>Maybe you posted this just because it's an interesting fact rather
>than to actually make a point. But if it's the latter, what is the
>point of going through these contortions? Michael S. could have said
>"getting your head cut off" instead of "large quantities of
>arsenic." And then you'd be plum out of isolated Chilean villages to
>post information on.
But he didn't say "getting your head cut off." He asked in what future society might it not be true arsenic would kill you. If everyone but the people in the isolated Chilean village was wiped out, then the future society that descended from them might be an answer.
>Why is it so painful for some people to just say "many things
>commonly attributed to human nature or biology are actually due to
>social relations, however some things really are just caused by biology"?
Who says it is? What's painful in this thread is the browbeating that would have Kenneally dismissed as a lightweight and a fraud and shag dissed for paying attention to her.