tiistai 27. lokakuuta 2009

Miksi naiset eivät tajua rotujen välisiä eroja

From an evolutionary point of view, it makes sense that men would have an interest in things like justice from a theoretical perspective. A man in prehistoric times may have served on a tribal council and have had to come to a fair decision based on objective criteria; a woman dealt mainly with her family and would put feelings over reason. Males would have to form alliances with other tribes, build things to deal with the forces of nature, figure out a practical way to get the mammoth down, etc.

Females gossiped and took care of children. They never evolved the mental tools to go beyond the personal.

That’s why something that is true but unpopular like race realism will appeal more to men than women.

A man (some of us) has the potential to ask “Is this true?” while a woman can’t go beyond “Is this the correct thing to believe for the status of me and my kids?”

I’ve had men and women disagree with my positions on race, but have only seen women refer to my beliefs as “stupid.” This used to puzzle me because they couldn’t articulate a reason why.

I eventually came to realize that the connotations that the word has for me are different than the ones it has for females.

When I say a belief is “stupid” I mean that there are actual reasons for not believing it. When a woman says a belief is “stupid” she means that it’s not the correct thing to believe if you want to have friends.

In that sense race realism can be stupid from a social stand point while also being true. But a woman doesn’t think in terms of what we call truth and doesn’t use it as a barometer to decide what is or isn’t “stupid.”

Ei kommentteja: