MarkTwainiac comments on My ex thinks he is a woman

submitted 3 years ago by Anoki from (self.GenderCritical)

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun - 3 years ago (7 children)

[+][deleted] 3 years ago* (4 children)

[removed]

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago* (3 children)

I'm referencing the biological drivers of certain inherent male and female behaviours like the male desire to spread their seed to the greatest number of healthy females and the female desire to raise and maintain the familial unit

The male and female behaviors you are describing are not analogous. You have said twice now that there's a

natural biological impulse in women to foster the familial unit and protect young

And that female human beings all have an innate

female desire to raise and maintain the familial unit

What is "the familial unit" that you keep speaking of and claiming all women and girls have an innate "female desire" to "foster and maintain"?

Is it the atomized nuclear family of mom+dad+kids now common in the modern West? Or is it the multigenerational model of extended family that much of the world has lived in through history, which typically has decreed that girls and women upon marriage must move into the homes of their in-laws and become sex slaves to their husbands and domestic servants/slaves to him and the rest of his relatives?

Is the familial unit you say we female humans all have a biological desire to foster and maintain the one that in virtually every culture across the world through history has been kept going coz people of means have been able to hire - and exploit - desperately poor girls and women with no other options as domestic servants, wet nurses, nursemaids, governesses, housekeepers, companions, nannies, au pairs, babysitters and caregivers?

I'm not trying to cast aspersions on you as a person, but I think what you are preaching here is male sexist bullshit. I say this as a female person who has studied and considered this issue over the course of more than 50 years and has personally birthed and raised human young whilst also pair-bonding with male partners.

BTW, I agree with you that most women do not understand male sexuality and the overwhelmingly powerful nature of the male sex drive. That's an excellent point. I'd like to hear more of what you as a male person have to say about that. But I'm not really interested in the sweeping generalizations you make from on high about what you think the entire human female population inherently and innately desires.

[+][deleted] 3 years ago (2 children)

[removed]

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago* (1 child)

I'm not disagreeing with the idea that female humans are biological beings who have evolved to have instinctive drives, and that those drives include the drive to mate, procreate and to

protect young

In fact, I suspect there is a natural instinct in males and females alike apart from the sex/mating drive to protect the young, particularly babies and toddlers.

What I'm taking issue with is your contention that there is a

natural biological impulse in women to foster the familial unit

and an innate

female desire to raise and maintain the familial unit

I asked you to define this "familial unit" you say that women have an innate desire to foster and maintain. But instead of doing that, you come back with a load of vague talk about

certain outcomes

every civilisation, every society has been predicated along similar lines.

You may disagree but the fact that symmetry despite clear cultural differences (that also relates to the design of the familial unit)

This is all waffle. What are the characteristics of these "familial units, outcomes, similar lines"? You've not said.

How is it that the social arrangements you say are natural - which since you won't say I have to guess you mean are male-headed and ruled families, be they nuclear and atomized or extended and multi-generational in which males and their spouses of younger generations are subordinate to the elders - are primarily or exclusively the result of female humans' biological impulses, instincts, desires?

Why is it that in your view females but not males are the ones who are biologically primed to foster and maintain these arrangements? How do these arrangements serve female aims, but not male aims?

Have you ever looked at family configurations in the Arab Middle East or amongst polygamous Mormons in the USA? These social arrangements allow males to spread their seed far and wide whilst also confining girls and women to being sex slaves in the service of men, breeding stock, child minders and household servants. But according to you, these arrangements have arisen coz us female people have a biological desire and inherent need to foster and maintain them.

Like I said before, I think this is sexist male BS.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun - 3 years ago (0 children)

Just coming back to say that I've just now noticed that on another thread you're the fella who in a discussion of the mechanics of childbirth made a statement showing you didn't know that the vagina has openings at both ends - and when corrected, you admitted you have no idea what actually goes on in the female human body during childbirth.

Yet here you are presenting yourself as an authority on both female biology and psychology! What's more, you've got the temerity to tell women that across cultures and throughout history all of us have had, been solely motivated by, and acted on, the exact same instincts, drives, desires, preferences etc. You tell me this is based on the role(s) we female people play in reproduction, but that's a topic you clearly know nothing about! And by nothing I mean nada, zilch. Coz not knowing that the vagina opens at both ends doesn't just show you aren't familiar with the mechanics of childbirth, it also means you don't understand how human conception occurs in the first place, where it happens, and all the processes that have to happen afterwards for a fertilized egg to result in a viable pregnancy.

I'm not saying this to be mean, but really listen to yourself.

[–]fuckupaddams 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago (1 child)

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun - 3 years ago* (0 children)

Sure, but I was responding to another poster's specific claim that the way(s) "the family unit" (or units) in human societies have evolved and come to be constructed is solely or primarily due to the instincts, drives, desires and needs of female people who have had or who want children. The poster I was responding to seemed to be suggesting that social arrangements starting with families/households in human societies have nothing at all to do with the instincts, drives, desires and needs of male people who have had or who want children as much as female people do. If study of humans and other animal species are an indication, it would seem that male instincts, desires, needs and preferences for making sure they're the only ones who could possibly impregnate "their" women and for forming hierarchies in which they themselves are dominant play a far larger role.

GenderCritical

MODERATORS