leichter@yale-com.UUCP (Jerry Leichter) (10/14/83)
"The biology of human beings is not as important as the sociology of human beings in determining what they do, and what they do well." Do you have any evidence for this broad statement, or is it as much a statement of faith as Dave Sherman's statement about the "naturalness" of women sympa- thyzing? Actually, NEITHER statement has much evidence behind it - you can probably find equal evidence for each, if you are objective about it. Both are state- ments of faith and, more important, of political belief. The little we know about in-born vs. learned differences between the sexes does not justify any moral or political judgements at this time; those judgements will have to be made, as they always have been, on another basis. -- Jerry decvax!yale-comix!leichter leichter@yale
mason@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Mason) (10/17/83)
"The little we know about in-born vs. learned differences between the sexes
does not justify any...judgements at this time..."
I have to agree, the point I meant to make was that the socialization of
children is so extensive and omnipresent (dare I say oppressive) that it
is a wonder that women are able to "succeed" in society (business) at all.
In fact I take this as some evidence that females must have more on the
ball to overcome these social handicaps and succeed (which large numbers
clearly do)!
If you read virtually ANYTHING about children, the assumptions that the
boys will want to have intellectual discussions and the girls will want
to help mommy make supper, vary substantially in force and subtlety but
are almost always there! (This even applies in some articles I've read
that are to help raise your children equally!)
-- Dave Mason, U. Toronto CSRG,
{cornell,watmath,ihnp4,floyd,allegra,utzoo,uw-beaver}!utcsrgv!mason
or {decvax,linus,research}!utzoo!utcsrgv!mason (UUCP)