--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote:
> > And do we have to realize that we can't always legislate > > our way out of human problems caused by our nature? > > Not always, but it's often worth a try. We need to be > careful about assuming a given problem is caused by our > nature rather than social conditioning. Male chauvinism > and homophobia, for example, aren't dead yet, but > legislation has surely hastened their eventual demise. Good points. The case for a biological need for 25% of the population for intoxication was made by Siegel in Intoxication: The Universal Drive for Mind-Altering Substances. He was the psycho-pharmacoligist who testified before congress to make MDMA illegal. He believes that the government is being irresponsible by not doing research in a drug that can satisfy people without the health consequences of common drugs. He believes that it is due to a puritanical rejection of the validity of people seeking these states. So he is pro intoxication but anti-drugs that we have today! I guess you could make a case for a biological basis for male chauvinism and homophobia although our social primate cousins have a lot of variations. Bonobo chimps are matriarchal and use gay sex as a tension reliever. "Nice to meet ya, can I fondle your tool? Feeling a bit tense today." But whether it has a biological basis or not we need to make choices that support ideals of equality. What we are doing legally is offering legal remedy rather than changing its root causes. But I guess this step leads to a greater shift because when humans become conscious of something, they can make changes. Think about how powerful Archie Bunker was for male attitudes in the US! And today's kids are as a group much less prejudiced and homophobic if they are exposed to a multicultural mix early. At least that is what I am seeing in my urban area. These are interesting issues for me since I am launching anti bully shows in schools this year. I am taking the position that even though dominance displays are natural, we can create a culture of respect and tolerance that makes bullying lessened by peer pressure. It is the witnesses to bullying events I am focusing on as the agents of change. This is relevant to homophobia and male chauvinism which can be lessened by a society that does not support that behavior. I guess both might be socially programmed rather than biological. Whatever its cause change can only go so far, but as you mention is noble. I believe we need to be aware of what is in our nature and then decide how we want to balance it to live in the society that is closer to ideas of equality and respect. And of course we can't just cop out and say it is our nature to be richard craniums. > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > I am enjoying the documentary. It is a complex story worthy > > of the time spent. For me it seems to be a story of women's > > empowerment in this country. > > It sure was. The temperance movement and the movement for > women's suffrage were very closely intertwined. The > temperance movement came first, of course (the earliest > members were men!), but many of the women who came to lead > the temperance movement also became leaders of the movement > for women's suffrage and women's rights in general. > > At first in the temperance movement, women participated as > guardians of the home and family values while political > activism was left to men. But it became apparent that > women could achieve their social goals only if they could > vote and influence legislation. So one movement fed > naturally into the other, and it all ultimately became > a movement for women's rights (divorce, birth control, > equal pay for equal work--still not achieved!--etc.). > > <snip> > > The parallels to today's drug war is important. How can a > > government be so clear about the impossibility of banning > > alcohol which must be fermented and or distilled then > > believe that it can ban a plant that grows like a weed? > > Not only that, alcohol as a recrational drug is > significantly more harmful than marijuana. And they're > now discovering any number of extremely positive medical > uses for marijuana. > > Question is, why were we so quick to repeal Prohibition, > but prohibition of marijuana is still in effect? > > Did the documentary address any of this? > > > And do we have to realize that we can't always legislate > > our way out of human problems caused by our nature? > > Not always, but it's often worth a try. We need to be > careful about assuming a given problem is caused by our > nature rather than social conditioning. Male chauvinism > and homophobia, for example, aren't dead yet, but > legislation has surely hastened their eventual demise. >
