Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id GAA02908 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 28 Jan 2002 06:54:24 GMT X-Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Message-Id: <email@example.com> In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <F223bCc9FPsBR2fY2Bs000254a6@hotmail.com> <F223bCc9FPsBR2fY2Bs000254a6@hotmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 01:50:36 -0500 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: "Francesca S. Alcorn" <email@example.com> Subject: Re: Rogue Males by Lionel Tiger Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
>>.... offering well-reasoned statements laying out your beliefs in a
>>way that people can see the value of your point.
>"Reason" will have limited effect. Some reasons for this include:
> 1) There is too much momentum, too much invested in the
>mainstream view, in order to willingly accept change. People will
>only change their views when they WANT to change them;
> 2) There is a tendency, particularly in the West (as I see
>it) to defer judgement to higher authorities. Self-evident "truths"
>are of limited value for us, unless they bear the stamp of approval
>from the relevant authority (academic institution, popular author,
>Any of the prominent feminists, such as Germain Greer and the like,
>attained notoriety less through reason than through rocking the
>establishment. Generally, particularly at the cutting edge of
>feminism, their ideas were ignored until a certain critical mass of
>public opinion was reached. People do not base their views on reason
>alone. Far from it.
Ah hah, this explains your aversion to it. :) (sorry, I couldn't resist)
>>>And if their answer is based in materialism or "security", or if
>>>it is based in attention-seeking
>>But these are all adaptive motivations, in the sense of natural
>>selection, however distasteful you might find them.
>If so, then in this context, patriarchal oppression of women is
>similarly an adaptive motivation and shouldn't women, according to
>your reasoning, accept their role as acquiescent doormats?
I don't see how this necessarily follows from what I said. Killing
off competitors is an adaptive strategy, that doesn't mean we should
just shrug our shoulders and have at each other. There are better
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 07:09:23 GMT