Monday, December 26, 2011 7:22:16 PM
Though most of the arguments I'm reading are pretty ridiculous. It`s safe to say that before modern toys were even made, boys wanted to be great swordsmen, cowboys and indians, in primitive society still beat each other up and had semi-macho confrontations with each other. This you cannot deny.
And nobody is denying it, so you`re countering an argument that nobody has made. What`s the point of doing that?
It`s the "nature versus nurture" thing again. It doesn`t matter whether it`s a modern wealthy highly urbanised society or a paleolithic hunter-gatherer tribe. There`s still nurture and there`s still nature. Anyone who asserts that it`s all nature is still wrong and silly.
Just look at how much and how rapidly gendered stuff can and does change. That proves that it isn`t all nature. Might be some nature, might be no nature at all, can`t be all nature.
Monday, December 26, 2011 7:17:51 PM
"That's* how engrained sexism is."
that`s not sexism. That`s just nature
Please provide your evidence proving that it`s solely nature that results in the normal unthinking assumption being that every person is totally defined by their sex.
Assuming, of course, that you actually read my post before replying to it.