Re: Coy males and insatiable females.
- From: "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 12:10:39 -0500 (EST)
"William Morse" <wdmorse@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dtjk0q$2652$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:dt90sq$bll$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
[Roughgarden] is just saying that there are a lot of fine points that have
been missed because the outlook of the authors has been mostly male.
I'm not sure how true this is in sexual selection theory, but it is
absolutely true in theories of hominid evolution. Reading this group,
you would think that language was invented by males to help organize
hunting groups. And that women picked up the notion of language by
listening to the mighty hunters bragging about their exploits around
the campfire. ...
I have commented elsewhere on the article itself. And I agree with you
on much of the "male centric" discussion on this newsgroup. Which leads
me to ask - why are there so few women posters on the group? We have had
a number of them, and generally their contributions have been interesting
both for their scholarship and their viewpoint - but they don't seem to
stay with the group.
I think that Michael Ragland hit the nail on the head with his comment.
This group is well over the line into the testoster-zone. This manifests
itself in competitiveness, one-ups-manship, and general lack of courtesy.
The worst offenders are the high-volume amateur posters - myself among
them (but yourself excluded), though even one of our professionals has
a fairly short fuse.
However, this question is one for which empirical data is readily available.
Someone could look at the newsgroups on the web that do have regular
female participants and generate some good hypotheses as to what seems
to be different there. Anyone want to practice what we preach and try
to collect and organize some data?
Anecdotal evidence that doesn't help much: The only other newsgroup I
read regularly is worse than this one for both general rudeness and low
female participation.
.
- References:
- Coy males and insatiable females.
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Coy males and insatiable females.
- From: whitesickle@xxxxxxx
- Re: Coy males and insatiable females.
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Coy males and insatiable females.
- From: William Morse
- Coy males and insatiable females.
- Prev by Date: Re: Fundamental Darwinism
- Next by Date: Re: Minimization principal for evolution
- Previous by thread: Re: Coy males and insatiable females.
- Next by thread: Re: Coy males and insatiable females.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading