…[Read more]

@jakelafort – It’s still before 8 AM here so have I a choice or reason to ever think all that glitters is gold?

From Nancy…Just say no.

From Catholics…Mary says yes

So i suppose that would be characterized as fostering rape culture.

The Catholic Church ought to be taxed out of existence for crimes against humanity. That it still has so much influence is amazing. If the Church be corrupt in whom the masses trust no wonder that a common man rust. You…[Read more]

@ Simon

If I were to take the position that “There is no such thing as patriarchy in a democracy” as long as women are free to participate in the process, what could you offer as proof I’m wrong?

Maybe societies simply naturally settle into patriarchy, if matriarchy worked on a large scale, there would be working examples, wouldn’t there?

Have…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:

Unseen wrote:
Simon Paynton wrote: But which ever way you look at it, it’s very common, and much more common for women than for men.

Outside prison.

A little victim blaming going on there? Rape is rape, after all.