Tweet
Re: Reasons to be married...
Interesting turn. I've also heard that men are biologically programmed to impregnant as many females as possible (to pass on his genes) and that women are programmed to mate with the 'best' man and not want him to stray (so that all his resources go to her offspring).
Both actions have the same goal - passing on your genes - but they're obviously at cross-purposes. However, I don't think it means all is lost and it's hopeless to even try. There are other actions that have evolved right along with those, and are equally compelling, in my opinion.
Men risk(ed) their lives to provide for women. Women set up support networks as safety nets should their man die. This behaviour manifests itself differently now that there aren't mastadons to hunt for dinner, but in the end, men and women's roles can be very complementary.
The problem, in my opinion, comes when the balance is lost. Take, for example, the part in the bible about women submitting. That's exceedingly offensive taken on its own, but when you consider the flip side of that is that men have full responsibility for the family. That includes not only money, but spiritual guidance and protection. Men can only expect women to follow their leadership when they are fair and compassionate. That part seems to get lost...
Remember, equal doesn't mean duplicates.
Took me a long time to learn that one. Fair doesn't necessarily mean a split down the middle. The overall balance is what is important, not each individual detail.
Laura
Interesting turn. I've also heard that men are biologically programmed to impregnant as many females as possible (to pass on his genes) and that women are programmed to mate with the 'best' man and not want him to stray (so that all his resources go to her offspring).
Both actions have the same goal - passing on your genes - but they're obviously at cross-purposes. However, I don't think it means all is lost and it's hopeless to even try. There are other actions that have evolved right along with those, and are equally compelling, in my opinion.
Men risk(ed) their lives to provide for women. Women set up support networks as safety nets should their man die. This behaviour manifests itself differently now that there aren't mastadons to hunt for dinner, but in the end, men and women's roles can be very complementary.
The problem, in my opinion, comes when the balance is lost. Take, for example, the part in the bible about women submitting. That's exceedingly offensive taken on its own, but when you consider the flip side of that is that men have full responsibility for the family. That includes not only money, but spiritual guidance and protection. Men can only expect women to follow their leadership when they are fair and compassionate. That part seems to get lost...
Remember, equal doesn't mean duplicates.
Took me a long time to learn that one. Fair doesn't necessarily mean a split down the middle. The overall balance is what is important, not each individual detail.
Laura
Comment