On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:20 PM, ss <[email protected]> wrote: > But hello? It appears that the bonobo model did not work well for many people > who lived through the age of Aquarius and a reversion to Victorian models of > fidelity and morality became a better bet for one's personal life. Why the > mealy mouthed protestation then?
> What is right for humans in terms of survival could possibly be what has > evolved over millennia. I would have thought that the reason why humans are > not bonobos should have been clear to most humans. Dismissing evolutionary > developments and imagining that a "natural law" may be uncovered by looking a > any convenient and horny animal at hand is good for a chinwag - but utter > tripe in most other respects. But neither are humans a species with "alpha males" (a fairly specific term relating to pack animal heirarchies, humans are not pack animals) and yet you seemed to want to use animal examples to justify human behavior - until animal counterexamples were presented. How about we agree that animal models aren't appropriate for prescribing human behavior and leave it at that? -- Charles
