Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site fortune.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!houxm!ihnp4!fortune!polard From: polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry Polard) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: male/female differences Message-ID: <4895@fortune.UUCP> Date: Thu, 17-Jan-85 12:09:59 EST Article-I.D.: fortune.4895 Posted: Thu Jan 17 12:09:59 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 18-Jan-85 02:46:06 EST References: <74@mot.UUCP> <382@unisoft.UUCP> <203@masscomp.UUCP> <1305@orca.UUCP> Reply-To: polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry polard) Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA Lines: 27 Summary: In article <1305@orca.UUCP> ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan) writes: >The entire argument doesn't hold water. Marriage developed when men >finally figured out that they had something to do with babies, and >that if they wanted to be sure that the baby was theirs, they'd >better make sure that "their woman" didn't go off in the bushes with >anybody else. Marriage as a societal institution has always been >disadvantageous to women.... I suspect most theories on the origin of marriage are based on impure speculation and not much more. Consider matrilineal and matrilocal societies: in these, who the father of a child is , is of no importance. In many of these societies, women have a lot of power, are not considered the property of men, and are the people who inherit land. Two examples of such societies are the Iroquois nations and the Hopi. In this discussion of sex and society, most of the views presented seem to be based on fantasies rather than research in the relevant sciences. If there is anyone on the net who has researched the evolution of sexual behavior, please speak up. In the meantime, Margaret Mead's _Male and Female_ might be a relevant read. -- Henry Polard (You bring the flames - I'll bring the marshmallows.) {ihnp4,cbosgd,amd}!fortune!polard N.B: The words in this posting do not necessarily express the opinions of me, my employer, or any AI project.