|
Man, is there a lot of female-directed animosity here. And a lot of biological determinism. I think it's undeniable that there are some basic physiological differences that have led to psychological differences between the sexes, but to assume that either sex "needs" the other to balance out certain tendencies is just ridiculous. To assume that the current state of the world is the way it "should" be is to ignore the infinite other possibilities for how the would could be, or could have been, in the absence of a number of formative characteristics, gender being only one of them. I love how all of you look into your crystal balls and say how the world would have been if women were in charge, or how it would evolve from here in the absence of men. The simple fact is that social forces are too complex to predict, and you have no idea how society would evolve if you removed a particular aspect of it. Nobody's talking about eradicating men on purpose, and as you've seen above there's no real certainty that this particular genetic event is going to come about, so you can stand down. Notice, also, how instantly some people start attacking women, as though this were somehow our fault, or even something we would want.
__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
- Anatole France
|