Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (74248)	9/10/2003 10:59:17 AM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

If you accept the basic evolutionary premise of the biological imperative -- that the essential function of male mammals is to impregnate as many females as they can to perpetuate their own genes in the future of the species -- your premise is that men should deny their biological imperative for some social convention. It hardly seems fair for women to force men to deny that which nature has imbued them with for millions of years. After all, what biological imperatives are you asking WOMEN to sacrifice to create at least a veneer of equality?

To: Lane3 who wrote (74248)	9/10/2003 1:49:44 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Seems to me that there can be contributory negligence on the part of men, too. Just as women shouldn't go around dressed like whores or visit the hotel rooms of strange men or get drunk without someone to look out for them, men need to be a bit judicious about where they go poking around. I agree. I just don't think that being injudicious in such situations should be punished with a multi year prison sentence. I also think going around dressed like a whore and then visiting the hotel room of a strange man and getting drunk should be punished by a prison sentence, or by being raped for that matter. Of course in both cases the man or woman involved is putting himself or herself at risk. Tim