Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site bcsaic.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!bcsaic!shebs From: shebs@bcsaic.UUCP (stan shebs) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: men dominate net.women (flame-ish) Message-ID: <232@bcsaic.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 16:44:01 EDT Article-I.D.: bcsaic.232 Posted: Thu Aug 22 16:44:01 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 13:18:54 EDT References: <175@drutx.UUCP> <231@whuts.UUCP> <2674@sun.uucp> Reply-To: shebs@bcsaic.UUCP (stan shebs) Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle Lines: 50 Summary: I'll try to be avoid being contentious, and just ask a couple of questions: In article <2674@sun.uucp> sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) writes: > >You see, Andy... in this forum, women don't want to prove anything. We >don't want to *have* to prove anything. And everytime men enter the >forum, it becomes a game of domination, rightness, superiority, power. >And that is why there are so few women posting in this forum. Because >the kind of communication which is cooperative and sharing, the kind >which comes naturally to women, is impossible whenever the men join in >too. > > >POWER over other humans serves no constructive ends. >only COOPERATION can be constructive. > >HATRED, ANGER, DOMINANCE will destroy this planet. >LOVE, CARING, NUTURING, SHARING, and LETTING GO of POWER >are the only pathways which will support or enhance life. > >It's not that I hate men, or that there's something wrong with the male sex. >It's dominant and powerhungry individuals who are the problem... (Andy) >It's the males with an overdose of agression producing testosterone, >who are causing the biggest of problems in the world. > > Sunny My question: how did this situation come to be? Is the aggressive behavior of males 1) an evolutionary screwup, or 2) is there some value in such behavior? Or (as seems more likely) 3) is the aggression something that had survival value once upon a time, but is now harmful? If alternatives are 1) or 3), the human race is basically doomed (unless some new method of reproduction becomes standard). If 2), then we put up with it with the situation or die. I suppose that some sort of massive restructuring of the race can be done, but how is one to kill off the aggressive men in a non-aggressive fashion? Should people be bred for nonaggressiveness? (I assume that since the problem is said to be testosterone, not any cultural thing, that a biological solution is required) Presumably free enterprise of any sort is out (since it involves competition)? Socialism can only work in the absence of desires for scarce things - would a socialist state of women really be successful? Trying not to be contentious, (but probably failing) stan shebs bcsaic!shebs