Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

96665Re: [evol-psych] Polanski, 'policing' and the high-status male

Expand Messages
  • Steve Moxon
    Oct 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Leif
       
      Re your last point: 'policing' of males is by both males and females, because everyone has an interest in it; with males and females coming from different places, as it were. Remember that females rule the roost in the sphere of relationship and generally at the domestic end of community. Males merely back this up in their civic sphere of male intra-sexual competition. Males and females are equally 'in control' of social system.
      Having said that, male intra-sexual competition is so fierce and so central to sociality that this surely must be regarded as the main locus of 'policing' of males.
       
      Rape is a complicated phenomenon because ancestrally in small close-knit kin-based highly communal social groups, presumably it would not exist. Even in our own mega-socieities there has to be a salient in-group/out-group boundary for a male to commit rape. Ancestrally, it would only occur beween-group, with perpetrators usually being the higher mate-value males raiding from a neighbouring group, which would, on average, actually confer fitness benefits on women. Consequently, in practice, you're right: rape had little impact on women. Then with the advent of our huge societies, this changed given the presence of in-group/out-group boundaries within society and the anonymity of individuals: the desire for rape could be triggered in some individuals, and they could hope to get away with it; and this could and would be those most motivated to subvert the social order -- low mate-value males. Women still possessed their adaptations re (ostensibly) coerced sex [I've discussed these previously], but this is incongruous in the new context.
       
      Steve Moxon [author of the book, The Woman Racket: The new science explaining how the sexes relate at work, at play and in society, 2008 Imprint Academic; and 'Dominance as adaptive stressing and ranking of males, serving to allocate reproduction by self-suppressed fertility: Towards a fully biological understanding of social system', 2009 Medical Hypotheses 73.]
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 7:14 AM
      Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Polanski, 'policing' and the high-status male

       

      Steve Moxon:
      The community indeed does act as if the crime were against the whole
      community, which is not rationally to base punishment on the impact or lack
      of it on the victim.
      Rape is seen as the fundamental crime in a social system, being the ultimate
      subversion of it; so rape will always attract severe punishment irrespective
      of the impact on the victim.
      This impact is, so far as research shows, not severe. The most recent
      overview of studies of rape sequelae of which I'm aware is back in 1985 by
      Gillian Mezey. She found that at worst the impact was up to two months of
      mild depression, with no subsequent detectable adverse impact. This is
      anything but the PTS often falsely assumed to attend rape generically. Of
      course, the research could be failing to detect something important, but it
      is not any sort of clinical psychological category.
      Given the universal ethos in contemporary developed societies of fairness,
      the punishments and judicial procedures afforded to those charged with rape
      are seriously anomalous.

      Leif Ekblad: Yes, I agree. There are many things with far worse effects that
      are not considered criminal acts at all. For one thing, it seems like it is
      common among autistics to fall in love with somebody and then not being able
      to get over it. Sometimes this has so averse effects that the individual
      finds that suicide
      is the only way to get out of the situation. In the view of the victim, the
      one that broke up violated some kind of agreement. However, since this is
      considered abnormal behavior, no crime has been commited accoring to the
      state.

      Steve Moxon:
      Criminal acts where individuals are victims are, tautologically, acts
      against individuals; which the community decides are unjustified rather than
      justified; this being often seeming to be obviously right from any
      viewpoint, but not infrequently is in part due to deep-seated prejudices;
      notably those emanating from biologically based 'policing' of male
      hierarchies -- the afore-mentioned ultimate subversion. Sex obtained by
      males other than through what they are permitted according to their social
      position and normal mate-choice by females is the no-no. Hence our largely
      irrational attitudes to prostitution and pornography as well as sexual
      assault.

      Leif Ekblad: Yes, but unlike you, I believe that it is males that is
      controlling this and setting up the rules. It is males, that based on
      perceived "unfair competition" wants to ban older men from having young
      partners (unfair competetion) , that want to severely punish rape (unfair
      competition) , that has banned deviant sexuality towards strangers (unfair
      competition) and all of this. From a female biology standpoint, none of
      these things are any big problems. It is males that WANT females to feel bad
      about these things, and the state is the primary enforcer. Most states are
      male-dominated in their choices of what is acceptable and what is not
      acceptable.

      Leif Ekblad

    • Show all 71 messages in this topic