The evolutionary advantage of sexual reproduction and sexual dimorphism is always an interesting topic. Imo generally if there is dimorphism it's probably to advantage. You get to store features into the genome that wouldn't lead to fitness if they were universal. Probably this includes a lot of female features. Certainly in social settings, when female features are not regulated, societies die out - this is a simple pathway from decadence to decline, it's where the West is now: But that's not relevant for the genetics question since we were split into male and female long before societies developed.
I do not know what you mean by “when female features are not regulated, societies die out”. And WHO is supposed to do the “regulating”? And WHAT you mean by “regulating”?
That aside, following the DIKW (Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom) model, I consider Wisdom should be the use of knowledge (scientific especially) to engender more Responsible Freedom in Humanity, that is, Everything Voluntary and no moral justification for first use of physical force and the right to rule (thus ALL governments are morally delegitimated and abandoned).
So to follow Konner's well-evidenced argument, we would do better to bring the female principle to bear in social structures rather than the dominant male one, because that would mean a less violent world.
To follow deMause's even more well-evidenced argument, we would do best by creating the conditions where mothers are supported to be maturely responsibly free and thus will produce children who will not enact violence for any "Greater Good". See my Substack
FOR U.S. MEMORIAL DAY: WHAT IF THEY HAD A WAR & NOBODY CAME? NO MORE SACRIFICIAL LAMBS; NO MORE INFANTS AS INFANTRY.
THE ORIGINS OF WAR IN CHILD ABUSE & THE PEACEFUL PARENTING PARADIGM
Women are already before “all” (men) in the present day. The only limits they encounter are enforced by other women to prevent them from submitting to men.
Women have a taller IQ curve and as such, women only barely show up in the quorum of exceptionally smart people. You think “better” comes from less violent but being deprived of 99/100 of geniuses? Well sure - What is “better” in your model is just “female preferred,” and the fact that the sex which generates 99% of geniuses SHOULD probably get to tell the other half what to do really grinds their delusional gears. The same error in the amazon blurb of that book: “Men don’t live as LONG, men must be defects.” Oblivious to the reality that ‘longevity for its own sake’ is not a neutral, objective value but a suffocating female shibboleth - MEN seek and achieve LEGACY, not LONGEVITY - no woman in history has ever directly managed the former.
Thanks Brian, a favorite subject, new material for me.
Do you know, along the original division of labor line of male and female, this book by Melvin Konner "Women After All", excellent.
https://www.amazon.com/Women-After-All-Melvin-Konner-MD-audiobook/dp/B011QH5OGK/ref=sr_1_1
Get free, stay free, first for the Mothers then for the Others.
(See Lloyd deMause "The Origin of Wars in Child Abuse" www.psychohistory.com )
The evolutionary advantage of sexual reproduction and sexual dimorphism is always an interesting topic. Imo generally if there is dimorphism it's probably to advantage. You get to store features into the genome that wouldn't lead to fitness if they were universal. Probably this includes a lot of female features. Certainly in social settings, when female features are not regulated, societies die out - this is a simple pathway from decadence to decline, it's where the West is now: But that's not relevant for the genetics question since we were split into male and female long before societies developed.
I do not know what you mean by “when female features are not regulated, societies die out”. And WHO is supposed to do the “regulating”? And WHAT you mean by “regulating”?
That aside, following the DIKW (Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom) model, I consider Wisdom should be the use of knowledge (scientific especially) to engender more Responsible Freedom in Humanity, that is, Everything Voluntary and no moral justification for first use of physical force and the right to rule (thus ALL governments are morally delegitimated and abandoned).
So to follow Konner's well-evidenced argument, we would do better to bring the female principle to bear in social structures rather than the dominant male one, because that would mean a less violent world.
To follow deMause's even more well-evidenced argument, we would do best by creating the conditions where mothers are supported to be maturely responsibly free and thus will produce children who will not enact violence for any "Greater Good". See my Substack
FOR U.S. MEMORIAL DAY: WHAT IF THEY HAD A WAR & NOBODY CAME? NO MORE SACRIFICIAL LAMBS; NO MORE INFANTS AS INFANTRY.
THE ORIGINS OF WAR IN CHILD ABUSE & THE PEACEFUL PARENTING PARADIGM
https://responsiblyfree.substack.com/p/what-if-they-had-a-war-and-nobody
As the title of Llloyd's last book explains: "The Origins of War in Child Abuse".
Once we have peaceful parenting begun and maintained by peaceful mothers, we will have a peaceful planet...and not until.
As Euripides knew: “The Gods Visit the Sins of the Fathers Upon the Children.”
WOMEN BEFORE ALL. Scire Licet
Women are already before “all” (men) in the present day. The only limits they encounter are enforced by other women to prevent them from submitting to men.
Women have a taller IQ curve and as such, women only barely show up in the quorum of exceptionally smart people. You think “better” comes from less violent but being deprived of 99/100 of geniuses? Well sure - What is “better” in your model is just “female preferred,” and the fact that the sex which generates 99% of geniuses SHOULD probably get to tell the other half what to do really grinds their delusional gears. The same error in the amazon blurb of that book: “Men don’t live as LONG, men must be defects.” Oblivious to the reality that ‘longevity for its own sake’ is not a neutral, objective value but a suffocating female shibboleth - MEN seek and achieve LEGACY, not LONGEVITY - no woman in history has ever directly managed the former.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222143648_The_golden_mean_as_clock_cycle_of_brain_waves
Science!
Fascinating.