The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
On the other hand Feminism as such has only been around little more than a century.
Big tests are still to follow thus.
The few examples of matriarchal or "equal" societies do not quite decide what is natural. Explaining their paucity just by patriarchal aggression is just a "so-so" story as any other.
The Aka example is interesting, also from the ecological perspective. Extensive fatherly involvement does not look unnatural to me - but it is rather a luxury in the modern economy (and perhaps in many cultures).
On the other hand, particularly male emotional perceptions are "naturally" supposed to be malleable.
The idea that we should give free rein to certain behaviours which might (or might not) be innate, and which might have been adaptive for hunter-gatherer societies, is just a bit weird. As you note in the diary, the Stanford prison experiment (and all of human history, actually) show us that people will do horrible things to each other (perhaps encouraged by primal impulses) if they are covered by a hierarchy and a doctrine. What I take away from this is that education and social engineering should be employed to take us as far away as possible from situations where this can occur. Likewise, for male dominance over women, one of the greatest causes of human suffering.
On the other hand particularly male emotional perceptions are "naturally" supposed to be malleable.
Perhaps you would like to expand on that? There seems to be a subtext here which is easily perceived to be a chip on your shoulder, but perhaps it's something else?
It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II
But we are catching a deep point here. Emotion control is a key difference between sexes in intimate attraction. Whether a man keeps his (foremost negative) emotions to himself or throws then around makes a huge difference to woman's feelings. Or at least, this is what I learned. On the other hand, woman's emotions are the gospel, the reality of the relationship.
Feminism only reinforces this difference, gives more free rein to female desires and perceptions. I do not complain here - rather honestly believe that it is more fun this way! I just warn - those desires may not be favorable to your cited educational or egalitarian goals at all.
Extensive fatherly involvement does not look unnatural to me - but it is rather a luxury in the modern economy (and perhaps in many cultures).
It's only a luxury if you assume the man is the primary wage-earner and the little woman is working as a hobby. Otherwise it becomes a necessity.
Except in the sense that in some versions of the modern economy extensive parental involvement is a luxury.
by gmoke - Jul 8
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 3 27 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 8 12 comments
by eurogreen - Jun 28 24 comments
by gmoke - Jun 28
by Oui - Jul 5 12 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 27 1 comment
by Oui - Jun 25 15 comments
by gmoke - Jul 8
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 812 comments
by Oui - Jul 74 comments
by Oui - Jul 7
by Oui - Jul 512 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 327 comments
by gmoke - Jun 29
by eurogreen - Jun 2824 comments
by gmoke - Jun 28
by Oui - Jun 2714 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 271 comment
by Oui - Jun 2515 comments
by Oui - Jun 1777 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1610 comments
by Oui - Jun 158 comments
by Oui - Jun 1210 comments
by Oui - Jun 781 comments
by Oui - May 29164 comments
by Oui - May 22130 comments