(no subject)
Aug. 30th, 2002 11:38 pmFor a while there, I was really in the mood to post to my journal. Then I realized how misanthropic it would all sound and crude, especially coming from a female, and I decided against my original topic. So just a tiny rant about men: why is it that so many of them think the ideal relationship is the "friends who have sex" model???? Because they feel free to recuse themselves of any sort of obligation in exchange for sex, I guess. How disappointing. I date older men in the hopes that they are more mature, but it seems that some things don't change with age.
Oh, and if I hear one more person spout off about how men can't help themselves because they're genetically programmed to "spread their seed," I will scream. One could also argue that men are genetically programmed for infanticide, to better their own offsprings' chances of survival, or that women should abort their babies upon opportunities to mate with "better" (you can take that however you want) men. And homicide would be sanctioned all around, as a legitimate means of survival. But we don't do those things, because human society has evolved to the point that many behaviors are not necessary. I know promiscuity is not on par with murder, but I'm uncomfortable with using "I can't help it" to justify anything. Suppose we determine that there are several genes that contribute to lying behavior. Do those people with those genes that lie on their resumes avoid punishment, or do we realize that genes are the rules but the environment plays the game? Or like a description I once read of poetry. The sonnet is a form, and there are certain things that must be there for a poem to be a sonnet. Yet even with strict rules there are infinite variations. There is plenty of room for creativity in sonnets, and there is plenty of room for modifications in human behavior.
Oh, and if I hear one more person spout off about how men can't help themselves because they're genetically programmed to "spread their seed," I will scream. One could also argue that men are genetically programmed for infanticide, to better their own offsprings' chances of survival, or that women should abort their babies upon opportunities to mate with "better" (you can take that however you want) men. And homicide would be sanctioned all around, as a legitimate means of survival. But we don't do those things, because human society has evolved to the point that many behaviors are not necessary. I know promiscuity is not on par with murder, but I'm uncomfortable with using "I can't help it" to justify anything. Suppose we determine that there are several genes that contribute to lying behavior. Do those people with those genes that lie on their resumes avoid punishment, or do we realize that genes are the rules but the environment plays the game? Or like a description I once read of poetry. The sonnet is a form, and there are certain things that must be there for a poem to be a sonnet. Yet even with strict rules there are infinite variations. There is plenty of room for creativity in sonnets, and there is plenty of room for modifications in human behavior.