Re: [evol-psych] Polanski, 'policing' and the high-status male
- Hi LeifRe 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 -----From: Leif EkbladSent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 7:14 AMSubject: Re: [evol-psych] Polanski, 'policing' and the high-status male
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
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
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
Actually.. ever here of actually?.. he alledged victim is now 45 years old married and mother of 3.. she says "let it go".. But the press won't.. I don't mind the press as i enjoy the work the do which ( unintentionally) serves us.. They are not out to serve us as the press is self serving but.. peeps love gossip.............what the hey.. this was the 60's everybody was getting it on ferchrisakes.. But I do know only too well what a prude is besiodes she got her money we.. he well meaning muther did,,
History 101 leson.. the good god fearing christian mother tlls her loving daughter.."be on constant alert and beware of men and boys aas they're only after ne thing.. But las the good god fearing christian muther conviently omitted telling he oh so loving nymph daughter that wif out that "one thing"neither one of them would be here now to spend all that $ they got from Roman.. Did you know that girl was a nymphomaniac? Matter of record... Some mothers do have um!
--- On Sun, 10/4/09, Julienne <julienne@...> wrote:
From: Julienne <julienne@...>
Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Polanski, 'policing' and the high-status male
Date: Sunday, October 4, 2009, 9:20 AM
At 08:12 AM 10/4/2009 -0400, Edgar Owen wrote:
There certainly can be real persistent trauma from any sort of extreme unpleasant event. The problem with the typical PC feminist approach to dealing with such trauma is that it tends to wallow in the trauma and perpetuate the identity of the person as angry victim. The proper healthy approach is to just let go of the trauma as quickly as possible and go on to good things in one's life. After all the event which caused it has vanished into the past so why should the hurt remain? It simply can't unless it is self perpetuated. Most healthy women have natural mechanisms which accomplish that and go on with the good things in their lives which is why Steve's reporting below is generally valid. It is actually the feminist approach to trauma of encouraging the victim to wallow in it as a victim and exacerbating the hatred of the man who initially caused it simply perpetuates PTSD and makes it worse. The proper treatment is forgetting the unpleasant event and intensively doing happy good things instead to replace its sequelae. That is anathema to the feminists who simply can't let go of their complexes.
The important point I'm trying to make here is that if one understands where people who do harm are coming from and considers them objectively one can better escape the trauma they may have produced. To the extent that one demonizes and actively hates such people that perpetuates the traumatized victim status of the hater.
That is why the interminable PC feminist demonization and hatred of men perpetuates the victim status and emotional trauma of women. Only by understanding and accepting men as they are can feminists finally free themselves from their own largely self inflicted continuance of trauma and begin to live happily in a hate free positive world of emotional stability as whole beings rather than as victims. So long as feminists see men as demonic oppressors they condemn themselves to be hate filled emotionally ravaged victims.
What you are saying is that, if women would just get over it,
rape would be no big deal. The only big deal for you is that
women just aren't accepting men as rapists.
We need survival now not of the fittest, but of the wisest. Deepak Chopra
Join us at Chaos-stars@ yahoogroups. com for in depth discussion of world events
Julienne's Blog: http://www.myspace. com/youandthecos mos
Radio: "You and the Cosmos" Tuesdays, 4:30 pm EDST http://whrwfm. org/listenlive. php