joanna bujes wrote:
>
> I had a revelation about why women are attracted to "dangerous" men. The
> standard theories are
>
> [clip]
>
> My theory/revelation:
>
> Women [clip]
>
> ....but what do you all think about the theory
> itself. . . .[clip]
I would be suspicious of the category, "women... attracted to 'dangerous' men." How many women are? And on what basis would you decide that there is any particular common element (aside from the empirical fact itself) defining the category. The question "why" cannot be answered in respect to a mere random collection of contingencies.
Do "dangerous men" form a relatively stable part of the population under different historical conditions? Or does the number vary according to the complex of social relations existing at any given time and place? Do all women "attracted to dangerous men" _continue_ to be attracted to dangerous men only? Are some "dangerous men" dangerous only in certain contexts or in response to some women, not all women? Is it possible to answer any of these questions?
It's been a long time since I read the book, but the two chapters on women in the Chinese revolution in Jack Belden's _China Shakes the World_ might be relevant here.
Carrol
>
> Joanna