|
Aswad -> RE: why most mass murderers are privileged white men (7/29/2012 4:49:40 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marini
Come on over to the dark side sweetie, I have been a bra burning feminist since I was about 13.
As the son of someone that had a breast reduction due to back problems, I would have to say bra burning is one of the most ludicrous artifacts of the period in question. The Shieldmaidens used bras, as did the gladiatrices, and while I'm not sure if the Spartan women who arranged the countersports events when they were barred from competing in Greek sporting events wore bras during the actual events (sports were nude at the time, hence the puritan Greeks barring them), they certainly did wear them the rest of the time.
quote:
Come on over to the dark side, women like me are great fun, and most of us have cookies.
Great fun, no doubt. But the question isn't one of cookies. I can make cookies. I also make a fiendish lasagne.
As for statistics, where I live, men and women are about equally subject to violence and threats thereof in all age groups, but women are disporportionately concerned about it. Risk adverse behavior in women adequately accounts for the disparity in violence when we correct for drug and alcohol abuse, the pattern of which is shifting together with other gender stereotypies, leading to further parity in violent tendencies. In short, risk adversity seems to be the only biological difference in disposition to violence between the genders, going by the detailed statistics kept over the past 30 years here. The rest is cultural.
In terms of domestic violence, the genders are at parity now, with women accounting for slightly more violence than men if you include violence directed at children, where they are significantly overrepresented but inflict less severe injuries due to less strength with which to do so. Statistics for abuse are slightly beyond parity, and well beyond parity if we include emotional abuse. Statistics for sexual abuse are not yet at parity, but recent studies indicate underreporting may bring the figure to parity. Risk adversity is still a major factor in sexual abuse, with women more likely by an order of magnitude to pick a target they can successfully abuse and get away with.
That last bit frequently means minors, and the abuse usually continues until the minor reaches an age where the disparity in physical strength reverses and the minor becomes able to physically prevent the abuse. Suspicion is rare, detection rarer, and conviction is all but unheard of, even in the presence of videotaped evidence showing the faces of the perpetrator(s). By contrast, for example, a man is currently being charged on the basis that his couch has the same pattern as the couch on which an unknown assailant is having sex with an unknown woman in what appears to be an unconscious state, and police expects this will be sufficient to convict. Similarly, paraphrasing a recent rape case with a male victim: "you're a man, so you should shut up and enjoy it."
As far as I can tell, humanity's darker impulses are evenly distributed, but men exhibit poorer impulse control in the age group 18 through 24, and women exhibit greater risk adversity throughout their life, with this adequately accounting for the differences in the culture corrected outcomes, but some cultural stereotypes still influence both behaviors, reporting and conviction rates for both genders. A society with true equality seems unlikely to see socially significant disparity in many areas beyond that of fear/yielding (feminine) and drive/ambition (masculine). Our genetic recipe is largely shared between genders, and the differences have been beneficial for the past million years or so.
Personally, I've always found it more interesting whether John/Jane is X than whether men/women are, for any value of X.
IWYW,
— Aswad.
|
|
|
|
