[Ami]

awhile back, i read a book that suggested a theory to end war... it was pretty detailed, woman could take sperm sample of men and then kill them, and have woman procreate thru artificial insemination. There were other contingencies of course but the point of the theory is that woman are more emmotional and less violent, therefore by eliminating the male sex (to a certain extent) war/fighting could end.... but i think there are a lot of physcological loopholes.... Do you think woman could take the part of men, is there any chance of this working to any extent if so how long.. just general points of vies since i thought it was interesting.....

[fafalone]

Women fight.

[Ami]

yes they do, but they fight for protective reasons.. it's proven that woman are less violent, men go through a chemical wash in the womb that stunts the growth of teh emmotion part of the brain, they don't think with their proverbial heart as much as woman..

[fafalone]

Estrogen floods are just as bad as testosterone floods.

[Ami]

probably worse, but less violent, that really wasn't the part of the theory i hoped to talk about tho...

[Ami]

i appologize if i made it sound like I thought woman are superior, i just found the theory interesting...

[dragoon]

i know some girls who could kick my ass... and who go around kickin ass --- what about them?

[Ami]

listen, i'm not disputing that! if you don't like the fact that it has been scientifically proved over and over again that woman are the gentle sex, fine! whatever floats your boat, but I would like to debate over the physcological prospects of the theory..... please. i will no longer defend that part of the theory, it's not even my theory. So, ok, that has been stated. Please, move on. I'm speaking of the after math of the theory anyway.:mad:

[Katie]

Hmm as to the psychological aspects... Would you block all past literature and make it a Farenheit 451 kind of thing? People are naturally curious, whether they be male or female, and eventually there would be a rebellion which would lead back to a sufficient amount of males in the population. Even a stupid romance novel could spark a revolution, so if this theory was to work, it would be imperative that knowledge be taken away.
Do we want to sacrifice knowledge for the sake of peace?

[aman]

A storage of sperm is stagnant.
Mens sperm evolves and changes as men are exposed to the changing enviroment. The soley female society would be missing out on an important half of the evolutionary process. In the far future this could be detrimental
Just aman

[Katie]

Also there is the problem of inbreeding, per say, for a small amount of the same male's semen impregnating a large amount of woman would make a huge amount of children siblings-preventing any of these women's sons from being potential sperm donors to any of the other women's daughters. The genetic pool would have to be greatly varied to prevent mutation-a great number of males would have to be allowed to reach sexual maturity and then killed.

I have to question how much missing out on half of the evolutionary process would hurt human evolution, after all, there is a part of inheritence that is solely from the mother (mitochondrial DNA), which may make her the more important of the genetic contributors? Also, I wonder how far into the future we are looking... there must be some glitch on the way in this plan that would make it fall apart, even before the harm it does to our evolutionary development becomes evident.

The glitch may be social, it may be psychological, enviornmental, even physical, but I have a feeling this plan wouldn't last for long enough to view the scientific effects it would have on our species.

[fafalone]

This is all a load of crap anyway.

[dragoon]

what if people rebel to this way of life?

[aman]

I would love to see it just for the fact that when women royaly screw it up I could say to my wife. "See it ain't just men"
Just aman

[fafalone]

Quote

Originally posted by dragoon
what if people rebel to this way of life?

What if llamas sprouted wings, flew into space, and ate the ISS astronauts?

[Katie]

We'd need a new Bellerophon, that's for sure...

[blike]

I don't know how you women would cope without us :).

In all honestly, I dont' really know enough about psychology to answer with anything worthwhile (though I took 2 semesters, it was basically a nap time for me).

Obviously social roles would have to be re-arranged, and how this would effect women psychologically is uncertain. Perhaps women could take the role of men. Maybe our roles aren't as necessary as we think. I mean, pretty much all our sociological functions have their basis in evolutionary needs. The bigger, stronger males protect, and the females make the nest. While these are stereotypical roles, we see this pattern often in nature. Perhaps women have some hard-coded psychological need for a male presence. While this is not apparent in all cases [homosexuals], it is still a possibility. If they don't, an all-female society could likely replace the role of males, keeping only our sperm for reproduction.

All that to say I don't know. :p It might be interesting to check into some research done on social structures [if there are any] where women play a dominant role, and men a submissive role.

[fafalone]

Men could grow babies in feeding chambers and eliminate women... in fact I'm sure the government has already perfected the technology.

[Radical Edward]

more war seems to be caused by religion and ideology as far as I can see.

[blike]

Ami, are we supposed to be discussing whether or not this would end war, or whether or not males could be eliminated...or both ;)??