Xref: utzoo sci.bio:917 soc.men:2792 soc.women:9569
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!dnelson
From: dnelson@faline.bellcore.com (Dorothy Nelson)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Rape: a genetic catastrophe
Message-ID: <1766@faline.bellcore.com>
Date: 17 Feb 88 17:31:48 GMT
References: <517@gtx.com> <5129@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <2201@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <377@rruxa.UUCP>
Reply-To: dnelson@faline.UUCP (Dorothy Nelson)
Organization: The Neo-Pagan Lusty Ritual Alliance
Lines: 16

In article <> egauss@houxa.UUCP (E.GAUSS) writes:
>Michael, and several other of the ladies, seem to be concerned that all
>examples of gender attitude seperation are artificial.  Yet most of the
>gentlemen who post, argue that they are real.  It struck me that this
>is in itself an example of a attitude seperation based upon gender.

True, but you will have a hard time convincing me that this separation is
motivated solely biologically... (my penis made me do it!!! :-)  I assume
you mean "artificial" to be used in lieu of "social context."

I have yet to see a logically thorough study on biological motivation.
All I have seen are studies done in a social context which claim to be
unsullied by social context.  Who needs that kind of misinformation?
(Hint:  the ruling class.)

--cosmique muffin (dorothy) ...!allegra!moss!thumper!dnelson