Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "jack" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: For those who like to regress to their youth? :-) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 05:10:28 +1100 Lines: 110 Message-ID: References: <6omdnTnQgKNKXx_LnZ2dnUU78IOdnZ2d@giganews.com> <871ta5kuta.fsf@garlic.com> <87wprxj96i.fsf@garlic.com> <87mvsska3k.fsf@garlic.com> <638004010.473170649.277938.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> <9527c347-d65c-4460-891b-0df68adcf841@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net uX00R+Os30kkq9RZfNcqCQZAzNr6pfW5/zaMPk8TrDwGt5vgw= Cancel-Lock: sha1:rqpaOZQyubw0UsI/5Mi01YdjXWM= In-Reply-To: <9527c347-d65c-4460-891b-0df68adcf841@googlegroups.com> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 Xref: csiph.com alt.folklore.computers:155832 "Quadibloc" wrote in message news:9527c347-d65c-4460-891b-0df68adcf841@googlegroups.com... > On Saturday, January 2, 2016 at 11:29:18 PM UTC-7, jack wrote: >> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote in message >> news:n69tm2$lsk$1@dont-email.me... > >> > Protecting women/girls is critical for a society to maintain/grow its >> > population; > >> That has never been true. > > A man can make many women pregnant; a woman > takes nine months to have a baby or twins. Sure, but that is a quite separate issue to his claim that protecting women/girls is critical for a society to maintain/grow its population. That happens fine even in societies that choose not to do that just like it does with animals that don't bother to do anything like that. > So of *course* this is true, Yes, but not what he actually said. > even if... illustrations... are rare. (There was a case > where polygyny became the norm in one Latin > American country for a time after a very destructive war.) That has nothing to do with his claim about protecting women/girls. >> > that is why most prohibit or at least discourage >> > them in combat or other dangerous professions. > >> Even sillier than you usually manage and doesn't >> explain Boudicca or the Amazons etc etc etc. > What most societies do is not contradicted by occasional exceptions. The claim is silly with dangerous work. >> > In contrast, men are considered expendable, especially >> > in polygynous societies. Boys have an odd status, being >> > protected like women/girls while being trained to grow >> > into expendable men. > >> Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage with that >> last. > >> The Spartans never did anything like that. > > Men are the ones who get drafted into combat, not women, That was a comment about his silly claim that boys have an odd status, being protected like women/girls while being trained to grow into expendable men. In fact even in Britain, very young kids ended up in the Navy and Army and those were nothing even remotely like protected like women/girls while being trained to grow into expendable men. Same with child labour in coal mines and factories too. And even today young boys are still used in the most obscene military systems, most obviously in africa essentially because they are much more biddable than older kids and a lot easier to control. And its ludicrous to claim that the girls are protected when they are essentially sex slaves for the troops. And that has nothing to do with maintain/grow its population either, its just sex slaves. > and this has been pretty universal over historical time. Essentially because men are rather more aggressive in combat situations. But plenty of women were used in combat by Russia particularly during WW2. > Why you seem to think that the entire history of Western > Civilization - plus China and India too - is somehow not > widespread enough to be considered the norm... I was pointing out the obvious exceptions to that norm. > is puzzling to me. Because you don't appear to be able to understand which bit of what he said I was commenting on there. I was commenting specifically about his silly claim that >>> Boys have an odd status, being protected like women/girls >>> while being trained to grow into expendable men. Nothing even remotely like that happened with boys in any military system that I am aware of, let alone when child labour was extensively used in coal mines and factories. > Perhaps too much indoctrination in political correctness. Nothing I ever do or say has ever anything to do with political correctness.