Loved this fschmidt! +1Our primary drive is for survival and reproduction. We will fight hard for resources to the extent that these resources promote these basic ends. In a traditional monogamous society, everyone gets one mate and no one is allowed more. This means that acquiring additional resources or status will not have reproductive benefit and so has little value. Instead, men tend to focus on supporting the tribe in a fairly ego-less way and women focus on raising their children. This makes for a stable and virtuous society. In contrast, in a promiscuous society, there is desperate competition between men for women. In this contest, men fight to acquire status in order to attract women. Promiscuous women also behave very differently from monogamous women. Women have a pecking order that depends on their ability to attract men and to show off resources. Promiscuous women will compete in this pecking order based on consumption. In a monogamous society, women's place in the pecking order is largely determined by the success of her husband and so her best way to improve her status is to support her husband. Feminism is basically anti-marriage, pro-promiscuity. It causes an extremely selfish and immoral culture for reasons just explained. Only traditional monogamous societies can be moral and non-materialistic.
publicduende? Totally agree with your points about classical feminism NOT having a pro-promiscuity bent to it!
IMHO, somewhere the message of modern feminism morphed from equal rights/opportunities for women to a cultural messaging of "Let's be equal to men by behaving how we think men are!"
One thing I have stated in the past here is that I don't believe that human beings being "slaves" to some DNA programming and/or biological imperative. Many here seem to think that men have no choice BUT to be promiscuous because of aforementioned "programming" when in reality it's just a choice a man makes. 10,000 years ago when man was not much more than a slightly smarter animal? Sure! Now? No!
Berlusconi is a classic example, in my limited view of the man, of the aging, rich, powerful vain man whom clutches onto and worships his vanished youth and refuses to let go. Like America's Hugh Hefner!
One thing I am curious about in regards to the "natural" promiscuity of man IS has it always been this way, throughout history? Always lurking under the restraints of the society a man finds himself in? Or is it a modern cultural phenomena encouraged, perhaps even created by modern cultural programming!
Doesn't the promiscuity of men ALSO lead to the cultural disintegration of western society?
Love this thread!