Re: Memes and sexuality

From: Aaron Lynch (aaron@mcs.net)
Date: Mon Jul 17 2000 - 19:45:28 BST

  • Next message: Bill Spight: "Re: Memes and sexuality"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA18290 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 17 Jul 2000 19:50:53 +0100
    Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20000717130443.021fd100@popmail.mcs.net>
    X-Sender: aaron@popmail.mcs.net
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
    Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:45:28 -0500
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    From: Aaron Lynch <aaron@mcs.net>
    Subject: Re: Memes and sexuality
    In-Reply-To: <39731605.F7B3705F@pacbell.net>
    References: <000001bfedb7$f067dd40$13281e8c@ultracom.net> <4.3.1.0.20000714113715.01eea1e0@popmail.mcs.net> <4.3.1.0.20000716080355.01fa0820@popmail.mcs.net>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    At 07:19 AM 7/17/00 -0700, Bill Spight wrote:
    >Dear Aaron,
    >
    > > The article by James Côté points out that Freeman was successful in
    > gulling
    > > many intelligent and famous people into believing his story about Margaret
    > > Mead being fooled by natives making up stories about their sex lives.
    > >
    >
    >What does Cote say about the video interviews with Mead's informants, in
    >which they say that they were having fun telling Mead about fictional
    >sexual encounters, which she obviously wanted to hear?
    >
    >Thanks,
    >
    >Bill

    Bill,

    Cote describes a late 1980s interview by Freeman with one supposed
    informant who claimed to have been part of a pair who hoaxed Margaret Mead
    back in 1926. Cote points out several things wrong with the way Freeman's
    interview was used. First, he says that the interviewee apparently does not
    correspond to anyone described in Mead's work, although Freeman presents
    this interviewee as a cornerstone of Mead's work. Second, he says that Mead
    had too many interviews for the whole thing to have been refuted by a
    single recantation, and that Freeman woefully misrepresents the extent of
    Mead's interviews. Third, he says that the person interviewed by Freeman
    contradicted herself in important ways when interviewed yet again. He also
    points out that this interviewee would have been elderly by the late 1980s,
    (Probably in her 80s by my reckoning.) The simple passage of over 60 years
    allows for forgetfulness, while her sheer age would be a risk factor for
    conditions that impair cognitive functioning.

    Numerous other misrepresentations of Mead's work are described in the
    article. Assuming that Cote did not get away with some kind of hoax on _The
    Skeptical Inquirer_, I would say that the professional thing for Freeman to
    do is to issue a long list of retractions and stop promoting his 1989-1998
    writings about Mead's work. However, as I have not studied either Mead or
    Freeman extensively, I am not the one to formally call on Freeman to change
    his ways--not that I am convinced he would respect such a call even a great
    authority on Mead's work. I do, however, recommend reading the whole
    article by Cote.

    At 07:08 AM 7/17/00 -0700, Bill Spight wrote:
    >Dear Aaron,
    >
    > > It seems to me that one of the key events in the development of sexual
    > > repression may have been the discovery some time in the past 100,000 years
    > > that sex causes pregnancy and childbirth.
    >
    >Timothy Taylor, in "The Prehistory of Sex" (Bantam, 1996), sees a link with
    >animal husbandry. "The essence of keeping a meat or dairy herd is not just
    >in the patterns of slaughter, but in controlling the ratios of the sexes
    >and their mating patterns. . . . The control of animal sexuality by men may
    >have had its analogue in control of the sexuality of human females" (p.
    >175). He also sees a link to homophobia.
    >
    >Taylor's general thesis in the book is the coevolution of human biology and
    >culture, via sexual selection. For example, clothing and hairlessness
    >developed together, he thinks. He does not express this in terms of genes
    >and memes, however. Like most archaeologists, he does not see any
    >theoretical value in positing memes or culturegens.
    >
    >Best,
    >
    >Bill

    Thanks for the reference to Taylor's book. It does seem quite plausible
    that the human forcing of long-term sex segregation in live stock may have
    been what first led to the discovery that the sexes have to have contact in
    order for reproduction to occur.

    --Aaron Lynch

    ===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 17 2000 - 19:51:42 BST