you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]just_lesbian_things 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

War and aggression come as part of the package.

That's like saying explosive diarrhea and taking a shit come as a package. Aggression and defecation is a normal part of any human's life, but war and explosive diarrhea indicates a loss of control. It is not inevitable, and you should not treat it as such.

feminists will argue that it's men starting wars. That's a bit like hating cars because they are a feature of every car accident, ignoring the benefits we get from the very features of cars that make them at times dangerous

Unlike cars in the 21st century, all the "benefits" of war can be gained through more efficient means.

Of course they could simply neuter Western males and then act entirely surprised when non-Western males exploit this weakness and enjoy themselves some raping and pillaging

I suppose we can start neutering all males (Incoming hurt male feelings in 3... 2...)

[–]Trajan 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

You missed the point. It’s not that negative consequences are desirable. It is a consequence of the underlying drives that ensure no cat lady need worry about having to live in ditch.

[–]just_lesbian_things 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

ensure no cat lady need worry about having to live in ditch

There's no link between cat ladies living in ditches and war. If I had to stated a correlation, I'd say war is more likely to cause people, including cat ladies, to live in ditches. Again, you assume war to be an inevitable product of "aggression", but it isn't. It's a weak mental crutch you're using to justify shit to yourself, like a bitter divorcé droning on about the inevitability of divorce.

Moreover, I'd say there's no direct link between aggression and the living situation of cat ladies either. You overvalue aggressive behavior. Quality of life has more to do with discipline and human ingenuity. We don't have a resource shortage, we have a self-control problem. Disaster planning tells you to behave in a calm and collected manner, not Hulk out and aggressively shove other people out of the way.

[–]Trajan 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, I’m not arguing that war is the inevitable result of aggression. Show me where you think I said that.

Also, I’m not stating aggression as the root of all that is good. I said ‘underlying drives’. This would include competitiveness, concern for kin and the tribe, curiosity, willingness to take risks, and aggression in many forms.

The feminist social constructionist view posits an embarrassingly simplified view of society in which masculinity can be reengineered away to make Male and female interchangeable in abilities and drives. Men take the risks, do the dirty jobs, defend, and develop most of the technologies that make life pleasant. Women will not magically want to do these things unless they have to (e.g. the gender equality paradox). Turn men in to women, in an effort to eliminate the bad actions of a minority, then say goodbye to the safest and most equitable societies the world has ever seen.

Edit: gender equality paradox, not gender paradox