|
Warfare is only an invention...
|
View this Thread in Original format
| AlphaStarred |
According to some Margaret Mead.
A couple of excerpts from the text:
"...an invention that lends itself to certain types of personality, to the exigent needs of autocrats, to the expansionist desires of crowded peoples, to the desire for plunder and rape and loot which is engendered by a dull and frustrating life."
"Warfare is frame for such prestige-seeking merely because it calls for the display of certain skills and certain virtues: all of these skills -- riding straight, shooting straight, dodging the missiles of the enemy and sending one's own straight to the mark -- can be equally well exercised in some other framework and, equally, the virtues -- endurance, bravery, loyalty, steadfastness -- can be displayed in other contexts."
"The tie-up between proving oneself a man and proving this by a success in organized killing is due to a definition which many societies have made of manliness."
My question is very simple. In your opinion, if there were only women existent would wars still occur? Or are women ultimately driven by the same passions as men are? |
|
|
| Zenchowdah |
war is caused by stupid people, gender has nothing to do with it. evidence : Bottle Action, by Miss Behavin
edit: chorus:
(I'll hit that bitch with bottle)
I don't fight I don't argue I'll just that bitch with a bottle
(I'll hit that bitch with a bottle)
Call my click don't bother I'll just hit that bitch with a bottle
(I'll hit that bitch with a bottle)
Got problems I'll solve em I'll just hit that bitch with a bottle
(I'll hit that bitch with a bottle) |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
I would say it's pretty easy to reduce the actual causes of many conflicts to sex and gender, even large-scale wars. It's reasonable enough that most wars are over money, right? Territory dispute, religious conflict, etc..most of it seems to be epitomized by currency, that sort of mindset, at least. Well why do people want money and power and prestige? Is it unreasonable to think that the few "leaders" out there act the way they do in evil ways - all for the money and the fame and the power - all to heed to some instinctually societal drive to attain the highest success of procreation and sexual gratification?
So is it necessarily about 'the men make war' or 'the women make war' or is it more like 'the fact that there is drive and desire for sex and procreation for both genders is what leads to conflict in the first place'? |
|
|
| Zenchowdah |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
I would say it's pretty easy to reduce the actual causes of many conflicts to sex and gender, even large-scale wars. It's reasonable enough that most wars are over money, right? Territory dispute, religious conflict, etc..most of it seems to be epitomized by currency, that sort of mindset, at least. Well why do people want money and power and prestige? Is it unreasonable to think that the few "leaders" out there act the way they do in evil ways - all for the money and the fame and the power - all to heed to some instinctually societal drive to attain the highest success of procreation and sexual gratification?
So is it necessarily about 'the men make war' or 'the women make war' or is it more like 'the fact that there is drive and desire for sex and procreation for both genders is what leads to conflict in the first place'? |
i think he's more calling into question whether men and women have a different level of desire for those things |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zenchowdah
i think he's more calling into question whether men and women have a different level of desire for those things |
Yeah, I know what he was asking. I was just dancing around the subject because the true answer and its implications towards the actual usefulness of *my* gender scare the out of me. :nervous: |
|
|
| Zenchowdah |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Yeah, I know what he was asking. I was just dancing around the subject because the true answer and its implications towards the actual usefulness of *my* gender scare the out of me. :nervous: |
meh. im perfectly happy looking down on feminists. people are people, gender has nothing to do with it. |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zenchowdah
people are people, gender has nothing to do with it. |
That's bull. That's like asserting that males are exactly equal to females in every respect with the exception of biological makeup. Sorry, I don't buy it. |
|
|
| Zenchowdah |
| quote: | Originally posted by AlphaStarred
That's bull. That's like asserting that males are exactly equal to females in every respect with the exception of biological makeup. Sorry, I don't buy it. |
why not? how are we different? |
|
|
| AlphaStarred |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zenchowdah
why not? how are we different? |
Are you serious? I'm not going to make any claims for I don't think I, or any one else here for that matter, can corroborate any supposed claims, but for one - I think women are generally more emotional and sensitive than men are. I think most women can agree with this. Men, I think, are many a time more 'logical' then women are, and hence more phlegmatic. This is also why I think many women are susceptible to mood swings, whereas guys - as far as I know - are not. Then again, there are many exceptions to this notion too, and I could be wrong for all I know. I never read "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus," maybe the person who wrote it can tell you lots more on the subject.
I would certainly like to know what the female TAs have concluded to my question, anyway. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zenchowdah
meh. im perfectly happy looking down on feminists. people are people, gender has nothing to do with it. |
Feminism is actually the belief that both genders are socially equal. Which is something I would definitely buy.
However, I do believe that, in general, men seek the money and the power and the prestige at all costs *more* than women do. Wait, scratch that. I would say that men seek the money and the power and the prestige more competetively than women do. Not to say that women are not competetive. heh. It seems to me that perhaps men are more confontationally competetive than women though - this sort of attitude causes conflicts to surface more often than not. When you truly analyze most major wars, doesn't it seem as though everything started on a small scale and just erupted from there? Seems that way to me. Of course there are infinite variables to consider at all times - but the breaking point, I think, comes from actions decided for the means of individually sexual preservation by and for...whomever is in charge.
This is not to necessarily discount the women in bed with the men responsible for waging war though. ;)
Whispering secrets in the dark...
I would conjecture to say that the opposite would be true, in terms of the original question proposed in this thread though. Yes, I think that if men were removed from the world, women would find peace and would, generally speaking, get along with one another. But I also think that if women were removed from the world, men would find far less reason to fight among themselves. |
|
|
| Zenchowdah |
| quote: | Originally posted by AlphaStarred
Are you serious? I'm not going to make any claims for I don't think I, or any one else here for that matter, can corroborate any supposed claims, but for one - I think women are generally more emotional and sensitive than men are. I think most women can agree with this. Men, I think, are many a time more 'logical' then women are, and hence more phlegmatic. This is also why I think many women are susceptible to mood swings, whereas guys - as far as I know - are not. Then again, there are many exceptions to this notion too, and I could be wrong for all I know. I never read "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus," maybe the person who wrote it can tell you lots more on the subject.
I would certainly like to know what the female TAs have concluded to my question, anyway. |
on the whole, sure, i agree with you, but that doesnt change the fact that men and women are capable of the same things. the fact that men tend away from being emotional and sensitive is due to hormones and upbringing. were the world full of women only (and a means to propagate the species existed) there would be a need to bring up some to be that type.
this is the same as saying that because women are more in touch with their feelings and their emotions, that they're less likely to cheat on their spouse or commit crimes. ill allow that not as many do, but it still happens. in a world where "manliness" has no definition, due to a lack of "men", a demographic of women would still exhibit these same characteristics. |
|
|
| Zenchowdah |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
I would conjecture to say that the opposite would be true, in terms of the original question proposed in this thread though. Yes, I think that if men were removed from the world, women would find peace and would, generally speaking, get along with one another. But I also think that if women were removed from the world, men would find far less reason to fight among themselves. |
i think you're naive. |
|
|
|
|
