[lbo-talk] Re: language of contempt

andie nachgeborenen andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 5 23:17:34 PDT 2006


Bullshit, rather. So there are exceptions to the general rule. No intelligent Sb ever said that SB propensities were more than statistical. No intelligent SB ever denied that the environment influences human behavior, I have repeatedly insisted that to say anything else betrays a total misunderstanding of evo biology. There's a lot of bad SB out there and I have repeatedly said that it should be demolished. But the glee with which Jenny and Joanne welcome this trivial non-counterexample is an illustration of the fundamentalist cultural determinism that I criticized when Carrol expressed it.

Of course SB is all post hoc. Evo bio is not a predictive science. Pop SB, too much of is, is vulgar ideology. But if you judge it by Robert Ardrey or Lionel Tiger or even Galton and Pearson (the latter was whom was a serous scientist), you're going to get a distorted picture. There is a lot of really good, careful, first rate work going on in SB, nut there's no point in mentioning it here because all good leftists know that biology has nothing to do with human behavior and it' just reactionary patriarchical claptrap to think otherwise. A few anecdotes will do, or not even those, just a priori assumptions.

--- joanna <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:


> Wonderful. Thanks,
>
> J.
>
> JBrown72073 at cs.com wrote:
>
> >Doug wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I think SB is mostly post hoc stories invented to
> shore up the status
> >>quo in the guise of science, but isn't the
> standard line that men
> >>want to be sure any kids are theirs and not some
> other guy's, or they
> >>won't stick around to support them?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Oh, I just can't resist:
> >
> >McDonald, Kim A. "Shared Paternity in South
> American Tribes Confounds
> >Biologists and Anthropologists," Chronicle of
> Higher Education, April 9, 1999, pp.
> >A19-20:
> > "Recent studies of multiple fatherhood in
> indigenous societies in South
> >America are forcing scientists to rethink their
> notions about the evolutionary
> >roles of female fidelity and male provisioning...."
> > "'Throughout lowland South America, there is a
> belief in the partability
> >of paternity... The belief, in essence, is that all
> of the men who have sex
> >with a woman around the beginning of her pregnancy
> and all through her pregnancy
> >share the biological paternity of her child. In
> this view, the fetus is
> >considered to grow by repeated contributions of
> semen.'
> > "The pervasiveness of those beliefs among at
> least 18 widely separated
> >and distinct cultures in South America, said Mr.
> Beckerman, suggests that social
> >views about fatherhood are not universal and do not
> follow the standard
> >picture of the evolution of human sexuality. In
> fact, he noted, examples of a
> >belief in partible paternity are being discovered
> outside South America, in
> >indigenous societies in New Guinea, Polynesia, and
> India.
> > ... "What's more, the concept of multiple
> fatherhood may minimize sexual
> >jealousy, a source of potentially lethal conflict
> between men. Mr. Beckerman
> >said that one of the more fascinating findings in
> his work with the Bari, a
> >lowland horticultural society, was that "we never
> got a man expressing jealousy
> >over his wife taking a lover.
> > "[Beckerman says:] 'Presumably, it's because,
> when that happens, the
> >husband, in effect, has purchased a life-insurance
> policy. If he dies, then there
> >is some other male who has at least a residual
> obligation to those children,
> >most of whom probably belong to the husband. So,
> it's to his benefit to have
> >his wife take a lover or two.'"
> >"'All of this calls into question this presumed
> evolutionary bargain between
> >men and women in which, in effect, female fidelity
> and guaranteed paternity
> >are the coin with which women pay for resources
> provided by their mates,' he
> >said. (He is Stephen J. Beckerman, professor of
> Anthropology at Pennsylvania
> >State University.)
> > ..." Ms. Hawkes of Utah said that what was
> clear about all of those
> >societies was that they do not fit the evolutionary
> paradigm—that, as humans
> >evolved, males shifted their efforts away from
> competition with one another for
> >mates to parental nurturing.
> > "Her own studies of the Aché of eastern
> Paraguay and the Hadza of
> >northern Tanzania, she said, "don’t support the
> notion that men's work is about
> >providing for their kids." Goes on to say hunting
> (and collecting honey) "do not
> >provide more for a man’s own wife and children
> than they do for anybody else."
> >
> >***
> >Jenny Brown
> >
> >___________________________________
>
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> >
> >
>
> > ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list